lill 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 Class 
 
 OOCUMEHT3 
 
 _ 
 
\ of H v^ ? OO T - 
 
 EEPORT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION 
 
 FOR THE 
 
 REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION 
 
 OF THE STATE OF NEW-YORK, 
 184ft. 
 
 REPORTED BY 
 WILLIAM G. BISHOP AND WILLIAM H. ATTREE, 
 
 ALBANY \ 
 
 AT THE OFFICE OF THE EVENING 
 
 1846. 
 
53 
 
 00 
 
 O 
 
 Q 
 ^ 
 < 
 
 GO 
 
 S 
 
 H 
 
 I- 
 
 63 
 
 63 
 
 a 
 
 5 <-* 
 
 o 
 
 II 
 
 2 2 
 
 It 
 
 M 
 
 OOT 
 
 pifl.gi S.&TI l -a |?H i^-ii 
 
 ^S^S^^oortp^c^o^ooSa^^o^^^a^o 
 g, ? g, g>*-*-s;g g ^o^ g.-0-o S^ o ^l^ll ^ 
 H^WfeWW SOW cfl W E-tWcnW OT^aj^W 
 
 ^>-<^i^ss 
 
 g : S '"S.J 
 
 O ""^ * "~* f3 13 * * * '<- ** *WTO*-^J 
 
 SSHaShhS cS SS^fc, i^oi EH ^S i^Ed SScq 
 
 ail 1 -" 
 
 ^ w S O 
 
 a >. C P , 
 
 nj5 a a 
 
 s ::::: 
 
 liy=lf 
 
 
 218037 
 
T 
 
 I 
 
 H 
 H 
 
 O 
 
 ft 
 
 2 
 
 W 
 
 S 
 
 ll 
 
 *' a - - : : : fl'|: : : : 
 
 i*:Si|| Uss: w ? 
 
 S!E>i**!-8j1i 
 
 S S o ? 2 So ^ 
 5 S^ S-aJ S- 5' 
 
 SH&H ,_) gfa _3 
 
i HfiHiJillrPil., III 
 
 0000 P3. 
 
 fffr. 
 
 fe^ J 
 
 .f.f'o/iJlf'.s 
 
 ilil 
 
 ^ oc 
 
 s 
 
 
 ^>< 
 
 S & 
 
 'ill rsllf flit 
 
 43 fctfSMMOKJ 
 
 -n OT'o.S Mfl 
 
 ^3^S3S 
 ?S.^g 3 ^ 
 
 OO*Jfo 
 
 ^ ?^= 5rt 2 
 
 iliillri 
 
 firtaSS^-o^ _ 
 O O O S cw < 
 
 (U ^ ^ K 3 
 
 cq <J cu <; < OT 
 
 *! a Ssfs^cS' 5 ! 
 o^^adfaQg^cSo' 
 
 Ilii 
 
 3Sg 
 
 & 
 
 S 
 
 Nt- 
 
 
 i.1 :s 
 
 S3 -B 
 
 n*r 
 
 11 
 
 sill 
 
 111! 
 
 OT o o c oa 
 
 3 : 
 
 ^ K 
 
 too 
 I? 
 
 ** ' 
 
 
 ll.i-IlllltillNII'lllill 
 
 - w(c/>:wa!c/3a!OQc/3a!c0&-<&-'E-iEH&->E-'HE-';> 
 
c 
 .2 
 
 V* 
 
 0) 
 
 f> 
 
 d 
 
 o 
 
 U 
 
 o 
 
 OJ 
 
 5 
 
 o 
 
 SB 
 O 
 
 H3 
 
 
 
 E 
 
 
 
 rTi 
 
 QJ 
 S 
 
 cou 
 
 stor 
 
 Profcssioa or 
 occupation. 
 
 
 
 otO 
 
 S ft O H 
 
 
 
 
 gcj 
 
 i '/; Ctj 
 
 1 ill! i 
 
 .-, 
 
 03 B 
 
 KW C^ 
 
 ' 
 
 2 = 0-00 
 
 . -3 
 
 .S 
 
 ;*s 
 
 o o 
 
 ^ - 
 
 gg 
 
 m 
 
 00000 
 
 B'O'ars'a'a 
 
 aSy 
 
 
 o o o 
 
 tis t 1 
 
 S>5 :-js 
 
 -a^ bf 
 
 I il 
 
 * 
 
 -sll 
 
 WO 
 
 11! 11 ^ 
 
 OKcO 
 
 
 : : g : : : : 
 * * IS * * * ; 
 
 let* 
 
 ill si : 1 : : : : g>3 
 
 llli gill II 
 
 : :3-l : 
 
 - 
 
 ^ oo 
 
 
 s & 
 
 111 1 3 
 
 
THE 
 
 CONSTITUTION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 STATE OF NEW-YORK, 
 
 AS AMENDED. 
 
 WE THE PEOPLE of the State of New- York, grateful to Almighty God for our Freedom: in 
 order to secure its blessings, DO ESTABLISH this Constitution* 
 
 ARTICLE I. 
 
 SEC now 1. No member of this State shall be disfranchis- 
 ed, or deprived of any of the rights or privileges, secured 
 to any citizen thereof, unless by the law of the land, or 
 the judgment of his peers. 
 
 & The trial by jury in all cases in which it has been 
 heretofore used shall remain inviolate forever; but a jury 
 trial may be waived by the parties in all civil cases in the 
 manner to be prescribed by law. jj 
 
 & 3. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious pro, 
 fession and worship, without discrimination or preference 
 shall forev T be allowed in this State to all mankind: and 
 no person shall be rendered incompetent to be a witness 
 on account of his opinions on matters of religious belief, 
 but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be 
 so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify 
 practices inconsistent with the peace or Safety of this State. 
 
 !j 4. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not 
 be suspended, unless when, in cases of rebellion or inva- 
 sion, the public safety may require its suspension. 
 
 6 5. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive 
 fines imposed, nor shall cruel and unusual punishments 
 be inflicted, nor shall witnesses be unreasonably detained. 
 
 ^ 6. No person shall be held to answer for a capital or 
 otherwise infamous crime (except in cases of impeach- 
 ment, and in cases of'militia, when in actual service; 
 and the land and naval forces in time of war, or which this 
 State may keep with the consent of Congress in time oi 
 peace; and in cases of petit larceny, under the regulation 
 of the Legislature), unless on presentment or indictment 
 of a grand jury, and in any trial in any court whatever, 
 the party accused shall be allowed to appear and defend 
 in person and with couasel, as in civil actions. No 
 person shall be subject to be twice put in jeopardy for the 
 same oflence; nor shall he be compelled in any criminal 
 case, to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of 
 life, liberty or property without due process of law: nor 
 ;?h ill private property be taken for public use, without 
 just compensation. 
 
 ij 7. When private property shall be taken for any pub 
 ic use, the compensation to be made therefor, when such 
 compensation is not made by the State, shall be ascertain- 
 ed by a jury, or by not less than three commissioners ap- 
 pointed by a court of record, as shall be prescri- 
 bed by law. Private roads may be opened in the manner 
 to be prescribed by law; but in every case the necessity 
 ol the road, and the amount of all damage to be sustained 
 by the opening thereof, shall be first determined by a jury 
 
 of freeholders, and such amount, together with the expen- 
 ses of the procesding, shall be paid by the person to be be- 
 nefitted. 
 
 ^ 8. Every citizen may freely speak, write, and publish 
 his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the 
 abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed to restrain 
 or abridge the liberty of speech, or of the press. In all 
 criminal prosecutions or indictments for libel, the truth 
 may be given in evidence to the jury; and if it shall ap- 
 pear to the jury, that the matter charged as libellous is 
 true, and was p'ublished with good motives, arid for justifi- 
 able ends, the .party shall be acquitted: and the jury shall 
 have the right to determine the law and the fact. 
 
 $}9. The assent of two-thirds of the members elected to 
 each branch of the Legislature, shall be requisite to every 
 bill appropriating the public moneys or property for local 
 or private purposes. 
 
 10. No law shall be passed abridging the right of the 
 people peaceably to assemble and to petition the govern 
 ment, or any department thereof, nor shall any divorce be 
 ranted otherwise than by due judicial proceedings, nor 
 hall any lottery hereafter be authorised or any sale of 
 lottery tickets allowed within this state. 
 
 11. The people of this state in their right of sovereign- 
 ty, are deemed to possess the original and ultimate proper- 
 ty 'in and to all lands within the jurisdiction of the state; 
 a'nd all lands the title to which shall fail, from a delect of 
 heirs, shall revert or escheat to the people. 
 
 12. All feudal tenures of every description, with all 
 their incidents, are declared to be abolished, saving how- 
 ever all rents and services certain which at any time here- 
 tofore have been lawfully created or reserved. 
 
 13. All lands within this state arc declared to be allo 
 dial, so that, subject only to the liability to escheat, the en- 
 rte and absolute property is vested in the owners accord- 
 ng to the nature o; their respective estates. 
 
 14. No lease or grant of agricultural land [for a. longe r 
 i)eiiod than twelve years hereafter made, in which shal 
 >e reserved any rent or service of any kind, shall be valid* 
 
 ij 15. All fines, quarter sales, or other like restraints up. 
 on alienation le-ervcd in any grant of land, hereafter to 
 be made, shall be void. 
 
 Iti. No purchase or contract for the sale of lands in this 
 State, made since the fourteenth day of October, one thou- 
 sand seven hundred and seventy-five; or which may here- 
 after be made, of, or with the Indians, shall be valid, unless 
 made under the authority, and with the consent of the Leg- 
 islature. 
 
8 
 
 fijl7. Such parts of the common law, and of the acts the of 
 Legislature ot the colony of New- York, as together did 
 form the law of the said colony, on the nineteenth day of 
 April one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, and 
 the resolutions of the Congress of the said colony, and of 
 the Convention of the State of New-York, in force on the 
 twentieth day ot April, one thousand seven hundred and 
 seventy-seven, which have not since expired, or been re- 
 pealed or altered; and such acts of the Legislature of this 
 State as are now in force, shall be and continue the law of 
 this state,subject to such alterations as the legislature shall 
 make concerning the same. But ail such parts of the com- 
 mon law, and such of the said acts, or parts thereof, as are 
 repugnant to this Constitution, are hereby abrogated, and 
 the legislature, at its first session after the adoption of this 
 Constitution, shall appoint three .commissioners, whose 
 duty it shall be to reduce into a written and systematic 
 code the whole body of the law of this state, or so much 
 and such parts thereof as to the said commissioners shall 
 seem practicable and expedient. And the said commission- 
 ers shall specify such alterations and amendments therein 
 as they shall deem proper, and they shall at all times make 
 reports of their proceedings to the legislature, when called 
 upon to do so ; and the legislature shall pass laws regula- 
 ting the tenure of office, the filling of vacancies therein, 
 and the compensation of the said commissioners; and shall 
 also provide for the publication of the said code, prior to 
 its being presented to the legislature for adoption. 
 
 18. All grants of land within this State, made by the 
 King of Great Britain, or persons acting under his author- 
 ity, after the fourteenth day of October, one thousand sev- 
 en hundred and seventy-five, shall be null and void; but 
 nothing contained in this Constitution shall affect any 
 grants of land within this State, made by the authority of 
 the said king or his predecessors, or shall annul any char- 
 ters to bodies politic and corporate, by him or them made, 
 before that day; or shall affect any such grants or charters 
 since made by this State, or by persons acting under its 
 authority; or shall impair the obligation ot any debts con- 
 tracted by this State, or individuals, or bodies corporate, or 
 any other rights of property, or any suits, actions, rights 
 of action, or other proceedings in courts of justice. 
 
 ARTICLE II. 
 
 SECTION 1. Every male citizen of the age of twen- 
 ty one years, who shall have been a citizen lor ten days 
 and an inhabitant of this state one year next preceding 
 any election^ and lor the last four moaths a resident of the 
 county where he may offer his voto, shall be entitled to 
 vote at such election, in the election district of which he 
 shall at the time be a resident, and not elsewhere, lor all 
 officers that now are, or hereafter may be, elective by the 
 people : But such citizen shall have been for thirty days 
 oext preceding the election, a resident of the district from 
 which the officer is to be chosen for whom he offers his 
 vote. But no man of color, unless he shall have been for 
 three years a citizen of this state, and for one year next 
 receding any election,shall have been seized, and posses- 
 sed of a freehold estate of the value of two hundred and fitty 
 dollars, over and above all debts and incumbrances charg- 
 ed thereon; and shall have been actually rated, and paid a 
 tax thereon, shall be entitled to vote at such election. 
 And no person of color shall be subject to direct taxation, 
 unless he shall be seized and possessed of such real estate 
 aforesaid. 
 
 & 2. Laws may be passed excluding from the right of 
 suffrage all persons who have been, or may be convicted 
 of bribery, of larceny, or of any infamous cnme ; and for 
 depriving every person who shall make or become direct- 
 ly or indirectly interested in any bet or wager depending 
 upon the result of any election, from the right to vote at 
 such election. 
 
 63. For the purpose of voting, no person shall be 
 deemed to have gained or lost a residence, by reason 
 of his presence or absence, while employed in the 
 service of the United States; nor while engaged in the 
 navigation of the waters of this state, or of the United 
 States, or of the high seas; nor while a student of any 
 seminary of learning; nor while kept at any alms house, 
 or other asylum, at public expense; nor while confined in 
 any public prison. 
 
 h4. Laws shall be made- -for ascertaining by proper 
 proofs the citizens who shall be entitled to the right of 
 suffrage hereby established. 
 
 & 5. All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot, ex- 
 cept for such town officers as may by law be directed to 
 be otherwise chosen. 
 
 ARTICLE III. 
 
 SECTION I. The legislative p%wer of this state shall b** 
 vested in a Senate and Assembly. 
 
 2. The Senate shall consist of thirty-two members, and 
 the Senators shall be chosen for two years. The Assem- 
 bly shall consist of one hundred and twenty-eight mem- 
 bers, who shall be annually elected. 
 
 $ 3. The state shall be divided into thirty-two districts;, 
 to be called Senate districts, each of which shall choose 
 one Senator. The districts shall be numbered from one to 
 thirty-two inclusive. 
 
 District No. 1 shall consist of the counties of Suffolk, 
 Richmond and Queens. 
 
 District No. 2 shall consist of the county of Kings. 
 
 Districts No. 3, No. 4, No. 5 and No. 6, shall consist of 
 the city and county of New York. And the board of Su- 
 pervisors of said city and county shall, on or before the 
 first day of May 1847, divide the said city and county into 
 the number of senate districts to which it is entitled as 
 near a& may be of an equal number of inhabitants, exclu - 
 ding aliens and persons of color not taxed, and consisting 
 of convenient and contiguous territory, and no Assem- 
 bly District shall be divided in the formation of a Senate- 
 District. The board of supervisors when they shall have 
 completed such division, ehall cause certificates thereoi 
 stating the number and boundaries of each district and the 
 population thereof, to be filed in the office of the Secretary 
 of State and of the Clerk of the said city and county. 
 
 District No. 7 shall consist of the counties of Westches- 
 ter, Putnam and Rockland. 
 
 District No. 8 shall consist of the counties ofDutchess 
 and Columbia. 
 
 District No. 9 shall consist of the counties of Grange 
 and Sullivan. 
 
 District No. 10 shall consist of the counties of Ulster and 
 Greene, 
 
 District No. 11 shall consist of the counties of Albany 
 and Schenectady. 
 
 District No. 12 shall consist of the county of Rensselaer. 
 
 District No. 13 shall consist of the counties of Washing- 
 ton and Saratoga. 
 
 District No. 14 shall consist of the counties of Warren, 
 Essex and Clinton. 
 
 District No. 15 shall consist of the counties of St. Law- 
 rence and Franklin. 
 
 District No. 16 shall c onsist of the counties of Herkimer 
 Hamilton, Fulton and Montgomery. 
 
 District No. 17 shall consist of the counties of Scho 
 harie and Delaware. 
 
 District No 18 shall consist of the counties of Otsego 
 and Chenang.o. 
 
 District No. 19 shall consist of the county ofOneida, 
 
 District No. 20 shall consist of the counties of Madisorr 
 and Oswego. 
 
 District No. 21 shall consist of the counties of Jefferson 
 and Lewis. 
 
 District No. 22 shall consist of the county of Onondaga 
 
 District No. 23 shall consist of the counties of Cortland, 
 Broome and Tioga. 
 
 District No. 24 shall consist of the counties of Cayuga 
 and Wayne. 
 
 District No. 25 shall consist of the counties of Tompkins 
 Seneca and Yates. 
 
 District No. 26 chsll consist of the counties of Steuben 
 and Chemung. 
 
 District No. 27 shall consist of the county of Monroe. 
 
 District No. 28 shall consist of the counties of Orleans, 
 Genesee and Niagara. 
 
 District No. 29 shall consist of the counties of Ontario- 
 find Livingston. 
 
 District No. 30 shall consist of the counties of Allegany 
 and Wyoming. 
 
 District No. 31 shall consist of the county of Erie. 
 
 District No. 32 shall consist of the counties of Chautau- 
 que and Cattaraugus. 
 
 ^ 4. An enumeration of the inhabitants of the State shall 
 betaken, under the direction of the Legislature, in the 
 year one thousand eight hundred and fifty-five, and at the 
 end of every ten "years thereafter; and the said districts 
 shall be so altered by the Legislature, at the first session, 
 after the return of every enumeration, that each Senate 
 district shall contain, as nearly as may be, an equal num- 
 ber of inhabitants, excluding aliens, and persons of color 
 not taxed; and shall remain unaltered until the return of 
 another enumeration, and shall at all times consist of con 
 tiguous territory, and no county shall be divided in the 
 formation of a Senate district, except such county shall be 
 equitably entitled to two or more senators. 
 
 <j 6. The members of Assembly shall be apportioned 
 
9 
 
 among the several counties of this State, by the legisla- 
 ture, as nearly as may be, according to the number of 
 their respective inhabitants, excluding aliens, and persons 
 of color not taxed, and shall be chosen by single districts. 
 The several boards of supervisors in such counties of 
 this State, as are now entitled to more than one member of 
 Assembly, shall assemble on the first Tuesday of January 
 next, and divide their respective counties into Assembly 
 districts equal to the number of members of Assembly to 
 which such counties are now severally entitled by law, 
 and shall cause to be filed in the offices of the Secretary of 
 State and the clerks of their respective counties,a descrip- 
 tion of such Assembly districts, specifying the number of 
 each district, and the population thereof, according to the 
 last preceding State enumeration, as near as can be ascer- 
 tained. Each Assembly district shall contain, as nearly 
 as may be, an equal number of inhabitants, excluding 
 aliens and persons of color not taxed, and shall consist of 
 convenient and contiguous territory, but no town shall be 
 divided in the formation of Assembly districts. 
 
 The Legislature, at its first session after the return of 
 every enumeration, shall re-apportion the members of As- 
 sembly amon^ the several counties ol this State, in man- 
 ner aforesaid, "and the boards of supervisors in such coun- 
 ties as may be entitled, under such re-apportionment, to 
 more than one member, shall assemble at such time as the 
 Legislature making such re-apportionment shall prescribe, 
 and divide such counties into Assembly districts, in the 
 manner herein directed; and the apportionment and dis- 
 tricts so to be made, shall remain unaltered until another 
 enumeration shall be taken under the provisions of the 
 preceding section. 
 
 Every county heretofore established and separately or- 
 ganized, except the county of Hamilton, shall always be 
 entitled to one member of the Assembly, and no new coun- 
 ty shall be hereafter erected, unless its population shall en- 
 title it to a member. 
 
 The county of Hamilton shall elect with the county of 
 Fulton, until the population of the county of Hamilton 
 shall, according to the ratio, be entitled to a member. 
 
 6. The members of the Legislature shall receive for 
 their services, a sum not exceeding three dollars a day, 
 from the commencement of the session ; but such pay shall 
 not exceed in the aggregate, three hundred dollars ibr per 
 diem allowance, except in proceedings for impeachment. 
 The limitation as to the aggregate compensation shall not 
 take effect until 1843. When convened in extra session by 
 the Governor, they shall receive three dollars per day. 
 They shall also receive the sum of one dollar for every 
 ten miles they ahall travel, in going to and returning from 
 their place of meeting, on the most usual route. The 
 Speaker of the Assembly shall, in virtue of his office, re- 
 ceive an additional compensation equal to one-third of his 
 per diem allowance as a member. 
 
 t) 7. No member of the Legislature shall receive any 
 civil appointment within this state, or to the Senate of the 
 United States, from the Governor, the Governor and Sen- 
 ate, or from the Legislature, during the term tor which he 
 shall have been elected; and all such appointments, and all 
 votes given for any such member, for any such office or 
 appointment, shall be void. 
 
 (j 8. No person being a member of Congress, or holding 
 any judicial or military office under the United States, shall 
 hold a seat in the Legislature. And if any person shall, 
 after his election as a member oftheLegislature.be elected 
 to Congress, or appointed to any office, civil or military, 
 under the government of the United States, his accept- 
 ance thereof shall vacate his seat. 
 
 9. The elections of Senators and members of Assembly, 
 pursuant to the provisions of this Constitution, shall be held 
 on the Tuesday succeeding the first Monday of November, 
 unless otherwise directed by the Legislature. 
 
 <J 10. A majority of each house shall constitute a quorum 
 to do business. Kach house shall determine the rules of its 
 own proceedings, and be thejudge of the elections, returns 
 and qualifications of its own members, shall choose its own 
 officers, and the Senate shall choose a temporary president, 
 when the Lieutenant Governor shall not attend as presi- 
 dent, or shall act as Governor. 
 
 11. Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings, 
 and publish the same, except such parts as may require 
 secrecy. The doors of each house shall be kept open, 
 except when the public welfare shall require secrecy. 
 Neither house shall, without the consent of the other, ad 
 journ lor more than two days. 
 
 (5 12. For any speech or debate in either house of the Le- 
 gislature, the members shall not be questioned in any other 
 place. 
 13. Any bill may originate in either house of the Le- 
 
 gislature, and all bills passed by one house may be amend- 
 ed by the other. 
 
 ^ 14. The enacting clause of all bills shall be " The peo- 
 ple of the State of New York, represented m Senate and 
 Assembly, do enact as lollows," and no law shall be en- 
 acted except by bill. 
 
 vj 15. No bill shall be passed unless by the assent of a 
 majority of all the members elected to each branch of the 
 Legislature, and the question upon tfee final passage shall 
 be taken immediately upon its last *4eding, and the yeas 
 and nays entered on the journal. 
 
 16. No private or local bill, which may be passed by 
 the Legislature, shall embrace more than one subject, and 
 that shall be expressed in the title. 
 
 ^ 17. The legislature may confer upon the boards of su- 
 pervisors ol the several counties of the state, such further 
 powers of local legislation and administration, as they 
 shall from time to time prescribe. 
 
 ARTICLE IV. 
 
 SECTION 1. The executive power shall be vested in a 
 Governor, who shall hold his office tor two years; a Lieu- 
 tenant Governor shall bo chosen at the same time, and lor 
 the same term. 
 
 ^ 2. No person except a citizen of the United States, shall 
 DC eligible to the office of Governor; nor shall any person 
 be eligible to that office, who shall not have attained the 
 age of thirty years, and who shall not have been five years 
 next preceding his election, a resident within tliis state. 
 
 ^ 3. The Governor and Lieu*enant Governor shall be 
 lected at the times and places of choosing members of the 
 Assembly. The persons respectively having the highest 
 number of votes for Governor and Lieutenant Governor, 
 shall be elected; but in case two or more shall have an 
 equal and the highest number of votes for Governor, or 
 for Lieutenant Governor, the two houses of the Legisla- 
 ture, at its next annual session, shall, forthwith, by joint 
 ballot, choose one of the said persons so having an equal 
 and the highest number of votes lor Governor, or Lieu- 
 tenant Governor. 
 
 4. The Governor shall be commander-in-chief of the 
 military and naval forces of the state. He shall have pow- 
 er to convene the Legislature (or the Senate only) on ex- 
 traordinary occasions. He shall communicate by message 
 to the Legislature at every session, the condition of the 
 State, and recommend such matters to them as he shall 
 judge expedient. He shall transact all necessary business 
 with the officers of government, civil and military. He 
 shall expedite all such measures, as may be resolved upon 
 by the Legislature, and shall take care that the laws are 
 faithfully executed. He shall, at stated times, receive for 
 his services, a compensation to be established by law, 
 which shall neither be increased nor diminished alter his 
 election and during his continuance in office. 
 
 ^ 5. The Governor shall have the power to grant re- 
 prives, commutations and pardons after conviction, for 
 all offences except treason and cases of impeachment, up- 
 on such conditions, and with such restrictions and limita- 
 tions, as he may think proper, subject to such regulation 
 as may be provided by law relative to the manner of ap- 
 plying for pardons . Upon conviction for treason, he shall 
 liavR power to suspend the execution of the sentence, un- 
 til the case shall be reported to the legislature at its next 
 meeting, when the legislature shall either pardon, or com- 
 mute the sentence, direct the execution of the sentence, 
 or grant a further reprieve. He shall annually communi- 
 cate to the legislature each case of reprieve, commutation 
 or pardon granted; stating the name of the convict, the 
 crime of which he was convicted, the sentence and its 
 date, and the date of the commutation, pardon or reprieve. 
 tj 6. In case of the impeachment of the Governor, of his 
 removal from office, death, inability to discharge th pow- 
 ers and duties of the said office, resignation or absence 
 from the State, the powers and duties of the office shall 
 devolve upon the Lieutenant Governor for the residue of 
 the term, or until the disability shall cease. But when 
 the Governor shall, with the consent of the legislature, be 
 out of the State in time of war, at the head of a military 
 force thereof, he shall continue commander-in-chief of all 
 the military force of the State. 
 
 7. The Lieutenant Governor shall possess the same 
 qualifications of eligibility lor office as the Governor. He 
 shall be President of the Senate, but shall have only a cast- 
 ing vote therein. If during a vacancy of the office ol Go- 
 vernor, the Lieutenant Governor shall be impeached, dis- 
 placed, resign, die, or become incapable of performing the 
 duties of his office, or be absent from the State, the President 
 of the Senate shall act as Governor, until the vacancy be 
 filled, or the disability shall cease. 
 
10 
 
 <5. Ine Lieutenant Governor shall, while acting as 
 such, receive a compensation which shall be fixed by law 
 and which shall not be increased or diminished durin"- his 
 continuance in office. 
 
 9. Every bill which shall have passed the Senate an 
 Assembly, shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to 
 the Governor: if he approve, he shall sign it; but if not, 
 he shall return it with his objections to that house ii 
 which it shall have originated; who shall enter the objec 
 tions at large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider 
 it. If after such reconsideration, two-thirds of the mem- 
 bers present shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent 
 together with the objections, to the other house, by which 
 it shall likewise be reconsidered; and il approved by two- 
 thirds of all the members present, it shall become a law, 
 notwithstanding the objections of the Governor But in 
 all such cases, the votes of both houses shall be deter- 
 mined by yeas and nays, and the names of the members 
 voting for and against the bill, shall be entered on the 
 journal of each house respectively. If any bill shall not 
 be returned by the Governor within ten days (Sundays 
 excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the 
 same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it. 
 unless the legislature shall, by their adjournment, prevent 
 its return; in which case it shall not be a law. 
 
 ARTICLE V. 
 
 SECTION 1. The Secretary of State, ^Comptroller, Trea- 
 surer aid Attorney General shall be'chosen at a general 
 election, and shall hold their ofiices for two years. Each 
 of the officers in this Article named (except the Speaker 
 of the Assembly) shall, at stated times, during his coniinu- 
 ance in office, receive for his services, a compensation, 
 which shall not be increased or diminished during the 
 term for which he shall have been elected ; nor shall he 
 receive, to his use, any fees orperquisites of office, or oth- 
 er compensation. 
 
 2. The State Engineer and Surveyor shall be chosen 
 at a general election, and shall hold" his office for twu 
 years, but no person shall be elected to said office who is 
 not a practical engineer. 
 
 ' 
 
 culling or inspecting any merchandise, produce, manufac- 
 ture or commodity whatever, are hereby abolished, and no 
 such office shall hereafter be created by law; but nothing 
 m this section contained, shall abrogate any office created 
 tor the purpose of protecting the public health or the'nte- 
 rests ot the state in its property, revenue.tolls or purchases 
 or of supplying the people with coirect standards oi 
 weights and measures, or shall prevent the creation of any 
 office lor such purposes hereafter. 
 
 ARTICLE VI. 
 
 SECTION 1 TheAssembly shallhave the power ofimpeach- 
 ment by the vote of the majority oi all the members elected 
 1 he court lor the trial ol impeachments, shall be composed 
 of the president of the Senate, the Senators or a major part 
 of them, and th* judges ofthe court of appeals, or the major 
 pan, 01 them. On the trial of an impeachment against the 
 Governor, the Lieut. Governor shajl not act as a member 
 01 the court No judicial officer shall exercise his office al- 
 ter he sauilhave been impeached, until be shall have been 
 acquitted. Before the trial of an impeachment, the members 
 of the court shall take an oath or affirmation truly and impar. 
 tially to try the impeachment, according: to evidence, and 
 no person shall be convicted without the concurrence oi 
 two-thirds of the members present. Judgment in cases ot 
 impeachment shall not extend further than 10 removal 
 from office, or removal from office and disqualification to 
 hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under 
 this state; but the party impeached shall be liable to in- 
 dictment, and punishment according to law. 
 
 2 There shall be a court of appeals, composed ofeight 
 uilges of whom four shail be elected by the electors of the 
 state for eight years, and four selected from the class of jus- 
 *ices of the supreme court having the shortest time to serve, 
 'revision shull be made by law, lor designating one ofthe 
 lumber elected, as chief judge, and lor selecting such Jus- 
 ices ofthe Supreme Court, Irom time to time, and for so 
 lassifying those elected, that one shall be elected every 
 econd year. 
 
 3. There shall be a Supreme Court having general ju- 
 
 3. Three Canal Commissioners shall be chosen at the ' risdiction in law and equity. 
 general election which shall be held next after the adop- i 4. The State shall be divided into eight judicial dis- 
 tion of this Constitution, one of whom shall hold his office j tricts, of which the city of New York shall be one; the 
 for one year, one for two years, and one for three years. ! others to be bounded by county lines; and to be compact 
 The Commissioners of the Canal Fund shall meet at the j aQ d equal in population as nearly as may be. There shail 
 Capitol on the first Monday of January, next after such ! be four justices of the Supreme Court in each district, and 
 
 election, and determine by lot which of said Commission 
 ers shall hold his office for one year, which for two, an 
 which for three years; and there shall be elected annuall 
 thereafter, one Canal Commissioner, who shall hold h: 
 office for three years. 
 
 ^ 4. Three Inspectors of State Prisons shall be elected a 
 the general election which shall be held next alter th 
 adoption of this constitution, one of whom shall hold hi 
 office lor one year, one for two years and one for three 
 years. The Governor, Secretary of State and Comptrol 
 ler, shall meet at the Capitol an the first Monday of Jauu 
 ary next succeeding such election, and determine by lo 
 which of said inspectors shall hold his office lor one year 
 which for two and which for three years; and there shaJ. 
 be elected annually thereafter one inspector of State Pi j 
 sons, who shall hold his office lor three years; said inspec 
 tors shall have the charge and superintendence of the state 
 prisons, and shall appoint all the officers therein. All 
 cancies in the office of such inspector shall be filled by the 
 Governor till the next election. 
 
 5. The Lieutenant Governor, Speaker of the Assembly, 
 Secretary of State, Comptroller, Treasurer, Attorney Ge. 
 neral, and State Engineer and Surveyor, shall be the Com 
 missioners ofthe Land Office. 
 
 The Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Comptrol- 
 ler, Treasurer and Attorney General, shall be the Com- 
 missioners ofthe Canal Fund. 
 
 The Canal Board shall consist of the Commissioners of 
 the canal fund, the state engineer and surveyor, and the 
 canal commissioners. 
 
 ^ 6. The powers and duties ofthe respective boards, and 
 of the several officers in this article mentioned, shall be 
 such as now are or hereafter may be prescribed by law. 
 
 7. The Treasurer may be suspended from office by the 
 Governor, during the recess of the legislature, and until 
 thirty days after the commencement ofthe next session of 
 the legislature, whenever it shail appear to him that such 
 Treasurer has, in any particular, violated his duty. The 
 Governor shall appoint a competent person to discharge 
 the duties ol the office, during such suspension ofthe Trea- 
 surer, 
 ^ 8. AH offices for the weighing, guaging, measuring, 
 
 as many more in the district composed of the city of Ne\. 
 York, as may from time to time be authorized by law, but 
 not to exceed in the whole such number in proportion to 
 its population, as shall be in conformity with the number 
 of such judges in the residue of the state in proportion to 
 its population. They shall be classified so that one of the 
 justices of each district shall go out of office at the end of 
 every two years. After the expiration of their terms under 
 such classification, the term 01 their office shall be eight 
 years. 
 
 ^ o. The legislature shall have the same powers to alter 
 and regulate the jurisdiction and proceedings in law and 
 equity, as they have heretofore possessed. 
 
 6. Provision may be made by law for designating from 
 time to time one or more of the said justices who is not a 
 
 dge of the Court of Appeals to preside at the general 
 terms of the said court to be held in the several districts. 
 Any three or more ofthe said justices, of whom one of the 
 said justices so designated shall always be one, may hold 
 such general terms. And any one or more of the justices 
 may hold special terms and Circuit courts, and any one of 
 them may preside in Courts oV Oyer and Terminer in any 
 county. 
 
 7. The Judges of the Court of Appeals ar^d Justices of 
 ;he Supreme Court, shall severally receive, at stated 
 imes, for their services, a compensation to be establish- 
 ed by law; which sh;ill not be increased, or diminished 
 during their continuance in office. 
 
 8. They shall not hold any other office or public trust. 
 All votes for either of them lor any elective office, (ex- 
 cept that ot Justice ofthe Supreme Court, or Judge ofthe 
 'Jourt oi Appeals,) given by the legislature or the people 
 hall be void. They shall not exercise any power of ap 
 lointment to public office. Any male citizen of the age 
 )f twenty-one years, of good moral character, and who 
 >ossesses the requisite qualifications of learning and abil- 
 ty, shall be entitled to admission to practice ^in all the 
 ourts of this State. 
 
 ^ 9. The classification of the justices of the Supreme 
 "ourt; the times and place of holding the terms of the 
 Jourt of Appeals, and of the general and special terms of 
 he Supreme Court within the several districts, and the 
 
11 
 
 < ircuit Courts and Courts of Oyer and Termiuer \vithii 
 
 -oral counties, shall be provided lor by law. 
 10 The testimony in equity cases shall be taken in 
 
 Banner as in cases at law. 
 
 11. Justices of the Supreme Court and Judges of the 
 Court of Appeals, may be removed by concurrent resolu 
 tion of both houses of the legislature, if two-thirds of al 
 the members elected to the Assembly, and a majority o 
 all the members elected to the Senate concur therein. Al 
 judicial officers, except those mentioned in this section, 
 ^cept Justices of the Peace, and Judges, and Justices 
 of inferior courts not of record, may be removed by the 
 Senate, on the recommendation of the Governor ; but no 
 removal shall be made by virtue of this section, unless the 
 thereof be enteied on the journals, nor unless the 
 party complained of shall have been served with a copy 
 of the complaint against him, and shall ifave had an op- 
 portunity of being heard in his defence. On the ques- 
 tion of removal, the ayes and noes shall be entered on the 
 journals. 
 
 v} 1-2. The judges of the Court of Appeals shall be elect- 
 ed by the electors of the State, arid the justices ol the Su 
 prerae Court by the electors ot the several judicial dist 
 ricts, at such times as may be prescribed by law. 
 
 13. In case the office of any judge of the Court of Ap- 
 peals or justice of the Supreme Court shall become va- 
 cant before the expiration ol the regular term for which he 
 looted, the vacancy may be tilled by appointment by 
 the Governor, until it shall be supplied at the next general 
 election of judges, when it shall be failed by election ior 
 the residue of the unexpired term. 
 
 ^ 14 There shall be elected in each of the counties of 
 this State, except the city and county of New York, one 
 county judge, who shall hold his office for four years. 
 He shall hold the county court, and perform the duties of 
 the office of Surrogate. The county court shall have such 
 jurisdiction in cases arising injustices' courts and in spe- 
 cial cases, as the legislature may prescribe, but shall have 
 no original civil jurisdiction except in such special cases. 
 The county judge, with two justices of the peace, to be 
 designated according to law, may hold courts of sessions 
 with such criminal jurisdiction as the Legislature shall 
 prescribe, and perform such other duties as may be requir- 
 ed by law. 
 
 The county judge shall receive an annual salary, to be 
 fixed by the board of supervisors, which shall be neither 
 increased nor diminished during his continuance in office. 
 The justices of the peace, for services in courts of sessions, 
 shall be paid a per diem allowance out of the county trea- 
 sury. 
 
 In counties having a population exceeding forty thou- 
 sand, the Legislature may provide for the election of a 
 separate officer to perform the duties of the office of surro- 
 gate. 
 
 The legislature may confer equity jurisdiction iu special 
 casc.s upon the county juJge. 
 
 Inferior local couits, of civil and criminal jurisdiction 
 may be established by the legislature in cities; and surh 
 courts, except for the cities ol New York and Buffalo, shall 
 have an uniform organization aud jurisdiction in such 
 cities. 
 
 fj 15. The legislature may, on application of the board 
 of supervisor.-, provide lor the election of local officers, 
 not to exceed two in any county, to discharge the duties 
 of county judge and of surrogate, in cases oftheir inability 
 or of a vacancy, and to exercise such other powers in spe- 
 cial rases as may be provided by law 
 5) 16. The legislature may reorganize the judicial dis. 
 it the first session alter the return of every enume- 
 ration under t'ois Constitution, in the manner provided 
 tprtn the fourth section of this article, and at no other 
 time; and they may, at such session, increase or diminish 
 th" number of districts, but such increase or diminution 
 it be more than 0110 district at any one time. Each 
 shall have four Justices of the Supreme Court; but 
 no diminution of the districts shall have the effect to re- 
 move a judge from office. 
 
 lectors of the several towns shall, at their 
 annual town meeting, and in such manner as the legisla- 
 ture may direct, elect justices of the peace, whose term 
 ot office .shall be four years. Incase of an election to fill a 
 vacancy occurring before the expiration of a full term, 
 they shall hold for the residue of the unexpired term. 
 Their number and classification may be rtgulatedby law. 
 Justices of the peace and judges or justices of inferior I 
 courts not of record and their clerks may be removed after i 
 due notice and an opportunity of b?ing heard in their de- ! 
 fence by such county, city or state courts as may lie pre- 
 
 scribed by law, lor causes to be assigned in the order of re 
 moval. 
 
 18 All judicial officers of cities and villages and all 
 surh judicial officers as may be created therein by law, 
 shall be elected at such times and in such manner as the 
 legislature inny diiect. 
 
 ^ r.i. The clerks of the several counties of this state 
 shall be clerks of the supreme court, with such powers 
 ana duties as shall be prescribed by law. A clerk for the 
 court of appeals to be ex-ollicio clerk of the Supreme 
 court, and to keep his office at the .seat of government, 
 shall bt: chosen by the electors of the state; he shall hold 
 his office for three years, and his compensation shall be 
 fixed by law and paid out of the public treasury. 
 
 ^-20. No judicial officer, except justices of the peace, 
 shall receive, to his own use, any fees or perquisites of 
 office. 
 
 21. The legislature may authorize the judgments, de- 
 crees and decisions of any local inferior court of record of 
 original civil jurisdiction, established in a city, to be re- 
 moved tor review directly into the court of appeals. 
 
 '2-2. The legislature shall provide for the speedy publi- 
 cation of all statute laws, and of such judicial decisions 
 as it may deem expedient. And all laws and judicial 
 decisions shall be free for publication by any person. 
 
 ^23. Tribunals of conciliation may be established, with 
 such powers and duties as may be prescribed by law; but 
 such tribunals shall have no power to render judgment to 
 be obligatory on the parties except they voluntarily sub- 
 mit their matters in difference and agree to abide the judg- 
 ment, or assent thereto in the presence of such tribunal in 
 such cases as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 ^ -24. The legislature at its first session after the adop- 
 tion of this Constitution, shall provide for the appoint 
 ment of three commissioners, whose duty it shall be to re- 
 vise, reform, simplify and abridge the rules and practice, 
 pleadings, forms and proceedings of the courts of record 
 of this State, arid to report thereon to the legislature, sub- 
 ject to their adoption and modification from time to time. 
 
 26 The Legislature at its first session after the adop- 
 tion of this Constitution, shall provide for the organization 
 of the court of appeals, arid for transferring to it the busi- 
 ness pending in the court for the correction of errors, and 
 '.'or the allowance of writs of error and appeals to the court 
 of appeals, from the judgments and decrees of the present 
 court of chancery and supreme court, and of the courts 
 hat may be organized under this constitution. 
 
 sfS' ARTICLE VH. 
 
 SKCTION 1. After paying the expenses of collection, su- 
 perintendence and ordinary repairs, there shall be appro- 
 riatedand setapartin each fiscal year, out of the revenues 
 of the State canals, commencing on the first day of June, 
 S46, the sum of one million and three hundred thousand 
 dollars, until the first day of June 1855; and from that time 
 he sum of one million and seven hundred thousand dollars 
 n each fiscal year as a sinking fund to pay the interest and 
 redeem the principal of that part of the State debt called 
 he canal debt, as it existed at the time first aforesaid, and 
 ncluding three hundred thousand dollars then to be bor 
 owed, until the same shall be wholly paid; and the prin 
 :ipal and income ot the said sinking f und*shall be sacredly 
 applied to that purpose. 
 
 ^ -2. Alt j r complying with the provisions of the first 
 ection of this article, there shall be appropriated and set 
 ipart out of the surplus revenues of the State canals, in each 
 iscal year, commencing on the first day ol Juu , It-Jo', the 
 sum of three hundred and fifty thousand dollars, until the 
 time when a suili'-iont sum shall have been appropriated 
 ii!) 1 et apart, underthosaidfirst section, to pay the interest 
 and extinguish the entire principal of the canal debt; and af- 
 ter that period, then the sum ot one million and five hun- 
 dred thousand dollars in each fisr;p ' yea r, ?-s a sinking fund, 
 to pay the interest and redeem the principal of that part of 
 the State debt called the General Fund debt including the 
 debt for loans of the State credit to rail road companies 
 which have failed to pay the interest thereon, and also the 
 contingent dobt on State stocks loaned to incorporated 
 companies which have hitherto paid the interest thereon, 
 whenever and as far as any part thereof may become a 
 charge on the Treasury or General Fund, until the same 
 shall be wholly paid ; and the principal and income of the 
 said la>t mentio: c<i sinking fund shall be sacredly applied 
 to the purpose ;:lon;-nid ; and if the payment ot any part 
 of the monies to the said sinking fund shall at any time 
 be deferred, by reason of the priority recognized in the 
 lirst section of Ibis article, the sum so deferred, with quar- 
 terly interest thereon, at the then current rate, shall be 
 
12 
 
 paid to the last mentioned sinking fund, as soon as it can 
 be done consistently with thejut rights of the creditors 
 holding said canal debt. 
 
 ^ 3. After paying the said expenses of superintendence 
 and repairs of the canals, and the sums appropriated by 
 the first and second sections of this Aiticle, there shall bV 
 paid out of the surplus revenues of he canals, to the 
 Treasury of the State, on or before the thirtieth day of 
 September, in each year, for the use and benefit of the 
 General Fund, such sum, not exceeding $200,000, as may 
 be required to defray the necessary expenses of the State ; 
 and the remainder of the revenues of the said canals shall, 
 in each fiscal year, be applied, in such manner as the 
 Legislature shall direct, to the completion of the Erie 
 canal enlargement, and the Genesee Valley and Black 
 River canals, until the said canals shall be completed. 
 
 If at any time after the period of eight years from the 
 adoption of this Constitution, the revenues of the State, un- 
 appropriated by this article, shall not be sufficient to defray 
 the necessary expenses of the government, without con- 
 tinuing or laying a direct tax, the Legislature may, at its 
 discretion, supply the deficiency, in whole or in part, from 
 the surplus revenues of the canals, after complying with 
 the provisions of the first two sections of this article, for 
 paying the interest and extinguishing the principal of the 
 Canal and General Fund debt; but the sum thus appropri- 
 ated from the surplus revenues of the canals shall not ex- 
 ceed annually $350,000,including the sum of $ 200,000 provi- 
 ded for by this section for the expenses of the government, 
 until the General Fund debt shall be extinguished, or until 
 the Erie canal enlargement and Genesee Valley and Black 
 River canals shall be completed; and after that debt shall 
 be paid, or the said canals shall be completed, then the sum 
 of $672,500 or so much thereof as shall be necessary, may 
 be annually appropriated to defray the expenses of the 
 government. 
 
 4. The claims of the State against any incorporated 
 company to pay the interest and redeem the principal of 
 the stock of the State loaned or advanced to such company 
 shall be fairly enforced, and not released or compromised; 
 and the moneys arising from such claims shall be set apart 
 and applied as part of the sinking fund provided in the se- 
 cond section of this article. But the time limited lor the 
 fulfilment of any condition of any release or compromise 
 heretofore made or provided for, may be extended by law. 
 5. If the sinking funds, or either of them provided in 
 this article, shall prove insufficient to enable the State, on 
 the credit of such lund, to procure the means to satisfy the 
 claims of the creditors o( the State as they become pa) able, 
 the legislature shall, by equitable taxes, so increase the re- 
 yenues oi the said funds as to make them, respectively, 
 sufficient perfectly to preserve the public iaith. Every 
 contribution or advance to the canals or their debt, from 
 any source, other than theii din ct revenues, shall, with 
 quarterly interest, at the rates then current, be repaid into 
 the Treasury, ior the use oi the State, out of the canal re- 
 venues, as soon as it can be done consistently with the just 
 rights of the creditors holding the said canal debt. 
 
 6. The Legislature shall not sell, lease, or otherwise 
 dispose'of any of the canals of the State; but they shall 
 remain the property of the state and under its manage- 
 ment, forever. 
 
 ^7. The Legislature shall never sell or dispose oi the 
 salt springs, belonging to this State. The lands contiguous 
 thereto and wliich may be necessary and convenient for 
 the use of the salt springs, may be sold by authority of 
 law and under direction of the commissioners of the land 
 office, for the purpose of investing the moneys arising 
 therefrom in other lands alike convenient; but by such 
 sale and purchase the aggregatequaiitityof these lands shall 
 not be diminished. 
 
 8. No moneys shall ever be paid out of the Trea- 
 sury of this State, or any of its funds, or any of the 
 funds under its management, except in pursuance of an 
 appropriation by law; nor unless such payment be made 
 within two years next after the passage of such appropria- 
 tion act; and every such law making a new appropriation, 
 or continuing or reviving an appropriation, shall distinctly 
 specify the sum appropriated, and the object to which it is 
 to be applied; and it shall not be sufficient for such law to 
 refer to any other law to fix such sum. 
 
 9. The credit of the State shall not, in any manner, be 
 given or loaned to, or in aid of any individual, association 
 or corporation. 
 
 10. The State may, to meet casual deficits or failures in 
 revenues, or for expenses not provided for, contract debts, 
 but such debts, direct and contingent, singly or in the ag- 
 gregate, shall not, at any time, exceed one million of dol- 
 lars; and the moneys arising from the loans creating such 
 
 debts, shall be applied to the purpose for which they were 
 obtained, or to repay, the debt ^o contracted, and to no 
 other purpose whatever. 
 
 (j 11. In addition to the above limited power to contract 
 debts, the State may contract debts to repel invasion, sup- 
 press insurrection, or defend the State in war; but the mo- 
 ney arising from the contracting of such debts shall be ap- 
 plied to the purpose for which it was raised, or to repay 
 such debts, and to no other purpose whatever. 
 
 <j 12. Except the debts specified in the tenth and 
 eleventh sections of this article, no debt shall be hereaf- 
 ter contracted by or ou behalf ol this State, unless such 
 debt shall be authorized by a law for some single work or 
 object to be distinctly spcciiiedtherein, and such law shall 
 impose and provide for the collection of a direct annual 
 tax to pay, and sufficient to pay the interest on such debt 
 as it falls due, and also to pay and discharge the principal 
 of such debt within eighteen years from the time of the 
 contracting thereof. 
 
 No such law shall take effect until it shall, at a general 
 election, have been submitted to the people, and have re- 
 ceived a majority of all the votes cast for and against it, at 
 such election. 
 
 On the final passage of such bill in either house of the 
 Legislature, the question shall be taken by ayes and noes, 
 to be duly entered on the journals thereof, and shall be: 
 'Shall this bill pass, and ought the same to receive the 
 sanction of the people." 
 
 The Legislature may at any time, after the approval of 
 such law by the people, if no debt shall have been 
 contracted, in pursuance thereof, repeal the same ; 
 and may at any time, by law, forbid the contracting 
 of any further debt or liability under such law; but 
 the tax imposed by such act, in proportion to the debt and 
 liability which may have been contracted in pursuance of 
 such law, shall remain in force and be irrepealable, and be 
 annually collected, until the proceeds thereof shall have 
 made the provision herein before specified, to pay and dis- 
 charge the interest and principal of such debt and liability. 
 
 The money arising from any loan or stock creating such 
 debtor liability, shall be applied to the work or object 
 specified in the act authorising such debtor liability, or 
 for the repayment of such debt or liability, and lor no 
 other purpose whatever. 
 
 No such law shall be submitted to be voted on, within 
 three months alter its passage, or at any general election, 
 when any other law, or any bill, or any amendment to the 
 Constitution, shall be submitted to be voted for or against 
 
 13. Every law which imposes, continues, or revives a 
 tax, shall distinctly state the tax and the object to which 
 it is to be applied, and it shall not be sufficient to refer to 
 any other law to fix such tax or olject. 
 
 14. On the final passage, in either house of the legisla- 
 tuie, of every act which imposes, continues, or revives a 
 tax, or creates a debt or charge, or makes, continues or re- 
 vives any appropriation of public or trust money, or prop- 
 erty;or leleases, discharges or commutes any claim or de. 
 inand of the State, the question shall be taken by ayes and 
 noes, which shall be duly entered on the journals, and 
 three fifths of all the members elected to either house, shall 
 in all such case?, be necessary to constitute a quorum 
 therein. 
 
 ARTICLE VIII. 
 
 SKC. 1. Corporations may be formed under general laws; 
 but shall not be created by special act.except for municipal 
 purposes, and in cases where in the judgement of the Le- 
 gisla'ure, th objects of the corporation cannot be attaired 
 under general laws. All general laws and special acts 
 passed pursuant to this section, may be altered from time 
 to time or repealed. 
 
 2. Dues from corporations shall be secured by such 
 individual liability of the corporators and other means as 
 may be prescribed by lew. 
 
 ^~3. The term corporations as used in this article shall 
 be construed to include all associations and joint-stock 
 companies having any of the powers or privileges oi cor- 
 porations not possessea by individuals or partnerships. 
 And all corporations shall have the right to sue and shall 
 be subject to be sued in all courts in like cases as natural 
 persons. 
 
 ^ 4. The Legislature shall have no power to pass any 
 act granting any special charter for banking purposes; 
 put corporations or associations may be formed for such 
 burposes under general laws. 
 
 5. The Legislature shall have no power to pass any 
 law sanctioning in any manner, directly or indirectly, the 
 suspension of specie payments, by any person, association 
 or corporation issuing bank notes of any description. 
 
13 
 
 6. The legislature shall provide by law for the regis- 
 try of all bills or' notes, issued or put in circulation as mo- 
 ney , and shall require ample security for the redemption 
 of the same in specie. 
 
 7. The stockholders in every corporation and joint- 
 stock association for banking purposes, issuing bank notes 
 or any kind of paper credits to circulate as money, alter the 
 first day of January 1850, shall be individually responsible 
 to the amount of their respective share or shares oi stock 
 in any such corporation or asssciation, for all its debts and 
 liabilities of every kind, contracted after the said first day of 
 January 1S50. 
 
 8. In case of the insolvency of any bank or banking as- 
 sociation, the bill-holders thereof shall be entitled to pre- 
 ference in payment, over all other creditors of such bank 
 or association. 
 
 ^ 9. It shall be the duty of the legislature to provide for 
 the organization of cities and incorporated villages, and 
 to restrict their power of taxation, assessment, borrowing 
 money, contracting debts and loaning their credit, so as 
 to prevent abuses in assessments and in contracting debt 
 by such municipal corporations. 
 
 ARTICLE IX. 
 
 SECTION 1. The capital of the conynon school fund, the 
 capital oi the literature fun.l, and the capital of the United 
 States deposit fund, shall be respectively preserved invio- 
 late. The revenue of the said common school fund shall be 
 applied to the support of the common schools; the revenues 
 of the sai<l literature fund shall be applied to the support 
 of academies and the sum of $25,000 of the revenues of the 
 U. States deposit fund shall iach year be appropriated to 
 and made part of the capital of the said common school 
 fund. 
 
 ARTICLE X. 
 
 SECTION 1. Sheriffs, clerks of counties, including the 
 register and clerk of the city and county of New York, co- 
 roners and district atterneys, shall be chosen by the elec- 
 tors of the respective coumies, once in every three years 
 and as often as vacancies shall happen. Sheriffs shall hold 
 no other office, and be ineligible for the next three years 
 after the termination of their offices. They may be re- 
 quired by law, to renew their security, from time to time 
 and in default of giving such new security, their offices 
 shall be deemed vacant. But the count3 r shall never be 
 made responsible lor the acts of the Sheriff. 
 
 The Governor may remove any officer in this section 
 mentioned, with in the term for which he shall have, been 
 electt d; giving tr> such officer a copy of the charges against 
 him, and an oppoiumity of being heard in his defence. 
 
 ^ "2 All county ofdcers whose electionor appointmentis 
 not provided :'or by this constitution, shall be elected by 
 the electors of the respective counties, or appointed by the 
 boards of supervisors, or other county authorities, as the 
 legislature shall direct. All city, town and village offi- 
 cers whose election or appointment is not provided for by 
 this constitution, shall be elected by the electors of such 
 cities, towns and villages, or of some division thereof, or 
 appointed by such authorities thereof as the legislature 
 shall designate for that purpose. All other officers whose 
 election or appointment is not provided for by this consti- 
 tution, and all officers whose offices may hereafter be cre- 
 ated by law, shall be elected by the people or appointed, 
 as the Legislature may direct. 
 
 ^3. When the duration of any office is not provided by 
 *his constitution, it may be declared by law, and if not so 
 declared, such office shall be held, during the pleasure of 
 the authority making the appointment. 
 
 \j 4. The time of electing ail officers named in this arti- 
 cle shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 ^5 The Legislature shall provide for filling vacancies 
 in office, and in case of elective officers, no person appoin- 
 ted to fill a vacancy shall hold his office by virtue oi such 
 appointment longer than the commencement of the politi- 
 cal year next succeeding the first annual election after the 
 happening of the vacancy. 
 
 () 6. The political year and legislative term, shall begin 
 on the first day of January ; and tlie legislature shall, every 
 year, assemble on the fir^t Tuesday in January, unless a 
 different day shall be appointed by law. 
 
 <} 7. Provision shall be made by law for the removal for 
 misconduct or malversation in office of all officers (except 
 judicial) whose powers and duties are not local or legisla- 
 tive und who shall be elected at general elections arid also 
 for supplying vacancies created by such removal. 
 
 Jj 8. The Legislature may declare the cases in which any 
 office shall be deemed vacant, when no provision is made 
 for that purpose in this Constitution. 
 
 ARTICLE XI. 
 
 SECTION!. The militia of this State shall at all times 
 hereafter be armed and disciplined, and in readiness for 
 service; but all such inhabitants of this State of any reli- 
 gious denomination whatever, as from scruples of con- 
 science may be averse to bearing arms, shall be excused 
 therefrom, upon such conditions as shall be prescribed by 
 law. 
 
 2 Militia officers shall be chosen, or appointed, as fol- 
 lows: Captains, subalterns, and non-commissioned offi- 
 cers, shall be chosen by the written votes of the members 
 of their respective companies. Field officers of regiments 
 and separate battalions, by the written votes of the com- 
 missioned officers of the respective regiments and sepa- 
 rate battalions; Brigadier Generals and Brigade Inspectors 
 by the field officers of their respective brigades. Major 
 Generals, Brigadier Generals and commanding officers of 
 regiments or separate battalions, shall appoint the staff of- 
 ficers to their respective divisions, brigades, regiments or 
 separate battalions. 
 
 ^ 3. The Governor shall nominate, and with the consent 
 of the Senate, appoint all major generals, and the commis- 
 sary general. The adjutant general and other chiefs of 
 staff departments, and the aids de-camp of the commander- 
 in chief shall be appointed by the Governor, and their 
 commissions shall expire with the time for which the Gov- 
 ernor shall have been elected. The commissary general 
 shall hold his office for two years. He shall give security 
 for the faithful execution of the duties of his office in such 
 manner and amount as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 ^ 4. The Legislature shall by law, direct the time and 
 manner of electing militia officers, and of certifying their 
 elections to the Governor. 
 
 5. The commissioned officers of the militia shall be 
 commissioned by the Governor; and no commissioned offi- 
 cer shall be removed from office, unless by the Senate on 
 the recommendation of the Governor, stating the grounds 
 on which such removal is recommended, or by the deci- 
 sion of a court martial, pursuant to law. The present offi- 
 cers of the militia shall hold their commissions subject to 
 removal, as before provided. 
 
 6. In case the mode of election and appointment of mi- 
 litia officers hereby directed, shall not be found conducive 
 to the improvement of the militia, the Legislature may 
 abolish the same, and provide by law for their appoint- 
 ment and removal, if two-thirds of the members present 
 in each house shall concur therein. 
 
 ARTICLE XII. 
 
 SECTION 1. Members of the legislature and all officers, 
 executive and judicial, except such inferior officers as may 
 be by luw exempted, shall, belore they enter on the du- 
 ties of their respective oilice.-:, take and subscribe the fol. 
 lowing oath or affirmation : 
 
 "I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be), 
 that I will support the Constitution of the United States, 
 and the Constitution of the State of New York; and that I 
 will faithfully discharge the duties of accord- 
 ing to the best of my ability." 
 
 And no other oath, declaration or test shall be required 
 as a qualification tor any office or public trust. 
 
 ARTICLE XIII. 
 
 SECTION 1 . Any amendment or amendments to this Con- 
 stitution may be proposed in the Senate and Assembly; and 
 it the same shall be. agreed to by a majority of the members 
 elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amend- 
 ment or amendments hall be entered on their journals 
 with the yeas and nays taken thereon, and referred to the 
 legislature to be choswn at the next general election of Se- 
 nators, and shall be published lor three months previous to 
 the time of making such choice, and if in the legislatu.e so 
 next chosen, as aforesaid, such pn posed amendment or 
 amendments, thall be agreed to, by a majority of all the 
 members elected to each house, then it shall be the duty 
 of the legislature to submit such proposed amendment or 
 amendments to the people ,iu sucli manner and at such time 
 as the legislature shall prescribe; andif the people shall 
 approve and ratify such amendment or amendments, by a 
 majority of the electors qualified to vote for members of the 
 legislature, voting thereon, such amendment or amend- 
 ments shall become part of the Constitution. 
 
 2. At the general election to be held in the year eigh- 
 teen hundred and sixty. six, and in each twentieth year 
 thereafter, and also at such time as the legislature may by 
 law provide, the question " Shall there be aConventionto 
 revise the Constitution, and amend the same?" shall be de- 
 cided by the electors qualified to vote for members of the 
 
14 
 
 legislature; arid in case a majority of theelectors so qual- 
 ified, voting at such election, shall decide in favor of a Con- 
 venliun for such purpose, the legislature at its next ses- 
 sion, shall provide by law for the election of delegates to 
 *uch Convention. 
 
 ARTICLE XIV. 
 
 SECTION 1. The first election of senators andmembers of 
 Assembly, pursuant to the provisions ot this Constitution, 
 shall be held on the Tuesday succeeding the first Monday 
 ot November, one thousand eight hundred and forty-seven. 
 The senators and members of Assembly who may be in 
 office on the lirst day of January, one thousand eight hun- 
 dred and forty-seven, shall hold their offices until and in 
 eluding the thirty-first day of December following, and no 
 longer. 
 
 -2. The first election of Governor and Lieutenant Gov- 
 ernor under this Constitution, shall be held on the Tuesday 
 succeeding the first Monda\ of November, 1848; and the 
 Governor and Lieutenant Governor in office when this 
 Constitution shall take effect, shall hold their respective 
 offices until and including the 31st day of December of that 
 year. 
 
 3. The Secretary of State, Comptroller, Treasurer, At- 
 torney General, District Attorney, Surveyor General, Ca' 
 nal Commissioners, Inspectors of State Prisons, in office 
 when this Constitution shall take effect, shall hold their 
 respective offices until and including the 31st day of De- 
 cember, 1847, and no longer. 
 
 4. The first election of judges and clerk of the Court 
 of Appeals, justices of the Supreme Court, and county 
 judges, shall take place at such time between the first 
 Tuesday of April and the second Tuesday of June, 1847, 
 as may be prescribed by law. The said courts shall re- 
 spectively enter upon their duties, on the first Monday of 
 July, next thereafter; but the term of office of said judges, 
 clerk and justices as declared by this Constitution, shall 
 be deemed to commence on the first day of January, 1848 
 
 6. On the first Monday of July, 1847, jurisdiction of all 
 suits and proceedings then pending in the present Supreme 
 Court ant Court of Chancery, and all suits and proceed- 
 ings originally commenced and then pending in any court 
 of common pleas, (except in the city and county of New. 
 York,) shall become vested in the Supreme Court hereby 
 established. Proceedings pending in courts of common 
 pleas and insults oiiginally commenced in justices' courts, 
 shall be transferred to the county courts provided for in 
 this Constitution, in such manner and form, and under 
 such regulations, as shall be provided by law. The courts 
 of Oyer and Terminer hereby established, shall in their 
 respective counties have jurisdiction on and after the day 
 last mentioned, of all indictments and proceedings then 
 pending in the present courts of Oyer and Terminer; and 
 also of all indictmenis and proceedings then pending in the 
 present courts of General Sessions of the Peace, except in 
 the city of New-York, and except in cases of which the 
 Courts of Sessions hereby established, may lawfully take 
 cognizance; and of such indictments and proceeding the 
 Courts of Sessions hereby established, shall have jurisdic- 
 tion on and after the day last mentioned. 
 
 6. The Chancellor and the present Supreme Court 
 shall,respectively,have power to hear and determine anyof 
 such suits and proceedings ready on the first Monday 
 of July, 1847, forbearing or decision, and shailfor their Cer- 
 vices therein, be entitled to their present rates of compen- 
 sation until the first day of July, 1848, or until all such 
 suits and proceedings shall be sooner heard and de- 
 termined. Masters in chancery may continue to ex- 
 ercise the functions of their office in the court of chance- 
 ry, so long as the Chancellor shall continue to exercise 
 the functions of his office under the provisions of this con- 
 stitution. 
 
 And the Supreme Court hereby established, shall also 
 have power to hear and determine such of said suits and 
 proceedings as may be prescribed by law. 
 
 k 7. In case any vacancy shall occur in the office of chan- 
 cellor or justice of the present Supreme Court, previously 
 to the 1st day of July, 1848, the Governor may nominate, 
 and by and with the" ad vice and consent of the Senate, ap- 
 point a proper person to fill such vacancy. Any judge of 
 the Court of Appeals or justice of the Supreme Court, elec- 
 ted under this Constitution, may receive and hold such 
 appointment. 
 
 8. The offices of Chancellor, Justice of the existing 
 Supreme Court, Circuit Judge, Vice Chancellor, Assist- 
 ant Vice Chancellor, Judge of the existing county courts 
 of each county, Supreme Court Commissioner, master in 
 chancery, examiner in chancery, and surrogate (except 
 
 as herein otherwise provided),-^re abolished from and af- 
 ter the 1st Monday, July, 1H47. 
 
 ^ 9. The Chancellor, the justices of the present Supremo 
 Court, and the circuit judges, are hereby declared to be se- 
 verally eligible to any office at the first election under this 
 Constitution. 
 
 tjlO. Sheriffs, and clerks of counties (including the reg- 
 ister and clerk of the city and county of New-York) , and 
 justices of the peace, and coroners, in office when this 
 Constitution shall take effect, shall hold their respective 
 offices until the expiration of the term for which they were 
 respectively elected 
 
 11. Judicial officers in office when this Constitution 
 shall take effect, may continue to receive such fees and 
 perquisites of office as are now authorized by law, until 
 the first day of July, 1847, notwithstanding the provisions 
 of the 20th section of the sixth article of this Constitution. 
 12. All local courts established in any city or village, 
 including the Superior Court, Common Pleas, Sessions, 
 Surrogates' Courts of the city and county of New-York, 
 shall remain, until otherwise directed by the legislature, 
 with their present powers and jurisdiction ; and the judges 
 of such courts, and any clerks thereof in office on the first 
 day of January, 1847, shall continue in office until the ex- 
 piration of their terms of office, or until the legislature shall 
 otherwise direct. 
 
 13. This Constitution shall be in force from and includ- 
 ing the first day of January, 1847,except as is herein other- 
 wise provided. 
 
 Done in Convention, at the Capitol, in the City of Al- 
 bany, the ninth day of October, in the year one thou- 
 sand eight hundred and forty-six, and of the Indepen- 
 dence of the United States of America the seventy- 
 first. 
 
 In witness whereof, we have hereunto subscribed our 
 names. JOHN TRACY, President, 
 
 And delegate from the county of Chenango. 
 JAMES F. STARBUCK, } 
 FRANCIS SEGER, > Secretaries. 
 HENRY W. STRONG, ) 
 STATF. OF NEW- YORK, ) 
 SECRETARY'S Office. $ 
 
 I have compared the preceding with the original en- 
 grossed Constitution deposited in this office on the ninth 
 day of October, 1846, and Do Certify, that the same is a 
 correct transcript therefrom, and of the whole of said ori. 
 nal* 
 
 Given under my hand and seal of office, at the 
 city of Albany, the tenth day of October, 1,1 the 
 ye;irofour Lord, one thousand eight hundred 
 and forty six. N. S. BLNTON, 
 
 Secretary of State. 
 
 The names of the following Delegates are appended to 
 the said engrossed Constitution: 
 
 ROBEB/T CAMPBELL, jr., 
 GEORGE C. CLYDE, 
 CHARLES P. KIRKLAND, 
 SAMUEL RICHMOND, 
 FEDERAL DANA, 
 JOHN MILLER, 
 ROBERT C. NICHOLAS, 
 ORNON ARCHER, 
 PETER YAWGER, 
 MOSES TAGGART, 
 STEPHEN ALLEN, 
 JOHN T. HARRISON, 
 DANIEL JOHN SHAW, 
 JOHN J.WOOD, 
 JULIUS CANDEE, 
 B. S. BRUNDAGE, 
 GEO. W. PATTERSON, 
 WM. B. WRIGHT, 
 ABSALOM BULL, 
 BENJ. F. BRUCE, 
 W. MAXWELL, 
 JOHN YOUNGS, 
 JOHN L. STEPHENS, 
 CAMPBELL P. WHITE, 
 W. G. ANGEL, 
 HARRY BACKUS, 
 GEO. S. MA.NN, 
 CYRUS H. KINGSLEY, 
 ENOCH STRONG, 
 ROBT. H. MORRIS, 
 DAVID MUNRO, 
 RUSSEL PARISH, 
 AARON SALISBURY, 
 
 GOUV. KEMBLE, 
 SAMUEL J. T1LDEN, 
 ELIJAH SPENCER, 
 ELIJAH RHOADES, 
 HEN. C MURPHY, 
 JOHN NELLIS, 
 ELISHA W. SHELDON, 
 HENRY NICOLL, 
 W.H.V'N S( HOONHOVEN. 
 E. M. McNEIL, 
 ARPHAXED LOOMIS, 
 CHARLES H. RUGGLES, 
 JOHN K. PORTER, 
 J. L. RIKER, 
 JAMES TALLMADGE, 
 WILLIAM TAYLOR, 
 GEORGE W. TUTH1LL, 
 AB R A M W I TB E C K , 
 PERRY WARREN, 
 L. B SHEPAE1), 
 TUNIS G. BERGEN, 
 ALBERT L. BAKER, 
 ANSEL BASCOM, 
 JOHN BOWDI8H, 
 IIERVEY BRAYTON, 
 ISAAC BURR, 
 JAMES M. COOK, 
 B. F. CORNELL, 
 GEO. A. S. CROOKER, 
 LEWIS CUDDEBACK, 
 RT. DORLON, 
 GEO. G. GRAHAM, 
 A. S. GREENE, 
 
15 
 
 C. SWACKHAMER, 
 HORATIO N. TAFT, 
 SOLOMON TOWNSEND, 
 WM. C. BOUCK, 
 FREDERICK F. BACKUS, 
 JOHN li. HUNT. 
 
 WM. S (JON ELY, 
 ALLEN AYRAULT, 
 JOHN J. TAYLOR, 
 JONAH SANFORD, 
 JNO. LESLIE RUSSEL, 
 
 D. R. FLOYD JONES, 
 C. C. CAMBRELENG, 
 G. T. CHAMBERLAIN, 
 ANDREW \V. YOI..NG, 
 A. \V . DAN FORTH, 
 EDWARD DOUD, 
 I'KTEK K. DUB01S, 
 JOSEPH R. FLANDERS, 
 JA.MKa C. FORSVTH, 
 JOHN GEBHARD. Jr. 
 THOMAS B. SEARS, 
 DAVID B. ST. JOHN, 
 
 IRA HARRIS, 
 ORRIS HART, 
 ALONZO HAWLEY, 
 MR HAEL HOFFMAN, 
 WILLIAM HOTCHK1SS, 
 ABEL HUNT1NGTON, 
 EDWARD HUNT1NGTON 
 J. L. HUTCH1NSON, 
 JOHN HYDE, 
 PETER SHAVER, 
 DAVID S. WATERBURY 
 WILLIAM KERNAN, 
 CH. O'CONOR, 
 RICH. P. MARVIN, 
 H. K. WILLARD, 
 BISHOP PERKINS, 
 JAMES POWERS, 
 BENJAMIN STANTON, 
 L. STETSON, 
 JOHN W. BROWN, 
 AARON WARD, 
 ALVAH WORDEN, 
 AMOS WRIGHT, 
 
 SECRETARY'S OFFICE. I 
 
 ALBANY, October 12th, 1846. $ 
 
 Instructions and forms prepared by the Secretary 
 State, in obedience to the following resolution, adopted bj 
 the Convention to revise the constitution, and of the ac 
 recommending a convention of the people of this state: 
 Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the Secretary o 
 State to cause the constitution, as proposed to be amend 
 ed, together with the forms of the ballots, to be publishe 
 at least twice, prior to the election, in each of the publi 
 newspapers published in this state, provided the same shal 
 be published for such reasonable compensation as shall be 
 fixed by the Secretary of State and Comptroller, but no ne 
 gleet to publish the s'ame in any of the papers of this stati 
 shall impair the validity of the notice. 
 
 Form of the ballot to be used by those electors who vote 
 for the constitution, as proposed to be amended: 
 
 CONSTITUTION. 
 
 If Amended Constitution, Yes." 
 Form of the ballot to be used by those electors who vote 
 against the constitution, as proposed to be amended: 
 
 CONSTITUTION. 
 
 " Amended Constitution, No." 
 
 An amendment in relation to the equal suffrage of color 
 ed persons, separate from those incorporated m the en. 
 grossed Constitution, is also submitted to be voted upon at 
 tlie same time, with a separate ballot, which is to be de- 
 posited in 3 .separate box. 
 
 Form of tae hallo t to be used by those electors who vote 
 for this proposed amendment: 
 
 CONSTITUTION: SUFFRAGE. 
 " Equal Suffrage to Colored Persons, Yes." 
 Form of the ballot to be used by those electors who vote 
 against this proposed amendment: 
 
 CONSTITUTION: SUFFRAGE. 
 
 " Equal Suffrage to Colored Persons, No." 
 
 Form of the poll lists to be kept by the clerks of election: 
 
 Names of 
 
 State Box. Constitutional Constitutional 
 
 Voters. 
 
 
 Box. Box. 
 
 
 
 Amended > Suffrage to 
 
 
 
 Constitution. 
 
 colored per- 
 
 
 
 
 sons: 
 
 
 
 
 Separate A- 
 
 
 
 
 mendmtnt. 
 
 
 
 
 
 No. 1. 
 CERTIFICATE OF CANVASS. 
 
 We, the board of inspectors of election in and for the 
 
 election district of the town of (or of the 
 
 ward of the city of ,) in the county of , do 
 
 certify that the following is a correct statement of the 
 votes taken at the general election held in said district on 
 the day of November, one thousand eight hundred and 
 forty-six, pursuant to the act entitled "An act recommend- 
 ing a convention of the people of this state," passed May 
 13th, 1845, chapter '26-2, to wit : 
 
 That the whole number of ballots received at the said 
 election having thereon the words " amended constitution 
 Yes," was 
 
 And that the whole number of ballots also received at 
 
 the said election having thereon the words " amended 
 constitution, No," was 
 
 That the whole number of ballots received at the same 
 election having thereon the words " equal suffrage to co 
 lored persons 7 Yes," was 
 
 And that the whole number of ballots received at the 
 said election having thereon the words " equal suffrage to 
 colored persons 1 No," was 
 
 We do hereby certify that the above statement is cor- 
 rect in all respects. Dated at , November A D. 
 1846. 
 
 The number of ballots or votes must be written at full 
 length, and must not be put down in figures or abbrevi- 
 ated. 
 
 No. 2. 
 COUNT ST CANVASS. 
 
 Statement in relation to the amended constitution and 
 the amendment separately submitted relating to equal suf- 
 frage to colored persons : 
 
 The board of county canvassers of the county of , 
 
 having met at the office of the clerk of said county, on the 
 of November, 1S46, to canvass and estimate the votes 
 given in the several election distiicts in said county at the 
 general election held on the day of November.iu the year 
 aforesaid, and having received the statements of the votes 
 taken in each election district of the said county in pur- 
 suance of the act chapter 262, entitled an act recommend- 
 ing a Convention of the people of this state," passed May 
 13th, 1845, do certify that the whole number of votes or 
 ballots given at the said election and having thereon the 
 words "amended Constitution, Yes," was 
 
 And that the w : hole number of votes or ballots given at 
 the s'ame time, and having thereon the words " amended 
 Constitution, No," was 
 
 That the whole number of votes or ballots given at the 
 same election and having thereon the words, " equal 
 suffrage to colored persons'? \ es" was 
 
 Ana the whole number of votes or ballots given as afore- 
 said and having thereon the words, " equal suffrage to col- 
 ored persons'? No" was 
 
 In witness whereoi we have caused this statement to be 
 Httcsted according to law by the signatures of our Chair- 
 
 an and Secretary. A. B., Chairman. 
 
 C. D , County Clerk and Secretary. 
 
 Care must betaken to iiii the blanks with words writ- 
 ten out at full length and not with figures. 
 
 If there were not any votas given for or against the 
 '' amended Constitution" or lor or againit the provision re- 
 lating to " equal suffrage to colored persons, " the fact 
 should be stated, and usiug the words " not any" in the 
 blank alter the printed word '< was" will be sufficient. 
 
 The Secretary of State and Comptroller have fixed the 
 compensation to be paid to the publisher ol any newspa- 
 per, in this state, who may p ibJish the foregoing amend- 
 ed constitution twice in two consecutive weeks with 
 hese instructions and forms, at twenty-five dollars, which 
 sum will be paid at the treasury on producing due proof 
 *o the Comptroller of the said publication. 
 
 Those who desire to publish the said constitution and 
 nstructions upon the foregoing terms must copy thein- 
 itrumunt published in the Albany Argus of this date, as it 
 s not intended to send from this office a circular contain- 
 ng the constitution and these instructions addressed to the 
 everal newspaper publishers. 
 
 N. S. BENTON, Secretary of State. 
 N CONVENTION OF THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW. 
 
 YORK, assembled at Albany, on the first day of June, in 
 
 the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and 
 forty-six, pursuant to an act of the kgislature of said 
 state, entitled ' An act recommending a Convention of 
 the People of this State," passed Aiay f3, 1845. 
 Resolved. That in the judgment of this convention, the 
 everal amendments to the constitution agreed to by this 
 ony miorij cannot be prepared so as to be voted upon se- 
 arately. 
 
 Resoived, That the form of the ballots, to be given for 
 lie adoption or rejection of the said amendments shall be 
 s follows; on such ballots as are given in favor of the 
 doption of the said amendments shall be written or print- 
 d or partly written and partly printed, the words 
 'Jlmended Constitution, yes;" and on such ballots as are 
 iveii against the adoption of said amendments shall bo 
 n-itten or printed or partly written or partly printed -the 
 rords ' intended Constitution,No," and the word " COH 
 Utution" shall be written or printed or partly written and 
 artly printed upon the said ballots in such manner as that 
 /hen such ballots are folded it shall appear upon the out 
 : de thereof. 
 
16 
 
 Resolved, That 10,000 copies of these resolutions,with the 
 said amendments, with the Address of the Convention and 
 also the present constitution subjoined, be printed; and 
 that the Comptroller cause fifty copies thereof to be for- 
 warded without delay, and at the expense of the slate, to 
 each member of this convention, and that the remainder in 
 like manner be transmitted by him to the several county 
 clerks, whose duty it shall be to distribute the same among 
 the different towns and wards in this state; also that said 
 amendments be published in the State paper weekly, un- 
 til the next election. 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretary of State forward immedi- 
 ately, to the several county clerks and sheriffs of this state, 
 a copy of the foregoing first and second resolutions. 
 And the said clerks and sheriffs shall cause the said reso- 
 lutions to be published once in each week in each news 
 paper published in their respective counties, until the next 
 election, and also a notice that the said amendments will 
 be voted upon at the next general election in the several 
 election districts ot the state. 
 
 Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of 
 State to cause the constitution as proposed to be amended, 
 together with the forms of the ballots, to be published at 
 least twice prior to the election in each of the public news- 
 papers published in this state, provided the same shall be 
 published for such reasonable compensation as shall be 
 fixed by the Secretary of State and Comptroller; but no 
 neglect to publish the same in any of the papers of this 
 state shall impair the validity of the notice. 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretary of State examine and 
 compare the printed copies of the constitution order- 
 ed by this convention, with the engrossed copy, this day 
 filed in the Secretary's office, and certify the same offi- 
 cially. 
 
 Resolved, That at the next general election, and at the 
 same time when the votes of the electors shall be taken 
 for tne adoption or rejection of the amended Constitution, 
 the additional amendment in the words following: 
 
 " ^ . Colored male citizens, possessing the qualifica- 
 tions required by the first section of the second article oi 
 the Constitution, other than the property qualification, 
 shall have the right to vote for all officers that now are, or 
 hereafter may be, elective by the people after the first day 
 of January, 1847," 
 
 Shall be separately submitted to the electors of this State 
 for adoption, or rejection, in form following, to wit: 
 
 A separate ballot may be given by every person, hav- 
 ing the right to vote for the amended Constitution, to be 
 deposited in a separate box. 
 
 Upon the ballots given for the adoption of the said sepa- 
 rate amendment, shall be written or printed, or partly 
 written and partly printed, the words, Equal suffrage to 
 colored persons? Yes." 
 
 And upon the ballots given against the adoption of tne 
 said separate amendment, in like manner the words, 
 
 " Equal suffrage to colored persons ? No." 
 
 And on such ballots shall be written or printed, or partly 
 written and partly printed, the words, 
 
 " Constitution : Suffrage?' 
 
 In such manner that such words shall appear on the oth- 
 er side of such ballot when folded. 
 
 If, at the said election, a majority of all the votes given 
 for ;>nd against the said separate amendment shall contain 
 the words " Equal suffrage to colored persons? Yes," then 
 the said separate amendment, after the first day of Jauua- 
 
 2, 1847, shall be a separate section of article second of 
 e Constitution, in full force and effect, any thing con- 
 tained in the Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding. 
 Resolved, That the last preceding resolution be caused 
 to be published, in the manner specified in the resolution 
 
 of the Convention relative tosthe notice of the time and 
 manner of voting for the amended Constitution. 
 By order of the Convention. 
 
 JOHN TRACY, President, 
 And Delegate from the county of Chenango. 
 JAMES F. STARBUCK, ) 
 FRANCIS SEGER, > Secretaries. 
 HENRY W. STRONG, ) 
 
 IN CONVENTION, 
 
 ALBANY, October 9, 1846. 
 
 The Delegates of the People in Convention, having ter- 
 minated their deliberations, present to you the result of 
 their labors in an amended Constitution of fourteen Arti- 
 cles, to be considered together, for your adoption. They 
 have presented for your separate consideration, a section 
 relative to suffrage, equally applicable to the present and 
 proposed constitution. 
 
 In these fourteen articles, they have reorganized the le- 
 gislature; established more limited districts for the elec- 
 tion ot the members of that body, and wholly sepaiated it 
 from the exercise ofjudicial power The most important 
 state officers have been made elective by the people of the 
 state; and most of the officers ol cities, towns and counties, 
 are made elective by ton voters of the locality they serve. 
 They have abolished a host of useless offices. They have 
 sought at once to reJuce and decentralize the patronage 
 of the Executive government. They have rendered invi- 
 olate *he funds devoted to Education. After repeated fail- 
 ures in the legislature, they have provided a Judicial Sys- 
 tem, adequate~to the wants of a free people, rapidly in- 
 creasing in arts, culture, commerce and population. They 
 have made provision for the payment of the whole State 
 Debt, and the completion of the Public Works begun. 
 While that debt is in the progress ol payment, they have 
 provided a large contribut c on from the canal revenues to- 
 wards the current expenses of the state, and sufficient for 
 that purpose, when the state debt shall have been paid ; 
 and have placed strong safeguards against the recurrence 
 of debt, and the improvident expenditure of the public mo- 
 ney. They have agreed on important provisions in relatiun 
 to 'the mode of creating incorporations, and the liability of 
 their members; and have sought to render the business of 
 banking more safe and responsible. They have incorpo- 
 rated many useful provisions more effectually to secure 
 the people in their rights of person and property against 
 the abuses of delegated power. They have modified the 
 power of the Legislature, with the direct consent of the 
 people, to amend the Constitution from time to time, and 
 have secured to the people ot the state, the right once in 
 twentv years to pass directly on the question, whether 
 they will call a Convention for the revision of the Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 These articles embrace all the provisions, agreed upon 
 by the Convention, to constitute the Constitution of the 
 State. They are of course very numerous, often depend- 
 ent one upon aaother, and can be best considered, as a 
 whole; and the Convention have not found it practicable 
 to separate them into parts to be separately passed upon by 
 the people. 
 
 The Convention have therefore presented the subject 
 in the form that will best enable the people to judge be- 
 tween the old and the new Constitution. If the Constitu- 
 tion now proposed be adopted, the happiness and progress 
 of the People of this State, will, under God, be in their 
 own hands. By order of the Convention, 
 
 JOHN TRACY, President, 
 And Delegate from the county of Chenango. 
 
 JAMES F. STARBUCK, ) 
 
 FRANCIS SEGER, > Secretaries. 
 
 HENRY W. STRONG, ) 
 
CONVENTION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 STATE OF FEW-YORK. 
 
 ASSEMBLY CHAMBER, 
 ALBANY, Monday, June 1, 1846. 
 
 In pursuance of the Act recommending a Convention of the People of this 
 State, passed May 13, 1845, the Delegates assembled at the Capitol, 
 in the City of Albany, on this day. 
 
 At 12 o'clock, the Hon. NATHANIEL S. BEN- 
 TON, Secretary of State, appeared and stated that 
 in obedience to the aforesaid Act, he was in at- 
 tendance with a certified List of the Delegates 
 elected to the Convention, He then proceeded 
 to call the List. 
 
 All the members elected to the Convention 
 were present and answered to their names, except 
 SAMUEL NELSON, of Otsego, JOHN K. PORTER, 
 of Saratoga, and ANDREW W. YOUNG, of Wyo- 
 ming. These not answering, the Secretary de- 
 clared that 125 out of 128 delegates were present, 
 and that those above named alone were absent. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN then said that a quorum be- 
 ing present, and that all the necessary forms pre- 
 paratory to the organization, as required by the 
 act, having been fully complied with, he now 
 thought the next duty was to proceed to the ap- 
 pointment of officers and to complete their organ- 
 ization. He therefore moved that 
 
 CHARLES H. RUGGLES, of Dutchess, be ap- 
 pointed Chairman pro tern, to preside over the de- 
 liberations of the Convention until its organization 
 was completed ; and that the Hon. Secretary of 
 State act as Secretary pro tern., either by himself 
 or his clerks. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES' name being put to the meet- 
 ing by the Secretary of State, he was unanimously 
 elected. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES then took the Chair. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN: The next business, gentle- 
 men, will be to prepare your ballots for a Presi- 
 dent of the Convention ; and as your names are 
 called over by the Secretary, by counties, you 
 will deposite your ballots in the box. 
 
 The members were then called over by coun- 
 ties, alphabetically, and 125 ballots were depo- 
 sited. 
 
 IB 
 
 The CHAIRMAN: All the members present 
 having voted, and the ballots having been de- 
 posited in the box, Mr. O'CONOR, of New- York, 
 Mr. BROWN, of Orange, and Mr. STETSON, of 
 Clinton, are appointed Tellers to count the same. 
 These three gentlemen then reported their count 
 to result thus : 
 
 John Tracy, of Chenango, 69 
 
 John Miller, of Cortland, 6 
 
 Charles P. Kirkland, of Oneida, 5 
 
 Ambrose L. Jordan, of Columbia, 5 
 George C. Clyde, of Columbia, 9 
 
 James Tallmadge, of Dutchess, 7 
 
 Alvah Worden, of Ontario, 11 
 
 Elijah Rhoades, of Onondaga, 1 
 
 Blank, 6 
 
 Charles H. Ruggles, of Dutchess, 1 
 George W.Patterson, of Chautauque, 3 
 George A. Simmons, of Essex, . 2 
 
 125 
 
 Necessary to a choice, 63. 
 
 Mr. TRACY, of Chenango, was declared elec- 
 ed, and Messrs. ALLEN, of N. York, and TALL- 
 MADGE, of Dutchess, were appointed a committee 
 to conduct him to the chair. 
 
 The Hon. Mr. TRACY, on taking his seat, said: 
 Gentlemen, in returning you my sincere thanks 
 for the honor you have done me in electing me as 
 your presiding officer, I can only assure you that 
 it shall be my earnest and constant endeavor to 
 execute the duties thereof with a deep sense of 
 their importance, and of the great responsibility 
 attached to them, and faithfully and impartially. 
 And I rely, gentlemen, upon your giving me your 
 valuable assistance to enable me to carry into ef- 
 fect such rules and orders as you may adopt, and 
 
18 
 
 in carrying out the business of this Convention. 
 And in conclusion, allow me to express the sin- 
 cere hope that our labors may extend to the pro- 
 motion of the happiness and to the enduring pros- 
 perity of our people. 
 
 Mr. STETSON then offered a resolution that 
 JAMES F. STARBUCK, of Jefferson, and HEN- 
 RY W. STRONG, of Rensselaer, be appointed 
 Secretaries of the Convention, without going into 
 a ballot. This was carried. 
 
 Mr. M'NEIL offered a resolution appointing 
 HIRAM ALLEN, of Columbia, Serjeant-at-Arms 
 of this Convention. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN seconded it, although there 
 was no provision in the law therefor; yet such an 
 officer was highly necessary. It was carried. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG then nominated HER- 
 MAN R. HOWLETT, as Doorkeeper to the Conven- 
 tion. It was carried. 
 
 Mr. WARD then offered a resolution that a 
 committee of 5 be appointed to prepare rules and 
 regulations for the government of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said he wished a commit- 
 tee of 7, as this was a very important matter, 
 and they were to make rules by which the Con- 
 vention must act throughout. He wished the 
 number enlarged, and was not tenacious of any 
 particular number. 
 
 Mr. WARD agreed to 7. It was carried. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said as they were now pretty 
 well organized, he wished to fix a time for ad- 
 journing to; he moved that when they adjourned, 
 it should be until 11 o'clock to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK offered a resolution to direct the 
 Secretaries to dll on the Clergy of this city to 
 ask them to make such arrangements amongst 
 themselves, so that one of their number should 
 open the Convention each day with prayer. This 
 was carried. 
 
 Mr. MANN, of New-York, offered a resolution, 
 that the members now go into a draft for their re- 
 spective seats, which subject occupied the time 
 of the Convention till it adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, (2d day,) June 2. 
 
 The Convention met this day, pursuant to re- 
 solution, and at 11 o'clock the President took the 
 chair. 
 
 The proceedings were opened with pra\er by 
 the Rev, Mr. WYCKOFF. 
 
 The minutes ot yesterday's proceedings were 
 read by Mr. STRONG, one of the Secretaries. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that the condition and 
 action of the Secretary of State, as stated in the 
 minutes, was not as it ought to be; he wished to 
 amend them by saying that the Secretary of Slate 
 attended them in person, called the Convention to 
 order, and delivered the official list and read it. 
 This proceeding added great dignity to the organi- 
 zation of yesterday. 
 
 The minutes were so amended and approved. 
 
 The President named thecomminittee on Rules : 
 
 Messrs. WARD, TALLMADGE, LOOMIS, PAT- 
 TERSON, CAMBRELENG, PERKINS, SIMMONS. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD offered a resolution that each 
 member be furnished with a copy of the State 
 Constitution, printed in proper size, to be presei- 
 ved with the proceedings of this Convention. 
 
 Mr. WARD suggested that all the Constitu- 
 ions of the State, be furnished, &c. 
 
 Mr. STRONG wished added the Constitution of 
 the U. S. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE wished to have it in an oc- 
 tavo form. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY wished the Act calling the Con- 
 vention, to be printed with it, and also the amen- 
 datory Act. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL thought the icsolution and 
 amendments not comprehensive enough. Few of 
 us have seen the various new Constitutions of the 
 other States. These were very necessary to aid 
 us in our labors. He wished all these State Con- 
 stitutions with all the other matters of reference 
 that were necessary for the guidance of members, 
 to be printed in the form ot a manual. He moved 
 to lay the resolution on the table, but withdrew 
 it at the request of the mover. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD supposed the Convention 
 were to furnish the members with the ordinary 
 supplies, and he moved to so amend the resolu- 
 tion. If we waited to print all the matters named 
 here, we should not get it till we are about to ad- 
 journ. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL asked if the old works on these 
 subjects contained (he recent new Constitutions of 
 New Jersey, Florida, &.c. &c. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD : No, sir, nor ot Texas. 
 (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr CAMBRELENG said the old work con- 
 taining the State Constitutions, had hardly one of 
 the present State Constitutions. It had not those 
 of Florida, Texas, Missouri, or Louisiana, nor any 
 of the amended Constitutions. 
 
 The resolution to appoint a committee to refer 
 all these amendments to, was carried, and Messrs. 
 RUSSELL, BOWDISH,' and KIRKLAND, were ap- 
 pointed such committee. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR, of Onondaga, offered a resolu- 
 tion that the Secretaries emploj the present con- 
 tractors for legislative printing, to print for this 
 Convention, at the same rates as their present con- 
 tract prices. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN wished the printer to this 
 Convention to enter into a contract with the Comp- 
 troller, precisely similar to the present contract 
 for legislative printing. He wished the resolu- 
 tion to be so amended. He had not the act by 
 him. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS read that section of the act. He 
 objected to the Comptroller being named here. 
 The Comptroller was no officer of this Conven- 
 tion. He preferred the contract to be made by 
 our own officers. It should be made by the Se- 
 cretary here ; but let it be similar in spirit to the 
 legislative contract. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to insert the name of 
 Charles F. Boughton instead of the present con- 
 tractors. 
 
 Mr. JONES called the ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON wished the 8th section of 
 the act, calling the Convention to be read. 
 
 It was read, and says that the Convention it- 
 sell shall appoint a printer. The name of the 
 printer thus appointed, should appear in the re- 
 solution. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD wished to strike out "pres- 
 ent contractors," and insert "Carroll & Cook." 
 
 Mr. JONES withdrew the call for the ayes and 
 noes, as there was no printed list. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS resumed the call. 
 
19 
 
 Mr. PERKINS called for a division of the ques. 
 tion 
 
 The CHAIR said the first question would be on 
 striking out. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said the ayes and noes must 
 be called for by a majority of the members; and 
 we have now no rules, 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND contended this was not the 
 case ; if so the small minority never could get the 
 ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR, of Onondaga, said in the ab- 
 sence of rules, it must require a majority with 
 rules, 10, 15 or 20 might demand them. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND contended that his position 
 was right. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR reiterated his opinion; and con- 
 sented to have the names of "Carroll & Cook" in- 
 serted. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS wished the Convention itself to 
 appoint the printer direct, and not the Secreta- 
 ries. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought that perhaps, without 
 a new contract, these printers might be entitled to 
 charge the same as the old prices. He wished the 
 resolution distinctly to state this point. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN wished nothing struck out. This 
 Convention was competent to have their Secreta- 
 ries select a printer or do it directly. The object 
 of this resolution is to have the present printers do 
 the work at the present contract prices. For no 
 one could do the work at those prices without 
 loss, unless they had other business to assist them. 
 The resolution might authorize the present con- 
 tractors to do the work of the Convention, provi- 
 ded they would do it at their present contract 
 prices for legislative printing. He proposed there- 
 fore, to save time, to pass the resolution in its ori- 
 ginal torm. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN was entirely satisfied with the 
 resolution as i" stands. For it contained the pro- 
 per limit?-iion. However, to give his friend from 
 Albany a (air chance, hs hoped the 'words would 
 be stricken out, and the name of his man (Bough- 
 ton) inserted, to give him a fair chance in the 
 race. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS did not wish to press his point. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS preferred the parliamentary course 
 to be taken, and the place for the name ot 
 the printer to be left blank.. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR : How can we get a blank there 
 without striking out? 
 
 The CHAIR: The resolution can be consider, 
 ed as "in blank," unless otherwise insisted on. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS wished that no names at all should 
 be inserted in the resolution on its passage. 
 
 The CHAIR first pul the question on the ayes 
 and noes. This was carried. 
 
 The motion for a division of the question being 
 withdrawn, the question was taken on striking 
 out and inserting. 
 
 The ayes and noes resulted thus ayes 39, noes 
 34. 
 
 The amendment was lost. 
 
 The resolution was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. JONES, of New York, moved that WM. S. 
 Ross, of New York, be appointed an Assistant 
 Doorkeeper. 
 
 This was carried by a count. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved that FRANCIS BRATT, be 
 2d Asasistant Doorkeeper. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that they did not need 
 so many Doorkeepers. He would rather multi- 
 ply the number of the boys. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS did not see how the boys could 
 keep order at the doors. We needed all the door- 
 keepers that we were about to appoint. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought that we had better 
 order under two doorkeepers, than when we had 
 three. Up to 1841 we had only two. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that up to 1841 we had but 
 two doors to the house, therefore the gentleman 
 had better also move to have one of the doors shut 
 up. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved that the president ap- 
 point such door-keepers for the gallery and such 
 messengers as he may think proper. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought they had gone far 
 enough in appointing door-keepers. There was 
 no provision in the law for a serjeant-at-arms, yet 
 he did not want to oppose the Captain of the 
 Convention on that point, and so went for it. 
 He moved to strike out "door-keepers for the 
 gallery," and let the president appoint such mes- 
 sengers as he thought necessary,and also messen- 
 gers for the gallery, but not to give them door- 
 keeper's pay. 
 
 The ayes and nays were called for by Mr. PAT- 
 RERSON, on his resolution to strike out the gal- 
 lery door-keepers, and ordered. The result was 
 Ayes, - 63 
 
 Noes, - 57 
 
 The motion to " strike out '* therefore pre- 
 vailed ; and the resolution on the messengers 
 came up. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to insert not more 
 than five messengers. 
 
 Mr. JONES thought 11 were not too many, the 
 Assembly last year had 15. He wished it left 
 discretionary with the president. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said the President would 
 meet with much embarrassment unless the num- 
 ber was limited ; he therefore wished to have 
 the number limited ; whatever number is abso- 
 lutely necessary, name them, but let there be a 
 limit. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said the number of boys last year 
 was not more than was absolutely necessary. If 
 we had too few, much delay will occur in the 
 public business, and will be anything but eco- 
 nomical to have too few. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said there would not be so 
 many resolutions offered here as there were in 
 the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD thought five boys were suf- 
 ficient. If five was not enough, the number 
 could be increased hereafter. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that seven or eight would be 
 enough. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL accepted Mr. CHATFIELD'S a- 
 mendment, that the number of messengers should 
 be designated and limited to five. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved to strike out five and in- 
 sert seven. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD seconded it. 
 
 A count was called for. The result was, that 
 Mr. TILDEN'S amendment was lost, and the reso- 
 lution, as amended, (for five messengers) was 
 carried. 
 
 Mr. WARD moved that provision be made for 
 
20 
 
 printing 600 copies of the Journal of the Conven- 
 tion, for the use of the members. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON wished to know how they 
 were to be disposed of. Were they to be dis- 
 tributed through the state, or left in the public 
 library, or are they all to be given to the mem- 
 bers ? 
 
 Mr. WARD said a portion would be sent to 
 every county in the State, another portion left in 
 the library, and another for the members. 600 
 copies were printed for the legislature. Since 
 the last Convention there were many new towns 
 and counties added to the state. 
 
 IVl r. STRONG wished to save expense, and to 
 have no more printed than were necessary. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said the greatest expense 
 was the setting up of the type, and that 300 
 would cost nearly as much as 500 or 600. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said that they were sent here to 
 set a pattern of economy and reform for the state, 
 and he objected to more than 250, the usual num- 
 ber printed of the Assembly Journal. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to refer the subject to 
 the committee appointed this day to take charge 
 of all these matters ; particularly as there was 
 much different information on the subject. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that 230 copies were laid on 
 the tables of the legislature daily, and over 300 
 copies were preserved in the library, to be bound 
 up, &c. 
 
 The motion of Mr. MURPHY was carried. 
 Mr. JONES moved that a committee of 16 
 two from each Senate district be appointed by 
 the President to consult and report upon the 
 best mode of proceeding to revise the Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 This was laid on the table for the present, by 
 consent of the mover. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved that the rules of the 
 Convention of 1821, be adopted as rules of this 
 Convention, until the committee report the new 
 rules. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved that the rules of 1821 be 
 read. And he sent the book to the Secretary. 
 
 The motion of Mr. PERKINS, however, was 
 laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved that ABNER S. BEARDS 
 X.EY, be continued a librarian, and to perform the 
 same duties to this Convention as he has hereto- 
 fore done to the members of the legislature. 
 
 A few remarks were made relative to this pow 
 er being vested in the Comptroller. 
 
 The resolution, however, was ultimately car 
 Tied. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND, of Oneida, said that there 
 was certain information very necessary to be laid 
 before the Convention, and he moved that the 
 County Treasurer of each county be directed to 
 send to the Secretary of this Convention, a state- 
 ment of the amount that has been paid to the 
 judges of the county courts in each county, in 
 1844 and 1845. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL thought it would not be in the 
 power of the county treasurer to furnish this. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said he only wished to get ac- 
 curate information as to the sums paid to the 
 judges for actual judicial duties ; not for what he 
 termed ministerial duties. 
 Mr. SMITH of Chenango, suggested that this 
 
 nformation could be better obtained from the 
 Clerks of counties. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that it would be better to 
 ask for the precise number of days these court* 
 were held in each year in the several counties. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that in different counties, 
 he differentfclerks adopted different rules in com- 
 mting the time or service of the judges. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to strike out Treasu- 
 ers," and insert ** Clerks." 
 
 Mr. BROWN of Orange, said the mere cora- 
 )ensation paid to judges, formed a small part of 
 he expenses of these County Courts. The at- 
 endance of jurors was often heavy. The sum of 
 j>36 a day was paid to the jurors of the Court of 
 Common Pleas, in his county, and there was the 
 compensation to poor witnesses, constables, &c. 
 le wished to have all the information connected 
 with this subject, obtained if possible by this 
 resolution, and brought before the Convention. 
 
 The resolution was laid on the table by consent 
 of the mover. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved that the Secretary of 
 State be directed to prepare and present to the 
 Convention, a list of all the officers of this state, 
 hat are appointed by the Governor, alone, or by 
 him and the Senate jointly. 
 
 It was amended so as to read ** and all officers 
 appointed by the Canal Board." 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to lay this on the table, in 
 order to make it, as well as the other, compre- 
 lensive enough to bring out all the information 
 necessary, on the subject. 
 
 The resolution was laid on the table, with con- 
 sent of the mover. 
 
 A motion to print these resolutions was offered 
 >ut withdrawn. 
 
 On motion of Mr. CHATFIELD, the Conven- 
 tion adjourned till to-morrow morning at 11 
 o'clock. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (3d day,) June 3. 
 
 The PRESIDENT took the Chair precisely at 
 11 o'clock. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr- WYCKOFF. 
 
 Messrs. NELSON and PORTER appeared and 
 took their seats. These, with Mr. A. W. YOUNG, 
 who arrived yesterday, complete the number of de- 
 legates, viz : 128. 
 
 The Secretary read theminutes of the last meet- 
 ing, and they were approved, after two amend- 
 ments, as t.o a change of the names of movers of 
 resc.lutions. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that the names of the 
 three absentees be called. Messrs. NELSON, POR- 
 TER, and A. W. YOUNG, were called, and they 
 answered. 
 
 Mr. WARD was directed by the committee on 
 Rules to present their report, which he did. 
 
 The Secretary read them. 
 
 Mr. WARD then moved that the vote betaken 
 on each rule separately. 
 
 1st. Rule. On the appearance of a quorum the President 
 shall take the Chair, and the Con ventiom be called to 
 order. Carried. 
 
 2d Reading of the minutes and corrections. Carried. 
 
 3d. The President shall \ reserve order and decorum, 
 and decide questions ot order subject to an appea>. to tiie 
 Convention. He shall have the right to name any mem. 
 ber to penorm the duties of the Chair ; but such substi- 
 tution shall not extend beyond the hour of adjournment. 
 Carried, 
 
21 
 
 4th. All motions and addresses to be made to the Presi 
 dent. Carried. 
 
 6th. No notice to be debated or put, unless seconded ; 
 and all to be reduced to writing. Carried. 
 
 6th. Ayes and noes, to be called tor by 10 members. 
 Carried. 
 
 7tb. President to name who has the floor. Carried. 
 8th. No interruption, and on a call to order, a member 
 must sit down. Carried. 
 
 9th. No conversation whilst a member is speaking, and 
 no passing between'* member who is speaking and the 
 Chair. Carried. 
 
 lOih. No reference to members' names in debates. 
 Canied. 
 
 llth. Motion can be withdrawn by mover before 
 question is put, and amendment made, and another 
 member may put the same. Carried. 
 
 ISth. All committees to be appointed by the President, 
 unless otherwise ordered. Carried. 
 
 13th. None to be admitted inside of the bar except 
 members or officers , without permission of the President, 
 or on the invitation of a member. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said if this passed so, he would 
 invite every man, woman and child on the floor, 
 who asked him to do so. If, might do in the win- 
 ter season, but not now. The deep recesses of 
 the vitality of some, enabled them to stand win- 
 ter's blast, and summer's scorching heat; but 
 others were more delicate. He wished the rule 
 amended so as to prevent the members trom hav- 
 ing any power to invite their friends. He moved 
 to amend so as to allow only Governors, Lieure 
 nant Governors, Presidents, Members of Congress 
 officers of the Army and Navy, &c., including the 
 whole string of persons that are usually allowed 
 on the floor of the House of Representatives, in 
 Washington, amounting to about 2,000 persons. 
 (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON was surprised to find that 
 the amendment would admit ten times as many as 
 the member* would invite. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. MORRIS declared that he had not read the 
 amendment It was handed to him by some kinc 
 friend, (langhcer) and he should now like to know 
 in whose hand writing it was. (Much laughter.' 
 Mr. WARD said it was in his; he had merely 
 drawn out the usual rule of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought the persons named 
 in the amendment were no better entitled to th 
 floor, than any honest citizen of the State of New 
 York. He wished the power to admit persons 
 to be left to the discretion of the President. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG thought the discretion o 
 the members was a sufficient guarantee to guarc 
 against any unnecessa-y number. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN called for the reading of th 
 rule. It was read. He moved this amendment 
 "That none be admitted within the bar, unless bj 
 the permission of the President except the mem 
 bers of the Convention and its attendants." H 
 thought if the matter was left to the members 
 discretion, there would be no bounds. He woul< 
 invite all who asked him to do so. And then 
 would be no end to the number; and the prope 
 business of legislation would be greatly interrupt 
 ed; besides the season of the year, would not al 
 low of such numbers being on the floor. 
 
 Mr. STETSON moved to strikeout all afte 
 "except" and including that word. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN accepted the amendment. 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to amend, "aud citizen 
 upon the invitation of the President." 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER suggested that the Gov- 
 rnor of Canada was coming this way soon ; and 
 nth this amendment in force, the President would 
 ot have the power to invite him ; and he thinks 
 ome of becoming an American citizen. 
 Mr. TAYLOR of Onondaga, thought the origi- 
 al rule best as it stood. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN suggested as a compromise, 
 hat the Governor of the State, Lieut. Governor, 
 he State officers, the Judicial officers of the State, 
 hould be admitted. They would be here fre- 
 luenlly, and ought to be allowed the freedom of 
 he floor. If former Presidents, distinguished 
 oreigners, &c., should come here, it would be 
 he most agreeable to them to be invited by the 
 'resident of this Convention. 
 
 The following amendment was read: "That the 
 Governor of the State, the Lieut. Governor and 
 he State officers be admitted " 
 
 Mr. CHATF1ELD vindicated the original rule. 
 The matter was fully discussed in committee ; and 
 ill limitation would be embarrassing, and the mat- 
 er was best left in the discretion of the members 
 and President of the Convention. Mr. HOFFMAN'S 
 )roposition would lead to invidious distinction > 
 t excluded the President of the U. S., Ex-Presi- 
 dents, members of Congress, &c. There were as 
 many out of office worthy of admission within the 
 bar, as those who now "held office. No trouble 
 would grow out of the rule as originally repotted. 
 No member would abuse the courtesy of the Con- 
 vention ; and it was intended to relieve the Presi- 
 dent from too large a number of applications. 
 
 Another proposition was sent up to the Chair, 
 to the effect that none but members of the Con- 
 vention, Governor of New York, Lieut. Governor, 
 State officers, and Judicial officers of the State 
 should be admitted. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved that none should be ad- 
 mitted except on the written invitation of a mem- 
 ber, which invitation should be preserved by the 
 doorkeeper. 
 
 The 13th rule of the Convention of 1821 was 
 read. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND then moved to admit none 
 but the members and the attendants of the Conven- 
 tion, the Governor of New York, the Lieut. Gov- 
 ernor, Chancellor, Vice Chancellor, Justices of 
 Supreme Court, Attorney General, Treasurer, 
 Comptroller^ Secretary of State, and Surveyor 
 General, 
 
 Mr. BRUCE, of Madison, moved to strike out 
 all after "attendants." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN objected to this. We must 
 have daily intercourse with the existing govern- 
 ment to consult its members in the discharge of 
 our duties, This courtesy was due to them, but 
 could not be extended to all ; butsuch distinguish- 
 ed persons as might be entitled by their position, 
 to expect this courtesy, could very properly be in- 
 vited by the President of the Convention. We 
 might even extend the courtesy to the existing 
 members of the State Senate and Assembly. 
 
 Mr. CAMPBELL, of Steuben, thought that pri- 
 vate citizens (the sovereigns) were as much enti- 
 tled to admission as the servants of the people. 
 He was in favor of the original rule. We ought 
 not to make an invidious distinction between the 
 servant and the sovereign. 
 
Mr. W. TAYLOR wished lo relieve the Presi- 
 dent from unnecessary responsibility, and throw it 
 on the members, to whose discretion this matter 
 might safely be left, and no inconvenience would 
 arise from it. He supported the original resolu- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. WATERBUKY thought we ought not to 
 exclude the State officers j we wanted their ad- 
 vice and counsel, their suggestions, and their as- 
 sociations. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought it would be an intoler- 
 able burden to the President if lelt to him alone; 
 he saw no difficuliy likely to arise under the ori- 
 ginal rule j he wished, however, that the invita- 
 tion should include all the State officers proper. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON asked what was the ques- 
 tion. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said it was on Mr. BRUCE'S 
 amendment to Mr RICHMOND'S motion to strike 
 out all after the word "attendants." 
 
 A count resulted thus : ayes 70, noes not 
 counted. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE'S amendment to Mr. RICHMOND'S 
 amendment to "strike out," was carried. 
 
 The amendment of Mr RICHMOND, as amend- 
 ed, to the original resolution was lost ayes 44, 
 noes 67. 
 
 The question recurred on the original rule ol 
 the committee. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called attention to his amend- 
 ment, that all invitations by members, should be 
 in 'writing, and be presented by the doorkeeper. 
 
 The question on this was lost ayes 2, noes not 
 counted. 
 
 Two other amendments were then put, varying 
 scarcely anything from Mr. RICHMOND'S, but 
 they received less than 20 votes. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved that none be admitted 
 but the Governor of New York, Lieut. Governor, 
 Ex-Governors, Chancellor and Vice Chancellors, 
 Justices of the Supreme Court, Circuit, &c., State 
 officers, and members of the former State Conven- 
 tion, except on invitation of the President. Mr. 
 M. contended that this courtesy was due to the 
 members of our former State Convention. This 
 would include the ex-President of the United 
 States, (Mr. VAN BUREN,) a member of a former 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought we were under more 
 obligations to invite past members of the Assem- 
 bly and Senate than Circuit Judges. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN'S amendment was lost ; only a 
 few voting for it. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS wished to have the previous 
 question put in force. 
 
 He was answered that it could not be ; they had 
 no rules at all in force. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD wished to strike out of the 
 original rule, the words " except on the invitation 
 of a member," 
 
 A motion to postpone the subject till to-mor- 
 row had only 2 votes. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD wished the discretion left en- 
 tirely in the hands of the President the matter 
 was safe in his hands he, of course, would invite 
 all those to whom the courtesy ought to be ex- 
 tended. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES supported Mr. SHEPARD'S mo- 
 tion for, during the Legislative sessions, the cit- 
 
 izens of Albany would wa!k inside the bar, with- 
 out any invitation. 
 
 Mr. LOOM1S was opposed to leaving this in ' 
 the hands of the President there would be no 
 danger of a violation of propriety to allow a dis- 
 cretionary power to the members. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES did not fear that members 
 would abuse this privilege but he feared that cit- 
 izens who used to come here, would abuse their 
 former privileges, and crowd the aisles on every 
 important debate. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE went for equal rights and privi- 
 leges ; if we were to admit any dignitaries, let us 
 admit all whom the members might choose to in- 
 vite here. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought that the former diffi- 
 culties arose from the neglect of the door-keep- 
 ers to do their duty. We might this session reg- 
 ulate that matter, and have the floor cleared at 
 any time. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that it would be impossible 
 for one member to know whom another member 
 had invited, if this privilege was allowed ; and 
 where was the evil to end ? 
 
 Mr. STOW proposed that all who are admitted 
 should have their names and the names of the 
 members who invited them placed in the hands 
 of the doorkeeper. 
 
 The proposition that persons should be invited 
 " by the Convention" instead of " by member," 
 was lost. 
 
 Mr. STOWS proposition was then read. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL did hope that this would pass ; 
 for persons who were never invited by any one, 
 would frequently come to the door-keeper, and 
 say they were invited by a member. 
 
 Mr. E. B. SMITH hoped it would not pass ; 
 we should have to have baskets to keep all these 
 written invitations in, and a clerk to sort them. 
 
 Mr. STOWS proposition was lost ayes 33, 
 noes 59. 
 
 The original resolution of the committee was 
 then put and carried ayes 91, noes not counted. 
 
 14. The previous question shall always be in order in 
 Convention, if seconded by a majority, and until it is deci- 
 ded all amendments and debates shall be precluded. The 
 question shall be put in this form, " shall the main ques- 
 tion be now put?" It it should be decided that the ques- 
 tion should not now be put, the main question shall still 
 remain under consideration. If seconded, the questions 
 will then be taken in their order without further debate. 
 Amendments proposed in committee of the whole shall be 
 deemed pending, and in order if called for by a member. 
 Carried. 
 
 15. A motion to adjourn shall always be in order, and be 
 decided without debate. Carried. 
 
 16. In forming committees of the whole, the president, 
 before leaving the chair, shall appoint a chairman. Carried. 
 
 17. No member shall speak more than twice to the same 
 question without leave, nor more than once until every 
 other member rising to speak shall have spoken. Carried. 
 
 18- A motion lor reconsideration shall be in order at any 
 time, and may be moved by any member of the Convention. 
 But the question shall not be taken on the same day, un- 
 less by unanimous consent, and if lost, it shall not be re- 
 newed, or any vote taken on a reconsideration a second 
 time, unless with the consent of the Convention. If the 
 motion to reconsider is not made on the same day, three 
 days shall be required to be given of the intention to 
 make it. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN asked why the form was changed, 
 viz : That a person, to move to reconsider, must 
 have voted in the affirmative. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said the committee did not 
 expect any abuse of the rule, from the way in 
 
23 
 
 which it was framed it was sufficiently guarded 
 by the " three days' notice" to be given before a 
 question could be reconsidered. He believed the 
 rule would be found exceedingly convenient by 
 all the members. He had known members vote 
 in the affirmative expressly to be able to move a 
 reconsideration directly, and to press that whilst 
 the house was in the same frame of mind, so that 
 no change could take place and this was a great 
 abuse. 
 
 The rule was carried. 
 
 19. The preceding rules shall be observed in committee 
 of the whole so far as they are applicable, except so much 
 of the 17th rule as restricts the speaking to more than 
 twice. A call for the ayes and noes and a motion to ad- 
 journ shall not be applicable; but a journal of the pro- 
 ceedings in committee shall be kept. Carried. 
 
 20. The President may admit such and as many report- 
 ers within the bar as he may deem proper. Carried! 
 
 All the rules of the Committee, therefore, were 
 adopted, as originally reported. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved that when in commit- 
 tee of the whole, a quorum should not be present, 
 that fact should be made known to the President. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN withdrew his resolution, but 
 intended hereafter to offer a resolution to the ef- 
 fect that these resolutions thus adopted, should 
 not be entirely beyond the control of this Conven- 
 tion. 
 
 A communication was received from the Sec- 
 retary of State, enclosing 135 copies of the Cen- 
 sus of the State. 
 
 The committee on that subject reported a reso- 
 lution that 600 copies of the journal of the Con- 
 vention should be printed. 
 
 This resolution and report was adopted. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved the consideration of 
 his resolution relative to the call on county trea- 
 surers for information. 
 
 The CHAIR wished members to preserve their 
 seats, as there was a person about to take a dia- 
 gram of the House. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND'S resolution (offered yester- 
 day) relative to a call on county treasurers for the 
 amount of moneys paid to county judges was then 
 called up. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND made this motion with ^spe- 
 cific object to ascertain the amount paid to judg- 
 es of county courts for judicial services. At the 
 suggestion of the gentlemen from St. Lawrence, 
 Orange and others, who were desirous to have 
 still further information in reference to the ex- 
 penses of county courts, he proposed to amend his 
 resolution. 
 
 AJr. BASCOM" said that to ascertain also the 
 expenses of the circuit courts, he would offer a 
 resolution calling for precisely the same informa- 
 tion in relation to these courts as that of the gen- 
 tleman in relation to the county courts. He asked 
 the gentleman to accept the amendment. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND had no objection to the pro- 
 curing of any information that might be required. 
 He was apprehensive, however, that his resolu- 
 tion might be so loaded down, as that the infor- 
 mation could not be received in time for action. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS suggested that in the resolution 
 as amended, there were some questions which he 
 apprehended the county clerks would not be able 
 to answer. As the accounts were kept in St. 
 Lawrence, he knew that they would not have the 
 means of answering all the questions by their re- 
 
 cords. So far as that, in respect to the payment 
 of judges' fees, grand and petit jurors, &c., he be- 
 lieved the county clerks could answer. But in re- 
 lation to the expenses for lights, fuel, drawing ju- 
 rors, those accounts were a matter of audit by the 
 boards of supervisors, and out of the hands of the 
 clerks. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that 'for convenience 
 sake, he would move that his resolution and all 
 the amendments, should be referred to a commit- 
 tee of five, who shall be required to report to- 
 morrow morning, 
 
 Mr. RHOADES wished to know if we were to 
 get the amount of damages and costs separately 
 stated ? 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said, notexactly. 
 
 The following is the resolution of Mr; KIRK- 
 LAND as modified by him, to meet the wishes of 
 the various gentlemen, who offered amendments 
 to it yesterday : 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretary of the Convention be di- 
 rected to address a letter to the county clerk of each county 
 in this State, requesting an immediate answer to the fol- 
 io wing questions : 
 
 1st. What was the amount allowed during each of the 
 years 1844 and 1845, to the judges of the county court of 
 your county as compensation for attendance at court? 
 
 2d. What during the same period was the amount al- 
 lowed for fees of grand jurors, of petit jurors, of constables, 
 of crier, of poor witnesses, stating each separately? 
 
 3d. What was the aggregate expense during those years 
 for said county courts, of drawing and summoning jurors, 
 lights, fuel, &c., for the court rooms, and of any other char- 
 ges on the county incurred by holding these courts? 
 
 4th. For how many days during each of said years were 
 said county courts in session? 
 
 5th. What was the number of civil causes tried at said 
 courts in each of said years, and what was the aggregate 
 amount of verdicts therein? 
 
 Mr. STRONG pioposed a committee of 8, in- 
 stead of 3 or 5 one from each Senate district. 
 
 This was accepted by Mr. K., and the resolu- 
 tion thus modified, was carried. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved that the Secretaries 
 of the Convention procure diagrams of this cham- 
 ber, for the use of the members* Carried. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved that a list of the sala- 
 ries of all judicial officers in the State be prepared 
 and submitted to this Convention. 
 
 This resolution was referred to the same com- 
 mittee of eight, as the last. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved a resolution to the effect 
 of obtaining from all the Judges, &c., in the State 
 the amount of fees received for what is called 
 chamber business. 
 
 A VOICE : ' They won't tell ! 
 
 It was modified so as to include Masters and 
 Examiners in Chancery, and referred to the same 
 committee of eight. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to take up the resolution 
 relative to furnishing the members with newspa- 
 pers. It was taken up and passed, nem con. 
 
 Mr .CHATF1ELD thought it time to take up 
 Mr. JONES' resolution offered yesterday, relative 
 to a committee of IS to prepare the order of busi- 
 ness of the Convention: 
 
 Mr. SMITH moved to adjourn. Lost ayes 48, 
 noes 55. 
 
 Mr. JONES' resolution of yesterday was then 
 read. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend, by making 
 the number 17 instead of 16. 
 
 Mr. JONES accepted the modification. 
 
24 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS thought that this was too impor 
 tant a matter to be taken up just at the hour o 
 adjournment, and he therefore moved to adjourn 
 
 This was carried, just before 2 o'clock. 
 
 THURSDAY, (4th day,} June 4. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BATES. 
 The PRESIDENT announced the committee o 
 Mr. KIRKLAND'S resolution, relative to " Count 
 Court expenses," &c.,to consist of Messrs. KIRK 
 LAND, BROWN, HARRIS, PERKINS, SMITH, BAS 
 COM, RICHMOND. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that he was requested b. 
 the chairman of the committee to whom was re' 
 ferred the subject of printing the constitutions 
 the several States (particularly the amended ones 
 for the use of the members, to make a statemen 
 for the information of the convention. He ha( 
 been in correspondence with a person in Nev 
 York, named Walker, who informed him that h< 
 (Mr. W.) was now in process of printing in om 
 book all the existing constitutions of the severa 
 States, for his own especial purpose ; andWalke 
 had sent him (Mr. K.) some 33 pages of his new 
 book as a specimen of the work. Walker agreec 
 to furnish 200 or 300 copies bound in muslin foi 
 $1 a copy ; and he would have them ready in < 
 week. This was edited by a gentleman of well 
 known talent, named Edward Williams. He (Mr 
 K.) proposed to lay these pages on the Clerk's 
 desk, so that members could see and examine foi 
 themselves. The committee propose to repor 
 that the convention purchase copies of this work 
 so as to supply each member with one ; becaus< 
 doubtless from the aggregate wisdom of the con- 
 ventions of 28 States, we may obtain a vast amoun 
 of information that may be of service to the mem- 
 bers of this convention. And the committee pro- 
 pose also to have another volume printed uniform 
 with this, which shall contain the constitutions 
 of the Territories connected with the Union, and 
 of others that are likely to come into it; also the 
 convention acts of 1845 and of 1821 ; the names 
 and residences of all delegates, and of all the offi- 
 cers of the convention; together with all the va- 
 rious statistical information which can be collect- 
 ed that is likely to be of service to this conven 
 tion. He would lay this on the Clerk's desk, and 
 request in the name of the committee that it be 
 accepted as an excuse for not making a report this 
 morning. 
 
 It was accepted. 
 
 Mr. BROWN then moved to take up Mr. 
 JONES'S resolution for a committee of 17, who 
 should consult and report on the best practicable 
 mode of proceeding to revise the constitution. 
 If the convention did take it up, then he believed 
 that the honorable gentleman from Herkimer 
 (Mr. LOOMIS) had the floor. The motion was ta- 
 ken up. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he would merely state 
 to the Convention a few of the particular views 
 which he had entertained in regard to this reso- 
 lution; and in relation to which the mover 
 (Mr. JONES) had failed to assign his reasons for 
 offering. This resolution was very comprehen- 
 sive ; and in some respects it embraced all that 
 which should be done by the body of the conven- 
 tion itself. He was fearful that this committee if 
 appointed might feel called upon to report a plan 
 
 of action might so arbitrarily divide up the sub- 
 jects to be considered a> to place the matter 
 comparatively beyond the wholesome and legiti- 
 mate control of the convention hereafter. He 
 could scarcely suppose that Mr. JONES had such 
 a result in view ; but it looked a little like it, 
 from the number named. The committee was a 
 very large one ; a body of 17 was large enough 
 for purposes of legislation. It was much too 
 large for mere informal movements ; too large if 
 it was intended to report merely specific propo- 
 sitions ; and yet too small if it was to embrace the 
 whole general scope of the subject to come be- 
 fore the convention. Any member, however can 
 offer specific propositions, and the House can pass 
 upon them, as well as a committee. And if the 
 committee report specific propositions they have 
 to be submitted to the house for future considera- 
 tion. It would be much better to submit this 
 whole matter to the house itself at once ; and then 
 all can hear and have a voice in discussing the 
 subjects that are to be considered. Every mem- 
 ber is sent here to speak for and to represent his 
 constituents, and they expected them to speak 
 themselves in their behalf, and not to be guided 
 by others. Why ask us then to delegate these 
 duties to a committee ? We ordinarily form com- 
 mittees to report bills, &c. &c. ; but merely to 
 make ordinary simple propositions, as to the 
 mode of proceeding to business, we do not want 
 a special committee. Let the house resolve itself 
 into a committee of the whole on the Constitu- 
 tion. Then let each man get up and state his 
 proposition. Some one must do it even in a spe- 
 cial committee. And why not as well do it here 
 as there ? for after all it has yet to come back 
 here and to be agreed upon by the House. He 
 had another very strong objection to having this 
 committee of 17. Such a body, composed as it 
 .vould be of the best talent and experience in the 
 rlouse, would carry too much weight with what- 
 ever propositions they might offer for our future 
 consideration. This influence would be far too 
 strong to be salutary. But a naked proposition 
 "rom a single individual would carry comparative- 
 y little weight with it. It would go merely for 
 vhatlt was worth. Mr. L. presumed that this 
 resolution of the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
 TONES) is taken from a proposition that was of- 
 ered in the Convention of 1821, by Mr. Rufus 
 King; which was adopted instanter, and without 
 a moment's consideration as to its results. But 
 t was no sooner adopted than several members 
 egretted that it had been ; and thought that much 
 he better course would have been to have taken 
 he subject up at once in committee of the whole 
 louse. Amongst others, Col. Young of Saratoga, 
 who moved a reconsideration, and this was se- 
 onded by Gen. Root. Peter R. Livingston also 
 Deeply regretted that such a special committee 
 of 13) had been so chosen. The weight there- 
 ore of that precedent amounts to nothing. And 
 ven that committee however did not pretend to 
 ssume the power of dictating what course should 
 e adopted by the House ; they did not see fit to 
 o aught but dissect the subject ; they propose to 
 ave a committee on the judiciary ; another on 
 ic executive ; another on the elective franchise ; 
 another on the financial parts of the Constitution, 
 &c., &c., &c. And in fact they proceeded in 
 
25 
 
 merely the same way that an individual would in 
 committee of the whole House, and they did no 
 more. Now for the mere purpose of saying or 
 deciding what shall be done or what shall not be 
 done, or how we shall proceed to conduct our 
 ess here, such a committee most assuredly 
 is not necessary. We have to consider and to pro- 
 ceed direct to a revision of the Constitution of 
 the St,ate of New York. Let us each go on and 
 act independently in the discharge of this great 
 duty which has been committed to our individual 
 care ; and the more we have perfect freedom of 
 discussion, (which always prevails in the commit- 
 tee of the whole,) the better we shall be able to 
 come to a proper conclusion on the subject. We 
 had much better have a committee of the whole 
 at once. Some might apprehend that a commit- 
 tee of the whole would w r aste time in endless dis- 
 cussion and leave nothing definite at last to act 
 upon. He had provided against this ; for if no 
 one lse would move on the subject, he 
 would move in committee of the whole to 
 refer the differen portions of the Constitution 
 to appropriate committees. He had prepared a 
 proposition to divide the subject up into commit- 
 tees ; any one, it is true, can do this ; and if no 
 other was. prepared he would submit his plan. 
 Perhaps it would be better after all to present 
 this to the House at once ; and to state his views 
 more fully, he would now read them to the House. 
 He offere'd, as an amendment to Mr. JONES' reso- 
 lution, to strike out all after the word " Re- 
 solved," and insert the following : 
 
 Resolved, That a committee consisting of five or seven 
 members each be appointed to consider and report on the 
 following matters respectively: 
 
 1. On the appointment, Election, Tenure of office and 
 compensation of the Legislature. 
 
 2. On the organization, tenure of office and compensa- 
 tion of the Judiciary. 
 
 3. On the anointment or election of the Judiciary and 
 of all State officers, whose duties and powers are not local, 
 except the J^gislauire and judiciary. 
 
 4. On the appointment or election of all officers, whose 
 powers arid duties are local, and their tenure of office and 
 compensation 
 
 5. On the powers to be vested in the State Legislature 
 on tae same, except as to the public debt. 
 
 6. On the public debt generally, including restrictions 
 on the power of the legislature, in relation thereto, and on 
 public revenue, canals, and internal improvements. 
 
 7. On legislation for local purposes, and on the powers 
 -of municipal corporations with reference to debt and taxa- 
 tion. 
 
 3 . On banking business, and on incorporations generally. 
 9. On the Elective franchise, and the qualifications to 
 vote and hold office. 
 
 All that he could say was that these were his 
 best thoughts. Every other individual might 
 have his own propositions, but whether this was 
 so or not he at any rate should propose these. He 
 I'd not design going into any discussion of them 
 at this time, but wished merely to suggest the 
 consideration that it was better not to organize a 
 formidable committee with extraordinary powers, 
 for the mere purpose of suggesting subjects for 
 the consideration of the Convention. Each mem- 
 ber was competent to do this, and then when a 
 vole was had it would not be under the authori- 
 tative influence which a formidable committee 
 of 16 or 17 men would exercise. He would move 
 these propositions as an amendment to the reso- 
 lution and then ask the Convention to resolve it- 
 self into a committee of the whole on the Con- 
 stitution, to take them up. 
 
 Mr. BROWN desired to express his obligations 
 to the gentleman from New- York (Mr. JONES) 
 for introducing this resolution, because, although 
 he did not concur with him as to the propriety of 
 its adoption, it would serve all the purposes that 
 such a proposition should serve to create'discus- 
 sion and enquiry on this subject. He regarded 
 this resolution as touching one of the most im- 
 portant, if not the most important subject that 
 could arise for the consideration of this Conven- 
 tion at this time, and he was unwilling for one 
 that it should go to a committee of 16 or 17 or of 
 any other number, without having first passed 
 through the ordeal of examination and discussion, 
 for the purpose of eliciting the best opinions and 
 judgment on the floor in the matter. He was in 
 a great measure indifferent as to the ultimate dis- 
 position of it whether it should go to a commit- 
 tee of the whole, or whether all the proposi- 
 tions after having the various opinions of gen- 
 tlemen should be sent to a committee. What 
 he did desire most earnestly, and deemed 
 essential was a full and free expression of 
 opinion and judgment upon the subject. If 
 these propositions go to a committee, what is 
 tobe'the result? In effect, it is to enable this 
 committee to say, in a resolution or report, upon 
 
 what subject the Constitution is to be amended 
 
 thus placing in their hands one of the most im- 
 portant questions the Convention was called up- 
 on to decide, at the outset. He knew very well 
 that he might be told, that when the report came 
 in that it could be amended. He was sensible of 
 that and he was aware, also, that every gentle- 
 man experienced in parliamentary debates and 
 action, and feeling a degree of confidence in him- 
 self, might rise up and make his proppsitions,but if 
 he does, he has to encounter the weight of autho- 
 rity which this committee would have, and gen- 
 tlemen, too, would feel a reluctance at undertak- 
 ing to overthrow such a report. But those who 
 know what it is to take a seat in a deliberative 
 body for the first time, unaccustomed to appear as 
 public speakers (and this, he knew, bore down 
 many a man capable of instructing his fellow- 
 men) could appreciate the difficulties that would 
 occur. He, therefore, concurred with the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) that this 
 question should be referred to the committee 
 of the whole, its appropriate place. Then 
 there eould be a free interchange of opinion, 
 and efery individual could make his propo- 
 sition, without having it put down before it was 
 fairly acted upon. He hoped, therefore, the a- 
 mendment would prevail, for if the whole funda- 
 mental law was to be overturned, and an entire 
 new instrument substituted, or if a portion of the 
 old was to be retained and a portion of it to be 
 amended, let us know the opinions of members 
 from every part of the State, on the subject. He 
 (Mr. B.) had his own opinions as to what the a- 
 mendments should be. He might differ from oth- 
 er gentlemen, and if he did, he desired to know 
 it, and upon what point. Let every proposition 
 be submitted, and then if they are so multifari- 
 ous that it would be impossible for the commit- 
 tee of the whole to come to a decision, he was 
 willing to refer it to a committee, having had the 
 benefit of the discussion and the suggestions of the 
 Convention. There was another consideration to 
 which he was not, and he trusted no gentleman 
 
26 
 
 was indifferent. It was impossible for gentlemen 
 to conceal from themselves or the public, that 
 there were two great parties who had some con- 
 nection with members here it was evident in 
 the vey organization of this body the one large- 
 ly represented, and the other portion not so large- 
 ly. And although he congratulated himself that 
 there had been evinced so little of party feeling 
 here, to disturb the good feeling and harmony 
 that prevailed; yet it was due to the minority, 
 to the character of the majority themselves, and 
 to the success of the deliberations of the Conven- 
 tion, that all the steps that should be taken at the 
 outset, should fully respect the rights of the mi- 
 nority. He therefore desired to place this ques- 
 tion where every gentleman should have an op- 
 portunity to be heard fully and freely. Let us, 
 (said Mr. B.) look at the matter a little further: 
 Supposing, the committee to which the question 
 should be referred, should undertake to say that 
 the judicial system of the State needed no amend- 
 ment. It certainly was an extravagant supposi- 
 tion, for he supposed that a sense of the necessity 
 for its amendment prevailed every where. But 
 suppose it to be so we should have to enter up- 
 on a discussion to demonstrate the folly of such a 
 conclusion, and its injustice to the community. 
 Suppose again, upon the question of suffrage, 
 where there is not so great a unanimity of opin- 
 ion is the committee to come in here, and en- 
 tirely suppress this question? This no man de- 
 sired. Let all the propositions be submitted here, 
 and allow every man however humble and unused 
 to public speaking, a full, free and ample oppor- 
 tunity to make any suggestions that he may deem 
 to be required. He (Mr. B.) therefore concurred 
 entirely with the honorable gentleman from Her- 
 kimer, that if any gentleman had propositions to 
 make he should make them here, and during this 
 discussion; and he would be permitted to say that if 
 the sense of the Convention differed from his, (Mr. 
 B's) and they should decide not to refer this matter 
 to a committee of the whole, he should feel it his 
 duty whenever the question was settled, to ask 
 that the committee should be instructed. But 
 he apprehended the Convention would not reject 
 the proposition to have these questions discuss- 
 ed. In all legislative bodies, when a bill is re- 
 ported, the general disposition of it is to a commit- 
 tee of the whole. In the House of Representa- 
 tives, propositions submitted there, especially re- 
 venue bills, and others which affect the Union at 
 large, take that direction. The President's mes- 
 sage takes the same direction, and for the purpose 
 of obtaining elaborately and fully the considera- 
 tion of all the members of the house. And when 
 we stand here to say what changes shall be intro- 
 duced into the fundamental law of the state, was 
 it not a question of greater magnitude and impor- 
 tance than these. He apprehended the House of 
 Representatives seldom entered upon the delibe- 
 rations of subjects of greater magnitude or fraught 
 with results of greater importance to posterity, as 
 that upon which did this body to-day; and before 
 a step was taken, which might preclude or em- 
 barrass enquiry to all, there should be great hesi- 
 tation and deliberation. Mr. B. said he had 
 drawn up briefly some propositions, which, if the 
 house should refuse to go into committee of the 
 whole, he would take the liberty of proposing by 
 way of instruction to the cwamittee that 
 
 should be raised to take^charge of the subject, 
 to be attached to the resolution of the honor- 
 able gentleman from New- York, (Mr. JONES). 
 They did not embrace all the subjects he had 
 desired, still it would bring the question before 
 the Convention and, perhaps, be the means 
 of elicting similar propositions. 
 
 Mr. WARD called for the reading of the origi- 
 nal resolution. 
 
 It was read as follows : 
 
 " Resolved, That a committee of 17, two from each se- 
 nate district, and one Irom the State at large, be appointed 
 by the president of the convention to report as to the best 
 mode of proceeding to the revision of the Constitution of 
 the State," 
 
 Mr. BROWN : Now add to it "with instructions 
 to report the following resolutions :" 
 
 Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates 
 to the finances of the State and the powers of the Legisla- 
 ture to create debts and to loan the credit of the State, be 
 referred to a committee to take into consideration and re- 
 port what amendments if any, are necessary to be made in 
 respect to them. 
 
 Resolved, That so much as relates to the power of the 
 Legislature to appropriate the public moneys or property 
 for private or local purposes, and for creating, continuing, 
 altering or renewing any body politic or corporate, and to 
 prescribe the powers, privileges, duties and obligations of 
 such bodies politic or corporate, or of the members and 
 stockholders thereof, be referred to a committee to take 
 into consideration and report, Sic. 
 
 Resolved, That so much as relates to the Judicial 
 Department, the manner of appointment or electing judi- 
 cial officers, and the tenure and duties of the judicial offi- 
 cers, be referred, &c. 
 
 5th. That so much as relates to the Executive Department 
 and the powers of appointment to office (other than judi> 
 cial officers, and the tenures thereof,) be referred, &c. 
 
 6th. That so much as relates to the members of Assem- 
 bly, the tenure and duration of [the legislative office, the 
 division of the State into separate Senate and Assembly 
 districts, be referred, 8tc. 
 
 7th. That so much as relates to provisions for future al- 
 terations and amendments in the Constitution, be refer- 
 red, &c. 
 
 8. That all parts of the Constitution not embraced in 
 the preceding resolution, be referred to a committee, to 
 take into consideration and report what further alterations 
 or amendments should be made therein. 
 
 Mr. WARD apprehended gentlemen had mis- 
 conceived the object of the mover of the resolu- 
 tion. If this matter was referred to a committee 
 of the whole for consideration, his impression 
 was that the convention would be detained here 
 in discussing various propositions, from this time 
 until the end of July, and then arrive at no defi- 
 nite conclusion. He was perfectly satisfied from 
 what he saw about him, that it was the desire of 
 every gentleman to get the several propositions 
 into a distinct form, and it seemed to him, if the 
 resolution was adopted, that the committee 
 could make a report to-morrow morning, and 
 if gentlemen felt inclined, they could take 
 up one proposition then, and begin the 
 discussion at once. But to take up each 
 proposition which might be offered in commit- 
 tee of the whole, he did apprehend would lead 
 to a discussion that would be endless. He much 
 preferred the course recommended by the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) that of 
 settling the question in the Convention taking 
 up his resolution if the Convention pleased, 
 and saying so much as relates to the Judiciary 
 shall be referred to one committee, so much as 
 relates to the Legislative department to another, 
 and so on through the whole of the resolutions. 
 It might thus be done simply and effectually, but 
 the idea of going into committee of the whole and 
 
27 
 
 discussing these propositions would lead to 
 endless discussions. Indeed, he would refer 
 to the Convention which framed the Federal 
 Constitution in 1787. That Convention met in 
 the early part of May. The first thing heard of 
 their proceedings was the submission of a provis- 
 ion for an entire Constitution by EDMUND 
 RANDOLPH. The same day Mr. PINCKNEY sub- 
 mitted another entire plan for a Constitution ; a 
 few days after, Mr. PATTERSON of New Jersey 
 submitted another, and shortly after that ALEX. 
 HAMILTON presented his constitution. These 
 were referred to a committee of the whole, as is 
 now proposed. The first taken up was that of Mr. 
 RANDOLPH'S, and according to his (Mr. W.'s) re- 
 collection, they entered upon its examination sec- 
 tion by section, clause by clause, and were 
 engaged upon it until the first of August without 
 making any progress; and then, a committee was 
 raised, who a few days after reported to the con- 
 vention. Then, and not till then was any pro- 
 gress made. He was happy to see now the har- 
 mony which prevailed, and the disposition that 
 Was manifested to go on with business. The 
 course recommended in the resolution of the gen- 
 tleman from New York, (Mr. JONES) is the same 
 as that pursued by the convention of 1823 . What 
 was the result ? In a little over two months, all 
 their labors were ended, and they remodelled an 
 entire new constitution. His own impression 
 was that if the resolution was adopted, and a com- 
 mittee was chosen not for the purpose of saying 
 how the constitution shall be amended, but to 
 state how many committees should be raised, 
 business would be got through with, and 
 every opportunity given for free, liberal and ho- 
 norable discussion. He said that if this resolu- 
 tion was not adopted, then he hoped the resolu- 
 tion of the gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOO- 
 MIS) would be Let each resolution be taken by it- 
 self, and passed -at once, without going into com- 
 mittee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to refer the whole sub- 
 ject to a committee of the whole on the constitu- 
 tion the original resolutions and the amend- 
 ments. While up he would make a single 
 remark in reply to the gentleman from West- 
 chester (Mr. WARD.) He has alluded to 
 the proceedings of the convention which 
 framed the federal constitution, and has shown 
 that in that convention individual propositions 
 had been made and discussed by the whole body. 
 That one, two, three and four whole constitutions, 
 were presented by different individuals. That 
 one of them was taken up and formed the nucleus 
 upon which that wise and learned convention 
 proceeded until they had settled nearly every 
 distinct proposition. Yes, they thus settled every 
 proposition in the manner now adopted in the 
 constitution, and when they had done this al- 
 though it did take them until the first of August, 
 they were then prepared with the foundation of a 
 constitution. Then they referred it to a committee 
 for arrangement, the proper business of commit- 
 tees, and to reduce the points upon which they had 
 all agreed to the form of a constitution. The pre- 
 cedent (said Mr. L.) was precisely analagous to 
 the proposition which he made, that the discus- 
 sion should go on in committee of the whole un- 
 til all questions were settled. 
 
 Mr. WARD was perfectly ready and willing to 
 have the question taken on the first proposition 
 of Mr. LOOMIS, now. Let us settle the question 
 at once. It was exceedingly unwise, to say the 
 least of it, to waste time in unnecessary debate. 
 The question could be settled in a very few min- 
 utes, and he wished the sense of the Convention 
 to be taken on it at once. For else the moment 
 that we get into committee of the whole, the en- 
 tire subject in all its various phases will come 
 up, and we shall receive 50 propositions at least, 
 and to the discussion on these there will certain- 
 ly be no reasonable termination. Let us take up 
 then the gentleman's first resolution, or the first 
 part of his proposition and pass on that, then take 
 up the second and pass on that, then the third; 
 and so on until we have disposed of the whole of 
 them. Then if other gentlemen feel desirous 
 that other committees should be raised than those 
 named by the gentleman from Herkimer, let them 
 be proposed and decided upon; but do not let us 
 at this stage of the proceedings waste time by go- 
 ing into a committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. JONES said he had not offered his resolu- 
 tion without reflection or consultation. When 
 ne drew it up originally, it was much wider in its 
 scope than it is now. And as he first drew it, in 
 order to give the committee more scope and pow- 
 er, he had proposed that its members should 
 not only consult and report what was the best 
 practicable mode of proceeding to revise the Con- 
 stitution, but that they should consult and report 
 whether it would best meet the popular will and 
 the real interests of the people, to present to them 
 an entire new Constitution for their approval, or 
 whether amendments only to that Constitu- 
 tion should be submitted to the people. He had 
 showed this to the gentleman from Onondaga (near 
 him) in its original shape,and that gentleman sug- 
 gested that it might, if so worded,give rise to a pre- 
 mature discussion, and that the Convention, in this 
 early stage of its proceedings, would not be capa- 
 ble of deciding whether it would be best to have 
 an entirely new Constitution, or only amendments 
 to the present one ; and that gentleman suggested 
 that he should strike out the last part of the reso- 
 lution, and leave the first part as it is, in the form 
 he had originally presented it to the Convention, 
 making it merely a resolution of inquiry, as to 
 the best mode of proceeding to the revision of the 
 Constitution. He concurred with the gentlemen, 
 adopted his views, and in that shape presented 
 the resolution. The gentleman from Herkimer, 
 with great fairness and ability, (qualities which 
 are eminently characteristic of him,) says, that 
 perhaps he (Mr. J.) was influenced in the course 
 he adopted by the resolution passed in the Con- 
 vention of 1821. He would admit that he was so 
 influenced; and he found on looking at the proceed- 
 ings of that Convention, (marked as they were by 
 ability, moderation,wisdom, candor, foresight, and 
 integrity, which he hoped this Convention would 
 follow as nearly as possible,) that one of the most 
 distinguished members of that body (Mr. Rurus 
 KING) presented a somewhat similar resolution 
 to that which he (Mr. J.) presented here ; and it 
 met with the general concurrence of the mem- 
 bers of that Convention. The number of that 
 committee was 13, instead of 16, as he (Mr. J.) 
 proposed. In the discussion which followed im- 
 
28 
 
 mediately afterwards, as to the mode of appoint- 
 ing that committee, Col. YOUNG changed his 
 views as to the manner in which he thought the 
 Convention ought to proceed to business and 
 said he thought the best mode would be to refer 
 the matter at once to the committee of the whole. 
 Gen. ROOT concurred with him in this view. 
 But these views were instantly met and over- 
 thrown by the mover (Mr. KING.) It does not 
 appear that any one else spoke on the subject. 
 After these gentlemen had spoken, and a recon- 
 sideration moved, the question was taken, and 
 the motion was lost ; and in fact it must have 
 been by a large majority, for the vote for recon- 
 sidering was not large enough to be stated, and 
 Mr. KING'S resolution was unanimously adopted. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS here read from the " Debates in 
 the Convention" a statement that Mr. P. R. LIV- 
 INGSTON had expressed his deep regret of the 
 course which had been adopted. 
 
 Mr. JONES : That was the next day, after the 
 motion to reconsider had been put and lost ; and 
 therefore Mr. L.'s remarks could have no practi- 
 cal application thereto. Mr. L. was merely sug- 
 gesting to the then President. It would be found 
 also, (said M J.) that that committee was appoint- 
 ed on a Friday ; on Friday afternoon it reported on 
 the different subjects which should be appropriat- 
 ed to certain committees ; on Saturday, the Presi- 
 dent named his appointments to those committees : 
 and on Monday morning, Gen. ROOT and Gen. 
 TALLMADGE presented reports from their several 
 committees on the subjects which had been com- 
 mitted to them the latter on the Council of Re- 
 vision. This shows most conclusively how ad- 
 mirably this plan worked for expediting the bu- 
 siness. It show r s that we could scarcely adopt a 
 wiser or more judicious, or expeditious prece- 
 dent ; and this influenced him in presenting the 
 resolution, and he hoped that excellent precedent 
 would be followed in this convention. The gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer objects that this commit- 
 tee was either too large or too small. That if it 
 was to embrace subjects generally, it was too 
 small and that if it was intended merely to pre- 
 sent specific propositions, that it would be found 
 to be too large. He (Mr. J.) trusted that the 
 gentleman from Herkimer would be found not to 
 be right in either case. If the report of the com- 
 mittee is to be considered as binding on the Con- 
 vention, (which the gentleman seems to urge as 
 an objection) then most certainly it was not too 
 large. If he designs to have a report as to what 
 part of the constitution shall be touched or amend- 
 ed, and what part shall not be so touched, then 
 certainly it is not too large. The two from each 
 Senate district would bring with them and repre- 
 sent, the wishes of their constituents and act in 
 accordance with the popular will; and we should 
 thus have a proper and fair combination of the 
 views, wishes, antipathies and desires of the peo- 
 ple of every portion of the State. If the gentle- 
 man wishes to have the committee examine what 
 parts of the constitution it is necessary for us to 
 alter, amend, reform, &c., and to report fully and 
 fairly thereon, (for such is what he intended) then 
 certainly this committee will not be too large. If 
 it is to present these subjects properly for the 
 consideration of the Convention,then it is not too 
 large. What \ve w r ant is a proper combination of 
 
 the wisdom, wants, andintelligence of the whole 
 people, and .how can we possibly better obtain 
 this desideratum than by the formation of such a 
 committee composed of the most intelligent and 
 practical men from every section of the State ? 
 But if we go into committee of the whole, in 
 what state would this matter be found ? Wt- 
 have two different sets of propositions before u> 
 now there is that of the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer (Mr. LOOMIS,) and a different one from the 
 gentleman from Orange (Mr. BROWN). And he 
 also had a set of propositions which, in that case, 
 he should present ; and he dared say that almost 
 every gentleman here has a set, that he would 
 wish to offer, on different parts of the consti- 
 tution which they desire to see amended* 
 from having seen their practical defects. Now 
 where is all this to end if we adopt that course ? 
 The object of the appointment of this committee 
 is to concentrate all the various propositions 
 which gentleman have to offer bearing on the sub- 
 jects that are to be taken into consideration. 
 When theymake their report,we shall have all that 
 is valuable in these propositions presented to us in 
 a concentrated form ; and we shall have the con- 
 centrated wisdom in this way, of the whole con- 
 vention displayed in that report. But the gentle- 
 man from Orange (Mr. BROWN) says that a dif- 
 ferent course is adopted with respect to the Gov's. 
 Message; that it is referred at once to the 
 committee of the whole. Very true. But the 
 object in those cases, is not to amend those docu- 
 ments, but to discuss them. And where is there 
 a better place to discuss them than in committee 
 of the whole. But let it be remembered, that ex- 
 perience shows us that these messages generally 
 remain there a great length of time even at the 
 last session of the legislature we saw that the 
 Governor's message was not taken out of the com- 
 mittee of the whole until 3 or 4 weeks before the 
 close of the session, tho' referred to it at the first 
 or seeond week. It thus remained there some 4 
 months for prolonged discussion and elaborate ex- 
 amination. And does the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer or from Orange, wish a similar course to 
 be pursued here with regard to the Constitution 
 of the State. He, Mr J. trusted not. What is his 
 object ? He hoped that the main design of every 
 member of this honorable body is not to consume 
 precious time in needless discussion of the Con- 
 stitution but that their main object their sole 
 and earnest desire is so effectually and judicious- 
 ly to amend it, as to secure to their constituents 
 additional security and happiness, and to them- 
 selves the lasting thanks of the whole community. 
 The proper place for discussion it is true, is the 
 committee of the whole. But it cannot be pro- 
 perly discussed until we have the reports of thi^ 
 committee, and the subsequent reports of the 
 various committees appointed upon their sug- 
 gestion. And when these shall all have given 
 their concentrated talent, energy, industry and 
 wisdom?. to the consideration of the various sub- 
 jects submitted to them, then there will be am- 
 ple room, ana*. time enough, and the proper place 
 thoroughly to discuss the result of their labors. 
 With regard to the proposition of the gentleman 
 from Orange, to instruct the committee in rela- 
 tion thereto if his proposition should be adopt- 
 ed to report particular subjects for reference 
 
29 
 
 all he (Mr. .1.) could ask was that the commit- 
 tee may not be instructed to report any gentle- 
 man's proposition in particular. Let the matter be 
 guarded carefully in this respect let all send up 
 their individual propositions to the President 
 let these be given to the committee of seventeen; 
 leave them to discuss them with that ability and 
 candor which they will of course possess; and 
 then let them report to this Convention, that 
 which in their judgment is the wisest and best. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he had moved his pro- 
 position as an amendment to the resolution of the 
 gentleman from New York, (Mr. JONES,) and not 
 for the purpose of committing the Convention to 
 any particular line of action. He wished to test 
 the sense of this question merely, by taking the 
 question as between the special committee, or re- 
 ferring from the committee of the whole the vari- 
 ous parts of the Constitution to the several appro- 
 priate committees. He would therefore move the 
 first branch of it first, and if that was adopted, 
 then he would propose immediately to take up 
 the balance of it. 
 
 Mr. WILLARD wished the original resolution 
 to be read again. (It was read.) He was satis- 
 fied that it proposed merely that a committee shall 
 report upon the best plan for expediting their 
 business. He thought it better 'to let this com- 
 mittee report on some plan to bring us at once 
 right to business; all this discussion is irrelevant, 
 it amounts to nothing. It has nothing to do with 
 the matter. He preferred to have the resolution 
 of the gentleman from New- York, (Mr. JONES,) 
 put at once ; and then to go on with our busi- 
 ness ; cease all this idle and random talk, and dis- 
 pose of the subject in a manner that becomes us. 
 
 Mr. CAMPBELL P. WHITE, offered a sub- 
 stitute, which he thought would amicably ar- 
 range the whole matter : 
 
 Resolved, That a committee be appointed to take into 
 consideration f nd report the manner in which it is expedi- 
 ent to proceed with the business of this Convention, in or- 
 der that such alterations in and amendments to the Con- 
 stitution may be made, as the rights of the people demand. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN was conscious that the -natural 
 predisposition in this body would be to follow the 
 course pointed out by his colleague (Mr. JONES.) 
 It had had the sanction of a good precedent in be- 
 ing adopted by a previous Convention, and it ap- 
 peared very plausible also, by holding out a pros- 
 pect of proceeding directly to the subject of 
 their deliberations, without useless discussion. 
 But in regard to the effects it will have upon the 
 deliberations of this body, he deemed it a matter 
 of the highest importance for us to settle at once, 
 and to settle correctly. The usual parliamentary 
 course with regard to the President's and Govern- 
 or's messages was to refer them to the committee 
 of the whole ; but not for the purpose, as his col- 
 league had alleged or supposed, of a rambling 
 discussion, but to distribute their several parts to 
 appropriate committees, constituted by order of 
 the House for the consideration of the subject 
 matter of those documents, in a parliamentary 
 manner. We may safely presume in this, as in 
 similar cases, that parliamentary usages have 
 some significancy and some utility; and he 
 thought that if any gentleman now entertained 
 any doubts on this subject, that before the end of 
 the Convention, he would find this to be the 
 right and proper course. The first thing they 
 ought to do in order to expedite business and to 
 
 come to a satisfactory conclusion was to refer all 
 the matters on which we arc to act, to appropriate 
 committeess, and in order properly to effect this 
 important object, it is highly necessary and in- 
 dispensable that we should have a careful and 
 accurate classification of all these matters. If we 
 do not if we commence with an imperfect clas- 
 sification we shall find ourselves wandering in 
 confusion through them unto the close of the ses- 
 sion. We had better know at the outset what it 
 is to be proposed for us to consider. We had bet- 
 ter go at once into committee of the whole, where 
 every gentleman here can present any proposition 
 he has to offer, state his views thereon fully, and 
 suggest any mode of classification he may wish to 
 have made. Then, when suggestions have been 
 fully made and freely discussed for two or three 
 hours, or a day or two, we will readily be able 
 to come to a satisfactory conclusion as to the 
 course to be adopted ; or if there should be found 
 nay difficulty, we can refer them to the appropri- 
 ate committees. He sustained this course, because 
 it would facilitate the transaction of business, 
 because it would give a full and complete 
 classification of the business, or be likely to do 
 so, and because it would enable the President, 
 when he comes to form the committees, to distri- 
 bute them in such manner as to submit to their 
 consideration all the subjects upon which the 
 Convention is called to act. There is a still more 
 important point of view in which this subject is 
 to be considered, and it is, that the action of this 
 committee will be, to a considerable extent, in 
 part restrictive of the subjects for the considera- 
 tion of this body, not directly, not necessarily in 
 terms, but in its inevitable effects. Suppose in 
 the committee, a majority of it, composed of nine 
 individuals, think that a particular proposition 
 is not of sufficient importance, or is not sufficient- 
 ly desirable, to justify them in raising a commit- 
 tee for the purpose of its consideration ; they 
 therefore form a classification which does not 
 embrace the subject, and thus have nine, perhaps 
 seventeen, of the most influential members of this 
 body been committed to the opinion that the sub- 
 ject ought not to be considered. From what little 
 experience he (Mr. T.) had been "enabled to 
 have in parliamentary proceeding, he thought 
 that any proposition in which his constituents 
 were interested would have 25 per cent, at 
 least, less of a chance for consideration by 
 this body, if the committee should happen to 
 form an unfavorable judgment in relation to 
 it. And here, without any discussion, without 
 consideration, without even any suggestion of the 
 various propositions upon which we may be call- 
 ed upon to act, it is proposed to submit the whole 
 action of this body, in a considerable degree, to 
 the entire power of a committee composed of 
 some seventeen of its members. His (Mr. T.'s) 
 friend and colleague from New York (Mr. JONES) 
 said that by the proposition as originally drawn 
 it was intended that this committee should con- 
 sider and report upon what subject it was expe- 
 dient for this Convention to act, but that upon 
 consultation with other gentlemen he modified it 
 by striking out that part of it. His (Mr. T.'s) ob- 
 jection to the form in which the resolution now 
 stood, was, that although not in terms, yet cer- 
 tainly it had in substance to a large degree the 
 same effect. And if his friend had been dis- 
 
30 
 
 posed, as he would not believe he was, to 
 limit the range of discussion and of ac- 
 tion in this body, he would more wisely and 
 certainly have accomplished his object by his 
 present proposition, the effect of which is not 
 likely to be seen and appreciated, than in the 
 form in which it was originally made. There is 
 great reason to fear that the effect of this course 
 of proceeding would to some extent at least, be to 
 organize an inferior body within the convention, 
 and if any man here has seen the effect of the 
 united and concerted action of 15 or 20 men in a 
 body of this kind he can judge what may be the 
 effect of it. It would have to some degree the 
 effect of the application of the caucus system to 
 the deliberations here. It was for this reason 
 he was opposed to it. He (Mr. T.) came here 
 resolving to have the widest latitude for considera- 
 tion and discussion of propositions whether adopt- 
 ed or not. If 15 or 20 men in this convention 
 might think a particular proposition ought to be 
 adopted, there should be constituted some appro- 
 priate committee to which the question should 
 be referred, by whom it might be considered, and 
 presented to the convention, on free and equal 
 terms with any and every other proposition sub- 
 mitted for deliberation. Take a possible case of 
 one question on this classification. There are a 
 considerable number of persons who suppose that 
 the rights of property of half the community 
 are not sufficiently protected by existing laws, 
 who think that the same object which by a re- 
 fined and complicated system of artificial law, 
 is secured to the few who are wealthy enough to 
 pay its price, should be given for a common right 
 without price to every member of the community. 
 Who think, in a word, that what is accomplished 
 in regard to the separate property of married wo- 
 men by a system of trust, should be plainly and 
 openly accomplished by the ordinary law of re- 
 medy. Suppose an organization in which no one 
 question of this kind should be appropriately re- 
 ferred. Is it to be supposed that individuals of this 
 Convention will be so wisely distributed among 
 these several committees, or that propositions by 
 individuals would stand an even chance, as though 
 they had been argued at the commencement of 
 the organization. He apprehended not. 
 
 One word as to the despatch of business. It 
 seemed to him that if a committee was formed as 
 proposed in the first instance, upon bringing 
 their report into the Convention, the question 
 will then arise on their report, whether it should 
 be amended. Any gentleman who has a proposi- 
 tion to make, which he shall not deem fairly in- 
 cluded in the organization proposed, could then 
 offer the proposition or some amendment to pro- 
 vide for it, as an amendment to the report of this 
 committee, and the Convention might then have 
 at least as long a discussion, and in all probabili- 
 ty a longer one than if gentlemen had been al- 
 lowed free latitude for'discussion for a day or two, 
 without being committed to any particular course 
 of action. He did not mean to say, and it would 
 certainly not be so, that the propositions would 
 not have an equal chance for adoption, but that 
 there would be a larger chance for a struggle for 
 their adoption. Alf that would be gained would 
 be a longer discussion with a less desirable 
 mode of disposing of business. Undoubtedly 
 
 there would be propositions with instructions 
 upon questions on which gentlemen were suffi- 
 ciently prepared to make them, and much time 
 would thereby be consumed. It was very clear 
 that much more time would thus be consumed than 
 even by the mode proposed by the gentleman 
 from Herkimer. If it should so happen that un- 
 der this mode, some slight indication of the opin- 
 ions of members should be given, although he 
 did not suppose it was desired to go into a gene- 
 ral discussion, he should not for one regret it. It 
 would tend very much to inform the Chair in so 
 forming the select committees, as to represent all 
 the various opinions on subjects. In every re- 
 spect he thought it would be the most preferable 
 mode in which one, two or three days at the com- 
 mencement of the session could be expended. 
 
 Before he concluded, he ought perhaps to cor- 
 rect one misapprehension into which his col- 
 league had fallen, as to the course pursued by 
 the present House of Assembly in reference to 
 the Governor's message. It was true that at the 
 commencement of the session the message was 
 referred to a committee of the whole, and that 
 some parts of it were not taken out of that com- 
 mittee until nearly the close of the session. But 
 all the material parts, all on which discussion 
 and action were had, were taken from it within 
 the first month. In that case he was averse, as 
 he was now, to going into a general discussion in 
 that committee. He thought it would be wiser 
 to refer originally, and to discuss the specific 
 propositions. He thought now that after there 
 had been discussion enough to enable a classifica- 
 tion of the propositions, it would be wiser 
 to refer them to special committees than 
 to go into a general discussion; but for the 
 purpose of an accurate, comprehensive clas- 
 sification, propositions from every member 
 should be freely received. There is in this 
 case, stronger reasons than in that of the 
 Governor's message. There all the subjects upon 
 action was to be had, were contained in the doc- 
 ument, and it was but a brief labor to analyze, se- 
 parate and refer its various parts. Here, there 
 were a great many propositions not to be found in 
 the Constitution as the provision in regard to 
 State debts and it was important therefore, that 
 every member should have an opportunity of sug- 
 gesting the subject on which he might deem it 
 proper for the Convention to act. When that 
 was done, if there was any difficulty in coming to 
 definite conclusions in committee of the whole, 
 they could readily adopt resolutions referring the 
 various propositions to a select committee, or 
 when the committee rose and got into the house 
 refuse leave for it to sit again, and then refer the 
 subjects to a committee. The committee would 
 then be informed of the disposition of most of the 
 individuals of the Convention, and would be en- 
 abled to make such a classification as would 
 meet the approbation of nearly the entire body, 
 and enable the Convention to proceed to business 
 in the most intelligent and expeditious manner. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER rose to make an enquiry 
 to ascertain the question now before the Con- 
 vention? If he understood it aright he was incli- 
 ned to the opinion that the gentleman last up had 
 not been speaking to the question. 
 
 The PRESIDENT stated the question to be on 
 
31 
 
 amending the original resolution by substituting 
 the proposition of Mr. LOOMIS. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER thought then that the 
 question of reference was not involved in that 
 motion. To prevent this random discussion he 
 would move that the whole subject be referred to a 
 committee of the whole on the constitution, then 
 this discussion he apprehended would be in order. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that it was his intention 
 not to have said anything ; but having been inci- 
 dentally alluded to as having been consulted as to 
 the original resolution by the gentleman from 
 New- York (Mr. JONES), it was perhaps due to 
 himself that he should explain his relationship, 
 so far as he had any to it. The resolution, as the 
 gentleman had correctly stated, was submitted to 
 (him) the gentleman from Onondaga. It was laid 
 before him and he read it. It was a subject upon 
 which he had not much reflected, but he knew the 
 course taken by the Convention of 1821,and deem- 
 ing that course suitable and proper, aid supposing 
 that the action of this special committee would be 
 very limited, he suggested to the gentleman to 
 strike out all that would be likely to give rise to 
 debate, in order to present the simple proposition 
 of appointing a committee for the purpose of bring- 
 ing the matter that had called the Convention to- 
 gether, in a suitable shape before them for their ac- 
 tion. It has been stated that it was the practice of 
 Congress and of the Legislature to go into commit- 
 tee of the whole on the Message, and in that com- 
 mittee to refer the various topics on which it trea- 
 ted, to appropriate committees. But what is the 
 condition here ? we have no such committees. 
 His idea was, that it was proper to appoint a com- 
 mittee for the purpose of designating the various 
 committees to which different subjects ought to be 
 referred, which would occupy but a short time. 
 When these committees were reported to the Con- 
 vention, if ii \vas thought advisable to go into 
 committee ri the whole, for the purpose of dis- 
 tributing the various parts of the Constitution, it 
 would be proper to do so. He had no objection 
 if gentlemen wished to discuss these questions of 
 Constitutional Reform, and to give their views, 
 that they should take this opportunity, or go now 
 into committee to do so. He was for the broadest 
 latitude of debate, and he was for taking no steps 
 that would curtail it: But it appeared to him 
 that a committee of eight would be a sufficient 
 number to point out the various committees which 
 should be appointed. And, afterwards, if all the 
 questions that should arise could not be referred 
 to these standing committees, as they might be 
 termed, it would be very easy and proper to raise 
 select committees. It seemed to him, that if the 
 committee was limited in its duties to the sim- 
 ple matter of designating these committees, and 
 made them numerous enough to cover the whole 
 ground^ that then the Convention could go in- 
 to committee of the whole on the Constitution, 
 and there refer the various parts of the Constitu- 
 tion to such committees as might be deemed pro- 
 per. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR had listened very attentively 
 to all the arguments that had been offered pro. 
 and con. on this question of reference to a com- 
 mittee, and although unable to bring to his aid, 
 in forming a judgment upon it, any amount of 
 parliamentary learning and law, yet he, as a 
 
 member of this body the question being treated 
 as one of some importance felt bound to express 
 his views upon it. They might be in some re- 
 spects different from any he had heard expressed 
 by any one gentleman, though perhaps not essen- 
 tially, from a true view of all the arguments pre- 
 sented on all sides. He understood the proposi- 
 tion to be very analagous to the first important pro- 
 position connected with our organization with 
 which we commenced this session the estab- 
 lishment of certain rules of order. We have a 
 vast subject spread before us. and how to ap- 
 proach that subject is the question. To take a 
 view of the whole of it at once was impossible 
 where we shall commence and how we shall pro- 
 gress is the question now before us. What me- 
 thod should be adopted for the purpose of giving 
 our judgments as to the place at which we should 
 commence, and the manner in which we should 
 progress in traversing the whole of this vast sub- 
 ject. Now, in relation to the appointment of 
 committees, he had entertained precisely the 
 opinions which were expressed by the gentle- 
 men who are opposed to the reference to this 
 committee of 17, and yet he was in favor of the 
 appointment of that committee. And to make 
 himself understood, it might be somewhat im- 
 portant to look at the two propositions now be- 
 fore us and see in what consisted the distinc- 
 tive character of each. The first proposition was 
 an open, general one, that it be referred to a com- 
 mittee to consist of a certain number of persons 
 from each Senate district, to lay before the Con- 
 vention a plan of operation. That is the propo- 
 sition upon the one side. That upon the other 
 is, that this Convention do now in its collective 
 capacity proceed to the classification of subjects, 
 and to the appointment of committees, to whom 
 these particular subjects shall be referred. Now 
 let us look at what would be the proper course of 
 operation of the first committee proposed, and 
 what it would be under the appointment of the 
 several classes of committees proposed. He 
 should infer, if this matter was submitted, ac- 
 cording to the proposition of his colleague, as 
 amended by another, to the committee of 17, it 
 would become them to determine whether the 
 Constitution should be divided, the amendments 
 expected to be presented, classified and referred 
 to distinct committees, or whether the proposi- 
 tions should be discussed before the Convention 
 in Committee of the whole in the first instance. 
 Or whether a plan might not be adopted by which 
 both modes of proceeding could be introduced 
 and the advantages of each secured. That is the 
 duty of the large committee. They would bring 
 us a classification, and we could vary it according 
 to our good judgment. It would also be the duty 
 and privilege of any member who might think 
 they had left out some important point, to bring 
 forward a distinct proposition, or a modification. 
 As for instance, in regard to the property qualifi- 
 cation, to be abolished in all instances, in regard to 
 voting or holding office, or any other of the nu- 
 merous plans that have been proposed, it would 
 be competent for any one to move such a proposi- 
 tion and to have it properly referred. This com- 
 mittee appointed to chalk out a course of proced- 
 ure, would doubtless secure to us the appoint- 
 ment of all proper committees and also a proper 
 
32 
 
 rule of order and a proper classification and dis- 
 position of all subjects that had not otherwise 
 been correctly and distinctly classified, and give 
 a construction to that classification which should 
 regulate it hereafter. And we might argue upon 
 any broad and general proposition before it went 
 to such committee, and so greatly curtail their la- 
 bors, reducing the same to a mere mechanical 
 duty. The amendment of Mr. LOOMIS is open to 
 this objection ; a single gentleman here executes 
 the duties that ought to employ a number of 
 minds. Mr. L. for instance, offers a plan of his 
 own, and makes a classification for himself. Ev- 
 ery other member may do the same on his ow r n 
 individual responsibility. But how much more 
 safe and satisfactory the other mode ! We shall 
 get a much better classification by having the sub- 
 ject discussed by a number of minds, than by one ; 
 and we shall have progressed a great way in our 
 work when we shall have got the opinion of a 
 committee of several gentlemen united in the 
 classification of even one or two subjects; for he 
 believed and hoped that at this early stage every 
 gentleman is influenced by nothing but good mo- 
 tives and a desire to come forward in a manly and 
 honorable manner to expedite, and not embarrass, 
 the business of the Convention. Mr. LOOMIS 
 proposes that at the outset the whole body should 
 proceed to classify. That would be exceedingly 
 difficult. We should have 1000 propositions and 
 conflicting opinions. No gentleman should 
 thrust his individual views before this house un- 
 til the proper order of proceeding shall have 
 been settled. Nor should opinion be forestalled 
 by the weight of any committee report. A small- 
 er committee might answer, one from each sen- 
 ate district, and thus let the matter be brought in 
 a matured shape before us. He thought it exceed- 
 ingly advisable that when we came to appoint 
 committees for classified subjects, that each mem- 
 ber should have an opportunity of advocating his 
 amendment, before either a large or a small com- 
 mittee should have had an opportunity to report on 
 or to forestal opinion on that point. He did not 
 at all fear that even a committee of 17 would over- 
 awe any member, and he trusted that no commit-, 
 tee would band themselves into a party to sustain 
 any particular report they might make. He was 
 in favor of a committee of 8 or 16 to call out a 
 plan of proceeding to business as under Mr. 
 JONES'S resolution. When they present the 
 plan we may and shall vary many parts of it. 
 And he (Mr. O'C.) w r ould for one move to 
 vary any part of it that did not agree with the 
 wishes of his constituents. And after we have 
 debated on and modified their report, we then 
 can get fairly to work at the business before us 
 not upon mere questions of form or mere classi- 
 fication but on distinct propositions not at all 
 technical touching the special reform which 
 each member may be instructed, or may deem pro- 
 per to present to us. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN was much obliged to Mr. 
 JONES for bringing this question before the Con- 
 vention, directly, by his resolution at this early 
 hour or stage of its proceedings calculated as it 
 most certainly was to bring the minds of gentlemen 
 here distinctly to the question to enquire how 
 we can best proceed to cut up, dissect, separate 
 and classify the subjects upon which the Con- 
 vention has to act. And he was still more in- 
 
 debted to his friend from* Kings (Mr. SWACK- 
 HAMER) who had moved a most proper refer- 
 ence of the subject as he thought. He (Mr. H.) 
 made no great claims to legislative experience. 
 It was true that he had had something to do in that 
 way ; and he should be wanting in his duty to the 
 Convention, if he did not distinctly state at the 
 outset, that upon a question like this he preferred 
 a direct reference to the committee of the whole. 
 By adopting this course, it is a direct and an im- 
 portant advantage gained immediately. It also 
 leaves to us every other mode that may be sug- 
 gested hereafter. We are free to choose. No- 
 thing is lost by it ; and we gain all that can be 
 gained by a special committee and a good deal 
 more. We are engaged in a great labor, and 
 when he recollected that in all the great legisla- 
 tive contests for freedom, the grand committee 
 the committee of the whole had been the instru- 
 ment by whkh victory had been achieved, he 
 could not sit^uietly by and leave his friend unpro- 
 tected. What is to be gained by a special commit- 
 tee? Submit this question to such a committee, and 
 they would only then be in the precise condition 
 we are in now for we have before us the con- 
 stitution of the State and the existing government, 
 in all its complicated workings. Refer it to the 
 committee of the whole, and they have the same 
 before them. Will it not be admitted that the 
 entire body of the convention must give wiser and 
 better instructions and come to wiser and better 
 conclusions that any special committee ? The 
 gentleman who moved the resolution very justly 
 and properly admitted that the select committee 
 could not rely altogether upon its own knowledge 
 but must derive most of its information from 
 the other members of the convention. And yet 
 he gave as a reason for not having a committee of 
 the whole, that each member would be at liberty 
 to present his own projet. Now, compare the 
 condition of a member presenting his projet to a 
 select committee, with that of one presenting his 
 projet to a committee of the whole. For this 
 must be done, or how is a select committee to get 
 at the views of the members ? Shall the special 
 committee travel round from room to room in this 
 hall, or from member to member at his dwelling 
 or elsewhere, to ascertain what are their wishes ? 
 Shall the members stand here with propositions 
 and the special committee there, and have them 
 sent to them ? Can anything be more unr,easona- 
 ble or disorderly than such a mode of proceeding? 
 But in committee of the whole each gentleman can 
 present his plan and .at the same time advocate it, 
 and defend it; and not be placed as they would 
 be before a special committee, where he would 
 be told to wait until some gentleman, who was 
 in before him, had given his views and reasons. 
 How preferable to this would be a committee 
 of the whole ? If the individual or aggregated 
 opinion of the Convention is to assist *he judg- 
 ment of the special committee, it can only be ob- 
 tained here in committee of the whole. Gentle- 
 men seem to think that they are going to expe- 
 dite business by taking this short cut. But gen- 
 tlemen familiar with legislation know by expe- 
 rience here, how poorly they can get their in- 
 structions before a special committee. And be- 
 fore the resolution could be referred, instruction 
 after instruction would be moved and debate af- 
 ter debate had upon each instruction. And so 
 
33 
 
 would it be upon the report when it came in and 
 the resolutions accompanying it; amendment af- 
 ter amendment would be proposed and then still 
 further debate arise on each, to an almost intermi- 
 nable length ; for no one supposes thatfot this ear- 
 ly stage of the session the previous question will 
 be very freely resorted to. Then if despatch 
 is the object of this Convention, the most certain 
 way to get it is by going into committee of the 
 whole at once. Each one will not have to argue 
 his proposition or defend them, because many a 
 person will hear precisely his own argument and 
 train of reasoning advanced by another. He 
 did not desire to inflict anything like a speech 
 upon this committee, but he did most earnestly 
 desire to see the highly important business which 
 brought us together,- properly and expeditiously 
 disposed of. A day or two spent in committee 
 of the whole will effect all that we desire. 
 It will give all the members an opportunity to 
 show on what subjects they desire to have com- 
 mittees of investigation appointed ; and it will en- 
 able them to draft resolutions as to the best mode of 
 conducting the business of the Convention here- 
 after. And if it should happen to be the case, 
 (which he Mr. H. did not anticipate,) that there 
 should be no concentration of views among the 
 members, then the subject can at once be taken 
 out of the committee of the whole, and all would 
 be entirely satisfied, and each one of a special 
 committee (whether formed of 8 or 16) will have 
 heard enough of the subject, and be able to form 
 such a judgment, as to the proper distribution of it 
 as will be as satisfactory to every member as can be 
 desired by any gentleman in the Convention. 
 He (Mr. H.) did not fear that we should have 
 what has been termed an endless debate, in 
 committee of the whole on the merits of 
 the various propositions to be submitted to 
 us. But it is better that there should be occa- 
 sional departures from the strict rules of order ; 
 better that we should have a large and varied de- 
 bate, than that gentlemen unaccustomed to this 
 mode of deliberation should be trammelled and 
 cut short by unnecessary calls to order. This 
 would injure no one, but might elicit many use- 
 ful truths ; and there is no other way in which 
 all can have an impartial opportunity of partici- 
 pating in the discussion and settlement of this 
 important question. In no way can you so spee- 
 dily expedite this business as by going into com- 
 mittee of the whole. You will then have each 
 man's proposition before you, and the reason he 
 has to assign for it. It may be feared that if we 
 should go intocommitte of the whole, we should 
 wrangle with each other, or approximate near to 
 it. But he had no fears of this kind ; no fear of 
 any personalities being resorted to, or of any de- 
 parture from the wholesome rules of decorum, in 
 this body. From what he had seen here, he was 
 quite satisfied that this Convention cauld and 
 would preserve perfect order and decorum. We 
 had no reason, no inducement, to depart from it. 
 It is true that many of us have been actors in the 
 past; but that action cannot be recalled, and 
 whether it has been for good or evil, it is gone for 
 ever! We are called hereto make a Constitu-' 
 tion, not only for the 3,000,000 of people now in" 
 this State, but for the millions that are to come 
 after them. As those who preceded us have gone, 
 
 so those now here shall go, and be succeeded by 
 others. And shall we, in view of this, depart 
 from that love of truth and justice which should 
 guide_ us in endeavoring to frame the best Con- 
 stitution that human wisdom can devise ? This 
 consideration alone ought to control any disposi- 
 tion here to indulge in animosities against each 
 other in any way This principle is the heart and 
 soul of our meeting, and should induce us to aim 
 at but one great end : that of honestly endeavor- 
 ing to benefit our fellow-men and our posterity ! 
 We commence then, with that great instrument 
 of public freedom, the Committee of the Whole, 
 and if we strictly adhere to it, we shall most 
 surely succeed in obtaining our end. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND enquired the question before 
 the Convention? 
 
 The PRESIDENT stated it to be on the motion 
 to refer the whole subject to a committee of the 
 whole. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG had but one word to say 
 on this very important question.' Jt was a mere 
 question of time and business. His friend over 
 the way, (Mr. HOFFMAN,) must be too familiar 
 with public business not to understand the ne- 
 cessity of parliamentary organization, and how 
 these things were done in Congress. We had no 
 eaucus there, but a few prominent men of the 
 body meet logether and arrange the business, and 
 some gentlemen were selected to carry the ar-- 
 rangement out, and that was the end of it. This 
 was the design of the resolution not to suppress 
 any enquiries, but merely to arrange our business. 
 No principle was involved in it. If there had 
 been any expression of a wish for one moment, 
 to suppress propositions that might be desired to 
 be presented, it would be a different thing; but 
 all of us know that there would not be a member 
 on the committee who would desire to do any 
 such thing. The usual design of a committee 
 was to prepare the order of business the same 
 course was pursued universally by every parlia- 
 mentary body throughout the world. But if we 
 should go into committee of the whole, what 
 would be the result? We should have forty dif- 
 ferent propositions, and at the end of three weeks 
 perhaps, then have all these propositions refer- 
 red to a select committee to do precisely what is 
 proposed to be done now. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN begged leave to reply to an al- 
 lusion of the gentleman from N. York to himself. 
 The gentleman supposes that it is customary in a 
 deliberative body to have informal committees, to 
 dissect the Executive messages. He (Mr. H.) 
 had done that labor, but he had never heard of 
 any such informal conference or committee out of 
 doors having any thing to do with it. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD asked the convention to par- 
 don him for a moment, while he said what he 
 could towards presenting this question as it was. 
 It had been very much misconceived by gentle- 
 men who had urged the proposition to go into 
 cqpimittee of the whole, he would not say design- 
 edly. Gentlemen seem to have understood that 
 ay referring this matter to a committee of 17 
 to report a projetfor the arrangement of busi- 
 ness, that they were to report a constitution al- 
 ready prepared, and were about to smuggle it 
 through the convention and no body find out any 
 thing about it. He did not believe that the gen* 
 
34 
 
 tleman from Herkimer would ever be found 
 asleep on such an occasion. He was always too 
 wide awake. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN, had heard no one entertain 
 such a supposition. He supposed it was under- 
 stood every where, to be a question of mere par- 
 celling and distribution. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD did not know that any such 
 proposition had been made in terms, but that was 
 the result and conclusion of the arguments on 
 that side. He had an entirely different view of 
 the matter. The only thing proposed to be done 
 was to take up the existing constitution and refer 
 its different parts and the amendments that were 
 necessary to appropriate committees there was 
 nothing beyond that. Now he would ask whe- 
 ther there was any danger to be apprehended 
 with the controlling force of the opinion of 
 gentlemen here expressed. He would be very 
 glad to have them show to him where this dan- 
 ger was to be looked for. This committee would 
 report no opinion except such as was implied 
 in their resolution of reference. And if any gen- 
 tleman thought there was a subject not embraced 
 in their report, it would be very, easy for him to 
 move an amendment. The gjgnileman from 
 New York, (Mr. TIL.DEN,) had undertaken to 
 say that no subject but what the committee pro- 
 posed could be referred. He (Mr. C.) did not so 
 understand it. These propositions would be pure- 
 ly affirmatory, none of them would be negative. 
 Every thing not included would be left to the 
 Convention to act upon. His opinion was that this 
 course would greatly facilitate the business, and 
 he believed that by to-morrow morning they could 
 report, and the various subjects be sent off to their 
 appropriate committees. Suppose that the other 
 course was taken. We are afloat on a wide sea, 
 without any helm or compass, or land-mark the 
 debate might continue till July, and then we be 
 obliged to come back to where we started, so far 
 as the labor we were sent here to perform was 
 concerned. He did not believe we had that time 
 to waste, nor that any great advantage would be 
 derived from discussion at this stage. When the 
 committee report, it was not expected that their re- 
 solutions would pass sub silentio ; they would then 
 be discussed, and as fully too as in committee 
 of the whole. He had some evidence that this 
 could be as well done here as in committee 
 of the whole. The gentleman from Orange and 
 Herkimer had already introduced propositions. 
 What can we gain by going into committee ? 
 Nothing but a waste of time ; almost a criminal 
 waste of the time of the people. There were 
 some portions of the remarks of the gentleman 
 from Herkimer, (Mr. HOFFMAN) which he (Mr. 
 C.) apprehended had very little to do with the 
 propositions before us. Our position in regard 
 to the present and coming generations, was a 
 matter perhaps to be discussed hereafter. But 
 he apprehended it had nothing to do with this 
 question, and that it was thrown in to mislead 
 the minds of gentlemen. He did not know but 
 the resolution was too broad in its form, and 
 might give the committee too much power, if it 
 did, it ought to be amended. 
 
 Mr. JONES had a substitute for his resolution, 
 which perhaps would obviate many of the objec- 
 tions that had been raised. 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER apprehended it would 
 
 not be in order. He should object to this piling 
 up of resolutions. 
 
 Mr. JONES said at the suggestion of several 
 gentlemen he should not offer his amendment. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN preferred the resolution as it was. 
 He did not design to detain the Convention, but 
 merely to say that he had been very unfortunate 
 in making himself understood to his friend from 
 Otsego. IT he supposed that his (Mr. T.'s) design 
 in favoring the reference to the committee of the 
 whole was to go into a prolonged discussion,he was 
 mistaken. He supposed it if was sent there, it 
 would give to the 111 members on this floor, 
 not embraced in the committee, a chance du- 
 ring a short period to offer any and all propo- 
 sitions that they might deem proper. And if 
 there was, as he did not believe there would 
 be, any difficulty in adopting a classification, 
 then there could be made such a reference as 
 was proposed by his colleagues, and the sub- 
 committees would be sufficiently informed of the 
 opinions of members to make a classification com- 
 plete and comprehensive. Certainly, these 17 
 gentlemen will embrace, in the propositions they 
 may submit here, only such as may offer them- 
 selves to their own minds, without respect to 
 what might appear proper to any other of the 111 
 members. It seemed to him that but a very short 
 time would be employed in presenting these pro- 
 positions, and they could ultimately be classified 
 by the committee. As to the apprehension that 
 if we go into committee, we shall not be able to 
 get out of it, the gentleman is perfectly aware 
 that a motion to rise and report progress is 
 not debateable, and that if it is the will of the 
 majority, leave can be refused to sit again, 
 and the debates be terminated. We shall un- 
 doubtedly have all these propositions in the Con- 
 vention, and the question is whether the com- 
 mittee shall be in possession of all the matter they 
 shall undertake to classify, or only 17-128ths of 
 that matter. That is simply the question for this 
 body to determine, and it seemed to him so plain 
 and simple that he was at a loss to assign any rea- 
 son for departing from it on this occasion if he 
 were not aware of the almost morbid anxiety on 
 the part of gentlemen to despatch business rapid- 
 ly. He was not less anxious to bring our labors 
 to a termination, but in his judgment the object 
 would not be attained by a leap in the dark. 
 Such a leap he considered this proposition to re- 
 fer to a committee of 17. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved an adjournment. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD wished to ask leave of ab- 
 sence, before that motion was put, for one week, 
 for Mr. NELSON of Otsego. Leave was granted. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, (5th day,) June 5. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BATES. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND, from the select committee of 
 8, in relation to the expenses of Judiciary pro- 
 ceedings, submitted the following resolutions: 
 
 COUNTY, MAYOR'S AND RECORDER'S COURTS. 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretaries of the Convention be di- 
 rected to address letters to the County Clerk of each coun- 
 ty in the State, requiring an immediate answer to the fol- 
 lowing questions: 
 
 1. How many terms of the County Courts of your coun- 
 ty were held, and for how many days did said courts sit 
 during the year 1845? 
 
35 
 
 2 How many civil causes were on the calendars at sai 
 terms for trial; how many wn-o tried; and what was the 
 aggregate amount of verdicts therein. 
 
 3. How many of said causes \v ere on appeal from Justi 
 ces' Courts; un'd in cases of appeal, in which verdicts were 
 rendered, state in each case the amount of the recovery for 
 debt or damages before the justice, and the amount of the 
 verdict in the County Court? 
 
 4. How many causes arising on certiorari were on the 
 calendars at said terms? How many judgments were re 
 rersed? How many affirmed? 
 
 5. What was the amount allowed during said year to thi 
 Judges ofthe County Courts and Common Pleas, (or thei 
 fees or salaries as compensation for travel and attendance 
 at the Courtsof Oyer and Terminer? 
 
 6. What amount was allowed, and chargeable to the 
 County, for fees, during said year, in said County Courts 
 of grand jurors, of petit jurors, of sheriffs and constables 
 of crier, of county clerk, for services in said courts, stating 
 each separately? 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretaries address similar letters t 
 the Clerks of the several Mayor's and Recorder's Courts in 
 this State, except the Recorders Court of the city ant 
 county of New York, asking for similar information, sc 
 far as applicable to their courts 
 
 CIRCUIT COURTS. 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretaries, in their said letters t( 
 the County Clerks, and also in a letter to be addressed by 
 them to the Clerk ofthe Circuit Court in and for the citj 
 and county of New- York, request answers to the follow 
 ing questions: 
 
 1. How many terms of the Circuit Court were held in 
 your county during the year 1845, and for how many day, 
 did said terms continue? 
 
 2. How many civil causes were on the calendar at eaic 
 terms; how many were tried ; what was the aggregatt 
 amount of verdicts rendered at each term? 
 
 3. What amount was allowed for fees at said terms, o 
 Grand Jurors, of Petit Jurors, of Sheriff and Constables, o 
 Crier, stating each separately? 
 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to prepare 
 for the use of the Convention a statement showing the 
 amount of salary or compensation paid or accrued during 
 the year 1845, to the Chancellor, the Vice Chancellor, the 
 Assistant Vice Chancellor, the Justices of the Supreme 
 court, the Circuit Judges, the State Reporters, the Regis 
 ter, including Clerk hire and other expenses allowed to 
 him, the Assistant Register, including Clerk hire and oth- 
 er expense* allowed to him; the Clerks in Chancery; the 
 Chancellor's <"lerk; the Clerks of the Supreme Court, in- 
 cluding hue and other expenses allowed to them; the 
 criers and constables attending the Supreme Court; the 
 Sergeants-at-arms of the Court of Chancery; the members 
 of tne Court for the Correction of Errors, its officers and 
 attendants, and all other charges or expenses during said 
 year paid by the State, or incurred and chargeable to the 
 State, for the Court for the Correction of Errors, the Court 
 of Chancery, the Supreme court and the Circuit courts 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretaries of the Convention be di- 
 rected to address a letter to the Vice Chancellors, the As- 
 istant Vice Chancellor, each ofthe Circuit Judges and Su- 
 preme Court Commissioners, the First Judge of each coun- 
 ty, each of the Judges of the Superior Court and of the 
 court of Common Pleas ofthe city and county of New-York 
 and of the Justices of the Marine Court in said city, the 
 Recorders of each of the cities of the State, the Clerk of 
 the Supreme court in the city of New. York, and also to 
 ths several Masters and Examiners in Chancery in the 
 state, requesting them severally to comrrunicate to this 
 Convention without delay, the amount of fees and perqui- 
 sites of office received or charged by them respectively, 
 for services rendered during the year 1845. 
 
 Mr. STRONG thought that part relating to "fees 
 of County Judges" was not strong enough. He 
 wished that part read again. 
 
 It was read again, as "follows : 
 " What was the amount allowed for fees for travel and 
 attendance on the County Court, and also the same for the 
 Court of Oyer and Terminer." 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that some judges had a sala- 
 ary, and some of the fees go in some places to- 
 wards the salary ; but this was regulated by the 
 Board of Supervisors. He did not think this 
 would reach that matter. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that if the First Judge 
 
 was a salaried officer, the report of the County 
 Treasurer would reach it. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved to amend, so as to read 
 ** fees or salaries." 
 It was so amended. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said there was an omission ; 
 because in New York city the County Court was 
 distinct from the Court of Common Pleas. He 
 moved to insert, " and Court of Common Pleas of 
 New York." 
 
 This was carried. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved the following as an 
 amendment : 
 
 Resolved, That the Clerks of the Supreme Court be re- 
 quested to furnish to this Convention a statement of the 
 number of judgments rendered in that Court during the 
 year 1845, with the aggregate amount of damages and 
 costs, stated separately. 
 
 It was carried as an amendment to the report. 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR moved as an amendment, 
 to include the number of enumerated and non- 
 enumerated motions made and recorded in the 
 Court of Common Pleas. 
 This was ultimately lost. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought we should not get an 
 answer to all these enquiries before it was time 
 for the convention to adjourn. We ought not thus 
 to spread out all these enquiries. For that rea- 
 son, the year 1844 was omitted. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said they had deliberately 
 considered all the interrogatories necessary to in- 
 clude all the information essential for the Con- 
 vention to know and they lopped off all those 
 minor matters for fear that there would not be 
 time to get an answer to the queries for several 
 months. The results of his report would furnish 
 a voluminous book of information for the Conven- 
 tion, and give the facts on all the great points 
 they wished to get at. He hoped they would not 
 load down the report any further, so as to destroy 
 its utility. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR thought that the facts about 
 the " enumerated motions, &c.," which he called 
 for, could be looked up by the clerk of a court at 
 the same time that he was looking up in his 
 book for the information that was asked for. He 
 would not for a moment press his amendment, did 
 he think it would prevent a full answer to the re- 
 port in time ; but he did not think it would ; and 
 it was highly necessary for us to have the amount 
 of these special motions and enumerated motions, 
 fee., so as to be able to compare the amount of 
 Dusiness done with the aggregate annual expense 
 of the court, and to compare its efficiency with 
 its cost per annum. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS asked if there were any enqui- 
 ries as to the criminal business of the courts the 
 'ees of district attornies, &c. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that the committee had 
 not intended to enquire as to the fees of district 
 attornies in this respect, at all. It was supposed 
 that some member of the Convention, if it was 
 deemed desirable, would propose the enquiry in 
 x e form of a separate resolution. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS thought it competent for the 
 clerks of the Boards of Supervisors to answer that 
 question. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN thought it would take up a 
 
 great deal of the time of these officers to answer 
 
 he enquiries. He knew it would certainly in 
 
 lis (Kings) county. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said it would save a good deal of 
 
36 
 
 time, and permit' an examination as it was 
 very desirable tha* these enquiries should be 
 right if the report was laid on the table until 
 to-morrow morning, and printed. The report 
 and amendments could then be better understood, 
 and at the end it would be a saving of time. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved to amend so as to pro- 
 cure further information which he deemed of 
 great importance to the Convention. He wished 
 to require of the county clerks, statements of the 
 amount of judgments docketed in their offices du- 
 ring those years, together with a statement of 
 the damages and costs separately. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL hoped the report of the com- 
 mittee would be adopted to-day, in order that 
 the earliest intimation might be received by these 
 officers, that this information would be required 
 of them. He doubted much whether it would be 
 received from all the counties before this body 
 adjourned. A committee of 8 had been appoint- 
 ed, conversant with all branches of the subject, 
 and they have reported extended enquiries, and 
 he thought under the circumstances it would be 
 rather uncourteous to this committee to delay im- 
 mediate action upon their report. Propositions 
 for further enquiries can afterwards be made. 
 He thought himself that there should be an en- 
 quiry instituted into the expenses of our crimi- 
 nal courts, so that we could know the whole ex- 
 penses of our courts. He thought it also desira- 
 ble that this same committee should be charged 
 with the duty of compiling these returns, and the 
 publication of an abstract of them for the use of 
 the convention at as early a day as possible. And 
 although not strictly in order he proposed to send 
 up an additional resolution charging the commit- 
 tee with this duty. 
 
 Mr. J. TAYLOR sent to the chair his amend- 
 ment. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL sent up his resolution in rela- 
 tion to the compilation and printing of the returns. 
 
 Mr.KIRKLAND might well be supposed to have 
 a word or two to say for himself and his brethren 
 on the committee in reference to that resolution. 
 It was impossible for them to attend to such a mat- 
 ter. There were other officers of that convention 
 whose duty required them to do it ; at all events 
 the convention had full power to require it of them. 
 He, therefore, proposed to amend the resolution, 
 so as to require the secretaries to have this labor 
 done, and he hoped the mover would not object 
 to this. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL concluded that the secretaries 
 would be engrossed with their general business, 
 and he apprehended it would be necessary to ap- 
 point pro-tempore secretaries to aid certain com- 
 mittees. He had no doubt that whenever the 
 chairman of a committee should suggest that a 
 special secretary was required, that the convention 
 would cheerfully allow one. This was the proper 
 course to be taken, and he hoped the objections 
 to his resolution would be withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND would withdraw his objec- 
 tions if the gentleman would make a motion in 
 accordance with the substance of the last part of 
 his remarks. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL, had no doubt the Convention 
 would furnish the committee the additional labor 
 required. They were only instructed to superin- 
 tend it. 
 
 Mr. R's resolution was rejected. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS sent up the following amend- 
 ment : 
 
 Resolved, That the Clerks of the Supreme Court be re- 
 quested tomform this Convention of the number of causes 
 upon the Calendar for argument at each of the terms of the 
 said court, during the year 1845; the number of such causes 
 whose issue bears date in the year 1845 ; and the number 
 whose issue bears date in each preceding year ; and the 
 number of causes heard and decided at each of said terms. 
 
 Resolved, That the Register and Assistant Register be 
 requested to furnish similar information with respect to 
 the Court of Chancery. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL desired to propose a substitute 
 for that amendment of a more comprehensive 
 character. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said this resolution proposed 
 a very proper enquiry in itself, but should not be 
 attached to this report. He hoped this report 
 would be adopted as it stood, then he would be 
 willing to vote for any resolution that would call 
 for accurate information for the Convention. But 
 he apprehended it would be impolitic to load 
 down the report with these amendments. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS could not see how the result an- 
 ticipated by his friend from Oneida, (Mr. KIRK- 
 LAND) could be produced by adding some enqui- 
 ries to those proposed in the report. He did not 
 recollect that there were any very important en- 
 quiries addressed to the clerks of the Supreme 
 Court or the registers. To oblige the gentleman, 
 who seemed to be tenacious about the report as 
 made, he would withdraw his amendment and 
 offer it as a separate proposition. But while he 
 did so it still seemed to him more appropriate 
 that all these enquiries should be embodied in the 
 same report, as it would save the trouble to the 
 secretaries of preparing different sets of interrog- 
 atories. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL merely offered his resolution be- 
 cause he believed it to be more comprehensive 
 than that of the gentleman from Albany. That 
 having been withdrawn he would also withdraw 
 his. 
 
 Ms. RHOADES' amendment, extending the 
 same enquiry to the county courts as the Su- 
 preme Court, was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. STOW wished to make some enquiries of 
 the chairman of the committee whether there 
 were any interrogatories proposed in the case of 
 officers who act ex-officio as Judges as Alder- 
 men who act as Judges of Recorder's courts. Also, 
 as to cases of incidental payments which were 
 not strictly salaries as in cases of Recorders of 
 cities who, in addition to their salary, receive 
 compensation from the Board of Supervisors. He 
 would point out a verbal error in the report. 
 In the cities, there was a Mayor's Court, and not 
 a Recorder's Court, as styled in the resolution. 
 The fees of Criers were also alluded to. These 
 were abolished by law, and a per diem compensa- 
 tion established in lieu thereof. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said the gentleman was un- 
 doubtedly correct in relation to his verbal criti- 
 cism as to the Mayor's Court, and the report 
 could be amended in that particular by the secre- 
 taries. These courts were some of them called 
 Mayor's Courts. The committee had taken into 
 consideration all the subjects alluded to by the 
 gentleman, but considering that all the cour'ts of 
 the State nearly had a similar organization, they 
 did not wish to elaborate the enquiries by pro- 
 viding for these particular cases. In relation to 
 
37 
 
 the fees of Criers, their fees were undoubtedly 
 abolished, as the gentleman had stated. 
 
 Mr. SMITH moved to lay the report on the ta- 
 ble. There were more important subjects before 
 the Convention that of yesterday for instance. 
 
 The motion wag rejected. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS had an amendment he desired to 
 offer not making any alteration in the report, 
 but only designating the proper officers in New 
 York to whom these inquiries should be address- 
 ed, in order to procure the necessary information. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND, considering the object for 
 which the amendment was proposed, being to car- 
 ry out the interrogatories in this matter, hoped 
 there would be no objection to it. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD objected to Mr. MORRIS'S 
 amendment, because it did not call for the 
 asnount of fees. Several officers in New York 
 city had large fees the 3 Judges of Supreme 
 Court, the 3 Judges of Court of Common Pleas, 
 the Recorder, the Vice Chancellor, the Assistant 
 Vice Chancellor, and other officers. 
 
 This was carried as an amendment, and the re- 
 port was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN wished the action of this re- 
 port indicated, so that the Secretary could get his 
 letters written. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said the Secretary would send 
 off the letters directly, so as to get the answers as 
 soon as possible. 
 
 SURROGATES THE DUTIES, &c. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretaries of this Convention be 
 and they are he;eby directed to address a letter to each of 
 the Surrogates of this State, ^requesting from them and each 
 f them an immediate answer to the following enquiries; 
 
 1. What was the total amount of lees and compensation 
 receive;! by you as a Surrogate tor the year 1845. 
 
 ii. How many applications were made to youduring said 
 year tor the proof of wills and for letters testamentary. 
 
 3. How many applications were ma.leto you during sait 
 year for letters of administration in cases of persons dying 
 intestate 
 
 4. Ho -v many letters testamentary and -of administra 
 tion were granted by you during said year. 
 
 5. ID how many cases did you appoint guardians for mi 
 nors during said time. 
 
 6. In how many cases were there settlements of the ac- 
 counts of executors and administrators before you during 
 that time, and how many of them were final. 
 
 7- How many applications were made to you for the 
 sales of real estate during said time. 
 
 Mr. WARD did not wish to oppose any whole- 
 some resolution that any gentleman might offer 
 but he would suggest to the Chair that no other 
 one than this might be entertained at present 
 for certainly the unfinished business of yesterday 
 must take precedence of any new resolution of- 
 fered to-day. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved the reference o: 
 the resolution to a new committee of 8, with a 
 view to expedite the business. Agreed to. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the unfinished busi 
 ness of yesterday took precedence of any new re 
 solution to-day. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved that the secretarie 
 have power to get as many copies of their letter 
 of inquiry printed, (as per resolutions, adopted to 
 day,) as were necessary to send all over the State 
 to the proper officers, with a view to expedite 
 this business, and to carry that resolution into ef 
 feet. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said, as there was so much busi 
 ness on hand, he moved that the secretaries havi 
 power to employ as many assistants as they want 
 
 ie withdrew it, however, and the motion vvu- 
 arried. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved that the requisite num- 
 er of copies of the report that he had presented 
 hat morning, be printed. Agreed to. 
 
 ARRANGEMENT OF BUSINESS. 
 
 Mr. WARD called up the unfinished business 
 f yesterday, being Mr. JONES' resolution for 
 
 committee of 17, and Mr. LOOMIS' amendment* 
 o go into the committee of the whole, in refer- 
 ence to how the convention should proceed in the 
 >est practicable mode of revising the constitution. 
 This was a highly important matter, and it waa 
 rery essential that some definite action be had on 
 t to-day, if possible. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH said that the committee of 
 17, would be sure to have an influence that would 
 
 e felt in all after deliberations. True, the sev- 
 eral members might suggest topics for delibera- 
 ion. But here would be a large committee em- 
 jodying much knowledge and talent, and it would 
 >e inferred that they would be fully competent 
 to chalk out all the reforms necessary to be made. 
 And he hoped the Convention would pause before 
 they appointed this committee. True, some time 
 might be lost in debate, but that would be the 
 setter course. And that was his solemn judg- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. MANN, of N. Y. said it would not come 
 out of the committee of the whole for six weeks r 
 if it once got there. The whole Constitution would 
 De discussed* and a great deal else. He would move 
 hereafter to reduce the committee to 7 instead of 1 7 
 A word more and he had done. He wished to 
 be understood distinctly that he had no question 
 about the PRESIDENT'S framing an excellent com- 
 mittee his remarks were only suggested under 
 the impression that we all were human and liable 
 to err. He had never known a case where a man 
 went into committee to consult, that he did not 
 come out still more convinced of the correctness- 
 and superiority of his own suggestions,and we here 
 might find it a very hard task to alter or modify 
 the report of the committee, even in the most tri- 
 vial particulars. For these reasons, he objected 
 to such a course of action. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that as he had 
 made the motion for a reference it might not be 
 out of place for him to say a few words in rela- 
 tion thereto. He would detain the Convention 
 but a very few minutes. If his motion (for refer- 
 ring the original resolution of Mr. JONES, and 
 the amendment of Mr. LOOMIS, to the committee 
 cf the whole) should not be adopted, then the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) ha 
 said that he will urge his propositions in some 
 other way or form ; and however this is done, in 
 my judgment (with all due deference to his abili- 
 ty and great parliamentary experience) it will in 
 any event prejudge the whole question as to 
 what we are, and on what we are not to act, in re- 
 lation to a revision and amendment of the Con- 
 stitution of the State. If the motion for a refer- 
 ence should not prevail, then the next question 
 will be to divide, and dissect up the various propo- 
 sitions that may be offered,for laying down the plan 
 of action ; and that, too, must be done here in this 
 Convention. And such a result will go far to de- 
 stroy that freedom for offering amendments, a 
 point so desirable in a matter of so much impor- 
 tance 1 as this. When we speak of prejudice and 
 
38 
 
 of prejudging a question, let us take a view 
 What we have seen to-day and of what we hav 
 seen before. Members, from this course, mu< 
 see the propriety of freely discussing such an ar 
 rangement of business as will conduce to the per 
 manent interests of the constituents of all thos 
 who come here to revise the Constitution. 
 Should the House vote down the reference to 
 committee of the whole, he would ask in all can 
 dor, whether members really believe that the spe 
 cial committee of 17, as proposed, will not b 
 prejudiced to a very great extent, in favor of thei 
 own plans, when they shall have reported them 
 and against those of individual members. Wlr 
 even here, to-day, we have seen an unirn 
 portant committee comparatively, certainly 
 greatly inferior, in point of importance, t 
 the proposed committee of 17 *one merely t 
 prepare certain inquiries,and We have seen no pro 
 position that was offered as an amendment to the 
 report of that committee, adopted, without the en 
 dorsement of the Honorable Chairman, and ther 
 only in one or two instances. Let these facts 
 then, be conclusive on the minds of all here."^ 
 For, however unprejudiced each member may go 
 into that committee, he will be influenced by the 
 collision of mind and intellect that he will en 
 counter there ; he will be influenced by the minds 
 of that small committee of 17 far more so than 
 he would be by a committee composed of 128 ! 
 We have heard complaints made here, of delay 
 and of talking members ; but as they had a certain 
 great work to do no less than the revision of the 
 constitution he fully believed that if that work 
 was done properly, ad within any reasonable 
 time, that no complaint would come up against 
 them from any quarter whatever. And as, unless 
 his resolution was adopted, we shall have propo- 
 sition after proposition and amendment after a- 
 mendment, in the House, he did most certainly 
 think that the best Way to save the valuable time 
 of the convention, was to go at once into commit- 
 tee of the whole. And there every person will 
 have a full opportunity of expressing their views 
 and opinions on the matters bro't before the con- 
 vention, in accordance with the wants and wishes 
 of his constituents, in every part of this great State. 
 He had said this committee would be liable to be 
 influenced by various extraneous causes ; and he 
 would repeat, that such will be the case. Now 
 with regard to the influence of local causes ; let 
 us see how the case stands. Gentlemen have 
 said here that this committee will represent every 
 locality in the State. Is this so ? This may be 
 correct in one point of view, perhaps but cer- 
 tainly not in another. For example, let us take 
 the 1st Senate District, under the old apportion- 
 ment. The Hon. Chairman (and he spoke with 
 all due respect to that gentleman, whose integrity 
 aud impartiality are far above suspicion,) may 
 perhaps select men to serve on a committee in 
 connection with the affairs of that District en- 
 tirely from the city of New York. Now it may 
 be the case that the city of New York is suffi- 
 ciently interested in internal improvements to 
 bear taxation for the construction of an Erie or an 
 Albany Railroad, on the ground that they will re- 
 ceive an equivalent in the cheapness of country 
 produce, through the additional facilities those 
 roads would afford for sending the same to mar- 
 ket. On the contrary, Long Island is injured in 
 
 her agricultural and marketing interest in conse- 
 quence of the reduction of me price of her pro- 
 ducts; and doubly injured by being taxed for im- 
 provements Which can only build up the inte- 
 rests of other sections of the State at the expense 
 of her own citizens. It must be clear, therefore, 
 in view of these facts, that his constituents would 
 be interested in having this Convention limit the 
 power of the Legislature to run them in debt, to 
 tax their property to pay this for the benefit of 
 others. He was aware that this might be con- 
 sidered a narrow view of the question, but h'e had 
 merely referred to it, by way of illustration ; be- 
 ing convinced from what he had already seen 
 here, that every member is above being ac- 
 tuated by local prejudices or private interests. 
 You go, on the other hand into a committee of 
 the whole, and every county and town aye, ev- 
 ery foot of land will be fully and effectually rep- 
 resented there, and not only so, but will be rep- 
 resented on the true, honest, and liberal princi- 
 ples under which we come here to act. But, then 
 we are not here } he said, to act for Long Island 
 alone, but for the whole State ; and what he con- 
 tended for is that there shall be no sectional partial - 
 ty or advantages, but that all shall be placed on 
 an equal footing. He did not charge that the 
 President will knowingly act with the slightest 
 partiality. He did not merely complain of these 
 jvils in the abstract ; but he did complain of the 
 system out of which these evils have grown. And 
 hese Very evils, therefore, show us the necessity 
 hat there is for our going at once into committee of 
 he whole. And, after we have fully convin- 
 ced members hereof thefiecessity of investigating 
 these matters thoroughly of concentrating their 
 views and of striking at the foundation of these 
 evils we have accomplished half the great work 
 vhich our constituents sent us here to perform. 
 And, sir, as the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. 
 ^OOMIS) observed,if precedents have any influence 
 lere , we have a noble one in the example of one 
 he most august deliberative bodies that have ey- 
 r assembled on this earth the men who met in 
 onvention to frame the Constitution of the United 
 States. That noble instrument which must stand 
 is a glorious land mark to freemen for ever I- 
 And if we do but follow the principles laid down 
 n that instrument and the example of those 
 men whose principles guided our fathers, and 
 -vhose example have incited our countrymen to 
 tie accomplishment of all that is truly illustrious 
 n our history, then we shall perform the 
 most commendable act that can possibly occur in 
 ur proceedings here. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that had he anticipated when 
 e made his proposition to amend, that a discus- 
 ion of this length would have followed, he should 
 ave felt constrained to take a different course. He 
 ad made it in conformity with what he believed 
 ras the usual and safe precedent, never departed 
 om in ordinary legislation, in arranging subjects 
 T their committees to bring before thewhole body . 
 [e had never heard of but one instance of a de- 
 arture from it and that was in the last Conven- 
 on. His course therefore was the ordinary one 
 nd not the exception. The course suggested by 
 .e gentleman from New York (Mr. JONES) was 
 e exception. He would make this comment 
 pon the general turn of the debate. He appre- 
 ended that if the Convention either in commit- 
 
39 
 
 whole or not would take it upon itself I the distinction. It had been suggested that in or- 
 
 ^ 
 
 SS in thTs-ire "Ire some three p tion wai Lt the appointment of committees but 
 -and instead of there being 50 or 100 as the distribution of the subjects^the same as of 
 had been suggested, he had aright to presume an Executive message. 
 
 that these were all that were prepared. Either Mr CHATFIELD, if he understood the gen* 
 of those he had heard read he would consent to, t leman f rom Herkimer, (Mr LOOMIS, would feel 
 perhaps, with slight modifications. He had no &g much bound now to dissent from his views, as 
 idea that this subject would open the whole de- he had before. He (Mr. C.) did not believe 
 b a te he had certainly no idea of goin^ into it. tnat tne on jy business before a legislate body 
 He would propose then, that now either in the I ^ t j ie E xeC utive message. In the course of his 
 House or the committee, one of these proposi- fom . years ' experience, as a member of the legis- 
 tions should be taken up and gone through with. latur e } he could not remember a single in- 
 There was time enough to do it before the hour stance w here the committees to whom "he mes* 
 of adjournment. He knew of no one who desired gao . e wag referred, had reported a bill for the ac- 
 to make a speech it was merely a question of t io n O f the House. The ordinary source of legis- 
 havins; the sub-committees so presented, as not to i at j on wag petitions. Suppose that the gentle- 
 interfere with each other and to be as distinct as man > g position, that the message was the only bu- 
 possible. If the Convention would make a trial s j ness O f legislation, was correct, he would ask if 
 of this for three or four hours, and if the object wewere to consider the present constitution, and 
 failed to be accomplished, then he would be per- tnat alone ? In the language of another gentle- 
 fectly content to have the committee of 17. man, we stand here upon the foundations of soci* 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that unless he was en- ety> with the elements of the constitution scatter- 
 tirely mistaken in his idea of parliamentary law, ed aroun d USj i n disorder perhaps, for the purpose 
 the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr.LooMis) was, O f bringing it into order. Not to consider the 
 
 any where, to go into committee of the whole to a comm ittee as proposed in the original resolu- 
 provide merely for their government or for the tion> and on the com ing in of their report, every 
 appointment of their committees. This resolu- mem ber would have an opportunity of voting to 
 tion had a three-fold object the action of the a d pt or to amend it. Gentlemen seem to misun- 
 committee, and the reference of subjects to ap- del-stand the object of the resolutions, and to sup- 
 propriate committees. What was the ordinary p 0se that it has a binding range of inquiry^ of ac- 
 course when the legislature convened, and had so tiollj en tii- e }.y beyond its purport. The business 
 far organized as to appoint the officers ? It was of t he committee under it was merely to suggest 
 then usual and customary although perhaps it tne ma tters to be referred to their appropriate 
 might not be strictly parliamentary to adopt the comm ittees. They suggest action, when they have 
 rules of the former body until they had provided done t hat, their power ceases. They could not 
 new ones for themselves. The next step Was to con t ro l that action. The only question was one 
 raise a committee on rules, who report to the Lf expediency in which mode can we get at some 
 House, who then adopt it. After this, when a tangible plan of action ? Shall it be by going in- 
 matter that is referrable is presented to the house, to committee of the whole; where the whole sub- 
 the presiding officer, without asking the house h ect w in be under discussion, where any gentle- 
 about it, sends it to some appropriate committee. man can suggest a proposition ; where on the most 
 No man ever yet heard of a proposition to go into trifling questions discussions for two or three 
 committee of the whole to see whether they should da y s w jn S p r i n g up, and where indeed all debate 
 be a committee of reference. Therefore that mus t be rambling and discursive. Or shall it be a 
 was not the ordinary parliamentary course, al- committee which shall set down, and in one hour 
 though he was willing to concede that there was p resen t to us subjects for action in a tangible 
 little in parliamentary legislation analagous to the form, in their proper order, and in such form as 
 proceedings here. w jn a jd the Convention in coming to a correct, 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS did not differ from the gentle- an d proper result ? These were the only ques- 
 men from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD,) in point of tions presented in the resolution, and he was sor- 
 fact as to parliamentary usage. He (Mr. L.) un- r y t o see a contrary impression thrown out. So 
 derstood that the Executive message was the sub- f ar ^ he (Mr. C.) was concerned, he cared noth- 
 ject matter before the legislature for legislation, i ng about the matter. He was willing to take up 
 and the only subject before it. That officer was and adopt the classification of the gentleman from 
 required to present such subjects as ought to en- Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) without the slightest 
 gage their attention. That was the business be- examination, as to whether it proposed a propel 
 fore such a body, and the business before this body classification, because if it did not cover the 
 was perfectly analagous to it. Here, it was the w hole ground, he, or others could suggest other 
 constitution. In ordinary legislation a member committees. It could just as well be done now 
 rises and moves to go into committee of the whole as ^ ev spending a week in committee of the 
 on the message, or in other words the subject of w hole. 
 legislation. Now then, a proposition here to go 
 
 into committee on the Constitution our business The question was then taken by ayes and noes, 
 was perfectly analagous. He could not draw I (on the call of Mr. PATTERSON,) on the motion 
 
40 
 
 to go into committee of the whole, and it was 
 lost, ayes 30, nays 91, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bascom, Brown, Burr, Conely, Cud. 
 deback, Daniorth, Dubois, Flanders, Hoft'man, A. Hunt- 
 ington, Hutchinson, Jordan, Loomis, McNeil, Penniman, 
 Perkins, Russell, Sanford, Shepard, Stetson, Swackha- 
 mer, Taflt, J J. Taylor, Tilden, To wnsend.Tuthill, Water- 
 bury, Witbeck, Wood, President 30. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F.F 
 Backus, H. Backus, Baker, Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish, 
 Brayton, Bruce, Brundage, Canjbreleng, D. D. Campbell, 
 R. Campbell, Jr. Candee, Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Cook, 
 Cornell, Crocker, Dana.Dodd, Dorlon, Forsyth, Gardiner, 
 Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Harris, Harrison, Hart, Haw- 
 ley, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, E. Hunting- 
 ton, Hyd^ Jones, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirkland, Mann, Mc- 
 Nitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Morris, Munro, Murphy, 
 Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Porter, 
 Powers, Rhoades, Richmond, Riker, Ruggles, Salisbury, 
 Sears, Shatter, Shaw, Sheldon, Simmons, E Spencer, W. 
 H. Spencer* St. John. St&nton, Stephens, Stow, Strong, 
 Taggart, Tallmadge, W Taylor, Vache.Van Schoonho. 
 yen, Ward, Warren, White, Willard, A. Wright, W. B. 
 Wright, Yawger, A. W. Young, J. Youngs- 91. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he would withdraw his 
 propositions with pleasure if he supposed the 
 Convention would decide now to designate the 
 several committees. Mr. S. made such motion. 
 
 Mr. JONES supposed that the question was 
 first to be taken on the amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Orange, (Mr. BROWN,) which he un-- 
 derstood was an amendment to that of Mr. LOO- 
 MIS', and should therefore be voted upon first. 
 
 The PRESIDENT stated that he understood it 
 to be a distinct proposition, to be acted upon af- 
 ter the amendment of the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer was disposed of. 
 
 Mr. JONES hoped the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer would withdraw his proposition for the pre- 
 sent, in order to allow the sense of the Convention 
 to be vested as to whether they would have a 
 committee of 17 or not. If they refused, then we 
 should be prepared to act on the other proposi- 
 tion. He had himself a set of propositions differ- 
 ing materially in many important particulars from 
 those that had been presented. But he thought 
 it would expedite the business to take the ques- 
 tion first on the motion to appoint the committee. 
 
 Mr. DANA suggested whether it was not better 
 to strike out the number of 17, and have the reso- 
 lution in blank. 
 
 Mr. BROWN regarded the determination of 
 the Convention as already an expression of opin- 
 ion on the very question involved in the motion of 
 the gentleman from Herkimer. Certainly if they 
 refused to go into committee of the whole, to con- 
 sider the proposition, they would hardly be dis- 
 posed to consider them in the House. The dis- 
 tinction was of so little importance, that he re- 
 garded the question, in effect, as disposed of by 
 the vote just taken. He hoped the question would 
 now be taken, to test the sense of the Convention 
 as to the appointment of the committee of 17. 
 His own propositions were not amendments, but 
 rather a distinct plea, which he would with- 
 draw. 
 
 9 Mr. TILDEN was quite indifferent, for one, 
 what course was taken. He was persuaded yes- 
 terday that if the whole matter was sent to the 
 committee of the whole, it could have been dis- 
 posed of in much less time than had already been 
 occupied in the discussion. He was persuaded 
 now that the whole matter could be disposed of in 
 the House to-day. However, he should offer no 
 
 obstacles to the adoption of the resolution of hi-* 
 colleague (Mr. JONES.) 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS concurred with Mr. T. in the 
 opinion that the question could be disposed of in 
 the House. He was however indifferent about it. 
 He had not considered the decision not to go into 
 committee as one on the main question. He was 
 willing however, to please the gentleman, to with- 
 draw his proposition. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to strike out 17 and insert 
 7, as the number of the committee. 
 
 The proposition was rejected. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND was opposed to allowing this 
 question to go to the committee now, without an 
 opportunity of drawing out more extensively than 
 had yet been done, some indication of the amend- 
 ments. He regretted therefore the withdrawal 
 from the consideration of the house of the amend- 
 ments proposed. He was aware that after this 
 question was decided to appoint a committee of 
 17, it was perfectly competent, either by amend- 
 ment of the resolution or by instructing the com- 
 mittee to bring up many and various questions to 
 occupy the attention of members. But fearing 
 that a question of order might intervene, he would 
 now ask leave to submit an amendment to the 
 proposition before the House, as follows : 
 
 1st. That the committee be instructed to take into con- 
 sideration the propriety ol making constitutional provis- 
 ions for the re-organization of the militia. 
 
 2nd. To take into consideration the propriety of making 
 constitutional provision for the abolition of all inspection 
 laws. 
 
 3rd. What other medium if any than gold and silver 
 should constitute the currency and be received by the 
 State inpayment of dues. 
 
 4th. In relation to the infringement of prospective con- 
 tractsso that legislation shall not interfere with the 
 remedy. 
 
 5th. Of the propriety of the exemption of personal and 
 real estate from judgments where no fraud was estab- 
 lished. 
 
 Mr. JONES said that the gentleman could come 
 at his object by calling for a division of the ques- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR wished the gentleman would 
 withdraw these propositions, after the house had 
 so evidently expressed its sense in favor of the 
 committee. And when that committee should 
 report he had no doubt it would cover all the 
 ground desired. And if not, for one he should 
 move to go into committee of the whole on the 
 report so as to afford every gentleman an oppor- 
 tunity to present his projet, or plan of distribution 
 of the various topics he wished to have considered, 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said, that if the gentleman de- 
 sired the committee to consider his propositions,the 
 proper way to arrive at that, without embarrass- 
 ing this question, would be, when the commit- 
 tee was appointed, to move their reference to the 
 committee. He hoped he would withdraw it now. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND could not withdraw it. He 
 thought a division of the question, as suggested 
 by his colleague, (Mr. JONES) suggested a way ot 
 disposing of it. If he thought it would embar- 
 rass the action on this question, he certainly would 
 withdraw it, but he could not see how it would. 
 
 Mr. STRONG was glad the gentleman had not 
 withdrawn his propositions. They could be vo- 
 ted down in half the time they had been talked 
 about. There were some most important ques- 
 tions among them. The gentleman had even got 
 to the sub-treasury. He supposed the judgment 
 
41 
 
 of the house had already been passed, and he be- 
 lieved the offering of these amendments to be di- 
 rectly in opposition to the well known will of the 
 Convention, and only designed to take up time. 
 He was ready to vote on the original proposition. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE rose to a question of order. 
 He maintained that the resolution before the Con- 
 vention could not be divided. This was a pro- 
 position whether a committee should be appointed 
 to look up subject matters of business for us, and 
 to report. He could not therefore regard it as a di- 
 visible question. It was not necessary to ask the 
 withdrawal of these propositions, he respectfully 
 suggested that the President should decide them 
 to be out of order. After the committee was ap- 
 pointed, it would be competent for any gentleman 
 to move to instruct them if he desired it. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said a proposition to amend 
 the resolution was in order. He concurred in the 
 opinion that the gentleman from New- York had 
 a right to call for a division of the question, to be 
 taken first or stricken out. That was now the 
 question. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that the house having de- 
 cided to raise a select committee, it became us 
 now to shape our action to that decision the best 
 way that we can. He had no doubt as to the 
 perfect right of the gentleman from New York 
 under parliamentary law, to ask for a division of 
 the question. As to the question of making and 
 filling up blanks, he would admit it to be a very 
 proper rule. A rule requiring questions of this 
 kind to be stated in blank did exist elsewhere. 
 After the strong indication of opinion already had, 
 in his view any effort to make instructions here 
 would be entirely unavailing. And however 
 pertinacious he might be in his own opinions, no- 
 thing would induce him to take a course of the 
 kind. The opportunity of adding instructions 
 to the present resolutions, although it exists in 
 form has passed away in substance. The decis- 
 ion not to go into committee of the whole, where 
 this could be done with all propriety, was the 
 strongest decision that could be had that it could 
 not be done in the house, where even the best 
 manner it could be done would be exceedingly 
 difficult, and very embarrassing. What other 
 course then remains ? It appeared to him that 
 there was only one of two courses remaining. 
 One was to amend the resolution before it was a- 
 dopted, and the other to instruct the committee. 
 The gentleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD) 
 had said let this resolution pass, and then gentle- 
 men could instruct the committee, or send their 
 projects to it. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELDdid not design that this com- 
 mittee should be instructed at all, and he should 
 certainly vote against any and every such propo- 
 sition. But that the committee might have the 
 benefit of the suggestions of gentlemen, let them 
 be put in the form of resolutions, and referred to 
 the committee before they act on the matter. 
 They would thus have the different propositions 
 to consider, although not bound by any instruc- 
 tions. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN understood the gentleman 
 aright ; not as expressing any opinion as to whe- 
 ther there should be a resolution of instruction, 
 or any other, but only as indicating the power anc 
 course members might take. Gentlemen may, 
 
 after the resolution has passed, move instructions 
 and move to refer them to the committee. That 
 was one mode of getting the opinions of mem- 
 jers before the committee, and when they make 
 their propositions, they may state briefly the rea- 
 sons for proposing them. The other mode, as sug- 
 gested by the gentleman from Onondaga, was 
 :hat when the report came in, either to move to 
 amend it in the House, or to send it to a commit- 
 tee of the whole. At this time, he did not think 
 any practical good result could be gained by pro- 
 posing instructions by way of amendment. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the question would 
 now be on striking out all after the word " Re- 
 solved," in Mr. JONES' original resolution. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said" And to insert my 
 substitute." 
 
 The PRESIDENT A division of the question 
 lias been called for, and the question will be taken 
 first on the motion to " strike out." 
 
 The question was taken, and Mr. TOWN- 
 SEND'S motion was lost. 
 
 The question then recurred on the original re- 
 solution of Mr. JONES, for the appointment of a 
 special committee of 17. 
 
 The ayes and noes were called for, but the call 
 was withdrawn. 
 
 The question was then put, and Mr. JONES' re- 
 solution adopted. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then announced the follow- 
 ing as the committee of 17 : 
 
 First District Messrs. Jones, Morris, Allen. 
 
 Second Hunter, Tallmadge. 
 
 TAtYd -Bouck, Clyde. 
 
 Fourth Hoffman, Stetson. 
 
 Fifth Greene, Brayton. 
 
 Sixth Campbell, Sears. 
 
 Sc<ntA-Miller, Sheldon, 
 
 Eighth F. F. Backus, Taggart. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN asked to be allowed to decline 
 serving on that committee. If personal inconve- 
 nience was an excuse, he had it. 
 
 Mr. HUNTER hoped Mr. HOFFMAN would not 
 decline. No gentleman was better qualified. It 
 was inconvenient for many others to serve ; he 
 (Mr. H.) could well plead excuse on the score of 
 ill health. And he hoped that he would not be 
 excused for mere inconvenience. 
 
 A vote was taken, and he was excused by 72 
 ayes. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was substituted for Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN. 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY offered the following resolution: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee of seven, 
 teen to inquire into the expediency ol appointing a select 
 committee to take into consideration so much of the con- 
 stitution as relates to municipal corporations. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY was induced to offer the reso- 
 lution in such a form in consequence of the inti- 
 mations recently thrown out in the Convention, 
 in the course of the discussion relative to ap- 
 pointing this committee of 17, viz: that unless 
 propositions were properly advocated here, that 
 there would be but little chance before the com- 
 mittee. And therefore he would very briefly state 
 the reasons that induced him to offer this resolu- 
 tion now. He would not trouble the committee 
 had we not had intimations in the different pro- 
 jets which have been thrown out by the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer, and the gentleman from Or- 
 
42 
 
 ange, that this very important subject, would not 
 receive that preliminary investigation in the com- 
 mittee, which the importance of the subject 
 seems to me at least to require. If he under- 
 stood the gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) 
 correctly? he proposed to enquire into municipal 
 corporations, only so far as relates to debt and taxa- 
 ation. Now this is too limited; too circumscri- 
 bed, and he could well conceive how the mind of 
 the gentleman from Herkimer, intently occupied 
 as it had been, upon the great question of debt 
 and taxation may have overlooked may not 
 have fully considered the other great questions 
 that must come before us in relation to munici- 
 pal corporations. Why, this is one of the 
 most important questions that will have to be 
 agitated in this Convention. Your municipal 
 corporations affect one fourth of the entire 
 population of this State even if we confine the 
 same merely to cities ; but if you include 
 the incorporated villages, then they affect one 
 third of the whole population of the common- 
 wealth. To the other two-thirds this may not be 
 considered a matter of much moment ; but to the 
 one-third it is a question of vital importance. 
 And he had long since come to the conclu- 
 sion to the decided conviction that whether 
 the charters of these corporations derived their 
 existence from royal grace, or State legisla- 
 tion, they have equally usurped powers, legisla- 
 tive and judicial. He did not wish to go into de- 
 tails in connection with the powers and abuses of 
 these corporations; but merely to impress the im- 
 portance of this enquiry on the minds of the com- 
 mittee. The proposition of the gentleman from 
 Orange differs from that of the gentleman from 
 Herkimer, and at the same time it seeks to em- 
 brace too much. It proposes that the committee 
 on this point shall investigate the appropriation 
 of public monies for private purposes, also the 
 subject of private corporations and of municipal 
 corporations. What a field of enquiry does this 
 present? It is too vast for the powers of one 
 committee. The very first branch of the propo- 
 sition opens the whole subject of our financial 
 policy ; and the subject of private corporations is 
 one on which the public mind has been agitated 
 almost ever since the adoption of the constitution, 
 as to their provisions and their powers. Now, if 
 these two great subjects are to be properly inves- 
 tigated by any one committee, how much chance 
 did his proposition in relation to municipal cor- 
 porations stand for a due investigation. 
 
 The proposition of the gentleman from Orange, 
 (Mr. BROWN,) ought to be divided into three pro- 
 positions ; and then each would stand a chance of 
 being fully examined. By this sub-division, we 
 should be greatly the gainers in other points. For 
 he felt certain that there were gentlemen here 
 who feel themselves fully qualified to investigate 
 and decide on the subject of private corporations, 
 who perhaps might be disposed to distrust their 
 knowledge on the subject of municipal corpora- 
 tions. He would instance the honorable gentle- 
 man from Suffolk, (Mr. CAMBRKLING,) whose 
 long experience in the national legislature, when 
 this very subject was repeatedly under the most 
 searching discussion his great opportunities for 
 obtaining information in relation to it, and his 
 great study of the questions connected with it 
 
 point him out as the most proper person to take 
 in hand the subject of private corporations, whilst 
 at the same time he might distrust his knowledge 
 for the thorough investigation of public corpora- 
 tions. And the honorable gentleman at the 
 head of the list of the New York delegation, 
 though he may not have been able to devote 
 so much of his time thereto, yet having seen 
 probably more of the practical workings both of 
 private and municipal corporations, is equally 
 qualified to investigate either. He would beg 
 pardon for thus pointedly alluding to these gen- 
 tlemen, but he had done so merely by way of 
 illustration. As to the using of public monies 
 for private purposes, there were many gentlemen 
 here who had fully studied the subject ; but who 
 not having dwelt in cities, had never felt the 
 power from the throne, greater than the throne 
 itself, and therefore have never reflected upon 
 the extraordinary power of municipal corpora- 
 tions in this particular. His object in rising at 
 this time, was not to detain the Convention ; but 
 merely to impress upon the minds of the 
 Committee, now, the vast importance of the sub- 
 ject embraced in his resolution; and he would 
 move its reference to that committee of 17. 
 
 It was altered so as to read, "the committee be 
 directed to enquire into the expediency," &c. and 
 then it was adopted, 
 
 Mr. BASCOM offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee upon the order of busi- 
 ness be instructed to enquire into the expediency of re- 
 porting in favor of appointing committees by a general de- 
 signation, without undertaking to classify the several sub- 
 jects that shall be referred to said committees respectively. 
 
 A new or additional rule to govern the order of 
 business was read and ordered to lie on the table 
 and to be printed. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART asked for leave of absence for 
 10 days. Granted. 
 
 FREE SCHOOLS. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the select committee just ordered, be 
 directed, or requested, to enquire into the expediency of 
 establishing a system of free schools, and to report there- 
 on for the consideration of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that from and after 
 Saturday next this Convention do meet at 9 in the 
 morning. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND did not mind meeting at 9 if 
 the House would adjourn at 12 meet again at 3 
 and adjourn at 6 P. M. 
 
 Mr. BROWN asked if the House met at 9, what 
 time were the committees to have to meet. He 
 was willing to meet at 10. 
 
 The resolution lies on the table by consent of 
 the mover. 
 
 On motion of Mr. STRONG, the Convention 
 adjourned till to-morrow at 11 o'clock. 
 
 SATURDAY, (6^ day) June 6, 1846. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BATES. 
 
 THE ARRANGEMENT OF COMMITTEES. 
 
 Mr. JONES, chairman of tne committee of 17, 
 appointed yesterday snhmitted a report as to the 
 best practical mode of proceeding to revise the Con- 
 stitution. Mr. J. then stated in addition to this re- 
 port, that in their resolutions the committee had 
 adopted the order of subjects just as they were set 
 forth in the present Constitution of the State. 
 
43 
 
 They have divided the subjects in every instance 
 where they could in their judgment well be divi- 
 ded ; so that the separate action of the various 
 committees might not so interfere with each other 
 as to impede progress. But in relation to the 
 subject of the Judiciary the opinion was decided 
 and unanimous that there should be but one com- 
 mittee. With regard to the number of gentlemen 
 to be placed on the various committees proposed, 
 they had not thought it advisable to make any 
 suggestion. He would now read the 15 Resolu- 
 tions for the appointment of 15 committees to re- 
 vise the 15 sections of the present Constitution. 
 Mr. JONES then from the Clerk's desk read 
 the Resolutions as follows : 
 
 1. The apportionment, election, tenure of office andc^m- 
 pensation of the legislature. 
 
 2. The powers and auties of the legislature except as to 
 public debt. 
 
 3. The canals, internal improvements, the public reve. 
 nue and property, and public debt, and the powers and 
 duties of the legislature in reference thereunto. 
 
 4. The elective franchise and the qualifications to vote 
 and hold office. 
 
 5. The election and appointment of all officers, other than 
 legislative and judicial, whose duties and powers are not 
 local their powers, duties and compensation. 
 
 6. The appointment or election of all officers whose pow . 
 ers and duties are local, their tenures of office, duties and 
 compensation. 
 
 7. The militia and military affairs. 
 
 8. Official oaths and affirmations, and oaths and affirma- 
 tions in legal and equity proceedings. 
 
 9. The judiciary system of the state. 
 
 10. The rights and privileges of citizens of this state. 
 
 11. Education, common schools and the appropriate 
 funds. 
 
 12. Future amendments of the constitution and the revis- 
 ion thereof. 
 
 13. Th ; organization and powers of cities, villages, 
 towns, counties, and other municipal corporations their 
 power of assessment, taxation, borrowing moneyand con- 
 tracting debt. 
 
 14. The currency, and banking business and corpora- 
 tions, 
 
 15. The tenures of landed estates. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that in the distribution of 
 the business of the convention, it was a matter of 
 great moment that no committee should be ap- 
 pointed until we have projets presented of all the 
 business that is to come before the convention. 
 Some others may have subjects to propose not 
 embraced in the report. And therefore it is bet- 
 ter not to appoint committees now, until we have 
 all the projets before us, and see whether the con- 
 vention approve of them, or not. He, therefore, 
 in order to give time to examine all the details 
 of the report, moved to lay it on the table and 
 to have it printed. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD heard nothing said about the 
 executive department, and, as he had been an ad- 
 vocate for the committee of 17, he moved to have 
 the report referred to the committee of the whole 
 House and to be printed. He had no objection to 
 have the committee of 17 discharged, and he 
 made that motion. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON had heard no reference to 
 the executive department, its duties, &c. 
 
 Mr. JONES said they had taken up that sub- 
 ject in all its parts and all the executive officers 
 both local and general, and their duties, ,c. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON still insisted that there was 
 no allusion made to the executive itself the Go- 
 vernor or his term df office. He would, there- 
 fore, at the proper time, offer a resolution embrac- 
 ing this point. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS insisted that the committee had 
 taken cognizance of all officers in the State their 
 powers and duties their compensation and te- 
 nure of office and this certainly did include the 
 Executive, all officers appointed by him, and eve- 
 ry matter relating to him in his official capacity. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON on further examination ad- 
 mitted that the report did include the Executive, 
 his duties, &c., &c. 
 
 Mr. WARD thought the report should be con- 
 sidered here, and not referred to a committee. 
 To read it, perhaps to discuss it here, and if all 
 concur in it, to adopt the first resolution at once. 
 Then to take up the next, and so on until we had 
 passed through the 15 which had been given us 
 and if they should be concurred in, then to allow 
 the President an opportunity to select these com- 
 mittees immediately. If hereafter it should be 
 found necessary to provide other committees, it 
 can be done either on this day or on another. 
 But for one, he did not see the necessity of going 
 into committee of the whole. Our deliberations 
 can as well proceed now with the President in 
 the Chair, as if we were to call some one of the 
 members to occupy his place. And if desired, 
 votes can be recorded by ayes and nays here, 
 which cannot be done in committee of the whole. 
 He hoped we should proceed at once this being 
 the last day of the week, and then having agreed 
 upon the committees, allow the President until 
 11 o'clock on Monday morning to select the com- 
 mittees. He hoped his friends from Otsego and 
 St. Lawrence would withdraw the motion for the 
 Printing. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said it was due to himself 
 to say that his better judgment inclined him not 
 to go into committee of the whole. But as so 
 many gentlemen of the House for whom he had 
 the highest esteem had intimated a great deal 
 of solicitude on the subject, he had as a matter 
 of courtesy yielded his opinions. He thought 
 it to be quite immaterial which course was taken. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said it was unimportant to him 
 whether this matter was examined here or in 
 committee of the whole, but he protested on his 
 part and on the part of those he represented here 
 against this action at once, as his friend from 
 Westchester desired. He hoped there would be 
 no hasty action of this Convention on a subject 
 so important as this. He hoped, that those gen- 
 tlemen who like himself, had but imperfectly 
 heard the resolutions read from the clerk's 
 desk, might have an opportunity of examin- 
 ing them. An examination upon a mere 
 reading was wholly out of the' question. These 
 resolutions should be printed, laid on the table 
 of members, in order that they might have an op- 
 portunity to take them home,examine them delibe- 
 rately and carefully, and see what subjects were 
 included and what excluded. The gentleman 
 from Chatauque (Mr. PATTERSON) was led to 
 believe that all that portion of the Constitution 
 relating to the executive department was over- 
 looked, and he (Mr. B.) confessed such was his 
 impression too, although he had listened atten- ' 
 tively to the reading of the resolutions. What 
 other questions might be omitted in them, how 
 far he had been misled in regard to them, he was 
 wholly unable to determine until he could see 
 them printed and have an opportunity to examine 
 
44 
 
 them. Therefore, he hoped the Convention 
 would take no hasty action, but give all an op- 
 portunity to do so. If there were but two or three 
 only who desired such opportunity, they ought 
 to have it, and he trusted the Convention would 
 yield it to them. He was at a loss to perceive 
 why gentlemen were so anxious to approach this 
 question. Why this haste ? Where the necessi- 
 ty for this rapid action ? Why hurry through 
 this preliminary arrangement and preparation 
 of business before time has been had to con- 
 sider what to do ? Do gentlemen expect to 
 gain any thing by it ? He would appeal to every 
 person who heard him, if any one was prepared 
 to express his opinion on the re-organization of the 
 judiciary, the public debt, Executive power, and 
 all the other vast and momentous questions. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that the motion was to 
 refer to a committee of the whole, not to go into 
 committee. That was an after consideration. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said it must go there, before the 
 preliminary steps could be considered. As he 
 stated before, he was indifferent whether the re- 
 solutions went there or not, all he desired was 
 time to examine them. He wanted information 
 on these questions he wanted to hear what gen- 
 tlemen had to say. He was present last evening 
 at a conversation where the question of clothing 
 the boards of supervisors with additional legisla- 
 tive powers came up, and of the many intelligent 
 gentlemen who surrounded him, not one was pre- 
 pared to say what course should be taken, what 
 power given to them, and what withheld. These 
 were the matters it was desirable to have talked 
 over, and those who thought they ought not to be, 
 he apprehended were greatly mistaken. He tho't 
 three or four days ought to be expended in the ex- 
 , animation of these subjects. But whether this 
 was allowed or not, let the resolutions be print- 
 ed, so that all might have an opportunity to 
 look at them. Let us at the outset lay the foun- 
 dation for such a course of proceeding as is justi- 
 fied and demanded by the labors we are called 
 upon to perform. He hoped, therefore, that those 
 who voted on the question carried yesterday 
 would yield this opportunity. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said it was quite immaterial 
 whether this report was examined in Convention 
 or in committee of the whole. The gentleman 
 from Westchester, (Mr. WARD,) for whom he had 
 a very high regard, he was satisfied did not wish 
 to force any portion of the Convention into a 
 vote or action until they had had an oppor- 
 tunity of examining the report which has been 
 made by the committee this morning, and of read- 
 ing it carefully and attentively with a view to see 
 whether the subject matters embraced all the) 
 desired to have considered, and whether they ma) 
 not be advantageously sub-divided and substitute: 
 for others, and also to enable them if desired 
 to frame resolutions of amendment, and additions 
 Intelligent action cannot be had here if the course 
 proposed by the gentleman (Mr. WARD) is pur 
 sued, for it is evident that the .Convention mus 
 .take the report of the committee as they find it 
 He confessed that although others might not pos 
 sess the same infirmities of mind, that it woulc 
 be impossible for him to take the scope of all the 
 propositions, without time to consider, or withou 
 having them before him to read. But the grea 
 
 Ejection he had to proceeding at once to the ra- 
 ification of the report of this committee is the sup- 
 >osition entertained by the gentleman from West- 
 hester, (Mr. WARD) that if one of the resolutions 
 s passed to-day, one committee may be appointed 
 in Monday morning and go into immediate action 
 m the subject. This was precisely the result he 
 Mr.P.) wished to avoid. He thought the President 
 would be extremely embarrassed if called upon to 
 appoint a committee, for instance on the first of 
 ,he resolutions, not knowing whether that would 
 )e the only committee raised or not. If there 
 should be 25 committees, both in respect to the 
 number of, and the persons composing it, each 
 would be differently organised, from what they 
 ,vould if there were only ten or fifteen of them. 
 !f there were but fifteen and before organizing: 
 ;hem at all, a resolution must be passed determin- 
 ing how many each shall be composed of there 
 would probably be 7 members perhaps, and of 5 if 
 there should be 25 committees, which would place 
 every member of the convention upon some com- 
 mittee. But if there should be only 12 in all, then 
 ;he committees to be created would have to be 
 larger, or a large portion of the members would 
 36 without employment entirely, until their re- 
 ports were received. But if we adopt in the first 
 instance the whole projet of arrangement, then it 
 can be intelligently determined what number they 
 should comprise, and the President could act 
 with decision and intelligence in their formation. 
 He proposed to lay the report on the table, and 
 have it printed, in preference to going into com- 
 mittee at this time, for if we should it would be 
 only to rise and report. And then the reso- 
 lutions would be beyond the reach of the House 
 until the committee were discharged, and no order 
 could be taken on the printing unless the report 
 was agreed to in Convention according to the 
 rules. He did not believe the business of the 
 Convention would advance a single step by hur- 
 rying this matter on. On the contrary, if the ap- 
 pointment of committees was gone into before 
 we got through with the final reference of the 
 whole matter, we should have to reconsider and 
 discuss again many of the votes which had pass- 
 ed, and so in room of forwarding, it would be the 
 means of delaying business. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR hoped the motion to refer to 
 the committee of the whole would prevail. He 
 fully concurred in the views expressed by his 
 friend from Orange, (Mr. BROWN) of the import- 
 ance and necessity of deliberation on these sub- 
 jects before action was had, and he was fully per- 
 suaded that a reference to that committee offered 
 the best opportunity for the deliberation which 
 the subject required, and for any gentleman to 
 present any additional matter or any suggestion 
 he desired to make, with reference to the dispo- 
 tion of the subjects embraced in any one of the 
 resolutions. And the convention would be better 
 prepared to act upon them, than it would by en- 
 tering hastily upon the consideration of the sub- 
 ject. It was not necessary, as some seemed to 
 suppose, to go into committee of the whole now; 
 but let it be referred, and we shall be able to go 
 into committee at any time the convention pleas- 
 ed. After the report was printed the members 
 could examine it, and would then be prepared to 
 
45 
 
 act upon it He hoped therefore the motion would 
 ^ evail. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that if the Convention 
 failed to go into committee of the whole on this 
 motion, he should feel warranted in the conclu- 
 sion that nothing which should be brought into 
 the Convention during the entire session, would 
 in its judgment be deemed worthy of being so re- 
 ferred. He thought the motion to be entirely the 
 proper one, and the report would be referred to 
 the proper committee, but at what time and at 
 what hour it should be considered would be a se- 
 parate question. Probably not until the printed 
 report was before the members of the Convention 
 for their careful examination. He supposed from 
 the casual reading of the report, and from what 
 had transpired here, that so far as the committee 
 were able to judge from what is apparent in the 
 existing Constitution, almost every matter was 
 referred. But whether they were referred in 
 connection with other matters, which a majority 
 here might desire to have referred, he could only 
 suppose from the mere casual reading of the re- 
 port. But when he directed his mind to matters 
 growing out of the actual workings of the gov- 
 ernment, not written in the constitution but 
 in action, he must suppose that many were 
 omitted. In this he might be entirely mistaken, 
 but with the printed copy of the report at his 
 room, where he might read it with the benefit of 
 reflection and a pencil, and perhaps not even 
 then, he might form a very accurate opinion as to 
 the best form in which the matter could be reach- 
 ed. He would not now inflict on the Convention 
 a speech to show what these subjects were, but 
 in his judgment those that arise out of the exist- 
 ing government and its action were quite as im- 
 portant to be attended to, and included in any 
 projet, as any that arose directly from a perusal 
 of the Constitution itself. He might mention ca- 
 sually the great power of appropriating money. 
 Shall it be done as heretofore for long years, in 
 an endless way, or shall there be a period when 
 money appropriated by law shall cease to be paid? 
 In his judgment an answer to this question was 
 of vital importance to the continuance of free re- 
 presentative government. Yet he did not hear in 
 the programme the subject referred to. There 
 was the decision of the question, whether we 
 shall fix a limit in the Constitution to acts 
 appropriating money, so that they must be 
 renewed at temporary periods. He had oc- 
 casion to look at one specimen of taxation 
 of the State. Having travelled in the West, 
 and having seen in what manner the salt tax 
 operated as a bounty to raise up competition 
 against us, he had been compelled to say 
 that tax was as impolitic as it was unjust, and he 
 knew of none in the history of human taxation 
 that would exceed it for injustice. Yet he did 
 not discover in the programme, whether any com- 
 mittee was proposed as the proper one to take 
 care of this subject. Again, in the course o 
 taxation he had remembered that we employ on( 
 directly against trade. That is the auction tax 
 In his poor opinion, if there be not already in the 
 programme a committee provided to take the 
 subject into consideration it ought to be given 
 over to some committee to enquire when the daj 
 will come to end this taxation upon commerce 
 
 r if the tax must continue, when it shall be 
 iven over for some proper purpose to the locali- 
 y where it is levied. The State claims to be a 
 iroprietor as of property, in the sacred right of 
 ,vay and travel. The sovereign does not claim to 
 lold it in trust for the million, but to hold it 
 with the power to make it the property of the 
 overeign. We have such ways now, and in 
 a few years many of those constructed will 
 all in by the lapse of their charters. Do we in- 
 end to adjourn here and leave the question open : 
 Whether the right of way to travel and transpor- 
 ,ation a right without which there could be no 
 >roperty in the land shall be a property in the 
 sovereign ; or whether we would restore it in so- 
 ciety its place in nature as a right held intrust 
 'or the million ? The sovereign never in this man- 
 ner ought to make a revenue from it beyond a fair, 
 ust indemnity for its construction and mainte- 
 nance. Now whether any of these questions were 
 jroperly referred in the report of the committee 
 le knew not. And if it were not for fatiguing 
 the convention he would call their attention to 
 others, that he deemed entitled at least to as much 
 mportance and place in the general programme. 
 They may all now be included the difficulty is 
 that we do not know, we cannot judge, and if 
 compelled to vote now it would be upon faith and 
 not upon knowledge. He hoped therefore, the 
 motion of the gentleman from Otsego would pre- 
 vail, and that as the report was printed we should 
 50 into committee of the whole and consider it. 
 [t might be that we shall be entirely satisfied with 
 it, and find it entirely sufficient, but he was not 
 prepared now to come to any such conclusion. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that the fears he 
 expressed the other day (in relation to the influ- 
 ence of the special committee of 17 on the action 
 of members) were more than realized, and his 
 predictions fully verified. Even his friend from 
 Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) although originally op- 
 posed to the committee, had come out of it fully 
 wedded to the propositions and the course of ac- 
 tion they had reported; and was now opposed to" 
 a reference to the committee of the whole. He 
 deeply regretted to see this, and he hoped for the 
 sake of preserving good feeling and harmony, and 
 a proper understanding among the members of 
 the Convention that the motion of the gentleman 
 from Otsego might prevail. We knew nothing 
 as yet of this report, except by hearing it hastily 
 read by the Clerk; it might require no modifica- 
 tionit might be perfect ; but still we ought to 
 analyse it thoroughly and investigate it carefully, 
 before we adopted it. If it was not thought ad- 
 visable (for fear of unnecessary delay) to commit 
 the subject to the committee of the whole yester- 
 day, surely there was no reason why it might not 
 be so referred to-day. He stated yesterday that the 
 report of this committee of 17 might prejudge the 
 whole matter ; and he now stated without fear of 
 contradiction that if it is not sent to the commit- 
 tee of the whole before the Chair can form these 
 several committees, that then the entire subject 
 will be prejudged for the whole of the session. 
 He trusted therefore, that for the sake of the har- 
 mony of the Convention, and that candor and jus- 
 tice which is due to the minority and to every 
 member, that we shall be allowed at once to de- 
 bate this fullv in committee of the whole. 
 
46 
 
 Mr. WARD said that he was the last man there 
 to do anything which should curtail the privileges 
 of any member of the Convention. For the min- 
 ority's sake he would not object to allow this to 
 go to the committee of the whole. But he wished 
 members to mark well what he said that if this 
 matter was not settled to-day, there would be no 
 certainty that it would be settled during the whole 
 of the next week. Shall we, or are we likely, to 
 settle it either on Monday, or on Tuesday, or even 
 on Wednesday, or any other day ? What are we 
 to gain by going into committee of the whole ? 
 Who imagines that we can settle the entire ques- 
 tion of the constitution there, whilst engaged in 
 discussing this report as referred ? It is absurd 
 to suppose it. Who supposes that any real or 
 satisfactory business can be done until the several 
 committees here named are framed, and they shall 
 make their reports ? What can we gain by dis- 
 cussing this subject in committee previous to these 
 reports being presented for our investigation ? 
 On the contrary we should consume at least one 
 week and perhaps more of the session, in useless 
 discussion by making the reference proposed by 
 the gentleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD). 
 Let these committees be formed at once, let their 
 reports be presented, and then we can take 
 them up, one by one, in committee of the 
 whole, and propose any amendment to any or all 
 of them; aye, and discuss each proposition fully. It 
 must be done, then, under any circumstances, and 
 why prematurely plunge into it now? Nay, more, 
 a member could call on his friends to sustain him 
 in any objections or amendments to these reports, 
 and compel each member to record his vote there- 
 on. What more could be desired? Nothing is to 
 be obtained by letting this matter go into commit- 
 tee of the whole now, to have a discussion com- 
 menced on Monday. And he (Mr. W.) asserted 
 this boldly and fearlessly. He was not one of 
 those who mean at the outset to assert that this 
 Convention shall not extend more than two or 
 three, or even to four months if it be necessary. 
 He believed that our constituents have the fullest 
 confidence in us they will not murmur at any 
 reasonable amount of time that we consume, it 
 we achieve the work they desire to see perform- 
 ed. They do not regard the mere matter of dol- 
 lars in connection with this subj ect they do not 
 care whether we expend $30 or $'40 for the ser- 
 vices of the pages here or whether we have 3 or 4 
 or half a dozen door-keepers their attention will 
 not rest on any matters so small as these but 
 they do wish to see if we are honestly, and earnest- 
 ly, and energetically disposed to go on at once, 
 and properly transact the business of this Conven 
 tion,which work they delegated us here to perform. 
 And in carrying out this point, we may and ought 
 to take up at once the first of these resolutions, 
 order a committee to be raised under it ; then take 
 up the second, and have a second committee tor 
 that ; and so on with the third, and fourth, until 
 we have similarly disposed of the entire 15 reso- 
 lu^ions . And this will be a proper commence- 
 ment of our work. Still he wished no feelings 
 of his to influence the action of the house. He 
 had not been one of this select committee of 17 ; 
 nor had he suggested to any of his honorable 
 friends on that committee any course of action in 
 relation thereto ; he had not even spoken to his 
 
 Hon. colleague (Mr. HUNGER) on the subject. 
 He should desire, and feel favored if the Hon. 
 President of this Convention would assign him no- 
 place on any of these committees, for he desired 
 to come to the discussion of all these subjects, 
 hereafter, entirely untrammelled. His prefer- 
 ences, therefore, were in favor of appointing the 
 committees at once ; but for the reasons he stated 
 in commencing his remarks,since it appeared to be 
 the wish of the minority connected with the vote 
 of yesterday, that the subject shall go over until 
 Monday, he withdrew his proposition. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that too much impor- 
 tance had been attached to this matter of going 
 into committee of the whole. He reviewed the 
 proceedings of the past four days in relation to 
 this matter. Mr. JONES' resolution was offered 
 on Tuesday laid on the table and called up on 
 Wednesday again laid over by request all 
 Thursday was taken up in discussing the matter 
 as to a special committee or a committee of the 
 whole besides the discussions on it of the pre- 
 vious day and yesterday half the day was used 
 up in the same way before they got a vote on it; 
 that vote was three to one against going into com- 
 mittee of the whole ; it was sent to a committee of 
 17, and they to-day report. He thought at first 
 that there was one subject that was not covered ; 
 but he was now satisfied that it wss. The-question 
 now is, shall we go into committee of the whole, 
 or take up these resolutions here one by one, and 
 dispose of them, As far as he or the minority with 
 whom he acted, was concerned, it was a matter 
 of indifference which course was taken, except 
 as to the saving of time. And of all the time 
 consumed in talking through the week, none 
 of the minority had taken up five mi- 
 nutes. The majority had had all the talk so 
 far, as he believed. And the question now 
 is whether we are to use up another whole 
 week in this idle discussion ? He agreed with 
 Gen. WARD, that we could best dispose of these 
 resolutions now in the House, and send them to 
 appropriate committees, and wait for their re- 
 ports, before we renew the discussion. Forfno 
 matter how long we may sit and talk in commit- 
 tee of the whole now, before we send the subjects 
 to separate committees, when we rise and go 
 out of committee, the whole matter will have to 
 be gone over again. And until the reports 
 came in from the several committees, it was worse 
 than useless to talk of going into committee of the 
 whole. He wished the report and resolutions print- 
 ed, and then we can take them up here in the house 
 one by one, and decide whether we will have such 
 a subject referred to such or such a committee 
 or not. Afterwards we shall get their reports and 
 resolutions and then fully discuss them and 
 amend them. This is the only sensible course, 
 unless we were sent here to do little else but 
 hear ourselves talk. He was convinced that, 
 (if what had been seen here during the past 
 week was a sample of what we should see 
 hereafter, or might expect,) we should not get out 
 of the committee for a week at least, if we went 
 into it now ; and we might waste many weeks 
 therein, and do nothing definite there after all. 
 He was opposed to going into committee of the 
 whole therefore until we had the reports of these 
 committees to discuss there ; and he moved to 
 
47 
 
 lay the report on the table and to have it printed. 
 
 'Mr. CHATFIELD said there would be no dif- 
 ference as to the consumption of time, between 
 going into committee of the whole or disposing of 
 it in the House ; or if there was, it was rather in 
 favor of the committee of the whole. No gentle- 
 man who had a proposition to submit would fail 
 to discuss it in the House any more than he would 
 in committee of the whole ; and to discuss it there 
 as fully. And in the House they would be em- 
 barrassed, and much time wasted in calling the 
 ayes and noes. In the committee of the whole 
 this very objectionable feature could not take 
 place. So much time would be saved by deciding 
 on it in the house. 
 
 Mr. WARD suggested, however, that when the 
 committee of the whole reported to the conven- 
 tion, that every resolution of that committee could 
 be debated over again, and on each one the ayes 
 and noes could be called. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD admitted that this might be 
 done ; but he did not believe it would be done ; 
 no gentleman would feel disposed to do so, or 
 thus to embarrass the Convention after he had 
 had full opportunity to state all his views in com- 
 mittee of the whole. Another advantage the' com- 
 mittee of the whole had over the House ; a great- 
 er freedom of debate was allowed there ; many of 
 the restrictive rules of the jjouse had no applica- 
 tion there. A gentleman presents his proposition 
 there with a few suggestions in its advocacy ; he 
 is replied to by an objector; and the mover wish- 
 es to answer this, and to reply again and again to 
 him and to all who object ; and he cannot do this 
 in the House. And he wished all members to 
 enjoy_the fullest and freest latitude of debate on 
 come before them that all 
 to state their views as often and 
 as long as their good sense, and their judgment, and 
 their responsibility to their constituents might dic- 
 tate. Re had been willing, at first, to adopt the re- 
 port of the committee, and not debate it ; but he 
 knew there were many gentlemen who had many 
 very good propositions to present to the committee, 
 which they considered of great importance to their 
 constituents which they wished to discuss and 
 which they would discuss and therefore it was 
 best to give up the hope of adopting the report at 
 once, and to go immediately into committee of 
 the whole, and there to discuss them all fully and 
 freely. He did not wish to move to go into com- 
 mittee of the whole but merely to refer the report 
 to it, and to have it printed, so that there shall 
 be no fear that this matter will be hurried im- 
 properly through the Convention without all due 
 investigation. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES thought it was much better to 
 have all the propositions that gentlemen intended 
 to introduce, or the most of the propositions to 
 appoint committees, brought at once before the 
 house ; because then the Chair could exercise a 
 better judgment in forming those committees. 
 He had hoped the committee of 17 would not have 
 asked to be discharged, but would have continued 
 to consider new propositions which gentlemen 
 might have to offer, and report on them, wheth- 
 er or not they considered them deserving the at- 
 tention of a special committee. But as the state 
 of the question now is, he preferred to refer the 
 
 all subjects that might 
 might be allowed to st 
 
 propositions of members be presented there dis- 
 cussed and passed upon. And it would be much 
 more satisfactory to every member and to the 
 Chair, if all these propositions, as far as they 
 could be, should be decided on before any com- 
 mittees shall be appointed. Let them be defer- 
 red until the whole subject has been spread be- 
 fore us. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN was prepared to vote on these 
 propositions, and was indifferent whether he did 
 it in committee or in the house. It seemed to be 
 apprehended that in case we concurred in the 
 
 ^ of a large number of members, who desire 
 an opportunity to consider and perhaps to amend 
 these propositions, that it would delay the busi- 
 ness of the Convention. Now he apprehended 
 that for a day or two, in the probability, that a 
 scheme of distribution somewhat similar to that 
 recommended by the committee,. though perhaps 
 enlarged, would be adopted, the Chair could not 
 be better employed than in considering, as he 
 had no doubt it would be, how to constitute the 
 committees, in case they should be determined 
 upon. He apprehended the Chair must have a 
 day or two for that purpose in any event, and 
 therefore to go into committee of the whole, 
 ivould not lead to any delay of business. He was 
 bound to say that he thought this select committee 
 had for the most part discharged its duty wise- 
 ly and well but he was not prepared however 
 to say but that there might be subjects omitted, 
 and that it would not be desirable for the Con- 
 vention to look over the whole ground, before 
 entering upon action on this subject. There was 
 for instance, the question of Eminent Domain, its 
 definition and limitation. Upon that subject he 
 he was free to confess, that he had no very pre- 
 cise opinions and he would be glad, and he hoped, 
 to be enlightened by the mature judgment and 
 reflection of other members of the Convention, 
 and it seemed to him very proper that a commit- 
 tee should be constituted to consider a question 
 so important as this. However, he was indiffer- 
 ent, if the Convention was prepared to come to a 
 vote on the report, although he thought it would 
 facilitate the business, if the wishes of the gen- 
 tlemen who desire to examine the subject in 
 committee of the whole, were gratified. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said that he was one of those who 
 voted yesterday to send this matter to a commit- 
 tee of seventeen. He did not give that vote be- 
 cause he wished to prevent discussion in commit- 
 tee of the whole. He wished to see the report of 
 that committee here, and upon that report he was 
 desirous of going into committee of the whole. 
 It was thfit mode of getting into committee which 
 he preferred, and it was with that view that he 
 voted for the committee of 17. The reason why 
 he desired that they should be discussed in com- 
 mittee of the whole, was because he desired to 
 know the minds of all the members of the Conven- 
 tion upon each of the resolutions ; that they might 
 if necessary be amended, and the judgment of the 
 convention had upon them before a final vote was 
 taken. He was therefore in favor of the motion 
 of the gentleman from Otsego. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that before the vote 
 was taken, a very few remarks from him might 
 perhaps enlighten gentlemen. The committee 
 
 report to the committee of the whole. Let all the that was appointed yesterday, of which he had the 
 
48 
 
 honor to be a member, met at 3 1-2 o'clock the 
 same afternoon. They felt that the occasion, and 
 the fact that the public were looking at us, and 
 that we had been here a week without making 
 any progress, demanded this promptness. Now 
 be could not consider that the convention had en- 
 tered upon its duties at all, until the committees 
 on the various subjects were in operation and 
 they might as well be so on Monday next as on 
 any other day. Allusions have been made to a 
 majority here. He would be permitted to say 
 that four of this committee were from the mi- 
 nority here. We had no feeling on that sub- 
 ject in the committee at all our report was 'a 
 unanimous one. Again, the anxiety of gen- 
 tlemen to go into committee of the whole, 
 was to learn the sentiments and feelings of the 
 members. But on this great question, the commit- 
 tee of 17 thought that no opinion should be drawn 
 from them, and hence they studiously avoided 
 even a suggestion or the most remote intimation of 
 the kind. Then again, it was proposed to go into 
 committee of the whole for the interchange of 
 ideas. But, the committee did not mean to have 
 that until the select committees should report and 
 until the subject matter was before us. It was a 
 rule in legislation never to discuss under circum- 
 stances where it was impossible to call a vote. 
 The only question here that could be argued in 
 committee was, whether there should be'commit- 
 tees to refer the various articles of the Constitu- 
 tion to, to see whether they required any amend- 
 ment. The principles of the amendments that 
 might be desired it would not be in order to dis- 
 cuss, and no vote taken could be a test one. 
 But when these committees were appointed, the 
 moment they made a report on the judiciary for 
 instance then the merits of the proposition would 
 come up, could be discussed, amendments offer- 
 ed, and a vote had on them. You cannot have a 
 test vote on a mere reference to a committee. For 
 one, he was anxious that the public should under- 
 stand that we had gone to work on Monday. As to 
 sympathy for the chairman, which gentlemen had 
 expressed, Mr. T. knew that he would not feel 
 embarrassed by any responsibility in this matter. 
 He knew him too well not to know he was ade- 
 quate to meet any responsibility in the appoint- 
 ment of these committees. What have the com- 
 mittee done ? They have divided the present 
 constitution into fifteen departments,to be referred 
 to fifteen committees; and, as had been said, they 
 had exhausted their judgment. But if any other 
 gentleman thinks that there are matters which 
 have been omitted, he could move to have another 
 committee. The report shut out nothing no 
 opinion was expressed its object was merely to 
 set the sub-committees to work, so that we could 
 progress with business. Why, therefore, go for 
 the printing of a paltry list of committee-men ? 
 Why send it to the committee of the whole, to 
 waste a day, and perhaps a week, in discussion ? 
 Let the fifteen committees be appointed, and let 
 them go to work. If any body has others to add, 
 let them be added, and let them go to work, too. 
 We have materials enough in this convention. And 
 he had no hesitation in adding, that it was his pur- 
 pose to move that each committee should consist 
 of seven members, except the judiciary, which he 
 should move should consist of 17 members, as it 
 
 was one of momentous importance. Here, in re- 
 lation to the judiciary, it might be said that we 
 should have one for each subject; but the com- 
 mittee, on looking at it, saw that it could not 
 be divided without hazarding the phraseology 
 of the constitution, and the unity of its arti- 
 cles. Let four men write on the same sub- 
 ject, and it will at once be seen, how variant 
 would be the construction that might be attached 
 to the language of each. If, therefore,, the sub- 
 ject was sub-divided, posterity would have full 
 occupation in construing the language used. 
 Therefore he hoped the question would be taken. 
 The committee desired to express no opinion, 
 other than that the several subjects should all be 
 referred to committees. The printing of the re- 
 port would give us no information, and what those 
 committees shall do, he apprehended was a ques- 
 tion not open for discussion. It was a mere na- 
 ked question of reference. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said he regretted that the gentle- 
 man who had just taken his seat had misunder- 
 stood him. Certainly if he (Mr. A.) used the 
 word feeling, he did not intend to do it in the 
 odious sense in which the gentleman had present- 
 ed it. He only intended to express the idea that 
 he was anxious to know the minds, opinions, and 
 views of all the members of the Convention, be- 
 fore he gave a vote i a single one of these reso- 
 lutions, and he hopea a contrary impression would 
 not go abroad. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE begged the gentleman's 
 pardon. He certainly did not intend to give any 
 such impression. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that the venerable gen- 
 tleman from Dutchess, (Mr. TAKLMADGE,) 
 had made an allusion to the action of the 
 committee of 17 in which he did not fully con- 
 cur, perhaps under a misapprehension of what 
 passed. It was very true that the action of 
 that committee was most harmonious, and for the 
 reason that its duties very of a very simple and 
 mechanical character, under a strict construction 
 of the resolution, and the discussion had upon it 
 in the house. The action of the Convention in 
 refusing to go into committee of the whole had a 
 very broad influence on the action of the com- 
 mittee. It necessarily limited its duties to a mere 
 subdivision of the existing constitution according 
 to its general parts. It did not pretend to assume 
 to cut up the subjects of amendments which will 
 come before the Convention, but only to furnish 
 subjects to amend by. And yet the whole duty 
 of this Convention was in part not touched at all 
 by the committee. We have drawn these conve- 
 nient rules for the first action of the body, and the 
 question is whether debate may now arise upon the 
 duty to be performed or whether it shall be re- 
 stricted until that duty is performed? Whether the 
 committees shall go out enlightened by discussion, 
 or go out and guess at the intention of the body, 
 and come back and meet opinions wholly unfor- 
 seen. This whole matter has been discuss- 
 ed by the people, a very numerous committee 
 of the whole. We are their representatives, a 
 smaller body, and yet almost the first action we 
 meet on this floor is a most visible distrust not 
 of those who sent us here, but of each other. 
 We dare not hear each other talk. As he under- 
 stood the report of the committee of seventeen* it 
 
49 
 
 was limited entirely to the distribution of the 
 duties of those committees, mentioned in the re 
 port, under the expectation that suggestion 
 might be made in Convention, which would im 
 prove it and without intending to determine the 
 time, or way it should be adopted, or the numbe: 
 of committees whether adopted instanter, laic 
 on the table, printed and referred to the commit 
 tee of the whole, or in any other manner, which 
 the wisdom of the body might determine. Tha 
 was his view, and he could not cordiallj 
 have agreed to any other report. For himself, h( 
 wished to make no propositions to the committee 
 of the whole or to the Convention, but he die 
 ardently desire to hear such arguments and pro 
 positions as other gentlemen who had not ye 
 occupied the floor, might submit for consider- 
 ation. We were sent here for that purpose 
 and if any one may desire to submit his views 
 and we now refuse him the opportunity, it woulc 
 be doing injustice to him, and to those who 
 stand behind and support him. Let it be the 
 committee of the whole, he had confidence 
 there. Let us not make the mistake of supposing 
 this a legislative body with general powers. Lei 
 us not be guided by resemblances and analogies, 
 false to the occasion and circumstances under 
 which we meet. This is not a two house legis- 
 lature, with broad legislative powers ; it is a Con- 
 vention, and at the most, the house of Assembly, 
 with power to pass a single bill. And yet here is 
 a proposition to refer, with instructions to the com- 
 mittees to report distinct sections, and that, too, 
 without combination of action, or any previous 
 consideration of the bill as a whole. We were to 
 send a committee to see if they could agree upon 
 what we ourselves had not agreed. Even upon 
 the adoption of the rules he was almost disposed 
 to rise and suggest whether we ought not to go 
 into committee of the whole on the whole Consti- 
 tution. Net for the consideration of its simple 
 parts, but of the whole connected instrument 
 with its dependencies, and on which we wish to 
 obtain some intimation of the views of the Con- 
 vention, before it was sent to a committee to be 
 guessed at. Therefore, he was in favor of a dis- 
 cussion, if gentlemen desired it, in committee of 
 the whole. Let us not distrust each other. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that if the only object in 
 going into committee of the whole was to propose 
 new subjects for consideration he should be a- 
 gainst it, on the ground that they could as well be 
 proposed in the house, and every one of them re- 
 ferred by the convention, without difficulty and 
 almost without debate, because they would be 
 mere subjects of reference. No member of the 
 body could vote against the reference of any sub- 
 ject that was proposed to be referred, unless it 
 was of so trivial a character as not to deserve consi- 
 deration, or such as to shock our.sense of propriety. 
 He did not understand that to oe the sole object 
 of going into committee. One of the objects pro- 
 posed, as he understood it, was to enquire wheth- 
 er any subject referred to one of the commit- 
 tees might not with greater propriety be referred 
 to some other committee. There are some 
 subjects dependent upon each other, and there 
 might be some doubt whether it should be refer- 
 red to one committee or another. For instance, 
 whether the question as to the power of appoint- 
 ing judicial officers, should go to the committee 
 
 on the judiciary or to the one upon the appoint- 
 ing power, may be one of some importance. He 
 had observed yesterday when the gentleman from 
 Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS) presented his proposition 
 that he proposed to refer the appointing power 
 of judicial officers to a different committee from 
 that on the judiciary, and it struck him that that 
 classification had much to recommend it. By the 
 report of the committee to-day he observed that 
 the question was referred to the judiciary com- 
 mittee. It might therefore be a question worthy 
 of consideration whether some of these subjects 
 dependent upon each other were properly refer- 
 red, as designated in the report of the committee. 
 It was under that idea, and in the full belief that 
 it was proper to allow any gentleman who might 
 wish to make a proposition, ample opportunity for 
 the consideration of it, that he was in favor of go- 
 ing into committee of the whole. But for the 
 purpose of merely making new propositions it had 
 not struck him that such a proceeding was neces- 
 sary, as it appeared to him that there was no 
 disposition to refuse time for the ample conside- 
 ration of any subject which gentlemen might 
 choose here to propose. But because it might be 
 proper to consider whether all these references 
 were so classified among the different committees, 
 as would best tend to the object in view he should 
 vote for the committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD wished to suggest a divis- 
 ion of the question. He would move to take it 
 first on printing; second on discharging the se- 
 lect committee ; and lastly on ' going into com- 
 mittee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that whatever might 
 be the action on this report, he thought all would 
 agree that the Convention had taken one step 
 which had saved very much of their time. 
 That was, the appointment of the committee of 17 
 to draw up and frame resolutions in relation to 
 the various subjects to be referred to standing 
 committees. That duty had been accomplished 
 by the committee during the afternoon of yester- 
 day, and they have accomplished more work in 
 that time than could have been performed in 
 committee of the whole for a whole week. 
 Therefore, whatever might be the action of 
 the Convention hereafter, it had accomplish- 
 ed very much by its action of yesterday. 
 Now as to the length of time that may be 
 consumed, he disagreed entirely with his friend 
 from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD,) when he said that 
 he experience of both of them ought to have sa- 
 isfied both, that much less time was consumed in 
 committee than in the House. His experience 
 was entirely to the contrary. The gentleman said 
 hat the matter could be taken up in the house, 
 md the ayes and noes called on every question, 
 tfhich could not be done in committee. His (Mr. 
 ?.'s) answer to that was, that in committee of the 
 vhole each member was not restricted to speak - 
 ng twice, but could speak as often and as long as 
 he pleased. Then when the question came into 
 he house, he had a second chance at it, could 
 peak twice again if he chose, and could have the 
 iyes and noes . called on every question. Some 
 members think this matter should be referred like 
 he Governor's message to a committee of the 
 vhole. What is the experience of legislation in 
 he matter of referring the Governor's message. 
 Before the year 1839, there never was any debate 
 
50 
 
 on the message it was merely referred to the 
 committee of the whole as a matter of courtesy to 
 the Executive. The first general debate on the 
 message was in 1839, and since that period it has 
 been made a peg to hang speeches upon, not for 
 the legislation of the house, but for sending home. 
 And during the last session, the message was un- 
 der discussion until the last week of the session 
 which lasted nearly until May. If we had 
 not decided as we did yesterday, to have the 
 reference to the committee of 17, we might have 
 gone into committee of the whole, and remained 
 there as long as did the message this year. He 
 promised that if the convention went into com- 
 mittee, they would have no long speeches from 
 him. He came here to act and not to talk. It 
 was the most simple thing in the world to dispose 
 of these resolutions. If the first resolution was 
 taken up and read carefully, so that all might hear, 
 he presumed every member would be prepared to 
 vote aye or nay on the question. It was not a 
 question whether we are in favor or opposed to 
 certain amendments to be made to the constitu- 
 tion, it was merely whether we would raise a 
 committee to put in shape the action of the con- 
 vention. And it seemed to him that all the time 
 that should be occupied in committee of the whole, 
 would be just precisely so much time lost. We 
 could dispose of the question in the house. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER called for the question on 
 the motion to print. 
 
 It was carried, as was the motion to discharge 
 the committee. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON called for the ayes and noes, 
 on the motion to go into committee of the whole, 
 and the House ordered them. 
 
 Mr- MORRIS said he had voted for the com- 
 mittee of 17, because he considered that commit- 
 tee would fulfil the ordinary duties of a commit- 
 tee on rules, such as are usually formed in legis- 
 latures. Now one committee had already report- 
 ed rules, (Gen. WARD'S) and this last had virtual 
 ly reported the standing committees thus making 
 a division of the ordinary duties of such commit- 
 tees. He had not intended or desired that they 
 should express an opinion on the subjects to be 
 referred, but merely to designate the several com- 
 mittees, and the subjects to be specially commit- 
 ted to them. They had reported, and there were 
 but two points for the committee to discuss : Has 
 this committee of 17 referred to any one commit 
 tee, two or more subjects that might clash with 
 each other, or that ought to be sent to different or 
 separate committees : and secondly, has the com- 
 mittee omitted to name a large enough number o 
 committees. That is, is there any subject omittec 
 that ought to have a special committee to consid 
 er it. These were the only two points to consid 
 er, and some gentlemen thought this would bi 
 done best in committee of the whole; and others 
 feared there would be scarcely any end to the de 
 bate. What experience he had had, induced hirr 
 to believe the debate would be likely to be a pret 
 ty long one but still he was one of those mer 
 who believe that an ounce of experience wai 
 worth a pound of theory and he was willing t< 
 go'into committee of the whole to get that expe 
 rience; for a discussion for one or two days am 
 short ones at that will show if this discussion i: 
 to last but a few days, or to last some weeks. A 
 
 .ny rate, any member c9n at any time move that 
 he committee rise, and then the House can stop 
 iebate by refusing leave to sit again ; and to get 
 t once at the practical views and ideas of gentle- 
 men, he should vote to go into committee of the 
 .vhole at once. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD'S motion to refer the report of the commit- 
 ee of 17 to the committee of the whole and to 
 >rint the same. 
 This was carried ayes 71, noes 39 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Baker, Bajscom, Bow- 
 dish, Brown.Cambreleng R. Campbell, jr., Candee, Chat- 
 field, Clarke, Clyde, Conely Cornell, Crooker Cuddeback 
 Dana, Dorlon, Dubois, Flanders, Gebhard, Graham.Greene, 
 larris, Hart, Hoffman, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, E. 
 iuntington, Hutchinson, Jones, Jordan,Kc>rnan, Kirkland, 
 Mann, McNeil. Maxwell, Morris, Murphy, Nellis, Nich- 
 olas, Nicoll, O'Connor, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, Pow- 
 ers, Rhoades.Richmond, Riker.Ruggles, Russell, St. John, 
 Sanford, Shaver, Shepard, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, 
 Swackhamer, Taft, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Tut- 
 hill, Waterbury, White, VVitbeck, Wood, the President 71. 
 
 NOES. Messrs. Archer, Ayrault. F. F. Backus, H. 
 Backus, Bouck, Brayton, Bruce, Burr, Cook, Dodd, Gard- 
 ner, Harrison, Hawley.Hotchkiss, Hyde.Kingsley.McNitt, 
 Viarvin, Miller, Parish, Patterson, Salisbury, Sears, Shaw, 
 Sheldon, Simmons, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stow, 
 Strong, Tallmadge, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Warren, 
 Willard, W. B. Wright, Yawger, A. W. Young, J. Youngg 
 39. 
 
 CONSTITUTIONS OF OTHER STATEH. 
 Mr. RUSSELL, (on leave being given,) pre- 
 sented the report of the committee, to whom was 
 referred the subject of having all the existing 
 State constitutions printed for the use of the mem- 
 bers. The report states that Mr. WALKER'S Book 
 is merely a s^ nopsis of the several constitutions; 
 and recommends the purchase of 150 copies of a 
 book called "American Constitutions," published 
 in Philadelphia, and to have printed in another 
 volume all the matters stated by Mr. KIRK- 
 LAND on Thursday. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said the Legislative amendments, 
 relative to "State Debts and Liability," and to 
 the "Judiciary;" he wished to have embodied in 
 the book to be printed. This was also embodied 
 in the report. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that the report says "And 
 such other matter as the Convention may direct 
 before the book comes to be printed." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved also to print with the 
 rest a statement of the finances of the State con- 
 taining the several funds separately the amount 
 received and disbursed how invested and how 
 otherwise diposed of. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that this would be a most 
 voluminous book. A call could be made on the 
 Comptroller for all the information required ; but 
 to go into the history of the half a dozen trust 
 funds controlled by the State, would entail great 
 expense. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS wished to know the ex- 
 pense of all this printing. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said the " constitutions" would 
 cost $1 and the other book about $1.25. 
 
 The report was accepted by the House, and 
 agreed upon. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS asked leave of absence for ten 
 days for Mr. SMITH, of Chenango. Granted. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR, of Onondaga, asked leave of ab- 
 sence for one week for his colleague. Granted, 
 
51 
 
 BUSINESS OF THE COURTS. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL offered a resolution of enquiry to 
 the Clerks of the Supreme Court, as to the causes 
 on thetlalendar of said Court in 1844 and 1845; 
 how many were heard, and the date of such caus- 
 es. The same information as to causes in the 
 Court of Chancery. The same as to the Superior 
 Court and the Marine Court of the city of New 
 York. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 STENOGRAPHERS. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER laid on the table a resolution for 
 the appointment by ballot of two competent ste- 
 nographers to report the debates of the conven- 
 tion. 
 
 EXECUTIVE PATRONAGE. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND called for the consideration of 
 his resolution offered on Tuesday last, calling for 
 information from the Secretary of State as to the 
 amount of Executive patronage. He presumed 
 every member felt the importance of having cor- 
 rect information, and he desired that this resolu- 
 tion might be adopted without amendments being 
 added to it. The report of the Secretary of State 
 on this subject would be found to be a very volu- 
 minous one. 
 
 Mr. STOW withdrew his amendment calling 
 for the same information in relation to the patron- 
 age of the Canal Board. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES proposed an amendment to 
 ascertain also the salaries, fees, and compensation 
 of the several officers. It was accepted by Mr. 
 KIRKLAND. 
 
 Pending the question on the resolution thus 
 amended, the Convention adjourned until Mon- 
 day morning at 11 o'clock. 
 
 MONDAY, (1th day,') June 8. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BENEDrer. 
 RULES. 
 
 Mr. STRONG wished to ask the PRESIDENT 
 whether, when there was no rule on a particular 
 point that had been reported by the committee, 
 the convention would consider itself as un- 
 der the usual tenure of parliamentary rules in that 
 respect. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that upon any subject 
 where the committee had reported no especial 
 rule, that he understood the usual parliamentary 
 rules would guide in all such cases. 
 
 Mr. STRONG then replied that in several in- 
 stances resolutions had been sent up to the Chair 
 with no name endorsed thereon. This produced 
 great confusion. The parliamentary rule required 
 that when any member presented a resolution, he 
 should endorse his name thereon. But the PRE- 
 SIDENT had called out sometimes, " the gentle- 
 man from Onondaga" now there was more than 
 one gentleman from Onondaga. Again, he would 
 call out, " the gentleman from New York" now 
 there were 16 gentlemen from New York. 
 (Laughter.) And this produces great inconve- 
 nience particularly to the Reporters whose la- 
 bors being exceedingly arduous, and likely to be 
 much more so, ought to have every facility af- 
 forded them. It is also inconvenient for the 
 Clerks, inasmuch as the name of the mover is 
 required always to appear on the journal. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then stated that what he 
 (Mr. STRONG,) had said was quite correct the 
 
 rule required that each member should endorse 
 his name on his own resolution, and he trusted 
 that gentlemen would govern themselves accord- 
 ingly. 
 
 ORDER OF BUSINESS. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR called for the consideration 
 of the rule for the order of business which was 
 presented last week, and laid on the table. It is 
 as follows : 
 
 After the reading and approving of the Journal, the or- 
 der of business shall be as follows: 
 
 1. Petitions, and communications from the Governor, 
 the State officers, and from all other persons to whom in- 
 quiries may be addressed by order of the Convention; 2. 
 Reports of committees; 3. Motions, resolutions and notices; 
 4. Unfinished business; 5. Special orders; 6. General or- 
 ders. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN doubted the propriety of adopt- 
 ing this as one of the standing rules of the Con- 
 vention. It would lead to much embarrassment. 
 In the Convention of 1821 no standing rules were 
 adopted, or any others to regulate the order of bu- 
 siness except such as were reported by the com- 
 mittee on rules. We have here adopted, substan- 
 tially, the rules that were passed in that Conven- 
 tion ; and as our committee have reported a set of 
 rules, and we have adopted them, he did think it 
 would be but a proper act of courtesy to refer this 
 rule to them. He saw no necessity for any other 
 rule for regulating the order of business than the 
 usual parliamentary rule, and which he believed 
 our committee will report to us in a day or two. 
 These special rules, for regulating the order of 
 business, frequently produce much confusion. 
 If we were to adopt this, we should have to fol- 
 low it literally ; no resolution could be offered till 
 all reports had been called for and discussed ; and 
 no reports presented until all petitions had been 
 disposed of. And in this way much valuable 
 time would be lost every day ; also in discussing 
 whether such and such a motion was in order or 
 not. Such would certainly be the case here if 
 the resolution was adopted. It might be neces- 
 sary to have somewhat such a rule as that in a le- 
 gislative body, but not in this Convention. He 
 would not, however, decidedly oppose the resolu- 
 tion at this time, but he would move its reference 
 to the committee on rules. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that committee had been 
 dissolved. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said he did not desire to 
 press his motion at this time, particularly; but he 
 did not consider Mr. MARVIN'S arguments on this 
 point to be sound. He believed that this very 
 rule, if adopted, would be the means of prevent- 
 ing those very discussions on points of order, 
 which the gentleman deprecated so much as the 
 result of the adoption of special rules. While 
 no such thing as a two-third rule exists, a ma- 
 jority can at any time suspend a rule. The rule 
 he had proposed would be found, he believed, 
 very effective in facilitating the business of this 
 Convention; the order of business laid down in it, 
 was that which was usually adopted in all legis- 
 lative bodies; and if any such rule for the order 
 of business was to be adopted at all, he could not 
 see the necessity of referring this to a committee, 
 though he would not oppose the reference. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said it would be much the bet- 
 ter course that the resolution should take that di- 
 rection. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that when a set of rules 
 
52 
 
 were reported to any deliberative body, and no spe- 
 cial order of business was reported with them, he 
 had always supposed that the members should be 
 guided in the matter by the usual parliamentary 
 rules, as laid down in Jefferson's Manual. And 
 if that was the case and such was his opinion 
 he saw no necessity for any further action on the 
 subj ect. However he would like to have the gen- 
 tlemen of that committee say what their opinion 
 on this subject was, or what they had intended 
 should govern the order of business here. For no 
 doubt those gentlemen had discussed this point in 
 committee. [No one answered.] But as there 
 were no members of that committee present, he 
 thought it best that the resolution should be re- 
 ferred to them. 
 
 Mr. C AMBRELENG said that there were some 
 of that committee present, altho' their Hon. chair- 
 man was not. The committee had not thought 
 it advisable to adopt any such rule as this, and 
 for that reason did not report one. If this reso- 
 lution should be adopted it would produce very 
 great inconvenience. The President would be 
 compelled each morning to go all over the list 
 to call for all petitions then Reports, Motions, 
 Resolutions; &c. &c. ; and this would cause a 
 very great and unnecessary waste of time. In 
 the preliminary stages of this convention, it was 
 not necessary that the stringent application of 
 strict parliamentary rules should be observed. 
 But when we get well a going with the business, 
 they could then adopt the usual rules of all legis- 
 lative bodies. He did not however object to the 
 reference. * 
 
 And by consent, the rule was so referred. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that he wished to have re- 
 ferred to the same committee the 18th rule of (he 
 assembly of 1843, and he made that motion.Y 
 This rule requires that every member previous to 
 presenting a petition, &c., shall endorse the same 
 with his name, and a brief statement of its con- 
 tents. 
 
 It was so referred. 
 
 EXECUTIVE PATRONAGE. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND called for the consideration 
 of his resolution which the convention had un- 
 der consideration at the time of the adjournment 
 on Saturday This resolution calls on the Secre- 
 tary of the State for a list of all the officers ap- 
 pointed by the Gov. of this State, by himself, 
 or with the consent of the senate, together with 
 the total amount of compensation they have their 
 duration of office, their duties &c. It was adopted. 
 
 PRESERVING DOCUMENTS. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that they had had the pub- 
 lic documents laid on their table for the first time 
 that morning. These would be very valuable and 
 useful to the members during the progress of the 
 convention, to guide them in transacting its busi- 
 ness ; and as they would want frequently to refer 
 to them, he hoped the usual mode of preserving 
 them would be adopted. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the usual covers, &c. 
 had been ordered by the Secretary, and woulc 
 probably be very soon placed in the hands of the 
 members. 
 THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE COMMITTEES. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that the report of the 
 special committee of 17 had not been laid on th 
 
 able. If it had been, lie would have moved to 
 lave gone into committee of the whole at once, 
 and to take it up and acted on it without delay. 
 3ut as the members had not the report before 
 hem, he did not know whether it would not be 
 rather premature to do so. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : Does the gentleman from 
 king's desire to make that motion ? 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER: Yes, sir ; I now move 
 ;hat this convention do go into committee of the 
 whole. Carried. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then called Judge RUG- 
 n LES to the Chair. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER called for the reading of 
 the report. 
 
 This having been done Mr. RICHMOND said 
 that on Saturday previous to the adoption of the 
 reference to the committee of the whole, the re- 
 3ort of the committee was ordered to be printed 
 :br the purpose of having it laid on the tables' of 
 members, but as yet this had not been done. He 
 had not thought of bringing forward any proposi- 
 tion himself nor should he, provided all that he 
 desired was embraced in those of others, but still 
 aefore any action was had he was desirous of hav- 
 ing the resolutions in a printed shape so as to see 
 what was left out and what was retained. He 
 would therefore move that the committee rise 
 and report progress. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS enquired of the Secretaries if 
 the report had yet been printed. 
 
 The CHAIR said that the Secretaries informed 
 him that the report went to the printers on Sat- 
 urday, immediately after it was ordered to be 
 printed; but as yet, they had not been returned 
 by the printer. 
 
 The committee then rose and reported progress, 
 and asked leave to sit again, which was granted. 
 
 HOUR OF MEETING. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD called for the consideration 
 o'f the resolution in relation to the hour of meet- 
 ing. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to amend so that the hour 
 o.f daily meeting should be 10 o'clock instead of 
 9, as proposed in Mr. C.'s resolution. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON enquired whether the reso- 
 lution was really before the Convention or not by 
 a vote, or whether its consideration had merely 
 been called for. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the resolution was now 
 under consideration, there having been no objec- 
 tions raised to it. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend by fix- 
 ing upon the hour of meeting at 8 o'clock, and 
 the adjournment at 12 ; but at the suggestion of 
 others modified it so as to fix the session from 9 
 to 1 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought if the Convention 
 would meet at 10 and adjourn at the earliest din- 
 ner hour, it would have a session as long as its 
 present exigencies demand. If it should meet 
 earlier than 10 o'clock, the members would have 
 no time to do any business in the morning, and 
 between the adjournment and 2 o'clock, there 
 would be no opportunity in the heat of the day 
 for the committees to do any business. So in re- 
 lation to the hour of adjournment, it would al- 
 ways be capable without a formal resolution, to 
 adjourn at 12 or any other hour that might be de- 
 sired. Whenever from the heat of the weather, 
 
53 
 
 or any other cause an adjournment was desired, 
 it would hardly ever fail to be had. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON did not think it important 
 at this particular time that the hour of meeting 
 should be fixed at 9 o'clock. Our committees 
 were not yet appointed, and until they were there 
 would not be anything requiring the action of the 
 committee of the whole. But it seemed to him 
 that as soon as there was business before the Con- 
 vention, it would be better for the health of the 
 members, that the hour of meeting should be as 
 early as 9 o'clock, and continue during the cool 
 of the day, rather than to meet at 1 1 and continue 
 until 2, during the warmest hours of the day. If 
 the session was to be but for three hours, then 
 for our own convenience we should meet at 9 and 
 continue until 12. For himself, however, he 
 cared not what the Convention agreed to, he was 
 willing to abide by it. He believed he could stand 
 it as well as others, but he saw gentlemen, whose 
 health he thought would not permit them to re- 
 main. Mr. P. further sustained the proposition 
 to meet early in the morning. In relation to the 
 hour of adjournment, he was not quite sure that 
 it was best to fix any particular hour, as the Con- 
 vention could adjourn at any time it thought pro- 
 per. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR supposed that for a few days 
 the Convention would be as well satisfied with 
 its present arrangement, as with any that could 
 be adopted. He would therefore move to lay the 
 resolution on the table. 
 
 The motion prevailed. 
 
 Mr. SHEPERD moved that the Convention do 
 now adjourn. They had but just received the print- 
 ed report, and as none of the members seemed 
 ready or disposed to proceed at once to the con- 
 sideration of it, he thought the best plan 
 would be to adjourn now, so as to give them all 
 time to consiu.;r the report. He had not had 5 
 minutes yet to examine his own copy of it. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said that this report, as it 
 had just com* from the printers, contained some 
 most ridiculous typographical errors ; (among 
 others, the 8th resolution reads " That so much 
 of the constitution as relates to official shoats") 
 he therefore moved that the printers have leave 
 to withdraw the same, and replace them by cor- 
 rected copies. 
 
 Agreed to, and the motion to adjourn was then 
 put and lost. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then moved to go into com- 
 mittee of the whole, for the purpose of consider- 
 ering the report of the special committee of 17. 
 
 Carried, and Judge RUGGLES was called to 
 the Chair. 
 
 THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE STANDING COM- 
 MITTEES. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved that the resolutions of the 
 committee of 17 be taken up and read separately. 
 The following are the 15 resolutions: 
 
 1. Resolved, That bo much of the Constitution as re. 
 lates to the apportionment, election, tenure of office and 
 compensation of the legislature be referred to a commit- 
 tee to consider and report thereon. 
 
 2. Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates 
 to the powers and duties ol the Legislature, except as to 
 public debt, be referred to a committee to consider and re- 
 port thereon. 
 
 3. Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates 
 to canals, internal improvements, public revenues and pro- 
 perty and public debt, and the powers and duties of the le- 
 
 gislature in reference thereto be referred to a committee 
 to consider and report thereon. 
 
 4. Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates 
 to the elective franchise the qualification to vote and 
 hold office be relerred to a committee to consider andjre- 
 port thereon. 
 
 5. Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates 
 to the election or appointment of all officers other than le- 
 gislative and judicial, whose duties and powers are not lo- 
 cal.and their powers, duties and compensation, be relerred 
 to a committee to consider and report thereon. 
 
 6. Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates 
 to the appointment or election of all officers whose powers 
 and duties are local, and their tenure of office, duties and 
 compensation be referred to a committee to consider and 
 report thereon. 
 
 7. That so much of the Constitution as relates to the mi- 
 litia and military aft'airs be relerred to a committee to con- 
 sider and report thereon. 
 
 8. Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates 
 to official oaths and affirmations and to oaths and affirma- 
 tions in equity and legal proceedings, be relerred to a 
 committee to consider and report thereon. 
 
 9. Resolved, That so much of the Constitution and laws 
 as relates to the judiciary system of the State, be referred 
 to a committee to consider and report thereon. 
 
 10. Resolved, That so much of the Constitution and laws 
 as relates to the rights and privileges of the citizens of 
 this State, be referred to a committee to consider and re- 
 port thereon. 
 
 11 Resolved, That so much of the. Constitution and laws 
 as relates to education, common schools, and the appro- 
 priate funds, be referred to a committee to report thereon. 
 
 1-2. Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as re 
 lates to future amendments and revisions thereof, be re- 
 ferred to a committee to consider and report thereon. 
 
 13. Resolved, That a committee be appointed on the or- 
 ganization and powers of cities, villages, towns, counties 
 and other municipal corporations; and especially their 
 powerofassessment, taxation, borrowing money, and con- 
 tracting debts, to consider and report thereon. 
 
 14. Resolved, That a committee be appointed upon the 
 currency, on banking business, and on incorporations, to 
 consider and report thereon. 
 
 15. Resolved, That a committee be appointed upon the 
 subject of the tenure of landed estates, to consider and re- 
 port thereon. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN suggested that the question 
 should not now be taken on the resolutions ; but 
 that in order to afford every member an opportu- 
 nity to reflect on them, and offer any amendment 
 he might choose, he wished to have them all read 
 over again and then acted on separately. 
 
 The first resolution was then read again. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that in order to afford the 
 largest opportunity for amendments, the best plan 
 would be to follow the practice of Congress, and 
 pass them over informally at present. 
 
 The 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th resolutions were read. 
 
 Mr. BROWN wished to ask Mr. JONES to 
 which committee he designed to commit that por- 
 tion of the constitution which related to the ap- 
 pointment or election of judicial officers? 
 
 Mr. JONES said that it would be seen that re- 
 solution embraced or referred to all officers ex- 
 cept legislative or judicial. With regard to the 
 judicial officers as well as the judiciary, the com. 
 mittee designed that the 9th resolution should em. 
 brace every thing connected with those subjects 
 the appointment of the judiciary and its officers,: 
 their several duties, their compensation, fee's, &c., 
 as well as the tenure of their office. In short, 
 every thing appertaining thereto. The gentle- 
 man from Herkimer not then present (Mr. 
 LOOMIS) had proposed a resolution for the ap- 
 pointment of a separate committee on this very 
 subject; but the committee of 17, in deliberating 
 on this matter, and giving it mature consideration, 
 came to the conclusion that the wisest course 
 would be to leave every thing relating to judicial 
 
54 
 
 officers and the whole system of the judiciary, t 
 be reported on by one committee. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that he was entirely satisfie( 
 with the disposition of this important part of th 
 constitution, as indicated by the Hon. Chairmar 
 of that committee ; but he would much rathe 
 have nothing whatever left for implication on thi 
 subject: and he would therefore move an amend 
 ment so as to designate definitely en this poin 
 the powers and duties of the committee wh< 
 should be appointed to take up this particula 
 subject. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMMER said that the 9th reso 
 lution referring to this matter was not then unde: 
 consideration, and therefore Mr. BROWN'S amend 
 ment would not be in order until that section was 
 taken up 
 
 The CHAIR so decided. 
 
 LOANING THE CREDIT OF THE STATE. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that he saw nothing ir 
 these resolutions about loaning the credit of th< 
 State for private purposes. 
 
 Mr. JONES said that matter was embraced in 
 the resolutions. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND could not see that it was. He 
 could easily show that gentleman that he was mis- 
 taken. There is the 3d resolution which relates to 
 the public revenues, debt and canals ; but tha 
 does not meet this question. And he woulc 
 tell the honorable gentleman that this subject o] 
 loaning the public money for private purposes 
 forms no part of the present constitution. That 
 instrument has no reference to loaning the State 
 credit to individuals or to corporations. And his 
 constituents and a large majority of the people o] 
 this and other States, are of the same opinion, 
 that the constitution never conferred any such pow 
 er to any body of men. He knew that he should 
 be met with the argument that the legislature had 
 at various times granted these loans ; but that 
 does not make it legal that the legislature has 
 done so, does not make it any part of the consti- 
 tution ; and he was sure that t'he convention 
 that the committee, would all agree with him that 
 the legislature had transcended their powers, in- 
 asmuch as the constitution had never conferred 
 any such powers upon them. But as the exer- 
 cise of its power had grown up to become a le- 
 gislative custom for some few years past, it was 
 highly important to have a special resolution on 
 this matter, and a separate committee formed ; so 
 as to report a clause in the new constitution pro- 
 hibiting the legislature from the future exercise 
 of this power, and to guard against such abuses of 
 the constitution for the future ; and clearly to de- 
 fine the powers of the legislature. He therefore 
 sent the following to the Chair : 
 
 41 Resolved, That the subject of loaning the credit olthe 
 State to corporations or individuals, be referred to a com- 
 mittee to report thereon." 
 
 Mr. BASCOM wished the resolution altered so 
 as to read, "loaning the credit or monies of the 
 State." 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND accepted this. 
 
 Mr. DANA wished that Mr. RICHMOND would 
 offer his resolution as an amendment to the 13th 
 Rule. But he withdrew his proposition, as he 
 was under a mistake. 
 
 Mr. JONES suggested it should be appended 
 
 to the 3d resolution. It ^vould effect the mov- 
 er's object. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND objected to this; for, .he 
 said, if it was placed there, it would be a virtual 
 admission that the Constitution gave that power 
 before ; and this he denied, and he would not 
 have this inferred or stated in any way ; or go 
 abroad even by implication that the Constitution 
 gave any such power. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought that if the gentle- 
 man from Genesee, (Mr. RICHMOND) looked 
 again at the latter part of the 3d resolution, which 
 in alluding to the finances, and to debt, speaks 
 of the "powers and duties of the Legislature in 
 reference thereto"; that he would find that this 
 covered the ground pointed out in his own reso- 
 lution. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that this went right 
 back to the original point of the constitution on 
 the subject ; and he had once for all denied that 
 the constitution contained any thing conferring 
 such powers. 
 
 Mr. JONES remembered that this very subject 
 was much discussed in the committee ; and Mr. 
 LOOMIS had distinctly asked if this very point 
 was fully embraced in the third resolution, and 
 on examination he was satisfied that it was. The 
 objection of Mr. RICHMOND might be met by 
 adding the word " and laws," thus : " Resolved 
 that so much of the constitution and laws as re- 
 late, &c ;" because certainly laws have been made 
 granting loans of the public money, &c. And 
 this addition would affect the subject in all its 
 bearings. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was not willing to have this 
 subject represented at all in any resolution where 
 there is any reference to the present constitution ; 
 he desired it to stand simply on its own founda- 
 tion ; he did not wish to have it said or thought 
 even by implication, that this power formed even 
 the slightest part of the present constitution. 
 And he therefore must press for a separate com- 
 mittee, the 16th. He therefore rnovil that it be 
 referred to the 16th standing committee. 
 
 Mr. JONES was desirous to see the gentleman's 
 object effected; and was as equally opposed to 
 oaning the State credit ; and he would move to 
 amend the resolution by adding " and laws of 
 .his State," after " so much of the Constitution." 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said suppose the 3rd resolu- 
 ion should be so amended, as while it met the 
 r iews of the committee and the objections of the 
 gentleman from Genesee (Mr. RICHMOND) there 
 ihould be added to it the words of his friend on his 
 eft, " and the subject of loaning the credit of the 
 State," after " public debt." This would prevent 
 any implication that this power had been at any 
 ime named in or conferred by the Constitution. 
 ?or it would be utterly unpretendable, as it was 
 utterly unfounded, that the Constitution had ever 
 ecognized any such power. And the gentleman 
 rom Genesee was right in the strong view of, and 
 he stand he had taken on this subject. The 
 amendment of the chairman of the select com- 
 nittee of 17 he did not consider would reach his 
 bjection ; it would not get rid of the difficulty. 
 ?he resolution speaking of " so much of the Con- 
 titution and laws of the State relating to canals, 
 nternal improvements, public revenue and pro- 
 erty and public debt," would only say that it was 
 
55 
 
 unnecessary to have these loans. But these 
 loaus have been made ; the credit of the State has 
 thns at various times and in various ways been 
 used for individual purposes. He knew also that 
 unfortunately these very loans had been made the 
 basis of a circulating medium. But it was not 
 intended by him, (nor did he believe it was by any 
 one) that after these loans had been made and the 
 credit of the State has gone forth,to raise a question 
 as to their validity. Certainly not. But by adding 
 very nearly the words suggested by the gentleman 
 from Genessee (he believed entirely) to the 3d 
 resolution, " and the subject of loaning the credit 
 &c.," he thought that this third standing com- 
 mittee would then have full charge of that whole 
 subject. He could wish to have the resolution 
 amended still farther, (if it could properly be 
 done,) so as to add some kindred subjects thereto ; 
 such as the power of loaning this credit to indi- 
 viduals the power of making gifts, &c. Because 
 he insisted and submitted that this power of ma- 
 king gifts had in times past been pursued to a 
 very large extent; and its results had been of the 
 most mischievous character. These gifts had 
 ' been made in various ways. Sometimes by pre- 
 tending to pay a debt ; sometimes under cover of 
 pretending to discharge a debt ; and sometimes by 
 granting what was called " relief;" but which was 
 in truth nothing more or less than a gift. And if 
 the gentleman from Genessee had time to attend 
 to it as this matter progressed, he hoped he would 
 so word his amendment as to include all these 
 kindred subjects, so that they might be fully con- 
 sidered and properly disposed of. He thought it 
 could be more conveniently annexed to the third 
 resolution than to any of the others, though he 
 had not fully examined all the others. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said he was glad to see these 
 various propositions thus spread before them at 
 this time. This was the first opportunity he had 
 had of looking ovar the resolutions, and he was 
 convinced th it it was well that we had gone into 
 committee to perfect them. It may also be 
 that many of these subdivisions should be still 
 further subdivided with advantage; but he thought 
 that still there must be other committees differ- 
 ently named, for he liked to see things called by 
 their right names. By the reading of the 2d re- 
 solution, he saw that the subject referred to was 
 therein comprised, and that the committee propo- 
 sed to be raised thereby were to have special 
 charge of the very duty the new resolution of Mr, 
 RICHMOND, sought to have performed by a 16th 
 committee, viz: the powers and duties of the le- 
 gislature of course to grant or loan money, or 
 other purposes. Another resolution merely re- 
 quired a reference to a committee of just so much 
 of the Constitution as related to the powers and 
 duties of the legislature, except as to the pub- 
 lic debt. Now as to the powers and duties of 
 that body generally, he had supposed that the 
 Constitution of this and of other States was 
 after organizing the government, a mere system of 
 restrictions the enumeration of restrictions on 
 power which the legislature would otherwise 
 possess and be free to exercise, (to be ascertained 
 by general law) were restrictions as to what the 
 legislature shall not do, just as the enumeration 
 of powers in the Constitution of the United States 
 is a specific grant of what the general government 
 
 may do. And he had also supposed that it was 
 utterly impossible for a committee charged with 
 this duty of considering generally these powers 
 and duties of the legislature, thus- enumerated, to 
 consider that they had performed their duty, un- 
 less they had made full and thorough enquiry as 
 to whether the legislature had the power to loan 
 the credit or the monies of the State, either to fo- 
 reign States, to capitalists, individuals or corpo- 
 rations, or whether they had no such power ; and 
 whether if any such power had been exercised, it 
 did not require thorough revision and wholesome 
 and immediate limitation. The gentleman from 
 Genesee (Mr. RICHMOND) had proposed that the 
 committee to be raised by the 2d resolution should 
 take charge of that part of the Constitution that re- 
 lated to the powers and duties of the legislature 
 (except as to public debt.) But these powers in 
 that phrase are exceedingly broad. It may mean, 
 the committee will consider it does mean, all the 
 powers and duties which the legislature have 
 been in the habit of exercising, or may exercise 
 hereafter and what restrictions should be im- 
 posed on the legislature in this particular ; and 
 this committee would feel greatly relieved in the 
 performance of this duty, if that portion relating 
 to the power of loaning the money or credit of 
 the State was to be referred to another committee. 
 He did not object even to a further subdivision of 
 the subject contained in the second resolution 
 that is if the abstract power of the legislature to 
 loan money at all, was to be considered separately 
 and it was a highly important one to raise two 
 committees ; but as the matter now stands it 
 clearly belongs to the committee to be raised 
 by the second resolution, which reads thus : 
 "Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as 
 relates to the powers and duties of the Legisla- 
 ture, except as to public debt, be referred to a 
 committee to consider and report thereon." But 
 let this subject be taken away from them, and 
 what work have they then got to do ? take away 
 this subject and all the considerations collateral 
 thereto, and what do you expect to obtain from 
 them ? It was supposed that this subject would 
 occupy their first attention. Many gentlemen had 
 so regarded it. It has been generally talked about 
 all over the country, as one which the committee 
 of the Convention that regulated the powers of 
 the Legislature, would have to take early in hand. 
 And what then are the powers of this committee, 
 unless to take charge of this very matter ? Is it 
 to be a formal committee to make only a mere 
 mechanical report ? Was this vital subject, that 
 has attracted so much public attention, to be taken 
 away from it, and given to a special committee ? 
 But he only threw out these suggestions for the 
 consideration of the Convention he was not te- 
 nacious of the course to be pursued he had no 
 motion to make but it was highly important to 
 divide and refer all the subjects in a proper man- 
 ner. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND wished to say a word in ex- 
 planation of his remarks made when first up. 
 He stated, and he repeated it, that he believed all 
 these loans to have been unconstitutional, but he 
 would agree with the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 (Mr. HOFFMAN,) and had no wish to disturb them 
 now that moment had gone by, and many inter- 
 ests had grown up under them, and he did not 
 
56 
 
 suppose the Convention had the disposition, if 
 had the ability, in its action to attempt to impa 
 what had been done. He had only spoken, so a 
 to call attention to this important subject. 
 These were the reasons why he preferred to hav 
 a separate committee then. By the resolutions 
 so much of the constitution as related to the pow 
 ers and duties of the legislature is referred to on 
 committee. Now he would ask the chairman o 
 the select committee, that supposing there shoul 
 be appointed on the committee raised by this re 
 solution, gentlemen who were of the opinion tha 
 the Constitution never gave these powers, wheth 
 er they could take up the question, and report tc 
 this body. In his judgment they could not, as 
 the resolution said expressly so much of thi 
 f Constitution, &c. A portion at least of this bo 
 dy believed there was nothing in the Constitu 
 tion giving the legislature the right to loan the 
 money of the State. He was inclined, on looking 
 over many of the resolutions adopted at the dif 
 ferent Conventions which nominated members 
 and observing that there was a separate resolu 
 tion on this subject to consider that it would b< 
 as proper and as well to have a separate commit- 
 tee. He had no disposition however, nor did he 
 believe any man here had, to disturb what hac 
 been done under the present Constitution. 
 
 Mr. O'CONNOR said that it had struck him 
 that a slight modification of this 3d resolution 
 would meet all the objections of the gentleman 
 last up, and at the same time prevent us from 
 running contrary to the views of any gentle- 
 man on this floor. That is to say, that it would 
 involve no commitment of the house on any ques- 
 tion as to the constitutional powers of the leg- 
 islature to do things heretofore done. To this re- 
 solution he had therefore drawn up an amend- 
 ment which embraced the idea contained in l.he 
 resolution of the gentleman last up, and which if 
 incorporated in the resolution^would present the 
 whole matter in this way : 
 
 Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates to 
 canals, internal improvements, public revenues and prop. 
 er*y and public debt, and the powers and duties of the leg. 
 islature in reference thereto [and the propriety of impo- 
 sing any and what restrictions upon the legislature, ia ma- 
 king donations of the public funds and loans of the moneys 
 or credit of the State] be referred to a committee to consider 
 and report thereon. (The amendment is in brackets, 
 thus[.j.) 
 
 Mr. O'C. said that it struck him that this would 
 meet the object, unless it was desired to have two 
 separate committees. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was not tenacious as to the 
 form, if he only got the subject properly up. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY, notwithstanding he believed 
 that there was nothing exceptionable in any of the 
 amendments proposed, held them to be entirely 
 annecessary. It appeared that the 3d resolution 
 was objected to on the ground that it created the 
 implication that the action of Legislatures here- 
 tofore had been constitutional. He however, 
 held that in any view, the terms of the resolution 
 were strictly proper. This was not a question of 
 constitutionality or unconstitutionally, but 
 whether these appropriations and donations of 
 the public funds for private purposes, should be 
 by a two-third or by a majority vote. If all that 
 had been made heretofore, had been made by a 
 two- third vote, this question would not have aris- 
 
 en. The amendment seemed to him to be en- 
 tirely unnecessary. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. O'C., and it was rejected. 
 
 Mr. BROWN thought that the principle of this 
 amendment would have to be adopted in some 
 form or other. But it appeared to him that if the 
 3d resolution should be amended by the adoption 
 of that amendment, leaving the second resolution 
 to stand, it would be committing to the commit- 
 tee precisely the same subject matter. We should 
 have probably conflicting reports one from one 
 committee going one way, and one from the other 
 going directly in conflict with it. He trusted 
 gentlemen now saw and felt the propriety of har- 
 monizing this subject in committee of the whole. 
 It had occurred to him (without assuming any 
 greater sagacity than others around him,) at the 
 outset, that no committee of 16 or 17 that might 
 be selected upon a business of this kind, would be 
 able, without the suggestions of others, to report 
 a satisfactory mode for the distribution of the bu- 
 siness of the convention. And what had taken 
 place and was now going on, was a perfect de- 
 monstration of the fact. The committee had, 
 coubtless, bestowed every attention and care upon 
 it still, when it came here and was submitted to 
 the test of 128 minds, instead of 17, it was appa- 
 rent that the report was defective. He hoped that 
 any gentleman to whom suggestions might occur, 
 would not be restrained by the consideration of 
 lusbanding time from making them. It was a 
 duty they were sent here to perform not of mere 
 egislation, changing every year, but of forming 
 an instrument to prescribe the powers and duties 
 of the agents of the people for the next quarter of 
 a century. And he hopedtthen that full and free 
 discussion would not be restrained by the fear of 
 consuming time, for in his belief, it would be 
 ime wisely and usefully applied. Let us look 
 at the second resolution. It says "that so much of 
 he legislative duties and powers," except as to 
 mblic debt shall be referred to a committee. 
 Vow what are we to do. All the power of the 
 egislature not over the revenue, but the property 
 >f the people, except so far as it may be exercised 
 or the mere purpose of creating debt, is to be com- 
 aitted to a committee. And the next resolution 
 eferred all the powers of the legislature in regard 
 o internal improvements, public revenue and 
 >roperty, to another committee. Now he sub- 
 mitted that these subjects must be referred to one 
 ommittee. Their separation was entirely un- 
 ecessary. They are from their nature one and 
 ndivisible,and he trusted they would be committed 
 o one and the same committee. Itwas very appa- 
 ent that doubts on the subject were existing in the 
 linds of gentlemen. One (Mr. SIMMONS) sup- 
 oses that the sovereign power resided in the leg- 
 slature, except where expressly forbidden by a 
 beral interpretation of the instrument and that 
 had complete and absolute power over the pro- 
 erty of the people. He expressed no opinion now 
 n this subject but it was sufficient for him to say 
 lat if that power did reside in the legislature, 
 len he apprehended the time had come when we 
 ught to consider it. If it is in the power of the 
 egislature to take into their hands the disposition 
 f our property and that of the State to exercise 
 le most unlimited control over it to give it to 
 
57 
 
 corporations to a foreign power even, as had 
 been said then it was time we knew it time 
 that a committee considered it and time that the 
 people of the State should know it. Another 
 class suppose that all those powers, not expressly 
 granted to the legislature,they should be restrained 
 from exercising. He would express no opinion 
 on this subject, because it would not be in order. 
 He suggested then that the powers of the legisla- 
 ture on all subjects should be submitted to one 
 committee. Separate them, and there would 
 most undoubtedly be conflicting reports. He 
 v out these suggestions for the consideration 
 of gentlemen, because the subject must be exa- 
 mined. We must know and desire to know be- 
 fore we take any steps, what are to be the results, 
 and what the power and authority these commit- 
 tees are to exercise. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said if he read aright the propo- 
 sitions in the 2nd and 3rd resolutions, there were 
 references of separate and distinct subjects propo- 
 sed to both committees. By the second resolu- 
 tions all the powers and duties of the legislature 
 except in relation to public debt were referred to 
 one committee. In the next resolution there was 
 a classification of four distinct subjects embraced 
 in the general designation in the first, to wit, in- 
 ternal improvements, canals, the public revenue 
 and property. And it was proposed by the gen- 
 tleman from Genesee to embrace another subject. 
 Perhaps an amendment to the second resolution 
 by striking out the exception as to public debts, 
 and substituting the words excepting the sub- 
 jects not provided for in the preceeding reso- 
 lutions would better attain the end. He would 
 like it better, if in all of these resolutions 
 the word constitution should be stricken out, 
 and the words business of the Convention, in- 
 serted, so that we should not be driven back at 
 any time to trie consideration of the constitution ; 
 and so that :t woald be considered a part of the 
 business of the Convention to take up, consider 
 and discuss, and appoint a committee of reference 
 on all subjects which might come legitimately 
 within the duties of the Convention, in the organ- 
 ization of a new constitution. He would suggest 
 that the report of the committee of 17 be amen- 
 ded as he had indicated. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND suggested that Mr. O'CoNOR 
 should engraft his amendment on the 2d resolu- 
 tion, instead of the 3d. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR had not the slightest objection 
 to placing the matter in the 2d resolution, pro- 
 vided those gentlemen who had given their atten- 
 tion most especially to the subjects embraced in 
 the 3d resolution, agreed to it. There were gentle- 
 men, who, in the course of our deliberations, had 
 given a foreshadowing of their views on the sub- 
 jects embraced in the 3d resolution, and had plain- 
 ly evinced, how very extensively they had reflect- 
 ed on these matters. It struck him that the a- 
 mendment which he had presented did properly 
 belong to the 3d resolution, but if the honorable 
 gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. HOFFMAN) who 
 had given us his views once or twice, in reference 
 to this very subject, is of opinion that this a- 
 mendment more properly belong to the 2d than 
 to the 3d, he was quite willing to present it as 
 such. Otherwise, he should be disposed-to add it 
 as an amendment to the 3d resolution. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL suggested that the resolutions- 
 having been but this moment laid on the tables 
 of members, it was almost impossible for any gen- 
 tleman who had not made previous preparation, 
 to suggest in its precise words, the idea he may 
 himself have to propose for the amendment of the 
 report. And with a view to enable gentlemen to 
 confer a little more on the subject, aud to allow 
 the member from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS) on the 
 committee, to oe here when the subject was con- 
 sidered, he would move that the committee rise 
 and report progress. Mr. R. waived his motion 
 at the request of 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND, who then explained that the 
 reason why he wished to change the amendment 
 from the 2d to the 3d resolution was this : The 3d 
 spoke of the power of the legislature to create 
 debt. He had understood that various proposi- 
 tions were to come in here in regard to State debt. 
 But on one thing all had agreed that there must 
 be power in the legislature to raise money in some 
 way or other. There were gentlemen who de- 
 sired to restrict the legislature, so that power 
 shall not be given it, in any shape, to loan the 
 credit of the State to corporations or individuals. 
 But no body wished under any circumstances that 
 the legislature or the people should be so restrict- 
 ed that they cannot borrow money at all. All 
 agree on that the only question was as to the 
 way it should be raised and appropriated. Hence 
 he wished to see these two propositions separated. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that it would undoubted- 
 ly be the desire of the Convention, of which we 
 were a committee, to group together the subjects- 
 sent to the standing committees, in such a way 
 that those which were very nearly allied, pro- 
 ducing the same results, the same mischiefs, 
 and originating in nearly the same causes, 
 should go to the same committee. So far as he 
 had had any experience in this, or in the govern- 
 ment of the Union, the power of making gifts, or 
 of loaning the credit, or of contracting debts, ori- 
 ginated very much in the same causes, and ended 
 in the same mischiefs, and should be considered 
 together, and by very nearly the same rules. If, 
 therefore, the power was inserted in eith- 
 er the one or the other of these resolution, it 
 was entirely proper that it should belong to the 
 3d resolution, where the debt power was retain- 
 ed, and not to the 2d, where it is expressly ex- 
 cluded. His colleague, (Mr LOOMIS,) who was 
 familiar with this matter, and a member of this 
 committee, was absent through domestic circum- 
 stances, and would not be here until 2 o'clock, 
 P.M. He had devoted his attention to the 
 matter, and he (Mr. H.) earnestly 1 desired that 
 his colleague should have an opportunity of 
 presenting his views and reflections on the 
 subjects arising out of these resolutions. 
 
 He (Mr. H.) did not know why the committee 
 had made this separation between the 1st and 2d 
 resolutions, but he begged leave to call attention 
 to a few considerations connected with the sub- 
 ject. The Executive and Judicial branches of 
 this government simply were the administrators 
 of the law the law was their strict rule and 
 guide. It was therefore unnecessary, very spe- 
 cifically to enumerate the duties they were to 
 perform ; the Legislature would perfect that task. 
 But there is no law over the Legislature but the 
 
58 
 
 Constitution itself, and limitations that were not 
 set forth in clear and definite terms, and in a strong 
 and direct manner, would scarcely be observed by 
 the Legislature. It would, therefore, seem very 
 desirable, if we refer to the experience of our own 
 and other States, that we should come to the con- 
 clusion that it was very necessary specifically to 
 enumerate the powers of the legislature. Two 
 modes of proceeding in this novel work of Consti- 
 tutional legislation have been adopted. In gen- 
 eral he believed it was true of the constitutions 
 of every State in the Union, that either from a 
 want of time to consider the subjects or from 
 some other cause, the Conventions have given the 
 legislative power in the mass in general terms 
 and then sought to restrain it within the bounds 
 of freedom, and to secure the rights of individuals, 
 by express limitations. This is true of our own 
 constitution, and of perhaps every one in the union 
 except that of the Union itself. What constitut- 
 ed legislative power, and what legislation may 
 properly do, was itself a subject in some de- 
 gree undetermined. In the history of this, and 
 other states and countries, where a constitutional 
 government, or in more current phrase and per- 
 haps more proper one a responsible government 
 existed, legislation'has attempted to perform, had 
 performed very largely not legislative duties but 
 duties approximating so nearly to the mere exe- 
 cutive, as to deserve a distinct and different desig- 
 nation from that of administrative: Such are 
 acts of attainder bills of relief on past matters, 
 where the laws do not reach various disposi- 
 tions of property and relief to individuals on va- 
 rious subjects. All tl 
 fit 
 
 upon 
 
 found that they, were not legislative powers, but 
 administrative duties, always to be performed, 
 whether by principals or subordinates, under the 
 scourge of the law, by a fixed and iron rule, which 
 no passion, temptation or interest could change. 
 The other mode of proceeding instead of adopting 
 a general, sweeping grant of power, and then 
 seeking in limitations to restrict it, so as to make 
 safe the rights of labor, property and person, 
 would be to adopt the course of specifying di- 
 rectly, and as far as possible affirmatively, what 
 the powers of the legislature should be and af- 
 ter enumerating them in the best way the uncer- 
 tainty of language would permit us to do, then to 
 say that all powers not granted to the legislature 
 are the residuary, reserved powers of the people, 
 not to be exercised unless they make an express 
 grant of them. If the Convention had resolved 
 itself into a 'committee of the whole at an 
 early stage of the business, he should have felt 
 compelled to have brought this question before it 
 and to have asked its judgment: Will you so ap- 
 portion your labors as that the committee to whom 
 it is referred shall grant legislative power in the 
 mass, and endeavor then to draw from it as much 
 as may be necessary for the security of individual 
 life, property and character ; or will you adopt 
 the other side of the alternative, and so constitute 
 your committees, as that some one of them shall 
 be charged with the duty of attempting to specify 
 the powers to be granted to the legislature, re- 
 serving all others to the people, until they shall 
 be especially granted. Under such a course, and 
 
 these had been treated as if 
 and proper matters of legislation. Perhaps 
 >n further looking into this matter, it would be. 
 
 where there was a reasonable possibility of suc- 
 cess, he should have felt compelled to inflict upon 
 the Convention various arguments to bring them 
 over to the other course to haVe answered the 
 common allegation of the impossibility of prepar- 
 ing the details, in an amendment, of these grants 
 of power. After the Convention had agreed to 
 give this matter to a committee, he had supposed 
 the better and only course would be to make their 
 programme as full and definite as possible. As 
 it now stands, if the third resolution be amen- 
 ded as proposed, the question now presented will 
 be disposed of, and it would yet be possible for the 
 committee charged with this exclusive question 
 of Legislative power, to enumerate the powers to 
 be granted, and if they should fail in that duty, 
 he trusted, with or without an intimation from 
 the Convention, they would take the measures 
 necessary to secure in any future Constitution 
 that may be produced, a fair and full enumera- 
 tion of these powers. He submitted that it was 
 clearly in their power to report a provision that 
 prior to any subsequent Convention, a commis- 
 sion charged with this duty, should be got up 
 by the government, limited and confined express- 
 ly to the duty of arraigning and specifying the 
 subjects of Legislative power to be granted to 
 compel its submission to the Executive and Leg- 
 islative branches of the government, and to the 
 public and compel the organized portion of the 
 government to suggest their approval or their 
 objections to any part of it, and show its imper- 
 fections or its defects. If the committee and the 
 Convention should leave this second committee as 
 it was, he should feel it his duty if no one else 
 did, to bring the subject before the Convention by 
 a resolution to instruct the committee to enquire 
 into the expediency of an express enumeration of 
 the legislative powers. And if that did not suc- 
 ceed, to enquire into the expediency of making it 
 necessary on the part of the government before 
 another Convention was held, to institute such a 
 commission, as he had indicated. Whether con- 
 siderations like these had moved the select com' 
 mittee, in their views and apportionment of the 
 matter, he knew not. He had never had an op- 
 portunity of looking at a programme, not even 
 that of his colleague, nor of hearing his reasons, 
 private or public, for any part of this apportion- 
 ment. It might be that he had a committee, in 
 which this high duty of enumerating the legisla- 
 tive powers would be performed. It might be 
 that these considerations lead to the singling out 
 of a committee for the purpose. If this 3d com- 
 mittee should be left with the powers it now has, 
 there were other subjects which seemed appro- 
 priate to be referred to it. He did not at pre~ 
 sent feel warranted in detaining the committee 
 longer in hearing observations which he felt it his 
 duty to make. He hoped the committee might 
 rise, in order that this programme might be more 
 fully examined for he confessed that he had not 
 had an opportunity to read all of the propositions. 
 Mr. TILDEN said that he would suggest an 
 amendment which he believed would meet the 
 objections raised by gentlemen to the form and lan- 
 guage of these resolutions. And before he intro- 
 duced it, he would state that he inferred from what 
 had been said by one gentleman, that the commit- 
 tee proposed by the second resolution was in- 
 
59 
 
 tended to consider the legislative power general- 
 ly, the restrictions to be imposed on it, and the 
 duties to be enjoined on it to perform a class of 
 subjects so multifarious and important, as to re- 
 quire and occupy a distinct committee. The 
 amendment he suggested was designed to obviate 
 objections entertained, not by himself but by oth- 
 er gentlemen, and which seemed likely to arise 
 successively, to each resolution. Gentlemen said, 
 and truly, that in regard to some of the subjects 
 which it was proposed to raise committees to 
 consider, there was no provision in the constitu- 
 tion, and that by these resolutions nothing was 
 referred to those committees but parts of the con- 
 stitution which do not exist. He thought that the 
 committees would feel justified in examining and 
 reporting on the general subjects, notwithstanding 
 the form of the reference ; but, as apprehension 
 seemed to be felt that matters not embraced in the 
 constitution might be excluded, he presented 
 the amendment. It was this : Prefix to the 
 resolutions of the committee of 17 "Resolved, 
 that standing committees be appointed to consider 
 and report on the following subjects and that the 
 several parts of the constitution which relate to 
 these subjects respectively, be referred -to the 
 said committees." And then strike out from 
 the beginning of each resolution the words " Re- 
 solved, that so much of the constitution as relates 
 to," and from the end of each of the 15 resolutions 
 the words "be referred to a committee to consider 
 and report thereon," He moved also to number 
 the subjects from 1 to 15 ; so as to have but one 
 resolution for 15 standing committees. He said 
 that if gentlemen desired to attain verbal accura- 
 cy, he thought this would accomplish that object. 
 Mr. STETSON remarked that he was in duty 
 bound to state that the gentleman from Herkimer 
 (Mr, LOOMIS) not in his seat, but who had been 
 called home very suddenly, expressed to him (Mr. 
 S.) before leaving, his hope that the general iden- 
 tity of the first 3 or 4 resolutions should be pre- 
 served, if it was practicable, and agreeable to the 
 views of the committee. As there appeared to 
 be some slight confusion for the moment as to 
 what were the duties of the legislature, and as to 
 the legislative power generally, he would call at- 
 tention to the 2d resolution ; and this they could 
 see included all the power of the legislature in full 
 sovereignty, except as related to public debt ; 
 and all so far as this power is to be derived from 
 the constitution ; and (not to say anything beyond 
 it) a very formidable power indeed this is. And 
 the 3d resolution w ent beyond it provided an- 
 other formidable power not derived from the 
 constitution. It goes beyond the exception it 
 subdivides the legislative power, it is true, but it 
 goes beyond the exception. The 2d resolution 
 exempts the public debt ; but it occurred to the 
 committee that the third, which was intended to 
 provide for the exception, should include the sub- 
 ject of internal improvement, the public revenue 
 and property, and all those powers of the legisla- 
 ture connected with the public debt. So in the 
 13th resolution, there are still farther details rela- 
 tive to legislative power, with a still wider ex- 
 ception. And it takes hold of and embraces the 
 organization and powers of cities, villages, towns, 
 counties and other municipal corporations, and 
 especially the power of assessment, borrowing mo- 
 
 ney, taxation, and the contraction of debts. And 
 in abatement 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : Will the gentleman from 
 Clinton inform me, taking these resolutions as 
 they are, to which one of them he would consider 
 my proposition as the most appropriate amend- 
 ment ? 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that that question had not 
 been fully settled in the committee of 17. Bt he 
 thought it would belong to the 3d subdivision. 
 The objection to it had been well stated by the gen- 
 tleman himself it was an unconstitutional pow- 
 ernot given to the Legislature at all ; but the 
 proper way to remedy this, was to add to the 3d 
 resolution, as proposed by the gentleman from 
 New-York, the words " and Legislative power:" 
 This would blend inquiry into the constitutional 
 power, and also into that power, which, though 
 exercised, has not been derived from the consti- 
 tution and which has gone beyond the constitu- 
 tion. There was really no other legitimate power 
 than that derived from the constitution. [He re- 
 peated the first part of the resolution, added the 
 words suggested, and then stated that he thought 
 that would reach the objection.] The gentleman 
 from Genesee, in his amendment, speaks of 
 " loaning the public credit." He had supposed 
 that the public credit was much the same thing 
 as public debt. If a man in business puts his 
 name to a note a piece of paper, promising to 
 pay he owes that amount of money, and that 
 certainly in one sense must be looked upon as a 
 debt. And he certainly thought public debt 
 must include the loaning of the credit of the 
 State. But it is easy to change or to increase the 
 powers of the committee so as to include all the 
 necessary subjects generally; because if we adopt 
 a special enumeration, we may leave out much 
 that we are desirous to include. That was the 
 principal difficulty as it struck him. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND did not consider this subject 
 to be of the same nature as the ordinary debt of 
 the State, as Mr. STETSON described it. Nor did 
 his constituents so understand it. And he wished 
 to have a special committee for it. What he par- 
 ticularly objected to, was the loaning of the credit 
 of the State to advance private improvements, and- 
 the interest only of certain individuals. There 
 must be some way to provide for the public debt, 
 it is true, when required for public purposes ant 
 some way to create a public debt but there was 
 a very wide distinction between the legitimate 
 kind of State debts, and the loaning public mo- 
 ney to corporations, for private purposes, as he 
 before stated; and what he wanted, was a report 
 on this system of loaning the State credit; and he 
 wanted the Constutution so amended that the le- 
 gislature would be utterly restricted from ever 
 creating such debts. The power of the legislature 
 to create a debt for public improvements is a to- 
 tally different matter; we may support the one; 
 but our votes will most certainly be given against 
 the other. He wished not to reflect on the com- 
 mittee of 17 at all; or to allude to any inflence it 
 may be supposed to have; he believed they have 
 done as well as they could under the circumstan- 
 ces; and if we can't get exactly what we want, we 
 must get the next best thing to it. And it is the 
 wish of all to get through this report as amicably 
 and speedily as possible. But the committee must 
 
60 
 
 see the great difference between these two sub- 
 jects; and he hoped no attempt would be made 
 then to blend them together. In many counties, 
 the people in their primary assemblies had voted 
 on both these subjects and against the one he 
 spoke of and as it was of great importance, he 
 hoped a separate committee would be granted to 
 report upon it. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said, that notwithstanding the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, and the gentleman 
 from Clinton were desirous that these resolutions 
 should stand substantially as they were reported, 
 yet the gentleman from Orange had very clearly 
 shown that the resolutions were by no means 
 consistent with each other ; and doubtless the 
 various committees would make reports and reso- 
 lutions thereon greatly conflicting with each oth- 
 er. The two subjects alluded to were not at all 
 similar and ought not to be considered by any one 
 committee. Whilst he was listening to the gen- 
 tleman from Genesee he had drawn up 2 resolu- 
 itons which he would offer as substitutes for two 
 of the special committee's resolutions on the same 
 subject. It included constitutional and legisla- 
 tive powers relating to internal improvements, 
 public debt and credit and the loan of public cred- 
 it for local and private purposes, and the other in- 
 cluded all other powers and duties of the legisla- 
 ture. He believed as these embraced every thing 
 on that point, they would satisfy gentleman, 
 They read thus : 
 
 Resolved, That so much of the Constitution and of leg- 
 islative power as relates to the canals, internal improve- 
 ments, public revenues and property, public debt and pub- 
 lic credit, as well as the appropriation of public moneys or 
 property, by way of gift or otherwise, or for local and pri- 
 vate purposes, and the authority and duties of the legisla- 
 ture in reference thereto, be referred to a committee to con- 
 aider and report thereon. 
 
 Resolved, That so much of the Constitution as relates to 
 the powers and duties of the legislature in regard to sub- 
 jects not embraced in the foregoing resolution, be referred 
 o a committee to report thereon. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that he believed we should 
 have a large number of amendments to the reso- 
 lutions and in relation to classifying the parts of 
 the Constitution and .other matters that would 
 come before them ; and there was one proposition 
 before the committee which would have a most 
 confusing effect on the Convention and on the 
 other amendments, if it should be adopted ; and 
 would at least require them to be altered. The 
 proposition of his colleague (Mr. TILDEN) was 
 the one he alluded to which required a varia- 
 tion in their general structure, in order to avoid 
 confusion ; to wit, in the making the entire set of 
 resolves to be but one resolution, and numbering 
 the committees, at the same time it got rid of that 
 continual reference to the Constitution which oc- 
 casioned scruples in the minds of many of the 
 members as to the extent of the powers which the 
 original resolutions would confer on the commit- 
 tees. Many gentlemen seemed to think that these 
 references to the Constitution tied down the com- 
 mittees to such parts as were actually to be found 
 in the present Constitution, To get rid of this 
 difficulty and to put the original resolutions in a 
 proper shape to receive the amendments suggest- 
 ed, he proposed that the question should be taken 
 on' the resolution of his colleague first to effect 
 hat general alteration ; and afterwards they could 
 ct on the specific amendments. It appeared that 
 
 both his colleague and himself however had failed 
 to make the proposition understood by the Con- 
 vention ; and in fact it was of such a character 
 that it could not be fully understood by any ver- 
 bal description. He therefore wished it printed, 
 and withdrew the amendment he had before su-- 
 gested. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS asked that the original reso- 
 lution should be read again, that was offered by 
 the gentleman from Genesee, (Mr. RICHMOND.) 
 He asked if the question was on the amendment 
 of the gentleman from New York (Mr. TILDEN.) 
 He had asked for the reading of the original res- 
 olution for the information of several of the 
 members, who had not nnderstood how the ques- 
 tion stood ; and with a view that if the various 
 amendments should be rejected, a distinct com- 
 mittee should be raised for the reference of this- 
 particular subject. All these amendments are 
 made to resolutions that refer to the subject of 
 the appropriation of the public money for public 
 purposes. This loaning money on credit of the 
 state for "private purposes," is a distinct subject, 
 so far as the action of this Convention is concern- 
 ed. He considered it an original question, as 
 taken in connexion with the old subject. 
 He agreed fully with the gentleman from Gen- 
 esee, (Mr. RICHMOND) that it was very ques~ 
 tionable whether any such power could be 
 possessed or exercised by the Legislature. 
 Many aye, a large majority of their constituents 
 entertained the opinion that it was positively un- 
 constitutional to loan the credit of the State to 
 private corporations, and that it could be done 
 under no circumstances but by a two-third vote ; 
 and therefore it was a most proper matter for an 
 exclusive committee on it, and he hoped one 
 would be raised for the purpose. This subject 
 had heretofore excited a great deal of interest 
 throughout the country it had been agitated very 
 extensively and very energetically and it there- 
 fore did occur to him to be a very appropriate 
 subject for a distinct committee, more especially 
 as- the other resolutions referred solely to the 
 expenditure of public monies for public purposes. 
 But he had another reason for desiring this course 
 to be pursued. The committee of the whole 
 should keep in mind that the fifteen committees 
 proposed to be raised were to be standing com- 
 mittees ; they were to act and to be in existence 
 all the session of this Convention, and they ought 
 not to be burthened with any thing that par- 
 took of the character of special instructions. 
 And the course he desired to see pursued would 
 prevent the necessity of continually offering and 
 voting upon special instructions to be sent to these 
 committees. They would have abundance to do, 
 by considering fully all subjects appertaining to 
 the particular sphere of their duty. And as soon 
 as they shall respectively report, if that report 
 should be found defective, and gentlemen found 
 omitted any subject that had been greatly discuss- 
 ed over the State, in which all feel a very deep in- 
 terest, or that any particular district of the State 
 feels a particular interest in, then it will compe- 
 tent for those gentlemen to move, and the Con- 
 vention to instruct that committee on those par- 
 ticular subjects. Therefore, he suggested that 
 when any new subject (such as that of the gen- 
 tleman from Genesee) should be brought forward?. 
 
61 
 
 (not included in the consideration of those 15 
 committees) it should be sent immediately to 
 a new committee to be raised especially 
 for its consideration. If the Convention do 
 this, then our labors will soon be brought 
 to a close ; but if we go on as we have be- 
 gun, then we shall be involved in an endless 
 discussion, and our labors will be interminable. 
 Let it be well remembered, then, that these are 
 to be standing committees, who are to sit and act 
 during the entire term of the committee, and any 
 gentleman who wishes to have any subject prop- 
 erly connected with any of them brought under 
 its consideration, has only to name it, and the 
 Convention will so order it. But do not amplify 
 the duties of any of these 15 as named in the pro- 
 gramme. Let there be no new committee unless 
 in the case of a new and entirely distinct subject 
 presenting itself; and then always raise a new 
 one. He would offer no amendment now, but he 
 hoped the amendment of the gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. TILDEN) would not be adopted ; he 
 hoped all the amendments would be voted down; 
 he was not prepared to vote on the original ques- 
 tion just now, but still he wished it to come up 
 fairly before the committee to be examined and 
 discussed, without being encumbered with un- 
 necessary amendments. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR thought that the committee 
 
 was not properly prepared at this time to vote on 
 his amendment ; and as it was near the time of 
 adjournment, he moved that the committee rise, 
 report progress and ask leave to sit again. 
 
 The motion prevailed, and the committee ac- 
 cordingly rose, reported progress, and had leave 
 to sit again. 
 
 Mj^HOFFMAN moved to print all the amend- 
 ments* Carried. 
 
 Mr O'CONOR explained the character of 
 Mr. TILDEN'S amendment. 
 
 Leave -rf absence for 4 days granted to Mr. 
 POWERS, and the Convention adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, (8th day,) JUNE 10. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BENEDICT. 
 
 RULES AND ORDER OF BUSINESS. 
 
 Mr. WARD, from the committee on rules, re- 
 ported in favor of the two rules referred to that 
 committee yesterday, relative to the order of bu- 
 siness (which were offered by Messrs. TAYLOR 
 and STRONG). When the committee originally 
 made their report on the rules, it was their de- 
 sire to leave the Convention entirely untrammel- 
 ed with regard to the order of business ; they left 
 it to the Convention to select and adopt that or- 
 der which would best conduce to the dispatch of 
 the business of the Convention, and that on this 
 a majority should decide. But since then they 
 had deliberated on the rules now reported for the 
 order of business, and as they saw nothing to ob- 
 ject in them, they reported accordingly in favor 
 of them. They report the following order of bu- 
 siness, after reading the journal : 
 
 1. Petitions and communications from the Governor, the 
 State officers, and from all other persons to whom inqui- 
 ries may he addressed by order of the Convention ; 2. Re- 
 ports oi committees ; 3. Motions, resolutions and notices: 
 4. Unfinished business ; 5. Special orders : 6. General 
 orders. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to amend by inserting 
 the word " resolution" after " petitions." 
 
 This was accepted by Mr. WARD. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said he would send up a resolu- 
 tion which would meet the view r s of gentlemen. 
 His only object in thus amending, was always to 
 get at the names of all those who offered resolu- 
 tions. He would therefore offer an additional 
 rule, thus : 
 
 " Resolved, That no resolution or papr should be re- 
 ceivpd by the President, unless accompanied with the 
 name of the mover." Accepted. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved to vary the phraseolo- 
 gy of the rule for the order of business. As it 
 now read it, seemed to say "petitions," as well 
 as " communications from the Governor." He 
 moved to insert " 1st, petitions ; 2d, communica- 
 tions from the Governor," &c. &c. 
 
 The report, with all the amendments, was 
 adopted. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then called over the order 
 of business; on reaching the 3d section. 
 
 STENOGRAPHERS. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to call up his resolution 
 to appoint two stenographers to report the Con- 
 vention debates officially. He observed that Mr. 
 PATTERSON had remarked that it required a vote 
 of the House to call it up ; but he thought the 
 mover might call it up at any time, if it had been 
 laid on the table with his consent. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD opposed the resolution. It 
 was entirely unnecessary for the committee to 
 appoint two stenographers; and it would be very 
 unfair to select any 2 from the 5 or 6 very able 
 gentlemen now present reporting these debates. 
 Thus far, most certainly, the debates of this Con- 
 vention have been most fully and fairly reported 
 by those gentlemen. He had the highest confi- 
 dence in the ability of the gentlemen reporting 
 for the city papers (Atlas, Argus and Journal,) 
 now present. And he believed some of them had 
 announced that they would publish all these de- 
 bates in a book at the close of the Convention. 
 There was no necessity to pay money out of the 
 Treasury for this purpose; it could not possibly 
 induce these gentlemen now engaged to make any 
 better reports than they now publish; and it would 
 be equally impossible to obtain two other report- 
 ers from any other place that could surpass them. 
 For this reason he opposed the proposed expen- 
 diture of money. There was no reason for it; and 
 nothing in the circumstances by which we are 
 surrounded, to warrant such outlay. 
 
 Mr. BROWN wished to know the object of the. 
 entleman who offered the resolution. Was it 
 esigned to pay any of the public money to these 
 stenographers? Or was it intended to purchase 
 this book of reports from them, out and out, and 
 make it the property of the State? He desired 
 information. He was willing to go as far as any 
 member, to take measures to ensure the publica- 
 tion of the fullest and most accurate reports of this 
 Convention. But up to the present time, every 
 thing connected with this subject, has gone on as 
 admirably and perfectly as the most sanguine 
 could desire; the reports given daily in the lead- 
 ing journals here, had been most excellent, and 
 given entire satisfaction to the members. How 
 could we ensure anything better? He wished the 
 
mover to explain. He might eventually vote for 
 the resolution; but he wished first to know its ob- 
 ject; he must first see the propriety and ne- 
 cessity of it. It would not be right in any event, 
 to select any 2, to the prejudice of the other 3 or 
 4. 
 
 Mr. STRONG asked if the resolution was pro- 
 perly before the house; if it was not, then we 
 could not debate it. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES made the same enquiry 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to lay the subject on 
 the table. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the question was on 
 taking the resolution from the table, and it was 
 not debateable. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said, that having been called 
 upon for his reasons, he would state that he had 
 no object in view on this matter, except to have 
 the proceedings of this Convention published in 
 a good and proper manner ; under the immediate 
 supervision and sanction of the Convention itself. 
 He wished to have the reporters of the debates 
 and proceedings made officers of the Convention, 
 and responsible to it for their reports. As to the 
 matter of the expense, he had limited the number 
 to two, in order not to startle gentlemen with the 
 expense of paying five or six. But he was not at 
 all tenacious on this point. He had not the slight- 
 est desire to make any invidious distinction be- 
 tween the very able gentlemen now engaged in 
 this most arduous and honorable duty of reporting 
 these debates ; he had no objection to have them 
 all engaged officially as reporters to this Conven- 
 tion ; and all paid liberally for their professional 
 services to the same ; what he desired was to in- 
 sure some additional responsibility in the publi- 
 cation of the important debates of this Conven- 
 tion to revise the Constitution of the great State 
 of New- York. These debates would be deemed 
 of the highest importance by the people all over 
 the State. And as to the expense of the same, 
 he was certain that none of their constituents 
 would ever complain of that. What he intended 
 to do with the book after it was published at the 
 close of the session was this ; every member of 
 the Convention should receive a copy as a right ; 
 and he had no fear to go home and meet his con- 
 stituents and show them the work he had voted 
 for himself, or any of the other books he might 
 receive. 
 
 He (Mr. C.) further proposed to put one 
 copy of it in the office of every county clerk 
 in the State ; this was highly necessary to be 
 done ; and he might go even so far, (and he tho't 
 he should,) as to put a copy in the office of every 
 town clerk throughput the State. And he was 
 quite sure that the people of this State would ful- 
 ly sanction such a proceeding For if the debates 
 are such as he trusted they would be, worthy of 
 the members themselves, and of the great objects 
 which called them together, then the outlay would 
 be one of the most judicious, one of the most 
 profitable, that could or would be made during the 
 entire session of the Convention. We print the 
 Journal, which is worth little more than waste 
 paper in comparison with the importance of these 
 debates. What do we know, what do the peo- 
 ple of the State know of the Journal of the Con- 
 vention of 1821 ? why, it is not only not read at 
 all by the people at large, but it is scarcely heard 
 
 of by them, while the debates of that Conven- 
 tion have long been and still remain, monuments 
 of the wisdom and learning displayed there ; and 
 they are to be found and are read in every section 
 of the State ; they served as a guide and a land- 
 mark in the construction of the Constitution, and 
 they have been of invaluable service for the last 
 25 years to all classes of our fellow citizens. 
 Our Journal, which, by law, we are compelled to 
 keep, is merely a dry, meagre, record of the bu- 
 siness transacted here from day to day, while 
 the opinions, the views, the knowledge, 1 and expe- 
 rience of members, elicited from day to day, and 
 hour to hour, in the debates and which are so vi- 
 tally important and material to us and to our con- 
 stituents now ; and will be to all our descendants 
 for perhaps a century to come and which should 
 be spread freely and abundantly all over the 
 State we hesitate to print at all. What an an- 
 omaly is this ? Can anything be more absurd ? If 
 we form such a Constitution as he hoped and ful- 
 ly expect that we shall ; one that shall last a cen- 
 tury and be the best that can possibly be devised 
 then these debates will form one of the most 
 interesting and valuable books that has ever been 
 published in this State. The debates at this pre- 
 sent time, it is true, are of a somewhat desultory 
 character, and upon incidental questions ; they 
 perhaps are not so very material as to require 
 that they should all be fully embodied in this 
 work ; but by and by we shall come to the care- 
 ful consideration of those vital questions connect- 
 ed with the heart and soul of this Constitution ; 
 and then it would be a matter of the last import- 
 ance to have these debates spread out before us 
 in the fullest and most accurate manner. He 
 had no feeling, whatever, as to which of the very 
 talented and experienced gentlemen (re^-ters) 
 now present, were chosen for this important and 
 highly arduous and responsible duty; but he 
 would commence the selection by choosing, first, 
 the very best reporter that could be found for the 
 duties, come from where he may ; then choose 
 the next best to him ; and so on, if the Conven- 
 tion thought proper, until they had chosen the 
 whole of those now present, who had been so ful- 
 ly and ably reporting these debates up to the pre- 
 sent time. 
 
 The question was then taken on considering 
 the resolution and it was agreed to, 56 to 34. 
 
 Mr. WARD would feel equally gratified with 
 the gentleman from Cattaraugus (Mr. CROOKER,) 
 to pass this resolution, if he could satisfy his mind 
 that this Convention possessed the power to make 
 an appropriation for the appointment of these ste- 
 nographers. But it did seem to him that they 
 possessed no such power. They had it was true 
 the power to direct the publication of the journal 
 of their proceedings; and that power they "had 
 exercised; and that seemed to be all that was re- 
 quired of them. With respect to the present re- 
 porters, those now within the bar of this Conven- 
 tion, he could say for one, from the long experi- 
 ence which he had had in such matters, that there 
 was not in America he believed that there was 
 not in the whole world a corps of reporters so 
 well qualified so able by talent and experience, 
 and in every way so well calculated to do justice 
 to the views and speeches of gentlemen upon 
 this floor, as those at present engaged in that most 
 
63 
 
 difficult but dignified and honorable task ; and as 
 had been stated by the Hon. gentleman from Ot- 
 sego (Mr. CHATFIELD,) two at least of the papers 
 employing these highly talented gentlemen, have 
 already announced that it is intended by them to 
 publish a book, containing the whole of these de- 
 bates, carefully revised, at the end of the session. 
 And if, then, after the close of our labors here, 
 we find that we possess the power or authority to 
 vote the money for the same, we can select from 
 either of ihe books which may be published by 
 these repwters, such a number of copies as will be 
 sufficient to supply each member with one. For 
 gentlemen must know from the opportunity they 
 had had to judge, that these reports would be given 
 most accurately. They could go farther and pur- 
 chase enough copies to send one to th office of 
 every town and county clerk, if it Should be 
 deemed expedient to do so. But they could not, 
 by merely appointing any of these gentftmen to 
 the position of Reporter to the Convention, and 
 awarding him a liberal sum for his services at 
 the same time award him a larger amount of ex- 
 perience, or talent in his peculiarly difficult pro- 
 fession, than he now possesses. Neither would 
 the payment of any sum induce either of these 
 reporters to make any better or more faithful re- 
 ports than they now do. Their personal pride 
 was fully enlisted in this matter now their pro- 
 fessional reputation was involved in the results of 
 their labors ; and knowing them as well as he 
 had the honor and pleasure to know them, he 
 could assert without fear of contradiction that 
 these feelings would be a far greater inducement 
 to their attaining excellence in their line, than 
 all emoluments, or all the intended or alleged, 
 nominal honors which the Convention could pos- 
 sible bestow upon them. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that he certainly could 
 not vote for ihis resolution. Heretofore, it had 
 been considerr-d an improper stretch of power for 
 the members to vote themselves many of the 
 books which they had so frequently done ; for it 
 had in times past been the practice for every 
 member of the Legislature to take a copy 
 of every thing that was published by the Le- 
 gislature ; and sometimes 2 or 3 copies. 
 
 There was the case of the Geological Reports 
 published at the expense of the people of the 
 State. He had voted for that measure, for those 
 works to be printed ; he had done so at the. time 
 without proper thought or reflection it passed ; 
 yet he was not able to get a single copy of that 
 work for himself. And at any* rate, it was very 
 questionable if we had the right so to print and 
 appropriate that work ; and it could not be made 
 a precedent for future action. The good sense of 
 the committee must tell them this is so. They 
 had much better confine themselves entirely to 
 the stationery. It would be highly impolitic al- 
 so, for them to print the debates; for if at this 
 late day, in 1S46, they should begin to print all 
 the speeches that might be made upon that floor j 
 he was very much afraid, indeed, that they would 
 not only get a great deal too many of them, 
 [laughter] but a very large majority of them that 
 would be positively not worth the paper on 
 which they were printed. [Increased laughter.] 
 This subject of reporting and publishing the de- 
 bates is a matter of fair and honorable competi- 
 
 tion among the three leading journals here ; 
 most competent and skillful gentlemen were al- 
 ready engaged in the task ; they had performed 
 their severe labors most admirably so far, and 
 there was no fear but that they would do so to 
 the end; and there was not the slightest danger, 
 but that their constituents would be fully ac- 
 quainted with their labors through the medium 
 of these papers, and properly appreciate and re- 
 ward them for the same. He must vote against 
 the resolution. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER said that if gentlemen laid so 
 much stress upon the point that we were bound 
 by the express letter of the law the act of 1844 
 calling this Convention he believed that we had 
 transcended that power already. We certainly 
 have alread violated that law. There is, assured- 
 ly, no provision therein to allow us to vote our- 
 selves any stationery ; or if this was contended 
 for, any how there was none for appointing a 
 Sergeant-at-Arms. Our constituents, he did 
 not believe, however, would object very rrfuch to 
 those matters ; much less would they object to 
 having the light of these debates shed on them. 
 On the other hand, he insisted that the publica- 
 tion of these debates did virtually and literally- 
 come within the meaning and letter of the act. 
 The law required them to keep a journal of their 
 proceedings ; and these details are as legitimately 
 apart of the proceedings of this body as any mo- 
 tion, resolution, report, or any part of the pro- 
 ceedings which is daily entered on that jourual ; 
 and how much more important are they to a pro- 
 per understanding of the proceedings which are 
 now entered there ? Shall, then, the proposition 
 offered here be spread upon that journal, 
 with the result, perhaps, that such a proposition 
 was carried and not the opposing remarks made 
 by gentlemen with a view to influence votes to 
 cause its defeat ? or those remarks which might 
 be made by gentlemen to ensure its success ? 
 How absurd would such a course be on the face 
 of it. The remarks were engrafted irremovably 
 in the proceedings, and as such should be printed 
 officially. The law itself certainly requires that 
 these speeches should all be published. And 
 therefore we ought to have the reports of these 
 debates made by officers of the Convention un- 
 der our supervision, subject to our order, and 
 published by our sanction. Then we should only 
 be doing our duty to our constituents. As to the 
 geological reports which the gentleman from Es- 
 sex (Mr. SIMMONS) had alluded to, all who were 
 then present must remember that the members of 
 the Legislature voted themselves, not one copy, 
 but eighteen or twenty copies ! and what is more, 
 they received them, at least nearly all must have 
 had them, and if the gentleman from Essex was 
 so unfortunate as not to get a copy of that work, 
 he (Mr. C.) could assure him that he got 18 or 20 
 copies; (laughter) and what is more, he considered 
 it to have been a valuable and legitimate appro- 
 priation. He had yet. to hear that this was not a 
 proper expenditure. The books were distributed 
 among his constituents, as was doubtless the 
 case with the copies obtained by other members 
 of the Legislature they imparted to each neigh- 
 borhood a vast amount of invaluable information 
 and he had yet to learn that this appropriation 
 was in any way to be considered as a waste of 
 
64 
 
 money. The object of the survey was to have 
 the results distributed over the country not lock- 
 ed up in a closet to spread all this information 
 abroad and the appropriation effected it. If the 
 gentleman from Essex, or his constituents, got no 
 copy of this work, he was sorry for it he cer- 
 tainly ought to have had some. (Laughter.) As 
 to the powers of the Convention upon these 
 subjects, he must say that he did not like all 
 these stringent notions of false economy the 
 rigid constructions which gentlemen chose to 
 put upon these points. We are here as the 
 people of the State in their sovereign capacity ; 
 we are here, only because they cannot all come 
 themselves in person ; but still the whole peo- 
 ple are here, acting here, thro' us, their represen- 
 tatives. And thus we possess all the power 
 which the whole body of the people themselves 
 possess and we are at full liberty to act so as in 
 our judgment, will best promote the interests of 
 the whole people. It was admitted we had th 
 
 Sower to tear the Constitution to pieces, and to 
 >rm, if we thought proper, an entirely new one, 
 (for the people to decide upon hereafter) and yet, 
 strange to say, gentlemen undertook to say that 
 we had not the power to vote a small sum, in or- 
 der to inform the people fully and fairly what 
 had been said and done during our session here ; 
 or to show them the grounds assumed and main- 
 tained why certain propositions were adopted, 
 and certain others were rejected. This would 
 not bear the test of common sense reasoning. 
 Gentlemen had said that they could furnish them- 
 selves at the close of the session with a copy of 
 the book of debates that one of the papers had 
 proposed to publish ; but this would not furnish 
 the whole people of the State with a knowledge 
 of how their business had been transacted here; 
 which information ought to be published at their 
 expense, so as to assist in forming a judgment on 
 the new Constitution when they should come to 
 vote on it hereafter. By this means they could at- 
 tain a proper understanding of all the amend- 
 ments we should adopt and not otherwise, and 
 at the close of the session they would thank us 
 for doing so. These are the reasons he had for 
 offering and pressing the resolution, which gen- 
 tlemen called on him to give. It was not his 
 wish to take up the time of this Convention ; he 
 offered the resolution because he deemed it a high- 
 ly important one to his constituents ; and he 
 thought that the good sense of the members (ena- 
 bling them to See its importance) would induce 
 them to pass it without debate. And with this 
 explanation, he should leave it in the hands of the 
 Convention, and should acquiesce in whatever 
 dispositionit might please them to make of it. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he was not able to find 
 sufficient reason to sustain this resolution ; and 
 he thought that the Convention ought not. We 
 we were already surrounded with an ample array 
 of very competent Reporters ; and we most cer- 
 tainly ought not to complain we had not the 
 slightest reason to complain of their accuracy ; 
 they had most faithfully discharged th% duties as- 
 signed them. He could bear full testimony to 
 the accuracy and faithfulness of their reports so 
 far as he had examined them. And these gentle- 
 men are employed by those who sent us here 
 by the people themselves. They are the agents 
 
 of the people who sent us and they are sent here 
 delegated by that people fb watch us to inform 
 them of all that we do and say. They are sent 
 by^the people in their primary capacity they are 
 paid by that people in their original capacity 
 they are not our agents we do not pay or employ 
 them and we ought not. He wished to allow 
 the fullest and freest kind of competition in this 
 matter ; and in that way the interests of the pub- 
 lic would be best served, and the duties assigned 
 them be best discharged. Nothing that was done 
 there could be kept from the peoj$e. Every 
 breath of wind that passes this Capitol, carries on 
 its wings every remark that is made here, to the 
 remotest corners of the country. We are fully 
 and amply supplied with intelligent, industrious, 
 and experienced gentlemen to accomplish all 
 these objects. And if we were to adopt the reso- 
 lution, we should set a most unwise and mischie- 
 vous ppcedent to the legislature,which they might 
 follow Hereafter with their debates, and which 
 he would be very sorry to see done. The perfect 
 freedom of speech and debate which is indulged 
 in on this floor by members of the Convention, 
 should induce us to allow the same freedom to 
 those who are sent here by the people to give 
 them to the world. He wished in this respect to 
 see the fullest and fairest competition without any 
 any official preference or patronage ; this was al- 
 lowed under the existing arrangement, and he 
 deemed this sufficient reason to oppose any change 
 therein. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that he must regard this pro- 
 position as somewhat novel and extraordinary. 
 He had no recollection of any legislative body 
 isver having employed stenographers to report its 
 debates. It certainly was not the practice of the 
 British Parliament, of the Senate, or House of 
 Representatives in Congress, nor of the Legisla- 
 ture of this State to do so ; neither was it the 
 course of the Convention of 1821 ; they did not 
 employ any reporters to report their debates. 
 And the reasons therefor were, in his judgment 
 very obvious. For if any thing could take away 
 from the impartiality of these reports if any thing 
 could induce the reporters to deviate from strict 
 accuracy in their reports (which he did not deem 
 possible) to make them favorable to the 
 members to flatter gentlemen in their speeches, 
 it would be the official sanction and preference 
 given to them by their selection to this body. 
 Such an appointment would create a desire to 
 have these reports of speeches all made as fa- 
 vorable and flattering as they could be made. 
 And this was one great evil which he decidedly 
 wished to avoid. He desired that each gentle- 
 man should stand here on his own responsibility; 
 and to answer for all that he should say, good, 
 bad, or indifferent. And if any gentleman should 
 undertake to make a speech, or to utter opinions 
 here, that might be deemed a waste of the time 
 of the Convention or that might be deemed irrel- 
 evant to the subject under discussion or that 
 might be deemed idle and useless then he de- 
 sired that such gentlemen should take the respon- 
 sibility of so doing; and not that he should be at 
 liberty to go to the reporter (who perhaps might 
 be indebted to him to his vote for his place) 
 and say to him that he must suppress so and so, 
 and insert so and so; or gloss over, or highly color 
 

 65 
 
 certain other parts. He desired that the debates 
 of this Convention should be reported and pub- 
 lished precisely as they occur, if that be possible 
 and that is the reason, and a sufficient one, why 
 we should reject this resolution. The reporters 
 should remain as they are independent and un- 
 influenced with no indycement to present fa 
 vorablc or unfavorable reports of the proceedings 
 here but to give them as they occur. And let 
 every gentleman stand, as he does now, on his 
 own responsibility. And by and by when we 
 come to engraft these propositions on the Consti- 
 tution, our constituents will see and know the 
 reasons and motives assigned for our proceedings. 
 He admitted that it was proper the people should 
 have spread before them the reasons, motives, 
 and objects we have in view, and the arguments 
 adduced to sustain them that induced us to en- 
 graft these amendments on the Constitution. But 
 the resolution of the gentleman from Cattaraugus 
 (Mr. CROCKER) will not answer that end. For if 
 these reporters were officiallyemployed, the result 
 of their labors would not be published till the 
 close of the session till the Convention rose ; 
 whereas it was of great importance that these 
 reasons should be spread before them, fully, from 
 day to day, that the people may see them as they 
 hourly transpire; judge of their value, and ap- 
 prove or object to them as they shall see proper. 
 But this proposition of the gentleman from Chau- 
 tauque does not meet this object; for under his 
 resolution these facts would not be spread before 
 the people (in time for them to read and digest 
 them) before they would be called upon to vote 
 upon these very amendments to the Constitution. 
 But if anything of this kind was to be done if 
 we were to send these debates abroad under our 
 sanction, he would rather prefer then to pursue 
 the course indicated by the gentleman from West- 
 chester, (Mr WARD) that is, to wait and see 
 what these reported debates are whether they 
 are good or bad. If good, then let us purchase 
 them and send them all over the State ; and if 
 bad, reject them. But if we thus create these 
 stenographers appoint them to this body and 
 have their reports printed at the public expense, 
 we hold out direct inducements for them to make 
 it a great book, to swell it unnecessarily to a 
 ponderous size very costly and we shall have 
 eck upon it. As to the expense of 
 
 no 
 suc 
 
 proper ch 
 h a roce 
 
 proceeding, or the power of the commit- 
 tee to authorize it, he had no doubt that we pos- 
 sessed this power, and if the results of its exercise 
 should be valuable, he was willing to exert all 
 necessary power to effect a good object. As to 
 the expense of such a work, or other expenses, 
 about which we had heard so much, that was in 
 his estimation a very small item, not worthy a 
 thought and he trusted that gentleman would 
 not so insult the understandings or feelings, or 
 good sense of their constituents by such ill-timed 
 
 They were ordered, and resulted as follows ayes 
 5, noes 103 : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Crocker, Gebhard, Hawley, Rhoad<, 
 Townsend. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayrault. F. F. 
 Backus, H. Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bouck, Bowdish, 
 Brayton, Brown, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Cambrelensr, D. D. 
 
 Campbell, R. Campbell, jr , Candeje, Chajtfield, Clark, Co- 
 
 ly, Cook, Cornell, 
 Dubois, Flanders, Forsyth, Gardner, Green, Harrison, 
 
 nely, Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback. Dana, Danforth Dorlon, 
 
 Hart, Hofl'man, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntinptton, 
 E. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, Kemble, Kenne- 
 dy, Kernan, Kirkland, Loomis, Mann, McNitt, Marvin, 
 Maxwell, Miller, Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, Parish, Pat- 
 terson, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, Richmond, Hiker, Rug- 
 gles, Russell, St. John, Salisbury, Sanford, Sears, Shaver 
 Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Simmons, E. Spencer, W. H. 
 Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Swack- 
 hammer, Taft, Taggart, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, W. Ta 
 
 agga 
 thill, 
 
 ay- 
 rd, 
 
 lor, Tilden, Tuthill, Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Wa 
 Warren, Waterhury, White, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, A. 
 Wright, Yawger, A. W. Young, J. Youngs, President 103. 
 
 DOOR-KEEPER FOR LADIES' GALLERY. 
 Mr. RUSSELL then offered a resolution that a 
 door-keeper be appointed by the President, to 
 take special charge of the ladies' gallery. And 
 he thought that the experience of the last few 
 days had satisfied members that such an appoint- 
 ment was absolutely necessary. The other three 
 door-keepers were all wanted at the three doors 
 on that floor, to preserve order not one of them 
 could be spared. And he had observed, and many 
 others had observed, with regret, during the last 
 week, that ladies coming to this house, desiring, 
 anxiously and commendably, to hear the debates 
 and witness the proceedings, had been crowded 
 out of their legitimate seats, in the front of their 
 gallery, by gentlemen, and been obliged to take 
 the back seats. This has been the case ; 
 and yesterday, from this very cause, seve- 
 ral ladies were compelled to take seats in the 
 gentlemen's gallery, in order to hear the de- 
 bates. And he had heard it remarked many 
 ladies in this city had said to him that they 
 hould not be able to attend here and hear the de- 
 bates, unless the front seats in their own gallery 
 were kept free from such intrusion, and them- 
 selves from this annoyance, by the proper officer. 
 In this country, where the sex have higher privi- 
 leges than in any other upon the face of the earth, 
 and where they are held in higher estimation by 
 men, (a feeling which should be universal,) the 
 usages of society alone demanded that all the pri- < 
 vileges accorded should be fully secured to them, 
 and he, therefore, trusted that the good sense of 
 the members would see the necessity of passing 
 this resolution. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that it was very neces- 
 sary that the gentleman from St. Lawrence (Mr. 
 RUSSELL) should designate which was the " la- 
 dies' gallery" or what he calls the " ladies' gal- 
 .ery." It is true that there is a place so designa- 
 4 ed by the legislature ; and the Assembly have es- 
 :ablished a rule, insisting that no gentleman shall 
 
 allusions. But looking at the precedent it would go in there, or occupy a seat there, unless accom- 
 afford and the resulting consequences, with the I panied by a lady ; and he believed that if the Pre- 
 considerations he had suggested he must vote sident was to direct the Sergeant-at-Arms to hang 
 against it. up a mere notice to that effect upon the door of 
 
 Mr. CROOKER desired to have the word two that gallery, it would meet the object as effectual- 
 striken out in the resolution, and the number.left ly or more so, than if we were to employ a hanger- 
 in blank. He had no objection to have the on here, and pay him $3 a day for taking charge 
 whole body of Reporters that were present ap- of that gallery and giving the like notice. -The 
 pointed ; and he called for the ayes and noes. j gentleman from St. Lawrence has told us a great 
 
66 
 
 deal about the feelings and opinions of the ladies 
 on this matter. Now, he doubtless under- 
 stands the opinions of the ladies on that subject 
 better than he (Mr. P.) did. (Laughter.) For 
 his own part, he had not had the pleasure of con- 
 versing with any of the ladies of this city on the 
 subject, but it appears that his honorable friend 
 from St. Lawrence (Mr. RUSSELL) had been more 
 fortunate than himself in this respect. (Laugh- 
 ter.) He had heard no complaints on the part of 
 ladies that, as the gentleman says he has, they 
 were not allowed to occupy the seats which have 
 been appropriated to them ; but if this be the 
 case, still he was opposed to the expenditure of 
 the public money for that purpose, as the design of 
 the Assembly in relation to those ladies could be 
 properly carried out, by merely putting up the 
 notice he had suggested. He therefore moved to 
 strike out all after the word " Resolved," and in 
 sert, " That the south gallery be set apart by or- 
 der of the Convention for the use of ladies and 
 gentlemen with them." 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend this by 
 adding " And that a door-keeper be appointed 
 there to see that the same regulation be put in 
 force." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON That can't be any amend- 
 ment to mine. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said he had at first voted 
 against this doorkeeper ; but he now saw that we 
 must have him. And if gentlemen on the other 
 side could only sit where he did, and see the do- 
 ings, and movements and carryings on in that la- 
 dies' gallery from day to day, they would vote for 
 it as cheerfully as he would. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD I shall be most happy to 
 change seats with the gentleman. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER Thank you, sir; I'm 
 perfectly well satisfied with my present position 
 and prospect. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON offered a resolution, thus : 
 
 Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms be directed to put 
 up a notice on the door of the south gallery, stating that 
 all gentlemen are excluded therefrom unless accompan- 
 ied by a lady. 
 
 Mr. P. said that there was a Sergeant-at-Arms, 
 and for his part he really did not see what his du- 
 ties were, or could be ; or what he has got to do 
 besides lounging about. We had much better put 
 him up there if an officer is wanted. He hoped that 
 that officer will not be obliged during this session 
 to put on his broad sword, and to fetch members 
 from, their lodgings. But he had been appoint- 
 ed, any how. How it was done, he (Mr. P.) did 
 not know. But since we had got him, we had 
 better use him ; and that was about the best use 
 that we can put him to. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL was opposed to the substitute 
 of Mr. PATTERSON ; and it was idle to say that 
 persons who will rudely thrust themselves for- 
 ward, and take the front seats in the Ladies gal- 
 lery away from the ladies themselves, when they 
 saw the latter, sitting uncomfortably away in the 
 back seats, would, on a mere notice, such as men- 
 tioned here, retire and give up thosq seats. No, 
 not even here on this floor could we prevent 
 it, even by putting up a notice at these doors 
 that none should be admitted except accompan- 
 ied . by a member. We had besides many la- 
 dies from the country, with their friends, 
 
 who did not know where the appropriate gal- 
 lery for them to sit is located. This, the door- 
 keeper could tell them; and also tell them the 
 names of the memb'ers speaking, and all such in- 
 formation that might be necessary, or that they 
 might desire. He hoped that an appeal to 
 the spirit of gallantry ,^f not of justice of the mem- 
 bers, would induce them to vote for this resolu- 
 tion; so that the ladies might be accommodated 
 with appropriate and convenient seats, and that a 
 proper officer* might be appointed who should 
 see that those seats were secured to them. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL would state further, that pre- 
 isely such a notice as that alluded to by the gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque, (Mr. PATTERSON) was 
 posted on the door of the gallery now, and has 
 been there for years. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Who put it there? 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL : It has been there for years. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : It was placed there, then 
 by the Assembly. It has not been placed there 
 by the order of the Convention. We have authori- 
 sed nothing of the kind. 
 
 The resolution and amendments were then 
 re ad. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON submitted that the amend- 
 ment was precisely the original resolution as of- 
 fered. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called for a division of the 
 question. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that the proposition of the 
 gentlernan from St. Lawrence came to him in 
 such a form that he found it impossible to resist 
 it. He regarded it as a petition from the ladies that 
 doorkeepers should be appointed to superintend 
 their gallery, and that they had chosen the gen- 
 tleman as their organ for its communication to the 
 house. And he was only surprised to find the 
 gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) 
 in opposition to it a man who had been so long 
 the object of the admiration of the ladies. [Laugh- 
 ter.] If he had heard one, he had heard one hun- 
 dred, ladies since he had been here, express their 
 admiration of that gentleman, and now for the 
 sake of saving the small sum of $1,50 per day, he 
 ought not to resist the application of the ladies for 
 a doorkeeper to be appointed to their gallery. 
 [Laughter.] He hoped the appointment would 
 be made, and that the President would exercise 
 his discretion so as to make one very acceptable 
 to the ladies. He hoped all opposition to the 
 measure would be withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER would inform the gentleman 
 from Onondaga (Mr. RHOADES) what it was that 
 influenced the gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. 
 PATTERSON) against this measure. He had a 
 seat under the gallery where he could have no 
 view of the ladies. Change his location and his 
 support to .the measure was secured. [Laughter.] 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought it made very little 
 difference to him whether he was located in 
 Greenbush or in any other part of the house. 
 For himself, he desired that the ladies should 
 have a gallery suitable for their occupation when 
 they came here, and he wished that gallery to be 
 kept in good order. But he doubted very much 
 whether the gentleman froift Onondaga had re- 
 ceived the petition of 100 ladies, that a door- 
 keeper should be appointed to take charge of 
 them. 
 
67 
 
 Mr. RHOADES would be allowed to explain. 
 What he said was, " if he had heard one lady 
 speak not of the galleries but in admiration of 
 his friend from Chautauque, he had heard a 100." 
 [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that the gentleman's 
 remark was very unfortunaMly qualified by the lit- 
 tle word IF. He says if he hm heard one lady, then 
 he had a hundred. (He (Mr. P.) had no doubt of 
 it. [Laughter.] Now it was entirely immaterial 
 whether"the ladies gave that decided approbation 
 spoken of by the gentlemen from Onondaga and 
 St. Lawrence, to the gentleman from Chautauk, 
 (as the gentleman from Orange would say,) or not 
 he had no objection to the ladies being ta- 
 ken care of. But he did object to the employment 
 of a hanger-on, to take charge of that gallery. 
 We had a Sergeant-at-Arms, who had little or no 
 business to do ; and if it was necessary to send an 
 officer up there, send him. There was no sort of 
 necessity for the appointment of any new officer 
 and he would enquire what authority would be 
 found in the Convention act for such appointment. 
 There were officers enough more messengers 
 than could be profitably employed, they were 
 in each other's way, and it was better to send one 
 of them up there. He saw no reason to change 
 his opinion in relation to this appointment. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM hoped that this resolution would 
 not be adopted, just after one had been voted down 
 so unanimously for the diffusion of information 
 among the people. We had taken liberal ground 
 enough when ourselves were to be provided for, 
 and had been pretty liberal towards the officers 
 had procured whatever newspapers we might de- 
 sire, but when we came to say whether the pro- 
 ceedings of the Convention should go into every 
 corner of the State, where it never would go un- 
 less so provided for, we could refuse to do it with 
 great unanimity. Mr. B. said that an occasional 
 intimation firm the Chair would be more efficient 
 for the prosen ation of order in the ladies' gallery 
 than any officer who could be put there, and 
 would be more complimentary and gratifying to 
 them. But Mr. B. did not believe there would 
 be a very strong disposition among the ladies to 
 witness these proceedings, unless the work 
 changed, nor was he desirous that the trifling, 
 technical character of the matters which had been 
 debated should be thus witnessed. He did not 
 believe it at all necessary to increase the number 
 of officers around the Convention, and he should 
 therefore vote against the proposition. 
 
 Mr. STRONG in reply to the remarks of Mr. 
 B., that the debates now were not interesting, 
 said that he thought them to be very much so 
 particularly those which had arisen this morn- 
 ing. He was at the organization, opposed to the 
 appointment of a door-keeper in the Ladies' Gal- 
 lery, from the fact that when he was a member 
 of the Assembly, gentlemen observed the rule, 
 and it was unnecessary for an officer to take 
 charge of it. But experience had taught him 
 that no regard whatever was now paid to this 
 rule and when he was satisfied that he was 
 wrong, he was willing to acknowledge it. He 
 had but one objection to the resolution, and he 
 trusted his amendment would be accepted. There 
 was a young lad here whom he thought from the 
 little he had seen of him, would be precisely the 
 
 man for the post. His name was George C. Gill, 
 an active, young lad, and about the right age and 
 size. He would move to amend the resolution so 
 as to appoint this lad to the post. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE hoped' that the original resolution 
 would not be adopted, and that the amendment of 
 Mr. P. would pass. He could see no necessity 
 for a gallery doorkeeper and he began ' to be 
 somewhat suspicious of the gentleman from Onon- 
 daga and St. Lawrence, aware as he was, that 
 they had had many years experience in legisla- 
 tion, and had never until this moment manifested 
 such a zeal for the ladies. He believed that there 
 was not an instance known of the appointment of 
 such an officer. There was the sergeant-at-arms, 
 and it was his duty, be believed, on certain occa- 
 sions, and in cases of extreme necessity, to put on 
 his sword, and place himself in battle array; and 
 he would suggest that if the rights of the ladies 
 are invaded, that he be allowed to march in de- 
 fence of women's rights, and he believed the 
 House would sustain him. 
 
 Mr RUSSELL wished to correct the gentle- 
 man |(Mr. B.) in one point. He was mistaken 
 when he said that there never had been any such 
 or.ceras doorkeeper to the ladies' gallery. He 
 (Mr. R.) was informed that at the last session of 
 the Legislature, there was a doorkeeper for each 
 of the galleries. At the request of ^ several, he 
 woulft withdraw his call for a division of the 
 question. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD offered an amendment which 
 he thought would meet with favor, and the in- 
 trinsic propriety of which would strike the Con- 
 vention at once. It was to strike out all after the 
 word " Resolved," and insert, " that the seats on 
 the floor of the house under the galleries should be 
 appropriated for the use of ladies, and gentlemen 
 accompanying them, and the whole of both galle- 
 ries for the use of gentlemen." 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the amendment was not 
 in order until there was a disposition of the pre- 
 sent question which was on the amendment pro- 
 posed by Mr. SWACKHAMER. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON renewed the call for a divi- 
 sion of the question, 
 
 The question first being on striking out, it was 
 refused to strike out ayes 49, nays 49. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued on a question of 
 order, as to whether Mr. SHEPARD'S amend- 
 ments was now in order or not, which was not 
 decided when 
 
 Mr. PERKINS called for the previous ques- 
 tionwhich would bring the vote back on the 
 original motion. 
 
 Mr. STRONG hoped that the gag-law would 
 not be enforced here. 
 
 There was a second to the call for the previous 
 question ayes 53, nays 38 ; and the mam ques- 
 tion was then ordered. 
 
 The resolution as originally introduced was then 
 adopted AYES 61, NAYS 47, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Bouck, Bowdish, Cambreleng, 
 D. D. Campbell, R. Campbell, Jr., Clark, Conl) , Cook, 
 Cornell, Crocker, Cuddeback, Danforth, Dodd, Dorlon , 
 Dubois, Gvbbard, Greene, Hart, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, Hunt- 
 A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, Kemble, Kenne, 
 dy, KingsUy, Kirkland, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, 
 Maxwell, Murphy, Nicoll, O'Conor, Parish, Perkins, Por- 
 ter, Rhoades, Riker, Russell, St. John, Sanford, Shepard, 
 Simmons, Stevens, Stetson, Stow, Swackhamer, Tafft, W. 
 
68 
 
 Taylor, Tilden.Townsend, Tuthiil, Vache.Ward, J. Young 
 61. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bascom Bergen, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, 
 Burr, Candeu, Chatfield, Dana, Flanders, Gardiaer, Hard- 
 son, Hawley, Hunter, E. Huntington, Kernan, Marvin. 
 Miller, Nicholas, Patterson, Penniman, Richmond, Salis. 
 bury, Sears, Shaver, Shaw, Shelden, E. Spencer, W H. 
 Spencer, Stanton, Strong, TallmaOge, J. J. Taylor, War- 
 ren, Waterbury, White, Willard, Wood. A. Wright, Yaw- 
 er, A. W. Young- 47. 
 
 THE ARRANGEMENT OF COMMITTEES. 
 
 And then on motion of Mr. JONES, the Con- 
 vention went into committee of the whole on the 
 report of the select committee of seventeen Mr. 
 TALLMADGE in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD desired to offer an amendment 
 to the 3d resolution to insert after the word 
 thereto in the 4th line, the words, " and all proper 
 piodes to secure the future safe-keeping and dis- 
 bursement of the public revenue." 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said the question was on his 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN asked the Chair to state the ques- 
 tion pending yesterday. 
 
 The CHAIR: The Clerk will read. 
 
 The CLERK : On the amendment offered by 
 Mr. TILDEN which leaves the resolutions as 
 follows : 
 
 Resolved, That standing committees be appointed to 
 consider and report on the iolbwing subjects, rfhd that 
 the seveial parts of the existing Constitution which re- 
 late to those subjects respec'ively, be also referred to the 
 same committees .- 
 
 1. The apportionment, election, tenure of office and 
 compensation of the Legislature. 
 
 2. The powers and duties of the Legislature, except as 
 to public (iebt. 
 
 3. Canals, internal improvements, public revenues and 
 property, and public debt, and the powers and duties of 
 the Legislature in reference thereto. 
 
 4. The elective franchise the qualification to vote and 
 hold office. 
 
 5 Tht- election or appointment of all officers other than 
 legislative and judicial whose duties and powers are ntt 
 local, and their powers, duties and compensation. 
 
 7 The militia and military iiflairs. 
 
 8. Official oaths and affirmations, and oaths and affirma- 
 tions in legal and equity proceedings. 
 
 9. Tue judiciary system of the State. 
 
 10. The rights and privileges of the citizens of this state. 
 
 11 Education, common schools and the appropriate 
 funds. 
 
 12 Future amendments and revision ofthe Constitution. 
 
 13. The organization and powers of cities, villages, 
 towns, counties and oiher municipal corporations ; and es- 
 pecially their power of assessment, taxation, borfowirg 
 mone\ , and contracting debts. 
 
 14. The currency, banking business and incorporation. 
 
 15. The subject of the tenure of landed estates. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that his amendments were 
 designed to simplify the resolutions under consid- 
 eration, and to obviate objections which ex- 
 isted in the minds of some gentlemen, in which 
 he did not himself share. The form of the 
 original resolutions was a mere reference of the 
 parts of the Constitution relating to particular 
 subjects. It was objected that there were sub- 
 jects not embraced in any provision of the ex- 
 isting Constitution, and some gentlemen enter- 
 tained doubts as to the authority of the respective 
 committees over subjects not thus embraced. 
 He did not himself entertain any idea that the 
 resolutions would be hereafter so literally con- 
 strued, but inasmuch as the question was raised 
 he thought it should be put at once to rest, 
 and with that view his amendment was offered. 
 
 It at least had the effect of simplifying very 
 much the language of the resolutions, condensing 
 it one half and putting it in the same form as the 
 rules constituting committees of the legislature. 
 He was not strenuous for the adoption of this 
 amendment. It was offered as he had before stat- 
 ed to answer the scriples entertained not by him- 
 self, but by others, and in the hope that it might 
 prevent the repetition of objections which would 
 occasion much delaj hereafter. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND supposed that the amendment 
 if adopted, would not materially affect the pro- 
 position introduced by himself, and which he 
 supposed was first in order. His amendment was, 
 that this matter of loaning the credit of the State, 
 should be referred to a separate committee, to 
 come in as No. 16 in the classification. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was of opinion that the amend- 
 ment proposed by the gentleman from New York, 
 was desirable, as it admits of stating the other re- 
 solutions in a little better form, and more easily 
 of contracting the three first resolutions into two; 
 and it seemed to him desirable to lessen the num- 
 ber of committees. If the amendment of the gen- 
 tleman from New York was adopted, then he 
 proposed that the three first committees should 
 be incorporated into two each of which would 
 be very distinct, and would reserve to them dis- 
 tinct landmarks. It will read then after enume- 
 rating the subject: 
 
 1. The constitution of 1he legislative department, with 
 its general poweis and duties 
 
 2. The particular powers and limitations of the legisla- 
 ture concerning canals and rail-reads, the public property 
 and revenues, and the public debt and credit. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN believed that the motion now 
 was to strike out a very substantial part of the 
 projet presented by the committee of 17, and 
 laid upon the table yesterday. It would certain- 
 ly be entirely competent and as he thought very 
 proper to go through with the projet, and allow 
 any gentleman here and more especially the mem- 
 bers ofthe committee, after hearing all the opin- 
 ions here to make the matter sought to be strick- 
 en out, as perfect as possible. He had laid on 
 his table yesterday this projet. He had endeav- 
 ored to study it while in committee had taken 
 it home to his room, and there submitted it to 
 the best reflection in his power. He came here 
 this morning scarcely knowing what the amend- 
 ments proposed amounted to, and he had to study 
 them here to day as he did the projet yesterday. 
 He believed it to be entirely in the power ofthe 
 committee who had this matter in charge, with- 
 out any very serious change in the form, to correct 
 any slight inaccuracies in the substance ofthe pro- 
 jet and before any question to strike out was taken, 
 he hoped that course would be taken with it. It 
 seems to be objected to in the form of the projet 
 as presented by the committee, that it was not 
 entirely artistic, in a parliamentary sense. If this 
 be so, it may be amended, and only proves that 
 the committee had devoted more attention to the 
 subject than to the form, of the matter to be sub- 
 divided. The principal objection he had heard 
 yesterday, and one which he thought very pro- 
 perly taken, arose from the double sense so com- 
 monly applied to the word Constitution. It might 
 mean precisely the written Constitution of the 
 country, and it was likely that the gentleman who 
 
69 
 
 objected to it, took it in that sense ; or it might 
 mean, in a broader sense, all those fixed parts in 
 a responsible government, which are deemed un- 
 changeable and are unchanged. Therefore, he 
 would surest to the committee that where the 
 word Constitution in the programme occasioned 
 any difficulty of this kind,4;o insert immediately 
 after it the words, " and government." This, in- 
 cluding the actual with "that which they had in 
 their minds in its broadest sense, and making it 
 substantially, so far as casually looking at it, ena- 
 bled him to judge, as it would be when amended 
 by his friend from New York, over the way, (Mr. 
 TILDEN,) would free it from all difficulties in 
 his mind, in regarding it as a full and fair reference 
 of the subject' named, w r hether embraced in the old 
 Constitution, or only a matter in the actual work- 
 ings of the existing government. Among other 
 matters proposed yesterday, was the transposition 
 of the 1st and 3d resolution but he was unable 
 to see the necessity. The committee to be ap- 
 appointed by the 3d resolution would be one of 
 the most important. He had occasion yester- 
 day to say something in reference to one of the 
 duties it would have to perform : One so as even- 
 tually, now or hereafter to secure, if it was 
 in human effort, an affirmative, specific, enu- 
 meration of legislative power. But whether 
 they engage in that ' heavy undertaking or 
 not, the committee will be from the very na- 
 ture of things, and its designation in the program- 
 me, a committee to consider all the limitations on 
 the legislative power all the proscription of leg- 
 islative duties, not specifically transferred to 
 other committees And it must strike the mind 
 of members that there will be as there should be, 
 very many propositions setting such safe limits to 
 legislative powers as will make the right of labor 
 and property secure and be safe to free govern- 
 ment. If mere was any obscurity in the general 
 words used by the committee of 17, that might be 
 obviated by amending the exception that is now in 
 the third resolution. That was by excepting the 
 specific matters contained in the subsequent 01 
 third resolution. An amendment was moved by 
 his friend from New- York on his right, to sepa- 
 rate what, in the action of government, and in the 
 very nature of things, cannot be separated that is 
 separation of the debt, finances and State credit. 
 He thought they must be considered together, anc 
 he believed it would be impossible to separate 
 them. And in the action actual of the government, 
 he knewthat one of these had frequentlybeen made 
 a substitute for the other, and he was bound to say 
 that the giving away of the State credit was not 
 perhaps the worst form of giving away the State 
 effects, and of creating State debts, bad as it 
 might appear. The committee would excuse 
 him for calling their attention to a small case il- 
 lustrative of this matter. The legislature of the 
 State passed an act requiring the Canal Commis- 
 sioners, to examine and to certify whether it 
 would be beneficial to the State to purchase a 
 canal, he believed called the Oneida Lake canal 
 a canal devised by individuals to open a com- 
 munication between the Oneida Lake and the 
 Erie canal, and overcoming about 40 or 50 feet of 
 lockage. The bill further provided that if the 
 commissioners gave this certificate, that the State 
 should pay the owners $50,000. They examined 
 
 he matter and they gave the certificate. In the 
 :ourse of his official duties, the question came 
 up where he was obliged to decide upon it. Sup- 
 )-jsing it to be utterly impossible that such a cer- 
 ificate had been given, he said to the applicant 
 'hat it could not be allowed unless the paper was 
 ihown. The paper was produced ! the commis- 
 sioners had certified that it would be advantage- 
 ous to the people to give $50,000 for a canal. 
 The State gave not a dollar in money for it, for 
 t had none it gave its credit, its note, bond or 
 scrip in the place of payments, and possessed it- 
 self of this advantageous speculation, which is 
 said to yield a revenue of a few hundreds a year, 
 and to cost in its annual expenses of repair sever- 
 al thousands. Assuming the form of a purchase 
 and payment, it was in reality a gift. . The giv- 
 ing outright, fairly and aboveboard, to this and 
 thtt man or orporation, of a few $100,000 of 
 State credit, might be less objectionable than the 
 conveying of it away in this form of bargain and 
 sale. He had mentioned this case, not in a spirit of 
 reprobation, but to illustrate the position he had 
 taken that whatever committee was charged 
 with the question of finance and debt, must also 
 be with all the ways and means, by which reve- 
 nues are raised, diminished, distributed, and debt 
 created or paid. The amendment of the gentle- 
 man from New York yesterday, seemed to him to 
 improve the 3d resolution, by making it more 
 specific. Making this amendment, so far as the 
 programme had gone, with a slight alteration in 
 relation to judicial officers, it seemed to him 
 about as fair as we could expect to make this 
 matter. There must and will be necessary addi- 
 tions. Of these additions, he did not feel him- 
 self at liberty now to speak. When the commit- 
 tee who had it in charge had made the matter as 
 perfect as they could, if his friend from New* York 
 (Mr. TILDEN) desired, he had no objection to the 
 question on striking out. Until they had that op- 
 portunity, he supposed the question to strike out 
 ought not to be pressed. If the amendment of 
 the gentleman from New York was pressed, then 
 those who desired a select committee on State 
 credit would undoubtedly resist it, because if suc- 
 cessful, it would not give them a fair opportunity to 
 add a 16th resolution. He had stated his opinions 
 in relation to the formation of these committees, 
 but he had no very serious apprehensions that 
 there would be any great collision on subjects 
 that might come up between any two committees. 
 
 Mr. JONES, in accordance with the sugges- 
 tions of the gentleman from Herkimer, and the 
 wishes of others, with whom he had conversed, 
 would move the amendment to add the words, 
 'and government' after the word Constitution in 
 each resolution. Not because he deemed it ne- 
 cessary, but in conformity to the suggestions he 
 had referred to. As Chairman of the select 
 committee he ha^ a right to make these amend- 
 ments. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND believed the first question to 
 be on his proposition. The others were offered 
 as amendments to the report of the committee, 
 while his was offered as a new and distinct 
 proposition. His proposition was not at all af- 
 fected by any other that had been proposed. 
 Therefore he hoped it would be understood that 
 whatever dispositiorFmight be made of his propo- 
 
70 
 
 sition, it would not effect those of other gentle- 
 men. It was a proposition for a separate com- 
 mittee. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN, (Mr. TALLMADGE,) 
 thought the amendment providing for a 16th rule 
 not to be in order until the consideration of the 
 rule preceding it should be reached. The Chan- 
 went on to explain the position of the question 
 as it understood it. The committee had the 3d 
 resolution under 'consideration, and a motion to 
 strike out and amend that would be in order, but 
 not to substitute propositions covering the whole 
 series. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND inquired if it would reliere 
 the committee from any difficulty if he struck out 
 the number of his resolution. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN'S impression was, that the 
 best way to offer it would be as a supplement to 
 the 3d resolution* 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND would then modify hie reso- 
 lution as indicated. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that the CHAIR was 
 clearly right. The amendment the gentleman 
 proposed was a distinct resolution. It had given 
 us a good deal of trouble. At one time it was of- 
 fered as an amendment to the 2d resolution, and 
 sometimes to the 3d then as a 16th rule, and 
 now it was nowhere at all. 
 
 The CHAIR said if the gentleman would only 
 say where it was to be inserted, it should be so 
 amended. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that he had been too 
 yielding in this matter. For the accommodation 
 of gentlemen, he had yielded yesterday; but still 
 Ihe was willing now that the resolution should be 
 said on the taole until the 15th resolution was 
 reached. 
 
 The CHAIR stated the question to be on the 
 amendment of the gentleman from New York, 
 (Mr. TIL.DEN.) 
 
 Mr. T1LDEN further explained his amend- 
 ment, 'when 
 
 The CHAIRMAN remarked, that in his opinion 
 the question should be taken on each resolution. 
 
 Mr, T1LDEN said if it was required to vote 15 
 times on this proposition, he must consent to it 
 of course. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that the hour of 2 hav- 
 ing arrived, he would vote to rise and report pro- 
 gress. 
 
 The motion was carried, and the question be- 
 ing on granting leave to sit again, 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said that the experience of 
 the past two days must have convinced gentle- 
 men that it was better for us to have adopted the 
 report of the committee of seventeen, and permit- 
 ted the several committees to have been appoint- 
 ed. If this course had been adopted, perhaps by 
 this time we should have had reports made by 
 some of the committees, and thij convention have 
 work to occupy itself with. It appeared to him 
 that now the wiser course would be to refuse per- 
 mission to the committee of the whole to sit again. 
 This would be bringing the whole matter direct- 
 ly under the control and direction of the conven- 
 tion. The report could be adopted, the commit- 
 tees appointed, and the question referred forth- 
 with, and then if there were any other subjects 
 not included in the programme, it would be com- 
 
 >etent for any gentleman to offer new proposi- 
 'ions. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that it appeared to him that 
 he time thus far spent in committee, had not 
 >een mis-spent. He thought, therefore, it better 
 to take the usual course, for it would not be a 
 misuse of time to go into the same discussion to- 
 morrow. In order to arrange this matter, let us 
 take what time was necessary- for it was much 
 more important that this thing should be done 
 right, than that it should be done quick. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that the Convention 
 adjourn. Carried. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (9M day) June 10. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BENEDICT. 
 
 After a verbal correction of the minutes, 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that he had a propo- 
 sition which he was about to offer, and one which 
 
 trusted would meet with general favor. This 
 was the 3d day of the 2d week of the Convention ; 
 ndwe had made but very little progress in its busi- 
 ness. He therefore moved that all previous orders 
 >e laid aside, and that the committee proceed to 
 the consideration at once of the unfinished busi- 
 ness of yesterday. 
 
 This motion was agreed to. 
 
 THE ARRANGEMENT OF COMMITTEES. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that when the adjourn- 
 ment took place yesterday, the question before 
 ;he house was on granting leave to the committee 
 of the whole to sit again. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN hoped that we would not grant 
 the committee leave to sit again. We had alrea^ 
 dy consumed much time there unnecessarily. 
 The work just immediately before them could as 
 well be done in the Convention as in committee ; 
 and he thought even a little better ; besides it 
 would cause a great saving of time, if they did 
 not go again into committee of the whole. 
 
 The question was then taken on granting leave, 
 and lost. Leave was refused ayes 48, noes 50. 
 
 Mr. WARD then moved that the committee 
 take up the resolutions (reported by the com- 
 mittee of 17,) separately, and agree to, or amend, 
 or reject, or present substitutes for them. 
 
 Mr. MANN hoped that they would be takerf 
 up in numerical order, and disposed of separate- 
 ly, as they came up, 
 
 Mr. TILDEN hoped that the question would 
 not be taken on the resolutions separately. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said he thought that the pro- 
 per question before the Convention would be on 
 adopting the report of the special committee of 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that he was decidedly 
 in favor of the proposition of the gentleman from 
 New- York (Mr. TILDEN). It avoided much of 
 the unnecessary verbiage that was contained in 
 the report of the committee of 17 the repetition 
 of the words, " that so much of the Constitution" 
 and " be referred to a committee to consider and 
 report thereon." He hoped that the Convention 
 would first take the question upon that amend- 
 ment to, or substitute for, the report of the com- 
 mittee. It contained, after all, the substance of 
 the resolutions reported by that committee, 
 whilst it avoided the constant repetition of those 
 points, which raised conscientious scruples in 
 
71 
 
 the minds of many of the members, about the 
 powers that really Were conferred by the Consti- 
 tution. And in the amendment or substitute of 
 the gentleman from New- York, (Mr. TILDKN,) 
 the word " Constitution," by being used in con- 
 nection with the word "subject," obviates all 
 the objections that have been raised to the origi- 
 nal resolutions of the committee of 17. He 
 hoped the committee's report would not be con* 
 sidered first; or at least until its phraseology 
 Was changed. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the question was 
 upon the motion of the gentleman from West- 
 Chester, (Mr. WARD). The other Would not be 
 in order. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND asked if it would not be bet- 
 ter first to adopt the phraseology of the gentle- 
 man from New-York (Mr. TILDEN) by general 
 consent, or otherwise. It would not change the 
 subject of the resolutions they would be greatly 
 simplified thereby not at all injured- and it 
 Would be much more satisfactory to have them 
 put into that shape before they proceeded to 
 consider them. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that such a motion 
 would not be first in order. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD thought that, with all due 
 deference to the Chair, the Chair Was in error. 
 He considered that the proposition of the gentle- 
 man from New York (Mr. TILDEN) was the first in 
 order; and it was neither the intention nor the 
 desire of any gentleman there to ride over it. In- 
 deed it could not be rode over unless by a privi- 
 leged motion; and the motion of the gentleman 
 from Westchester Was not a privileged motion. 
 (Mr. C. here read the 14th rule,) and he contend- 
 ed that the motion of the gentleman from N. Y. 
 (Mr. TILDE??,) having been first in order in^com- 
 mittee of the whole, was first in order in the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that it was with very great re- 
 luctance that he should detain the committee with 
 any remarks about rules and orders. But his 
 friend who spoke last, was in error. We are now 
 in the House. His (Mr. W.'s) motion was the first 
 proposed in the House, consequently it must be 
 the first that can come up for consideration in the 
 House; and it certainly, therefore, could not pos- 
 sibly be affected by any motion that had been 
 made in committee of the whole. The amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from N. Y. (Mr. TILDEN) 
 to have been first in order here to have preced- 
 ed his motion, should first have been offered here, 
 instead of in committee of the whole. Besides 
 it was a well known parliamentary rule that a 
 member may insist, at any time in the House, on 
 taking up the business before it, precisely in the 
 order in which it stands. It is so in all Legisla- 
 tures that he had ever heard of it is the prac- 
 tice in Congress, although from courtesy, it is 
 not always strictly adhered to in the Senate of 
 the U. S. ^ He would not pertinaciously, by any 
 means, insist upon the strictest adherence to thig 
 rule. He was desirous to accommodate gentle- 
 men he would do so at all times, when vitally 
 important business was not delayed thereby. 
 The parliamentary rule is, that if you take up a 
 bill you must read the whole bill through first in 
 committee of the whole or in the House, and af- 
 ter that, take it up by sections read it by sec- 
 
 tions, and so act upon it. We are here now, de- 
 bating on the report presented by the Chairman 
 of the committee of 17. And he had a right to 
 demand that the resolutions appended to that re- 
 port should be taken up and disposed of. He 
 would therefore assent to the motion of his friend 
 from N. Y. on his right, (Mr. MANT*.) The 
 amendment of the other gentleman from N. Y. 
 would have been right enough, and he would 
 have had no objection to have seen it put, if it 
 had been offered in the first instance. But there 
 Was no necessity that these original resolutions 
 should assume at first the phraseology recomend- 
 ed by Mr. TILDEN . He was not tenacious about 
 it; but their present form and wording is the 
 same as is pursued in all legislative bodies, 
 
 Mr.TlLDEN said that the refusal to grant leave 
 for the committee of the whole to sit again, had 
 brought the subject into the Convention in the 
 same state in which it was pending in committee. 
 Under the general parliamentary law? the ques- 
 tion would be on the amendments adopted in 
 committee, but by a special provision of our rules 
 amendments offered were for this purpose consi- 
 dered as adopted, The first question in the Con- 
 vention, was on the adoption of his amendment, 
 
 Mr. MURPHY rose, but gave way to 
 
 Mr. WARD, who said that he would not detain 
 the Convention, but he would reiterate the views 
 he had just laid before the Convention, and in- 
 sist that his motion Was first in order. He wish- 
 ed that course adopted that would secure a deci- 
 sion on this report as early as possible ; and he 
 appealed to the Convention to proceed. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that he was clearly of 
 opinion that the decision of the Chair was right, 
 We had had no report from the committee of the 
 whole; we had no cognizance of any business that 
 had been transacted there, and consequently no 
 amendments that had been offered there could be 
 considered as being now before the Convention. 
 We have refused that committee leavelHo sit 
 again; and the first proposition therefore that 
 has been offered in the house to-day, is the 
 first business in order. But still he hoped that 
 while the' gentleman from Westchester (Mr, 
 WARD,) was right in his position, he would allow 
 the question to be taken on the amendment of the 
 gentleman from New- York (Mr. TILDEN). For 
 all must admit that the proposition of the latter 
 gentleman though not differing in substance, was 
 drawn with more art and skill and was more sim- 
 ple in its construction, than the resolutions pre- 
 sented by the committee of 17. He hoped there- 
 fore the gentleman from Westchester would allow 
 the gentleman from New- York to renew his pro- 
 position. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that he would not offer any 
 obstruction to the progress of the business of the 
 Convention ; but as long as we had certain rules 
 for the guidance of the Convention, he hoped 
 that they would be adhered to. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN renewed his motion. 
 
 Mr. JONES then moved his anjendment^o the 
 amendment(of Mr. TILDEN) to insert after the 
 word " Constitution," in that of the original reso- 
 lutions of the committee of 17, the words "and gov- 
 ernment.." No amendment was necessary, but 
 he deferred to the wishes of others. He said- that 
 this committee had met here to consider prima 
 
72 
 
 rily the Constitution of the State, and the best 
 practicable mode of proceeding to revise the same, 
 and he wished this lact to appear plainly on the 
 face of the resolutions. The amendment of his 
 colleague seemed to make the revision of the 
 Constitution, a mere secondary matter. It pro- 
 vided only for standing committees on subjects in 
 general. This he was decidedly opposed to. It 
 may be said that the difference here pointed out 
 is only a mere matter of form in- the wording of 
 the propositions ; but after all, the whole was a 
 mere matter of form ; and the question was, which 
 is the most important form to be adopted. It was 
 certainly proper that that form should be the 
 right one. However, he was not at all tenacious 
 about mere phraseology, and should offer no im- 
 pediment to the progress of business. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the regular order 
 of parliamentary proceedings was, on the intro- 
 duction of a bill, to read it over ; then, to take it up 
 and read it by sections, and propose amendments 
 to each particular section, and thus avoid confu- 
 sion ; thus not confounding those things together 
 which did not belong together. The proper par- 
 liamentary cours* to be pursued here, would be 
 the same as in the action on a bill to take up 
 this report of the committee of 17, and act upon 
 these resolutions as you ordinarily would upon 
 the sections of a bill. No amendments offered in 
 committee are now in order ; but the 1st resolu- 
 tion is ; and, unless the Convention directs other- 
 wise, (and the Convention unquestionably has the 
 power to do so, if it thinks proper,) the Chair will 
 take up the 1st resolution in the report of the 
 committee of 17. The amendment of the gentle- 
 man from New- York, (Mr. TILDEN) and the 
 amendment to that amendment of the gentleman's 
 colleague, (Mr. JONES) are, at the present time, 
 both out of order, in the way in which they were 
 offered. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that then he should move 
 his proposition as an amendment to the first reso- 
 lution of the committee of 17. To strike out the 
 words " so much of the Constitution," in the 
 beginning of the resolution, (and afterwards in 
 each resolution,) and at the close of it, the words 
 " be referred to a committee to consider and re- 
 port thereon." These separate questions on the 
 15 resolutions could be dispensed with by unani- 
 mous consent. 
 
 The PRESIDENT was about to put the ques- 
 tion on this, when 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that the prefix must also be 
 added. 
 
 The following is the prefix, and the entire re- 
 solution, as offered by Mr. TILDEN as an amend- 
 ment to the report of the select committe of 17 : 
 
 Resolved, That a standing committee be appointed to 
 consider and report on the following subjects.and that the 
 several parts of the existing Constitution which relates to 
 those subjects respectively, be also referred to said com- 
 mittees. 
 
 1. The apportionment, election, tenure of office and com- 
 pensation of the Legislature. 
 
 2. The powers and duties of the Legislature, except as to 
 public debt. 
 
 2. Canais, internal improvements, public revenues, and 
 property, and public debt, and the powers and duties of 
 the Legislature in reference thereto. 
 
 4. The elective franchise the qualification to vote and 
 hold otiice. 
 
 5. The election or appointment of all officers other than 
 
 legislative and judicial, whose Duties and powers are not 
 local, and their powers, duties and compensation. 
 
 6. The appointment or election of all officers whose 
 powers and duties are local and their tenure of office, du- 
 ties and compensation. 
 
 7. The militia and military affairs. 
 
 8. Official oaths and affirmations, and to oaths and affir* 
 mations m legal and equity proceedings. 
 
 9. The judiciary sjstem'of the State. 
 
 10. The rights and privileges of the citizens of this State. 
 
 11. Education, common schools, and the appropriate 
 funds. 
 
 12. Future amendments and revisions thereof. 
 
 13. The organization and powers of cities, Tillages, 
 towns, counties, and ether municipal corporations; ami es- 
 pecially their power of aseesment, taxation, borrowing 
 money, and contracting debts. 
 
 14. The currency, on banking business, and on incor* 
 porations. 
 
 15. The subject of the tenure of landed estates. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN was very desirous to avoid any 
 difficulty which he saw might arise in this mat- 
 ter ; this would be done if the gentlemen from 
 New York, instead of offering his proposition as 
 an amendment, should offer it as a substitute to 
 the whole, and we should then vote on the whole 
 of the 15 resolutions of this committee of 17. It 
 was entirely competent for him to do so ; and for 
 the convention to entertain and pass upon the 
 same. If adopted, this substitute is before us as 
 the ground work of action, and would be open to 
 any amendment, 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that much valuable 
 time would be saved, if gentlemen would but al- 
 low the question to be taken on the proposition 
 of the gentleman from New York first, although 
 it is no better than the plain one from the com- 
 mittee of 17. (It was read again.) All this talk 
 was idle it amounted to nothing ; we have al- 
 ready talked 2 or 3 days upon this subject with- 
 out effecting anything, and we have only now 
 just got back where we started from. And as to 
 the particular phraseology of the gentleman from 
 New York, if he was so particularly tenacious 
 about it and will try to stick it on, without regard 
 to the waste of time here, it's a great pity that he 
 had not been a member of this committee of 17, 
 where he could have fixed it to suit himself. It is 
 our duty to dispose of this matter soon ; and we 
 had therefore better go to work like men of sense, 
 and settle it at once. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN wished to take up Mr. TILDEN'S 
 proposition as a substitute for the entire report of 
 the 'committee of 17, and after adopting it, then 
 to vote such amendments as the committee might 
 think proper, to each one of the resolutions seria- 
 tim, from 1 to 15. The question is, will the con- 
 vention now pass upon the entire substitute. 
 This proposition was judicious ; and it was fur- 
 ther intended to relieve the minds of gentlemen 
 from the doubts they had about the name of 
 " the Constitution" being repeated so often in 
 the original report. Some had thought that 
 the committee of 17 intended by using the 
 word " Constitution" in connection with the sev- 
 eral resolutions and committees, to refer to those 
 committees the Constitution of the State. 
 Whereas many of the subjects those resolutions 
 proposed for consideration were not only not 
 sanctioned by the Constitution, but were not to 
 be found in the Constitution at all. Therefore 
 the word " subject" had been added in Mr. TIL- 
 DEN'S amendment; besides by putting in thepe- 
 
73 
 
 culiar form of prefix which he has, they woui 
 
 dispense with the surplusage and repetitions i 
 
 the original resolutions. He had no feeling i 
 
 the matter but he wanted to get at some definii 
 
 question. 
 Mr. NICOLL asked if the Chair decided M: 
 
 TILDEN'S proposition to be out of order, as an en 
 
 tire substitute ? 
 The PRESIDENT said that he had so decided 
 
 the question was on it as an amendment to th 
 
 1st resolution. 
 Mr. NICOLL then moved to lay aside the re 
 
 port of the committee and to take up Mr. TIL, 
 DEN'S proposition. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he believed the decisio 
 of the Chair to be right. The question, was, o 
 may be put, on the proposition of Mr. TILDEN as a: 
 amendment to the 1st resolution of the committe 
 of 17 ; and it will perhaps be best to put it in tha 
 way before the Convention without further cere 
 mony ; and then we can come at once to a direc 
 vote on it. This will test the sense of the Conven 
 tion between the two forms ; and settle the orde 
 of business without any more delay. There was 
 no difficulty about it. He had, as one of the com 
 mittee of 17, assented to the report of that com 
 mittee ; but he had entertained a preference then 
 in committee for a proposition almost precisely 
 similar to Mr. TILDEN'S ; and such a one he hac 
 offered in committee ; but he yielded to the wish 
 es of others in that particular. Now that the com 
 mittee had been discharged and the question was 
 fairly before the Convention, he felt himself at ful 
 liberty to make these statements, and to assent to 
 the substitution of his (Mr. TILDEN'S) views, not- 
 withstanding he had assented to the report pre- 
 sented originally by that committee. He be- 
 lieved then and believed now, that the proposition 
 (Mr. TILDEN'S) is the most simple form of pass- 
 ing the resolution to raise these committees, and 
 much the easiest to be got along with. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS asked whether, if they adopted 
 the proposition of his learned colleague J.Mr. 
 TILDEN) it would be open to amendment Here- 
 after, 
 
 The PRESIDENT said it would be. 
 
 The question was on this part of Mr. TIL- 
 DEN'S proposition to amend the 1st resolution : 
 
 "Resolved, That standing committees be appointed to 
 consider and report on the following subjects, and that the 
 several parts of the existing Constitution which relates to 
 these subjects respectively, be alo referred to said commit- 
 tees: 
 
 "1. The apportionment, election, tenure of office, and 
 compensation of the Legislature." 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he most decidedly pre- 
 ferred the original resolution of the committee of 
 17, to the amendment of his learned colleague, 
 (Mr. TILDEN.) That resolution defined explicit- 
 ly that there must be and provided for the ap- 
 pointment of a separate standing committee for 
 each separate class of subjects ; but this amend- 
 ment did not provide therefor. No doubt his col- 
 league might have intended that there should be 
 a separate committee for each separate class of 
 subjects ; but the amendment does not provide, in 
 language, for a separate committee for each dis- 
 tinct class of subjects. It merely provides for 
 the appointment of standing committees, and does 
 not say whether one, two, or more, should be 
 
 raised on any subject, or whether two or more 
 subjects shall be classed together and sent to a 
 single committee ; and in short, it is not definite 
 enough. As it reads now, there might be a doubt 
 whether each single subject mentioned in the re- 
 solutions (without any reference to the classifi- 
 cation) might not be referred to a separate com- 
 mittee, to consider and report thereon ; and thus 
 we would have to raise above 50 committees. 
 He would therefore move to amend the prefix just 
 passed, by inserting as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That o standing committee bo appointed, to 
 consider and report on each of the following subjects; and 
 that the several parts, &c." 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that he had used the precise 
 phraseology of the committee, except that 'he had 
 struck out the surplusage. He certainly, as 
 his friend from New- York (Mr. MORRIS) suggest- 
 ed, had intended to have a separate committee 
 raised for each class of subjects. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said, so he had supposed ; but 
 his colleage (Mr. TILDEN) had struck out the 
 surplusage, as he termed it, and having done so, 
 tiad not supplied that which made the amend- 
 ment understandable or practicable ; as to the 
 raising of distinct committees on each class of 
 subjects. He must therefore move to amend, as 
 he had stated. 
 
 Mr, O'CONOR thought that this amendment of 
 Mr. MORRIS, would compel us to appoint a com- 
 mittee on each of the 40 or 50 subjects named in 
 J ;he resolutions ; for there were 12 or 15 subjects 
 n some jpf the resolutions. 
 
 The PRESIDENT, by request, read Mr. TIL- 
 DEN'S resolution with Mr. MORRIS' amendment. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN begged leave to correct the Chair 
 and his amendment again. 
 
 The PRESIDENT requested Mr. TILDEN to 
 tate his amendment and the resolution as it would 
 ead when amended, 
 
 Mr. TILDEN, did so, and said he did not sup- 
 lose it capable of being misconstrued or misun- ' 
 erstood in ti.e manner feared by his colleague. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS repeated his proposition, when 
 
 The PRESIDENT asked Mr. MORRIS to put 
 is resolution. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS did so, and said that he would 
 ary it so as to meet the objection of his learned 
 olleague, (Mr. O'CONNOR) to this effect : 
 11 Resolved that a standing committee be appointed to 
 onsider and repoit on each of the following CLASSES OF 
 ubjects," &c. &c. 
 
 He thought that would meet every objection, 
 nd embrace all that was desired. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN remarked, that the phraseology 
 f the resolution was the same as the standing 
 ules of the two houses. He read the 53d rule of 
 le Assembly. The language was well settled in 
 s meaning, and had never given rise to doubts 
 s to its construction. The amendment of his 
 olleague would not make it more perspicuous, 
 r definite ; but he had no objection to it if it 
 
 ere desired. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS' amendment was adopted. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN hoped that, having disposed of 
 iis rather important point, the House would 
 ike up the rest of the resolutions, and read 
 icm all over, as was suggested by the gentleman 
 om Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) and not take 
 question separately on each of these 15 
 
74 
 
 sub-divisions. Take them up one by one 
 now, amend them at the time if we think 
 proper, and so go through them, and that wil 
 not prevent us from afterwards going back to ei- 
 ther of them, and amending them, if that course 
 became necessary. He would move that the en- 
 tire substitute of the gentleman from New- York 
 (Mr. TILDEN,) be accepted for the report, to be 
 subject to future amendment ; as we had already 
 tested the sense of the house on this point ; and 
 this would save time, by bringing the whole sub- 
 ject immediately before us. This would also 
 meet with the views of the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer (Mr. HOFFMAN,) to whose extensive par 
 liamentary experience he (Mr. MARVIN,) was 
 quite willing to defer on all occasions. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said, that having been refer- 
 ed to on this subject, he would beg leave to say 
 a few words. The practice which he recommen- 
 ded the other day in committee of the whole was 
 the settled practice of parliamentary proceedings, 
 in every legislative body in this Union, except in 
 the legislature of this State that is, the commit- 
 tee of the whole, like any other committee only 
 proceeds by way of amendment they pass over, 
 without adopting, propositions as they may come 
 up, with or without amending them and the on- 
 ly question to be taken there is on an amendment. 
 But as no final question can be taken in commit- 
 tee of the whole, when we come to report on the 
 projet, it is perfectly competent for any member 
 to go back to any question proposed to be amen- 
 ded, or to any amendment, and renew*it ; and 
 thus a measure can be passed amounting to what 
 is called a substitute for the original proposition. 
 But no such practice is ever adopted in the house, 
 in any legislative body. It cannot be done here ; 
 we must consider the propositions in the order in 
 which they are presented here in the house ; and 
 that was why he had wanted all these amendments 
 perfected in committee of the whole, so as to dis- 
 . entangle the question from the perplexity of this 
 rule ; but if we were to adopt the course proposed, 
 we should only be entangling that matter in 
 a worse way, which it should be our sole ob- 
 ject to keep disentangled, as much as possible. 
 But the Convention having indulged in debate in 
 committee of the whole some 3 hours on one day, 
 and 14 hours another day, he was not disposed to 
 interpose any farther delay himself, as the House 
 had decided by their vote not to grant the com- 
 mittee leave to sit again. He did not want to go 
 back again into committee of the whole. The 
 House has adopted this new proposition ; and we 
 must take up the subjects one by one ; and pass 
 upon each, before we proceed to another. And 
 gentlemen will find no serious difficulty in get- 
 ting through with these amendments if they will 
 only be a little patient. But there appeared to 
 be such an extreme anxiety to get on with the 
 discussion of serious constitutional legislation; 
 while the members were yet so little disciplined 
 to the rules of their own framing, that they could 
 scarcely contrive to get along with the considera- 
 tion and disposition of the primary order of busi- 
 ness contained in the report of the committee of 
 17. And if any other course than that which he 
 thus pointed out, should be pursued, the Conven- 
 tion would be continually in a state of entangle- 
 ment and confusion. Put the question then on 
 
 these propositions, one by one, beginning with 
 the first ; and if any meriroer wishes to propose 
 an amendment to any of these special resolutions 
 as they are taken up, it will be competent for him 
 to do so ; but not to make a motion to take up in 
 the house, the entangled matter from the commit- 
 tee of the whole ; for if we did so, we should nev- 
 er get along with the business, unless we sent it 
 back to the committee of the whole, or to a spe- 
 cial committee, to disentangle it. The best plan 
 then would be to take up each proposition now, 
 and for members to offer amendments to each as 
 they came up, to suit themselves now in their pre- 
 sent views,or to suit themselves prospectively; and 
 the house can dispose of them as it sees fit, and 
 so we can go through the whole 15 resolutions or 
 subdivisions : and if we will only exercise a lit- 
 tle patience and more judgment, we shall get 
 along easy enough. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that as there was no propo- 
 sition of amendment to the resolution before the 
 house, he hoped the question on it would be taken 
 at once. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said it was true that the subject 
 was now in the house : but he thought still that 
 we were acting as if in committee of the whole : 
 (and in this he agreed with Mr MARVIN) we 
 ought therefore to follow the course of the com- 
 mittee of the whole, and take up the resolutions 
 separately, and if amended, or not amended, lay 
 them aside to be reported to the house. (Laugh- 
 ter.) When we had got through if they all agreed 
 with each other then adopt them. 
 
 The first resolution, or rather the resolve and 
 first subdivision (as given above) of Mr. TILDEN, 
 as amended by Mr. MORRIS, was then put and 
 adopted. 
 
 The 2d subdivision was then called up, when 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved to strike out of the same 
 words which had been stricken out of the first 
 resolution. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR proposed that by common con- 
 sent fchey should consider Mr. TILDEN'S plan as 
 the one unanimously adopted for the action of the 
 Convention at this time; and then go on and con- 
 sider each proposition in it separately, amend 
 and adopt them. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN amended the 2d to read thus: 
 
 '2. The powers and duties of the Legislature, except as 
 to matters otherwise referred." 
 
 This was carried. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN then asked unanimous consent to 
 amend all the other resolutions, so as to conform 
 their phraseology to those adopted. He did so, 
 to avoid the necessity of taking a separate vote 
 on each, to the same effect. The substance of the 
 propositions, remaining in the language of the 
 committee, would be still open to amendment. 
 
 This was agreed to by the unanimous consent of 
 the Convention; and TILDEN'S proposition, as 
 amended by MORRIS, then stood before the Con- 
 vention, as the entire substitute for the original 
 report and resolutions of the select committee of 
 17. 
 
 The 3d subdivision of TILDEN'S resolution was 
 hen called up: 
 
 "3. Canals, internal improvements, public revenues, and 
 iroperty , and public debt, and the powers and duties of the 
 legislature in reference thereto." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to amend this 3d subdi- 
 
75 
 
 
 rision, by adding as follows: "And the restric- 
 tions, if any, proper to be imposed upon the ac- 
 tion of the Legislature in making donations from 
 the public funds, and in making loans of the mo- 
 
 cmlit of the State." 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER considered that this 
 ought to be offered as a distinct proposition, and 
 be referred to a new committee. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he had no objection to 
 the principle of the proposed amendment, because 
 it embraced the language of the resolution ; but 
 he objected that tautology and repetition would 
 be placed thereby in the resolution. The words 
 " canals, internal improvements, public revenues 
 and property, and public debt, and the powers 
 and duties of the legislature in reference there- 
 to," must necessarily imply the powers and du- 
 ties of the Legislature in reference to making 
 loans of tne property and funds of the State and 
 all appertaining to it. He merely would add the 
 words, "and public credit" after the word "debt," 
 if anything could be considered as wanting to 
 complete the resolution ; this would meet every 
 difficulty. He considered that the committee to 
 be raised under this proposition was the proper 
 one to take charge of all these matters j and he 
 did not think it necessary to raise a separate com- 
 mittee to consider the proposition which had been 
 submitted here in relation to loaning the credit of 
 the State to corporations or to individuals ; the 
 power of the legislature to do this has been fully 
 discussed and disposed of by the people all over 
 this State. The day for that had gone by ! All 
 parties in the state are now opposed to it. Such 
 a proposition as that could find no favor in this 
 Convention. All parties in, and sections of, the 
 State have so distinctly and unhesitatingly con- 
 demned it, that it is not necessary for us to raise 
 a separate committee to consider it. The entire 
 question of the public debt, in all its ramifications 
 was embraced in the third sub-division, as he 
 thought ; and if he voted against Mr. O'CONOR'S 
 amendment it was not because he desired to raise 
 a separate committee on that point, but because 
 he did not think the amendment necessary. He 
 was against all these various ways of loaning the 
 public money and these credits from first to last. 
 And he would move to add merely the words 
 " public credit," as he had before suggested. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said that he did not consider 
 the amendment of his colleague (Mr. O'CONNOR) 
 as at all necessary. For one he held that the Le- 
 gislature should possess no power other than that 
 expressly delegated. Under this view he con- 
 sidered the action of those committees that were 
 to be raised to carry out the principle of leaving 
 to the towns, cities and counties much of the le- 
 gislation that had been heretofore used by if not 
 delegated to the legislature, of the greatest im- 
 portance, and that until we had the views of those 
 committees upon this point, little essential pro- 
 gress could be made in knowing what remaining 
 powers the legislature need be invested with in 
 order to carry on properly the business of the 
 State. Some would require that there should be 
 placed in the Constitution the specified clause of 
 granting all the necessary and proper powers to 
 carry out the objects of the government .in one 
 section, but he would prefer to first endeavor to 
 delegate expressly those powers that were deem- 
 
 ed necessary and if after experience should show 
 that more were needed, then under the provisions 
 for amendment, the additional powers might be 
 granted. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES was pleased with the proposi- 
 tion of the gentleman from New-York. He was 
 willing to see these propositions loaded with spe- 
 cifications, even to tautology, as it would obviate 
 the necessity of offering separate resolutions to 
 instruct committees to the consideration of par- 
 ticular subjects. He saw no danger in proposing 
 such specific and distinct specifications to any pro- 
 position, as might suggest themselves to the minds 
 of members. These propositions, if adopted, were 
 merely for our own convenience, to guide and di- 
 rect our deliberations, and when we have done 
 with them; are of no use to any future body. And 
 it is unnecessary then to waste time in criticism 
 on the precise words and manner in which the 
 propositions were drawn. They are sufficient for 
 our purpose, if all the objects of Constitutional 
 Reform, in the minds of the members of this Con- 
 vention, are brought before these committees. 
 And as it was obvious that that they ought all to 
 be brought before the committees, he hoped the 
 amendment would succeed. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN hoped the amendment would be 
 adopted, as there were a number of intelligent 
 gentlemen who had expressed doubts as to wheth- 
 er this matter was contained in the original reso- 
 lution. He had no doubt about it himself, and 
 he thought none ought to be left by the discussion 
 which arose yesterday. 
 
 The amendment was then adopted. 
 
 The PRESIDENT stated the question to be on 
 the 3rd resolution, as amended. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to strike out the 3rd resolu- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN suggested that this object could 
 be attained by voting down the resolution the 
 question now being on its adoption. 
 
 _Mr. STOW had understood that the resolution 
 had b'een already adopted. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that it had not been 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. STOW was entirely immaterial as to the 
 form so long as the substance of his motion was 
 contained in it. It was with great reluctance 
 that he rose to take a part in the debates of the 
 Convention at this early period of the session, 
 unaccustomed as he was to speaking. He regret- 
 ed that he felt compelled in this instance to take 
 part on the discussion of these matters, but as he 
 deemed them essential in their substance, he un- 
 willingly did so. It was with somewhat of grief 
 that he found himself differing very essentially 
 in the views he entertained, from the respectable 
 committee of 1 7, and indeed differing from all 
 that he had heard expressed. But he had this 
 consolation, the rule was sustained by authority, 
 he would be pardoned in saying, quite as respecta- 
 ble as any committee of the house ; the proceedings 
 of the Convention of 1821. The committee in their 
 resolutions differ essentially from the proceedings 
 of that Convention, and he trusted he would be 
 pardoned in saying, had been inconsistent with 
 themselves. How so ? The Convention of 1821 
 put the entire legislative departments together 
 this committee proposed to separate them to 
 subdivide them, and thereby they essentially dif- 
 
76 
 
 fered from what was deemed expedient in the 
 last Convention. As he said before, they had 
 been inconsistent with themselves. How so ? 
 The committee on looking at the Constitution, 
 undoubtedly undertook, in the first place, to con- 
 template the great and essential purposes of gov- 
 ernment. They saw all governments naturally 
 and necessarily divided into Executive, legisla- 
 tive, and judicial departments. Now then, when 
 they came to the consideration of the Executive 
 department, they had said, substantially, we do 
 not deem in point of principle, it is advisable to 
 subdivide the question, so that the tenure of of- 
 fice, his compensation, or his relation to the le- 
 gislative authority, should be placed in sepa- 
 rate and distinct hands. On the contrary, they 
 said it was not safe so to divide one of the great 
 elements, if he might be allowed the expression, 
 of government. The same they said in re- 
 gard to the Judiciary, by putting the whole sub- 
 ject together the jurisdiction of the courts, the 
 selection of judges, their compensation and 
 tenure of office. He agreed with the committee 
 in relation to the executive, and also in the 
 view they had taken of the Judiciary ; but he 
 thought they had departed from the principle 
 they had thus laid down in their action in 
 regard to the Legislative department. In his 
 view, it was just as essential, nay, more so, 
 that the Legislative department should go to 
 one committee. How so ? It would he 
 said, perhaps that the powers and duties are 
 multifarious, and that there are a vast number of 
 subjects upon which the Legislature must have 
 authority to act. Concede this to be true, and for 
 that very reason because tbey are so multifari- 
 ous, he would have them referred to one com- 
 mittee, and avoid the reference to separate com- 
 mittees. It was for this very reason, when 
 subjects were multifarious, that committees here 
 were appointed to arrange them. Let them 
 come before us in a systematic form. So 
 in this matter, he would have but one committee. 
 With one committee entrusted with the duties 
 and powers of the legislature and another with 
 the restrictions on those duties and powers, how 
 would it practically work? He would appeal to 
 all experience on this subject. In one report the 
 legislature would be possessed of a certain power, 
 which in the other it would not and thus would 
 clashing and conflicting reports be received. He 
 would submit also that it was impossible for the 
 committees intimated in the 2d resolution to act 
 wisely or prudently, without having cognizance 
 of the subjects referred to in the 3d resolution. 
 He would endeavor to illustrate: He supposed 
 that the first and perhaps the most obvious propo- 
 sition for the committee under the 2d resolution 
 to take under consideration, would be, to what 
 extent, or rather, how long the members of the 
 Legislature should hold their office or what 
 powers should be vested in that particular 
 department of the government. Suppose it 
 were the peculiar duty and province of another 
 committee, for instance, to determine whether 
 the veto power should be qualified. Now, 
 then, he would ask how it was possible for the 
 one to determine whether they should restrict, 
 enlarge, or entirely abolish the veto power, un- 
 less they know whether the legislature is going 
 
 to be invested with that power. The subject 
 ought to be considered in Shother point of view. 
 He submitted that it would'be found entirely im- 
 practicable to refer to the several committees dif- 
 ferent branches of the same subject, as it had 
 been found impossible for this house to do, and as 
 had already been made manifest in the. fact that 
 gentlemen had expressed doubts as to understand- 
 ing now whether certain subjects or limi- 
 tations were in the resolutions or not. If 
 this was so now, what would it be by and by, 
 when every gentleman came to propose his own 
 peculiar ideas for the consideration of the house. 
 He would now submit by way of illustration anoth- 
 er case : Suppose he (Mr. S.) should propose 
 that the present restriction in the Constitution 
 upon the power of the legislature to grant lotte- 
 ries should be continued, to which committee 
 ought it Jo be referred ? He knew gentleman 
 would say, that relating to the revenu* depart- 
 ment, it therefore naturally ought to go to that 
 committee. He would submit that so far as the 
 prohibition of lotteries was concerned, it was 
 much more political, more a matter of police than 
 of revenue, and it was so understood by the last 
 Convention. It was a matter of morals rather 
 than of finance. He used this by way of il- 
 lustration. Suppose also that he introduced 
 a resolution into the Convention prohibit- 
 ing the sale of the products of State Prison 
 labor except by auction ; to which committee 
 would it belong ? Would it not be to the com- 
 mittee on the revenue ? And yet after all it ap- 
 pertained solely to State Prison discipline and the 
 general policy of the State prison. He could il- 
 lustrate further the difficulty that would arise un- 
 der an arrangement so essentially and palpably 
 wrong. The legislative powers could not be di- 
 vided in this manner, for they were not suscepti- 
 ble of it. We might as well attempt to create sep- 
 arate legislatures, as to cut up and subdivide these 
 committees giving to one one power, to another 
 another, and to a third a third and all parts of 
 one great whole. The only safe and prudent 
 course was to submit the entire range of subjects 
 relating to the legislature to one committee. Then 
 whenever they contemplated one subject of po- 
 wer, they would have before them all the others, 
 and could consider the proper position of each to 
 the other, and each to all. These were his views, 
 and he must again express his regret at differing 
 with the committee, and at being compelled to 
 take part in the debates at so early a day. 
 
 The PRESIDENT stated the question to be on 
 striking out the 3d resolution. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that there were a large num- 
 ber of these propositions that related to the pow- 
 ers and duties of the legislature, and the gentle- 
 man who last addressed the house would perceive 
 that if the whole subject is referred to one com- 
 mittee, it would devolve upon it the details of 
 two-thirds of the business of the Convention. 
 He understood the gentleman's argument to 
 be that it would be difficult for the committee 
 to divide the subjects at all to define the 
 difference between them. There might be points 
 where it would be very questionable to which 
 department it should belong. The powers of the 
 legislature extended to the judiciary and the re- 
 gulation of its proceedings. The regulation of 
 
77 
 
 the common schools belonged to the legislative 
 department the organization of cities and vil- 
 lages the regulation of the currency and bank- 
 ing business the matter of the tenure of landed 
 estates all belonged there. These committees 
 might possibly, two or more of them will perhaps, 
 embrace in their reports the same subject matter. 
 It was very possible that it may be difficult for 
 those bodies to confine themselves to their own 
 jurisdiction of the matter, because observation 
 shows that all bodies to whom belong power are 
 apt to extend their jurisdiction, and therefore 
 probably two of them will report propositions on 
 the same subject; but if they did there would only 
 be two instead of one, and if they are conflicting, 
 the Convention would be surely not less likely to 
 be embarrassed than if there was but one, and not 
 less likely to arrive at correct conclusions. It 
 appeared to him that there was the utmost ne- 
 cessity for dividing up these subjects. He was 
 not strenuous as to the peculiar form, but those 
 reported by the committee appeared to offer the 
 most natural divisions. 
 
 The motion to strike out was rejected. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved an amendment to the 
 3d resolution. To insert after the words " pub- 
 lic revenues" in the 4th line " and the safe keep- 
 ing and disbursement thereof." Mr. S. wished 
 to say one word in favor of the proposition. He 
 certainly should not have claimed for it the atten- 
 tion of the Convention, had he not deemed it one 
 of considerable importance. He did not know 
 how it might be with gentlemen who represented 
 other parts of the State, but in the city of New- 
 York, there is a clear, distinct, and decided feel- 
 ing upon this proposition. Its signification is 
 distinctly understood, and its purposes are clear- 
 ly sought to be achieved When he heard it sug- 
 gested that it was desirable that the propositions 
 of every delegate should go to this committee, and 
 that it We- ? rather better to risk the evil, if evil 
 it could be called, of surplusage, than that any 
 proposition should be shut out. It struck him 
 that it was perfectly proper to send up the prop- 
 osition which he had. It was very clear, that in 
 the signification of the terms of the 3d proposi- 
 tion this point was not embraced; and as it 
 was desired by a large portion of the State, he 
 should propose, at all events, that it should be 
 considered by the committee. And it was for 
 the purpose of procuring the consideration and 
 judgment of the committee and thg Convention 
 upon the subject, that he submitted it. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said that if the proposition 
 suggested by his colleague was not comprehend- 
 ed in the words at present used in the 3rd reso- 
 lution, he was certainly in favor of inserting it, 
 or whether it was there or not in order to make 
 the thing more certain, and definite beyond per- 
 adventure. He most cheerfully sustained and 
 concurred fully in what his colleague remarked 
 in reference to the fixed public sentiment in the 
 city, and from the tone of the public press in the 
 interior of the State, he had supposed the neces- 
 sity for some such constitutional provision had 
 become apparent in the minds of unprejudiced 
 men of all parties throughout the State. Cer- 
 tainly the connection of the banks and the govern- 
 ment had involved a loss of half a million of dol- 
 lars upon the people, and they required addi- 
 
 tional safeguards to be thrown around the offi- 
 cers and the banking institutions of the State. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN _said that before he was called 
 upon to vote on this resolution, he would be very 
 glad if the gentleman from New York (Mr. SHEP- 
 ARD) would define its meaning. It seemed to him 
 now to be perfectly unintelligible, or to say the 
 least, without any meaning whatever. He would 
 enquire of that gentleman if he supposed there 
 was to be no power vested in the legislature in 
 regard to the safe keeping or disbursement of the 
 public revenue or if he deemed it necessary that 
 this Convention should frame a special clause in 
 order to confer the power on the legislature. If 
 the gentleman had that idea, it certainly was not an 
 enlightened notion of legislative power ; if he sup- 
 posed that this Convention would adopt a rule un- 
 der which for all time to come, the public means 
 and revenues of the State were to be governed and 
 controlled. He wished the gentleman would bring 
 forward his proposition somewhat more definitely 
 and clearly, than it was contained in this abstrac- 
 tion sent to the chair. That proposition in his 
 judgment had no meaning or intelligence of pur- 
 pose. If as he said before, it was a proposition 
 that we should adopt a rule and a constitutional 
 provision which was to govern in this respect and 
 specify legislative power, he should like to see it 
 submitted in some tangible shape or manner by 
 which he could infer that such was its design. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD did not entertain any such ab- 
 surd notion as that the same Constitution which 
 creates the legislature which gives to it power 
 to draw from the people all the revenues ne- 
 cessary to conduct the government, would not 
 give by implication, if not in express terms, it 
 the power of keeping those revenues and disburs- 
 ing them. He supposed that the power to col- 
 lect fully implied the power to keep and disburse. 
 It was not then for the purpose of conferring any 
 new and unheard of power upon the legislature 
 that he offered the amendment to the 3d resolu- 
 tion. He did suppose, and he said this in answer 
 to the gentleman, that within the last ten years 
 some change in the public opinion might have 
 taken place in regard to the mode of safe keeping 
 and disbursement of the public money. He 
 did suppose that a clear and decided opinion was 
 entertained by a large and respectable number of 
 the voters of the State, upon the subject and that 
 a reference to this committee directing them spe- 
 cifically to turn their attention to the question, 
 would lead them to examine the propositions that 
 might be offered by any large number of individ- 
 uals in the State. It was not so much for the 
 purpose of instructing the committee to report 
 any plan that he offered the amendment, as it was 
 for the purpose of calling their attention expli- 
 citly and in distinct terms to the subject, in order 
 that it should not be forgotten amidst the multi- 
 plicity of labors ; for these committees were 
 charged with a vast amount of labor. The third 
 proposition, includes in many respects the most 
 important features of government, and he was de- 
 sirous amidst the consideration of all those great 
 questions that this peculiar one should not be lost 
 sight of. The gentleman complained that the 
 proposition was put in an abstract form. That 
 was precisely what it ought to have been. 
 He did not desire to instruct the com- 
 
78 
 
 mitee to do any particular thing not even 
 to express their views on the subject because 
 they were not discussing substantial principles, 
 but mere questions of the order and the distribu- 
 tion of business. He desired therefore that they 
 should go to them in an abstract form, in order 
 that they should be untramelled, and report their 
 best judgment upon the proposition. He would 
 add this other consideration, and he did so also 
 from motives of delicacy towards any and all who 
 might differ from him in opinion on this subject. 
 The gentleman from Ontario knew that this was 
 a matter that must be considered in some com- 
 mittee. Where then was the harm in naming it? 
 if even as a mere matter of personal gratification 
 to a single member of the Convention; being one 
 of those things that we must examine, there was 
 clearly no impropriety in making the reference. 
 Therefore he said again to the gentleman from 
 Ontario, that in the first place he put it in an ab- 
 stract form to avoid any appearance of instruc- 
 tions ; in the second place to avoid any indelicate 
 expression of opinion on his own part, and in the 
 third, because these propositions merely related to 
 the distribution ot business, and it was desirable 
 to frame such as would be comprehensive enough 
 to include any and every shade of opinion that 
 might be entertained on subjects. He hoped the 
 explanation was satisfactory. 
 
 Tho question was then taken on the amend- 
 ments, and a count being ordered, 39 members 
 rose in favor, and 41 against it and so it was 
 lost. 
 
 The 3d proposition, as amended, was then 
 agreed to nem. con. 
 
 The 4th proposition was then read as follows : 
 
 4. The Elective iranchise the qualification to vote and 
 hold office. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD proposed to insert after the 
 4th, a distinct proposition, to come in as the 5th, 
 relating to the Executive department, as follows : 
 
 5. The election, tenure of office, compensation, power 
 and duties, except the power to appoint or nominate to of- 
 lice, of the Governor and Lieutenant Governor. 
 
 He believed the subject of sufficient importance 
 to warrant the proceedings of a distinct commit- 
 tee, rather than to leave it as some seemed to 
 suppose, to a sort of omnium gather um> where 
 all the subjects were grouped together. 
 
 The proposition was agreed to. This, of course, 
 changed the numbers of the remaining resolu- 
 tions. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND suggested that the 6th reso- 
 lution should be amended so as to conform to this 
 change. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to add after the 
 words " legislature and judicial," the words 
 " governor and lieutenant governor," which 
 would make it correspond with the preceding re- 
 solution. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN wished to make a suggestion to 
 the gentleman from Otsego. That he would wait 
 until the resolutions were gone through with, 
 and then submit in a substantial form the speci- 
 fication in relation to the Executive department. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that such was his first 
 view, and he had drawn a proposition for that 
 
 purpose. He thought, however, the object could 
 be attained by the course ritew adopted. 
 
 The resolution as amended was adopted as 
 follows : 
 
 5. The election or appointment of all officers other than 
 Legislative and Judicial, and the Governor and Lieutenant 
 Governor, whose duties and powers are not local, and 
 their powers, duties and compensation. 
 
 The 7th resolution was then read as follows : 
 
 7. The appointment or election of all officers whose pow - 
 ers and duties are local, and their tenure of office, duties 
 and compensation. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN wished to make two verbal a- 
 mendments to correct what was clearly a cleri- 
 cal error. After the word " office" to insert the 
 word " powers," and to substitute for the words 
 " powers and duties" in the first and second line 
 the word '"functions." 
 
 There was no objection, and the resolution as 
 amended was agreed to. 
 
 The 8th resolution was then read as follows ; 
 
 8. The militia and military aflairs. 
 It was agreed to. 
 
 The 9th was then read, as follows : 
 
 9. Official oaths and affirmations, and oaths and affirma- 
 ions in legal and equity proceedings. 
 
 Mr. NICHOL moved to insert after the word 
 " affirmations" the words " and competency of 
 witnesses." This was agreed to and the resolu- 
 tion thus amended was adopted. 
 
 The llth resolution was then read as follows : 
 
 10. The Judiciary system of the State. 
 
 Mr.TlLDEN moved to strike out the words "sys- 
 tem of the State," as a number of gentlemen had 
 supposed that it might restrict the committee to 
 the consideration of the present system. This 
 was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to add 
 "And the appointment and election of judicial officers 
 and their tenure of office.". 
 
 If he mistook not, there was no proposition that 
 provided for the consideration of the question sug- 
 gested in his amendment. 
 
 Mr. JONES thought the amendment a very pro- 
 per one, for as the gentleman stated this peculiar 
 matter was not expressly stated in the proposition. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD suggested the insertion, af- 
 ter the word " duties," in the amendment, of the 
 words " and compensation." 
 
 This was accepted by Mr. B. and the amend- 
 ment, and the resolution as amended, adopted. 
 
 The llth resolution was then read, as follows: 
 
 11. The rights and privileges of citizpns ol this State. 
 Mr. KENNEDY said it would probably be as 
 
 well, while making provision for persons, citi- 
 zens of this State, to make provision for those 
 who were not, either in the Constitution, or to 
 give the power to the Legislature, if it were not 
 there already ; to protect foreign witnesses, for in- 
 stance. It was the usual practice now to incar- 
 cerate them if they did not happen to have 
 friends. There were quite a number of them in 
 the New York city prisons, who were witnesses 
 in cases of assaults at sea. The parties being 
 seafaring men, had attended to their usual voca- 
 tion, and left the witnesses in jail until their re- 
 turn. He would propose an amendment himself 
 if he had it prepared. 
 Mr. BASCOM said the gentleman could at- 
 
79 
 
 tain his object by adding the words after the 
 word "citizen," "and persons within the jurisdic- 
 tion" of this State. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS did not understand these resolu- 
 tions as embracing every thing that was to be 
 sent to the committees. He considered them 
 merely as forming committees to which gentle- 
 men might send any proposition that was thought 
 proper to be considered. Instead of amending 
 these resolutions, when the propositions were 
 made, send them to the committees. Now, to ex- 
 plain himself, he intended offering a proposition 
 that the rights of married women to the enjoy- 
 ment and control of their individual property, 
 should be considered by this Convention. When 
 he introduced it, he should ask to have it referred 
 to the committee on the rights and privileges of 
 the citizens. He would suggest to his learned 
 colleague, the adoption of a similar course. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY withdrew his resolution. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. BASCOM, and the reso- 
 lution as amended was then adopted. 
 
 The 12th and 13th resolutions were then read 
 and adopted as follows : 
 
 12. Education, common schools, and the appropriate 
 funds. 
 
 13. Future amendments and revisions of the Constitu 
 tion. 
 
 The 14th resolution was then read as follows : 
 
 14. The organization and powers of cities, villages, 
 towns, counties, and other municipal corporations; and 
 especially their power of assessment, taxation, borrowing 
 money, and contracting debt. 
 
 Mr. BAKER wished to call the attention of the 
 Convention to the fact that there was in this and 
 in the proposition originally introduced as the 6th, 
 (numbered 7,) a double reference. The point 
 was, that the duties of all local officers are in- 
 volved in the 6th resolution, and again in the one 
 under consideration. If he was correct, the error 
 might be avoided, by amending the proposition, 
 by inserting after the word " corporations," " in- 
 cluding their power of legislating on local sub- 
 jects." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL before the amendment was put 
 desired to offer a distinct proposition. First, to 
 confine the attention of the committee to the pow- 
 ers of those quasi corporations as they were call- 
 ed, of cities, villages, towns, and counties ; and to 
 constitute a second committee whose duty should 
 be confined exclusively to the municipal corpo- 
 rations created by legislative charters. Towns 
 and counties were common law corporations. It 
 appeared to him after listening to the eloquent 
 remarks of the gentleman from Kings (Mr. MUR- 
 PHY) the other day, that the subject of municipal 
 corporations, particularly cities, was a great one, 
 and afforded a large field for the individual labors 
 of a separate committee. He merely threw out 
 these suggestions and he hoped that gentlemen of 
 the cities, would suggest an appropriate commit- 
 mittee. He would have offered an amendment to 
 this effect, but he desired not to do so unless 
 those interested saw its fitness. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND would send up an amend- 
 ment hastily prepared, subdividing the resolu- 
 tion, and raising three committees on the sub- 
 ject. 
 
 Mr. JONES suggested that the amendment of 
 Mr. BAKER, if necessary at all, would be more 
 
 properly made to the 7th resolution. He sup- 
 posed that its object was already accomplished by 
 what was contained in the 7th resolution, and he 
 would suggest that this 14th resolution should be 
 confined, as indicated by Mr. RUSSELL, to cities 
 and villages entirely. Towns and counties were 
 already provided for in the 7th resolution. It 
 embraced all the local officers, their powers, du- 
 ties and compensation. He would suggest there- 
 fore that the gentleman should withdraw his 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that if he believed that the 
 views of the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
 JONES) were entertained by the Convention, or 
 by the committee, he would indeed withdraw his 
 amendment. But it seemed to him that it might 
 not be regarded as excluding the bodies of offi- 
 cers ag supervisors and village trustees. It is the 
 body, the collective body, being or entity, the 
 proposition alludes to. But as the words were 
 very general, he would upon reflection withdraw 
 his amendment. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that the Convention had 
 already adopted 13 propositions for standing com- 
 mittees. With the most diligent attention to the 
 subject matter, he apprehended the President 
 would hardly be able to make the appropriate se- 
 lections before some time in the course of to- 
 morrow. It was nearly now the usual hour of 
 adjournment, and if the Convention should think 
 proper to modify materially or to divide the sub- 
 ject matters in the 14th proposition, perhaps a 
 little more reflection on the subject was necessa- 
 ry. He desired very much to have the next suc- 
 ceeding propositions subdivided. 
 
 [Here there were several manifestations of a 
 desire not to adjourn.] 
 
 However, (continued Mr. R.,) if a majority of 
 the Convention differed from him and saw no 
 necessity for any delay he would not press a mo- 
 tion to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to divide the 14th 
 resolution into two as follows : 
 
 gJH. The organization and power of cities and incorpo- 
 rated villages, and especially their power of taxation, as- 
 sessment, borrowing money, contracting debts, and loan- 
 ing their credit. 
 
 15. The power of counties, towns and other municipal 
 corporations, except cities and incorporated villages, and 
 especially their powers of local legislation, taxation, as- 
 sessments, borrowing money and contracting debts. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS' impression was, that these sub- 
 jects had better be considered together. Both of 
 these classes are municipal corporations, designa- 
 ted for the exercise of the powers of government 
 in particular localities that of cities and yilla- 
 g eg> an <i they were very nearly akin in their na- 
 ture to each other. The complaint now existing 
 before the public was, that the cities and villages 
 exercised unduly their powers, and carried them 
 too far. On the other hand, with reference to 
 towns and counties, the suggestion abroad, was, 
 that the legislature had taken the power out of 
 their hands, and did not allow them to exercise 
 it sufficiently. It appeared to him that the same 
 committee should have both subjects under con- 
 sideration. The question of devolving a great 
 portion of the legislative powers upon the boards 
 of supervisors, or town officers, was one worthy 
 of great consideration, and involving a great many 
 serious questions. 
 
80 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND differed with the gentlema 
 in some respects, although he agreed with him i 
 his conclusions. He thought the proposition ( 
 the gentleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD) t 
 be warranted by the importance of the subjec 
 He thought with the sub-divisions there pro 
 posed and that of the 7th resolution, the mem 
 bers of those three committees would find abun 
 dant materials to occupy them in deliberation. 
 In order to blend the system and make it perfec 
 as a whole, if necessary the several committee 
 could occasionally assemble together as a boarc 
 The amendments of Mr. CHATFIELD were the 
 adopted. 
 
 The 16th res6lution was then read as follows 
 16 The currency, banking business and incorporations 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to amend as follows : 
 
 16. The currency and banking. 
 
 17. Corporations other than banking and municipal. 
 
 Mr. R. said that the object was to relieve 
 committee on banking and the currency from the 
 immense labor that would devolve upon them. 
 All are aware that the subject of banking alone 
 would require the attention of a most able com 
 mittee the greater part of the session, if they die 
 justice to the subject. There were three classes o 
 private corporations, rail road, insurance anc 
 manufacturing, and all would agree with him tha 
 the laws relating to them, should be essentially 
 different from those referring to monied incorpo- 
 rations or the business of banking, and that they 
 were separate and distinct in their purpose and ob 
 jects, although each different in themselves. He 
 did think it of decided importance to the progress 
 of our labors that separate committees should be 
 appointed. He had desired to have three, bu 
 others had thought that two would be sufficient 
 The amendments were adopted. 
 
 The 18th resolution was then read as follows 
 
 18th. The subject of the tenures of landed estates. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved to strike out the words 
 the " subject of." 
 
 Mr. WORDEN wished to make a suggestion to 
 his friend. Having abolished tenures in this 
 State some 60 years ago, and there being no landed 
 estates held here on tenure, as the word is under- 
 stood, he proposed to amend by adding the words 
 " the creation and division of estates in land." 
 
 The amendment was adopted as the substitute 
 for the 18th resolution. 
 
 Mr. BAKER now moved that the Convention 
 adjourn until to-morrow morning at 9 o'clock, 
 but waived it at the request of 
 
 Mr. WARD, who proposed that each commit- 
 tee should consist of seven members, excepting 
 the judiciary, which he proposed should consist of 
 thirteen. 
 
 After some conversation between Messrs. LOO- 
 MIS and BASCOM as to the number on the ju- 
 diciary committee, the former gentleman sugges- 
 ting nine and the latter advocating thirteen. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND trusted that the proposition 
 of the gentleman from Westchester (Mr. WARD) 
 would be adopted, as then every member would 
 be on some committee. He deemed it important 
 also that the judiciary committee should consist 
 of the number mentioned by him. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN had heard it intimated that pro- 
 positions were to be offered for more committees, 
 
 and perhaps it would be premature therefore to 
 decide upon the number now. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that before this question 
 was taken, he apprehended it would be well to 
 know whether we had parcelled out all of the 
 business of the Convention. He had been look- 
 ing anxiously for some proposition to be brought 
 forward in regard to the Executive the execu- 
 tive power of this government. There had been 
 various propositions submitted, tending to cir- 
 cumscribe and limit the legitimate action of the 
 popular will, through the only organ by which 
 that popular will acted the legislature the im- 
 mediate representatives of the people. Especial 
 pains had been taken in that respect, but he had 
 seen no indication of any disposition as yet mani- 
 fested in any quarter, even to interfere with or 
 enquire about the still greater power lodged in the 
 Executive department of the State and before this 
 question was finally disposed of, he trusted some 
 gentleman would bring forward a proposition to 
 that effect. 
 
 Several gentlemen here said that the motion 
 lad been brought forward. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN did not so understand it. It 
 struck him with some surprise that we should 
 lave omitted entirely to have alluded to the ques- 
 tion of Executive power of the power of State 
 officers to the delegation of legislative powers 
 rom time to time vested in the public function- 
 aries of the State. And without going into that 
 oroposition now, in order that we may look at 
 ;hese resolutions which had been adopted, and 
 see whether any thing required to be added or to 
 )e taken away from them, he moved their print- 
 ng, and that the question on their final adoption 
 >e laid over until they were printed. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG called for the reading of 
 he 5th and 6th propositions. 
 
 They were read as follows : 
 
 6. The election, tenure of office, compensations, pow- 
 rs and duties, except the power to appoint or nominate to 
 ffice, of the Governor and Lieut. Governor. 
 6. The election or appointment of all officers, other than 
 egislative and judicial, and the Governor, and Lieuten- 
 nt Governor whose duties and powers are not local, and 
 aeir powers, duties and compensation. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said it appeared to him that we 
 ad better ascertain whether there were any more 
 ommittees to be raised, before a vote was taken 
 n the number of persons they were to comprise. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. WARD'S 
 motion, (relative to the number) and it was 
 arried. 
 
 THE RIGHTS OF MARRIED WOMEN. 
 
 Mr. BOWDISH desired .to lay on the table are- 
 olution, in behalf of his colleague, (Mr. NELLIS) 
 ow absent. 
 
 It was read, as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That a committee be appointed to consider 
 nd report on the expediency of giving to females the 
 ght to hold and transfer, after marriage, all property real 
 nd personal, acquired by them before or by gift, devise 
 r bequest after marriage, and of making them and their 
 roperty liable for their debts contracted before or after 
 arriage, and in case of the inability of the husband, liable 
 r the support and maintenance of their families. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said it was perfectly proper to re- 
 r the resolution to the committee on the rights 
 nd privileges^ of the citizen. 
 Mr. BOWDISH assented to this course, and it 
 as so disposed of. 
 
81 
 
 CLASS LEGISLATION. 
 
 Mr. WHITE offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That a committee be appointed to inquire into 
 the expediency of providing in the Constitution, that no 
 law or laws shall be enacted by the legislature, or by any 
 corporation or other municipal authority, restrictive of the 
 principles of trade or commerce, or the right of the people 
 to follow any business, calling or employment whatsoever 
 whereby one branch of industry shall be subjected to a 
 tax from which others are exempted -and that said com- 
 mittee report thereon. 
 
 Mr. STRONG would suggest to the Chair, 
 that these resolutions were not in order. They 
 would be when under our rules resolutions were 
 in order. There would be no end to them if al- 
 lowed to be received here. And as it was about 
 the hour when members wanted their dinners, and 
 as he had always noticed that wh#t was done 
 when we wanted our dinners, was' badly done, 
 he would therefore move that the Convention ad- 
 journ. 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that he had a motion pending 
 to adjourn to 9 o'clock to-morrow morning, which 
 he thought to be first in order. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that a motion to adjourn 
 without hour, took precedence. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned to 11 o'- 
 clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 THURSDAY (IQth day) June 11. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. BENSON. 
 
 Mr. BOWDISH offered a resolution that the 
 secretary call over the names of the members, and 
 that the latter as they are called announce the 
 number of their respective seats, so as to correc! 
 the printed diagram of the chamber. This was 
 adopted and the roll called, &c. 
 
 THE RIGHTS OF FOREIGN WITNESSES. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY offered this: 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 right and pr : vileg<;s> of citizens this State, to consider and 
 report on the propriety of securing the rights and priv 
 ileges of persons, other than citizens, who may b under 
 the jurisdiction of this State. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 POWERS OF BOARDS OF SUPERVISORS. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH offered a resolution, that eo 
 much of the constitution as related to the powers 
 and duties of the Board of Supervisors in various 
 counties throughout the State be referred to a spe- 
 cial committee to consider and report thereon. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH said he did not know but that 
 some might consider the objects of this resolution 
 to be embraced in one of the subdivisions that had 
 already been passed upon. But in his judgment 
 the subject was of sufficient importance to demand 
 a separate committee. It was a matter which had 
 attracted very great attention for some time past 
 throughout the State; and the vast field of inllu. 
 ence, and the enormous powers, and very respon- 
 sible duties, which these supervisors held and ex- 
 ercised, rendered the subject deserving of the 
 special attention of the committee. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD did not desire to embarrass 
 any gentleman who might offer and desire to refer 
 any propositions which he deemed worthy of con- 
 sideration. But before this resolution for appoint- 
 ing a special committee was adopted, we had bet- 
 ter consider our action of yesterday, and especial- 
 ly the committee that was to be raised under the 
 15th subdivision. The powers and duties of su- 
 
 pervisors embraced, in a measure, the sum total 
 of the corporate powers of each county. That 
 was the main business for that 15th committee to 
 inquire into, and if taken away from them, they 
 would have nothing to inquire into, because it is 
 not to be presumed that that committee will make 
 any very great alteration in the political power of 
 these towns, villages. &c.; but they will mainly 
 have to consider the duties and powers of the 
 board of supervisors ; .the power of assessment, 
 taxation, borrowing money, &c. &c. And this 
 was the especial purport of the gentleman's resolu. 
 tion. There was, therefore, no necessity for a 
 special committee. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH said he would remove the ob- 
 jection of Mr. C., by moving to have his resolu- 
 tion referred to that 15th committee. Agreed to 
 and referred. 
 
 ELECTION DISTRICTS. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS offered a resolution that the ap- 
 propriate committee enquire into the propriety of 
 dividing the State into single election districts 
 for members of the Senate and Assembly, &c. 
 
 Mr. STRONG enquired to what committee he 
 proposed to refer this. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said he found it was the commit- 
 tee under the 1st sub-division. 
 
 Agreed to and referred. 
 
 NATURALIZATION LAWS. 
 Mr. HARRISON (from Richmond) then moved 
 the following: 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the elective franchise 
 &c., inquire into the expediency of so arrrending the Con- 
 stitution of this State as to secure to the people of this State 
 an annual Registry of the names of all legal voters, previ- 
 ous to the election; and further to inquire into the expedi- 
 ency of so amending the Constitution that citizens from 
 other States, and every person hereafter naturalized shall 
 reside one year in the State after naturalization before he 
 shall be admitted to exercise the right of suffrage. 
 
 Mr. STRONG hoped that the Chair would in 
 all instances give the names of all gentlemen who 
 should offer resolutions, as it would be a very great 
 accommodation to the members. 
 
 Mr. HUNT of N. Y. moved to amend by strik- 
 ing out the words "every person hereafter natu- 
 ralized. 5 ' 
 
 Mr. WARD said that he was opposed entirely 
 to the sentiments contained in the resolution of 
 the gentleman from Richmond (Mr. HARRISON;) 
 but he would express no opinion in advance. He 
 was desirous to hear, to see, and to receive, the pro- 
 position of every gentleman, having reference to the 
 amendment of the Constitution, in precisely his 
 own words; and he wished all propositions to be 
 referred in that shape without mutilation or al- 
 teration. We were not here then to settle prin. 
 ciples, and no gentleman would be committed by 
 such a course, and we should all know precisely 
 where we stand, what are our sentiments, and 
 what we have before us to consider. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR did not like the precise shape 
 in which many of these resolutions of enquiry 
 were presented. The one just presented for in- 
 stance, if adopted, would convey, to a certain ex- 
 tent, the impression that it is the sense of the 
 Convention that all persons shall reside at least 
 one year in the State after they have become citi. 
 zens by the ordinary process of naturalization. 
 Now, he was exceedingly desirous to avoid, even 
 
82 
 
 by implication, any such expression of opinion, 
 previous to the subject matter having been de- 
 bated before that body. He did not desire to pre- 
 sent any obstruction to the free discussion of any 
 propositions; nor should any gentleman desire to 
 do so. He would offer no impediment to the con- 
 sideration of any resolution on that floor, although 
 it might have but a single advocate in the Con- 
 vention. And therefore, to avoid committing the 
 Convention to the principles of the resolution in 
 any way, or having it inferred that its tenets were 
 in any way countenanced or considered necessary, 
 he would move to refer it to the committee on the 
 elective franchise. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said there was one difficulty in 
 this resolution. It provided that citizens should re- 
 side here one year after they were naturalized be- 
 fore they should be allowed to vote. This conflicted 
 with the Constitution of the United States, and 
 could not be put in force, even if it was engrafted 
 on our Constitution by the Convention, and subse- 
 quently adopted by the people, being contrary to 
 the superior power of the Constitution of the 
 United States. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that this had been the 
 precise provision of the Constitution of this State, 
 for the last 25 years. The gentleman from New 
 York could not have understood the resolution. 
 
 Several voices No, no citizens from other 
 States must reside a year. 
 
 ,Mr. SIMMONS said that with regard to the 
 principles contained in this resolution there were 
 many * seriously conflicting opinions among the 
 very best, most well-informed, and well meaning 
 men in the State. For his own part, he had never 
 expressed a decided opinion on the subject, or 
 taken strong ground either for or against the doc- 
 trine contained in the resolution. It was well 
 known that our constituents have the right of pe. 
 tition to this body; but still we cannot, and do not 
 expect that many petitions will flow unto us 
 from the people at this session. And we re- 
 cognize the right of presenting a resolution in 
 this Convention to be referred ; for it is a kind 
 of petition, from the people, expressed through 
 their delegates. The gentleman from West- 
 chester (Mr. WARD) was quite right, there- 
 fore, in the position he took, that every gentleman 
 on this floor had a right to be heard, and his peti. 
 tions or resolutions referred in his own language, 
 without any obstruction ; for, after all, these reso- 
 lutions are quasi petitions from our constituents 
 and all have a right to be heard. Both sides shoulc 
 be heard, however wrong any one of them may be 
 and then by fair investigation we shall easily de 
 tect the wrong ; as to each subject there can be 
 but one right side. The sentiments of the gentle 
 man from Westchester (Mr. WARD) are the cor 
 rect sentiments, and such as ought to guide this 
 body in all its deliberations. These questions wil 
 have all to be met, first or last. They cannot be go 
 round, nor rode over, nor done away with. The) 
 must be met with able argument, and imparti^ 
 and learned reports, setting forth their errors, i 
 they exist. That is the only way to meet all grea 
 moral questions by reason. And this would no 
 in any way commit the Convention to any peculiai 
 doctrines contained in any of these resolutions 
 even if they were not only received, but referred 
 discussed, and reported on. It was nothing mor< 
 
 ban thecouise pursued vttlh an ordinary petition. 
 And they must be met at the start in a fair, honest 
 and candid manner ; for if we did not do this, they 
 Tvill increase four fold; and to-morrow morning they 
 vill be brought in as petitions and command all 
 ;hat attention and notice we ought to give them 
 now in this shape. It was best to pursue a liberal 
 course ; let gentlemen make all their propositions 
 reely have no restraint let them be referred 
 and considered and then there can be no miscon- 
 struction or misunderstanding about the matter 
 hereafter. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND thought that Mr. O'Cowoa 
 was under a misapprehension in regard to the ef- 
 fect of referring these resolutions of enquiry. In 
 adopting and referring any resolution he (Mr. K.) 
 cer'ainly did^not consider that he committed him. 
 self or that any member of the Convention was 
 committed in any way to any course of action in 
 relation to that subject hereafter. He agreed with 
 the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) that all 
 these resolutions, like all petitions, come from 
 what quarter they may, should be properly refer- 
 red as a mere matter of right. Were this a vote 
 on a question of the principle involved in the re- 
 solution, he would vote very differently from what 
 he did on the mere question of reference. He re. 
 garded it as a sort of petition presented by the 
 mover ; embodying the desires of his constituents 
 as the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) very 
 justly observed. But he at the same time wished 
 it understood that in thus voting to refer and to 
 have fully considered, all these resolutions of en- 
 quiry, that he was not therefore in the slighest 
 degree committed to one of the principles involved 
 in any of the resolutions. 
 
 Mr.TALLMADGE felt great gratification in find- 
 ing that the membeis of the Convention were begin- 
 ning in some measure to develope their attitude be- 
 fore the public ; and to exhibit and draw forth the 
 feelings and views, the motives and opinions by 
 which they were actuated. He was glad to see 
 that they were taking up a fixed position, so that 
 it could be known to the public where they stood 
 and how they stood. What was the proposition 
 now before them? It was to refer a certain sub- 
 ject to a committee of enquiry. How had it been 
 met ? Why, it was proposed to grant its reference 
 as a matter of courtesy. Now he wished to have 
 nothing referred as a matter of courtesy, but he 
 demanded that his friend's resolution should be 
 referred as a matter of right ! on the same footing 
 and the same principle that the resolutions of 
 other gentlemen had been referred. What did we 
 propose on the second day of our meeting here- 
 the very first step almost in our proceedings 
 why, to take up the great and leading features of 
 the Constitution ; to refer the Executive depart- 
 rrent, the Legislative department, and the Judi- 
 cial department of it; and so on, running through 
 the great divisions of that instrument and refer 
 them to various committees, without having any 
 member thereof, or of this body committed by such 
 a course ; and it was then proposed and agreed to 
 and understood by all, that any member should 
 have the right to send any proposition of his af- 
 terwards to these committees without obstruction. 
 And what do we see now ? We come now to car. 
 ry out this agreement, this understanding, thus en- 
 tered into and gentlemen come forward with cer- 
 
83 
 
 tain propositions which thev desire to have re 
 ferred, and they put them in a shape which they 
 prefer; how are they met? " Oh." it is said, 
 " that won't do that's too loose [laughter] 
 too loose the blade flew out of the han- 
 dle ! [Laughter.] This won't do!" Wha 
 next ? Why we have spent nearly two weeks in 
 the discussion of trifling amendments; and here 
 we stand now just about where we were on the 
 2d day of the session. Well, we now think o 
 putting ourselves into a condition to proceed di 
 rectly to the important business before us. These 
 little resolutions of enquiry begin to come, in and 
 what then ? Ah! then the cry is that these reso 
 lotions have a meaning they aie objected to, 
 because they have too much meaning; and there, 
 fore it would not do to trust these committees with 
 them! Yes indeed, 'some of them have a meaning 
 And this one just offered by his friend from Rich- 
 mond, (Mr. HARRISON) had a most momentous 
 meaning! What was the resolution? What did 
 it propose for enquiry? That each citizen coming 
 from another State into this State shall reside one 
 year in this State, just preceding the election, b 
 fore he shall be allowed to cast his vote! That is 
 the enquiry; and a most proper one it is. Who 
 can object to it? to engraft on the Constitution 
 that which now forms part of the law ; and which 
 is embodied in the election oath that each man 
 may be compelled to take before he can vote. 
 What farther does it require? Why it goes on 
 and says, that every alien shall have resided here 
 one year after his naturalization, before he shall 
 be entitled to vote ! And unless this rule is made 
 to operate generally, the native born citizens 
 coming here from other states will not be on a 
 par with the foreign voter. While an alien 
 who comes to the State only the day before 
 the election, and gets out his naturalization 
 papers, can vc*e the next day. (Several voices 
 "That's not so:") Yes that is so. Why not 
 then let the alien have the same requirements to 
 fulfil as the native born citizen has?- the same 
 period of residence before he can vote? He could 
 go on and show, if it was not out of order, or con- 
 suming the time of this Convention, the injustice 
 of the General Government on other branches 
 connected with this subject; in the commercial 
 regulations that have been adopted by Congress; 
 where by pursuing a course similar to this, the 
 General Government have put the alien ships over 
 our own ships given a preference to foreign ships! 
 What caused gentlemen to be so very sensitive on 
 this subject? We want to get a good registry act, 
 at least, a great many of us did Is there any 
 objection to that? Give the gentleman from 
 Richmond the enquiry. It does not commit 
 the Convention. He desired it in the name 
 of his constituents. And he also wants an 
 enquiry into the propriety of putting the alien 
 under the same rules and restrictions as our own 
 citizens ! Is there any thing unreasonable in this? 
 Was it not a very natural desire ? It struck him so ; 
 and he rejoiced for one that these opinions and feel- 
 ings have thus begun to develope themselves. 
 He was glad that members had begun to develop 
 their sentiments to the country in this way; and if 
 they continued thus, their relative associations and 
 positions would soon be shown. The reference 
 
 ought certainly to be made at once ; and what was 
 more, it ought to have been made in silence. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend by adding 
 after the words " Resolved, that" the words " it 
 be referred to;" and after the word " franchise" 
 the word " to." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR agreed to this, and withdrew 
 what he had offered. 
 
 Mr. HUNT then withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said his would read, " Re- 
 solved, That it be referred to the committee on 
 the Elective Franchise to enquire into the expe. 
 diency &c. &c." 
 
 Mr. HARRISON accepted this. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN suggested that gentlemen bring, 
 ing propositions for reference before the Conven- 
 tion should give them a distinctly affirmative cha- 
 racter ; and then move to refer them to the appro- 
 priate committee. There will be no expression 
 of opinion by the Convention in referring the pro- 
 position. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY rose and said, that he had no 
 objection whatever to the reference of this reso- 
 lution. He concurred with the gentleman from 
 Dutchess, (Mr. TALLMADGE) so far as that 
 point was concerned. But when that gentleman 
 was making his remarks on the subject of the re- 
 ference, he had not stopped there, but had gone 
 on and introduced the subject fof the merits of 
 that resolution, and be for one, rose to protest 
 against the doctrines of that gentleman, as then 
 laid down. He denied that any advantages were 
 given by the present Constitution, or by the 
 laws of the State to the alien, over the native 
 born. No alien can vote now in this State unless 
 he has resided in the State for one year just pre- 
 ceding the election ; that was his understanding 
 of the Constitution of the State 
 
 Mr. T : Not the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY : Yes, sir. And the proposi- 
 tion of the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. HAR- 
 RISON) is at least the certain effect of it will be, 
 to compel an alien to reside in this country six 
 years before he shall be entitled to vote, instead 
 of five years as now ! He believed that five years 
 was long enough to develop the intention of any 
 alien, as to whether he intends to become a citi- 
 zen of this country or not ; and that was the only 
 question of principle involved in our Naturali- 
 zation laws. He repeated that he heartily protes- 
 ;ed against the doctrine as laid down by the gen- 
 ;leman from Dutchess, (Mr. TALLMADGE). He 
 lad no wish to take up the time of the commit- 
 ;ee ; and he rose simply, because he could not al- 
 .ow the remarks of that gentleman to go without 
 opposition to them. He had nothing more to say. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE wished to say but a single 
 word in reply to his learned friend from Kings 
 Mr. MURPHY.) An alien (under the present 
 Constitution) who may have resided 5 years at 
 rloboken, goes over to New York to-day, gets out 
 lis naturalization papers, and to-morrow he goes 
 o the polls and votes there in the city of New 
 York. 
 
 Several Members No, no! Oh, no! No, sir 
 le can't. It's not so! That is not so! 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said he believed it was so; 
 he felt sure it had been done. And the law alone 
 would prohibit him if he did not do it not the 
 Constitution. While citizens of other States must 
 
84 
 
 reside a year in this State before they can vote; 
 this is the requirement, however by law, and it is 
 not in the Constitution. (Voices "oh, yes, it is.") 
 There w as the great difficulty. And as his learned 
 friend from King's (Mr. MURPHY) would make 
 him speak on this point, he would say for himself 
 that he, and also those who thought on this sub- 
 ject as he did, desired by this resolution to pave 
 the way for a plan to put these fliens on the same 
 footing precisely as our own citizens. What rea- 
 sonable man would possibly object to that? Let 
 the reference be had. Nobody would be commit- 
 ted by it. Let the committee examine the sub 
 ject and report on it; so as to have some clause 
 engrafted on the Constitution in reference to this. 
 Aliens should certainly be put on a par with our 
 own native born citizens. That was the law on 
 the subject; but it was not required by the Constitu- 
 tion. The law of the State requires that if chal- 
 lenged, we shall swear we have resided at least 
 one year, just preceeding, in the State. But we 
 want to make that Constitutional, which is now 
 .only the Statute Law. 
 
 SEVERAL VOICES. It is in the Constitution 
 now! 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said he did not certainly so 
 understand it to be. He might however possibly 
 be mistaken ; and if he had, his information came 
 from a friend sitting near him, who had often pre- 
 sided as an inspector of elections. But even if it 
 was there, then it resolves into a mere question of 
 policy, which is worthy of inquiry, whether an 
 alien shall or shall not reside in the State one year 
 after he has been naturalized, before he shall 
 vote. That point certainly was not a requirement 
 in the present Constitution. We wish this dis- 
 tinct point of inquiry presented : " Shall aliens 
 be allowed to vote in the State the instant they 
 are naturalized, when native born citizens have to 
 wait a year in the State before they can vote ?" 
 That's the question. But let us look at it in another 
 point of view. Is it not worthy of inquiry to see 
 whether the citizens of England, Ireland, Hol- 
 land, Gaul, Italy, or other parts of Europe, who, 
 when they first come here, are subject to none oi 
 the requisitions that are made on our own citizens 
 shall acquire in 5 years the right to vote ; when 
 up to the day they vote, they have no liabilities on 
 them as citizens ? Is this right or just? While 
 our own citizens wait one year, ought not the for- 
 eigner to wait that one year also ? But to go fur- 
 ther, you will not allow that gentleman's son to 
 vote because he's only 18; and yet you subject 
 him to do military duty. Why should you exclude 
 these, when you put the German who cannot speak 
 our language, over them, and give them privileges 
 which your native born citizens do not have ? 
 You give the alien, who is ignorant of our Ian 
 guage, who knows nothing of our laws and insti 
 tutions, advantages you deny to your own sons 
 Here is the foreigner, brought up under monarchi 
 al institutions, with no intetest in our country, n< 
 respect for our laws ; why let him vote before he 
 has remained a year after naturalization ? W< 
 merely think that these naturalized citizens ough 
 to wait as long as our own children have to wait 
 after they are liable to militia duty ; they ough 
 to wait long enough to know our institutions am 
 laws, and to vote intelligibly. He did not wan 
 to discuss the question now ; let the committee 
 
 ave the subject at once,^vithout any one saying 
 whether he was in favor of the measure or not. 
 Send it to the committee. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said he only rose now to state 
 hat he had no desire to provoke any discussion on 
 his question. If he had correctly understood the 
 course of proceeding in this matter, all the dis- 
 cussion on it had been provoked by the course 
 pursued by his venerable friend from Dutchess 
 Mr. TALLMADGE). What he had first risen to 
 effect, was an entire separation of the question of 
 he reference of this subject, from the one of me- 
 rits. He had not the slightest objection to having 
 t referred. He wished distinctly to be so under- 
 itood. He hoped that every question connected 
 w ith the policy or government or Constitution of 
 he State would be referred. He would have every 
 sentiment, every document, every opinion en- 
 ertained by his fellow-citizens referred to an 
 appropriate committee, whenever any one choose 
 o offer a proposition to that effect let these 
 opinions and sentiments and doctrines, be as 
 broad at the State itself! But on the merits of 
 he resolution, he differed with the gentleman from 
 Dutchess, in toto ccelo. The gentleman from Dutch- 
 ess (Mr. TALLMADGE) however, had invited this 
 discussion. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE had merely replied to the 
 
 bjections which were made to the reference of 
 
 it, by the gentleman from N. York (Mr. O'CoN- 
 
 OR.) He had no intention to invite a discussion but 
 
 merely to meet those objections. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that the Constitution of this 
 Stale now provided that all aliens, as well as all na- 
 tive born citizens shall reside here at least one year 
 preceding the election, before they shall be allow- 
 ed to vote. Now if the principle contained in that 
 resolution be adopted, it will require an alien to 
 reside here 6 years instead of 5, before he can vote; 
 thus nullifying the law of the federal government, 
 which gives him the rights of citizenship at the 
 end of 5 years. But to the gentleman's own illus- 
 tration the case of the native born who are not 
 allowed to vote till they are 21 years of age ap- 
 ply this doctrine to them and it will require that 
 minors shall stay here until they are 22 years of 
 age before they can vote. And against this doc- 
 trine, sir, I protest ; and having protested, I have 
 no more to say. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON had not intended to commit 
 the Convention in any way to the principle of hia 
 resolution. He merely wished an enquiry into 
 the subject; he desired earnestly to see if some 
 provision could not be engrafied on the Constitu- 
 tion that would prevent the abuses at the polls 
 which had been so frequent of late years and he 
 believed mostly with the foreign voters. He did 
 not wish to injure or take away the rights or pri- 
 vileges of any class of our native bom citizens, or 
 of those aliens now naturalized, or who might here, 
 after come amongst us. But, he contended, that 
 it was no more oppressive for an alien after he 
 was naturalized to reside here a year before vot- 
 ing, than for a citizen who had been a citizen for 
 40 years of the United States, and moved to anew 
 State, to reside a year before voting. He had re- 
 sided in the State of New York 40 years, but if he 
 had lived 40 years in his native State, and had 
 moved to New York State last April, he would 
 not vote here next November because the law 
 
 
85 
 
 ne shall be here a year first. Is it more op- 
 pressive to require this from aliens than it is to 
 ask it of native born citizens? But he would not 
 now go into the merits of the question ; he mere- 
 ly asked now that it should be referred. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON did suppose that under all 
 parliamentary usage, on a mere question of refer- 
 ence, the intuits of the question to be referred were 
 not debatable. And he supposed so still. But 
 others, it seemed, had^aken a different view of this 
 matter.and the President has permitted them to 
 go on and to go into the merits of the question, 
 and to discuss the principles which are involved 
 in it. He would not take advantage of this liber- 
 ty which had been granted to others; he would 
 not go into the merits of the question at all. But 
 he would, now he was up, protest once for all, 
 against any distinction being drawn between the 
 naturalized, and the native born citizens. He 
 had no objection to the reference. Let every 
 gentlemen have whatever subject he pleases to 
 have referred, sent to be considered by a proper 
 committee. But he mu?t again protest, once for all, 
 against any line of distinction being drawn, here 
 or elsewhere, between the naturalized and the na- 
 tive born citizens. 
 
 The resolution of Mr. HARRISON was then 
 referred. 
 
 PETIT JURORS. 
 
 Air. HART presented this: 
 
 Resolved, Tiiat it be referred to the committee on the 
 Judiciary to consider and report on the propriety and ex- 
 pediency o; reducing the number of petit jurors to eight, in 
 trials of civil causes ; and especially whether in their 
 opinion the due administration of justice would in any 
 way be impaired thereby. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL wished the committee also to 
 enquire into the propriety of dispensing with jury 
 trials altogether, in common law casesj on consent 
 of parties, a proposition which Mr. S N. said he 
 would reduce ( writing and offer separately. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSF.ND wished the gentleman from 
 Oswego (Mr. HART,) not to fix any number ol 
 petit jurors; but to leave that blank; less than 
 eight might be considered sufficient by the com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. HART preferred to have that number in- 
 serted. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 DUTIES OF JURORS. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the following: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 powers and duties of the legislature, except, &c. to take into 
 consideration and enquire into the expediency and proprie- 
 ty of limiting the power of the legislature in exempting in- 
 dividuals from jury duty. 
 
 Adopted. 
 
 APPOINTMENT AND FEES, &c., OF JUDICIAL OF- 
 FICERSCOURT OF ERRORS. 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that as some 4 or 5 days 
 must intervene before we should get the repoits 
 01 the committees so as to have them to act upon. 
 He thought that interim could be very profitably 
 and instructively employed in discussions on this 
 floor of general subjects to be proposed here 
 and in interchanging sentiments. These would 
 go abroad through the press, and perhaps we 
 should then get back to us the views of our own 
 constituents on these subjects through the same 
 medium; an instruction which could not be other- 
 wise than valuable to us. He knew no better way 
 
 of arriving at this result than by resolutions of in- 
 structions; and tor that reason he had prepared 2 
 or 3 resolutions, which he proposed to have printed 
 and laid on the Uble. 
 
 Mr. STETSON * You cannot discuss them if 
 they are laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said, then, that he would 
 
 Mr. STRONG rose to a question of order. A 
 serious question might arise here, as to whether 
 any gentleman had a right to offer more than one 
 resolution at a time ; because if they could do this, 
 why some gentleman might get up and offer a lot 
 of resolutions in gross, and block up the way so 
 that gentlemen, who were as diffident as he was, 
 [laughter,] would not be able to get along at all. 
 [Laughter.] He had seen this sort of business prac- 
 tised to a great to some extent ; but it was, as he 
 thought, quite a small business, compared to what 
 was proposed now. [Laughter.] He cared no- 
 thing about it himself; but it is getting to be a big 
 business, and ought lobe taken in hand. He wish- 
 ed the Chair to decide whether it was in order to 
 allow more than one resolution to be presented at 
 a time, so that we could have the matter settled at 
 once. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that he thought perhaps 
 more than one at a tim.3 might be presented to the 
 chair for the purpose of being laid on the table ; 
 but that only one could be considered at a time. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said he saw no difference between 
 presenting to lay on the table, or considering. 
 There they were, and they could be called up at 
 any time ; this ought not to make any difference 
 as to the number a member was allowed to offer. 
 He did not care himself how the resolution was ac- 
 ted upon but it might be ra'her a grievous thing 
 to some people who are naturally bashful. (In- 
 creased laughter.) 
 
 The following resolutions were then sent up by 
 Mr. KIRKLAND: 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the judiciary be in- 
 structed to report an amendment of the Constitution abol- 
 ishing the Court for the Correction of Errors, as at present 
 organized, and proposing a suitable substitute therefor. 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the judiciary be in- 
 structed to report an amendment of the Constitution de- 
 priving judicial officers of all powers to appoint to office. 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the judiciary be in- 
 structed to report an amendment to the Constitution pro- 
 hibiting all judges of courts (except justices of the peace) 
 from receiving any fees or perquisites for official services 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved that the resolutions be 
 printed. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE enquired if the resolutions 
 covered the whole ground the gentleman desired. 
 Did the resolution in relation to the jndiciary 
 say that the judges shall not receive any fees or 
 compensation other than their salaries? 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said the resolution expressed 
 precisely what he desired, so far as words could 
 be made to do so. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE again rose, when * 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said this debate was not in 
 order. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that he would be in 
 order, by going on to show that these resolu- 
 tions ought not to be printed unless made more 
 comprehensive. He wanted it to cover the pay- 
 ment of judges and clerks of these Courts. If 
 one may believe what is said, the judges of Courts 
 are in the habit of adding .to their salaries, by 
 dividing with their clerks so much more lu- 
 
86 
 
 crative was the latter office. He wished to 
 know if that was provided for. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that the gentleman had 
 stated a case of corruption. He meant to apply 
 the resolution to cases as the law now is, and not 
 to cases of official corruption. 
 
 The motion to print was agreed to, and the re- 
 solutions suffered to lie on the table. 
 
 DISTRICT ATTORNEYS THEIR FEES. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE offered a resolution directing an 
 enquiry, through the Secretary of State, to the 
 several district attorneys for the fees and com- 
 pensation charged and received by them in the 
 year '45. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN suggested that in many counties 
 Kings, for instance, the District Attorney was 
 a salaried officer. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said that the resolution related to 
 fees or compensation and therefore covered the 
 whole ground. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that these officers were 
 now required to file annually in the office of the 
 Secretary of State copies of his minutes. All the in- 
 iormation sought, could be obtained at that office, if 
 the district attornies of the State all did their 
 duty. The interrogatories, should be ad- 
 dressed only to those who had neglected to dis- 
 charge this duty. 
 
 Mr. CRUOKER suggested that the resolution be 
 laid on the table until this fact was ascertained. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE had no objection, and the resolu- 
 tion was so disposed of. 
 
 THE COURTS FOR THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS 
 AND OF CHANCERY. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered the following re- 
 solution: 
 
 2. Resolved, That the committee on the judiciary fce re. 
 quested to inquire into the practicability of abolishing 
 the court ior the correction of errors, and the court of 
 chancery and the establishment in lieu thereof of a court 
 of law and equity , divested of legislative functions, harmoni- 
 zing with the present enlightened public sentiment, and 
 strictly in consonance with our liberal institutions and of 
 fixing a limitation as to the time within which decisions 
 shall be made by the courts of this state, restricting suitors 
 to one appeal, and on the expediency of establishing a 
 court of conciliation. 
 
 Adopted. 
 
 COLLECTION AND DISBURSEMENT OF THE 
 PUBLIC REVENUE. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD had a resolution which in the 
 present good temper of the Convention, he hoped 
 would be regarded with favor. He had madft it 
 specific for the sake of meeting the require- 
 ments of his friend from Ontario (Mr. WORDEN). 
 The following was the resolution : 
 
 2 Resolved, That the propriety of providing for the col- 
 lection of the public revenue of this State, in the current 
 coin ofLthe U. S. be and hereby is referred to the commit 
 tee on fee public revenues. 
 
 THE EQUALIZATION OF TAXATION 
 Mr. LOOMIS offered the following resolution,: 
 
 3. Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 powers and duties of local officers to inquire into the expe- 
 diency of making constitutional provision to equalize di- 
 rect taxation, and to make it proportionate to the actual 
 value oi the estate of the individual taxed, regardless of 
 the distinction between real and personal estate. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 Mr. L. said that in submitting these proposi. 
 tions for consideration, he entertained some doubt 
 
 as to the proper committee to which it should be 
 referred. He would have referred it to the one 
 on the finances of the State, were it not for the 
 fear thai it would overburthen a committee already 
 charged with a high and important duty. The 
 point included in the resolution, was this in lo- 
 cal assessments of taxation, individuals are assess- 
 ed or taxed upon the whole value of the real es- 
 tate in their possession, regltdless oi its liabilities, 
 whereas in respect to personal estate it is only 
 assessed on the amount in possession, less the 
 amount of liabilities. By this means the farming 
 interest of the country bears an undue proportion 
 of the public burdens in direct taxation. A large 
 share of the farms in the country, as well as city lots 
 and town lots, are under mortgage and other liens 
 and yet the assessments on them were to their full 
 value. He made this statement in explanation of 
 the object of the resolution, and to call public at- 
 tention to the consideration of the subject. He 
 moved to refer it to the committee to whom was 
 referred the subject of local officers.. 
 
 The resolution was so referred. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS proposed the following rule : 
 
 4 Resolved, That members, in presenting subjects for the 
 consideration of the Convention, present them as the pro- 
 position of the member: and that the President shall refer 
 them to an appropriate committee, unless some other refe- 
 rence be ordered by the Convention. 
 
 Mr. M. said that under this rule, instead of the 
 offering of a resolution, of reference being required, 
 the President could send it to the proper standing 
 committees, unless otherwise directed. It would 
 thus assimilate to the manner of disposing of pe- 
 titions in the legislature, and relieve the mem- 
 bers from all embarrassment in voting on a reso- 
 lution of reference. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE suggested that the gentle- 
 man should modify his resolution, so as simply 
 to provide that any gentleman having propositions 
 should send them to the Chair, who would refer 
 them without the form of coming through the 
 house. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS intended to place the subject on 
 the same footing as are petitions in the Legisla- 
 ture. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL had one very great objection to 
 the proposition. It compelled members to come 
 out in the affirmative on every proposition, and 
 he apprehended that few men were willing to 
 Commit themselves on any point without dis- 
 cussion. He thought the present form pursued, 
 to be altogether the best. 
 
 Mr. W. W. TAYLOR could see no necessity for 
 the adoption of such a resolution as this. It would 
 only tend to burden the Chair, as to the action en 
 the matter. Now there may come up questions 
 on which debate may arise as to the proper com- 
 mittee to which they shall be sent. It appeared 
 to him that the better way was that the gentle- 
 man who proposes a resolution should move its re- 
 ference to a particular committee, and that it should 
 be so referred as a matter of course, unless it was 
 objected to. This would fa:ilitate business with- 
 out involving the formaluy of putting the question 
 without throwing on the President the duty of 
 designating the committee to which the reference 
 shall be made. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS concurred in the views sug- 
 gested by his colleague (Mr. NICOLL). The adop- 
 
87 
 
 tion of this resolution would make it imperative 
 on a member to assume the affirmative on every 
 proposition he might offer. The submission of a 
 question to a committee, although merely one of 
 enquiry would be considered as committing the 
 mover to its propositions. He had this morning 
 received a letter from one of his constituents re- 
 questing him to make a suggestion, which on some 
 future occasion in accordance with that request 
 he might take it upon himself to do. His own 
 toind was not made up as to its propriety, yet he 
 should out of respect to a friend whom he va 
 lued very highly, submit the proposition for the 
 consideration of the Convention. Under the re- 
 solution now pending, he would not be able to do 
 so without committing himself, which he was not 
 prepared to do and therefore he would be cut off 
 from a chance of presenting it at all. He thought 
 every opportunity should be offered for a free ex- 
 pression of the will of the constituency. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN hoped this proposition would 
 be withdrawn. It was a rule, and all rules were 
 ropes around the necks of members. If the rules 
 stand as they now are, it will be competent for 
 every member of the Convention to present each 
 subject as his own, if he pleases or as a mere na- 
 ked matter of enquiry if he chooses or a matter 
 of notice from the house to the committee, to 
 control its action. And it would be competent 
 for the same members, or for any other to move 
 a reference of the matter to any committee, be- 
 fore the question, was taken on it and that mo- 
 tion had priority and preference. It would be 
 seen, then, that if matters were left as they now 
 stand, every member would be at liberty to take 
 the course his own good sense should suggest as 
 the proper one but if we adopted this rule, he 
 would be straitened in his actions. For a - person 
 who entertained doubts, whose mind was not 
 made up, could not draw a resolution in the form 
 saying " I think thus." And next by the very 
 form of the order, each resolution would be under 
 the influence of the rules that it be sent to 
 a committee. The question now had a priority, and 
 it was Tletermined by a vote whether it should go 
 to a committee or not. Under the gentleman's 
 proposition a member has no possible mode of 
 keeping a question before the Convention, even 
 until he could explain the reasons for making it, 
 which he thought, would be abridging the rights 
 of discussion further than his friend from New- 
 York supposed. If any question was presented here 
 which the Convention might think ought not to 
 be agitated, it would be perfectly competent for a 
 member to raise an objection to its reception, 
 when the question would be, shall the resolution 
 be received? It appeared to him that the ordinary 
 parliamentary practice in the existing rules was 
 entirely superior to what it would be if limited by 
 the present proposition. And he was very cer. 
 tain that the Convention would find it very con. 
 venient and safe, and perhaps indispensably ne- 
 cessary, in no case to adopt any rule until they 
 had a day or two to consider it. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS then consented that his resolution 
 should lay on the table for the present, and it 
 was so disposed of. 
 
 AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY. 
 Mr. HART submitted the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That Thomas J. Loomis, be and he hereby it 
 appointed an assistant secretary to this convention. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON had supposed that two sec- 
 retaries would have been as many as the business 
 of the Convention would require, and he thought 
 now, that if two experienced individuals had been 
 selected, they could have done all the business. 
 But he was not quite certain now that they could 
 get along without some additional help. One of the 
 Secretaries, indeed, as he understood, was out of 
 health ; the other he had no doubt with experience 
 enough would make a good secretary, but from 
 what he had seen, he was pretty well satisfied 
 ;hat we were not lo get along without some addi- 
 tional help in that department. In the organiza- 
 tion of the Convention, the chair would bear him 
 out in saying that, for one, so far as the regu. 
 ular officers of the Convention were concerned, he 
 had taken no part, nor had any of the minority 
 who acted with him. It was left entirely to the 
 majority of the Convention they selected their 
 own officers and appointed them but he did sup- 
 pose for himself, that in the organization of a 
 Convention like this the majority would have 
 deemed it expedient that at least one of the Sec- 
 retaries should be an individual entertaining the 
 views of the minoriiy. In this, he confessed he had 
 been disappointed, and he would now appeal to the 
 majority, and enquire of them, if they appoint an 
 additional Secretary, whether in courtesy to the 
 minority, they ought not concede to us one Sec- 
 retary, if we should name a competent man todis* 
 chaige the duties. He did notask it as a personal 
 favor to himself, because he had no favors to ask. 
 He proposed to amend the resolution by striking 
 out the name cf Mr. Loornis with whom he had 
 no acquaintance of whom he had never heard be- 
 fore this moment of whose exprience he knew 
 nothing, though he took it for. granted if he had 
 been experienced he would have known of it and 
 insert the name of Philander B. Prindle of Che- 
 nango co. He made the motion, knowing as he 
 did that there was no man better qualified to dis- 
 charge the dutiesof the office. He would not say 
 that Mr. P. was superior to any man, but he would 
 say that no man was superior to him. He had 
 had long experience in this house, as clerk for 
 two years, and as deputv clerk for two years, and 
 he (Mr. P.) could appeal to gentlemen who w< re 
 here during that time to bear him out in the as- 
 sertion that no man could discharge the duties bet- 
 ter than did Mr. Prindle. He appealed to gentle- 
 men of the minority not only, but to those of the 
 majority and would ask them if they had ever 
 known an officer who discharged his duties with 
 greater ability and satisfaction^ all, than did Mr. 
 Prindle? He made this appeal with entire confi- 
 dence, arid if another Secretary was to be appoint- 
 ed, let us select a man who is known to be com- 
 petent. Do not let us blunder along any further, 
 but let the business of the Convention progress ra- 
 pidly. He had no feeling for one man or another 
 he could name a great many who could dis- 
 charge these duties well, but he could not think 
 ofc any one who would do it better than Mr. 
 Prindle. 
 
 Mr. WARD hoped the resolution would be ac- 
 ted upon in blank, so that the sense of the Con- 
 vention should be first taken as to whether an ad- 
 ditional Secretary was required or not. If it was 
 
88 
 
 decided to have another, he could be chosen by 
 ballot or viva voce, as might be desired. It was cer- 
 tainly better that the Convention should designate 
 him, than that the Clerks should hire one them 
 selves, which it was not within their power to do 
 It was not within the power of one or even two 
 gentlemen to get up and make out a journal with- 
 out further help. They have employed some per- 
 son, and they must pay him out of their own 
 pockets or ask a future Legislature to do 
 it. It was better to settle the question now, and 
 if we should say further aid was required, as he 
 had no doubt it'was, that this aid should be order- 
 ed by us. He hoped gentlemen would consent to 
 this course first to take the question in blank 
 whether we should have a Secretary or not. 
 
 Mr. HART had no objection to the resolution 
 being left in blank. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that as ihis was a matter 
 which required some littledeliberatiou, he would 
 move that the resolution lie on the table. 
 
 The Convention refused to do this. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER suggested that the word " As. 
 sistant" should be stricken out, so as to come with- 
 in the Convention act, which said nothing about 
 Assistant Secretaries. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL offered as a substitute, the follow- 
 ing: 
 
 Resolved, That the Convention will proceed on Monday 
 next at 12 M. to elect an Assistant Secretary. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG opposed the postponement 
 till Monday. There was now no lack of candi- 
 dates. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES asked if the election was to be 
 determined by ballot ? 
 
 Mr. ANGEL had not thought of the matter, and 
 he supposed the Convention would determine. 
 It was said that we ought not to select a Secretary 
 with whose qualifications we were not acquainted; 
 and he wanted a little time to enquire who was 
 qualified and who was not. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said it seems now that one 
 of the Secretaries was not qualified for want ol 
 health. He thought it would be better then to 
 test the applicants by hearing them read at the 
 desk. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER declared that he would 
 not rote for a man until he had heard him read. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that gentlemen seemed to be 
 alarmed lest some one shall be appointed who is 
 not competent for the duties of the office ! Whe- 
 ther gentleman came to that conclusion from the 
 appointments that had already been made, it was 
 not for him to say, but he appealed to the gentle- 
 man from Kings (Mr. SWACKHAMER,) whether if 
 we appointed Philander B. Prindle, he did not 
 know from experience, that his equal was not in 
 the Empire State J He will do more business in 
 one hour than is done now in two and the gen- 
 tleman will assent to that ? He is the most ready 
 man to read writing and sometimes I have thought 
 even when it dicj. not exist that I ever saw. 
 [Laughter.] He would read any man's hand, tho' 
 no better than " quail tracks," or a lawyer's, which 
 was next to " quail tracks." [Great laughter.] 
 He was always sure to read it right, for if genil<?. 
 men did not write it righl, he would read it right. 
 [Renewed laughter.] There was no mistake about 
 his getting thro' it. If, therefore, the majority had 
 the magnanimity to select one from the minority 
 
 there would be no difficulty in the choice it need 
 not be put off for a morrtent. But if it was the 
 determination of the majority to select one of their 
 own party, then it might become necessary to cast 
 around to have a caucus and look fora man. Now 
 he asked, with a good deal of confidence, of gen- 
 tlemen in a body like this, to let us have the pri- 
 vilege of selecting the very man we all want, and 
 whom we would all select if it were not tor his po- 
 litical creed. But that would have nothing to do 
 with the discharge of his duties. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that in reply to the 
 very strong appeal from his friend last up, he 
 concurred in the opinion that Mr. PRINDLE was 
 a perfect gentleman, and as able a man as a Sec- 
 retary, as he had ever known in his life. He was 
 fully equal to the task of being Secretary to this 
 or any other body. There may be his equal in 
 the State, but he (Mr. S.) had yet to meet with 
 him. He wished here, in explanation to remark, 
 that the gentlemen already selected, he as fully 
 appreciated as any could, both as gentlemen and 
 scholars, but it required peculiar qualifications 
 for a reader to a body of this kind, that very few 
 possessed, and it was therefore, that he made the 
 remark that he would not vote for any one caucus, 
 or no caucus unless he had been tested. In re- 
 lation to giving to the minority the individual to 
 be appointed, he conceded it would be right. He 
 deprecated party allusions, in our discussions, and 
 members evidently sought to avoid them, and 
 but once previous to to-day, there had been 
 one, and that a very silly and foolish allusion to 
 party. He hoped the proceedings would be so 
 conducted that party and faction would not be 
 heeded, and so as to reflect good and happiness, 
 on the whole people of the State. While he con- 
 ceded this to Mr. PRINDLE, it was but justice to 
 remark, that he had heard others named, who 
 were equally experienced as Mr. ROSE, Mr. 
 SEGER, and Mr. DEAN, the late Clerk. 
 
 Mr. CHATF1ELU said that, inasmuch as the 
 resolution was offered at his solicitation, he felt 
 called upon to make a few remarks as to the pro. 
 priety of its adoption. He must express his ex. 
 ceeding regret that any gentleman on this floor 
 should have so far forgotten the usual courtesies 
 of life, as to cast imputations upon the present 
 Secretaries. 'So far as he had observed, he was 
 free to confess that the gentlemen appointed had 
 fully answered his expectations,and had discharged 
 the duty devolved upon them with fidelity and an 
 earnest desire to facilitate and discharge business. 
 It was not to be expected that genilemen, coming 
 here from other avocations, without experience as 
 Clerks of Legislative bodies, should be as well 
 qualified to discharge the duties of Secretary as 
 men who had experience. He had no doubt that 
 the present Secretaries, with a very little experi- 
 ence, would answer the expectations of all. He 
 was persuaded himself that the duties of the posi- 
 tion required more help, from the vast amount of 
 business cast upon it. It was too much for any 
 two men to discharge, and under that view, he 
 had inserted the name of a gentleman who was in 
 every way competent as assistant Secretary. He 
 had yet to learn that this was not a Secretary 
 within the purview of the act, and the objection 
 of the gentleman from Cattaraugus (Mr. CROOKER) 
 to say the least, was certainly hypercritical. The 
 
89 
 
 gentleman named was a member of the legislature 
 last winter, was a ripe scholar, a beautiful writer, 
 and in every way qualified for the post. He had 
 inserted his name also for another reason, he was 
 here before us at the organization, seeking the 
 place of Secretary, but when he found that other 
 names were proposed whom he supposed to be 
 better qualified, he very cheerfully withdrew his 
 own. He thought it was therefore no more than 
 fair and honorable that he should receive the ap- 
 pointment now. The gentlemen from Chautau. 
 que and Monroe had asked the majority,as a mat- 
 ter of magnanimity,to yield to them a Secretary of 
 the party to which they belong. Now, he would 
 ask, if they held the majority here, and were re- 
 sponsible as such and the minority should ask this 
 magnanimity at their hands, if it would be regard- 
 ed? He would ask them if when the Constitution 
 was framed and sent to the people, they would 
 not take the stump for or against it, and cast the 
 responsibility of the action here upon the majority? 
 He knew enough of political action and party to 
 believe that such would be the result. And in. 
 asmuch as the majority would be required to take 
 this responsibility, they should have Secretaries 
 of their own choice, and not those whose respon- 
 sibility they might not be willing to assume. The 
 gentleman from Monroe had suggested the best of 
 all reasons why this man Prindle should not be 
 appointed that he read wrtimg that was not writ- 
 ten not found in the proposition sent up. Per- 
 haps the gentleman made the assertion from 
 some knowledge of the fact, and if he did, he (Mr. 
 C.) would second the proposition. He had been 
 here with that gentleman, and he was willing to 
 say that he possessed very superior qualifications, 
 but the man who could read where it was not, 
 could count votes on a division where they did not 
 exist. He had had occasion to challenge the 
 count of that c'erk, and in the 2d vote the result 
 was entirely the reverse of the previous one. He 
 wanted no man here whom he could not trust. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS did not think this subject wor- 
 thy of any grave debate. He had had the honor 
 of a seat on this floor in the Assembly during 3 
 successive years of Mr. Prindle's service, and he 
 was not aware during all that period that any sus 
 p'icion or any complaint of any unfairness or dis 
 honesty existed against him, and he was really 
 sorry that it had been deemed necessary gravel) 
 to make such a suggestion in this body. He knew 
 the gentleman from Otsego would not have don< 
 it, if he had not been provoked by the indiscree 
 suggestion made, as a joke he had no doubt, by the 
 gentleman from Monroe In relation to the gen 
 tlemen already selected, he considered that all the 
 reflections thrown out were entirely undeserved 
 He had the honor of a long acquaintance with on 
 of the gentlemen, and for a short time with th 
 other, and he had seen nothing to disapprove in 
 them as Secretaries. He did not hold that be 
 cause a gentleman had well rilled a place for se 
 veral years, he should necessarily be continued in il 
 He believed in rotation in office. If a man ha 
 received the patronage of this party, and held th 
 office of Clerk and done well, his pay and hono 
 was very well for him, and it is well enough t 
 try others. And yet it was very important, as 
 matter of business, that the Convention shoul 
 have an experienced man, and he considered, i 
 
 6 
 
 lis connection, that the mode of choosing inspect- 
 rs of election, where one was allowed totheminor- 
 y, as a very good thing. He should like to see the 
 lea adopted in a parliamentary body of this kind, 
 s it would, he believed, have the tendency of keep- 
 ig all parties fair and square. 
 
 Mr. STETSON was exceedingly happy to hear 
 
 e disclaimer of the gentleman from Essex (Mr. 
 iMMONS,)with respect to the very extraordinary 
 llusions made by the gentlemen from Monroe 
 nd Chautauque. But it was with considerable 
 urprise that he heard both gentlemen in conclu. 
 ion, making an appeal to the magnanimity of the 
 majority, when their title to it was founded al. 
 nost on an act of discourtesy. The remarks of 
 he gentleman from Chatauque were a direct re- 
 ection on the present Secretaries, and yet 
 ie appealed almost for that reason to us, to waive 
 he considerations of party and give the choice to 
 hem. He did not wish to meddle with the ques- 
 ion of political magnanimity, but he would refer 
 o the election law of 1842, when the party now in 
 he ascendancy were so then,and where the minori- 
 y were conceded one of the Inspectors of election. 
 Would the minority show a better title. He was 
 as willing as one to cast off the trammels of mere 
 >arty, yet the especial circumstances under 
 
 hich this proposition came up and the very pe- 
 uliar manner in which it was introduced, caused 
 lim at least to hesitate in this instance. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that the gentleman 
 must have seriously misunderstood him. There 
 vas nothing against the present secretaries that 
 .ould, by any fair construction, be put on hie 
 anguage. 
 
 Mr. STETSON understood the gentleman to 
 
 allude to the failure to accomplish the duties of the 
 
 iffice which he attributed to the wants of expe- 
 
 ience, and to say also that one or two men could 
 
 lave accomplished all the labor. 
 
 .Mr. PATTERSON was misunderstood, if he 
 Tvas understood as saying any such thing. -What 
 ie said was, that if the Secretaries had more ex- 
 perience, they would make very good officers,- but 
 ;hat at present one was unwell, and the other 
 was lacking only in experience. This was no reflec- 
 ;ion on the Secretaries, and he had only mentioned 
 't, to show the necessity for further help. Why, 
 f it was thought necessary to have three Secreta- 
 ries, were they not designated when the caucus 
 was held ? But it was supposed two were suffi- 
 cient, and he repeated that two experienced men 
 would have been able to discharge all the duties. 
 And so the majority must have thought at that 
 time. In relation to the question of magnanimi- 
 ty, he had stated that so far as he was concerned, 
 he had no favor to ask; not the least. He was ask- 
 ed to point out a case where the present minor- 
 ity when in a majority, had ever exercised it. 
 He would refer to the first instance of the kind ever 
 known in the State. In the year 1839, when the 
 then majority (the whigs) gave to the then mino- 
 rity, one of the committee or tne legislature to ex- 
 amine the Treasurer's accounts. This, although 
 practiced by both parties since, had never been 
 done before. If it was thought advisable by the 
 majority to make every thing political, be it so; 
 he should be content. He had supposed that he 
 came here with a different object in view; and 
 when the majority came to vote for a presiding 
 
90 
 
 officer, and insisted on going into a caucus, he re- 
 gretted it exceedingly. All he asked now was 
 that the majority should select for another Secre- 
 tary a man competent to discharge the duty. 
 None could do it better than Mr. Prindle. One 
 word in relation to the charges the gentleman 
 from Otsego had thought proper to go out ot his 
 way to way to make against Mr. Prindle. 
 He" (Mr. P.) was here four years with 
 him, and during that time he never heard 
 a lisp against the man, either from the rna. 
 jority or the minority. The gentleman says that 
 he made a miscount. Well, yesterday the Secre- 
 tary of the Convention miscounted, or he (Mr. P.) 
 did, for he was counting at the same time ; but he 
 presumed the Secretary intended to count right. 
 Hehad no doubt that Mr Prindle intended to count 
 right, and he was unwilling; that any attack should 
 be made on him here. In conclusion Mr. P. said 
 he had no feeling about this matter, if the majori. 
 ty intended to select a Clerk from their ranks he 
 was content; but he supposed that the minority 
 had rights; and if the man whose name he had 
 presented was appointed, there would be no doubt 
 of business progressing to the entire satisfaction 
 of all. 
 
 Mr. STETSON, in justice to the gentleman 
 from Chautauque ,would state that all he meant to 
 say before, was, that the appeal to the magnanimi. 
 ty of the majority was not very much commended 
 to their acceptance by the reflections which he 
 thought were insinuated against the Clerks. 
 He (Mr. S) did not pass upon the right of 
 the minority. The general course of the gen- 
 tleman's remarks had gone far beyond the le- 
 gitimate bearing of any of his own. He had 
 already instanced the case of magnanimity on 
 the part of the majority in the Election law of 
 1842, but he would not dwell upon this con 
 sideration, he did not wish even by the influence 
 of his humble example to contribute to political 
 discussions on this floor he would leave the mat- 
 ter where it was. He begged leave to add a word 
 in respect to the clerks that ought to be known 
 abroad, after what had occurred here. The man- 
 ner of making up the journal is different from that 
 of 1821 different from that of Congress or the 
 Legislature. Here every thing was recorded, even 
 rejected propositions, and the proceedings in com- 
 mittee of the whole. And any gentleman need 
 only to have given his attention to what occurred 
 here this morning to see the immense amount of 
 clerical labor that is requited to be performed. 
 He agreed with the gentleman from Chautauque 
 that we should have experience here, and he be- 
 lieved we had it in the Secretary from Rensselaer 
 (Mr. STRONG,) as was acknowledged by all. He 
 was well kno'wn as having been a highly distin- 
 guished State Senator for several years, and as 
 an accomplished scholar and distinguished in his 
 profession. Under these circumstances he should 
 now leave the question with the Convention. 
 For himself, he had not even intimated as yet 
 what course he should take. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES did not know that his friend 
 from Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) had said any 
 thing derogatory to the character and competency 
 of the secretaries of the Convention; other than 
 that one was absent through ill health, and the 
 other was wanting experience. He did not listen 
 
 :o the remarks of his friend from Monroe (Mr. 
 STRONG,) but he thought Tie knew him too well, 
 to believe that he would stand up here in the pre- 
 sence of the Secretaries, and call in question their 
 qualifications to discharge the duties of their offi- 
 ces. He thought, therefore, these gentlemen had 
 been improperly charged. 
 
 Mr. STETSON would be allowed to put a word 
 in here. He ought to have said before to his 
 friend from Chautauque after his declaimer, that 
 he (Mr. S.) was free to say now that he (Mr. P.) 
 had no such intention, because he avows he has 
 not- 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that with the Secretary 
 from Rensselaer he had the pleasure of an acquain- 
 tance, and had had the honor of a seat with him 
 in the Senate, and he regarded him in every thing 
 but health, as fully as competent to discharge these 
 duties as any other man. He had seen him du- 
 ring the ill health of the Secretary of the Senate, 
 volunteer to discharge his duty, and he did it with 
 great ability. In regard to the other Secretary, 
 with whom he had not the pleasure of an acquain- 
 tance, he must say that all be had exhibited was 
 a want of experience only, and great diligence 
 and attention to his duties, and he had no doubt 
 would make a competent Secretary, when he had 
 sufficient time to become more familiar with the 
 duties of the station. And he did not believe that 
 any gentleman of the party to which he belonged, 
 would either publicly or privately attempt to de- 
 nounce or to speak disparagingly of these gentle- 
 men. Something had been said about an appeal 
 to the magnanimity of the majority. With that 
 he had nothing to do no appeals to make no- 
 thing to ask of them. In fact he had seen but lit- 
 tle to indicate that there was any party here. 
 The gentleman from Otsego talks about a majority 
 in the Convention being responsible for its doings 
 and acts. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD : That was in answer to the 
 appeal made to us as a majority. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that from the organization 
 of the two political parties, into which the State 
 was divided, it might not be expected that the of- 
 ficers of the Convention would be distributed oth- 
 er than among the majority. But he put it to gentle- 
 men if it was not the wishes ot their constituents that 
 the Convention should be organized without there 
 seeming to be any political party here. It was 
 not a party who called for this Convention par- 
 ties were divided upon it but the people called 
 for it. And the very position some of us occupy 
 on this floor shows that the people did not carry 
 party feelings into that election. Look at Greene 
 county, where there was one gentleman of each 
 party elected. Look at Chemung; there we find 
 those who are called democrats and whigs uniting 
 and sending a gentleman here of known and ac- 
 knowledged talents, by a very large majority 
 There were other counties. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER. Onondaga, for instance. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES was about to allude to that, He 
 was nominated by the Whig party, then by a con- 
 vention of a party who called themselves Reform- 
 ers, and after that'by a convention of the Liberty 
 party; and when he came to be voted for, he had 
 good" authority for saying that he was voted for by 
 Whigs, Liberty men, and more than 200 of those 
 who called themselves Barnburners; and this vote 
 
91 
 
 was garnished, and climaxed, and sprinkled by 
 some Old Hunkers. He was not here then he ap- 
 prehended, to represent party. He believed that 
 if a Secretary was appointed from among the mi- 
 nority, it would have a very salutary effect upon the 
 feelings of the great body of our constituents. 
 
 Mr. VVILLARD moved that the Convention ad- 
 journ. Carried. 
 
 And the Convention adjourned to 11 o'clock to- 
 morrow morning- 
 
 FRIDAY, (llth day) June ]2. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BENSON. 
 
 THE STANDING COMMITTEES. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then announced the names 
 of the members of the committees in the order in 
 which the resolutions were passed by the Conven- 
 tion, as follows : 
 
 On the apportionment, election, tenure of office and com- 
 pensation of the Legislature Messrs. W.Taylor, R. Camp- 
 bell, jr., Salisbury, White, Burr, Sanford, W. B. Wright. 
 
 On the powers and duties of the Legislature, except as to 
 matters otherwise referred Messrs. Stetson, Powers, Mil- 
 ler, St. John, Harrison, J. J. Taylor, McNitt. 
 
 On canals, internal improvements, public revenues and 
 property, public debt, and the powers and duties of the Le 
 gislature in reference thereto; and the restrictions, if any, 
 proper to be imposed upon the action of the Legislature in 
 making donations from the public funds, and in making 
 loans of the moneys or credit of the State Messrs. Hoft- 
 man, Tilden, Gebhard, jr. Hunter, W. H. Spencer, Greene, 
 Richmond. 
 
 On the elective franchise the qualification to vote and 
 hold office Messrs. Bouck, Gardner, Kennedy, Dodd, Dor- 
 Ion, Wood, E. Huntington, 
 
 On election, tenure of office, compensation, powers and 
 duties (except the power to appoint or nominate to office) 
 of the Governor and Lieutenant-GovernorMessrs. Mor- 
 ris, Porter, Hyde, Kingsley, Penniman, Clark, Waterbury. 
 
 On the election or appointment of all officers, other than 
 legislative and judicial, and the Governor and Lieutenant- 
 Governor, whose duties and powers are not local, and 
 their powers, duties and compensation Messrs. Chatfield, 
 Perkins, Kemble, Strong, Nicholas, Danforth, Shaver. 
 
 On the appointment or election of all officers whose pow- 
 ers and duties arc local, and their tenure of office, powers, 
 duties and compensation Messrs. Angel, Jones, Archer, 
 Dubois Maxwell, Hawley, Shaw. 
 
 On the militia, and military officers Messrs. Ward, 
 Chamberlain, McNeil, Bruce, Stanton, Kernan, A. Wright. 
 
 On official oaths and affirmations; ond the competency of 
 witnesses, and oaths and affirmations in legal and equity 
 proceedings Messrs. Rhoades, Baker, Forsyth, Cornell, 
 Brundage, Brayton, Hotchkiss. 
 
 On the judiciary, and the appointment or election of ju. 
 dicial officers, and their tenure of office and compensation 
 Mes'srs. Ruggles, O'Conor, Kirkland, Brown, Jordan, 
 Loomis, Worden, Bascom, Simmons, Patterson, Hart, Ste- 
 phens, Sears. 
 
 On the rights and privileges of the citizens of this State 
 Messrs. Tallmadge, Ayrault.Swackhamer, Parish, D. D. 
 Campbell, Witbeck, Yawger. 
 
 On education, common schools, and the appropriate 
 funds Messrs. Nicoll, Munro, Bowdish, A. W. Youngr 
 Tuthill, Willard, Hunt. 
 
 On future amendments and revisions of the Constitution 
 .Messrs. Marvin, Riker, Vache, Cook, Nellis, Graham, 
 J. Youngs. 
 
 On the organization and power of cities and incorporated 
 villages, and especially their power of taxation, assess- 
 ment, borrowing money, contracting debts, and loaning 
 their credit Messrs. Murphy, Allen, Stow, Mann, Crook- 
 er, Van Schoonhoven, Sheldon. 
 
 On the power of counties, towns and other municipal 
 corporations, except cities and incorporated villages, and 
 especially their powers of local legislation, taxation, as- 
 sessment, borrowing money and contracting debts Messrs. 
 Brown, U. Campbell, jr., F. F. Backus, Smith, Tafll, Flan- 
 ders, Canute. 
 
 On the currency and banking Messrs. Cambreleng, 
 Russell, Dorlon, Townsend, E. Spencer, Cuddeback, Tag- 
 gart. 
 
 On corporations other than banking or municipal- 
 
 Messrs. Loomis, Shepard, Bergen, Dana, Conely, H. Back- 
 us, Warren. 
 
 On the creation and division of estates in lands Messrs. 
 Nelson, Harris.Flanders, Bull, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, 
 Clyde. 
 
 AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that he rose to offer an 
 amendment (which he believed was perfectly in 
 order) to the amendment offered yesterday by the 
 gentleman from Allegany ; and to which he 
 trusted that gentleman would offer no objection. 
 The question when we adjourned yesterday was 
 on the amendment of the gentleman from Alle- 
 gany, to go into the election of an assistant Sec- 
 retary on Monday next. The amendment which 
 he (Mr. JORDAN) had to offer, was to strike out 
 " Monday next" and insert " immediately by bal- 
 lot." 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said that he perceived an evi- 
 dent disposition on the part of the members of the 
 Convention to have this question disposed of with- 
 out any further delay. And therefore* he would 
 offer no opposition to the proposition of the gen- 
 tleman from Columbia, (Mr. JORDAN.) 
 
 The PRESIDENT then said that the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from Columbia, (Mr. JOR- 
 DAN) was in order. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD wished to know if by the 
 strict parliamentary rule, the resolution which he 
 had requested his friend from Oswego (Mr. 
 HART,) to present yesterday, when he (Mr. C.) 
 was in the Chair, was now under his control. 
 
 The PRESIDENT replied that it was. 
 
 Mr. HART then withdrew the resolution. 
 
 THE QUALIFICATIONS OF VOTERS. 
 
 Mr. GREENE then sent up the following reso- 
 lution: 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the Elective Franchise 
 be directed to inquire and report to the Convention as to 
 the expediency of making constitutional provision, requir- 
 ing that every person hereafter to become a voter, except 
 in cases of physical inability, shall be able to both read 
 and write. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that he would then offer a 
 resolution similar to the 'one withdrawn. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that there was already 
 a resolution before the Convention that of Mr. 
 GREENE. 
 
 Mi. HOFFMAN wished to make one suggestion 
 to the gentleman from Jeffeisori, (Mr. GREENE) 
 and that was to so modify his resolution as to strike 
 out the word " requested,'' and insert the word 
 " directed." This Convention aid not request 
 any of its own committees it directed them to in- 
 quire into the various subjects sent to them. 
 
 Mr. GREENE consented so to modify his reso- 
 lution, and it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN again rose, and said that the re- 
 solution offered by the gentleman from Oswego 
 (Mr HART) yesterday, and the amendments there, 
 to, having been withdrawn, he would now offer 
 a resolution similar to it. 
 
 The PRESIDENT suggested lhat he should not 
 offer a similarly worded resolution, but one con- 
 taining the substance of the one just withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that was his resolution, and 
 he theiefure offered the following: 
 
 Resolved, That this Convention proceed immediately to 
 jhe election of an assistant Secretary by ballot. 
 
 Mr- CHATFIELD said that he should move 
 as an amendment to that resolution, this: 
 
"Resolved, That the President and Secretaries of this 
 Convention be, and they are hereby authorised to appoint 
 one or more assistant secretaries, in their discretion." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that he had just sent 
 for the act calling this Convention, as he wished 
 particularly before voting to ascertain the precise 
 powers of the convention in this respect. For the 
 question arose in his mind, whether the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from Otsego, (Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD) would comply with the requisitions of the 
 act he had just alluded to. He then read the 
 8th section of the act, which says that the Con 
 vention shall have the power to elect a President 
 by ballot, and the power to appoint one or more 
 Secretaries. It was an important question in his 
 mind whether we could transfer that power 
 (thus delegated to us,) to the President and Secre- 
 taries of the Convention. He doubted very much 
 whether this could be done; whether it was not a 
 power vested solely in the Convention itself. He 
 was not disposed to take up any time in the dis 
 cussion; but what he paiticularly wished to get 
 at was, whether, if we were to have another sec- 
 retary, his appointment must not proceed direct 
 from the Convention itself. Though, individually 
 the cared but little what course was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD contended that there could 
 not of course be a doubt that the Convention had 
 the power to appoint the requisite number of Se- 
 cretaries to transact the business of the Conven- 
 tion. The act said " one or more Secretaries." 
 Neither was there any doubt that the Convention 
 might delegate to the President and the present 
 Secretaries, the power of appointing these assis- 
 tant Secretaries, or that it would be perfectly legal 
 and in strict accordance with the provisions of the 
 act. One of the most familiar principles of the 
 Common Law is, that whatever was done by a sec- 
 ondary power under the direction of a primary 
 power is considered to be the act of the principal. 
 All this power of appointment can be thus delega- 
 ted ; if this be not the case, then the appointment 
 of the doorkeeper to the ladies gallery made yes- 
 terday, was wrong ; if there was any force in the 
 argument of the gentleman from Chautauque, then 
 the appointment of the messengers here, by the 
 President, was all wrong ; and neither they nor 
 the door keeper held their appointments according 
 to law. The Convention certainly had the power 
 to make its appointments in such a way as the 
 members should think most conducive to the dis- 
 patch of business, and without violating the spirit 
 of the act. He had proposed this plan, because he 
 thought that the President and the Secretaries 
 would be better able to judge what Secretaries 
 would be wanted, and when they would be want- 
 ed, to discharge the duties of the office ; and they 
 could fully enquire at leisure into their qualifica- 
 tions for efficiently transacting that department of 
 the business of this Convention. He would leave the 
 number, to be appointed, in blank. But he would 
 add " not to exceed two." They might require at 
 least two more Secretaries, and he believed they 
 would ; but at all events there ought to be a limit, 
 and he would so modify his amendment. And 
 this plan of his would, after all, he was certain, 
 be found the best, the cheapest, the quickest, and 
 the most satisfactory mode of proceeding in the 
 matter. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that he most decidedly enter- 
 
 tained the opinion that the power to appoint these 
 additional Secretaries restea with the Convention, 
 and not with the president or the present eecreta? 
 ries. If he could entertain a different opinion, it 
 would aflbid him a great deal of pleasure; and he 
 would be extremely glad to delegate this appoint- 
 ing power to those gentlemen ; but the act calling 
 the Convention was too clear on this subject to be 
 misunderstood. His friend from Otsego (Mr. 
 CHATFIELD) who yesterday caused a resolution 
 to be offered by the gentleman from Oswego (Mr, 
 HART) for the appointment of an assistant Sec- 
 retary, drew up that resolutii n himself, in accor- 
 dance with this view of the question ; that was very 
 apparent from the tenor of the resolution itself* 
 for if the gentleman had not then entertained such 
 views he would not have so drawn up that reso- 
 lution. He would say again, that he was convinc- 
 ed there was not force enough at the Clerk's desk 
 to transact the important and fast increasing busi- 
 ness of the Convention- Just at this time the Con- 
 vention appeared to have little to do j and they 
 can as well go on, and do this work now dispose 
 of this matter of appointing a secretary and se. 
 Itict the most competent person they could find to 
 perform the duties. He hoped they would pro- 
 ceed at once, either by open vote or by ballot, 
 either way he would be satisfied with. To-day 
 we had nothing; to do to-morrow we will get a 
 report from some of the committees ; and on Mon- 
 day we shall discuss the same. Therefore let us 
 do up this business at once. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN had not the slightest intention or 
 desire to take up the time of the convention un- 
 necessarily, either on this or any other subject. 
 He offered this resolution after the mover had 
 withdrawn the original resolution, because he con- 
 sidered it highly advisable to set this question at 
 rest ; and because he desired to have a proper 
 number of Secretaries, and be completely organi- 
 zed before we proceeded to the transaction of the 
 main business of the convention. It was not in 
 the least a matter of personal leeling with him, 
 either one way or the other, how the appointment 
 was made; it made no sort of difference with him 
 whether this business was done by the convention 
 appointing a Secretary by name, or the Secretaries 
 should appoint him themselves, so long as the ap- 
 pointment was made at once and disposed of. He 
 regretted, however, that he was compelled to dif- 
 fer from his learned friend froni Otsego, (Mr. 
 CHATFIELD.) in regard to the principle of com- 
 mon law, which he, (Mr. C.) had alledged would 
 govern in cases of this kind. True, it is a maxim 
 of law that he who dors an act by another, does 
 it by himself ; but that applies only to our indivi- 
 dual concerns, where we are the sole fountains of. 
 power, &c. But in a case of delegated authority, 
 either by a power of attorney or by statute, &c., 
 the power of making a sub-delegation o! delegated 
 authority, he apprehended, does not exist. And 
 he therefore on this point fully agreed with the 
 honorable gentleman from Westchester, (Mr. 
 WARD,) who was perfectly correct in the princi- 
 ple which he had laid down, as to the power of 
 the Convention to delegate this appointment to its 
 own officers. With regard to the final disposiiion 
 of this question, he cared not in the least what 
 was the result; but he most earnestly desired to 
 see it settled in some way immediately. 
 
93 
 
 The question was then taken on the amendment 
 and it was lost. The question then recurred on 
 the resolution. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER suggested to Mr. JOR- 
 DAN that he better modify his resolution, so as to 
 make it read " An additional secretary," instead 
 of " an assistant secretary." 
 
 Mr. JORDAN was pleased with the suggestion, 
 and would so modify it. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that he would now offer 
 another amendment to the resolution of the gen- 
 tleman from Columbia, (Mr. JORDAN) which 
 would perhaps be more fortunate than the one he 
 had just offered. He would move to strike out 
 the words ' by ballot ;" and to insert 
 " Resolved, that each member shall be called by name by 
 the Secretary ; and as his name is called he shall rise in his 
 place, and_openly name the person, for whom he votes, to 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN called for a division of 
 the question j he moved first to take the question 
 on striking out the words by ballot." 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that he infinitely pre- 
 ferred the mode he had now suggested, for the 
 election of all officers; they should, in his hon- 
 est opinion, be thus elected, except those that had 
 to be chosen at the polls. And even at the polls, 
 he believed, the best and fairest way, in the ab- 
 stract, would be to choose the candidates by viva 
 voce voting, were it not for the extreme inconve- 
 nience which would attend that plan at exciting 
 elections, and where a very large number vote. 
 But in bodies like this Convention, or in legisla- 
 tures (State or National) he sincerely believed 
 that no method could be so good as the plan of 
 voting viva voce. Besides it would be, in this 
 case, (as in others,) unquestionably the most ex- 
 peditious mode of dispatching the business, for 
 each member to rise in his place, as his name 
 should be cnlled, and name the person for whom 
 he wishes to cast his vote. But there were other 
 considerations also that influenced him (Mr C ) 
 in desiring now and at all other times to see this 
 plan of voting adopted. In all the positions in 
 which he had been placed (in his past and public 
 career) of delegated trust, he had always been 
 ready and willing to assume the full responsibility 
 of his actions; and in all positions of a similar 
 character which he might, perhaps, be called 
 upon to fill hereafter, he never would shrink from 
 that responsibility. And he well knew that if all 
 who had to act in a delegated capacity were re 
 quired to do this to vole viva voce, it would en- 
 able their constituents to know to a certainty i 
 these delegates had acted with fidelity and ii 
 strict accordance to the wishes ot the one party 
 and the promises of the other. In making these 
 remarks he intended to cast no reflection upon any 
 of the gentlemen now present; but to express his 
 decided conviction that it was better at all times 
 for the cause of truth and morality better for tht, 
 general and social welfare of our fellow men bet 
 ter -far better for the great and diversified inte- 
 rests of the community that all these votes shouk 
 be taken openly and above board. 
 
 The amendment was then put and lost, withou 
 a count, the house refusing to vote viva voce. 
 
 Mr. WARD then said that the question would 
 be on the resolution of the gentleman from Co- 
 lumbia, (Mr. JORDAN,^ to go immediately into a 
 ballot for a Secretary. 
 
 The PRESIDENT put the question, and it was 
 arried, nem. con. 
 
 The ballot' for Secretary was then gone into, and 
 he result was announced by the Secretary to be 
 12 votes, checked oft' by him. 
 
 The TELLER, appointed by the Chair, Messrs. 
 MORRIS and NICHOLAS, announced that there 
 were 113 votes. 
 
 Whole number cast, 
 Necessary to a choice, 
 
 Philander B. Prindle, 
 
 Francis Seger, 
 
 Thomas J. Loomis, 
 
 James R. Rose, 
 
 E. J. Marsh, 
 
 W. H. Grant, 
 
 Joseph Rose, 
 
 W. W. Dean, 
 
 C. F. Crosby, 
 
 Blank 
 
 No choice 
 
 113 
 57 
 60 
 21 
 19 
 14 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE then rose and said the Clerk 
 lad checked only 112 ballots, whilst the tellers 
 iad announced 113. He merely mentioned this 
 circumstance by way of an apology, or explanation 
 ot what had been alluded to yesterday, about the 
 naccuracy or mistakes of a former clerk (Mr. 
 Prindle ) He (Mr. T.) having had the misfortune 
 o preside here, and elsewhere on several occa- 
 sions and for considerable periods over deliberative 
 bodies, he well knew how easy it was for mistakes 
 of this nature to occur, even with the most accu- 
 rate and skilful officers; and he knew how ex- 
 ceedingly difficult it was for 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD called the gentleman to or- 
 der; all of his remarks were out of place at this 
 time. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE then said that he would 
 orbear to say anything more than this, in relation 
 to the rule in such matters. It is usual for the 
 clerk to be required to check off the number of 
 ballots he has called, before the ballot-box is 
 touched by the tellers ; for thus you have the only 
 means of obtaining a fair and correct result ; oth- 
 erwise there is no check to prevent any person 
 putting in two or three ballots at a time. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS, on the part of the tellers, an- 
 nounced that there were 113 names called, by 
 the clerk and yet there was found 114 ballots. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that this was caused by so 
 many of the members voting out of the order. 
 
 Mr. JONES suggested that the list be called 
 over, and that each man rise up and answer whelh. 
 er he voted. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that the correction would 
 not be accomplished in that way, as a great many 
 had gone out after voting. 
 
 The Convention then went into another ballot, 
 the same tellers acting as before, and with the 
 following lesult : 
 
 Philander B. Prindle, 
 
 Francis Seger, 
 
 Thos. J. Loomis, 
 
 James R.Rose, 
 
 Blank 
 
 J. T. Disosway, 
 
 E. J. Marsh, 
 
 58 votes being required for a majority. Again 
 there was no choice, and the Convention went in- 
 to a third ballot the same tellers acting as before 
 and in the following result : 
 
94 
 
 Francis Seger received 65 
 
 Philander B. Prindle, 63 
 
 Thomas J. Loomis, 4 
 
 Blank 1 
 
 James R. Hose, 1 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN then offered the follow- 
 ing resolution, on which he called for the ayes and 
 nays: 
 
 Resolved, That FRANCIS SEGER be and he is hereby 
 declared duly elected one of the Secretaries of this Con- 
 vention. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the resolution adop- 
 ted, was that the Convention should proceed to 
 elect by ballot a Secretary. It had proceeded thus 
 far without a choice, and he apprehended it was 
 not in order to go into any other mode of election 
 without a reconsideration of the vote to go into 
 ballot. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN thought that the elec- 
 tion could be arrested at any time if it was thought 
 proper so to do. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought it would be in order to 
 go into a ballot between the two highest, and not 
 to allow the votes that might be cast for other 
 candidates to be taken into consideration. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON doubted very much the pow- 
 er of the majority to dictate to the rfimority who 
 they should vote for. There were here for Mr. 
 LOOMIS 4 votes and he doubted the power of this 
 Convention to compel these men to go for either 
 of the two highest candidates. He thought the 
 largest liberty should govern here. 
 b Mr. HARRIS thought that time enough had 
 . e en spent in this process of balloting he be- 
 ^eved as much time as could be well spent. He 
 a pprehended there was not one who doubted the 
 Jesuit of another balloting, and he would there- 
 'ore move a reconsideration of the vote adopting 
 the resolution to go into a ballot, in order to al- 
 low the resolution of the gentleman from Allegany 
 (Mr. CHAMBERLAIN) to pass afterwards. 
 
 The motion prevailed a count being had 56 
 to 42. 
 
 The PRESIDENT stated that now the resolu- 
 tion of the gentleman from Allegany was in order. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY rose to a question of order. By 
 the 18th rule it was provided that a motion to re- 
 consider was in order to be made at aiiy time, but 
 that the question on it might not be taken on the 
 same day without unanimous consent. 
 
 Mr. JONES: Unanimous consent has been 
 given. There were no objections. 
 
 Mr. MURPHHY : No, sir there were objec- 
 tions a strong vote was given in the negative. 
 
 The PRESIDENT stated the objection would 
 have been a good one if it had been taken in time, 
 but not now after the vote had been announced 
 and the result declared. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved to amend the resolution 
 by striking out the name of FRANCIS SEGER, 
 and inserting that of PHILANDER B. PRINDLE. 
 He called tor the ayes and nays on this motion. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD called for a division of the ques- 
 tion to be taken first on striking out. 
 
 The question was then taken and the motion to 
 strike out was lost ayes 49, nays 65, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Back- 
 us, Baker, Bascom, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Candee, 
 Cook, Dana, Dodd, Flanders, Forsyth, Gebhard, Graham, 
 Harris, Harrison, Hawley, Hoffman, E. Huntington, Jor- 
 dan, Kennedy, Kirkland, Marvin, Nicholas, Parish, Patter- 
 son, Pemu'man, Porter, Rhoades, Richmond, Salisbury, 
 
 Shaver, Simmons, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stow, 
 Strong, Tallmadge, Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, 
 Waterbury, Worden A. Wright, A. W. Young 49. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Allen, Angel, Bergen, Bouck.Bowdish, 
 Brown, Cambreleng D. D. Campbell, R. Campbell, jr., 
 Chamberlain, Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Cornell, Danforth, 
 Dubois, Gardner, Greene, Hart.Hotchkiss, Hunt, A. Hun- 
 tington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, Kemble, Kernan, Kings- 
 ley, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Maxwell, Morris, 
 Murphy . Nicoll, O'Conor, Perkins, Powers, Riker, Rug- 
 gles, Russell, St. John, Sanford, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Shepard, Stanton, Stevens, Stetson, Swackhamer, Tal't, J. 
 J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, Vache, Ward, 
 White, Willard, Wood, Yawger, J. Youngs, President 65. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN hoped that his friend from Alle. 
 gany (Mr. CHAMBERLAIN) would now withdraw 
 his call for the ayes and nays for from the state of 
 this vote, he apprehended there would be great 
 unanimity on the next one. He should under the 
 circumstances vote for Mr Seger. and he hoped 
 that he would receive the unanimous vote. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN assented to this. 
 
 And the resolution was adopted without a di- 
 vision. 
 
 Mr. DODD moved that the Convention adjourn 
 to meet on Monday at 9 A. M. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON mo/ed that the Convention 
 adjourn. 
 
 This motion prevailed a count being called for 
 54 to 52. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned till 11 o'- 
 clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 SATURDAY, (12th day), June 13. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BENSON. 
 RIGHTS OF EQUITY, LAW OF LIBEL, &c. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR offered the four following res- 
 olutions: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the eleventh standing 
 committee, to consider the propriety of securing to cit- 
 izens of this State, by Constitutional provision, the follow- 
 ing rights and privileges, to wit : 
 
 1st. A right to the accused, in all criminal cases, and in 
 all actions or proceedings for penalties or forfeitures, to 
 waive a trial by jury, and submit himself to trial by the 
 Court. 
 
 2d. A right to the accused in all impeachments, criminal 
 cases, and actions or proceeedings for penalties or forfeit- 
 ures, or for misconduct in office, to make a final reply to 
 the prosecutor upon questions of law or fact. 
 
 3d. The right of peremptory challenge to persons 
 drawn as jurors, to the extent now allowed by law; and 
 a like right to the accused, in all criminal cases, and in 
 all actions and proceedings for penalties or forfeitures, to 
 the extent of five challenges; and a like right to each party 
 in all other civil cases, to the extent of one challenge. 
 
 4th. The exemption of every person from being com- 
 pelled to be a witness against himself in any case, for the 
 purpose of subjecting himself to a penalty or forfeiture, or 
 any loss or deprivation, in the nature of a penalty or of a 
 forfeiture. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the question would be 
 on the first resolution. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE asked to what committee 
 it was proposed to refer that resolution ? 
 
 Mr. O'CONNOR said to the llth committee, on 
 " the rights of citizens, &c." 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said the subject did not 
 properly belong to that committee. It was really 
 a subject of legislation, and ought to go to the 
 committee on the Legislature. One or two ab- 
 stract statements were made, but it was not in fact 
 a principle put forward, but merely a detail of very 
 sound Legislation. He would move to refer it to 
 the committee on the powers and duties of the 
 Legislature. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that the resolution referred 
 
to subjects that were properly embraced in the 
 duties of the committee on the llth subdivision 
 the Bill of Rights ; it affected the rights and pri- 
 vileges of citizens. All that was contemplated in 
 the resolution was perfectly analagous to the mat- 
 ters contained in the duties of, or that had been 
 committed to that committee. It might be thought 
 expedient perhaps to reject the resolution at once, 
 but if it was to be committed at all it ought to go 
 to that committee. If the motion of the gentle- 
 man from Tutchess (Mr. TALLMADGE) should be 
 approved, for sending it to the committee on the 
 2d subdivision, (on the powers and duties of the 
 Legislature) it would be giving it a wrong direc- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER hoped that his venerable 
 friend from Dutchess (Mr. TALLMADGE) would 
 withdraw his proposition. In the abstract it was 
 a matter of very little moment to which of the 
 two committees it was sent ; but it was a very 
 important proposition; and if the committee on 
 the Bill of Rights have time enough, they will 
 give Jt all that attention which its importance de- 
 mands. For his own part, while he wished the 
 largest liberty to be enjoyed in presenting resolu- 
 tions, he also hoped that all gentlemen would 
 be allowed to request or give any desired direc- 
 tion for the consideration of their various- propo. 
 sitions. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that as his honorable 
 associate on the committee (Mr. SWACKHAMER) 
 wished it, he would withdraw his motion ; at the 
 same time, he wished to give notice, that he ob- 
 jected thus early in the session to this multiplied 
 sub-division of subjects; he was not desirous to 
 get into them; for if they did, how they were to 
 get out ot them, he could not possibly imagine. 
 
 The four resolutions of Mr. O'CONOR were 
 then read and put separately, and all adopted and 
 referred to the llth standing committee. 
 
 LAWS OF LIBEL. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said he had still another resolu- 
 tion which he would offer; it was this : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the llth standing com 
 mittee to consider the propriety of amending the last sen- 
 tence in the eighth section of the seventh article of the 
 Constitution of this State, so that the same shall read as 
 follows: "In all prosecutions or indictments for libel, the 
 truth may be given in evidence to the jury; and if it shall 
 appear to the jury that the matter charged as libellous is 
 true, and was published with good motives, and for justi- 
 fiable ends, the party shall be acquitted, and, in favor of 
 such acquittal, the jury shall have the light to determine 
 the law as well as the fact." 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 SURROGATES. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR offered the following which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 judiciary to enquire into the expediency of making the 
 office of surrogate a salaried office, and of transferring to 
 that officer in the several counties jurisdiction of chancery 
 foreclosures of mortgages in cases not contested appli- 
 cations for leave to sell real estate of infants the care of 
 the estates of lunatics, idiots and habitual drunkards ard 
 nuch other powers of the court of chancery as may be pro- 
 perly, and more cheaply, ormore expeditiously, exercised 
 by a local judge. 
 
 INDIAN SUFFRAGE. 
 Mr. RICHMOND offered the following: 
 Resolved, That the committee on the elective franchize, 
 be aad they are hereby mtmcted to inquire and report 
 
 on the subject of extending the right of suffrage to the In- 
 dians residing in this state. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS wished the phraseology of these 
 resolutions to be changed. He did not like the 
 erm " instructed." 
 Mr. R's resolution was adopted. 
 LOCAL OFFICES. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said that the committee on lo- 
 ;al offices had instructed him to offer the follow- 
 ng: 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretary of State be requested to 
 urnieh for the use of this Convention, forthwith, so far as 
 le may be able, a full statement or list of all offices in this 
 State, the duties of which are local, their respective ten- 
 ures, and the respective powers, dflties and compensation 
 ot their incumbents. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 PERSONAL LIABILITY. 
 
 Mr. SHELDON offered the following, which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on banks 
 :o enquire into the expediency of making it a constitution- 
 al provision that the stockholders of banks and other mo- 
 neyed incorporations shall be individually liable for the 
 debts of their respective corporations. 
 
 LIST OF STANDING COMMITTEES. 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved the printing often times 
 he usual number of the list of standing commit- 
 tees. Agreed to. 
 
 THE SALT SPRINGS. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES offered the following which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the third standing com- 
 mittee, to inquire into the expediency of amending the Con- 
 stitution in relation to the powers and duties of the Legis 
 lature in regard to the lands belonging to this State conti- 
 guous to the Salt Springs. 
 
 CLERGYMEN. 
 
 Mr. BOWDISH offered the following which was 
 adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the elective franchise, 
 kc., be directed to enquire into the expediency of extend- 
 ing to clergymen all the political rights, privileges and im- 
 munities that are enjoyed by other citizens of this State, 
 and of imposing on them an equal proportion of the taxation 
 necessary to the support of government. 
 
 THE TWO-THIRD CLAUSE. 
 Mr. ALLEN offered the following, which was 
 adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on incor- 
 porations, to enquire and report on the expediency of abol- 
 ishing the two-third vote on incorporations, and substitu- 
 ting therefor a majority of all the members elected. 
 
 ASSESSMENTS OF PERSONAL PROPERTY. 
 Mr. RUGGLES offered the following, which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the powers of coun- 
 ties, &c., be directed to enquire into the expediency of re- 
 quiring the legislature to make further and more effectual 
 provision than now exists, for ascertaining the value of 
 the peronal estate of each individual, by the assessors for 
 the purpose of taxation. 
 
 FRANCHISE AND ESTATES. 
 Mr. STOW offered the following: 
 
 Rosolved, That the committee on the elective franchise, 
 &c., be instructed to inquire into the expediency of secur- 
 ing to every elector the privilege of holding a certain 
 amount of real estate owned by him, or in which he has a 
 
 permanent interest ,of not less than $ in value, and not 
 
 more than $ in value; that such property be described 
 
 and registered; and that the same shall not be incumbered 
 by or for any debt contracted or created by such elector, 
 after such registry and a reasonable publication and notice 
 thereof. 
 
96 
 
 Mr. STOW said he did not wish to make this a 
 qualification clause for an elector; but he \vishei 
 to confer it on electors as a high and valuable pri 
 vilege ; and that to all the other privileges which 
 an elector now enjoyed, this one "might be super 
 added. He would not give this to all; but in 
 wished to make it a mark of honor and distinction 
 for those who should deserve it; to distinguish 
 them from those who by their own infamy or 
 otherwise, had rendered themselves unworthy o 
 this privilege- That was his only object. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that he did apprehend, when 
 the gentleman first read his resolution but he die 
 not think so now perhaps it was not so; but he 
 knew that it had been said, that after this Con- 
 vention had got through making all the reforms 
 which they might consider necessary in the Con- 
 stitution ; that then all the farmers would be ex- 
 pected to divide off part of their farms with the 
 lawyers, [much laughter.] He did not know ex- 
 actly how this cat might jump in the long run. 
 [Laughter.] He did not know how it would turn 
 out; indeed he did not know that he should go 
 against it; but he thought he would just say one 
 word on the subject. 
 
 Mr. STOW would relieve the gentleman from 
 Monroe. (Mr. STRONG.) He himself knew but lit- 
 tie of law and wished no man to divide his farm 
 with him. [More laughter.] 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 THE SALT DUTY. 
 
 Mr W. TAYLOR offered a resolution to the ef. 
 feet that the duty on salt should never be more 
 than 1 cent a bushel. Referred. 
 
 RIGHTS OF WIDOWS AND ORPHANS 
 
 Mr WATERBURY offered the following which 
 was adopted : 
 
 the ri S hts and Privileges of widows and 
 
 RATE OF INTEREST. 
 
 Mr. DANA offered the following, which was 
 adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the powers and duties 
 of the Legislature, except, &c., enquire into the expedi- 
 ency of making it a constitutional provision that the rate 
 of interest in this State shall not exceed six per cent. 
 
 NEGRO SUFFRAGE. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG offered the following, which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 elective franchise to inquire into the expediency of ex- 
 tending to colored citizens the right of suffrage, and of 
 abolishing entirely the property qualification. 
 
 THE CANALS. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN offered the following 
 which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on canals and internal 
 improvements report to this Convention whether in their 
 judgment it is expedient to make a constitutional provision 
 for the completion of the unfinished canals of this State in- 
 cluding the Erie Canal Enlargement) and if they should 
 deem such a provision inexpedient, to report what action 
 would be necessary for this Convention to take in relation 
 to said canals. 
 
 TAXATION OF FOREIGNERS. 
 Mr. MORRIS offered the following : 
 Proposed, That there be incorporated in the Constitution 
 the principle of taxation on foreign residents, after they 
 shall have resided in this state for a time sufficient to be- 
 come citizens, 
 
 Mr. M. said he had o%red this with a view to 
 reach a large class of very worthy and wealthy 
 gentlemen from abroad ; who pass nearly their 
 whole lives amongst us ; who thus here accumu- 
 late large fortunes out of us; who never. intend to 
 become citizens, and who contribute nothing to 
 the support of the State or General Government. 
 It was adopted. 
 
 UNFINISHED BUSINESS IN THE COURTS. 
 Mr. MORRIS offered the following : 
 Proposed; That there be incorporated into the constitu- 
 tion authority to appoint a special commission to dispose 
 of the unfinished business that has accumulated in the 
 courts of law and equity. 
 
 Mr. M. said he offered this in order to dispose 
 in some way of the vast amount of unfinished le- 
 gal business that would be left in the old courts, 
 under the old system, when we shall come to have 
 our new courts in operation under the new or 
 amended Constitution; so that the new courts shall 
 not be lumbered down, and incur censure, by be- 
 ing encumbered with the vast mass of unfinished 
 legal business that had accumulated under the old 
 regime. It was adopted. 
 
 NON-IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. 
 Mr. MORRIS then offered as an individual pro- 
 position of his own, that the committee enquire 
 into the incorporating of the principles of non-im- 
 prisonment for debt, in the new Constitution. It 
 was now only to be found in an enactment of the 
 legislature ; and he desired to see this great prin- 
 ciple form part of the Constitution of the State. 
 
 Proposed, That there be incorporated into the constitu- 
 tion the principle of taxation on foreign residents, after 
 they shall hare resided in this State for a time sufficient to 
 become citizens. 
 
 Proposed, That the principle of non-imprisonment for 
 debt, be incorporated in the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN thought that all these resolutions 
 ought to be definitely worded as they were pre- 
 sented and referred at present, they certainly 
 seemed to commit the Convention to a great ex- 
 tent to the principles involved in the resolutions. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said, most certainly not ; all these 
 propositions which he now presented, he was of- 
 fering upon the very principle contained in the 
 resolution that he had offered the other day, and 
 which was ihen laid upon the table. They were 
 his individual propositions, and he alone was res- 
 ponsible for them. He merely asked them to be 
 eferred in the same way that a petition would be 
 disposed of; and he most certainly did not there- 
 ay commit any individual member to any particu- 
 ,ar course; much less the Convention itself. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that when the Convention 
 lere deliberately sent these instructions about 
 principles to the committees, with their deliber- 
 ate sanction, as they had done, that then it was 
 an act which the whole body does; they sanction 
 he principle contained in the resolution. The 
 >ody here deliberately makes up its mind to do a 
 hing; they under this pass a resolution, delibe- 
 ately vote upon it, and thus positively instruct 
 he committee to bring in a report accordingly 
 Vow this may cause a great difficulty to arise here- 
 fter as to the intention of members in thus voting 
 here now. For, hereafter, we shall find entered 
 >n the journals- our own actions in sending these 
 esolutions to the committees with positive in- 
 itructions to pursue a certain line of action 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that his were nake 
 
97 
 
 tuns of an individual member presented the 
 same as a petition; to these he signed his name) 
 and added a request for a reference of them. Hi 
 could not see how this course could possibly com 
 mit any of the members. They read/' proposed' 
 and not "resolved." 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that word entirely change* 
 the aspect of the matter. 
 
 They were referred. 
 
 EXPENSE OF REGISTRATION. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY offered the following, which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretaries address acommunica 
 tion to the Comptroller of the city and county of New 
 York, requesting him to transmit a statement of the ex 
 pense incurred by said city and county, during the year 
 '40 and '41, under the act of 1840, providing for a registry 
 of the voters of said city and county. 
 
 THE SALT DUTY. 
 
 Mr. ST JOHN offered the following, which wa 
 adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on canals, &c., be instruc 
 ted to inquire and report on the expediency of entirely 
 abolishing the duty on salt. 
 
 The following resolutions were then all read in 
 the ensuing order, and all were adopted : 
 CONTRACTS WITH THE STATE. 
 By Mr. CHATFIELD: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on canals 
 Jtc., to inquire into the expediency of requiring all con 
 tracts made with the people of this state to be in writing 
 and prohibiting the state agents and officers from altering 
 or varying the same unless authorized so to do by a law 
 specif} ing the alteration; and prohibiting the annulling or 
 surrender of any such contract, except by a judicial de- 
 termination or decree. And also of prohibiting all extra 
 allowances, gifts or compensation beyond the prices speci- 
 fied in such contracts, except by the judgment or sentence 
 of an appropriate judicial tribunal. 
 
 USURY LAWS. 
 By Mr. CONELY : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 powers and duties of the legislature, to inquire into the 
 propriety of prohibiting the legislature from passing usury 
 
 BETTING ON ELECTIONS. 
 By Mr. ANGEL: 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the elective franchise 
 be instructed to inquire into the expediency of checking 
 by constitutional provisions the practice of betting on 
 elections, by suspending the right of every person to vote 
 who shall have a bet in any form pending on the result of 
 the election at which he offers to votej and that said com- 
 mittee do also inquire into the expediency of disqualifying 
 every person from voting at elections and from holding any 
 office of trust or profit, who shall have been duly convicted 
 by a jury of the country of bribing any elector to vote, at 
 any presidential, congressional, state, county, city, ward 
 or town election. 
 
 ELECTION DISTRICTS. 
 By Mr. BAKER: 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretaries be directed to request 
 the county clerk of the city and county of New-York to 
 furnish this Convention with a statement of the separate 
 population of each election district therein, together with 
 a description of such district by boundaries. 
 
 Mr. B. said that the day before yesterday the 
 largest gentleman from New York, (laughter) on 
 his left, (Mr. MORRIS) he knew no better way to 
 distinguish amongst that numerous and intelligent 
 delegation had procured the passage of a resolu- 
 tion relative to a division ot the state into single 
 senate and assembly districts. And if the com- 
 mittee to whom that resolution was referred should 
 
 agree to do this, they had not the means to guide 
 them. On the maps forwarded to us by the 
 Comptroller, we had the population of the several 
 fawns, and of wards; in some of the latter there 
 are 40,000 voters. We have then in the aggregate 
 also, the census returns laid on our tables, but 
 not in detail; he therefore wiehed" the county 
 clerks to furnish the committee with these statis- 
 tics. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said, that if by answering 
 this, it would subject the city of New York to the 
 expense of another census, he tor one, would most 
 decidedly object to it. Would not the last State 
 census give us the information ? 
 
 Mr. BAKER said he had applied to the Secre- 
 tary of State supposing he could find" the returns 
 he desired, in his office ; but the tables there would 
 not give them. They are returned only in the ag- 
 gregate, by wards. Now the county clerk has the 
 population of votes of each election district which 
 he has sent here only by wards. In one hour he 
 could look up for all the information we desired. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND would not by any means pre- 
 vent any member from obtaining any necessary in- 
 formation ; but if this was to entail the expense of 
 a new census upon the city of N. Y. burthened 
 as it was with an annual tax of $2,500,000, he 
 would oppose it, and only with the understanding 
 that it would not, would he consent to the refer- 
 ence of the resolution. 
 
 THE DUTY OF COMMITTEES. 
 Mr. BAKER offered the following : 
 Resolved, That in the opinion of this Convention, it will 
 be inexpedient for the several committees on the constitu- 
 tion, to accompany their reports with written explanations, 
 pt the reasons which may have influenced them in agree- 
 ing thereto. 
 
 Mr. B. said that as the Committees were formed 
 and we might soon expect their reports, in order 
 to test the sense of the committee on this subject 
 he had offered this resolution, as to the way 
 n which the Committees should present them. 
 The committees in the Convention of 1821 
 merely reported to that Convention the form 
 of the amendments they proposed, and gave no 
 written explanation of the motives which had 
 ed to these conclusions, 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to lay the resolu- 
 ion on the table. Lost, 35 to 20. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that as he understood 
 ;he rules of legislation, it was merely a question 
 f discretion with the various committees wheth- 
 er they would give the reasons for their report- 
 ng certain resolutions, or not, as they pleased. 
 At the last Convention the committees exercised 
 his discretion, and thought it best not to state 
 any reasons for reporting the various resolutions 
 hey presented. It ought to be left entirely to 
 he discretion of the committees now. The Con- 
 r ention of 1821 gave no reasons, because they 
 nought it might lead persons to vote for the 
 mendments from very different reasons than 
 hose which induced the committee to make 
 hem. He was the first to report in 1832, and 
 hen he did assign some reasons therein, but it was 
 hought objectionable, and the plan was after- 
 yards abandoned. Elaborate reports were unad- 
 isable ; for different gentlemen had very differ- 
 nt reasons for coming to the same conclusion, 
 lowever there were no restrictions herej and per- 
 
98 
 
 haps the Convention had better not tie themselves 
 down to any particular rule ; leave all the com- 
 mittees free to do as they thought proper. 
 
 Mr. BROWN hoped it would not pass the ge- 
 neral sentiment in the Convention was againstgiv- 
 ing any elaborate reasons for a report. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said as the word was in- 
 expedient, the resolution met with his entire ap- 
 probation. 
 
 Mr. BROWN observed that the resolution for- 
 bade a committee or said they ought not to ac- 
 company their reports with any elaborate reasons 
 for the same He knew the general feeling was 
 this way ; and there was much propriety therein; 
 but still he tfrought the committee ought to be 
 left free to assign reasons for their report, or not 
 as they pleased. He would suppose a case. 
 Suppose the members of a committee should differ 
 as to the propriety of the proposition a majority 
 decided to report. Shall the majority or minority 
 be allowed to assign any reasons tor the same ; or 
 would it not be much better to leave this mat- 
 ter free leave it open to the committee to say 
 why they reported such and such matters or 
 not. Here was the judiciary committee, a large 
 one and one of immense importance; with a great 
 diversity of subjects committed to their charge; 
 he would not, from what he had learned, be at all 
 surprised if that committee should widely differ 
 as to the plan of a judicial system which fchey 
 would report for adoption, and present a 
 majority and a minority plan. And if two dis- 
 tinct systems are sent here by them, would it not 
 be important and advantageous for the public and 
 for the Convention to know the reasonings, as to 
 why they reported these different plans. If this 
 resolution should pass; and he certainly hoped it 
 would not, under any circumstances then he 
 would consider it as a clear intimation given by 
 this Convention that it does not desire or expect 
 to see the reasons assigned for a committee's dif- 
 fering; whereas if this was all left entirely to the 
 discretion of the various committees they would be 
 better able to arrive at a just conclusion. They 
 could exercise the most prudent discretion in the 
 matter, if they are left entirely unembarrassed by 
 any expression of opinion by the Convention be 
 forehand. But there is another point of view in 
 which to consider this matter; which the mem- 
 bers ought not, by any means, to lose sight of. It 
 is this; the action of the Convention does not set- 
 tle the question of the final adoption of any of 
 these amendments that may be reported to the Con- 
 vention. The report of a committee will not be 
 at all' conclusive. This body is not like a legisla- 
 ture, whose acts when passed go abroad with the 
 full force and vigor of a law to the people, not to 
 be disobeyed, or changed, or overturned, until it 
 be repealed by the people at the next or any sue 
 ceeding legislature. But all these amendments 
 that would be proposed must ultimately be sub. 
 milled to the people, for their adoption or rejec- 
 tion ; and he sincerely hoped that on all the im- 
 portant constitutional amendments which any com. 
 mittee might report, they would feel it to be a so. 
 lemn duty to accompany their propositions with 
 such a report or explanation to this House, as 
 shall clearly elucidate the nature of the proposed 
 change, and of the reasons that prompted the 
 change. This will assist the people in forming 
 
 a judgment as to whethet they will vote for it or 
 not. They ought certainly to give their reasons 
 to the people of the State why they have changed 
 the fundamental law thereof. He did not desire 
 to see, and would not encourage any elaborate or 
 lengthy reports, except on a matter of very great 
 importance, but this should be left to the judg- 
 ment of the committee. The question should be 
 left entirely open. If a committee could give the 
 reasons better on paper than they could by a speech 
 on that floor, they ought to be left at liberty to do 
 so. A great many of the members doubtless were 
 unaccustomed to debating would find it difficult to 
 make a speech in giving their reasons, but whose 
 ability lay in committing their thoughts or views 
 to paper, and if they can assign their reasons bet- 
 ter in the form of a report than by a speech, it is 
 their duty to do so. Then these reports can go 
 forth and the people will see these reasons and 
 the arguments that led any committee to arrive at 
 certain conclusions. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that he would not consume 
 time by debating this matter, but he was certain 
 that on many of the committees, members would 
 arrive at their conclusions by the aid of statistics ; 
 and unless these statistical details are brought be- 
 fore the committee in something like an official 
 form other than by a speech the result of their 
 labors would not be properly brought before the 
 Convention; for some of the papers might publish 
 and some might not, publish these statisti- 
 cal details- Before they got through the session 
 there would be many statistical details that the 
 committee would see the necessity of throwing 
 before the public, as the reasons for their action. 
 He did not want any elaborate reasoning, from a 
 committee; this was not at all desirable; but he 
 did not want them to be denied or deprived of 
 the power of publishing all these facts, statistics, 
 and details derived from official sources. He did 
 not want to be cut off from putting this informa- 
 tion before the people. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that before the gentleman 
 from Orange, Mr. BROWN) made his remaiks, he 
 was disposed to vote against the adoption of this 
 resolution; but he had changed his mind by hear- 
 ing the gentleman . One or two of the suggestions 
 that fell from him (Mr. B.) would cause him to 
 support the resolution. And the speech of the 
 gentleman from St, Lawrence, (Mr. RUSSELL) had 
 also strengthened him in this latter view. It was 
 very true that the result of all these resolutions 
 were to go forth to the people they were to judge, 
 and pass finally upon the Constitution, that we 
 are met here to frame and with regard to the 
 facts, arguments, reasons and opinions to which 
 the gentlemen have here alluded if they are to 
 be gathered together if they are at all to be use- 
 ful and employed if they are to be sent forth 
 to the people of the State for any practical 
 purposes, it is to influence results- to influence 
 the public mind in deciding upon the work of 
 this Convention. He had too much regard for 
 the intelligence of the community at large to 
 suppose that they desired us to gather up these 
 facts and spread them before them ; the people 
 could, and would for themselves, and by them- 
 selves, search out and collect, and examine, and 
 arrange all these necessary facts connected with 
 the subjects to be considered, and the Constitu- 
 
99 
 
 tional amendments to be made by the Convention. 
 And if they sent forth facts of an erroneous char- 
 acteror statistics that were not strictly true in 
 point of fact or any inferences which could not be 
 legitimately drawn therefrom, it might and would, 
 instead of leading the minds of the people to cor- 
 rect conclusions, lead them to very erroneous con- 
 clusions. He did not consider that it was necessary 
 for the public at this day to come up to them for any 
 facts to enable them to form their judgmenton these 
 subjects ; and he did not want at the outset to 
 take up a position there, which would show that 
 they thought it necessaiy to fortify their conclu- 
 sions by tacts of their own manufacture, in support 
 of a Constitution which they were to frame for the 
 people's adoption. This plan of collecting and 
 publishing facts to go forth with the endorsement 
 of the Convention, would much sooner lead to 
 mischief than to anything else. He would prefer 
 to give the people the result of their deliberations 
 calmly and truly, and he would leave to the public 
 mind the formation of its own judgmenton the Con- 
 stitution that would be presented to them. He 
 would not stand there in an attitude of distrust of 
 the people; nor would he endeavor to fortify the re- 
 sult of their deliberations by a species of exparte ar- 
 guments, or a one-sided statement of facts, or infer, 
 ences not warranted thereby. Therefore he should 
 oppose the plan to have these reports accompanied 
 by a string of facts or a long argument; it would 
 be neither wise nor expedient that this should be 
 the case; they would all necessarily be one-sided. 
 He did not say they would be party colored,but I hey 
 would present or partake of ex-parte views of the 
 matter. They would not embrace a full and impar- 
 tial view of the whole subject ; but they would just 
 be the mere arguments of individuals in favor of 
 their own conclusions; and not such as ought to 
 be endorsed bv the committee and sent forth to 
 the people, as the arguments upon which the 
 committee! ad acted in corning to their conclusions 
 in the important labor of framing a new constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD differed with the gentleman 
 from Orange, (Mr. BROWN. Before tins resolu- 
 tion was offered even some days since, he had 
 drawn up a resolution which embodied the same 
 views as the one now under discussion; and he 
 had intended to offer it. He was satisfied that 
 the better and wiser course was to^leave all the 
 arguments that would otherwise be embodied in a 
 report, to be made in speeches on that floor; and 
 then all who desired to dc so, may participate in 
 the debate. All the members will then hear the 
 arguments pro and con, and be better able to judge 
 between the conflicting views that may be pre- 
 sented. The gentleman from Duchess (Mr. 
 TAL.LMADGE) gave good and sufficient reasons 
 very conclusive ones, why this resolution should 
 be adopted. There was another strong argu- 
 ment in favor of it; the Judiciary Committee will 
 send in a report here; and if they give their reasons 
 for the new system at length (and he thought they 
 should give no arguments or reasons lor adopting 
 a certain plan) these will go upon the journal and 
 always be consulted by judges hereafter, (as al- 
 ways had been the case) when they come to give 
 a construction to any part of the Constitution. 
 He wished the new judicial system to go down 
 to the Judiciary without any such an interpre. 
 
 tation as the reports of any committee might 
 give to it. Such reports always carried great 
 weight with them, always had more or less autho- 
 rity when presented by a standing committee, and 
 it was very difficult to resist it. He would 
 not give the committees this authority to bring 
 in here, in detail, through the medium of a report, 
 arguments, opinions, and views to influence the 
 judgments of the members here, or of the people 
 elsewhere. Allusion had been made to the judi- 
 ciary committee; that committee was composed 
 of the strongest minds and the most towering in- 
 tellect that was to be found in that house ; and ary 
 conclusion to which this committee should come, 
 will derive an almost irresistible force, from the 
 character, talent, and standing of the various mem- 
 bers. This would be quite enough then, without 
 giving them the additional advantage and force 
 which they would derive from presenting to the 
 Convention a written report. If, when theybro't 
 in the result of their labors to the Convention, any 
 member ofit desired to sustain, or to explain any 
 part thereof or any of the conclusions to which the 
 committee had come let him or them do it solely 
 with the advantage of their speaking talent. And 
 it is not the case that any gentleman would not be 
 fully understood in this way by both partids those 
 who agree, and those who differ with him. Ev- 
 ery member thus could and should be required to 
 assign a reason for " the hope that is in him." 
 If they should, however, distrust themselves 
 they could then write out their reasons or write 
 out a speech ; and in this form present them to 
 the Convention ; for any member who can write 
 out a report, would have no difficulty in writing 
 out a speech. But the gentleman from Ontario 
 (Mr. WORDEN) had alluded to another reason, 
 and a good one that the various expositions of 
 the Constitution, from, and in, the reports of 
 these committees, are always resorted to hereaf- 
 ter, with the view to influence the people in eith- 
 er adopting or rejecting the various amendments. 
 It is true that the Federal Convention never would 
 have been adopted if it had not been for the vari- 
 ous reasons, arguments, and opinions assigned by 
 Hamilton, Madison, Jay and others; and which 
 were all collected and published in a work called 
 the " Federalist." The people voted for it because 
 they were told that its adoption was necessary, in 
 order to preserve the country. He was willing 
 that any member hereafter should go before the 
 people and explain his reasons for making amend- 
 ments, but he did not wish to see it done by a writ- 
 ten report ; and he hoped no committee would 
 attempt in this way to influence the public 
 mind either for 'or against the new constitution 
 vhich they were about to frame ; and therefore 
 he was clearly in favor of the resolution. 
 
 It was put and carried. 
 
 Then were offerred the following resolutions 
 which were all referred to the committees named 
 and desired by the movers thereof: 
 
 JUSTICES' COURTS APPEALS. 
 By Mr. RICHMOND : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 judiciary to enquire into and report upon the propriety of 
 laving all appeals from judgments in justices' courts 
 amounting to $50 or under, where the parties reside in the 
 same town, finally decided by an appeal to a town court to 
 >e composed of all justices of the peace of said town. 
 
100 
 
 RENT CHARGES, &c. 
 By Mr. JORDAN : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 creation and division of estates m lands, to enquire into 
 the expediency of prohibiting by constitutional provision, 
 the future creation of any estates in lands, reserving rents 
 in fee, or for life, or for any longer term than years : 
 also, all covenants for quarter or tenth sales, and all other 
 covenants in restraint of alienation, and of forfeiture. 
 
 DISTRICT ATTORNIES. 
 By Mr. HAWLEY : 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretaries of the Convention be re- 
 quested to call upon the District Attorneys of the several 
 counties of this state for answers to the following inter- 
 rogatories : 
 
 1 What is the amount of bail bonds and recognizances 
 forfeited in your county in the Court of Oyer and Termi- 
 ner and of General Sessions, during the year 1845. 
 
 2. What is the amount of recognizances upon which 
 siuts were commenced by you during the year 1845. 
 
 3. What is the aggregate amount which has been re. 
 covered in such suits, the aggregate amount of damages 
 and costs being separately stated 
 
 4. What is the aggregate amount which has been col- 
 lected in such suits from the defendants therein. 
 
 5. What is the aggregate amount of costs and counsel 
 fees connected with such suits which has been paid by or 
 charged to the county or to the people. 
 
 RETROSPECTIVE LEGISLATION. 
 
 By Mr. RHOADES : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 judiciary to enquire into the expediency of amending the 
 constitution so as to prohibit the legislature from passing 
 any law which shall suspend or alter any of the legal or 
 equitable remedies for the collection of debts and the en- 
 forcement of contracts so as to operate retrospectively. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said this more properly belonged 
 to the committee on the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES thought not. It was referred 
 as Mr. R. desired. 
 
 JUDICIAL DISTRICTS, &c. 
 
 By Mr. GARDNER :- 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the judiciary inquire 
 into the expediency of dividing the state into judicial dis- 
 tricts, locating in each district a proportionate part of the 
 judiciary of the state providing for the election of all ju- 
 dicial officers of the state by constituting the board ol 
 supervisors of the counties in each district a board of elec- 
 tors for the purpose, requiring the majority of the whole 
 for a choice, and creating a board of canvassers to be com- 
 posed of a delegation from each board of supervisors, anc 
 in case of no choice, such board of canvassers to have 
 power to elect from the whole number voted for by the 
 supervisors. 
 
 COUNTY OFFICERS-SHERIFF, &c. 
 
 By Mr. GARDNER: 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the election and pow 
 rs of local officers be directed to inquire into the expedi 
 ency of abolishing the office of sheriff, under sheriff anc 
 deputies, superintendents of the poor and common schools 
 and of providing for the election of a single officer in each 
 county charged with the duty of the offices so abolished 
 and with such other powers and duties as may be confer 
 red by law, and to have the aid of the constables of tlr 
 towns in the service of process, and as the general peac 
 officer of the county. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL gave notice that on Monday th< 
 22d of June instant, he should move to reconsider 
 the vote by which the resolution of the gentle- 
 man from Washington (Mr. BAKER) had jus 
 passed. Under the eloquent speech of that gen 
 tleman, the committee had passed it without uro 
 per reflection ; but he was satisfied that many o 
 the committees ought to make written reports ex 
 planatory of their reasons tor offering the varioui 
 amendments which they would offer. Many gen 
 tlemen on those committees there were, whose ha 
 bits and pursuits comparatively disqualified them 
 
 rom making such a speech upon this floor an 
 ;vould enable them properly to explain the rea- 
 ons why they offered the amendments which 
 .vould be contained in their reports; and fur- 
 hermore 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD suggested that the gentle- 
 man from St. Lawrence had better make his 1 
 speech upon this subject " on the 22d day of June 
 "nstant." [Much laughter.] 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL: I intend to do so, sir, I can 
 assure you. [More laughter.] 
 
 The following resolutions were then offered and 
 adopted: 
 
 PAY OF THE LEGISLATURE 
 
 By Mr. TOWNSEND :- 
 
 Resolved, That the first standing committee be instruct- 
 ed to enquire into the expediency of giving to the mem- 
 >ers of the legislature a stated annual salary in place of a 
 per diem allowance. 
 
 SHORT SESSIONS. 
 
 By .J.TAYLOR: 
 
 R 4lved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 apj ,.ntment, election, &c., of the legislature, to enquire 
 into the expediency of encouraging short sessions of the 
 legislature by reducing the pay of the members after a 
 session shall have continued a stated period of time. 
 COURT OF EQUITY. 
 
 By Mr. BASCOM: 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the judiciary be in- 
 structed to report such a judiciary system as will render 
 unnecessary the further continuance of tribunals of exclu- 
 sive equity or chancery jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. B. said he would offer this as a distinct res- 
 olution of instruction to one Committee ;viz: the 
 Judiciary Committee. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said he objected to the use 
 of the term " instructed" in the resolution. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said he did not offer it, to have 
 it referred now ; he merely wished to have it laid 
 on the table, to be taken up hereafter, in order to 
 provoke discussion on the subject. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said it was quite useless to 
 lay resolutions on the table in this way, if it was 
 intended to have them understood and discussed by 
 members. Lay it on the table, and so far as all but 
 the mover was concerned, it was a sealed book. 
 It should be printed and fully examined. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM modified his resolution so as to 
 have it printed, and this was carried. 
 
 PLAN FOR A JUDICIAL SYSTEM. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR then presented a plan for a judi- 
 cial system, which he would not fully endorse ; but 
 which had been sent to him by a highly dis- 
 tinguished gentleman from New-York, whose 
 name he was not now allowed to mention ; but 
 whore character and opinions were entitled to 
 the highest consideration. He would move 
 therefore, out of respect to his distinguished con- 
 stituent to refer the resolution to the judiciary 
 committee, and to have it printed. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he had 4 or 5 plans which 
 had been sent to him by various gentlemen of dis- 
 tinguished consideration; (a laugh) and he there- 
 fore very much doubted the propriety of printing 
 all the various plans that would come into thai 
 house ; for he had no doubt that several other gen* 
 tlemen had many plans for a Judicial System.--^ 
 There was hardly a man of talent in any part oj 
 the State that had not matured, and drawn out a 
 system of his own that he was desirous to have pre 
 
sented. And he would move that none ot them 
 be printed until the committee had time to ex 
 amine them all and so with this onej for if they 
 once began to print all the plans for judicial sys- 
 tems, there would really be no end to them. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that there were many other 
 persons that wanted to see these plans besides the 
 committee. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL differed with the gentleman 
 from New York (Mr. Morris ) He was satisfied 
 that this plan, tromthe statement made so strong- 
 ly by the distinguished counsellor from New York 
 (Mr. O'Conor) was worthy of being printed , and he 
 was bound to urge that it be printed, and that it 
 form one of their documents. And notwithsiand- 
 ing that this judiciary committee comprises such 
 a very able array of talent, and high legaj experi- 
 ence (perhaps the most able and talented com. 
 mittee that had ever been formed on any subject 
 in that Hall,) yet it was very important, indeed, 
 and very necessary that others than members ot 
 this judicial committee should see this plan, coin- 
 ing trom such a high source as the gentleman Horn 
 New York pledged himself it did. And others alsi 
 wanted to see all able and matured plans that may 
 be offered they want them printed, before they 
 go to the committee, or whilst they are being con- 
 sidered by that committee. The great subject 
 contained in this paper this plan would more 
 than compensate for the expense incurred by the 
 printing of it. And if any gentleman should rise 
 here and present any great and valuable plan of a 
 judicial system, which he endorsed in whole, 01 
 in part, and which he deemed worthy of hav 
 ing printed, he thought it no more than wha 
 was due in common courtesy, to yield to the re 
 quest, and to have the plan printed. He woul< 
 say further, that on the mere point of econo 
 my, it would be much better to have it prin 
 ted. Members must know its contents ; at leas 
 they ought to; and it was very much bet 
 ter to print it and read it quietly at their leis 
 ure, than to sit and hear it read from the desk by 
 the Clerk amid the noise and confusion of thi 
 house ; and where it would have to be read, per 
 haps two or three times over. The time thus ex 
 pended, would cost more than the printing. 
 
 Mr. BAKER rose barely to say that until h 
 knew something more of these various plans, an< 
 of this one, he should oppose the printing; be 
 cause, notwithstanding the statements of th 
 learned and distinguished Counsellor from N. Y 
 (Mr.O'CoNOn) there was this point about it if w 
 printed the plan of one gentleman (no matter o 
 how high consideration he might be) we mus 
 feel bound to print all of the 15 or 50 plans of a 
 the gentlemen, "highly distinguished" and ( 
 "great consideration," in and out of the Conven 
 tion who might think proper to draw up plans fo 
 a Judicial System. He should therefore vot 
 against the motion to print; for if this course wa 
 taken it would only lumber up their desks, and ad 
 very largely to the expense ot the session; with 
 out a corresponding good result. Several gentle 
 men here have plans, and some very good ones 
 on this subject of the Judiciary; they may an 
 will, all desire doubtless to have them printed 
 and if you once open the door for this matte 
 where is it to stop ? It would be difficult to an 
 swer. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL asked the last speaker (Mr. BA 
 ER) how he expected to understand the plans 
 roposed by honorable gentlemen, unless they 
 ad them printed and then were to read the docu- 
 ents? 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that he expected to have the 
 Lan sent to the judiciary committee first; let 
 lem examine it ; and by and by we would get 
 icir report and opinion on that and all others ; 
 nd upon that point they would vote. That was 
 ic way. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that would not answer. 
 Mr. PATTERSON wished particularly to en- 
 uue as to the mode of pulling these papers, plans, 
 r documents upon the Journal. How were they 
 oted, entered, recorded, or referred to (here? 
 Vas every subject thus presented, spread out at 
 ull length on the journal? Will this plan that 
 as been just piesenttd be i-piead outin lull ihere? 
 Ie should say it would. It had been presented arid 
 tceived; it is discussed, and )our jcurnal will eer- 
 ainly not be complete without it. For it the ie^- 
 ution be entered, without the contents of a plan, 
 our journal will not say what the paper contain- 
 d, iu relation to which the resolution was oflei- 
 d. One man presents a plan here from New 
 fork; another sends one from Buffalo ; others 
 rom elsewhere and these papers are all thus 
 pread out on your journal, without action having 
 >een had on them by the Convention. Now, he 
 was opposed to all this; he would much rather see 
 he report upon all those plans before they are 
 pread on the journal. They were not similar to 
 i petition sent to the legislature ; for that required 
 merely that the substance ot its contents should 
 be endorsed on the buck of it, and that endorse, 
 ment only (significant of the character of the peti- 
 tion) is entered on the journal. But here, in the 
 present case, the whole paper will have to go on. 
 ^The endorsement was here read.) And having 
 :hus put it on, it will be printed with, or in the 
 ourual at full length ; and therefore to order es- 
 pecially the printing of it as a separate document, 
 would be to cause it to be printed twice over ; and 
 ntwo distinct forms. Without that order or no- 
 ice to print, it would all go on the journal ; and 
 he therefore moved that it be merely received and 
 recorded as an ordinary petition. Thus the sub- 
 tance of it only would ^go on the journal, and the 
 paper go to the proper committee. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR asked if the gentleman from 
 Chautauque (PATTERSON,) would otter any amend- 
 ment so as to effect his object ? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that if a member merely 
 sends up a pape? to the President, and asks that 
 it be referred to the judiciary committee, then the 
 substance ot it only is stated on the journal ; and 
 it is not therefore all printed. Now if the gentle- 
 man from New York leaves out the "Resolved 
 that it be printed," that will be the right course. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that the explanation of the 
 gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS,) had re- 
 lieved in two minutes the subject from all its dif- 
 ficulties. And if the gentleman from New York 
 had sent this merely to the President, and asked 
 its reference, that would have been all that was 
 necessary. 
 
 The PRESIDENT sustained the views of Mr 
 LOOMIS. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said the best way was to put 
 
 
 <^H ^aS^W 
 
 ^Mf \ 
 
 UNIVERSITY I 
 
102 
 
 down on the journal only that Mr. O'CoNOR sub- 
 mitted a plan for a judicial system, and asked its 
 reference to the judiciary committee, without the 
 plan going on the journal. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said it would be best to leave out 
 the words, " without going on the journal." It 
 would under all ordinary rules, no more go on the 
 journal than would a mere petition. And to 
 insert the words ** without going on the Jour- 
 nal," is to imply that, without that specification, 
 it would, as a matter of course and in the ordinary 
 way be entered at full length on the Journal. 
 Let it merely be assimilated to the form of an 
 ordinary petition. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR accepted the medification not to 
 print it at all. 
 
 The resolution was then adopted simply to re- 
 fer it. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE : What then, becomes of 
 the question of printing? 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER: Gone over-board. 
 
 Mr. WARD then said, that as they had trans- 
 acted quite a large amount of business that day ; 
 and referred to the various committees, quite as 
 much as they could possibly do justice to, tor a 
 week to come, he would move that the Conven- 
 tion do now adjourn. This was carried. 
 
 Adjourned to 11 A. M. on Monday. 
 
 MONDAY, (13th day) June 15. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr BRITON. 
 
 RETURNS FROM COUNTY CLERKS, &c. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the Secretary had 
 received a number of communications from sev 
 eral of the County Clerks, Surog^tes, Clerks of 
 Boards of Supervisors, &c. &c., in reply to the let- 
 ter of enquiry (as per motion of Mr. KIRKLAND,) 
 the Convention had directed to be sent to them. 
 Other returns were hourly expected ; they treated 
 of the various expenses of our courts, civil and 
 criminal; and the Convention should arrange for 
 some dispositioR of them. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD thought that all these an- 
 swers ought to be referred to a distinct committee 
 as fast as they came in; and he would make a mo 
 tion to raise a committee of 5 for that purpose. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that all the information con. 
 tained in these returns belonged strictly to the 
 judiciary system, and all this matter from the clerks 
 of counties and other officers, with their powers, 
 came clearly under the purview of the Judiciary- 
 committee. The enquiries had been made for the 
 benefit of that committee, and they had best be 
 referred to that committee, to let them make 
 such a disposition of them as they think proper. 
 The Secretary can first digest and arrange them. 
 But any other committee cannot know what to do 
 with them so well as the Judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that it seemed to him 
 the most proper course would be to send all these 
 communications, returns, reports, or whatever 
 they were, to the 7th standing committee, which 
 has cognizance of those officers whose duties and 
 powers are local. That was the proper com- 
 mittee, and not the judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that this was a matter 
 which was for the benefit of the whole Conven- 
 tion, and not solely for the mere benefit of the 
 judiciary committee. That committee already 
 had quite enough business to attend to without 
 
 having the labor of supervising and sorting all 
 these papers ; and he thought that there could 
 be no better plan than that proposed by Mr. 
 CHATFIELD, to raise a new committee, whose du- 
 ty it should be to digest and sort all these returns; 
 to make a complete but condensed abstract of 
 them, and to put them in such a form as to ^ren- 
 der them intelligible to the Convention. Tt was 
 not at present, certainly, the duty of any of the 
 standing committees to overhaul, and arrange all 
 these papers, as they came in ; and therefore he 
 hoped, that no objection would be offered to a 
 new committee. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said he understood it was pro- 
 posed to have this committee prepare this mass of 
 information in a proper form ; for as these returns 
 are received now they would be exceedingly em- 
 barrassing to the judiciary committee. A special 
 committee might digest them, and give all the re- 
 sults in such a form as would be easy to manage ; 
 and he hoped they would come to that arrangement, 
 so that they could contract and consolidate all 
 this information, and then proceed with the regu- 
 lar business. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY made a few remarks, but 
 spoke in so low a tone of voice that he was not 
 understood, except to say that this information 
 ought to be spread on the tables of the members 
 in some form or other. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD hoped the Convention would 
 agree witli him; as these desultory matters were 
 coming in now from all parts, no present commit- 
 tee could take hold of them ; and to send them to 
 any of the 18 would be a great waste of time. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY again rose, but was not un- 
 derstood. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD'S motion was then ngreed to. 
 NON-IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. 
 
 Mr. 'TALLMADGE presented the following, 
 which was referred : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on th e 
 judiciary to consider and report on the expediency of in" 
 corporating into the Constitution the principle of non-im' 
 prisonment for debt, and providing the right, in any suit 
 for the collection of debt, to charge that there had been de- 
 ception or fraud in the creation or contracting of the de- 
 mand; and upon conviction thereof, the party defendant 
 shall be liable to imprisonment, or such other personal lia- 
 bility as shall be provided by law. 
 
 NEW. JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE then said that he had a plan 
 for a judiciary system, which had been drawn up 
 and sent to him by a gentleman from the Western 
 part of the State. 
 
 Mr. STRONG rose to enquire if that communi- 
 cation in all its length and breadth would go on 
 the journal ? He was decidedly opposed to having 
 all these rambling communications from private 
 citizens, of all parts of the State, sent here to lum- 
 ber up the journal ; whilst at the same time they 
 did not know the contents of them. He would 
 move to have it left off the journal. 
 
 Mr. JONES said it was not at all necessary to 
 make the motion to have such papers left off 
 the journal any memorial or petition presented 
 here, which is not read or printed, but which is 
 merely asked to be referred to an appropriate com. 
 mittee, would not, of course, under the rules be put 
 upon the journal ; the clerk had no authority at all 
 to enter this on the journal. Let him write mere- 
 ly, " Mr. Tallmadge presented a plan for a judi- 
 
103 ' 
 
 ciary system, which without being read or printed 
 was referred to the judiciary committee." That 
 is all that was necessary. 
 
 The PRESIDENT stated the course pursued on 
 Saturday in relation to the plan prescribed by Mr. 
 O'CoNOR. 
 
 Mr. STRONG agreed with the gentleman from 
 New York (Mr. JONES) that these papers ought 
 not to go on the journal j and the question ought 
 to be settled now so that we should not have any 
 of this trouble hereafter about them. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said, a question had been 
 raised as to whether this paper was to be drawn 
 out at full length on the journal ; thai was not the 
 usual course, any more than a whole petition is 
 drawn out on the journal. Nothing but just such 
 a caption as the clerk chooses to give it, is enter 
 ed there. And he hoped that would be the course 
 now adopted, by the decision of the Chair, with- 
 out any motion on the subject. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said there was no standing rule 
 that these papers should be entered on the jour- 
 nal in full ; if there was, let the gentleman from 
 Monroe, (Mr. STRONG,) move to amend it, to pre- 
 vent such an anomaly as putting all these in full 
 on the journal. He hoped the rule would not be 
 considered by any one to have such a construc- 
 tion, and he hoped that the Chair would not put 
 any such construction op it. 
 
 The PRESIDENT again referred to Mr. 0'. 
 CONOR'S, plan of Saturday. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN did not then understand that 
 that course had been adopted as a rule of the com- 
 mittee, but merely as a mere suggestion of his 
 colleague. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that had been made a 
 special case. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that he had supposed so 
 the parliamentary law certainly was to put only 
 an abstract of ihese papers on the Journal the 
 mere title; and it would occasion great confusion 
 and delay if every time these were presented we 
 should have to move always to say without 
 their being printed," " without their being read," 
 " without their being eniered on the Journal," 
 and so on. 
 
 ARRANGEMENT OF THE JOURNAL. 
 Mr HAWLEY said in order to settle this he 
 had drawn up a new rule oj resolution, to the ef. 
 feet that hereafter the mere endorsement on the 
 papers should be entered on the Journal. He read 
 his resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That every member, previous to presenting a 
 petition, memorial, or propositien for an amendment ot the 
 constitution, shall endorse on the same the substance 
 thereof, and add his namej and on the reception or refer- 
 ence of such petition, Sic., the endorsement only shall be 
 entered on the journal. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that might answer in 
 some respects, but there was another way to dis- 
 pose of all these papers, and that was better altoge- 
 ther than to bring them before the House. He had 
 received a dozen or fifteen plans already, and they 
 were coming to him through the post office every 
 day; he intended to lay them all before the Judi- 
 ciary committee, aad not to trouble the House 
 with them at all; and if every gentleman would 
 take this course the whole matter would easily 
 and soon be disposed of. The committee would 
 quite as much notice of them, as if they had 
 e through the House; and in all cases where 
 
 papers are not intended fur the action of the 
 House, it was best to send them in that way to the 
 committees; for, after all, they were merely the 
 private opinions of individuals. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that his apology for 
 the course he had taken with this plan, and for 
 not sending it privately to the president was to be 
 found in the fact, that the other day he did pro. 
 pose or suggest such a course ; and was then met 
 by cries of " No, no, no," from all parts of the 
 House. Therefore to-day he took another course. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY said the course suggested by 
 the gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) 
 would certainly not answer. If that was adopted, 
 such a numbemof multiplied crude papers would 
 be presented as would lumber up the files of those 
 committees to such an extent that they would 
 never be able to get along with their business. 
 By and by numeroas petitions will come in the 
 proceedings of public meetings, &c. &c. and oth- 
 er responsible bodies ; and no one ought to be al- 
 lowed the privilege of sending these matters on 
 his own responsibility to the committees, or of 
 keeping them back as he pleased. And when sent 
 they could never get such a consideration as they 
 deserve unless they are passed upon by the House 
 first. He therefore pressed his rule, and referred 
 to the discussion on this subject on Saturday and 
 also this morning, to show that we should have 
 the same every day unless his rule adopted. 
 
 The rule was then adopted, and under it Mr. 
 T's. paper was referred. 
 
 NEV JUDICIAL DISTRICTS-SUPREME COURT &C 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE then presented the follow- 
 ing, which was read and adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 judiciary to inquire into the propriety of adopting as a prin- 
 ciple in the judiciary system, that the State be oivided in- 
 to four districts; that a Supreme Court be established in 
 each, of not less than four judges; of jurisdiction law and 
 equity; the judges to hold circuits; the term of office to be 
 not less than 7 nor more than 10 years; to be ineligible 
 to hold or take any other office or commission during the 
 term; or to have the power of appointing any other offi. 
 cers, or to receive pay or fees other than the salary allow- 
 ed by law. 
 
 If a separate Court of Chancery be established, its Chan- 
 cellor to hold for the same term of not less than 7 nor 
 more than 10 years; and to be subject to like ineligibility 
 to hold or take office during the term, and the like restric- 
 tions on the above judges. The judges or Chancellors to 
 be elected in the State or Districts of their jurisdiction. 
 
 A Court lor the Correction of Errors to be established, 
 to consist of 7 judges; the jurisdiction, appeals and writs 
 of error; the'term of office to be 7 yearsj ineligibility and 
 restrictions as above stated. The judges to be appointed 
 by the Governor and Senate. 
 
 The County Courts to be continued. A judge to hold 
 for a term of years; several counties may be embraced in 
 his jurisdiction Also, to try issues referred from Supreme 
 Court. The same ineligibility and restrictions as before 
 mentioned. To be elected in the county or District of his 
 jurisdiction. 
 
 PRIVATE ROADS AND BRIDGES. 
 Mr. WELLS then said that in consequence of a 
 recent decision of the Supreme Court, declaring, 
 in effect, that there was now no law to authorize 
 the construction of private roads and bridges, he 
 should offer the following, which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the rights and privi- 
 leges of citizens be directed to consider and repert on the 
 propriety and necessity of incorporating in the constitu- 
 tion some provision authorizing private roads and bridges 
 to be constructed on just compensation being made to the 
 owner or owners of the lands taken for these purposes. 
 
104 
 
 The five following resolutions were then offered 
 and adopted: 
 
 FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE. 
 By Mr. CORNELL: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 rights and privileges of citizens of this state, to inquire into 
 the expediency ot making constitutional provision to se- 
 cure the practical enjoyment of perfect liberty of con- 
 science, opinion aod belief to all persons within the juris- 
 diction of this state, and to prohibit all political and civil 
 disabilities on account thereof or in connection therewith. 
 
 EDUCATIONAL FUNDS COMMON SCHOOLS. 
 
 By Mr. R. CAMPBELL, Jr. : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on edu- 
 cation, &c., to consider and report as tollhe propriety of 
 constitutional provision for the security of the common 
 school, literature, deposite and other trust funds, from con 
 version or destruction by the legislature, and the estab- 
 lishment of such a system of common schools as will, by 
 taxation, bestow the facility of acquiring a good education 
 on every child in the state, 
 
 TAXATION. 
 By the same : 
 
 Res jived, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 powers and duties of the legislature, except, &c., to consi- 
 der and report as to the propriety of requiring by constitu- 
 tional provision, that all property within this state protect- 
 ed by its laws, except that which belongs to the people ol 
 this state, shall be assessed for taxation equally and at its 
 intrinsic value. 
 
 PRACTICE OF COURTS. 
 
 By Mr. STOW : 
 
 Resolved, That the judiciary committee be instructed to 
 inquire into the expediency of providing for the appoint 
 ment of a commission to revise the system of practice and 
 proceedings of courts. 
 
 BIENNIAL SESSIONS. 
 
 By Mr. CORNELL: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 apportionment &c. of the legislature, to inquire into the 
 expediency of providing for biennial sessions ol the legis- 
 lature. 
 
 THE PRACTICE OF LAW. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said he would now offer a resolu- 
 tion which he tried to do the other day, but 
 which he had not been able to do betore now, for 
 gentlemen were so very anxious to be in first. 
 He saw we were to be flooded with resolutions, 
 and he would therefore send up one expressive of 
 his views on certain matters and things that 
 ought to be brought up before the Convention. 
 It was this : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on Rights and Privileges 
 be instructed to inquire into the expediency of reserving 
 to the people their dormant right of freely choosing their 
 counsel and attorneys in all courts of law, with the like 
 freedom from State interference that they now enjoy in 
 the selection of their spiritual advisers, and of their Legis- 
 lators, Delegates and Governors; so that the anti-republi- 
 can usage by means of which a close and gainful monop- 
 oly 01 the legal practice has hitherto been secured to a 
 wellorganizedorderoflicensedadvocat.es and solicitors, 
 to the exclusion of the rest of community, may speedily 
 cease. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 SINGLE SENATE DISTRICT 43 SENATORS. 
 
 By Mr. CHATFIELD: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 apportionment, &c., of the legislature, to inquire into the 
 expediency of increasing the number of senators to 48, and 
 dividing the state into single senate districts the senators 
 to be elected biennially and to hold their offices for two 
 years. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 ANOTHER COMMITTEE. 
 
 By Mr. SHAW: 
 
 Resolved, That for the purpose of expediting business 
 and producing uniformity, that a committee of five be ap- 
 pointed by the President, to which shall be referred all 
 resolutions intended for the standing committees, and 
 whose duty it shall be to adjust and arrange them and re- 
 fer them to the appropriate standing committees. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was opposed to this, and 
 hoped it would not be adopted. Every resolution 
 that was to be referred ought to go right direct 
 from this body; and no committee ought to have 
 power as that now proposed. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND was of precisely the same 
 opinion; the presentation of these resolutions 
 ought to be encouraged every iacility should be 
 given to gentlemen" to present them; they were 
 in fact the short speeches of members, and no re- 
 strictions should be placed on them. They ought to 
 be received with respectful attention; and they 
 would thus obtain the views of all gentlemen as 
 to reforms of the Constitution, besides other val- 
 uable information. No committee ought to have 
 so great a discretionary power as that the resolu- 
 tion contemplated. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said this was like the plan 
 adopted by the Legislature; where at the close of a 
 session a committee of 13 or 17 was appointed to ar- 
 range the unfinished business for final disposition. 
 It was m fact transferring fhe duties of Legislation 
 to that committee; they could thus reject bills 
 or direct them to be passed. No committee of 
 5 should have power to say what shall or shall not 
 be sent to an appropriate committee. 
 
 Mr. SHAW said that probably another resolu- 
 tion, which was on the same piece of paper, and 
 which he had intended to offer, would, if it was 
 read, remove all the objections, and fully explain 
 his object. It was read thus : 
 
 Resolved, That all resolutions and propositions intend- 
 ed for standing committees be sent to the President, read 
 by the clerk, and referred to the select committee of five, 
 without motion or debate, if no objection is made. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said lhat the proposition contain- 
 ed in the last resolution was precisely what they 
 were doing there then, and had been doing for 
 two weeks. Therefore this resolution was unneces- 
 sary ; and the first resolution was decidedly objec- 
 tionable, because it would give a very dangerous 
 power to that committee of 5 ; the power to reject 
 any papers they thought proper, so that they would 
 never reach a committee. This is too dangerous 
 a power to be given to any committee any where. 
 It is not democratic and he was a strict demo- 
 crat, and he hoped this democratic Convention 
 would not sanction any doctrine so contrary to all 
 the natural principles of justice and right. 
 
 The two resolutions of Mr. SHAW were then 
 put separately, and lost. 
 
 THE CANALS. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT offered this, which was adop. 
 ted: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the third standing com- 
 mittee to inquire into the propriety of making constitution- 
 ftl provision for the completion of the unfinished canals, 
 including the enlargement of the Erie Canal, by appropria- 
 ting the revenues arising, and to arise, from said canals. 
 
 RAILWAY CORPORATIONS. 
 Mr. LOOMIS offered a plan for forming or in- 
 corporating Railway Associations, and it was re- 
 ferred to the committee on Incorporations. 
 
105 
 
 PRINTING OF DOCUMENTS. 
 Mr. A- WRIGHT asked if the committee had 
 as yet taken any action or order as to the amount 
 or number of the various documents that were to 
 be printed for the members. The number had 
 been usually 160 but that was quite too small. 
 Presently, the reports of committees would be 
 coming in, and other valuable documents; and it 
 was desirable to have at least one extra copy to 
 put by lo hiwe bnund up; and one was wanted to ex- 
 amine, and conduit, and analyze, so that all might 
 come to a ritjht conclusion on a subject. He 
 would offer this: 
 
 Resolved, That the usual number of reports of commit- 
 tees and propositions of amendments to the Constitution, 
 for the purpose of printing, be fixed at 300. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS was in favor ot the resolution. 
 He hoped it would pass ; he had prepared one to 
 have 200 copies ; but 300 was not one to many ; 
 if any one lost a document, the Serjeant-at-Arms 
 was not able to supply it. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY thought 300 none too many. 
 
 Mr CHATF1ELD doubted whether it would 
 be necessary to print 300 copies of documents pre- 
 sented; a great deal of matter would be sent to 
 them. He did not object to print the reports oi 
 standing committees. 
 
 Mr. STETSON thought that there were to be 
 no reports from standing committees. 
 
 Mr. CHATF1ELD. The gentleman had heard 
 wrong, the standing committees will report ; he 
 at the head of one, and we hope to have his report ; 
 but not any written aiguments. That was the dif- 
 ference. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON enquired if on ordering the 
 printing of two or three times the usual number 
 of copies it would mean two or three times 30C 
 or not. In cases where additional numbers shoulc 
 be ordered, he thought that the usual number in 
 this ordering of extra printing should consist o 
 150. He vvoui 1 .! move that as an amendment. 
 Mr. P. ex"lain-, ! d that the usual number in th 
 legislature in cases where no extra copies were 
 ordered, was 250, and where extra copies were or 
 dered of 150. 
 
 Some conversation ensued here between Messrs 
 HARRIS and PATTERSON, as to the rules in 
 the legislature on this subject, when 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that the Assembly last win 
 ter in the middle of the session, determined tha 
 when more than the usual number of copies wer 
 ordered, the person making the motion shoul 
 designate the number in specific terms. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY called tor the reading of th 
 rule ot the last house, in relation to the printing 
 It was read when after some further conversa 
 tion on the subject, the resolution as amended o 
 the suggestion ot Mr. PERKINS, was adopted. 
 
 THE ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 
 
 Mr. CONELY offered the following resolution 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on th 
 
 powers and duties of the legislature, to enquire into an 
 
 take into consideration the propriety of making constit 
 
 tionai provision for the abolition of capital punishment. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 THE PARDONING POWER. 
 Mr. CONELY then offered the following : 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the 5th standing com 
 raittee, to take into consideration the propriety of vestin 
 
 7 
 
 e pardoning power in the Governor with the advice and 
 nsent of the Senate. 
 
 It was also adopted. 
 
 AN EXPLANATION. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that on Saturday last, he had 
 ibrnitted a resolution referring it to the Commit- 
 e on the Elective Franchise, to inquire into the 
 xpediency of securing to every person the privi- 
 ge of having a permanent interest in real estate, 
 
 having it recorded and publicity given to s i ich 
 ecord. The property so described, not to be en- 
 umbered by, or liable for, any debt whatever, 
 "he resolution he had submitted seemed to have 
 een misunderstood in its effect and object. It 
 as apprehended by some that it aimed at the se- 
 urity of property. This was an entire miscon. 
 eption of the resolution. He had Bought in its 
 ntroduction the benefit of *he masses, and to pro- 
 iote the cause of humanity. He now asked that 
 le resolution might be printed, to prevent any 
 urther misunderstanding. This was agreed to. 
 
 NATURALIZATION OF CITIZENS. 
 Mr. WORDEN offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the elective franchise, 
 nquire into the expediency of providing in the constitution 
 r the exercise of the right of suffrage, so that in no in- 
 ance shall the exercise oi that right depend on the uatu- 
 alization laws of congress. 
 
 Mr. W. said that as his friend from Erie had 
 een so unfortunate as to have been misconceived 
 nd misunderstood in the propositions he had sub- 
 nitted, he begged leave to say a single word in 
 egard to the resolution he had offered, in oider 
 hat he (Mr. W.^ might not also be misunderstood. 
 As the present Constitution now stands, the right 
 t suffrage was conferred upon citizens, but it does 
 iot designate whether they shall be citizens of this 
 State or of the U. States. There is no provision in 
 ur Constitution or laws by which persons can be 
 made citizens ot this State, as contra- distinguish- 
 ed from citizens of the United States. We have 
 virtually by our statutes, given that construction 
 o the word Citizens in one Constitution and 
 ;ve have held that no person not natural born can 
 Decome a citizen of this State except through the 
 action of the federal Congress. He desired there- 
 ore to present the question whether it would not 
 DC wise in us to establish a rule in this respect, 
 totally independent of the action of Congress. As 
 it now stands, Congress may enlarge or shorten 
 the period ot residence necessary lor citizenship, 
 and in that wa/ might affect what may be sup- 
 posed to be the interest of citizens of this State, 
 and legislate contrary to the express bill of the 
 People. In regard to naturalization, it was early 
 decided under the kderal Constitution that each 
 State possessed naturalization powers for itself. 
 At an early day the U. S. Circuit Court of the dis- 
 trict of Pennsylvania made that decision. Sub- 
 sequently, there were opinions to the contrary, in 
 the Supreme Court, but more recently an able 
 and learned judge, now deceased, had classed[the 
 power to pass naturalization laws, as among those 
 which the States exercised in connection with the 
 Federal Congress. He thought the subject was 
 worthy of examination, and he desired nothing 
 more in what he said now, than not to be misun- 
 derstood. He thought it expedient that in the 
 new Constitution, we should so fix the right of 
 suffrage as applicable to that class of persons call. 
 
106 
 
 ed aliens, so that their admission to the right to 
 vote, should in no case depend upon the action o 
 Congress. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that there had been 
 some two or three propositions submitted by gen- 
 tlemen in different forms from those submitted to 
 the house, and referred to the committees. II 
 gentlemen were ready to-day to give us the rea- 
 sons for their submission, and why they should 
 be adopted, he would call for the consideration of 
 one of them. He would call for that of the gen- 
 tleman from Seneca, (Mr. BASCOM) in relation to 
 the judiciary. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM had not called up this resolution 
 nor had he intended to have done so to-day. It 
 was only laid on thefable in order that when the 
 Convention was not furnished with other busi- 
 ness, it might perhaps be considered, if it was de- 
 sired to call it up. He did not move it himself, 
 although he should not object to its considers 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND thought it rather premature 
 to bring up now a question involving such mate- 
 rial considerations, and he thought that we were 
 hardly prepared to discuss beneficially so impor- 
 tant a change as these propositions would make. 
 He presumed the Convention would be better pre- 
 pared to do so at a future day than at this moment, 
 and besides the matter was already under consi- 
 deration before the judiciary committee, and in- 
 deed they may be prepared to report on it. He 
 therefore hoped that the resolution of the gentle- 
 man from Seneca, would not now be considered. 
 
 After a pause, no motion being before the Con- 
 vention 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON, after enquiring whether 
 any gentleman desired to make any further mo- 
 tion, moved that the Convention adjourn. 
 
 The motion prevailed. 
 
 TUESDAY, (14th day,) June 16. 
 COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY RETURNS. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BRITTON. 
 A SELECT COMMITTEE. 
 The PRESIDENT announced the new com- 
 mittee to examine all returns from county clerks, 
 &c , to consist of Messrs. J. J. TAYLOR, HAW- 
 LEY, St. JOHN, CANDEE, and CONELY. 
 
 EXPENSES OF THE JUDICIARY. 
 Mr. RHOADES said a statement had been sent 
 up to him by the Supreme Court clerk of Albany, 
 at the time he made out the returns, the requi- 
 sition of the Convention had not reached him ; 
 the business in that office was very heavy and 
 time valuable, and he hoped these returns which 
 were made out for the last six months of 1845, 
 would be sufficient to answer the wants of the 
 Convention. 
 
 It was read and referred to the new committee 
 of 5 above named. 
 
 PLAN FOR A JUDICIAY SYSTEM. 
 Mr. SHEPARD offered the following, which 
 was referred : 
 
 Resolved, That the judiciary committee consider the 
 propriety of the following propositions: 
 
 if The division of the State into eight judicial circuits. 
 
 2. The establishment of three common law courts, of 
 
 general and concurrent jurisdiction, to consist of not more 
 
 than eight judges each, who shall be required to hold their 
 terms according to the demands of business, and with re- 
 ference to its most speedy dispatch. 
 
 3. The arrangement of the circuits so that no judge shall 
 hold court two consecutive terms for the same circuit. 
 
 4. The establishment of practice courts, to be held by 
 the said judges, for the adjudication of all questions of 
 practice, in the first instance, that may arise in their re 
 spective courts. 
 
 6. The hearing of certioraris and appeals from the jus- 
 tices' courts before one of the judges of one of the said 
 common law courts, to be designated which hearing, and 
 the decision thereon, shall be final. 
 
 6. The hearing of certioraris to other officers, proceed- 
 ings in cases of mandamus, prohibition, procedendo, infor- 
 mations in the nature of quo warranto, and other special 
 cases not otherwise provided for, in another of said com' 
 mon law courts to be designated. 
 
 7. The hearing of proceedings in criminal cases on writ 
 of error or other proceeding in the nature of an appeal from 
 the judgment of a single judge, in the third of said com- 
 mon law courts. 
 
 8. The granting of the fullest equity powers in all mat- 
 ters that may be auxiliary to a suit at law, at any stage of 
 its proceedings, to the judge having cognizance thereof. 
 
 9. The abolition of the present court of chancery, and 
 the distribution of its powers to not more than eight equity 
 judges. 
 
 10. The abolition of the present mode of taking testimo- 
 ny in chancery, and the substitution of oral testimony, to 
 be taken before the equity judge who shall hear the parti- 
 cular cause. 
 
 13. The establishment of courts of general and special 
 sessions in the city and county of New York, which shall 
 try and finally dispose of all criminal eases cognizable in 
 said city and county, subject to the right of appeal to the 
 common law court designated for the purpose, as before 
 provided. 
 
 14 The establishment of courts of special sessions to 
 consist of not less than two justices of the peace, who shall 
 have cognizance of the smaller grades of criminal of- 
 "ences. 
 
 15. Arguments in bane in common law cases, shall be 
 heard and decided before the court in which the particu- 
 lar cause was tried, excluding the judge who tried the 
 same from giving his voice in the decision. 
 
 16. In equity cases on appeal, the particular case shall 
 be first heard before two equity judges, neither of whom 
 
 hall have sat at the hearing of said case. 
 
 17. The establishment of a court of errors to be formed 
 from the common law and equity courts, to hold not less 
 than three terms in each year. 
 
 18. The exclusion from the decision of any case of the 
 particular court or equity judges by whom said cause has 
 been heard and decided. 
 
 19. A tenure of judicial office not exceeding eight years 
 n its duration, and a choice of judges by classes of one 
 udge in each court every year. 
 
 20. The abolition of all fees or rewards for judicial ser- 
 vices other than a liberal salary, which shall neither be in- 
 creased or decreased during the term of office of the in- 
 cumbent. 
 
 21. The abolition of the county courts and courts of 
 common pleas. 
 
 Mr. S. said his original plan contained other 
 Doints, but they were anticipated by some plans- 
 hat had already been offered ; this was incom- 
 jlete, and did not embrace all his views ; but 
 still as an outline he would send it to the judici- 
 ary committee. 
 
 THE COURT OF ERRORS. 8m. 
 
 Mr. WARD wished to know when it was the 
 ntention of the gentleman from Oneida (Mr. 
 IRKLAND) to call up the resolution which he 
 ^resented and had laid on the table a day or two 
 since, relative to the Court of Errors. For, if he 
 ntended to call it up at all, he had better do so 
 jefore the judiciary committee should come in. 
 tfith a report on that subject. He believed that a 
 arge majority present were in favor of changing 
 )r abolishing the form of the present Court or Er- 
 _-ors ; not so much, perhaps, because they did not 
 wish to see any court of last resort, with similar 
 
107 
 
 powers, as that they desired to see this court sepa- 
 rated from the present State Senate. 
 
 Mr KIRKLAND said that this very subject was 
 now under serious consideration by the judiciary 
 committee. They had deliberated already to some 
 extent on the subject ; but not sufficiently so to 
 enable them as yet to come to any such a definite 
 conclusion on this point as could be embodied in 
 a report. And in connection with this he certain: 
 ly had not intended to call up the resolution spo- 
 ken of by the gentleman from Westchester, to-day. 
 
 Mr STRONG agreed entirely with the gentle- 
 man from Westchester (Mr. WARD.) He wanted 
 to hear the views and arguments of the gentleman 
 from Oneida (Mr. KIRKLAND) on this matter. It 
 was of no use to throw in here these 3 or 4 resolu. 
 tions as he did the other day, unless he meant to 
 take them up and debate them. He did not think 
 then that his old friend from Oneida, after throw- 
 ing down hare a whole batch of resolutions, on 
 purpose, as he himself said, to provoke discussion, 
 would attempt, affer all, to dodge the question. 
 (Laughter.) He wanted to hear them debated 
 to hear the views of the members on the subject. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that when he offered 
 them the other day, he did so principally with a 
 view to lay these points before the members for 
 their calm reflection and mature deliberation ; he 
 certainly did not consider that in so doing he 
 would stand committed to call any one or rrfbre 
 of them up on any particular day; not that he was 
 afraid at all of the result, for he felt certain that 
 they would meet with general favor here. 
 TO LIMIT THE POWERS OF JUDGES. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY offered the following which 
 was referred : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 Judiciary to enquire into the expediency of restraining 
 the Legislature by positive prohibition from assigning 
 aay duties to the Judicial Department except such as are 
 of a judicial character. 
 
 EXEMPTING NON-VOTERS FROM MILITIA DUTY. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH offered the following which 
 was referred : 
 
 Resolved, That the Committee on the rights and citi- 
 zens of this state be instructed to enquire iuto the expedi- 
 ency of exempting from military duty (excepting in cases 
 of insurrection or war) all those who are not recognized 
 by the Constitution as legal voters. 
 
 THE BANKING SYSTEM. 
 
 Mr. POWERS said that a few days since the 
 gentleman from Cayuga (Mr. SHAW,) had offer- 
 ed a resolution to the effect of making all di- 
 rectors of banks and stockholders liable to be 
 held responsible for the liabilities of said 
 banks. This was an entirely new element in 
 the history of banking institutions in this State : 
 it well deserved the close and continued at- 
 tention of the committee and it was a resolu- 
 tion which would meet with his cordial and 
 hearty support; provided that there should be 
 be annexed, a security, that shall remain under 
 all circumstances, a security for the redemption 
 of the notes of the bank. He thought it was high 
 time to revise the whole system of banking 
 throughout the State, with a view to put a stop to 
 its various abuses, and place the whole on a sounc 
 and wholesome footing. He would offer the fol 
 lowing : 
 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller report to this Conven 
 tion a list of the incorporated Banks of the state the time 
 
 f their incorporation or renewal when their charters 
 xpire, and the amount of capital of each. Also a list of 
 uch of the said Banks subsequent to the safety fund law 
 s have become insolvent, and the amount contracted and 
 mid out of that fund to the creditors of such insolvent 
 Janks. Also a list of the Banks established under the 
 act "to authorize the business of banking" where the 
 ame purports to be located and its business carried on 
 he actual capital as returned to his office by the applica- 
 ion to him for circulating notes the amount of such notes 
 elivered by him to each banking association or individu- 
 jl banker and the nature and amount of the securities 
 ransferred to him for the redemption of said notes. Also 
 -a list of such of the last mentioned banks which have 
 ailed to redeem its notes by reason of insolvency or oth- 
 erwise the amount of the circulating notes of such banks 
 jnredeemed or not returned to hinvand the loss (it any) and 
 he amount thereof upon the securities transferred to him 
 or the payment of said circulating notes. 
 
 Mr. P. said that this information, which the 
 Comptroller would furnish, would be very valua- 
 )le in examining into the affairs and systems of 
 all the banks, and be a good guide to the conven- 
 'ion in their action on the subject. 
 It was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said, that as there did not 
 ippear to be any more business for the immediate 
 consideration of the Convention, and as the time 
 of members could be much more profitably spent 
 .n their committee rooms, he moved that the 
 Convention do now adjourn. 
 
 Carried, and the Convention adjourned till to- 
 morrow at 11 A. M. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (15th day) June 17. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BRITTOJV. 
 
 As soon as the minutes were approved, 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD rose and moved that the 
 Convention do now adjourn. He added, that he 
 made this motion in consequence of the desire of 
 the members of the various committees to dispatch 
 the business before them in their committee rooms 
 as fast as possible ; hut that if any gentleman had 
 any resolutions to offer, he would withdraw the 
 motion for the present. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS: I have a report to present first 
 Mr. President. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: I withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS had a report to offer from com- 
 mittee No. 5 relative to the power and duties o.< 
 the Governor and Lieut. Governor, except as re. 
 lates to their power of appointing to office. Hf 
 read it in his place, as follows: 
 
 POWERS, &c., OF THE GOVERNOR AND LIEUT 
 
 GOVERNOR. 
 
 Committee No. Five, on " The election, tepure of office 
 compensation, powers and duties (except the power to an' 
 point or nominate to office) of the Governor and Lieuten- 
 ant Governor," unanimously report the accomoanvin^ 
 proposed Article: 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 On the election, tenure of office, compensation, powers and 
 duties (except the power to appoint or nominate to office) of 
 the Governor and Lieutenant Govtmor. 
 
 1. The executive power shall be vested in a governor 
 He shall hold his office for two years; and a h'eutenant so- 
 vernor shall be chosen at the same time and for the same 
 term. 
 
 2. No person except a native citizen of the United 
 States shall be eligible to the office of governor, nor shall 
 any person be eligible to that office who shall not have at- 
 tained the age of thirty years, and have been five years a 
 resident within this state, unless he shall have been absent 
 during that time on public business of the United State-? 
 or of this state. es ' 
 
108 
 
 3. The governor and lieutenant-governor, shall be 
 elected at the times and places of choosing members of the 
 legislature. The persons respectively having the highest 
 number of votes for governor and lieutenant-governor, 
 shall be elected; but in case two or more shall have an 
 equal and the highest number of votes for governor, or for 
 lieatenant-governor,the two houses of the legislature shall, 
 by joint ballot, choose one ol the said persons so having 
 an equal and the highest number of votes for governor or 
 lieutenant-governor. 
 
 fc 4. The governor shall be general and commander-in- 
 chlef of all the militia, and admiral of the navy of the state. 
 He shall have power to convene the legislature, (or the 
 Senate,) on extraordinary occasions. He shall communi- 
 cate by message, to the legislature at every session, the 
 condition of the state, and recommend such matters to 
 them as he shall judge expedient. He shall transact all 
 necessary business with the officers, civil and military. 
 He shall expedite all such measures as may be resolved up- 
 on by the legislature,and shall take care that the laws are 
 faithfully executed. He shall receive for his services the 
 following compensation, viz: Four thousand dollars an- 
 nually, to be paid in equal quarterly payments; six hun- 
 dred dollars annually, to be paid in equal quarterly pay- 
 ments, for the compensation of his private secretary; the 
 rent, taxes and assessments of his dwelling house, shall be 
 paid by the state. 
 
 & 5. The Governor shall have power to grant reprieves 
 and pardons after conviction for all oflences except trea- 
 son and cases of impeachment. He may commute sen- 
 tence of death to imprisonment in a State prison for life. 
 He may grant pardons on such conditions and with such 
 restrictions and limitations as he may think proper. Up- 
 on convictions for treason, he shall have power to sus- 
 pend sentence until the case shall be reported to the legis- 
 lature at its next meeting. He shall in his annual mes- 
 sage communicate to the legislature each such case of re- 
 prieve, commutation or pardon granted by him since his 
 next previous annual message, stating the name of the 
 convict, the crime of which he was convicted, the sen- 
 tence and its date, and the date of the commutation, par- 
 don or reprieve. 
 
 & 6. In case of the impeachment of the Governor, or his 
 removal from office, death, inability from mental or physi- 
 cal disease, resignation or absence from the State, the po- 
 wers and duties of the office shall devolve upon the Lieu- 
 tenant Governor for the residue of the term, or until the 
 Governor absent or impeached, shall return, or the disabi- 
 lity shall cease. But when the Governor shall, with the 
 consent of the legislature, be out of the state in time of 
 war at the head of a military force thereof, he shall still 
 continue commander-in-chief of all the military force of 
 
 $5 7. The Lieutenant Governor shall be President of the 
 Senate, but shall have only a casting vote therein. If dur- 
 ing a vacancy of the office of Governor, the Lieutenant Go- 
 vernor shfcll be impeached, displaced, resign, die. or from 
 mental or physical disease become incapable of perform- 
 ing his duties, or be absent from the State, the President of 
 the Senate shall act as Governor until the vacancy shall be 
 filled, or the disability shall cease. 
 
 5j 8. The Lieutenant Governor shall receive six dollars 
 for every day's attendance as president of the Senate; and 
 he shall also receive the like compensation for every 
 twenty miles travel in going to and returning from the 
 place of meeting of the Senate in the discharge of his du- 
 
 & 9. The Governor and Lieutenant Governor, or either 
 of them, shall not ex-officio or otherwise, hold any other 
 office of trust, honor, profit or emolument, under the State 
 or the United States, or any other State of the Union, 
 or any foreign State or government; the acceptance 
 by the person holding the office of Governor or Lieu- 
 tenant Governor, of any other office ol trust, honor, 
 profit or emolument under the State, or under the United 
 States, or under any other State of the Union, or under 
 any foreign State or government, shall vacate his said offi- 
 ce of governor or lieutenant governor. 
 
 {5 10 The governor may in his discretion deliver over to 
 ustice any person found in the state, who shall be 
 charged with having committed, without the jurisdiction 
 ofthe United States, any crime except treason, which by 
 thelaws of this state, if committed therein is punishable by 
 death or by imprisonment in the state prison. Such de- 
 livery can only be made on the requisition of the duly au- 
 thorised minister or officers of the government within the 
 jurisdiction of which the crime shall be charged to have 
 been committed; and upon such evidence of the guilt of 
 the person so charged as would be necessary to justity his 
 
 apprehension and commitment for trial, had the crime 
 charged been committed in this state. 
 
 11. Every pro vision in the Constitution and laws in re- 
 lation to the powers and duties of the governor, and in re. 
 lation to acts and duties to be performed by other officers or 
 persons towards him shall be construed to extend to the 
 person administering for the time being the government 
 of the state. 
 
 12. The governor may, upon the application of the 
 sheriff of any county in the state, order such a military 
 force from any other county or counties of the state, as 
 may be necessary to enable such sheriff to execute pro- 
 cess delivered to him. 
 
 13. The governor may remove from office any sheriff 
 at any time within the period for which such sheriff was 
 elected. He shall first give to such sheriff' a copy ofthe 
 charges against him, and an opportunity of being heard in 
 his defence, before any removal shall be made, 
 
 14. Every bill which shall have passed the Senate and 
 Assembly, shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to 
 the governor ; if lie approve, he shall sign it; but if not, 
 he shall return it with his objections to that house in which 
 it shall have orginated, who shall enter the objections at 
 large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If, 
 after such reconsideration, two-thirds ofthe members pre- 
 sent shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent together 
 with the objections, to the other house, by which it shall 
 likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of 
 the members present it shall become a law. But in all 
 cases, the votes of both houses shall be determined by 
 yeas and nays, and the names voting for and against the 
 bill shall be entered on the journal of each house respect- 
 ively. If any bill shall not be returned by the governor 
 within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have 
 been presented to him, the same shall be a law, in like 
 manner as if he had signed it, unless the legislature shall, 
 by their adjournment, prevent its return ; in which case it 
 shall not be a law. If at the next ensuing session -ol the 
 legislature, the same bill shall be again passed by the vote 
 ofthe majority of all the members elected in each branch 
 of the legislature, such bill shall become a law notwith- 
 standing the objections of the governor ; but in such case 
 also, the votes of both houses shall be determined by yeas 
 and nays, and the names of the members voting for and 
 against the bill shall be entered on the journals of each 
 house respectively. 
 
 Respectfully submitted: 
 
 ROBT.H. MORRIS, 
 JOHN K. PORTER, 
 WILLIAM PENNIMAN, 
 SERENO CLARK, 
 JOHN HYDE, 
 CYRUS H. KINGSLEY, 
 DAVID S. WATERBURY. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved that it be laid on the table 
 and printed. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that as this is the first report 
 which has been presented to the Convention from 
 any Committee, we ought to consider well as to 
 the best disposition that can be given to them as 
 fast as they come in. This had better be referred 
 to the committee of the whole, and be printed. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS accepted that modification, as it 
 was what he intended. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said he wished to have an 
 additional number of copies printed. He thought 
 double the usual number- 
 
 The PRESIDENT said lhat the rule required 
 the gentleman to state the exact number he desires 
 to have printed. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR would say 500, then. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS accepted this modification. 
 
 The report was then referred to the committee 
 of the whole, and 500 copies ordered to be print- 
 ed. 
 
 RESOLUTIONS INCORRECTLY REFERRED. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that his committee 
 had desired him to ask a change of reference of 
 that part of a resolution offered the other day by 
 the gentleman from Cayuga (Mr. SHAW) relative 
 to the liability of stockholders in Banks; the lat- 
 
109 
 
 ter part of the resolution clearly belonged to an- 
 other committee to the comm'ttee on Corpora- 
 tions other than Banking or Municipal. He 
 therefore moved the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the currency anc 
 banking be discharged from the further consideration ol 
 BO much of a resolution adopted by the Convention, re- 
 ferring to that committee the question of the individua 
 liabili y ol stockholders in moneyed corporations other 
 than banks, and that the same be referred to the committee 
 on corporations other than banking or municipal, 
 
 Adopted. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said that his committee, No. 7, on 
 the powers ot local officers, asked to be discharged 
 Irom the further consideration of the resolution 
 that had bot!ti referred to it the other day by the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) relative 
 to the equalization of direct taxation, and propor- 
 tioning it lo the actual value of estates, &c. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said, that at the time he had of- 
 fered the resolution he had some difficulty in his 
 own mind as to its reference. Still he considered 
 that committee No. 7, on the powers and dunes of 
 local officers, was the right committee to refer this 
 to. The committee on the powers and duties of 
 the Legislature had been mentioned ; but although 
 the powi r of taxation did belong to the Legisla. 
 ture, yet the exercise ot that power clearly be 
 longed to others to local officers. But still if the 
 committee No. 7 asked to be discharged from its 
 consideration, he would amend by asking its refer- 
 ence to committee No. 2. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL then read his resolution: 
 
 Resolved, That committee No. 7 on the appointment or 
 election of all officers whose functions are local, &c., be 
 discharged from the further consideration of the resolu- 
 tion adopted by the Convention on the llth inst., (Mr. 
 LOOMIS',) referring it to said committee " to inquire into 
 the expediency of making constitutional provision to 
 the actual value of the estate of the individual taxed, re- 
 gardless of the distinction between real and personal es- 
 tate," and that the same be referred to the committee on 
 the powers and uuvies of the legislature, except, &c. 
 
 This was accepted, and the subject referred to 
 committee No. 2, on the legislature. 
 
 SALE OF NON-RESIDENT LANDS. 
 
 Mr. HYDE offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the. committee on the rights and privi- 
 leges ol citizens, except, &c , be instructed to inquire in 
 to the expediency of providing in the constitution that 
 non-resident lands which are sold for taxes be sold in the 
 counties in which they belong. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE objected to the reference ; 
 the committee of which he was chairman could 
 net make a law on the subject of taxation, &c. 
 He would move to have it referred to the Com- 
 mittee on the Legislation. 
 
 Mr. HYDE said there had been a law passed 
 last winter in relation to this very subject. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE: Then what is the use of 
 referring it to a committee? 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND: Because they want to have 
 it incorporated in the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE: Very well; but I give 
 the gentleman warning beforehand that the good 
 sense of my committee will induce them to return 
 it promptly, and ask 10 be discharged from itg con- 
 sideration, as not falling wiihin the purview ol 
 their duties. 
 
 TLe resolution, however, was adopted and re- 
 ferred, 
 
 STATES NOT TO EMIT BILLS OF CREDIT. 
 Mr. KENNEDY offered the following, which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 currency and banking to inquire whether the 10th section 
 of the 1st article ofthe constitution of the U. S., by provid- 
 ing that no state shall emit bills of credit, does not there- 
 by prohibit a state from creating corporations empowertd 
 to do that, which said state cannot do under said provision. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that he wished to ofler a 
 resolution, containing a great principle, which 
 had been adopted by many other of the Northern 
 States of the Union, but which had not yet been 
 adopted by this State. It was as follows: 
 ARRESTING RUNAWAY NEGROES. 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committees on the 
 powers and duties ofthe legislature to enquire into the ex- 
 pediency of so amending the constitution as to require the 
 passage of laws prohibiting any officer connected with the 
 administration of justice in this state from aiding in the ar- 
 rest or detention of any person claimed as a fugitive from 
 slavery or involuntary service. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 MAYOR OF NEW YORK'S TERM OF OFFICE. 
 Mr. CORNELL offered, the following, which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the or- 
 ganization and powers of cities, &c., to inquire into the 
 expediency of permitting the city of New York to length- 
 en the official term of the Mayor thereof to two years. 
 CIVIL DISABILITY OF DUELLISTS. 
 
 By Mr. KENNEDY: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the llth standing com- 
 mittee to inquire into the expediency of incorporating a 
 clause into the constitution providing for the civil disabil- 
 ity of all persons who shall hereafter be engaged, directly 
 or indjrectly, in a duel, as principal or accessory before 
 the fact. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 CODIFICATION OFTHE LAWS. REFORMS IN LE- 
 GAL MATTERS, &c. 
 
 Mr. CAMPBELL P. WHITE then rose and in 
 his place read the following : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 judiciary to inquire into the expediency of providing in 
 the constitution for a systematic and thorough reform of 
 courts of law and equity for a simplification and reduc- 
 tion of the antiquated, artificial and ponderous forms of le- 
 gal and equitable proceedings and ultimately for the en- 
 actment and codification of the vast mass of unwritten law 
 and equity in order that the people may know the legal 
 and equitable rules by which they must be governed that 
 litigation may be diminished, and justice more promptly 
 administered: And also for the extension of the right of 
 trial by jury to all practicable cases. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said this was a most important 
 proposition, and required serious attention; it 
 was undoubtedly the fact that some portions of it, 
 might very properly be referred to the committee 
 on the judiciary, yet it was equally certain that 
 other portions of it ought to be referred to a select 
 committee. For as it occured to him on the rea- 
 ding of it, one part decidedly looked to a codifica- 
 :ion of the laws ; a plan he was in favor of. 
 This was, perhaps, the most important proposi- 
 :ion that had yet been submitted to the Conven- 
 ;ion; and he trusted that the gentleman (Mr. 
 WHITE) would modify it in such a way as to have 
 t considered by a select committee say a com- 
 mittee of 7, for besides, that portions of it do 
 not properly require the reference to the judicia- 
 iry committee, that committee has already before 
 t a greater amount of business than it can prop- 
 erly or conveniently dispose of, in the short pe- 
 
110 
 
 riod that would be allotted to it for that purpose. 
 Mr. WHITE said that he had desired a refer- 
 ence of it to the Judiciary Committee, believing 
 that that committee was best calculated to give it 
 proper attention; he felt a deep interest in this 
 matter: but if the Judiciary Committee was so 
 overburthened with other business already, he 
 would not hesitate to modify his motion in com- 
 pliance with the request of his colleague (Mr. 
 NICOLL ) 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that the Judiciary Commit- 
 tee had now some very important business before 
 them that would occupy all the time they could 
 devote to it for a considerable number of days. 
 He desired, therefore, with the gentleman from 
 New York (Mr. NICOLL) to have the resolution 
 referred to a select committee; atid he thought 
 that beyond a doubt a majority of the Judiciary 
 Committee desired that it should take that course. 
 Mr. WHITE said that he would not object to 
 referring it to a select committee. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that he wished to say one or 
 two words before the resolution was referred. 
 The other day he had offered a resolution calling 
 on the judiciary committee to enquire into the ex 
 pediency of providing for a board of law commis- 
 sioners to revise the present form of practice in 
 our courts of law ; or to provide either by such a 
 commission, or in some oiher way, for a decided 
 and wholesome alteration to effect the same ob- 
 ject ; a change in the mode of law proceedings 
 pleadings, &c., in the courts. This resolution o 
 the gentleman from New York (Mr. WHITE) evi 
 dently looked to the same end it had the same 
 object in view, and clearly should be referred t 
 the committee that had charge of the organization 
 of the courts, &c. the judiciary committee. 
 There was no necessity for a. separate committee 
 to consider this proposition ; it would be very in 
 consistent to raise one for that purpose, after re 
 ferring his resolution to the judiciary committee 
 No board of commissioners would agree to an> 
 thing unless they were to be confined to a specifi 
 object ; and he did not wish the subject divided 
 but that the resolution might be sent to the judi 
 ciary committee, to which it properly and natural 
 ly belonged. 
 
 Mr, STEPHENS observed, that, with all du 
 respect to the Hon. the Chairman of the Judiciar 
 Committee, (Mr. RUGGLES) he would say, tha 
 whilst he by no means desired for an instant to im 
 pose upon that important committee greater bur 
 thens than they could conveniently bear, the sub 
 ject, in his judgment, was already before the judi 
 ciary committee. And he considered it clearl 
 the legitimate business of that committee. ] 
 .comes so regularly through the regular order o 
 the business of that committee. Suggestions o 
 this point having already been made in their deli 
 berative meetings, and a particular course of ac 
 tion in relation to it already partially indicate 
 there; if a select commiitee was raised thei 
 recommendations might come in collision wit 
 the proceedings of the judiciary committee. An 
 though it might therefore add to the burthens < 
 the judiciary committee, he thought it was cleai 
 ly a subject for their disposal, and he hoped to se 
 it so referred. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that he had examined the r 
 solution, and he fully concurred with the gentle 
 
 an from New- York, wh% had last spoken (Mr. 
 TEPHENS.) It was clearly a subject for the con- 
 dera'tion of the judiciary committee. There 
 as much good sense in the suggestions contain- 
 d in this resolution ; and he fully believed that 
 'this Convention should omit to provide a rem- 
 dy for the evils alluded to in that resolution, 
 lat the people themselves would apply the refor- 
 lation hereafter, through the legislature which 
 icy will elect after the new Constitution shall 
 ave been voted upon. It was a subject worthy 
 F the highest and most serious consideration of 
 lis Convention; but he thought it not advisable 
 o raise a select committee for that purpose ; foi- 
 led report might possibly conflict with the re- 
 ort of the judiciary committee, in relation to ma- 
 y of the subject matters contained in the resolu- 
 ion. He trusted, therefore, it would be referred 
 o the judiciary committee though, undoubtedly, 
 much of the resolution belonged to legislative ac- 
 ion, and not to the framing of the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL repeated, that undoubtedly a por- 
 ion of it did belong to the Judiciary Committee 
 mt another part did not; and as to any fears of a 
 ollision or difficulty between the reports of that 
 nd a select committee of 5 or 7, there was noth- 
 ng to be apprehended ; for the two could easily 
 lold a conference, and adjust any differences of 
 pinion they might entertain. He was strongly 
 n favor of a select committee; but some of the sub- 
 ects in the resolution extended beyond the aims 
 and objects, and duties of the judiciary committee. 
 The latter committee regard or contemplate the 
 administration of the laws; whilst the object of 
 he resolution, is, with regard to the laws them- 
 selves. And this is a distinct subject, and re- 
 quires the attention of a distinct committee; it 
 ooks to far higher ends than what weie original- 
 y pointed out for the judiciary committee, and he 
 did trust that this Convention would, on account 
 of its great importance, direct euch a reference. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that the resolution embrac 
 ed various objects, all of which were unqestiona 
 aly of importance. It appeared that a portion of 
 the subject matter of the resolution was already 
 before the judiciary committee, and he was of 
 opinion that such portion had been properly re- 
 ferred. That was the correct committee to inves- 
 tigate that branch of the subject ; and will be fully 
 considered by that cummittee. But there was 
 another which was not only of equal importance, 
 but which went far beyond the first part in its 
 aims and object?, and did not properly belong to 
 the consideration of the judiciary committee; and 
 he agreed with the gentleman from New York 
 (Mr NICOLL) that it ought to be referred to a se- 
 lect committee 'He had reference here to that 
 portion of it, which contemplated an examination 
 of the subject of a codification of the laws. This 
 was a vast subject ; one of very great importance 
 and magnitude. It was a tremendous task to un 
 dertake ; and the duty thereof, if properly perform- 
 ed would occupy very much of the best talent of 
 the State. It it was now in order, he would move 
 so to modify the resolution as to refer the one part 
 to the judiciary committee which had that matter 
 already under consideration ; and the other part of 
 it, which had reference lo the codification of the 
 laws he would desire to have referred to a select 
 committee. 
 
Ill 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that such a motion would 
 be perfectly in order. 
 
 Mr. WHITE said he would not object. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN then said that he would make 
 that motion. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that he wished gentlemen 
 to pause a little; and particularly to avoid com- 
 mitting kindred subjects to different committees; 
 for if they did, the collision would very much t m- 
 barrass both the committees and the House. He 
 had not very distinctly heard this resolution read; 
 but as there appeared to be a considerable diver- 
 sify of opinion as to the proper disposition that 
 should be made of it; and as he wished every 
 member fully to understand the subject so as to 
 vote correctly on it he would, in order to give 
 them all time for reflection, move that the resolu- 
 tion be laid on the table, and that it be printed. 
 
 Mr. WHITE accepted this proposition. 
 
 The resolution was then laid on the table and 
 ordered to be printed. 
 
 ORIGIN OF STATE GOVERNMENT. 
 
 Mr. CORNELL offered the following, which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 rights and privileges of citizens, &c., to inquire into the 
 expediency of embodying In the constitution, a clear and 
 succinct statement or declaration of principles as to the 
 origin and grounds of government in this state. 
 
 SUBDIVISION OF TOWNS INTO TITHINGS-ELEC- 
 TION OF JUDGES BY THE PEOPLE, JURORS, &c. 
 
 Mr. HUNT oflered the following, which he said 
 he would read in his place: 
 
 Resolved, That the judiciary committee be directed to 
 inquire into the expediency of a subdivision of the several 
 wards and townships of the state into tithings or jury dis- 
 tricts, each to contain about ten citizens competent to the 
 performance of jury duty.who shall annually, or as often as 
 a vacancy may occur, elect one of their number to the 
 office of juryman: The expediency of prohibiting any 
 person not thus electedfrom filling the office of juror and 
 the expediency o conferring on the jurymen thus chosen 
 the exclusive powrr of electing justices of the peace, and 
 all state, circuit and local judges. 
 
 Mr. HUNT : I desire to accompany my motion 
 with a few remarks; if it were only to ask pardon 
 of the judiciary committee lor adding another to 
 the many schemes and suggestions before them. 
 They will perceive, however, that what I propose 
 is no new scheme, but one that was tried by our 
 Saxon ancestors, for ages, and found to work well, 
 too well, indeed, to suit the Noranan aristocracy, 
 who adroitly managed to magnify the powers of 
 judges ot their appointment, and to prevent the 
 people from appointing their best and wisest men 
 to represent them in the jury box, as they had 
 been accustomed to do from the time of Alfred. 
 That aristocracy so amended the jury system as to 
 make it, in most cases of importance, where 
 their special interests were at stake, little els( 
 than an automaton, a scape goat, "a screen be- 
 hind which the judges could skulk from re- 
 sponsibility." They preserved the forms of jury 
 trial, so far as those forms could be used to lend a 
 sanction to their oppressions; but they perverted 
 the spirit of tha* admirable democratic institution 
 by a judicious ultraism a violent regard for equal 
 rights which led them to throw open the jury- 
 box fj everybody; and which, of course, enabled 
 them to pack it, when necessary, with their own 
 instruments and retaineis. I would by no means 
 assert that the general character of juries, under 
 
 our pi esent system of selecting them, is bad. I 
 suppose the contrary to be the fact. Yet very many 
 of our courts are haunted, day after day, by disso- 
 lute loungers, wailing a chance to obtain a shilling 
 by getting on a jurv, whose integrity and judgment 
 no man can confide in, and who are utterly unfit 
 to decide either the law or the facts of any case 
 men whose governing motive, in making up their 
 verdict, often may be nothing higher than a hope, 
 by humoring tne judge, to " to place themselves in 
 the line of succession" for another case and ano- 
 ther shilling. Now, the admission of such men 
 to the jury-box, tends to degrade the democratic 
 element of our judiciary, precisely as the exten- 
 sion of the elective franchise to an inferior, barba, 
 rian, or servile race, would degrade those who 
 might exercise it in common with them, and im- 
 pair its \alue. I am aware that some may con- 
 sider this language anti-democratic. But I think 
 differently. While democracy is opposed to all 
 false and aristocratic distinctions, it recognizes all 
 distinctions that are real, and that exist in the na- 
 ture of things. If I must in order to entitle my- 
 self to the name of democrat, disregard the dis- 
 tinctions between civilized and savage, black and 
 white, drunk and sober, cheats and honest men, 
 then I am no democrat, "and will, by God's help, 
 continue so until my life's end." Although I never 
 served on a jury, nor hardly ever entered a court 
 house in my life, I suppose our present mode of se- 
 lecting the judges of all fact, and of law, when they 
 choose it, (as Jefferson describes them,) is this: 
 In ordinary cases, they are raffled into office: but 
 when a rich murderer, or skilful swindler is to be 
 cleared, then the system of challenging regular 
 jurors, and bringing in the right sort of talesmen 
 is resorted to. Now if this is the right mode of 
 appointing our judges of the law and the facts, 
 why not fill the bench in the same way? I con- 
 sider it our duty to veto all this. I consider the 
 office of juryman as one of the highest trusts that 
 can be conferred upon any man, and would have 
 it filled by the very best men in the state. To en- 
 sure this result, I propose the system of electing 
 jurors, which was adopted by our Saxon ancestors, 
 and advocated by Jefferson. I advocate 'their sys- 
 tem because 1 know of no better one, and cannot 
 myself devise any other so good. 
 
 Should we succeed in filling our jury benches 
 with men who are fully qualified to sit there, the 
 legislature might with great propriety reduce 
 the number now required to try a cause, and 
 thus lighten the present tax on jurymen's time 
 and patience. Business men, when they submit 
 a dispute lo arbitration, generally find three ar- 
 bitrators sufficient; and I see no reason why more 
 than twice that number of jurors should be re- 
 quired, unless in cases of great difficulty or im- 
 portance. I would respect the just rights of all 
 litigants, but at the same time remember that 
 men who are not litigants have rights also and 
 ought not to be dragged from their own business 
 by dozens to settle other people's quarrels, when 
 half a dozen would answer all the ends of justice. 
 It would also be but just to increase the pay of 
 jurors to say $1 a day, or 10 cents an hour. A 
 man whose time is not worth that is not fit for 
 the office ; and when government takes a man's 
 time or other property by force without payment, 
 it sets a most pernicious example to thieves, I 
 
112 
 
 would not have consumed the time of the Con- 
 vention with these remarks, if I did not deem it 
 possible that some plan like that I advocate, when 
 properly prepared by our judiciary committee, 
 might obtain the sanction of this body. The 
 Whigs and Conservatives those at least who 
 are not of the Norman stock should approve it 
 out of respect to Woden and the good King Al- 
 fred ; the democrats, because it is endorsed by 
 Jefferson, the Confucius of the new world. My 
 main reason, however for the hope just expressed, 
 lies in the strong object-ions which exist against 
 the appointment of judges by the present mode, 
 and the scarcely inferior objections to their 
 election by the people direct. But should 
 we entrust the selection of judges, (as I 
 hope we may,) to our chosen jurors to the 
 men who have the best opportunity to know 
 personally the character and fitness of candi- 
 dates to the picked men of the whole people 
 then our judges, while strictly amenable to the 
 intelligence and integrity of the community, 
 would have no inducement to sacrifice justice 
 at the shrine of popular prejudice and ignorance; 
 the bench would be beyond the reach of party and 
 of aristocratic influence, and exempt from the 
 carelessness and corruption always induced by the 
 absence of responsibility to the people. And 
 while the reform proposed would tend thus 
 strongly to secure an able, industrious and impar- 
 tial bench, its effects would be still more elevat- 
 ing upon the jury itself. It would render it im- 
 possible for even the most dexterous pettifogger 
 about our courts to obtain a corrupt or incompe- 
 tent jury in the whole state. It would not only 
 restore to our jurors their ancient powers an<l 
 their legitimate rights and dignity, but it would 
 tend to render them worihy of those honors 
 worthy of their trust. I have ventured to obtrude 
 these views, because I think they deserve the 
 consideration of this Convention. Most that has 
 hitherto been said here relates to the superstruc- 
 ture of our judiciary: I would therefore direct at- 
 tention to its foundation ; believing that if we can 
 only perfect that, the superstructure will almost 
 grow up of itself,and prove a refuge and asancluary 
 to generations yet unborn. One word as to the cost 
 and trouble of electing jurors. Were it made the 
 duty of the assessors to divide their respective 
 towns and wards into tithtngs to appoint an in- 
 spector or overseer to each tithing and to give 
 him on or before the last Monday of every year a 
 written designation of its boundaries and inhabi- 
 tants subject to jury duty ; were such inspector 
 required to convene his little district on the first 
 Monday of each year, and whenever a vacancy 
 should occur, for the purpose of electing a jury- 
 man out of their number, and then to receive and 
 canvass the votes and send the name of the jury- 
 man chosen to the town clerk, or whatever officer 
 might be directed to keep the jury list were 
 the performance of these simple duties to be en- 
 forced by adequate penalties, nothing more would 
 be required. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that this was indeed what he 
 considered to be a very novel proposition. He 
 Could only say, that he thought the gentleman 
 was something like, at least, a century behind 
 the age. However, as it was only a matter of re- 
 ference, he did not know as it made much differ- 
 
 ence ; and so he would notiake any objections to 
 the mere reference. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS said that he did not at first ful- 
 ly comprehend the precise nature of the inquiry 
 sought to Le instituted by the resolution of his col- 
 'eague, yet he had listened with a great deal of in- 
 terest to the arguments in support of the proposi- 
 tion, which the gentleman had subsequently sub- 
 mitted to the House. They contained several 
 points that were new and interesting to him ; and 
 he had merely risen to say that he should f el 
 iged if his colleague would refer those arguments 
 to the committee, with the resolution offered ; 
 there were many suggestions in that statement 
 which he had prepared, that did not occur to him 
 when he first heard the resolution read. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said there was one difficulty; 
 part of the resolution belonging certainly to the 
 committee on the right of suffrage. 
 
 Mr. HUNT wished to know then, if the judiciary 
 committee did not mean to enquire into, or recom- 
 mend the granting of the right to the people to 
 elect their own judges, as well as other officers ; 
 that was what he wanted to see brought about ; 
 the election of judges as well as jurymen by the 
 people. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD asked further leave of ab- 
 sence for judge NELSON for a week, who had to 
 hold a U. S. Circuit Court at Canandaigua. 
 Granted. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that the members, he believ- 
 ed, could much more usefully employ their time 
 to-day in committees than in Convention, and he 
 therefore moved to adjourn. 
 
 Carried, and the Convention adjourned till next 
 day at 11 A. M. 
 
 THURSDAY, (16M day,) June 18. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. W. H. CAMPBELL. 
 VOTES &c. OF NEW-YORK. 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that he had the pleasure of 
 presenting the returns of each election district in 
 the city of New-York, in answer to the resolu- 
 tion he had presented a day or two since. He 
 would move that they be printed. 
 
 His motion was agreed to. 
 
 COMMON SCHOOLS. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the President of 
 the Common School Convention held not long 
 since, had sent a statement to the Convention m 
 the form of a preamble; this was accompanied by 
 a resolution passed by that Convention and sent 
 here for consideration. 
 
 It was read, and on motion of Mr. VVAKiJ re- 
 ferred to standing committee No. 12. 
 THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said he held in his hand a me- 
 morial or petition, which had been sent to him 
 by the Society of Friends; it had been adopted at 
 their last annual meeting at New-York, m May 
 last, and entrusted to him to present to the Con- 
 vention, together with printed copies for the use 
 of all the members ; .and with a request that he 
 would move its reference to an appropriate com- 
 mittee The obj ect contemplated by the petition 
 was to relieve that respectable body of citizens 
 from certain grievances under which they seem 
 
113 
 
 to labor, and of which they complain in relation 
 to military service. He therefore presented it as 
 requested", and moved its reference to the com- 
 mittee on military affairs. Agreed to. 
 
 EXPENSES OF COUNTY COURTS, &c. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the Secretary had 
 received an answer from JAMES CONNER, Esq., 
 clerk of the City and County of New York, rela 
 tive to the expenses of his court, the number of 
 cases tried, &c., causes docketted, &c., costs, da- 
 mages, &c. The Clerk would read it; and he 
 would suggest that part of it be referred to the 
 judiciary committee, and part to the committee 
 of 5. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD asked if any provision had yet 
 been made for printing the answers to the inter- 
 rogatories on these subjects, sent out by the Se- 
 cretary ? The judiciary committee were acting as 
 rapidly as possible, and they were acting on these 
 matters at the present time, without any of this 
 data before them as a guide. Now the two great 
 capital evils in the judiciary system, of which the 
 people every where complain, and ask to have re- 
 medied, are 1st, " the great delay," and, 2ndly, 
 " the great expense." Now the Convention had 
 ordered these very interrogatories to be sent out 
 in order, expressly, to get at the expense of, and 
 the time consumed by, various suits. And these 
 returns are the best approximation we can get at, 
 as to the expense. And those who desire to have 
 the judiciary system as perfect, in all its parts, as 
 we can get it, (and he trusted that, was the desire 
 of every member,) and to have legal business 
 transacted as free from delay and expense as it 
 could be procured, should have all these facts be- 
 fore them ; and particularly so should the judiciary 
 committee. The expense of printing was not at 
 all to be considered as commensurate with the 
 advantage of the information sought. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that when they got all 
 the returns in ai.cl had them digested, then they 
 could be printed ; not onry for the information of 
 the judiciary committee, but for all the members. 
 The present list was not complete ; all the civil 
 causes were not on it, nor the number of judg- 
 ments docketted. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that as far as he was acquaint- 
 ed with the operations of the Judiciary committee 
 this document in its present shape would be of 
 very little use to them. They would not be pre- 
 pared for some days to make up a statement or 
 report in relation to the matters contained in this 
 return ; and it would be better to wait until all 
 the documents came in, or as many of them as 
 they could Reasonably expect to receive ; and 
 then when the committee of 5 had made a digest 
 of them it could be printed. He was opposed to 
 the printing now. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD withdrew his motion. 
 
 TAXATION OF REAL ESTATE. 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that on Saturday last he 
 offered a resolution in relation to taxation of real 
 estate ; and on his motion it was referred to the 
 15th standing committee; he had it so referred 
 because a resolution on a kindred subject had just 
 before been referred to that Committee, at the 
 request of the gentleman from Hevkimer (Mr. 
 LOOMIS.) Since, then, however, the resolution 
 of that gentleman, had been taken from the 15th 
 
 and transferred to the standing committee No. 2, 
 (that on the powers and duties of the Legislature) 
 and consequently he would now move to have his 
 own resolution taken from the 15th and sent to 
 the 2d standing committee. No opposition ; and 
 it was transferred. 
 
 NEW RULE. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said he would move the 
 following as a new rule hereafter for the Conven- 
 tion : 
 
 Resolved, That a motion to strike out and insert shall be 
 one motion and indivisible. 
 
 Mr. T. said that he desired this to be an addi- 
 tional rule ; it was one that was absolutely ne- 
 cessary to enable the Convention to get along 
 with its proper business hereafter. By and 
 by, when they came to dispose of the different 
 amendments that would be offered to the vari- 
 ous reports of the committees, a result would 
 be exhibited that would illustrate this. For in- 
 stance, four gentlemen would have amendments 
 to offer to one proposition ; a motion would be 
 made to strike out ; the others would all sustain 
 this, in hopes of having each of their own spe- 
 cial amendments adopted as a substitute. But 
 when they came to act on the affirmative propo- 
 tion the difficulty would present itself. They 
 might vote on all the amendments and re- 
 ject them , and at last prefer the old form of the 
 proposition ; but then in order to restore to the 
 body of it, the original matter, it will be necessa- 
 ry to move for a reconsideration ; and by a rule 
 already passed in this body that cannot be acted 
 on without three days' notice, and it would take 
 three days therefore to accomplish this. If we 
 consider the motion to strike out to be merely 
 ministerial if the motion is not indivisible, there 
 will be an opposition raised to every new motion 
 " to insert," after the original words are stricken 
 out. He read from Jefferson's Manual to sustain 
 his position. It was carried. 
 
 COMMON SCHOOL FUND. 
 Mr. NICOLL offered this which was referred : 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to furnish 
 for the use of the Convention a statement, showing 
 
 1. The amount ot the school tuna, the character of the 
 investment, and the amount of money paid into the Treas- 
 ury an>-( not invested; also, a brief history oi tne changes 
 made in the investment of the capital with a reference to 
 the laws under which they were made and the t fleet of 
 those changes on the security or productiveness of the 
 fund. 
 
 2. The same particulars in relation to the Literature 
 Fund. 
 
 . A statement of the present condition of the U. S. de- 
 posit fund, giving all the losses of capital and specify- 
 ing the counties in which the same have occurred; also, 
 the amount of revenue derived annually from the fund, and 
 the manner in which it is appropriated by existing lawsj 
 and showing the terms on which these moneys were de- 
 posited in the State Treasury. 
 
 CANAL DEBT OF STATE, TAXES, &c. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN, from the committee No. 3, o& 
 canals, public revenues, debts, &c., offered the 
 following : 
 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to furnish 
 for the use of the Convention, the following statements: 
 
 1. A statement of the debts of the State, and the pay- 
 ments thereon, as exhibited in Table F-, of Assembly Doc- 
 ument No 61, of 184-2. brought down to June 1, 1846. 
 
 2. A statement of the direct debt of the canals, showing, 
 in the order of time, the periods at which the principal be- 
 comes payable; the works for which it was conlraetedj 
 the times at which the scrip was issued; the rate of inter 
 
114 
 
 est thereon; and showing the principal sum, the interest 
 in each year, on the supposition that the debt be paid as 
 fast as it becomes payable. 
 
 3. A like statement of the debt created in aid of incorpo- 
 rated companies. 
 
 4. A like statement of the General Fund debt, assuming 
 the Astor stock, and the Indian annuities to be paid in ten 
 years. 
 
 5. A like statement of the whole debt united. 
 
 6. An account showing in each year, from 1817 inclu- 
 sive, the amount of the Salt tax, Auction tax, Steamboat 
 tax, and Land Sales, so far as such lands were not dona- 
 tions to the Canal Fund, received into the Canal Fund; 
 and also any payments by the General Fund to supply de- 
 ficits in the revenues of the lateral canals, and the present 
 aggregate amount thereof, calculated on the principal of a 
 yearly rent, with interest compounded at five per cent., 
 deducting from time to time, sums paid to the Canal Fund 
 into the Treasury and used by the General Fund. 
 
 7. A like account, computing only simple interest on 
 the moneys advanced, making a rest only when the Canal 
 Fund in effect made a payment absorbing the payment 
 for interest as soon as may be, but calculating no interest 
 on interest. 
 
 8. The revenue of the Erie and Champlain Canals for 
 each year, and their expenses for repairs, superintendence 
 and collection; and their net revenue. 
 
 9. The revenues of all the canals, taken as a system for 
 each year; the expenses of each of them, and all of them 
 collectively, and their nett revenue. 
 
 10. The current expenses of the State for each year, be- 
 ginning as early as 1817, exclusive of payments for the 
 lateral canals; specifying any sums paid for interest, and 
 showing what the annual expenses would have been if 
 
 the general fund had been supplied with ready means, and 
 been subject to no debt; and also showing the yearly 
 charge by reason of any general fund debt. 
 
 11. An estimate of the probable revenues of the general 
 fund under existing laws, and any information he may 
 deem proper to aid in forming a correct opinion on that 
 subject; and as to probable current expenses of the gov- 
 ernment, chargeable on that fund 
 
 Mr. STRONG very much wished to know if 
 all that matter was to be spread upon the jour- 
 nals. He could not see the use of it. It mighl 
 be all very proper for a legislature to call for all 
 this information, but he could not see the use o 
 the Convention doing it, except it was to lumber 
 up the journal with a whole pack of useless 
 stuff. He could not see any use at all in their 
 calling on the Comptroller for all this. He 
 should like to know the reasons of the mover for 
 doing it. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that the information called 
 for was necessary to enable the committee to 
 frame provisions in regard to the future contrac- 
 tion of debts, and the payment of the existing 
 debt. It ought also to be before the Convention, 
 and the committee had with entire unanimity 
 agreed upon the resolution. 
 It was adopted. 
 
 THE MILITIA. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM offered the following resolu- 
 tion which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on military affairs en- 
 expediency of exempting all 
 .,__ __________ ^ :e of military duty, who shall 
 
 certify in writing to the military commandant, that they 
 have conscientious objections to engaging in war. 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM offered the following resolution : 
 Resolved, That the judiciary committee inquire into the 
 expediency of further continuing a judiciary system that 
 provides tribunals of limited local and inferior jurisdiction 
 tor one class of suitors, and those of general unlimited anc 
 superior jurisdiction for other classes, involving the neccs 
 eity of appeals from court to court, to procure final deci 
 gions: And farther, That the said committee inquire into 
 the practicability and expediency of so changing the cha 
 racter, jurisdiction and powers of the justices' courts as tr 
 make them courts of conciliation. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that he hoped he should not 
 or a moment be suspected or charged with any 
 disrespect to the judiciary committee 1o which he 
 himself belonged, by offering this resolution. He 
 lid not offer it, either because the last part em- 
 jodied his own views, or because the judiciary 
 committee had not considered the matter; but he 
 lad done so in order to call the attention of mem- 
 jers particularly to the subject, and to elicit the 
 deas and views of others upon it. Many of the 
 members had given this subject considerable at- 
 tention, and he hoped it would result in some 
 proposition, by which, if adopted, the objects 
 sought for could be attained. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that as it was only a mere 
 matter of form, the resolution was unnecessary. 
 For as the gentleman was himself a member of the 
 judiciary committe he could at any time lay his 
 own views before that committee, without having 
 them referred thereto,in the form of a resolution by 
 the Convention. He rose merely to meet the ques- 
 tion of any implied instructions to that commit- 
 tee, that might arise from the position which had 
 been assumed. For when a gentleman was not a 
 member of a certain committee, then the only 
 way in which he could get his views before it, 
 was by offering a resolution here in the House ; 
 but this, certainly, was not the position of the 
 gentleman from Seneca, (Mr. BASCOM,) who be- 
 ing now a member of the committee, to which he 
 desired this resolution sent, could have free ac- 
 cess to all its members, and freely spread his 
 views before them, and interchange opinions. 
 And yet this resolution is to pass through this 
 House with a sort of directory clause to the com- 
 mittee. But as the gentleman has disclaimed 
 any such intention as that which he (Mr. STET- 
 SON) had at first apprehended the resolution im- 
 )lied, he would offer no further opposition. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that he certainly had not 
 meant any thing of the kind ; he did not wish to 
 commit that committee in the least to the propo- 
 sition he had presented ; nor did he desire now to 
 indicate, himself, what course should be pursued. 
 rle had merely offered it, as many other gentle- 
 men had offered them, as individual propositions, 
 and on his own individual responsibility. He was 
 induced to do so, because a great variety of plans 
 and propositions had gone through this House 
 (the Convention) with all sorts of plans for judi- 
 cial reform, &c., many of them containing com- 
 plicated systems of arrangements for courts of 
 Law and legal systems, with general and concur- 
 rent jurisdiction. He wanted this plan to go also 
 with them, as a sort of antagonist proposi- 
 tion, from the Convention to the committee. 
 
 , 
 
 This was his reason for offering the resolution, 
 and also with a desire to invite discussion or so- 
 licit suggestions, so that the proper object should 
 be attained, if possible 
 
 SALES IN CHANCERY-INFANTS' ESTATES. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART offered the following resolu- 
 tion : 
 
 Resolved. That the Secretaries of the Convention ad- 
 dress to the Register, Assistant Register and Clerks of the 
 Court of Chancery respectfully the following enquiries: 
 
 1st How many applications for the sale of iniants real 
 estate were made in su^h court during the year 1845? 
 
 2d What AN as the aggregate value of the property of in- 
 fants' sold by order of the court during said year 184$, and 
 
115 
 
 what was the value of such property in each case respect- 
 ively ? 
 
 3d. What was the aggregate amount of costs taxed and 
 allowed for conducting such sal^s? 
 
 4th. What is the whole amount of moneys now invested 
 lor the use of infants in said court? 
 
 6th. The commissions retained by the Register, Assist- 
 ant Register and Clerks respectively from the proceeds of 
 infant's estate? 
 
 Mr. WORDEN wished that, as all the money 
 arising from these sales is now paid into the 
 Court of Chancery, that the gentleman from Gen- 
 esee, (Mr. TAGGART). would modify his resolu- 
 tion so as to make it embrace an account of all 
 the monies, &c. paid to these Clerks and Regis- 
 ters in Chancery as commissions, fees, &c on the 
 amount of sales passing through their hands. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART assented to this. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that he also wished to know 
 how much of these costs in Chancery are paid 
 for Master's fees. In his part of the country, tlie 
 Master's swallow up nearly all the costs and fees; 
 and as this is a political office, they ought to get 
 at these facts. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the returns asked 
 for at present, from the masters in chancery, 
 merely embraced the gross amount of theij fees ; 
 and not the fees arising from any particular 
 branch of their business. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD wished to know if the enquiry 
 embraced the commissioners on investments of 
 dower estates ? 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that it did not. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said that in drawing up his 
 resolution he had only called for the aggregate 
 amount ; and therefore the answer to it would 
 not add anything to that from the call already 
 made, which he knew nothing of before, and as 
 many gentlemen wished to add amendments, he 
 would withdraw the resolution for the present so 
 that they all might be embodied in it. 
 FUTURE REVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION. 
 
 Mr. MANN offered the following, and it was 
 adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on future 
 amendments and revisions of the constitution, to consider 
 the propriety of amending the constitution, so as to submit 
 to the electors of this state, at a general election periodi- 
 cally, or every years, whether they, the people, will 
 call a Convention to revise the Constitution, or not. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY asked for leave of absence for 
 Mr. CROOKER for 10 days. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said it was necessary they 
 should spend as much time now in committee as 
 possible, and moved an adjournment. Carried. 
 
 Adjourned till Friday at 11 A. M. 
 
 FRIDAY, (llth day") June 19. 
 EXPENSE OF THE REGISTRY LAW. 
 The PRESIDENT presented a statement of 
 the expenses incurred in the city and county of 
 New York in registering the voters of that coun- 
 ty. It amounted to $17,878 73. 
 
 On motion of Mr. KENNEDY, it was referred 
 to the commitee on the right of suffrage. 
 
 EXPENSES OF THE COURTS. 
 A communication was received from the 
 Comptroller relative to the expenses of several 
 courts of law and equity, in answer to a resolution 
 of the Convention on that head. 
 Mr. WARD suggested that it should probably 
 
 be referred to the committee of 5 ; but afterwards 
 at the suggestion of tho President, moved to refer 
 it to the Judiciary Committee and it was so re- 
 ferred. 
 
 A RECESS. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved that when the Conven- 
 tion adjourn, it adjourn until Monday at 11 A. 
 M. He said that it . certainly did seem to him 
 that the time of the Convention could be much 
 better spent in deliberations in their respective 
 Committees, than by meeting here in the House 
 to-morrow. This was his leading object in offer- 
 ing the resolution ; there was a great deal of work 
 to do in the Committees, and very little work to 
 do here in the House. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS wished to say a word or two be- 
 fore that resolution was put ; lie was very appre- 
 hensive that if that resolution was carried, the 
 number of the gentlemen detailed to serve on 
 Committees would be very greatly diminished. 
 Many of the members while here, were but a 
 short distance from home ; and could soon and 
 easily reach home by steamboat or railroad. And 
 they may if we adjourn over until Monday, 
 find it very convenient to adjourn home, which 
 many others of us cannot do. [Laughter.] He 
 hoped the resolution would not pass. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that he understood that it 
 was the intention of some gentleman here to of- 
 fer a resolution in the course of next week, to the 
 effect that the Convention shall take a recess for 
 some days or a week or so, somewhere in the 
 neighborhood of the 1st of Juy. And in order to 
 procure a pretty unanimous and harmonious vote 
 on that point, he hoped that there would be no pre- 
 vious adjournment, beyond the usual periods. 
 For a recess at that time would be very desirable; 
 some would wish to go home for the purpose of 
 spending a few days with their families some 
 would want to go for the purpose of taking in 
 their harvest, (a most desirable thing) among 
 which class he must place himself others to ce- 
 lebrate the 4th of July a very appropriate dis- 
 position of their time and others to celebrate 
 the recent splendid victories on the Rio Grande, 
 as that would be a very appropriate time for the 
 celebration of the triumphs of the gallant little ar- 
 my there. And as he did desire to see a recess of 
 some days taken at that period, he hoped no long 
 adjournment would be had now. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that it was a matter of in- 
 difference to him whether his little resolution of 
 adjourning over for one day. should pass or not ; 
 but it did make a great difference to him, and to 
 many others of the members, whether a proposi. 
 ti6n, such as that just stated by the gentleman 
 from Orange, (Mr. BROWN) passed or not. He 
 saw that there was a very great disposition on the 
 part of several of the gentlemen to go away, by 
 and by about the 4th of July, for two or three 
 weeks ; and gentlemen talked of voting down his 
 little proposition to adjourn for a day, in order to 
 get a large slice by and by. He did not care any- 
 thing at all about it, but still, as he wished to try 
 the feelings of gentlemen on this point he could 
 not withdraw it. He wanted some kind of a 
 steering oar to have by and by to guide him, when 
 gentlemen should ask him to vote on their reso- 
 lution for the big adjournment. 
 
 Mr. WARD wished to know if it was the in- 
 
116 
 
 ten'ion ot the gentleman from Orange (Mr. BROWN) 
 or any of his friends, to take up the resolution he 
 had alluded to, (for a recess) either to-day or to- 
 morrow; he wished to learn this, so as to guide 
 him in voting. If we met to-morrow, we should 
 probably have only to receive some few resolutions, 
 which perhaps could as well be offered to-day. 
 However, his only desire was to see the business 
 of the committees disposed of as speedily as was 
 consistent with prudence, good sense, and the 
 interests of the people of the State. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he had intended to ask 
 the Convention to go into committee of the whole 
 to-diy on the report which he had presented the 
 other day on " the powers and duties of the Gov- 
 ernor" &c. Not for the purpose of discussing it 
 however, but for the purpose of altering the Ian- 
 guage of the report merely. He was one of those 
 who were of the opinion that this report should be 
 one of the last if not the very last, to be acted up- 
 on and disposed of finally in the Convention. For 
 they could not tell what powers and duties should 
 properly be delegated to the'executive, until they 
 saw the action of other committees whose reports or 
 resolutions may effect that office.and saw what pow- 
 ers and duties they proposed to leave him. The 
 alteration in the phraseology of the report would 
 not occupy over 5 or 10 minutes at the farthest, in 
 the committee of the whole. And while he was 
 up, he would say on this question of adjournment, 
 that if they were to adjourn over to-morrow, it 
 would benefit but a very few ; he, it was true, 
 would be one of the few, for he was now released 
 from aay committee, hiving got through with the 
 labors of his own; but he thought that probably it 
 might tend to break up the deliberations of some of 
 the other committees. But there was another im- 
 portant point for consideration; we are daily re- 
 ceiving answers from county clerks and others, to 
 enquiries which we have directed to be sent to 
 them; and it is important that the Convention 
 should act on these as fast as it receives them, and 
 assign them to the appropriate committees for their 
 information and guidance; and therefore a short 
 session to-morrow, of at least one hour, would 
 enable them to receive any resolutions, and so to 
 dispose of these returns as to get the benefit of 
 them in the committee as speedily as possible. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that he would not de- 
 tain the Convention by any unnecessary or length- 
 ened remarks; it was a matter of very little mo- 
 ment to him personally, whether they adjourned 
 over till Monday, or spent an hour in Convention 
 to-morrow in receiving and referring resolutions; 
 but he thought it best that there should be a ses- 
 sion to-morrow, even if it was but a short one. 'As 
 to any adjournment of this body, either for a long- 
 er or shorter period, he thought it was not to be 
 tolerated ; the people did not desire it ; the peo- 
 ple did not expect it ; nor would they be pleased 
 with it- For his own part, he felt and knew that 
 his constituents sent him here to do a certaii 
 work ; to aid in amending the present State Con- 
 stitution ; and in his discharge ot that duty, whicl 
 he had undertaken cheerfully, he should act as he 
 had always done in his past public career; en- 
 deavor to perform it as promptly, as cautiously anc 
 as efficiently, as was consistent with the best inte- 
 rests of the people, and as his abilities would ena 
 ble him; without believing this to be less a dutj 
 
 nan any other that he or aj^y one might under- 
 ake to perform in private life He would dis. 
 harge it without any regard to his own personal 
 cnvenience. Some members seem to act as if they 
 
 ete merely sent here as a matter of mere perso- 
 al advantage ; and as if the principal point they 
 lad to consult was their own personal con- 
 "enience. He would act with the same diligence 
 nd sense of responsibility as if he was a mere 
 lired man, employed to do a certain work; and 
 vithout having any more right to study his own 
 personal convenience than any such hired man. If 
 he adoption of the motion to adjourn to-morrow 
 would have the effect of preventing any more 
 engthened adjournment hereafter, he would cer- 
 ainly vote for it. For they might by adjourning 
 >rotract their session till the 1st of November, or 
 ill the time for the people to vote on the amended 
 constitution, as they would come back from a re- 
 ess of one or two weeks much less fitted to dis- 
 )atch their business than when they went away. 
 This breathing time would give them renewed en- 
 ergies to go into the debate with fresh vigor. They 
 were now in the third week of the session ; and 
 as yet no single proposition had been definitely 
 acted -upon ; but one had been submitted to the 
 louse ; and it was his firm belief that their duty 
 ;o their constituents impressively required that 
 without any of these adjournments, all the leisure 
 should be devoted to their committees, and that 
 hey should go on and transact their business as 
 speedily as possible. 
 
 Mr. STRONG believed that he had now accom. 
 plished the object he designed in offering his re- 
 solution. He had drawn out the intentions of 
 gentlemen as to their designs in relation to ad- 
 ourument. He preceived that there were those 
 who were desirous of adjourning about the fourth, 
 jut he knew another class who were in favor of 
 an adjournment at another time, and for a much 
 more important purpose than celebrating a holi- 
 daythat of harvest. He would now withdraw 
 tiis resolution. 
 
 BOARDS OF SUPERVISORS THEIR POWERS. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH offered the following resolu- 
 tion : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the 15th standing com- 
 mittee, to inquire into the expediency of conferring upon 
 the Boards of Supervisors of the several counties of this 
 state by constitutional provision, the power of legislation 
 with respect to the location, erection, and maintenance of 
 public buildings, bridges, and highways; the erection and 
 division of towns; the election, number, term of office, and 
 compensation of all town ( ffieers, police courts and courts 
 of special sessions; the power of raising money by taxation 
 upon real and personal property; and generally with re. 
 spect to all other matters of a purely local nature. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM asked leave of absence for Mr. 
 J. J. TAYLOR, of Tioga, for three days. Granted. 
 SAFE KEEPING OF THE PUBLIC MONIES. 
 
 Mr. MANN offered the following resolution: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to committee No. 3, to take 
 'nto consideration the propriety and expediency of report- 
 
 the intervention or agency of banking institutions or mo- 
 neyed corporations, and separating the state finances from 
 the power, control, and agency of all moneyed corpora- 
 tions. 
 It was adopted, 
 
 
117 
 
 
 
 EXHIBIT OF THE AFFAIRS OF BANKS AND OTHER 
 INCORPORATIONS. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES offered the following : 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the 17th standing com- 
 mittee to enquire into the expediency of establishing some 
 power or authority by which the stockholders or creditors 
 of banking and other private corporations may, by sum- 
 mary examination under oath of all officers and agents of 
 such corporations, enquire into, discover, and publish the 
 situation and condition of their afl'airs in all respects, and 
 the particulars of the management and conduct oi the of- 
 ficers and agents of the corporation in relation to its affairs. 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG suggested that the refer- 
 ence should be diyided the matter relating to 
 banks to one committee, and that relating to pri- 
 vate incorporations to another. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES accepted the amendment, and 
 the resolution was adopted. 
 
 ESPECIAL PRIVILEGES. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN offered the following resolution: 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the llth standing com- 
 mittee to consider and report as to the propriety of prohi- 
 biting the legislature from granting any privileges or ex- 
 emptions to any citizens beyond those of other citizens, 
 and from granting to any association of individuals or body 
 corporate, any privileges or exemptions which are denied 
 to other citizens except such privileges and exemptions 
 as are expressly provided for in the constitution. 
 CODIFICATION OF THE LAWS. 
 Mr. .VHITE called for the consideration of the 
 resolution of enquiry presented by him on Friday 
 last as to the expediency of a thorough reform ol 
 the courts and practice, and also of a codification 
 of the written and unwritten law, and an exten- 
 sion of the right of trial by jury. 
 
 Mr. W asked that the inquiry might be 
 divided, so that so much of the resolution as re- 
 lated to the courts of law and equity, &c., be re- 
 ferred to the judiciary committee ; and so much as 
 related to the codification of the laws, to a select 
 committee 
 
 Mr. N1COLL moved that the select committee 
 consist of 7 merr.bers This was also agreed to. 
 THE ERECTION AND DIVISION OF COUNTIES. 
 Mr. STOW offered the following resolution : 
 Resolved, That the committee on the powers and duties 
 of the legislature, be instructed to inquire into the expe- 
 diency of providing in the Constitution, that before any 
 law erecting a new county shall take effect, the location 
 of the public buildings shall be designated, and then it 
 shall be submitted to the electors within the limits of the 
 proposed county to determine, by a majority of the votes 
 given, whether such county shall be established or not: 
 And whether any law annexing part of one county to 
 another, ought not to be restrained from taking effect, un 
 til the electors residing within the limits of the district so 
 to be annexed, shall have determined in its favor. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 DAMAGES TO CANAL CONTRACTORS. 
 Mr. JORDAN offered the following : 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to repor 
 to this Convention the amount of all moneys paid to con 
 tractors with the State for the enlargement or construction 
 of public works as damages for the violation or recisio: 
 of contracts on the part ol the State: And also all claim 
 of a similar character against the State, so far as he may 
 have it in his power to ascertain the same. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 PLAN FOR A JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON presented a plan for a judi 
 ciary system, which he asked to have referred t 
 the proper committee. It was, he understood 
 one of great merit, and was prepared by Mr 
 CLARK of New York. It was so disposed of. 
 
 ROYAL CHARTERS AND FRANCHISES. 
 Mr. MURPHY offered the following: 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the following commit- 
 ees respectively to inquire into the expediency of striking 
 ut of the constitution, as useless and unnecessary, and 
 iable to popular misconstruction as follows: 
 
 1. To the committee on the creation and division of es- 
 ates in l.mds so much of the constitution as declares 
 hat nothing contained therein shall effect any grants of 
 and within this state made by authoiity of the King of 
 
 Great Britain or his predecessors, before the 14th day of 
 October 1775, or affect any such grants since made by this 
 tate, or by persons acting under its authority. 
 
 2. To the committee on the organization of cities and 
 'illeges, so much as declares that nothing contained there- 
 n shall annul any charters to bodies' politic or corporate 
 )y the said King or his predecessors, made before thu said 
 lay, or shall effect any such charters since made by this 
 
 state, or by persons acting under its authority. 
 
 Mr MURPHY said it would be proper, in order 
 o prevent misapprehension as to his object, to 
 state that in offering this resolution he had no de- 
 sire or wish to interfere with the rights of property, 
 whether that property be in lands or in franchises 
 n the nature of private property. If this provi- 
 lion be stricken out of the Constitution, there will 
 itill remain the provision that nothing contained 
 n that instrument should affect or impair 
 he obligations of contracts or the rights of 
 property, which would serve every purpose for 
 which this proposition was originally intro- 
 duced. The object for which he introduced 
 this resolution was to prevent a very common 
 error in this community an extensive error that 
 ;here is something in charters granted prior to the 
 ormation of the constitution, so very sacred that 
 they may not be touched, while charters granted 
 since may be. Now the charter of the city ot Buf- 
 falo or Brooklyn may be altered or repealed by the 
 Legislature, but the moment you touched the an- 
 cient city of Albany, granted in 1656, by a royal 
 Governor, you are touching something sacred. 
 Now, he did not present an imaginary case here, 
 but one in which we had before us every day the 
 evidence of the truth of what he said. By the 
 chartei of the city of Albany, to which he referred, 
 there is conferred on theJMayor the exclusive pow- 
 er to grant licenses to tavern keepers, as he was 
 informed, (and if he was wrong the gentleman 
 from Albany could correct him.) And he under- 
 stood that the Mayor of that city notwithstand. 
 ing the supreme power of the State and the peo- 
 ple of Albany have united to say that no license 
 shall be granted persevered in granting them. 
 He (Mr. M.) did not wish to be misunderstood 
 on this subject. In regard to Temperance, 
 he did hold that the great cause was more 
 likely to be injured than benefitted by at- 
 tempts to enforce obedience to a sumptuary law, 
 as he regarded it. He merely referred to this 
 as an illustration, and if it was law it should be 
 obeyed as well in Albany as in Buffalo. He held 
 that all public powers were held in trust for pri- 
 vate purposes, and he did not wish that the error 
 should prevail, as it did<in the community, and in 
 high places too, that the charter <f a city was now 
 protected by the Constitution from the exercise of 
 the sovereign power. In regard to the form of the 
 resolution a part of it referred to the committee of 
 which he was chairman. Properly, perhaps that 
 did not belong, under the present arrangement of 
 committees, to that committee, but, however, in 
 order that it might be before some committee he 
 
118 
 
 had moved its reference there. It was immaterial 
 whether it went there or to the committee on the 
 rights and privileges of the citizen. It was a mere 
 matter of form. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN considered this a pretty import- 
 ant resolution in its principles, and he rose to 
 move that it be laid on the table, so that in some 
 form or other, the sense 1 of the Convention might 
 be taken out before it was referred to a commit- 
 tee. It was a matter of very great question, wheth- 
 er, under the treaty of 1783, between the British 
 Government and the American People, we were at 
 liberty, in any way, to legislate, either by Con- 
 stitution or otherwise, so as to affect vested rights. 
 He was not disposed to go into an explanation of 
 his views at this time ; he had risen but to move 
 to lay the resolution on the table, in order to di- 
 rect attention to it before it* went to a committee. 
 
 The resolution was laid on the table, with the 
 assent of Mr. MURPHY. 
 
 THE EXERCISE OF THE PARDONING POWER. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD offered the following resolution: 
 
 Resolved, That the Governor be, and hereby is, request- 
 ed to furnish to this Convention 
 
 1 The number of applications for pardon for criminal 
 oftences, made during the year 1845. 
 
 2. The number of pardons granted on such applications 
 during said year. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 APPRAISAL OF PRIVATE PROPERTY TAKEN FOR 
 PUBLIC PURPOSES. 
 
 Mr. STOW offered the following resolution: 
 Resolved, That the committee on personal rights be in- 
 structed to inquire into the expediency ot providing the 
 means by which the value of private property shall be as. 
 certained, when taken lor public purposes. 
 
 Mr. S. said that he observed that the commit- 
 tee on personal rights had a vast amount of busi- 
 ness referred to them; but he hoped the Conven- 
 tion and the committee uould pardon him in ex- 
 pressing his earnest desire that they would exam- 
 ine and see whether the Constitution was now 
 sufficiently guarded in respect to private property. 
 It now provided that it shoudd not be taken for pub- 
 lic use, without just compensation to the own- 
 ers thereof. Under the determinations of the 
 courts by which we are ail bound, whatever may 
 be our private opinions, the legislature may, in its 
 discretion, provide the means or tribunal by which 
 that compensation is ascertained. Now, it must 
 be obvious that the security of personal propeny 
 is left entirely at the mercy of the legislature. 
 If the party taking the property can also provide 
 its own tribunal, it might be as well to let him 
 take it without any tribunal. This operated very 
 severely in cities, where the powei was conferred 
 on the Corporations to appropriate private pro- 
 perty, and to appoint their own appraisers grant- 
 ing the privilege also of an appeal to the same 
 Council which authorized the taking of the pro- 
 perty ! He hoped he would be pardoned in ex- 
 pressing his earnest desire ; that there should be 
 some relief ife this case. 
 
 SECURITY FOR COSTS. 
 
 Mr. NELLIS offered the following resolution : 
 Resolved, That the committee on the judiciary be di- 
 rected to inquire into the expediency of making some con- 
 stitutional provision, whereby a party on commencing an 
 action at law or in equity, or in removing any cause or 
 suit at law or in equity to a higher court or tribunal than 
 the one in which it was commenced, shall be required to 
 
 give security for the payment otall costs, he or she may 
 be liable to pay to the opposite party, and also to give ei- 
 ther party on the trial of any cause or matter, the right of 
 calling on the opposite party as a witness, and having the 
 benefit of his or her testimony. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 ARRANGEMENT OF THE NEW CONSTITUTION. 
 
 Mr. BRAYTON offered the following resolu- 
 tion : 
 
 Resolved, That a committee ot seven be appointed, 
 whose duty it shall be to examine into and report upon the 
 following subjects: 
 
 1. The arrangement of the several articles and sections 
 of the Constitution as amended and adopted. 
 
 2. The manner and form in which the Constitution as 
 amended and adopted shall be submitted to the people of 
 this State for their adoption and rejection. 
 
 3. The publication ol the amendments, or of the Consti- 
 tution as adopted 
 
 4. The form of the notice of the election. 
 it. The form of the ballot. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN suggested that it was quite too 
 early to raise such a committee. It was better to 
 wait until we had come to some definite conclu- 
 sion. The resolution although it would be very 
 proper in its time, had better lay on the table. 
 
 Mr. BRAYTON had no objection to that dispo- 
 sition of it. 
 
 THE DURATION OF LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS. 
 
 Mr. CANDEE moved the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the 2d standing com- 
 mittee to inquire into the expediency of restricting the an- 
 nual sessions of the Legislature of the State to a term not 
 exceeding 90 days; and whenever the Legislature shall 
 continue in session beyond, the time above specified, they 
 shall do so without compensation, except incases oi ex 
 treme emergency, in which cases the Governor ir-ay have 
 the power to determine. 
 It was adopted. 
 
 SECURITY OF PRIVATE PROPERTY. 
 Mr. RICHMOND offered the following resolu] 
 tion : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the rights and privile- 
 ges of citizens inquire into and report upon the propriety 
 ot so framing the Constitution, as to prohibit hereafter the 
 taking of private property for the benefit of corporations 
 or individuals. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 On motion of Mr. BROWN, the Convention 
 adjourned to 11 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 SATURDAY, (18th day) June 20. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. CAMPBELL. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a report from the 
 Register in Chancery, in answer to a resolution 
 of the Convention, showing the number of bills 
 filed in that Court, and the causes on the calen- 
 dar, during the years 1844 and 1845. 
 
 On the motion of Mr. CHATF1ELD, the pa- 
 per was referred to the judiciary committee. 
 EQUALIZATION OF TAXATION. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS offered the following resolution : 
 & . No citizen can by any means be compelled to con- 
 tribute to any gift, aid, loan, tax or imposition or other 
 like charge, which is not imposed on and required of all 
 other citizens irrespective of class, calling or occupation. 
 
 It was referred. 
 
 THE LOCALITY OF TAXATION. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS also offered the following resolu- 
 tion : 
 
 & . Personal property used or invested iu trade, busi- 
 ness or occupation, shall be assessed in the town or ward 
 where euch trade, business or occupation is conducted. 
 
119 
 
 He moved its reference to the 14th committee, 
 which was on the organization and powers of 
 cities and incorporated villages, and especially 
 their power of taxation, assessment, borrowing 
 money, contracting debt, and loaning their credit. 
 Mr. TAGGART suggested that the proposition 
 belonged more properly to the 15th committee. 
 The duties of that committee were in relation to 
 the power of counties, towns, and other munici- 
 pal corporations, except cities and incorporated 
 villages, and especially their power of local leg- 
 islation, taxation, assessment, borrowing money, 
 and collecting debts. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS had no choice in this matter 
 his only desire was that it should be referred. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY had no objection to the refer- 
 ence. The object of the resolution was sufficient- 
 ly apparent, and expressed in direct terms. It 
 was the opinion, no doubt very honestly enter- 
 tained by the mover, that residents in one place 
 doing business in another, should be assessed in 
 the place where the business is done, for their 
 personal property. This is an exceedingly inter- 
 esting question, and like others that would pro- 
 bably come before the Convention, it concerned 
 more particularly two cities in the southern part 
 of the State. He had no objection to this refer- 
 ence, but he had rather it should go to some com- 
 mittee of which he was not a member. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS begged the gentleman's pardon. 
 When he mentioned the committee No. 14, it did 
 not occur to him that his friend from Kings (Mr. 
 M.) was on that committee. He had however, ac- 
 cepted the suggestion of his friend on his left that 
 it should go to committee No. 15, prior to the gen- 
 tleman from KINGS', rising or his (Mr. M's.) dis- 
 covering that he was on committee No. 14. The 
 gentleman was right, this was an important ques- 
 tion and to borrow the figure or reference which 
 the gentleman made use of yesterday, and one to 
 which we could all refer the city of Albany, was 
 ,an instance It might be that the city of Albany 
 might have an immensely heavy business transact 
 ed in the lower part of the city and the gentle 
 man who used the stores of Albany, its water 
 lamps, docks &c., and conducted this immensel) 
 heavy business there, might live over the river a 
 Greenbush, and therefore pay nothing for all this 
 He was happy to have this practical instance 
 as it might illustrate the necessity of the propo 
 sition he had offered. The gentleman from King: 
 was mistaken if he supposed it was intended t< 
 tax gentleman who live in Greenbush, it wa 
 only intended that their property in Albany shouL 
 be taxed there. That the property used in Alba 
 ny, and protected by its municipal laws, shoul< 
 contribute to the support of those laws, leaving 
 the person to be taxed in Greenbush for all th 
 property he might own there. 
 
 Mr. STETSON wished to enquire whether th 
 gentleman intended to include property of th 
 country that might be there on commission ? Thi 
 would subject the whole country to taxation, fo 
 the benefit of the city. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said, that would be for the con 
 sideration of the committee, and at any rate woul 
 afford a very good reason for a report against th 
 section. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that it was apparent that th 
 subject of the resolution did not relate to commi 
 
 e No. 15. Any gentleman-who would take the 
 ouble to look at its organization and the subjects 
 Dmmitted to its action would see that this had 
 o possible connection with those duties. To 
 ommittee No. 15 is committed the powers of 
 ounties, towns, and other municipal corpora- 
 ons, except cities and incorporated villages, and 
 specially their power of local legislation, taxa- 
 on, assessment, borrowing money and contract- 
 ng debts. If the subject embraced in this reso- 
 ii related to local as well as general taxation, 
 len it did not belong to committee No. 15. The 
 ommittee to which the resolution should be re- 
 erred was No. 3. That is where it should go, and 
 e was the more anxious that it should take that 
 irection from the fact that the committee No. 15 
 ad already a very troublesome task before them. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS had rro objection to that. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that gentlemen would 
 iscover if they looked into this matter that it 
 tad nothing at all to do with committee No. 3. 
 ^hat committee took charge of the subject of ca- 
 lals, internal improvements, public revenue and 
 iroperty, public debt and the powers and duties 
 f the legislature in reference thereto, &c; Now 
 e proposed to look a little into the duties of 
 ommittee No. 2. That committee had charge of 
 he powers and duties of the legislature except 
 is to matters otherwise referred. That was the 
 roper committee for this matter as to the mat- 
 er of taxing property and as to where it should be 
 ocated whether in Albany or Greenbush, or in 
 York or Brooklyn. It was a matter of le- 
 gislation a general matter having reference to 
 he whole State, and the resolution was a general 
 me and was not alone of special reference to these 
 cities there was nothing of the kind. If he un- 
 derstood it, it proposed that personal property 
 hould be taxed at the place where the business 
 was done, and not where the residence was lo- 
 
 ated. Cases of this kind occur in almost every 
 town and county in the State, and it was therefore 
 a general matter appertaining to the duties of 
 committee No. 2. It certainly did not belong to 
 committee No. 3, for that had charge of the great 
 matter of State debt and loans of its credit, &c. 
 matters sufficiently large and ftiportant enough 
 for their consideration. It was never constituted 
 to take charge of such a matter as this. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY concurred in the views taken 
 of this matter of reference by the gentleman last 
 up. This subject no more belonged to No. 3, 
 than it did to No. 15, or No. 14, for it was a mat- 
 ter of general interest. Those committees refer 
 to particular matters in the Constitution. No. 14, 
 that of Municipal Corporations No. 15, to cer- 
 tain other than municipal Corporations, and No. 
 3, in regard to our general internal policy. No. 
 2 perfectly embraces the subject. It is truly a 
 subject for legislation,and probably did not belong 
 to this body at all. But it was well to have it 
 considered and he hoped that it would be fully 
 considered. But the object of the qpsolution was 
 to change a principle which exists in all govern- 
 ments, both in civil and common law the tax- 
 ation of personal property at the domicil of the 
 owner. This seeks to change the invariable rule 
 that taxation is levied for the benefit of those among 
 whom its owner resides. He hoped it would be 
 sent to a committee where it would receive full 
 
120 
 
 examination. For years the Legislature had been 
 besieged by the city of New York, to have the re- 
 sidents of Brooklyn taxed or legislation changed 
 so that she should be made a black sheep for 
 New York. He hoped it would be examined by 
 a committee that would give it full consideration. 
 
 Mr. STETSON was sorry to see the direction 
 which this reference was taking. He did not 
 Want the charge of the subject, and he would sub- 
 mit that the fair construction of the last part of 
 the subdivision in relation to committee No. 2 
 " except as to matters otherwise referred" was 
 that every other committee should be first tried be- 
 fore any attempt was made to give it to his custody. 
 Again, he was clearly against the gentleman's 
 proposition, and it was a settled parliamentary 
 rule that all references should take a direction 
 somewhat, at least, favorable to the intention of 
 the mover. He therefore hoped that committee 
 No. 2 would not be burthened with its conside- 
 ration. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD wished to make a disposi- 
 tion of this torpedo which none seemed disposed 
 to touch. Each proposition of reference had 
 brought some member of the committee to his feet 
 to protest against it. Now he would move that 
 it be referred to a select committee of five, at the 
 same time protesting against being put on the 
 committee. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS concurred in the view that the 
 proper reference was to a select committee. On 
 looking over the list, it appeared to him that 
 there was no one more than another, under 
 whose peculiar powers and duties this resolution 
 would come. And he would refer it to a select 
 committee, more particularly after the expression 
 of the gentleman at the head of committee No. 
 2, of his unfavorable impression as to the object of 
 the mover. He knew nothing of the relative posi 
 tions of Brooklyn and New York on this question, 
 but he desired to express this suggestion. He saw 
 no good reason for the distinction between perso- 
 nal and real estate. Both should participate alike. 
 In the case of real estate the taxation is always 
 local and levied where it is situated ; and he saw 
 no reason why taxation on personal estate should 
 not be liable to Ae same rule. We should either 
 bring the real estate under the same rule as was 
 applicable to personal, or the personal under the 
 same as applied to real estate. A good many 
 difficulties have arisen out of our system of taxa- 
 tion, and the adjustment of the details. The sys- 
 tem of arbitrary distinctions between real and 
 personal property were derived undoubtedly from 
 the mother country. There a landholder is con- 
 sidered of more importance than the owner of 
 mere personal estate. The difficulties there in 
 the way of the alienation of real and personal 
 estate do not exist in this country. And with us 
 this distinction is almost abolished in its prac- 
 tice. We have some remains of it, it is true, in 
 the requirements of the formality of a deed in 
 real estate transfers, but generally the spirit of 
 the law was in favor of transferring one as well 
 as the other. His impressions were in favor of 
 the proposition for a select committee or of its 
 converse, and this seemed to him the best of the 
 two. 
 
 ^ Mr. PERKINS said that if it was desirable en- 
 tirely to change the law in relation to assessments 
 
 on personal property, it^was a matter which 
 should engage the very serious attention of this 
 body. He apprehended that the proposition of 
 the gentleman from New- York and the views of 
 the gentleman from Herkimer, were impractica- 
 ble, without an entire change in the system of the 
 taxation of personal property. And in order to ar- 
 rive at any views thus entertained by them, we 
 must tax all personal property as we tax real estate, 
 without reference to any distinction on account 
 of the indebtedness of (.he person in possession. 
 As the law now exists and has existed since the 
 organization of our government a person is only 
 taxed for the excess of his personal property over 
 and above all indebtedness If the proposition 
 of the gentleman from New- York prevails how 
 is that to be ascertained. As the laws exists, if a 
 deduction is allowed on account of indebtedness, 
 the person assessed must have notice given him 
 of the amount of his taxation. If a person doing 
 business in New- York has $100,000 of personal 
 property there, and the same amount in Brooklyn, 
 making $200,000 in all, where is the distinction 
 of the $100,000 indebtedness to be made in New 
 York or Brooklyn ? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS: Let the deduction be made where 
 he desires. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that if the deduction was 
 made in the place where he resided although he 
 has $100,000 personal property there his estate 
 would be entirely untaxed where his business 
 was done ; and where he did reside, the city or 
 town could derive no benefit whatever from his 
 wealth. And very serious questions became in- 
 volved here, as the result necessarily of destroying 
 the distinctions which now exist between real 
 and personal property, so far as respects indebt- 
 edngss. Whether that was desirable, and wheth- 
 er it was not better that all property should be 
 taxed without reference to any indebtedness, and 
 whether that would not operate as equally upon 
 all classes as now, was a new and serious ques- 
 tion, and one, he apprehended, upon which few 
 members in this Convention could give an opin- 
 ion without a careful examination. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN thought it unne- 
 cessary that a special committee should be ap- 
 pointed on this subject. If he understood the 
 duties of the committee No. 11, that was precise- 
 ly the reference to make of it. That committee 
 takes charge of the rights and privileges of citi- 
 zens of the State. This was a question involv- 
 ing the rights of the citizens of the State in point 
 of taxation whether they should be taxed in one 
 place or in another for instance, in New-York 
 or Brooklyn. He should like to have this com- 
 mittee, at the head of which was the venerable 
 gentleman from Dutchess, (Mr. TALLMADGE,) 
 examine this subject, and have the benefit of that 
 examination. He was inclined to concur with 
 the gentleman from Herkimer, in some of his 
 views, but as he thought the subject was not 
 strictly before the Convention on a motion of ref- 
 erence, he should refrain from any remarks upon 
 it. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM hoped no special committee 
 would be raised on this propsition. It would 
 seem to the observer that this Convention sup- 
 posed itself possessed of all thd wisdom in the 
 land, past, present and prospective. We are en- 
 
121 
 
 tering into the consideration of subjects it seemed 
 to him, belonging, exclusively to legislation, and 
 some even to the local authorities of counties. 
 We are unnecessarily consuming time in these 
 discussions aud if we give importance to all 
 these matters by raising select committees for 
 their consideration, we invite a thousand similar 
 propositions for the reformation of the State 
 laws. There was great propriety in their con- 
 sideration, he granted ; but it belonged to a leg- 
 islative body. He hoped therefore that conse- 
 quence would not be given to this matter by 
 raising a select committee, but that it would be 
 allowed to take the usual reference. He cared 
 not to which committee it went. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that it seemed to him that 
 the course of reference in this case was clear. It 
 could, however, not be made to any one commit- 
 tee by itself. It seemed to him that the 14th 
 committee had charge of that part of the resolu- 
 tion which referred to the powers of cities and 
 incorporated villages to tax and assess. He 
 thought there could be no doubt of that. There 
 was then a considerable part of the resolution not 
 embraced in the plan of reference, and that he 
 thought would probably go to committee No. 2, 
 which he supposed had general charge of matters 
 of taxation or to No. 3. It struck him, there- 
 fore, that the resolution in its reference should be 
 divided. The part alluded to by him, to No. 14 ; 
 and the other part to No. 2 or 3, as gentlemen 
 might think in regard to this matter of taxation. 
 Some allusion had been made by the gentleman 
 from Kings, (Mr. MURPHY,) to the substantial 
 part of this proposition, to its merits. Now, upon 
 that subject, as one of the representatives of the 
 city of New York, he felt obliged to say this. 
 Certainly, no greater injustice could be done to 
 such a corporation as the city of New York, than 
 by permitting citizens of Brooklyn to trade there 
 to the extent of i_.illions of dollars, and escape the 
 burthens tha f should be imposed on that property. 
 A question of considerable practical inconve- 
 nience also arises as to where property should 
 be taxed. He supposed it to be impossible to set- 
 tle the question so as to avoid that inconvenience, 
 but it seemed to him that the nearest approxi- 
 mation to such an avoidance of the difficulties, was 
 contained in the proposition of his colleague. He 
 therefore hoped that the reference would neither 
 be made to a special committee, nor to any of the 
 others named and assented to by his colleague, 
 but that it would be made as he suggested in the 
 introductory part of his remarks part of it to 
 committee No. 14, and the other part, he would 
 say for the purpose of getting the sense of the 
 convention on the question, to committee No. 2. 
 
 Mr. STRONG confessed that he had been some- 
 what entertained by this debate. When we look- 
 ed over the Speeches made by the gentlemen from 
 the two cities the contending parties it would 
 be found that no two of them agreed. He believ- 
 ed the whole matter was out of order this dis- 
 cussing the merits of a resolution merely on a mo- 
 tion of reference. Suppose that we should en- 
 graft into the Constitution all these propositions, 
 what kind of a Constitution would we have ? 
 There was another good reason and that was 
 we should not engraft on the Constitution, that 
 which had been rejected by the legislature, who 
 
 8 
 
 had full power to grant it. He had seen it him- 
 self when he had been here before, and he did not 
 .believe that our time was well taken up, or that 
 the people were so ignorant as to the laws of tax- 
 ation, as to suppose that we came here to investi- 
 gate that matter and put it in the Constitution. 
 Any thing that touched the pockets of the people 
 they understood very well. These were matters 
 that they looked into, and they wanted no propo- 
 sition of this kind in the Constitution. There 
 was another difficulty to a considerable extent : 
 to what committee shall the subject be given, and 
 where shall one be found favorable to it. It was 
 an old rule and always pretty generally adhered 
 to, that we should not put the child to nurse 
 where it would be strangled. No committee had 
 as yet been found who were not opposed to it 
 who would receive the nursling, and for that rea- 
 son a special committee was asked to take 
 charge of it. He was opposed to referring it to 
 any committee that objected to it it would be 
 doing injustice to the subject and to the gentleman 
 from New- York, so to refer it. He should vote 
 if compelled to vote at all, and he hoped he should 
 not be, although he should not move to lay the 
 subject on the table, but hoped some other gen- 
 tleman would for a special committee. And 
 while up, he would say, that he hoped he would 
 not be placed on the "committee, as he was en- 
 tirely opposed to the proposition. [Laughter.] 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion to 
 refer the resolution to committee No. 3, and it 
 was rejected, a count being had, ayes 42, nays 43 
 
 The PRESIDENT announced the question now 
 to be on the motion of the gentleman from Rens- 
 selaer, (Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN,) to refer to 
 standing committee'No. 11. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE asked to have the resolu- 
 tion read, (it was read.) Mr. T. had two views 
 of this resolution. He was not entirely suited 
 with the resolution as it stood. In the first place, 
 the resolution as it stood, sent us forth, even to 
 our newly acquired territory on the Rio Grande, 
 and to the world,as having agreed to the proposi- 
 tion. The motion therefore should be made so as 
 to be in fact one only of reference. On the other 
 hand neither the second or the eleventh committee 
 was the proper committee to take charge of the sub 
 ject. When that committee, (the llth)was created, 
 he had not supposed that it was to be a commit- 
 tee of what the Romans, in their law Latin, call- 
 ed Omnium gatherum. He had not the least 
 objection to it's being so occupied so far as he 
 was concerned. He was perfectly willing if the 
 Convention thought proper to do so, but he tho't 
 it expedient then to alter its name. If it was 
 considered a glorious privilege to be taxed, then 
 of course it should go to the committee on the 
 rights and privileges of the citizen. But he tho't 
 that this matter should go to the delegation from 
 New York and Kings not to the black or white 
 sheep alone but to the two crows to take it and 
 settle it together. This would be in accordance 
 with the rule in legislation, that all kindred sub- 
 jects should be sent to a kindred committee and 
 if there was no standing committee, a select com- 
 mittee should be raised for that reason. When 
 any gentleman created or begot a doll, he ought 
 to be permitted to dress it in his own robes and 
 present it in his own garniture. And all nonde- 
 
122 
 
 script resolutions of this sort should be similarly 
 disposed of. Having suggested this, he had no 
 hesitation in saying that it ought to go to if to 
 any standing committee to No. 14. Most cer- 
 tainly it ought not to be sent to a committee on 
 the rights and privileges of citizens unless it 
 was to be considered a glorious privilege to be 
 taxed. It would indeed be amplifying the privi- 
 lege very much to let him have it without re- 
 straint and to tax a man in every town where 
 he happened to own a cow, a horse, or an ox. 
 But he had been reproved the other day for dis- 
 cussing the merits of a proposition on a motion of 
 reference, as had been done all this morning, and 
 he would refrain from further discussion. He 
 hoped the motion to refer the proposition to 
 a committee of kindred associations, would 
 prevail, and that the committee on the rights 
 and privileges of citizens, would be left busy to 
 study constitutional law in order to secure pro- 
 tection to the citizens. But if gentlemen how- 
 ever thought it the proper committee for this sub- 
 feet, he should not object to it. The committee 
 would endeavor to do it justice. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES hoped this proposition might 
 go to a select committee. Every committee nam- 
 ed that seemed to be regarded by the Convention 
 as in any way appropriate to take charge of it, 
 seemed disposed not to take it ; to say hands off. 
 And every gentleman who had spoken had pro- 
 posed a different committee before he sat down, 
 and concluded too with the hope that he would 
 not be put on it. He, too, was going to propose 
 a select committee ; and he was going to say an- 
 other thing. It would be recollected that there 
 was a time when the citizens of New- York oppo- 
 sed those works of Internal improvement in our 
 State, which had added so much to the wealth of 
 that city or at least came tardily to their sup- 
 port. Now they seemed disposed to tax the pro- 
 perty of every man who happened to be in their 
 city, transacting business. He wished, briefly to 
 say to the gentleman from New- York, that the 
 time may come when business men may recollect 
 out of the State as well as in it that there are 
 such places as Boston, as Philadelphia, as Mon- 
 treal, and as New-Orleans. And that the time 
 may come when this trade might be diverted to 
 these cities. He would not say any thing more 
 about that. He esteemed, highly, the honorable 
 gentleman and his colleagues, and as far as he 
 was acquainted with the business men of the city, 
 they were honorable men enlarged and liberal 
 in their views, but he hoped that the city of New- 
 York would not be found standing out against its 
 own interests. He should prefer that the propo- 
 sition should be referred to a select committee, 
 composed of the delegates from the city and coun- 
 ty of New-York. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said a delegate from the city 
 of New-York might be excused, if he should offer 
 thanks to the gentleman for selecting that delega- 
 tion for the consideration of this proposition, were 
 it not for the previous part of his speech which 
 was to inform us gentleman from New York that 
 there was a Boston, a New Orleans and a Mon- 
 treal. As though the holding up before our faces 
 of such places, was to frighten us all out of our 
 sense of propriety, as the threatened flagellation 
 to the school boy and that frightened thereat, we 
 
 were immediately to retreat from any honest 
 conviction we might h^ve of an important prin- 
 ciple. Now although a delegate from the city and 
 county of New York, and he thanked God from 
 the State of New York he had yet to see 
 or rather his memory had yet to return back to 
 the first instance where local feeling perverted 
 or destroyed his sense of what was due to the 
 whole. He introduced the proposition from an 
 honest, thorough conviction that it was just in 
 itself, without any reference to any locality, or 
 the residence of any individual whose property 
 might be taxed and as equally important to eve- 
 ry locality in the State. Now, as matters now 
 stand, he found himself something in the position 
 of the man who went to a certain village to sell a 
 fox skin. He tried all over to sell it but could 
 find no purchaser. He then tried to give it away, 
 but no man would have it. At last he tried to 
 lose it and accordingly he dropped it carefully 
 and ran. But immediately he heard the halloo of 
 " Mister, mister, you've lost your skin" [laugh- 
 ter.] The poor fellow thew up his hands in des- 
 Eair. He had tried to sell it and could not he 
 ad tried to give it away, but could not then he 
 tried to lose it, but in that even was he defeated. 
 (Renewed laughter.) Now he (Mr. M.) had tried 
 not exactly to sell it but to place it in such a 
 position, that those now opposed to it might re- 
 ceive it, and after a thorough examination wake 
 up to the justice of his proposition. That 
 would be called a sale. Then he tried to give 
 it away. He had assented to all and every sug- 
 gestion as to where it should go and each and all 
 repudiated it, and would not touch it. He there- 
 fore would ask to have it referred to a select com- 
 mittee, and he believed that under parliamentary 
 rule, the member who made the motion, is made 
 the chairman of the committee. He did this open- 
 ly and would not shrink from the responsibility 
 of examining this question, and placing it before 
 the public on its merits. If he was wrong on the 
 merits, he knew there was wisdom and firmness 
 in the house to put him down. He would not at- 
 tempt to designate the committee, all he desired 
 was that intelligent men should be placed upon 
 it. He wished his learned friend from Rensselaer 
 (Mr. V. S.) would oblige him so much as to with- 
 draw his motion. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN cheerfully with- 
 drew it, and 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD also withdrew his. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that he believed this 
 motion to raise a select committee was his pro- 
 position. [Laughter.] He did not wish to take 
 from his friend from New York the honor of be- 
 ing chairman of it, however, and he distinctly 
 stated when he made the motion, that he did not 
 desire to be put upon the committee at all. Still, 
 according to parliamentary usage, jt would belong 
 to him. Perhaps he could give his reasons for 
 not desiring to be on the committee, and it would 
 be only extending the fox skin story to its con- 
 clusion*. The fellow, after his repeated failure 
 to get rid of his skin, as a last resort, said he would 
 take it to Rhode Island, where they would steal 
 it from him. [Laughter.] Now, he thought if 
 the gentleman would take his proposition over to 
 Brooklyn, they would steal it fiiem him, and he 
 could thus dispose of it. [Laughter.] 
 
123 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said this was not the first time 
 he had heard this fox story. It had occurred to 
 him that his friend was about to lose his fox skin, 
 and it was for that reason he proposed to refer it 
 to a select committee. The gentleman from New 
 York had spoken of the attempt he (Mr. R.) had 
 made to frighten the citizens of New York and 
 its members in Convention from their position. 
 He had not intended any such thing. Ho was led 
 into the train of remark which nad thus been 
 construed, not by what fell from the gentlemen 
 from New York, but from what his friend from 
 Kings (Mr. MURPHY,) had said. He was led to be- 
 that the object was to tax the inhabitants of 
 Brooklyn doing business in New York. And al- 
 though the gentleman from New York, did not 
 name that city, but referred to Albany, and asked 
 if people were to come and enjoy its pavements, 
 its streets, its docks, its wharves, its lights, its 
 police, &c., and not pay for it it was from those 
 remarks that he, (Mr. R.) supposed that he in- 
 tended to illustrate and state the condition of the 
 people of the city of New York. Then he (Mr. 
 R ) had brought up the subject of its opposition 
 to the great works of internal improvement, 
 which had done so much for it, and had felt at 
 liberty to suggest the idea that business people 
 might learn that there were other places where 
 they could do their business, and that if they 
 were to suffer in addition to the opposition on 
 the part of New York to measures they deemed 
 of vital importance themselves to be taxed for 
 the purpose of using the pavements, gas lights, 
 of that city, they might feel disposed to trade else- 
 where. It was for this reason that he felt inclin- 
 ed to admonish him, of the feeling which had be- 
 gun, at least, to pervade the minds of our trading 
 population. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY had no objection to the refer- 
 ence to a select committee, indeed he desired that 
 might go there, if, as he remarked before, the 
 Convention should deem it a matter of sufficient 
 importance to engage their attention. And in the 
 few remarks he had submitted he had attempted 
 to confine his attention to the subject of refer- 
 ence. But in the course of the debate we have 
 been amused, by the gentleman from New- York, 
 who had told us a very interesting Joe Miller, 
 which story had been taken up and finished by the 
 gentleman from Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIELD). Now 
 he thought the gentleman from Otsego was a lit- 
 tle too fast. The gentleman from New- York was 
 not disposed to lose his proposition he wished 
 to take it. And he (Mr. M.) hoped he would 
 take it where Brooklyn would have no opportunity 
 to steal it. Nor did Brooklyn ask to be placed in 
 the category with stealing Rhode Island. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said this was a serious and 
 a difficult question. The Legislature had for 
 years been petitioned on the subject, for there 
 was not a county in the state where a similar 
 condition of things did not exist as had been re- 
 ferred to. The question was whether the taxa- 
 tion should be levied in the town of a county, or 
 in its centre, where all the capital was drawn, 
 .and it was one not to be trifled with. He hoped 
 herefore, it would have a candid and careful ex- 
 amination, not with reference to a particular lo- 
 cality ,but to i^ effect on the State at large. 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion to 
 refer to a select committee, and it prevailed. 
 
 PROVIDING THE OFFICERS WITH NEWSPAPERS 
 Mr. CHATFIELD had a resolution to offer 
 which concerned the business of the Convention 
 and the convenience of the secretaries. They 
 informed him that they found it extremely con- 
 venient in making up the journal, instead of in- 
 serting the propositions to be entered, in the 
 original manuscripts or by copying, to transfer 
 the printed copies which they found reported 
 with the debates in the daily papers of the city 
 they occupying less space, and being correct 
 copies. He offered, therefore, the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the resolution heretofore adopted, pro- 
 viding lor supplying members with newspapers, be and 
 the same is hereby extended so as to include the secreta- 
 ries of the convention. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 THE SEPARATION OF BANK AND STATE, 
 Mr. CONELY offered the following resolution: 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the third standing com- 
 mittee to enquire into the expediency of making provision 
 in the constitution that nothing shall be received in pay- 
 ment oi dues by this government except, gold and silver 
 coin, and such evidences of debt as are secured by bonds 
 of this state, and are issued by institutions which do not 
 
 issue such evidences of a lower denomination than 
 
 amount. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said it was very evident that 
 committee No. 3 was not a currency committee, 
 or one to say in what kind of funds the debts owing 
 to the government should be paid, or any thing 
 of the kind. Its duties were only in reference to 
 the great questions of State credit and State debts. 
 That was what it was constituted for. We have 
 at least three more committees far more proper 
 to refer it to than No. 3. He was almost 
 afraid to designate one lest he should alarm the 
 feelings of some gentlemen on the committees, 
 and induce them to vote it on to his, (Mr. R.'s) 
 committee, however wrong it might be to put it 
 there, in order to get rid of it themselves. He 
 would not suggest to what committee it should 
 go, but gentlemen could see for themselves, that 
 it had no affinity with the duties of committee 
 No. 3. That was not raised to say in what kind 
 of funds the business of the government was 
 transacted in, or what kind is paid or received 
 for its indebtedness. 
 
 Mr. CONELY was indifferent to what commit- 
 tee it went to. The 3rd committee was on pub- 
 lic revenue and this resolution referred to the 
 subject. He should not object however to its 
 going to the 16th committee. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD hoped it would not take that 
 reference. It was a question of the collection of 
 the revenue, whether it should be in gold or sil- 
 ver coin, bank paper or bank paper only of a cer- 
 tain denomination. It most clearly then ought to 
 go to the committee on the public revenue the 
 3rd. What the State should take as between it- 
 self and its debtors, in its dealings, the bank com- 
 mittee had nothing to consider. It did not come 
 at all within their purview. He hoped there- 
 fore the matter would be referred to the 3rd 
 standing committee. 
 
 < Mr. CAMBRELENG said that substantially 
 the same proposition in another form had been 
 referred already to committee No. 3, and it wa 
 
124 
 
 proper therefore that this should take the some 
 direction. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that if a proposition of 
 this kind had been already referred it was not ne- 
 cessa-ry then to refer this. While up he would 
 take the occasion to say, that if we were to have 
 questions of this kind daily, the committees would 
 have more than they could attend to, and while 
 he was in favor of a full and free reference of all 
 propositions, still he would say that this question 
 was one of a nature not belonging to committee 
 No. 3. Indeed he hardly knew where it did be- 
 long, and he thought there should be a select 
 committee on the Sub-Treasury. He did not say 
 this because he wished to be chairman of such 
 committee. He was not anxious for such an hon- 
 or, but there were gentlemen who were,and whom 
 he knew would be gratified to examine into and 
 make a report on the subject. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said he had introduced himself 
 the proposition which was referred to ' the com- 
 mittee, and it only varied in two particulars from 
 the one now under consideration. The particu 
 lars are these : The resolution provides that bank 
 notes above a certain amount may be taken or at 
 all events whether they may or may not be taken 
 is proposed to be considered, and, secondly, whe- 
 ther State stocks shall or shall not be taken. The 
 3rd branch is, as stated by the gentleman from 
 Suffolk, already referred. If this is referred now 
 to a special committee, then we shall have two 
 reports presented upon precisely the same subject 
 matter. Now he hoped the reference would be 
 made according to the expressed wish of the 
 mover, for it was drawn in that direction by the 
 nature of the resolution, even if not in express 
 terms. 
 
 Mr TOWNSEND hoped that the views of his 
 friend last up, would be sustained by the Conven- 
 tion. This undoubtedly was a question involv- 
 ing the safety of the public revenues, and a mat- 
 ter devolving on committee No. 3. And to them 
 properly belonged the question as to how the re- 
 venues were to be managed and it would be sin- 
 gular if that committee, at the present day and 
 period whether it was directly referred to them 
 or not when the subject was mooted throughout 
 the State, and in view of the losses sustained by 
 the deposits in broken institutions,and the recep- 
 tion of broken promises to pay, should not consi- 
 der the question, of what should be evidences of 
 debt. He had the honor to be on the Bank Com- 
 mittee himself, and had no objection to taking 
 the responsibility of action upon it, if this Con- 
 vention thought fit to send it there ; but his indi- 
 vidual opinion was, that the Banking Committee 
 had sufficient to do already. There had been a 
 great deal too much said and done already. The 
 great error had been in the outset, in the depar- 
 ture from the standard of gold and silver, and un- 
 dertaking to facilitate transfers of large amounts, 
 instead of leaving them to be made in such form 
 as individuals might chose. He hoped that it 
 would take the direction desired by the original 
 mover. 
 
 Mr. CONELY was satisfied that it should go 
 to the 3d committee, as it was a question of reve- 
 nue purely. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to amend by striking out 
 the 3d and inserting the 2d committee. It ap- 
 
 peared to him a very proper question for that 
 committee to consider, whether the legislature 
 should for all time be deprived of the power of 
 regulating the reception and disbursement of pub- 
 lic money. The proposition is to take away from 
 the legislature the power of regulating from time 
 to time, as the exigencies of the times and business 
 may require, the mode of collecting and disbur- 
 sing the public revenues. The duties of commit- 
 tee No. 2 were the powers and duties of the leg- 
 islature, except as to matters otherwise referred. 
 The powers and duties of the legislature embrace 
 the matter of keeping, disposing and disbursing of 
 the public funds, and the proposition was to de- 
 prive them of that and engraft it into the Consti- 
 tution as a matter of constitutional law. That 
 was what a committee was to enquire into. 
 
 Mr. STETSON did not wish to oppose any ap- 
 propriate or just reference to a committee of which 
 he was a member, but with due -respect to his 
 friend from St. Lawrence, he could not see the 
 propriety of the reference he proposed. In one 
 respect these resolutions concerned banking and 
 the currency, and in another the revenue. It be- 
 longed mainly to that department. General 
 legislation, it was true, would include this, and 
 in the absence of all specific directions, it 
 would either hate been more properly divided 
 among the three, or given to all of them. He did 
 not wish either, by a premature disclosure of opi- 
 nions on any question, to get rid of any subject the 
 convention might feel disposed to refer to his 
 committee, but it was proper that he should re- 
 mark now that his own opinion was in favor of 
 an Independent Treasury system for the nation, 
 and that he had been so from its origin. With- 
 out wishing to discuss the question prematurely, 
 however, he would go farther, and say that he 
 saw a very distinct difference between a Sub-trea- 
 sury for the State, and for the nation. The Go- 
 vernment of the United States was the great mo- 
 ney dealer of the country, and its specie clause 
 reached and affected every locality. And he 
 hoped that if this proposition was referred to him, 
 that the mover of it would make an argument to 
 convince him that its introduction into the con- 
 stitution would not produce locally the same ef- 
 fect as what was called the small-bill law that 
 is, of making this State the ground for the circula- 
 tion of other States, without accomplishing the 
 great object of reform gentlemen had in view. 
 Such object, it seemed to him, would be bet- 
 ter accomplished at Washington than here. 
 
 The PRESIDENT reminded gentlemen that 
 the merits of the resolution were not under dis- 
 cussion, under the motion to refer. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that the gentleman at the 
 head of committee No. 2, (Mr. STETSON) had not. 
 answered the suggestion he (Mr. P.) had made, 
 that this resolution principally involved the ques- 
 tion as to w r hether this matter was to be left to le- 
 gislation as the exigencies of the case might re- 
 quire, or whether it was to be engrafted on the 
 constitution as constitutional law. And for that 
 reason he had spoken of it as belonging appropri- 
 ately to committee No. 2. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that the gentleman would 
 by his reasoning make committe%No. 2, a supervi- 
 sory one over all of the others to determine 
 what were proper subjects for Constitutional limi- 
 
]25 
 
 tation. Each committee should determine this 
 question for itself. It was the residue of matters 
 not referred to other committees that were refer- 
 red to No. 2. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that this subject had not 
 been referred to any committee, for if it had this 
 debate would not have arisen. Therefore this 
 subject was not referred, and it was a matter of 
 question between legislation and Constitutional 
 law. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON had supposed that on a mere 
 question of reference the merits of the matter to 
 be referred was not debateable. He had suppos- 
 ed that to be the settled parliamentary law, but 
 from what had taken place here he had about 
 come to the conclusion that a different rule was to 
 be adopted. He saw that in that, he might have 
 been mistaken, because the Chair had indicated 
 after the gentleman from Clinton had got thro' 
 with his remarks, that the merits of the resolution 
 were not debateable. Therefore he should not 
 attempt to debate it, but it was in order he would 
 say that he did not understand this matter as the 
 gentleman from Clinton did,and if permitted and it 
 was in order, he would say that if it was right for 
 the Nation, it was equally right for the State. 
 In the matter of referring it, it ought not to be sent 
 to any committee that would be a dry nurse to it. 
 Gentlemen on committees had,what to him seem- 
 ed very extraordinary, declared that they would 
 report against it if sent to them, tit least that was 
 the fair inference to be drawn from their remarks. 
 He would not send it to such a committee, but to 
 one that would give it a fair investigation, 
 examination, and consideration. And when 
 they have so considered it, if they agree in 
 opinion with the gentleman on his right, 
 (Mr. SHEPARD) and the one over the way, 
 (Mr. COXELY) thatHhe sub-treasury with the 
 specie clause, is right for the State, let us 
 have the proposition before us. He, for one, 
 desired to discuss that principle, and he did not 
 know how he was to get at it unless it was refer- 
 red to the New-York delegation. He was appre- 
 hensive that if it was referred to the country de- 
 legates, there would be found to be a great deal of 
 flinching on the subject. Therefore he would 
 send it to such a committee as would give it a fa- 
 vorable report, and if the gentleman who offered 
 the resolution would indicate what committee he 
 desired to have it sent to, he would vote to sus- 
 tain him. 
 
 Mr. CONELY preferred committee No. 3. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND could not promise, as'one of 
 the committee, to make a favorable report. 
 
 Mr. HUNTER was on that committee, but was 
 not willing to commit himself on the question. 
 THE TAKING OF PERSONAL PROPERTY. 
 
 Mr. JONES offered the following resolution, as 
 he said, in behalf of his colleague, Mr. VACHE : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the eleventh standing 
 committee to consider the necessity of providing that 
 whenever private property shall be taken lor public us, 
 and the compensation therefor shall not be payable direct 
 ly irom the public treasury of the State, or of some coun- 
 ty, city, town or village, the amount of compensation so 
 to I e made, shall be assessed by jury in some court of gene- 
 ral jurisdiction, or the principal court of the county or 
 larger judicial division oi the State, in which the lanjs to 
 be taken may lie, in the same manner and with the. like 
 right of review as to questions arising on such assessment 
 as is or may be allowed by law in civil actions. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 JUDGES ELECTIVE BY THE PEOPLE. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR offered the following reso- 
 lution : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 udiciary to enquire into the expediency of making the 
 ,uJges of the supreme court, elective by the people for a 
 :erm of six years, and re-eligible without limitation as to 
 age- after then st election the judges to be divided into 
 three classesj the seats of the first class to be vacated at 
 the end of two years, the seats of the second to be vacated 
 at the end of four years, and the seats ol' the third class to 
 be vacated at the end of six years. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 THE QUALIFICATIONS OF VOTERS. 
 Mr. SHAVER offered the following resolution : 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the fourth standing com- 
 mittee to enquire into the propriety of so amending the 
 Constitution as to require- 
 
 1. That every naturalized citizen, to be entitled to vote, 
 shall have resided in the State six months after he shall 
 txave become naturalized. 
 
 2. That citizens coming into this State shall be entitled 
 to vote after they have resided in the State six months. 
 
 3. That no person shall be entitled to vote who shall not 
 aave resided thirty days in the town or ward where he 
 shall offer to vote. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 CHANCERY SALES, &c. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretaries of the Convention ad- 
 dress to the Register, Assistant Register and Clerks of the 
 Court of Chancery respectively the following inquiries: 
 
 1st. How many applications for the sale of infant's real 
 estates were made in such court during the year 1845 1 
 
 2d. What was the aggregate value of the real estate of 
 infants sold by order of such court during said year 1845, 
 and what was the value of such estate in each case respec- 
 
 3d. What was the average amount of costs taxed and 
 allowed for conducting such sales? 
 
 4th. What is the whole amount of moneys now in or un- 
 der the control of said court belonging to infants which is 
 not invested? 
 
 5th. What is the whole amount of commissions retained 
 by such Register, Assistant Register or Clerks from the 
 proceeds of the sales of infants real estate made in the year 
 1845, for investing or paying out such proceeds or for any 
 other cause? 
 
 7th. What is the whole amount of moneys now in or un- 
 der the control such court, invested or not invested, be- 
 longing to unknown owners of real estate, sold by order 
 of such court? 
 
 8th. What is the whole amount of moneys now in or 
 under the control of such court invested for the use of 
 widows, or the interest upon which is payable to them, 
 upon dower or other rights by order or decree of such 
 court? 
 
 9th. What is the whole amount of money snow in or un- 
 der the control of such court, belonging to widows upon 
 dower or other rights, which is not yet invested? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that in addition to the above, 
 there was another enquiry that he would like 
 to have made of the Register in Chancery, for in- 
 formation which had not been spread before the 
 public for several years. He had understood that 
 very large sums of money were now under the care 
 of the Court of Chancery, paid in by different es- 
 tates on behalf of infants and others, and some of 
 which had remained there for a great length of 
 time. Several years since, he understood, it 
 amounted to over $2,000,000. He might be 
 wrong, but it seemed to him that was about the 
 amount stated. He did not know that any special 
 action of the Convention was necessary on this 
 subject, but it seemed to him that as the business 
 of the Court was to be the subject of examination 
 it would be proper to obtain the information 
 
126 
 
 which he desired. He could accomplish this by 
 adding to the resolution the following : 
 
 Also, a statement showing the amount of funds deposited 
 in the court of chancery in each year for 25 years past, the 
 amount paid out in each year, the rate of interest at which 
 said funds are invested, whether any part or not is on in- 
 terest, and if any, how long. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART thought that this proposition 
 would embarrass his resolution very much. It 
 would require an extension of the time to make 
 these enquiries, and thus the benefits of the an- 
 swer would be lost to the Convention. He hoped 
 the gentleman would withdraw his amendment, 
 and offer it hereafter as a separate proposition. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS had no objection. 
 
 The resolution was then adopted. 
 
 THE FUNDS IN CHANCERY. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that he had a resolution 
 which had particular reference to the funds in the 
 Courts of Chancery, and as it was talked of abo- 
 lishing this court in its present form, it might be 
 desirable that something should be known of the 
 aggregate amount of the monies deposited in that 
 court, without reference to \vhom they belonged. 
 
 Mr. R. offered the following : 
 Resolved, That the Chancellor of this State be request- 
 ed to furnish to this convention the aggregate amount of 
 all the funds in the Court of Chancery, (and subject to the 
 order and control thereof,) on the first day of June, 1846 
 
 funds deposited in 
 
 as follows: 
 
 1. The aggregate amount of all 
 oanks. 
 
 2. The aggregate amount deposited in all trust compa- 
 nies. 
 
 3. The aggregate amount vested in bond and mortgage. 
 
 4. All other funds, if any, under the control and ordercf 
 said Court. 
 
 He would enquire of the gentleman from Gen- 
 esee (Mr. TAGGART) if his resolution embraced 
 these enquiries. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said it did not. 
 
 this resolution, and he lioped therefore that the 
 mover would allow it to lay on the table for the 
 present. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES assented, and the resolution 
 was so disposed of. 
 THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE AMENDMENTS. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said he had a couple of resolu- 
 tions which he would send up on this explanation. 
 He had desired yesterday to go into committee of 
 the whole on the Article which he had reported 
 in relation to the powers and duties of the gover- 
 nor and lieutenant governor, for the purpose of 
 making some alteration in the phraseology, and 
 to correct some errors which had crept in, in co- 
 pying. On conversing with members of the Con- 
 vention, he found a diversity of opinion as to 
 whether the manner of reporting should be that 
 adopted by the committee, or not ; and as other 
 committees were soon to report, it was deemed 
 most prudent to have that question settled now, 
 so that if the committee to which he belonged, 
 had erred in the form of their report, they might 
 take it back and conform it to the directions of the 
 Convention ; or, if the Convention should think 
 the committee had pursued the correct manner of 
 doing it, that other committees might follow the 
 example. His first resolution -, if adopted, would 
 sanction the manner in which his committee had 
 reported. He would read it r 
 
 committees be and they 
 suggestions for a 
 
 Resolved, That the standing commi 
 e hereby directed to embody their 
 
 are hereby 
 
 Constitution in their reports, in articles and sections, that 
 they copy into such articles the sections of the Constitu- 
 tion applicable thereto to which they do not propose 
 amendments or alterations, and in such sections as they 
 propese to amend and alter, they shall incorpoiate such 
 amendments and alterations. 
 
 Mr. M. said that to make himself understood, 
 if he had not done so already, he would state that 
 his plan, on taking up an article of the Constitu- 
 Mr. WORDEN would suggest to his friend from tion was, that such sections as the committee did 
 Onondaga, that he allow his resolution to lay on no t propose to alter, they copied into the propos- 
 the table until Monday, for he (Mr. W.) thought e( i article for the new Constitution. Such 
 it was not sufficiently comprehensive. He thought i other sections as did not conform to what 
 that in relation to the amount of money loaned or thev intended the new Constitution to be, they 
 
 i "-A - J ' _ i 1_ - j_ A _ _ j.1 . 1.. _.*' - j -i- j i i ' / _ Ji _l 
 
 deposited in banks or trust companies, the resolu- 
 tion w r ould not draw forth the desired informa- 
 tion. He had understood that there was a large 
 amount of funds under the control of the Court of 
 Chancery, so entrusted to incorporationsnot 
 loaned to them, strictly speaking, or deposited; 
 and he would be glad to see in the resolution 
 some language that would draw out informa- 
 tion on this subject. There was another subject 
 of enquiry he would like to see included. The 
 Court of Chancery had from time to time been re- 
 ceiving what is called fines, and he was informed 
 that a very large amount of these fines, were now 
 and had been for years returned by that -court, 
 and he was not sufficiently advised to say wheth- 
 er by authority of law or against the provision of 
 law. He had always supposed however that fines 
 imposed and collected by a Court belonged to the 
 people, and should go into the public treasury. 
 He had understood that the fines or a portion of 
 them imposed and collected by the Court of Chan- 
 cery, had not received that direction, but were 
 retained in some way, and appropriated in some 
 other manner of that particular way and man- 
 ner he was ignorant, and had not been able to as- 
 certain. He desired to embrace this enquiry in 
 
 altered and- presented in their modified shape. 
 Thereby the committee supposed the members of 
 the Convention would be better able to judge of 
 all parts of the article, and the propriety of the 
 amendment. He would state also, that as there 
 was no difference in the printing of the report,, 
 they were compelled to go to the present Consti- 
 tution, ajid to examine it to know what were and 
 what were not amendments. To provide for this 
 for the future, he proposed to submit a resolution, 
 by the adoption of which form they would have 
 all the parts of the Constitution before them, and 
 see what were and what were not amendments. 
 
 The resolution was as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the reports of standing committees shall 
 be printed under the direction of their respective chairman,, 
 and that all alterations and.amendments shall be printed in 
 italics. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that a very important 
 and material partof our duties were involved in 
 the resolution now presented. The act under 
 which we were assembled, contemplated amend- 
 ments to the existing constitution. By looking 
 at section 9 of the Convention act, it would be 
 perceived in the first place, that the Convention, 
 was assembled for the purpose of considering the 
 
127 
 
 constitution and to make such alterations therein 
 as they might deem necessary. Such amendments 
 were to be recorded in the office of the Secretary 
 of State, and then submitted to the people for 
 adoption or rejection, separately, unless the Con- 
 vention should declare that it was impracticable 
 to submit them. Now, although he did not stand 
 there to find fault with the committee which had 
 reported the article spoken of, yet he would re- 
 mark that if that mode of reporting was adopted, 
 we should have beyond all doubt, an entirely new 
 constitution reported, and no amendments speci- 
 fically to the existing constitution. The report of 
 the fifth committee proposed an article contain- 
 ing 1, 2, 3 and 4 sections and perhaps more, of 
 article 3 ot the existing constitution, without 
 even a verbal alteration, Then in another part 
 the report contained section 13 of article 4 of the 
 existing constitution without material amend- 
 ment. They had also reported article 1st, sec- 
 tion 12th with some amendment. The Conven- 
 tion would therefore perceive that in this report 
 we had presented to us what might very properly 
 form a specific part of an entirely new Constitu- 
 tion and not as presented, either in the form or 
 substance of amendments to the existing Consti- 
 tution. He apprehended the mode adopted by that 
 committee would require every other committee 
 however unnecessary it might be, to amend any 
 article submitted to them. He knew not the 
 views of the committee on the militia, but if this 
 course was adopted, and the committee should be 
 of opinion that no amendment was required, they 
 would nevertheless be compelled to report word 
 for word the article or sections on that subject in 
 the existing Constitution. And the consequence 
 of this would be, that we should have reported by 
 way of amendments, for the accptance or rejec- 
 tion of the people, various and perhaps whole ar- 
 ticles of the existing Constitution, on which the 
 people nei'her expected nor desired to be called 
 upon to vote, and thy would have a book much 
 larger than they had anticipated. Now looking 
 upon the amendments which had been heretofore 
 been voted upon and adopted by the people of the 
 state, he found they were in the following form : 
 at the end of section 10 article 4 of the Consti- 
 tution, add the following words, " except in 
 the city of New- York," &c. which was the form 
 of the amendment by which the election of Mayor 
 of New-York was given to the people of that city. 
 But the mode adopted by the fifth committee 
 as he had before observed, was one which beyond 
 all doubt, if approved by the Convention, would 
 require all the committees to make like reports 
 to this body, although they might report existing 
 provisions, word for word, comma for comma, p^e- 
 riod for period. It seemed to'him, though he was 
 not prepared to say what should be the mode pur- 
 sued by the committee, that this was a matter of 
 importance as to a material part of our business 
 here, and inasmuch as this was new matter, pre- 
 sented here this morning, he should wish to have 
 it referred to a committee to report to the course 
 to be pursued in order that some uniform rule 
 might be adopted. He had no doubt that com- 
 mittee No. 5 would be willing to undertake that 
 duty. And it was desirable perhaps that they 
 should do it, as they were the first committee to 
 
 eport, and might establish very readily th'e rule 
 icreafter to be published. 
 
 Mr. WARD said he was gratified with the re- 
 port alluded to, as it was presented. His own 
 mpression was the committee had adopted the 
 correct mode. It would probably have been better 
 t' the report had been printed in the manner pro- 
 posed by the second resolution. No matter what 
 night be the report of a committee here,any gentle- 
 man might rise in his place and propose other a- 
 iH-iulments to the article. Certainly it may be that 
 the committee have not reported all the amend- 
 ments that would be desired by the Convention. 
 Need he call attention to one point in particular, 
 so far as the executive of the State was concerned. 
 3y the present Constitution, and as reported, that 
 officer is chosen every two years. Now he had 
 leard gentlemen say that they intended to offer a 
 Droposition that his election should be annually. 
 Slow, as the report contained the present consti- 
 tutional provision, with the amendments of the 
 committee when that was taken up in commit- 
 tee of the whole, the first question would be on 
 the amendments proposed by the committee ; and 
 after they had been considered and passed upon, 
 any gentlemen might rise up and propose other 
 amendments to the same Article. He said there- 
 ibre that the report of the committee was in the 
 :orrect form, but it would have been more ad- 
 visable he granted, if the report had been so 
 printed that we could distinctly have seen the 
 amendment proposed. The gentleman from 
 Oneida (Mr. KIRKLAND) had said that there 
 were some provisions in this report which were 
 not proposed to be altered, and which therefore it 
 was unnecessary to submit to the people. But 
 were we now in a condition to say what shape 
 this article would finally assume, or in what shape 
 amendments should be submitted to the people ? 
 When we had gone through all the articles of the 
 Constitution, and had disposed of all the proposed 
 amendments, that would be the proper time to 
 say how they should be submitted to the people, 
 and then a'committee could present a plan. He 
 therefore humbly conceived that as one of the 
 members of the Convention he had some rights 
 as well as the committee, and he could not under- 
 standingly propose any amendments he might de- 
 sire unless he had the whole subject of the Con- 
 stitution before him. He had no objection for 
 one to have this matter referred back to the com- 
 mittee, that they might report the various articles 
 in the Constitutton as they now are, and with 
 amendments, and in that form go into committee 
 of the whole upon them and amend or reject them. 
 But still nothing would be gained by it as the sub- 
 ject would be still open, and gentlemen be at lib- 
 erty to propose other and further amendments. 
 
 Mr KIRKLAND said that beyond all doubt, 
 under any mode which might be adopted, gentle- 
 men would be authorized in proposing any 
 amendment they might desire, but the Conven- 
 tion would find it exceedingly important, he ap- 
 prehended, to have some fixed permanent rule to 
 go by some model report. He had not himself 
 found one, nor did he rise to discuss the merits of 
 this resolution, but rather to call the attention 
 of the Convention to the proper course to be 
 adopted. He wished to ask its reference to some 
 committee who would carefully consider rt, ami 
 
128 
 
 then form and submit to our consideration what 
 might be called a model report, and which, if it 
 met our approbation, would secure an unifor- 
 mity in the reports of the committees. He 
 trusted it would have a reference to some com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. BROWN thought the resolution ought not 
 to be adopted now. Certainly it was of sufficent. 
 consequence to entitle it to an opportunity for de- 
 liberation and reflection. It proposed to pre- 
 scribe a mode of proceeding which should gov- 
 ern our committees in reporting to the Conven- 
 tion. Now he apprehended that gentlemen com- 
 posing the several committees had thought very 
 little upon this subject. There was but one com- 
 mittee out of all the 15 or 10, who had reported 
 as yet, and they had undoubtedly adopted the 
 mode of arranging it which pleased them best, 
 and was most appropriate, in their estimation. 
 He submitted whether it was not due to the other 
 committees, to let them examine the subjects com 
 mitted to them, and let them see what is the best 
 form to submit to the Convention the result of 
 their deliberations. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said he had introduced this reso- 
 lution at the suggestion of other gentlemen in- 
 stead of going into committee of the whole 
 for the purpose of eliciting opinions as to the 
 propriety of a uniform system of reporting. He 
 was not desirous himself of pressing any par- 
 ticular plan, and was willing to let the resolu- 
 tion lie on the table, so that it might be examined. 
 
 Mr. BROWN desired to make one remark in 
 continuation. It occurred to him when this re- 
 port came in, that it did not come exactly in the 
 form to command his approbation, He confessed 
 he had some difficulty in understanding in what 
 particular it was proposed to amend the article 
 committed to them. And he could only ascertain 
 it by a critical comparison of their amendments 
 with the constitution itself. But not to enlarge 
 on this subject for if the resolution was laid on 
 the table, he should be content he would only 
 say that all these reported amendments should 
 come before us in a mode so simple that we could 
 understand them the moment we laid eyes on 
 them at all events, that it should not be neces- 
 sary to take theix reports to our rooms, and enter 
 into a critical comparison of the report with the 
 constitution. It was due to ourselves and the 
 the people at large, that we should adopt, if prac- 
 ticable, some mode of reporting, which should be 
 simple, plain and intelligible. At the same time 
 time it occurred to him that the committees them- 
 selves would best be able to say in what form 
 their reports should be submitted -and that we 
 had better postpone the subject until we saw what 
 progress the committees made, and knew and un- 
 derstood in what particulars the fundamental law 
 was proposed to be changed. 
 
 NEW-YOBK COURT OF ARBITRATION. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS offered the following resolu- 
 tion, which was adopted: 
 
 Resolved, That it be rc-feired to the committee on the 
 judiciary to inquire into tne expediency oi constructing a 
 court for the city of New York, upon the principl.s laid 
 down in the Revised Statutes, vol. 2, part 3, chap 8, title 
 15, article " Arbitration." 
 
 Said court to be entitled the " Arbitration Court in and 
 for the city and ctunty of New York;" to consist of a 
 chief justice of the degree of counsellor at law, two asso- 
 
 ciate justices, not members of the legal profession, to be 
 elected by the people, to holdtheir offices for five years ; 
 to have cognizance of all matters in controversy between 
 all persons who may bind themselves to submit to its de- 
 cisions, and not to appeal therefrom ; to have a clerk at a 
 fixed salary, to prepare bonds of submission, and to enter 
 up judgments. 
 
 On motion of Mr. CLYDE, the Convention 
 then 
 Adjourned to 11 o'clock on Monday morning. 
 
 MONDAY, (19th day) June 22. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. CLAPP. 
 
 Mr. GARDNER presented a memorial from the 
 Chiefs and Head Warriors of the Tuscarora In- 
 dians, praying that the Convention would not dis- 
 turb their present political privileges. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved that the memorial be 
 printed. It was agreed to. 
 
 Returns were announced as having been receiv- 
 ed from the Clerks of the 2d and 3d Chancery 
 Courts, in answer to the resolution of the Con- 
 vention. 
 
 The PRESIDENT .announced the following as 
 the select committee on the resolutions of Mr. 
 MORRIS, in relation to the locality of taxation, 
 viz: Messrs. MURPHY, LOOMIS, PERKINS and 
 VACHE. 
 EXEMPTION OF PROPERTY FROM EXECUTION. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND proposed the following, 
 which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee upon the rights and priv 
 ileges of the peopled this State, enquire into the proprie 
 ty of fixing a Constitutional limit to the amount of real and 
 personal property, that it shall be the privilege of a citizen 
 of this state to hold, exempt from execution for debt, con- 
 tracted subsequently to the first day of January next. 
 THE DEBT CREATING PO^ER OF THE LEGIS- 
 LATURE. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY proposed the following, 
 which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the third standing com- 
 mittee to enquire into and report on the expediency ot incor- 
 porating into the Constitution a provision, that every law 
 authorizing the borrowing of money, or the issuing of 
 state stock, whereby a debt shall be created or increased 
 on the credit of the state, shall specify the object for 
 which the money shall be appropriated; and that every 
 such law shall embrace no more than one such object, 
 which shall be single and specifically stated; and that no 
 such law shall lake effect until it shall be distinctly sub- 
 mitted to the people at the next general election, and be ap- 
 proved by a majority of the votes cast for and against it at 
 such election; that all money to be raised by the authority 
 of such law to be applied to the specific object stated in 
 such law, and to no other purpose M hattver, except the 
 paympnt of the debt thereby created and increased. This 
 provision shall not extend or apply to any law to raise mo- 
 ney for the purpose of suppressing insurrection, repelling 
 a hostile invasion, or defending the state in war. 
 THE SCHOOL MONEYS. 
 
 Mr. A. HUNTINGTON offered the following, 
 which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved. That the Secretary of State be requested to 
 report to this Convention, if any, what towns have been re. 
 fused their distributive shares of the proceeds of the com- 
 mon school fund, for Don- conformity with the requisitions 
 of the law regulating the distribution thereof. 
 
 THE TAXATION OF MORTGAGES. 
 
 Mr. STRONG offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That there be in the Constitution an article 
 ontaining in substance the following provisions: That 
 ll 
 
 containng 
 
 all bonds, mortgages, judgments and all other evidences of 
 debt which are liens on real estate, shall not be taxed as per- 
 sonal propertj ; and that all real estate shall be taxed to the 
 owner or occupant at its fair value; and that any person 
 
129 
 
 bond, mortgage, judg 
 ni<-nt, or any other evidence of" indebtedness which ai 
 liens on real estate, shall be liable to the person or }>en?oi 
 to whom the same shall have lem taxed for his, her, o 
 their portion of said tax in proportion to the interest he 
 she or they may have, hold or own in said real estate. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said the object of this was t 
 prevent double taxation, and to reach a larg 
 amount of personal property now hid from th 
 assessor. If a man owned a farm worth - 
 on which there was a mortgage of $4000, h 
 would be compelled to pay taxes on the whol 
 amount, while the man holding the $4000 mort 
 gage would not pay a cent if he could conceal hi 
 mortgage from the assessor. His propositio 
 would equalize this taxation. He knew it woul 
 meet with opposition, and that men who wer 
 making princely fortunes out of lending money i 
 this way would fiercely oppose it. But if it wa 
 just, he was willing to stand by it. It might b 
 said that this was a business for legislation. Pas 
 experience taught otherwise. The present lav 
 had stood for he did not know how many years 
 Property was now doubly taxed with no othe 
 reason than because it was the law. This was ; 
 disgrace to the State. Had past legislation reme 
 died this evil ? We had seen that it had not. 
 He had drawn his resolution in this form because 
 he wanted a direct expression of the Convention 
 He wanted the views of members. He hopec 
 there would be no delicacy on this subject, but i 
 gentlemen wanted a reference after a discussion, 
 he should not object. He was not afraid to stanc 
 on his vote in favor of this, here or before the 
 world. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that this did not seem 
 to be a resolution of reference, but a direct pro- 
 position to amend the Constitution. He did no 
 believe the Convention were prepared to discuss 
 so important a proposition to-day, and he woulc 
 suggest, therefore, that it be laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. STRONG had no objection to its being laid 
 on the tabk, although he should take an early op- 
 portunity to call it up. He desired, also, that it 
 should be printed. 
 
 This was agreed to, and the resolution laid on 
 the table. 
 
 REPORTS OF COMMITTEES HOW TO BE MADE 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote by which the Convention declared it to be 
 inexpedient for the committees to make written 
 reports. 
 
 Mr. R. was proceeding, when 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON rose to a point of order. 
 The question, he said, might as well be settled 
 now as at any future time. He wished to know 
 if a call for the consideration of a resolution was 
 a debateable question. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued between Messrs 
 PATTERSON, RUSSEL, STETSON, and MAR- 
 VIN when Mr. P. withdrew his point of order. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that it was not his design 
 to inflict a speech on the Convention, on this sub- 
 ject; but it did appear to him that when this re- 
 solution, of which a reconsideration was now 
 moved, was adopted, from the very brief consi- 
 deration given it, and from the thin house present, 
 it was unadvisedly so adopted ; and, as he thought, 
 would be found to interfere with the exercise of 
 the duties of members in the Convention. It ap- 
 
 peared to him that there were many members 
 who could not, or Would not, rise up and state 
 their reasons for concurring in the report of a 
 committee, where they could only be addressed 
 orally to the house, and so taken down by the 
 reporters, rapidly as they must be. At the 
 same time these gentlemen were competent very 
 greatly to enlighten us in our deliberations, and be 
 of vast service to us, in presenting to us compila- 
 tions of statistics and facts of great value to the Con- 
 vention. For, he desired that when these propo- 
 sitions were reported to us, that the Convention 
 should be furnished with the strongest and best 
 arguments, and the references that are made to 
 other documents and constitutions, in support of 
 them. He desired them in preference to speech- 
 es ; for he could ta"ke the written report to his 
 room, and give it that examination which no man 
 could give a mere speech ; and study its argments, 
 and see if he could be brought to the same con- 
 clusion. He could then compare it with his own 
 knowledge, and the results of his own experi- 
 ence, and if there was an open point in the argu- 
 ments, he could better answer it by having it 
 before him, than by listening to the chairman of 
 a committee closing the debate by an eloquent, 
 powerful argument, so irresistible as to carry by 
 mere excitement the proposition. Members', 
 like himself, who neither made reports or speech- 
 es, would also be benefitted by well written and 
 digested reports. It was probable that many of 
 the committees would not desire to make such 
 reports perhaps the most important, the judi- 
 ciary committee, would not. But there were 
 other committees from whom it was desirable 
 to have written reports. The one that he was 
 upon the Bank committee the chairman of 
 which, with his experience of 40 years, was 
 able to give us a digested report of great va- 
 and interest. But he or no other man could 
 do so, orally upon this floor, unless the written 
 report should be in the shape of a speech, read, 
 and published by the reporters as such It would 
 )e a written report nevertheless, and would only 
 )e a thing called by a wrong name. There were 
 some who would have no fear in doing this, of 
 laving their names put in small letters instead of 
 capitals, as was the case with many papers in 
 some instances, when gentlemen read their argu- 
 ment, but there were those who felt a reluctance 
 about adopting such a course. It would perhaps 
 >e a saving in printing, but it would add also 
 much to the consumption of time. It would take 
 much longer to hear the speeches read in slow 
 measured language, than if it was a written re- 
 >ort, which would be printed and which we 
 ould take to our rooms. It would also have the 
 fleet of drawing out the talent, the industry and 
 bility of members much more efficiently, than 
 ould be 'done by confining the defence of their 
 iositions to oral arguments on the floor. There 
 vere many like himself, who were not so indus- 
 ious as to give all the time due to the examina- 
 ion and consideration of subjects which might 
 ome before them, even so far as their own com- 
 nittees weia concerned, unless their atten- ' 
 on was called particularly to it. If it was 
 etermined that the conclusions of a com- 
 littee should be accompanied by a statement of 
 acts in writing, for which each member 
 
130 
 
 of it would be responsible, unless he openly dis- 
 sented therefrom, the report would be most care- 
 fully examined, and every paragraph, even, care- 
 fully scrutinized. He had not intended to re- 
 mark at the length he had ; all he designed was 
 to show the real importance of this question. He 
 should not press a division now, although he 
 thought since he had given the notice of his in- 
 tention to move a reconsideration of this vote, a 
 sufficiently long time had elapsed to turn the at- 
 tention of every member to the subject. 
 
 ^ Mr. RICHMOND said that the gentleman had 
 given somewhat of a lengthy statement in regard 
 to this matter, and had advanced some ideas which 
 would seem to carry conviction with them. He 
 said also at the close of his speech (and he Mr. 
 R. might as well begin there) that he had made 
 this motion some days previous, in order that 
 members might have an opportunity to weigh 
 and consider this important matter, in the hope 
 that thereby they might come to a different con- 
 clusion, from what they had in originally adopt- 
 ing the resolution. As had been suggested by 
 him, they had considered on the proposition, and 
 there had been a good deal of out door talk about 
 it, and he himself had been spoken to by a large 
 number about it. The argument used to him to 
 induce a reversal of the vote, was that it was im- 
 portant to give to those who were not in the habit 
 of public speaking, and who addressed the house 
 with a great deal of diffidence, and as the gentle- 
 man from Monroe (Mr. STRONG) would say he 
 was troubled somewhat that way himself an op- 
 portunity to express themselves. But he had 
 heard but one member of that class who had asked 
 or expressed a desire to have the resolution re- 
 versed ; and he had heard at least a dozen gen- 
 tlemen who were in the habit of getting up here 
 and making long speeches, pleading the impor- 
 tance that the lay members, those excellent com- 
 mon sense members, as they termed them should 
 have an opportunity of getting their views before 
 the Convention, and the public. But judging 
 from the arguments used, it seemed only to arise 
 from a desire on their part to get their own views 
 twice before the Convention and the people. They 
 being at the head of the most important commit- 
 tees, could get up a long and labored report to 
 fortify their positions, and have it laid on the table 
 of members and then in addition to that, could 
 inflict each of them, a two hours speech on the 
 Convention. Under such circumstances where 
 would be this distinguished body of laymen for 
 whom they expressed so much apprehension? 
 They would be more in the dark then than now. 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG would not have troubled 
 the Convention with a single remark had not the 
 gentleman from St. Lawrence made a direct refe- 
 rence to the committee fo which he belonged. 
 Although he in some degree concurred in what the 
 gentleman said, yet he was not at all dissatisfied 
 with the resolution adopted by the Convention. 
 In the former Convention,no order was taken up- 
 on the subject. It was left to the discretion of 
 the different committees to act as they thought 
 proper. The course they adopted was to present 
 the naked amendments, and for the reason that it 
 was all important at the outset of the Convention 
 that the members should know what amendments 
 were to be proposed, and deliberate upon them. 
 
 [n almost every instance thdy were presented to 
 the Convention without sufficient deliberation,he 
 might say, by the committees, and had to be re- 
 'erred back again. And notwithstanding the ar- 
 guments of the gentleman from St. Lawrence, 
 'Mr. RUSSELL,,) he must say that he preferred that 
 course. Present the proposition unprejudiced, 
 unbiased and even unargued before the Conven- 
 ;ion, leaving the members unprejudiced, to come 
 to their examination in committee of the whole, 
 and to perfect them by debate. He did not think 
 there was any necessity for the resolution, be- 
 cause he believed that upon reflection every com- 
 mittee of the Convention, would feel the neces- 
 sity of presenting their propositions without any 
 report whatever. As for himself should he be 
 instructed by the committee of which he was 
 chairman, to report any amendments, he should 
 prefer to report naked propositions, and when the 
 time arrived for discussion, he should be better 
 prepared to submit his views in a mature shape. 
 Whether the resolution was reconsidered or not 
 was immaterial to him, but he hoped and believed 
 that the different committees would act in the 
 spirit of the resolution. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that when this resolution 
 was originally adopted, he was surprised, he 
 must confess, at the course taken. Had he anti- 
 cipated even the probability of that result, he 
 would have felt called upon to rise and oppose 
 the resolution, and to explain the views he had 
 upon it. He had himself, no doubt in his own 
 mind, nor should he now entertain any doubt in 
 this matter, did he not find gentlemen eminent 
 from their position and experience in le- 
 gislation, advocating the opposite of the views 
 he entertained. It appeared to him to be a 
 proposition adopted by this Convention to 
 suppress information. Yes, to suppress the 
 convictions of the committees of this body, sent 
 out from it for the very purpose of ascer- 
 taining facts and coming to deliberate con- 
 clusions. Why, he had supposed that the sup- 
 pression of opinion was above all, the last thing 
 that would be adopted here. These committees 
 are sent out from this body, composed of a few 
 individuals of our number, who are requested to 
 take a subject into consideration to give it their 
 best study and attention to collect facts, analyze 
 them, reason on the subject and present a con- 
 clusion to the Convention. Now it appeared to 
 him, that if the committee found that in their 
 judgment it was expedient to present the reasons 
 and facts which brought them to these conclu- 
 sions, in order to sustain them before the body, it 
 was their duty so to present them. And he should 
 feel bound himself to do so, if the Convention 
 had not absolutely prohibited it, if there were 
 facts and information or a course of reasoning 
 which he should deem important to a proper con- 
 sideration of a subject. Committees were, sent 
 out for this very purpose. Then gentlemen 
 would have the whole facts spread out before 
 them, and the reasons which induced the com- 
 mittee to come to the conclusions which it might. 
 And then they would be able to analyze them in 
 their own minds, prepare their thoughts upon 
 them, and be ready to oppose or support them. 
 He was not aware whether there was or not any 
 committee which desired to make a written re- 
 
131 
 
 port, but he could very well imagine that there 
 might be, and it was desirable that they should 
 be allowed to do so. We are not to suppose that 
 the committees would go out and come back with 
 views on one side, as partixans, against the whole 
 body of the Convention on the other side ? No 
 the committees were the representatives of the 
 Convention, and acted for the whole body. They 
 would not perhaps, all of them, feel it necessary to 
 present arguments for their propositions, but 
 there might be cases when they would find it ex- 
 pedient to do so; and he for one would feel him- 
 self very much assisted in his efforts to arrive at 
 correct conclusions, by knowing the reasons which 
 induced the committee to come to the conclusions 
 which they had, and knowing it too in advance, 
 before any debate here. Then he would be pre- 
 , pared to form his opinions and express them in 
 debate. With this view, he thought it best that 
 the Convention should permit the committees to 
 exercise their discretion in this matter. The last 
 body in the world to prohibit the expression of 
 opinion, should be a Convention to amend the 
 fundamental law. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS perfectly agreed with the sen- 
 timents expressed by the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer (Mr. LOOMIS.) Why, if we went back some 
 2000 years, before the eloquence of the press was 
 known, and when the inhabitants of Athens and 
 of Rome, discussed great questions of peace or 
 war from the stump, then perhaps it was not so 
 necessary for persons to give even to themselves, 
 the reasons for their own action. But now it 
 seemed to him to be inseparable from the very 
 idea of deliberation, that we should have writing 
 and printing. And for what purpose? Why, 
 that we may more deliberately examine ques- 
 tions, and not trust to mere declamation in an 
 assembly, where some of us may not hear dis- 
 tinctly, and all of us not be able to determine on 
 the moment, and to examine the principle of 
 argument. It seemed to him that the direction 
 in the Bible that every Christian should give the 
 reason for the hope that was in him, was appli- 
 cable here. And no person could come to a con- 
 clusion in which he could expect others to have 
 confidence, unless he himself had confidence in 
 it and he could not have that, unless he had 
 travelled over the whole ground. And before 
 he got to the conclusion of his labors, he would 
 find many occasions to qualifiy the reasons which 
 heat first entertained. He "(Mr. S.) wanted to 
 have at least the prima facie reasons which 
 should lead to the conclusions of a committee, to 
 aid him in his examination. He confessed he 
 was surprised at the vote he had not supposed 
 this resolution would have received the slightest 
 support. It was entirely contrary to the usage 
 of any similar body. In all of them he had 
 ever heard of, this liberty was allowed to the com- 
 mittees, but above all was it out of place in a con- 
 vention like this! Indeed the only question 
 was, whether they ought not to be compelled to 
 give their reasons in every .case in writing. To 
 deprive our committees of the right to do so, was 
 to deprive ourselves of the benefit of their ex- 
 amination and study in coming to just conclu- 
 sions. We had no security for that unless they 
 were allowed to make a written report, to which 
 they would be committed for all future time. 
 
 With all respect for the committee who had 
 already reported, he had not the slightest doubt 
 that if they had been compelled to accompany 
 their proposition with written reasons for it, there 
 would have been an entirely different report. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that this resolution conveyed 
 the sense of this house, that it was inexpedient 
 for any committee to assign the reasons for any 
 conclusion they may have adopted. Now he ven- 
 tured to say that among the many experienced gen- 
 tlemen in legislation in that house, there was not 
 one of them that could ever bring to memory any 
 legislative or deliberative body in a free country 
 that ever adopted a proposition so perfectly pre- 
 posterous he had almost said infamous as this 
 was. The business of this house had been distri- 
 buted by a committee of 17 without any oppor- 
 tunity for deliberation and here are the members 
 of this body, without having interchanged senti- 
 ments except such as when the house was not 
 in session upon the points upon which this con- 
 stitution is to be amended and now we are to 
 have in express terms, our committees forbidden 
 from assigning any reasons which induced them 
 to arrive at conclusions. What did this mean ? 
 It was not deemed expedient, it was said, that 
 the committees should encumber the journals by 
 elaborate reports. But he did undertake to say 
 that it would be a very material aid in our delibera- 
 tions to understand what the reasons were, and 
 that they should be put on paper. It was very 
 justly stated, that a portion of these reports would 
 be based upon statistics and figures and facts, be- 
 yond the reach of the larger portion of us, w r ho 
 would have neither opportunity or time to seek 
 for them. And if this resolution should be adopt- 
 ed as the deliberate sense of the house, it would 
 be equivalent to shutting out every opportunity 
 of possessing ourselves of these facts and conclu- 
 sions. He had the honor of being on the judi- 
 ciary committee who met at 9 o'clock in the 
 morning, and continued in session until the hour 
 of meeting then as soon as we adjourn until 
 dinner, and then again until the close of the day. 
 He begged to know how he was to be informed 
 of the important questions of great magnitude, 
 submitted to the other committees, if his time 
 was to be consumed in this kind of way. It was 
 unjust to him individually for there were sub- 
 jects referred of the greatest solicitude to himself 
 individually, and to his constituents. And he 
 regarded it as a cruel piece of injustice' to him, 
 for instance, that the proper committee should not 
 inform him, \vhat was the public indebtedness 
 whether 20 or $28,000,000. It was a compli- 
 cated and most difficult subject, and required a 
 long and searching examination to be clearly un- 
 derstood. And were we to be told that the able 
 committee to whom the subject was referred, 
 should not give us the reasons for arriving at their 
 conclusions. He trusted gentlemen would de- 
 liberate long before they adopted such a course. 
 He wanted that committee to report here what 
 the state of the debt was, and what was the state 
 of the public revenue, and what had been the 
 course and practice of the legislature in appro- 
 priating the public monies, until the state found 
 itself almost upon the very verge of bankruptcy. 
 He wanted it spread upon the journals and before 
 the house, that all might see and understand it. 
 
132 
 
 The judiciary committee, permit him to say, may 
 find it their duty to report a large increase 
 of the judiciary and judges, probably to an 
 extent that will alarm the people at the expense 
 to be entailed upon them, and are we to be pre- 
 cluded all opportunity of stating what the 
 expenses of the present system were, and what 
 they would be under the proposed system. Shall 
 we be told to keep our mouths close, that we 
 shall submit the bare, naked proposition here, 
 and do no more. He hoped that no such thing 
 would be done. Permit him also to say one word 
 in regard to the report we had already got here, 
 from the committee on the Executive depart- 
 ment of the government. He concurred in the 
 sentiment, he did not learn here this morning, 
 althongh it was an opinion, in which also he was 
 happy to find his friend from Essex, (Mr. SIM- 
 MONS) concurring that if that committee had 
 been obliged to accompany their report with the 
 reasons which induced their conclusions, it would 
 not have been here in the shape it was. Here 
 we have an entire Article of the Constitution re- 
 ported, with the addition of two or three words ; 
 and he ventured to say that a man must exercise 
 no little ingenuity to say what were the reasons 
 for that report. He would like to have the rea- 
 sons for inserting that the lieutentant governor 
 should have $6 ^per day, as his compensation 
 neither more nor less. Why not fill the Constitu- 
 tion up with articles as to the pay of officers as 
 well as to say that in relation to the Lt. Governor. 
 But there were other points about the report of 
 that committee, of which he would not speak 
 now. He wished to refer to another question 
 here. It was well known that the question of 
 the abolition of slavery in the District of Colum- 
 bia, had distracted Congress, year after year, 
 and any gentleman who had been within the 
 region of that excitement, would concur with 
 him in the opinion that if that question had been 
 sent to a committee and reported upon, and the 
 reasons fully assigned that agitation would have 
 ceased long since. But it had been continued 
 and kept up, because a portion of the members 
 were unwilling that the petitions on that subject 
 should be disposed of, other than laid on the ta- 
 ble. It was not his opinion alone but that of ev- 
 ery gentleman of intelligence with whom he had 
 met, that if the question had been sent to a com- 
 mittee to make a report upon it and that report 
 had been spread before the country, it would 
 have had the same effect as did the Sunday Mail 
 report, of putting the question to sleep forever. 
 He had taken the occasion the other day to enter 
 his protest against the resolution, and he hoped 
 the Convention, out .of justice to itself, if not to 
 those w r ho desired the reports, would allow them 
 to be made or withheld at pleasure. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that having given his 
 views at length in relation to this subject, at the 
 time of the adoption of the resolution, he should 
 not feel justified in repeating them again, were 
 it not for the course taken by certain gentlemen, 
 who had, with a great deal of warmth and zeal, 
 advocated the other side of this proposition. He 
 regretted that any gentleman should have thought 
 it important for him, or even tolerable here to 
 have so far departed from legislative courtesy, as 
 
 to brand any proposition here presented as infa- 
 mous. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : I did not do so. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then had entirely misunder- 
 stood the gentleman. He had understood him to 
 say that the proposition " was perfectly prepos- 
 terous, he had almost said infamous." Now he 
 (Mr. C.) did not choose to stand in the position as 
 a representative of the people, that* any pro- 
 position he should present here, should be so 
 branded. He scorned the imputation ! Nor did 
 he believe that that gentleman here was so far 
 above the rest of his fellows as to stand up 
 and pronounce judgment, not upon a pro 
 position itself, but upon the motives that might 
 have prompted it. We may very well dif- 
 fer as to the course of proceeding, but still we 
 were bound to believe of every member, that 
 every proposition was submitted from good mo- 
 tives and for justifiable ends. This proposition 
 he believed, was submitted by the gentleman from 
 Washington, (Mr. BAKER) in good faith, and with 
 a desire if possible to permit the Convention to 
 arrive at conclusions with minds elsewhere un- 
 prejudiced. He sought to get from the commit- 
 tees merely rules for'the action of the body, leav- 
 ing every member uncommitted as to the reasons 
 which led to those conclusions. Such was his 
 (Mr. C.'s) views then,and such they were now, and 
 no epithet would change that view. Gentlemen en- 
 tirely mistook his character if they supposed that 
 he was to be driven from any position, he deem- 
 ed tenable, by any epithet that they might cast 
 upon him. He had not changed his views in re- 
 gard to the propriety of the action to be adopted 
 here. He looked upon this body as entirely dif- 
 ferent in its constitution and mode of action from 
 a legislative body. In such a body, it was very 
 proper that committees should make reports on 
 subjects which were referred to them of a local 
 character, and where all the information as to the 
 propriety of legislation is derived from an exami- 
 nation of local facts and causes, and of knowledge 
 confined to the locality. It therefore became 
 important to present the reasons and facts upon 
 which was based the conclusions to the house as 
 the subject matter for legislation. But was there 
 any man who came here not knowing that the 
 subject matter for our action was the Constitu- 
 tion of the State the organic law to amend it if 
 we deem proper or to frame an entire new in- 
 strument if we deem it preferable ? Every pro- 
 position here therefore was connected with the 
 organic law, and he desired for one to have them 
 presented to the house without being embarrassed 
 with the reasons which led to conclusions in others. 
 The gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS) 
 had said that these committees were dele- 
 gations of the power of the house. That may 
 be true, but he did not believed they could force 
 upon us binding and irrevocable results. If so, 
 then the propositions they submitted to this house 
 could not be changed or altered in any particular. 
 He did not believe that. They were sent to these 
 committees for the purpose of being arranged and 
 reduced to form, and after this primary action in 
 committee, should be submitted to this body with- 
 out any reasons for their conclusions. He did not 
 know how far the action of gentlemen looked be- 
 yond this hall or what ambitious aspirations they 
 
133 
 
 wished to strengthen by being put upon record in 
 the form of written reports. He knew not what 
 offices were to be made by the Convention to be 
 filled by its members, or how far gentlemen were 
 looking for places on the judiciary. It was not 
 for him to say, but he was surprised to find almost 
 every member of the judiciary committee advo- 
 cating this proposition, to allow the committee to 
 make written reports. It was not for him to im- 
 pugn or to judge of the motives which promp- 
 ted the action of gentlemen he was bound to 
 believe that they were good ones, and he did 
 believe so. There were some other reasons 
 which induced him to support the resolution 
 adopted the other day. There might be long 
 elaborated reports from several members of a 
 committee, and in one instance,perhaps that of the 
 judiciary, from 13. These would all go on the 
 journal, and it would therefore be encumbered 
 and enlarged beyond all useful purposes. And he 
 did not believe that we should gain any thing by 
 printing all of them he had come to the conclu- 
 sion that the money of the State could be better 
 expended. The gentleman from Orange had said 
 that in some instances the committees were charg- 
 ed with matters merely statistical. Did the gen- 
 tleman suppose that those statistics if necessary 
 to the house, would not be communicated ? If he 
 made a report from any committee he chanced to 
 be on, and it was necessary to communicate any 
 information not already communicated, he appre- 
 hended he could do so. There would be no lack of 
 an opportunity. As had been said by his friend 
 from Genesee, the advocates of this motion to re- 
 verse the previous action of the house, were al- 
 most all of them, men who were able to make 
 known their views here. And this proposition 
 came not from the men who seemed to have so 
 many excellent friends to present their side to 
 house. Not from those who were not speaking 
 men, but f'-om those who seem to feel it a duty 
 imposed uj-on them to submit their reasons in the 
 form C' written reports. Not from those who had 
 not the power to make themselves understood, 
 but from those who were perfectly competent to 
 do so. Now his friend from Herkimer could 
 at any time, when any proposition was un- 
 der consideration, whether it had passed 
 through a committee or not, make himself un- 
 derstood in every respect and manner. So with 
 his friends from Orange, and Essex and St. Law- 
 rence. But he did not desire that they should be 
 put upon the record first in a written report, and 
 then have their speeches spread before the house 
 and the country afterwards and have members 
 perhaps committed to their views. He wished to 
 leave every man on terms of equality, and not to 
 have his judgment prejudiced by the elaborate 
 reasons of other gentlemen. It was in that view, 
 and that only, that he opposed the bringing in of 
 written reports, and their being placed on the 
 journals. 
 
 Mr. BROWN rose for the purpose of making 
 an explanation. He had used a word in the heat 
 of debate which seemed to admit of an offensive 
 interpretation. Whether it was really so in it- 
 self, or whether given that form through the de- 
 sire of the gentleman from Otsego to put him in 
 the wrong, he would not undertake to say now. 
 He would only say that he imputed motives to 
 
 no person, and that the word was not used at all 
 in an offensive sense That would be sufficient 
 for the house whether it would be for the gen- 
 tleman from Otsego, was another question. If he 
 desired to put him (Mr. B.) in the wrong, as he 
 had manifested on another occasion, he would 
 take an opportunity to reply to him, in a man- 
 ner which he should not now. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD desired to say that he might 
 have labored under a misconception. The reason 
 of his remarks, was only because he had been an 
 advocate of this proposition the other day, and he 
 had supposed that the offensive remark was le- 
 velled at him, in part. 
 
 Mr. BROWN assured the gentleman that he did 
 not intend to do so. He did not think at the time 
 what course the gentleman took. He had used 
 the phrase in the heat of debate, and if the gen- 
 tleman had not been so ready to put him in the 
 wrong, as he had on another occasion, in refer- 
 ence to a little matter of adjournment 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD had no remembrance of the 
 occasion. 
 
 Mr. BROWN had but he would not advert to 
 it further. 
 
 Mr. DANA hoped this motion would be adopt- 
 ed. He found himself in an unpleasant situation 
 in relation to it. He was told by gentlemen that 
 we could all express our views on any subject, 
 and he was told by others who opposed the reso- 
 lution, that we could not. So he knew not what 
 to think. He knew nothing about talking in pub- 
 lic all he desired was an opportunity if he 
 chose, to write and read off his speech, as was 
 done the other day. And he would therefore pre- 
 fer to have the reports of the committees printed, 
 so that he could take them home to his room and 
 examine them at his leisure, and then he would 
 be much better enabled to come to correct con- 
 clusions, and to write out a reply if he desired. 
 He hoped therefore the committee would have the 
 privilege of adopting the course which to them 
 might seem best. He should vote therefore for 
 the motion to reconsider. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that he did not hear all the 
 discussion that took place the other day, when 
 this resolution was adopted. He had been com- 
 pelled to be absent from his seat, and came in 
 while it was in progress. Whose resolution it 
 was, he did not know until after the question was 
 taken. He heard the very able gentlemen from Ot- 
 sego and Ontario advocating it when the vote was 
 taken, and from an instinctive sense, he had voted 
 against them. For himself, he felt that the con- 
 clusion was unwise, and he was happy therefore 
 to hear the gentleman from St. Lawrence imme- 
 diately move a reconsideration, and had he (Mr. 
 S.) been the only member of the house, to do it,' 
 he would have taken pleasure in recording his 
 vote with that gentleman upon the proposition, 
 and it might be yet that they would stand alone. 
 He did not feel that the proposition was infamous, 
 or that any gentleman who had argued on that 
 side of the question, had done more than to ex- 
 press his views. But this resolution went a great 
 way beyond the precedent to which they referred. 
 This declares it to be inexpedient for any com- 
 mittee to give their reasons for coming to any 
 conclusion. The practice in the Convention of 
 1821 was not founded on a resolution, but on the 
 
134 
 
 suggestion of a member, now in this body. It 
 was left discretionary with the committees. 
 The present resolution was a direct instruction 
 to them. What was it ? Why, a gag upon the 
 organized Committees of the body. It involves 
 the extraordinary absurdity of constituting a 
 committee, and taking their conclusions and at 
 the same time repudiating the reasons that had 
 conducted them to it. He believed that he was 
 right. Would the gentleman say that a wise con- 
 clusion was always apparent upon a statement of 
 facts. If that was so, we needed no committee 
 for we might act together in the body. If the rea- 
 sons are not apparent upon a statement of reflected 
 forms connected with Constitutional law, then 
 these was needed as we now have, the organiza- 
 tion of committees. And pray for what purpose, 
 unless to hear the matured reasons, that may have 
 brought them to the conclusions, not apparent 
 and obvious to all. It was feared that these 
 reports would influence the action of the House. 
 It might have that effect but unless we came 
 here to act upon a premature distrust of the orga- 
 nization of the house, we should have no fears of 
 it. This always was the case in all legislative 
 bodies. The standing committees were constitu- 
 ted for the arrangement csf thought, and the con- 
 sideration and deliberation of subjects. They 
 examined books, documents, history and every 
 source of information, and gave us in a concise 
 form the result of their deliberations. But, 
 says the gentleman from Otsego, we do not want 
 these reports to stand upon the journals of the 
 house or have them printed, because they 
 will influence the people encumber the jour- 
 nals, he said. Well, then, it was reduced 
 to a mere question of time. Was the gen- 
 tleman certain that reasons given orally on 
 the floor of this house, vrould be as well con- 
 sidered and as well attended to as a written re- 
 port. And again, if they were not written, time 
 must be taken by the whole body to hear them 
 presented. In the one case they could be read and 
 examined in their rooms, and in the other, the 
 whole body must depend upon one hasty and im- 
 perfect hearing, with a general consumption of 
 time. It was an argument in favor of long ses- 
 sions, and in that respect, where was the saving 
 of public money ? The gentleman although ar- 
 guing ably, it seemed to him, had gone too far. 
 He seemed to take it for granted, that if this reso- 
 lution was reconsidered,and each committee left to 
 its own discretion in the matter, that the journals 
 would be encumbered with long written reports 
 upon every subject. He thought better of the in- 
 telligence of the committees. He had the fullest 
 confidence in that comprehensive word, the dis- 
 cretion, of members. The committees would not 
 unnecessarily make any long written reports. 
 There had been mixed up too with this discussion, 
 a dissertation as to the motives of gentlemen on this 
 floor, which he wished to repudiate on both sides 
 alike. Allusions had been made by the gentle- 
 man from Genesee (Mr. RICHMOND,) to members 
 who desired to make a written report and a speech 
 also. This he was glad to see, was disclaimed by 
 his friend from Madison,(Mr. DANA) who was de- 
 sirous to have the right of writing as well as talk- 
 ing. Those who talked would undoubted- 
 ly be satisfied with the monopoly of that 
 
 right while those who desired to express 
 their views in writing, would also have the full- 
 est opportunity for that. Allusions had been 
 made by his friend from Otsego, rather ambig- 
 uously made somewhat insinuated that there 
 might be a lurking desire for posthumous fame on 
 the part of the members of 'Certain committees, 
 and to perpetuate their names on the journals in 
 connection with their reports. If the glory of 
 the future operated upon their minds of distin- 
 guished gentlemen, he would leave it to his saga- 
 cious friend from Otsego to say, whether they 
 could not accomplish that by a speech as well as 
 by a report. Here we had an able corps of repor- 
 ters, taking down the discussions word for word, 
 to be daily published, and after to be bound up in a 
 book and thrown upon the country. If any de- 
 sire of that kind existed, therefore, it could be as 
 easily attained in one form as the other. His 
 friend from Otsego had also made use of a personal 
 allusion wholly unnecessay. He Mr. S. was not 
 on the judiciary committee himself, but knowing 
 them to be honorable,high-minded, distinguished 
 gentlemen, he would not believe them for one 
 moment to be animated by any such feeling or 
 sentiment as the gentleman from Otsego imagined. 
 He believed they possessed that same fidelity to 
 the best interests of the people, as was the other 
 day claimed by the gentleman for himself. He wan- 
 ted these written reports for his own examination. 
 If the committee gave good reasons he would 
 thank them for it. If they failed to do so and 
 put a bad one before him, it gave him warning of 
 it in time to get rid of it. There was another 
 point. To refuse to reconsider the resolution, 
 would have possibly the certain effect to place 
 every member of this Convention in a false posi- 
 tion before the country and before posterity. 
 Here we have referred to us baskets of resolutions 
 some of them containing propositions very 
 plausible in their form, such at, the greatjnass of 
 persons would at once, urge the adoption of and 
 we are gagged from giving our reasons if we do not. 
 And we go forth to the world as having made 
 an unwise conclusion, because a wise conclu- 
 sion is not always apparent in a wise proposition. 
 There was yesterday the proposition of the gen- 
 tleman from New-York (Mr. MORRIS) in relation 
 to taxation what was the action upon it ? It 
 was referred to a select committee for the purpose 
 of getting information upon that subject. How 
 were we to get this information when the com- 
 mittee were restricted solely to the bringing in of 
 a projet. The gentleman from New-York (Mr. 
 MORRIS,) who had been placed at the head of this 
 committee had promised to give his reasons for 
 the adoption of this proposition. And how must 
 he do it except through a speech,which he had the 
 same right to make before. This was the dilem- 
 ma in which the operation of that resolution 
 would put him. These views would induce him 
 (Mr. S.) to differ from the able gentlemen on the 
 other side. He might be in a minority, still he 
 was confident that he was in the right. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that when the resolu- 
 tion was under consideration the other day, he 
 did not participate in the debate had upon it, and 
 indeed he paid but very little attention to it. He 
 could see nothing then or now so very preposter- 
 
135 
 
 ous in this Convention adopting the same rule as 
 did that in 1821. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that there was no gag law 
 th en the matter was left to the discretion of the 
 committees. He was willing to trust it there 
 still. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR did not apprehend that there was 
 any gag now. The resolution was merely decla- 
 ratory of the sentiments of the Convention, that it 
 was inexpedient that the various committees 
 should accompany their propositions of amend- 
 ment with any written report of the reasons which 
 influenced them in coming to the conclusions to 
 which they had arrived. He believed on that oc- 
 casion he voted for the resolution. He had lis- 
 tened with that attention and pleasure he always 
 listened, to the remarks of the gentleman from Ot 
 sego, and he must confess that taking into consi- 
 deration with those remarks, the action of the 
 Convention of 1821, his mind was impelled to 
 favor the resolution. He should now vote to re- 
 consider, because he thought the end desired to 
 be attained by the resolution, was already well ac- 
 complished, from what had been the indications 
 here to-day, of the sentiments of the Convention 
 against these long written reports. But if it was 
 needed for the information of the body, to accom- 
 pany a proposision with statistics and facts, toge- 
 ther with the reasons which influenced the con- 
 clusions, drawn up in a concise and succinct man- 
 ner, the committee should be at liberty to give it. 
 He believed no committee would feel at liberty to 
 present any report lengthily and specially drawn 
 out For these reasons, he should now vote for 
 the reconsideration. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE did not believe it to be his duty to 
 give his vote for the motion to reconsider, not 
 only for reasons which had already ben adduced 
 but for others. In the first place the resolution 
 was the same as adopted by the Convention oi 
 1821, and he had yet to learn that any evils had 
 arisen out <:f it there. Another reason, was that 
 he was opposed to giving any committee the righ 
 to spreac out on the journals their opinions as 
 it would be giving to them an advantage that no 
 member on the floor could have. When their ar- 
 guments came to be discussed, members woulc 
 not have the privilege they had, of having their 
 remarks spread out also upon the journals. Ano- 
 ther reason was, that to repeal the resolution now 
 would be to retard and embarrass the action o 
 the Convention. One committee had already re 
 ported, and they did not consider themselves as 
 having the right to give their reasons for the con- 
 clusions to which they had arrived. He believec 
 also that there were others who had got their re 
 ports nearly ready, under the supposition that thej 
 too were not to have this privilege. If the reso- 
 lution was repealed, they may feel it their duty to 
 look into their arguments and to make up a re- 
 port, and thus it would be delayed several days 
 If there were no written reports, judicial tribu 
 nals hereafter in construing the Constitution 
 would not deem it to be their duty to go beyonc 
 *he instrument to ascertain its meaning. Bu 
 as a sufficient reason that those who migh 
 dissent in toto from the reasonings of the report, 
 although agreeing with its conclusions, woulc 
 not have the same opportunity of being recorded 
 
 in the journals. He was therefore opposed to 
 he motion to reconsider. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS had but little parliamenta- 
 y experience, but so far as his knowledge and 
 information extended, he believed there never did 
 happen in a legislative body such a thing as the 
 committees being precluded from making a writ- 
 en report, if they chose to do so. Reference had 
 jeen made to the last Convention, and it struck 
 lim, at the time, that it was rather unparliamen- 
 tary to allow committees to make reports without 
 assigning their reasons for them ; and he believed 
 t was so considered in that Convention. It was 
 not pretended there that they were precluded 
 from giving their reports in writing ; it was left 
 entirely to their own discretion. He stood in 
 this matter in rather a peculiar situation. He had 
 voted for the resolution ; but without full consi- 
 deration, he confessed. And subsequent reflec- 
 tion, and the remarks he had heard here, had 
 satisfied him now that it ought not to have been 
 adopted. He could see none of the evils gentle- 
 men had depicted, in merely allowing the com- 
 mittees to avail themselves of the opportunity if 
 they chose. He believed that very few would da 
 so unless they deemed it actually necessary. One 
 word in reference to the judiciary committee, of 
 which he had the honor to be a member. He was 
 not aware that there was such a unanimity of opin 
 ion among the members as had been intimated. 
 But, as for his own part, his mind had been en- 
 tirely undecided on the subject; and he might 
 therefore be absolved from any imputation of hav- 
 ing reference to the future, in his action upon this 
 matter. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that he voted for the resolu- 
 tion when it passed ; and he had heard the de- 
 bates upon the motion to reconsider ; but still he 
 remained in his first opinion. He would state 
 briefly his reasons. Objections were raised, wor- 
 thy of great consideration that it was unparlia- 
 mentary that there never had been an instance 
 in any deliberative body, of committees being pre- 
 cluded from expressing their opinions on the sub- 
 jects referred to them. It seemed to him that the 
 objection was not well taken, for the reason that 
 this was unlike any other deliberative body. No 
 precedents could be cited from the British Con- 
 stitution, because they had never known such a 
 thing as a Convention to revise the fundamental 
 law. Nor could we draw any conclusions of 
 practice from other bodies for there had been 
 but one such convened in the State. And altho' 
 on that occasion no formal resolution passed pro- 
 hibiting committees from making written reports, 
 yet it was universally understood, and the records 
 show that in no instance was there any such re- 
 port made. He would not repeat the reasons 
 which had been suggested in opposition to the 
 proposition, but he rose for the purpose of stating 
 some reasons which had not yet been arrived at 
 by any remarks that had been submitted. We 
 are not to act finally and conclusively. The 
 Constitution we might adopt, was to be passed 
 upon ultimately by the People themselves. 
 It might very well be said that the results to 
 which the committees might arrive, would not 
 be in accordance with the final deliberations 
 of the Convention. For instance, the judiciary 
 committee, of which he was a member, might re- 
 
136 
 
 port a plan for the re-organization of the judiciary, 
 and in the Convention that plan might be essen- 
 tially amended. But were it otherwise and the 
 action of the committee final, so far as this body 
 was concerned still it had to go to the people be- 
 fore it become a part of the fundamental law. He 
 understood that the reports of these committees 
 were to go upon the journal. No other remarks 
 offered by any other member would go there, and 
 the consequence would be that when the Constitu- 
 tion was submitted to the people, they would have 
 the arguments only on one side. If the proposition 
 should be overruled, there would be the reasons 
 which sustained the committee in coming to their 
 conclusions, but where would the people look for 
 the reasons which ruled the convention, to a dif- 
 ferent conclusion or to that modification. It may 
 be said that we have reporters Jiere, who will 
 carefully report all the suggestions that were 
 made here, and who would embody the entire pro- 
 ceedings proceedings in a volume. If the peo- 
 ple were to rely on that for information, why not 
 permit the reasons which influenced the commit- 
 tee in coming to the conclusions, to be put also in 
 the same book, so that their action might be re- 
 conciled with that of the Convention, especially on 
 all occasions when the Convention might come to 
 conclusions differing from those to which the 
 committees had arrived. It was to be desired 
 that every member here should have an equal op- 
 portunity of putting his reasons for action in the 
 Convention at large before the people, when they 
 came to pass upon the Constitution, in at least 
 as imposing and as enduring a form as the reports 
 of the committees. These were the reasons that 
 would actuate him in voting to sustain the reso- 
 lution. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN proposed to add a single remark 
 or two in addition to what had just been said. 
 He \vould submit to gentlemen whether there was 
 any analogy between this Convention and a leg- 
 islative body. In such a body, committees are 
 raised to take into consideration entire subjects, 
 and the committees so act, and report an entire 
 bill, having no connection whatever with any oth- 
 er bill that may be passed. Now our action here 
 would be somewhat analagous to the action of the 
 legislature, if the entire Constitution was referred 
 to a single committee. Then the committee in 
 making their report, could give as an entire sys- 
 tem of government for the State, and in doing so 
 it might well be quite necessary and important 
 that it should render its reasons, in an elabo- 
 rate form, for the system it proposed to have 
 adopted. But how w r as it here ? We have 
 parcelled out the Constitution, among 18 
 different committees. Now suppose a com- 
 mittee on one subject of the Constitution 
 should come in here, and that their reports, sus- 
 tained by strong and able arguments, should be 
 adopted ; when another committee came in, w T hat 
 guarantee would there be, that both reports would 
 harmonize ? But adopt it, and the various re- 
 ports of the other committees, conflicting in the 
 .same manner, what kind of a thing would we 
 have of the Constitution ? Even if they were adop- 
 ted as proposed, he apprehended it would be of- 
 ten necessary to reconsider votes, previously had, 
 in order to make the several propositions harmo- 
 nize. In this way it might so happen that in 
 
 point of fact, the reasons assigned by a commit- 
 mittee would cease to be thiproper ones, and have 
 no applicability. Indeed the very committee 
 may themselves agree to changes and important 
 alterations, for the sake of harmonious action. 
 There was another view he had not heard sugges- 
 ted, and which indeed governed the action of the 
 Convention of 1821, in this matter of written re- 
 ports. It might so happen, that we should vote 
 unanimously perhaps for a proposition presented 
 by a committee, and at the same time not agree 
 with all their reasons for arriving at the same con- 
 clusion. Hence, if these written reports should 
 be received, it would appear and be so consider- 
 ed, that every man agreed and coincided with its 
 reasonings, and that they, were those which con- 
 trolled the action of the Convention. There was 
 therefore no analogy between this and a Legisla- 
 tive body. It had struck him at the first, when 
 this resolution was adopted, that it w r as not very 
 important, and that we had better have none 
 on the subject, but after hearing the debates, he 
 had become entirely satified that by allowing 
 these reports to be made, it would involve us in 
 great difficulties. Going out as they would into 
 the country, and then not followed by our final ac- 
 tion, it might lead to confusion among th,e peo- 
 ple. After the Constitution had been formed 
 and a final vote taken on it in Convention, then 
 he should like to see arguments made pro and 
 con, upon it, and to see the best minds in the 
 State take it up and discuss it section by section. 
 Then the people could take it as a whole, as an 
 entire proposition, without having heard these 
 reports in parcels, conflicting as they must w r ith 
 each other. It semed to him that the people 
 would have a better knowledge of the action of 
 the Convention if it was discussed in that form, 
 and in that way. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN regretted very 
 much to find himself differing on this occasion 
 with so many able gentlemen, and had it not 
 been that he had thought very much on the sub- 
 ject, he knew not to what conclusion he might 
 have come. He was decidedly opposed to the 
 adoption of the resolution when first presented, 
 and he should vote for the reconsideration now. 
 In the first place the proposition to shut out the 
 reports of committees was in direct violation of 
 the standing rules of parliamentary law, and of 
 legislative practice. What was the object of ap- 
 pointing committees at all, but to gather facts and 
 furnish arguments on them for the use of the 
 body, and to guard against hasty action, and the 
 effect of that kind of eloquence to which we had 
 listened this morning. Gentlemen might by a 
 very plausible argument, induce very different 
 conclusions to what members would arrive at, if 
 those arguments were spread out before them on 
 paper, and opportunity afforded them for exami- 
 nation. What sort of argument was it to address 
 to the people, to say that these reports going out 
 to them would have a tendency to mislead 
 them. He had too much reliance on their intel- 
 ligence then to believe that they would be imposed 
 upon by the report of any committee. They might 
 indeed, and ought to be, influenced by any report 
 whose reasonings were based on a sound founda- 
 tion but of that they were capable to judge. 
 But if they were not, there would undoubtedly be 
 
137 
 
 found enough of those who would give them all 
 necessary suggestions and reviews of improper 
 reports. So there was no need of apprehension 
 of any danger resulting from the effects of these 
 reports upon the people. But there was hardly 
 a subject on which there would not be at least 
 one or two minority reports from the committees. 
 So there would be no important subject presented 
 to the people in a one-sided point of view. For 
 instance in regard to the important question of the 
 creation and division of estates in land, was it to 
 be believed that when the able chairman of that 
 committee presented his report on the subject, 
 that the committee would be so harmonious as all 
 to agree to it. He thought not, and he desired that 
 all might have an opportunity to express their 
 views upon it. What then became of the argu- 
 ment that the people would be improperly influ- 
 enced by these reports ? It had been also suggest- 
 ed by the gentleman from Otsego, that these re- 
 ports would be encumbering the journals, and 
 making a most voluminous volume. There might 
 be cases where there would be more said than 
 necessary, but he believed that taking the great 
 majority of them, they would contain nothing 
 more than was deemed actually necessary for the 
 information of the house. He would not say that 
 it was a reflection upon these committees to assert 
 this, but it would be the last thing that he would 
 look for. It had also been said that it would be 
 giving an undue advantage to the members of the 
 committees to allow them to urge their reasons in 
 writing, as though they were all to be upon one 
 side of the question, and there would be no op- 
 
 advantage, if any, would be on the side of the 
 members, who would have an opportunity to ex- 
 amine carefully and deliberately the reasonings 
 of the committee and their arguments, and be better 
 able to answer them if wrong, than if called upon 
 at the moment, without understanding them clear- 
 ly. All would then be better prepared to arrive at a 
 safe and wi ;e conclusion. This was the course 
 adopted by ail legislative bodies, and this was the 
 course he desired the Convention to take. He 
 could not perceive the distinction which the gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN) had at- 
 tempted to draw between this and other legislative 
 bodies, as regarded the action of the committees. 
 Here as there, each committee had a distinct sub- 
 ject to act upon, whether brought before them 
 
 by petition or resolution, 
 subject was gone throu 
 
 In the Legislature, the 
 ;h with, and examined 
 
 with deliberation and care, and then the commit- 
 tee brought in their report upon it, justifying their 
 conclusions. Now in the Convention a commit- 
 tee would be raised, perhaps, on the same subject, 
 and why should they not report the result of their 
 deliberations in the same way ? He could not 
 perceive any distinction in the two cases, himself, 
 and he thought, for the benefit of the action of 
 the Convention itself, as well as the people, it 
 ought to conform to the uniform rule. He re- 
 peated, that there was no danger of the people 
 being misled by these reports ; and they might 
 as well go forth to them a.s such, as in the shape 
 of speeches. While, with reference to the action 
 of the Convention, we could not have the benefit 
 of these printed speeches ; the only way we could 
 get it would be orally, in the hasty progress of 
 
 the debate. He wanted this information in a 
 permanent, deliberate, reflective way ; as perma- 
 nent as the substantial arguments of the men 
 who made them. Now it was often found that 
 speeches were inaccurately reported, or a person's 
 meaning misunderstood, not from a want of care 
 on the part of the reporters, but often from an 
 inability to hear. How this question was to be 
 disposed of was immaterial to him ; but he felt 
 bound to submit the views he entertained upon 
 the subject. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY was in favor of giving 
 the committees discretionary powers in this mat- 
 ter. He repelled the idea that these reports 
 were to be considered as binding and unalterable 
 laws in their influence. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS was unwilling to prolong the 
 discussion at this late hour, but it appeared to 
 him that the manner in which this resolution 
 should be disposed of, must have an important 
 bearing on the only question that every gentle- 
 man had in view, which was to secure to every 
 member the greatest possible freedom of thought 
 and action, and a most judicious and wholesome 
 result ultimately, to our deliberations. He would 
 not at this late hour think of reviewing all the 
 reasons that had been assigned by gentlemen in 
 favor of the adoption of this resolution, or tres- 
 passing upon the time of the Convention,but it ap- 
 peared to him that they were two strong and con- 
 trolling ones one of which had been only par- 
 tially stated, and the other had not been refer- 
 red to by any gentleman who had opposed the 
 consideration of the resolution. The first was 
 
 portunity for others to present their views. The Ithat alluded to by the gentleman from Madison. 
 
 :** lji__il l-.fil-rmi. n ,1 i ,1 
 
 behind the instru- 
 that influenced the 
 
 That not only the people in coming to the 
 discussion on the question of the adoption of the 
 Constitution might look 
 ment itself for reasons 
 Convention, but that the tribunals might also 
 be influenced by those reports. The venerable 
 gentleman from Dutchess, (Mr. TALLMADGE,) 
 himself had used this as an argument against; 
 written reports in the last Convention. He would 
 now allude to another reason which had not been 
 referred to here at all, and which if he did not 
 consider it a most conclusive one, he should not 
 now refer to. Almost every member had had 
 something to say to-day of the danger lay mem- 
 bers, who were unaccustomed to public speaking 
 would be exposed to, of an undue bias by the 
 very able members of the committee, and he 
 was equally apprehensive of the effect of the re- 
 ports upon the minds of the members themselves. 
 He feared that they would be so strictly wedded 
 to their opinions, that their minds would not be 
 as open to arguments as they should be. They 
 may be unconsciously influenced in this way. 
 There would be perfect freedom of discussion in 
 committee of the whole, and there every member 
 of a committee might freely and fully assign his 
 reasons for his conclusions as reported, and at the 
 same time, if it became proper and necessary, he 
 would be much less embarrassed in changing hia 
 views. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL asked Mr. N. to give way, the 
 hour ot adjournment having arrived 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS assented. 
 
 Leave of absence was granted to Mr. SHELDOW 
 for one week. 
 
138 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL then moved an adjournment, 
 which was carried, and then the Convention. 
 Adj. to 11 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 TUESDAY, (20th tJay} June 23. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. CI.APP. 
 
 A REQUEST TO BE EXCUSED. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS rose immediately after the min- 
 utes were approved, and asked to be excused 
 from serving on the committee to which he had 
 been appointed yesterday, relative to taxing the 
 personal property of a man doing business in one 
 town or city, and resident of another. He said 
 that it was true as had often been remarked, that 
 a ^proposition should not be sent to any com- 
 mittee where the members of it were straight out 
 
 in this Convention they were bound by the rules 
 of what was termed legislative courtesy, so that 
 the mover of every proposition should be placed 
 at the head of the select committee that had to 
 consider it. And he did not think that any of 
 the standing or select committees had made up 
 their minds on important questions in advance; 
 or upon these subjects that incidentally came up 
 and were sent to them. By no means. Their 
 business was and would be to meet and deliber- 
 ate with calmness and prudence and candor ; 
 using their best judgment in discussing the mat- 
 ter and in arriving at their conclusions ; and he 
 thought it the most advisable that but as few 
 amendments should be made to the Constitution 
 as was consistent with the best interests of the 
 whole community in this State. There should not 
 
 opposed to such propositions. He was in this -be the slightest tinge of partizanship or sectarian 
 position ; he was opposed to the resolution. He feeling throughout the entire matter ; this is a 
 considered it a subject of legislation, not of Con- 
 stitutional action ; and he should not (in addition 
 
 to other heavy duties) have confidence enough in 
 himself to go to work to help make a system of 
 taxation that was to be considered as a matter of 
 permanent law. And as it has been considered 
 inexpedient by the Convention for the several stan- 
 ding and special committees to make written 
 reports, giving the reasons why they might pre- 
 sent or reject certain propositions, he could not 
 see what a committee had to do, unless to report 
 in accordance with this matter which had been 
 assigned them, or to prepare members to debate 
 these questions that arise ; and for his part he 
 could not report in favor of these resolutions and* 
 he did not want to be in a minority in the matter, 
 and not be able to give the reasons for coming 
 to such a conclusion. Here, for instance is a pro- 
 position sent to a committee to be considered ; 
 and if there is any reason in the matter at all, or 
 the result of L, it will be because the committee 
 are enabled to present the information they acted 
 on and the reason for their conclusions ; now, if 
 they have no information on the subject commit- 
 ted to them, and are not allowed to give any rea- 
 sons, why, then there is no use to refer any of 
 these propositions to a select committee. And, 
 therefore, gentlemen who have any of these pro- 
 positions to offer had much better offer them in 
 the Convention and have a vote taken on them at 
 once without the trouble of sending them to a 
 committee to report upon. He did not want, to 
 debate the question. But he had another reason 
 for declining to serve. There was another sys- 
 tem of taxation which had been presented by the 
 gentleman from Monroe, (Mr. STRONG,) and if 
 this committee was to be raised, that gentleman 
 ought, as a matter of right, to be put on that com- 
 mittee, so as to nurse his own bantling, and bring 
 it strong and healthy into the Convention. (A 
 laugh.) And he therefore moved to be excused, 
 and that gentleman, (Mr. STRONG) should be put 
 in his place. And he had still another reason, 
 the mover of the original resolution on this sub- 
 ject, (Mr. CHATFIELD) had been left oft' the com- 
 mittee at his own request; and he (Mr. PERKINS) 
 did not like to be made the scape goat for others 
 under these circumstances. 
 
 Mr. STOW hoped the gentleman would not be 
 excused; aTid for the very reasons he had assigned, 
 in asking thi favor. He did not consider that 
 
 subject of vast and vital importance to all; and 
 the committees should be very careful and decide 
 which among the various propositions that have 
 
 been or shall be submitted to them are fit subjects 
 of legislation, and which are not; what should 
 be engrafted permanently on the Constitution, 
 and what should not. There should be no con- 
 fusion on these points. And nothing alarmed 
 him so much as the fear that attempts would be 
 made to fasten too many of these new proposi- 
 tions on the present Constitution. And he felt 
 thus from seeing now on the few first days of the 
 Convention the discussion going on for hours and 
 hours, and day after day, about things that really 
 were only matters of form. He wished this all 
 avoided. And he hoped the gentlemen from St. 
 Lawrence, would be retained on the committee; 
 oped, desired, and wanted the great advan- 
 
 tage of that gentleman's large experience and 
 ability; they wanted the sound judgment of all 
 such in the deliberations of the various commit- 
 tees ; so that it might be decided permanently 
 what ought to be engrafted on the Constitution, 
 and what was only a fit subject for legislation ; so 
 that this might then remain eternally fixed as the 
 firmament of heaven. 
 
 Mr. STRONG did not by any means so under- 
 stand the rule in this matter to be such as to 
 require that all of the members of a committee 
 should be in favor of the propositions (a laugh) 
 submitted to them ; for if it did, it might be a 
 little difficult sometimes to get their committees 
 filled up. But he had rather thought that in 
 standing committees both sides should be repre- 
 sented, so that the opposing views of gentlemen 
 should be brought together. And this was a wise 
 and salutary arrangement ; and was the rule as 
 generally adopted. As to excusing the gentleman 
 from St. Lawrence, (Mr. PERKINS,) he hoped it 
 would not be done by any means. He was the 
 very best selection that could have been made for 
 that work ; his wisdom, his experience, and his 
 great talent all convinced him (Mr. STRONG) 
 that he was the most proper man in all the house 
 to serve on that committee. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS must differ widely with the 
 last speaker. That gentleman had submitted an 
 able plan for a system of taxation, and no man 
 would offer such a proposition to be engrafted in 
 the Constitution who had not deeply studied the 
 subject in ail its bearings; and for this 
 
139 
 
 the experience, the talent and the wisdom of the 
 gentleman from Monroe (Mr. STRONG) all pointed 
 him out as the very man of all others to serve on 
 this Committee. [Laughter.] Now as two com- 
 mittees of course would not be raised on this 
 question of taxation, that gentleman ought to 
 have a place on this committee, and then he 
 could properly give his reasons to the commit- 
 tee for oilering his system to it. He did not 
 think it all right to put men on a committee to 
 consider propositions they were known to be 
 opposed to, and then shut up their mouths and 
 tie up their pens, and not allow them to give any 
 reasons for the conclusions they come to. And 
 as his known modesty [laughter] was almost 
 equal to that of the gentleman from Monroe (Mr. 
 STRONG) he felt great delicacy on on this sub- 
 ject, and most certainly ought to be excused. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that the gentleman from 
 St. Lawrence evidently begged a part of the 
 question. His resolution as to a system of taxa- 
 tion, had not yet been sent to any committee. 
 It might never be sent to any committee, or it 
 might be sent to a different committee from the 
 one which the gentleman from St. Lawrence was 
 on, and probably would. But at present it laid 
 on the table ; it might never be called up. So 
 the gentleman need not borrow any trouble in ad- 
 vance ; for trouble always came fast enough, 
 without borrowing any of it in advance. 
 
 The question was then put and the Convention 
 refused to excuse Mr. PERKINS. 
 
 VALUE Of CANALS, PUBLIC LANDS, &c. 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS presented this : 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to furnish 
 for the ue of the Convention thblullowing statements and 
 estimate.- : 
 
 1st. The value of the Erie and Champlnin canals on the 
 fist day of January, 1S46, estimating tli.- value at such 
 sum as thf rtettyroceetisof the t^iis oiw revenues of those 
 ca..au or th s-u-ono; 1845 w^uld pay the interest at 6 
 |r cent, after deducting the expanses of collection, cot 
 of suptrint- D !<n ce aiid r. piirs u r that year. 
 
 2. 'ihe ag(jrega e raim ofalitue canals, upon the like 
 basis, that is, at:er deducting the expenses of collection, su- 
 perimeui:cnce and n pairs, irom the gre-s amount of tolls 
 and canal revenue lor the <-ea.- on oi navigation for 184,3, 
 showing upon wh;)t amount otca,.ital the nett pioceeds 
 would pay tne interest at d per ce.it. 
 
 3. i he aveiage rate or (>r cerita-ie 'of the animal in- 
 crease of the toils ol all the canals tor the last ten years, 
 or from 1836 to Io4r/, both inclusive, and the average an- 
 nual amouutofexp' nditurts for collection superintendence 
 
 4. The aggregate value of,iilth canals on the fir, t day 
 of January, 18,6, upon tne supposition that there will be 
 the like annu 1 average inc; ease lor the. next ten years ; 
 or upon wh.-U sum the nett proceeds of the toils anu ieve- 
 nut s tor 1845, would, at such average annual increase pay 
 the interest at 6 pur cent, deducting the average am. Mint ul 
 annual expenditu e lor superiu endence, culle. tion and 
 tepairs for that year from the gross amount 01 canal reve- 
 nues. 
 
 5. An account, showing what would be the nett pro- 
 ceeds or earnings of all the canals from the 1st J*n., 1866, 
 upon the supposition that the canals \veie already paid lor, 
 and deducting only irom year to year the aver.ge amount 
 ol expenses lor collection, Bupeiinteodr nee and lepairs for 
 the last ten years, compounding the interest from year to 
 year, upon the nett proceeds lor the coining ten years, at 
 6 p.er cent 
 
 6. The like calculation and estimates computing only 
 imple inteiest at 5 percent. 
 
 7 The aggregate valuation of real and personal estate in 
 the several couiuies ol this State at the time ot the comple 
 tion of the Lne and Champion canals. '1 he present valu- 
 ation, and the average annual rate per cent of increase for 
 this period. 
 
 8 The estimated present value of the public property 
 
 olthe State, including 1st, all the canals, estimating th 
 same as directed under tie 4th head as above; 2d, the cap- 
 ital of the school iiind; 3d. the capital of the literature fund; 
 4 h, the United States dfposite lurid; 5th, the several pub- 
 lic buildings am grourus appurtenant, belonging to the 
 State, whoever situated, estimating the same .it cost, and 
 showing tne a^gie^ate amount ol all. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said he should very much like to 
 examine that resolution, and he therefore hoped 
 the mover would let it lie over for a day. 
 
 Mr. BACKUS consented to do so. 
 BANKS OF THL: STATE. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a communication 
 from the Comptroller in answer to the resolution 
 of enquiry sent to him relative to the condition of 
 the Banks of this State. 
 
 On motion of Mr. TOWNSEND, it was order- 
 ed to be printed, and referred to the committee 
 on Banking, of Which Mr. CAMBRELENG is Chair- 
 man. 
 
 FLANS ROR JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 Mr. SHAW, of Cayugua, presented a new plan 
 for a judiciary system. 
 
 Mr. WITBECK, of Rensselaer, also presented 
 a plan having the same object. 
 
 Both were refered to the judiciary committee. 
 THE TRANSMISSION' OF BILLS, &c. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL presented a resolution that the 
 committee on Legislation, enquire into the pro- 
 priety of prohibiting the legislature from trans- 
 mitting bills from one Branch of the legislature to 
 the other branch within a certain number of days 
 before the day of adjournment. It was referred. 
 
 ROYAL CHARTERS, GRANTS, TENURES, &c. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that he had a day or two 
 since ottered certain resolutions relative to Royal 
 Grants, Charters, &c. ; he consented then to have 
 them laid on the table, at the request of the gen- 
 tleman from Columbia, (Mr. JORDAN) and he now- 
 moved to take them up. They were taken up 
 and are as follows : 
 
 Resolve t, 1 hat it be referred to the following commit- 
 tees to inqu-reinto the expediency of striking out of the 
 Cons 1 itution, as useless and unnecessary, and liable to 
 misconstruction, as follows : 
 
 1. To the committee on the creation and division of es- 
 tates in lands, so much oi the Constitution as declares that 
 nothing contained therein shall efl'ect any grants of lands 
 within tins State, made by the King of Great Britain or his 
 predecessors, before the 14th of October, 1775 ; or *hall af- 
 lect any such grants since made by this State, or by per- 
 sons acting under its authority 
 
 2 To the committee on the organization of cities and 
 villages, so mu.-h as declares that nothing contained there- 
 in shall annul any charters to liodies politic or corporate 
 by the said King or his predecessors, maue before the said 
 day, or shall atf'.;ct any su h charters since made by thia 
 State, or hy persons acting und. r its authority. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that at the time he offered 
 these he was somewhat in doubt as to the appro- 
 priate committee for their reference, or as to the 
 propriety of the reference there indicated ; which 
 reference he now thought should be to the com- 
 mittee on the rights and privileges of citizens, for 
 the clauses to be struck out were in that part of 
 the Constitution referred to that committee. And 
 there was also another reason why he wished the 
 reference changed; of one of the committees 
 named in the proposition (the 2d) he himself was 
 the chairman ; he wished the preliminary exami- 
 nation to be made by others, and he therefore 
 wished them referred to the committee on rights 
 and privileges, (No. 11.) He would offer a sub- 
 atitute for these resolutions making tba.t refer* 
 
140 
 
 ence, and also to further define the object which j Mr. SHEPHERD said there was a very clear 
 he had in view. He wished the proposed sub- and important alteration ir! the last from the first 
 stitute to read thus : proposition ; the latter proposes, or urges an 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committpe on the ! amendment to the Constitution in terms; there 
 
 is a very great difference. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that the gentleman (JoR- 
 was right it only referred that to one corn- 
 
 rights and privileges of the citizens of this State, to inquire 
 
 into the expediency of striking out so much of the four- 
 
 teenih section of article 7 of the Constitution as declares, 
 
 that "nothing contained in this Constitution shall attect 
 
 any grants ot land within this State, made by authority ot j mittee, which before was proposed to be sent to 
 
 the said king (of Great Britain) or his predecessors, or ! two 
 
 bytmTllS: f before tLtLr/o-hanSTa?y The question was then put and it was reconsi- 
 
 such grants since made by this State, or by persons acting dered. 
 
 under its authority," as useless and unnecessary, and liable Mr. SHEPARD moved to lay it on the table 
 
 to .popular misconstruction; and of otherwise amending and Drint it 
 
 the said section so that the same hall read ar follows: */[ i\,TTTr>r>tr-\r u L j ^ A-U /~i 
 
 All grants of land within this state made by the king , Mr MURPHY would not delay the Convention, 
 of Great Britain or persons acting under his authority, af- 1 but the gentleman from New-York, (Mr. SHEP- 
 ter the fifteenth day of October, one thousand seven hun- j ARD,) entirely misapprehended the resolution 
 dred seventy-five, shall be null and void , but nothing con- | wnich he had now propose d as a substitute. It 
 
 tained in this Constitution shall impair the obligation of 
 
 any debt or contract or any other rights of property, or merely proposed that to one committee, which 
 
 any suits, actions, rights of actions, or proceedings in 
 
 courts of justice." 
 
 The CHAIR put the question and declared it 
 to be carried. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND thought there had been a 
 mistake about this ; the house had not understood 
 it clearly ; he supposed that the question was 
 
 before he had desired to send to two. With an 
 addition (not substantive, but merely in form,) 
 providing that section 14 of article 7, should read 
 in this as it would read in the Constitution, if the 
 amendments he proposed were carried, and the 
 provisions enumerated were stricken out of it. 
 This was the only alteration ; and he put it to the 
 
 TT li_l 'j_ A IT* 1 
 
 merely on receiving the substitute for the origin- 1 House whether it was courtesy to him to have 
 al, and not on adopting it. And he hoped the 
 Chair would decide that this was the case, for it 
 was a very important matter, and involved char- 
 tered-rights of great magnitude ; it ought not thus 
 
 1 o pass off and 
 
 e. printed. He hoped it 
 
 .. 
 
 would be printed that thety,,might examine and 
 consider it. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD did not certainly understand 
 it as any thing but merely the reception of the 
 substitute not as a question of reference. He, 
 Jor one, wished this proposition to be printed be- 
 fore it was referred. It involved a great princi- 
 ple ; and perhaps extensive infringements of 
 vested rights of property. He did not suppose 
 that the gentleman (Mr. MURPHY) meant any 
 thing of this kind ; but such might be the result ; 
 it was treading exceedingly close on that line 
 where a great deal of mischief might be done by 
 -a ialse step. He therefore moved to lay it on the 
 table and to print it. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that the question having been 
 ptit anxl adopted, all debate thereon was out of 
 order. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND then said that he would 
 relieve the question of all difficulty on this head, 
 l>y moving to reconsider the question ; and he 
 xlid hope that the Convention would under the 
 circumstances consent to reconsider it. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said certainly ; he hoped him- 
 se^f that the Convention would allow it to be re- 
 cons idered. 
 
 The* PRESIDENT said that it would lay as the 
 original proposition did ; as" adopted and on the 
 table," u nless unanimous consent was given. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that where it was ve- 
 ry apparent there had been a miss-vote, he urged 
 that the Chair would put the question again ; es- 
 pecially in a matter of this importance, where 
 there had been a mistake made, and yet no blame 
 could be attached anywhere. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped it would be printed. 
 
 Mr'. JORDAN said that there was no alteration 
 in the matter of the substitute ; it was merely a 
 change of reference. 
 
 this lie on the table, alter he had let it lie there 
 several days already. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to take the ques- 
 tion on printing first. 
 
 The committee finally voted to lay it on the 
 table, and to have it printed. 
 
 ASSESSMENTS AND TAXES. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS presented this : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to committee No. 2, to in- 
 quire into the propriety 01 inserting in the ConstitUiion the 
 lollowing provisions: The Legislature shall provide by law 
 a uniform rule of assessment and taxation lor the several 
 counties in this Sta.te, tnd shall prescribe fcuch regulations 
 as will secure a due valuation of all property, both real and 
 personal; the estimates of real estate to be rmuie on its ac. 
 tual and intrinsic value, as near as the same can be deter- 
 mined at the time; and that County Clerks and Registers 
 in Cities shall, upon the requisition of the assessors of 
 towns, and those ot wards in cities, make annually, by th e 
 first day ol June, full returns ot all mortgages, liens and in 
 cumbrances on the real estate situate in their respective 
 towns and wards, to enablethe assessors justly to appor- 
 tion equalize and assess the same. 
 
 Adopted. , 
 
 SALARIES OF STATE OFFICERS. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY offered this : 
 
 Resolved, That the third standing committee be instruc- 
 ted to inquire into the expediency of making provision in 
 the Constitution, that in all cases where a salary is given 
 to any officer in this State as a compensation for his ser- 
 vices, that no extra compensation shall be allowed to such 
 officer, for any purpose or under any pretence whatever. 
 
 Adopted. 
 
 < PEOPLE'S RESOLUTION." 
 
 Mr. SHAW offered this : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee (No. three) on canals, 
 internal improvements, public revenue, &c. be directed to 
 inquire into the expediency of incorporating into the Con- 
 stitution of this State the People's Resolution (so called) 
 and the pledges and guaranties of the act of 1842, entitled 
 ' Art-act to provide lor paying the debt and preserving the 
 credit of the State." 
 
 Adopted. 
 
 APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES. 
 Mr. STOW offered this : 
 
 Resolved, That the judges of courts ftf record shail bo 
 appointed in the following manner 
 
 i 
 
141 
 
 The State shall be divided into not less tl.au six, nor 
 more than ten districts containing as ne:irh as may be, 
 without dividing a senate district, an equui number of peo- 
 ple. 
 
 The governor shall nominate, and by and with the fid. 
 vice and consent of two-thirds of all the senators elected, 
 of whom there shall always be one vote 1'rom each dis- 
 trict, appoint th> judges. 
 
 Jn case th senate shall not confirm the nomination of 
 the governor, when he shall have submitted two nomina- 
 tion< for one vacancy, the senate sliall proceed to appoint 
 a .judge to supply "such vacancy. Each senator 
 (without debate) n .m a person, and from the two persons j 
 named by the largest number of senators, the senate shall j 
 determine, by lot. which one sliall be appointed. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that this was an affirma- 
 tive proposition, and if adopted would be de- 
 claratory of the sense of the Convention on this 
 subject. He did not intend to call it up at that 
 time; but he merely wished to propose to the 
 Convention (and through them to call the people's 
 attention to it) a plan for electing Judges differ- 
 ent from the only two plans he had seen proposed. 
 Gentlemen seem to consider it a settled theory 
 that there is no alternative in this matter of ap- 
 pointing judges, between the present plan of ap- 
 pointing by Governor and Senate, and their ap- 
 pointment directly by the people. And indeed 
 it has been said tnat the people have already dis- 
 tinctly decided that Judges should be elected di- 
 rectly by their votes. He did not consider that 
 this was so ; he did not believe the people had said 
 any such tiling, and moreover, he thought that 
 the people would be very slow to come to this de- 
 cision ; and that they would pause a great while 
 and deliberate long and cautiously before they 
 made this great change in a fundamental princi- 
 ple of the government. He doubted very much 
 whether the people would decide to elect even 
 jurors by the popular vote ; much less to elect 
 the judges. He would not debate the question, 
 then, but he merely wished to call serious atten- 
 tion to this plan ; he had offered this proposition 
 for the selection of Judges, by which the people 
 would have a very decided voice in selecting 
 them. He did not believe any mere majority of 
 the people either by a direct vote or through 
 their representatives should create the judiciary 
 of the State ; the minority (for whose benefit this 
 branch is established perhaps more than for any 
 other) should have a decided voice in the matter ; 
 they sfiould be heard. And he hoped the people 
 would bear in mind the wide and decided distinc- 
 tion between the Executive and legislative 
 powers, and the judiciary. A majority elect the 
 legislature and executive ; and the reasons for this 
 arc very obvious. But a very different mode of 
 selecting the Judges should be adopted. They 
 are as the shield of the minority ; to protect 
 from the oppression (if tried) of the ma- 
 jority. Again it was desirable that all parts 
 ot the State should have a voice in deciding who 
 are to form the Judiciary and how thev are to be 
 elected; all the different localities of the State 
 and particularly the minority should be heard in 
 this matter, especially about the courts of gen- 
 eral jurisdiction. He had drawn up his proposi- 
 tion with a view to effect this ; that those at the 
 when they went to New- York to have their 
 rights determined should be able to know that 
 their constituents, or in fact, themselves had 
 had something to do and say about the judges and 
 court, before whom their rights were to be inves- 
 
 tigated. By his proposition it would be impossi- 
 ble to have partrzans on tlie Bench. It would 
 tend to call men from the walks of private life to 
 a seat on the Bench good men of moderation, 
 prudence and talent; something other than mere 
 political partisans. It. was opposed to the two 
 equally dangerous extremes, of appointment by 
 Governor arid Senate,, or else by the popular vote. 
 Both were wrong. By his plan the two leading 
 parties must concur in a choice ; and they would 
 be compelled to select moderate men, and men of 
 ability, lie did not intend to argue the question. 
 He intended merely to lay the proposition on the 
 table and te have it printed ; that members could 
 have something else besides the two extreme 
 modes of selecting judges of which he had already 
 spoken, to reflect on. He moved to print it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said he wished to make an 
 amendment to this, and also to offer some few re- 
 marks ; as he understood that this was intended 
 by the gentleman from Erie (Mr. STOW) to draw 
 out the sense of the Convention as to the rule of 
 appointment indicated in the proposition; that 
 this was not a mere resolution of inquiry, but one 
 prescribing that the mode of appointment should 
 be as here laid down. Now he was not, for one, 
 prepared to say that the people of this State were 
 incompetent to elect the judges of their courts. 
 For he believed that they are as capable of doing 
 this, as of electing a President or Vice-president 
 of the U. S., or a Governor or Lieutenant-Gover- 
 nor of the State of New- York, or any other State. 
 He was opposed to having the judiciary a mere 
 political machine ; he wanted to strip the power 
 of appointing the judges, at once and entirely, 
 from the Executive ; and he would not consent 
 that this power, which had been left in the Go- 
 vernor's hands for 25 years, should be left there 
 any longer. How were these judges appointed 
 at present ? The Constitution truly confers that 
 power on the Governor and Senate ; but do they 
 exercise it, in reality ? Certainly not. T^e judges 
 of county courts are not thus appointed. Practi- 
 cally, they are appointed by a caucus ; and this is 
 held in the county where the judges are to offi- 
 ciate : the people there get together in a caucus : 
 make nominations for the office of judges, and 
 then send these names in to the Governor. Well, 
 who ever knew a Governor to refuse to send in 
 these very names to the Senate, to be confirmed ? 
 And when have we had a Senate that refused to 
 confirm these caucus nominations, sent to them, 
 thus through the Governor ? When one political' 
 party has the Executive, then their friends follow 
 this phui, and their men are appointed ; and so it 
 is when the other party is in power: they make 
 the caucus nominations, and that is, in reality, aa 
 appointment. He remembered the case some 
 years ago in 1S34 (he had told the story to 
 another and smaller body than this, and in this 
 city) some persons got together, in Franklin 
 county, and resolved themselves into a Democratic 
 Republican County (.'(invention. Mr. A. J3. was 
 made Chairman, and Mr. C. D., Secretary : and 
 alter a while it was declared unanimously that 
 Messrs. E. F. and G. H. had a majority of all the 
 votes then present at this great county convention, 
 and they were then unanimously recommended 
 therefor to Governor MARCY for nomination to 
 the Senate. Thf. proceedings came down to- him.. 
 
142 
 
 headed, " Proceedings of the Democratic Repub- 
 lican County Convention of Franklin," &c., arid 
 so on : and Governor MARCY, seeing the words 
 " Democratic Republican," naturally supposed 
 surely they were all right ; that was strong enough 
 recommendation, in all conscience, for him : and 
 so he sent in these two names to the Senate, and 
 they were confirmed. And it turned out after- 
 ward, upon inquiry, that they had thus appointed 
 a couple of whigs, instead of a couple of demo- 
 crats. (Much laughter.) And this is a practical 
 illustration of the mode of appointing these judges 
 that has been in operation over 20 years. He did 
 not know whether any similar tricks had been 
 played on other Governors : but it is enough that 
 the Governor swallows whatever is sent to him 
 in this kind of way. They might assert that this 
 was not the way the judges of the supreme court 
 got their appointment; but still, he wanted them 
 all appointed in a better way than now. The 
 people must have something to do in the matter. 
 They ought to be elected directly by the people. 
 He had heard no good argument yet against this 
 mode ; nor did he believe that any other mode 
 would satisfy the people. He had yet to hear a 
 good argument to the contrary ; and he did not be- 
 lieve a good reason could be given on it. They 
 were now discussing this very subject in the ju- 
 diciary committee, (of which he was a member) 
 and probably in a few days they would send in to 
 the Convention some plan for the electing of the 
 judiciary. He would have preferred that the 
 committee should have reported before there was 
 any debate on the subject : but as this plan was 
 thus thrown in here, he rose to protest against 
 that way of appointing. He was opposed to the 
 Governor having any thing to say or do about the 
 appointment of the Judges of the Supreme Court 
 or any of the other Judges. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said he did not wish to interfere 
 in it ; but he should like to know if this discus- 
 sion was strictly in order. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the resolution or 
 proposition Was properly under the consideration 
 of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. STOW said he had not there in the Con- 
 vention desired to discuss this point, and he would 
 merely say further that when his friend from 
 Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) came to see the 
 resolution in print, and to reflect on it, and un- 
 derstand the motives that had influenced him in 
 presenting it, that he would find he had entirely 
 misunderstood both. He would therefore renew 
 his motion to lay on the table and print. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that it had better be referred 
 to the judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that would not at all answer 
 ~his purpose. 
 
 The motion was then put and carried. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that as he had the gratifying 
 intelligence to communicate to the house, that 
 on to-morrow the gentleman from New York, 
 (Mr. MORRIS) near him, would be prepared to 
 call up his resolutions in relation to the Executive, 
 for the consideration of the house, and as there 
 were no further resolutions to be offered, he 
 moved that the Convention do now adjourn. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD asked Mr. WARD to with- 
 draw it for a few minutes, as he had a resolution. 
 
 Mr. W. did so. 
 
 STATE LIBRARIES. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD offersd a resolution that the 
 Sergeant-at-Arms take the proper measure to en- 
 sure the opening of the State Libraries at 8 A. M. 
 during the sittings of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that officer had no power 
 over the State Libraries. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD knew this ; he had expect- 
 ed that by merely passing this resolution here, it 
 would have the effect desired. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said that the Librarian was so 
 willing to accommodate all, that a mere intima- 
 tion was sufficient to effect the object. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said they were open always from 
 9 A. M. to 4 P. M.; and now they are also open 
 from 4 to 9 P. M. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 WRITTEN REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to take up the unfinished 
 business of yesterday. Carried. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the subject under con- 
 sideration was the reconsideration of the resolu- 
 tion declaring the inexpediency of the commit- 
 tees making written reports to the Convention. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS had the floor. He said that 
 if the House wanted to take the question at 
 once, he would waive his right to the floor; 
 but if they did not, he would make a few remarks. 
 He then went on briefly alluding to the arguments 
 he made yesterday, and opposed a reconsideration. 
 
 Mr. BURR said he ought to ask pardon of the 
 Convention for detaining them a single moment 
 on this question ; and he was greatly surprised 
 that a matter of so little importance had drawn 
 forth such a long, and such an earnest debate. 
 There must certainly be something about it 
 which he could not now see, that gave it so much 
 importance. The question he understood to be 
 whether they should rescind the resolution they 
 framed the other day or not, in which it is stated 
 to be inexpedient for the committees to send in 
 written reports or arguments with their resolu- 
 tions. He thought, at first, that it was of very 
 little consequence whether they passed the reso- 
 lution or not. If he had supposed that the reso- 
 lution was intended to restrict the committees al- 
 together from making any written reports, he 
 would have opposed it at first. But he, .did not 
 think that it was intended to restrict or cripple 
 these committees. If, as he supposed, it was in- 
 tended merely as an advisory resolution express- 
 ing the wish of the Convention that the commit- 
 tees should exclude all extraneous matter from 
 their reports, then he would vote for it, as he had 
 done before. But he felt now puzzled how he 
 should vote. He was inclined yesterday to vote 
 to reconsider ; as he supposed the resolution was 
 to be considered as somewhat stringent on these 
 committees; but as he had watched the debate, 
 and on further reflection, considered it to be only 
 an advisory one to tell them so to frame their 
 reports as to shut out all unnecessary matter from 
 cumbering the journal; if this really was the 
 sense of it and purport, and he thought it was, 
 he would vote not to rescind. It was very pro- 
 per to caution the committees on this point, and 
 from the course the debate had taken in the Con- 
 vention, he thought it would be quite as well to 
 caution some of the gentlemen, here against in- 
 
 
143 
 
 troducing too much extraneous matter; speaking 
 too often and too long. (A lauglO For the 
 Convention has spent a great d ea i too much time 
 in considering this and some other matters, of 
 too little importance to justify the length of the 
 debate. For his own part, he would safely pro- 
 mise the Convention that his speeches, like an- 
 gels' visits, should be few and far between, and 
 very brief into the bargain. 
 
 Mr. BASCOMsaid he voted for this resolution, 
 and from the course the debate had taken and the 
 extreme severity with which the proposition had 
 been treated, he trusted the friends of it would 
 bo -allowed a little indulgence in the debate 
 those who meant to adhere to it, of whom he was 
 on\ What is the question before us ? It is a 
 question of how much power you will give to 
 your committees ; of how much authority and in- 
 fluence in effect you will give to them. It is not 
 a question whether the committees shall be gag- 
 ged as stated yesterday by the gentleman from 
 Clinton (Mr. STETSON) but whether the commit- 
 tees shall gag the House. They have parcelled 
 out to the IS or 20 committees the various sub- 
 jects that were to come before the Convention; 
 and when they came to examine these sub- 
 jects they would have full as much autho- 
 rity and influence in the House as they 
 wo'uld have had if we had gone at first 
 into committee of the whole, and therefore 
 needed not the assistance of any written argu- 
 ments. The gentleman from Columbia (Mr. 
 JORDAN) had given very able arguments and 
 well stated this yesterday, and he would attempt 
 to repeat the position that gentlernan then took, 
 and see if he could make himself understood. 
 And in doing this, he did not intend in the least 
 to indicate what the report of the committee of 
 which he was a member was at all likely to be. 
 But suppose a case. Suppose the Judiciary com- 
 mittee (he did not say they would) should report 
 a plan for a judiciary with a separate and distinct 
 chancery t.ibunal ; there were members of that 
 committee who he might say, (without any dis- 
 respect to other gentlemen) could give as strong, 
 able, and decisive arguments in favor of that pro- 
 position, as any person in the countrv. Suppose 
 the Convention should differ from them,and strike 
 out the proposition, and substitute another one for 
 it; the plan thus substituted, would go down to the 
 people for their vote ; it would have no distinct 
 chancery jurisdiction connected with it, and yet 
 it would have with it all the very plausible argu- 
 ments of the committee in favor of such a tribu- 
 nal, (which would be most powerful in their in- 
 fluence with the people) and the action of the 
 Convention against it. What would be the pro- 
 bable result, if these amendments to the Consti- 
 tution are submitted to the people separately (as 
 probably it is right they should be) with a propo- 
 sition one way, and a strong able argument the 
 ither? Why the people probably under the in- 
 fluence of these strong arguments would vote in 
 favor of the present beautiful system. That 
 would be the result of having the proposition sent 
 down with an argument opposed to it. Would 
 this be desirable ? Still there is another objec- 
 tion. He certainly wished every man in the 
 Convention to act freely according to the convic- 
 tions of his own judgment ; but when he was told 
 
 that a committee deliberately agreed to any pro- 
 position and offered their reasons for sustaining it, 
 (and that report had gone out on the wings of the 
 wind to the farthest corners of the State,) tell 
 him not of its influence being of no avail; he could 
 not believe that those gentlemen of the commmit- 
 tee would be as free and at as full liberty to dis- 
 cuss that proposition in committee of the whole 
 as the other members who were not so distinctly^ 
 committed to this proposition. Yet he would not 
 detain them further than to call the attention ot 
 the Convention to one more position ; it was one 
 that to be consistent himself, would require that 
 he should be brief in explaining it. It is this 
 dill gentlemen here, or had they thus far, calcu- 
 lated the value of time. They had alreaby seen 
 that it was quite difficult to get committees to 
 agree on the propositions they intended to submit. 
 They were now in the fourth week of the ses- 
 sion ; and there had not been a vote on a sin- 
 gle resolution and only a solitary report presented, 
 yet 4 weeks have nearly elapsed. The Conven- 
 tion had not yet assumed, to use the language of 
 the venerable gentleman from Dutchess, (Mr. 
 TALL.MADGE) its proper attitude before the peo- 
 ple, whose constituents they were ; and who had 
 sent them here to do this work; and he knew 
 that the people were looking on with much im- 
 patience at the dilatory conduct of the Conven- 
 tion. Now if, when the committees shall agree 
 on propositions, we set them to work to furnish 
 arguments and reasons in detail, and their chair- 
 man to draw up a long report, &c., we should 
 thus impose an improper task upon them ; and 
 one which if they undertook to perform, would 
 consume a great deal of very valuable time that 
 might much better be devoted to more important 
 business. He repeated, they were in the fourth 
 week of the session; there are 18 or 20 commit- 
 tees to bring in reports ; each will average 3 or 4 
 propositions ; they all have to be debated and con- 
 sidered by the Convention ; and yet November is 
 the time when the people are required to vote on 
 these amendments. And they want some time to 
 read and reflect on them before casting their 
 votes, and finally acting on the amended Consti- 
 tution of their State. "Did the members reflect on 
 the importance of the work before them ? What 
 had they to do ? Why, their business here is 
 simply to frame the best Constituti<m or svstem of 
 government that God ever permit^! any people 
 to live under on the face of the earth. There was 
 plenty of ability in the house to do it; but they must 
 be careful of their time, and they must not waste it, 
 bygiving to these committees workto do thatwould 
 interfere with the proper business of the Conven- 
 tion. They must not,either, allow propositions to 
 go out with erroneous or one-sided statements at- 
 tached to them. It was said that the speeches of 
 members in favor of them (given by the very able 
 body of Reporters here) would be as influential 
 as written arguments when given to the world; 
 but he did not believe that these speeches of sin- 
 gle members would have anything like the ad- 
 vantage of committees privileged to present ela- 
 borate arguments, and to spread them on the jour- 
 nals of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that he had not as yet been 
 able to alter his mind from any thing he had. 
 heard. M any gentlemen in the course of the <Ji. 
 
144 
 
 bate had spoken his sentiments so fully that it 
 would not be necessary for him to go over that 
 ground, or to say much on the subject. But he 
 was opposed tatdl long reports, and he would 
 state why. The gentleman from Essex (Mr. 
 SIMMONS) and the gentleman from Rensselaer 
 (VAN SCHOONHOVEN) and some of the other gen- 
 tlemen who had addressed the Convention in fa- 
 vor of this motion to reconsider, must have been 
 satisfied that they at least had all the eloquence 
 and all the talent necessary to express all that 
 they could desire to have said. But if the Con- 
 vention adopted the plan these gentlemen wish 
 and advocate that is to allow the committees to 
 write out all their reasons and arguments upon 
 paper in favor of their several propositions, why 
 then these very eloquent and talented gentlemen 
 would be the very ones to whose lot it would fall 
 to write out the arguments ; the great advantage 
 would be given to such men, and see what a 
 double advantage they would thus have over lay 
 members like himself. How would they for in- 
 stance guard themselves against the gi- 
 ant pen of the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN) or against his eloquent tongue. 
 There was not perhaps any man in the State, 
 or the United States, who could spread out his 
 thoughts upon paper better or with more force 
 than that gentleman. And then after having 
 done so, he could come in here with the elo- 
 quence of a Patrick Henry, a Henry Clay or a 
 Daniel Webster, to sustain his propositions. 
 He did not want such gentlemen to have this 
 double advantage over the lay members. And 
 there was another reason for it. He could not un- 
 stand how it was that gentlemen could from day 
 to day be converted over to the new doctrine. 
 This was a matter very much to be dreaded in- 
 deed. It was evident that the force of argument 
 did sway the minds of members, for they were 
 constantly getting up there and declaring they 
 were converts to this new doctrine. And this 
 very much reminded him of what was told him 
 once by an old friend of his, who took great 
 pleasure in seeing religious conversions and in 
 talking about them ; and he said that for some 
 men to be good Christians it was necessary for 
 them to be converted every day, (Laughter) and 
 he thought we had a good number of that class a- 
 mong us hSe. (Laughter.) They seem to be con- 
 verted every day, and so of course they must be 
 good members (much laughing.) They told us 
 that the privilege to make these long written re- 
 ports would be for the benefit of the lay members. 
 Now he belonged to this class, and he did not want 
 them to take any such trouble to do anything of 
 .that sort for him ; (Laughter) and he had not 
 heard but only one lay member express himself 
 here in favor of having these reports ; and he 
 thought it very likely before that one lay mem- 
 ber got through with one report, that he would 
 be a convert back again to the old doctrine, as he 
 was the other day converted to the new. (Laugh- 
 ter.) And other gentleman who get converted 
 by reading the majority report, are just as likely 
 to be converted back next day by reading the mi- 
 nority report. (Laughter.) But he wanted no one 
 to trouble themselves for him ; he wanted no lay 
 Deports to go down to the people to influence 
 
 their votes. He was in favour of short talk and short 
 work. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that he felt there was some 
 misunderstanding in this matter ; some said these 
 reports would be spread on the journals. Now 
 the Convention had to decide what should go on 
 the journal, and not the committees, and so this 
 argument was not well founded. He had been so 
 unfortunate as to call out this debate, and he 
 would now make a single remark. It was this. 
 That the debate had exhibited a most conclusive 
 argument in favor of written reports. He trusted 
 that no exciting language would hereafter be 
 used or sent down with the proceedings here; 
 but two hon. gentlemen had, in the course of this 
 debate, used language and assigned motives for 
 each other's conduct, that neither of them would, 
 on cool reflection, place on paper in his own 
 room. Now, the written reports would have 
 none of these personalities and be divested of 
 everything calculated to excite the prejudices, or 
 to inflame the passions; and they would be 
 much more valuable in conveying the necessary 
 information, than the ordinary speeches of mem- 
 bers. 
 
 Mr.RHOADES was decidedly in favorof a recon- 
 sideration; it was very evident,that if we did not re- 
 consider, that we should have these written reports 
 in the form of speeches, pro and con ; and he was 
 very much mistaken if his friends who opposed the* 
 reconsideration of this, should be present when his 
 friend on his left (Mr. HOFFMAN,) the chairman 
 of the Canal committee, came to make his report ; 
 if the Convention compelled him to make it oral- 
 ly, they would not be induced to cry out, "Oh that 
 mine adversary had written a book." (Laughter.) 
 We ought to be admonished by what took place 
 yesterday, that these reports ought rather to be 
 written than oral. It did seem as if a sort of epi- 
 demic had come over the Convention and seized 
 on its members; and he did not know but that he 
 felt a little touch of it himself. [Laughter.] It 
 was a tendency to make very long speeches about 
 very small subjects. (A laugh.) Now all physi- 
 ologists declared that the body can only entertain 
 one specific disease at any one time. This dis- 
 ease of the Convention now appeared to be what 
 was called, he believed the " caccethes loquendi" 
 (Laughter.) Now he thought it would be better 
 to get rid of this disease, and inoculate the Con- 
 vention, with a little of the caccethes scribendi 
 he believed that was the title of it. (More laugh- 
 ter.) And this change in the system would help 
 them to save a good deal of time, and hasten the 
 period when they should have completed the in- 
 strument the people desired to have presented for 
 their adoption. And as he believed that the pri- 
 vilege to make written reports would curtail the 
 otherwise long speeches that would be made, he 
 should vote to reconsider the resolution. 
 
 iMt. HOFFMAN said that he had been absent 
 when ihe question before tlie house was adopled, 
 and that he should not have felt called on. to say 
 anything on the subject; but there having been 
 distinct allusions made fo him, he v\ould say a 
 word, not upon the theory of this, but on its prac- 
 tical application and execution. Let the conven- 
 tion proceed as it might, difficulties would arise 
 and time must be consumed. It was not enough 
 to point out, therefore, some difficulty in any par 
 
 
145 
 
 ticular case. We have to make a choice between 
 difficulties ; and in this matter, he thought that 
 they could very safely make such a choice. If 
 they were to leave that Convention where the 
 Convention of 1821 was left where every othei 
 Convention had stood, and where every Legislative 
 bodv in the United States had stood that was, to 
 leave their committees free to report or not, as they 
 thought proper beyond a doubt they would adopt 
 the same course, in the main, that had been adopt- 
 ed by the Convention of 1821. Why, then, should 
 they thus early begin to distrust these committees? 
 Ind'olence the love of speaking the natural dis- 
 like to the labor of hard writing, all induced mem- 
 bers to lean to the course pursued by the Con- 
 vention of 1821. Why, then, attempt to coerce 
 or drive them into, or from a particular course. 
 To some it may be easy to write ; but any one 
 who had attempted to write out an elaborate re- 
 port on any subject, however apparently easy at 
 first sight, has found it much more difficult than 
 he had anticipated, and he would assure members 
 that no written reports would be made in the 
 Convention unless the committee that made it, 
 was of the opinion or found that the subject could 
 not be safely treated in any other manner. This 
 was the case in all legislative bodies. But sup- 
 pose the rule to stand as it was, and that a com- 
 mittee should conclude to report against an im- 
 portant proposition. How was it expected they 
 were to make that report. They could say that 
 they had come to that conclusion, so to report, and 
 that was all they could, do they could assign 
 measures. And was it to be supposed that com- 
 mittees would consent to do this ? They would 
 not do it. They will not present resolutions or 
 otherwise, if you go on and say to them that they 
 shall give no reasons why they present them or 
 are opposed to presenting them. No, they 
 will wait to the very last days of the session, when 
 no reply can be made to them or their suggestions, 
 and no investigation can be gone into, and then 
 ask to be discharged from the further considera- 
 tion of the subject. This is the course they will 
 pursue if you tie them down so, and allow them 
 to give no reasons. This will be the inevitable 
 result the practical operation of the rule. On 
 the other hand, suppose a committee should find 
 that they could not with safety present their con- 
 clusions without giving their reasons for the same, 
 in some form or other either in the form of facts 
 leading inevitably to the one result ; or in the 
 form of facts and arguments which lead to 
 that conclusion by the rule of sound logic. 
 How would that committee behave under these 
 circumstances. They would present their re- 
 port at your table. They would necessarily be 
 compelled to do this, and then the Convention 
 must decide on its reception or rejection. A ma- 
 jority can then decide that it shall be received. 
 And that, in practice, would actually annihilate 
 your rule ; for the Convention would not give 
 this privilege to report to one of your commit- 
 tees, and then refuse it to another. And thus 
 your rule would not only be annihilated ; but you 
 must have in addition an argument raised on the 
 question why it should be adopted or not. If you 
 receive it, you annihilate your rule ; and if you 
 reject a report thus presented, is there a man here 
 who does not know that the anxiety to know why 
 
 you have done so, and what it was you had reject- 
 ed,w r ould induce all readers to go and seek it every- 
 where, and read the subject over and over, and the 
 causes assigned for a rejection, and the reasons of 
 the committee for thus reporting. So that the be- 
 nefit of this reasoning would be had and experi- 
 enced in every other place but this. You can not 
 prevent this you can not prevent this practical ef- 
 fect of your rule when thus enforced;for if you could 
 so enforce it, you could go no farther. And there is 
 a step still within the reach of a member by which 
 he can appeal from the judgment of the House, 
 and indicate his individual right as a member, 
 against the Convention as a body. He did not 
 want to see the Convention thus come into colli- 
 sion with individual rights. How could the Con- 
 vention, for instance prevent his friend from 
 Monroe, (Mr. STRONG) from writing out his rea- 
 sons at full length, where he could refer to the 
 very page and the very line, and where the people 
 could find the facts upon which he rested thus 
 giving to them the strong and iron reasons of truth, 
 and spreading the same abroad as widely as the re- 
 gion of letters? And will any member of this Con- 
 vention who believes this to be his duty to him- 
 self or to his fellow, hesitate to pursue such a 
 course, to give .his best vindication against those 
 acts of the Convention by which it sought to pre- 
 vent the bringing of his reasons before the public 
 at the time he presented his conclusions to that 
 body ? Certainly not. And this would be done, 
 too in the last days of the Convention when they 
 had no power to stop it, or to answer the reason- 
 ings of the member. It would be done too, under 
 circumstances that would prevent any reply to 
 that reasoning which it is so much feared would 
 overthrow the judgment of the Convention. This 
 would certainly be the practical result of the ex- 
 ecution of this rule. Did gentlemen doubt it? If 
 so, they had only to look back to a case where 
 not even closed doors, and the strongest injunc- 
 tions that could be imposed on man, could not 
 succeed in destroying the individual rights of 
 membcTs. Luther Martin told the people of 
 the U. States in spite of all these restrictions to the 
 contrary, what he had done and said in relation to 
 their rights, and the reasons for his conduct. But it 
 you allow a committee, against the natural love of 
 ease, against natural indolence against the strong 
 desire of making a speech against the satisfaction 
 of being listened to against the opportunity of 
 taking up and employing a new argument in the 
 progress of debate still to have the privilege of 
 writing out to embody in writing, whenever 
 they thought proper, their arguments, to be read, 
 considered, and the errors of it (if any) to be ex- 
 posed and corrected here before the Conven- 
 tion, and through it before the country, they 
 would be pursuing by far, the best and wisest 
 course. And depend on it they would be trou- 
 bled then, with very few of these reports. For his 
 own part, there was no labor to him more disa- 
 greeable than that of writing out ; and he be- 
 lieved this to be true of almost every other mem- 
 ber of the Convention. If they did not think so, 
 it was because they never had been compelled to 
 try their hands at an elaborate argument for 
 which they were hereafter to be held responsible; 
 and a more responsible act, in his judgment, 
 than such an argument, a man could not be com- 
 
146 
 
 pelled to perform; an argument yet to be con- 
 sidered, answered, adopted, or rejected. And 
 believing this, he should vote for the motion to 
 reconsider the resolution, hoping that the Con 
 vention would not embarrass either itself or in- 
 dividual members in this Way but leave every 
 gentlemen free to write out or to speak out the 
 reasons for their conduct and conclusions their 
 reports if you choose to call them so as they 
 may think proper. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that when he submitted the 
 motion to adjourn, he feared this resolution 
 if called up would give rise to a protracted dis- 
 cussion. Such it seems was the case, and in his 
 opinion it had been a very profitless one. He 
 voted in favor of the original resolution, and he 
 still entertained the same opinion, and he should 
 vote now on this occasion against the motion to 
 reconsider. And while he said so, he availed 
 himself of this opportunity to answer but a single 
 objection raised by the gentlemen from Essex and 
 Rensselaer. They alluded in the course of their 
 remarks to the practice of other bodies of this 
 kind. Now, they failed to present the first and 
 single case where a Convention had been held in 
 this State or in the Union, where any report of 
 the kind had been made. He had thought he 
 heard the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) 
 mention in the course of his remarks a case of 
 that character ; and he (Mr. W.) did himself the 
 honor to call personally on that gentlemen and 
 asked him, whether he recollected a single in- 
 stance of any Convention held in this country 
 where any report had been made in writing. 
 That gentleman told him frankly that he could 
 not. He (Mr. W.) had now to say that in the Con- 
 vention that framed the Constitution of the United 
 States, there was not one single, solitary written 
 report. And hence it was that we heard the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer allude to with so much force 
 and eloquence as he always does on such occasions, 
 to Luther Martin. He felt it necessary to present 
 his views to the people, and he did it as an honora- 
 ble gentleman ought, and any one may do here. 
 He could not present his views in a report, and 
 hence he presented them in a letter to the Amer- 
 ican people. He (Mr. W.) came here wholly 
 uncommitted on any question. He did not even 
 come committed to a change in the judiciary. 
 He came here open to conviction. If gentlemen 
 satisfied him that it was expedient to change, he 
 would go with them. If he became satisfied that 
 the judiciary should be elective, he would go 
 with his friends who went for that, but as yet he 
 was not satisfied, although he might be. As he 
 said before, he came here uncommitted, still, if 
 he made a report to the Convention, of any cha- 
 racter in writing, he should feel bound to fortify 
 it with all the ingenuity and ability at his com- 
 mand, and if he did so, it was not all the philoso- 
 phers or logicians on this floor, learned though 
 they be, who could induce hint to change his 
 view. He did not wish to be placed in such a 
 position. Now, he maintaine'd that this country 
 would have been involved in endless difficulty if 
 we could have gone back to the old constitution and 
 examined reports and presented reasons why this 
 or that proposition was or was not adopted. Need 
 he refer to the question of granting incorporations; 
 whether the power was vested in the Congress of 
 
 the U. States or not. Has not that question been 
 discussed with infinite ability throughout this 
 country everywhere. Has it not been said by 
 some that Congress does possess that power, and 
 has it not been denied by others ? Has it not 
 been said that when the U. S. Constitution was 
 under consideration in the Convention, a 
 gentleman offered an amendment, giving to 
 to Congress the power to grant charters for incor- 
 porations. Yes ; and did we not know that it 
 was voted down. But his learned and distinguish- 
 ed friend on the other side (Mr. SIMMONS) would 
 tell him had told him and the house, that al- 
 though it was voted down, still the Convention en- 
 tertained the opinion that the powers already there 
 were sufficient for the purpose, without it That 
 was his (Mr. S.'s) opinion ; his (Mr. W.'s) dif- 
 fered from that. But suppose that there had been a 
 solemn, written report on the subject, to have 
 gone back to would not the party to which he 
 (Mr. W.) belonged been involved in infinitely 
 greater difficulty than they now are : We go 
 upon tiie ground that unless the power in the 
 Constitution was clearly and positively given, it 
 could not be exercised by Congress. There were 
 others, and he need not refer to them particularly, 
 who contended that if the power was not there in 
 so many words, it could be taken by implication. 
 Need he refer to another prevailing question, 
 which involved equally as great difficulties, and 
 had given rise to a word of discussion throughout 
 the country, from one end of it to the other as 
 to whether there was any thing in the Constitu- 
 tion to authorize the levying of a tariff for pro- 
 tection. On the one side, it was insisted that 
 there was ; and, on the other, that there was not. 
 Suppose that there had been a written report 
 there, and adverse to it what would the high ta- 
 riff men say ? Why all of us could see the diffi- 
 culties that the country would have been involved 
 in. It was better then that we should let it re- 
 main open, and pass upon the various proposi- 
 tions here, and let the people interpret our views 
 as they please and allow us to explain our views 
 by letter to our constituents, if it became neces- 
 sary. In regard to the tariff' question, what is its 
 condition now ? There are many who say that 
 the Constitution gives to Congress the right to 
 raise a revenue, not for the support of government 
 only, but for the protection of the manufacturing 
 interest. In other words, that Congress possesses 
 the power to regulate the Commerce of the Uni- 
 ted States. -He hoped therefore that this ques- 
 tion would be settled immediately, that it was 
 better that we should not have these reports go 
 out and confound the people. Let them judge of 
 the intention of the Constitution according to its 
 Letter, and not from the views of members pre- 
 sented in their reports. He asked the pardon of 
 the Convention for submitting any remarks at all, 
 nor should he have done so, had" it not been that 
 after what had been said, he felt it his duty to 
 present his views briefly. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD before this question was 
 taken, wished to say one word in explanation 
 of the resolution itself, because he believed it 
 was misunderstood in certain quarters. It did 
 not prohibit the making of written reports to the 
 Convention by any committee who may choose 
 to do it. It was the expression of the opinion 
 
147 
 
 alone of the Convention, that it was inexpedient 
 to do so. But before it amounted to a positive 
 prohibition in the view of the language of the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer, (Mr. HOFFMAN) it should 
 be of such a character that the presiding officer 
 of this body, when such a report was made by a 
 committee, would be called upon to decide it out 
 of order. Now, as he understood the resolution, 
 the chair could decide no such thing, and the 
 committee were left just at much at liberty to 
 make a report, so far as parliamentary proceed- 
 ings were concerned, and the resolution was no 
 more binding on the committee,than though it had 
 not been passed at all. 
 
 Mr. STETSON asked if it was not prohibitory 
 if it did not have that meaning if the gentle- 
 man would be so good as to express that meaning 
 in unambiguous terms? He (Mr. S.) agreed with 
 him in the object. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said it was as free from am- 
 biguity, as any word that could be selected from 
 any lexicon in the country. The word inexpe- 
 dient, to him,was by no means an ambiguous one 
 it was perfectly clear and expressive, and one 
 that any philologist would understand at a single 
 blush. In the opinion of the Convention, it was 
 inexpedient to report not that you shall not re- 
 port was the language of the resolution ; and 
 as he said before, under it the Chair could not 
 decide that any report would not be perfectly in 
 order. It was no order, but the mere expression, 
 of the Convention, that the course adopted in 1821 
 would be preferred by it for its government. 
 There was another reason thrown out by the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer, which was plausible on 
 its face, but when examined, in his judgment, 
 would prove to be a felo de-se a two-edged 
 sword and applying with more force against the 
 gentleman's reasoning, than in support of it. It 
 was this that if the Convention would not allow 
 written report to be made by the committees, 
 that those of them charged with special duties 
 and distinct propositions, not referred under the 
 general order, could if they chose hold on to their 
 reports until the last of the session, and then they 
 would be precluded ex necessitate from giving 
 them. Now, let us examine that a little further. 
 If the committees were allowed to make their re- 
 ports, as contemplated by the gentleman from 
 Herkimer, on the last day of the session, when 
 would be the opportunity for gentlemen op. 
 posed to these propositions to meet and answer 
 them ? Was it not unfair and dangerous to the 
 rights of persons submitting propositions ? Ii 
 seemed to him that if the report was made in ac- 
 cordance with the resolution, and the reasons fov 
 it stated orally, in a speech, any gentleman could 
 answer them in the same way, and they could be 
 given to the public in juxta-position, side by side. 
 Now, the force of the argument was on the other 
 side, and in favor of what he (Mr. C.) was con- 
 tending for for the equality of the rights of mem- 
 bers of the Convention. That was what he was 
 contending for, and he desired to secure that 
 equality of right by giving to no committee the 
 advantage of making a report under such disad- 
 vantageous circumstances to the members. 
 
 Mr HOFFMAN asked leave to interupt the 
 gentleman. The gentleman confounded the bring- 
 ing in of propositions at the close of the Conven- 
 
 tion, and the asking leave to be discharged from 
 their consideration without expressing any opin- 
 ion upon it, with the practice of reporting: agains 
 them. At any time, the Convention could take an 
 order requiring the committee to report. But if 
 there was no order ,practically the practice would 
 be as he had stated. They would not report a- 
 gainst it they would delay it, and at the last mo- 
 ment ask here, as was done in other bodies, to be 
 discharged from its consideration. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD, would ask whether there 
 was any difference in the two modes as to practice? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : Undoubtedly. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that there was none 
 whatever. A committee asking to be discharged 
 from the further consideration of a subject would 
 not submit a written report to do it, unless what 
 was never done in a parliamentary body they 
 were ordered to do it. He needed not to enlarge 
 on the argument as presented, except to say to 
 his friend from St. Lawrence, that as a matter of 
 practice, standing committees of legislative bo- 
 dies seldom made written reports, although there 
 was a rule requiring select committees to do so 
 to state the facts, and not the reasons that lead to 
 their conclusions. Standing committees are nev- 
 0r required to do so they might if they pleased. 
 As had been well said, he did not consider this 
 body as standing in the light of a legislature, 
 where there were two branches, acting as checks 
 on each other, and an executive department ac- 
 ting as checks on both. We were here a single 
 legislature body or rather a single body charg- 
 ed with the performance of a specific object and 
 as the gentleman from Westchester had said, he 
 had never known a Convention to embarrass its 
 operations and deliberations by the written re- 
 ports of the committees. It was the first time he 
 had ever heard the proposition urged with so 
 much tenacity. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : Has the gentleman ever heard 
 of a prohibition ? . 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD had never heard any stronger 
 one than the practice of such bodies. And thafin 
 his judgment was prohibition enough. In 182] 
 the Convention of this State, adopted something 
 like an expression of opinion, that it was expe- 
 dient so to do, and he would rather take the ex- 
 perience of the past in bodies like this. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS rose more to say explicitly and 
 distinctly that he understood the restriction, im- 
 posed by the standing resolution now in existence 
 and which it was proposed to repeal, to be one 
 never known in any legislative body within the 
 knowledge of history. The case 'proposed by 
 himself and those who advocated the views he 
 took of this question, was the ordinary course. 
 Neither the Convention of 1821 nor that which 
 adopted the Constitution of the United States, 
 nor any other legislative body that he was aware 
 ofwere guilty of what seemed to him, to be the 
 absurdity of organizing committees to consider 
 particular subjects, and then refusing to hear the 
 reasons of those committees in such manner as 
 they might choose to submit them. There never 
 was such a rule adopted by any legislative body. 
 When gentlemen said that reports had not been the 
 practice, they said nothing to the question and 
 he was not prepared to say that written reports 
 had not been the practice in many cases in Con- 
 
148 
 
 was he afraid to have 
 from those who were 
 
 ventions. The argument here was simply this 
 that the reports of committees are calculated to 
 exercise an undue influence. And gentlemen 
 were disposed to vote against having them for 
 fear they should read those reports and be satis- 
 fied with the conclusions they came to. The gen- 
 tleman from Seneca (Mr. BASCOM) had put a case 
 3 written arguments 
 in favor of having 
 chancery jurisdiction separate from the Supreme 
 Court, for fear of being convinced. Was that so ? 
 No he would not say that he was afraid of any 
 such influence on his mind but he was 
 afraid it would influence others not him. 
 And who w r as the man on this floor that was 
 afraid to read the reasons urged by a committee 
 which this body had selected to consider a subject, 
 for fear that he should get information and be 
 convinced ? The same process of reasoning, said 
 Mr. L. would require you to stop your ears here 
 during a debate, for fear that you would be con- 
 vinced and prejudiced before the question was ta- 
 ken. You send out a committee to deliberate on 
 a proposition, to examine and investigate it, and 
 at the same time, tell them it is best that thev 
 should not make a report, for fear that it should 
 influence you, who sent them out for that purpose. 
 It was said that this resolution was not mandato- 
 
 on this subject, and happened to be members oT 
 the judiciary committee, ^sinister and ambiguous 
 designs in desiring to make written reports, and of 
 spreading them upon the record with a view to 
 the future. It appeared to him that such an im- 
 putation was unworthy of that gentleman, and as 
 he was sure, one not deserved. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS confessed that there was a prin- 
 ciple involved in this matter, as there frequently 
 was in small matters, and we all knew that Dr. 
 Franklin said that he always found great princi- 
 ples in little things. What was the principle 
 here ? It was whether the reasons that were to 
 be given by committees should be in writing, so 
 that all might have due notice of them, and ex- 
 amine them carefully as business men, and be pre- 
 pared to put them down when wrong or whether 
 those reasons should be rendered orally, and of a 
 sudden, with the committee all charged and load- 
 ed and with the members not sufficiently pre- 
 pared with arguments to meet them. Now he 
 would appeal to every gentlemen acquainted with 
 private transactions, if when they served on a busi- 
 ness committee, they had not always found it bet- 
 ter to make a report and to put in writing their 
 points and arguments, rather than to depend upon 
 memory, and verbal explanation. There could 
 be no doubt about it whatever. In ancient times 
 
 ry. Was that so ? What are our committees ? j before printing became as general as it is, people 
 They are the representatives of this body, not j were obliged to depend upon mere verbal decla- 
 
 as the gentlemen from Otsego made him say the 
 other day possessed of the power of the Con- 
 vention but for the duty enjoined upon them 
 to examine into and enquire and report upon sub- 
 jects for the information of the Convention. 
 And would a committee representing the body in 
 that respect, go on against the opinion of that 
 body. He should not do it, and he expected that 
 
 mation. But now, in modern times when we can 
 Easily print much more so than even at the time 
 of the Declaration of Independence he would ask 
 if there was any doubt as to the propriety of that 
 course. It seemed to him to be eminently pro- 
 tective of the rights of the minority. It was the 
 interest of the minorities always, if they could, 
 
 to put the majority on their written rea- 
 
 no committee would come in contradiction of the sons. Minorities could get along very well with- 
 expressed opinion of the body that created them, out doing it. He always felt safe when in a mi- 
 unless they intended feeling in its full strength, j nority, when the majority put themselves on 
 the absurdity of the proposition to appeal to the their written reasons and were willing to stand 
 Convention to act again upon it. He could look or fall by them. What were the guarantees that 
 upon it in no other light than as an expression of j the public had that all of us would act with a de- 
 the Convention, that it was willing to suppress j sire to give them the best possible constitution. 
 the truth, for fear of being prejudiced by it. Gen- j It is that we are willing to be tried by it that 
 tlemen seemed to have started with the idea that i our reputations are at stake -and that if we make 
 the reports of the committees were to be errone- j a bad one, we alone, in some respects, share the 
 ous, and are afraid lest that error should prevail | responsibility. He always thought of this prin- 
 ciple when he got a man on paper, and he wish- 
 ed to know the reasons for propositions that 
 might come up in this convention, and which he 
 might feel it his duty to oppose. The effects of 
 those reports were carried upon judges in explain- 
 ing the Constitution. He thought no danger was 
 to be apprehended from that source. The report 
 of the revisers was sometimes looked into, but 
 only to compare old laws with new, and it was 
 never considered of any binding effect. Gentle- 
 men, some of them, seemed to have the idea 
 that this body was unlike a Legislature. Well, 
 so far as the mere word was concerned, it was 
 unlike it, in one sense. It was a body of the 
 
 by the reasoning and arguments adduced, and 
 hence they would shut their ears not their 
 eyes, for they would like to examine and look 
 into the propositions 
 
 Thev did not fear for 
 
 themselves, but for the people. The same 
 reasoning would require that the publication 
 of the debates here should be suppressed, for 
 fear that the people might be influenced by 
 them. Every member on this floor was a mem- 
 ber of a committee, and if he did justice to a sub- 
 ject, sits down and examines it and further, 
 takes his pen and paper and examines arid puts 
 his propositions down, sees what they are, and 
 reduces them to form. That was the best mode 
 of thinking, as every one doubtless had ascertain- 
 ed. He would detain the Convention but a mo- 
 ment longer, merely to allude to an idea thrown 
 
 people making laws which comprehended all 
 
 other laws, and existing for a long period. 
 But where was the dissimilarity as to the proper 
 
 out by the gentleman from Otsego the other day, j mode of proceeding ? A Constitution was a 
 
 and to repel what he considered a personal im- 
 putation. He imputed to three individuals, him- 
 self (Mr. L.) among the number, who had spoken 
 
 of laws, organic or fundamental, and if there 
 any utility in having the reasons of a committee 
 rendered at all, it should be on such a subject, 
 
 upei 
 body 
 
 WUrf 
 
 
149 
 
 What was the best form in whichto have them ? Is 
 it not where they can be criticised and compared 
 with others ? It seemed to him, that if gentlemen 
 had not committed themselves to this resolution in 
 the first instance, there would be very little hesi- 
 tation about leaving the question open, as it had 
 been in other Conventions. As a business mat- 
 ter, he had no doubt that a Constitution made in 
 one or the other of these ways, would be a very 
 different thing. If one were made through decla- 
 mation and the excitement of oratory, and the other 
 from carefully collected opinions on paper, and 
 an examination of them all together, and in a bu- 
 siness manner, he did not doubt that the result 
 would be different. He declared that he would 
 rather see all debate nineteen-twentieths of 
 which was for what was called Buncombe stop- 
 ped entirely by a vote of the house, and go entire- 
 ly upon sound, written, business-like reasons and 
 reports. He preferred it by far to mere frothy 
 declamation in the house. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved that the Convention do now 
 adjourn. 
 
 Cries of" question," * question," and the mo- 
 tion for an adjournment was voted down by ac- 
 clamation. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON rose for the purpose of mov- 
 ing the previous question. [Laughter.] 
 
 The question being then taken, the Convention 
 refused to reconsider the vote on the resolution 
 ayes 52, noes 63, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Brown, Bi undage, Clark, Conely, Cook, 
 Cornell, Cudde"a' k, Dana, Danlorth, Uubois Gebhard, 
 Greene, Hart, Hoffman, A. Huntington, E Uuntin.^ton, 
 Hutchiason, Kern.iii, Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, 
 Munro, Neliis, Nicoll O'Connor, Perkins, Porter, Powers, 
 Rhoades, Ruggl s, Russell, St. John, r?anford, Shaw, Sim- 
 mon*, W. H. spencer, Stephens, Stetson, Taft, Taggart, 
 J. J. Tav lor, W. Taylor, Tilden, lownsend, Tuthill, Van 
 Sehomhoven, Witbeck, Wood, Yawger, J. \oung, the 
 President 52. 
 
 NAYS- .Messrs. ;-.n~ e l, Archer, F. F. Backus, H. Back- 
 us, Baker, Bsscom, jbergcn, Bouck, Bruce. Bull, Burr, 
 Cambreleng, L>. !> Campbell, Candee, Chamberl.ir., Chat- 
 field, Clyde, Uoud, Dorlon, Planners, Korsyth, Gardner, 
 Graliam, Harris, Harrison Hunt, Hyde, Jones, Jordan, 
 Kemble Kennedy, Kirkland, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, 
 Miller, Morris, Murphy, Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Pen- 
 niman, Richmond, Hiker, .-ears, Shaver, Shepard, E Spen- 
 cer, Stanton, Stow, Strong. Swackhamei, Tallmadge, 
 Vache, Ward, Warren, Waterbury, White, Willard, Wor- 
 den. A. Wright, W. B. Wright, A. W. Y. ung 63. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned till 11 o'- 
 clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (21st day,} June 24. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. CLAPP. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY presented a petition of Mr. 
 Archibald Watt, of Harlem, N. Y. in relation to 
 errors of assessments &c. Referred to committee 
 No. 14. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS presented returns, from 1st 
 Judge and Surrogate of the county of St. Lawrence 
 in answer to the enquiries of the Convention. 
 ReferVed to committee No. 5. 
 
 The PRESIDENT laid before the committee a 
 communication from the Secretary of State of N. 
 Y. State, giving a list of all State officers &c. ap- 
 pointed by the Governor alone, or by the Gover- 
 nor and Senate. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to refer it to com- 
 mittee No. 7. 
 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to print it. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said it was a very important 
 document, and moved to print 800 copies of it in 
 all. 
 
 Agreed to. 
 
 STATE OFFICERS THEIR MODE OF ELECTION, 
 COMPENSATION, TENURE OF OFFICE, &.c. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that standing commit- 
 tee No 6 had directed him, as their chairman, to 
 report certain propositions which that committee 
 had agreed to have reported to the Convention, 
 and in obedience to their direction, he now ask- 
 ed leave to report; premising that this was only 
 a report in part. It related to Section G, Article 
 4 of the present Constitution. Mr. C. then pre- 
 sented the following 
 
 REPORT: 
 
 The standing committee on " the electionor appointment 
 ol all officers (other than legislative find judicial and the 
 governor and lieutenant-governor,) whose duties and pow- 
 ers are not local, and their powers, duties an.i compensa- 
 tion," beg leave to report in part performance of the duties 
 committed to them, the following proposed aiticle, in lieu 
 of section 6, of article 4, of the existing constitution. 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 The Secretary of State, Comp. roller, Treasurer and 
 Attorney General shall be chosen by the people at an an- 
 nual general election, and shall hold their oluces lor two 
 years. The Secretary of State and Comptroller shall ie- 
 ceive an Annual salary uf two thousand and live hundred 
 dollars j the Treasurer shall receive an annual salan of one 
 thousand live hundred dollars; and the Attorney Geneial 
 shall receive an annual salary of two thousand dollars ; but 
 he shall not receive any oilier or further lees, perquisites 
 or compensation IJT any services peifoimed by him as At- 
 torney General. 
 
 The State Engineer and Surveyor shall be chosen ta 
 a general election, and shall hold his office two jears; but 
 nj person sha.l be elected to said office who is not a prac- 
 tical engineer, and has not pursued civil engineering as 
 a business or pio.es.-ion lor seven successive } ears next 
 before his election, lie shall receive an annual salary of 
 two thousand dol.ars and his necessary expenses v\hiie 
 travelling on official business on the line of the canals and 
 pubhc woiks of this State. 
 
 Three Canal Commissioners shall be chosen at the 
 geneial ejection which shall bo held next alter u.e adop- 
 tion of this Constitution, one ol whom shall hold his office 
 for one year, one sha,i hoi 1 his office lor two years, and 
 one shall hold his office for three years. The Commissi n- 
 ers of tue Canal Fund shall meet at the Capitol on the first 
 Monday of January next alter such election, and deter- 
 mine by lot which of said commissioners shall hold hi> of- 
 fice for one year, which for two years, and which lor three 
 years, and theie shall be elected annually thereafter one 
 Canal Commissioner, who shall hold his office three \ ears. 
 The annual salary of a Canal Commissioner shall be six 
 teen hundred dollars, and his necessary expenses while 
 travelling on the line of the canals of this state on official 
 business as such commissioner. 
 
 Three Inspectors of state Prisons shall be elected at 
 the geneinl election, which shall be held next alter the 
 adoption of this Constitution, one of whom shall hold his 
 office for one year, and one for two years, and one for 
 three years. The Governor, Secretary of State and Comp- 
 troller, shall meet at the Capitol on the first Monday of ja- 
 nuary next succeeding such election, and determine by lot 
 which ot said inspectors shall hold his office for one year, 
 which for two, and which for three years; said Inspectors 
 shall have the charge and superintendence of the State pri- 
 sons, and shall appoint all the officers therein, and shall re- 
 ceive lour dollars each for every day actually occupied in 
 official duty at the Prisons or ai the Capitol, and 10 cents 
 for every mile actually travelled on official business. All 
 vacancies in the office of such Inspector shall be filled by 
 the Governor till the next election. 
 
 The Lieutenant Governor, Speaker of the Assembly, 
 Secretary of State, Comptroller, Treasurer, Attorney Ge- 
 neral and State Engineer and Surveyor, shall be the Com- 
 missioners of the Land Office. 
 
 The Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of St^e, Co^ 
 
150 
 
 er, Treasurer and Attorney General, shall be the Commis- 
 sioners of the Canal Fund. 
 
 The Canal Board shall consist of the Commissioners of 
 the Canal Fund, the State Engineer and Surveyor, and the 
 Canal Commissioners. 
 
 {$ No law shall be passed creating or continuing any of- 
 fice for the inspection of any article of merchandize, pro- 
 duce or manufacture, (except salt manufactured in this 
 State,) and all existing laws authorizing- or providing fur 
 such inspection, and the offices created thereby are hereby 
 abrogated. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD repeated that this was but a 
 report in part ; and the committee had not report- 
 ed in full, because it was highly probable that 
 the action of other committees (in relation to 
 public offices) might throw additional burthens on 
 committee No. 6, for them to attend to hereafter, 
 and report upon. If any officers or offices should, 
 when the rest of the committees make their re- 
 ports, be found unprovided tor, then his commit- 
 tee would be ready to dispose of them in what- 
 ever way they may be deemed desirable. He 
 said that it was also due to the Convention to state 
 that the committee was not unanimous in regard 
 to all the propositions presented in this report ; 
 but still they desired that the report, should be 
 thus early presented and in its present shape, 
 each reserving to himself the right to offer any 
 amendments that he wished, when the report 
 should come to be considered in committee of the 
 whole. He did not intend at this time to go into 
 any statement of the reasons that actuated the 
 committee in recommending the proposed changes 
 they had presented in their report, as to these 
 offices, and the organization &c. of that branch of 
 the State Government, because he would have a 
 full opportunity to do so in committee of the 
 whole, when the report should be taken up there. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE wished to know if this was 
 was a report of a majority of the committee. The 
 gentleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD,) had 
 told the Convention that the committee were not 
 unanimous; but he had not said that a majority of 
 the committee had agreed upon these proposi- 
 tions ; now he wished to get at this fact ; for un- 
 less we started right upon this important point, 
 we shall be involved in inextricable confusion in 
 a very short time. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIEL'D could only reply to his ve- 
 nerable friend from Dutchess, (Mr. TALLMADGE) 
 that he would hardly have ventured to make a 
 report from a committee to this Convention, 
 unless he had been authorized by the committee 
 to do so. This report was assented to by the 
 whole committee ; all the members desired it to 
 be made, reserving to themselves however the 
 right to propose any additional changes which 
 may become necessary hereafter by the action of 
 the committees. This however he could say 
 that every proposition contained in the report had 
 the approval of a majority of the members of the 
 committee. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE : Aye ; that is the point ; 
 that is what I wanted to know. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD : That was the case. 
 
 800 copies of the report were ordered to be 
 printed. 
 
 STATE PRISON COMMISSIONERS POWER TO 
 PARDON. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that he had in his hand a 
 resolution which contained matter in reference 
 to which the committee of which the gentleman 
 
 from Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIELD) is chairman, had 
 reported, or in part ; but there were other matters 
 contained in his resolution which had not been 
 touched on by that committee ; this was in rela- 
 tion to the duties and powers of a certain body of 
 officers proposed to be appointed; and so he 
 would send up his resolution to be referred to 
 that committee without striking out any part of it 
 
 It was read as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the sixth standing com- 
 mittee to inquire into 'he expediency of amending the Con- 
 stitution, so as to provide lor the election or appo.ntment 
 of a board of officers, to be denominate.! the Commissioner* 
 of State Prisons, whose powers and duties shall be to p e 
 scribe the mode of discipline and general gove nment of 
 the State Prisons, and who, with the Governor of the 
 State, shall constitute the sole p<>wer to grant pardons 10 
 sueh offenders as shall be s ntenced to the State Pnsi.ns. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS thought that the latter part of 
 the resolution properly belonged to committee No. 
 5, on the powers and duties of the Governor. 
 And as to another of the subjects in the resolu- 
 tion, the committee No. 6 had already deliberated 
 and reported on it. He would suggest to the 
 gentleman the propriety of having it sent to the 
 committee of the whole, who now had charge of 
 the report of committee No. 6, presented yester- 
 day. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES had no particular objection to 
 that course ; but yet he had rather have his re- 
 solution lie on the table, until he could fully ex- 
 amine the report made by committee No. 6 this 
 morning. 
 
 The resolution was laid on the table. 
 
 POWERS OF SUPERVISORS, &c. 
 
 Mr. C. P. WHITE offered this : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the powers of coun- 
 ties, town and other municipal corpora'ions, enquire in- 
 to the expediency of providing in the constitutkm lor the 
 enactment of such genet al laws as may be deemed neces- 
 sary for the government of said counties, towns, &c.; and 
 also that the bo rdsof supervisors in the several C'.-umies 
 n the sta e be entitled to the exercise of such powers as 
 are administrative and not legislative. 
 
 It was referred. 
 
 COURTS OF APPEAL FROM JUSTICES' COURTS. 
 Mr. WATERBURY offered the following: 
 Resolved, That the committee on the judiciary be in- 
 structed to inquire into the expediency of increasing the 
 amount of judgments rendered by justices of the peace 
 that a court of appeal may be formed to settle appeals from, 
 justices' courts, in such manner that the ends of justice 
 may be reached, costs saved, and difficulties settled with, 
 more dispatch. 
 
 Referred. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART presented a plan fora judicia- 
 ry system. Referred to committee on judiciary. 
 CIVIL OFFICERS THEIR SALARIES. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS, said he would offer the follow- 
 ing, without asking any action on it at the present 
 time : 
 
 Resolved, That all civil officers chosen or appointed for 
 a pei iod of three years, or less, ought to receive a compen- 
 sation which shall neither be increased nor diminished 
 during the term for which they shall have been elected; 
 so that all laws pa>sed after the constitution shall take ef- 
 fect, re ating to the compensation ot such officers, shall re- 
 late onJy to the then future incumbents of such offices. 
 
 Mr. P. said in submitting this resolution to the 
 consideration of the Convention he did not pro- 
 pose to refer it to any committee. There was no 
 committee that could properly have it especially 
 in charge, for tha subject matter of the resolution 
 
151 
 
 was diffused in its operation through a great va- 
 riety of committees. He had supposed until he 
 came here that the business of a Constitutional 
 Convention was to define and lay down proposi- 
 tions of government, principles of legislation, the 
 powers of the executive and judicial departments, 
 and perhaps to limit and define the powers and 
 the reserved rights and privileges of citizens. 
 These he had supposed to be the principal ob- 
 jects to be attained by a fundamental law. But 
 a great variety of resolutions had been offered, 
 and a great variety of matter thrown before them, 
 which seemed to him to be proper subjects for 
 legislation, not for constitutional enactment. 
 The committee to which he had the honor to 
 belong had proposed to fix the salaries, or com- 
 pensation to be paid to certain officers, as w r ell 
 as their duties and mode of appointment. 
 Another committee previously reported a pro- 
 position to fix the compensation to be paid to 
 the governor and to his secretary, together 
 with his house-rent and various other mat- 
 ters, which would appear to be rather sub- 
 jects for legislative detail, than constitutional 
 provision. Considerable leeling had been exciled 
 in the comniuniiy on account of what had been 
 supposed by some, to be legislation prompted by 
 p.inv motives, local hatred, and private passions; 
 and in some quarters also, it had bee.n imputed 
 that attempts had been made to alter the com- 
 pensation ot officers and to lower them for the pur- 
 poses of local popularity. He apprehended the 
 proposition he had now offered would avoid such 
 imputations on legislation; for it the legislature 
 o>uid not act on exist ing incumbents, there would 
 be no motive but to legislate on true principles 
 as it wi.uld not be known vvh.it party might suc- 
 ceed them. He had objections to defining the 
 salaries ot officers in the Constitution. He pie- 
 umed the Convention hoped to firm a constitu- 
 tion that would foi some time render unnecessary 
 another Convention; bu if we were to form a 
 constitution which would be acceptible to the 
 people and endure for many jears. tie thought wt 
 should not go into details as to compensation. 
 The value ol money, us compared with products 
 and merchandize, might changej the expenses o! 
 substance, might var\, and thus what would be a 
 proper salary at one time, would not be at another 
 This would be more especially the case in respec 
 to local officers; and he leared that by the adop 
 tion ot such a sys em we would bring befoie the 
 peoples ich a m<i9s of detail as would rather set 
 the people o exdiuiniog them, than those lu. da- 
 mental principles which U was more peculiarly 
 the provin.-e of the Convention to lay down. H< 
 hownver, thought there could be i.o tear of an- 
 proper legislation on such matters if they coulc 
 not act on the existing incumbents >t office. Bu 
 it we should a tempt to fix whit should be a reas 
 oruble salarv f >r every officer 3u, 4U, or 50 yeai^ 
 to come, when Ihe population of the State ma] 
 have doubled, when their duties in many respect 
 had become more onerous, when the price of pio 
 diu-ts anJ necessaiies ot lile had augmented, and 
 the value of labor had greatly changed, it seethed t< 
 him we should place oniselves in ditficuitie 
 which would involve ihe necessity of anothe 
 Convention. To avoid such a result, he had sub 
 
 nutted this resolution, to be disposed of as the 
 invention might think proper. 
 Mr. CHATFIELD very much regretted that 
 lis friend from St. Lawrence (Mr. PERKINS) 
 hould thus desire to anticipate by a resolution 
 if this kind, the action of the committee of the 
 ,vhole upon the report he had presented. The 
 mnciple involved in this resolution, he consid- 
 ered was a very important one ; it looked to an 
 entire change in the condition of the Executive 
 fficers of the State. Now this had already been 
 ully discussed in his committee, and though they 
 were not unanimous, yet they had reported cer- 
 tain propositions to the Convention and intended 
 ;o suggest any desirable modifications thereto, 
 Hereafter in committee of the whole. But after 
 laving this report appropriately referred to the 
 committee of the whole after directing it to be 
 printed for the use of the members giving them 
 ~ull time to examine and discuss it in private, he 
 could not but regret this evident attempt to anti- 
 cipate a discussion on its merits, for it could lead 
 l .o no good result. He would not discuss the mat- 
 ter now, but when it came up in committee of 
 the whole, he would then give his reasons for the 
 course he had adopted and the conclusions they 
 had come to. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to lay the reso- 
 lution on the table and print it. Carried. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that some days ago he 
 had the honor of offering a resolution relative to 
 the procuring of diagrams for the use of the 
 members of the Convention. They had this 
 morning been laid on their tables. His resolu- 
 tion only included one for each member, reporter 
 and officer of the Convention ; and one to be fur- 
 nished for their use by and by. They would 
 want more ; they ought to have 4 additional di- 
 agrams. Many persons came from the country 
 who wanted to use them to find out members' 
 seats particularly ladies. Many ladies about 
 the city also wished to find out the seats of 
 members. He would move that 5 additional cop- 
 ies be furnished. 
 
 Mr. STETSON wished to know what the ex- 
 pense of all this would be who had the plate for 
 this diagram ? They had no control over him ; 
 it was the man's own property, and he could 
 charge whatever he pleased for these diagrams 
 he preferred that some one should make a con- 
 tract with him, before ordering any more. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said he knew the engraver, and 
 he would do them very cheaply only a few cents 
 for each. 
 
 Mr SIMMONS said it made very little differ- 
 ence whether they had 6 or 10. 
 
 The motion to print 10 copies for each mem- 
 bfer, reporter and officer in the Convention was 
 then put and carried. 
 
 Mr. E. HUNTINGTON moved a resolution, 
 that hereafter there shall always be 800 copies 
 printed of all the Reports of the standing com- 
 mittees. Carried. 
 
 CELEBRATING THE FOURTH OF JULY. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that he had received a 
 communication from the General Committee of 
 Arrangements of the city of Albany for celebra- 
 ting the ensuing 4th of July, by a military and ci- 
 vic procession, &c.* and inviting all the member* 
 
152 
 
 and officers of the Convention to join with the 
 in this mode of celebrating that day. 
 
 After some conversation the Convention accep 
 ed the invitation. 
 
 THE GOVERNOR AND LIEUTENANT GOVERNOI 
 On motion of Mr. MORRIS, the Conventio 
 went into committee of the whole, Mr. CHAT 
 FIELD in the Chair, on the amendment to the Con 
 stitution heretofore reported by him, in relatio 
 to the powers, duties, &c., of the Governor an 
 Lieut. Governor. 
 
 The CHAIR directed the Article to be rea 
 through, and it was partly read when 
 
 Mr. MORRIS suggested that the reading b 
 dispensed with, as it had been printed an 
 laid on the tables and was unnecessary. Mi 
 M. then said that the committee had though 
 best to retain and place in their report the sec 
 tions of the Constitution to which they proposec 
 no amendments, and for the reason that it wa 
 deemed to be more convenient for the member 
 to have the whole of the article before them 
 to enable them the better to judge of the proprie 
 ty of the amendments suggested. There had beei 
 great objection made here by prominent member 
 of the Convention, that the committee had repor 
 ted the salaries of the governor and lieutenant go 
 venor. The learned member who made these 
 objections, must have neglected to read the reso 
 lution of reference, because it expressly directe< 
 the committee to report in relation to the com 
 pensation of these officers. The committee there 
 fore were bound to do so, although they may no 
 have spoken of the compensation as other gentle 
 men would. (Mr. M. here read the resolution of re^ 
 ference to show this was so.) The committee he 
 said had really supposed the word compensation 
 put in there to mean something, and hence, they 
 had acted accordingly. The 1st section of this 
 article was in substance the existing Constitution, 
 as was the 2d section. The committee had touch- 
 ed only upon such subjects relating to the Exe- 
 cutive department, upon which there had been 
 an opinion expressed by the public, or or to 
 which their own minds had been particularly 
 called. The 3d section was also a copy from the 
 present Constitution, and here he wished to make 
 a verbal correction. (This was agreed to.) The 
 4th section was also from the existing Constitu- 
 tion, with the addition of what was now in ac- 
 cordance with existing laws, in relation to com- 
 pensation. The 5th section was also found of the 
 old Constitution, and some new matter. To this 
 he wished to add a clause in the present Consti- 
 tution in relation to the pardoning power, which 
 the committee had left out, because it appeared 
 to refer more to the legislative than to the Exe- 
 cutive department, and they thought they had r^o 
 right to interfere with it. But as it was so inti- 
 mately connected with the pardoning power of 
 the governor, he thought it had better be inserted 
 here, for fear it might be overlooked elsewhere. 
 It is the power to suspend sentence until the case 
 should be reported to the next legislature, when 
 they could either prevent or direct the execution 
 of the criminal, or grant a further reprieve. 
 
 Mr. STETSON asked if the only object in this 
 was to perfect the report ? 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that was all. The commit- 
 tee were under the impression that the matter be- 
 
 longed to the legislative committee. And it may 
 be so now. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that the Convenfion had 
 already sent the subject of capital punishment to 
 that committee. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that the next new matter in 
 that section was, in relation to the communica- 
 tion in the annual message of the number of par- 
 dons so granted. The 6th section was from the 
 old Constitution, with the exception of a mere 
 verbal amendment in the phraseology. The 7th, 
 8th and 9th sections were the same as now, with 
 the exception of some mere verbal amendments. 
 In the 10th section it was proper to state that 
 there was a very serious question whether the 
 State has the authority to exercise the power of 
 delivering up criminals to foreign governments, 
 and whether it was not entirely vested in the 
 government of the United States. The opinion 
 of the supreme court would seem to intimate the 
 latter, and the action of the governor of Vermont 
 subsequent to their decision would show an 
 acquiescence in it. 
 
 Mr. STETSON enquired if that was not also 
 provided for in the treaty of Washington. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that was only with England. 
 [f the Ashburton treaty had been made with the 
 Universe, then it might answer. He had report- 
 ed it, however, as the laws now were. The next 
 section the llth was taken from the laws and 
 s not now in the constitution. 
 
 Mr. JONES enquired why the committee had 
 omitted to provide for the delivering up of crimi- 
 nals on the requisitions of Governors of neigh- 
 oring States. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that the reason they did not 
 do it, was because it was provided for by the 
 constitution and laws of the United States. 
 
 Mr. JONES wished the gentleman to refer to 
 hat portion of the constitution of the United 
 states which vested this power in the Governor, 
 le thought the gentleman was mistaken and 
 hat the power was merely left to the State, with- 
 ut specifying the authority, to do it. 
 
 Mr. WARD, at the request of the chairman of 
 hu committee, would read the section of the 
 Jonstitution of the U. S. in this particular : 
 
 2. A person charged in any state with treason.felony, 
 r other crime, who shall flee from justi; e, and be lound 
 i another state, shall, on demand of the executive autho- 
 uy of the state from which he fled, be delivere.1 up, to be 
 emoved to the state having jurisdiction of the crime." 
 
 Mr. JONES said it would be seen that there 
 
 s no obligation imposed there upon any State 
 fficer to do it. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said it said Executive authority. 
 
 Mr. JONES said it alluded to the authority only 
 o made the demand. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said the laws of Congress provi- 
 ed for it ; it was suggested to him by Judge NEL- 
 ON. The 12th and 13th sections he said were 
 iken from the statutes with a little alteration and 
 as entirely new matter. The 13th, was to ena- 
 .e the Governor to remove the Sheriff of a county 
 r cause shown omitting the Register and Cleric 
 ' the county of New- York. In the 14th section 
 ie only alteration was that it required that the Le- 
 slature in connection with the exercise of the 
 eto power, should on every final vote take the 
 uestion by ayes and nays whether in the first 
 
153 
 
 passage of the bill after it was returned or 
 whether reversed by a subsequent legislature. It 
 also provides that the Governor should have ten 
 days after the adjournment of the legislature to 
 approve of bills, &e. He would read the section 
 as amended : 
 
 ^ 14 Every bill which shall have passed the Senate and 
 Assembly shall, b- fore it becomes a law, be presented to 
 the Governor. If he approve he shall s gn it; but if not, 
 he shall return it with his objections to that house in which 
 it shall have origin .ted; who shall enter the objections at 
 Jat'ge on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If. af- 
 ter such reconsideration, two-thirds of the members pre- 
 sent shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together 
 with the objections, to the otiier houie, by which it shall 
 likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of 
 the members present, it shall become a law. If not ap- 
 proved by two-thirds of the members present and if at the 
 next ensuing session of the legislature, the same bill shall 
 b* again passed by the vote of the majority of all the mem- 
 bers elected in each branch ol the legislature, such bill 
 shall become a law. notwithstanding the objections of the 
 Governor. And upon the final passage of every bill, the 
 votes of both houses shall be determined by nyes and nays, 
 and the names of the members voting shall be entered on 
 the journal of each house respectively. If a >.y bill shall 
 not be returned by the. Governor within ten days (Sunday 
 excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the 
 same shall be a law in like manner as if he had sign- d it, 
 unless the legislature shall by their adjournment prevent 
 its return; in which case it shall not be a law. unless the 
 governor shall approve the same within ten days after the 
 a ijournment The omission of the Govemor in such case 
 to a' prove of a bill within ten days after the adjournment, 
 hall have the same effect as if such bill had been returned 
 to the Legislature with his objections. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS suggested some further mere 
 verbal amendments which were adopted and 
 then moved that the Committee take up the con- 
 sideration of the first section of the report. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD, before that motion was called 
 up, would like to ask the Chairman of the 
 Committee on the Legislature whether they con- 
 sidered the veto power, strictly speaking, a Leg- 
 islative one. 
 
 Mr. STETSON did not think that he could an- 
 swer that question with precision. The commit- 
 tee to which the gentleman alluded have had 
 some of these matters partially under considera- 
 tion, but as to the veto powor it was connected 
 with the duty of the Governor to a certain extent. 
 In the existing Constitution, it was placed in the 
 department of legislative power, and they ran 
 into each other to some extent. As to the ex- 
 tension given it in the last amendment, nearly 
 the whole of the legislative power at the close of 
 the session was under the regulation of the veto 
 power. These-were subjects of great importance 
 connected with the Legislature at the close 
 of the session, most of which had received some 
 consideration at the hands of the committee. 
 Perhaps, however, it would be best that they 
 should be fully discharged from the considera- 
 tion of this, and that it should be referred to the 
 committee of which his friend (Mr. MORRIS) was 
 chairman. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS suggested that when the sub- 
 ject was reached in the report, the Convention 
 could decide, perhaps, to which committee the 
 matter belonged. This report was unanimously 
 reported for the consideration of the Convention, 
 but each and all of the committee, were un- 
 wedded to any suggestion there made. They 
 came in here after the performance of their du- 
 ties, like the rest of the gentlemen of this Con- 
 vention, open to conviction, and to receive the 
 
 10 
 
 suggestions of each and all as preferable to those 
 made by themselves. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON hoped that in taking up 
 the report by sections the usual course of legis- 
 lative bodies would be adopted that is, if none 
 object to the first section, then to consider the 
 second, and so on until the report was gone 
 through taking no question on any. 
 
 The CHAIR understood that to be the usual 
 parliamentary law. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND considered, before any time 
 was spent in considering this report, section by 
 section, that the opinion of the committee should be 
 ascertained as to whether they wo^ld not report 
 the whole of the article. How that question was 
 to be discussed by taking up the first section, he 
 knew not. If he had a correct view of the mat- 
 ter there could be presented to the committee 
 overpowering reasons why it should be entirely 
 rejected. Or, he might say, mother words, why 
 the Article of the Constitution we now have in 
 relation to the powers of the Governor and Lieut. 
 Governor was not fully sufficient for all the 
 purposes of this people. 
 
 The CHAIR said that after the report had been 
 taken up by sections and amended, if desired, 
 then the whole report would be under considera- 
 tion and open for discussion. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND considered the act under 
 which the Convention was assembled and which 
 created it, as a special power of attorney as a 
 chart on which its course of action was marked 
 out. He could not conceive, therefore, that we 
 ought to discuss in the name of amendments, as 
 reported in the article of the committee, word for 
 word, the existing Constitution. Can this be 
 said to be amendments. Are we to sit here to 
 discuss the propriety of submitting to the people 
 for rejection or adoption not an amendment of 
 the Constitution, but the existing Constitution it- 
 self. He apprehended not, and he trusted there- 
 fore the committee would not be detained by a 
 separate consideration of each of these 14 pro- 
 posed sections of this 4th article, as it would be a 
 very useless waste of time, and not be accom- 
 plishing the important objects for which we were 
 assembled. And he begged now to say that with 
 reference to the chairman of the committee and 
 its members, that he entertained the very highest 
 respect for them, and in stating his objections he 
 was guilty of no want of personal regard to every 
 member of that committee. But he did consider 
 that important questions were involved in the 
 present proposition, and which, if correctly 
 decided, would have great influence in saving us 
 a useless expenditure of valuable time. And he 
 did trust that before the committee took up the 
 report section by section they would allow gen- 
 tlemen to give their views on the other question, 
 as to whether the report should be rejected or 
 not, and if he was not out of order, he would now 
 proceed for a few moments to state his views. 
 
 The CHAIR suggested that it would not now 
 be in order, until after the report had been gone 
 through with. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND thought the decision of the 
 question he had raised now, would save a vast 
 deal of time. But perhaps the mode suggested 
 by the Chair, would arrive at the same result, 
 though certainly it would not save time. 
 
154 
 
 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL suggested that, as the commit- 
 tee would probably soon rise, the gentleman could 
 then attain his object when the question was on 
 granting leave to sit again, by moving to recom- 
 mit the Article with instructions. The report 
 Mr. R. thought ought to be printed, as amended, 
 and the new parts distinguished from the old, by 
 italics, or some such distinction. 
 
 Mr. WARD hoped that the committee would 
 proceed regularly. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND apprehended that it would be 
 a useless delay to print. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER called the gentleman to 
 order. On being required to reduce his point of 
 order to writing he stated it to be that the gen- 
 tleman was discussing while the first section only 
 was under consideration, the entire report. 
 
 Here there was much desultory conversation on 
 the point .of order, when it was withdrawn, and 
 the 1st section was then taken up. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND now wished to say a few 
 words on that. He would now object to the 
 1st section at once ; it was part and parcel of 
 the present Constitution, and precisely the 
 same as the 1st section there. If he under- 
 stood the matter, the people were not to pass 
 on the Constitution. If we find any thing in it, 
 that the people find no fault, let us let it alone, 
 if all are satisfied with it. For it would be a most 
 useless expenditure of time and trouble ; and in- 
 volve them in inextricable difficulties, that would 
 .greatly embarrass their movements hereafter. 
 And no report should be made, there, except to 
 amend some part of the existing Constitution, 
 and which amendment should be specifically sta- 
 ted. They had a good precedent for this course 
 in the manner of reporting the amendments to the 
 old Constitution, by the Convention of 1821 ; anc 
 on these the people passed ; and this is the course 
 they want us to pursue in the 
 
 The CHAIR Does the gentleman from Oneida 
 move to amend the 1st section of the report. 
 Mr. KIRKLAND No, Sir. 
 The CHAIR Then the gentleman's remarks 
 are out of order. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND I move to strike it out alto- 
 gether. 
 
 The CHAIR said he would state the parlia- 
 mentary rule ; it was to take up the 1st section ; 
 amend it if they thought proper, then pass on 
 
 under their direction. It was also desirable 
 hat the old parts of the Constitution should be 
 listinguished from the amendments, proposed by 
 them, by being printed, one in italics and the 
 other in roman letters. He would, therefore, 
 move to refer the report back to the committee for 
 that purpose. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the question would 
 
 taken first on granting leave. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN thought his motion involved 
 that. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND would like to know what 
 reason there was, because there had been a few 
 verbal corrections in the report, that the whole 
 matter should be printed over again. There was 
 not a man here but understood it all. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the question was 
 not on printing, but on granting leave. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was in favor of granting leave 
 to sit again, and on the report as it is, for he liked 
 the shape. Every man. he thought, could see at 
 once, what was the old and what was the new 
 matter. If members had been here as long as 
 they had, without understanding pretty thorough- 
 ly what was in the old Constitution, then they 
 should prepare themselves before we went into 
 committee to morrow. He hoped no order would 
 be taken to print. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS though the object of the gen- 
 tleman from New York (Mr. TILDEN) could be at- 
 tained and at the same time the committee have 
 leave to set again. He agreed that the report was 
 very defective, from the manner in which it was 
 presented. Here were some twelve or thirteen 
 sections of the old Constitution, with which were 
 connected a number of amendments, and they 
 could only be distinguished by a great deal of care 
 and examination. If leave was granted to set 
 again, he intended to make a motion instead of 
 referring the report back to the committees, for 
 that was unnecessary that the report be printed, 
 and the several parts be distinguished by italics. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that could only be done 
 
 by resolution. 
 
 that 
 
 to the next, section by 
 take up the whole bill. 
 
 section, and so come to 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND Are not the merits of the 
 1st section in order ? 
 
 The CHAIR The merits of the 1st section are 
 not in order, without an amendment. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND then said that in order that 
 they might all have time to consider this, and to 
 study the parliamentary rule, as well as those who 
 like him knew but little about it, as well as those 
 who pretended to know such a great deal, he 
 would move that the committee rise and re- 
 port progress, and ask leave to sit again. Carried 
 ayes 49, noes 36. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then stated the question to 
 be on granting leave to the committee to sit again. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN would suggest to the committee 
 which reported the matter now under considera- 
 tion, that there having been numerous amend- 
 ments, 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said that he would offer 
 resolution. 
 
 Mr. WARD wished merely to make a sugges- 
 tion. As was remarked, there had been but a few 
 verbal amendments proposed by the committee, 
 and after the report shall have been gone thro' 
 with in committee, and reported to the Conven- 
 tion, then and not till then, would be the time to 
 order them to be printed, with other amendments 
 that might be adopted. If we took the advice 
 of the gentleman last up and had these amend- 
 ments printed, various others might be offered, 
 and then they would all have to be printed over 
 again. There was no sort of necessity for it, and 
 he hoped there would be no further talk about it. 
 Let us meet the question at once and settle it, 
 Let us go into committee again upon it, where 
 gentleman will be privileged to oiler such amend- 
 ments as they may desire. There were some he 
 understood who desired to propose that the gover- 
 nor should be elected annually. Then they ceuld 
 do it. Others he understood desired to strike out 
 the veto power. Then they could have an op- 
 portunity to do it, but otherwise it would be im- 
 possible. He trusted therefore that the commit- 
 
 to it, that it should be printed tee would have leave to set again. 
 
155 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that in order that the ques- 
 tion on granting leave to sit again might be un- 
 rrassed from the consideration of any other, 
 ho would withdraw his motion to print. 
 
 Mr. W ATK K HI TRY said that we had met here 
 for the purpose of revising, amending and alter- 
 ing the Constitution. And so that was done hi 
 the h<'-;t w;n , ho cared not for (ho form of the re- 
 or where tl.r in,;!!.'!- e:mie from whether 
 from the old Constitution pr an Almanac f no 
 better could be proposed. He was astonished In 
 hear gentlemen tell us in effect that we should first 
 er the whole ground and then go back and 
 it up. It would be like buying a new waggon, 
 and for that reason alone throwing away the old 
 one. Whoever heard of such logic it was enough 
 to move heaven and earth. 
 
 Mr. DANA hoped that the committee would 
 have leave to sit again. He was satisfied with 
 the report in the shape it was, and if there was 
 no other gentleman who deserved to propose 
 amendments, he did at least He hoped also the 
 report would be ordered printed. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said that having been one of 
 the responsible majority who voted to get the re- 
 port out of the committee, he must be permitted 
 to express his regret that the gentleman from 
 Oneida did not now avail himself of the oppor- 
 tunity of placing his remarks before the Conven- 
 tion. If, however, the gentleman was not pre- 
 pared he was willing to let it go until to-morrow. 
 Still it. was in order for him to do so now. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND was prepared, but he had so 
 much trouble this morning about the rules of or- 
 der, that he had been afraid to say any more just 
 then. If on this motion the merits of this report 
 would be a proper subject for discussion, he 
 would be glad to have the opportunity of saying 
 a few words. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the gentleman's re- 
 marks would m v be in order. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLA.XD said he desired only an op- 
 portunity to discuss the merits of the whole re- 
 port, without being obliged to take up the time 
 of the Convention by going through with it sec- 
 tion by section. He deemed that important 
 principles in reference to our future action were 
 involved in the acceptance or rejection of the re- 
 port of the committee. As he understood our 
 duty on this occasion, it was to amend the exist- 
 ing Constitution of the State, and if we confine 
 our work to the amendments of that instrument, 
 which are demanded by the people and their in- 
 terests, without going over the ground in a manner 
 we were not called upon to do, we should find our 
 time well occupied at least for two months to 
 come. Some might differ from him, but his opin- 
 ion was that when we assembled, it was by virtue 
 of the act recommending a Convention of the peo- 
 ple, for the purpose of accomplishing the objects 
 proposed by and stated in that act, as fully and 
 as far as the-act prescribed our course. Now this 
 was a very important matter, as the Convention 
 would find beyond all doubt before they got 
 through. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND asked the gentleman to give 
 way for a motion to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. K. assented but the motion was voted 
 down ayes 28, nays f>4. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND resumed : Now on referring 
 
 to the act which called the Convention together, 
 and the duties devolved on us by that act by 
 reading the 6th section it would be found 
 that, we were to take into consideration the 
 Constitution of this State, to make such altera- 
 tions as the rights of the people demand, and as 
 we may deem proper. Now ho apprehended 
 that in the performance of that duty, we were not 
 called upon here, to report from our committees, 
 existing articles of the present Constitution, 
 but that we were called "upon to report such 
 amendments as the rights of the people demand, 
 to our existing Constitution. Now as to this re- 
 port, and he found no fault with the committee, 
 for they had entered upon a new path, and were 
 the first committee that reported, and had no 
 model form for them, or any instructions from 
 the Convention in that particular if the mode 
 adopted .by the committee, perhaps without 
 a great deal of reflection, be the one adopted 
 by the Convention, it involves every commit- 
 tee, both standing and select, in the necessity 
 of reporting to the Convention the article 
 and section of the existing Constitution on 
 which they wish no amendment whatever. Why 
 on a little analysis of the report of the committee, 
 he found there seven sections of article 3 of the 
 existing Constitution reported, and most of them 
 substantially, in hec verba. He found also a sec- 
 tion of article 1, substantially in the same manner, 
 and also a section, he thought, of article 4. Well, 
 now, it seemed to him that in the first place, this 
 manner of reporting would lead us into very great 
 confusion, and devolve on the committees of the 
 Convention much unnecessary labor, and besides 
 not attain the important object for which we 
 were assembled,and therefore in reference to that 
 he apprehended the committee had committed an 
 error in reference to the form of their report. If 
 they had proposed ai\f amendments to the arti- 
 cles and sections of the Constitution which had 
 reference to the duties of the Governor and Lieu- 
 tenant-Governor, they should have reported sub- 
 stantially in the form to be found in the amend- 
 ments already proposed and adopted by the peo- 
 ple. He referred to the amendment for the elec- 
 tion of mayor by the people an extension of 
 popular rights and power immensely important in 
 its results and its principles. How was that ob- 
 ject obtained ? Was it by proposing whole sec- 
 tions in the manner suggested now, or in the bet- 
 ter form adopted on that occasion. The fornj 
 then adopted was as follows : 
 
 ' At the end of the tenth suction of the fourth article ol 
 the sviid Constitution, add the following words : 'Except- 
 ing the city of New-York, in wnich city the Mayor shall 
 he hosen annually by the electors thereof, qualified to 
 vote tor th other charter officers of the said city, and at 
 the time ol 'he election of such ottieeis."' 
 
 Now in reference to this matter he was very 
 clearly of the opinion, and he trusted members of 
 the Convention would agree with him in senti- 
 ment, that it would be deemed the most advisable 
 course, not to report here the entire article 
 of the Constitution, whether amended or not ; 
 but on the contrary to present to us clearly and 
 and distinctly, seriatim, the amendments that are 
 proposed to the Constitution, and if it was desired 
 to alter or to strike out aline or a paragraph, pro- 
 pose it in the manner in which the important 
 
156 
 
 amendment in relation to the Mayor of the city of j 
 New-York was proposed If it was proposed 
 merely to add to a particular article or section, 
 let them report that they are in favor of so doing 
 to section 5, 10th line &c. as the case may be. 
 
 THURSDAY, (22d day,} June 25. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr^FisHER. 
 The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention 
 communication from the assistant register in 
 
 Then we should have before us in a proper shape | <- hancei 7 at New- York, setting forth the number 
 the consideration of the business for which we | ot 9 aus f on the calendar, in answer to interroga- 
 came together, to make such amendments, which | 5"?L Deferred to the committee on the ju- 
 -was in the language of the act,tothe existing con- 
 
 stitution as the rights of the people demand. This 
 mode of doing the business was one which would 
 tend to expedition, great economy of time, and 
 if he was not grossly in error save much confu- 
 sion hereafter. These remarks it would be seen 
 had reference more to the form of proceeding, than 
 to the substance, but it would be found during the 
 course of our arduous labors, that this matter of 
 form was one of no small importance to be at- 
 tended to. And it became more important now, 
 because this was the first committee that had 
 reported, and he desired to express his thanks 
 to them, that they had set the example of 
 reporting early on the subjects referred to 
 them. We should find, he apprehended in the 
 course of our deliberations here, that we had 
 as much as we could well do, in providing for 
 amendments to this Constitution, without report- 
 ing existing parts of it, and what was still more 
 to be deprecated, without reporting legislative 
 enactments. We had not assembled on this great 
 and solemn occasion as a legislative body we 
 have assembled as the representatives of the peo- 
 ple in their sovereign capacity not to amend their 
 laws, which were ephemeral and transitory, but 
 for the purpose of amending the fundamental 
 
 diciary. 
 
 Mr. JONES asked if a record of the proceed- 
 nings in committee of the whole, had been enter- 
 ed on the journal as required by the 19th rule. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that up to the present 
 time there had been no amendments made ; the 
 record had been kept (somewhat informally) to 
 be perfected hereafter. 
 
 FORM OF REPORTS. 
 Mr. RHOADES offered the following : 
 Resolved, When report' of committees are hereafter pre- 
 sented which embrace propositions to s.mtnd the (Jonstitu* 
 tion, and in which sections or parts of sections of the ex- 
 isting Constitution aie embraced, that such parts be print- 
 ed in italics. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS called up his resolution, 
 Doc. No. 33. The printer had omitted in the 
 5th section the words " from the 1st of June, 
 1846," before the words " to the 1st of Jan. 1856." 
 He had the error corrected and the document re- 
 ferred to Comptroller. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY called up his resolution, Doc. 
 No. 29. relative to Royal Grants, Tenures, &c.; 
 but, at the suggestion of Mr. KENNEDY, he post- 
 poned its consideration till the gentlemen from 
 New- York, (Messrs. SHEPARD and MORRIS,) 
 were in their seats. They were in the commit- 
 
 laws of the government, and if he was not | tee rooms. 
 
 grossly mistaken, this report embraced besides I THE RIGHTS OF MARRIF.D WOMEN. 
 
 Constitutional amendments, a large share of le- 
 gislative, (properly so called,) enactments. We 
 have found in this country, perhaps in others, but 
 certainly in this State, that excessive legislation 
 had been the bane of the land, and one reason 
 among others, for which the people sent us here, 
 was to interpose guards and barriers against it. 
 And he humbly trusted that by our action on this 
 occasion, we might not set a worse example 
 that of excess of Constitution-making. If in the 
 course of his remarks on this occasion, he might 
 be able to satisfy the members of this Convention 
 that the report now before us was one that ought 
 not to be adopted, because, in the first place, in 
 some parts of it, it proposed subjects entirely 
 within legislative power and as to other parts of 
 it, is in violation of the Constitution of the Unit- 
 ed States and as to other parts, because they are 
 already provided for in the present Constitution 
 and as to the whole of it,because it is not called 
 for by those rights, in the language of the act, 
 which the people demand then he hoped that 
 he should have succeeded in satisfying this body 
 that this report was one which ought not to be ac- 
 cepted. This had become a matter of much more 
 importance, because here a precedent must follow 
 in oneway or the other. Mr. K. here gave way, 
 ut the request of 
 
 Mr. BASCOM, who moved that the Convention 
 adjourn. Carried. 
 
 And the Convention adjourned to 11 o'clock to- 
 morrow morning, 
 
 Mr. WOOD offered this, which was referred : 
 Resolved, That the committee on the rights and privi- 
 leges of citizens of this state enquire imo the propriety and 
 expedience of securing to married women by Constitu- 
 
 hiiveat the time of their marriage, or which they may i>f. 
 terwards be entitled to by descent, devise, bequest, con. 
 tract, gift, or any o;her proceeding which nuy entitle 
 them tu the right of property, to empowe. them to make 
 bargains and contract for the same, to bind them by such 
 con racts or agreements, relaiing thereto an I that the said 
 property he liable for the debts mdividu.lly contrac ed t>y 
 them, and also for their support and the support and main- 
 tenance of their children, and that thjy may by la-t will 
 and testament devise and bequeath the same, and that 
 laws may be passed hy the let^Litu: e lor the descent of 
 such estate, or the -.listubution of such property in cases 
 ot intes acy, and also to secure to the husuand the same 
 interest in his wife's estates and property, that his wife 
 would by law be entitled to in his under similar circum- 
 stances, and that a married woman nv'y bef/ie or af er the 
 death of her husband, enfor. e any contract or agreement 
 u>a ie wi.h her during marriage, for her support and main- 
 tenance. 
 
 REMOVAL OF OFFICIALS. 
 Mr. PERKINS offered this : 
 
 Resolved, That a select committee of seven be appoint- 
 ed by the Chair, to consider and report appropriate 
 amendments and provisions for the suspension of offi.ers 
 suspected to be guilty of malversation, Irom office, and for 
 their removal ou pi oper proof, and ior supplying vacan- 
 cies ail interim. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that it seemed to be very 
 probable that the deliberations of the Convention 
 would result in deciding that a large number of 
 officers who were now elected by another mode, 
 should hereafter be elected by the people direct. 
 
15? 
 
 They had at present in the Constitution some 
 modes of removal from office of those who were 
 delinquent; he meant those elected by the peo- 
 
 introducing, it was highly necessary to 
 provide that receiving and disbursing officers 
 when found guilty of malversation or there was 
 
 pie ; some can be removed by the governor ; but probably cause to suspect them, should be in- 
 for the most part, a majority of these public offi- 1 stantly suspended from office ; or else they would 
 cers can only be removed by impeachment; a ma- j never be able to stop these abuses practised by 
 jority of the members of Assembly must com- j defaulters ; and we should be carrying out the 
 mence proceedings against them, and it required , vulgar proverb of shutting the door after the horse 
 two-thirds of the Senate to convict; whilst the is stolen. And it was these views, which he sin- 
 members of the Senate and Assembly could be ex- j cerely entertained, that induced him to submit 
 pelled by the Houses to which they belonged. It I this resolution. (He read from the Revised Sta- 
 aeemed to him probable, that an officer elected by 
 the people whose term of office is prescribed by 
 the Constitution, could not be removed until his 
 term expired ; that he could not be removed by 
 any legislative enactment; and therefore it would 
 
 be necessary to make such a provision in the Con- ! vision for removing those officers elected by the 
 stitution for removing bad officers, or suspending i people. For if these officers who are guilty have 
 them and supplying their places ad interim ,-Qor^got to remain in office till they are tried or con- 
 as such officer derives his power direct from The victed by legislative enactments the consequences 
 people, he could not be removed by any thing i to the finances of the State will be most injuri- 
 short of a Constitutional provision/ It has been i ous ; and unless they can also be removed onsus- 
 proposed here that officers shall be elected here- i picion or good cause for it. He therefore offered 
 alter very extensively by the people. He did not j this resolution, as under the rules he could not 
 know hoV far this would be carried into effect. ! explain his views about it, and put them on re- 
 
 tutes of 1830 where the Governor had power to 
 remove the officers lie had appointed, and to sup- 
 ply all vacancies he thus created.) But still he 
 believed that he was correct in saying that it 
 would be necessary to make constitutional pro- 
 
 But one report was received already, to have all 
 the State officers, Secretary of State, &c., Canal 
 Commissioners, Inspectors of State Prisons, and 
 several other*, elected by the people. And in 
 
 cord, in any other way ; and he moved for a select 
 committee ; but, as he had explained his views, 
 if any other gentleman chose to move its refer- 
 ence to the judiciary committee he would not 
 
 many other highly respectable quarters they spoke ! object, 
 of appointing Surrogates and District Attorneys | Mr. STRONG had heard these doctrines of the 
 by the people; and this had met with great favor; ! gentleman from St. Lawrence so often that they 
 and probably it would be proposed to elect others had become as common words to him. He 
 in the same way. Now a large number of these thought the gentleman had abundance of op- 
 officers are the receivers and disbursers of a very portunity the other day before the committee to 
 large share of the public monies. And in order j express his views on the subject; the question 
 to make them properly and immediately respon- j there was debated from day to day, and fully con- 
 
 sible (if elected by the people,) there must be 
 some change from the present Constitution. [Mr. 
 P. here mentioned the clause in the first Consti- 
 
 tution of 1777, in relation to this.] Under the 
 Constitution of the U. S. all receivers or disbur- 
 sers of public money can be removed either by 
 the President of the U. States, or through the in- 
 strumentality of his subordinate officers. This 
 was practically so to some extent in our Consti- 
 tution of 1777. Under the Constitution of 18:21, 
 there were not many officers that were elected di- 
 rectly by the people, with their tenure of office 
 
 sidered, and the gentleman ought to have been 
 content with this. But he now comes here with 
 the same old story, and asks for a special commit- 
 
 tee. He could hardly tell in short, he 
 at a loss to know to what school of politics the 
 gentleman actually belonged. He thinks he 
 had offered the same kind of sentiments as was 
 entertained by that class of men who in the 
 Revolutionary war came down upon our fore- 
 fathers with the great warrior Brandt at their 
 back, with his men, and their views and 
 to that class which in a later day have been 
 
 prescribed. The Sheriff was one, and a princi- : called Blue Lights and old Federalists. Now, 
 pie one; he received and disbursed money for the ! he (Mr. S.) was opposed to any new commit- 
 people they elected him and they made pro- j tee to be raised. 1- or when the gentleman had 
 vision in the Constitution to remove him ; and ! plenty of opportunity to express his views in the 
 many cases occurred since, where that power has | committee, he did not think it right; and if he 
 been very properly exercised. The removal and | was dissatisfied with what his own committee had 
 the suspension of officers under the present Con- done, when the Convention went into committee 
 stitution, have usually been regulated by law ; of the whole he could move an amendment, and 
 and not by Constitutional provisions ; and if it ! again explain his views ; and. to ask for any more 
 could always be so regulated and properly enfor- i was us king for a little too much, 
 ced, perhaps that would be the better way to doit, i Mr. PKKKLVS .s;nd it was true that h.t> had 
 and so leave it there. But it can not be fully carried I made some of these suggestions in committee No, 
 out ; and he very much doubted, if the Constitution (i, ^to which Mr. STHOJMJ and he belonged.) But 
 prescribed an election of a certain officer by the i he did not then understand or suppose that it be- 
 people, and named his term of office for 1, 2, 3, 4 | longed to that committee to prepare, or that they 
 or 5 years, whether any such officer could be remo- had been charged by the Convention to prepare 
 ved or suspended without a constitutional provi- any constitutional provisions on the subject he 
 sion that should state the manner imvhich it should referred to in his resolution; although he had 
 be done. He very much wished to see if these of- j made provision for removing sheriffs ; it might a* 
 ficers thus elected could be otherwise removed. I well, he apprehended, be considered as belong- 
 Now under the system they proposed or talked of | ing to the committee on executive powers, The 
 
158 
 
 officers, whose duties were local, they must and 
 had provided for, but not others. The power of 
 removing others may perhaps belong to those who 
 take their power by assumption, but certainly not 
 legally. He did wish to know the views of the 
 Convention as to how these officers ought to be 
 removed when necessary. He did not understand 
 the gentleman from Monroe (Mr. STRONG,) to 
 assume in committee that this should be provided 
 lor in any article submitted ; the committee had 
 not assented to this, and therefore it had become 
 his duty to bring it up, and in asking for a select 
 committee he had not asked for a " little too 
 much;" but the gentleman from Monroe in try- 
 ing to throw a little mud at him had gone entire- 
 ly beyond the facts of the case. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to refer it to the 
 committee on the judiciary. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said' he deemed it to be his^ 
 duty to explain the action of his committee in 
 relation to the matter. The gentleman from St. 
 Lawrence (Mr. PERKINS) and himself were both 
 members of this committee. And he hoped that 
 the gentleman (Mr. PERKINS) did not intend to 
 distrust the action of that committee, or to cast 
 any reflection either on its ability or its willing- 
 ness to discharge its duty ; neither of which the 
 members had failed to do in any way. And yet the 
 action of the gentleman seemed the other day, and 
 also the resolution of to-day, to have that kind of 
 aspect most certainly. The whole* of this subject 
 for removal of officers, had been fully discussed 
 in that committee by another member, and almost 
 in the precise words of the gentleman from St. 
 Lawrence to-day, and after much discussion, they 
 found that there was not a unanimity of opinion, 
 and it was thought best to defer its further consi- 
 deration until the Convention shall be in commit- 
 tee of the whole on the report of the gentleman 
 from New York, (Mr. MORRIS) on the powers and 
 duties of the Executive ; as it was thought that 
 perhaps this subject was properly part of the Ex- 
 ecutive duties. And with this view he had drawn 
 up an amendment to that effect, embracing this 
 principle, (and which as chairman of the com- 
 mittee of the whole he could not offer,) and he 
 had given it to a colleague to offer for him to 
 amend the report of committee No. 5 ; and yet 
 he had the surprise this morning to see his col- 
 league rise and anticipate all this action by his 
 resolution for a select committee. He should op- 
 pose this reference, for it was a direct implica- 
 tion that the committee, of which he was chair- 
 man, was either not competent or not willing to 
 consider it ; if it had to be sent to a committee 
 at all, it ought to be sent as a matter of parlia- 
 mentary rule, and a right by courtesy at least, to 
 his committee which already had the subject un- 
 der consideration. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER then changed his mo- 
 tion so as to have it referred to committee num- 
 ber 0. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that he perceived the gen- 
 tleman, who was chairman of committee No. 6, 
 (Mr. CHATFIELD) to which he belonged, still 
 seemed to suppose that any movement made by 
 him in any matter connected or not with the du- 
 ties of that committee, was an allegation on him, 
 or in derogation of the powers conferred on him, 
 as well as an imputation upon the committee to 
 
 ich they both belonged. He confessed to some 
 surprise and astonishment at the view the gentle- 
 man took of his movements to day and yesterday. 
 The Convention had determined that they would 
 receive no reports or expositions from these com- 
 mittees. Now, the report made yesterday from 
 the committee of which he was a member, in ma- 
 ny of its provisions had his cordial approbation 
 whilst some of its details did not meet his assent. 
 And yet the gentleman from Otsego seemed to re- 
 gard it as a personal imputation on him, that he 
 (M\\ P.) should make any movement here imply- 
 ing that he did not assent to every item and arti- 
 cle of that report. Now, in the ordinary course 
 of parliamentary proceedings, it would have been 
 his right and not discourteous in him, to have ex- 
 pressed in writing the views he had indicated 
 that expression would have come before the con- 
 vention with the report, and the implication 
 wquld not have arisen, as now, that he as- 
 sented to the entire article. Again, in offer- 
 ing his resolution yesterday, he desired in that 
 way to indicate his views in relation to the 
 matter of fixing the compensation of officers- 
 anticipating that the article reported by the com- 
 mittee on the Executive department (Mr. MOR- 
 RIS'S) would come up, and that standing on re- 
 cord in favor of that proposition, by the report 
 made by his committee, he should be placed in 
 a false attitude, if he should, as he intended, 
 take ground against that provision. He did not 
 desire to be placed in that position ; and had 
 the ordinary course been pursued here, he should 
 not have been compelled to stand in that attitude. 
 Mr. P. did not know what was intended. The 
 gentleman from Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIELD) his as- 
 sociate on the committee, had made a speech 
 against written reports ; and if a minority wished 
 to place themselves, on record, they must at least 
 write something perhaps in the form in which 
 he had chosen to do it here. But as it was be- 
 tween the action of the Convention on one side, 
 and what was deemed courtesy on the other, the 
 mouths of a minority of a committee were closed. 
 They could not bring their views before the Con- 
 vention, except when a report came up in com- 
 mittee of the whole. Was a course of that kind 
 to be put down the throats of the Convention, 
 and of such minorities ? If comity required it, 
 he would submit for he designed no disrespect 
 to anybody, nor did he think he had been guilty 
 of any. Minorities of committees, when a re- 
 port was made, should be allowed to stand on re- 
 cord, as early as the residue of the committee, 
 that the views of both sides might be before the 
 body. He did not uniderstand until now that 
 this matter, appropriately belonged to committee 
 number six. If the gentleman from Otsego 
 wanted to have charge of it, Mr. P. had no 
 objection. The gentleman claimed it, and Mr. 
 P. was willing he should have it or any other 
 committee. But he did not regard it as "within 
 the range of the powers delegated to that commit- 
 tee. It reached beyond to other officers to the 
 Executive to all local officers perhaps to the 
 judiciary committee. He did not know that the 
 gentleman from Otsego had exclusive jurisdiction 
 over this subject. But Mr. P. had no objection 
 to his having it ; Mr. P. did not desire to have it 
 himself; for he apprehended it was not a matter 
 . 
 
159 
 
 so easily disposed of. He confessed he did not j fore it was that his committee, report! ng in ad<- 
 undi'rstand this matter as some of the committee j vance of the action of all other committees but 
 djd though he presumed they were right about one, had reported only in part; reserving to 
 it. The subject was introduced before the com- 
 mittee, by whom he would not pretend to remem- 
 b er and he was certain that it was mooted and 
 talked about and that the declaration was made 
 and assented to, that some stringent provisions 
 would be necessary. And then the matter drop- 
 ped nothing being said as to who was expected 
 to perform that duty. Had he supposed that it 
 belonged to the committee of which he was one, 
 
 he should have proposed that provisions be drawn 
 up in detail for consideration. He did not hap- 
 pen to hear the suggestion of a mode of effecting 
 the removal of these officers, if it was claimed 
 that they were made, as a step towards the com- 
 mittee's framing such provisions. And he was at j hibiiion there.' 
 a loss to understand when, and from what source, 
 and on what ground these imputations were at- 
 tempted to be cast on him of disrespect towards 
 the chairman of the committee to which he be- 
 longed. Mr. P disclaimed any intention to fore- 
 stall the committee. He repeated he had no de- 
 sire to be on the select committee. If the gentle- 
 
 one, 
 
 themselves the right to report on all these officer* 
 created by other committees whose powers and 
 duties are not local, if the action of these com- 
 mittees render it necessary. But the gentleman 
 from St. Lawrence (Mr. PERKINS) has made hi 
 resolution a sort of peg to hang a speech upon, 
 made against the action of this House some days ago- 
 in relation to written reports ; and his complaint 
 seems principally now to be that he had no means 
 
 man from Otsego desired to have the framing of 
 such provisions as he had indicated, he hoped the 
 Convention would gratify him 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD did not intend to say that 
 the gentleman from St. Lawrence had intention- 
 ally cast any imputations upon the committee, or 
 any disrespect to him. But he did say, what he 
 now repeated, and what must strike the common 
 sense of every man there, that the course pursued 
 by the gentleman, did bear that construction, and 
 could not be regarded by a majority of persons in 
 any other light than as an imputation on the ac- 
 tion of that committee. He had never known 
 through the whole of his parliamentary experi- 
 ence, a select committee raised on a subject be- 
 fore referred, uiid which was under consideration 
 by a committee, unless that committee had refu- 
 sed to act, or had treated the subject in a very im- 
 proper manner. And what he now complained 
 of was that the gentleman should ask for a select 
 committee whom he proposed should be charged 
 with a duty that had legitimately devolved on his 
 committee. And if that was not an allegation 
 a reflection or an imputation on the committee 
 that had the matter in charge, he did not know 
 what was. He did not desire for a moment to 
 arrogate to himself any duties that properly be- 
 longed to any other committee ; but when he 
 looked at the classification of subjects adopted by 
 the Convention and that part which had been 
 ! to his committee, he saw clearlv that it was a 
 
 of putting his views on this subject on record. 
 But he would ask that gentleman it he could not 
 re.idily hereafter, iti committee of the whole, give 
 his reasons for dis.sen;, uui by an amendment then 
 and there record his views ? Was there any pro- 
 Was there any gag in lorce there 
 certainly not. Was there not also another mode 
 by which the gentleman could have placed hirn- 
 self upon lecoui? There certainly was nothing' 
 in I he recent expression of the House to prevent 
 the H'inority of a committee from presenting pro- 
 positions counter to or varying from the report of 
 the majority; they might both he presented at the 
 
 s*nine time, and both go on record at the s-arne 
 time; and thi.s would have been perfectly parlia- 
 mentary, and by far the most judicious course. 
 It would also have been much more appropriate 
 for (he gentleman to have made his speech in 
 committee of the whole, than to have made it as 
 he has done here to-day, with a resolution to get 
 up a new committee And it certainly did serin 
 to him (Mr. C.) that the proposition or the speech 
 of the gentleman was? not made in a very amiable 
 manner, or mood. He might, it was true, have 
 mistaken the gentleman's feelings; he would be 
 charitable enough to believe that the gentleman, 
 had no bad feeling or motive in making that mo. 
 tion. But let that be as it might, there was a, 
 short am! proper mode by which the gentleman 
 could ger every object that he sought to effect by 
 this resolution ; this was when I hey go into com- 
 rnit'"e of the whole upon the report which he 
 (Mr. C ) made yesterday, to move sections pro- 
 viding for the suspension of officers (that should 
 be guilty of malversation) by I he executive power,, 
 tin il the legislature shall next meet, and proceed 
 to impeach and try them. This would be hut 
 (.-(n^iMitional and just, il was all that was re- 
 quired ; I hen no one could be finally moved until 
 he had been heard. That was the view of hist 
 committee, and they preferred to K-ave it *> .m 
 they b.id in their teport, until they went infa 
 eonirriiM'H' of i!u> \v(mk'. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that it was very evident. 
 
 duty to consider this very subject ; and according- they could not arrive at those results which every 
 : had discussed it at length. He saw it was member hern desired to arrive at, and which ev- 
 ery person throughout the State was desirous of 
 
 his duty to provide the appointment, cornpensa 
 
 tion, &.c. of certain officers, (other than those spe- 
 
 seeirig them arrive at, if they allowed these per= 
 
 cified m the article reported by him but yesterday) smi al feelings and personal reflections to be in- 
 another committee had to provide other officers ; ! dulgert in whilst discussing such small matters, - 
 No. 7, for instance, on local officers, and he had Tln-'onlv way to i;-t alone; properly was to avoid, 
 no doubt that the chairman (Mr. ANGELA) would i all personal feelings. It was very probable that 
 iithiully discharge his duty, and so with every the differences between the gentleman from St 
 other committee. Now it is very probable that oth> j Lawrence (Mr. PKHKINS,) and the gentleman 
 er committees may create other oiiicers riot known from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD,) had originated 
 to the present constitution or laws; and the mode entirely through some mistake. The gentleman 
 jointment &c. of all these not local, would : from St. Ltuvvonce (Mr. PERKINS) supposed that 
 y belong to his eofamittee No. r>; and theiv- the rule adopted tln?ofher day precluded minority 
 
160 
 
 reports entirely ; but he did not take this view 
 of the case by any means; the gentleman (Mr. 
 PERKINS) could have presented a counter report ; 
 and he would not at all like to go into committee 
 of the whole upon this subject without a report 
 upon it. The gentleman having omitted to use 
 his privilege at the right time ought to have it 
 restored to him; so that before we considered the 
 majority report we have the views of the minor- 
 ity embodied on paper. It was true that as the 
 rule read appointing the committee No. 6, it did 
 not in so many words speak of the removals from 
 office of any of the persons there named; yet that 
 certainly must have been its intent and meaning. 
 It spoke of their " election," " appointment," 
 " powers," " duties" and " compensation." Now 
 it certainly never was purposely designed to omit 
 their " tenure of office," or the power of remo- 
 ving them for delinquency, or of suspending them 
 for probable cause. In committee No. 7, the 
 " tenure of office," is expressly named. And no 
 doubt it was an unintentional omission in the 
 phraseology of the title of committee No. 6. 
 He should like to have the views of Mr. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said, that this was old par- 
 liamentary law as old and universal as parlia- 
 mentary bodies themselves. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH .said tha<- he understood the 
 usual course was for the majority to bring in re- 
 ports with their reasons, but that the house could 
 put a constraint on them. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said undoubtedly they could 
 limit them, and they have done so here. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH yes, so it appears. And 
 that was the reason the gentleman from St. Law- 
 rence (Mr. PERKINS) felt induced to adopt the 
 course he had. He (Mr. D.) belonged to com- 
 mittee No. 6, and he did not assent to all that re- 
 port. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD asked him if he did not as- 
 sent to the portion of it under discussion, and to 
 its being presented, 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH said he did ; but it was only 
 a partial report ; but he wished Mr. CHATFIELD 
 to inform him how the minority were to present 
 their views if they now wanted to do so ? 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said he had tried to inform 
 that gentleman and others that they could do so 
 
 PERKINS on this point. There certainly must I when they get into committee of the whole. Any 
 
 be some powers some way of removal from 
 office ; and he certainly believed that this 
 power came within the spirit and meaning of 
 the title of committee No. 6. He certainly had 
 considered that this was the most appropriate 
 committee for the consideration of the best modes 
 for removing delinquents from office. And this 
 power was a very important one ; almost as much 
 so as the power of appointing to office. The 
 history of the last 10 years clearly showed this; 
 there always seemed to be a necessity for the ex- 
 ercise of that prayer, " Lead us not into tempta- 
 tien." We were often mistaken in individuals 
 and this power should be held in terorem over 
 them. The old mode of impeachment we have 
 seen was ineffectual ; and the arbitrary mode of 
 
 member could then and there present his views 
 and argue them ; there was no difficulty about 
 that matter at all ; not a particle. 
 
 Mr. STOW ;-aid that he defciied to say a word 
 or two in order to know if he understood the 
 question. He had the title of committee No. 5, 
 before him; and as he construed the resolution, it 
 clearly belonged to that committee. Though it 
 was not named there in express teims, yet it be- 
 longed to it by implication. There was no com- 
 mittee so appropriate as that commit tec ; none 
 were so proper to remove tioin office as those who 
 elected and appointed to office. This, then, be- 
 longed to the powers and duties of the Executive. 
 And if that was not the proper construction of 
 this resolution, then he should move to add these 
 
 giving to the Governor the power to remove when words to all the titles of all these committees: 
 he pleases, is certainly not a safe one. And he! "And the power and manner of removal from of- 
 wished committee No. to consider and devise fice." But he thought he had named the proper 
 
 some plan ; because he wished to have the view r s 
 and experience of the gentleman from St. Law- 
 rence on this subject, and he was on that com- 
 mittee. 
 
 He would therefore offer this resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the report submitted liy committee No 
 6, be recommitted to afford the minority of the committee 
 an opportunity to make the report iriadverteutly omitted 
 by the minority. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that he must strike out 
 the last sentence. There was no inadvertency ; 
 and that would not be the truth. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said he meant to say " inadver- 
 tency" on the part of the minority only. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD Well, even that is not 
 true. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said the committee had on- 
 ly reported in part ; they could not charge them 
 with inadvertency, for how could they tell what 
 they meant to report hereafter ? the minority 
 could report what they pleased. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS withdrew his motion. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH would like to know where 
 the minority of committees got their authority to 
 bring in minority reports, stating their reasons for 
 the same ? 
 
 committee, and there was no occasion to appoint 
 a select one. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE said that as a member of com. 
 minee No 6, he felt bound to say that the subject 
 and matter of this resolution was informally dis- 
 cussed in that committee, but that some ge"tle 
 men had expressed doubts as to whether the subjrct 
 did not properly I elong to committee No. 5, (on 
 the powers and duties of the Executive) and this 
 committee, therefore, thought it was best, in view 
 of this fact that other committees might by their 
 action, bring other matters before them Create 
 other officers, &c., or interfere with Executive 
 powers to postpone this subject to be decided on 
 hereafter ; and having thus decided they brought 
 in their report as far as they had gone. And 
 therefore he moved to lay the resolution on the 
 table. This was carried. 
 
 ROYAL CHARTERS, GRANTS, AND TENURES. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said, that seeing the gentleman 
 from N. York in his place, he would now call up 
 his resolution, No. 29. 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 rights and privileges of the citizens of this state, to inquire 
 into the expediency of striking out so much of the four- 
 teenth section of Article 7 of the Constitution, as declare 
 
161 
 
 that " nothing contained in this Constitution shall affect 
 grants of land witliin this state made by authority of the 
 aid King (oi Great B itain) or his predecessors, or shall 
 annul ;iny charters to boJics politic ami d rpoia e, by him 
 or 'h m 'ma.Ie before that day ; or shall artect any such 
 grants or charters since made by this state, or by persons 
 acting under i s authority/'- av verges* and unnecttsaiy 
 and liublt to popular misconstruction; and of otherwise 
 amen, ling the said section so that the same shall read as 
 follows: 
 
 " ^ - All grants of land within this state made by the 
 King of Great Britain or persons a -ting under his autho- 
 rity after the fourteenth clay of October one thou-and se- 
 ven hundred andseventy-five, shall be null and void; but 
 nothing contained in this Constitution shall impair the ob- 
 ligation of any debt or contract, or any other rights of 
 property, or any suits, actions, rights of actions or pro- 
 ceedings in courts ofjustice." 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that he had no objection 
 to the reference of this resolution to an tfppfopri- 
 ate committee, but the gentleman Irum Kings lias 
 not selected the proper committee. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said it appeared to him that the 
 gentleman irorn Kings had evidently mistaken the 
 proper committee tor the reference of this resolu- 
 tion ; he proposed to commit it to the committee 
 on the rights and piiviieges of citizens of this 
 State; now but a small portion of the gentleman's 
 resolution can properly go to that committee only 
 the grants to private individuals. But there are 
 two important branches* to that resolution. First, 
 the one that relates logrants ot land to individuals ; 
 secondly, the grants to bodies politic, corporations, 
 tc. Now, giants of land made by the King ol 
 Great Britain, were made to individuals as well <is 
 to corporations. And the giants thus made to in- 
 dividuals, may be thug very properly referred; but 
 the grants thus made to bodies, do not come pro- 
 perly within the supervision of that committee. 
 So the 2d branch of the gentleman's resolution as 
 to " chaitfrs to bodies political and corporate, by 
 him or them made," 8cc , ought not to go to com- 
 mittee No. 11, nn the rights and privileges ol'citi- 
 zens of this State. There i" in fact no committee 
 that has b*en raised in this Convention, that 
 that subject can be appropriately referred to. 
 He did not see that it came within the peculiar 
 province of any of the present standing commit- 
 tees. Of those now raised, the one to whom it 
 would seem to be the most proper to send it, was 
 the 14th committee, the one on the organization 
 &c., of cities, towns and villages, and of which 
 the gentleman from Kings (Mr. MURPHY) was 
 himself the chairman. But at the same time it 
 was very clear that vested rights in a city or vil- 
 lage was not a matter of city or village organiza- 
 tion. It does not enter into the mode of admin- 
 istering their local affairs ; it has nothing to do 
 with their organization ; but if it is to be referred 
 to any of the present standing committees, the 
 14th seems to be the most proper one. But, this 
 is a matter ot vast importance to the people in 
 that part of the State, which he had the honor in 
 part to represent; in the city of New York 
 great rights were to be affected by the action of 
 the committee on this subject; and he would 
 therefore move its reference to a select commit- 
 tee of 5. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY was very happy to hear the gen 
 tleman from New York (Mr. SHEPARD) say that 
 this resolution did not affect the rights and privi- 
 leges of citizens of any portion of this State. It 
 was precisely what he 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD wished to correct the gentle- 
 man ; what he said was that it did not so peculiar- 
 ly affect the rights and privileges of the citizens 
 of this State, as to be referable to the committee 
 on the rights and privileges of the citizens. Eve- 
 ry thing, however, that was or could be done 
 here, must directly or indirectly aft'ect every citi- 
 zen more or less. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said He understood the gentle- 
 man. And if this did not thus affect the rights 
 and privileges of any of the citizens of this State, 
 then the view in regard to the reference which 
 he had taken of it was fortified by the views of 
 the gentleman from New York (Mr. SHEPARD.) 
 But in speaking of this question of reference, the 
 gentleman from New York has fallen into the 
 very error which he (Mr. M.) had sought to re- 
 move by that resolution. He (Mr. M.) had ori- 
 ginally proposed to refer the two parts of it to 
 two distinct committees. He then, the other day, 
 called it up, and modified it, saying that he 
 would waive the separate reference of its parts ; 
 that probably in first referring it he had been 
 wrong, and that the reference belonged properly 
 to committee No. ] 1 on the rights and privi- 
 leges of citizens, and to that committee he said 
 he should move its reference ; because as 
 he then said the clauses proposed to be 
 struck out were contained in that part of the con- 
 stitution which had been referred to committee 
 No. 11, (article 7 of the present Constitution, sec. 
 14, referring particularly to the rights and privi- 
 leges of citizens.) Then why should the resolu- 
 tion not be referred to that committee. It was 
 true that so much of the resolution as related to 
 corporations was not technically referable to that 
 committee ; but in reality, even that subject very 
 nearly and intimately concerned the rights and 
 privileges of citizens. The gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. SHEPARD) contends that a part re- 
 lates to grants of land to individuals and the 
 other part to bodies politic and incorporate ; (that 
 have no existence, except what is termed a legal 
 existence ;) and that therefore the reference is 
 wrong ; but he contended the whole subject more 
 or less affected all citizens of the State, and their 
 rights and privileges ; and therefore ought to go to 
 the committee having thatvery important matter in 
 charge. The gentleman had talked about vested 
 rights. Now he, (Mr. M.) did not wish to interfere 
 with vested rights ; as, from his resolution, some 
 had supposed. And if the gentleman had examined 
 this matter, he would have seen a reservation in 
 this resolution on this very subject, in favor of 
 vested rights. He did not propose to attack any 
 vested rights here at all. But he did propose *a 
 thorough examination into all that political pow- 
 er, arising out of what was called vested rights 
 in corporations ; and which was so often shame- 
 fully exercised by corporations to the injury of 
 the rights and privileges of the great body of citi- 
 zens. This was what he did intend most fully that 
 the Convention should inquire into: this corruptly 
 exercised political power, which some gentlemen 
 seemed to regard as in a measure sacred that must 
 not be examined into or touched in any way. 
 But he denied this position; for the " Rights of 
 man," (as had been said by a distinguished writer 
 many years ago,) the rights of man were not the 
 rights of one generation, and they cannot be mo- 
 
162 
 
 nopolized they belong to all ! And if there i 
 any thing in the charter of any city, &c., whic 
 interferes with the political rights of man, it mus 
 fall; powers of all kinds which interfere wit 
 man's individual and political rights cannot stan< 
 they must fall. They cannot be vested. Th< 
 gentleman has also fallen into a further error in 
 supposing that there is something peculiarly pow 
 erful in royal grants. Now, the people here sue 
 ceeded to all the royally conferred power ; thej 
 succeeded to all the powers, rights and preroga 
 tives enjoyed in this country by royalty previou 
 to the Revolution. After that Revolution, the} 
 were the sole depositaries and exercisers of these 
 powers. And whatever the King of Great Britain 
 could have done before that Revolution, the people 
 could do now; and what they cannot now do, the 
 King could not have done then. The clauses he 
 desired to strike out of the Constitution had been 
 very mischievous and injurious to the people in 
 their tendencies. We found men even in high 
 places and found members in that Convention 
 and they found legislative bodies putting construc- 
 tions on these clauses of the Constitution which 
 have frequently been repudiated by the most em- 
 inent men, and by the Courts of Law. These 
 clauses had led to the perpetration of most mon- 
 strous and mischievous errors ; not only 
 in the case of the city of Albany, which he 
 referred the other day, but in the legislature. 
 There was an instance of a town setting up this 
 same question of royal grants. The town of 
 Huntington in Suffolk co., was a royally charter- 
 ed town, and the legislature gravely referred it to 
 the Attorney General then, now chief justice, to 
 get his opinion, whether they possessed the pow- 
 er to divide the town of Huntington, in conse- 
 quence of its being a royal grant and charter. 
 What did he do ? He reported as he (Mr. M.) con- 
 tended now. He stated in his opinion (Assembly 
 documents of 1830,) that this very proposition 
 which it is now sought, by this resolution, to have 
 expunged from the Constitution, was an entire 
 nullity, and had no business there. That was 
 the opinion of your present chief justice. Then 
 why not let this go to the committee, selected by 
 the President, from the body of the house, and 
 in his opinion proper to take into consideration 
 the rights of citizens of this State, and those of 
 other than its citizens in this matter, and to 
 look to the rights of the whole State. He knew 
 that this touched very closely the opinions of his 
 friends from New York and the citizens there 
 but there vrere those even there who did not be- 
 lieve that chartered rights were of such a nature 
 as to prevent an exercise of sovereignty here with 
 a view to correct evils. No, the spirit of Leggett 
 still lives there, and there were many, very many- 
 there who wished to see this doctrine of vested po- 
 litical rights broken up. With a view of having 
 it sent to the proper committee, and not to those 
 whose peculiar interests and local feelings were 
 involved he desired it should go to the commit- 
 tee at the head of which was the most experien- 
 ced and venerable member from Dutchess. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD certainly did not propose to 
 examine, nor did he in any degree examine, the 
 section of the Constitution which the gentleman 
 from Kings had introduced by way of amend- 
 ment. It had appeared to him that to examine 
 
 that would be to discuss the merits of this ques- 
 tion and with the merits of it at this stage of 
 the proceedings he determined to have nothing 
 to do. The gentleman from Kings had not an- 
 swered his (Mr. S.'s) objection to the reference 
 except by stating that the particular section of 
 the Constitution which he proposes to strike out, 
 and in place of which he proposes to insert his 
 substitute, was arranged in the 7th Article of the 
 present Constitution, among the rights and privi- 
 leges of citizens of the State. So it was that 
 was conceded, but there were other things ar- 
 ranged there too. There were propositions in re- 
 gard to the rights of toll, and some other matters 
 not peculiarly the subject of privilege to the citi- 
 zens of the State. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said, as he stated before, he did 
 not propose in his resolution to interfere with 
 the rights of property. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD understood the gentleman to 
 say so. He confessed he did not understand the 
 section to be as broad as that and whether it was 
 so or not he did not feel at liberty to examine, as 
 tie was not discussingthe merits of the proposition, 
 [f he (Mr. S.) should undertake to convince the 
 PRESIDENT, that the vested rights of the city of 
 >?ew York were now secured, that the proposi- 
 tion was substantially defective in its merits, he 
 would be decided to be out of order. Now, he 
 would take up the argument he left off a moment 
 since. And supposing that the 7th article of the 
 Constitution was entirely made up of the enume- 
 ration of the rights and privileges of citizens of 
 the State, still that would propose nothing in fa- 
 vor of the present reference. Why ? Because you 
 appointed a standing committee, and referred to 
 hem various subjects, without any reference to 
 he particular part of the Constitution in which 
 hese subjects were placed at present. Accord- 
 ngly his (Mr. S.'s) colleague from New York 
 lad reported upon the Veto power in connection 
 vith the duties of the Executive of the State. 
 These were not found together in the present 
 Constitution, but were widely separated Now, 
 le must say, to pass on to .another consideration, 
 hat he was under peculiar'obligations to the gen- 
 leman from Kings, for placing on his lips argu- 
 ments that he did not use, and he would concede 
 hat all the arguments so placed had been satis- 
 ictorily and triumphantly answered. But he 
 /ould not say as much for the arguments he (Mr. 
 1.) had placed on his own lips. Now, he did 
 ot stand here as the advocate of Royal grants, 
 xcept so far as they had been acquiesced in by 
 le people, and were acted upon for the ad- 
 antages of the interests of the State, by the 
 rantees themselves. He supposed that vested 
 ights were sacred, though the gentleman ap- 
 eared to think not. He supposed that aside 
 om any provision in the Constitution, that 
 ley would be prelected by the genius and spirit 
 four laws. There was no danger whether the 
 roposition was in the Constitution or stricken 
 ut. But there was a large class of rights which 
 
 city of New York exercises. It is an ex- 
 ensive corporation and stood in two relations to 
 ic people of the State. First, as a large polit- 
 ^al corporation, exercising the rights of political 
 overnment, and in the second place as a large 
 rivate corporation, exercising the rights of such 
 
 
163 
 
 corporations, taking fees, and deriving a large 
 revenue from sources, such as a mere public cor- 
 poration, had no right to derive it from. The 
 right of the corporation had been secured by a 
 long chain of statutes, and by a number of Courts 
 extending through many years, and it seemed to 
 him that it would be entirely unwise for the 
 mere purpose, as the gentleman in conclusion 
 states, of avoiding popular misconstruction, has- 
 tily to cast aside, these sections of the Consti- 
 tution that were inserted by the wise foresight 
 of the Convention of 1821, for the purpose of se- 
 curing those great private rights about which we 
 had been speaking. It seemed to him to be unwise 
 for that purpose merely, to strike these proposi- 
 tions out, without the fullest and most compre- 
 hensive examination. Now he desired that 
 examination should be made by a proper commit- 
 tee. He had no objection to the committee of 
 which the venerable gentleman from Dutchess 
 (Mr. TALLMADGE) was chairman, except that in 
 the order and division of the business, it had 
 nothing to do with the subject. And it seemed 
 to him, that would be a conclusive objection. 
 It applied to every other committee as well, as 
 he would undertake to demonstrate, if the gen- 
 tleman from Kings should think differently. 
 There was no alternative'but a special commit- 
 tee, and there was in the magnitude of the ques- 
 tion itself, every thing to call for its considera- 
 tion by a special committee at the hands of the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS agreed with the gentleman from 
 Kings, that the proper reference of this subject 
 was to the standing committee on the rights and 
 privileges of citizens. He agreed also with that 
 gentleman, that he had correctly stated the law 
 on the subject of corporations, &c.; and he (Mr. 
 M.) did not know he was not aware that there 
 had been, any different opinion entertained since 
 the delivery oi the learned opinion to which the 
 gentlemar had referred. No one now dreamed 
 or contended that political power given to corpo- 
 rations of any kind, could not be touched. That 
 was conceded by all all contended that it only 
 required a two-thirds vote to effect or alter them, 
 whether granted by king or given by people. 
 There was no man any where, even though the 
 spirit of Legget was not there, that would con- 
 tend for a contrary doctrine. Then the object of 
 the clause in the Constitution which the gentle- 
 man wishes to have stricken out was nugatory 
 and could only be to preserve private rights. 
 When we lawyers said private rights, we meant 
 the rights of property of incorporations as well 
 as of individuals. it did strike him therefore 
 that the proper committee was the one the gen- 
 tleman from Kings had selected on the rights 
 privileges of the citizen whether the citizer 
 was made by God or manufactured by man. 
 
 Mr, SHEPARD was not aware before that a 
 corporation was a citizen he was very mud 
 obliged to his colleague for informing him of th< 
 fact. 
 
 The question was then put on referring to tht 
 eleventh standing committee, and it was agreet 
 to 
 
 ELECTION OF COUNTY OFFICERS BY THE PEOPLE 
 Mr. CLYDE offered the following resolution 
 which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 ppointment, tenure, &c., of local officers, to enquire into 
 he expediency of providing in the Constitution for the 
 ilection by the people, of co^timy treasurers, district attor- 
 neys and surrogates. 
 
 THE TRIAL BY JURY. 
 
 Mr. MILLER offered the following, which was 
 adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 rights and privileges of citizens of this State, to examine 
 nto the expediency of incorporating into the Constitution 
 he following article :- 
 
 The right of trial by jury shall forever remain inviolate, 
 ut the legislature shall have power in its discretion to fix 
 he numbr and determine the manner of drawing and se- 
 ectiug, and to fix the compensation both o! the grand and 
 )etit jury. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the question would 
 irst be taken on the motion to refer to a select 
 committee, and it prevailed. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved to lay the present order 
 of business on the table, in order to take up the 
 unfinished business of yesterday. 
 
 The PRESIDENT asked the gentleman to 
 waive his motion, until he announced certain 
 
 REPORTS FROM PUBLIC OFFICERS, 
 [n answer to resolutions of the Convention: 
 
 From the Secretary of State a list of the State 
 officers whose duties are local. Referred on mo- 
 tion of Mr. CHATFIELD to committee No. 7, 
 and ordered printed. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD suggested that as these reports 
 contained important statements of facts, it might 
 be desirous to have a few extra copies. He would 
 therefore move the printing of 250 extra copies. 
 This was agreed to. 
 
 Also, a report from the Comptroller in relation 
 to the Common School, Literature and United 
 States Deposite Fund. This was referred to the 
 committee on Common Schools, and ordered 
 printed as above. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then put the question on 
 Mr. STRONG'S motion, and it was agreed to. 
 
 THE POWERS AND DUTIES OFTHE GOVEKNOR&c. 
 The question being on granting leave to the 
 committee of the whole, on the proposed article 
 to the Constitution in relation to powers and du- 
 des of the Governor and Lieut. Governor : 
 The PRESIDENT awarded the floor to 
 Mr. KIKKL^ND who said, that, he did not intend 
 o detain the cotniuiitee but a kv.v moment*, aiKi 
 he hoped to receive us atleniion. No loss of nine 
 was involved I'm he should be obliged to consume 
 the same amount in comiuiliee of the whole as he 
 should now here. Ai.d he intended to say no more 
 on I hi.s >ui)ji:ct alter i ms, unless it might be, in the 
 way of explanation, or domei hmy of ihai kind. 
 He was speaking ytsu-iclay in relation to I he loim 
 of the report, and nad presented some general con- 
 siderationsiipplicabletu no particular section of I Ins 
 but to all other capons. ! had bi-eo Conceded, 
 however, that this Convention ought to have befoie 
 it when the iv p !'! was presented, only suun m.iiu-r 
 as to sim\v .\ hat amendments to I he xistmsi conit- 
 tutinn were proposed. He thought Ihissul-ject was 
 >ubsi,inti<illy attained t>y I he resolution adopted if: is 
 morning in relation to the printing of thp reports. 
 This would give every gentleman an opportunity 
 to distinguish what amendments were proposed. 
 i But when we came to a further question in the 
 I course of our deliberations, it may be a matter of 
 
164 
 
 serious and grave discussion as to what manner 
 the amendments shall be presented to the people 
 and whether they should then be called upon 
 to vote also upon the existing parts of the Con- 
 stitution, to which no amendments have been re- 
 commended, as well as to those to which there 
 had been. But this was, perhaps, not a very 
 material matter now, and he would say no more 
 on it. What he would now proceed to say was 
 in reference to a matter which he apprehended 
 had an important reference as to the manner in 
 which the business of the Convention should be 
 conducted. Many members of the Convention, 
 and many citizens out of it, had appeared to think 
 that we were assembled here not for the purposes 
 of amending the Constitution, but for legislation. 
 This was not an original idea with him, but it 
 had been remarked by many members of 
 the Convention. He did not now intend to go 
 into a detailed examination of every section 
 of this report, but merely to call the attention 
 of members to its different sections. He found 
 no fault with the committee, and it was per- 
 fectly right in presenting the first report that 
 the error should be in reporting too much rather 
 than too little. There were in it, to his 
 view a number of sections relating entirely to 
 subjects within the control of legislation, and 
 for that reason, he was opposed to their adop- 
 tion as amendments to the Constitution. By way 
 of illustration, he would refer to the provision 
 that the Governor should have a fixed salary, &c. 
 This was a matter, he apprehended, entirely 
 within the control of the legislature, and one 
 which should be left to them as it had been for 
 the last 25 years, and the existing constitution, it 
 appeared to him, was fully adequate for all of 
 their purpose. So in relation to the provision for 
 the compensation of the Lieutenant Governor. 
 And without going further into details, he object- 
 ed to many of the amendments as trifling and as 
 proposing to incorporate legislative enactments 
 into the Constitution, well enough in themselves 
 but entirely unnecessary by way of amendment 
 to that instrument. No amendment should be 
 made except what was actually necessary, and as 
 simple as possibly. So in relation to the section 
 which provided that the Governor and Lieutenant 
 Governor should not ex-ofncio hold any other of- 
 fice that practically was now provided for. 
 There were many others also, which, although 
 he was favorable to them, he did not deem practi- 
 cally of sufficient importance to the rights of the 
 people to require an insertion, by way of amend- 
 ment, to the existing Constitution. He would 
 but refer to another section, which he objected 
 to as being nugatory in its operation and as de- 
 cided by the Supreme Court, in its effect, a vi- 
 olation of the Constitution of the Union. He 
 referred to the 10th section in relation to the ar- 
 rest and delivery of criminals to foreign powers. 
 He would refer the Convention to the report of a 
 case in which this question was elaborately dis- 
 cussed, and the opinion of the Judges of the Su- 
 preme Court given in support of his position. It 
 would be found in the 14th of Peters' page 540 
 the case of Holmes against Jennison and others. 
 Mr. K. here read from the opinion the opinion of 
 the Justices to show that this power did not exist 
 in the State governments. He wanted therefore 
 
 no such provision in th Constitution. And in 
 reference to this very matter the 10th article of 
 the Treaty of Washington provided expressly for 
 the surrender of all criminals of a certain descrip- 
 tion alluded to in that section, and since then 
 other treaties of a similar character had been en- 
 tered into with other countries. Before he 
 closed he would take the liberty of repeating 
 briefly his reasons why the report should not be 
 adopted and why the committee of the whole 
 should not have leave to sit again: In the first 
 place as to the form in which it was in. In the 
 second, over and above all parts of the existing 
 Constitution, reported with amendments, it re- 
 ported others clearly within the legislative power, 
 entirely unnecessary though good enough in them- 
 selves. In the 3rd place, as rendered nugatory 
 by the Constitution of the Union. He apprehend- 
 ed we had enough to do with what amendments 
 were clearly necessary and he hoped this Con- 
 vention would follow the example of the immor- 
 tal authors of the Constitution of the Union, in 
 the clearness and brevity of their amendments. 
 Mr. K. then quoted from the opinion of the Chief 
 Justice in the case above referred to, an eulogium 
 on the Constitution of the U. S. for its excellence 
 in this respect. He had now accomplished the ob- 
 ject he had in view, and he should not trouble the 
 Corvention further on this report except perhaps 
 it might be to explain something he had said on 
 this occasion. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said he had looked forward with 
 a great deal of anxiety, and he believed the people 
 of this State had been looking with equal anxiety 
 to the time when this Convention would go into 
 committee of the whole, and begin to do what 
 might properly be called the substantial work of 
 the Convention. We did yesterday arrive at that 
 order of business and he had heard a number of 
 gentlemen express their surprise that we must be 
 deterred from going on with that business in the 
 manner they had been. They were disappointed 
 to see it, for they expected when they got into 
 committee, that they should go to work in good 
 earnest. But he was not disappointed. He well 
 knew, so far as he could judge, that his honorable 
 friend from Oneida was charged with a speech, 
 which if he did not deliver might prove in- 
 jurious to him. He was satisfied also that 
 he would take the very first opportunity to deli- 
 ver it, and he did. As he had expected such a 
 state of things as had existed, he was not disap- 
 pointed in the course pursued. He would not 
 have said a word on this occasion, or have taken 
 up the time, had he not apprehended that 
 the long and eloquent speech of the gen- 
 tleman, possessing as he did the ability to 
 spread out his views in glowing language, 
 and in sailing sentences, might have its 
 weight on the house, and that it might be pro- 
 per for an humble layman to reply to it. 
 Having made these general remarks, he would pro- 
 ceed to answer a few of the objections the honora- 
 ble gentleman had raised to the report of his hon- 
 orable friend from New- York. And he might as 
 well say here that his friend did not need his 
 aid to defend that report he wielded a giant 
 tongue. The gentleman from Oneida had said 
 that we were assembled here for the purpose 
 of carrying out the act of the legislature 
 
165 
 
 and to make amendments to the Constitu- 
 tion. This was the first subject he took up. He 
 first informed this Convention, and he (Mr. S.) be- 
 lieved it was the first time we had it so seriously 
 announced to us of that fact. Now it was the 
 easiest thing in the world to start on false premises 
 and the conclusion was always of the same char- 
 acter. It was always found that lawyers when- 
 ever their case was a hard one when they had 
 up hill work they always began with false pre- 
 mises, and the conclusion was of the same char- 
 acter. Now the gentleman started upon the first 
 place with the assumption that the Convention 
 had no other power or authority only that which 
 was given it by the act to which he had referred. 
 Where did the gentleman learn that? He (Mr. 
 S.) went back of that act. He would ask the 
 gentleman and he asked the question in all 
 kindness and good feeling where he got the au- 
 thority for the legislature to pass that act ? Was 
 there one word in the old constitution giving them 
 the power to do it? How then came they by 
 any authority to pass an act restricting the action 
 of this Convention in any manner whatever ? 
 And yet they had restricted this Convention 
 they had said what our pay should be, but they 
 had" no authority for saying that they had con- 
 trol over this Convention ^we were not bound 
 by a single line of that act, for we are over and be- 
 yond that legislature. Now he would ask, if these 
 premises were so on what foundation the gentle- 
 man in the first place based his argument. The 
 next subject the gentleman took up and here 
 (Mt. S.) must confess was a point very difficult 
 for him to answer - not understanding all about 
 it, and if he was not right he hoped he would 
 be excused, as it would not be intentional. He had 
 taken it down as well as he could and he under- 
 stood the gentleman to say something about several 
 sections of report being " in hakverby." [Great 
 laughter. ]Now,he being a humble layman,and not 
 understanding those phrases, confessed he did not 
 kpow what ihat meant. But he had too high an opi- 
 nion of the gentleman to believe that he in- 
 tended to lay any clap-trap for us. He did 
 not know, or he would give some reasons on 
 the subject; but he did not know any way to ex- 
 plain, if he did not understand the terms. 
 But it would please him very much, if there was 
 no objection, and it would take but a moment, to 
 tell an anecdote. Two French barristers dispu- 
 ted one day about a law point before a judge, but 
 they could not settle it, when one said to the 
 other we will leave it to the judge. This was 
 agreed on. and the case was stated to him by one 
 of them but the judge made no reply merely 
 shook his head. " Ah !" said the counsel on the 
 oljher side, " when my lord shakes his head, there 
 is nothing in it" [Renewed laughter.] He 
 now came to the gentleman's third proposition, 
 as he introduced them that in the language ol 
 the act, we were here to make amendments only. 
 Here was a strong word " Amendments only.' 
 He would say a word here in behalf of his friend's 
 report, which seemed to be very appropriate. 
 He would ask seriously any member of the Con- 
 vention to answer this question ? Suppose that 
 his friend from New York had made, as the gen- 
 tleman contended he should, his report, contain- 
 pg some articles with but a few words altered 
 
 and had left out all of the original constitution 
 e (Mr. S.) would ask what kind of a skeleton 
 ould that have been ? No one could have known 
 any thing about it. The gentleman seemed to 
 lang with a great deal of energy to the doctrine 
 hat we were only to make amendments, and to do 
 nothing further. Suppose that we should conclude 
 merely to alter one word in the old Constitution, 
 and report that to the people, would it not be an 
 mendment ? Now where is the doctrine that 
 we are only to make amendments, and what kind 
 of a Constitution would we send down to the peo- 
 le ? If the gentleman's course was pursued, we 
 hould send down the snatches of a Constitution 
 a little here and a little there and the people 
 would not know what it meant. They expected 
 t to be sent to them in such a shape, " so tnat he 
 who reads may understand and he who runs 
 need not err therein." That was what the peo- 
 expected, and what he believed it was the 
 jounden duty of the Convention to do. He 
 therefore believed his friend from New York had 
 taken the right view of it and made his report in 
 he proper shape. Suppose he should, when he 
 went home, be asked by a neighbor if the in- 
 strument was sent down as recommended by the 
 gentleman from Oneida " well, is this the Con- 
 stitution ?" ** Yes." ' Is this all of it?" " No, 
 one part of it is in another book in the Consti- 
 tution of 1821." " How will I find it ?" " You must 
 go to a lawyer, and he must pick out this and that, 
 and tellyou the meaning of the constitution." That 
 is what would occur, said Mr. S., and he was not 
 sure but that he would have to go further back 
 to the Constitution of 1777. He could not be- 
 lieve that his friend meant really to make such a 
 Constitution as this, and yet such in his (Mr. S.'s) 
 opinion would be the result, if the course the gen- 
 tleman recommended Was pursued. Mr. S. went 
 on to express his regret that the gentleman should 
 have taken up so much of the time of the Con- 
 vention, and when he had the opportunity to 
 make his speech in the committee of the whole. 
 The gentleman had asked this Convention at one 
 fell blow to set aside the result of the labors of 
 one of its committees not even to suffer its re- 
 port to go into committee of the whole a second 
 time, where it might be amended. And he re- 
 gretted also that the gentleman had made use of 
 another expression yesterday, when called to 
 order. He said that he was surrounded by so 
 many wise men, that he thought did not know 
 more than he. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND did not say that. He said he 
 was surrounded by so many men who he found 
 were not wiser than he on these points of order. 
 Mr. STRONG was willing to take the explana- 
 tion. But it did not make it any bettter. 
 The gentleman then goes on to show that be- 
 cause he was in the neighborhood of some very 
 wise gentlemen who did not know more than he, 
 and that made him wise with them. 
 
 Mr. DANA said Uiat wh?n in other day the 
 question was being discusstd as to I lie propri- 
 ety of the committees accompanying their re- 
 port with an explanation of their reasons, it 
 occurred to him, that notwithstanding In- was not 
 accustomed to addressdtliberalive bodies, he might 
 still be allowed to read his argument it he 
 desired. What was his surprise on coming int 
 
166 
 
 the Convention the next, day to find his friend 
 from Monroe saying that it was unparliamentary 
 even to do that. But he found that gentleman 
 to-day using a brief tor his speech, and he (Mr. D.) 
 would avail himself of that privilege. 
 
 Mr. STRONG replied that the rule had a little 
 more to it. The rule was that you should not 
 read a written speech for the mere purpose of 
 consuming time. 
 
 Mr. DANA stood corrected. The gentleman 
 from Monroe had something of the lawyer in him 
 too he reads just enough to help his side. 
 Mr. D. went on to say that having written 
 out some remarks in reply to the gentleman 
 from Oneida, and not having committed them 
 to memory, he would read them, with the permis- 
 sion of the House. The question was, whether 
 we should go again into committee on this report? 
 He would do this as an act of courtesy to the 
 committee from whom it came and there have 
 it fully discussed, whether it was ,made up of 
 parts of the old Constitution or was new that 
 amendments might be offered to it He had 
 amendments to offer himself Among others, 
 one to abolish the office of Lieut. Governor. 
 Several other members, he knew desired to offer 
 amendments. The position of the gentleman trom 
 Oneida, that we were bound by the act calling us 
 togetner, to submit naked amendments only to 
 the people, he thought an unfortunate one. For 
 it happened that the very section of the Conven- 
 tion act to which the gentleman relerred ro sus- 
 tain it, was nearly in the precise language of the 
 act of '21, so far as it prescribed the duty of the 
 Convention of that year], And yet that conven- 
 tion did not submit naked amendments but an 
 entire constitution, which the people ratified and 
 thus endorsed their action. Nor did Mr. D. see 
 any greater force in the objection that some of the 
 sections of this article were proper subjects of 
 legislation. That was no reason why we should 
 not go into committee on it nor any insuperable 
 objection to making such constitutional provis- 
 ions. Again if this article contained provisions 
 in conflict with the constitution of the United 
 S'ates, the stronger the reason why we should go 
 into committee on it. And as to the remaining 
 argument that the course adopted by the commit- 
 tee, was not the course called for by the people, 
 Mr. D. had only to say that it was begging the 
 question taking for granted what should have 
 been, but was not attempted to be proved. Mr. 
 D. concluded by urging it was due to the corn 
 mittee not less than to the subject to go into com- 
 mittee on the entire report. 
 
 The question was then taken, and leave was 
 granted to the committee to sit again. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved the printing of the report. 
 After some conversation, in which Mr. RICH- 
 MOND objected to the printing of the report 
 the motion prevailed. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned to 11 o'- 
 clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 FRIDAY, (23d day} June 26. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. FISHER. 
 
 JUDICIAL PRACTICE. 
 
 Mf . MANN had handed to him a memorial 
 coming from a very respectable source, which he 
 
 felt it his duty to present. They related to the 
 practice in the Court of Chancery, and to judicial 
 practice generally. The paper was referred to 
 the judiciary committee. 
 
 COMMON SCHOOL FUND. 
 
 A communication was received from the Sec- 
 retary of State, transmitting a report in relation 
 to the distribution of the Common School Fund in 
 answer to a resolution of the Convention. 
 
 It was referred to committee No. 12, and order- 
 ed printed. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS presented a resolution requiring 
 the documents to be printed on sized paper, so as 
 to be more convenient for writing amendments 
 upon it. 
 
 Mr. STRONG proposed a substitute so as to 
 make the direction conform with the contract 
 with the printer. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS accepted the substitute, and it 
 was adopted. 
 
 Mr. HYDE asked that the report of the 
 Equity Clerks of the 4th Circuit, and of the Su- 
 perior Court of New-York be referred to the ju- 
 diciary committee where similar reports had 
 gone. This was agreed to. While up, Mr. H. 
 would state that reports had been received from all 
 the Surrogates but thirteen, and from all the 
 Clerks of counties except 13, and he suggested 
 whether it was desirable to wait for the remain- 
 der. Those received would probably be adequate 
 for the purposes of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. BAISCOM was of that opinion, and moved 
 
 that the committee be instructed to report to the 
 
 Convention the abstracts of these reports, that 
 
 they had already prepared. This was agreed to. 
 
 THE FUNDS OF THE COURTS OF CHANCERY. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES called for the consideration of 
 his resolution, (laid on the table at the request of 
 Mr. WORDEN and Mr. LOOMIS) in relation to the 
 mo/iies under the charge of the Court of Chance- 
 ry as follows: 
 
 Resolved, That the Chancellor of this State be request- 
 ed to furnish to this Convention the aggregate amount of 
 all the funds in the Courts of Chancery, (and subject to 
 the order and control thereof) on the first day oi June, 
 1846, as follows: 
 
 1. The aggregate amount of all funds deposited in 
 banks. 
 
 2. The aggregate amount deposited in all trust compa- 
 nies. 
 
 3. The aggregate amount vested in bond and mort- 
 gage. 
 
 4. All other funds, if any, under the, control and order 
 of said Court. 
 
 Some conversation here occurred with a view 
 to make the resolutions more accurate and com- 
 prehensive; and amendments were adopted to 
 that tflfcct, and the report, on the motion of Mr. 
 RUGGLES, was to be made up to the 1st of Janua- 
 ry last, instead of the 1st or June. 
 
 * The resolution thus amended, was then adopt- 
 ed. 
 
 EXTRA COMPENSATION-SUITS AGAINST THE 
 STATE. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered the following re- 
 solution, which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That committee No. 2 inquire into the expe- 
 diency of reporting an amendment to the Constitution 
 prohibiting the legislature from granting extra compensa- 
 tion to any officer, agent, servant or public contractor, af- 
 ter such public service shall have been performed or con- 
 tracted lor; also, prohibiting the payment of any money 
 out of the Treasury when the same shall not have been 
 
167 
 
 provided for by pre-existing law; and also to provide that 
 every person having claims against the State may sue for 
 such demand in like manner as is now the practice be- 
 tween individuals in similar cases. 
 
 GRANTING THE USE OF THE CHAMBER. 
 
 On the motion of Mr. MORRIS, the use of the 
 Convention Chamber was granted to ROBERT 
 OWEN this evening, for the purpose of delivering 
 an Address. 
 
 DISQUALIFICATION FOR HOLDING OFFICE. 
 
 Mr. STOW offered the following resolution, 
 which was adopted. 
 
 Resolved, That no person holding any civil office under 
 the government of this State, shall hold any civil office 
 under the government of the United States, or any office 
 from any foreign State or Government, and the acceptance 
 of any such office from the United States, or foreign State 
 or Government, shall vacate any office held under the go- 
 Ternment of this State. 
 
 On motion of Mr. MANN, the Convention went 
 
 into committee <>1 the whole, Mr. CHATFIELD in 
 
 the Chair, on the unfinished business, being I he 
 
 proposed article to the Constitution in relation to 
 
 THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to amend the first section of 
 the article, by striking out the subdivision in rol 
 tion to the Lieutenant Governor, and adding other 
 matter, so th.it the section would read as follows : 
 [amendment in italic.} 
 
 " ^ The executive power shall be vested in a governor, 
 who shall hold his office for two years, but he shall not 
 during the period for which, he was elected be eligible to, or 
 hold any other office or public trust." 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved to amend by adding af- 
 ter the words " public trust" the words * under 
 the government of this State," so as not to dis 
 franchise him from holding vffice under the gov 
 ernrnent of any other State. 
 
 Mr, TILDEN wished to enquire of the gentle- 
 man who proposed this amendment, whether he 
 supposed it would apply to offices and trusts ex- 
 qfficio. 
 
 Mr. DANA certainly intended it. 
 Mr. TILDEN confessed he could not see any 
 paiticular reason why there should be adopted an 
 exclusion of that nature. There were a numbei 
 of little public trusts which it was very conve 
 nient lor the governor to execute, and which were 
 conferred upon him ex-officio. For instance, he 
 was a Regent of the University, and as such one 
 of the trustees of the State library. Now was 
 there any objection to this? He was also a trus- 
 tee of the State Capitol, and of the public build- 
 ings. He (Mr. T.) could not fur his own part 
 see that there was any impropriety in his execu- 
 ting those duties, on the contrary being always 
 ht re and connected with these public buildings, 
 id the performance ot his executive functions, it 
 was entirely fit and proper that to him should be 
 r )mmitied the execution of these and sirnil.tr 
 trusts. It was suggested that the Governor was a 
 trustee of Union College under its charter and 
 also of the Sailor's Snug H-irbor. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS thought not of the Sailors' Snug 
 Harbor. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that at any rate there were a 
 variety of little functions conferred upon him 
 which were perfectly consistent with his other 
 du;ies. It there could be any object of utility ac 
 cornplished by excluding him from the perform- 
 ance, he would be glad to hear it. 
 
 Mr. DANA said that this exclusion was in the 
 original report of the committee, and he iully con- 
 curred in it. He believed that the Governor should 
 be divested of all other care and employment ex- 
 cept those exclusively relative to his duties c.s 
 Governor. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES thought there was a great deal 
 of force in the remarks of the gentleman from 
 New York, (Mr. TILDEN.) He thought thai the 
 Governor should be permitted to hold, ex-officio, 
 the same offir.es as he now does. It was very con- 
 venient for the Legislature to clothe the Governor 
 with a variety ot little [towers such as the location 
 of th<> Clinton County Prison; and the people 
 would have more confidence in such an appoint, 
 inent. If the Governor was to be divested of the 
 greater part of his vast patronage as would pro- 
 bably be the case even in this state, he would 
 have very little to do There was another propo- 
 sition to divest him still further of his present du- 
 tii.-s that was. to take away the pardoning power. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER lully approved of the 
 views of his friend (Mr. DANA.) We were told 
 that the Governor's duties were to be comparative 
 ly small under the radical changes that are propos- 
 ed, and fears even were entertained thut he might 
 not have enough to do. Mr. S. was in favor of 
 divesting the Governor of all patronage and power 
 except such as was merely executive in us legiti- 
 mate sense. Allusion had been made to the fact 
 of his being ex-officio trustee of Union College. 
 This fact he considered a most unanswerable ar- 
 gument against his holding, and exercising these 
 trusts. That very position might prejudice him 
 in favor of the institution, and deprive the State 
 of a vast amount of money, through the induce, 
 rnent to recommend such a course of legislation 
 from his sympathy with the institution. If he is 
 to be divested ot all executive patronage, properly 
 speaking, let us go further divest {he legislature 
 of conferring any office upon him whatever. And 
 if there was a prison to be built, he apprehended 
 there were men in the State fully competent to 
 locate it as the Executive. He hoped no fear 
 that the Executive would not have a sufficient 
 amount ot duties to perform, would induce the re- 
 jection of this amendment. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN here withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was a reformer but he was not 
 disposed to reform where no wrong existed in 
 things as they are. It seemed to be necessary that 
 there should be an officer to preside, over the 
 Senate, and in case ot circumstances that might 
 happen to the Governor, rendering him incapable 
 of discharging his duties, when it was desirable 
 to have a person to fill the station elected by the 
 whole people instead of one selected by the mem- 
 bers of the Senate. He had never heard any 
 complaint against the Executive holding these 
 Ex-officio offices but of the extent of his ap- 
 pointing powers, there had been a great deal of 
 complaint. But he was not prepared to say that 
 he would deprive him entirely here of that* He 
 looked upon the Executive of (he State as one of 
 the great branches of the government and as em- 
 bodying more immediately than any other branch 
 of it, the sovereign will and authority of the peo- 
 ple. He was not less the representative of the 
 people than the Legislature. He of the whole, 
 and the Legislature of the different parts, and 
 
168 
 
 hence the activity and harmony of (he system. 
 He was in favor of correcting such errors in it 
 as experience and practice demonstrated lo exist, 
 such as the gieat concentration of the appointing 
 powei the centralization of fhe system which ex 
 ictid thereirom ihe appointment of local cffi 
 cers by ihe whole goveintnent. The localities 
 in hi.-* judgment were competent to dischaige ihe 
 duty ot the Appointment ot all local officers, He 
 was nut prepared to say at this stage of ihe debute, 
 he would not have wilh the Executive the ap- 
 pointment of certain siate officers. He could 
 vei> well see that if we were to elect all the ofh 
 cers v\ ho.e personation was geneial by general 
 ticket, and the judiciary by the people also, we 
 should have such a muliiplicity ot officers as may 
 lead to difficulty. But he was departing from the 
 q.e-siion. He should vote against the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. DANA said that the only reasons which 
 had been given why the office of Lieutenant Gov. 
 should be letained was the need of a presiding ol- 
 ncer over the Senate, and in case of the death or 
 inability of the Governor, that thtre would be 
 needed some one to fill his place. Such an ob 
 ject he apprehended n>uld be attained without en- 
 plo\mg a person at $6 per day or a contingency. 
 He believed the Senate fully competent to elect 
 theii uwn presiding officer, and in case of the ina- 
 bility of Ihe Govei n<>r to perform his duties, he 
 supposed that in this Slate as weli as in most 
 of the otheis of Ihe Union, 'hat presiding of- 
 ficer might pei form the duties of the Executive. 
 In a Urge majority of the State* no such officer as 
 Lieutenant G >v. was known. Now he v\as so 
 radical that he would dispense with every office 
 ju our government that lie believed to be not ac- 
 tually necessary for the wants of the people. He 
 thou.hi. the Senate could select its own presiding 
 officer from it-; members, and that without depriv- 
 ing him i-f his right to vote. In the case of a tie 
 it could be settled as in the Assembly, when 
 the motion would be declared lost. He thought 
 the fact of the G ivernor holding the offices which 
 h.id bt-en alluded luex-cfficio, might have an 
 improper influence upon him, and induce him to 
 depart from the performance of his duties strictly 
 belonging !o him as the executive of the State. 
 
 Mr. BROWN desired to vote on Ihe question of 
 striking out the office of Lieutenant Governor. He 
 deernrd it entiiely unnecessary, and that it was 
 better to dispense wih it. He regarded the ex- 
 pense as of very little importance if such an ol- 
 ficer was needed he w,is willing to pay for it 
 But we had the example of a number of Siates it 
 we should dispense with these offices. Among 
 them were Ohio, New Hampshire, Maine, Virgin- 
 la, New Jersey, and several others. Were he to 
 model our constitution fiom those of other States 
 he would choose New Jersey. He should there- 
 fore vote to dispense with the office. 
 
 Air. RICHMOND hoped the motion to strike 
 out the office of Lieutenant Governor would not 
 prevail. It had been said that many of the Slates 
 had no Lieut. Governor. This was so, and per- 
 haps we could get along without such an officer. 
 But gentlemen ruust bear in mind that this is a 
 very large State the Empire State and he 
 thought we should have a Lieut. Governor as well 
 as a Governor. The saving of salary was but a 
 
 small consideration. As to depriving the Gover- 
 nor of all other offices and trusts, Mr. R. said at 
 first his impression was that the proposition was 
 not right; but on reflection he was willing to go 
 for it in part Trustees ot institutions often con- 
 ferred that office on the Governor. This might 
 look very well, but there was an after considrra- 
 'ion not so agreeable. These very institutions 
 came to the Legislature for grants of the public 
 money, and he believed this power had been aou- 
 sed in at least some instances. He would cite an 
 instance. A few years since, a Univer.-ity was 
 established to help forward the interests of educa. 
 tion in its highest departments. This University 
 received largesumsot money to start with. When 
 the trustees came to erect their building, which 
 they determined should be on an extensive scale, 
 they made a contract with the Agent of the State 
 Prison for marble to the amount of $10,000, lor 
 which the individual bonds ot certain icsponsible 
 persons weie given- A splendid edifice was erec. 
 ted. The time to pay this $10,000 came round 
 and these individuals came to the Legisla'ure to 
 be relieved from their bonds. A law was passed 
 for that purpose, and yet these individuals were 
 abundanily responsible. Here was nn illustra- 
 tion. He only memioned thiscircumstance to show- 
 that when the Governor was connected with such 
 matters, he might beswaved in his opinion by his 
 connection with them. In regard to the trustee- 
 ship of the State buildings, he agreed with the 
 gentleman from New- York. The people would 
 have more confidence in the Governor in holding 
 such an office, because he was an officer of their 
 own choosing. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN should not trouble the Conven- 
 tion with any extended remarks. He had sup- 
 posed one great object in electing a Lieut. Gover- 
 nor with a Governor, was that we might have a 
 man in the State take upon himself the office of 
 Governor in case of a vacancy, and that this per- 
 son should be elected by the people of the whole 
 State. He had always supposed that this was De- 
 mocratic although Pennsylvania and other States 
 did not follow our example. When the Governor 
 dies everybody knows who will take his place. 
 There is no confusion, no commotion, no revolu- 
 tion. All was as in the case of the Vice Presi- 
 dent recently. The people had provided for all 
 this beforehand. But suppose the Speaker of the 
 Senate is to discharge these duties. How is he 
 elected ? Not from the whole State but from a 
 single district as Senator merely. But a small 
 portion of the people have any voice in the elec- 
 tion of this man, who in a contingency is to pre- 
 side over the people of the whole State. Was 
 this Democratic ? Mr. M. thought not. To al- 
 low the Senate to choose this man, is at least one 
 remote from the people. But he did not intend 
 to speak thus far - but only to urge his objections 
 to this proposition to amend. He suggested to 
 his friend from Madison whether upon reflection 
 he was not satisfied his amendment was anti- 
 Democratic ? 
 
 In answer to a question by Mr. BURR, 
 
 The CHAIR decided that the question could 
 not be divided so as to take the question first upon 
 striking out. 
 
 The amendment proposed by Mr. DANA was 
 rejected no member voting in the affirmative. 
 
169 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved to strike out two years and 
 t " three years." 
 
 Mr. HUNT rose to propose an amendment ex- 
 tending the term of office to three years, but 
 withdrew his proposition at the request of 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS, who desired to offer an amend 
 ment so that the section should read as follows : 
 [The new matter in italics.] 
 
 The Executive power shall he vested in a Governor, 
 end such subordinate officers as are created by this Constitu- 
 tion, or may be at any time constituted by law for that pur- 
 pose- r 
 
 Mr. S. apprehended this might be thought a 
 mere question of literature, but it would be found 
 something more. It was an oversight in the old 
 Constitution. It was not true that the Executive 
 power was vested in the Governor when thers 
 were other Executive officers. The supreme Ex- 
 ecutive power was in the Governor, but not all 
 the subordinate powers. It would not be proper 
 to say that the judicial power was in the highest 
 court", when there were other courts. The Exec- 
 utive authority was vested supremely in the Go- 
 vernor and such subordinate officers as it might be 
 devolved upon by the Legislature. But this was 
 something more than form. This question was 
 once raised in Congress, and excited more discus- 
 sion than any other that had arisen for years. 
 The question was never settled until passed upon 
 by the Supreme Court, in the case of Kendall. 
 Mr. S. referred to the particulars of that case. 
 The Court unanimously decided that in thedistri- 
 bution of power to subordinate officers they must 
 be taken subject to law, and that therefore the 
 positions of JVlr. Kendall's counsel were not well 
 taken. He had drawn up his amendment as in- 
 dicative of his views. If it did not reach the ob- 
 ject sought, lie would assent to any modification. 
 Mr. SHEPARD agreed with the gentleman 
 from Essex in relation to the accuracy of the terms 
 employed in the article. But he would suggest a 
 shorter way of avoiding that inaccuracy, by sub- 
 stituting the form used in various other State Con~ 
 stitulions, by inserting the word " supreme" before 
 " executive," or the word chief," as in the Con- 
 stitution of Virginia. He moved the insertion of 
 the latter word, but withdrew it for the present, 
 on being informed that he was not in order. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was not particular about the 
 form of the amendment. A friend had handed 
 him a mode of expressing his idea, which seemed 
 to be better than his own. He was not very tena- 
 cious about the form; but still he thought the 
 word Supreme" would lead to difficulty. It 
 would not do very well to say that the supreme 
 executive power was vested in a Governor, because 
 the Governor might then say " We, the Su 
 preme," in his Message, &c ; or in a question aris- 
 ing between him and his subordinates ; still it was 
 bettei than the word " Chief," after all ; we give 
 thai Mtle to towns ; we may say that the supreme 
 executive power shall be vested in the legisfature, 
 and yet other bodies have legislative powers, ll 
 would be best after all to say the executive power 
 is vested in a Governor, (who would be supreme 
 of course) and in such subordinates as we make 
 as he had in his amendment, which after al 
 he thought was the best. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said the phrase in the section as 
 he reported it, was infinitely better and less like 
 
 11 
 
 y to be misunderstood than the amendment of 
 his learned gentleman, (Mr. SIMMONS.) Such a 
 brm of expression as that proposed, would make 
 ill these subordinates equal to the Governor ; for 
 every thing in it applicable to the one was equal- 
 y applicable to the other. Certainly that was not 
 he intention. Least of all could the gentleman 
 ntend that the legislature that we had corhe here 
 o place within reasonahle and proper bounds, 
 should by this constitution be authorized to make 
 a supreme executive power in the State, as often 
 and as many as they chose. Mr. M supposed the 
 gentleman's intention was precisely what this 
 clause, in Mr.M's judgment, expressed that the 
 executive power should be vested in a Governor. 
 What executive power ? The executive power of 
 the State. What was that?. The supervisory 
 power over subordinate executive officers in the 
 counties such as your sheriffs. One of these 
 sections provided that he should take care that 
 the laws be faithfully executed. That came with- 
 n the executive power, and was co-extensive with 
 the state. He was to see (hat the laws were faith- 
 fully executed. By whom? By subordinates, 
 who had local and special executive powers. If 
 we Should say the supreme 'executive power of 
 the State, the question might arise whether there 
 was not a shade ot difference intended between 
 the supreme power and other power co-extensive 
 with the State. It might be regarded as convey- 
 ing less power than we intended, or than was 
 now given to him. His impression was that the 
 clause of the old constitution, being shorter and 
 more comprehensive, carried out fully the inten- 
 tion of the people in regard to the Governor. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD differed with his colleague 
 (Mr. MORRIS); he did suppose that the phraseol- 
 ogy of the article reported by the committee and 
 which was also contained in the existing Consti- 
 tution was inaccurate. There are other Execu- 
 tive officers in the State besides the Governor and 
 if his colleague did not see them, he did. The 
 only other Constitution in the United States that 
 contained this phraseology was that of New Jer- 
 sey. 
 
 A MEMBER : It is in that of the United States 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD : It is in that of the United 
 States ; but the expression is an inaccurate one 
 for all that. There was no practical inaccuracy, 
 but there is a clear and decided verbal inaccura- 
 cy in it. This had been avoided in other States 
 by saying the supreme executive power, or the 
 chief executive power or the chief executive au- 
 thority, or by saying that the governor shall be 
 the chief executive officer, and then define his 
 powers by this, and the legislature define those 
 of the subordinates. Nearly all else in the Union 
 had avoided the difficulty ; and it was very de- 
 sirable to do so here. He preferred so to vary 
 the proposition as to state " the supreme or chief 
 executive officer of the State shall be the gover- 
 nor." That takes away the odium of the word 
 '* supreme," and leaves a clear and definite mean- 
 ing to the whole matter. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that it was true no prac- 
 tical difficulty had ever arisen from the use of 
 this term ; but the governor under it might say 
 ' by virtue of the inherent executive power," &c. 
 Now he wanted to avoid by any possible implica- 
 tion, that by virtue of this executive power being 
 
170 
 
 vested in the governor all subordinates were to 
 act as he directed and not by law. He did not 
 care much between his own and the other propo- 
 sitions ; it might not perhaps be worth while to 
 alter it at all ; but it was wrong false on the face 
 of it ; or else it established a monarchy. Now if 
 ALL executive power was to be vested in a go- 
 vernor as soon as he found this to be the case, 
 he would quit the State and go somewhere else. 
 
 Mr. DANA asked him if the law should create 
 officers having executive powers, whether they 
 could not exercise those powers, notwithstanding 
 what was alleged to be vested in the Governor, 
 with whom he could not interfere ? 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said, that may be so, but that 
 was the question ; as it now stands he has all pow- 
 er, and all others are the mere hands and fingers 
 of the Governor. Every sheriff, constable, &c. 
 in short, every executive subordinate is the mere 
 ** organ" (as they say in Washington) of the Pre- 
 sident the Governor. How are they to be ame- 
 nable only to him, or to the law ? He wanted to 
 get a set of subordinates who shall not shield 
 themselves behind the executive power. The 
 new Constitution of Iowa gave the Governor the 
 supreme executive power. And if that be suffi 
 cient to indicate his proper functions and to give 
 him a supervisory executive power over his sub 
 ordinates, making them the organs and executors 
 of the law, and amenable to it, and not merely 
 hands and fingers of the Governor, then that was 
 all he wanted to see accomplished. 
 
 Mr. STOW said he should not have taken part 
 in this debate, did he not suppose there was a 
 principle involved here beyond that immediately 
 involved in the amendment. The propsition was 
 to alter the phraseology of the section without 
 changing its substance. Now all professional 
 men were aware of the important consequences, 
 that sometimes resulted from the change of a 
 single word, even in the statute law. These con- 
 sequences the wisest men could not foresee. If 
 we were to commence in the first section of the 
 new Constitution, to alter well defined and well 
 settled language, there would be no end to the 
 alterations we should make, and no end to the 
 difficulties that must grow out of ir. His objec- 
 tion was that here was a phrase the meaning and 
 intent of which was well known and which foi 
 half a century had received a practical, undisput- 
 ed construction. All knew the meaning of it. 
 And if so, why adopt language that all might not 
 know the meaning of? Gentlemen seemed to 
 think they could express the same thing more 
 definitely. But could they agree among them- 
 selves as to what the new phraseology would 
 mean ? And if we, who were to adopt it, could 
 not agree as to its meaning, how were those who 
 were to come after us, the judiciary, the Execu- 
 tive, the legislature the people, to understand 
 it? He repeated that it was dangerous to change 
 written and well settled law. The alteration of a 
 single word in the English law in relation to 
 frauds, cost the people of England more than fifty 
 thousand pounds sterling -and yet it was extreme- 
 ly doubtful whether the intention of the legisla- 
 ture was to change the law in substance at ail- 
 Hence it was that in our own state, when the laws 
 were revised, the principle was adopted not to 
 change the phraselogy of the law that had receiv- 
 
 ed a practical construction for a series of \ears 
 and that construction alkone way. Did any one 
 ever hear a doubt expressed as to the meaning of 
 this section ? He had heard none. Why raise a 
 doubt about it ? Why especially attempt to substi- 
 tute words the meaning of which we could not 
 agree upon ? As to this phrase, supreme execu- 
 tive power, he denied that that was American 
 doctrine. He insisted that there was no supieme 
 executive power in our government overruling 
 and controlling, as the phrase implied, the judi- 
 cial, legislative and all other powers in the State, 
 It would be asserting a principle at war with the 
 history and genius of our government. Heap- 
 pealed to members to consider well before they 
 set the precedent of changing the fixed and well 
 settled law of the land. 
 
 The question was then take.i on Mr. SIMMON'S 
 amendment and it was rejected. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD then moved to amend by saying, 
 the " CAte/Executive power." 
 
 This was put and lost. 
 
 Mr. DANA then moved to alter it so as to change 
 the word "be" in the second line to "who," thus: 
 "who shall hold his office ;" and to strike out the 
 word " and" in the same line and put a capital a, 
 thus : " for two years. A Lieut. Governor shall be 
 chosen, &c." 
 
 This was put and lost. 
 
 Mr. HUNT then said that his amendment was 
 next in order, to strike out two and insert three j 
 and he would read a few reasons for so doing. 
 He went on to say that by extending the Governor's 
 term of office to three years, as was the case un- 
 der our old Constitution, our election for Governor 
 and that for Piesident would very seldom occur at 
 the same time ; consequently, our State Executive 
 would be chosen with more express reference to 
 state interests than is now the case. By making 
 our elections less frequent, the people would have 
 more time for other matters than the election of 
 officers, and our officers would hare more time for 
 their legitimate duties. The conduct and policy of 
 our government would be less uncertain and unsta. 
 ble. By extending the term of offices generally, 
 we should have more competent officers, and fewer 
 bungling apprentices in office. Experience, (said 
 Mr. H.) is requisite for the right and prompt per- 
 formance of the duties of every office. He who 
 has it not, must be to some extent a deputy to 
 his own clerks, who often have ends of their own 
 to accomplish, and are never responsible to the 
 people. It may be said that by extending the 
 Governor's term of office, we increased his power for 
 evil as well as for good. Admitted. He could do 
 more of voluetary good or harm during this third 
 year, than he could during the first two years of 
 his term, because he then knows precisely what 
 springs to touch, what wires to pull, in order to 
 effect his object. But to compensate for this we 
 should have fewer official blunders, which are to 
 be guarded against as well as crimes. Besides, it 
 does not follow that because an experienced en- 
 gineer can blow up his engine more effectually 
 than a mere learner, that he would therefore be 
 more likely to do so. Some will say that by pre- 
 scribing short terms of office, the people can get 
 rid of an unfaithful or incompetent officer with less 
 delay than they could if the term were lengthened. 
 True, but the people have no right to elect anun- 
 
171 
 
 fit man for their Governor; and whenever they 
 may do so, I would sentence them to live under 
 his administration tor the full term of three years, 
 without a hope of reprieve or pardon. The pun. 
 ishment would not be a whit too great for the of. 
 fence, and the people need not subject themselves 
 to it unless they choose. Hundreds of my con- 
 stituents have complained to me of the frequency 
 of our elections j none, that our elections are too 
 few. If we choose our Governor for three years 
 and our legislature for two, we shall reduce the 
 present election tax upon our time and faculties 
 nearly one half, and the public will be much bet- 
 ter served. 
 
 The amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. DODD proposed to strike out the 1st section 
 and insert, 
 
 " The Executive power shall be vested in a Governor, 
 who shall hold his office for two years. A Lieut. Govern 
 or shall be chosen at the same time and for the same term." 
 
 This would improve the section in its wording, 
 and leave out all that was superfluous. Itwasver) ' 
 desirable that all unnecessary words should be 
 
 with the gemleman from New York that this was 
 an after consideration, coming up more appropri- 
 ately when we had determined on some other 
 matters. But he did not see how it could well be 
 laid over. We must take a vote on it. At pre- 
 sent he thought he should vote against it. He 
 concurred however in the propriety of separating 
 these elections. If we did not so arrange it, he 
 
 should be for returning to this, 
 
 arrange 
 and giving it a 
 
 omitted, so as to render the 
 and easy to be understood. 
 
 constitution simple 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR saw no reason why we should 
 come here to amend the Constitution, if it was 
 for the mere purpose of altering phraseology. 
 
 Mr. DODO'S amendment was lost. 
 
 Mi STOW moved this : 
 
 " But the Governor and Lieutenant Governor who shall 
 be chosen at the next election, shall hold their respective 
 offices only for one year." 
 
 Mr. S. said the effect of his amendment would 
 be to change the time of holding our elections 
 and his object was to separate our State elections 
 from the presidential contest. He thought we 
 should not blend our State elections and policy 
 with that of the general government. But he 
 would not argue the question. He submitted it 
 to the good sens-? of the Convention whether we 
 had not better submit for once to a little inconve- 
 nience, than to have our State elections forever 
 hereafter blended up with national politics. 
 
 Mr. BURR said that it would depend upon the 
 time fixed to elect a governor under the new Con- 
 stitution, before we could say if this was a proper 
 amendment to be adopted. 
 
 Mr. STOW said a governor must be elected 
 this fall ; and for two years, unless they inserted 
 this clause. 
 
 Mr. DANA asked if he meant it to take effect 
 this fall ? 
 
 Mr. STOW said he did, so that the election for 
 governor of New- York, and President of the Uni- 
 ted States, should not happen the same year. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that it was quite uncertain, 
 
 at present, 
 
 eriod the amend- 
 
 ed Constitution will go into effect. And it was 
 premature to assume at this time at what period 
 the election for a governor under it would first 
 take place. The amendment had better ^ e de- 
 ferred. 
 
 Mr. STOW repeated that we must elect a Gov- 
 ernor next fall. And so he wanted a vote on it 
 now. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN was glad the proposition had 
 
 been brought forward, and he should be unwilling 
 
 to see any vote taken now which would be regard- 
 
 ! decisive against it. He agreed somewhat 
 
 fair and full consideration. It voted down, the 
 gentleman could renew it in the House. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that under those circumstances 
 he preferred much to withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. WARD said if he did so he could not re- 
 nev it in the House. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that then he would not with- 
 draw it. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought they ought to discuss 
 the proposition a little. It must be very evident 
 to all persons of their age that the State and the 
 national policy was infected with a powerful dis. ' 
 ease peculiar to liberty; and this was instability 
 and change. The very best forms of governments 
 have their peculiar drawbacks inconveniences; 
 he who consented to live even under a monarchy, 
 was excepted from several inconveniences that we 
 are obliged to submit to, in order to obtain a great- 
 er amount of good. But how are these changesof 
 policy, these instabilities of the State and nation, 
 occasioned ? It is because the great volume of 
 public sentiment is concentrated on the great ex- 
 ecutive officers of the ration. Who cares about 
 the election of a member of Congress now? but 
 they do care who is to be chosen President; and 
 when this is to be, parties rally in mass, and or- 
 ganize and put forth all their energies for the 
 struggle. And why is this? Because all feel it 
 to be true to be daily developing itself in prac- 
 ticethat whoever is President, has the Congress 
 of the United States. Who cares for elections of 
 Assemblymen, in comparison with that of Gover- 
 nor ? None and the progress of our institutions 
 is such as to render the Legislature subservient to 
 the Executive power the Legislature to the Go- 
 vernor, the Congress to the President; and thus, 
 instead of having the great mass of the intelli- 
 gence of the people shape the course of legisla- 
 tion, or to have it embodied in their representa- 
 tives, so as to shape the policy of the State, it was 
 always felt to be a truth that it was concentrated 
 in the Governor for the time being after all be 
 he whom he might. And so it is in regard toihe 
 election of a President of the United States j and 
 the concurrence of the election of these, too, on 
 the same day, always had- and always would bring 
 along wiih it the great drift of public sentiment 
 not always correct. And if we would prevent 
 his wrong influence, especially in this State, 
 where it would be highly disadvantageous, we must 
 contrive to separate the periods of electing these 
 officers. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS would make a suggestion that 
 would prevent the necessity of an argument from 
 he gentleman, (Mr. SIMMONS) if this was adop- 
 ed, it could not go into operation till the fall of 
 1847 ; and then if you elected the Governor first 
 ' one year, you would bring him at his next 
 election right on to the Presidential election again. 
 The new Constitution would have to be submitted 
 and voted on by the people at the same time they 
 
172 
 
 elected their Governor, in November. And thus 
 they would all be brought up as in the language 
 of his military friend, Gen. WARD, "as you were." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that might all be so, but 
 that was not material. He was calling the at:en- 
 tion of the Convention to the importance of thi 
 question. And he hoped that every one who 
 loved his land's institutions and their preservation 
 in purity, would do all they could to so arrange 
 these two elections as to avoid the concurrence ot 
 these two wrongdrifts of public sentiment, setting 
 in favor of executive power, rather than the rep 
 resentative power. 
 
 Mr. STOWS amendment was then put, and lost. 
 SECOND SECTION NATIVE GOVERNOR. 
 
 The 2d section was then read : 
 
 \ 2. No person except a native citizen of the United States 
 shall be eligible to the office of governor ; nor shall any 
 person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained 
 the age of thirty years, and have been five years a resident 
 within this State j unless he shall have been absent during 
 that time on public business of the United States or of this 
 State. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY rose and moved to strike out the 
 word native." He said that he first wished to 
 test the sense of the Convention in that form ; and 
 if they adopted that amendment,' he meant to fol- 
 low it up by one of a more general form and 
 character; believing, as he did, that all these 
 qualifications which were proposed to be required 
 for the elected, differing from those qualifications 
 required from the electors, to be inconsistent with 
 the spirit of our institutions to be contrary to th^ 
 spirit of our government. As had been remarked 
 by the gentleman from Onondaga, (Mr. RHOADES) 
 the Governor to be elected under the Constitution 
 that this Convention was likely to frame, would 
 have little or no power or patronage. His office 
 will be purely administrative. They intended to 
 confer on the people and in that he concurred 
 the power to elect their officers of almost every 
 description. He might say the tendency of this 
 convention was to give to the people the election 
 of all officers; and yet they proposed in this sec- 
 tion to say that although the people are capable of 
 electing every officer in the State, they are not 
 capable of electing a proper one, and therefore 
 they must be restricted to a native. The provi- 
 sion was inconsistent with other positions of this 
 proposed article of a constitution. Nobody would 
 contend there that they should require the mem- 
 bers of the legislature to be native born, but they 
 would allow persons of alien birth to be elected 
 to legislative office, where really all the power to 
 do good or mischief rested. Where no power ex- 
 isted but to administer the law, the occupant of 
 office must be native born, and yet they would, 
 without restricting, put the supreme legislative 
 power they would put power to make the laws 
 probably, in the hands of foreigners! Now, 
 this was contrary to the practice of all free 
 governments. There was not perhaps a case 
 throughout this Union of such qualification being 
 incorporated in any constitution. A gentleman 
 near him said there was in the United States con- 
 stitution; but he asserted that the provision in the 
 United States constitution was not so broad as 
 this.because they could elect a foreigner,provided he 
 came here before the adoption ot that constitution. 
 Besides, the difference between the two govern- 
 ments was very great and Yery apparent. In the 
 
 state, the Governor was elected by the people, 
 but it was not so with t?te President. In that case, 
 there were agents interposed between the people 
 and the President to do it. The President was 
 elected by " electors," and not by the people di- 
 rectly. The people were too numerous, and that 
 perhaps was a sufficient reason for such a distinc- 
 tion between the two governments. But in all 
 free governments the principle prevails of allow- 
 ing aliens who have become citizens and entitled 
 to all the privileges, duties and immunities of citi- 
 zens, to have the supreme power conferred on 
 them. A foreigner might be King of England, 
 hut he could not be Governor of the State of N. 
 York, and thus we were adopting more stringent 
 principles than even monarchies. We were also 
 inconsistent with ourselves; for while we submit 
 to the people the result of the labors of this Con- 
 vention, such a restriction exhibited a distrust in 
 fhe intelligence of the people, for it was in effect 
 saying to them, ' we cannot intrust you with the 
 discretion to select a proper man as Governor." 
 Now, if that principle were true, there were se. 
 veral members in that Convention who had no bu- 
 siness to be there, and thus they would be depriv- 
 ed of the services of several intelligent and patri- 
 otic men. Now he had no fear bat that the peo- 
 ple would do right, and he had no wish to keep 
 here what was introduced into the constitution by 
 the Convention of '21, as a restriction. It was 
 not in the constitution of '77, and he hoped they 
 would restore the constitution to what it was, and 
 thus follow the example of their illustrious ances- 
 tors who first formed a constitution for this State. 
 Mr. PATTERSON was extremely gratified with 
 the gentleman from Kings, (Mr. MURPHY) for 
 offering this amendment. He had prepared one 
 himself for this same object; and he should have 
 sent it up, had not the gentleman from Kings an- 
 ticipated him ; and he now expressed his thanks 
 to him for his motion. He could not see that 
 there was the least necessity for any distinction or 
 difference to he made between the native born and 
 the naturalized citizen of this State. And if this 
 principle had been adopted at the earlier part of 
 the history of this country, who was there then 
 here that could have held the office of Governor 
 of the State of New York? Scarcely one. Who 
 were the earliest settlers of this country ? All 
 foreigners, who left their native coumry, and 
 came here to seek, as they found, an asylum 
 for the oppressed. And when foreigners came 
 here and took the oath of allegiance to this coun- 
 try and government, and became citizens, why 
 make any distinction between them and the na- 
 ive born ? why attempt to exclude them from 
 holding any office in the gift of the people ? He 
 agreed ,with the gentleman from King's, (Mr. 
 MURPHY) that it was distrusting the intelligence 
 of the people themselves to say by a constitutional 
 Drovision, that they were not to be treated with 
 ;he selection of such men as they considered 
 competent to discharge the Executive duties ; it 
 was as if to say by this, that the people were not 
 capable of so selecting. He was greatly surpris- 
 ed when this report was thrown upon their tables 
 to see that word " Native" retained there. He 
 ivas surprised, because he had at least supposed 
 hat the keen and penetrating eye of his friend, 
 he able Chairman of that committee, (Mr. MOR 
 
 
173 
 
 RIS) would have discovered that that word cer- 
 tainly was not a proper one to be used there and 
 he had supposed that if no other gentleman had 
 done so, that the gentleman from New- York 
 would have been among the first to strike it out. 
 It was true that this word was in the Constitution 
 at present, and he was bound in common charity 
 to that committee to suppose that the word had 
 been passed over without being observed that it 
 was overlooked that in copying off the provis- 
 ion of the old Constitution (which he supposed 
 was done by the chairman himself,) it was over- 
 looked ; but yet he was astonished it appeared 
 very singular, that in copying this the chairman, 
 the gentleman from New-York, (Mr. MORRIS,) 
 had not let his pen slip through that word or not 
 have written it at all. Let that word stand there 
 in the new Constitution, and how large a number 
 of that gentleman's own constituents will be for- 
 ever debarred from holding the office of Govern- 
 or of the state of New- York? He (Mr. P.) did 
 not know the number, but beyond a doubt it was 
 a very large one. Every year for many years 
 that he had been in the legislature, he had seen 
 the evil of this ; for he had never known a time 
 when there were not amongst the representatives 
 from the city of New- York, gentlemen, who were 
 not native born, but naturalized foreigners and 
 he presumed this to be indicative that this 
 respectable class of citizens were somewhat 
 numerous in New-York city. Why we have 
 in this very Convention, a venerable and 
 highly distinguished gentleman from the city 
 of New- York, who is not a native born citizen. 
 (Here he pointed to the Hon. C. P. WHITE, 
 whose seat is on the right of the President's 
 chair.) That gentleman had also served his con- 
 stituents with honr and distinction in the Con- 
 gress of the United States. And would they ex- 
 elude that gentleman from filling the office of Gov. 
 of the State j or aay other citizen whom the peo- 
 ple might think p;oper to select for the office. 
 He would give this privilege to the people to the 
 fullest extent He had at this time in his mind's 
 eye several eminent and distinguished native 
 born citizens in various parts of the State lor 
 whom he should be proud to vote lor the office of 
 Governor. He knew several distinguished natu- 
 ralized citizens who had proved to be very valua- 
 ble members of Congress. He had known one 
 a genileman from the Western part of the State 
 the county of Ontario whe was a very able mem- 
 ber of the house of Representatives for some years 
 he knew no man of more talent or more capable 
 of filling any office in the gift of the people, 01 
 within the whole range of his acquaintance, for 
 whom he would sooner cast his vote. That gen- 
 tleman h id been a citizen of this country longer 
 than he (Mr. P.) had had an existence; and if 
 this principle prevailed they would be deprived 
 of the valuable services of so honorable and com- 
 petent a gentleman. He hoped the amendment 
 would prevail, and that by an unanimous vote ot 
 the ommittee this objectionable word would be 
 stricken out; for it must have been entirely by an 
 oversight that this section of the report of the 
 committee had been brought before them in that 
 shape ; it never could have been intended, lor 
 there was more than one gentleman sent to this 
 Convention to revise the old or draft a new Con- 
 
 stitutiun who were not native born. He saw be- 
 fore him his aged friend from Steuben (Mr. KER- 
 NAN.) and the gentleman from Cayuga (Mr. SHAW) 
 and where would these gentlemen now have been 
 if this principle had universally prevailed, or been 
 made applicable to this Convention ? Why, they 
 would have had to remain at home ; and 
 left to those who were fortunate enough to have 
 been native born, the monopoly of seats in this 
 body. He believed that our forefathers were as 
 wise and as good citizens as were we of the pre- 
 sent day. He considered that his grandfather, 
 who came from the other side of the water, was 
 as wise and as patriotic as any of his descendants 
 at the present day ; that he was quite as good as 
 he was. He would leave this subject entirely to 
 the people. Let them elect whom they pleased. 
 In them he had entire confidence in relation to 
 this matter; for he was quite satisfied that they 
 would elect their best men. By and by he meant- 
 to propose to amend this section still further, 
 by having struck out or it all that part relat- 
 ing to the age at which a man should be eli- 
 gible for the office of Governor of the State. He 
 would not have a man asked whether he was 30 
 years of age, or 35, or 25; or have him excluded 
 if he lacked but one year of the time and was only 
 just turned 29 years of age. The people would 
 take care that he was capable and that was suffi- 
 cient. If the people thought proper to select a 
 young man, and if that young man at 25 or 21 
 years of age, had so far by his natural talent and 
 abilitieSj and due application and energy, had 
 raised himself so far above the level of those 
 around as to be the most fit person for the office of 
 Governor, in his neighborhood, he would not offer 
 any obstruction thereto. He would leave the peo- 
 pie to decide the age of their candidate. All 
 that he would have asked or required was wheth- 
 er the person so elected was a citizen of the U. S., 
 of capability and ot good character, and an elector 
 of the State. He was in favor of the amendment 
 now, because it was out of order to strike out the 
 whole section ; but he very much doubted the 
 propriety of letting any part of that section remain 
 in the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that he also wished to have 
 the section struck out ; and he had intended be- 
 fore this to move an amendment to strike it out 
 entirely. He did not see any thing in the section 
 that it was desirable to retain even when the 
 word " native" was stricken out. He would add 
 in reference to the motion of the gentleman from 
 Kings that it was unlikely that a person would be 
 elected governor of the state who was not a native 
 born citizen unless he had rendered some re- 
 markable service to the state, and in that event 
 they should not desire to exclude such a citizen 
 from the office. There were coming into this 
 state annually a large number of foreigners who 
 brought with them children, some of them were 
 infants who were brought up here from their 
 earliest years ; some of these might probably ren- 
 der as efficient service to the state as any citizen 
 could render to his country, and would it be desi- 
 rable to exclude from the office of governor such 
 citizens if the people were disposed to elect them? 
 Would it be desirable to exclude from that office 
 by constitutional provision any such citizens of 
 foreign birth merely who might be possessed of 
 
174 
 
 extraordinary talent ? Again the manufacture of 
 such a principle into our Constitution might re- 
 sult in an incongruity. On a reference to the 
 Constitution adopted by the Convention of 
 1821, it would be found that there was no 
 such restriction on the office of lieutenant 
 governor. But the 6th section, both of the 
 present Constitution and the proposed article of 
 the new Constitution, declared that in case of 
 the impeachment of the Governor, or his removal 
 irom office by death ot otherwise, the powers and 
 duties should devolve on the Lieutenant Governor. 
 This was like the provision in the United States 
 Constitution, by which a Vice President had suc- 
 ceeded to the Presidency of the Union, for it was 
 agreed on the death ot General Harrison that Mr. 
 Tyler became President to all intents and purpo 
 ses. Now, if they required a certain qualification 
 in their Governor, and no such qualification for 
 Lieutenant Governor, and a vacancy should hap- 
 pen, it would be a matter of construction and 
 doubt whether the Lieutenant Governor could take 
 upon himself and discharge the duties of Governor 
 of this State. Probably it would be construed that 
 the express declaration that the Lieutenant Gov- 
 ernor should in such an emergency exercise all 
 the powers and duties of the governor, would con- 
 trol the previous language, and he might succeed 
 to the office of Governor or to the execution ot his 
 powers and duties, but certainly there would be 
 room for controversy, doubt, and partisan strife in 
 relation to it, which it would be prudent to avoid 
 Now, if this section should be retained, he should 
 feel it to be his duty to move to put the same re- 
 strictions on the qualifications of the Lieutenant 
 Governor, to prevent any incongruity in the Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 Mr. CORNELL, like the gentleman from Chau- 
 tauque, (Mr, PATTERSON,) had prepared an 
 amendment of a more general character, which 
 he had intended to offer to this section ; it includ- 
 ed, as its most essential feature, the amendments 
 which had been prepared by his friend from 
 Kings, (Mr. MURPHY,) with whose remarks he 
 was pleased; for himself, he had at present, but 
 one remark to make. It was in reference to the 
 provision of the Constitution of the United States, 
 which had been referred to, and from which he 
 believed this portion of the section under consi- 
 deration had been taken by the Convention of 
 1821. He thought, there had been a strong, if not 
 a sufficient reason for the interposition of such a 
 provision in the Federal Constitution, weighing 
 upon the Convention by which that instrument 
 was framed, which could have no application to 
 the selection of a Governor of this Slate. It was, 
 that the President of the United States, in the per- 
 formance of his official duties, was often brought 
 in contact with foreign governments, among v\ hich 
 might be the one of which the President, if a na- 
 turalized citizen, had been a native born citizen or 
 subject. In such case, it might have been suppos- 
 ed that some undue influence would, or mijiht 
 reach him in negociating with that government, 
 or with its enemies, which would not reach him 
 in treating with other nations. But in the case 
 of a Governor of this State, that objection to alien 
 birth could not apply, inasmuch as the Governor 
 of this State could have no legal intercourse with 
 governments beyond the Federal Union. For 
 
 that reason and to hin\ it was a very weighty 
 reason the provision in the Constitution of the 
 United States, should have no weight here, as an 
 example to guide our action, in this particular. 
 Mr. RHOADES said he was in 'favor of the 
 proposition, not altogether for the reasons assign- 
 ed by the gentleman from Kings (Mr. MURPHY) 
 and from Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) but for 
 other reasons. When our forefathers entered into 
 the struggle for liberty they invited the friends 
 of liberty from all parts ofthe earth to join them. 
 That invitation was accepted by a great number 
 of the friends of liberty in the old world they 
 came over they acted and fought their share in 
 the battles of freedom, and sustained their portion 
 of the hardships in achieving this country's inde- 
 pendence. These were not required to be native 
 born, and since then the Congress of the United 
 States, by the facilities which it has extended to 
 persons for emigrating to this country and to be- 
 come naturalized citizens, has shown that they 
 meant to extend the privileges of this blessed 
 country to the oppressed in all parts of the world. 
 And we of this State, by our legislative enact- 
 ments giving the rights and privileges of those 
 who are not citizens to hold real estate, have 
 shown the same feeling and evinced clearly that 
 we are willing to afford all an asylum here and 
 that we wish to have them without distinction 
 part and parcel of our own people. And what- 
 ever any one may think or talk about the dangers 
 likely to arise from foreign emigration, or this le- 
 gislation in regard to it, it is a " fixed fact" 
 that this country is destined to have a still 
 gr<- ater, a much greater purtion of emigration from 
 foreign countries than it has yet had. This is in- 
 creasing rapidly year after year ; it will always 
 go on ; and his feeling was that when the people 
 from foreign countries corne here with the view 
 to settle among us and to become citizens in reali- 
 ty that there should be nothing left to show them 
 that they are of a different order or class from the 
 native born ; all distinctions of this kind he want- 
 ed abolished. He wanted them all to feel that 
 they owed not a panicle of obligation or allegi- 
 ance to any government on the face of the earth 
 except ours. He wanted them to feel they were 
 truly American citizens. And if there was any 
 danger at all to be apprehended, (which he be- 
 lieved there was not,) from foreign emigrations it 
 was in the danger that was to be apprehended from 
 our own course in adopting some stringent rules, 
 or laws, or paity organization, that might drive 
 these men together to form some sort of clanship 
 in self defence, as they might deem it. They 
 might then organize to carry out their own 
 views and plans, but under such they were very 
 likely to be misled ; and the sooner they get rid 
 of those views and feelings, and were brought to 
 see and feel that they were Americans, the better. 
 He wanted them to be educated in the doctrines 
 only of American citizens. He had seen 
 with regret organizations of military compa- 
 nies and other organizations of associations, 
 with foreign titles and distinctions. All this was 
 wrong. He had seen Gtirnan companies and Irish 
 companies, and others formed in this State, and 
 he was soiiy to see these associations of such 
 distinctive characters. He wished to see them 
 all sink down into the plain and noble title cf 
 
175 
 
 American citizen, and if we wish to concentrate 
 all these in one bond of brotherhood ; we must 
 get rid of every thing in our Constitution and 
 laws that tends to keep alive and perpetuate these 
 national distinctions, and the sooner this is done 
 the better, and then the foreigner will forget that 
 he is anything but an American citizen living in 
 his own land. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM wished to say one or two words 
 before the vote. He was obliged to the gentle- 
 man who offered the amendment and to all who 
 advocated it; but vet he would not be regarded as 
 a convert to the reasons they had advanced for 
 their support. He should vote for it, but not for 
 the reasons assigned by some that the new Con- 
 stitution would strip the Governor of so much of 
 his power as to make it less dangerous to allow a 
 foreigner born, to exercise; nor was it an induce- 
 ment to him to vote that this course would go 
 abroad and show that we were willing to engraft 
 a little more by favor of the grace of God upon 
 our stock; none of these reasons influenced him 
 But it was because that the principle of resfric- 
 tion is wrong. It was because these restrictions 
 would be an infringement of the great principle 
 of the right of the popular power to designate and 
 put in power whom it pleases. 
 
 The amendment was'adopted with one dissent- 
 ing voice, (Mr. PENNIMAN'S). 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON then moved to strike out the 
 part restricting the age of the Governor to be ovei 
 30 years. He thought 21 old enough. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL wanted to offer an entire substi- 
 tute for the section in the form of an affirmative 
 proposition. This clause had been copied care- 
 lessly from the Constitution, without a thought 
 about the phraseology. And he wished it merely 
 to say that, "any person who is a citizen ot the 
 U, 8. and a qualified elector, is eligible to the of- 
 fice of Govei i 
 
 Mr. SHEPAKD asked if it would be in order to 
 strike out tiie whole section. 
 
 The CHAIR said, "No " 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said it would be in order to 
 perfect the clause; and then "to strike out" 
 would be in order; but not before its friends (as it 
 was termed) had time to perfect it. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that Mr. P. was right only 
 in part it might not be right to strike out alto- 
 gether, but he could move to strike out and 
 insert a substitute. 
 
 The CHAIR said there was no such thing known 
 in parliamentary usage as a substitute. A motion 
 could be made to strike out and insert. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL withdrew it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON'S amendment was put and 
 carried. 
 
 The committee then rose and reported, and 
 leave was granted to sit again. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned to 11 o'clock. 
 A. M., on Saturday. 
 
 SATURDAY, (24th day) June 27. 
 
 Prayer bv Rev. Mr FISHER. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a memorial from 
 Mr. W. H. Remsen, praying that Justices &c. be 
 never allowed to try or decide a cause without a 
 Jury as in the case of the New York Special 
 Sessions. Referred to the Committee on the Ju. 
 diciary. 
 
 The Returns of the Clerk of the 6th Circuit, 
 relative to the number of bills filed and causes on 
 the calendar in ] 844-5, was referred to the same. 
 
 The Returns of the Clerk of the 4th Circuit 
 Court, relative to the value of the real estate of 
 infants sold, the amount of money invested, the 
 costs, &c., for 1844-5, was also referred to the 
 Judiciary Committee. This is the first of these 
 returns. 
 
 THE TAXATION OF MORTGAGES, &c. 
 
 Mr. STRONG called up the following: 
 
 Resolved, That there be in the Constitution an article 
 containing in substance the following provisions: That 
 all bonds, mortgages, judgments and all other evidences 
 of debt which are liens on real estate, shall not be taxed 
 as personal 'property, and that all real estate shall be tax- 
 ed to the owner or occupant at its fair value; and that any 
 person or persons owning or holding any bond, mortgage, 
 judgment jr any other evidence of indebtedness which 
 are liens on real estate, shall be liable to the person or 
 persons to whom the same shall have been taxed for his, 
 her or their portion of said tax, in proportion to the inte- 
 rest he, she or they may have, hold or own in said real 
 estate. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY asked him to make the resolu- 
 tion one of enquiry. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that, he preferred not to do 
 so. If the principles contained in his resolution 
 were wrong, then he hoped and wished that some 
 gentleman would point them out. He was not 
 wedded particularly to the details of it ; they were 
 the reflection of a few moments of his own. 
 His resolution only wished to have the principle 
 it contained embodied in substance in the Con- 
 stitution ; not the words of it merely, but the 
 principle There was something decidedly and 
 radically wrong about the present mode of taxing 
 personal property and real estate. In many in- 
 .stances not a lew double taxes were paid on a 
 large amount. One object he had was to remedy 
 this evil ; and another object was to reach a large 
 amount of property that is now covered up and 
 concealed in such a way that the taxation does 
 not reach it all. Some said this was a matter for 
 the legislature to pass upon; but he would ask, 
 had the legislature remedied the evil? Never. 
 And we never should get a remedy until we en- 
 graft this principle on the Constitution, so that it 
 may be carried out in practice, and justice be 
 exercised alike to all in this very serious matter 
 of taxation. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved its reference to commit- 
 tee No. 14. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES feared that it would be con- 
 sidered, as now worded, as instructing that com- 
 mittee to report a clause in the Constitution em- 
 bracing these principles; would the gentleman say 
 " they be requested to consider ?" 
 
 Mr. STRONG said he thought not. The 
 Convention expressed no opinion by sending it 
 to a committee. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said it certainly did instruct 
 them. It called for a positive expression that 
 there should be in the Constitution an article in 
 substance like that embodied in the resolution ; 
 the gentleman (Mr. STRONG) did not offer it with 
 the view of sending it to a committee to enquire 
 into the expediency of such a provision, but it 
 was in such a shape as to be imperative, if adopt- 
 ed. And if they attempted to incorporate pro- 
 visions like this into a constitution they would 
 have a constitution more voluminous than any 
 
176 
 
 ever yet made, and they would be required to re- 
 main here a much longer period than any of them 
 dreamed of. The legislature had always had 
 power over this whole subject of taxation, and 
 it must have that power. But if they attempted 
 to go into such details they would involve them- 
 selves in difficulty. There was an evil in the 
 mode of assessing the great and increasing bur- 
 thens of taxation. Now, for an example, the oc- 
 cupants of land were taxed as owners, whilst in 
 point of fact, the property might all be in the land 
 owner, being held on contracts. There were per- 
 haps difficulties requiring attention but in fram- 
 ing a constitution they were not to attempt to lay 
 down a system ol taxation. On looking over this 
 resolution, it would be seen, that it seemed to 
 suppose that the subject was before us as a legis- 
 lature. It took the position that bonds and mort- 
 gages should not be taxed, but that the land on 
 which they were an incumbrance should be, and 
 that the occupant should deduct a proportionate 
 share from the person w T ho had a lien on it by 
 judgment, mortgage, or otherwise. How would 
 this operate ? Here was a judgment of $1000. 
 It might be a lien on half a dozen farms, but the 
 owner of the judgment was worth $1000, for the 
 judgment was worth $1000 to him. When the 
 occupant of one of these farms was taxed, was he 
 to call upon the holder of the lien to refund in 
 part ; and was his neighbor also to do the same ? 
 These were difficulties which should satisfy the 
 gentleman from Monroe (Mr. STRONG) that this 
 matter should be left to legislation. There were 
 other difficulties also in the way, which he would 
 not advert to now, further than to say, that in 
 framing a constitution we were not to interfere 
 with vested rights and contracts. If any such 
 provisions were to be engrafted' by them on the 
 Constitution,who could possibly tell what it might 
 lead to ? 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that he had prognosticat- 
 ed this in the onset, that those who did 
 not wish to debate the resolution would try 
 to get lid of it by a motion to lay it on the 
 table. Why should it be laid on the table ? 
 The gentleman last up admits thaj, there is some, 
 thing wrong here; but thinks it more a matter of 
 legislation, than to be provided for in the Consti- 
 tution. He hoped the gentleman from Chau- 
 tauque (Mr. MARVIN) had not come to the same 
 conclusion as his friend from Oneida (Mr. KIRK- 
 LAND) the other day, that however good a thing 
 might be, however just, or however right, it' it was 
 not law, it could not be adopted, and thajt whatever 
 was law now should not be touched. Now here is a 
 wrong that had existed as long as he could re- 
 member and the legislature wilh full power to 
 remedy it, had not done it, and never would. 
 This was a day of reform. The people had sent 
 us there to get the reforms which they could 
 not get through the legislature. Hence it was 
 that this or some similar principle should be in 
 the Constitution. He had heard the difficulty 
 suggested before, that you could not apportion the 
 tax where a judgment covered several pieces of 
 property but it was a very easy matter to cal 
 culate how much should be refunded to the occu- 
 pant or owner ol each farm. Any body could 
 cypher that out. But another case the opposite 
 had been brought up the case of a mortgage o 
 
 $5,000 on a farm assessed at only $2,000. In that 
 case, it was said the man>vho held the mortgage 
 would pay the whole tax on the land: That 
 would be so under his proposition: but how 
 would it be under the present system?' The man 
 who held the mortgage, unless he covered up his 
 lien, would have to pay taxes on $3,000 besides 
 whereas, under his system, this $3,000 would 
 pay nothing. Was there any thing in that ope- 
 rating against the mortgage holder ? And on the 
 other hand, the interest of the occupant would be 
 to bring into the assessment these mortgages, that 
 now escaped taxation in a great degree. The 
 man who has an interest in getting back his. taxes 
 ,vill look up all his mortgages, and then he would 
 get a lien on it to the amount of the tax. He did 
 not object to a reference, but he did not want the 
 resolution to sleep on the table. And there was 
 nothing in the mere act of referring if that com- 
 mitted the Convention to it any more than there 
 ,vould be in referring a petition or memorial. If 
 the Convention passed a direct vote on the reso- 
 lution, that would be adopting the principle. 
 But he did not ask that. He wished it referred 
 to Committee No. 2, who now had this taxation 
 subject before them. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES would not object if the resolu- 
 tion was couched in the same language as other 
 resolutions; directing the committee to consider. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said there appeared to altogeth- 
 er too much sensitiveness here about the phrase- 
 ology of resolutions. He wished all this left to 
 the mover of them. The merits of this or any- 
 other question were not at all involved in a mere 
 motion of reference. The reference committed 
 nobody, and it was only courteous to the mover 
 to allow him to refer it in what shape he pleased. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND s^id that really for his own 
 part he could not see that there was anything 
 wrong in the way the resolution was drafted. It 
 was a very important matter; and the discussion 
 was proper He differed from the mover as to 
 the remedy he suggested. He proceeded to ad- 
 vocate an amendment to confine taxation to real 
 estate only. As it was, the city of New York 
 paid nearly one half of the State mill tax. There 
 were there annually returned about $240,000,000 
 of taxable property. Of this about $1/70,000,000 
 was real estate, about $40,000,000 banking and in- 
 surance capital, leaving only some $30,000,000 as 
 personal property. This certainly could not be 
 all the personal property in that city, and showed 
 that there was great concealment of such from the 
 Assessor. He only stated this fact to show the im- 
 portance of the inquiry suggested by the gentle- 
 man from Monroe. He differed^ from some that 
 this should be left to legislation merely. He deem- 
 ed it of importance sufficient to become a Consti- 
 tutional provision. It was not a mere matter of 
 legislation. 
 
 It was finally referred to committee No. 2 as 
 Mr. STRONG desired. 
 
 TITLES OF ACTS. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART offered the following: 
 
 Resolved, That the second committee consider and re- 
 port on the expediency of incorporating a provision in the 
 Constitution, providing that every law passed by the le- 
 gislature shall in its details, be in accordance with its title- 
 Mr. TAGGART said that what had induced 
 him to offer this resolution, was the examination 
 
177 
 
 he had made of a law passed last winter, the title 
 of which was an " act concerning passengers in 
 ressels coming into the port of New York ;" and 
 the last section of that law contained a provision 
 allowing the Corporation of New York to "regu- 
 late the rates of wharfage charged upon goods 
 discharging from vessels at the wharfs and piers" 
 in that rity. Incongruities were also observed in 
 other laws which had come under his notice, one 
 of which was "an act to amend certain parts of 
 the Revised Statutes in relation to bringing ap- 
 peals and writs of error," the 3d section of which 
 repeals the 31st section of an ''act concerning 
 costs and fees in courts of law." At the 
 same session there were two laws passed, which 
 might properly have contained the latter 
 provision, but did not ; and he had gone on for 
 several months without knowing that the above 
 repeal had been made at all. There were many 
 other abuses of this kind that had been practiced 
 in the titles of acts ; and he thought it high time 
 that a stop was put to it 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was very glad to see this 
 first step taken. Some remedy was wanted for 
 this abuse; he knew many instances of the kind 
 named ; and one was a bill passed in 1841, which 
 purported to be a bill for a Legal Reform ; and 
 this very bill actually increased the fees of law- 
 yers 25 per cent. And it required a great deal 
 of courage to vote against a bill, with such a 
 title ; but he did do so, as he could not get the 
 title changed. 
 
 Mr. STRONG was entirely in favor of this 
 matter. He knew a bill that had been before 
 the leislature to compel the Utica and Sche. 
 nectady Railroad to carry freight And there 
 were the friends of that company hanging around 
 this lobby all winter, complaining that it would 
 be very hard on the company to have this bill 
 passed ; and yet all the time urging it through 
 the legislature, because it was, they said, for 
 the people'; gn,,d. And at the close of the 
 session, that and many other bills, came in the 
 liltle rider to do so and so, * and for other pur- 
 poses." How was that to be got rid of? 
 
 Mr. NICOLL was in favor of the resolu 
 tion He knew a case in point. It had long 
 been considered as settled law, that a man could 
 not apply for a divorce from his wife on the 
 ground of her cruel treatment to him. This 
 was so considered by the Courts. And yet in 
 arguing a case of this kind some time ago, the 
 counsel opposed to him brought forward a sta- 
 tute the title of which was, " An act for chang- 
 ing the time of holding the General Sessions, 
 and for other purposes." And on this very act 
 was engrafted a rider allowing a man to sue 
 for a divorce on the ground of cruel treatment 
 by his wife. Who would have ever thought 
 of wading through the local statutes to look 
 for this in such a place. And the trouble 
 would be endless, unless such titles were given to 
 acts that would enable lawyers at least to know 
 what they contained. For it was disagreeable to 
 find themselves unexpectedly floored by these in- 
 congruous laws. 
 
 The resolution was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. WARD moved to lay the pending order of 
 business on the table, so as to go into committee 
 of the whole, on the report of Mr. MORRIS rela, 
 
 tive to the powers, duties, &c. of the Executive. 
 But he withdrew it, to allow 
 
 A RECESS. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL to make a motion that the Con. 
 venlion to take a recess for 10 days, from about 
 the 10th to the 20th of July. 
 
 This produced some discussion ; it was pretty 
 generally opposed; but some proposed to adjourn 
 irom next Friday to Monday or Tuesday morning, 
 so as not to sit on the 4th of July. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said he had accomplished his 
 object, in testing the sense of the Convention ; and 
 as a motion to adjourn over the 4th of July could 
 be made at any time, he would withdraw his mo- 
 tion. 
 
 THE POWERS &c. OF THE EXECUTIVE. 
 
 The Convention then on motion of Mr WARD 
 went into committee of the whole on the following: 
 
 The question was upon the second section, 
 which as amended read as follows: 
 
 2. No person except a citizen of the United States shall 
 be eligible to the office of Governor; nor shall any person 
 be eligible to that office who shall not have been five years 
 a resident within this State, unless he shall have been ab- 
 sent during that time on public business of the United 
 States, or of this State. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that Mr. BRUCE had 
 left an amendment with him to offer. To add. af- 
 ter the word "State" in the fourth line, the words 
 " next preceeding the election " 
 
 Mr. BRUCE'S amendment was put and lost. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL offered this as a substitute for 
 the entire section : 
 
 " Every qualified elector shall be eligible to the office 
 of governor." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that he would leave every 
 other qualification to the judgment of their con- 
 stituents merely requiring the candidates for 
 governor to be a citizen of the United States, and 
 an elector of this State. Some had proposed to 
 strike out the whole section, and to leave it an ! 
 But that would not answer; for that would 
 allow any woman to come in be she maid, 
 wife, or widow ; or even a minor. There must 
 be some qualification. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN wished to know if the gentleman 
 from St. Lawrence ( RUSSELL.) meant to make the 
 colored people who are worth $250, and who are 
 now voters, eligible to the office of Governor ? 
 
 A MEMBER They are now eligible. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL Yes; if the people so choose 
 to elect a colored man, certainly. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN. I understand the gentleman. 
 That is sufficient. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON was sorry to see the haste with 
 which this important point was disposed of the 
 other day. He wished the committee to give it 
 more serious consideration; they were about to 
 pull down the aggregated wisdom of States ; the 
 place of a Governor's nativity ought certainly to 
 be considered, and so ought the age of a Govern- 
 or. The enquiry of the gentleman from Colum- 
 bia (JORDAN) was a verv proper one. And if we 
 passed upon this section in the hasty and inconsi 
 derate manner in which we were about to pass 
 upon it, he presumed that our action would be 
 visited with severe censure on the part of our 
 constituents. He begged gentlemen, therefore, to 
 bestow a little consideration on a proposition so 
 uncalled for. He hoped also that we would COR . 
 

 
 178 
 
 sider that we had no charge from our constituents 
 to act on this subject. No complaint had reached 
 him that there was any dissatisfaction as to the 
 present qualifications for Governor. These con- 
 siderations and others which he would offer at a 
 more suitable time, he hoped would induce the 
 committee to hesitate. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that he very much doubt- 
 ed whether the gentleman from St. Lawrence 
 (Mr. RUSSELL) hacl carried out in his own mind 
 the full extent of his proposition. It would leave 
 this whole question of the qualification for Gov- 
 ernor to be controlled hereafter by the action of 
 Congress. By the law of Congress now it is re- 
 quired five years for a member to become a citi 
 zen of the United States; but suppose Congress 
 in their horse race speed and love for foreigners, 
 should reduce the time down to 3 days, (and 
 that certainly could not surprise him more than 
 many of the acts which he had known them to 
 commit lately,) then perhaps we might have Mr- 
 Daniel O'Connell for the next Governor. 
 Or suppose they went farther, and allow the 
 privilege to non-residents; allow of naturali- 
 zation before the foreigner comes oves here, and 
 allow them all to vote by proxy besides, then 
 they would be citizens ex-gratia, and we 
 might also then have a Governor ex-gratia 
 [laughter] ; and then we shall be in about the same 
 fix that we were in before the Revolution, as a co- 
 lony ; they would select a Governor in England and 
 send him over here to rule us; they do so even 
 still in Canada. We might have O'Connell, but 
 then he would have to come over here. He was 
 willing to strike out the word "Native," but he 
 insisted that a candidate ought tor reside at least 
 for a certain period in this State. He wanted an 
 equal rule that would work fairly for all. Let all 
 who come into to our American world, either by 
 birth or importation 
 
 Mr. JORDAN : Or construction. 
 Mr. SIMMONS : Or otherwise," be subject to 
 an equal rule, whilst they have the full enjoy 
 ment of our privileges. He would have some 
 time fixed for a candidate to have been here ; say 
 five, or say three years if you please, but have 
 some fixed time ; and do not leave this important 
 point to be determined by the mere caprice of 
 Congress. For they once made the term of nat- 
 uralization fifteen years ; and then in a time of 
 great party excitement they brought it down to one 
 year ; and now they have come up to five years 
 and who knows, (as the sailor said when the show- 
 man blew him up with gunpowder) what under 
 heaven they would do next. This was all done by 
 the spiritof party ; and he (Mr.S.) thought it very 
 possible that it might be done again in "strong par- 
 ty times." He agreed with the general principle of 
 Mr. RUSSELL'S amendment, but it went altogeth- 
 er too far ; it threw of all restraint all check 
 Now there was no Constitution in the world thai 
 contained more sound sense and true wisdom than 
 the Constitution of the United States; and in tha 1 
 instrument, residence, and age, were considerec 
 matters of some moment. And whilst we ar 
 living in these great days of struggling for Stat 
 Rights, it would not be right or prudent to throw 
 away all safeguards. We ought not to have a rav\ 
 boy of 30, or even perhaps under 30 for governor 
 They had one of ihese raw boys once for a gover 
 
 or, he believed in Michigan, and the last time 
 hat he (Mr. S.) had heard of him, that raw boy 
 ad given pretty strong indications of his age. He 
 ould send up as an amendment : 
 
 " Every qualified elector, who shall have been five years 
 resident of this state, shall be eligible to the office of go- 
 ernor." 
 
 Mr. HARRISON And over 30 years of age. 
 
 Mr. SHAVER said that all restrictions were 
 imputations on their constituents. He should 
 ote against Mr. SIMMONS' amendment. He dis. 
 greed with Mr. HARRISON ; to put on these res- 
 rictions is to say that our constituents are not 
 ualified to choose who will best suit them as ser- 
 ants, and who is most likely to do their work best. 
 ie did not, would not, believe that their constitu- 
 nts were at all likely to rebuke them if the Con- 
 ention gave them the largest liberty in the mode 
 f making a decision as to who they should select 
 or the office of Governor. And as to the remark 
 >f the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) if 
 he time should ever ai rive when it should become 
 iccessary to send across the water to select a can- 
 didate, he did not care whether Daniel U'Connell 
 .vas chosen, or Louis Philippe, or even Queen 
 Victoria ! He was entirely satisfied that the people 
 would be trusted in this matter, and therefore he 
 should vote for Mr. RUSSELL'S proposition. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he hoped'the Conven- 
 ion in the outset would have some regard to the 
 elements which entered into the Constitution of 
 a Republican Democratic government. It wasal- 
 eged and conceded by all, (he believed,) that the 
 jopular will was the true and only source and 
 buntain of power in the government of this coun- 
 ry. And he believed that this form of government 
 s best administered, when the popular will has 
 as few restraints around it as possible. The more 
 restraints you throw around the free and full ex- 
 ercise of the popular will, the more of an artificial 
 machine you get, and the less advantageously it 
 works. It is conceded on all hands that the peo- 
 ple of this State are very well qualified to elect 
 their Governor ; he believed that nobody pretend- 
 
 d or desired to restrict them in the exercise of 
 that right. Yet, whilst gentlemen conceded this, 
 they conceded it with the qualification that though 
 competent to elect a Governor, they were not com- 
 petent to select the man for whom they were to 
 vote, and that if this subject was left open to them 
 they perhaps would fall into some most egregious 
 error. Now he (Mr. W.) would concede to no 
 such doctrine as that. He believed that a people 
 who were competent to vote for a Governor, were 
 competent to select the candidate. And suppose, 
 as the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) said, 
 that the people should choose to select Daniel O'- 
 Connell for Governor, why should we attempt to 
 thrown any obstacles in the way of their carrying 
 out their determination. If they chose to strike 
 at the foundation of their own government and 
 overturn it, no legislative or constitutional provi- 
 sions can prevent them. But no such contingen- 
 cy is likely ever to rise ; the people would always 
 exercise a sound discretion in selecting a Gover* 
 nor or a candidate; and so long as the latter was 
 a competent elector and a citizen of the State, 
 that was enough to ask of them. And any attempt 
 to curb and check the action of the popular will, 
 would only injure the whole machinery of our go. 
 
179 
 
 vernment ; it would invariably result in harm 
 never in any good. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said there was a rule in pri- 
 vate life which it would be as well to observe here; 
 and that was never to make any unnecessary 
 changes. We had now the five year's residence 
 qualification. It had always worked well. He 
 had never heard it objected to, and this being the 
 case, why change. There was no reason for it 
 His colleague, (Mr. WORDEN) had spoken of 
 the great deference due to the popular will. 
 Now he had as great a respect for the clearly 
 ascertained popular sentiment and popular 
 will as his colleague, but he thought there 
 was a wide difference between public senti- 
 ment thus defined, and mere popular clamor. 
 He would be second to no man on earth in bow- 
 ing on all occasions to the former ; and he was 
 as free to say, that on all occasions he was deter- 
 mined not to be led by the latter. The public sen- 
 timent of the state, when deliberately formed on 
 any subject and properly ascertained, he consid- 
 ered as imperative with him, as placing him un- 
 der obligations to defer to it implicitly, here and 
 on all occasions. But he had never heard any 
 complaint as to this qualification of residence 
 from any part of the state. And when gentlemen 
 talked to us about the obligations resting on mem- 
 bers of a republican government, he must- claim 
 the right to consider himself a democrat ; a re- 
 publican elector of the old democratic republican 
 school of '98, as he honestly believed himself to 
 be, in maintaining a due respect for the rights of 
 the state. He had no idea of a mere stranger 
 coming here he cared not whether from Eng- 
 land, Ireland or Scotland or even from a border- 
 ing state, and being a candidate for the Chief 
 Executive office of this state, at any rate 
 not until he had been here long enough to 
 make hitnseli acquainted with the peculiarity of 
 our government, with the institutions and wants 
 of the Slate, the defects in our system, if any, the 
 laws of the State, the habits of the Slate, and with 
 the various local interests of the State. This kind 
 of knowledge was indispensably necessaiy to qua- 
 lify a man for a useful and efficient discharge of 
 Executive duty. And he thought it became every 
 man who was a republican in sentiment, thus to 
 respect the right of the State of which he was a 
 citizen. He could see no good reason tor making 
 a change here. Why not require this now as they 
 had always done. The standing charge agains't 
 all republican institutions was instability and love 
 of change. And it did appear to him that where 
 any part of one system had worked well, for a 
 long aeries of years, and the people subjected to no 
 inconvenience by it the sate course was not to 
 umper with it. In all these cases, the only 
 safe course was to avoid change. He was 
 ready and willing to unite in making all ne. 
 issary changes ; wherever evils existed, he 
 would remove them. But he never would substi- 
 tute mere experiment for experience, nor under- 
 take to improve on what had stood the test of time 
 for the mere sake of experimenting ; he had al- 
 ways found that where anything in a Constitution 
 worked well .t was best to leave it alone; and 
 we had too many and too important interests in 
 charge, to venture on such a path. We were now 
 embarking on this work. This was the incipient 
 
 step in it. And he thought the admonition could 
 not be too often inculcated, that we should in all 
 cases avoid unnecessary changes avoid mere ex- 
 periments and adhere to the experience of the 
 past. He repeated, however, that a respect for 
 the rights of the State, its dignity and character, 
 if no other considerations, would induce him to 
 retain this requirement as to residence. And 
 whilst retaining this, he would remedy any evils 
 that required it, but make no unnecessary or un- 
 tried changes for experiment sake. 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN said that he wished to re. 
 tain all the qualifications the committee had 
 named in this 2d section; , age, nativity and resi- 
 dence. He wished to retain the word "native" 
 for more reasons than one. First it was in very 
 many of our State Constitutions it was to be 
 found in those of Maine, Missouri, and virtually 
 in Arkansas. And in every State of the Union a 
 certain number of years was required as a resi- 
 dence 5 and upwards. Virginia virtually re. 
 quired that a Governor should be native born. 
 Maine required a man to be 30 years old, and 5 
 years residence and to be a native of the U. S 
 New Hampshire required 30 years of age, and 7 
 years an inhabitant, with a freehold propeity 
 qualification, which he did not believe in. He 
 wished the members carefully to review these 
 Constitutions before they decided this important 
 point, or attacked the committee. The Consti- 
 tution of New Jersey passed in 1844, required 
 30 years of age and a citizenship of 9 years ; 
 Delaware, to be 30 years old, 12 years an elec- 
 tor, and 6 years a resident of the State j Mary- 
 land, to be 25 years of age, a property qualifica. 
 tion and 5 years a resident; Virginia required 
 30 years of age, to be a native born citizen, or 
 ,vhat was equivalent to it, to have been a citizen 
 at the time of the adoption of the Federal Con- 
 stitution, and 5 years a resident of the State. 
 In Ohio, Arkansas and Tennessee, all these qualifi- 
 cations were required, besides many much more 
 stringent ones. In Missouri, it was required that 
 the candidate for Governor must be either a native 
 born citizen, or to have been a citizen of Louisi- 
 ana when it was ceded to us by France, and that 
 is pret'y nearly equivalent to being a native born. 
 So in Arkansas, a Governor must either be native 
 born, or else he must have been a resident 10 
 years of the territory of Arkansas before it was a 
 Stale. And there was not a State in the Union, or 
 hardly one, that did not require a long period of 
 residence at least; and all of them require the 
 qualification of a certain age; and a majority of 
 them what is equivalent to being native born. 
 And yet we were yesterday attempted to be thrust 
 down, and driven from this; and for what? Not 
 for the sake of democracy but by the cry that 
 those who advocated these doctrines distrusted the 
 "dear people," the love of the people, the dear peo- 
 ple was all that the gentlemen said influenced 
 them. How very considerate. The love of the 
 people the dear people was generally on men's 
 tongues when they wanted to gain some particular 
 end of their own, or to assail some one else ; they 
 did that for the people that is they said so ; but 
 whether they had always acted in accordance 
 with that sentiment or not was entirely another 
 matter. He considered that he had complete- 
 ly shown by referring to the Constitution of Vir~ 
 
180 
 
 ginia that this section in this report did require 
 no more, and not quite as much in fact as the 
 Constitution of Virginia ; and he supposed also that 
 though he was a native of New Hampshire, that 
 he could not be considered a full-blooded democrat 
 unless he belonged to Virginia. (Laughter.) But 
 he felt certain that whilst he held to Virginia doc- 
 trines, he at the same time took it that not 
 all the high priests of party could unchurch 
 him. And he would here take occasion to 
 state a case, in illustration of the evils arising out 
 of matters that he wished to avoid and guard 
 against. The political quarrels and fights in his 
 section of the State, were not between native born 
 citizens and foreigners, proper ; but between the 
 native citizens of different breeds, the descend- 
 ants of the Dutch and the Yankee people ; 
 both parties being born in this country. In his 
 own town in Orleans, and one part was set- 
 tled by the people of Dutch descent, and the 
 other by people from New England ; these par- 
 ties at an election did not struggle or fight upon 
 party grounds ; but for men. And they always 
 went in a body against each other. " Let us put 
 up so and so," they would say, " and then we 
 shall carry the Dutch" ; and sure enough they 
 always did carry them on those grounds (laughter) 
 And if he was truly informed this was the case in a 
 great many other, towns in the State. Now, 
 then, if they were to strike cut the word " Na- 
 tive" what would be the practical result of it? 
 why, that each party would bid for the foreign 
 vote by selecting a foreigner as a candidate for 
 Governor, or else, on the other hand, they 
 would bid for native votes by putting up a native 
 candidate proper; and the tendency of all this 
 must be in the highest degree injurious to our in- 
 stitutions and to the people. Retain the word 
 " Native" here, and then neither party can play 
 at that game. He had done with that part ot the 
 subject ; but yet he could not take his seat with- 
 out alluding to the course which had been taken 
 in the debate in that House, in relation to their 
 report and to the way in which poor committee 
 No. 5 had been treated. He had felt the other 
 day, when thjs course of warfare was going on 
 against them a good deal in the situation of the 
 Indian, " considerably troubled in his conscience." 
 But he got pretty well over that, and now he felt 
 tolerably good natured. He did not know, to be 
 sure, but what it might all have been considered 
 very courteous towards the committee. He did 
 not know but that the committee had been 
 treated decorously in fact quite well treat- 
 ed. He was bound to suppose that nobody 
 had intended any intentional disrespect of 
 course not. (More laughter.) The gentleman from 
 Oneida (Mr. KIRKLAND) opened the ball by mak- 
 ing something of an attack upon this report of 
 poor committee No 5, some days back on Satur- 
 day. But he was merely the vanguard, as Gen. 
 Hull said.ot a much larger force. (Laughter.) Well 
 he was followed by the gentleman from Orange, 
 (Mr. BROWN,) on Monday ; and he with great power 
 and increased foice enlarged and amplified the plan 
 and mode of attack. (Laughter.) Then came the 
 gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS,) and he 
 of course without intending any disrespect to 
 us (laughter) in speaking ot the absence of 
 any written arguments or report in the case, 
 
 said, that had the committee written a single 
 one in the support of this^article it would have 
 been a totally different thing from what it was 
 insinuating most distinctly, that either we 
 had never studied or investigated the sub- 
 ject, or else that there was not ability enough 
 in the committee to draft an article or a re- 
 port to defend it. The gentleman from Or- 
 ange (Mr, BROWN,) came again, after his 
 breathing spell, with renewed energy to the as- 
 sault, and then round in his turn came the gen- 
 tleman from Oneida (Mr. KIRKLAND,) again, 
 and he outdid the whole, il he did not outdo him- 
 self. [More laughter.] Last, but certainly not 
 least came his friend, the venerable gentleman 
 from Chautauque, [Mr. PATTERSON,] who, by the 
 by was about half related to him, as he also came 
 from the old Granite State. [Laughter.] And 
 that gentleman considered the matter entire- 
 ly in a charitable light. He in his exces. 
 sive charity presumed that we had been too 
 idle or too ignorant to investigate the sub. 
 ject at all, and so he threw the whole force 
 of the blame upon the gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. MORRIS,) our chairman because he 
 did not run his pen through certain words in the 
 old Constitution supposing as a matter of 
 course (in his charity) that all the rest of the com- 
 mittee could neither read nor write. This 
 great mantle of charity of his covered the 
 whole of them up ! except the chairman. 
 Arid he sincerely hoped that when the vene- 
 rable gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. PATTER- 
 SON) came to make his report, that he will not 
 need that mantle ot charity himself. (Laugh- 
 ter.) For then it was, on hearing him, that he 
 (Mr. P) exclaimed in the bitterness of his soul,with 
 Julius Caesar in the Senate, " And you, too, Bru- 
 tus ?" But now, as we are all dead, though not 
 quite buried, [laughter] except my friend, our 
 chairman, [here all eyes were directed to Mr. 
 MORRIS] and the inmost recesses of the vitality 
 of his soul are so deep, that you cannot kill him, 
 [laughter,] for though he is not dead, yet he 
 sleepeth ; [continued laughter] and now, then, 
 as we are > dead, down, used up, he (Mr. P.) was 
 afraid tha't the blame would be thrown upon the 
 president for forming such a committee as poor 
 No. 5 was, whilst it was living (renewed laughter.) 
 And why it may be asked, oh why ? why 
 under Heaven did ihe president select all the tal- 
 ent all the great lights of this Convention 
 and put them on the Judiciary Committee, 
 leaving poor number 5, without any talent at 
 all. (laughter.) It was true, that we have 
 had two lawyers on our committee, (Laughter) 
 but they are nothing as it were they are but as 
 the small lights of man's wisdom, compared to Ihe 
 towering the gigantic intellects on that Judiciary 
 committee, (much laughter.) Now, he should de- 
 sire to .make a proposition. And his first 
 idea was this, " Resolved, that either of those 
 gentleman the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIM- 
 MONS,) or thegentleman from Orange(Mr.BROwN) 
 or the gentleman from Oneida (Mr. KIRKLAND) be 
 and they are hereby equal to any commiUee in this 
 Convention (laughter) that they be committee No. 
 5 and that we give up the ghost and step out." 
 (laughter). But he had a request to make, 
 and it is a sort of a dying request, (laughter.) 
 
181 
 
 and it is that the learned and eloquent gentlemen 
 from Essex and from Orange (Messrs. SIMMOJVS 
 and BROWN) be and they hereby are, all the com- 
 mittees in the Convention, (much laughter,) ex- 
 cept committee No 5; and that the able and extra- 
 ordinary gentleman from Oneida(KiRKLAND) if he 
 has got any time to spare from his most arduous du- 
 ties on the judiciary shall constitute committee 
 No. 5, (laughter,) and that the gentleman from 
 Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) be the Convention 
 to prepare and submit every thing to the dear 
 people himself ! No, not exactly so he did not 
 mean that but that he be the Convention and 
 the dear people altogether in his own person! 
 (Increased laughter.) At any rate, he would beg 
 that some way might be provided by which poor 
 committee No. 5 may be put out of its misery ; 
 because as a certain high dignitary once said, 
 " our sufferings is intolerable." (Roars of 
 laughter.) 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he rose among other 
 things to say that " Robin's alive, and alive he is 
 like to be." If his learned associate upon the 
 committee, the gentleman from Orleans (PENNI- 
 MAN,) had had the experience which he had had 
 (though it was true his years might be more,) 
 he would not have felt quite so sensitive but he 
 would have known that no disrespect could pos- 
 sibly have been intended to them. He (Mr. 
 MORRIS,) knew each and all of the gentlemen 
 who had thus spoken, and he felt sure that they 
 had intended no disrespect v\Q censure whatev- 
 er. They had merely used committee No. 5, and 
 its report for a few days whether that report 
 was under discussion or not and his learned 
 associate would have known that it was much 
 the best way to let gentlemen in this way 
 get through their Bunkum speeches, and so get 
 done with them. (Laughter.) Gentleman cer- 
 tainly would uot knowingly have censured the 
 committee; for there was no committee in the 
 whole Convention to whom gentleman were so 
 much indebted as to committee No. 5, for its re- 
 port ; for it had afforded them subjects for discus- 
 sion tor several days, and had enabled them thus 
 to get rid of a great deal of their superabundant 
 patriotism. And instead of censure, for he 
 knew none was intended, the committee de- 
 served and ougnt to receive a vote ot thanks from 
 gentlemen; it was merely the foot ball which the 
 gentlemen were kicking to kick themselves into 
 public notice. (Much laughter.) That however, 
 had all passed away the cork has been withdrawn, 
 the effervescence has exploded, and we can now 
 settle down to thesober.serious legitimate business 
 of the Convention. The question before thecommit- 
 mittee was the time specified in the section that the 
 citizen should be a resident of the State before be- 
 coming eligible to the oflice of Governor wheth- 
 er from thirty to five or three years. The 
 section states 5 yea r 3. Some proposed to 
 make it 3 years, and others proposed to strike out 
 the whole section. It was said by some here that 
 to require any qualification in the Constitution for 
 a citizen to become eligible to the office of Gov 
 ernor, or to trammel the people the least in their 
 choice, was to cast an imputation upon their in- 
 telligence. If so, what is the use of any checks 
 or guards at all? Why have any Constitution, 
 but to provide them? Why have two delibera- 
 
 tive bodies of the legislature one electee* for se- 
 veral and the other for but one year? Why all 
 this, but for checks and guards? Was not 
 this as much an restriction ? It was all 
 to enable the two bodies to reflect and delibe* 
 rate carefully upon the subjects for legisla- 
 tion. If he might be allowed to imitate his learn- 
 ed associate from Orleans, (Mr. PENNIMAN) and 
 use a quotation, he would say that all these checks 
 and guards were provided in order to secure the 
 " sober second thought." This was their 
 object; and this was always the object of pro- 
 visions creating qualifications of age, &c., in 
 the candidate for Governor. Now, all the gentle- 
 men here would remember, he himself remember- 
 ed some two or three, (and others doubtless re- 
 membered more,) exciting elections arid political 
 campaigns, when this whole State was in commo* 
 tion from one extremity to the other; during which 
 period the people were addressed at their meetings 
 of tens of thousands, and often were carried away 
 by the burning eloquence of gentlemen from other 
 States and of the Union. He was not driven to the 
 necessity of crossing the Atlantic tor an illustra* 
 tion on this point, nor did he desire to cross it 
 that is, for any such purpose; for gentlemen who 
 did so were always sure to be charged on the one 
 hand with reflecting on those citizen who were of 
 foreign birth, or on the other with talking for 
 Buncome, or fishing for political capital* 
 And as neither of these was his object, 
 he did not desire to rest for a moment under 
 any such imputation. But he could only al- 
 lude to citizens of other States. It might be (as 
 it had been) that during some great excitement 01 
 the nature he had described, the people.enchanted 
 and carried away by impassioned, fervid eloquence 
 all around, would stand ready to vote for the ora- 
 tor for any office whatever. And thus they 
 might elect a stranger, ignorant of our local laws 
 and institutions, and of the necessities and require- 
 ments of the people. Now it was to guard against 
 all this it was to secure to our Governor the 
 proper local knowledge, arid the proper feeling of 
 State pride and interest, that he (Mr. M.) deemed 
 it desirable that the Governor should be a citizen 
 having resided amongst us a sufficient time to 
 become acquainted with our local laws and insti- 
 tutions to understand the wants and necessities 
 of the people and the proper remedy to relieve 
 those wants. Was there anything improper in all 
 this? Some will say that there is not exactly ;but 
 that it is a useless piovision that the people will 
 nenjr thus foolishly act. But though this might 
 be true, and he trusted it would always be so, yet 
 there might arise again times of great public ex- 
 citement to prevent its so being. We had all seen 
 certain periods of temporarily, but very great pub- 
 lic excitement that overthrew all the efforts made 
 to stay it, and that threatened to destroy an impor- 
 tant and valuable feature in our republican insti- 
 tutions. We had lately passed thro' such an excite- 
 ment in New York city ; and he asked any man, 
 if, when that excitement was at its height, almost 
 any man could not have been elected that wag put 
 in nomination. It was not necessary to mention 
 what that excitement was, for it occurred but a 
 very short lime since, and could not readily be for- 
 gotton. It was sufficient to say that it was the 
 very excitement which almost laid Philadelphia 
 
182 
 
 in ashts. And it was to guard against all this [Then we 
 
 can pass on, progressing in prosperity 
 greatness and happiness, pointing with pride and 
 
 that the clause was inserted ; that he should be a 
 
 citizen a five years resident and thirty years I pleasure to the principles* sustained 'by thisTcon" 
 of age ; some say only three years; be it, how- ventipn as a bright and shining example worthy 
 ever, some time, that he may be amongst us of imitation by the new and rising States. While 
 long enough to know our wants, and to become he regretted that any allusion should be made, in 
 acquainted thoroughly with the laws and institu- this body, to party, country or sex, or fears enter- 
 tions of the State. tained of popular sentiment in this enlightened 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said the arguments on \ d W> he felt bound to say that he had yet to learn 
 theside of restrictive qualifications for office were that . a11 the changes of parties, and revolutions in 
 all based upon the assumption that the people Public opinion, from the promulgation of the De- 
 could not nor would not judge properlv. It was a clarat ion of Independence to the present day, have 
 want of confidence in the discrimination of the not g radu ally yet unerringly tended towards the 
 elector to select judiciously those who should act P? m anent establishment of perfect mental, po- 
 as his public servants. Practically, it was a mat- lltlcal and SOC 1 freedom amongst the human race, 
 ter of little consequence to him" as it regarded Mr - SIMMONS rose and disclaimed that he 
 time or age, but the difficulty was, that it involv- me ant any disrespect to Mr. PENNIMAN. 
 ed the same principle, only not in so obnoxious a Mr< PENNIMANwas satisfied no doubt he had 
 sense as that of birth. It it is your duty to fi x I misunderstood him:, but at the time he thought 
 the age of an elective officer at 35 years, w hy not the reference to the committee was rather ungra- 
 say not less than 35 nor over 40. Many believe C10US - But he s clearly he was mistaken, 
 this period of life to be the most intellectual and Mr> * ENNEDY moved the committee rise and 
 vigorous. The gentleman from Orleans, (Mr. I re P rt - 
 PENNIMAN,) had illustrated his position by allud- 
 ing to a difficulty in his town between the Dutch 
 and Americans it seems they some times differ 
 in relation to public men and measures is there 
 any harm in this ? And if there was, is it not 
 perfectly fair to infer that it grows out of the dis- 
 
 They rose ; leave was granted to sit again and 
 the Convention adjourned. 
 
 REPORT. 
 
 The committee, to which were referred the subjects of 
 banks and currency, and a resolution to enquire into the 
 
 that 
 
 MONDAY, (25th day,) June T9. 
 
 Prayer by Dr. WYCKOFF. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a return from the 
 
 tinction sought to be continued by gentlemen on equity clerk ol the 5th Circuit relative to the sale 
 the other side of this question. If gentlemen are O t infant's estates, moneys received therefor, &c , 
 at times over-ruled in their political views, and j n answer to the resolution of the Convention 
 rejected by the popular will, is it just that they Referred to the judiciary commitee. 
 should come to this convention, and ask to be pro- REPO RT FROM COM. ON BANKS AND BANKING 
 tected in their peculiar notions, by asking that Mr. CAMBRELENG said that the committee 
 restrictions be placed upon the lull and free ex on banking and the currency, of which he was 
 ercise of the sovereign will of the people ? chairman, had instructed him to make the follow- 
 The gentleman from Erie (Mr. SIMMONS) has ex- h n g 
 pressed fears that a great man miijht come from 
 the other side of the water and secure his election as 
 governor of this State; and the gentleman from N. 
 
 Y. (Mr. MORRIS) is apprehensive that a mighty I "expediency of making a constitutional provision, 
 nrafnr mav come here from another StatP HPPPJVP the stockholders of banks shall be individually liable for 
 orator may come here trom another stale, deceive thedeb ts of their respective corporations," respectfully re- 
 the people through the power of his eloquence, port .the following resolution and amedments: 
 and be elected Governor. Now he would ask in Resolved, That so much of the 9th section of the 7th 
 all sincerity whether either of these gentlemen article of the Constitution of this State as relates to the in- 
 have anyfears that they themselves would be carried corpon ol 
 
 away by such influence? Oh, no ! They have no The Legislature shall have no power to pass any law 
 aprehensions of this kind. Then, he said again granting special charters for banking purposes, but associ- 
 that their whole argument rested on false provis- a ^ ns lor such P ur P oses ma y be formed under general 
 ions, and was based upon the distrustfulness of ^rh'e legislature shall have no power to authorise, nor 
 the judgment of the people in the selection ol to pass auy law sanctioning in any manner, the suspension 
 their public agents. We have been a>ked for P 1 ~ specie payments, by any person, association or iucorpo- 
 whar arp WP spnf here ? He answprpd to Tramp ration . issuing bank notes of any description. 
 wnac ar . answ eri i irame A ll individual bankers, and the stock-holders in every 
 
 a Constitution tor the protection ot the people in association for banking purposes, issuing bank notes or 
 all their social and political rights, and not to die- any kind of paper credits, to circulate as money, hereafter 
 tate to them who they shall appoint to enact their authorized or formed, shall be responsible in their individu- 
 lawa anrt administpr instirp unrlpr thp orpat rhar al and Private capacities lor all debts and liabilities of eve- 
 laws and administer jus ice, under the great char- kind incurred by any such banker or association, 
 ter that the people through this Convention may The Legislature shall provide by law for the registry of 
 establish. Allusion has been made to the Consti- all bills or notes issued or put in circulation as money, and 
 tutions of other Stales as fit examples for us to shal \ require for the redemption of the same in specie, 
 follow Ho arlmittpH that whprpv^>r the nrore^ ample security by pledges ot property, 
 tollow. He admitted tnat wnerever tne preced iso individual banker, nor banking or other institution 
 ent set by our sister States was in accordance of any denomination, shall, after the year 1S55, issue bank 
 With the present enlightened public opinion, they notes or any kind of paper credit to circulate as money, 
 should be so regarded, but not otherwise. But except under the provisions and upon tte conditions pre- 
 why not this, first of States, establish a precedent r^om^a^aft^the^year^So, all perpetual charters 
 here worthy of imitation by others? Why not granted for banking purposes, or to companies or associa- 
 engraft upon the new Constitution, without tions for any other purpose, and exercising banking pow 
 reference to other States, the broad and deep ers - shali be revoked and annulled. 
 principles of eternal truth, justice, and equality ? I Mr. RUSSELL said that he wished to make 
 
183 
 
 ' 
 
 a few remarks upon ^a single point on which 
 he might hereafter be found to differ with the 
 committee. He considered it due to himself 
 and to the committee, and to the great impor- 
 tance of the subjects contained in this report, 
 and to his constituents, to make this expla- 
 nation at once, so as to prevent any mistake 
 or misapprehension that may arise hereafter ; by 
 any possible implication from his signature to 
 the report which he did not entirely concur. 
 (The committee having decided against written 
 arguments being presented as a report, he had 
 prepared a statement of his own views and rea- 
 sons a S ort of report which he had placed on the 
 desk before him, and which he presented to the 
 house in the form of a speech.) He wished to 
 prevent possible misapprehensions arising from 
 the submission of naked propositions, unaccom- 
 panied by any reasons, facts or arguments, to jus- 
 tify the general scope of these propositions The 
 Convention had decided that the reports of all 
 standing committees should be made in this man- 
 ner. To this order he yielded cheerful acquies- 
 ence, as every member should, to every decision 
 of the body fairly expressed, whatever his own 
 opinion of the propriety might be. Upon the 
 great and intricate subject of currency and bank- 
 ing, a report embracing merely specific provisions 
 of fundamental law for its regulation, without any 
 exposition of the facts and principles upon which 
 such provisions are founded, and without previ- 
 ous discussion, was a novel idea to his mind. Yet 
 it might be all right. By this course, however, 
 members of the standing committee were indivi- 
 dually responsible for the entire report, unless a 
 dissent in some form was expressed, because the 
 report itself was nothing but the conclusions of 
 the committee, upon the whole subject. The re- 
 port might be able and correct as a whole, yet if 
 any member partially disagreed, his dissent 
 so far, to avoid inconsistency, should be ex- 
 pressed upon the first opportunity. With all 
 deference t- the honorable chairman and to 
 the other members of the committee who united 
 in the report, and with unfeigned distrust of his 
 own opinions, he could yield not entire assent to 
 one position contained in it. He could not see 
 the force or propriety of the distinction taken by 
 the committee, as to personal responsibility in one 
 braqch of banking business, between two classes 
 of bankers performing the same business. If 
 circulating notes should be made secure by pledg- 
 es of stock and other security, and by superadded 
 personal liability, he could not see why the per- 
 sons issuing this doubly fortified currency, should 
 be held to more stringent constitutional provi- 
 sions relating to other branches of banking busi- 
 ness, than were numerous other banking associa- 
 tions, that did riot issue the circulating medium. 
 In other words, if the legislature were permitted 
 to establish, upon the principle of limited copart- 
 nership, associations for the business of discount, 
 exchange and deposit, merely, why not entrust to 
 the law-making power, the regulation of the same 
 branch when transacted by others, who, in addi- 
 tion, shall furnish a safe currency, based upon 
 security and unlimited personal liability ? To 
 him, the distinction appeared invidious and un- 
 reasonable. The committee unanimously agreed, 
 tu -,t all persons, authorized by government to issue 
 
 paper for circulation as the representative of coin, 
 should, in addition to other securities, be person- 
 ally responsible for the certain redemption of 
 such paper. This regulation of the currency was 
 emphatically demanded by our constituents. 
 Concerning other branches of banking, as with 
 all other kinds of business connected with com- 
 merce, might not the control of government, if 
 at all necessary, be safely entrusted to legisla- 
 tion without constitutional restraints ? If con- 
 stitutional law should enforce full personal lia- 
 bility upon individual members of all associa- 
 tions, who might issue registered and secured 
 notes as money, for all other contracts of asso- 
 ciations, and should relieve, from similar liabil- 
 ities, members of other banking associations 
 engaged in the same business, because they did 
 not issue such notes, he feared this discrimi- 
 nation might tend to throw the issue of cur- 
 rency into weaker hands, who might be willing 
 to hazard greater liabilities. Such was the opin- 
 ion of several gentlemen of much experience, 
 with whom he had recently conversed. Besides, 
 it would create an onerous preference in favor 
 of the bankers of our commercial emporium, 
 against those of other sections of the State. It 
 was well known, that the amount of circulating 
 notes issued by the large banks of New- York 
 city bear but a small proportion to the amount 
 of their capital, discounts and exchanges. The 
 notes of these city, banks were not their real cir- 
 culation. Persons obtaining discounts from, and 
 selling exchanges to these banks,and not receiving 
 their notes, but simply credits on their books, 
 which were withdrawn by drafts or checks of the 
 depositors. These drafts and checks, rather than 
 the notes of the banks, were the real circulation 
 furnished. This currency was safe, because it 
 had the individual responsibility of the drawers, 
 as well as the bank credits upon which it was 
 based, and was promptly returned for payment, 
 in the ordinary course of business. The New 
 York city banks could easily withdraw their cir- 
 lating nojtes, and still not materially diminish 
 their business. Not so with country banks. 
 Their notes performed the office of checks and 
 drafts, in nine-tenths of the ordinary business ex- 
 changes performed through the agency of these 
 banks. Country banks, of necessity, must be 
 banks of issue, as well as of discount and deposit. 
 These were some of the considerations, which 
 induced in his mind the opinion, that it is unwise 
 to insert in the constitution any provision going 
 beyond the enforcement of personal liability of all 
 bankers for the redemption of their paper circu- 
 lated as money. All persons, authorized by law 
 to circulate paper as a substitute for coin, should 
 be held to unlimited responsibility for its redemp- 
 tion in coin. But in his judgment every other 
 branch of banking business should be placed on 
 the same ground with other commercial opera- 
 tions. These suggestions were thrown out with 
 great diffidence, and with most respectful defer- 
 ence to the opinions of other members of the com- 
 mittee. It gave him much pleasure to be able to 
 state, that upon other question before the com- 
 mittee, they had been unanimous in conclusions 
 expressed in the report, and the chairman, by 
 his experience, research, and industry, had great- 
 ly aided in the attainment of this unanimity. 
 
184 
 
 With the single exception before explained, he 
 concurred fully with every part of the report. 
 Under present impressions) he would amend the 
 report, in the latter clause of the third proposed 
 amendment, by striking out the words, " debts 
 and liabilities of every kind incurred," and by in- 
 serting, the words, " such notes on paper credits." 
 There was at least a doubt of the propriety of a 
 constitutional provision enforcing unequally lia- 
 bilities growing out of the same kind of business, 
 merely because one class of persons, transacting 
 the business, conduct also another branch of bu- 
 siness, which was made perfectly secure without 
 this controlling inequality. It was better to leave 
 the question open to legislative action, than to 
 incorporate in the constitution a provision of 
 doubtful tendency. He trusted when the report 
 should go to the committee of the whole, this 
 subject would receive the attention of members 
 much abler than himself to give it appropriate 
 discussion. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that he would not, in 
 reply to the gentleman fioin St. Lawrence (Mr. 
 RUSSELL) violate the parliamentary rule, which 
 he was very soiry to say, had been repeatedly vi- 
 olated during the sitting of this Convention. We 
 have consumed one month of our time by a de- 
 parture from this rule, in discussing the merits of 
 a proposition whilst the question before them was 
 only on the subject of reference. He contended 
 that on mere motions to refer', the merits of a 
 measure were not under consideration. He did 
 not interrupt his associate on the Committee, be- 
 cause from the first he desired that that gentleman 
 should have an opportunity to present and explain 
 his views to the Convention. And he would only 
 wish merely to answer one objection that had 
 been urged not that he desired to anticipate dis- 
 cussion on this subject, for that was a matter 
 which he would not allow himself to be drawn 
 into at this time but he would merely make a 
 single remark. The point and the only point 
 which his associate had made was this; that he 
 would require personal liability to the extent ot 
 the circulating notes. Whereas, we (the com- 
 mittee) require, by these amendments, property 
 to secure these notes ! We have endorsed these 
 banks; they are theiefore government banks, and 
 they are acting under the authority of the Gov. 
 ernment, and such being the case, we thus make 
 them good not only for our own purposes, as re- 
 garded the circulation, but we make them good al- 
 so for the widows and tor the orphans who place 
 their deposits in their vaults. There was one 
 other point that of inequality, which perhaps 
 required also of him a single remark. The dis- 
 tinction, and the only distinction which the com 
 mittee had recognized, was this: that banking, 
 legitimate banking was a branch of trade, 
 with which Government had nothing whatever to 
 do, and ought never to have to do with, any more 
 than any other branch of legitimate trade. 
 Currency is the business of Government, with 
 which banks ought never to have any thing to do 
 But government having had to do with banks, arid 
 given them an authority and sanction, we are to 
 protect the community against them and their 
 infringements. And his committee proposed, af- 
 ter the year 1855, to put every bank upon the same 
 footing they would have no distinction between 
 
 the various banks of the State; every bank issuing 
 currency (after 1855) m%st be under the control 
 of this law. And every bank that does not issue 
 currency, may conduct its business as it pleases. 
 How stand these matters now ? At present there 
 is very great inequality. There are 24 country 
 banks, conducted by individual bankers, who are 
 personally liable for all the debts of their banks, 
 in every shape and form. What a spectacle does 
 this present ? 24 banks conducted by some of the 
 first and best capitalists in the State issuing cii* 
 culating notes, well secured, according to the law, 
 and the bankers personally liable for every kind of 
 debt; and here are your privileged associations, 
 which are doing the same kind of business, in is- 
 suing circulating notes, and their conductors are 
 not personally liable 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : I would ask the gentleman 
 (with great deference) to tell me where those 24 
 banks are. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG : I have a list of them, 
 which I will furnish the gentleman, at the proper 
 time. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : -Do you mean that it embraces 
 the Free Banks ? 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG: Yes; the Free Banks. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : Does not the gentleman know 
 that by law the. stockholders of these banks are 
 not individually responsible ? 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG :-r-I have the authority of 
 the Comptroller and of the law, to say that they 
 are responsible. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : Why, the statute expressly 
 says that associate bankers shall not be personally 
 liable for the debts. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG: The shareholders in 
 these joint slock associations are not liable, but all 
 individual bankers are; and there is the mistake. 
 It will be found at the Comptroller's office that 
 the notes all read "I promise to pay," and that 
 they are signed by the individual banker. But 
 these amendments are not intended to disturb the 
 business of any banking institution now existing. 
 After 1855, any or all of these banks may with- 
 draw if they please ; they will have the option of 
 either withdrawing their notes from circulation, 
 or of coming in under this general law. The 
 free banks, the joint stock banks, the safety fund 
 banks, &c. &c. But he would not make any fur. 
 iher remarks to anticipate discussion j and ftnly 
 state that these amendments were not intended 
 to disturb existing institutions for banking 10 
 years hence, if these were adopted, all banks 
 must determine whether they would remain cur- 
 rency banks or not. If they dp, they must come 
 in under these general piovisions ; and every 
 bank, every individual banker, every association 
 and corporation, must stand upon the same foot- 
 ing. Whilst he was up, he would allude to the 
 remark of the gentleman from New-York (Mr. 
 MORRIS) in presenting his report, that every gen- 
 leman on that committee had signed it; but he 
 very much doubted whether if in the end, when 
 all its provisions come to be discussed, all of those 
 gentlemen would be found to agree with every 
 provision of that report. The parliamentary rule, 
 after all, was the best ; it was that reports, though 
 considered as the act of the majority of a commit- 
 tee, were hy no means to be considered as binding 
 upon that committee. They are not binding even 
 
185 
 
 on the majority of the committee making them any 
 more than they are binding upon the Convention; 
 
 . neb member, even of the majority, is at li- 
 berty to reverse his opinion or his vote, if he was 
 
 i inced that he had come to a wrong conclu- 
 sion. He should certainly feel at liberty thus to 
 
 limself, even after he had made a report on a 
 subject. The report is merely the result of an 
 informal conference; the members of a commit- 
 igether have a consultation, exchange 
 their views, deliberate on them, and agree to pre- 
 sent a report. And in the report he had present- 
 h every member did not agree with eve- 
 ry proposition, yet each proposition had a majori- 
 ty of the members of the committee there was a 
 majority on the whole; and all agreed that the 
 report should be presented ; which decision he 
 had complied with. He would move that there- 
 port be referred to the committee of the whole 
 and that it be printed. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that he did not rise to 
 discuss this question in any way or shape on its 
 merits ; but he rose to say, after hearing the re- 
 marks of the two gentlemen who just preceded 
 him, and who had spoken on both sides of the 
 question, that he should hereafter feel it to be 
 his duty to call any gentlemen to order, who 
 should attempt to discuss the merits of any sub- 
 ject upon a mere motion to refer. He had not 
 done so now, because after the gentleman from 
 St. Lawrence had made his sort of counter-report 
 in the form of a speech, he thought it was no 
 more than right that the chairman of that com- 
 mittee should have an opportunity to reply to him, 
 as he had been allowed to make his remarks at 
 some length. But all this was out of order ; and 
 much time would be saved by adhering strictly to 
 the parliamentary rules in the matter. We have 
 wasted too much time in these discussions ; they 
 would have plenty of opportunity to discuss all 
 these points in committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said, that whenever a report 
 was made from a committee of which he was a 
 member, in which he did not concur, he should 
 claim it as his right to have his views come be- 
 fore the Convention in some shape, simultaneous- 
 ly with the report, the conclusions of which he 
 did not agree with, but to which he impliedly as- 
 sented by his signature thereto, and thus correct 
 the error that might go abroad. It was necessa- 
 ry that all should have this right, in order that 
 their subsequent action might not be miscon- 
 strued into inconsistency. And unless the gag 
 law was to be enforced on all of us at once, he 
 \vould exercise this right, and he hoped every 
 other gentlemen would do the same ; and if any 
 one did so, even though no one else should stand 
 atleman so doing, he himself (Mr. R.) 
 would stand by him and sustain him in his right. 
 * TERSON did uot object to any mem- 
 l a minunty of the committee rising in his 
 place, and expressing his dissent trom any parts 
 of a report, and s.iy wherein they differed But 
 he did and would object to any gentleman's mak- 
 ing thai an excuse for a full discussion of ihe mer- 
 its of a question, pending a mere motion to refer. 
 J only be done with the unanimous consent 
 
 ..- I Jou.se. 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that he thought certainly a 
 
 
 12 
 
 member may make an oral report before a motion 
 to refer was made. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: Certainly, and that would 
 have been the time to have made it. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL: But the motion to refer was 
 m.ide bt fore I got the floor 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that he had understood 
 the geritli'imm from St. Lawrence (Mr. RUSSELL) 
 to have ask^d and obtained the unanimous consent 
 of the House previous to his expressing his views 
 as he did. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN also understood it to be so that 
 Mr RUSSELL had asked and obtained leave to 
 present his views, as the majority did when they 
 reported. He thought the gentleman was entire, 
 ly in order; and he did not suppose that any com- 
 mittee or any member, could on a mere motion to 
 refer, discuss the merits ot the question without 
 universal leave of the House. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS moved to print an extra num- 
 ber say 800. 
 
 So ordered, and the report was referred to com- 
 mittee of the whole. 
 
 LIMITATION OF LANDED PROPERTY. 
 
 Mr. WILLARD offered the following resolu- 
 tion, which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to committee number 
 eighteen, " on the erection and division of estates in land," 
 to inquire whether the character and permanency of our 
 institutions would not be increased by multiplying the 
 number of freeholders and the expediency of forbidding 
 all future accumulation of the soil to exceed 320 acres per 
 man and to provide some equitable mode for the gradual 
 reduction of the present landed monopolies as they now 
 exist. 
 
 RECESS OF THE CONVENTION. 
 Mr. STRONG submitted the following : 
 Resolved, That when this Convention adjourns on 
 
 Thursday next, it will adjourn to meet again on Tuesday 
 
 the 7th July. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that many of the members 
 were exceedingly anxious to have this perplexing 
 question settled at once ; for a good many of them 
 who did not live on the line of the great thorough- 
 fare the Hudson River wanted to write home 
 to their wivds to come and meet them. (Laughter.) 
 It was very clear that the Convention was to have 
 no other adjournment but this one ; and it was 
 also clear that on Friday next there would be very 
 few members here in their seats there would not 
 be a quorum any how. He was sure of that from 
 the signs he saw ahead ; and he knew there would 
 not be a quorum here on Monday either. And 
 it would be very hard to have the President come 
 he/e to call this Convention to order and then 
 have to adjourn it directly. He was ready to stay 
 every day and to go to work ; he did not want to 
 go home ; but a good many of them did. And 
 he wanted to accommodate such as did want go. 
 He was willing to give all of them a day or two ; 
 but if they would take hold of this and vote now 
 he would like it ; but if they were going to dis- 
 cuss it, he would withdraw it. He did not wish 
 any debate; but he wanted to know what the con- 
 vention was going to do. 
 
 Mr. MILLER hoped he would not withdraw it. 
 He believed there would be no quorum here on 
 Friday or Monday. Many gentlemen had gone 
 home already, and others were going very fast, 
 And it was bes' to pass the resolution at once. 
 
 Mr, RICHMOND wanted the resolution well 
 
186 
 
 understood ; he wished to do one of two things. 
 If they was to adjourn so as to let all go home, it 
 must be for more days than now named, Thurs- 
 da) to Tuesday ; but if they would not let all have 
 time to go home; and 4 d^ys was nor enough tor 
 the most distant man (who had an equal right) 
 to go home then he would only vote to adjourn 
 one day from Friday to Monday, and no more 
 
 Mr/CHATFlELD moved to adjourn from Fri- 
 day to Tuesday. Lost 32, to 59. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD called the yeas and nays on 
 Mr. STRONG'S resolution, and it was lost ayes 50, 
 noes 53 : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Baker, Bascom, Bouck, Brown, 
 Bull, Carebreleng, Conely, Cook, Cornell, Dana, Danforth, 
 Dodd, Dubois, Gerhard, Graham, Greene, Harris, Hoffman, 
 Hotchkiss, Hunt, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Ken- 
 nedy, Maim, McNeil, Miller, Nelson, Nicoll, O'Conor, 
 Hiker, Shaver, Shaw, St. John, Stephens, Strong Tafl't, 
 Tallmadge, Townsend, Tuthiil, Vache. Van Schoonho. 
 Ten. Ward, Warren, Waterbury, Wilbeck, Worden, Yaw- 
 ger, A. W. Young 50. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Bow- 
 dish, Brayton, Brundage, Burr. R. Campbell, jr., Candee, 
 Chatfield, Clark, Crooker, Dorlon, Flanders, Harrison, 
 Hart, E. Huntington, Jordan, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirkland, 
 Marvin, Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Penni- 
 man, Perkins, Powers, Bhoades, Richmond, Ruggles,Rus. 
 sell, Salisbury, Sanfcrd, Sears, Sheldon, Shepard, Simmons, 
 Smith, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stow, Tag- 
 gart, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Wood, A. Wright, W. B. 
 Wright, J. Youngs, Mr. President 63. 
 
 SERVICE OF MEMBERS. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE offered the following reso- 
 lution : 
 
 Resolved, Tkat when the members of this Convention 
 make application lo the President for certificates entitling 
 them to their compensation, they be severally required to 
 certify upon their honor, the number of days which they 
 have severally attended the sittings of this body; and that 
 the President deduct all the days which any member shall 
 have been absent, except such time as he may have been 
 detained in this city and prevented attendance by sickness. 
 
 Mr. T. said he would accompany this with a 
 single remark, and then wish it laid on the table 
 lor the present. He had not been away from the 
 sittings of the Convention for one hour since the 
 commencement of the session ! But last Monday 
 he found that 43 members were absent ; and very 
 many other times the seats were half empty. And 
 he observed that a majority of the negatives on 
 the resolution just rejected, were absent always 
 on Saturdays and Mondays. He, in view of this 
 fact, offered the resolution, which might lie on 
 the table, for consideration. A'greed to. 
 
 The house then went into committee of the 
 whole, Mr. CHATFIELD in the chair, on 
 THE REPORT ON THE EXECUTIVE. 
 
 The CHAIR said, the question was on the 
 amendment of Mr. SIMMONS, (to the substitute 
 oHMr. RUSSELL.) which required the governor to 
 Jbe a five year's resident of the state 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS sent up an amendment. 
 
 Tfce CHAIR read it and said it contained new 
 matter and was not in order. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said the amendment of the 
 gentleman from Essex, (Mr. SIMMONS) was de- 
 signed to add after the "elector" the words, 
 4< who has resided in the state five years ;" his 
 own amendment was to extend that to seven years. 
 
 The CHAIR said that his amendment went 
 further; if designed to provide that the Governor 
 should be at least 30 years old, and reside here 7 
 years. If was not therefore now in order. 
 
 Reading of the amendment call&d foi, thus: 
 The Governor shall not be^ess than thirty year; of age, 
 and shall have bten for twenty years at least a citizen of 
 the United States, and a resident .of this state seven years 
 next before his election, unless he shall have been absent 
 during that time on the public business of the United States 
 or of this State. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that he had but a single sug- 
 gestion to make; and this was to enable them to 
 dispatch the business of the committee quicker. 
 It seems to have been quite proper in the opinion 
 of theconvention atone lime, and theopinion seems 
 to have been general that there should be some 
 general qualification for office for officers of every 
 grade and descriptionfor the convention had refer, 
 ed to committee No.4,this very subj ect of the quali 
 fication of officers, sheriffs, judges, and all others. 
 Now, he thought that there was but one single 
 line of constitutional provision necessary to em- 
 brace this whole subject under consideration, and 
 every other similar subject that could possibly 
 arise. And he should therefore vote against the 
 amendment now pending. This clause was one 
 by which the qualification of every officer to he 
 elected in the State could he defined. And he 
 wished a test vote taken on the proposition of Mr. 
 RUSSELL, ; because this would be the only proper 
 .rule to adopt in reference to all officers, from go- 
 vernor down to constable. We ought to have a 
 rule, and this was the best one to define the qua- 
 lifications of every officer. And it was because 
 this proposition of the gentleman from St. Law- 
 rence would effect this object, that he hoped they 
 would adopt it , and let this be the only qualifi- 
 cation for all. Perhaps it might have been bet- 
 | ter if some general provision had been reported. 
 as he believed was intended ; but as it stood, he 
 would vote for Mr. Russell's, as the only qualifi- 
 cation necessary now for every officer. 
 
 Mr. HUNT wished to have the gentleman from 
 Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) withdraw his amendment 
 for a little while, so as to enable him to show how 
 they can expedite business ; and to give his views 
 as to the propriety of taking up any proposition 
 whatever. 
 
 The CHAIR said his remarks would be in or- 
 der without the withdrawal. 
 
 Mr. HUNT said that he had wished Mr. S. to 
 withdraw it for a time at least, in order that a vote 
 may be taken as to the propriety of our dictating 
 in any way to the electors of the state what class 
 of persons they shall elect to office; for if we have no 
 authority in the premises, as he thought we have 
 not, it was idle for us to waste time in discussing 
 how we would exercise such authority if we had 
 it. He stated this objection to the second section 
 of the report of committee No. five, soon after it 
 was presented, to some of his colleagues in whose 
 judgment he had great confidence, and they ad- 
 mitted its force. He stated, as his view, that thi^ 
 Convention should regard itself in the light of an 
 attorney, acting for its client the people of the 
 state, and that the constitution we were drafting 
 should be regarded as a simple power of attorney, 
 or code of instructions, to be finally executed by 
 our client or principal, for the direction of such 
 agents as they might hereafter employ to transact 
 the business of government in their behalf. The 
 great questions we have to consider were What 
 offices shall be created ? How shall the people 
 designate their officers or agents ? What powers 
 
187 
 
 be delegated to them, and what specifically 
 withheld? It is proper for the people to prescribe 
 the duties and limit the power of their deputies, 
 for otherwise their deputies would become their 
 masters ; but they cannot limit their own discre- 
 tion in relation to the choice of their own agents 
 without forfeiting their sovereignty. Who, in 
 framing a power of attorney for an agent, would 
 ever think of inserting any clause limiting his 
 own powers of tying his own hands in order to 
 keep himself from picking his own pocket? Now 
 as our Governor is to be chosen not by an elector- 
 al college, nor by deputies, but by the people in 
 person, why say a word about his qualifications 
 here ? He admitted there were many qualifications 
 which it was important that our Governor should 
 always possess, for instance : he should be a 
 white man he should be not only a native citi- 
 zen, hut a native of Greene county for, to quote 
 the great argument of the natives, there are enough 
 competent Greene county men in the State to fill 
 all the offices of the State. He should be a good 
 Jeflersonian not less than 6 feet 2 in height able 
 to read and write and say the Lord's prayer, the 
 creed and the ten commandments in a word, he 
 would insist on all the qualifications he possessed 
 himself; but inasmuch as he doubted whether the 
 people of the state had constituted him their guar- 
 dian, he dared not usurp that office, and therefore 
 presented the above qualifications, not in the light 
 of sovereign mandates which they must obey , but as 
 the sincere ad vice of a disinterested friend Enter- 
 taining these views, he desired, that we should 
 first decide whether we have any right to " inter- 
 fere with the freedom of elections," and then it 
 may be in order to determine how far our iater- 
 ference shall extend. He would not waste a whole 
 week in arguing what restrictions upon the free 
 choice of electors should be imposed, while cer- 
 tain that we have no right to impose any restric- 
 tions at all. Every moment spent in discussing 
 propositions upon which we cannot act, is a mo- 
 ment lost ; and if we thus waste our moments 
 now, we may be compelled to act hastily here 
 after upon those great matters which come with- 
 in our legitimate sphere of duty. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER wished the gentleman from 
 New-York, (Mr. HUNT) would at least cut ofl 
 *ix inches of his qualifications, for he himself pos- 
 sessed all the other requisites, and he did not 
 know but that he might be a candidate for gover- 
 nor some day himself. (Laughter,) But that 
 six inches would cut him entirely off from a 
 look. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that he thought that the 
 time had now come when it would be well for 
 the committee to settle a principle as to the fu- 
 ture mode of proceeding with their business. 
 And he wished to call out from that Convention 
 an expression of opinion, as to whether they in- 
 tended to have any thing left of the old Constitu- 
 tion, or whether they intended to confine them- 
 selves to the amending of those parts of it, which 
 have been found inconvenient in practice, and re- 
 specting which, the people of the State had been 
 loudly calling everywhere to have the requisite 
 reforms applied. He thought that this was 
 as favorable an opportunity to call out such 
 an expression as any other ; now, just as they were 
 taiting upon the regular, substantial business o' 
 
 he Convention . He had thought that the members 
 lad come, or were sent there, for the purpose of 
 examining the old constitution ; to find out and 
 correct in it that which was defective in its ope- 
 ration to remedy the evils and abuses that had 
 grown up under it; that is, where there were 
 evils existing of which their constituents had com- 
 jlained ; and that they had not came there for the 
 )urpose of joining in any attempt to correct or 
 alter the old constitution where it operated to 
 heir satisfaction, respecting which, there was no 
 complaint whatever, and no voice raised, not even 
 a murmur through the whole community, in re- 
 gard to its operation. And he submitted to the 
 Convention that where no inconvenience had aris- 
 en from a provision of the constitution as none 
 iad from this before them (the provision of quali- 
 fication requiring a candidate for the office of 
 
 overnor to have resided in thisSta'e for 5 years,) 
 that it was not prudent to alter it. Not a voice 
 had been raised, not a murmur heard from the peo- 
 
 le against the practical operation of that provision 
 of the constitution as it now stands; and therefore a 
 vote upon thequesiion then before them, would set. 
 lie the question he had desired to see settled that 
 is, the disposition of the Convention in these par- 
 ticulars. It would settle as to whether they had 
 come there to repair and correct the defects in that 
 instrument, or to tear up the whole fabric by the 
 roots, and make something entirely new in its 
 place quite perfect perhaps in their judgment; or 
 asp erfect as human wisdom and ingenuity could 
 make it. Now he did not pretend in this matter 
 to be any wiser than others his predecessors ; 
 except so far as the lights of experience had given 
 him that wisdom. But even as to the matter of 
 theory as a matter of speculation, he should feel 
 disposed to follow or defer to those great men 
 who have gone before us in the establishment 
 of the fundamental law, as well for the great 
 State of New- York, as for the United States and 
 all the other States of the Union. Now we have 
 in the first place the Constitution of the U. S. ; 
 an instrument prepared by some of the best and 
 wisest men of the nation. And we have in that 
 instrument a provision requiring the candidate 
 for the Presidency to be at least 35 years of age ; 
 that is the qualification required there, and he 
 would ask wherein the experience of any one had 
 shown this to be improper or unnecessary ? 
 What defects have ever been discovered in the 
 working of this provision ? What voice through- 
 out the land had been raised against it. 
 None. Is it not of itself a wise provision 
 that they should have experience 'as well as ca- 
 pacity. He was willing to admit that there 
 were many gentlemen to be found under 30 years 
 of age who were capable of governing this great 
 State ; but he had yet to learn that if a gentleman 
 who had capacity and ability sufficient to fit him 
 for the office of Governor under 30, that he would 
 not be improved by 10 years more experience and 
 information. A friend near by had put into 
 his hands a sort of statistical view of the Constitu- 
 tions of the varioussfa'es of the Union; and by this 
 he found that there was not an instance, except 
 Rhode Island, (and not even in that) or except 
 Connecticut (and not even in that) where there 
 was not some provision of this nature; where a 
 certain term of residence was not required, in Con- 
 
 
188 
 
 necticut the candidate for Governor must have 
 gained a settlement ; and we have mly to refer to 
 the Statute law of that State to learn what time 
 is necessary for a man to gain a settlement there 
 [It is one year.] In two States of the Union, 
 Missouri and Michigan, the term of residence is 
 two years. In four States, Alabama, Ohio, Mis- 
 souri and Vermonnt, it is four years. In seven 
 States, Maine, Maryland, Virginia, North Caroli- 
 na, Indiana, Illinois and New York, it is five 
 years. In three States, Delaware, Kentucky and 
 Louisiana, it is six years. In four States, Mas- 
 sachusetts, New Jersey, (under the new Consti- 
 tution,) Tennessee and New Hampshire, it is 
 seven years. In two States, South Carolina and 
 Arkansas, it is ten years. In one State, Georgia, 
 it is 12 years. Thus under the Constitution of 
 the United States and under the Constitutions of 
 over twenty States of the Union, they have restric- 
 tions as to age ; and in many of them they have 
 restrictions as to a term of residence longer than 
 is required by the present Constitution of this 
 State ; and in all the other States there is a re- 
 striction as to some term of residence. What ne- 
 cessity then is there for us to change this proper 
 qualification unless it be for the purpose of launch- 
 ing out into the bounless field of speculation and 
 conjecture ? Where we find things in the Consti- 
 tutions good as they now stand, it was wise to 
 leave them so. We shall have enough to do 
 in the great work before us the revision and 
 correction of the Constitution, in those particu- 
 lars where there are defects in its operation, or 
 where it is inadequate to the advancement of pub- 
 lic business,and so to devise it as may best tend for 
 the prosperity of the state. We have enough to 
 do to consume all the time that is left us between 
 now and the next election, (when the people will 
 be called upon to vote un these amendments,) in 
 correcting these real defects, without going into 
 long debates, or indulging protracted discussions, 
 such as this one we are now in, and which, if 
 he was not in error, had already lasted sever- 
 al days, and all arisen on the subject of 
 proposed alteration of a part of the Consti- 
 tution in relation to which there had never 
 been a complaint; against which there had 
 never been a voice raised, or a murmer heard; 
 and about which they had not been sent there by 
 the people to trouble themselves, or to alter. Now 
 it was said by some gentlemen, that the Conven 
 tion possessed no right to restrict the people in 
 any way in their choice of a Governor. He did 
 not desire to restrict the people in the least, in 
 this respect. He did not intend they should be 
 restricted in the exercise of any of their rights of 
 sovereignty. And it was not the sovereignty of 
 the people or any of their sovereign powers that 
 they were expected to restrict. But still the peo- 
 ple had a perfect right to restrict themselves the 
 people have a right to enter into a social compact 
 a general bargain, it you like with each other ; 
 and they have sent us heie to do that business 
 to draw up that bargain, or compact, for them 
 to settle those rules of action and govern- 
 ment by which the people agree to govern 
 themselves hereafter. For if we did not come 
 here for that purpose, we came here for noth- 
 ing. He thought he was not quite as ultra 
 a democrat as some of the gentlemen around him ; 
 
 but still he thought that he had quite enough of 
 it in his composition; and*he was opposed to the 
 imposition of any restraints or restrictions upon 
 the sovereignty of the people of the State, except 
 on those points, or on such subjects, and under 
 such contingencies, where it became necessary to 
 impose restrictions and rules of action which must 
 govern all parties in the Union, to prevent all 
 from running into anarchy and confusion. Na- 
 ture has ever been governed by her laws; and ev- 
 er will continne to be so governed. And the 
 sovereign people must be governed by their 
 laws and ever required to abide by them; "or else 
 there is no use in having any Constitution at all. 
 Gentlemen have said here that we must not restrict 
 the people in their acts must not restrain their 
 right of sovereignty, by saying that a candidate 
 for the Governorship shall not be elligible unless 
 he is at least 30 years of age. But if this be so, 
 what right have we to say that there shall be any 
 Governor at all ? What right have we to say 
 that there shall not be two Governors ? or to say 
 that there shall not be 10 Governors ? if the so- 
 vereign people shall so will it to be ? Or what 
 right have we to say that there shall not be two 
 or ten Secretaries of State ? or two or ten Comp- 
 trollers of the State ? or two or ten Surveyors 
 General ? What right have we to say that the 
 sovereign people, in the exercise of their power, 
 shall not elect a dozen of each of these officers, if 
 they should so choose ? Because the people sent 
 them here for the very purpese of preventing 
 this ; they sent them there to prescribe proper 
 rules of action for them, and for themselves. And 
 to make the proper provisions in the Constitution 
 is the only way that this can be prevented ; for 
 we are ourselves the sovereign people, represent- 
 ing them in the only way they can be represent- 
 ed, to do that work for ourselves and for them 
 which they could not come here to do for them- 
 selves. And the doctrines of the gentleman that 
 he had referred to, who were against any restric- 
 tions regarding the age of the Governor, certainly 
 appeared to go that entire length. If their doc- 
 trine was correct, (as they had so strenuously 
 contended) what right had we to say that a judge 
 of the Supreme Court should hold no other office, 
 if the sovereign people should will it to be ? 
 What right have we to say that an officer of the ge- 
 neral government of this State shall hold no other 
 office, if the sovereign people should so will it. 
 What right have we to make provision for the ap. 
 pointment of military officers, or say that military 
 officers shall not be selected and elected by the 
 military themselves, if the sovereign people should 
 so decide, why bind the people to that or those 
 points? >Vhy bind them in hny respect ? What 
 right have we to say that the comn.on school 
 fund shall not be diverted to any other purpose if 
 the sovereign people choose to put their hands 
 into the treasury and to scatter it to the four winds 
 of Heaven ? Where is this ultra democracy to 
 stop ? What right have we to say what shall or 
 shall not be done with the Canal Fund, with any 
 other fund, or any other matter, that the sovereign 
 people choose to take in their own hands to regu- 
 late and dispose of. What is to become of any 
 of the funds, or institutions of the State, or any 1 
 thing else in it, unless the sovereign people are 
 to be restrained by the committee. How is it that 
 
189 
 
 any of the present provisions of it are carried out. 
 Jt is because the sovereign people are restrained 
 by the Constitution and laws formed under it. 
 They are restricted to the exercise of certain pow. 
 ers, not by any laws, rules or restrain's that we 
 have, or that we wish to impose upon them bu 
 restrained by their own tree consent and compact 
 and by those laws they themselves have prescrib- 
 ed for themselves, in older to prevent that confu- 
 sion and -anarchy that would otherwise ensue. 
 He was not in that Convention to be frightened by 
 anything that was got up there, like the idea put 
 forth by many, that they were about to circum- 
 scribe or abridge the people's sovereign power. 
 They had come there, simply for the purpose (as 
 the sovereign people) to prescribe a certain rule 
 of action, that they will all consent to be govern- 
 ed by, such a rule as that in times of popular ex- 
 citement would not allow a bare numerical majority 
 to trample upon the rights of the minority, or up- 
 on the government itself. It might not, or would 
 not-- perhaps sound very pleasing to t he ears of some 
 ot the trentlemen in that convention to saythat there 
 were times of excitement when the people them- 
 selves are not to be trusted when the halls of leg- 
 islation become corrupt That there may be such 
 times all experience, history and common sense 
 had taught us, and hence it was not only proper 
 for us, as a mere rule of conduct for the people, to 
 adopt a Constitution by which they should be go- 
 verned, but m his judgment, it was lor this peo. 
 pie, in their cool moments of sober deliberation, 
 when they had no other matters to excite their 
 attention, and no perplexing subjects of conten- 
 tion, to determine the rule by which they them- 
 selves should be governed. He was disposed up- 
 on this occasion, as the first opportunity he had 
 had, to record his vote in favor of the amendment. 
 He understood the resolution proposed by the gen- 
 tleman from St. Lawrence, was to strike out all 
 qualification as to age. He understood that the 
 amendment proposed to restore the provision ot the 
 old constitution which required a five years resi- 
 dence. He could see noshing in that to operate 
 mischievously. He could see nothing but what 
 may and probably will operate benefically. He 
 could see nothing in the idea which had been 
 started of stripping the people ot sovereign pow- 
 er, to divert him trom supporting the amendment. 
 And he saw much in it to settle a principle of ac- 
 tion and call out the sentiment ot the Convention 
 as to whether they were determined to lay a ruth- 
 less, wanton hand on every portion of the constitu- 
 tion, and revise and alter it after the fashion of 
 those Utopian gentlemen who imagined them- 
 selves so much wiser than their ancestors, and 
 that without the aid of experience; or whether 
 they would let well enough alone whether they 
 would pass on to the business of the Convention, 
 and exercise the power delegated to them, and 
 when they had done that, separate and go home 
 to their consiituents. He hoped the sentiment of 
 the Convention would now be called out upon that 
 subject. He would go with any gentleman any 
 length warranted by Experience either here or any 
 other .state ; or by any well digested or well con- 
 sidered theory, where there were detects in the 
 constitution and no experience to teach us a reme- 
 Hul he was unwilling to go into any project 
 to alter this instrument under which we have so 
 
 long and he might say, so happily and so prosper- 
 ously lived, where no mischief arises, and where 
 no voice was raised for its alteration and 
 where in his judgment it was unwise to do it. 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that he was inclined to 
 favor the suggestion of the honorable gentleman 
 from Ontario, made upon this subject when it was 
 last up for discussion, that those parts of the con- 
 stitution about which there had been no com- 
 plaint, in which there was no evil experienced 
 or inconvenience felt, had better be left undis- 
 turbed. That doctrine had now been advocated 
 by the gentleman from Columbia, (Mr. JORDAN) 
 but he must add that when a question is brought 
 up requiring his vote, if he found involved in it 
 a principle which will be violated by the appli- 
 cation of the rule, then the rule must give way 
 for the security of the principle. And so he 
 would say if it were a question of expediency. 
 If it was more expedient to adopt an amendment 
 than to violate the rule, he would adopt the 
 amendment and put the rule aside. He believed 
 the Convention had acted on that principle al- 
 ready. There was no complaint, no evils expe- 
 rienced from the word " native," which is in the 
 Constitution, and he presumed his friends from 
 Columbia and Ontario had set aside the rule if 
 there was not a principle involved, and for the con- 
 sideration of expediency, they had voted to strike 
 out to amend the Constitution in that particu- 
 lar. Now it came to be considered whether there 
 was a question of principle involved, or whether 
 it was most expedient to adopt the amendment of 
 the gentleman from St. Lawrence. That propo- 
 sition did not go, as was suggested by the ger.tle- 
 man from Columbia, to the removal of all restric- 
 tions with regard to residence. It proposed that 
 L person, to be eligible for the office of governor, 
 hall be a qualified voter in this State, and if we 
 did not alter the present provision of the Consti- 
 tution in that respect, he must reside here one 
 year, and must be a citizen of the United States. 
 Now he submitted, if a residence of one year, was 
 not sufficient for any individual who had had^ op- 
 portunities of making his talents and qualifications 
 cnown who by the people of the State of New 
 York might be supposed to understand their in- 
 stitutions and laws, and who had made himself so 
 conspicuous by his talents or in some other way 
 as to recommend himself to the entire confidence 
 of the majority of the people of the State if it 
 was not safe and wise to leave to the people the 
 broadest range of latitude in the selection of their 
 candidates. It was a cherished principle with 
 he people that the broadest latitude of political 
 action should be allowed, consistent with individ- 
 ual security and the public welfare that in the 
 selection of candidates for office they should have 
 the broadest range, and he apprehended no dan- 
 ger, nor any evil could grow out of the adoption 
 >f such a provision as the one under considera- 
 iori. The State of Rhode Island had framed a 
 Constitution within the last three or four years 
 State that has hitherto been regarded as not very 
 democratic in her views ; but she has been eri- 
 ightened she has received an impulse in the 
 -ause of democracy, and she has adopted in her 
 Constitution the very proposition which the gen- 
 leman from St. Lawrence had proposed. If a per-, 
 son is a qualified voter for the office for which he 
 
190 
 
 is <i candidate, he should be eligible to the office it 
 self. With regard to the danger to grow out of any 
 excitement, as the gentleman from New York sup- 
 posed, from a person coming into the State pos- 
 sessing such rare powers of eloquence as to car- 
 ry away the heads and hearts of the people in a 
 moment of political excitement, he must confess 
 he had no fear of any such result. And as to the 
 taking up of an utter stranger who might come 
 amongst them, because he swayed their judgments 
 on some political subject if in the dense popula- 
 tion of New York such a thing could possibly 
 happen if they should become so excited under 
 the glowing powers of oratory of some man, as to 
 desire to place him in the highest office within 
 their gift, it would be but a momentary impulse. 
 A moment's cool reflection would make it ah right 
 with them. But if not, it would be corrected by 
 the staid and scattered popula'ion of the country ; 
 the sober, industrious, thinking mechanics and 
 farmers, who would not be thus swayed. If, there- 
 fore, New York got wrong, the country would put 
 the city right. With regard to the question of age, 
 we had seen instances where persons under 25, 
 and he believed but 21 or 22, had been elected go- 
 vernors of states in which no provision was made 
 in their constitutions in regard to agn. In Michigan 
 this had occurred. They had had some experience 
 there of the talent of a young man who was left 
 in charge of the territorial government, anJ they 
 desired to avail themselves t;f his qualifications, 
 when they became a State, and perhaps ihat influ- 
 enced them in having no restriction with regard 
 to age. And when he bec;me governor, Mr. T. 
 believed he might say without ftar of contradiction, 
 that he administered the government of that state 
 in a manner highly satisfactory to the people. No 
 evil had resulted there. Arid if it should happen 
 in New York that a youi:g man hud sodis.inguish- 
 ed himsf If as to commend himself to the highest 
 confidence of the people, and they chose to ele- 
 vate him to the highest office in their gift, they 
 could do it with entire safety. But it was not 
 probable that such a case would occur soon or ever. 
 It required, ordinarily, a man to struggle along 
 ten, 01 even fifteen or twenty years, against his 
 competitors who were struggling to attain the 
 same point; it required a long period to gain 
 that confidence among the people of this State 
 as to induce them to put a man in the highest 
 place in their gift. How were nominations got 
 up by all parties and how perhaps would they 
 be got up for all time to com? Why, the people 
 Assembled and elected delegates Irom such as 
 they kn^w to be men of character intelligent, 
 prudent and discreet men and they assembled in 
 Convention and they put in nomination before 
 the people a man in whom they had confidence. 
 Now then is it supposed that any evil could grow 
 out of leaving it unrestricted when such a course 
 was pursued ? An individual could not rise up 
 and nominate himself for Governor and carry 
 away the feelings and affections of the people if 
 he were an improper person. It was a thing im- 
 possible. There was no danger whatever in leav- 
 ing the clause in the Constitution unrestricted, in 
 regard to either age or residence further than as 
 proposed by the gentleman from St. Lawrence. 
 Entertaining these views he should sustain his 
 amendment. 
 
 AJr ANGEL had be^n unwilling to impose 
 himself upon the Convention, and he had sat in si- 
 lence from the commencement of the session, buc 
 as had been observed by the gentleman from Co. 
 lumbia, as they were about to establish a princi- 
 ple, he felt some anxiety respecting the conclu- 
 sion to which they might come, and was desirous 
 that they should have a free expression of views 
 one to another, and a full and fair understanding 
 in regard to the principle which the Convention 
 might soon be called upon to settle. He had 
 heard it suggested here, (without naming indivi- 
 duals,) and much to his surprise, that they ought 
 not to make laws here to bind the people, that 
 when the time arrived, the people would judge 
 tor themselves. Now, what was meant, under- 
 stood and designed by a Constitution ? What but 
 a rule of action to govern the sovereign in the ad- 
 ministralion of a government? It was a law 
 which was designed to bind the sovereign action 
 of the people. By our institutions we make a 
 majority control we vest sovereign power in a 
 majority of the people. But the minority always 
 existed, and it had rights equil to the majority. 
 The minority had a right to say to the majority, 
 " we must bind and circumscribe your action; we 
 are not willing to give you a power that is omni- 
 potent." Such was the right of minority; and 
 what was a constitution good for unless it were to 
 bind the action of a majority ? We could not live 
 if we were left to the ever varying disposition and 
 feelings of the people. We have had experience 
 enough for the las'; six years to admonish us that 
 we should* have something stable that cannot be 
 broken down or blown to the four winds of Hea- 
 ven by every excitement that was started. As he 
 understood their duty h re, it was to prescribe 
 rules and regulations that will correct and keep 
 within bounds the action of a majority of the peo- 
 ple. This was not a new idea. Minorities do com- 
 plain often, and bitterly, of the action ot majori- 
 ties. They have a right to say that we will lorm 
 a compact, that we will make a bargain among 
 ourselves that shall set due bounds to all, and say 
 to the majority " thus far shall you go and no 
 farther." As regardt d the amendment under con- 
 sideration, 5 years was proposed by it to be the 
 time during which a residence should be shown 
 in this State. That was the provision of the ex- 
 isting Conslitution, but it went further and re- 
 quired that the Governor should be a " native" 
 citizen of the United State*. Since the adjourn- 
 ment on Saturday, he had taken the pains to look 
 into the debates and jour nals of the Convention of 
 '21. In examining the Constitution of '77, he 
 found that there was no such qualification re- 
 quiredbut in that of '21 the word ' native" was 
 introduced. He had enquired of several gentle- 
 med why such an alteration had been made, but 
 he was not able to get a specific and satisfactory 
 answer. He therefore took the trouble to look in- 
 to the journal of the debates, and he there found 
 that the report of the committee on the Executive 
 department recommended a residence of 14 years ; 
 and that when the Convention went into commit- 
 tee of the whole on that report, a delegate from 
 Saratoga rose and made a motion to strike out the 
 provision for 14 years' residence* and insert a 
 provision that the Executive should be a natural- 
 born citizen of the United States. That was, 
 
191 
 
 adopted in committee of the whole unanimously. 
 After w;!.rds, however, in Convention the words 
 * natural-born citizen" were stricken out, and the 
 word " native" was substituted, as it was suggest- 
 ed that the original words might have left an un- 
 certainty as to the meaning of the Convention, 
 for ** natural-born citizen" might have had some 
 reference to the manner of birth, while the word 
 " native" would mean the place of birth. Now 
 he was not tenacious about the retention of the 
 word " native," but he thought it would cut off a 
 considerable class of citizens that ought not to be 
 excluded. There were many brought here by their 
 parents in infancy who would by a life spent 
 here, be as well acquainted with our institutions, 
 and who would be as competent and capable as 
 any body to fill the place of Governor. But he 
 certainly had objections to taking a foreigner who 
 was born, and whose life had been matured, 
 under a different form of government, a stranger 
 to our institutions and their operations, and who 
 would bring with him more or less of the feelings 
 inherent in human nature, and which follow man 
 wherever he goes. Man naturally looks back to 
 the place of his nativity, and his lingering recol- 
 lections might bring him in collision with his du- 
 ties as Executive of the State. He wanted the 
 person who should administer the government of 
 the State to be well acquainted with its history 
 :md its administration. Why, we were a large 
 territory and a numerous people ; we have diver- 
 sified interests, and a year's residence would not 
 give any man a knowledge of them. He must be 
 here for years, and identified with us and our 
 system of administering the government, and must 
 know the several wants of the people in the several 
 localities of the State. Would any one insist that 
 all this could be acquired in the short period of one 
 yean? It appeared to him that it could not, and 
 tor this reason he wou'd make a change in the 
 provision reouinr g a residence of five years. He 
 thought that to be as short a period as it should 
 be, for the qualification of the Executive. He 
 had none of that spleen against foreigners which 
 pervaded some he was pleased to see them come, 
 and he thought it was profitable to the State that 
 .'hey should come. And when they got here, he 
 would grant them equal rights and privileges, as 
 tar as their information would enable them to dis- 
 charge their duty. He had no attachment for the 
 party got up to proscribe and persecute them, but 
 he wanted to keep the Constitution as he thought 
 it should be. He wanted to have the man "to 
 whom was assigned the executive duties of the 
 ro have a sufficiently long residence rur-Mo 
 know the seveial wants and the several interests 
 of the people. He was somewhat surprised to 
 hear it stated here that no qualification as to age 
 was required. He had himself numbered a good 
 many years, and he certainly looked back and saw 
 That when he was 20 or 30 'he knew but little. 
 When he was thirty, he found he had learned 
 more in the last ten years, than in the preceding 
 twenty. And when he was forty, he found the 
 previous ten years had been more profitable in 
 
 experience than any part of his previous life. 
 
 We wanted an experienced and not a rash young 
 
 man holding the reins of our government. It 
 
 might be said we shall not get one. There 
 
 ' then be no objection to a restriction which 
 
 would be harmless, while it would prevent any 
 evil of the kind. We saw many young men ca- 
 pable of managing business, before they arrived 
 at their legal majority, 21 years ; yet before that 
 age they could not bind themselves by contracts. 
 But because a few were as well qualified at an 
 earlier period of life as others at forty, would they 
 remove the restrictions from an entire class ? 
 Would they for such a reason, permit boys to 
 vote ? The age of twenty-one was fixed as the pe- 
 riod when an adult should vote, and had they not 
 as much right to restrict the governorship to 
 thirty as the franchise to twenty one ? We had a 
 perfect right he held, in principle to say to the 
 people, " We will not, with your consent, allow 
 you to elect a governor, until he is thirty years of 
 age, because you may elect one without experi- 
 ence." The Constitution had been likened to a 
 ship at sea, and he apprehended every prudent 
 man, before he went a long voyage, would ascer- 
 tain whether his vessel was rotten, and able to do 
 very well in a calm, or whether she was not sound 
 and able to stand whatever of rough and hazar- 
 dous weather she might encounter. 
 
 Mr. BROWN felt called upon to submit an ob- 
 servation or two here, because he felt that there 
 were difficulties in regard to the proposition of the 
 gentleman from St. Lawrence, that had not oc- 
 curred to him at all. There was no difference in 
 principle between the two pending propositions 
 the one required a five years' residence the other, 
 one. It was, therefore, a question ot time, en. 
 tirely. And if the imposition of a residence of 
 five years was a violation of the sovereignty of the 
 people, then that of one year was equally so. 
 There was nothing therefore in that; but the dif- 
 ficulty which had occurred to his mind, was this : 
 He thought there was great propriety in requiring 
 a longer residence than the one year and if that 
 were to be ihe term, he preferred not to put it in 
 i he form in which it was presented for all 
 knew that there were no more embarrassing ques- 
 tions at the polls than this qualification of resi- 
 dencequestions growing out of the fact of the 
 voter having been abroad, in a distant part of the 
 world, during the year. He would have no such 
 question raised on the election of a Governor, nor 
 the least shadow of duubt as to his qualifications 
 under the Constitution, to administer the govern, 
 meat. As to the idea of limiting the sovereign 
 power of the people in this matter, it had been 
 well met by the gentleman from Allegany, (Mr. 
 ANGEXL ) We required a person fo be 21 before 
 he couid bind himself by contract. Here it was 
 proposed not to permit him to do an act in the 
 luiuu or on behalf of ihe people, without some 
 limitation as to age. Where was the distinction, 
 or the reason for a distinction between the two 
 ciisis ? As to the limitation of age, he was not so 
 clear. The capacity or ability to discharge the 
 functions of Governor, did n< t belong to any period 
 of life. It was by no means well settled at what 
 period the humai, intellect was in its best vigor. 
 He would not therefore prescribe 30 years he 
 would leave some latitude there, lor some men 
 possessed morevisior of intellect at 25 than at any 
 future period. He would be permitted to advert to 
 some facts that would illustrate this subject. If he 
 was not mistaken the Constitution of the U. S. re- 
 quired an individual to be five and twenty to be eli - 
 
192 
 
 gible to a seat in the House of Representatives, and 
 if Mr. Clay had not been misrepresented he took 
 his seat in the Senate of the U. S. long before he 
 was 25 and very few would question the ability 
 and skill and power with which he exercised del- 
 egated authority. Napoleon Bonaparte comman- 
 
 great General 
 
 ded the arm^ 
 to refer 
 
 irmy of Italy at 26 and were he (Mr. B. 
 to the period when that ereat Genera 
 
 exhibited the greatest capacity for war or govern- 
 ment, he should point to that period of his life. 
 He would advert to the fact that the Convention 
 of '21 excluded judges from the bench at 60. 
 But what was our experience on that subject? 
 It is this that men thrown out by that rule, had 
 exhibited more vigor of intellect after 60, than 
 for the ten years before and the rule was now 
 almost universally condemned. He would advert 
 to one other fact and then conclude. Mr. Pitt, if 
 his memory served him, took his seat in the House 
 of Commons at 22 or 23. He was prime minis- 
 ter of England at a period in the history of that 
 nation, when her very existence was threatened. 
 He should therefore, vote against the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from St. Lawrence 
 while he felt that at a period of time less than 
 30 years of age, gentlemen were qualified to dis- 
 charge the duties of Executive. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD did not agree entirely with the 
 gentleman from St. Lawrence in his proposition 
 although it seemed to be a step and a conside- 
 rable one, nearer to his view of thinking upon the 
 question under consideration, than the proposition 
 of any other member, before the committee. In 
 his judgment the second section should be strick. 
 en out entirely. He saw no necessity of imposing 
 any restriction whatever upon the choice of the 
 people, and he should in the course of his re- 
 raarks answer the argument which the gentleman 
 from Columbia had advanced to support the op- 
 posite view of this question. He did not go to 
 the length of his colleague (Mr. HUNT) in sup- 
 posing that the people have no right by joint con- 
 cert and agreement to impose upon themselves 
 such restrictions to the exercise of their powers as 
 they might see tit. He did not see that that 
 proposition was necessarily involved in this dis- 
 cussion. He did not see that gentlemen \\eie 
 driven, ;>s the gentleman from Columbia (Mr. 
 JORDAN) seemed to suppose, to take either that 
 proposition or the one he contend d for. He (Mr. 
 S.) saw a middle ground that could be safely occu- 
 pied, and in his judgment was the wiser ground. 
 What did the second section provide for? The 
 selection of a Governor immediately by the 
 
 people, voted for by them, to carry out those 
 measure! that are agitating the public 
 
 mind 
 
 and that the public desire to see achieved at 
 the time of his election. Although he concurred 
 in the opinion that it was in the power of the 
 people to impose that restriction upon the object 
 of their choice, yet in his judgment it was un- 
 wise to do so. The Governor was chosen to be 
 the representative of the people, of their views, 
 and feelings and interests, as they exist at the 
 time he is chosen. He would leave it to the peo- 
 ple to judge who was the most fit thus to repre- 
 sent them. Gentlemen feared that they might _ r r _ 
 
 judge unwisely. He would say that if that fear tened with a great deal of attention to the arg 
 
 If the people had not tlj intelligence nor the ca- 
 pacity to select their immediate representatives, 
 they certainly want the capacity and intelligence 
 to govern through those representatives. Our 
 whole system in this country the system of nine 
 and twenty distinct governments is an elective 
 one ; it proceeds entirely on the supposition that 
 the people are able to judge who are best quali- 
 fied to represent their views, and it is that sys- 
 tem with which the gentleman from Columbia 
 proposes to interfere. He says, and says very 
 truly, that the practice in many States of the 
 Union has been different. That was very true 
 but what did it prove ? It proves too much. It 
 was an argument, and always had been for a thou- 
 sand years, in favor of the existing state of 
 things. Now, without question, those who 
 sought to make changes, should be guided 
 by the lights of experience he did not de- 
 ny that. But the gentleman's argument drawn 
 from practice proved entirely too much ; be- 
 cause everything it had been the uniform practice 
 to do was not intrinsically right. Now to go on to 
 another argument and upon these two that he 
 (Mr. S.) was stating, rested the objections of the 
 gentleman from Columbia. He (Mr. J ) said that 
 no evil had arisen from the present system. That 
 was very true, but it did not prove that it should 
 be retained. In his (Mr. S.'s) judgment, we should 
 act most wisely by considering, not whether evil 
 has or has not arisen, but whether the principle 
 was intrinsically right or wrong. Now he rernem. 
 bered two very important instances in history 
 which made the fallacy of the gentleman's argu- 
 ment, most signally apparent. When the 13 co- 
 lonies were driven by the British system of taxa- 
 tion to take up arms in their defence, Dr. Johnson 
 wrote a very able pamphlet called "Taxation no 
 Tyranny," and he insisted, if Mr. S. remembered 
 aright in that pamphlet, that there was no evil in 
 that system of taxation, because the colonies must 
 be taxed in some form or other. He overlooked 
 the piinciple involved. The same question arose 
 when a levy of twenty shillings for ship money was 
 made on John Hampden in Charles the First's 
 time. That practically was no evil to him. 
 for he w.is a man of wealth but the pay : 
 ment of half of it would have made his chil- 
 dren slaves forever. Therefore it seemed to him 
 that the argument drawn from the consideration 
 that no evil had arisen, was not intrinsically 
 sound. This provision it has been said was adop- 
 ted in the Constitution of the United States so 
 it was. That Constitution, however, it may be 
 said in the first place, was made under circum- 
 stances of considerable difficulty, and was emi- 
 nently an instrument of compromise : and in the 
 second place it may be said as to the choice of 
 President that it was delegated to an Electoral 
 College; and the provision that the President 
 should be of the age of 35 years was perhaps pro- 
 perly inserted to prevent the erroneous action of 
 the College. The same may be said as to the 
 choice of Senators under the government, who are 
 chosen by the legislatures of the States. As to 
 the selection of Representatives he did not think 
 that the principle was well applied. He had lis- 
 
 was well grounded, that the whole system and 
 order of our institutions were not worth a rush. 
 
 ments urged on the other side, and he had be 
 peculiarly struck with the outre out of the waj 
 
193 
 
 instances that had been produced supporting their 
 views of this question. We want a candidate 
 says his colleague (Mr. MORRIS,) who knows our 
 wants. Our wants! We want one who knows 
 the wants of the people. Who best knows that. 
 He (Mr. S.) would say the people themselves. 
 And that was the best answer he could give to 
 such an argument. The gentleman from Essex 
 was fearful lest O'Connell might come lu re. 
 
 Mr. Si Ai MOXS said nothing against him. He 
 woul 1 like to vote for him as he thought him to 
 be more Conservative than most of our Democrats. 
 
 Mr. SMKPA11D had supposed that Mr. O'CoN- 
 NKLL had fallen into the sere and yellow leaf, 
 and was out of the question, and he had appre- 
 hended that there were so many candidates on this 
 side of the water, that it would hardly be neces- 
 sary to go the other side for one. But his col- 
 league from New- York, (Mr. MORRIS) had the 
 most astonishing doubt of all it was beyond the 
 doubts of all the doubters that ever existed. He 
 was fearful that some wandering stranger would 
 enter the state, and by exciting the people by the 
 silvery tones of his eloquence, they might be in- 
 duced to select him for the governor. He (Mr. 
 S.) had taken the trouble to examine the circum- 
 stances to produce these results, and he found 
 that the silvery address must be made on the elec- 
 tion day, and at all the polls in the state and 
 the ballots already prepared and distributed. He 
 found also, because he supposed that there was 
 some pride of party that it was required 
 that the regular candidates should be willing 
 to withdraw in a word, perhaps, it was bet- 
 ter to say, that the people should have run insane. 
 All these objections to the illustration of his col 
 league, seemed to him to be perfectly conclusive. 
 His colleague ran into another en or. He v.'is 
 fearful that the people might bemislead by a tern 
 porary excit .i:". > nt. Now, he (Mr. S.) did not be 
 lieve in tempo, ary excitements. Where thete 
 were such excitements there were temporal 1 } 
 causes, and his colleague had cited an instance in 
 New York It was not for him (Mr. S.) to state 
 the causes which gave rise to that. He could do 
 it, and he would if it were desirable. He put his 
 answer to the other arguments on the other side, 
 on the broad ground that the people were better 
 able to judge <>f their own wishes and their own 
 wants, and would be therefore better represented 
 than we are, or we could possibly assist them by 
 any limitation upon them, no matter how wiseK 
 devised or how well meant. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE : I sir, have sat silent 
 thus far in the progress of these discussions, 
 and in a great measure during the progress ot 
 business here. My strength and energies have 
 been severely taxed by the duties imposed on 
 me by this body. I sir, have arrived at an age 
 and under circumstances that leave me nothing 
 to say to Buncombe. And I feel no interest in 
 this-controversy save what every citizen ought to 
 feel in a matter which involves remotely certainly 
 a principle. My lot is cast; my destiny is limited; 
 and whether you let a young man of 20. be Go- 
 yernor, or admit the old man of 70, is a question 
 in which personally I have no interest. I have 
 sat still under the hope that some gentleman 
 would say what I would like to hear said. But 
 nqt hearing it, I venture to make a few re- 
 
 marks on this subject. Sir, the particular ques- 
 tion under consideration is whether your Gov- 
 ernor shall be 30 years of age and 5 years a resi- 
 dent of the state. That is the great question 
 pending. I care very little which way it 
 goes. But I rise to enter my protest and to ex- 
 press my alarm at the spirit evinced in the course 
 of these discussions. It is of very little conse- 
 quence to be arguing hypothetical questions 
 questions that have not arisen in the practical 
 operations of our government for a quarter of a 
 century. Here we are, entering on the fifth 
 week of the session, spending day after day in 
 debate, and doing nothing. Why sit here deba- 
 ting imaginary questions questions that have 
 not arisen that I know of, any where in the 
 state? What is the spirit evinced by this motion 
 and the tenor of this debate? It is a spirit to pull 
 down and destroy. It is that against which I rise. 
 Go to the constitution of the U. S., and you 
 will find that our ancestors, many of them born 
 in a foreign country, fixed 35 years of age, and 
 14 years' residence for the presidency. Was there 
 not discretion there? Were there not fitness and 
 propriety? Had they not lived under a monar- 
 chial government, and under royal officers? Did 
 they not know and understand the whole ques- 
 tion? Did they not appreciate the importance 
 of guarding against undue influences, to pro- 
 vide against contingencies in a matter where the 
 people c ould not review and reconsider? It is a 
 great and important principle, this power of re- 
 consideration. Why do you sir, (pointing to 
 the Chairman) hold that seat as chairman of 
 this committee? It is that we may have the ad- 
 vantage of a double consideration that propo- 
 sitions may be submitted here, debated freely 
 in committee of the whole, first impressions 
 poured forth, no vote taken which is obliga- 
 tory, no yeas and nays, but a free inter- 
 change and comparison of opinions so that 
 when we come into the house, we may vote 
 more understandingly and deliberately upon a 
 calm view of the case. In the constitution you 
 provide for a senate and assembly, and some- 
 times you provide that bills touching revenue 
 shall originate only in the popular branch. 
 Why all these restrictions? And then, after the 
 bills have passed, there was your council of re- 
 vision, now your executive, to approve or 
 disapprove of what has been done. Is this 
 the invasion of Liberty? of that Liberty 
 which I hope we may all live long to enjoy? 
 But how is it with individuals ? Will you let 
 me promise to pay the debt of a third person ? 
 No, says the law, you must reduce it to writing 
 or it shall not be obligatory. What sir, deny 
 my right to do this! Dare you so invade y 
 liberty, that I cannot will my property to my 
 child or friend ? No, says the law. We compel 
 you to put it in writing, under hand and seal, 
 witnessed by three witnesses, signing in pres- 
 ence of the testator and of each other or else 
 your deed is void. Why this caution, but to 
 secure due deliberation and care in important 
 transactions of private life? And why not 
 make provision to secure the same prudent cau- 
 tion when we come to choose a chief magistrate? 
 Plant these checks in the constitution ; or rather 
 
194 
 
 do not eradicate those which have been put 
 there, and found to work well. He that goes to 
 pull up these posts and landmarks, will never find 
 me his companion. I came here by order of the 
 people of a county that in my youth never failed 
 rae, when they thought it would gratify me to 
 take part in the councils of the state or nation. 
 They commanded me to come here because they 
 knew that at my advanced age they could rely 
 on me to utter without fear what I thought, 
 and to do what I thought right. To allude to a 
 recent matter by way of illustration: I am not 
 one of those who are willing to absent them- 
 selves regularly from the sittings of this body 
 oa Saturday, and perhaps on the following 
 Monday, and yet fear to record rny name, on a 
 call of the ayes and noes affirmatively for an 
 open adjournment. Turn over all these things, 
 and see if it is not better to come back to calm 
 considerate reason. My constituents sent me 
 here to amend the constitution. I brought with 
 me we all brought our tools along our sod- 
 dering and caulking tools among others to see 
 if the vessel of state may not need repairing 
 if a leak was found here, to patch it and mend 
 it our commission being to examine the hulk 
 thoroughly, and repair where we find it neces- 
 sary. I come here to help mend the constitu- 
 tion. But what have we been about? Have 
 we been mending the constitution, or have we 
 with reckless hand, been pulling it down? I 
 ask if the tenor of the resolutions offered 
 here and referred to committees, proposing to 
 amend the constitution, will not alarm a calm 
 and considerate people, who want quiet, hap- 
 piness, and a good and stable government? Sir, 
 ia my agricultural pursuits*, if I send my wagon 
 to the mechanic to mend, and he keep it awhile, 
 and at his caprice breaks it up and uses it for 
 fuel and sends me back in due time a new 
 wagon is there a bench in the state or Union 
 that would say that I am bound to take it or to 
 pay for it? I employed him not to destroy I 
 commissioned him to mend, to fortify and correct. 
 Therefore I rise here to thank my friend, the 
 chairman of committee number five, who has 
 made this report, for adopting as far as he 
 could, the old constitution. To that I declare 
 my adhesion, subject only to such amendments 
 here and there, as the people have suggested 
 or urged. I came not to destroy, but to repair. 
 Aad where are we at the beginning of the fifth 
 week of the session ? We have got through 
 one short section, declaring in effect that we 
 will have a Governor and Lieut. Governor. 
 We have partly passed for we are in commit- 
 tee of the whole, where no final vote is taken 
 one single section with three lines in it, pre- 
 cisely as it stood in the old constitution. I am 
 pained to see this. With my friend from Co- 
 lombia (Mr. JORDAN) whom I am proud to en- 
 dorse and with my friend from Ontario (Mr, 
 NICHOLAS), whom I am also proud to endorse 
 I came here to repair, not to destroy, I'feel 
 that it is out of our commission to pull to pieces 
 this whole instrument. Far be it from me, sir, 
 to pretend to any special devotion to that por- 
 tion of the civilized world called the people of 
 Shis Union. I have no humility to profess no 
 declarations of love and confidence to make 
 
 here except that I believe they are disposed 
 to stand by what is right, and I have no 
 apprehension but what they will ultimately 
 decide right. Now, sir, looking back to the 
 Convention which framed the constitution of 
 the Union, we find that they proceeded with 
 caution and prudence and so far as the Presi- 
 dent was concerned, prescribed certain qualifi- 
 cations of age and residence. We see that our 
 constitution of 1821, prescribed 30 years of age 
 and five years residence for a Governor. Shall 
 we hastily pull away these landmarks, which 
 experience has shown to be in no way incon- 
 venient or embarrassing, and with which no- 
 body has found fault ? It is painful to me, sir, 
 to argue this question, which I regard as one of 
 jurisdiction. It is not in my commission. We 
 were sent here to repair defects to examine 
 and search out the defective spots to which the 
 people have directed our attention, as necessary 
 to be made good, and more effectually to secure 
 the welfare of all. Do this, and we shall find 
 our work short. Let us go to work with unan- 
 imity and diligence upon the spots which have 
 been pointed to as defective, and leave those 
 which have not been a subject of general com- 
 plaint as they are. In relation to religious 
 freedom, for instance, will any man be disposed 
 to disturb the article on that subject? Espe- 
 cially after the prayer that all of us listened to 
 the other day, from that desk (pointing to the 
 Speaker's chair) thanking God for his man- 
 ifold mercies, and especially for the privilege 
 common to us all of worshipping the true God, 
 or many gods, or no god at all ! Our liberty is 
 indeed great in this and other respects. Let us 
 see that we do not abuse it. And yet, sir, the 
 valuable article guarantying some of these 
 rights is too restrictive for those who don't 
 want to be asked as a witness, as to their ac- 
 countability. I enter my solemn and open pro- 
 test against this destructive effort at pulling 
 down/ A great misfortune, sir, it is, that the 
 legislature "which passed the law calling this 
 Convention, did not point specifically to those 
 parts of the constitution which they charged us 
 to amend but that not having been done, it is 
 our duty to repair the error by confining our- 
 selves to those parts of the instrument that the 
 public attention has been called to as defective. 
 The great principle of having some precaution 
 against inconsiderate action, runs through all 
 our institutions, and must not be lost sight of. 
 It is not necessary to imagine cases, to show its 
 importance. Yet as many have been imagined, 
 let me suppose one having immediate reference 
 to the present state of things. No man shall 
 go beyond me in admiration, I had almost said 
 adoration, of the gallantry of a Taylor, who 
 has so recently immortalized the name of Ame- 
 rica on the banks of the Rio Grande. He has 
 always been regarded, as he really is, as an able 
 General. But was there a man that ever 
 thought of him for the Presidency until a single 
 battle, won I had almost said in a single hour's 
 contest, brought him prominently befor'e the 
 public? My word for it, sir, bring that man here, 
 and there are not ten men among us beginning 
 with my venerable friend who leads off on the 
 ayes and noes (Mr, ALLEN), that would not be 
 
195 
 
 ready at once to go for him for any office in the 
 state or nation. "Let him arrive here in Octo 
 her, and he would be your Governor in Novem 
 her. [Laughter.] It is wise to guard agains 
 these impulses. The character, welfare, anc 
 destinies of this state should not be placed at 
 the mercy of these temporary excitements. 
 Provision should be made in the fundamenta 
 law, to secure especially a mature and reitera- 
 ted consideration of every matter connected 
 with the government. That is the leading 
 principle that runs through all our institutions 
 The case of Michigan has been referred to, as 
 illustrating the safety of having a Governor ol 
 26 years of age. It is painful to me, sir, to 
 speak of the dead. I knew the person alluded 
 to. I now know his father, and respect him 
 highly. But being compelled to speak of the 
 career of Michigan and I do it with reluctance 
 under the auspices of a young Governor 
 I must be permitted to point to the career 
 of that state, from indebtedness to repudia- 
 tion, as an admonition to us to see to it that 
 we secure age and the discretion which years 
 bring with them, at the helm. No blame I lay 
 to him who is dead. I am dealing with facts, 
 not men. And I point you to the history of that 
 infant state, from her first loan of five millions, 
 put forth under a Governor below 25, down to 
 her repudiation of it as replete with instruc- 
 tion and admonition. I regret that the case has 
 been alluded to. But being cited here, I cannot 
 forbear to say that were I to have named a sin- 
 gle case that should inculcate prudence and cau- 
 tion in this matter of qualification, it would 
 have been that case. I would have drawn from 
 it an impressive lesson on the propriety of se- 
 curing the benefit of a mature consideration in 
 advance, in a matter where we cannot recall 
 and revoke the results of our own indiscretion. 
 Look at this article now under consideration. 
 Have you not a section there providing for the 
 displacement of an elective officer that may 
 prove unworthy? And why is this? It is be- 
 cause the people having once chosen a man, can- 
 not recall the act, except by the process ol im- 
 peachment, which takes two years. Let us 
 plant a few landmarks here. Let us secure at 
 least ypars of discretion in the Governor of this 
 great state, and a residence long enough to ena- 
 ble a candidate to become acquainted with the 
 theory and working in detail of our institutions. 
 I urge therefore, that all these are provisions to 
 re caution and prudence. The idea of re- 
 stricting the people and that the people can be 
 trusted has nothing to do with the question. 
 t is a fallacy to suppose that these are restric- 
 tions on the people. All words, sir all words 
 -that should have no weight. The people sent 
 us here, because they could not meet them- 
 selves. We stand here for them and I have 
 no hesitation in saying or acting for them, that 
 it is wise and prudent to plant landmarks and 
 safe guards against precipitate and hasty action 
 My friend from Orange, (Mr. BROWN,) has 
 called up the case of Napoleon, at the head of 
 an army, when but a youth, and as even at that 
 period at the height of his military glory. True 
 ir, in all the qualities of a commanding general 
 Napoleon was indeed great and perhaps his 
 
 prominent qualities of impetuosity and daring> 
 intrepidity and rashness were those which 
 marked him as the very man for the crisis 
 But let me ask, if in the destiny of a wise Prov- 
 idence, it had been permitted to this mighty 
 spirit, instead of being doomed to end his 
 life at St. Helena, to have come among us at 
 this moment would he not have said, at the 
 first glance at our condition,, that we had gone 
 rashly to work that we had all set to with our 
 various tools and implements, without direction 
 or system, at cutting clown the vessel of 
 state ? Would he not have said that it 
 strongly reminded him of the scenes of early 
 life ? Would he not have whispered caution * 
 Beware this free country ! Remember, that 
 liberty run wild, has ever found its end in des- 
 potism ? I bring before you a military com- 
 mander, than whom perhaps no hero before 
 was ever inspired with a more ardent love of 
 country and of liberty. I evoke his spirit, and 
 imagine him talking with us. W T ould he not 
 say, ' I have run this career before you. I be- 
 gun with the impetuosity of youth. Liberty, 
 run wild, was the object of pursuit. I follow- 
 ed in that direction, until the world almost was 
 at my heels.' Would he not say, ' search my 
 path through the t< rrid, the temperate, aye, the 
 frigid zones and you will find whitening the 
 battle fields I won, the bones of those who fol- 
 lowed my wild footsteps. Learn from this the 
 consequences that rash precipitation and head- 
 long impetuosity, in the pursuit of any object, 
 however noble, always bring with it.' Would he 
 not add ' If that is not enough , look at the blood 
 that overflowed Europe under my career, and 
 learn lessons of wisdom from the desolation 
 that has marked its termination.' Taking then, 
 my opponent's argument, I dwell on the case 
 put as one on which we should ponder well.- 
 It admonishes us to be prudent to see to it, not 
 that popular liberty should be curtailed, but 
 that that liberty should be secure from the con- 
 sequences of precipitation. Let not empty 
 words delude any body. Go forward with pru- 
 dence as we have gone on thus far, in a ca- 
 reer of marked success with a magnificent 
 system of internal improvements nearly per- 
 "ected with our finances safe and secure^ our 
 state prosperous to a degree unparalleled any 
 where. Sir, it has been my lot to know some- 
 thing of the history of the system, which com- 
 menced with the construction of what was call- 
 ed by a certain Senator, the " big ditch." Where 
 that ditch now? What its condition? 
 Need I speak of its value and importance to this 
 great state off the wealth it has yielded, and is 
 still yielding to our people and to the state ? But 
 sir, it has been my lot to stand in congress and to 
 )e taunted with the cry of the insolvency of New- 
 York, and its apprehended bankruptcy, under the 
 oad of this great undertaking. To the glory of 
 !*few-York be it said, she has never yet repudia - 
 ed and, thank God! I trust she never will. 
 But sir, let us stop this infernal spirit of pulling 
 lown. Adhere to the principle of the rule, 
 adopted the other day, on my motion when 
 ou are asked to strike out, see that what is to 
 )e put in, is preferable, and not merely an 
 equivalent and particularly that changes b 
 
196 
 
 not made for the mere sake of change. He had 
 only to forewarn his friends to take care how 
 we undertook to make anew what the people 
 had commissioned us to repair for he had con- 
 fidence in the country that they would reject the 
 new wagon we should send to them, in place of 
 the one they wanted repaired. 
 
 Mr. STOW took the floorbut gave way to a 
 motion t" rise and report which prevailed. 
 
 Mr. ARCliER had leave of absence for lour 
 days j Mr. MONRO for 6. 
 
 Adj. to 11 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 TUESDAY, (26/A day) June 30. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Dr. WYCKOFF. 
 
 A report was received from John Davidson, Re- 
 gister in Chancery relative to the sale of Infant's 
 estates, &c.; also one from the Equity Clerk of 
 the 7th Circuit, on the same subject. Referred to 
 the judiciary committee 
 
 An invitation was received from the Van Rens- 
 
 selaer Guards, offering themselves as an escort to 
 
 the Convention, in the procession on the 4th of 
 
 July. On motion of Gen. WARD, it was accepted. 
 
 RIGHTS OF CITIZENS. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE, from the committee on 
 the rights and privileges of the citizens of the 
 State, submitted the following report : 
 ARTICLE -. 
 
 (j 1. Men are by nature free and independent, and in 
 their social relations entitled to equal rights. 
 
 -2 All political powers is inherent in the people. 
 
 3. No member of this State shall be disfranchised, or 
 deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any 
 citizen thereof, unless by the law of the land. 
 
 4. The right of trial by jury in all cases in which it has 
 been heretofore used, shall remain inviolate. 
 
 5. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive 
 fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishment inflicted. 
 
 6. Th free exercise and enjoyment of religious profes- 
 sion and worship, without discrimination or preference, 
 shall forever be allowed in this State to all mankind; but 
 the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so 
 construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify 
 practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of this State. 
 
 7. All such inhabitants of this State, of any religious 
 denomination whatever, as from scruples of conscience 
 may be adverse to bearing arms, ^hall be excused there- 
 from by paying to the State an equivalent in money; and 
 the Legislature shall provide by law for the collection of 
 such equivalent, to be estimated' according to the expense 
 in time and money of an ordinary able-bodied militiaman. 
 
 9. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not 
 foe suspended, unless, when, in cases of rebellion or inva- 
 sion the public safety may require its suspension. 
 
 ^ 9. No person shall be held to answer for a capital or 
 otherwise infamous crime, (except in cases of impeach- 
 ment, and in cases of the militia when in actual service, 
 and the land and naval forces in time of war, or which this 
 State may keep with the consent of Congress in time of 
 peace and in cases of petit larceny, un ier the regulation 
 of the Legislature,) unless on presentment or indictment of 
 a grand jury, and in every trial or impeachment or indict- 
 ment the party accused shall be allowed to appear and de- 
 fend in person and with counsel, as in civil actions. No 
 person shall be subject to be twice put in jeopardy for the 
 same offence, nor shall he be compelled to be a witness 
 against himself, in any criminal case; nor in any case to 
 subject himself to a penalty or forfeiture, or any loss or de- 
 privation in the nature of a penalty or forfeiture; nor be 
 deprived of life, liberty or property without due process 
 of law. 
 
 10. Every citizen may freely speak, write and publish 
 his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the 
 abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed to restrain 
 or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all 
 prosecutions or indictments, and in civil actions for libels, 
 the truth may be given in evidence to the jury; and if it shall 
 appeai' to the jury that the matter charged as libellous is 
 true, and was published with good motives and for justifi- 
 
 able ends, the party shall bo^icquitted, and the jury shall 
 have the right to determine the law and the fact 
 
 ($11. Private property shall not be taken for public use 
 without just compensation being first made therefor. If 
 the taking is for the use of the State, the Legislature shall 
 provide for determining the damages; and if lor any other 
 public use, the damages shall be assessed by a jury. The 
 Legislature may provide for the opening of private roads, 
 in case a jury of freeholders shall determine the road ne- 
 cessary; the persons benefitted paying all expenses and 
 damages to be also determined by a jury. 
 
 12. Witnesses in criminal cases shall not be imprisoned 
 for the want of bail to secure their attendance at the trial 
 of the cause; unless upon the special order of the magis- 
 trate or court having jurisdiction of the case. Laws shall 
 be passed to secure, if necessary, the temporary detention 
 f witnesses in criminal cases, and for their prompt exami- 
 iation de bene esse, which examination shall ; be evidence 
 n all subsequent proceedings upon the subject matters: 
 and shall have the same effect as the oral testimony of the 
 witness would have, were he present and examined in 
 person. 
 
 13. No person shall be imprisoned on any civil process, 
 on any writ or proceeding upon any contract, express or 
 implied, or upon any judgment or decree founded upon 
 such contract; but nothing herein contained shall extend 
 to actions for the recovery ol moneys collected by any 
 public officer, or on promise to marry, nor in any case to 
 fraud or breach of trust. 
 
 14. All property, real or personal, of the wife, owned 
 by her before marriage, and that acquired by her after- 
 words, by gift devise or descent, or otherwise than from 
 her husband, shall be her separate property. Laws shall 
 be passed providing for the registry of the wife's separate 
 property, and more clearly defining the rights of the wife 
 thereto, as well as property held by her with her husband. 
 
 15. No divorce shall be granted by the Legislature, or 
 otherwise than by judicial proceedings provided for by 
 law. 
 
 fy 16. No lottery shall be authorised in this State; nor 
 shall the sale of lottery tickets within this State be al- 
 lowed. 
 
 17. No purchase on contract for the sale of lands in 
 this State, made since the" seventeenth day of October, 
 1775, or which may hereafter be made of, or with the In- 
 dians in this State, shall be valid, unless made under the 
 authority and with the consent of the Legislature. 
 
 18. Such parts of the common law, and of the acts of 
 the Legislature of the Colony of New York, as together 
 did form the law of the said Colony on the nineteenth day 
 day of April, 1775, and the resolutions of the Congress of 
 the said Colony and of the Convention of the State of New 
 York in force on the twentieth day of April, 1777, which 
 have not since expired or been repealed or altered; and 
 such acts of the Legislature of this State as are now in 
 force, shall be and continue the law of this State, subject 
 to such alteration as the Legislature shall make concern- 
 ing the same; but all such parts of the common law, and 
 such of the said acts, or parts thereof, as are repugnant to 
 this Constitution, are hereby abrogated. 
 
 19. All grants of land within this State, made by the 
 King of Great Britain, or persons acting under his authori- 
 ty, after the fourteenth day of October, 1775, shall be null 
 and void; but nothing contained in this Constitution shall 
 impair the obligation of anv debts contracted by the State, 
 or individuals or bodies corporate, or any other rights of 
 property, or any suits, actions, rights of action, or other 
 proceedings in courts of justice. 
 
 By order of the Committee, 
 
 JAMES TALLMADGE, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that his committee 
 had spent much time, labor, and research upon 
 the subjects contained in this report. They had 
 retained all these provisions contained in the ex- 
 isting constitution which it was not deemed de- 
 sirable to amend or alter; and in order to iacili- 
 i->te members &c. in understanding the report, the 
 committee had carefully distinguished the old from 
 the new provisions inserted. With regard to the 
 resolutions which have been offered by members 
 of the convention from time to time, and had been 
 referred to his committee, he would state that they 
 had each and all been carefully considered by the 
 committee ; and if those gentlemen who offered 
 them did not find them embodied in this repoit, it 
 
197 
 
 s cause the committee either considered the 
 resolutions as properly apperiaimug to legislation, 
 (which was the case with many of them) or else 
 where the committee had been opposed to any ac- 
 tion on or to the adoption ot the resolutions or pro- 
 positions presented to them. But the gentlemen 
 who piesented those resolutions would, however 
 have an opportunity to present them in the shape 
 of amendments to the report, when the Conven- 
 tion came to act upon it, section by section, in 
 committee of the whole. And he would furthei 
 state that when the sections came up in order for 
 consideration hereafter, some member of the com- 
 mittee would explain the reasons that had actua- 
 ted them in their adoption as they stood j and for 
 this reason the committee had not made any re- 
 port in detail He would not now remark any 
 further, as he wished to avoid all discussion on the 
 report at present; and therefore moved its Tefer 
 ence to the committee ot the whole. It was re- 
 ferred as usual. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said it was so important a re- 
 port, that he wished 5 or 10 times the usual num- 
 ber printed. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL reminded him that the standing 
 rule provided that 8' ; should be printed ; 10 times 
 that number would be 8000. 
 
 The usual number (800) was ordered. 
 
 EARLY HOURS. 
 Mr. BAKER presented this: 
 
 Resolved, That on and after Tuesday next, this Conven- 
 Tention will meet daily at 9 o'clock A. M. 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that after this week, he did 
 not think that the members of the Convention 
 would be under the necessity of meeting in their 
 respective committee rooms in the morning, as 
 they had hitherto been compelled to do j at least 
 there would -be but few that would have to do so ; 
 and therefore he thought the Convention should 
 meet at an rariT-r hour than 11 o'clock. He 
 would request thai the resolution be laid on the 
 able for consideration. 
 It was so ordered. 
 
 THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole, upon the report on the powers and du- 
 ties cf the executive, Mr. CHATF1ELD in the 
 chair. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that he was not disposed to oc- 
 cupy the time of the committee on this subject. 
 He had the floor when the committee rose yester- 
 and he was merely then proceeding to make 
 one or two suggestions on this question ; and 
 now, in order, if possible, to save the valuable 
 time of the Convention give even one more 
 day to the people to enable them to examine 
 the amendments that would be made here, he 
 would be perfectly willing to waive his right 
 to the floor, provided that trie committee now de- 
 sired to take the question on the motion before 
 them. (Here he paused; some one or two told 
 him to proceed; and there did not appear to be 
 any desire to have the question taken at that 
 time..) But as it did not appear to be the desire 
 of the committee to take the question just then, 
 he would go on and add a few suggestions only, 
 to what had been already advanced. At the same 
 time, he wished the committee distinctly to bear 
 in mind, that if they unnecessarily protracted 
 
 this debate, it would not be done from any 
 part that he would have taken in it. He 
 bad wished yesterday to make a suggestion, 
 which he would make at this time, but he did 
 not, under any circumstances intend to go into a 
 discussion of the subject at length; this was not ne- 
 rssary, after the very able and eloquent remarks 
 and elucidations that had already been made here 
 by members of the Convention. But he desired, 
 in the first place, to remind this Convention we 
 had a Constitution ! already in existence ; and 
 that the provision that was then under discussion 
 was to be found in that Constitution ; and those 
 who desired to alter this, ought to show affirma- 
 tively how they wished to have it altered. It 
 would not do for them merely to show that the 
 present Constitution is wrong in some respects : 
 they must go on, and give the reasons, why and 
 wherefore they w*ish such and such alterations to 
 be made ; and they must go farther, and bring for- 
 ward a substitute for this provision that will be 
 preferable to it. It was a highly important point 
 that the committee should distinctly keep in mind 
 that all who propose any amendments to the Con- 
 stitution must show affirmatively why it is to be 
 done. That is the true issue. He did think that 
 in regard to the question then before them that 
 the ardent attention which had been drawn to the 
 present Constitution, had caused them to over- 
 look to a great extent the probable effect of many 
 of the proposed amendments. The gentleman 
 from St. Lawrence [Mr. RUSSELL] proposed sub- 
 stantially, that whilst striking out all other quali- 
 fications for the governor, yet that the candidate 
 for that office should be an elector of the state. 
 Now r , this, he contended, instead of being an en- 
 largement, would practically be a limitation; 
 for many more men would be thought of by the 
 people to fill this office, who are not strictly and 
 technically electors at the time of their selection. 
 He would, for example, suppose that the present 
 governor had removed to an adjoining county, so 
 many months before his election ; by this amend- 
 ment he would have been rendered ineligible. 
 And this alone would amount to a far greater 
 practical limitation than the 5 year's residence 
 proposed by the gentleman from Essex, [Mr. 
 SIMMONS.] And as to the requisition that a can- 
 didate should be thirty years of age. Now, he 
 was not so far removed from the age of thirty 
 years himself, as not to feel in his own 
 heart and conscience, that no man, who has 
 not passed, at least, that number of years, is 
 a fit man to wield the destinies of this great and 
 important state. The duties of the governor, it 
 ought to be remembered were not confined to those 
 of an executive character. He exercised duties 
 of a much higher character than those which 
 might be regarded as strictly executive ; there 
 was a power entrusted to him that is, in its charac- 
 ter, judicial, as well as executive that is, the 
 pardoning power ! And this should be entrust- 
 ed to no young man under 30 years of age ; seeing 
 the caution, prudence, experience and strict im- 
 partiality and justice that is required in rightly 
 administering it. Again they prppose to entrust 
 to the Governor certain great legislative powers ; 
 powers that might, in effect counteract the action 
 of all the other branches of the government. To 
 him the command of the army might and could be 
 
198 
 
 given ; and though it is true that a power like this 
 might sometimes be safely entrusted to a young 
 man.yeicertainlythe judicial and legislative powers 
 ough not to be entrusted to so great an extent to 9 
 young man under 30, without sufficient experi- 
 ence, and without that sound judgment, caution, 
 and prudence which many years of experience 
 only can give. Now, would it be prudent, h< j 
 asked, in all candor, to place k a power that was 
 equal to a check upon all branches of the govern 
 ment, in the hands of a young man who had had 
 the little experience which is to be found always 
 in men under 30 years old ? Why it would be 
 highly improper ; and to strengthen him in his 
 belief, he had the co operation iti opinion of the 
 most intelligent men of the country. He was al- 
 so sustained therein by the people ; tor as had been 
 well observed on yesterday by the gentleman horn 
 Columbia, (Mr. JORDAN,) not a voice, not a mur- 
 mur, has been raised against it. And to go even 
 still further, the Convention should remember 
 that the Governor possessed a power that was not 
 derived from the Constitution of the Stale at all ; 
 and, notwithstanding all the restrictions they 
 might put upon hitn, they would not deprive him 
 of this one great power. It was the power to fill 
 the vacancies in the Senate of the United S'ates ; 
 and the members ought to remember thai those 
 vacancies must be filled by men of the age of 30 
 years ; and that certain emergencies had already 
 occurred, and of course might soon occur again, 
 whete the Governor oi a State has had to fill both 
 vacancies in the United Stales Senate, from this 
 State. Now was il not incongruous and absurd to 
 say that a man under 30 years of age should ap- 
 point those two Senators? It was ridiculous and 
 inconsistent upon the face of it; and it was, in 
 effect, pron nmcing the Constitution of the United 
 States an absurdity, where it requires, as one 
 qualification of United States Senators, that they 
 snail be 30 years of age. He had intended yes- 
 terdaj, when he had the floor, to make substan- 
 tially these suggestions to the committee; he 
 would have passed them by had the committee 
 been ready to vote on the question ; having made 
 them, he would go no further, as about all that 
 could be said on the subject had beensaid alteady. 
 He would confine himself hereafter to very brief 
 suggestions, believing it to be his duty and the 
 duty of all the members to the People and to the 
 Convention, to save all the time they possibly 
 could in its deliberations. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG said he would not detain 
 the Convention but a few minutes. He was op- 
 posed to this protracted discussion of this ques- 
 tion, but there was one point on which a word 
 or two might properly be spoken here. The gen- 
 tleman from Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) had very 
 justly said on yesterday that it was very important 
 now to settle the course of action which the Con- 
 vention intended to pursue throughout its session 
 in regard to the existing Constitution ; whether 
 they intended to take up and alter every part of 
 it ; or only such parts as the people had called for 
 reform in. For it was clear to him and must be 
 to all, that unless. the Convention very much al- 
 tered their course, they would never get through 
 the business before them that is they would not 
 within any reasonable time accomplish the ob- 
 ject for which the people had sent them there ; 
 
 and for the future he did hope that the unimpor- 
 tant propositions that h*d occupied their time 
 from day to day would no longer receive so much 
 or any attention from the Convention; but that the 
 members would confine their deliberations to 
 those subjects only that were really of importance 
 enough to be considered. And that they should 
 not hereafter discuss for days, all those points 
 that are now to be found in the existing Consti- 
 tution. And if the committees should hereafter 
 make a report upon any of these minor matters, 
 he thought the Convention ought to pass over 
 them, and proceed to dispose of those of more 
 importance. He did not know whether the Con- 
 vention was ready at once to take the question on 
 this amendment ; but he wished to present one or 
 two considerations which had some weight at 
 least they had so to his mind, and in determining 
 his course. One was, that if the Convention in- 
 troduced into the Constitution so many of these 
 new features and provisions (many of which that 
 had been offered being in the highest degree ob- 
 jectionable) would it not endanger the ultimate 
 adoption of it by the people ? Now if they wished 
 to secure its adoption, they ought only to make 
 these important amendments which had been 
 loudly demanded by the people ; and all those 
 well-tried provisions of the present constitution, 
 about which there has not been the least com- 
 plaint, should be left untouched. They have 
 served our purpose well in all time past, and that 
 is the best guarantee that we can have that they 
 will serve our purpose well in all time to come. 
 As to the removing of the restrictions which have 
 been reported by the committee, it has been ob- 
 jected that the people should be left entirely free, 
 inasmuch as they are fully competent to select a 
 Governor for themselves, and to decide whether 
 he should be under or over 30 years of age. This 
 is all very true, but then who is it that brings for- 
 ward these candidates for Governor ? Not the 
 great body of the people ; but a few persons, (ma- 
 ny of them not much known) delegated for that 
 purpose, meet together privately and decide this ; 
 and it is but too well known that in those con- 
 ventions for selecting a Governor, considerations 
 enter that.never would govern the people it they 
 had the selection of candidates directly by them- 
 selves. And then, also, the candidate who may 
 be selected, although he may have been some time 
 in public life, is never too well known by the 
 people of a State. And scarcely one under 30 
 years of age is sufficiently well known by or to 
 the people personally or by his acts. This State, 
 it should be remembered, is a very large one ; and 
 these considerations should have great weight 
 with the Convention, and render them much more 
 particular in determining as to the qualifications 
 of the Governor, (the age, residence, &c.)than in 
 a small State where all the prominent public men 
 are pretty well known to the whole people. It 
 has been said that this is wrong in principle, the 
 imposition of these restrictions. But what prin- 
 iple is violated by it? The people are by 
 tar too wise to believe that they need no restric- 
 tions; and hence they nave always imposed re- 
 strictions on themselves. He fully agreed witti 
 the views of the fathers and founders of our insti- 
 tutions who framed the Constitution of the U. S. 
 that it was a most important point a matter high- 
 
199 
 
 eessary, to guard against the abuse of liberty 
 as against the abuse of power. He should cer- 
 tainly vote lot some of the restrictions that had 
 been brought forward, though he was opposed to 
 retaining that word "Native." He wished to ie- 
 move all distinctions between the foreign citizen 
 aud the unlive born citizen; b U he would retain 
 the restrictions respecting the 3(3 years of age and 
 the residence; and add (hat the candidate for Go- 
 vernor shall have been for five years a citizen 
 oi the U. S ; and this he did not believe was ai 
 present provided for by any of the restrictions or 
 resolutions. 
 
 Some remarks having been suggested about the 
 range of the debate having too great, a latitude. 
 
 The CHAIR said it was true thit the debate had 
 taken rather a wide range; and if had been, under 
 the circumstances, somewhat difficult to restrain 
 gentlemen within due limits. To a great ex- 
 tent this mast be left to the discretion and good 
 sense of the committee ; but at the same time, he 
 observed that the provisions as to birth and age 
 had both been stricken out ot the clause now un- 
 der consideration. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that he had not desired to 
 take up the time of the Convention for a single 
 moment upon this question : but that the debate 
 having taken so wide a range, arguments had been 
 adduced which required to be fully understood. 
 The Convention would be brought to vote on the 
 question whether a majority of the people are to 
 have full power in every matter connected with 
 this government. In his judgment there was a 
 very great error prevailing as to the exercise of 
 the sovereign powei ; whether it belonged to the 
 majority, or to the whole people. Undoubtedly 
 the sovereign power resided in the whole people ; 
 the exercise of this power is given by the whole 
 people to the majority ; and the question to be 
 decided is whether the whole people have not the 
 right to say to i:.e majority that they shall exer- 
 cise this power uader certain restrictions. These 
 restrictions are imposed on the majority by the 
 whole people, for they have never given to the 
 majority the unlimited exercise of any power; 
 and it would be contending for a very dangerous 
 principle to attempt to maintain that the majority 
 can ever possess the unlimited exercise of this 
 power. There is no greater truth, than that all 
 government depends upon the assent of the go- 
 verned, which is made up of the majority and the 
 minority. They never had an instance of a gove- 
 nor of the state being elected by the whole peo- 
 ple; he was elected by a mere majority, whom the 
 will of the people allowed to elect a governor. 
 But it does not follow, therefore, that the whole 
 power should be exercised by the majority with- 
 out any restrictions as to how Ihey should exercise 
 it ; for the power is not in the majority's hands, but 
 merely the right of its exercise, under proper re 
 strictions. That is the whole question before us. 
 And it was not at all derogatory to the whole people 
 to say that a majority shall be under certain res- 
 trictions (which restrictions shall guide all future 
 majorities) and that one of these restrictions shall 
 be that the candidate for Governor shall have re- 
 sided in this State 5 years. For if this question 
 were to be put to the whole people for them to 
 say whether or not it was proper, in their judge- 
 ment, that the candidate for Governor should have 
 
 been a resident oi the State fur 5 years, would they 
 not all answer in the affirmative? They had ae 
 much a right to say to the majority that there- 
 shall be such a restriction in the Constitution as 
 to' say that the right of trial by jury shall remain 
 inviolate for ever, They had the same right to 
 say so, as to say that the glorious privilege of ha- 
 beas corpus should be preserved for ever to Un- 
 people. And if the whole people can extend or 
 limit the exercise of one power oi privilege, they 
 can extend or limit the exercise of another. Mr. 
 N considered that the declaration of a majority 
 might be as oppressive as the despotism of one 
 man ; for, as an eloquent writer had most truly re. 
 marked, what difference did it make to theopprea- 
 sed \\heihei he was bound to the earth by one 
 man, or by 10,000 me^i. To him the despotism 
 is the same. He sincerely trusted that this sut" 
 j^'Ct would be considered with prudence and calm- 
 ness. He desired to restrain the intemperate use 
 of power whether sought to be exercised by tf*e 
 few or many ; and thus secure as tar as practicable 
 the rights of ihe whole people, the minority ac 
 well as the majority. And believing the qualifi- 
 cation, to be en'irely proper, that the candidate 
 for governor should have a 5 years residence, he 
 should vote for the same. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that he had not risen for I!K 
 purpose of going into the discussion of the 
 of the question under consideration, but to 
 the committee to a knowledge of their positioi... 
 as to exac'ly where they stood, and to point out 
 the propriety of gentlemen limiting themselves to 
 9 dehate upon the real point at issue. The con;- 
 mittee have already struck out the word "Na- 
 tive," and they have also struck out that part oi 
 the clause relating to the qualification of aa;e ; and 
 therefore according to ihe rules of parliamentary 
 law, it was not now competent for any member 10 
 discuss either of those questions ; but if any gen 
 tleman chose to make a motion to have thoj-e 
 questions reconsidered, then a discussion on their 
 merits would be perfectly proper and in order, 
 But it was not necessary for any gentleman to 
 make any such motion to reconsider ; for ev- 
 ery member would have an opportunity to 
 move any amendments, or make any obser- 
 vations thereon when this matter comes 
 up hereafter in the house. It would, there- 
 therefore, greatly facilitate the business of the 
 Convention, whilst it would certainly inflict no 
 wrong on any gentleman, if the members would 
 hereafter confine themselves within the strict 
 range of parliamentary law. And whilst he was 
 up, he would state, that he was opposed to the 
 substitute which had been offered by the gentk- 
 man from St. Lawrence, [Mr. RUSSELL.] He 
 was not in favor of the qualification that a candi- 
 date for governor should be thirty years of age, 
 but he was in favor of the five years residence : 
 that is, he was in favor of the clause reported by 
 the committee as it now stands amended, and he 
 would recommend, as the true course to be adop- 
 ted, that the committee should at once get a vote 
 upon this matter; vote down the proposition of the 
 gentleman from St. Lawrence (Mr. RUSSELL) and 
 vote down the proposition of the gentleman from 
 Essex, [Mr. SIMMONS] and pass the resolution 
 with tre words " Native" and the qualification of 
 age stricken out And if they then passed this 
 
200 
 
 section, as it now stands, they could go on to the 
 next section, and afterwards test these much dis- 
 puted points in the house ; and there he would 
 not shrink from the responsibility of meeting all 
 of them, and of recording his vote upon each and 
 every one of them. These matters had been very 
 ably and very fully discussed, and it wa* much 
 better to take the question on them at once with- 
 out any further debate. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN agreed with the gentleman 
 from Westchester, [Mr. WARD] and united sin- 
 cerely with him in the earnest hope that they 
 would come back to the original proposition of 
 the Committee as it stood, and he trusted that 
 the gentleman from Essex, (Mr. SIMMONS) and 
 the gentleman St. Lawrence (Mr. RUSSELL) 
 would withdraw their propositions. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that the gentleman from 
 Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) had only anticipated his 
 intention; and with a view to expedite the busi- 
 ness of the Convention, he would accordingly 
 withdraw his proposition. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN hoped that the gentleman from 
 St. Lawrence (Mr. RUSSELL) would also with- 
 draw his proposition ; and he at the same time 
 trusted that there would be a clause inserted 
 hereafter containing provisions specifying the 
 requisite qualifications for all persons holding 
 office. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called for the reading of the 
 section as it now stood. 
 
 It was read. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL did not withdraw his amend- 
 ment 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said, that although complaints 
 were made of the time already consumed in the 
 debate, and some members seemed to attach little 
 importance to the question under consideration, 
 he was so strongly impressed with disfavor toward 
 the whole section, had so clear a conviction of its 
 unsoundness and inability, that a sense of duty 
 impelled him to present to the committee the 
 reasons which had led him to his conclusion. 
 Very little of the section remained. The only 
 qualifications of foreign birth and immaturity in 
 years had both been stricken out by very strong 
 votes. All that remained for us was to determine 
 whether the disqualification of happening not to 
 have resided within the State for some specified 
 time should be continued. In urging the rejec- 
 tion of that also, he should not descant upon the 
 merits or demerits of the other portions of the 
 original section which had been already condemn- 
 ed. But he would make some remarks, bearing 
 as well upon those, now repudiated disqualifica- 
 tions, as upon the general question of express dis- 
 qualification, as an entirety. He thought but lit- 
 tle light had been thrown upon the question by 
 the references which had been made to the con- 
 stitutions of other states. He also had looked into 
 these constitutions, as well as those adopted during 
 the Revolution, as those adopted subsequently, 
 in reference to the subject of superadded qualifi- 
 cations for public office, beyond those required in 
 members of the constituent body ; he had also 
 looked into and compared the former constitu- 
 tions of our own State ; and in the course of this 
 examination he had been led to contemplate 
 the precedents upon this question in a point of 
 view somewhat different from that occupied by 
 
 other gentlemen. He had found that in none 
 of the constitutions adopted during the revo- 
 lutionary struggle was foreign birth a disqual- 
 ification. He conceived that the omission 
 furnished strong proof of the discretion of 
 those who framed those early constitutions. 
 Long after that struggle had successfully termi- 
 nated, some of their descendants, not very credi- 
 table to their liberality or gratitude, had intro- 
 duced that disqualification into the constitutions 
 of new States, and into the amended constitutions 
 of some old States. It would be interesting and 
 instructive in this respect to refer to the history 
 of our own State. The first constitution was 
 adopted in April, 1777, very shortly after the de- 
 claration of Independence, and during about the 
 darkest period of the Revolution. At that time, 
 our arms were receiving the aid of many distin- 
 guished foreigners. La Fayette had just arrived 
 from France. Dekalb, who afterwards fell glori- 
 ously battling for our liberties at Camden, pierced 
 with eleven wounds, was with La Fayette in the 
 service of the United States. At that very time, 
 Steuben and Pulaski were in France, preparing 
 for embarkation to join our standard. The ser- 
 vices of the former were invaluable, the latter 
 also fell in our cause. To her own great honor ; 
 Georgia erected a monument to his memory, on 
 which is inscribed his name only. Sufficient for 
 his epitaph, the memory of his deeds, his best 
 eulogium, is inscribed upon the hearts of the 
 American people. It certainly would have been 
 a weak, unwise policy in '77, to have introduced 
 into the constitutions of the new empires then 
 springing into life-^sustained in their struggles 
 for existence by the combined exertions of these *> 
 distinguished foreigners, and our own country- 
 men, and daily receiving succour from the patri- 
 ots of other climes disqualifications declaring to 
 these gallant and generous strangers, that if any 
 of them chanced to survive the perils of the field, 
 they would sustain an inferior position as deni- 
 zens of the new States they had hazarded their 
 lives to establish. No such policy found favor 
 with the framers of constitutions during our strug- 
 gle for independence. In the constitution of '77, 
 but one qualification was required, and that was 
 in no small degree indicative of the weakness of 
 mind which usually accompanies an illiberal sen- 
 timent. It was, that he should be a freeholder ; 
 a qualification but yesterday pronounced by the 
 people to be unworthy of a place in the Constitu- 
 tion. He repeated, that the insertion of this was 
 only evidence of the weakness which ordinarily 
 accompanied a disposition to create disqualifica- 
 tions by prescribing qualifications. What consti- 
 tutes a freeholder ? The ownership oftwo square 
 feet of land in John Brown's track ; where the 
 ownership of a thousand acres was but evidence 
 of a man's property, would make a man a free- 
 holder and qualify him to be Governor. When 
 practically viewed, how sage and valuable seems 
 this safeguard for our common weal ? The fact 
 to which he invited attention, was that these 
 States during their revolutions, while they were 
 receiving these brilliant accessions to the talents, 
 ability and valor employed in establishing their 
 Liberties, introduced no disqualifications, imply- 
 ing distrust of, or contempt for foreigners. And 
 when was it first done in this State ? After half 
 
201 
 
 
 a century had elapsed; during which period we 
 had made as wise selections for Governor as we 
 had ever done since; during which no complaint 
 had ever been heard that by the constitution cit- 
 izens of immature age or unworthy persons of 
 foreign birth, might be unwisely selected for that 
 high office. It had been strenuously urged by 
 the gentlemen from Dutchess and Ontario 
 (Messrs. TALLMADGE and NICOLL) that provi- 
 sions of an existing constitution, whereat no fault 
 was found, and from which no evil had resulted, 
 should be left untouched. The Convention of 
 1821 did not act upon this conservative principle: 
 but seemed to be animated by a sentiment which, 
 perhaps might as well not be characterized a 
 spirit of animosity of exclusion. Mr. O'C. 
 would not apply this remark to the whole body ; 
 but to the individual member or members, who 
 brought forward and advocated these checks up- 
 on the popular will. They introduced the dis- 
 qualification of foreign birth, which the Conven- 
 tion of '77 would have blushed to create while 
 the blood of the lamented Montgomery was still 
 fresh upon the heights of Quebec. His fall pre- 
 ceded that instrument but about one year. It 
 would have been well if the Convention of '21 
 had let well enough alone. After these States 
 had secured their independence, and had acquired 
 great strength and power after the common 
 school system had diffused the benign influence 
 of learning, and thereby increased the wisdom 
 and capacity of the constituent body, it ill be- 
 came that Convention to forge new trammels for 
 the people to stamp upon the fundamental law 
 of the State the impress of exclusiveness, of illi- 
 berality, towards the natives of other climes ; for 
 many whom it in part disfranchised were among 
 the most valuable and intelligent of the constitu- 
 ent body. We had lived nearly half a century 
 under a Constitution perfectly good in that re- 
 spect, as all experience and the absence oT com- 
 plaint fully proved. Still, uninfluenced by the 
 principle so warmly advocated by the two gentle- 
 men before alluded to, that Convention declined 
 to let well enough alone. It warred against thai 
 principle, innovated and erred ; and now but 25 
 years having elapsed since its action only half 
 the period which had sanctioned the previous 
 rule of eligibility, we, being called upon to re- 
 vise its work, ought to apply that principle to 
 their erroneous innovations. We should strike 
 out these idle, preposterous additions to the quali 
 fications to be required in public officers. Le 
 us, however, for a moment recur to principle, anc 
 see whether there is a propriety in retaining an) 
 of these qualifications. In every democratic 
 State the Constituent body is the Supreme powe 
 and in it reposes all the powers of governmen 
 that men can legitimately exercise over them 
 selves or others. In such a State it is the prov 
 ince of the fundamental law to ascertain wha 
 persons shall form the constituent body, or gov 
 erning power in the State, and then to limit am 
 define, with as much exactitude as practicable 
 the powers and duties of the agents of the people 
 or in other words the several departments of th 
 government, to the end that the rights of indi 
 viduals or the interests of the State may suffe 
 no detriment from their exercise. It was th 
 proper province of such an instrument, he repeat 
 
 13 
 
 ed, to ascertain the constituent body, 
 
 in which 
 nature of 
 things, that body never could embrace all within 
 
 resided the supreme power. In the 
 
 the protection of the state, and who were to be 
 governed by its laws. Some must be too young 
 to participate in the governing power. Others, 
 again, too advanced in life to take part in it. It 
 was a question whether females should constitute 
 part of the governing body. It was a proper sub- 
 ject of consideration whether persons convicted 
 of crime shall be permitted to form part of the 
 governing body. It was a proper subject of con- 
 sideration whether particular classes of persons 
 he would mention negroes, Indians, aliens, and 
 if you pleased naturalized citizens should form 
 art of the constituent body. And in laying down 
 ules for determining who were the constituent 
 ody, we did not lay restraints on the people. 
 Ve only ascertained who the people were. And 
 aving ascertained that, it was a principle not to 
 e departed from that in a democratic form of 
 overnment no restraint should be laid on 
 lem in their sovereign capacity when the whole 
 eople acted for the purposes of the government, 
 'his doctrine was quite consistent with the exis- 
 ence of provisions declaring what persons should 
 e eligible from a particular precinct to the Sen- 
 te or Assembly ; for a portion was not the whole 
 eople, and where power was thus delegated to 
 portion of the people to elect a member of As- 
 embly who might enact laws affecting the inte- 
 ests of the whole, the latter leaving no other 
 heck on the election in the precinct or district, 
 night rightfully retain the selection to individu- 
 Is having prescribed qualifications. What re- 
 traints ought to be imposed in such cases, was 
 mother question. But when we come, as in the 
 jase of the Governor, to an election in which all 
 articipate, an exercise of the power of choice 
 )y the whole people, acting in their sovereign 
 capacity every one of the constituents, or gov- 
 erning body, having a vote he insisted that no 
 restraint whatever should be imposed. The field 
 of selection should be free and unrestricted. 
 This principle, he took it, was too clear to be 
 disputed. We had an illustration of it in the 
 sitting of this very body. The Convention of '21 
 virtually provided that there never should be 
 another Convention ; for they declared how all 
 future amendments of the Constitution should be 
 made, confining them to the action of the Legis- 
 lature, in a given way. Yet the electoral body : 
 the constituent body of the State : the absolute 
 ruling power of the State in whom reposed the 
 right of sovereignty : had set that law entirely 
 aside ; and we sat here deliberating as a special 
 committee of that great body, to prepare for their 
 examination such amendments as may be deemed 
 necessary in the fundamental law. There was 
 no mode in which this power could be controlled, 
 and any attempt to control it in this way, would 
 be unwise, against sound principles, and should 
 not be attempted. Besides what particle of good 
 could result from this provision ? What amount 
 of security did it provide for the good people of 
 this State ? As it stood, no man could be a Go- 
 vernor, who had not resided five years within the 
 State. It did not say five years immediately pre- 
 ceding the election, but merely required a five 
 years' precedent residence. For aught Mr. O'C. 
 
202 
 
 could see in this provision, a person born here, 
 spending the first five years of his life here, and 
 then going to India, might remain absent until 
 invited home by hearing of his election to the 
 Gubernatorial Chair. But aside from this mere 
 verbal criticism, of what utility, he asked, was 
 it to provide that the 200,000 electors of this 
 State, who must concur to elect a Governor, shall 
 not elect a man who had not resided in this State 
 long enough to acquire as much knowledge of its 
 concerns as citizens ordinarily acquire in five 
 years ? It was an insult to the people to suppose 
 them capable of making such a selection. The 
 supposition was a reproach upon the good sense 
 of the people, which it ill became us, as their 
 representatives the vindicators of their honor 
 and dignity before the world to put on record. 
 What would it avail us, if an unworthy individ- 
 ual should happen so far to win the esteem of 
 the people of the State as to be elected Governor, 
 that he possessed the very common qualification 
 of a five years' residence ? It would be more 
 profitable to enact that he should have a certain 
 height though it would be hardly reasonable 
 to say, with his colleague, (Mr. HUNT) that he 
 should be six feet it would be more profitable 
 to say that he should be able to read and write. 
 Retaining this small, insignificant qualification, 
 which could scarcely be wanting in any individu- 
 al who could command even 10,000 votes lor Go- 
 vernor, could serve no useful purpose. It could 
 perform but one office, and that was to show that 
 the spirit of illiberally which, by imposing quali 
 fications would exclude from office, and which 
 distrusts the constituent body, yet possesses suffi- 
 cient influence in the public councils, to have its 
 last expiring groan, impotent as it might be, i ,- 
 coiporated into the fundamental law. For his 
 own part, he would noi, and he hoped the com- 
 initlee would not leave, in the Constitution any 
 evidence that such a sentiment existed in this 
 State. He said that although none of ihe elec- 
 tors should be declared incapable of holding of 
 fice, still it was true as an universally recognized 
 principle that the electoral body was bound to se- 
 lect one ot their own class. This may rightfully 
 be insisted on, as to all officers, but it was not 
 usually inserted in written Constitutions. It was 
 tacitly assumed that a stranger could not be intro- 
 duced, and that all selections must be from the 
 constituent body. Thisappearsfrom thesilenceof 
 all our constitutions as to the qualifications of 
 judges, and other officers of State, except where 
 something beyond the ordinary qualifications of an 
 elector was intended to be prescribed. For aught 
 that appears in the Constitution of the U. S., an 
 alien might be Chief Justice of the Supreme 
 Court, and most of the officers under our State 
 Constitution might be held by an alien, a woman 
 or an infant. By the United States Constitution 
 the President was required to have certain quali- 
 fications beyond those of an elector. So, as to 
 Senators, and so as to members of the House of 
 Representatives. He supposed, however, that 
 there was a species of common law upon this 
 subject unwritten, but universally understood 
 to this effect, that no man was eligible to any of- 
 fice in the State who did possess the general qua- 
 lification of an elector. He meant the general, 
 not the special or incidental qualification pre- 
 
 scribed merely for the regulation of the places of 
 voting. Six months residence in the county is a 
 special qualification, but a person not possessing 
 that might have the general qualifications of an 
 elector that is, he might be a white male citi- 
 zen of 21 yisars of age, and for one year a resident 
 within the State. This, by the common law, 
 would render him eligible to any office. If so, 
 there was no necessity for any special provision 
 in relation to the Governor, and the whole sec- 
 tion should be stricken out without inserting the 
 words proposed by the gentleman from St. Law- 
 rence, (Mr. RUSSELL,) requiring that the Govern- 
 or should be an elector. If the section was 
 stricken out, the Governor would stand on the 
 same footing as all other officers. If however he 
 was mistaken as to the common law rule, then it 
 would be proper to insert somewhere in the Con- 
 stitution a provision as suggested by the gentle- , 
 man from Ontario, (Mr. WORDEN) requiring that 
 all persons in order to be eligible to office should 
 possess the general qualifications of an elector. 
 This might be necessary to prevent the disquali- 
 fications of a person who was in every other re- 
 spect a qualified elector, but who had not the spe- 
 cial qualification of residence in the county for 
 six months next prior to the election. Such a 
 provision would be proper and would include the 
 Governor in common with all other officers. Be- 
 lieving therefore that the common law was well 
 enough understood, or if not, that a general pro- 
 vision of the kind suggested would be introduced, 
 though he could not vote to introduce the new 
 matter now proposed he would vote to strike out 
 the whole section, as useless in respect to any- 
 practical results, repugnant to the true principles 
 of a democratic State, and improperly evincing a 
 distrust of our constituents. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said that he regarded this matter 
 as of very little importance. It was entirely 
 immaterial whether this section was retained or 
 not. He had no idea that it had ever been of any 
 practical benefit to the people of this State that 
 it had ever saved them from an injudicious choice 
 or that it ever would. He had no idea that the 
 people of this state for long centuries to come 
 if the labor of our hands should continue so long 
 would ever be disposed to elect a man as Gov- 
 ernor who did not possess all these qualifica- 
 tions. He had no fears that the people of this 
 state were so liable to delusion, or to be led away 
 by passion, or by any improper influence, that a 
 foreigner who might happen at a period of high 
 political excitement, to take the stump, might be 
 elected Governor. Nor had 'he any fear that the 
 people, whether restrained or not by constitu- 
 tional provisions, could be so far operated upon 
 by improper considerations as to make an inju- 
 dicious choice. Gentlemen seemed to suppose 
 that we were trenching upon the rights of the 
 people when we went beyond those defects in 
 the Constitution which had been the subject of 
 complaint, and his friend from Columbia (Mr. 
 JORDAN) had indicated it as his opinion that we 
 ought to limit ourselves to certain specific de- 
 fects which had been the occasion of our con- 
 vening. He did not regard himself, as confin- 
 ed to those narrow limits. He (Mr. H.) stood 
 there to make, as far as his feeble efforts would 
 go, the best Constitution that he was able to de- 
 
203 
 
 
 vise. And whatever in the old Constitution 
 could be improved by alteration, by the intro- 
 duction of any new principle, or the striking out 
 of any thing now in it, he felt it to be his duty to 
 go for it, whether ,the people had complained 
 of it or not. We are here to revise the Consti- 
 tution to make it in our judgment so as best to 
 promote the great interests of the people. Now 
 what is the office of a Constitution ? It is to 
 provide the machinery by which the people can 
 carry out effectively, the great work of Sfelf-gov- 
 ernment the form, the mode of operation, 
 by which the people the great foundation of 
 . , in whom sovereign power naturally ex- 
 ,m carry out this work. And when we 
 define and prescribe a limit to delegated power, 
 we are then bringing ourselves within the prop- 
 er office of our great labor. But when we un- 
 dertake to prescribe a limit to the power of the 
 sovereign, then we transcend our duties. And 
 here lies the great principle he thought involved 
 in this question. We are transcending our du- 
 ties in prescribing what they shall and shall not 
 do. Therefore he coincided entirely with the 
 view taken by the gentleman from New York 
 (Mr. O'CoNOR.) He had listened with great 
 interest and profound attention to the varied 
 arguments of learned and eloquent gentle- 
 men, who had advocated the retention 
 of this proposition in the Constitution. 
 These arguments were urged with great force, and 
 were he now sitting in a nominating convent ion 
 foi the office of Governor, he should feel that they 
 were sound and impressive, and he should feel it 
 to be his duty to be governed by them. But we 
 are not in that posiuon, not are our duties of ih<it 
 character. We aie simply to prescribe a form, a 
 rule, a machine, by which the people can conveni- 
 ently cany on their great work of self-government. 
 And' when vve attempt to limit them in reference 
 to the qualifications of candidates, we go beyond 
 the power cjmnaitted to our hands. His venera- 
 ble friend from Dulchess (Mr. TALLMADGK) yes 
 terday seemed to deplore that the people hau not 
 preset ibed to us limits within which we should 
 act. That was a question at the time of the pas 
 sage of the act. and there were those, and ihose 
 not a !ev, who were desirous that the action ol 
 this Convention should be limited to certain par 
 ticular dements in the Constitution, upon which 
 they were to operate. The people thought other 
 wise they sent us here to reform the Constitu- 
 to make it the best we could tor theii 
 
 interests and we were nut to be lir^ittd 
 
 in any mariner in what the people think it is our 
 duty to do. He would be allowed to refer for 
 .ut to the apt illustration of the gentlern:-.n 
 Duiciie.ss ol yesterday. He says that if he 
 sends a waggon to he repaired, and the mechanic 
 teais it in pieces and constructs a new one, tha 
 he was not bound to take it or to pay for it. Well 
 be it so j but let us carry the illustration a littli 
 further. Suppose the waggon was sent to the 
 mechanic to be made as good as mechanical power 
 would enable him. He sets about it and makes 
 it as good as new makes it better than ever be 
 fore. He is unlimited in his delegation of power 
 and under those circumstances sets about repair 
 ing it wherever he thinks it needed. We are ir 
 that position. We are to set about repairing th 
 
 Constitution wherever we th.nk it needs improve- 
 
 merit, and if we think it more consistent with the 
 
 emocratic sentiment to strike out a provision 
 
 lere, or one there, it was our duty to do it even 
 
 It hough it had never been the subject of com- 
 
 laint. As to the provision under consideration, 
 
 omplaint or no complaint, it was inconsistent 
 
 \-ith the great foundation principle on which our 
 
 ;overnment rested ; and therefore he should go to 
 
 ttike out the entire section. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN had at first been willing to take 
 he question at once and proceed to further busi- 
 less within the action of the Convention, but as 
 he debate had been continued, and differing as 
 ic did unfortunately from some of those gen- 
 lemen who had addressed the Convention with 
 great eloquence and effect, and being called upon 
 o vote, he deemed that he should but ill dis- 
 charge his duty if he did not briefly state some 
 iews of his own. Gentlemen had gone back to 
 elementary principles, and had endeavored to as- 
 certain under what circumstances we were here 
 what are our powers, and what are the rela- 
 ions that we bear to the people. And it had 
 >een said by some that we were the mere repre- 
 sentatives of the people, their mere agents. Our 
 rue relations are, that we are here not only as 
 he agents of the people, but as part and parcel 
 >f the people. To do what ? To perfect a Con- 
 ititution a fundamental law for the government 
 >f the people themselves, under which*they were 
 to act and to carry out the great machinery of go- 
 vernment. And he claimed that while sitting 
 lere in Convention, that he was one of the peo- 
 jle. He would admit that he was here in a de- 
 legated capacity, but not as agent authorized to 
 aind his constituents to any thing. He was here 
 together with the rest of the delegates from all parts 
 of the State, meeting in council for the purpose 
 of looking over the fundamental law and seeing 
 if we could not make a better arrangement among 
 ourselves for our own government, but he had 
 not that delegated power which authorized him 
 to bind the people to what he did here. The re- 
 sult of our action was to be submitted to them 
 and then they acted upon it, and he with 
 them as one of the people. It had been said here 
 that we had no right to restrict the great and ul- 
 timate power of the people, and that all power in 
 a democratic government was vested in them. 
 Nobody denied that nobody denied but that 
 this ultimate power was in the sovereign peo- 
 ple, but how was it to be exercised that was the 
 great question ? It was for that that we met. here 
 in Convention to endeavor to make a compact, 
 to say how this sovereign power should be exer- 
 cised. If that were so then he would ask if we 
 had not the right if the people had not the right 
 to establish just such a government as they 
 pleased. He supposed that they did possess that 
 right. It was true that we were very well agreed 
 in this country as to what kind of a government 
 we would have, but had the people ever yielded 
 the power to establish any government they 
 choose ? Certainly not, except so far as they sur- 
 rendered their power to the government of the 
 United States. If this be so, then we came down 
 to the question, as to what kind of a Constitution 
 we will have, and that brought him to the point. 
 It seemed to him that all were agreed on the pro- 
 
204 
 
 position, that we should have a governor in 
 whom should be vested the Executive power. 
 The question now was, should there be any qua- 
 lifications required of -a Governor in advance ? 
 Some said no impose no trammels on the peo- 
 ple. Let them select whom they please. Was 
 there a gentleman here who was not struck with 
 the good sense of a remark of one of the gentle- 
 men from New York, (Mr. NICOLL,) in regard to 
 the power of the majority. If it had indeed come 
 to this, that a majority acting together was to ex- 
 ercise all the power which the whole people pos- 
 sessed, and that without any restriction, without 
 any qualification or control, then what kind of a go- 
 vernment would we have ? Now, to make himself 
 understood for he was insisting here that we had 
 the right, and not only the right but that it was our 
 duty, to provide those safeguards which all expe- 
 rience and history has taught us to be proper. 
 To carry out his idea distinctly, he would suppose 
 that we were here talking over this matter 
 in a friendly way, and all alike desirous of estab- 
 lishing a government that should last for ever 
 agreeing upon the principle that in all republican 
 governments the majority must rule and that the 
 minority must acquiesce. Well, say the minority, 
 we must have some security, we want you to 
 agree in advance that we shall never be deprived 
 of life, liberty and property, without due process 
 of law. T,he majority would say that that was a 
 reasonable proposition, and would agree to it. 
 Very well, was that not a restriction upon the 
 power of the people, upon the power of the ma- 
 jority ? He might amplify these examples, and 
 might go through with the whole category of the 
 great rights of liberty and the privileges extorted 
 from King John by the sturdy barons of England, 
 for their protection. And he might take up the 
 constitution of this State, of the United States, 
 and of every State in the Union, and these res- 
 trictions would be found everywhere, and every 
 where assented to by the people. Well, we had 
 now come to consider about a Governor. " What 
 kind of a one will you give us ?" says one man of 
 the minority, to resume the dialogue. " Why, of 
 course, the best one that we can find," says the 
 majority ;" it is for our interest so to do." Says 
 the minority, " We have no doubt of that at all, 
 but let us talk it over do you want the right to 
 elect any one you please ?" Says the majority 
 " Yes, we will exercise it prudently." " Well," 
 replies the minority, " we are not certain that 
 you will do that; let us come to some understand- 
 ing about it. It is agreed among us all that 
 we are embarked in the same ship, and if 
 she is not brought safely into port, and we 
 do not have a good commander, and all 
 that, we will share our misfortunes together, and 
 it' forced, we will all go to the bottom together. 
 In talking this matter over, ope man says, Well, 
 now, from all writers who have written upon 
 man and the physiology of man, and from our 
 own experience, we know that the judgment ol 
 man is not matured until he has passed a certain 
 period of his life." What is that period! "I do 
 not know," says one. It is fixed by our laws thai 
 he shall arrive at his majority at the age of 21." 
 "Well," says another, " I do not think that a 
 good rule." I have read a book which says that a 
 inan ought to be emancipated at the age of 18 
 
 years. Another book declares that in a ^reat na- 
 tion a rr.an did not arrive lh majority until ha was 
 25 years. There was no absolute rule about it, 
 although it was now established all over Christ- 
 endom that a man should ariive at his majority at 
 21, for certain purposes. " But," says another, 
 " in order to be vested with the powers of Govern- 
 or, we desire that a man should be somewhat, old- 
 er, because his understanding and judgment would 
 not be fully ripened at the age of 21; we prefer 
 that hethould not be elected until he h.ad arrived 
 at the age 30." * Well," say they, these collect- 
 ive delegates, that seems to be reasonable, and 
 to satisfy you, we will agree to that." Well, 
 have not the people the right to make just such a 
 restriction as that, and was it any restriction upon 
 their liberties? Instances had been given of re- 
 markable precocity. Napoleon Bonaparte hrid 
 been alluded to and the gentleman, (Mr. HROWJN) 
 might have gone further and instanced the case 
 of Charles the XII of Sweden. At the age of 16 
 or 17 yeats of age, that young prince, in witnessing 
 a review of the troops, exclaimed that such troop* 
 ought not to be governed by a woman. And there 
 were enough of supple ministers who were pre- 
 pared to worship the rising star, instead oi the 
 setting luminary 1<> get up a conspiracy to place 
 the youthful prince on the throne. He might 
 have gone further into the history of that pnuce, 
 and seen him leading his people at the head of 
 her armies, through foreign lands, and scenes o{ 
 blood, never to return to his country. And he 
 should have pointed him out in history as one of 
 the mightiest captains the world ever produced. 
 But what was the fate of his country ? It will be 
 borne in mind lhat he never returned to it, and 
 great as he was as a captain, that he did not possess 
 the qualities for a wise ruler, and Sweden ha* 
 never recovered from the blow she received 
 through the errors of her young sovereign. He 
 would insist therefore that it was judicious and 
 safe to preserve some of these qualifications and 
 restrictions among ourselves, and it would not be 
 an evidence of a spirit of ilUberality on theirpart. 
 He submitted to his friend from New Ifork, (Mr. 
 O'CoNOR,) that it was no evidence of ilhberal- 
 ity on the part of the people in desiiing, that 
 the governor should be 30 years of age or that he 
 should be born here. He would not discuss the 
 question in relation to the qualifications hereto- 
 fore required under the Constitution of 1821, but 
 in his judgment there was no more a spirit of il- 
 liberality, in it than there was in the proposition 
 to leave the matter entirely open. The people 
 had a right to choose whom they please they 
 have if we so make the Constitution if otherwise 
 they have not. That was all there was about it. 
 But how stood the matter as to the original ques- 
 tion of propriety. The gentleman from St. Law- 
 rence proposes to strike out all qualifications 
 whatever, and leave the matter so that any one 
 can be chosen governor by the people. We were 
 told that this would be safe, and perhaps it would 
 be. But was there not a principle involved. Gen- 
 tlemen say that we are separated 3000 miles from 
 foreign countries and that there was no danger of 
 interference from that quarter. All history show* 
 us that in States adjoining each other, even in 
 elective monarchies, one source of the greatest 
 evils among them has been the intrigues of sur- 
 
205 
 
 rounding nations. He (Mr. M.) looked forward 
 to the period when the State of New York should 
 number from five to ten millions of inhabitants 
 and to the period not far distant when the po- 
 pulation of these United States shall number two 
 hundred millions and to the time when the val- 
 ley of the Mississippi shall contain some two- 
 thirds or three-quarters of that population. He 
 looked forward to the period when the Executive 
 of the United States if we go on in the career 
 we are now pursuing will be clothed with pow- 
 ers that any king in Europe might envy, let him 
 be ever so ambitious of power and to the period 
 when the struggles shall be great in this country 
 among men of ambition to be clothed with these 
 vast powers. The State of New York expressed 
 her views through the Executive he was the or- 
 gan through which she communicated with other 
 States and he was so much of a State Rights man 
 aa to wish ever to see the Empire State standing 
 on her own pedestal and her own rights. Now 
 some ambitious man may rise up, and having 
 made his arrangements, to complete his purposes 
 may send his beloved son to New York. He may 
 live here but a day may have an understanding 
 with the ambitious claimant for the Presidency 
 and by an understanding with men here he may 
 be brought forward as a candidate for governor. 
 But it may be said that the people would not elect 
 him arid that we were all safe there. But how 
 are our governors nominated and brought forward. 
 Was it not known that the power in this partic- 
 ular was always in the hands of some few 
 individuals here or elsewhere. These men 
 might have this understanding with (tie fir 
 man and ail who aie acquainted with ihe cor- 
 rupting influence of party politics, know this to be 
 easy they may bring forward his son and induce 
 the people to elect him, und thus would theinflu 
 ence ol this State be secured. He (Mr. M.) wouk 
 adn.it that this manner of supposing cases was no 
 d very good way of arguing, but it was an evidenc* 
 that there might dangers arise Irom leaving ihi; 
 matter unrestricted, which would be fully guard 
 ed against by the restrictions. It was genera 
 ROOT and he presumed nobody would deny hi: 
 democracy whomadethe motion in the last Con 
 mention, to fix the age at 30 years. The Stale o 
 Michigan, referred to, was an unfortunate illustra 
 tiou lor the side it was adduced. Were gemleinei 
 aware of the circumstances connected with the 
 fcdininisiration of her young Governor ? He wa 
 there as Governor ol the Territorial Government 
 under the authority of the President, to whom he 
 was hound to report, and acting there, in point o 
 fact, as the representative of the general govern 
 oient. Difficulties had arisen between Michiga 
 and Ohio, in relation to a question ot boundary 
 and this young Governor wrote articles arid -A\ 
 peals to the pride and patriotism of Michigan 
 and finally led her troops and rode down to th 
 mouth ot the Maumee, to whip the J3uck Eyes 
 Well, the State Government was formed, an 
 iu the Constitution this restriction was left ou 
 for the very purpose, perhaps, of enabling fh<w 
 who hail ihe control of the machinery of g< 
 *rnment in their hands, to making this youn 
 Didu the first Governor. He was thus chosen, an 
 .t followed? Summon to the stand thos 
 ijo acted with him, a phalanx ot young me: 
 
 lost of them from the State of New-York, many 
 f whom he (Mr. M ) knew personally, and you 
 ould find them a visionary knot of schemers. 
 Vhy they located banks where the foot ol man 
 efore had never trod. They put them in the 
 ollow trees even the homes of the wild cats 
 nd hence the term wild cat bank. The whole 
 ountry was full of it, and Michigan still suffers 
 rom its effects ; and was she not compelled, to 
 be deep regret of her honest citizens, even to 
 epudiate, in consequence of the course of her 
 oung Governor and his associates And these last 
 11 fell with him when his wild career was run. 
 e hoped therefore we should derive a little 
 knowledge from that sad experience, and require 
 hat our Governor should possess some of the 
 unifications of age. Mr. M. again repeated that 
 t would be no restriction on the rights of 
 he people. He was willing to yield that the 
 word native should be stricken out, but he asked 
 hat the remainder of the qualifications might be 
 etained in its original form. Or otherwise, 
 hat the provision in the New Jersey Con- 
 ititution, that the Governor should have been 
 .werity years a citizen ot the United Slates, and 
 of the State for seven years, should be adopted, 
 ie would refer gentlemen, in answer to some of 
 he arguments on the other side, to the Delaration 
 )f Independence, in effect that the people the 
 governed in organizing their government, and 
 rescnbing qualifications for office, acted for them- 
 selves and for their mutual protection. Under 
 hat rule he was willing to meet gentlemen here. 
 [t was no great hardship either for a man to wait 
 until he was thirty years; for, although pre. 
 vious to that he may Lave displayed every attri- 
 bute of genius, still when that time arrived, it might 
 be found that he was lacking in that sound judgment 
 and experience we require of a Governor. He 
 hoped therefore that this section would be suffered 
 to stand as it is, with simply the word " native" 
 stricken out, or else that the provision of the 
 New Jersey Constitution would be adopted. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he regretted to hear 
 gentlemen say that a question of this kind had bet- 
 ter be taken without any great debate or discus- 
 sion, for if they were to divide on any great 
 question of principle or public policy, it was proper 
 that the dividing line should be clear and distinct- 
 ly defined. Now he could not regard this ques- 
 tion as involving merely the consideration whe- 
 ther a young man under (he age of 30, shall be 
 elected Governor of this State; or whether a resi- 
 dence of five years was requisite for a candidate 
 tor Governorship; he regarded it as involving a 
 great and fundamental principle totally distinct 
 from these two considerations. It was whether 
 in reference to the formation of a constitution, and 
 the organization of a democratic republican gov. 
 ernment, the people were capable of being en- 
 tru.-,ted with the right of judging whether a man 
 under 30 years of age or one over that age is a fit 
 and proper man u serve them in this office. That 
 was the question, and the only one involved in this 
 discussion. Now, gentlemen seemed to forget 
 that when they put it on the ground which they 
 did, they involved themselves he would not say 
 in an absurdity but fie would say that their pro. 
 position entirely failed when it came to be practi- 
 cally applied. Their arguments also were faUe, 
 
206 
 
 when they came to give them a practical applica- 
 tion. It was said you must not elect a man under 
 30 years, because in all human probability he will 
 be incapable of discharging the duties of his of. 
 fice, and therefore the people should be guarded 
 against what on their part might be an act of in- 
 discretion. He would concede, if they pleased, 
 that it would be highly indiscreet to elect a young 
 man under 30 years of age, but he held that it was 
 equally indiscreet, nay more so, to elect a super- 
 annuated old dotard of over 80. Then why not, 
 if we undertook to limit and control and tie up 
 the public judgment, in the one case, why not in 
 the other? There much more danger to be ap- 
 prehended in electing a man whose powers of 
 mind have left him whose judgment and capacity 
 are destroyed by age than in electing one who 
 has not arrived at the years of discretion. Was 
 it to be supposed that any man from any quarter 
 could receive the vote of the people of this State 
 until he had exhibited himself in some public ca- 
 pacity, and shown t<> the people that he was ca- 
 pable. It was an absurdity to say that such an 
 event could take place. It was an impeachment 
 of the public intelligence to suppose thijt the peo- 
 pie were ever to elect a chief magistrate unless he 
 had in various ways and by public employments 
 shown his fitness and capacity. On the other hand, 
 the case does not admit of the same safeguards. 
 He would take a distinguished man, who had oc- 
 cupied high office in this Slate a man who had 
 exhibited himself abundantly qualified for any 
 trust ; but who like others had fallen into the sere 
 and yellow leaf, become stricken by age,and his fac- 
 ulties become impaired. But such a man goes be- 
 tore the public with all the brilliancy of his for- 
 mer career, and the public mind would not per- 
 haps be drawn to the fact that all his capacities 
 for public usefulness had been destroyed. There 
 vras then more danger of a superannuated old man 
 being elected than an " indiscreet raw boy" as his 
 friend from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS,) had complained. 
 If then, a proposition was to be incorpoiated into 
 the Constitution to remedy any apprehended dan- 
 gerfrom this source, let it be consistent, and pre- 
 scribe the period beyond which the people should 
 not elect,'and when the candidate should be in- 
 competent. Now he had seen in some constitutions 
 the qualification which he had intimated that no 
 man over a certain age should be elected governor. 
 And if this principle was to be applied to the of- 
 fice of Governor, then let us be consistent, and do 
 not let it stand as a mere theory in the constitu- 
 tion. Did any gentleman propose to apply it to 
 the office of lieutenant governor ? And yet what 
 had we seen in this State? He did not mention 
 the fact by way of complaining of it by any 
 means; but we had seen a gentleman of great 
 and distinguished ability elected chief magistrate, 
 and within three weeks resign his office, and we 
 had seen an individual coming into the exercise of 
 the duties ot chief magistrate, whom he would 
 admit wa< of equally distinguished ability. The 
 case might occur again, and thfe individual might 
 not have the qualifications it was now proposed to 
 require, and would it not be inconsistent then to 
 say that a governor shall have certain qualifica- 
 tions, without imposing the same restrictions on 
 the lieutenant governor, or any one who ever 
 might succeed to that station ? Some gentlemen 
 
 without arguing on the piopriety of such restric- 
 tions, had contented themselves with referring to 
 the constitutions of other states; and because 
 they found some such provisions in the constitu- 
 tions of other Stales, they were willing to incor- 
 porate them in that of our own. He had looked 
 into some of the constitutions of other states also, 
 and he found provisions in them that he never de- 
 sired to see incoporated here. And yet if gentle- 
 men should be disposed to incorporate ihehi, they 
 would probably argue fiom the fact that they 
 were incorporated in constitutions of other states, 
 and therefore being prescribed by the wisdom of 
 their ancestors and by those who had gone before 
 them, they ought to be in the constitution ol this 
 State. On looking through the more modern con- 
 stitutions, he found no such qualification as that 
 now proposed to be retained here. Another gen- 
 tleman had said that he would leave as much as he 
 could untouched in the constitution; and said that 
 we might as well determine in the outset how 
 much of the old instrument is to be swept away. 
 The people had sent us here to sweep away as ma. 
 ny absurdities as we found in it, and to conform it 
 to the spirit of the age, and the advanced intelli- 
 gence of the public mind ; and if we found any 
 provision in it incompatible with that pubjic in* 
 telligence, the people sent us here to strike it out. 
 Some gentlemen had said there boldly, that no 
 complaint had been uttered against this clause 
 until the question was discussed here. Now, he 
 had never heard any intelligent gentleman speak 
 ofthis second section without condemning it as 
 senseless and unmeaning. Within the last four 
 years it had been amended in one particular, and 
 when it was under consideration in 1845 in the 
 legislature of this Stale, every gentleman who 
 spoke in reference to it, without distinction of par- 
 ty, only regretted that the amendment had not 
 gone to the whole clause and one without a 
 qualifying or dissenting voice every man he had 
 heard express an opinion on that section unequi- 
 vocally condemned it. In the old clause there was 
 a property qualification, but that was stricken out 
 by the amendment of 1844, which was latified in 
 1845, and the legislature by which the second 
 vote was given only regretted that it had not an 
 .opportunity to submit to the people whether the 
 whole section ought not logo. Hiscolleague had 
 found the principle of this restriction in the de- 
 mocratic doctrine of '98. He trusted his friend 
 was not prepared to rest himself on the democrat- 
 ic doctrine of '98 and the theory which governed 
 and controlled at that day. He really hoped 
 his friend had come down to the democratic 
 creed of '46, and was not going to rest him- 
 self on the old doctrine of '98, and to form 
 a constitution and government upon it that 
 was to control us to-day. Why it was then 
 sound democratic doctrine, as then understood, 
 that a property qualification was necessary to 
 enable a man to vote for the office of governor. 
 But since then, we have made advances in the 
 science of civil government; the public mind has 
 progressed on that subject, and has become more 
 intelligent, and the people are now better able 
 than they were then to discharge the high du- 
 ties of administering, directing and controling 
 their government. Every argument that hag 
 been brought forward to show that there should 
 
207 
 
 be a restriction of this character in the Consti- 
 tution, goes with equal force to show that the 
 people are incapable of electing a governor when 
 he has been nominated. It all rested upon the 
 Assumption that the people will misjudge in the 
 lion of a candidate and that if left unre- 
 strained in their choice they will fall into the 
 absurdity of electing some man under thirty 
 years of age, incompetent to discharge the duties 
 of the office, and that therefore they should not 
 have the opportunity to do so. Now if there was 
 any thing in the argument that the people were 
 not capable of discriminating between a young 
 man under thirty and one over thirty years of age, 
 then they certainly would not be capable of dis- 
 criminating and judging between any man who 
 be nominated, and if there was anything in the 
 did not think there was 
 equal force to the voting 
 
 
 government so much so as to gain the unquali- 
 fied approbation of the people of this entire state. 
 But unfortunately he belongs to the party to which 
 he (Mr. WORDEN ) belonged a party that is al- 
 ways in a minority in this State, or a great por- 
 tion of the time. But he might propose to nom- 
 inate him for the high office of Governor, know- 
 ing that there were enough of the political asso- 
 ciates of his friend from New- York, who in view 
 of his distinguished services, great fitness and 
 qualifications for the office would vote for 
 him ; but unfortunately his friend from New- 
 York belonging to an irresponsible majority 
 under the cloak and cover of the constitution, 
 exercised that very despotic power whicn prevents 
 him and his friend* from puuing his candidate in 
 a position to obtain the votes of" a majority of the 
 people of the Slate. The gentleman would see 
 then that his principle could not be carried out. 
 Gentlemen had adverte-1 to ether fads and argu 
 
 merits to illustrate their positions, in all of which 
 they did not seem to distinguish between elemen- 
 
 tary sovereign power and delegated power. He 
 apprehended when we came to form a Constitu- 
 tion we came to make a compact, a conventional 
 agreement under which we will live and that 
 agreement in itsdetails constituted the tnachmery 
 of government ; the delegated power we will con- 
 fer, in the various departments of the government. 
 AH these were arbitrary rules and conventional 
 agreements entered into on the expediency of 
 things and not on any ground of principle, but 
 when we came to givo application to it to apply 
 (he motive power that set it in motion we will 
 find a different element in the sovereignty, the el- 
 ementary power of the State, the people, the po- 
 pular will. Now it was behind the intelligence 
 of the age, it was certainly not up to the intelli- 
 gence of the age, to undertake to say the popular 
 will shall be restrained 
 checks and curbs to it, 
 
 that it shall have 
 as stated by the 
 
 argument and he 
 it applied with 
 
 for candidates nominated, for if they could 
 not select understandingly they could not vote 
 understandingly when they had been selected. 
 His friend from New- York (Mr. NICOL.L,) had in 
 admirable language and temper drawn t our atten- 
 tion to the great principles of government, that it 
 was not a majority that should dictate but the 
 whole people ; and he argued (and his argument 
 made a deep impression on the committee,) that 
 it was necessary to retain this clause because a 
 majority might force on the state a young man 
 under 30, contrary to the will of the minority. 
 Now he asked the gentleman from New- York" if a 
 majority has not forced on the minority himself 
 amongst the number a Governor altogether con- 
 trary to his choice and selection ? Could the gen- 
 tleman then discriminate between one case and 
 another between inflicting on them a Governor 
 over 30 years whom we would not desire to elect, 
 and one under 30 whom we would elect ? But 
 he would show the gentleman from New- York 
 how his proposition if carried out, would work a 
 more perfect tyranny than even he supposed the 
 majority might exercise. He would suppose that 
 a man had rendered some distinguished service to 
 the people of the state, and had evinced in the 
 rendition of those services abundant capacity for 
 the discharge of any public duty, and abundant 
 knowledge ot the theory and principles of the- subjects, or those whom he has the power to 
 
 yentleman from New York (Mr. MORRIS) 
 These checks are proper in that department of 
 government, which exercises so much of delega- 
 ted power as to require the control of any other 
 department. In that sense and application, it 
 was, that he understood the term checks and bal- 
 ances to be applied ; but it was a novel doctrine 
 brought forward here he ventured to say for the 
 first time in the whole history of the government 
 that in the formation of a government, checks 
 and guards should be placed upon the exercise of 
 the popular will. We have gone by that, and it 
 is too late to return to it again. There was a 
 time when we did impose some checks, and 
 guards were placed on the exercise of the popu- 
 lar power by requiring property and other artifi- 
 cial qualifications to distinguish those who should 
 exercise the sovereign power. But it was too 
 late, he trusted, to return to that artificial 
 
 mode of 
 
 ry sovereignty 
 
 the 
 
 popul 
 
 regulating t 
 :igntv of the 
 
 the exercise of the elementa- 
 land. We have abandoned 
 
 principle of putting checks and guards on the 
 ular will. Some gentlemen had said the peo- 
 ple should be restrained in this respect, because 
 in times of popular excitement, they misjudge. 
 Now, he submitted to those who advanced this 
 argument, that it was the very argument by 
 which every despot on earth would restrain his 
 
 keep from the exercise of popular rights and it 
 was the argument which had securely kept des- 
 pots on their thrones for ages and prevented men 
 from exercising those political rights which God 
 intended them to possess. It was the very frame 
 work and structure that supported despotism in the 
 world. Now, he wished to see the government 
 here without any sort of reference to a principle 
 or idea like this! He regarded but one conserv- 
 ative power that was capable of controlling and 
 checking the power of the government and that 
 was the popular will ; and when gentlemen will 
 be wise enough for it is wisdom,* and the high- 
 est attribute of wisdom to acknowledge the prin- 
 ciple, we shall have a conservative power in this 
 government that will conduct it prosperously. But 
 if they resorted to artificial expedients, or provid- 
 ed for classes which were tobe clothed with some- 
 thing like elementary power, as checks on the 
 rest, so long would they deprive us of the benefit 
 that would result from the enjightened action of 
 the public will. Suppose they should, in firm- 
 
208 
 
 ing this class, introduce the word "native" as a 
 restriction in the Constitution, and submit it to 
 the people for consideration, did they apprehend 
 they would be likely to get from the people their 
 clear, unbiassed intelligent judgment on such a 
 provision of a Constitution. No; they would 
 not be likely to arrive at any such result. It 
 would be^ placing in the hands of every dema- 
 gogue in the land a power, a weapon, by which 
 he could disturb the public sentiment and the 
 judgment of the community. The public atten- 
 tion would be turned from the consideration of 
 the more important affairs of this Convention by 
 agitating this very unimportant and useless provis- 
 ion. He desired to see the Constitution framed so 
 as to leave the public mind and will to its free and 
 unrestricted action, so that nothing might inter- 
 vene between that action and the calm considera- 
 tion of the constitution we may submit to them, 
 and the action of the government that may be 
 formed under that constitution. When they should 
 corne to this and act upon this principle, they 
 would act wisely, and they would frame a govern- 
 ment whose administration would be metre likely 
 to be controlled by the sound sense of the popular 
 mind. His friend from Chautauque (Mr. MAR- 
 VIN) had adverted to the great fundamental pro- 
 vision contained in the Declaration of Indepen- 
 dence that all power is derived from the consen- 
 ts the governed ; but how did that principle ap 
 ply to this provision, that no man under 30 years 
 of age shall have any power in the adminisiration 
 of the government? Was there not much of 
 efficient power of this government in the class 
 under 30 years, and would they consent to the for- 
 mation ol this restriction which which will ex 
 elude them from the administration ot public af- 
 fairs. Would they get a government ""with the 
 consent of the governed' which disfranchised one 
 portion of the constituency ,or governed them con- 
 trary to their will? Certainly not. The ver> 
 proposition 'the gentleman advocated violates the 
 principle he brings to sustain it. He would have 
 been content himself in regard to the second sec- 
 tion, if the committee that brought it forward had 
 simply stricken out the word ' native" and the 
 age which was prescribed he would be content 
 to let it stand as probably it will stand when the 
 vote is taken on it and on the proposition of his 
 friend from St. Lawrence. He had too great re- 
 gard for the public intelligence to suppose that 
 any party would bring forward a candidate who 
 had not resided here five years. ' 
 
 Mr. WARD rose to a question of oider. The 
 question befoie the Convention wag . n animaied 
 one, and he hoped gentlemen would hereafter re- 
 strict themselves to the discussion of that alone. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN then stated the question to 
 be on the amendment of the gentleman from St. 
 Lawrence. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that to obviate an ob- 
 jection which had been raised to that amendment, 
 he would offer the following: 
 
 No person who does not possess the qualifications of an 
 elector, other than residence in the town or county, shall 
 be eligible to the office of governor. 
 
 On motion of Mr. MURPHY the committee rose 
 and reported progress, and then 
 
 The Convention adj. to II o'clock to-morro\N 
 morning* 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (21th day) July 1 . 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. DI-^WYCKOFF. 
 ADJOURNMENT. 
 
 Mr. ANGELL rose and offered a resolution 
 that when the Convention adjourn to morrow f 
 (Thursday, July 2,) it should adjourn to Tues- 
 day next, July 7th ; and that it shall thereafter 
 meet at 10 o'clock, A. M. 
 
 This w r as carried almost unanimously. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend the 19th 
 standing rule, so that the tnree days notice of in- 
 tention to move a reconsideration of any subject 
 should not apply in committee of the whole. 
 
 He made this motion because he believed that 
 it was an omission on the part of the committee 
 which reported the rules. He desired to give to 
 the committee of the whole the fullest liberty to 
 reconsider their acts, and he supposed it was not 
 intended by the committee to impose any restrict- 
 tion. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved that Mr. DANA have 
 leave of absence from Friday next to Wednesday 
 next, both days inclusive. 
 
 ABOLITION OF BOARDS OF SUPERVISORS. 
 Mr. CROOKER offered the following, which 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, Tliat committee No. 7, be directed to enquire 
 into the propriety and expediency of abolishing the offices 
 of Supervisor; and of conferring the powers exercised by 
 the Boards of Supervisors, upon some less numerous and 
 less expensive body. 
 
 AN ADDITIONAL SECRETARY. 
 
 Mr. WILLARD offered a resolution that Mr. 
 BEARDSLEY be appointed an additional Secretary 
 to this Convention, and that he have charge of the 
 Library and the delivering of the stationery as 
 heretofore. Mr. W. said that up to the present 
 time, Mr. BEARDSLEY had attended very punc- 
 tually on the members of the Convention, and 
 had most diligently and efficiently discharged the 
 duties of the position to which the Convention 
 had appointed him. But still, under the act call- 
 ing the Convention, there was no authority vest- 
 ed in them, to appoint a Librarian, and conse- 
 quently there was no authority for the Comptrol- 
 ler to remunerate Mr. Beardsley for the efficient 
 services he was rendering the Convention. And 
 it was on this occount, and to remedy this, that he 
 (Mr. W.) had offered this resolution. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that tne gentleman 
 from Albany (Mr. WILLARD) would not effect 
 the object he appeared to have in view by the 
 passage of the resolution in in its present form j 
 that is, to have Mr. Beardsley paid for the effi- 
 cient services which he has been rendering to the 
 Convention for the past four or five weeks. The 
 Comptroller considers that he is not authorised to 
 draw his warrant for the pay of Mr. Beardsley, 
 whilst acting as Librarian to the Convention, be- 
 cause the Convention had no power or authority 
 to appoint a Librarian ; but that he would be au- 
 thorised to draw his warrant for his pay, if he was 
 appointed one of the Secretaries of the Conven- 
 tion. And if he is merely appointed as a Secre- 
 ta^y from this time out, according to this resolu- 
 tion, he cannot draw his back pay for the time he 
 had been acting as Librarian. He would there- 
 fore suggest an amendment to remedy the defect 
 
 Mr, P. then modified the resolution as to make 
 
209 
 
 it read, that Mr. BEARDSLTCY, shall be deemed to 
 have been acting as an additional Secretary since 
 the first day of June last. 
 
 The resolution thus modified was then put and 
 carried. 
 
 On motion of Mr. WARD the Convention then 
 went into committee of the whole on the 
 REPORT ON THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE 
 KXKCUTIVE. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD resumed the Chair. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY was entitled to the floor from 
 yester 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that although he consider- 
 ed the principle involved in the question now be- 
 fore the committee as a very important one, in 
 view of the further action of the Convention, he 
 would yield the floor, and waive any remarks if 
 it were the desire of the committee to take the 
 question. [Many voices, ** go on."] Mr. M. 
 proceeded. In submitting the other day the mo- 
 tion to strike out the word " Native" from the 
 section as reported, he stated that he would fol- 
 low it up, if it prevailed, with a further amend- 
 ment abolishing all distinction between the qual- 
 ifications of electors and elected, which would be 
 the case if the section were stricken out altogeth- 
 He had. however, been anticipated in mak- 
 ing such an amendment by others. He had " set 
 the ball in motion" but he had not been left 
 " solitary and alone." Gentlemen had come up 
 gallantly to this attack upon the last foothold of 
 popular restriction, from all parts of the state, 
 and from all parties and sections in this hall ; but 
 the ground had been contested inch by inch, by oth- 
 ers of great talent, experience, and learning. He 
 therefore hoped that he might be indulged in a few 
 remarks in reply to objections which had been ur- 
 ged against the proposition under consideration. 
 We are met at the threshold with the objectionthat 
 we have no rigiitto make alterations of this kind, 
 and are confined to remedying such defects as had 
 been pointed out in popular and legislative dis- 
 cussions. In reply to this, he would ask where 
 do gentlemen find a warrant for the position ? 
 Certainly not in the act under which this conven- 
 tion was legalized ; for that authorizes us to re- 
 vise the constitution, not a part, but the whole 
 of it, in such manner as we may deem conducive 
 to the interests and welfare of the commonwealth. 
 Certainly not in any popular expression ; for no 
 one will pretend that any such has been formally 
 made, and as to what may have been the motives 
 of voters, nothing can be known. They were 
 undoubtedly various. In this matter, therefore, 
 each member representing an independent con- 
 stituency must judge for himself; and he there- 
 fore denied the right of any one to question the 
 action of a majority of this Convention on any 
 alteration which they might propose of the pre- 
 sent Constitution. *It is sufficient that we are 
 here to revise it. Having possession of the sub- 
 ject matter we must treat it according as our 
 judgments dictate. He was not one who believed 
 that every change was reform. He wished to 
 stand by the old landmarks, and depart from them 
 only when it was necessary ; but when it was ne- 
 cessary to depart from them, he would have no 
 hesitation in doing so else he would not be here. 
 
 the present constitution were perfect, there 
 was no necessity of this Convention. If we find 
 
 in it either a defect in the working of the system, 
 or a conflict with principle, it is not only our 
 right but our duty to correct the one and remove 
 the other, even though the public mind may not 
 have been directed to it. Government is not 
 an exact science. It is eminently an impro- 
 ving and experimental one. We must adapt it 
 to the change of circumstances which we find 
 continually taking place around us, in the physi- 
 cal and material world. We are engaged in re- 
 volution, peaceful and bloodless, but still a revo- 
 lution : we are seeking to establish one govern- 
 ment on the subversion of another. For his part 
 he desired to see even such revolutions but seldom . 
 The way to avoid them, was to make our work 
 now as perfect as our judgment will enable us to 
 do : we might even anticipate a little ; for he re- 
 garded the stability and continuance of any sys- 
 tem which maybe adopted, as very desirable. In 
 his opinion, this unrestrained examination was 
 expected from us, on all sides. Why were our 
 tables daily groaning under the load of communi- 
 cations, pamphlets, and newspapers, from our 
 constituents, and from the friends of reform in 
 other States ? and why was it that we had lec- 
 tures upon the subject of our labors, from a gen- 
 tleman who had travelled hundreds of miles for 
 that purpose, if it were not that the eyes of the 
 friends of human improvement were turned 
 towards us from all parts of the world ? The 
 population, wealth, resources, and intelligence of 
 the State of New- York, gave her a prominence 
 in the Confederacy, acknowledged by all here, at 
 least. The great principles which have been 
 discussed since the present Constitution was 
 framed, and which have been developed through 
 the inquiring spirit of the age, quickened by its 
 wonderful facilities of intercourse, and of the 
 transmission of intelligence, must here receive 
 form and vitality. The current of reform, thorough 
 and radical reform, is irresistible. All attempts to 
 prevent it are futile,and those who make them,seek 
 but to strangle the infant Hercules in his cradle. 
 He would pass from this formal objection to the 
 consideration of one which had been urged with 
 great force by h:s friend from New Yorft, (Mr. 
 NICOLL,,) and by the gentleman from Columbia, 
 (Mr. JORDAN,) that the striking out the proposed 
 qualifications of candidates for the office of Go- 
 vernor, would leave the rights of the minority in 
 the unrestrained power of the majority. If this 
 were true, he would stand shoulder to shoulder 
 with those gentlemen in resisting the motion. 
 He concurred with them in the views they had 
 taken of the rights of individuals and of minori- 
 ties, and of the tyranny of majorities. He be- 
 lieved it made no difference to the sufferer whe- 
 ther it was one or a many-headed monster which 
 oppressed him. More, he believed that majori- 
 ties were not always right that they were some- 
 times wrong. He only adopted them in all pro- 
 per cas~s where a general public object was to 
 be attained, as furrishing the best rule of action, 
 because they were more likely to be right than 
 minorities. In all this then he agreed with those 
 gentlemen ; but he denied that these principles 
 had any application in the present case, which 
 was broadly distinguished < rom the cases which 
 they put of private or individual A* personal right 
 The choice of a Governor, is not an exercise of a 
 
210 
 
 power of government. It is merely the selection 
 of an agent to perform ministerial duties, who 
 can do nothing except as the laws confer the pow- 
 er upon him. The Executive, as we understand 
 the term, has no portion of the sovereign power, 
 except his Veto, and that is a protection of mino- 
 rities. This was the doctrine in the Revolution, 
 and it is so laid down by all writers of eminence 
 since. Lord Brougham, in his late work on Po- 
 litical Philosophy, expressly says it is more 
 strictly correct to consider the Legislature alone 
 supreme, because whatever authority has the 
 power of making laws, has of necessity the pow- 
 er also of directing and controlling their adminis- 
 tration and their execution. If this view of Exe- 
 cutive authority be correct, and it appeared to him 
 it was, the Governor can do nothing to affect the 
 right of minorities. He cannot suspend the right 
 of habeas corpus, to which the gentleman from 
 New York alluded, or violate any other personal 
 right. The right of a majority to select a Gover- 
 nor does not enable that majority to take 
 away the property of an individual without 
 compensation, or destroy life, or interfere with 
 the happiness of any one. It is therefore not 
 true that we propose to leave any power in 
 the hands of the majority which they can use 
 to the prejudice of the minority. But let us pro- 
 ceed a step further in this argument. We pro- 
 pose not to confer but to leave the power of ap- 
 pointment in the people to let them act in their 
 original capacity. We refuse to delegate that 
 power to any other body. We believe that it will 
 be best exercised by the majority and yet we are 
 afraid to trust them. It is here that we betray -a 
 sense of distrust of the capacity of the people to 
 select proper agents. We hold out " the word 
 of promise to the ear and break it to the hope." 
 He opposed these restrictions because he wished 
 to be consistent for to him it appeared incongru- 
 ous to say in the same breath we have entire con- 
 fidence in the virtue and intelligence of the peo- 
 ple, and yet we will not trust them to choose a 
 Governor without restrictions, which from their 
 very nature must be nullities. We have abund- 
 ant instances of the utter disregard of those quali- 
 fications. The freehold qualification for public 
 officers was constantly and notoriously violated 
 before the alteration of the Constitution the last 
 year. So, two, instances have been alluded to of 
 the election of members of Congress under re- 
 quired age. Yet in those cases there is a perfect 
 remedy. But suppose the whole people of the 
 State should elect a man who was only twenty- 
 nine years and eleven months old ? How would 
 he be prevented from taking his seat ? And this 
 was no unprecedented case. It is precisely so 
 that we now hold our seats. We are here with- 
 out Constitutional authority. We are here in de- 
 fiance of a respectable though small majority 
 and we draw our pay without any Constitutional 
 right. Gentlemen argue this questipn as if we 
 proposed an innovation. As has been repeatedlj 
 remarked the Constitution of 1777 contained onl] 
 a single qualification, and that was that the Gov> 
 ernor should be a wise and discreet freeholder. 
 That provision has since been stricken out by an 
 almost unanimous vote of the people ; so that i 
 we take the constitution of 1777 and the action o 
 the people upon it, we have a precedent running 
 
 n all fours for striking out this section altogether. 
 And did not the people ^lect good Governors un- 
 ier the old constitution ? You had a George 
 Clinton, a Jay, a Tompkins, and De Witt Clin- 
 on. It is true that George Clinton and Tompkins 
 vere young men when they were elected, but no 
 Governors engaged more the confidence of the 
 ^tate. Both were elevated to the Vice Presiden- 
 y of the United States, and both were scarcely 
 hirty. In 1821 these qualifications as to age 
 vere introduced ; and the first Governor who was 
 dected under them turned out it is said to be so 
 ild and dogmatical, that though he went in by 
 he consent of both parties, he could find none to 
 advocate his re-election. The people have taken 
 are not to commit such an error the second time, 
 n the virtue and intelligence of the people we 
 lave the best guarantee that this duty will be best 
 serformed. They are quick to see their interest. 
 They will place no man in the Executive Chair 
 ,vho does not come with strong claims to their 
 ;onfidence, unless indeed they should unfortu- 
 lately be imposed upon, by the reputation in 
 "ormer days of some old man. There is the dan- 
 jer. Not that they will take one too young, or 
 newly among them. But if the people of this 
 State should become so debased as to repose this 
 rust in some bad man's hands in some eloquent 
 >r " raw youth," as one gentleman says, unworthy 
 >f the place, if they so far disregard the leg- 
 acy that has been bequeathed them by their fa- 
 ;hers as to choose a despot to rule over them, 
 ;heh, he admitted that his confidence in their 
 virtue and intelligence would be gone. But in the 
 dreary desolation of that hour, when your proud 
 abric of freedom shall be destroyed your re- 
 strictions would be of no avail, for your Constitu- 
 ;ion itself would be buried in the ruins. When 
 rie looked around him upon this Convention and 
 saw how, and of what men it was composed, and 
 aow its members had been elected, without any 
 qualification required by law, he felt that it was 
 the best answer that could be given these objec- 
 tions to point them to it. There were here young 
 men and old men between whom there was an 
 interval of fifty years, one class looking to the 
 future, and the other to the past ; yet beautifully 
 showing the wisdom of the constituency. The 
 young would represent the progress of the age ; 
 the old would see to it that the fruits of past ex- 
 ertion and labor should be protected and enjoyed. 
 For himself, he felt that he was an unworthy 
 member of this body ; yet he could not forbear 
 saying that he considered the doctrine of those 
 who would place restrictions upon the people in 
 the choice of their agents, as an unjust rebuke of 
 them in their selection of the members of this 
 Convention. Entertaining the views which he 
 had now expressed, he would vote to strike out 
 the entire section. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG said that having spoken 
 for a short time upon this subject yesterday, he 
 felt great reluctance in trespassing upon the time 
 of the committee again ; but he felt compelled, 
 by the remarks which had been made after he 
 took his seat yesterday, and the doctrines which 
 had been so broadly asserted upon that floor, not 
 only to make a brief allusion to them to day, but 
 in reply to enter his solemn protest against those 
 doctrines. He had been astonished to hear gen- 
 
211 
 
 tlemen yesterday lay down so broadly those pecu 
 liar principles, and advocating such doctrines a 
 had been advanced. It was advocated by then 
 that " the day has gone by, when checks are t 
 be placed upon the popular will." And again i 
 was asserted, that, " We have abandoned th 
 principle of putting checks and guards upon th 
 popular will." Now he would ask those gentle 
 man who advanced and advocated these, whethe 
 such were the doctrines of the majority of tha 
 Convention ? Were they the doctrines of the peo 
 pie, whom they had assembled there to represent 
 No ; he hoped not ; for he considered them to b 
 fundamental political heresies ; most alarming i 
 their character ; and in their action tending di 
 rectly to the worst disorganization and revolution 
 Upon what principle was this doctrine based ? 1 
 few evening's since, the President's desk in thi 
 Convention was occupied by a gentleman, (Mr 
 OWEN,) one of that class who are so very anxiou 
 to overturn (reform, as they term it) the whole fun 
 damental law of society, that they would go man) 
 hundreds of miles to accomplish this object to in 
 cite others to assist them or to make converts 
 and the doctrine urged upon that occasion was tha 
 human nature was perfect. But he did no 
 believe this ; and above all, he did not be 
 lieve that such a doctrine would ever have been 
 advocated by a member of this Convention. In 
 the course of the debate, gentlemen had assum 
 ed that the popular will was never wrong in 
 its action, and they presumed that the populai 
 sentiment must be always right. For this i 
 amounts to virtually, when we rightly and 
 carefully considered the doctrines that have been 
 advanced here. Now he well knew that a man 
 greatly risked his popularity who should attempt 
 to deny that the people are always right; who 
 should assert that the people can ever be wrong ; 
 they must all come there to that ground, and say 
 that the people an. infallible; that is, if they are to 
 be considered as true democrats. Now is there, he 
 would ask, in all candor, any member of that Con- 
 vention,who came there,and acted as if he believed 
 such a doctrine ? It was in effect saying that 
 every administration had been right, and that the 
 people had never erred. Now he would ascribe to 
 the people, all the virtue and intelligence to which 
 they are entitled ; he would go farther and admit 
 that no nation could be pointed out upon the face 
 of the earth, where the people were as virtuous 
 and intelligent as they are in this country ; but at 
 the same time the public mind might be misdi- 
 rected even in this country. He believed that 
 the great mass of the American people were vir- 
 tuous and incorruptible ; a large portion never 
 have ha,d their minds corrupted ; but yet at times 
 many of them have been led astray have had 
 their minds improperly influenced and have 
 grossly erred in their actions. This he believed 
 has been and will be again admitted by men 
 of both political parties. This has been 
 conceded most certainly in relation to one 
 great political struggle which had occur- 
 red not many years ago. And as they have 
 erred heretofore, they are fallible, and are liable 
 to err again. Those who have held to the doc- 
 trine of the people's infallibility, have assumed 
 that the people are at all times competent 
 to choose their own governor and other officers; 
 
 and that being so, any restrictions on them are 
 unjust and anti-republican. Now he had too good 
 an opinion of the American people to suppose 
 that they would subscribe to such doctrines as 
 these. Instead of the contemplated measures 
 these restrictions, (as they are called,) being re- 
 strictions upon the people, they are restrictions on 
 the representatives of the people. The gentle- 
 men seem to lose sight of our form r f govern- 
 ment. It is representative throughout ; not 
 only in its legislation, but in those conven- 
 tions, which select the candidates for the people 
 to vote for. There is no such thing as pure and 
 unmixed democracy in this country. Do the peo- 
 ple always select pure candidates ? We all know 
 the materials of which these conventions are com- 
 posed. There may be half a dozen or a do- 
 zen gentlemen who have their eyes on the guber- 
 natorial chair, having friends representing them 
 in that Convention ; and men are frequently sent 
 to these conventions, because they are known to 
 be in favor of this or that particular man. This 
 is the machinery by which Governors are nomi- 
 nated ; and the people being well aware that those 
 whom they send to these conventions are liable to 
 be improperly influenced, they do not wish to 
 give to their delegates unlimited control in the 
 choice of these candidates, any more than in the 
 enactment of laws. The restriction imposed, is a 
 restriction on their delegates their representa- 
 tives. The gentleman had said that the majority 
 must always rule, and that it did always rule in 
 this country. And that the minority must always 
 submit to it. Now he would ask that gentleman 
 to reflect a little, and say if this had always been 
 the case ? In one instance at least, an important 
 one, (and one of somewhat recent occurrence) the 
 will of the majority did not have sway; but a 
 principle had been adopted there which required 
 that a candidate should be nominated by a two- 
 :hird vote ; and in this instance most certainly, 
 the majority did not rule. Were not the wishes 
 of the people thwarted there i In this instance, 
 he favorite candidate of the majority was set on 
 one side by the minority. And he would also re- 
 mind them that many times during the strife and 
 contentions that would occur in these nominating 
 conventions, a majority would have to sub- 
 mit to a minority, because the minority threat- 
 ened to rebel unless their favorite candidate 
 vas chosen. In this way, too often the no- 
 minations were made, and it therefore did 
 not always happen that the best men were nomi- 
 lated. Now, the only question, it was said by 
 hese gentlemen, is, " Are the people capable of 
 choosing their own Governor ?" Certainly they 
 ire. He fully believed that the people could al- 
 vays and generally would make a good selection, 
 f entirely left to themselves ; but then all the 
 rominent public men are not sufficiently well 
 cnown to the people. Before a man was 30 years 
 >f age, however eminent for ability he might be, 
 here would not be time enough allowed for all 
 ris public acts to be thoroughly known and pass- 
 d upon by the people ; and this was sometimes 
 he case with those who were over 30 ; and there- 
 ore they devolved that duty of selecting a candi- 
 ate on their delegates, who should be restricted 
 when they put men before the people for their 
 ufirages. And no public principle is here vio- 
 
212 
 
 lated no rights of the people are here infringed 
 upon. Whilst the people are virtuous and intel- 
 ligent, they are also unsuspecting and confiding ; 
 and demagogues have frequently taken advantage 
 of this, to foist themselves into office ; and the 
 people have afterwards condemned them and their 
 acts. Demagogues are not all dead yet. Whilst 
 the people are virtuous, there will still always 
 be those who use all sorts of arts and stratagems 
 by which they endeavor to corrupt the people 
 and to betray them. Look at your criminal ca- 
 lendars, and you will find that virtue is not yet 
 so prevalent as to authorise you to abolish your 
 courts of justice : there are thousands who are dis- 
 qualified from even being electors disqualified 
 by crimes of various kinds. And how much of fraud 
 is there how much of the spirit of revenge 
 how much of the spirit of retaliation and injus- 
 tice to be found in our very midst. Let those 
 who preach the doctrine that human nature is 
 perfect, look through the community from day to 
 day, and from week to week, and say, whilst 
 these people thus act, whether they are not dis- 
 qualified, virtually, from discharging their polit- 
 ical, as well as their social and Christian duties? 
 People, influenced by such feelings to pursue 
 such a line of conduct, must be liable to err if en- 
 trusted with power. And how many do we see 
 throughout the communitywho neglect the ordi- 
 nary means to inform themselves of the state o 
 public affairs transpiring daily around them ? 
 Men who do not open a newspaper from on< 
 year's end to another ; and so long as men are de 
 voted to the acquisition of wealth and property 
 so long as the spirit of avarice prevails so long 
 as vice and crime prevail so long will the spiri 
 of indifference on the 
 the people. And 
 
 possible that the people will sometimes err ? 
 Look at the ballot-box ! was that pure ? Is not 
 the elective franchise frequently abused ? Cannot 
 the members call to mind instances when votes 
 have been purchased ? He would not say that 
 this was by any means characteristic of our peo- 
 ple ; but many had heard politicians say that it 
 was necessary for them to take money to the polls 
 
 escribed, they had contrived to obtain a nomina- 
 ion, and had thus forceTl themselves into public 
 avor without any real qualification to recommend 
 hem to the people. It was said this restriction 
 nust be opposed because a great principle was 
 nvolved; it must be done away with, because it 
 vas not democratic but contrary to the spirit of 
 epublican institutions. Now we had heard a 
 $r eat deal of democracy here lately ; and he be- 
 "ieved as was said yesterday by the gentleman 
 rom N. Y. (Mr. NICOI/L.) that democracies or 
 majorities should not always remain unrestrained 
 This is however the " age of improvement" and 
 of " progressive democracy" and of "ultra radical- 
 sm." And there seemed to be a large share of this 
 Latter in the present Convention. But there was 
 a radicalism with which he had no affinity. It 
 had been just now said by the gentleman from 
 Kings (Mr. MURPHY) that we should not be 
 bound down by any old principles. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY rose and said that he would 
 correct the gentleman ; what he said was distinct- 
 ly that they should stand by the old landmarks, 
 
 Mr. YOUNG : We should be very cautious how 
 we depart from these old landmarks ; the land- 
 marks laid down by Washington, Jefferson and 
 Madison. The spirit abroad seems to be that of 
 innovation on these; and there are those who 
 think innovation must of necessity be reform. 
 Against this he must distinctly protest. And he 
 would submit to the gentleman whether this was 
 not what might properly be termed retrogressive 
 democracy ! It was annihilating the representa- 
 tive principle ; and he would submit to the sober 
 sense of the Convention whether we had come 
 to that point yet, where all checks and guards 
 
 ;he part of many, prevail among should be considered as no longer necessary ? 
 whilst this is the case, is it not History has shown that there was such a thing 
 
 Democracy running mad. And he wished gen- 
 tlemen to pause and ponder before they suffer 
 themselves to be carried by such sophisms (he 
 would term them,) as had been advocated there, 
 It had also been intimated by the gentleman from 
 Kings (MURPHY,) that we have advocated the 
 doctrine that this Convention has no authority to 
 make any alterations in the present Constitution, 
 
 to secure their object. And whilst 'this state of except those which have been recommended by 
 things has existed, is there not a possibility that ! by the people. Now, what he (Mr. Y.) had said 
 if m* v n^nv oo-oir, I Ti* fK~ ; ."; was that they had better confine themselves to 
 
 it may occur again ! That these improper influ- 
 ences may be used ; and that very mischievous 
 consequences may result therefrom. The gen- 
 tleman from Albany had told them yesterday 
 that if he was in a nominating Convention 
 he would probably never take part in select- 
 ing a candidate for Governor under thirty years 
 of age ; but then they had no guarantee that 
 they would always have delegates so wise, so 
 discreet, and honest as that gentleman ; all del- 
 egates for the time to come certainly might not 
 be so discreet as he was ; and he firmly believed 
 that if this question were now to be submitted to 
 the people, but a very small minority would be 
 found who would be willing to do away with 
 these restrictions, either as to the 30 years of age, 
 or the 5 year's residence. They have had too 
 many instances of men having risen to public fa- 
 yor, to high political distinction who were only 
 the creatures of circumstances, who had not the 
 corresponding merit or ability to justify such ele- 
 vations. In some such a way as he had already 
 
 .he consideration and completion of the most im- 
 portant alterations which have been suggested by 
 :he people in all parts of the State, and then they 
 could turn their attention to the disposal of these 
 minor matters. He was not desirous of confin- 
 ing his attention to any of these particulars. He 
 was willing to take up the whole subject of the 
 Constitution ; and see if there be any points in it, 
 which though not in the abstract wrong, are 
 likely to lead to bad results ; and then he was per- 
 fectly willing to amend or abolish them. But 
 he did not wish to go into any random, indis- 
 criminate alteration of that instrument without 
 any reason whatever. It was also said by the 
 gentleman from Kings (Mr. MURPHY) that the 
 Governor had no control no power over individ- 
 ual rights, and also that the sovereign power al- 
 ways resided in the Legislature. He knew that 
 a belief in this doctrine has prevailed and 
 may prevail in other countries, and persons are 
 very apt to adhere to those doctrines in the be 
 
213 
 
 lief of which they have been educated. But the 
 doctrine is not true. And he would go fart hoi- 
 back than the gentleman from Kings (Mr. MUR- 
 PHY) and say that the sovereign power resided 
 solely in the people themselves; and hence the 
 necessity of imposing some restrictions upon the 
 powers they delegate; and if the people consent 
 to have alterations and amendments made in the 
 Constitution, it is the strongest restriction that 
 can be imposed upon them or their power. Now, 
 the Governor is a co-ordinate branch of the law- 
 making power, and we shall hear by and by that 
 his power as a co-ordinate branch of the Legis- 
 lature shall be abolished, He had risen, as he 
 said, for the purpose of solemnly protesting 
 against these doctrines, that no checks of any 
 sort are to be imposed upon the popular will. 
 He believed that the people would never sanc- 
 tion such doctrines. And they would be quite 
 as likely to support those who advocated prop- 
 er restrictions, as those who tickled their ears 
 with praises of their virtue, intelligence and 
 patriotism, in order to gain popular applause, 
 He believed that the people are willing to have 
 these restrictions imposed in this clause, excep 
 as regards the word "native," and about tha 
 the popular feeling had pretty well determined 
 And he hoped that the good sense of the Con 
 vention would restore the qualification of thirty 
 years, which had been stricken out, and retain th 
 five years' residence, with the addition of having 
 been five years a cftizen. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that this debate hac 
 taken a very wide range. He had at first sup 
 posed, like the gentleman from Westchester 
 (Mr. WARD,) that the question originally was on 
 the amendment of the gentleman, from St. Law 
 rence (Mr. RUSSELL). But from the remark 
 which had fallen from the Chair, he now sup 
 posed that the whole subject was under discus 
 sion, and that therefore he would not be out o 
 order in the r marks that he was about to make 
 It had evidently been supposed and contended fo 
 by some, that the Convention had no right t 
 make any amendment to this part of the Consti 
 tution. And it was added, that they had bee 
 sent to that Convention by the people, for certai 
 specific purposes. Now, he wished that the gen 
 
 tlemen who so contended would point out thos 
 specific purposes for which the people had sen 
 them there. Let them point out any of the pe 
 culiar provisions of the Constitution which, a 
 they contended, the people had sent them ther 
 to amend, or alter, as well as those which truey 
 were not to touch or meddle with at all. He 
 (Mr. P.) was not aware that they had been sent 
 there with any restrictions at all; or that they 
 had been directed to amend one part and not 
 touch the other part of the Constitution. He had 
 not so interpreted his mission. He had supposed 
 that they had been sent there without any limi- 
 tation to their action on the Constitution, and 
 that the whole of the subject matter of that in- 
 strument was to be submitted to them ; that their 
 business in that Convention was to revise the 
 Constitution ; that they were sent there by the 
 
 on. And if this was not the case, he 
 r ished gentlemen to point out to him what the 
 rnitations were, and where they were, that had 
 een imposed upon them by the people. When 
 e heard in that House gentleman propose to 
 lace shackles and fetters upon the people, he 
 onfessed that he was surprised. He had sup- 
 osed that the day had gone by when the people 
 ould in any way be thus hampered, "cabined, 
 ribbed, confined," in the full and fair exercise 
 f their own free will. When propositions 
 hould be made in that body to impose checks 
 nd restraints upon the powers now exercised by or 
 hat were likely to be invested in the Governor, or 
 o impose checks and restraints upon the powers 
 exercised by any of the State officers, they would 
 ind him standing up in his place and recording 
 lis vote in favor of it. But when gentlemen 
 ;ame there, and declared that the people ought 
 ,o be restricted in the same way, why, they must 
 get their votes from some other quarter, for they 
 would get no support from him. His friend the 
 gentleman from Wyoming (Mr. A. W. YOUNG) 
 had said that the people were not competent to 
 choose a candidate for Governor, and 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG said that he had stated 
 that the great mass of the people were virtuous 
 and intelligent ; but that they did not directly 
 choose their candidate for Governor ; that choice 
 t>eing made by a Convention of delegates 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON: Well, it comes'to about 
 the same thing ; he says that the people do not 
 choose their Governor; and that is equivalent to 
 saying that the people are incapable of selecting 
 a candidate for Governor. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG: I deny that; I did not 
 so say, nor so intend to be understood 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Well ; the gentleman from 
 Wyoming, [Mr. YOUNG] has also spoken about 
 demagogues; and he says that the demago- 
 gues are not all dead yet. And he spoke 
 also of the action of caucusses that controlled the 
 action of the people. He said that the people 
 were not presumed to know who the candidates 
 were, that were selected for them by these cau- 
 cusses. But he would ask the gentleman if the 
 nominees of these caucusses always obtained their 
 election. No, indeed. It was true that the me- 
 
 people, to frame th 
 they possibly could ; 
 
 best 
 and 
 
 expected the Convention 
 mil to them, a lair ind 
 
 Constitution that 
 that the people 
 and sub- 
 Constitu- 
 
 to frame 
 liberal 
 
 thod usually adopted in selecting a candidate for 
 governor, was by delegates in a caucus ; but it 
 did not follow that the people were therefore 
 bound to vote for him ; and many instances had 
 occurred, especially of late years, which showed 
 pretty plainly that the people did not, and could 
 not be induced to vote for the nominee of a cau- 
 cus, [a laugh.] Many gentlemen had found that 
 out to their sorrow. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG wished very much that the 
 gentleman from Chautauque, [Mr. PATTERSON,] 
 would tell him an instance, or the time when a 
 governor of this state had been elected, who was 
 not the nominee of a party caucus. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : When ? why he would an- 
 swer the gentleman ; there was, at least, always 
 one of them nominated by a party caucus, 
 that never did and never could be elected, and 
 sometimes two of them. (Laughter.) But the 
 question now is, whether you will trust the peo- 
 ple with the duty of selecting their own Govern- 
 or ? Or will you tie them down in thia respect, 
 
214 
 
 and say that; they shall not vote for a man unles 
 he is so old ; or 30 years of age, or 5 years unde 
 a certain mark ? That is the point. The plair 
 simple question before us, and for us to decid( 
 is, are the people capable of self-government, c 
 are they not ? That is the question ; and ther 
 is no other one involved in the subject befor 
 them. May the people vote for whom the 
 please? or, will you say at once, that you will nc 
 let them vote for a man under 30 ? If you tie u 
 one end, why not go on, carry out the doctrine 
 and tie up the other end ? You say they sha] 
 not vote for a man who iy only 29 years old; on 
 year, one month, or even one day, under 30 year 
 of age ; and yet you will allow them to vot 
 for a man an old, superannuated man on 
 in hie dotage ; and say that he may be mad< 
 Governor of the State. Now, if you elec 
 a young man to be your Governor, and should hap 
 pen to make a mistake, the people could verj 
 soon correct it ; and the young man will improve 
 but if you should choose an old man, and he wa 
 to go wrong, you could not improve or correc 
 him ; for he would be growing worse am 
 worse every day. Whereas, on the contra 
 ry, a young man would be growing better and bet 
 ter every day. But the fact is, that the day foi 
 imposing fetters and shackles upon the action o 
 the people of this country, has gone by. And i 
 you place such a restriction as this in the Con- 
 stitution, it will be of no use. Who is there that 
 does not know that that provision in the Consti- 
 tution of the United States relative to the free- 
 hold qualification of United States Senators has 
 been utterly disregarded ? Who does not know 
 that there are Senators elected to the Senate o 
 the United States who do not own one single foo 
 of land, except that to which they will be enti- 
 tled to when they come to lie down at the close of 
 their journey in this life ? 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : Did those Senators take an 
 oath to support the Constitution of the United 
 States ? 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Very likely ; because 
 they claim the right to construe the Consti- 
 tution as they please ; or to construe it as 
 they understood it ; as a certain distinguish- 
 ed man once remarked that he had done. 
 (Laughter.) Now, he (Mr. P.) would not put up 
 any bars which should prevent the people from 
 exercising the fullest freedom in the choice the 
 selection as well as the election of all their offi- 
 cers. The gentleman from Wyoming (Mr. A. W. 
 YOUNG) had said that this has been called " the 
 age of progressive democracy !" He (Mr. P.) was 
 perfectly well aware of that fact ; he also said that 
 the demagogues were not all dead yet. He (Mr. P. ) 
 was aware of that fact also, Mr. Chairman. And 
 he was also strongly inclined to believe that all the 
 old Federalists are not dead yet. He was 
 strongly inclined to believe that there was a con- 
 siderable sprinkling of the remnant of old Feder- 
 alism left in this Convention yet. He wished that 
 those gentlemen who thus mistrusted the people, 
 by saying that they should be thus restricted, who 
 refused to put full confidence in the judgment and 
 integrity of the people he wished all gentlemen 
 to show themselves ; he wished all those to put 
 themselves on the record, and vote to that effect. 
 But he was not one of them ! For he had never 
 
 seen the day when he was not willing to trust the 
 people with the choice t>f all their officers and 
 rulers ; those who in fact were after all but their 
 servants. He did not mean, of course, to insist 
 that the people were always right in what they 
 did; they may be, and sometimes are, wrong; 
 neither is the majority always correct; and he 
 did not mean to say that the people in their deci- 
 sions and conclusions were generally right. He 
 believed in the integrity of the people, and their 
 intention to do right ; and he was therefore wil- 
 ling to trust them. And he believed that though 
 majorities did not always act correctly, yet that 
 the majority ought to rule and to that doctrine 
 he was perfectly willing at all times to submit. 
 The gentleman from New York, (Mr. NICOLL,) 
 who spoke yesterday, contended that it was ne- 
 cessary in order to piotect the rights of the mino- 
 nority against the encroachments of the majority, 
 that these restrictions should be imposed that 
 the minority had certain rights here which must 
 be protected. But he would ask him how can 
 the rights of the' minority be protected ? How 
 can the minority express their wishes ? Who 
 adopts this provision ? Who is to adopt all the 
 provisions in the new Constitution about to be 
 framed by the Convention ? The minority or the 
 majority ? The new Constitution might be adop- 
 ted there, by a majority of even a single vote ; it 
 may be sent out from here by a bare majority of 
 one ; and it may be adopted b^y the people of the 
 State by a bare majority of one ? Who governs 
 then ? The majority! What becomes then of the 
 rights of the minority, as the gentleman had 
 :ermed them ? It is the act of the majority ; and 
 :he minority must submit; for a majority only 
 can rule in this country. It certainly was a great 
 misfortune and very unpleasant to be in a 
 ninority. He himself had had the mis- 
 brtune in the course of his time to find himself 
 n a minority. (Laughter.) It was very unpleas- 
 ant, to be sure he was so situated now, in some 
 espects but there was no help for it ; they had 
 o submit ; grin and bear it ; and get along the 
 )est way they could. He and his colleague (Mr. 
 MARVIN) happened to differ in opinion on this 
 ubject ; he would not for a moment impugn the 
 notioves of his colleague ; he knew his integrity, 
 ndependence of character his patriotism his 
 ntelligence and his devotion to the interests of 
 he people, too well to suppose that he was any 
 hing but perfectly sincere and honest in the 
 ourse that he was taking. He (Mr. P.) would 
 ot say that he regretted he could not agree 
 rith his colleage ; but he regretted much that, 
 is colleague could not agree with him. 
 "hey had both been sent there by the same con- 
 tituents to represent the interests of the same 
 ounty; and it might seem somewhat singular 
 lat they should thus differ. It might be because 
 ley had a dividing ridge in the county of Cha- 
 auque. There was a northern portion, and a 
 outhern portion. He [Mr. P.] came from the 
 orth side, and his colleague came from the south 
 de. And perhaps that might account for the 
 ifference of opinion between them. His col- 
 jague had said, also, that the rights of the mino- 
 ty must be protected here ; and instanced that 
 o man's life, liberty, or property can he taken 
 xcept by the due course of law. But he would 
 
215 
 
 is colleague, who made that law ? Did the 
 whole people make it, or did a majority only 
 make it ? The passing of that very law was the 
 act of the majority, and the majority alone. And 
 it is not by the will of the whole people that you 
 
 any law of the state. As he said before, 
 when the time arrives when the question comes 
 up that they are to restrict the powers of the 
 Executive, or impose restraints and checks upon 
 the legislature or state officers, he would be found 
 going quite as far as his colleague, or as him who 
 goes^the farthest. But he would never go with 
 those who were so afraid to trust the people, that 
 they endeavored to hamper them in every possi- 
 ble way. They were not advocating the choice 
 of a young or an inexperienced governor ; they 
 contended for nothing of the kind ; but they in- 
 sisted that the people be left free from any tram- 
 mels or this point, to select whom they pleased. 
 This he believed to be the true doctrine ; and this 
 he therefore advocated. He was, once for all, 
 opposed to all restrictions here ; and whenever 
 the question was taken, he should vote to strike 
 them all out; and to strike out the whole ques- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES wished to express his dissent 
 to some of the propositions advanced by the gen- 
 tlemen from New- York and Albany, (Messrs. 0'- 
 CONOR and HARRIS) and which had been repeated 
 just now, by the gentleman who last occupied the 
 floor. The proposition advanced by those gen- 
 tlemen is, that when the Convention undertook 
 to propose to the people for their adoption that 
 the candidate for governor should possess certain 
 qualifications, that it transcended its powers and 
 that it would be undertaking to trammel and con- 
 trol the action of the people. He did not under- 
 stand it in that way, and in seemed to him that 
 the argument was founded on two indefensible 
 propositions. In the first place, on the pro- 
 position that the people never can do wrong. 
 He knew that it was usually and frequently said 
 by candidates for elective offices, and by persons 
 seeking popular favor, that the people never 
 could do no wrong ; but go into the country , and put 
 the question to the farmer, whether he be high 
 or low, rich or poor, and take his answer, and it 
 would be found that not one of them would ad- 
 mit the truth of the proposition. Collect them 
 all together and they will give you the same an- 
 <\Yi i r. There was another point of fact which 
 t'vi-ry one knew. The people collectively, are 
 
 times mistaken, as well as individuals are 
 moved the same by sudden impulses, and re- 
 trace their steps when they have had the oppor- 
 tunity of sober thought. The other assumption 
 was that the action of this Convention binds the 
 people. This was not true we are here assem- 
 bled to make propositions to the people, and un- 
 til they are ratified by the people they are in no 
 way binding upon them. It appeared to him 
 that when they assert that it is trenching upon 
 the rights of the people when we propose that the 
 officers to be elected should have certain qual- 
 ifications, that they assume the proposition that 
 the people are incapable of laying down whole- 
 some rules by which their action shall be govern- 
 ed. We do not propose to lay down but to submit 
 to the people to declare by their votes, whether 
 it was or was not expedient, that rules should be 
 
 adopted by them to regulate their action the 
 same as are adopted by every other assemblage or 
 body of men to regulate their action. This Con- 
 vention has adopted rules to preserve order, and 
 to prevent the hasty adoption of measures, as was 
 adopted by every deliberate body. And might it 
 not in the estimation of the people then be neces- 
 sary that they should adopt some rules by which 
 the rights of the minority should be protected, and 
 the majority prevented from going wrong. Might 
 there not then, in the estimation of the people, 
 be some general rule to govern the people, in 
 giving their votes for candidates for office, that 
 might operate wisely in making our popular elec- 
 tions safe. It struck him that at least the Con- 
 vention had the power to present the question to 
 the people, and to ascertain w r hether or not they 
 would feel that some such rule should be adopt- 
 ed, calculated to qualify their action and to ren- 
 der it safe. It had been said by the gentleman 
 last up, (Mr. PATTERSON) that no rule could be 
 adopted by the people themselves to restrict their 
 action in regard to votes given for candidates 
 elected by the whole people, and that none would 
 be observed by them. It seemed to him (Mr. P.) 
 to be anything but flattering to the honesty or good 
 sense of the people, to doubt that. It was wrong to 
 suppose that they would act from impulse, from 
 sudden passion, and without any regard to the 
 fundamental law. He had too great a regard tor 
 them to subscribe to any principle of that des- 
 cription. He believed, that this people would by 
 common consent, adopt any rule that might be 
 deemed necessary to prevent sudden and impro- 
 per action, and the only question for the Conven- 
 tion to decide was whether the rules we here 
 proposed as to the qualifications of candidates for 
 Governor, were such as would in general, in the 
 average, and in the long run operate to elect safe 
 and responsible men to that important office. As 
 to the expediency of any one qualification he did 
 not mean to say anything, but he hoped that no 
 member, in giving his vote on this question, 
 would be governed or regulated by any other rule 
 than to ask himself whether the qualifications 
 proposed to be inserted were wise and necessary. 
 If he thinks so, let him vote for its adoption and 
 its reference to the people. If he should be of 
 the opinion that it was improper to impose any 
 qualification that it was inexpedient, unnecessa- 
 ry and not calculated to check the improper ac- 
 tion of the people, let him vote against its adop- 
 tion. He hoped no member would vote against 
 the section on the ground of its imposing restric- 
 tions on the action of the people, for that was not 
 the case. We only proposed to them to say whe- 
 ther they would adopt the restriction. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that if the learned gentle- 
 man from Dutchess (Mr. RUGGLES,) had extended 
 his remarks a little further, there would have 
 been no occasion for him to rise. But there were 
 some things that were suggested by the very dis- 
 tinguished gentleman from New-York (Mr. 
 O'CONNOR,) to which alone he Mr. S. intended to 
 reply. There were two or three to be sure, who 
 had treated us with a lecture upon the powers of 
 the people, without distinguishing between arbi- 
 trary power, influenced by passion and impelled 
 by sudden emergencies and that power which 
 was regulated by constitution, by law and by the 
 
 
216 
 
 action of the people, when confined to the rules 
 prescribed by themselves before hand. But he 
 thought that the answer to such arguments would 
 suggest itself to every one who read their speech- 
 es, and need not be controverted in any formal 
 way by any gentleman on this floor. But the 
 gentleman from New-York advanced some pro- 
 positions here to which he (Mr. S.) really 
 could not assent. He was not certain but 
 that he should have assented if he had not 
 had time during this debate to examine them, 
 because he granted that his feelings rather in- 
 clined him that way. Had we been favored by a 
 written report, or permitted to be so, and a tho- 
 rough examination and statement of the reasons 
 for all propositions, it would have saved time and 
 a great deal of waste breath. But not having the 
 necessary examination for himself he had ex- 
 amined the question as presented by the gen- 
 tleman from New York, in regard to the par- 
 ticular qualification of nativism more especially; 
 and although rather inclined to venture the ex- 
 clusion of the word from the Constitution under 
 certain circumstances, yet he confessed that on a 
 deliberate consideration of the subject it was with 
 great apprehension that he voted so. The gen- 
 tleman from New York informed us that our early 
 constitution, formed about the time of our dec- 
 laration of Independence or a little after, between 
 the declaration and the achievement, contained no 
 exclusion of aliens from the office of Governor, 
 though he admitted that the Constitution of the U. 
 States did. And the gentleman seemed to think, 
 and he (Mr. S.) confessed that it occurred to him 
 that it was so at first, that the reason for such 
 exclusion lay no further than in a spirit of ex- 
 clusiveness and jealousy of foreigners. But if 
 we look a little further, it would be seen that we 
 have no reason to think so meanly of the great 
 men of the Revolution, or the great men, as some 
 seem to think, that followed after, if one genera- 
 tion is supposed to add any thing to the stock of 
 our common knowledge. At all events, the gen- 
 tleman seemed to think that the Convention of 
 ''21 adopted the principle exclusively upon some 
 narrow jealousy or personal motive, not imme- 
 diately concerning the safety and good govern- 
 ment of the State. And he has ventured the in- 
 timation, as he (Mr S.) must suppose, upon due 
 consideration, knowing that even this Conven- 
 tion contained two members of the former one. 
 Now, upon an examination of the subject, 
 we find, at all events, a good reason for 
 the action of the Convention of '77, and 
 also some reasons which induced the action 
 of that of '21. It is an old settled rule of inter- 
 national law, (and nothing is clearer than that it 
 is the law of England, and he had found it to be 
 the law ot France, and he was inclined to believe 
 it to be the law of every nation ; Blackstone says 
 it is the universal law of the world, and the Su- 
 preme Court of the United States in the 3rd of 
 Peters', 1830, tell us that it is the law of Ameri- 
 ca) that a person coming from a foreign coun- 
 try an alien born on being naturalized, is not 
 discharged from his allegiance to his native coun- 
 try. In other words, the doctrine of expatriation 
 is not recognized by the law of the world. If 
 that be so, if Thomas Addis Emmett, or any most 
 distinguished man, whom we would all like to 
 
 vote for in this country could hold the office of 
 governor, or be the commander of the armies, and 
 in his capacity as a branch of the legislature, act 
 as a proposer, and then as an affirmer or negativer 
 of laws his other relations to a foreign country 
 would perhaps have influenced his action, more 
 than it would, if such a person could have been 
 governor without incurring the responsibility of 
 allegiance to the two countries in time of war. 
 We could see good reasons to induce our forefa- 
 thers in 1777 to make their Constitution as they 
 did, and their successors in 1821 to make theirs 
 as they did. It was laid down by Chancellor 
 Kent and other writers, that all persons who were 
 residents of America at the time of the signing 
 of the Declaration of Independence, no matter 
 where born, if they continued to reside here until 
 it was achieved, by the law of nations they would 
 be discharged from their allegiance to foreign na- 
 tions, and become as it were, natural born citi- 
 zens, because born with the birth of our own lib- 
 erties. Though born elsewhere, they became 
 parties to our achievement of independence and 
 were considered the same as native citizens 
 their naturalization being thus coeval with the ex- 
 istence (the Chancellor should have said birth) of 
 the nation and its liberties. This was the reason 
 why the first Constitution, that of 1777, was made 
 as it was and it was all proper. But those who 
 came here subsequently, and became citizens 
 with us by naturalization, (as they of course must 
 have been down to '21,) did not stand in that par- 
 ticular. They were naturalized by us, and they 
 became so far identified with us, as they could be 
 by municipal legislation. But we cannot dis- 
 charge them from their allegiance to their own 
 country. By-the-by, he had always been surprised 
 that inasmuch as the question of citizenship was 
 a part of the law of nations and of the world, that 
 A he national government had not made some at- 
 empts at least, even if not successful, to obtain 
 the sanction by treaties with other nations, of the 
 doctrine of self-expatriation. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that the attempt had 
 often been made, but unsuccessfully. During the 
 war of 1812, the question of expatriation was up, 
 and our government took the ground that if any 
 naturalized citizens were executed by the British 
 government for treason, that they would retaliate 
 by executing all British subjects captured in the 
 war. 
 
 Mr.SIMMONS thanked the gentleman for his 
 explanation. He could only state that the law 
 was such as to draw the distinction as it was 
 drawn in the law of nations, between those 
 citizens by naturalization who were in the coun- 
 try at the time of the formation of the Constitu- 
 tion of 1821, and those who were here as part 
 and parcel of ourselves in achieving our liberties. 
 It was therefore through these reasons that the 
 Convention made this distinction, instead of from 
 motives of illiberality and small jealousy. It 
 was said by Blackstone and Mr. Chitty, in re- 
 gard to the law of England, that naturalization 
 in foreign countries without license, will not 
 discharge the natural born subject from his al- 
 legiance, and they give an instance of a man 
 who was born in England, who afterwards re- 
 moved to France, where he lived from infancy 
 and became a captain in the French army. 
 
217 
 
 Having been taken prisoner, he was indicted and 
 
 condemned, being tried by the civil courts, 
 
 d of a court martial. Now he con- 
 
 l that so long as human nature was 
 
 * knew it to be as was instanced in the 
 of General Hull that man is not always 
 
 in point of physical courage, against all 
 circumstances he should regret to have a Gov- 
 ernor in time of war (especially with a great 
 
 r) with the control of our armies, and act- 
 in the character of Governor of the State, 
 with his weight and influence as part of the 
 iature he repeated he should regret to 
 te station filled by a person, who was not free 
 nil hazards and temptation, so that we could 
 no doubt at all of his courage. Courage 
 is .said to be rather a matter of constitutional tem- 
 perament, a thing not easily acquired, if nature 
 did not supply the constitutional element and al- 
 though we should hope that a naturalized citizen 
 should do as well, and incur all his responsibili- 
 .s the native, " yet the battle is not always 
 to the strong, nor the" race to the swift," and they 
 thought of that as well as we. He apprehended 
 Jthat it was motives of this sort that influenced 
 the former Convention, for certainly there were 
 gentlemen there who knew as much of the broad 
 doctrine of international law as any gentleman on 
 this floor pretended to. The supreme court of our 
 mvn nation, 3d of Peter's page 246, says that the 
 general doctrine is that no person by any action 
 of his own, without the consent of his govern- 
 ment, can put off his allegiance, and become an 
 alien. For American citizens cannot expatriate 
 themselves so that our claim to their allegiance 
 would not remain. The principle was that no 
 man could serve two masters, and it is easy to 
 perceive then, that certain circumstances would 
 render it highly dangerous to have such a person 
 elected Governor of the State. He granted this 
 doctrine was highly obnoxious to all Americans; 
 and if we could by any constitutional enactment 
 here which is alter all only municipal legisla- 
 tion change that law so as to establish the free 
 and full doctrine of expatriation, he should like 
 to do it. And inasmuch as he saw that some of 
 the new constitutions had left out that exclusion, 
 he was rather inclined himself to try the experi 
 ment, though as he said before it was with some 
 reluctance. His feelings were so strong that he 
 should be rather tempted to go the whole length, 
 provided we can substitute a reasonable residence 
 and age for it. So much for the qualification 01 
 disqualification of birth He thought in regard 
 to that, that the enlightenment of the age, which 
 is progressive for knowledge is running to anc 
 fro in the earththat the strong tendency of the 
 .ige is to put down this illiberal doctrine of per ; 
 petual and eternal allegiance, and in favor of es- 
 tablishing the more reasonable docrine of v olun 
 tary expatriation. Although there was no s ettle( 
 law, no treaty establishing it, and although th( 
 elementary writers of Great Britain of the day 
 laid it down as law, yet the doctrine seemed t< 
 be so repugnant to reason, the prevailing 
 feeling and good sense that it might be 
 considered as almost obsolete the practice 
 would take away the whole sting of it. And 
 he should therefore be inclined to try the 
 imerit here if he could secure a good term o 
 
 14 
 
 esidence and age, and in fact he should not an- 
 icipate much evil from it. But now in regard to 
 he other question, the other qualification. It 
 vas said here that it was sufficient to let the peo- 
 >le select for themselves, for they were always 
 i^ht. He confessed without some little reflec- 
 ion he was puzzled to answer a great many ar- 
 guments that had been made here, yet he felt there 
 ,vas something in them that had not satisfied him. 
 The gentleman from Dutchess had removed some 
 f the difficulties, but he desired to suggest that a 
 government is not a government except by the con- 
 ent of the governed, or by force. Government must 
 cither be by consent or by force. If by force, it is a 
 isurpation, and is no government at all ; and it is 
 o be resisted by every individual that can do it. All 
 ust government is founded on the consent of the 
 governed. That all will agree to, and by recurring 
 ;o a few first principles we should come out right. 
 Then further than that, it is not only founded on 
 he consent of the governed, but it is to be exer- 
 cised by law. It can not be exercised by force, 
 arbitrarily, any more than it can be founded by 
 brce. Law is only the consent of the governed 
 the form in which the consent of the governed 
 s given ; and the government can no more be 
 continued, if exercised arbitrarily, than the go- 
 ernment could be so formed. Very well, then, 
 lere we have advanced two steps. The next 
 hing was the principle that distinguished the 
 modern Democracy or Republicanism, from the an- 
 cient. The writers say that the ancient Republics 
 owe their downfall to the want of a knowledge of 
 the practice and principle of representation ; 
 and that the modern ones have a prospect of du- 
 ability and great good to the people, from an in- 
 creasing acquaintance with the principle of rep- 
 resentation and its expansibility. Now, the peo- 
 ole, in our kind of democracy, govern through 
 iheir representatives, and never personally. And 
 all the people do, substantially, towards the gov- 
 ernment, notwithstanding they are the fountain 
 of power, is to select their representatives and to 
 'lold them responsible, periodically. Then came 
 ip two very important questions : what shall be 
 the proper qualifications of a representative ? and 
 how can the constituency know that he possesses 
 them ? Now, if we provide well for these two 
 things, then we might say that representative go- 
 vernment stands on a broad and secure foundation. 
 Well, now, the qualification of the representa- 
 tive must depend on the duties to be performed. 
 Certainly the qualification of a town constable 
 might well be less than the qualification of a 
 sheriff, and his much less than that of a governor. 
 Would it be pretended here that there was any 
 democratic mode of acquiring the necessary 
 knowledge and fitness for the office of governor, 
 without the usual time of study and experience, 
 in God's world ? Has it come to this, that it is 
 seriously mooted, in this land of Sabbath schools, 
 common schools, and academies, that it is very 
 important for the common people, in order to 
 manage their own business, for the first twenty or 
 thirty years of their lives, to be dilligent in at- 
 taining the rudiments of knowledge : but when a 
 man comes to be appointed an agent to control 
 the great affairs of State, requiring an under- 
 standing of its interests, and a comprehension of 
 its whole financial and political system, that every 
 
218 
 
 person is fit for it, as a matter of course. It is the 
 theory of representative government, that every 
 man is a " jack at all trades," Or is it that while 
 nature is left free, there will be some men 
 peculiarly fitted to do that high business, and the 
 rest will have the good sense to know it, and to 
 put them in office. The people will secure such 
 aid in the government ; and when they want a 
 watch, they will go to a watchmaker ; when they 
 want boots, they will go to a bootmaker ; and 
 when they want flour, to a flour dealer and so 
 forth. He took that to be the true doctrine. He 
 granted that true democracy supposed the peo- 
 ple to be capable of self-government, but it did 
 not begin by abolishing all the sciences and arts, 
 but it availed itself of them to maintain self-go- 
 vernment. Now, he could very well suppose 
 that generally a young man at the age of 21 might 
 be well trained by his parents and guardians if 
 they had done their duty, to get along with 
 the ordinary transactions of life but even then 
 he, (Mr. S.) would recommend that he should 
 consult his father frequently. ,Very few men 
 commenced the study of our institutions 
 practically, until they come to that age, although 
 it was a fact, and he was glad to see it, that many 
 gentlemen under 30 were sufficiently educated in 
 the subject to represent their counties in the As- 
 sembly. Yet it did not follow that they were of 
 necessity equal to others of greater experience, 
 but it was a school to them, and we must have 
 young men before we had old ones. Education 
 may be said to be perhaps sufficient to qualify 
 them, but he considered education to be two-fold 
 private and public; and granting that some 
 amount of private education was necessary to re- 
 gulate private affairs, of course a public educa- 
 tion was required for public concerns. And was 
 it not clear that the necessary degree of acquaint- 
 ancewith public matters, and the financial and 
 political economy of the nation came at a little 
 later period of life than 25 years. A very consi- 
 derable portion of our young men do not leave 
 their colleges until they are 24 or 25. And in ge 
 neral, he might say that every public man 
 aquired his public experience and knowledge at 
 a later period of life than 21- usually between 
 that period and 30, or about that time. This was 
 the general rule,although it was possible that there 
 might occasionally be a Wm. Pitt but the ex- 
 ception only proves the truth of the general rule, 
 that we could not rely on an earlier age than 3U 
 for matured and good public men. If that was 
 the general rule, then there was no harm in say- 
 ing so, and there might be great safety and caution 
 in so doing. Then in regard to residence it amount- 
 ed to about the same thing. It was only another 
 mode of securing a proper education in reference 
 to our public institutions which we possess as 
 contradistinguished to other municipal institu- 
 tions in other countries. Yet owing to the intro- 
 duction of steam and the Magnetic Telegraph, 
 and all the multiplied means of intercommunica- 
 tion, between the intellectual world, within the 
 last few years, there had been such a general spi- 
 rit of what might be called cosmopolitanism 
 spreading through this country and all others, 
 that he thought we might well shorten the time 
 in regard to residence. He thought that a man 
 would get emancipated from any peculiar views 
 
 or prejudices he might be supposed to have, com* 
 ing from another government, and become liber- 
 alized in the course of seven years, as completely 
 as he could in twenty years in 1821. So that for 
 himself he should be willing to vote to exclude 
 from the Constitution this principle of exclusive- 
 ness on account of the doctrine existing in law 
 books, and in the decisions of courts and cabinets, 
 and which he was inclined to think would not 
 really be attempted to be enforced. And if nego- 
 tiation could not break up the law he was willing 
 if possible to break it up in some other way. 
 People in the transaction of their private busi- 
 ness, found it important in the selection of their 
 agents, to have some general rule as to qualifica- 
 tion. And it could not be less important that 
 they should have the benefit of some general rule 
 in choosing the most important agent they could 
 employ in the State. But it was said that the 
 people would know all about it, aud that they 
 would need no such general rule. How were they 
 to know ? Why it was said because the people 
 were generally intelligent. He would grant that 
 they were in the proper sense of the word. But 
 they could never know except from an ac- 
 quaintance and residence among them, or from 
 others, what the qualifications of a man were. 
 This would be secured to them, Mr. S. urged by 
 the adoption of the requirement of a five years 
 residence in the state. And it was also necessa- 
 ry to prevent a person being set up for governor, 
 from the very fact of his being unknown, and 
 therefore perhaps considered the more available. 
 There was no fear of the public not judging right- 
 ly of the fitness of a candidate, with the means of 
 becoming acquainted with him, by reputation or 
 otherwise. He granted the public sentiment, 
 within its proper sphere, was a truer test of truth 
 than the individual opinion of the wisest man in 
 God's world. This was well settled now in phi- 
 losophy, as well as in common sense. But now 
 what was the proper sphere of this public 
 intelligence. ? It was as to individual facts s 
 correctly reported, and tested by general prin- 
 ciples. Present any thing to the people, where 
 the subject matter for reflection is general 
 principles, and they will be right; but when re- 
 quested to know particular facts, without the 
 means of knowing them to be so, it was absurd. 
 And the history of the world presents very little 
 more than a succession of miscarriages of all the 
 attempts made by the people to regain their rights 
 right in principle but erring through mistakes 
 of particular facts. It seemed to him, then, to 
 be safe to secure some competent qualification as 
 a general rule, in the candidates ; and then to se- 
 cure to the people the means of knowing it : and 
 that was to be obtained by requiring a reasonable 
 term of age and residence. Some gentlemen 
 seemed to pay no regard to former Constitutions, 
 and times, in regard to this question. Everything 
 had an age of scepticism ; sometimes on religion, 
 sometimes on politics, and sometimes on some- 
 thing else. Every age had its peculiarity. In 
 1836, he believed, we had extreme credulity m 
 the commercial world, and now, we had extreme 
 scepticism and distrust, and all seemed to be 
 thinking how to tie up every thing in that di- 
 rection. It was to avoid these extremes, where in- 
 dividual sentiment was liable to be jostled from 
 
219 
 
 >per bearing,that he wished a general rule to 
 be prescribed in regard to the qualification for age, 
 not only for the Executive, but for all general offi- 
 cers. It had been suggested by some that we were 
 limited in our mode of action, and by others that we 
 are not limited at all. Some contended that we 
 were to go to work and pull down and remove the 
 x)ld building, then bring on the stuff and put up a 
 put up a new one, in a style of architecture un- 
 known in the world. To his mind it was per- 
 fectly clear that this Convention was not limited 
 by the statue under which it assembled, and only 
 by our own sense of expediency. But as wise 
 men, we should go to work carefully, and never 
 remove a column without being very sure before 
 hand that the new one would not only look as 
 well, but work as well as the old one. The Con- 
 vention was sitting here with the consent of 'the 
 existing government. Were it here without that 
 consent, and for the purpose of overturning the 
 existing government, it would be a revolutionary 
 and unlawful assemblage. The law gave no 
 power to us. It was in the form of law, but 
 in fact but a mere expression of the consent of the 
 existing government. We having the assent of 
 the existing government, our power to reform 
 and remodel the constitution was unquestiona- 
 ble. But to assume to be so wise that all 
 that had lived before us were small lights, and 
 that all who were to come after us would not 
 know as much, would argue a very small amount 
 of modesty. He thought however, it was expe- 
 dient to look over the whole Constitution; but he 
 should be generally opposed to changing any part 
 :hat the nublic attention had not been called to 
 
 that the public attention had not 
 
 as a grievance, unless it was a mere trifiin< 
 
 mat- 
 
 ter, rather for ornament than use. He desired 
 to seo the fundamental law specify the qualifi- 
 cations of candidates. Not, however, on the 
 ground taken by the gentleman from Albany (Mr. 
 HARRIS) who inferred that we should never 
 go wrong and select too young a man, because 
 we never had. We had heretofore lived under 
 restrictions, and the argument assumed that what 
 we had not done under these restrictions, we 
 would not do if they were taken off. The gen- 
 tleman might about as well have said, that be- 
 cause heretofore we had had no voters under 21 
 years of age, there was no ground to fear they 
 would vote, if we abolished the law and let them 
 vote as they pleased. He confessed, he prefer- 
 red to retain the rule of age, on the ground that 
 public experience could not be acquired by a 
 
 that he (Mr. T.) participated in the feeling in 
 which the native American party originated. 
 And he would add, that he regarded it as one of 
 the caprices and follies of the day; and since 
 that party sprung up, he had been cautious never 
 to use the word. The Convention of 1821 had 
 been alluded to, and the motives which induced 
 them to put this word among the qualifications 
 for governor, had been called in question by the 
 same gentleman from New- York, (Mr. O'CoNOR.) 
 He begged leave to explain, not what the motives 
 of gentlemen were, but the circumstances under 
 which that word was inserted. In the mad orgies 
 of the French revolution the Patriots who had 
 guided us thro' the horrors of our own, still lived, 
 as well as him who wielded the pen with such re- 
 markable power and effect in the Cause of Liberty 
 Tom Paine who afterwards in his fall uttered 
 his Age of Reason, and God spare us that we shall 
 not get up a second edition of it he followed the 
 orgies of the French Revolution until he got into 
 prison. He then called upon Washington to 
 claim him as an American citizen. And what 
 did Washington, the father of his country say? He, 
 [Mr.T.] need scarcely remind those who were in 
 any way conversant with our history, what the 
 answer of Washington was or what the doctrine 
 here was at that day. It was enough to say that 
 it was the reverse of the doctrine that Great Bri- 
 tain held that no man could expatriate himself. 
 Gen. Washington then held the opposite to be the 
 American doctrine that a man who left his 
 country and gave his adhesion to another, parti- 
 cipated in its concerns and entered into its revolu- 
 tionary struggle, had ceased to be an American 
 citizen, and that Washington refused to demand 
 Tom Paine. Great Britain being at war with 
 France, could not demand him, and he remained 
 in prison for a long time. At last private letters 
 from Washington and others, extricated him, 
 and 
 the 
 tion of expatriation 
 
 And he would 
 that the constit- 
 
 younger man than one of 30. 
 have some period of residence, 
 -ent body might have the means of knowing some- 
 thing of the man and his fitness. As to the word 
 native, he would strike that out having no fears 
 that in the present enlightened state of public 
 sentiment the doctrine of foreign allegiance 
 would ever be attempted to be enforced or main- 
 tained. 
 
 Mr.BASCOM obtained the floor, but gave way to 
 Mr. TALLMADGE, who desired, in justice 
 
 he came here and died. Again, when 
 war of 1812 came on, then rose the ques- 
 
 gov- 
 
 ernment had refused 
 
 which the British 
 
 to surrender. He would 
 
 mention a case which could be vouched for by the 
 delegates from Orange. Some twenty-three na- 
 turalized citizens of this country, volunteers in 
 our army, were captured at Queenston by the 
 British among them was John Wiley of New- 
 burgh. The British government, reviving its 
 doctrine of expatriation, refused to treat these 
 twenty-three men as prisoners of war, and they 
 were sent to Quebec, to be tried for treason, as 
 British subjects found in arms against the King, 
 and to be hung as traitors. Simultaneously at 
 this time, the same course was being pursued in 
 relation to prisoners they had taken from our 
 ships of war. Fortunately, at the time, our Go- 
 vernment held as prisoners of war more than that 
 number of British subjects, and the opportunity 
 was presented of testing the practical operation of 
 the British doctrine, that no man could expatri- 
 ate himself. Under this state of things, our go- 
 vernment told the British government, ifyoupro- 
 to himself, to make a word of explanation. It ceed under your doctrine of expatriation, to hang 
 
 was due to himself, from the import atttached 
 yesterday by one of the gentlemen from New- 
 York to his (Mr. T.'s) remarks, in connection 
 with this word " native." The gentleman was 
 mistaken in supposing, if that was his meaning, 
 
 John Wiley and his fellow prisoners, we pledge 
 you that we will hang man for man aye, two for 
 one, of the British subjects now in our power, as 
 prisoners of war. And our government did main- 
 tain by one of the strongest arguments that could 
 
220 
 
 be addressed to the human mind, the naturaliza- 
 tion principle of this country, and saved the lives 
 of these twenty-three naturalized citizens of the 
 Union. The demand was that they should be 
 treated in all respects as prisoners of war, and 
 though the British Government never surrender- 
 ed the principle; still they saw fit never to exer- 
 cise it, and these men were not hung. These 
 facts, he said, which all here who had reached 
 the age of fifty-five would vouch for, showed that 
 our government had not been tardy in asserting 
 the rights of naturalized citizens, and the great 
 American doctrine on which our naturalization 
 laws were based. It was under the excitement 
 of these circumstances, with the knowledge that 
 the British government still clung to its doctrine, 
 once a British subject always a British subject 
 that the convention of 1821, in no spirit of perse- 
 cution towards foreigners, nor in any odious or 
 prescriptive sense, introduced the word na- 
 tive among the qualifications for Governor. 
 As to the question of the present day narrowed 
 down as it was to a distinction between classes of 
 our own people or the native and naturalized 
 he regarded it as comparatively trifling and im- 
 material. He had not even used the word in its 
 modern application and meaning since the origin 
 of the Native American party. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that if he did not apprehend 
 that the decision of this question would be deci- 
 sive of some other important questions that were 
 to be discussed here, he would not have contri- 
 buted to protract the debate. But perceiving 
 from the course of the discussion, and from the 
 reasons given for imposing these restrictions, that 
 those who came here to carry through substantial 
 and required reforms in the Constitution, would 
 find themselves by and by, met by some of the 
 arguments that met us here, he had deemed it 
 proper to draw the attention of the body for a 
 few moments, to the question itself, and to the 
 positions taken in regard to it. ^ He would here 
 be permitted to remark that as to this question of 
 expatriation, if there was any thing that made 
 him firm in his determination to expunge the 
 word Native, it was that very question ; and he 
 desired the action of this body to show that 
 we repudiate this English common law doctrine 
 of expatriation. It was in defiance of that doc- 
 trine that we had grown up to be what we are. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped the gentleman did not 
 understand him as saying that it was the common 
 law of England alone. It was the universal law 
 of the world. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said it was not the law of this 
 country, and Supreme courts could not make it 
 so. The general feeling of every citizen, native 
 or adopted, was arrayed against it. And if there 
 was any thing that would impel him to the battle 
 field, it would be to defend adopted citizens who 
 had voluntarily expatriated themselves. But he 
 rose not to discuss this question. What were the 
 arguments of gentlemen in favor of these restric- 
 tions. And on what idea were they founded ? 
 Why' all this groping back to the past, and quo- 
 ting precedents, but upon the supposition that 
 the men of the past were wiser than we ? Why 
 all this anxiety to guard against the indis- 
 cretion of the future, but upon the principle 
 that we are wiser than will be the future. 
 
 In his judgment, the progress of humanity 
 was in the other direction, and we were not to 
 apprehend that the future would be more care- 
 less of its interests than we, or the past. And 
 when gentlemen had quoted precedent, they 
 were somewhat unfortunate, for on going back to 
 the constitutions formed during the revolutionary 
 period, they found no precedent for the native 
 qualification In our constitution of 1821, it was 
 found, and the gentleman from Dutchess had ex- 
 plained why it was there. He, Mr. B., however 
 was not. satisfied with it. The constitution of the 
 United States requiring that the President should 
 be thirty years of age, had also been quoted as a 
 precedent. But that precedent failed. Did not 
 gentlemen recollect that the election of President 
 was by an electoral college, and that therefore it 
 was a restriction on delegated power ; not on the 
 power of the people. But what a spectacle did 
 we present here ? A great deal of anxiety had 
 been exhibited to provide against the indiscretions 
 of the period of life which nearly all of us had 
 passed but none to guard against the indiscre- 
 tions of the age to which we were rapidly hasten- 
 ing. In coming here to endeavor to assist in 
 framing a constitution, he came in the hope of 
 being able to frame one that should assert the 
 popular intelligence and virtue. He had not yet 
 been able to discover the importance and value 
 of the securities gentlemen would insert. 
 And what were they after all. That the candi- 
 date should have arrived at the age of 30 years by 
 some and by. others that he should have had a 
 residence in the State for five years. So far as 
 he was able to estimate these securities they were 
 of no value at all, and he would certainly rather 
 have the influence of one well directed common 
 school for a quarter of a century, than all the se- 
 curity proposed in this section. And he feared 
 that the result of our deliberations here, from day 
 to day, consuming four days in the consideration 
 of this proposition, of so little value in itself, 
 would be to compel us to slight other and" more 
 important subjects. 
 
 Mr. B. without concluding gave way to a mo- 
 tion to rise and report progress. 
 
 The committee rose and 
 
 On motion of Mr. CHATFIELD, the Conven- 
 tion adjourned to 11 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 THURSDAY, ("28th day) July 2. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. HARRINGTON. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER presented a memorial 
 from Mr. P. Shapter, of Williamsburgh, relative 
 to Negro Suffrage, and the rendition law. He 
 moved it should be read and referred to the com- 
 mittee on the judiciary. Mr. S. said, however, 
 he might differ from the sentiments contained in 
 the memorial, yet, as it came from a very respec- 
 table inhabitant of his village, it was entitled to 
 a consideration by the Convention. 
 
 It was read. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that the judiciary commit- 
 tee had not been raised for purposes of legal in- 
 vestigation, but to form a plan for the organiza- 
 tion of Courts. The petitioner prays for an alter- 
 ation in the oath required from our State officers, 
 by which they swear to support the Constitution 
 of the United States ; and it also prays for some 
 
221 
 
 alteration in the treatment of slaves. Part of this 
 should be referred to committee No. 11. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD was perfectly aware that no 
 action could be taken on this memorial by the 
 Convention, as it was purely a matter of Congres- 
 sional action. But he had no objection to a pro- 
 per reference. 
 
 Mr. BASCOMsaid that there was something in 
 the memorial with which the Convention had 
 something to do. And that was in relation to the 
 oath which is required by our State officers. In 
 some of the states, the small state officers, are 
 not required to take an oath to support the Con- 
 stitution of the United States; but in tftis State 
 they all are so required from the governor down 
 to the lowest officer. The petition, therefore, 
 contained a legitimate subject for prayer, and 
 ought to have a proper consideration. It should 
 be referred to the committee on oaths. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said part ought to go to 
 that Committee and part to the committee on 
 suffrage. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER : and part to the committee on 
 Human Rights. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL wished it laid on the table till 
 they met again. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER opposed this, and it was 
 referred to the committee on the Judiciary. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG moved to print it. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN rose to oppose it ; but said he 
 thought it was not necessary to say a word. 
 
 The resolution was lost. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN presented a petition and moved 
 its reference to committee No. 1. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : What is it ? 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD : I want to hear it read. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL : I should like to know what it 
 is all about. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said it would be imposible to 
 tell that without reading it all over. It relates 
 to the apportionment and election of members of 
 the Legislature but not to their compensation. 
 
 It was referred. 
 
 A communication was received from the 
 clerk of the 8th Circuit Court, relative to the 
 sale of infant's estates. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said that a special committee 
 on the communications received from public of- 
 ficers, were already preparing an abstract of all 
 these returns ; and as it might be necessary to 
 print this abstract he would move to take all 
 these returns that had been referred to the Ju- 
 diciary Committee from that eommittee and send 
 them to the special committee. Agreed to. 
 
 An invitation was received from the 
 Men's Association for mutual improvement, to 
 attend and celebrate the 4th of July with them. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved that it be accepted. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL doubted the propriety of ac- 
 cepting it, for two reasons ; the first was, that we 
 had accepted one invitation to celebrate the 4th 
 of July already ; and the other was that not a sin- 
 gle member of the Convention would be there to 
 attend. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. MANN said that the exercises of the one 
 company would be in the morning, and the oth- 
 er in the afternoon. 
 
 It was accepted. 
 
 REPORT ON INCORPORATIONS OTHER THAN 
 BANKING. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS then presented the following Re- 
 port : 
 
 The committee on incorporations, other than municipal 
 and banking, respectfully submit the following which they 
 propose as an amendment to the constitution, and to sub- 
 stitute the same in lieu of the provisions of the existing 
 constitution relating to the same subject : 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 (\ 1. Special laws, creating incorporations or associa- 
 tions, or granting to them exclusive privileges, shall not 
 be passed. But the legislature may pass general laws by 
 wbi -,h any person may become incorporated on comply ing 
 with the provisions to be contained in such laws. And^ 
 all corporations shall be subj ct to all such general laws 
 a< the legislature may from time to time enact not incon- 
 sistent with the provisions of this constitution 
 
 fj -2. Every corporation for purposes of gain or benefit 
 to the corporators or share-owners, shall cause the names 
 of all its stockholders and officers, and the places of their 
 residence, ana an estimate of the value of its property, esti- 
 mated and appraised as the legislature shall by law direct, 
 and the aggregate amount of all its debts and liabilities, 
 absolute and contingent to be published at stated peiiods 
 as often as once in each year, in a newspaper published iu 
 the vicinity of its place of business. Any such corpora- 
 tion shall not become indebted to an amount greater than 
 its capital stock actually paid in, together with the undi- 
 vided nett profits thereon invested and employed in the 
 business of such corporation, or actually on hand in cash 
 or good securities for such purpose. But this shall not be 
 construed to limit the hazards of any insurance company. 
 
 3. Every corporator or share owner in any incorpo- 
 ration for gain or benefit to the corporators or shareholders, 
 except insurance, and except for purposes specified in the 
 next section, in case such corporation shall become in- 
 solvent, shall be liable for the unsatisfied debts, and liabil- 
 ities of such corporation, contracted while he was such 
 corporator or share owner, to an amount in the same 
 proportion to the whole unsatisfied liabilities that his stock 
 or share shall bear to the whole stock. But such personal 
 liability shall not extend to any indebtedness or liability 
 the payment oi' which shnll have been deterred more than 
 one year by contract with the creditor, or which shall not 
 have been demanded by suit within one yearafter it be- 
 comes due. 
 
 4. Every corporator and share-owner in any corpora- 
 tion for a public railway, canal, turnpike, bridge, plank- 
 way or other franchise of public wav, or for any tele- 
 graphic or other means of communicating intelligence for 
 public use, shall be liable for the debts and liabilities of 
 such corporation to the extent provided in the last preced' 
 ing section, except as to debts for money borrowed, for 
 land purchased or taken by authority of law, or for iron 
 for railroads. 
 
 5. Lands may be taken for public way for the purpose 
 of granting or demising to any corporation the iranchise ol 
 way over the same for public use, and for all necessary 
 appendages to uch right ot way. Such grants and demi- 
 ses shall be made in such cases and on such term? and con- 
 ditions as the legislature may deem lor the public goodj 
 but no such grant or demise shall extend beyond fifiy years 
 in duration. 
 
 ^6. All corporations and associations to be created or 
 formed after the adoption of this Constitution, shall be 
 subject to the provisions herein respecting corporations. 
 All which is respectfully submitted, 
 
 A. LOOMIS, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said it was due to the importance 
 of the subject, due to the committee and to the 
 Convention, that some explanation here should 
 be given by him ; and the committee had reques- 
 ted him to submit now the reasons that had actu- 
 ated them in arriving at the conclusions they pre- 
 sented that report. 
 
 [Mr. LOOMIS then, following the example of 
 Mr. RUSSELL from the committee on Banking 
 the other day, went on and delivered the follow- 
 ing reasons, as an oral report of the committee, 
 in the form of a speech : ] 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS rose and said he had ben direc- 
 ted by the committee to ask leave to submit some 
 
222 
 
 remarks, to state the grounds briefly on which 
 they had made this report. It would be conce- 
 ded that among the subjects to which the public 
 attention had been called, and which led to the 
 calling of this Convention, that in relation to in- 
 corporated companies held a prominent place 
 The people had seen a system existing by which 
 the government had granted to particular indi- 
 viduals special privileges which had been refus- 
 ed to others, contrary to the great principle oJ 
 equality among men. They had seen not only 
 that, but that when these special privileges, 
 which were essential to the very nature of a cor- 
 poration, were exercised, they had the further 
 privilege of immunities from loss arising from 
 business which other individuals had not from 
 loss by their business. Persons exercising the 
 powers of corporations in many cases, have all 
 the benefit of the gain which they could make by 
 means of the corporation, but in cases of loss, the 
 losses have devolved on other than those who 
 would be gainers in case of success. This struck 
 so directly against all propriety and equality 
 amongst men, that it was not surprising the pub- 
 lic attention had been called to the subject, and 
 especially when the business these incorporations 
 have carried on, is a great portion of the business 
 of the country having at its disposal so large a 
 proportion of its active capital, and affecting not 
 only private relations but the political institu- 
 tions of the country. The object of the com- 
 mittee had been to meet this prominent difficul- 
 ty in the first place, by permitting all persons 
 who may choose, to associate and become incor- 
 porated for every legitimate purpose, thus doing 
 away with the first difficulty, that of a special 
 grant of favor to a few individuals who may 
 succeed in getting a charter. In the next place 
 they endeavored so to organize the organic law 
 that while they would not discourage this means 
 of doing business or using capital, they would 
 make the corporations thus using capital, pos- 
 sess as near as possible the same power, and be as 
 powerless as private citizens. An incorporation 
 is a person a legal person, and not a natural 
 one. It is impelled on to action by the same mo- 
 tives of gain which impel private citizens, but it 
 is not restrained by the same motive of benevo- 
 lence and of humanity, and of fellow feeling, 
 which exists in the mind of every individual per- 
 son, and which restrain his selfish propensities 
 in the acquisition of gain. Nor were they res- 
 trained by those prudential considerations which 
 prevent individuals from embarking their capital 
 rashly, in the desperate hope of gain, reckless of 
 loss. The effect of the present state of things has 
 been to urge them on in the hope of success, with 
 the prospect of realizing whatever benefits might 
 be derived by the incorporation, or of devolving 
 any loss that might ensue on others. The prin- 
 ciple which the committee have incorporated in 
 their report as to the payment of debts or sustain- 
 ing losses, is such as to make every corporator 
 pay the same proportion of losses or debts in case 
 of misfortune, that he would have realized bene- 
 fits in case of success. II a partnership of five 
 persons be instituted, each partner knows at the 
 time he enters into it the partners he associates 
 with. lie selects his men, and he does not as- 
 sociate with them without knowing them. One 
 
 partner could not go out and bring in another in hi* 
 place. And an individual therefore knowing his as- 
 sociates, is content to be bound with them for loss- 
 es as well as gains. But in incorporations, an indi- 
 vidual takes an undivided share of the bus. 
 leaving other undivided shares to float where they 
 may. He is willing to embark his capital, and hi* 
 means to the given extent of one fifth, if they 
 pleased. Now, the proposition in the report, 
 was to make individual corporators holding one- 
 fifth of the capital stock answerable for one-fifth 
 of the loss, thus establishing a principle of equi- 
 ty both in profit and loss. This is made to apply 
 to all incorporations for the purpose of gain, ex- 
 cept certain classes which are specified in the pro- 
 position, and which are intended to embrace 
 those for the construction of public ways rail- 
 roads, turnpikes, plank roads and bridges and 
 others which may relate to public ways that are 
 under the necessity of taking property for public 
 use. The committee were unable to devise am 
 system by which this power of the government 
 should be exercised for the purpose of assuming 
 the right of eminent domain, except by a direct 
 application to the government itself. To do oth- 
 erwise would be to delegate a dangerous power 
 But while they would allow the establishment 
 of incorporations with the privileges he had spe- 
 cified, for railways and turnpikes, with some oth- 
 ers^yet the committee would not permit them to 
 proceed and take private property without the 
 sanction of the state itself, exercised by its high- 
 est power its legislature. The committee in 
 respect to that class of incorporations have made 
 another class of privileges, considering the large 
 amount of capital involved, and the manner it af- 
 fects real estate, and other benefits of which they 
 are productive, making the corporators responsi- 
 ble only for that class of small debts which ex- 
 ist independent of the items which such compa- 
 nies usually get into debt for. They have excep- 
 ted them from personal liability, for the land pur- 
 chased or taken, for the use of such companies, 
 because the individuals conveying the same can 
 retain it until they get their pay and for money 
 borrowed, because incorporations of that kind 
 borrow large sums, and of a class of persons who 
 are supposed to be men who examine minutely 
 into the prospects of the companies to whom they 
 lend their money in short that they look out for 
 themselves. They also excepted Jron for rail- 
 roads, embracing so large an expenditure of such 
 companies. The committee had deemed it pro- 
 per to except these items, leaving these compa- 
 nies the same responsibilities as others in all oth- 
 er refpects in fact making the corporators per- 
 sonally liable for labor and other small debts. 
 Also as a security to the corporator as well as to 
 the public, the committee had seen fit to recom- 
 mend the Convention to adopt the principle that 
 all incorporations shall publish at stated periods 
 as often as once a year in the paper published 
 in the vicinity of such company, a statement 
 showing the names of the corporators, an appraisal 
 of its property, and the aggregate amount of its li- 
 abilities, so that as well the public as the corpor- 
 ator concerned may know as often as once a year 
 its state and conditions. They had also provider 
 that such incorporations shall be limited in the 
 amount of debts they shall contract. And al- 
 
223 
 
 though the amount, to be limited, must necessari- 
 ly be arbitrary, the committee had come to the 
 conclusion that it should be equal to the whole 
 capital stock and undivided profits. To be more 
 explicit: if an incorporated company has invested 
 $100,000, or had capital to that amount paid in 
 and invested, the company would be limited to 
 that as the amount of debts it should contract. 
 Debts to the amount of $100,000 might probably 
 be salely incurred by such a company, inasmuch 
 as it had property and responsibility to that 
 amount. Thus safeguards were thrown around, 
 not only the people, but the corporators them- 
 selves by this limiting of debts, for an incorpora- 
 tion properly conducted, could not in any event 
 contract debts by which a corporator could become 
 seriously injured in his property. The commit- 
 tee had also provided a limit in point of time, be- 
 yond which a claim for debt should not be defer- 
 red, without releasing the personal responsibility 
 of the corporator. Every person failing to de- 
 mand his debt within one year,the committee were 
 of opinion should lose his lien on the corporation. 
 And this seemed to be necessary to enable men 
 to wind up their business, and to know when 
 they were safe after they had sold out. These 
 provisions, though to some they might seem to 
 bear hard on corporators, would be found to be 
 for the safety not less to them than to the pub- 
 lic and such would be the effect of limiting the 
 debts and the periodical publication of the state 
 of their affairs. There had existed for over thirty 
 years a general act of incorporation, under which 
 a large number of incorporations had been form- 
 ed and successfully prosecuted for years ; but 
 under that a different rule prevailed as to the li- 
 ability of corporators one which in the judg- 
 mer i of the committee was less equitable for 
 the corporators were made liable to the amount 
 of their share, be it more or less. They were 
 made to be security for their co-corporators, and th- 
 committee were of opinion that every one should 
 be responsible for himself only, or for such por- 
 tion or shfire as he owns, leaving the insolvency 
 among the corporators to be provided for as other 
 cases of insolvency were. They put it on the 
 principle <f equity, that he who has the advan- 
 tage of gain lor such a shire, shall be answerable 
 for the loss of the same share and no more. The 
 committee have not deemed these incorporations 
 an injury to the public, but on the contrary, an es- 
 sential benefit. They, viewed them as very use- 
 ful institutions for the employment of capital, the 
 developement of enterprise, and to carry on the 
 business which requires greater capital than indi- 
 viduals or limited partnerships can conveniently 
 furnish. They had therefore made provision so as 
 Jo render them sate, and put restraints upon their 
 abuse, corresponding with the restraints which 
 nature had imposed on the natural persons. It 
 made no difference, in the estimation of the com- 
 mittee, whether business was carried on by corpo- 
 rators or otbeis, si lung *s the business was legiti- 
 mate, and paly legitimate business should be so 
 conducted. But this system would allow men of 
 : means to come in and unite in carrying on 
 business. The principle was democratic; bu: 
 when these privileges weie limited toafe-v 
 when special privileges were granted to some and 
 denied to others, it was opposed to every princi- 
 
 ple of democracy. He moved that the report be 
 ommitted to the committee of the whole, and 
 printed. 
 
 Mr. SANFORD moved to print double the usu- 
 al quantity ; as it was a most important report. 
 
 Mr CHATFIELD concurred in the report and 
 thought it a very able one, but opposed the extra 
 number. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD was in favor of printing the ad- 
 ditional number of copies, moved by the gentle- 
 man from St Lawrence. He thought the report ot 
 vast importance to the business community. No 
 other report to this Convention would involve 
 larger interests, or arouse more inquiry. Great 
 commercial questions were involved in it. It was 
 therefore desirable that members should have a 
 sufficient number of copies to send to business men 
 of their acquaintance who mitjht return to the 
 sender their views upon the subject for the bene- 
 fit of the Convention and the State. 
 
 Mr RICHMOND supposed that all the matters 
 in all these reports would be very important; or 
 they would not have raised any committees to con- 
 sider them ; but the first sight we shall get of them 
 all, wili be in the daily papers here; the report- 
 ers will with their untiring industry and activi- 
 ty, spread them like lightning all over the State, 
 as well as our remarks. And the best way was 
 to send a newspaper to those of our constituents 
 who wanted to see the report. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY wished to know if in the insur- 
 ance companies, the personal liability should ap- 
 
 piy- 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS s^id it was expressly stated that 
 it would riot. For although the corporators in 
 those companies gain a benefit, yet as they set 
 aside a specific fund to provide for all loss; and 
 as this loss is always the result of accident, and 
 not of mismanagement, the committee had not 
 made them liable as in other corporations 
 ^Mr. PATTERSON wished to see some uni- 
 formity observed in the printing of these reports. 
 Now, by to-morrow night the Albany papers con- 
 taining them would be in New- York, in Buffalo, 
 and he did not know how far north, so that every 
 business man could see them there. Before he 
 could get his copies of a report from the printer, 
 the newspaper in his county of Chautauque had 
 come back to him, containing the report, copied 
 from an Albany paj^r. If we could have them 
 on our table next day he should like it ; but we 
 can not compete with the newspapers. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said if they departed from 
 the rule they would have a debate on all the va- 
 rious reports ; each one would think a certain re- 
 port very important to his particular section of 
 the country It would be a great expense, and 
 create invidious distinctions between the reports 
 of the different committees. The newspapers 
 would spread it in 48 hours before every business 
 man in the State. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS wanted their practice to con- 
 form to their theory, and to stick to the general 
 rule, and not to adopt a special rule for each par- 
 ticular report. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL wanted an extra number, so as 
 to send them to tiis constituents, on fair paper, 
 with lines between, so that those gentlemen who 
 had thought much on the subject, might write on 
 them such amendments as they thought proper. 
 
224 
 
 Why should they haggle about an extra number ; 
 his share would only be 12 out of 1600, and he 
 wanted them all. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD asked if this was deemed 
 more important than the report of the bankingcom- 
 mittee relative to the whole monied interests of 
 the State. The same reason Mr. RUSSELL, urged 
 would apply with equal force to the report of any 
 other committee. He could not sit down there 
 and say that any one of his constituents was more 
 entitled to these than another. And there were 
 
 no twelve gentlemen among his constituents that 
 deserved this preference. He wished the rule 
 preserved. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL being a member of the com- 
 mittee had thought it indelicate for him to pro- 
 pose to have an extra number printed. And even 
 when he had thought it necessary to make a few 
 remarks explanatory of the reasons why he dif- 
 fered partially with that committee, his remarks. 
 had been likely to have been trampled under foot, 
 and he himself voted a disorderly person. And 
 the lash had been held up before them there the 
 gentleman from Chautauque had let him off that 
 -once, he presumed, on the supposition that he was 
 too ignorant of parliamentary law to act other- 
 wise, and too inexperienced, but he had given 
 notice that he would not let any other gentleman 
 off in the same way. Was it a harsh request to 
 want to have 1600 copies printed ? 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that he felt a good deal 
 alarmed if on every little question of printing such 
 a terrible debate was to be got up ; and gentle- 
 men were all going to work themselves up into 
 such a perfect state of phrenzy. He wished to 
 know of the chair if it would be in order to move 
 the previous question ? 
 
 The PRESIDENT said it would. 
 Mr. STRONG : Then I shall certainly move 
 the previous question if I can get the floor. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said that when his folks in 
 Delaware had sent on to him for information about 
 these reports, he had told them they would be ol 
 no use, until they were altered and voted on ; and 
 then they could get them through the newspapers. 
 
 800 copies were ordered, and it was referred to 
 the committee of the whole. 
 
 RETURNS FROM LAW COURTS. 
 
 Mr. J. TAYLOR presented a report from the 
 special committee on communications from pub- 
 lic officers ; they had embodied the footings ol 
 the abstracts. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND, while the question was, in 
 a measure, before the house, would like to inquire 
 of the Chairman of the committee, what pro- 
 portion the abstracts just handed up, embraced o 
 the amount of judicial costs within this State for 
 the year 1845 ? He understood the judgments 
 returned to have amounted to some $4,000,000 
 whilst the costs were $232,000. In 1840 it was 
 stated on this floor without contradiction the 
 costs alone of court in this State, for some recen 
 year, were as much as $4,000,000. 
 
 Mr. /. TAYLOR stated that the returns were 
 only complete from the Supreme Court and from 
 47 of the 60 County Courts 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND was pleased to hear that the 
 reports from the Common Pleas were so full. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR said the returns were quite full 
 
 rom the Supreme Courts, except the first 6 
 months of 1845, from the Court in Albany. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL wished the abstracts to be print- 
 ed ; as lawyers &c. wanted to compare relatively 
 ';he expenses of the judicial system in detail 
 hroughout the State, and that was the only way 
 ;o get at it. 800 copies of the report were order- 
 ed, and 150 of the abstract.. 
 
 PARDONS. 
 
 The following report was received from the 
 (jovernor : 
 
 EXECUTIVE CHAMBER, > 
 ALBANY, July 2, 1848. J 
 To the Convention: 
 
 In compliance with a resolution of the Convention, in 
 the following words 
 
 ' Resolved, That the Governor be, and he is hereby re- 
 ' quested to furnish to the Convention, 
 
 " 1. The number of applications for pardon for criminal 
 1 offences made during the year 1845. 
 ' 2. The number of pardons granted upon such applica- 
 ' tions during the said year." 
 
 I have the honor to state that it has not been customary in 
 his office, to endorse upon the papers connected with ap- 
 plications for pardons, the time of their receipt. ^Of the ap- 
 ^ lications on file therefore, and undisposed of, it is diffi- 
 cult to tell, with perfect precision, which were received 
 near the close of the year 1845, and which in the early 
 part of the year 1846. The partial or final disposition oi 
 the cases however, when endorsements are made with the 
 proper dates, and the dates of the papers connected with 
 the applications themselves, render it practicable to make 
 an enumeration, so far as the files of the officer present the 
 data, which cannot vary materially from the truth. 
 
 The fac s that many applications are made without any 
 papers, or upon a mere letter, or other paper, wholly un- 
 mportant for the office files, as containing no material 
 fact-, and that, in many other cases, papers presented, ex- 
 amined and pronounced insufficient, ar<; withdrawn by the 
 rrson presenting them and are not leit to be filed, make 
 impossible from the files of the office, to answer with 
 accuracy the first inquiry. 
 
 It is proper further to remark that the same case is of- 
 ten made the foundation for more than one, and some- 
 times for several applications. 
 
 The files of the office, as nearly as a count can be made 
 from the papers, show that six hundred and ninety three 
 applications for pardons of all description, were made and 
 considered during the year 1845, not including the cases 
 of mere verbal applications, nor cases where the papers 
 were withdrawn. Applications of these two classes are 
 very numerous, but I have no databy which I can make 
 an estimate of the number of either, upon which any con- 
 siderable degree of confidence can be placed, and I there 
 fore do not attempt to estimate them. 
 
 From the applications made, the following pardonewere 
 granted during the year 1845, namely: 
 
 Pardons from the State Prisons JM 
 
 " County Prisons 30 
 
 " " Penitentiary, New York 9 
 
 " to restore citizenship 24 
 
 " to commute sentences of death to imprison- 
 ment in the State Prison for life 2 
 
 Whole number of pardons issued during the year 
 1845, 169 
 
 To show how perfectly an ex parte business it is to 
 prefer these applications for pardons, it may not be impro- 
 per to state, that in but sixteen cases out of the whole num- 
 ber presented during the year 1845, was there remon- 
 strance or opposition, or unfavorable expression of any 
 description 
 
 All which is respectfully submitted. 
 
 SILAS WRIGHT. 
 
 After some conversation, the report was order- 
 ed printed and referred to standing committee 
 No. 3. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS had leave to present at this time 
 a memorial from citizens of Albany on various 
 subjects connected with the business of the Con- 
 vention. He was also requested, to ask for it:- 
 reading. 
 
225 
 
 At the suggestion of Mr. RUSSELL, the report 
 was suffered to lay on the table until the next sit- 
 ting. 
 
 THE RECESS. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote taken yesterday on the resolution, relative 
 to the adjournment from to day until next Tues- 
 day. Mr. T. said that if the time was fixed to 
 allow members to go home, it was too short, ex- 
 cept for those being in the vicinity, and was, 
 therefore unequal or if it was in honor of the 
 4th of July, then it was too long. For himself it 
 was a matter of little consequence, but he made 
 the motion at the request of several gentlemen, 
 with a view to extend the time of adjournment 
 until the 13th inst. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON was in favor of shortening, 
 rather than lengthening the time. He was in fa- 
 vor of an adjournment over on the 4th, but for no 
 longer period. The time he urged was needed 
 here if the work of the Convention was to be 
 submitted to the people in time for their action. 
 If every proposition was to be discussed, as the 
 one under consideration during the last four days, 
 the election in November would still find the 
 Convention in session. Besides he did not be- 
 lieve it to be right to adjourn for two weeks and 
 charge the State for labor not performed. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR again urged the inequality of the 
 present period and also that the time should not 
 be shortened. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD also urged that it would be 
 an injustice to the people, for the members of 
 the Convention to absent themselves more than 
 was possible from their business. As to adjourn- 
 ing on the fourth he had no objection to that. 
 
 The conversation was further continued by 
 Messr>. TAYLOR, RUSSELL, FLANDERS, 
 STRONG, DANFORTH, HOFFMAN, and HAR- 
 RIS, in favor of the reconsideration, on the ground 
 of its being due to the members who resided at a 
 distance from Albany, arid who would not be able 
 to avail themselves of the time, as now fixed. 
 
 Messrs. KIRKLAND, BRUCE, RICHMOND, 
 SIMMONS, and CHATFIELD, in reply, urged 
 that there was no need of any adjournment ex- 
 cept merely for the 4th of July, and that every 
 moment of time was required for the deliberation 
 of the Convention, in order to perfect the work 
 in season. 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion to 
 reconsider, by ayes and nays, on the call of Mr. 
 CHATFIELD, arid it prevailed, ayes 50, nays 45, 
 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Ayranlt, H. Backus, Bruce, Bull* 
 D D. Campbell, Chamberlain, Conely, Cook, Crocker 
 Danforth, Dodd, Flanders, Forsyth, Greene Harris, Hoff 
 jnau, Hunt, A. Huritingtoii, Hutchinson, Kings-ley, McNeil- 
 Miller, Morris, Murphy, Nelson. Nicoll, O'< oiior, Penni, 
 man, Richmond, Russell, SanCord, Shaw, Sheldon, Shep- 
 ard, Smith, \V H. Spencer, Stephens, Stow, Str . ng, S\va k 
 hamer, Taggart, J. J. Taylor, VV. Taylor, To\\ nsei.d, vv ar- 
 ren, Waterbury, Witbeck, A. Wright, Yawger, the Presi- 
 dent 60. 
 
 NAYS -Messrs. Bascom, Bergen, Bouck.Bowdish, Brjy. 
 ton, Brundajie, Lurr, R. Campbell, jr., Chatfield, Clj de, 
 Cornel!, Dorlon, Duhois, Gebhard, Graham, 1 1 an, Hotch- 
 kiss. Jordan, Kemble, K-rn;m, Kirkland, Mann, Ne.lis, 
 Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Peikins, P-rter, Powers, Rug- 
 gles, St. John, Salisbury, Sears, Shaver, Simmons, K Spcn. 
 cer, Stauton, Talimadge, Tuihill, Van Schoonhoven, Wil. 
 lard, Wood, W. B. Wright, A. W. Young, J. Youngs-45. 
 
 Mr. TAYLO*R (hen moved to amend so as to 
 
 piovide that when the Convention adjourned to- 
 dav, it nonlH be to meet on Monday the 13th inst., 
 at 10 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved that the Convention 
 do now adjourn. Lost. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend thejimend. 
 rnent so as to provide that when the Convention 
 adjouined tomorrow, it would be to meet on Mon- 
 day next at 10 o'clock. 
 
 The amendment was rejected ayes 37, nays5f>, 
 as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Bowdish, Bruce, Bmndaere, Barr, 
 R. Campbell, jr., Chatfh Id, Clyde. Du> ois, Gebhani. 
 Hotchkiss, A Huntingdon. Jordan. Kernan.Kiikl; nd.IV'ann, 
 Nellis, Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Perkins, Richmond, 
 Ruggles, St. John, Salisbury, Stars, Shaver, Simmons, E. 
 Spencer, Stanton, Stow, Swackhamer. Tacgart, J. J. Tay- 
 lor, Van Fchoonhoven, Willard, W B. Wright, J. Younge. 
 the President 37- 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Ayrault. H. "Backus, Bascom, Bergen, 
 Bouck, Brayton. Bull, D. D. Campbell, Chamberlain, Co- 
 nely, Cook. Cornell, Crooker, Danforth, Dodd, Dorlon, 
 Flanders, Forsyth, Graham. Greene. Harris, Hoffman, 
 Hunt, Hutchinson, Kenible. King-ley, McNeil, Miller, 
 Morris, Murphy, Nelson, Nicoll, O'Conor, P< nniman, Por- 
 ter, Powers, Kussell, Sanford, Shaw, Shellon, Shepard, 
 Smith, W. H. Spencer, Stephens, Strong, Talimadge. W. 
 Taylor, Townsend, Tuthill, Warren, Waterbury, Wood, 
 
 A. Wjight, Yawger, A. W. Young-55. 
 
 Mr BASCOM moved that the Convention ad- 
 journ for one week from to day. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the motion was not in 
 oHer. 
 
 Mr. BURR moved to amend so as to adjourn 
 until Wednesday the 15th of July. Lost, without 
 a division. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to amend so as to adjourn 
 until Thursday the 19th. Lost. 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion of 
 Mr. TAYLOR, to adjourn until the 13th. Lost 
 ayes 40, noes 49, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ayrault, H. Backus, Bull, D D Camp- 
 bell, Chamberlain, Conely, Cook, Crocker, Danforth, Dood, 
 Flanders, Korsyth, Greene, Harris, Hoffman. Hunt, Hut- 
 chinson, Kemble, Kingsley, McNeil, Miller, Morris, Nel- 
 son, Nicoll, O' 'onor, Penniman. Porter, Russell, Sanford, 
 Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Smith, W. H. Spencer, Stephens, 
 Stow. Strong, Taggart, J J. Taylor, W. Taylor. Town- 
 send, Tuthill, Warren, Waterbury, A. Wright, Yawger 
 46. 
 
 NOES Messsrs. Allen, Bascom, Bergen, Bonck, Bow- 
 dish, Brayton, Bruce, Brundage, Burr, R. Campbell, jr., 
 Chatfield. Clyde, Cornell, Dor'on, Duhois, Gebhard, Gra- 
 ham, Hart, Hotchkiss, A. Huntington, Jordan, Kernan, 
 Kirkland. Mann, Murphy, Nellis Nicholas, Parish Patter- 
 son, Perkins, Powers, Richmond, Ruggles St. John, Salis- 
 bury, Sears, Shaver, Simmons, E. Spencer, Stanton, Swack- 
 hamer, Talimadge, Van Schoonhoven Willard, Wood, W. 
 
 B. Wright, A. W. Young, J. Youngs, The President 49. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS had leave of absence until the 
 21st ; Mr. WATERBURY until the 13th ; Messrs. 
 YAWGER, MILLER and SHEPARD for one week. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that the Convention 
 adjourn, but withdrew his motion at the instance 
 of 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR, who urged that it was due to 
 the members who were absent, and those who had 
 made their arrangements to be absent, that the 
 original resolution should be adopted. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned till Tues- 
 day morning next at 10 o'clock. 
 
 TUESDAY, (29th day,} July 7. 
 The PRESIDENT, at ten minutes past 10 
 o'clock, directed the Secretary to call the roll. 
 
226 
 
 The roll was accordingly called, and a bare 
 quorum answered. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL inquired if the names of the 
 absentees would be entered on the journal ? 
 
 The PRESIDENT replied in the negative, un- 
 less a motion was made for that purpose. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved the names of the absen- 
 tees be entered on the journal. 
 
 The PRESIDENT requested the gentleman 
 from St. Lawrence to suspend his motion until 
 the Convention arrived at that order of business 
 motions, &c. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL assented. 
 
 The journal of Thursday's proceedings were 
 then read and approved. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a report from the 
 Clerk of the second Chancery Circuit, in answer 
 to a resolution calling for statements respecting 
 infant's estates, and which was referred to the 
 committee on the judiciary. 
 
 The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention 
 a communication from James Connor, Esq., clerk 
 of the city and county of New York, accompany- 
 ing a map of the several districts of the 7th ward, 
 thereby perfecting the map of the county. Re- 
 ferred to the first standing committee. 
 
 The PRESIDENT also presented a communi- 
 cation from the Comptroller, in relation to the 
 debts and revenues of the State, which was ap- 
 propriately referred. 
 
 PERSONAL LIABILITY. 
 
 Mr. COOK offered the following resolution: 
 Resolved, That the standing committee on currency 
 and hanking be instructed to enquire and report concern- 
 ing the expediency of a constitutional provision, requir- 
 ing the legislature to pass a law for the equitable liquida- 
 tion of the personal liability of banks to their creditors, 
 to prevent unnecessary litigation and delay in the enforce- 
 ment of such liabilities. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND asked what the gentleman 
 intended by the words personal liability of bank- 
 ers ? He supposed there were no cases where 
 they were liable, except those covered by the re- 
 port of the committee on that subject. 
 
 Mr. COOK replied that to make bankers issu- 
 ing currency responsible personally was one 
 thing but to provide the means by which this 
 liability should be adjusted, and liquidated with- 
 in a reasonable time, was another. He would 
 vote to make them personally liable so far as cur- 
 rency was concerned, provided some speedy mode 
 of settlement was provided by law but he would 
 not vote for it to go into effect under existing 
 laws. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL was happy that the gentleman 
 had called attention to this important subject. 
 The great objection to the principle of personal 
 liability of stockholders, was the impracticability 
 under our laws of effecting a speedy, certain and 
 just settlement of these ILiabilites. In England, 
 Scotland and other countries, provision had been 
 made for such settlements, which had been found 
 to work well in cases of insolvency. Here the 
 effort to settle such matters had only resulted in 
 a ridiculous bandying of the matter about from 
 court to court, without effecting the desired ob- 
 ject, and making unpopular a great and just prin- 
 ciple. Mr. R. would compel the legislature to 
 provide for the equitable adjustment of these lia- 
 bilities and this, in his judgment, would be per- 
 
 fectly easy bysome such mode as was in vogue 
 in England, requiring a registration and sale of 
 the effects of the insolvent corporation the as- 
 certtdnment of the deficiency, if any, to meet lia- 
 bilities and the share pro rata which each stock- 
 holder was bound to make good. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS of course had no objection to 
 the enquiry. The existing law might need 
 amendment. But he could not assent to all the 
 reasons that had been urged for it. We had pre- 
 cisely the law now which the gentleman from St. 
 Lawrence seemed to wish and which the resolu- 
 tion contemplated. When a corporation failed, 
 where the stockholders were personally liable, a 
 bill was filed in Chancery, to compel a pro rata 
 contribution, after selling all the effects and ap- 
 plying them pro tanto, to make good the defi- 
 ciency. And thus the matter was all settled up. 
 Mr. S. knew this to be so, for he had done it him- 
 self. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL asked if proceedings were stay- 
 ed against individual stockholders, until after the 
 deficiency had been ascertained and assessed 
 among the stockholders ? 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS replied that the Chancellor 
 controlled that matter. He knew of a case where 
 two men went on and got judgments against stock- 
 holders, before the sale and application of the 
 effects, and the Chancellor refused costs. Other- 
 wise too, immense sacrifices must ensue from the 
 litigation that would grow out of allowing an in- 
 dividual stockholder to be sued for the entire 
 amount of a debt ; he to turn round and sue oth- 
 ers for their contributions. The gentleman from 
 St. Lawrence would find that our predecessors 
 knew something after all, and had got all this 
 thing beautifully arranged so that such matters 
 could be all easily settled up. In the case he al- 
 luded to, the contribution was less than half each 
 one's stock. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL replied that the legal and learn- 
 ed gentleman might be correct ; but Mr. R. knew 
 one instance of a gross perversion of law and liti- 
 gation growing out of such a case. The Rossie 
 mining company, upon its failure had liabilities 
 to the amount of $45,000. An immense amount 
 of costs had accumulated, and though the case 
 happened six years ago, the litigation had not 
 been finally settled to this day. Mr. R. knew 
 that a bill was filed by one stockholder before a 
 vice chancellor to compel two or three others to 
 make contribution, and it was thrown out by the 
 vice chancellor. The courts of law decided that 
 a bill be filed in chancery against all the corpora- 
 tors and that bill was thrown out on the ground 
 that he had no jurisdiction. Now, Mr. R. would 
 save the expense of chancery proceedings. A 
 commission should be appointed, as in cases of 
 bankruptcy through which stockholders might 
 be compelled to pay in their rateable proportion 
 of the assets to be used in paying debts. Such a 
 law would be vastly beneficial in his opinion at 
 all events, the enquiry could do no harm. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG merely rose to express 
 his concurrence in the propriety of the resolution 
 as the committee of which he was one, were 
 acting on the subject of general liability. It 
 struck him, from the tenor of this debate, that the 
 difficulty now arose from our judiciary system. 
 It seemed to be a contest between chancery and 
 
227 
 
 law. Between the judiciary and bank committees, 
 
 remedy for existing evils would no doubt be 
 
 ^led for if the legislature had not or would 
 
 not do its duty, the Convention should instruct 
 
 them. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES hoped the resolution would 
 pass. The remedy now in these c.ises was intri- 
 cate, tedious and difficult to be understood by the 
 most careful attention. There were various lia- 
 bilities of corporations sometimes against the 
 directors and mother cases against stockholders 
 and it was difficult in some instances the profes- 
 sion had found it so, to draw a bill in chancery 
 to meet the particular case precisely. The plan 
 proposed by the gentleman from St. Lawrence 
 was the correct one. A commission mis>htbe ap- 
 pointed with full power to investigate all the facts 
 and decide on every matter in relation to an insol- 
 vent corporation and the facts being ascertained 
 oti which the bill was based, it could then be 
 safely drawn. Mr. R. thought a system might be 
 framed which would be safe, convenient and 
 speedy, by which stockholders might find out the 
 situation of companies in which they were inter- 
 ested, and creditors could have their claims set- 
 tled without expensive litigation. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 Mr. WHITE offered the following resolution : 
 
 LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS 
 
 Reso veJ, That the Comptroller be requested to report 
 *o thti Convention the duration of each session of the legis- 
 lature for th years 1841, '2, '3, '4 and '5. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN doubted if the Comptroller 
 knew anything about it. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG suggested that the Secre- 
 tary of State should be substituted for the Comp- 
 troller. 
 
 Mr. WHITE assented to the suggested amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND suggested an amendment, to 
 call for the amount of compensation that was paid 
 to those legislatures respectively. 
 
 Mr. WHITE assented, ajtd the resolution as 
 amended was agreed to. 
 
 ABSENT MEMBERS. 
 
 Leave of absence was granted to Mr. SHAW for 
 4 days ; Mr. ST. JOHN for 5 days ; Mr. ANGEL un- 
 til Monday next ; Mr. HYDE for 10 days, and Mr. 
 FORSYTH for 10 days. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN, while these motions were be- 
 ing made, had no objection to them, but the pro- 
 ceedings was, to say the least, unusual, and an 
 unnecessary consumption of the time of the Con- 
 vention. Why ask leave of absence, unless the 
 Convention has power to punish its members for 
 being absent ? Now he knew of no such power 
 being possessed by the Convention. If gentlemen 
 were disposed to absent themselves with or with- 
 out leave, the Convention could not interpose, 
 and it was therefore an unnecessary waste of time 
 :V-r and act upon these resolutions and to re- 
 cord them on the journal. He doubted if they 
 could even call the House, in the parliamentary 
 mode of proceeding. 
 
 The PRESIDENT announced the unfinished 
 business to be next in order. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said it seemed to him in this 
 very thin state of the house it was hardly discreet 
 ti go into committee of the whole, and pass any 
 resolution or take any vote to-day, for there are 
 
 enough away probably, with the aid of gentlemeu 
 who are here, to move a reconsideration at any 
 time, and thus consume much time unnecessarily. 
 It struck him they would not promote the busi- 
 ness but rather retard it by giving occasion for 
 motions of reconsideration, and they had there- 
 fore better adjourn until to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER remarked that there were about 
 70 members present, and he apprehended they 
 would not have more for a week. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN replied that he would adjourn 
 for a week then. He found that many of those 
 gentlemen who made eloquent speeches against 
 any adjournment the other day, were now absent. 
 
 Mr. STRONG desired the gentleman from On- 
 tario to withdraw his motion, to enable him to ask 
 for leave of absence for a gentleman. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN assented. 
 
 Mr. STRONG then asked for leave of absence 
 for Mr. CHATFIELD for two days. [Laughter.] 
 He was sure the gentleman from Otsego must be 
 sick, or he would be present. [Renewed laugh- 
 ter.] 
 
 Leave was granted unanimously. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN had no desire to press his mo- 
 tion, if gentlemen were of opinion they could safe- 
 ly proceed with business. He then renewed his 
 motion. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY called for the yeas and nays. 
 He desired to have the yeas and nays* to-day on 
 s'ome question, and he thought this was as favor- 
 able an occasion as any other. 
 
 The yeas and nays were ordered, and resulted 
 thus, yeas 7, nays 72, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Hoffman, Kingsley, Rhoades, Shaver, 
 Simmons, Townsend, Worden ? 
 
 NOK.S Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 Baksr, Bascom, Bergen. Bowdi^h, Brayton, Brown, Bruce, 
 Brundage, Bull.Burr, Camhreleng, R. Campbell, jr. Clyde t 
 Cook, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dantbrth, Dodd, Dorlon, Du- 
 bois, Flanders, Gebhard, Greene, Hotc^kiss, Hunt, E. 
 Huutington, Kennedy, Kernin, Loomi?, Mann, McNeil, 
 Maxwell, Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicboll, O'Connor, 
 Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Porter, Riker, Ruggles, Rus- 
 sell, Salisbury, Sanford, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stan- 
 ton, Strong, W. Taylor Tutlull, White, Willard, Witbeck, 
 Wood, W. B. Wright, A. W. Young, the President 72. 
 
 So the Convention refused to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said his object was the same as 
 that of the gentleman from New York, (Mr. 
 KENNEDY.) It was now accomplished, and they 
 had now an opportunity to compare the list with 
 the list of those very scrupulous gentlemen who 
 spoke here so eloquently the other day in opposi- 
 tion to the adjournment. He now moved that 
 the Convention go into committee of the whole 
 on the article which had been previously under 
 consideration. 
 
 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 
 
 The Convention resolved itself into committee 
 of the whole on the report of Mr. MORRIS, on 
 the powers and duties of the Executive, Mr. 
 PATTERSON in the chair, in the absence of Mr. 
 CHATFIELD. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN stated the question to be on 
 the motion of Mr. RUSSELL to strike out the 
 second section and insert a substitute making 
 every qualified elector eligible to the office of Go- 
 vernor. 
 
 Mr. HUNT wished to correct a serious misap- 
 prehension which existed in many quarters, of 
 the bearing of his argument at an early stage of 
 
228 
 
 this discussion. I contended (said he) that we 
 had no right to restrict the free choice of the peo- 
 ple when acting in their sovereign capacity, and 
 that they cannot do so themselves without dero- 
 gating from their sovereignty. Many, I find, 
 think we cannot recognize this principle without 
 destroying all authority over the citizen, and 
 placing him above the law. This misapprehen- 
 sion comes from confounding the rights and pow- 
 ers of the people as an organized whole, with the 
 rights and powers of the persons constituting this 
 whole, when regarded in their individual capaci- 
 ty. This distinction should be always kept in 
 sight. The people, as a whole, are the sovereign 
 the persons constituting the sovereignty are, 
 considered, individually, the subjects. The 
 whole, being superior to the parts, can give laws 
 to the parts, and give laws to its servants and de- 
 puties also but it cannot give laws to itself with- 
 out committing an absurdity ; for law is the voice 
 of a superior to an inferior, not of an equal to an 
 equal. Equals bind themselves by treaties, not 
 by laws and no power can make a treaty with 
 itself. So whether you regard the restrictions 
 upon the sovereign power of the State con- 
 tained in section 2, in the light of a con- 
 tract or a law, they are invalid and absurd 
 in either case. Whenever the people might 
 choose to disregard them they could do so, and 
 no satisfaction could be obtained from any quarter. 
 I should be guilty of disrespect were I nut to 
 notice at least some of the able arguments thai 
 have been offered by gentlemen who dissent from 
 the views 1 expressed. Perhaps I he most effec- 
 tive of these -arguments was that of my esteemed 
 colleague, [Mr. NICOLL..] I understood him to 
 say, in s'ibstance, that the principle design of a 
 constitution was, to restrain the people from exer- 
 cising undue powers, and especially from plunder- 
 ing or oppressing the minoiity; in fact, that ihe 
 restriction of the power ot the people (not their 
 delegates) within due bounds, was one ot the great 
 objects we were chosen to accomplish. But 1 
 must have misunderstood him. Mr. Jtfferson, to 
 whose general opinions upon governmen my col 
 league will subscribe quite as fully as I do, de- 
 clares that "governments are republican only in 
 proportion as they embody the will of the people 
 and execute it," Ch. Justice Taney says (I quote 
 from memory) " that the sovereignty of the peo- 
 ple can never be limited or stopped; for if this 
 could be done in a single instance, or for a single 
 day, it might be done in every instance, and lor 
 ever." My colleague's remarks would have much 
 force it applied to the federal constitution, which 
 is in most respects a permanent treaty between 
 sovereign States, but none when applied to 
 the constitution of an independent State. The 
 gentleman from Chautauque [Mr. MARVIN" 
 made a very skilful use ot the doctrine tha' go- 
 vernments derive their just powers from the con 
 sent of the governed. Suppose the governed o 
 this State should at some future time not only con 
 sent but desire to he governed by a man under 3( 
 years of age, would he carry out this dor'rine b 
 forcing an older man upon them against Iheir wish 
 ea? The gentleman from Allegany [Mr ANGEL 
 considered that it would be no more derogatory t 
 the people to prohibit them from electing a G( 
 vernor under thirty than it is to say no perso 
 
 hall have power to bind himself by any contract 
 
 hile under twenty-one. If he will show me that 
 
 le people as a whole are not sovereign, or that 
 
 ndividuals are sovereign ; I will admit: him to be 
 
 orrect. Until he does so, I must deny that there 
 
 any analogy between the two cases. Any man 
 
 full ae;e may delegate almost any power he has 
 
 o a deputy or agent of 15 if he chooses. Would 
 
 deny to the sovereign a discretion which 
 very subject of mature age mav fully exercise? 
 ut I do not feel called on to review or to an- 
 wer all the arguments advanced against the doc- 
 ine I advocate. I leave- that to abler men. My 
 hief motive in trespassing upon the committee 
 t this time, is, as already intimated, to show that 
 le doctrine of the sovereignty of the people, and 
 f the inviolability of that sovereignty, by no 
 means implies that individual citizens are above 
 le law, or that the sovereign is absolute or law- 
 ess. My notions concerning the rights and pow- 
 rs of government are briefly these : The only 
 erfect government known among men, is self- 
 overnment, God has written certain laws upon 
 le heart of each individual, and requires him to 
 overn himself by them. But some are too fool- 
 sh to clearly understand these laws, and thou- 
 ands are too wicked to obey them. Thousands 
 ill not govern themselves ; and they must there- 
 ore submit to a greatly inferior government from 
 thers. The establishment of such less perfect 
 ;overnment is fully justified, and can only be jus- 
 ified, by the plea of necessity. The right to in- 
 titute artificial government is incidental to the 
 ight of self-preservation. They can therefore 
 laim no powers that are not strictly subordinate 
 .nd subservient to this right. They cannot law- 
 ully meddle with the man who will and wisely 
 governs himself, unless it be to claim his aid and 
 lace him in a post of honor. If they impose 
 nnecessary restraints if they trample upon 
 private rights if they are false to the public in- 
 
 erests then they become transformed into 
 
 yrannies. They are no longer governments, but 
 ubjects requiring government for themselves ; 
 and it is the duty of all honest men to unite for 
 heir correction or, if need be, for their over- 
 irow. But while they exist and confine them- 
 selves to their legitimate duties, they should be 
 respected, and all their attributes, especially the 
 ital attribute of sovereignty, should be held sa- 
 cred. The grand objection to the section under 
 consideration, is, that it seeks to restrict the so- 
 vereignty in its legitimate sphere of action a 
 course not only wrong but absurd ; for if the 
 power restricting be not greater than the power 
 restricted, the restriction amounts to nothing 
 and if it be greater, then the power restricted is 
 no longer sovereign. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said he did not ask the com- 
 mittee to delay action on his own account, tho' 
 he had but just reached town after riding all 
 night, He intended to reply to the positions ta- 
 ken by two or three gentlemen, neither of whom 
 were now in their seats and if he went on, it 
 mio'ht perhaps appear discourteous to them to re- 
 ply in their absence. But if such was the pleas- 
 ure of the committee, he would continue his re- 
 marks which were suspended by the adjournment 
 on Thursday presuming that no other member 
 desired to speak to so thin a house. (No objection 
 
229 
 
 being made,) Mr. B. went on to speak of the res- 
 trictions in the section under consideration. 
 They were originally that the Governor should 
 be a native, 30 years of age, and a resident in the 
 state for five years. These were substantial res- 
 trictions, and perhaps required particular con- 
 sideration. These were the points on which gen- 
 tlemen commented who took ground for these 
 restrictions. As to this limitation of age, how he 
 asked, did gentlemon hope to enforce obedience 
 to it. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS suggested that the restrictions as 
 to age and nativity had been struck out. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM : True but the Chair decided 
 that the whole subject was open, and the gen- 
 tlemen he proposed to answer took that latitude. 
 
 The CHAIR replied that the present occupant 
 of the chair dissented from that decision and 
 thought the whole subject was not under discus- 
 sion. The question was on striking out all that 
 remained of the section, and inserting a clause, 
 making every qualified elector eligible. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said he should say very 
 
 little 
 
 our foreign population were from that government, 
 and the doctrine should be met and repelled on 
 every proper occasion. The way that question 
 was met by the Convention of 1821, seemed to 
 him just about as extraordinary, and as ill calcu- 
 lated to effect the object, as the mode of carrying 
 on hostilities attributed to the Dutch by the veri- 
 table historian Diedrick Knickerbocker. That 
 was to collect together everything they had pur- 
 chased and paid for, of the nation with whom they 
 were at war, and burn them in one large huge 
 pile. This was about as singular mode of carrying 
 on hostilities against the doctrine of expatriation as 
 that of our illustrious ancestors. But Mr. B. rose 
 mainly to enter his dissent to some other posi- 
 tions taken by the advocates of these restrictions. 
 The gentleman from Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) 
 had it that we came here with .restricted duties. 
 This doctrine of restrictions was to be begun on 
 ourselves. We were to begin it on ourselves. 
 The position was that we were to do what the 
 people sent us here to do. That would be found 
 to be a rule of difficult application. We should 
 find, when we came to compare views on this 
 question of what we were sent here to do, that 
 we had little to do. One might be sent here to 
 effect one reform another, another. Mr. B. 
 doubted whether we should find that the masses 
 of the people had decided in favor of any single 
 proposition we might debate here. Mr. B. 
 knew there were complaints about the judiciary. 
 Yet he knew that the people were far from being 
 anxious as to the propriety of abolishing the pre 
 sent system and substituting another. There had 
 been complaints also about State debt, and the 
 action of the legislature on that subject but he 
 doubted whether a majority of the people had 
 so settled down on the matter as to require at 
 our hands restrictions on the legislature in that 
 respect. He knew there were a great many 
 subjects of local complaint, that it could not be 
 insisted that a majority of the people had sent 
 us here to reform. Take, for instance the 
 question that had agitated the counties in this 
 neighborhood the very question which the gen- 
 tleman from Columbia would urge here as call- 
 ing for a reform and would the gentleman says 
 that a majority of the people had sent us here 
 to consider that question ? We came here to 
 listen to and consider the various subjects ihat 
 were matters of complaint in the various loca- 
 lities in the State, though urged by a small por- 
 tion of the people of the State, and to decide 
 whether they were well founded, and whether 
 the propositions designed to meet these com- 
 plaints were intrinsically just and right. Mr. B, 
 had supposed all would concede that our duties 
 were general that they required of us a gen- 
 come out. And but for the suggestions thrown ] eral examination of every section of the constitu- 
 
 about that but a good deal about something else. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG contended that the sub- 
 ject of a restriction of any description involved 
 every other limitation and that the whole sub- 
 ject was open. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM expressed his obligations to the 
 gentleman for the suggestion. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL remarked that five or six gen- 
 tlemen had discussed the whole subject on this 
 motion. 
 
 The CHAIR would not interrupt the gentle- 
 man, unless others did. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM went on to insist that you could 
 not enforce this qualification of age, if it was left 
 in the constitution. Suppose a majority of the 
 people should inadvertently elect a governor who 
 was under 30. Would the majority relinquish 
 their favorite man merely because he should be 
 found to be in fact a little under 30 ? If we should 
 come to this, we should find it necessary to sub- 
 mit to an infraction of the constitution, or anar- 
 chy must ensue. As to the qualification of resi- 
 dence, in the form in which it stood here, it was 
 objectionable because such residence was not re- 
 quired to be next preceding the election. It 
 might occur, as it did sometimes, that a man en- 
 tirely qualified, might have resided out of the 
 state for some time. Such a man must under this 
 provision, perform six months' quarantine, to get 
 foreign influences out of him, before he could be 
 a candidate for governor. We to be sure had 
 abundant material for Executives at home but 
 the man that the people might most desire, as best 
 qualified, might not be eligible. As to the word 
 native, he regarded it as settled that that must 
 
 out by the gentleman from Dutchess and Essex 
 (Messrs. TALJ/MA.DGK and SIMMONS) in regard 
 to the reasons why it was left out of the constitu- 
 tion of 1777, and inserted in that of 1821, he 
 should not have thought it necessary to have said 
 a word on the subject. If there were any one 
 thing that should induce us to be firm in exclud- 
 ing this word, it was the doctrine to which allu- 
 sion had been so often made of expatriation the 
 doctrine that a natural born British subject could 
 not throw off his allegiance. A large portion of 
 
 tion. If not, why did we direct the appointment 
 of 18 or 20 committees, giving them in charge 
 every branch of the government and every sec- 
 tion of the constitution ? Were we to be told 
 that we were confined to such a view of the sub- 
 ject as the people had decided we should go to 
 work upon ? But the gentleman from Columbia 
 would restrict us still further. We were to 
 make nothing new, according to his view of the 
 subject. He represented us as being here with 
 brushes and paint and putty and tinkering tools, 
 
230 
 
 to stop up cracks and brush over deformities, 
 leaving things essentially as they are now. 
 Mr. B. came here with no such instructions or 
 limitations. He had been directed to stop at no 
 certain point, in the way of reform, but to go 
 forward in that work in the direction and to the 
 ttent which should appear to be necessary ; and 
 he should do this with the more fearlessness 
 under the evident anxiety of certain gentlemen 
 to arrest his course. The old Constitution had 
 caused dissatisfaction. And whilst some were 
 finding fault with one section, and others with 
 another that instrument was held up for our ve- 
 neration ! One gentleman wanted to sanctify one 
 section and another another until we should 
 find the whole instrument too sacred for our 
 touch ! And the idea that such is written in the 
 Constitution of 1821, seemed to be quite conclu- 
 sive against any change. They seemed to work 
 with the Constitution of 1821, as the Mahomedan 
 did with a hog, when they had an inclination for 
 bacon. It was forbidden food with them, for the 
 curse of the Prophet rested on the whole animal. 
 And yet one of the faithful would sanctify one por- 
 tion of the animal and another another, as not com- 
 ing within the intention of the Prophet. ' Surely,' 
 said one, f the good Prophet did not mean to pro- 
 scribe the head,' and ' surely not the tail,' and so 
 on, until by piecemeal they absolved the whole 
 from the interdict, from one end to the other. 
 We might as well adjourn and go home, and tell 
 the people that the Constitution is all right, and 
 that their complaints are ill founded. Mr. B. 
 wanted gentlemen to go in detail into the beau- 
 ties of this old Constitution, when they insisted 
 that we should not touch it. He wanted them 
 to tell him whether it was the judiciary system 
 that claimed their admiration whether the sub- 
 stitute which it provided for the old council of 
 appointment, vas one of those beauties for 
 which they claimed our adoration or whether 
 the restriction on the elective franchise was 
 one of these beauties? Would these gentle- 
 men tell him whether the appointing power was 
 lodged where it should be ? He invited them to 
 look at the unjust impo'sition of taxes provided 
 for in that instrument. One of them was the 
 tax on the consumer of an article of neces- 
 sity. His constituents, when they went to a salt 
 manufacturer and paid a shilling a bushel for the 
 article, must turn round and pay the State ano- 
 ther shilling for carrying it away. The truth 
 was, very few of the innovations made by the 
 Convention of 1821, were satisfactory to the peo- 
 ple. Mr. B. pointed to the restrictions placed by 
 the Convention of 1821 upon the right of suf- 
 frage the qualification especially of having 
 done military duty during the year preceding the 
 election and he alluded: to the fact that this 
 qualification drove from the polls some of the re- 
 volutionary veterans who were then too infirm 
 for military trainings or labor on the highways. 
 This, he said, was not the liberal extension of 
 the franchise which the people expected and 
 through the action of the legislature, they left 
 nothing of these qualifications save the beautiful 
 provision of that Convention which based politi- 
 cal rights on shades of complexion. Again, act 
 ing on the idea that the further certain power was 
 removed from the people the better, the Conven 
 
 tion of '21 made provision that every justice of 
 the peace in the state should be of the same po* 
 litical caste with the Governor himself. That 
 provision also the people abrogated. As to the 
 judiciary, a very good system administered by 
 able and talented officers, had to give place, un- 
 der the edict of the convention of 1821, to a sys- 
 tem not as good, and to incumbents no better. 
 These restrictions on the elective franchise, and 
 others of which the instrument was full, had 
 rested under popular condemnation almost from 
 the time of its adoption. And Mr. B. was not 
 one of those who with paint brush and putty 
 knives were ready to stop up cracks and gloss 
 over deformities. He came here with a disposi- 
 tion to unite with others in an honest attempt to 
 make a constitution founded on correct and just 
 principles. He would have restrictions in it 
 but they must be restrictions on the delegate pow- 
 ers rather than on the people themselves One 
 jreat object with us should be to secure a good 
 judiciary system, by which the controversies 
 which were constantly arising might be settled 
 with convenience, dispatch, and satisfaction to 
 parties. Another should be to put salutary re- 
 strictions on the power of the legislature not. 
 however that we could make a bed or pillow on 
 which the people could rest in ease and security, 
 without watching their agents, but we were 
 bound to secure the public, with ordinary vigi- 
 lance on their part, against the excesses of legis- 
 lation. We were bound also to perfect a system 
 of common school education, which should chal- 
 lenge a parallel in the world, and which 
 should put at rest the imputation that Mo- 
 narchies had better schools than Republics. 
 We were bound also to adopt some princi- 
 ple by which our internal improvements 
 might be safely and properly extended, until 
 their blessing should reach, every corner of 
 the State the whole so managed that political 
 parasites should not pocket half the benefit of 
 the system. If we went forward and provided 
 such 'securities as experience had shown to be 
 necessary to sustain popular institutions in their 
 vigor and efficiency, we should find no need of 
 these restrictions on the popular action. Apply 
 them to the Governor, and we must go through 
 the list making them applicable to all other of- 
 ficers who we may make elective. Better leave 
 the qualifications of their agents to the direct 
 judgment and discrimination of the people and 
 proceed upon the assumption that they will be as 
 capable of judging ten years or more hence, of 
 the proper age and qualificatians of their officers, 
 as we can be. Mr. B. closed with some remarks 
 in support of his former declaration, that the doc- 
 trine of expatriation was part of the common law 
 of England, and quoted a proclamation of the 
 Prince Regent in 1844, in which it was asserted 
 to be such calling attention to the inconsistency 
 and impropriety of adopting in our Constitution, 
 without reservation, as was done in our former 
 constitutions, the common law of England. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS desired permission to explain, 
 to prevent any misunderstanding. He intended 
 to affirm that the subject of perpetual allegiance 
 was the doctrine of the whole world so far as we 
 know though it was growing weaker and weak - 
 er, and becoming obsolete in practice, it would 
 
231 
 
 . in every nation. That it was the now ex- 
 isting law of every nation of Europe, there could 
 be no doubt. He found in the code of Napoleon it 
 was laid down in very strong terms, and we know 
 it has always been the doctrine of England, and 
 of the ancient' world the Romans and the Greeks. 
 Evry gcntk'inan acquainted with the classics 
 would agree with him as to the existence of the 
 doctrine, that no man can put off his country. 
 Now, however, there seemed to be some difficul- 
 ty in settling the question. The doctrine might 
 be permitted to stand, and yet they might co 
 to take the risk of electing their Governor, even 
 if he should happen to be placed in that condi- 
 tion in which he would owe an actual allegiance 
 to his adopted country, and an obsolete and anti- 
 quated one to another. There were two sides to 
 
 land States a female was competent to pass pro- 
 perty at the age of eighteen. He knew it was 
 so in Vermont. But in this State we put it at 
 twenty-one. A very few years ago a majority 
 of the European nations required twenty-five 
 to be the period, which we limit at twenty- 
 one, of competency to do certain acts. That 
 was the old law of France in Bonaparte's time : 
 and now the question is whether, inasmur; 
 some period must be fixed upon foV the perform- 
 ance of political duties, we will take the limits 
 fixed in other matters for voters for instance, 
 or raise the ages so as to comport with the eleva- 
 ted duties, more enlarged views, and sober 
 thought, that ought to be the qualifications of state 
 officers. It appeared to him it would be discreet 
 to have a little more age attached to persons hold- 
 
 every question, and he would put it to gentlemen ing state offices, and it seemed to be conceded on 
 if, in a country like ours, where we always go- ! this floor that the people would not elect anybody 
 vern by party spirit, we should get into a war ! under 30 years. If then, as a general rule, it had 
 with Great Britain, and there should be a strong | been seen to be fit and proper, it would be no 
 party against the war, and many should remove j less if the rule were declared in the constitution, 
 into "Canada, and there get naturalized and be ta- The doctrine of want of power was hardly to be 
 ken in arms, would there not be many that would endured. And here he would take occasion to 
 like to treat them as traitors to our own country ? suggest to those gentlemen who were opposed to 
 Many men would be unwilling to give up the the limit of age, if they were not after all on the 
 right in their own behalf. And yet he thought it aristocratic side of the question. At what period 
 ought not to be put down, and that the tendency ; do our young men in the country become capable 
 of modern civilization was to put it down. He of taking the field as competitors for state offices ? 
 was therefore willing to elect a naturalized per- 
 
 son, without regard to that double allegiance. 
 
 It must be remembered that most of our distin- 
 guished men were self-made men who had to 
 
 But one word more as he was up, in addition to go to work like Roger Sherman and Col. Young, 
 what he had said before. Let it be remembered j who with lamp and book had made themselves 
 that the question ot natural born and naturalized learned and fit for any station. And what age 
 citizen is disposed of that we have not now any was it at which such men were capable of taking 
 question about that. The question is now then | the field ? Was it till about 30 ? But if they 
 
 just as if there was no nation in existence but 
 one, an 1 no citizen who was not natural 
 born in it. The question then is, what age 
 is proper at which a person shall be made Gov- 
 ernor, or hold any other important State office ? 
 He would simply suggest, as he did the other day 
 that we do find it important in many things to fix 
 a period regulating the age at which a person has 
 competent discretion to act. Even the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from St. Lawrence (Mr. 
 RUSSELL,,) establishes an age by implication the 
 age of 21 ; and the question is whether for the 
 purpose of the great public interests here involv- 
 ed, it should be 21, 25, or 30. No gentleman 
 would abolish 21 as the age for legal competency. 
 The principle then was given up, that there 
 should be no limit of age at all. and the question 
 simply was what in this case that age should be. 
 Gentlemen were aware that ages have been fixed 
 upon by law for different purposes. For the pur- 
 poses of committing crime the law says that a per- 
 son under seven years of age is incompetent. 
 Between the age of seven and fourteen, the law 
 presumes the person to be incompetent, but allows 
 competency to be proved. Between the ages of 
 fourteen and twenty-one, the law presumes com- 
 petency, but allows the incompetency to be 
 shown. And at the age of sixteen the law al- 
 lows a person to make the most important con- 
 tract which can be made the contract of mar- 
 riage. So they found that ages were fixed by 
 law for different purposes, according to the dif- 
 ference and importance of the oflice to be per- 
 formed He believed in some of the New Eng- 
 
 opened the door if they threw it open wide 
 were they not opening it to the rich, and giving a 
 monopoly to those who have been able to pass 
 through college, get Dr. Nott's diploma, travel 
 through Europe, and come back a De Witt Clin- 
 ton, or Governor Tompkins No. 3 ? Now, he 
 wished it left to our middle classes, as well as to 
 the high. He wished gentlemen would think on 
 this subject, for it would bear reflection. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked what the gentleman from 
 Essex meant by middle classes under our institu- 
 tions ? 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS replied the great mass, that 
 work and sweat, and get their living in that way 
 who plough and toil and live on pork and beans, 
 as distinguished both from those above and those 
 below them. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN enquired if the gentleman from 
 Essex put any legally instituted class above them ? 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said not a legal,- but a self in- 
 stituted class. He added that this was a subject 
 on which he would not legislate. When a thea- 
 tre takes fire, all cannot rush out at once ; and 
 the elevation of the human family must be ac- 
 cording to God's nature : instead of all scrambling 
 for the door, it must be left free to voluntary ef- 
 fort; he desired the door to be left open to the 
 sons of our farmers, instead of limiting it to the 
 rich men's sons, who became travelled and learned 
 at an earlier period than the poor and self-taught 
 could possibly be. But as to the power of the 
 people to regulate themselves, he wished to 
 throw out one remark, and then he should have 
 done. He held that the people had no right to 
 
232 
 
 act but by law ; any other action was a usurpation 
 and a tyranny. But that was not all. Let gen- 
 tlemen who had reflected deeply on this subject 
 take his suggestion, and he would then ask them 
 whether they ever read of a people from the 
 commencement of the world to this time, where 
 the majority were not interested in upholding the 
 laws ? It had been gravely argued on this floor 
 that the majority ought to go by law to secure the 
 rights of the minority; but he asserted that it 
 was to secure the rights of the majority. Go 
 where law does not prevail, and a minority rules. 
 Minorities rule in proportion to where the law 
 fails. Go back to the darkest ages that ever pre- 
 vailedj and there would be found that one man 
 governed. Gentlemen would find that where law 
 and justice were recognized, majorities governed. 
 It was for majorities he wanted law. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN being about to put the ques- 
 tion on the amendment, 
 
 Mr. STRONG rose and said there were many 
 members absent, who perhaps would like to say 
 a word upon this subject, and to record their 
 votes also. To give them an opportunity to do 
 so, he would move that the committee now rise 
 and report progress, and ask leave to sit again. 
 
 The motion was carried on a division, by a vote 
 of 46 to 22 and leave granted accordingly. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL then moved that the Conven- 
 tion adjourn, which was carried by a vote of 52 
 to 14. 
 
 And the Convention then adjourned till to- 
 morrow morning at 10 o'clock. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (30th day) July 8. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. J. N. CAMPBELL. 
 
 Mr. WHITE offered a resolution calling on the 
 Comptroller to enquire into the amount of travel 
 fees, and per diem allowance drawn by the mem- 
 bers of the legislature during the sessions of 1841, 
 '2, '3, '4, and 1845, and the duration of the ses- 
 sions. This was adopted. 
 
 Mr. WARE then moved that the Convention 
 go at once into committee of the whole, on the 
 
 REPORT RELATIVE TO THE POWERS AND DU- 
 TIES OF THE EXECUTIVE. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said it had become very fashion- 
 able of late, for gentlemen to make various excu- 
 ses for taking up the time of the Convention in 
 debating this subject; particularly had he noticed fell 
 two or three gentlemen who had made two or 
 three speeches each upon this very subject here, 
 in committee of the whole, when they were about 
 to begin another, they would commence by mak- 
 ing excuses for troubling the Convention, and 
 then go on and make a long speech, and 
 take up another hour. Now, for his part, he 
 had no excuse to make. He claimed it as his 
 right to make a speech on this or any other sub- 
 ject. He had been for some days quite at a loss 
 to know what range or course the debate on this 
 question was to take ; and quite at a loss to think 
 what could be the object of gentlemen in making 
 the speeches they had done. They said that they 
 considered this only a mere minor consideration, 
 and yet they evidently made it a great test ques- 
 tion, with regard to what restrictions were to be 
 imposed upon the people by this Convention. 
 
 The gentleman from Chautauque, (Mr. PATTER- 
 SON) had said that he was very much at a loss to 
 know how it wag that he should happen to differ 
 upon this subject of restrictions with his colleague 
 (Mr. MARVIN) when they represented the same 
 people. Now though he said it might be because a 
 certain mountain ridge divided their county, yet 
 he (Mr. STRONG) thought that very probably the 
 reason was because there was a good deal of a 
 kind of a squinting towards Governor-making in 
 the matter [much laughter] and he took it that 
 a good deal of that debate had been made more 
 for the purpose ol a kind of Governor-making, 
 than for any other. It was more for that, than 
 it was for their love for the " dear people," that 
 they kept continually talking so much about. 
 [Laughter.] When he heard gentlemen talking 
 so much about the dear people and their love for 
 all of them, it satisfied him that there was al- 
 ways something beyond this. It was like the 
 stump orators in his part of the country. They 
 were all full of love for the dear people, and they 
 would talk long, and they would talk loudly, and 
 they would talk eloquently about the dear peo- 
 ple, and the dear people's rights and privi- 
 leges. But it was all done merely for the pur- 
 pose of securing their votes ; and after they 
 had got them, the people might take care of 
 themselves. [Laughter.] The gentleman from 
 Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) also differed with his 
 colleague, and probably it was for the very same 
 reasons. [Laughter.] He might think it was 
 high time that Ontario had a Governor given to 
 her; for he (Mr. STRONG) believed that that 
 county never had had a Governor as yet; he be- 
 lieved she had once had a candidate for Gover- 
 nor [laughter] but he was not elected. [Laugh- 
 ter.] And perhaps the gentleman from Chau- 
 tauque (Mr. PATTERSON) might think that it 
 was high time they should go a little further 
 west to look for their candidate, even as far to 
 the west as his own county [laughter] and he 
 might have a kind of a squinting up to this here 
 Governorship, and so thought it best to begin in 
 time to make a little political capital on the 
 strength of it, and that might account for the 
 reason why that gentleman should differ so 
 widely from his colleague on this subject when 
 they represented the very same sober thinking 
 set of people. [Much laughter.] He had a few 
 words to say with regard to a remark or two that 
 fell from the gentleman from Seneca (Mr. BAS- 
 COM) who begun his speech with a long pream- 
 ble that he had rid all night, [laughter] and so 
 on. Now that gentleman started upon the doc- 
 trine that the present generation is a good deal 
 wiser than the one that has gone before. Now, 
 he might have gone on, and finished with the bal- 
 ance of the proverb, that "every generation 
 grows wiser"; and lie was satisfied that every 
 generation grows weaker. He did not believe 
 that men formerly were not as wise as they are 
 now. He did not believe that they had not as wise 
 as good and as great men in the last Convention 
 as they have got in this. And that gentleman 
 (Mr. BASCOM) next said that if these restrictions 
 are retained and imposed upon the people, you 
 cannot enforce them; that they would not be 
 obeyed. Now what does he mean to say by this ? 
 Does he mean to say that the people are not a 
 
233 
 
 law abiding people ? Does he mean to say that 
 the people will not regard a rule which they 
 es havr n<_rreed to ? Does he mean to 
 '. hat the people are not ahle to say what re- 
 :ons or rules are proper for their own guid- 
 ance ? And that whilst they set to work and 
 make these restrictions for themselves, that after- 
 wards, they will turn round and violate them ? 
 Why it is equal to saying to the people that " you 
 are not wise and virtuous enough to refrain from 
 violating your own agreement, deliberately and 
 solemnly entered into^among yourselves." Now, 
 he (Mr. STRONG) believed much better of the 
 people than all this came to. He believed that 
 they would never, knowingly, violate any 
 such agreement so made. And that if these 
 proper restrictions were placed in the Consti- 
 tution, that the people never would violate 
 them. The gentleman from Seneca (Mr. BAS- 
 OOM) had next attacked the Convention of 
 . as being unwise and too restrictive. 
 Now he (Mr. STRONG) had always supposed that 
 every law should be adopted to public opinion at 
 the time it was made. And he had thought that 
 a law that was very proper in 1821, might not be 
 a very proper law now. What satisfied the peo- 
 ple -J , might not satisfy them now. 
 He (Mr. S.) did not'belieVe that the Convention 
 of 1821 was so all unwise as the gentleman as- 
 serted ; if the instrument they framed was so nn- 
 wise and imperfect and restrictive, why did the 
 people adopt it ? That Convention was formed 
 ^and constituted like the present one ; and the 
 people sat in solemn and deliberate judgment 
 upon its acts afterwards, and upon the article it 
 passed, and they adopted and approved of that 
 article. Now, therefore, the verdict of the peo- 
 ple is against the gentleman. For they consi- 
 dered the Constitution so good a one, that they 
 ndorsed it, and were willing to adopt it, and 
 agreed to abide the consequences of it, with all 
 its provisions and restraints. And this is a suffi- 
 cient answer to the gentleman's argument. The 
 gentleman said besides that we must restrict the 
 Legislature, so as to keep them in proper bounds ; 
 and that we cannot form a Constitution to be 
 like a pillow, that we can go to sleep upon, 
 and not care what sort of officers are elected 
 to represent them. Now how does this agree 
 with his previously expressed sentiment, where 
 he says that 'the whole power shall be thrown 
 open, and that there shall be no restrictions 
 upon the people ? And he says in the same 
 breath with this that we must make restrictions, 
 and that we must not form a Constitution to be 
 like a pillow that we can go to sleep upon and 
 not care what officers are to be elected ! How 
 does this reconcile ? In two speeches he says he 
 will throw away all restrictions as to the Gover- 
 nor, &c., from around the people. This doctrine 
 he advocated here two or three days ago, and yet 
 in the same speech he says that we must restrict 
 we must be careful who we elect. Now he 
 (Mr. STRONG) could not make these two recon- 
 cile with any kind of reason or common sense, or 
 come together in any proper shape, at all. For 
 he as well as all must believe that the Governor 
 represented the whole people, and acted for the 
 whole state, and therefore great care and caution 
 ind restrictions jwe re necessary as to who the peo- 
 
 15 
 
 pie should choose. But there was another senti- 
 ment the gentleman had uttered-; it was this : 
 " But to pass all these by to insist upon these 
 petty qualifications of Governor as to whether he 
 should be a little over or under 30 years of age 
 this was not what the people required. In grasp- 
 ing after these minor qualifications, we should en- 
 danger the loss of the greater and needed restric- 
 tions to which he had referred." Here then,we see 
 that in this very next sentence he calls these re- 
 strictions mere minor matters ; and upon these mi- 
 nor matters they have been debating over a week, 
 and yet he insists that we should not in consid- 
 ering on these, lose sight of the greater restric- 
 tions necessary to be made. Now, if these are of 
 so minor a character, why do gentleman day after 
 day here, get up and contend for them ? and de- 
 bate on them ? As if it was a great test question 
 upon which is to hang every thing that comes af- 
 terwards ; all the other restrictions that are to 
 follow ? The gentleman next took up the amend- 
 ments to the Constitution of 1821, and insisted 
 that they were full proof that the people were 
 dissatisfied with that Constitution and so they got 
 it amended by the legislature as soon as possible, 
 and had the odious restrictions there struck out. 
 Now, it was true that they had part of the res- 
 trictions of the elective franchise struck out ; but 
 it must be remembered that it was only last fall 
 that the property qualification was taken out of 
 the Constitution. And yet it was to this that the 
 gentleman had referred as evidence that the peo- 
 ple disliked the Constitution and had the restric- 
 tions renewed. Ah ! indeed ! But the gentle- 
 man has passed over one very important fact. 
 That the people had the whole subject before 
 them. And why, then, if they were so dissatisfied 
 with this Constitution why did they not then, last 
 fall ask to have these restrictions as to the age 
 &c., of the Governor, be stricken out, and the five 
 years residence. Why did they say naught about 
 this ? The people sat in judgment upon this in- 
 strument last Fall ; and yet they left this in, be- 
 cause they were satisfied with it ; for if they had 
 not been, you would have heard of it from one 
 end of the State to the other. But you have heard 
 no complaint; the people made none; and this is 
 the evidence that they are perfectly satisfied with 
 it as it stands. But there are those who go far- 
 ther than the gentleman from Seneca. The gen- 
 tlemen from New York and Ontario go still far- 
 ther in this career of popularity and courting of 
 the dear people. They go the whole length, to 
 strike out the whole section and to leave it open 
 entirely, without even retaining the restriction 
 in the amendment proposed by the gentleman 
 from St. Lawrence. Now, what a state of things 
 would exist provided this was the case? It 
 would allow a young man of 18, provided he got 
 the votes, to be elected, and thus throw open the 
 office of Governor to men who had not the right 
 to vote, as he did not suppose that the qualifica- 
 tion of an elector was to be changed. Thus mak- 
 ing restrictions on the qualifications for an elector, 
 and throwing none at all around the candidate. 
 Was this the true Republican doctrine ? Gentle- 
 men seemed to suppose that those who were in 
 favor of retaining some of the old landmarks, 
 were not strictly democratic ; but he asked if this 
 principle was democratic ? Why seek to enforce 
 
234 
 
 it in the one case and not in the other ? Why li 
 mit the age of the voter, or the age at which 
 man .is entitled to transact business for himself 
 And to carry out the doctrine still further, wh; 
 limit the number of representatives the peopl 
 shall be entitled to elect ? It is as much arestric 
 tion in the one case as in the other. Why limit th 
 number of sheriffs, judges or any other class of of 
 ficers, for certainly according to the doctrin 
 which the same gentlemen hold, the people can d 
 no wrong and if they elect too many or not enough 
 or make any other error, they are fully competen 
 to correct it ? There was no difference in th< 
 principle, and then if it was more democratic t 
 carry it out why not do so, and place no restric 
 tion on the people whatever. But it is said tha 
 whether restricted or unrestricted the peoplt 
 would never elect a man under 30 years of age 
 What good reason was there then for striking i 
 out ? He could see none. It was not sufficien 
 to say that it would never happen because it neve: 
 had happened. Besides these restrictions hac 
 been imposed upon the people for the last 25 vears 
 and they had neither violated or complained o 
 thpm. We had an instance in the history of other 
 States that such a thing might occur. The State 
 of Michigan had once elected a young man anc 
 the State of New York might do so also. Michi- 
 gan after electing her young man has to rue the 
 day she ever did it. He dishonored the State anc 
 caused her to refuse to pay her honest liabilities 
 The black veil of dishonor was thrown over that 
 broad State, and the beginning of it was the elect- 
 ing of so young a man for her governor, as to be 
 incapable of taking care of her interests. Wei] 
 would it have been for her had she the same re- 
 striction as there was in our present Constitution 
 she might then have been saved from dishonor 
 and disgrace. These very restrictions were what 
 they needed in Michigan. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH (with the gentleman's per- 
 mission) wished to ask him and the Chair one 
 question. It was whether it was necessary that 
 the ashes of the dead should be disturbed, "in or- 
 der to sustain positions that gentlemen might oc- 
 cupy. He felt deeply on this subject, and re- 
 gretted exceedingly the frequent allusions that 
 had been made to a Governor of Michigan, whose 
 standing was very high, and that it had been 
 found necessary to make any reference, particu- 
 larly an invidious one, to one who has long since 
 been numbered with the dead. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN supposed that to be a matter 
 of taste among gentlemen. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that perhaps he ought to be 
 obliged to the gentleman for his moral lesson, 
 although he had sat still while other gentlemen 
 were doing the same thing, and he had been ra- 
 ther late in offering it. He had alluded to the 
 instance of the Governor of Michigan as an illus- 
 tration, and not with any view of disturbing the 
 ashes of the dead. The doctrine advocated there, 
 that placing these restrictions in the Constitution 
 was placing restrictions on the people, in his 
 opinion, was not tenable. It was our duty to 
 form a Constitution which was hereafter to go- 
 vern the people, but we had not the power to 
 restrict them. And while on this point, he 
 would add a few words in relation to his views as 
 to the powers of this Convention, in answer to 
 
 the charge that those who advocated the views 
 which he now did, were urging, that its powers 
 were limited and confined. Now, as he said once 
 before, he believed the Convention to have power 
 to make an entire new instrument, provided it 
 should think proper. That work was then to be 
 submitted to the people, and they were to pass 
 upon it to reject it if they dislike it, or to ac- 
 cept it if they like it. If, then, there wa^ any re- 
 striction on this section, ft would after all be the 
 act of the people, and not of the Convention in 
 imposing it, and they would birfd themselves by 
 their own will. Gentlemen seemed to have the 
 idea that all power in this matter rested with the 
 Convention, and that the people had nothing to 
 do with it. Again, as to the supposition that no 
 case of a young and inexperienced man being elect- 
 ed Governor would ever occur if these restric- 
 tions were stricken out, he would suppose a case. 
 Had Gen. Jackson, directly after his defeat, when 
 he ran against Adams and Clay for the Presi- 
 dency, came into this State, and after residing, 
 here for one year, had desired to become Govern- 
 or, did gentlemen believe it would have been 
 within the power of human beings to have pre- 
 vented his election ? Gentlemen near him said 
 that he would have made a good Governor a 
 first rate one. He would not dispute it, because it 
 had never been tried, but he would ask if they 
 would like to have a man placed in the station of 
 Governor of this State, who had been raised in 
 the Southern States, who was attached to their 
 institutions, and not acquainted with those of our 
 State, except such as he might derive from a bare 
 Due year's residence. Would he get rid of the 
 attachments of his early days of those of his 
 childhood, the most lasting of all, within that 
 short time ? He apprehended not. Again, sup- 
 pose that General Taylor should come into our 
 State, and reside here long enough to be an elect- 
 or, and one of the parties should see fit to nomi- 
 nate him, he would ask if he could be defeated 
 f he would not go in with a rush ? The same 
 objections, however honest he might be, would 
 apply to this case as in the former. He was not, 
 >y these observations, to be understood as Presi- 
 dent-making, but he was not sure but Gen. Tay- 
 or would be the next President. How was it 
 vith the Roman Empire, the most ancient of the 
 Republics, and how did she lose her republican 
 nstitutions. Was it by adhering to these safe- 
 guards, these restrictions ? No, the election of 
 ambitious, hot-headed young men to the guidance 
 f the government, was what caused the tumbling, 
 lown of the Republican Institutions of Rome, 
 and her conversion into a monarchy. If such a 
 hing happened elsewhere, might it not here. 
 \nd are we to lose sight of these precedents, and 
 o throw open this oflice to every ambitious young 
 man who might choose to bid for it. At what 
 age were men the most ambitious ? Was it after 
 30, or was it before they arrive at that age. From 
 vhat little experience he had, he should say be- 
 ore thirty years. He could not speak for other 
 ounties,but he believed the young men of Monroe 
 vere much too modest and toodiffident to ever seek 
 o assume the office of Governor until 30. He had 
 o apprehensions of their being dissatisfied at the 
 etention of the restrictions in the present Con- 
 titution. And yet he knew there were very ta- 
 
235 
 
 I young men there too, under the age of 30, 
 and he would be loth to admit that there were 
 not. Perhaps ho had taken up more of the time 
 of the committee than he ought, and he had not 
 thought of saying any thing on the question, for 
 he supposed that when the debate commenced it 
 was only a kind of flare up for some kind of indi- 
 vidual aggrandizement. He had no idea that it 
 was to be made the test question, buthavingbeen 
 so made, it became necessary for all to place 
 themselves in the condition they wish to stand. 
 Tho gentleman had said that he wished to place 
 members on the record on these votes. Why, he 
 he could tell the gentleman that he should cer- 
 tainly do so he had no fears in so doing. If the 
 ;man threw out this with an idea to fright- 
 en members, the lay members here, he will find 
 that he has mistaken them. To whatever was 
 the will of the majority on this question he should 
 yield that will in our government ever must 
 rule. But before a decision was had, he desired 
 the convention to remember that it was not pre- 
 tended that the striking of this restriction out was 
 such a very important question. Then it was 
 better to retain it to leave well- enough alone. 
 Mr. S. urged that the convention should proceed 
 to amend the constitution wherever it was need- 
 ed, but that it should not tear it all apart for the 
 
 purpose ot makin 
 
 ; something new. 
 
 It should not 
 
 be so ready to consider that it was the wisest and 
 best association of men that ever assembled. If 
 there had been any serious objection to the old 
 constitution in this respect, he was of opinion 
 that we should have heard of it. And yet he 
 heard no one speak of it yet except in this Con- 
 vention. He had been among his own constitu- 
 ents, ana .imong those of Saratoga county recent- 
 ly, and they universally disapproved of the pro- 
 position to strike out these restrictions. These 
 considerations would induce him to vote against 
 the proposition. As to striking out the word na- 
 tive, that was right and proper. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that he certainly had in- 
 tended to have remained silent during the debate 
 upon the several sections of this article of the Con- 
 stitution, as reported by the standing committee, 
 and he should have persevered in that intention 
 but for the course which the debate had taken, 
 and the peculiar doctrines which had been ad- 
 vanced during the discussion. Positions had 
 been taken here, by gentlemen on this subject, 
 winch he (Mr. K.) regarded not only as radically 
 erroneous in themselves, but as dangerous in 
 their tendency, and subversive instead of preser- 
 vative of the'great democratic principle that the 
 people were the source of all power in the gov 
 ernment of this country. Under these circum- 
 stances he could not consent to give a merely 
 silent vote on the question now before the com- 
 mittee ; for such a vote might be construed into 
 an acquiescence in the principles and doctrines 
 advanced by gentlemen, who have advocated the 
 motion to strike out the section under considera 
 tion. These doctrines (or principles, as some 
 term them,) to which he was alluding, had no 
 been casually or lightly advanced ; nor had the} 
 been confined to gentlemen upon one or the othe 
 ideof that line which, it was supposed, dividec 
 
 and ably argued by distinguished gentlemen upon 
 both sides of this line ; a line Mr. Chairman, 
 which has now become so faint that the keenest 
 observer would find it a difficult task to discover 
 any traces of its present existence, or any 
 vidence that it ever had existed. (Laughter.) 
 These doctrines have been put forth also under 
 trong professions of regard for the great, the glo- 
 ious principle upon which this government is 
 minded. And the very fact that these doctrines 
 lave been thus zealously urged by gentlemen of 
 rery high standing here and elsewhere, imposes 
 upon me the necessity of entering my solemn tho' 
 lumble protest against them. For I regard them 
 s of a dangerous tendency, and as political 
 heresies not in accordance with the vital princi- 
 ple of our government. All these gentlemen 
 n-ofess, (as I doubt not they all sincerely enter - 
 ain,) the highest veneration for the great princi- 
 ple on which this government and every truly 
 ree government is founded, viz., that the people 
 ire the only true source of sovereignty. A prin- 
 ciple to which I yield my full, unqualified assent, 
 without any mental or other reservation what- 
 ever ; nay, more, sir, a principle which I em- 
 Drace with enthusiasm and gratitude ; gratitude 
 to the Great Giver of all good, that He has vouch- 
 safed to the people of this land institutions and a 
 government founded solely upon that principle, 
 and deriving their force and power, aye, and 
 their very existence only from the consent ot 
 those living under them, and enjoying their bless- 
 ings. I rejoice, too, to know and to feel, that 
 these institutions and this government are suffi- 
 ciently broad and extensive to admit within their 
 shelter and protection the oppressed of all lands 
 and to furnish an asylum to those who truly love 
 Liberty, from all quarters of the globe. And I 
 have the ardent hope that they will be as endur- 
 ing, as their results have been benign and valua- 
 ble to the people of this, and of other lands 
 I concur fully and cordially in the sublime and 
 noble sentiment, which our revolutionary fathers 
 proclaimed to an astonished world, and which we 
 find incorporated in the first Constitution of the 
 State of New York, "that no authority shall, on any 
 pretence whatever, be exercised over the people or 
 members ul tln.s State, but sucn as shall he derived 
 
 them 
 tion. 
 
 when they first came 
 These doctrines ha 
 
 to that Conven 
 been advance< 
 
 Horn and granted by them." May this noble piinci. 
 pie and the guvei nment lounded on it, be perpetual. 
 It is, sir, because I love and cherish this principle, 
 and becau.se I desire to preserve it for ever unim. 
 paired, and to guard it with ceaseless vigilance, 
 ihatl am constrained to dissent from propositions 
 which have been so earnestly stated on this occa- 
 sion by gh-ntlemen whose patriotism and devotion 
 to the cause ot free government are unquestioned ; 
 and whose excess of zeal in (his very cause, has', 
 as I apprehended, led them into this very error' 
 which I deem it my duty 10 expose and to repudi- 
 ate. For these reasons I rose to enter my pro- 
 testespecially as this is the pioneer debate and 
 the principles established in this, may be brought 
 up hereafter to guide the action of this Conven- 
 tion, when we come to more important clauses of 
 the Constituiion than the one now under consid. 
 eration. Now, Sir, the doctiine in whose abso- 
 lute truth, these gentlemen and myself fully con- 
 cur, is, that the people are the only true and legi- 
 timate source of power; that in this land they 
 
236 
 
 are the only " Sovereign." Starting, then, with 
 this proposition, let us see what other and farther 
 doctrines are advanced. Let us tor a few moments 
 read some of the arguments which have been put 
 forth in this matter. One honorable gentleman 
 the gentleman from Kings's (Mr. MURPHY) tells 
 us that " it is incongruous to say that we have en 
 tire confidence in the virtue and intelligence, ol 
 the people, and jet we will not trust them to make 
 a Governor without restrictions; he considered 
 the doctrine ot those who would place restrictions 
 upon the people in the choice of their agents an 
 unjust rebuke, &c." Another member the gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque (Mr, PATTERSON) says, 
 "the question now is, whether you will trust the 
 people with the duty ot selecting their own 
 Governor, or will you tie them down ? The 
 simple, plain question before us, and for 
 us to decide is, are the people capable of 
 self government, or are they not ? The day for 
 imposing fetters and shackles upon the action of 
 the people in this country has gone by; and he 
 wished gentlemen who thus mistrusted the people 
 by saying that they ought to be thus restricted, to 
 put themselves on the recoid, and vote according- 
 ly." And another, the gentleman from New York 
 (Mr. O'CoNOR) says, " We are not to restrain the 
 people. On the great body of the people in their 
 sovereign capacity, we have no right to impose, 
 restrictions." Another, the gentleman from Al- 
 bany, (Mr. HARRIS) says " When we attempt to 
 prescribe to the sovereign power what they shall 
 do, and what they shall not do, we transcend our 
 powers." And the gentleman from Ontario, (Mr 
 WORDEN) tells us "a deeper principle is involved. 
 The question is whether the people were to been- 
 trusted with a discretion to elect a man whom 
 they may think best fitted for the office. Gentle 
 men do not distinguish between elemental and de- 
 legated power. The doctrine of checks and ba 
 lances and guards only applies to delegated pow- 
 ers; to talk about its application to the people in 
 their sovereign, elemental capacity, was too late 
 in the day." And other honorable gentlemen, 
 members of this body, have, as I understood them, 
 expressed similar sentiments. Now, it is against 
 such propositions as these that I rise to enter my 
 protest. And sir, the first remark I have to make 
 is that many of these gentlemen seem entirely to 
 misapprehend the position which we occupy as 
 members of the convention. They speak ot our 
 imposing restrictions ; of our prescribing to the 
 sovereign power, &c. ; thus implying that we are 
 here invested with power to prescribe, to dictate, 
 to order, or to direct. This is a fallacy. Such, 
 sir, is in no sense our position; we have no such 
 mighty attributes. We occupy a much more 
 humble station j and are here to perform a 
 much more humble task. As I deem it we 
 are here now as if we were in an assembly of the 
 whole people; and as if, in that assembly, we, as 
 part and parcel of the people, should propose that 
 we, the people, in our sovereign capacity, 
 being now entirely unrestrained and unrestricted, 
 should impose upon ourselves, in virtue of our 
 sovereign power; and as its very highest and 
 sublimest exercise, certain rules, conditions re- 
 strictions, if you please which we. the pro. 
 posers, regard as promising advantage and benefit 
 to the whole people to the " sovereign." The 
 
 'sovereign" takes the proposition into considera- 
 tion, and rejects or adopts it, as it sees fil. We 
 have nothing to do in the way of presciibing, 
 commanding, or " imposing" anything; our duty 
 is performed, and our power exhausted, when we 
 have made our suggestions or propositions to our 
 fellows of the "sovereignty" to our brethren of 
 the great constituency, lor their and our consid- 
 eration. And we then return among them to 
 mingle our votes with theits on the great ques- 
 tion of the adoption or rejection of the measures 
 thus proposed. We simply propose to one an- 
 other that we will all agree to bind ourselves, by 
 our voluntary act, to a certain rule of action, so as 
 to admit to its greatest extent, that the people are 
 not only the source of all political power, but also 
 of its highest exercise the exercise of self- re- 
 striction. Is there any thing in all this like " im- 
 posing," on our part, " restrictions" on the peo- 
 ple ? Anything like "fettering and shackling" 
 their action any thing inconsistent with the 
 freest action and exercise of power by the peo- 
 plethe fullest exercise of unlimited sovereignty 
 on their part? If there is, I have been unable to 
 discover it. Again, sir, the doctrine that the peo- 
 ple cannot or should not impose restrictions upon 
 themselves in their fundamental law is, in my 
 judgment, a doctrine alike erroneous in principle, 
 and fraught with danger in its consequences, and 
 calculated to lead to confusion and anarchy. Its ad- 
 vocates, as it seems tome run, directly counter to 
 the great principle that the people are the source 
 of power ; are the " sovereign", for they would 
 deny to them the exercise of the highest act of 
 sovereignty, the act of self-restraint ; they are 
 unwilling to submit to them the decision of the 
 question, whether they will or will not freely and 
 voluntarily impose any restraint or restrictions 
 upon themselves, in the use and exercise of their 
 sovereign power. The doctrine too, sir, is tanta- 
 mount, as it strikes me, to declaring that we can- 
 not or should not have a Constitution. What is 
 a Constitution ? It is a " system of fundamental 
 rules, principles and ordinances for the govern- 
 ment of a State, made by the sovereign-authority." 
 In this land it is but a mutual compact or agree- 
 ment between the "members" of the State be- 
 tween the component parts of the " sovereignty" 
 between one of the people on one side, and the 
 whole of the people as sovereign on the other. 
 It is merely entering into an agreement of associ- 
 ation, of social and political union, and necessari- 
 ly implies in the very statement that certain rules, 
 conditions, and restrictions are to be prescribed 
 for the good of all ; and consequently that each 
 individual of the collective sovereignty gives up a 
 portion of his sovereignty for the sake of all the 
 others, and in consideration of all the others 
 yielding a portion of theirs for his sake. The con- 
 sideration, like the compact, is mutual, reciprocal. 
 Why, sir, to deny this power of res'riction ot self- 
 restraint to the people the " soveieign-" in this 
 land is to deny to them the power possessed by 
 the despotic tyrant of the Russian throne. He, 
 too, is a " sovereign ;" but no more a sovereign in 
 his land, than are the people in this. And yet he 
 believed thatno one would deny to Aa "sovereign" 
 the power, by compact with his subjects, of im- 
 posing resfrictions upon himself in the exercise of 
 his sovereign authority. And what that sovereign 
 
237 
 
 1 . there, surely this greater sovereign the 
 people can do here. The question as to how far 
 and to what extent our " sovereign" should exer- 
 cise !his power of self-restraint, is another and a 
 different question; but it is a question which on 
 every principle of free government : which, in har- 
 mony and consonance with the great basis on 
 which this government rests must be left to the 
 free, untramrneled, unshackled will of the people 
 to determine. There is a vast difference at least 
 ther< is in my judgment between elemental and 
 delegated power, as to the amount of restriction 
 that should be placed on each, under the form of 
 government with which we are blessed. The dele- 
 gated should be carefully and cauiiously guarded 
 and restricted ; whereas I can conceive of but 
 comparatively little restraint that should be thrown 
 around the elemental, deposited as it is here in 
 the people themselves. Still, to say that no re- 
 8'riction can, or should be, placed on this elemen- 
 tal power, by the power itself, is to utter a politi- 
 cal heresy, not transmitted to us by the Fathers of 
 the Republic, nor taught in any school, where the 
 true principles of Democratic Government are 
 understood. This question, now that the word 
 * native" has been properly stricken out, stands 
 merely as a mutual agreement between all, that 
 certain things are to be done, and certain things 
 are not to be done. But if the doctrine that the 
 people can agree to no restriction for themselves, 
 is maintained, then it certainly goes the entire 
 length of disclaiming that the people can make a 
 Constitution for their own government. And this 
 doctrine, too, sir, is one which I apprehend will 
 oflen appear again in the course of the delibera- 
 tions of this Convention ; and if I am not greatly 
 mistaken, it is one which will " plague" its advo- 
 cates most seriously ; for I cannot doubt before the 
 close of our labors, each one of us will be found 
 urging the adoption of some proposition which 
 shall imply more or less of restraint upon this 
 " elemeptal power " Indeed some of the honor- 
 able gentlemen were unable to finish their remarks 
 without admitting away the very principle for 
 which they were contending. This was a most 
 singular fact attendant upon this discussion. For 
 by one it was said that there should be a " restric- 
 tion" on the sovereign as to the election to the 
 office of Governor of a stranger, not " a member 
 of the constituency ;" another says, " a five years' 
 residence;" and another declared himself very 
 well satisfied with the "restriction" contem. 
 plated by the gentleman from St. Lawrence (Mr. 
 RUSSELL) which proposed, in substance, the res- 
 tric'ion of a year's residence. And thus they 
 argue away the very doctrines they have been 
 contending for. And they thus also do away with 
 the very line which they were at first for drawing 
 between those who like themselves, as they said, 
 were in favor of true republican institutions and 
 of democratic Government, and us, who they said 
 were not in favor of the same; placing on one side 
 those who were in f.,vor of the qualifications, and 
 on the other side those who were opposed to them. 
 But by admitting any restriction; no matter how 
 email, their whole doctrine falls to the ground; 
 for their grand dogma is that there must and shall 
 be no restriction whatever, of any sort or kind; 
 and the principle is as much violated by the smal- 
 lest, as by,the largest amount of restriction. So diffi- 
 
 cult is it to maintain and consistently to carry thro* 
 a political doctrine which rests on error instead of 
 t-uth. I say again, sir, that the propositions 
 against which I have been contending, instead of 
 preservative, are, in my humble judgment, 
 subversive, of the great principle on which our 
 institutions rest ; and I believe that those who 
 " put themselves on record" in favor of proposing 
 (he restrictions of age and residence contained in 
 the section under consideralion, need have no fear 
 that they will be condemned, as being politically 
 unsound, or that they will be charged by their 
 constituents with ignorance of the true princi- 
 ples of the government. The question, then, be- 
 comes one of mere expediency; and on this 
 we may well differ without any compro- 
 mise of principle. The question is, then, not 
 what the people can do on this subject ; for, by 
 theii very sovereignty, they can do any thing; but 
 what they shall do; in other words, what is ex- 
 pedient for them to do. Gentlemen would find it 
 very difficult and troublesome hereafter to pre- 
 serve the distinctions which they have here at- 
 tempted to lav down ; for many things in relation 
 to them will be sure to arise hereafter that will 
 more or less trouble their authors ; they will find 
 it exceedingly difficult to draw the line between 
 the results to which their arguments led them ; 
 for many cases must come up hereafter that will 
 involve the admission thai there must be restric- 
 tions even on the elemental power of the people. 
 The elemental may require less restrictions it 
 wants very little; whilst the delegated power 
 wants much restriction; the difference is only in 
 degree. And when gentlemen come to advocate 
 restrictions upon the delegated power only, they 
 would be sure to find that in doing so, they were 
 at the same time actually imposing restraints up. 
 on the elemental power, out of which the dele- 
 gated power grew. All will propose, doubtless, 
 more or less restraint on the elemental power of 
 the government ; and the very fact$ of submitting 
 puch restrictions to the judgment of the people, 
 is at once a confession of the power of the people 
 to exercise that highest act of power the act of 
 self government. The vote on this will not divide 
 us into a democratic and anti-democratic faction 
 in this body ; the question involves no fundamen- 
 tal principle of democratic government. It is a 
 mere question of expediency, as I said before ; the 
 question that we have to submit to the people is 
 this : " Is it expedient that you, and I, and all 
 of us, should be restricted in a certain manner, 
 or is it not ?" That is a question which the peo- 
 ple have the full and the only power to settle. 
 We prescribe no rule to them ; they are left free 
 as God left them to adopt which they please ; and 
 it is for them to say and pass upon these proposi- 
 tions, whether they will restrict themselves in 
 any w*ay or not. Now, in reference to the five 
 year's residence proposed in this section, I con- 
 sider it practically as of very small consequence, 
 for with or without this restriction, I regard it 
 only as among possible events that the people of 
 this State would elevate to the gubernatorial chair 
 an individual Who has been a resident of the State 
 for a less period than five years. Still, on the 
 w i'iole, as one ofihe "membeis"of the State, I 
 think it advisable to ask my brethren to agree 
 that they will not place over me as Governor, any 
 
238 
 
 person who has not been of and amongst us for 
 the space of five years. And I, on my part will 
 agree that I will so far yield mv portion of the 
 "sovereignty" as to "restrict" myself on this point, 
 so as to deprive myself of the power of doing any 
 thing to place over them such an one for Gover- 
 nor. B"t after all, I regard this qualification or 
 "restriction" as of little practical moment, and I 
 record my vote in favor of it, more for the pur 
 pose of furnishing "record" evidence of my dissent 
 from doctrines against which I protest, than be- 
 cause I deem its insertion in the Constitution es- 
 sential to the the happiness or welfare of the 
 people. The retention of it, however, is a 
 practical repudiation by these gentlemen of 
 their own doctrines. As to the remaining qual- 
 ification, or "restriction" that of thirty years 
 of age I do not deem it expedient; and am not 
 willing on my part to give up my portion of the 
 sovereignty so far as to incapacitate myself from 
 voting for a person for the office of governor, sole- 
 ly and merely because he had not attained the age 
 of 30 years. So far as I am concerned as a " mem- 
 ber" of the State, as a component part of the 
 sovereign power, I do not wish to make this " re- 
 striction" one of the terms of our mutual compact 
 of association. In plainer words, I do not de- 
 sire such a provision to be inserted in the Consti- 
 tution, although I fully admit the right and the 
 power of rny " fellow members" to insert the 
 same therein, and thus to bind me if a majority 
 of them shall deem it expedient to do so. I am 
 opposed to the insertion of this qualification, be- 
 cause I have not the slightest apprehension that 
 the people of this State would ever devolve the 
 powers and duties of the Chief Executive Mag- 
 istrate on any one who was incompetent 
 by reason of youth, merely. I have too 
 much confidence in the intelligence and in- 
 tegrity of the people to believe this, and no- 
 thing is to be feared from the absence of such a 
 qualification. Whereas, I am taught by his ory 
 that there have been instances of individuals un- 
 der the age of 30, who have been in all respects 
 competent to the highest civil duties ; who have 
 been entrusted in times of the greatest difficulty 
 and danger with the management of the helm of 
 State in the most poweiful nations; and who have 
 accomplished their momentous task with 
 consummate skill and unequalled ability. Histo- 
 ry has shown this to have been the case; and 
 may it not well be supposed that in this State in 
 the course of events some such men should arise; 
 capable of filling the office of Governor, and exe- 
 cuting properly all its powers and duties, 
 and yet be under 30 years of age. And should 
 such a contingency arise, I do not wish to de 
 prive the people and myself of the power 
 to vote for him, should such an one be found to 
 be more capable than others. I would never con- 
 sent so to tie up the hands of the people that 
 they could not make choice of the man best qual- 
 ified to discharge the duties of the office. Besides 
 I know too that among those under the age in ques- 
 tion, there is quite as much disinterested love of 
 country, patriotism, devotion, zeal, resolution, en- 
 ergy, freedom from selfishness, as in those of more 
 advanced periods of life, and where we can find ad- 
 ded to these qualities maturity of judgment, and 
 experience, there is no reason for depriving our- 
 
 selves of the possessor of such qualities, merely 
 for the reason that his locks have not been white- 
 ned by age. It is true that such instances are 
 rare ; but still they have occurred and they may oc- 
 cur again. This question has been argued by some 
 honorable gentlemen in the course oifthis debate, 
 as if the striking out of this provision would neces- 
 sarily place in the Executive chair men of imma- 
 ture years, whereas the real question is, whether 
 the not having attained the age of thirty years shall 
 alone and of itself be a disqualification, however 
 well qualified in every other respect the individ- 
 ual might be. The insertion of this provision 
 may work injustice, it may injure the State. Its 
 exclusion, in my judgment, can never be a cause 
 of harm, and I am therefore for striking it out of 
 the section. But again, have gentlemen calcu- 
 lated the great injustice that would arise from 
 such a provision ; or how many would be thus 
 excluded from filling this office and enjoying its 
 honors ? I find by the last census that the numbers 
 who would thus be disqualified from partaking of 
 the confidence of their fellow citizens would be at 
 least 170,000 ; that is, there is about one-third of 
 the whole constituency between the ages of twenty 
 one and thirty. At least 170,000 would fall 
 under that proscription now, and the number 
 would largely increase in each succeeding year. 
 One-third of the whole voting population of the 
 State would be thus partially disfranchised; and I do 
 not feel willing by my vote to say that upwards of 
 170,000 of ourconstituentsare, and that the same, 
 or a greater number, shall forever continue to be, 
 as a class, disqualified for holding the office itt 
 question. I see no reason or necessity fur pro- 
 nouncing such a judgment of exclusion or disquali- 
 fication. I am not prepared to say that in this 
 largely increasing number there will be no per- 
 sons who will ever be fit to act as Governor nor 
 will I place so many qualified electors out 
 of the reach of this office ; for I am fully per- 
 suaded that the people will never select a Go- 
 vernor so young, as to disgrace either the station 
 or themselves. Besides, sir, I consider that upon 
 this point we have recently had a strong expres- 
 sion of opinion from large masses of the 
 constituency. Our position here is one of great 
 importance. It is true that a seat in this conven- 
 tion is not equal in dignity and importance to the 
 position of Governor of this State ; but it is no less 
 true that matters entrusted to us as members of 
 this body, are of high and enduring consequence; 
 aud that a single vote here may aflect for weal or 
 woe the men of this and of coming generations, as 
 much or more than any act the Governor can do. 
 And yet with the full knowledge of this important 
 fact before them, look at what has been done by 
 the people ! They have of their own accord placed 
 several men of high intelligence and ability in this 
 body who did not number 30 years of age; and 
 should not that operate upon us as a reason for not 
 retaining this qualification ? We find that the city 
 and county of New York has, by a majority of ma- 
 ny thousands, sent to us here an honorable member 
 (Mr. SHEPARD,) whose years are several short of 
 30 One has also been sent from that county 
 which had the honor to furnish us our highly re- 
 spected President, (Chenango,) and Ire has not 
 that qualification! The old and honored county 
 of Ulster has done likewise; and Saratoga coun_ 
 
239 
 
 ty, of glorious Revolutionary memory, has not 
 thought herself unworthily or unfitly represen ed 
 here by an honorable gentleman, in that respect no 
 tKT"r qualified; and last, though, in myjudgrnent, 
 not least, my own county of Oneida has by an 
 immense majority (over 2000) committed her im- 
 j> irtant interests upon this floor, in part, to my 
 honoiable colleague, who fails in no qualification 
 fitly to represent her, except, perhaps, that 
 he has not attained the age of 30. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND: Well, then, if all these 
 ** boys" as the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIM- 
 MONS,) calls them, behave themselves, I suppose 
 they can be Governors by and by. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND: That is begging the ques- 
 tion. A man under 30, may be as much a man, 
 and as well qualified in every respect a^ any man 
 over that age except in maturity and experience; 
 a^d that is not always wanting in rr:en ol 25 or 
 27. As a general rule there is not as much experi- 
 ence under 30 as over 30. But we have in 
 history mnnv glorious instances of young men un- 
 der 30, of 21, 25 or 27, (history is lull of such 
 examples,) who have combined much maturi- 
 ty, wis'lom and experience. And all this only 
 goes to show that we might or we might not 
 properly propose this restriction as we think fit. 
 The question whether we will or will not propose 
 anv of those to the people for them to ratify or to 
 reject is a mere matter of expediency, the pro 
 position involving in no degree a violation of the 
 principle of republican government. And no 
 member here, who shall vote for the quali- 
 fication will show himself ignorant, or op 
 posed to the principles of the Government 
 under r/hich he lives, and under which he ex- 
 pects to live. It is a question of mere expe- 
 diency, and therefore he (Mr. K.) should vote 
 only for the five years residence, deeming the 
 rest inexpedient. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, 
 I will only say that the question of these "restric- 
 tions" is a question not ot principle, in the sense 
 urged bv the honorable gentlemen, whose opin- 
 ions I have endeavored to combat, bui of expedi- 
 ency, merely, and I trust that no member will 
 vote here from any fear of losing political caste, 
 or that he would be regarded by his constituents 
 as having committed a great blunder; but solely 
 in reference to the question whether the proposi- 
 tions were fit and proper to be proposed to the 
 people to our fellow members ot the constituent 
 body for their approval or rejection. I deem it 
 expedient that we sould have the restriction of 
 five years residence, and as one of the "members'' 
 of the community, 1 shall record my vote in favor 
 of it. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS before the vote was taken de- 
 sired to express the grounds on which he should 
 vote, being as they were somewhat different from 
 those he had heard any member express on the 
 floor. He apprehended that if these restrictions 
 were continued in the Constitution, they would 
 have little or no practical effect, and it certainly 
 was scarcely worth while to retain provisions of 
 such a character, as might possibly create 
 disorganization in the Government. He did not 
 suppose there was any considerable probability, 
 if they were left out that any man would ever be 
 elected to the office of Governor who was not a 
 native, 30 years of age and a resident 5 years in 
 
 the state. If there was danger of that, and that 
 the people might exercise their power unwisely 
 in these respects, they should be equally guard- 
 ed against it, that they might not elect a man who 
 could neither read nor write or who was an idiot 
 or insane person. But it would be an imputation 
 on their integrity and judgment to suppose that 
 they would ever elect such men. He did not 
 suppose that there was the remotest probability 
 that the people would ever select a Governor 
 whose qualifications were below any thing we 
 might prescribe here. He did not agree with 
 gentlemen that it was anti-democratic to place 
 restrictions on the people, where they were 
 necessary, or where we apprehend there was 
 danger. The people had sent us here to form 
 a compact, by which, if adopted, they would con- 
 sent to be governed, and by which the rights of 
 the minority would be protected. The very ob- 
 ject of a Constitution was to lay down fundamen- 
 tal rules of government, both for the people and 
 their delegates, and all others to whom they might 
 delegate power. The object of restriction on 
 themselves, was that in times of excitement they 
 might have a rule to govern them, formed when 
 no excitement existed, and by which the minority 
 might be protected from the oppression of the 
 majority. And to all such restrictions the peo- 
 ple had, in substance, given their assent by voting 
 for a Convention and sending us here. And when 
 any restriction on the people was proposed here, 
 which he believed to be practically useful, he 
 would have no objection to voting for it. But he 
 did not believe there was any practical utility 
 in the restrictions proposed in the report. 
 If any person had ever succeeded to the gu- 
 bernatorial chair, without all these qualifica- 
 tions, it would be from his having first been 
 Lieut. Governor. Instances had been alluded to 
 where the Governor had not served out his term. 
 Tompkms, Clinton, and Van Buren did not. 
 It may well be supposed that persons may be 
 elected to the office of Lieutenant Governor, on 
 account of some particular local or partisan influ- 
 ence, and who, through the death, removal, or 
 resignation of the Governor, without having one 
 of the qualifications proposed, might accede to the 
 gubernatorial chair That he apprehended was the 
 only way in which there was the remotest proba- 
 bility that we should ever have a Governor under 
 thirty, or one who had not been a resident for five 
 years. The qualifications for Lieut. Governor 
 were not usually looked to with the same degree 
 of caution that those of the Governor were. And 
 in the report of the committee, there is no objec- 
 tion made to a Lieut. Governor being elected 
 without having a single one of these qualifications. 
 There should certainly be a distinct declaration 
 on this point, for in high party times, in the 
 event of the removal of a Governor from the 
 state, or some other cause of vacancy in his office, 
 a Lieut. Governor succeeding him, without the 
 qualifications of a Governor, might create distur- 
 bance and high feeling, and result in bad conse- 
 quences. He repeated that he did not apprehend 
 the slightest probability that any man would ever 
 be elected Governor who had not all these quali- 
 fications, except through his first being Lieut. 
 Governor. But through the voluntary election of 
 the people, by their judgment and understanding 
 
240 
 
 he apprehended such a thing would never occur. 
 Therefore, to be consistent we must, if we re- 
 quired these qualifications in a Governor, require 
 them also of a Lieut. Governor. We must also 
 go further and require the same of all other offi- 
 cers of judges of the supreme court, for instance. 
 And to incorporate so extensive a code of restric- 
 tions in the Constitution might raise up a feeling 
 of animosity, and subject us to the charge that 
 instead of making a more liberal Constitution, 
 we had put on greater restrictions on the direct 
 action of the people than there were before, and 
 excite a just prejudice against the whole instru- 
 ment. For these reasons and these only, Mr. P. 
 should vote to strike out these restrictions and 
 not because he had the slightest objection to re- 
 strictions on the action of the people when he 
 deemed them proper, useful and desirable in the 
 organization of the government. 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN was sorry to be compelled 
 to obtrude himself again on the notice of the con- 
 vention, but the debate had taken a very wide 
 range much wider than he anticipated. It had 
 called out much of the wisdom and talent of this 
 body. Positions that had been taken by 
 our opponents had been repeatedly overturn- 
 ed, aftd had been re-taken and re-stated and 
 he did not know that he should be justified in the 
 course he should deem proper to take. But in 
 the absence of any commander here, supposing 
 that we all stood on equal ground he should 
 adopt the conclusion of Admiral Nelson on a me- 
 morable occasion, that it would not be wrong if 
 he should lay himself along side of any one of 
 his opponents. Though he had been somewhat 
 anticipated by the gentleman from Oneida, (Mr. 
 KIRKLAND) he should proceed to notice some of 
 the positions of the gentleman from Ontario, over 
 the way (Mr. WORDEN). That gentleman in his 
 speech the other day, said that " the more mod- 
 ern constitutions contained no such restrictions 
 as this in regard to five years residence, and that 
 the day had gone by when checks were to be pla- 
 ced on the popular will that we had abandoned 
 the principle of putting checks and guards upon 
 the popular will." Now he (Mr. P.) proposed to 
 take some notice of all these points, and he would 
 first ask the gentleman what we meant. Was it 
 the Convention, or the people, or the collective 
 wisdom of the nation as expressed in the differ- 
 ent State Constitutions? Now, he (Mr. P.) had 
 looked at the more modern constitutions, those of 
 the new States, and found the reverse to be the 
 fact. And as he should endeavor to show they 
 contained the most stringent provisions in this 
 particular of those of any in the union ; but also 
 that as circumstances changed, many of the states, 
 as if taught wisdom from experience, had increa- 
 sed the qualifications. The gentleman had said 
 when his colleague (Mr. NICHOLAS) had stated 
 himself to be a democrat of 'US, that he hoped he 
 would come up to his standard and be a democrat 
 of '46. He (Mr. P.) was his man he was a de- 
 
 mocrat of 1846 as well as 1798- 
 
 fully up 
 
 to the democracy of both periods on this ques- 
 tion, as he would endeavor to show. He would 
 examine briefly the qualifications of other states, 
 commencing first with New Jersey. The old 
 constitution imposed no restriction on the 
 candidate for Governor but the new one of 1844 
 
 was a little more stringent, and required 30 year* 
 of age, 20 years citizenship and seven years resi- 
 dence. Louisiana in her constitution of 1 
 required 35 years of age, citizenship of the Uni- 
 ted States and six years residence. The new con- 
 stitution of '45 required 35 years of age, 15 j 
 citizenship, and 15 years residence. Here was ;i 
 remarkable instance of the more stringent qualifi- 
 cations required by the new above the old consti- 
 tution. True, as had been said, our constitution 
 of '77 contained none of these,; anti the reason.- 
 were to be found in the fact that we had just 
 emerged from colonial vassalage, and were then 
 but recently British subjects. Similar reason 
 influenced some of the new States at the West, 
 upon their first organization, but where they had 
 formed new constitutions or amended old ones, 
 they had incorporated in them those restriction 
 or rendered them more stringent. Florida in 183^ 
 required 30 years of age, citizenship and five year.- 
 residence. Texas in 1845, 30 years of age, citi- 
 zenship and three years residence. Missouri un- 
 der the old constitution required 30 years of age, 
 four years citizenship and four years residence. 
 Under the new one of 1846, thirty years of age, 
 10 years citizenship and five years residence. 
 !<>wa required 35 years of age, and two years ci- 
 tizenship and residence. It had been asked by 
 gentlemen, why not carry this out, and requiiv 
 the same qualifications of the judiciary and othei 
 officers. Mr. P. would go with gentlemen to ex- 
 tend these restrictions to the Lieutenant Gover- 
 nor, the judiciary, and the legislature if the) 
 pleased. He had looked over some of the State 
 Constitutions, and saw there was precedent for 
 this too. Vermont required a Senator to be thir- 
 ty years old, to be a citizen and a resident. Tex- 
 as, 30 years for a Senator, citizenship and three 
 years residence for the house, 21 years of age, 
 citizenship and two years residence. Florida re- 
 quired for the Senate 25 years, and for the House 
 21 years of age, citizenship, and two years resi- 
 dence for* both. Louisiana 27 years of age, ten 
 years citizenship and four ye^rs. residence, forSe- 
 nator for judges 30 years of age, six years resi- 
 dence and five years practice of law. The old 
 constitution required no such qualifications. 
 Missouri required 30 years of age and five years 
 residence for the Senate and the judiciary ten 
 years citizenship for the Senate, and citizenship 
 for a judge. Now, it would be seen that so far a^ 
 the wisdom of all these States were concerned 
 undoubtedly founded on experience, they had 
 found it expedient to engraft on their new consti- 
 tutions all these restrictions, and the question 
 was should we avail ourselves of the wisdom of 
 other States, or should we reject it. But w 
 were told by the gentlemen from New York, Se- 
 neca, Ontario and Chautauque, that the sovereign 
 people had no right to restrict themselves. And 
 yet every one of these gentlemen had in the end 
 given it up. The gentleman from New York had 
 not expressly done this, yet such was the result 
 of his argument. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : What have I given up ? 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN : The right of the peeople 
 to restrict themselves. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : 1 should like to know in 
 what particular I have yielded it ? 
 
241 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN : If you will have a little not with any expectation of carrying a question 
 
 ice, F will show you. which had been already decided but to explain 
 
 Mr. PATTKR ^<)N : V. iv well. the views of the committee in reporting it. He 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN: 1 havw not entire!) done \\ ith believed the attachment to one's place of nativity 
 
 you yet. As lie was saving (continued Mr. P.) 
 ed the point the moment they fixed the 
 qualification of electors; for that was a restric- 
 tion. No hum;.; ..aid be establish- 
 ed without restricting the people. We are, by 
 
 e, when brought into existence, by the fiat 
 of the Almighty, free, equal, and independent. 
 We possess alike every right and quality, and 
 stand on equal grounds ; but we could not enter 
 
 >ociety without surrendering a portion of 
 those natural rights. Those that were essential 
 to the establishment of government, we yielded ; 
 those that were not, we retained. And the very 
 moment we undertake to assume the doctrine, 
 that the people could not restrict themselves, 
 that moment we aim a fatal stab at the establish- 
 ment of all human governments. And yet the 
 gentleman from Ontario, who held that the peo- 
 ple had no right to restrict themselves, was willing 
 to require a five years' residence leaving out the 
 word native, and all the other qualifications ! It 
 did appear to him that if the principle was pen- 
 cilled athwart the arch of Heaven, in letters of 
 living light that the people had a right to restrict 
 themselves that gentlemen would not give up.' 
 There was a point which, when men determined 
 they would not be convinced, you could not con- 
 vince them. He would tell those gentlemen one 
 thing, and he had not intended to allude to it 
 again that this eternal cry of " you distrust the 
 people" " we have confidence in the people" 
 
 ;ur the only friends of the people" and 
 this chulltnging of them to put their names on 
 record, had- not been a legal tender with the elec- 
 tors of Orleans for many years since. The day 
 had gone by when this eternal praise of the peo- 
 ple was current coin with the farmers and mecha- 
 nics of that county. Indeed, they distrusted the 
 man who indulged in it. It would not be receiv- 
 ed there even to pay old debts of broken down 
 politicians. But in some counties it seemed to 
 be not only a legal tender but the only capital 
 and stock in trade with certain gentlemen. The 
 gentleman from Seneca (Mr. BASCOM) and others 
 were lawyers, and could better decide than Mr. 
 P. what a legal tender was. But that gentleman, 
 though a lawyer, seemed to operate as a farmer 
 would, in assailing provisions of the old constitu- 
 tion which he could not successfully attack. He 
 would illustrate. We farmers, in chopping down 
 wood, when we found a large, fine tree, so straight 
 that we could not tell which way it would fall, 
 in order to make it fall in the direction which 
 we wished, always looked out for a driver. So 
 with the gentleman, when he found a proposi- 
 tion he could not overthrow, he was going to 
 drive it over. The gentleman could find no oth- 
 er resource than a whole phalanx of revolution- 
 ary soldiers, and these he put in- requisition to 
 prostrate the qualification of a five years' resi- 
 dence. How he had succeeded, remained to be 
 Mr. P. said he had designed when he rose 
 to have taken a nrore extensive view of the posi- 
 tions of dilieretit gentlemen, but he did not think 
 it necessary to do it at this late hour. In regard 
 
 and residence and friends, was one of the strong- 
 est passions and best feelings of the human heart. 
 He was born in New Hampshire, and he did not 
 believe it to be in his power ever toforgether 
 granite hills or the associates and friends of his 
 youth. No, while memory retained her empire, 
 he would never forget them. We had been told 
 that foreigners have ever been most ready to wield 
 not only the pen but the $word in defence of their 
 adopted country. This was true, as was instanced 
 in the Revolutionary struggle. The Pennsylvania 
 line, one of the bravest of the army, was composed 
 almost entirely of Irishmen. And so with the 
 Irishmen who had fought in France and in other 
 countries they were always faithful and devoted 
 to their adopted country. It was the Irish brigade 
 that maintained the honor of the French arms, 
 and indeed saved France, at the battle of Fonte- 
 noy. So with the Dutch they stand as high. 
 Those who knew him, knew that he had no pre- 
 judice against foreigners. This was well un- 
 derstood in his own county, where he received 
 a very libertl support from them. With regard 
 to the striking out of the native qualification, 
 therefore, he would not revive that question 
 again it had been decided. And so far from 
 being opposed to foreigners, he had been ex- 
 tensively supported at home because he al- 
 ways had a warm heart and a ready hand to 
 relieve or succor the foreigner when necessary ; 
 and those who knew him would bear him out in 
 the truth of this ; he cared not what countiy a 
 good man came from ; and therefore, as to the word 
 "Native," he did not object to have that striken 
 stricken out. It was, what was considered 
 by some, an odious qualification, and he did 
 not want to revive it. But he wished to se- 
 cure all that could be obtained under this 
 clause or rule by retaining the qualifications 
 of age and residence. We had been told not to 
 distrust the people ; that we ought not to do so ; 
 that they would always do right, and so on. 
 Now he was the last man on earth to distrust 
 the people unnecessarily. He did not deny 
 that they were capable of choosing and act- 
 tng for themselves. He also believed that in 
 999 cases out of 1000 the people would not 
 act wrong where they fully and properly- 
 understood the subject they had to act upon and 
 had time to look into it, and to reflect upon it. 
 But he was convinced that in times of great polit- 
 ical excitement the people were apt to do wrong ; 
 to be led away by designing leaders ; else how 
 had certain things - occurred during the last few 
 years in various parts of the country ? They had 
 heard of the doings of lynch law they had heard 
 of mobocracy they had heard of rowdyism of 
 church burnings, and many other occurrences 
 deeply to be regretted, where in times of great 
 excitement there was an utter disregard of all 
 law. Mr. Van Buren in the Convention of 1821 
 said that there always was and always would be 
 danger to be apprehended from our large cities ; 
 Mr. Jefferson in his day solemnly declared that 
 this country and its institutions had very much of 
 
 to this Native question, he had a word to say danger to apprehend from our large cities. And, 
 
242 
 
 the day is not far distant when our large cities, 
 and large towns and large villages will carry more 
 sway with them than all the rest of the country put 
 together. And the masses in these large cities are 
 very easily excited, and sometimes, too, upon tri- 
 fling topics, and this excitement leads to very sad 
 excesses. And at such times the mass of the people 
 is not capable of exercising its legitimate power 
 with due discretion. And at these times it is that 
 the people do wrong. The people are sensible 
 of this tendency themselves, and therefore desire 
 to have these restrictions placed upon them 
 selves ; and particularly aware of the fact is the 
 agricultural portion of the State. He was not 
 going to pass any opinion on the " patriot war ;" 
 but at the time of the burning of the Caroline 
 this feeling and this danger was seen to an alarm- 
 ing extent. In Orleans and Niagara counties, 
 and others close by, had the people been gathered 
 together, three-fourths of them would have de- 
 clared war against Great Britain in a moment. 
 They poured out by thousands on Navy Island; and 
 it was more than a man's reputation was worth for 
 any one to say that the feeling and conduct thus 
 displayed was at all wrong. And yet one year had 
 hardly passed away before they felt thoroughly 
 ashamed of it. He was not, and would not ex- 
 press an opinion on these Canadian troubles but 
 t hese were the facts. And such instances ought to 
 convince us of the danger of doing away with all 
 these restrictions; for they are invaluable as 
 checks and guards against excesses in times of 
 great excitement. Perhaps he might be unne- 
 cessarily alarmed ; he might be the only one to 
 anticipate danger from absence of restrictions ; 
 (he did not think he was) but let the opposite 
 doctrine prevail, that no restrictions should 
 be imposed upon the people on the popu- 
 lar will in any part of the Constitution 
 and let the plan be adopted of doing nothing 
 but sing hozannas to the people to the dear peo- 
 pleand my word upon it, that the child is born 
 whose head shall not blossom for the grave before 
 the sun of our liberties shall have gone down and 
 set in a sea of blood, and our institutions be 
 shrouded in one eternal might of anarchy and 
 darkness. The gentleman from Chautauque had 
 talked much about those members, who distrust- 
 ed the intelligence of the people, putting them- 
 selves on the record. Now he had no fears about 
 doing this this had no terrors for him. If he 
 possessed any standing character or influence in 
 his county, it was because, under all circumstan- 
 ces, he had always told the people what he be- 
 lieved to be true. He had always been thus frank 
 and honest with them both before and after an 
 election. And he could also tell the gentleman 
 that the people of his county were always grateful 
 and thankful to those who told them the truth ; if 
 they esteemed any man their friend, it was one 
 who told them of their errors and they were 
 equally candid to tell their representatives of 
 theirs. And they would pass at one of their 
 meetings, such a resolution as this : " Resolved 
 that we esteem that man our best friend who 
 candidly advises us of our errors." This 
 had been his course for 25 years; and he was not 
 only desirous to put his name on the record upon 
 this question, but he would to God that every 
 feeling of his heart every motive that actuated 
 
 him in his course could be put on record also, 
 and go with that vote to his constituents. His 
 constituents knew him as making no pretensions 
 to learning to high attainments, or to speaking 
 talent; they knew him as a plain unlettered far- 
 mer; and they knew him also, (he would say it 
 without intending any unkindness to the gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque, Mr. PATTERSON) as 
 possessing some firmness of character, and as 
 having the moral courage to do his entire duty 
 to them and to the State both here and else- 
 where. And acting under a deep and a full 
 sense of his duties here and responsibility to 
 them to his country and to that God who 
 spoke him into being, he would thank any gentle- 
 man in that Convention, on all occasions to have 
 the ayes and noes recorded; that his name might 
 appear on the record, and on the adamantine ta- 
 bles of history go down to posterity. 
 
 Mr, BRUNDAGE said that he felt great reluc- 
 tance in breaking through the silence he had im- 
 posed on himself when he first came to the Con- 
 vention. And when he was elected to this body 
 he formed the determination to be passive, and 
 for the reason that he was taken from the plow 
 handle, without education or experience, and 
 was placed among gentlemen most eminent for 
 their talent, and learning, and ability. In such 
 an assemblage he had thought it impossible to 
 make a conspicuous figure, for the reasons he 
 had given; but in addition he had an infirmity of 
 ear, the extent of which he had never experi- 
 enced so much before, which confirmed the wis- 
 dom of his determination. But it struck him 
 they were taking an imprudent course. They 
 had exhausted seven days, if his memory served 
 him, on a subject which should have occupied 
 less than that number of hours, for 'it would re- 
 sult in no serious consequences which ever way 
 it was decided. Their constituents had placed 
 them there to discharge one of the most sacred 
 duties ever confided to any body of men ; they 
 were placed there as had been expressed by 
 somebody, he thought the chairman of the com- 
 mittee himself (Mr. CHATFIELD,) on the ele- 
 ments of society; and the duty assigned to them 
 was to organize those elements and reduce them 
 to system to define and clearly designate the 
 rights of the people, amongst whom they were 
 included individually and to set prescribed 
 bounds to delegated power hereafter, that the ser- 
 vant may not become greater than the master. 
 If he mistook not they were wasting the time 
 which might be devoted to a better purpose. 
 There had been a great desire expressed by some 
 gentlemen to restrict the people lest in some un- 
 guarded moment, and under the influence of some 
 excitement, they might make an injudicious se- 
 lection of an officer to preside over the destinies 
 of the Empire State. One gentleman, he believ- 
 ed it was the gentleman from Essex had feared 
 that they might be led to elect an inexperienced 
 youth or " raw boy" as he expressed it. Fears 
 were also entertained that a " raw import" might 
 be taken without an acquaintance with our insti- 
 tutions or our language that under such influen- 
 ces, with the wide range that was proposed to be 
 given them, they might cross the broad waters ol 
 the Atlantic and select Queen Victoria, Louis 
 Phillipe, or Daniel O'Connell. He could not but 
 
243 
 
 think all such fears were visionary, and baseless 
 as a vision. He had more confidence in the com- 
 mon sense of the people than to anticipate danger 
 from such sources. It struck him these fears 
 pointed to a contingency that could occur only by 
 a bare possibility, of which there was not. the 
 least rational ground of probability, and which 
 could only arise when degeneracy and corruption 
 have rendered us incapable of self-government. 
 And when anarchy shall have usurped the place 
 of reason and common sense, and so subverted all 
 order, and destroyed our institutions, as to render 
 us fit subjects for despotism, it will be immaterial 
 whether the Executive chair shall be filled by 
 native-born or foreigner, by the British Queen, 
 the French King,or an Irish repealer. For himself, 
 if he should be unfortunate enough to live at such 
 a period, it would be immaterial whether the iron 
 were placed on his neck by the jewelled hand of a 
 millinery Queen or the stern command of a despot. 
 But such a state of things was not to be expected, 
 and hence they might dispense with this subject. 
 Their constituents were looking at them, and they 
 saw that this Convention had spent five weeks in 
 session and have hardly got across the threshhold. 
 He hoped they would now take the question, for 
 it would be much better to spend their time in 
 devising sume liberal system of free schools for 
 the education of every child in the state; for 
 when they should have enlightened the people 
 there would be no danger of the evils to which 
 gentlemen had alluded. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN was as anxious 
 
 when he said so he merely spoke what he knew 
 and felt. His second reason for thus voting was 
 that occasions may arise, and that within a very 
 short period, when the people of this State may 
 feel themselves imperatively called upon in some 
 great emergency to select a gentleman to be placed 
 in the Executive chair of the State, who may not 
 quite have arrived at the required age of 30 years. 
 It had indeed but comparatively recently happen- 
 ed that a gentleman was selected and run as a 
 candidate for Governor who was but a very little 
 
 as any gentleman to have the vote taken upon this 
 question at once; but owing to the remarks which 
 had been made here by certain gentlemen, he 
 could not consent to record his vote without stat- 
 ing the reasons that influenced him. His princi- 
 ples and character were involved in this matter. 
 One charge had been made there that they in- 
 tended to pull down and destroy the Constitution, 
 and to scatter its fragments to the four winds of 
 Heaven. Others had suggested that the people 
 were disposed on many occasions to be governed 
 by a mobocracy and allusion had been made 
 there to demagogues who desired to control the 
 people ; and certain gentlemen who have been 
 termed ultras, have been thus stigmatized and 
 charged with a desire to lend a helping hand in 
 this destruction ; and that this same class those 
 occupying the position that he did, were catering 
 for such a state of popular feeling to catch the 
 popular ear, and to cater for what is termed the 
 " dear people." [A laugh.] Now under these 
 remarks, and with his feelings he could not re- 
 frain from stating the grounds upon which he 
 should record his vote. And the principal rea- 
 son why he should vote against these restrictions 
 was that he held to the soundness of the doctrine 
 that the people of this State were competent in 
 all tlh sc matters to judge and act for themselves 
 He believed that the people were competent, hon- 
 est and wise enough, to select, (when they sent a 
 delegation to Syracuse or any other place for no- 
 mination of State officers,) to send proper men 
 competent in every way as to qualification, age, 
 or any other matters. He was willing to trust 
 them, at all events. He had unlimited confidence 
 in the intelligence and integrity of the people to 
 do this ; and he paid them no empty compliment 
 
 over 30 years of age. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : Gov. Tompkins was under 30 
 years of age. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN : Yes ; but I was 
 speaking of events of more recent occurrence ; 
 when the people in their sovereign capacity saw- 
 fit to place a young man in the Gubernatorial 
 chair ; and if the people should now say it was 
 their pleasure to place a young man in that chair 
 under thirty years of age, who shall say that they 
 shall not do so. Arid there was no time during 
 the last ten years that there had been such a state 
 of popular excitement that they are not willing 
 to trust the people in this matter; and no man 
 has dared to hold that doctrine for the last ten 
 years. No man would now take that ground ; 
 and if it was to be taken and sustained here, in 
 less than one month the people would hurl back 
 upon them these restrictions with indignation. 
 ft is true, as has been suggested that an occasion, 
 such as he had stated, may not occur for a centu- 
 ry to come, when the people may desire to use 
 such a right as that of selecting a candidate under 
 thirty years of age ; but is that a reason why we 
 should here attempt to tie them down to declare 
 that they shall not exercise that right, even if 
 they desire it. But what are we doing ? Framing 
 an instrument, as perfect as we can, which is 
 hereafter to be ratified by the people. Then 
 as we are preparing such an instrument, which 
 is to endure for a long time, why should we not 
 make it as perfect as possible before we submit it 
 to the people ? Let us not forget that we are only 
 preparing an article for the people to execute. 
 They are to sanction it if they like it, and to re- 
 ject it if they do not like it; and in framing it 
 we ought to make it as perfect as possible. If 
 the principle is wrong, vote against putting it in- 
 to the Constitution. But the doctrine that this 
 Convention is intended to restrict the people can- 
 not be true ; because the people are to decide up- 
 on adopting or rejecting the result of its action ; 
 they have not decided beforehand upon this, and 
 therefore it is their duty to place the article be- 
 fore them in as perfect a state as they could pre- 
 sent it. Now, those who say that there may be 
 cases arise, where it may be proper for the peo- 
 ple to take a candidate for Governor who shall 
 be under 30 years of age, completely yield all their 
 objections. For if it be proper that the people 
 should do this in a'single instance, then it is prop- 
 er in all cases; and they should not be shut out from 
 
 the 
 For it 
 
 privilege of exercising this power at all 
 it may be, in the course of events, thai 
 
 times, 
 that some 
 
 great and distinguished man may stand out so 
 prominently from among his fellow citizens, as to 
 work him into the estimation of all parties and 
 classes, as the only proper person to be their can- 
 didate for Governor ; and would you shut out 
 
244 
 
 such an one by the retention of a restriction like 
 this ? For if he was under 30, however great he 
 might be, this restriction would exclude him. 
 And if it is impolitic once to do this, it is impo- 
 litic always. Again, it had been urged here that 
 some members advocated the doctrine that they 
 had no right to insert any restrictions whatever 
 in the Constitution. Now, he had heard no man 
 in that committee assert such a doctrine as that. 
 The gentleman from Orleans had asked about the 
 
 restrictions on electors 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN : I said if you conceded the 
 right to impose restrictions on electors, you con- 
 ceded the whole ground. 
 
 Mr. HUNT said that if he was alluded to, what 
 he had spoken of was the general restrictions im- 
 posed upon the sovereignty of the State. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that they im- 
 posed the restriction upon electors, because they 
 could not submit that question every year to the 
 people as they can this, as to who shall be the 
 candidate for the Governor. If they could every 
 year decide if a certain man was qualified to vote 
 or not, there was not a man who would hesitate 
 to submit that question directly to the decision of 
 the people And if the people should say that 
 there should be no restrictions whatever as to the 
 qualifications for an elector, would any of them 
 hesitate to bow to this ? No ! certainly not. If 
 they would put this question of electors to the 
 same test as that of Governor, he would agree to 
 remove all qualifications for electors ; but it can- 
 not be done. Some asked-, why not leave 
 point also without restriction ? Why not select 
 a candidate for Governor who is not an elector ? 
 For a very good reason. To require a Governor 
 to have less qualifications than those who choose 
 him, would indeed be putting the elected above 
 the electors. It lifts him up over and above all 
 the people oi the State beside. And this was in- 
 troducing a principle in our system not in accord- 
 ance with our doctrine of equality. That was an 
 objection sufficiently strong for him. . The gen- 
 tleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) had asked the 
 convention what necessity there was (to follow out 
 our views) for common schools, and institutions 
 for learning to instruct the children of the State ? 
 And whether in carrying out our views, we meant 
 to throw away all the qualifications of education in 
 our Governor, and take a candidate at random from 
 any part or position in the State ? Now, no man 
 not even that gentleman went farther than he 
 (Mr. V. S.) would for the necessary qualifications 
 of education, moral character, and proper train- 
 ing in the candidate for Governor ; for it did not 
 follow because they wished to select a candidate 
 under 30 years old, that they meant to throw 
 away all moral greatness or other tests ; nor did it 
 follow that in all men over 3D they would secure 
 the necessary qualifications of education, &c. for 
 a Governor, according to the estimate of any of 
 the gentlemen on either side.. Other gentlemen 
 spoke of demagogues ruling in a State Conven- 
 tion to nominate a Governor ; but did they get rid 
 of the rule of these demagogues by a qualification 
 of 30 years of age ? Put in the 30 years, and still 
 demagogues will meet you at every corner of the 
 State, and exert their influence. He should be 
 happy to notice other remarks, but the hour was 
 advanced, and he saw that the Convention was 
 
 mpatient to take the question. He would, how- 
 ever, offer a single remark with regard to the 
 doctrine of expatriation so strongly and frequent- 
 y alluded to by the gentleman from Essex, (Mr. 
 SIMMONS.) But he was convinced however, that 
 ;his matter had very little to do with the subject 
 inder consideration. But he would undertake to 
 say that whatever might be the doctrine on this 
 subject in England, in France or in Rome, or in 
 any other aristocratical, or monarchial country 
 upon the face of the earth, it has never been the 
 doctrine in the judgment of the people. He 
 was told that some judge of the U. S. Court, had 
 said that such was the doctrine of this country ; 
 sut the people of this country had never recogni- 
 zed any such principle. And they would laugh 
 at any who should say that they could not 
 alienate themselves if theypleased to do so; wheth- 
 er our people by going to Europe, or foreigners 
 by coming here. The gentleman from Essex, 
 (Mr. SIMMONS) had himself said that this "doc- 
 trine was weakening in this country : well, if any 
 of it still exists, he hoped this Convention would 
 give it the death blow at once. Let it not be said 
 or seen that this Convention ever by a single act 
 recognized, or seemed to recognize this principle. 
 But who is to fear any thing from such a prepos- 
 terous doctrine even if it were true. If England 
 chooses to hold on to the doctrine, let her do it. 
 She cannot injure us or any of our citizens by so 
 doing. And to say that we are called upon to 
 hold on to this, because England does, would be 
 equal to saying that we must adopt the doctrine 
 of the Divine Right of Kings, because England 
 does. Let England hold to it ; she cannot injure 
 any of our citizens by so doing ; and if any of 
 our citizens choose to go there and enjoy any of 
 the privileges of that land, let them do so. 
 The gentleman from Chautauque had argued to a 
 considerable extent, that the power of a majority 
 should be restricted as tending to oppress the mi- 
 nority. And he had went so far as to suppose a 
 case where a president having a son under 30 
 years of age, he might by bribery and corruption 
 secure his election as Governor. Would not the 
 same difficulty be as likely to occur if the man 
 was over 30 ? If there was any force in the argu- 
 ment it would apply in the one case as well 
 as in the other. But, that we must believe 
 the people of the union were first so corrupt as 
 to elect such a president, and then that the peo- 
 ple of this State, could all be bought up by 
 the general Government there was no force 
 to the illustration. Then as ,to this sovereign 
 power of the majority what was it ? There were 
 certain fixed principles that a majority never can 
 touch. It would be an assumption, and a viola- 
 tion he might say of divine right to touch them. 
 There were certain principles recognized over ^ 
 the civilized world among men of intelligence ' 
 which secured those rights which we call un- 
 alienable the right to life, liberty and property. 
 No majority can assail those rights ; but in rela- 
 tion to all questions and principles of expediency 
 and of policy which are entirely arbitrary, which 
 are to be judged of by their effects on the inter- 
 ests of the community, who would stand up and 
 say that the majority should not rule ? And he 
 expressed the hope that no provision would be 
 inserted in the Constitution, which would bind 
 
245 
 
 the body .But whether he was canea a aema- me Maie repre iceiing m me ycup 
 
 gogue or not he would say here that he had very that part of the State. And they were boui 
 
 great confidence in the good sense of the sover- say that the Legislature does speak out the 
 
 eiffn people. No suggestion of that kind would ings of the people ; and in relation to the ma 
 
 !he people in what might more properly founded the legislators with the sovereign peo- 
 ne deemed a matter of legislation for a long pe- pie ? 
 
 riod. They might under the change of circum- Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN was glad that he 
 stances and things desire to change it in the had got something like a definite statement from 
 course of a few years, and he would leave them the gentleman upon this point. And it appeared 
 free to act through the legislative department. to him that the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIM- 
 He trusted therefore that he at least would not be MONS) put the legislators, as a class, above the 
 charged with acting in this matter from any oth- people. And if he takes up that position as an 
 er consideration than that of a desire to promote argument, he had no disposition to argue with 
 the interests of the State, and to fulfil the de- him. He (Mr. V. S.) was bound to believe that 
 mands of duty imposed upon him as a member of a representative who came there from any part of 
 the body But whether he was called a dema- the State represented the feeling of the people of 
 
 -'"" '' - - **!.-*-*- And they were bound to 
 
 ' feel- 
 
 people. No suggestion of that kind would I ings of the people ; and in relation to tne matters 
 ever deter him from giving free expression to he had referred to, there has been a direct expres- 
 the sentiment and voting in accordance with it. sion of opinion by the legislature. Some few 
 He was aware of the strong disposition that existed years ago, when he had the honor to occupy a 
 here and elsewhere on the part of many to stand seat upon that floor, the principle of taxing ground 
 out distinctly as the strong friends of established rents, and that of distress warrants was brought 
 principles and old land marks, as they were called, up ; and but a very few could be found to advo-* 
 There were those who always took alarm at the cate a change for the better ; and yet but a corn- 
 idea of disturbing the established order of things, paratively short time passed away and the mem- 
 Why we had been told over and over again that bers of the Assembly and Senate voted for a 
 we were paying no respect to the framers of the change. 
 
 Constitution of '21, or regard to the wisdom of Mr. SIMMONS: Did those Senators who 
 that day and that we had better leave well voted for it, represent the feelings of the people 
 enough alone. And it had been urged also that at the time they voted ? 
 
 the people expected us to confine our attention Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that there 
 only to such amendments as had been agitated in must always be a time for a beginning to every 
 the community. And the venerable gentleman thing. When those Senators were originally 
 from Dutchess (Mr. TALLMADGE) even went so elected, these subjects had not been talked about 
 far as to express his regret that the Convention or discussed. They had not been agitated, and 
 act had not presented the subjects of amendments, there was a disposition in their legislature to vote 
 Now (Mr. V. S contended) we had a perfect right against them. It was a new Question, and the 
 to amend and go through with the whole instru- delegates were entirely uninstructed. They had 
 me nt and i* was their duty to do it, and the peo- to rely entirely on their own judgment, and they 
 pie expected it from them.* Mr. V. S. read from voted erroneously ; and the people said so, and 
 the act, calling a Convention, to show that it re- rebuked them for it. It was only about five years 
 quired them to revise the Constitution, thus em- ago that these doctrines were first broached, and 
 bracing the whole of it, and to make such amend- those who then had the hardihood to stand up and 
 ments as the interests of the people demanded. advocate those doctrines, were assailed on almost 
 In fact he contended it was the necessity for a every side in the most opprobious manner, and 
 general and not particular amendment that in- with the most abusive epithets ; he was called an 
 duced the calling of the Convention. This par- Indian, &c. &c.; and upon this very floor his own 
 ticular proposition now under discussion was one colleague had been assailed because he dared to 
 of the amendments discussed both in the legisla- broach some of these very doctrines which have 
 ture, and by the people, previous to the passage of since been advocated by the people, and had been 
 this act. This was a day when Constitutions and rebuked by the then Speaker of the House, point- 
 long established principles were being subjected edly and in a most disrespectful manner. And 
 to investigation and scrutiny by the people, and this showed them that they should not now hesi- 
 gentleman who were so tenacious of holding on tate to speak out their principles, because they 
 to doctrines that prevailed half a. century ago, chance to stand in broad opposition to the doc- 
 would learn that there was a spirit of intelligence trines^ advocated by others or in opposition to 
 and advancement abroad among the people,which principles that have stood for near a century. 
 must and woulfc be obeyed. And he (Mr. Van Two years ago, we could scarcely be heard on 
 S.) was not willing to put his judgment against Uhis matter; and now the Legislature, by a large 
 the judgment of the sovereign people of his State, majority, nearly unanimous, had made it the law 
 Some 4 or 5 years ago, it had been spoken of of the land ; and this shows us riot to put restric- 
 with horror, when some persons talked about a tions on the people, to operate for 25 years, or 
 * change in the system of distress warrants, and the more, when, in much less time, essential changes 
 principle of the taxation of ground rents. are sure to be called for by public sentiment. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS : They do so now. This is emphatically an age of progression. It 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN : Yes ; but a flat matters not whether we or the people impose re- 
 contradiction has been given to the doctrine of strictions; except in this ; we have no power to 
 the gentleman ; for a large majority of the Assem- do so. But the question is, shall we recommend 
 bly had declared in favor of a change ; and in the the people to adopt a course that will bind and tie 
 Senate a strong expression of opinion had been up their own actions for many years to come ? It 
 made in relation to it. is the same in principle and -effect as if we were 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS asked him whether he con- 1 to tie ourselves down by a law that we could not 
 
246 
 
 act contrary to a certain plan for 25 years. Now, 
 he would not object to prescribing certain gene- 
 ral rules of action which cannot be wrong ; .but 
 he would never consent to be bound to act in a 
 certain way, for a certain time towards a certain 
 thing, which might be subject to a considerable 
 change of circumstances every coming year. 
 And by adopting the principle of the restrictions 
 here laid down we should be paying a most mis- 
 erable compliment to the wisdom and intelli- 
 gence of the present day. We should be very 
 careful and not let our own Constitution be 
 sent out to mislead other states in this matter ; 
 it doubtless, in regard to this very clause, has 
 misled several states already (those that have been 
 alluded to) in the matter of framing their new 
 Constitutions. They have seen the restriction in 
 ours and adopted it. The fact, therefore, of its 
 being found in other Constitutions is nothing. 
 But it now remains for us to say at this late day, 
 whether we will, by adopting this restriction, put 
 forth the doctrine and say in effect to the Euro- 
 pean governments, that the people of this great 
 and enlightened Empire State, cannot be trusted 
 in the election of their Executive ; they do not 
 feel it to be safe to leave to their delegates the 
 free choice of a -candidate for governor. And to 
 say in effect that we are so fickle and unstable 
 so liable to change so liable to be influenced by 
 demagogues so liable to be led astray by foreign 
 influence so liable to be bought up by money 
 so liable to be swayed by the influence of young 
 and inexperienced men, and to be influenced by 
 so many other matters, that we are compelled to 
 put a clause in the Constitution to restrict our- 
 selves in this ve'ry matter. It is to say to the 
 world that you really cannot trust yourselves as a 
 people in the matter of your own electiops. That 
 you must, in short, be put in straight jackets. 
 And again, he would ask if there really was any 
 thing in this bugbear about the people being so 
 deeply misled by demagogues. His friend from 
 Wyoming, (A. W. YOUNG]! had deeply regretted 
 that the people had so often been led wrong by 
 them 
 
 Mr A. W. YOUNG : Have they not ? 
 
 M. VAN SCHOONHOVEN: I would ask the 
 gentleman if his party have always selected the 
 wisest and best to fill the chair of Governor. He 
 believed they had, 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS: If they had, there would be 
 no necessity for restrictions. Suppose they should 
 nominate a female. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN: And suppose 
 the Whig party were to meet and choose to nom- 
 inate a female. Who would object to that ? 
 
 Mr SIMMONS : I should like that. 
 
 Mr! VAN SCHOONHOVEN: The gentleman's 
 past course has not indicated that he would like 
 that, sir. [Laughter.] If he will put it into his 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS: Yes, but under 30 is the age 
 when men are under petticoat government; or 
 when petticoat influence prevails most with indi- 
 viduals. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said there would 
 never be a nomination made in the State under 
 undue excitement. The candidates were always 
 talked about for a long time beforehand, six 
 months or a year before they were nominated. 
 
 Why, even now, they could pretty well tell who 
 were to be the candidates next fall. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS and others : Name them 
 give us the names. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN : That was not 
 necessary under the rules of the Convention. 
 But he apprehended that on this subject gentle- 
 men would find no difficulty in ascertaining. 
 [Laughter.] We could at least tell within two 
 or three men. The gentleman from Essex (Mr. 
 SIMMONS) asks how we are to get at the merits 
 of a candidate. No difficulty at all about 
 that. By means of the press ; by conversations in 
 your public assemblies, your highways and by- 
 ways, your bar-room meetings, &c. &c. If he 
 has done any thing that is good, his friends will 
 be sure to let it be known ; and if he has a fault, 
 or has done any evil, his enemies will take good 
 care that that shall not be overlooked. [Laugh- 
 ter.] We shall therefore always know who we 
 shall have to vote for. There is no danger of 
 that. His qualities will be thoroughly canvassed, 
 and spread as rapidly through the State, as even 
 lightning can disseminate the information. We 
 are more likely to get a good candidate if we take 
 this restriction off than we are if we keep it on. 
 For there is no danger of a young man under 30 
 being selected unless he possesses very great me- 
 rit indeed. An old man may be selected for other 
 reasons than talent or merit, but if ever one under 
 30 should be selected it would be for some supe- 
 rior qualities which an old man did not possess. 
 Was the young man (the Governor) previously 
 mentioned selected because demagogues ruled, or 
 the people could be bought up. No, it was for his 
 superior qualifications. And as a general remark 
 he would say that history showed that young men 
 had administered the government of this State as 
 well and even better than the old men. The gen- 
 tleman from Essex had said we had better take 
 care how we strike down Democracy by taking 
 away these restrictions. But in this he would 
 have the rich man's son crowd out the poor man's. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that the perpetuity or glo- 
 ry of our Republican Institutions did not depend 
 on the talent of half a dozen miraculous young 
 geniuses. The average amount of knowledge in 
 the community was sufficient to support them, and 
 on that they rest and that requisite knowledge 
 does not come till after 30. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that the gen- 
 tleman based his idea on the assumption that the 
 poor or working classes did not become sufficient- 
 ly educated for public business so soon as the 
 rich man's son. This was a mistake ; so it was 
 to suppose that they were not woU educated be- 
 fore 30, and could not compete^with the rich 
 man's son without a limitation of age. Now, the 
 fact was, that the self-educated were the earliest 
 and best educated men. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that under 30, there may 
 spring up a few smart mushroom, hot bed politi- 
 cal aspirants, but they were generally not of 
 much account. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that then 
 the argument was that under 30, it was not right 
 to select men to transact public business. We 
 had members of the Convention here under 30 
 years of age, who had shown themselves to be as 
 
247 
 
 able as others. He would ask why shut out the 
 sons f rich men. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS wished only to put them on an 
 equal footing. The danger was then that they 
 would have an unequal advantage. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN urged that at this 
 day, the knowli dgc- of our political institutions 
 was pretty generally spread through the people, 
 and it was in the power of every man to make 
 himself familiar with them. It was a fact too he 
 believed that where one such man's son was well 
 versed in the politics of the day, 20 such men's 
 sons were ignorant of the subject. They were 
 better educated generally. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS: I grant that the best, but not 
 the earliest. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN. Yes sir the best, 
 and the earliest. Go into the institutions of 
 learning and you would find it was the members 
 of the poorer classes, who went through with 
 the most honors and came out qualified to make 
 the best citizens. Mr. V. S. went on to say that 
 he came here as though he was acting under the 
 solemnity of an oath, to act in view of his 
 position as a member of the Convention and 
 of the sovereignty of the State. The sovereign 
 power he believed was with the people, and 
 he would never consent to take it from them, or 
 place any restrictions upon its exercise. It was 
 x;ife under all circumstances to trust them to its 
 fullest exercise within the prescribed limits of 
 divine law. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that he had rose before this 
 question was taken, to perform a promise in ref- 
 erence to the mode of taking the final question 
 though against his own judgment. He therefore 
 felt at liberty to make a few remarks on this ques- 
 tion not, before submitted. It appeared to him to 
 be the wisest course, and the one most in accor- 
 dance with principle, to insert merely that the 
 right of eligibity was co-extensive with the right 
 of voting. The power of wielding the authority 
 of 3,000,000 of people the safe-guard of improp- 
 er legislation can be trusted to any elector whom 
 the whole people shall choose to elect. If this 
 was not so, then the people themselves are inca- 
 ble of exercising that power or of checking the 
 improper conduct of their representative, wheth- 
 er judicial or otherwise. The proposition he 
 made, was taken from the Constitution of Rhode 
 Island, a State not much famed for its alacrity in 
 the adoption of republican principles. But this 
 one he did considered as worthy of the immor- 
 tal founder of that State, Roger Williams him- 
 self, and worthy this great State to follow. He 
 did not agree with gentlemen who contended 
 that the people could not impose any restrictions 
 upon themselves that they might deem necessary, 
 but he did hold that there was no possible evil 
 that could result from removing these restrictions 
 and much possible good may be prevented by 
 retaining them. He would appeal to nine-tenths 
 of those who heard him, if any practical evil had 
 arisen in the selection of Chief Justices, where 
 no restriction of this kind existed ? It was the 
 miserable plea of availability so often used in nomi- 
 nating conventions, by political leaders, that evil 
 was to be apprehended from. Not from the peo- 
 ple. And what was the remedy for it ? Can yoli 
 put it in the Constitution ? There was something 
 
 of the kind in the Constitution of Maryland that 
 they should select as candidates the most honest, 
 wise and suitable men, and if it could be carried in- 
 to effect he would be glad to vote for such a section 
 in this constitution. It was only to be corrected 
 by the sober, second thought of the people them- 
 selves. They would no longer sustain a candi- 
 date, even of their own party, who had not some- 
 thing more than mere availability to commend 
 him to their favor. This feeling was getting to 
 be prevalent over the whole country. In illus- 
 tration of this fact, Mr. R. alluded to the settle- 
 ment of a recent great and absorbing question in 
 Congress one in which the feelings of the peo- 
 ple were deeply involved, and which might have 
 resulted in involving the country in a bloody war. 
 In conclusion he would add, that in his judg- 
 ment this whole question belonged to the duties 
 of committee No. 4, embracing the whole subject 
 of eligibility to office. But as it being here, and 
 the committee having undertaken to act upon it, 
 he had proposed his proposition to make all elec- 
 tors eligible to the office, and leaving it to the 
 people to make such selections as they might 
 deem proper. As he had stated in accordance 
 with his promise, he would withdraw his propo- 
 sition. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR renewed the proposition to 
 strikeout and insert a provision that " no person 
 who does not possess the qualifications of an elec- 
 tor, other than those of a residence in the town or 
 county, shall be eligible to the office of Govern- 
 or." Mr. T. said that in the few remarks he had 
 made the other day he had alluded to the fact of 
 a young man haying been chosen in the State of 
 Michigan tothebffice of Governor. His remarks 
 on that occasion had been made the subject of com- 
 ment by gentlemen who followed him. Now what 
 we said here was not a mere ephemeral thing, but 
 became a matter of record, andwith the debates, 
 would go down to posterity charges against the 
 character of Governor Mason which were un- 
 just and should not be uncontradicted. The 
 embarrassments ot the state, and her Wild Cat 
 system of banking was attributed to the fact 
 that she had in him a young Governor. Mr. 
 T. here read from the Constitution of Michigan 
 to show that Gov. Mason was compelled by a con- 
 stitutional provision to call the attention of the 
 legislature to the subject of internal improve- 
 ment for by the constitution, it was made the 
 duty of the legislature to project a plan of im- 
 provement. He also recommended a loan, the 
 negotiation of which the legislature threw upon 
 him, contrary to his wishes. The state suffered 
 loss by that loan and became embarrassed and 
 so did many other states, who had no young men 
 governor, but which were infected with the rage 
 then prevalent for internal improvement. Gov. 
 M., Mr. T. insisted, was as guiltless of blame in 
 this matter as in regard to the system of banking 
 and were there time he would read from the 
 messages of that very able and accomplish- 
 ed young governor, to show that he was op- 
 posed to the system, and constantly urged 
 upon the legislature, that proper safeguards 
 should be provided against loss to the people. 
 It was unjust, therefore, to tarnish the reputation 
 of that man, and it was proper for him to say 
 that he had never had the honor of an acquaint- 
 
248 
 
 ance with him, but he had always admired his 
 splendid talents, his course, and above all, the 
 beauty of style, elegance of diction and sound 
 principles set forth in his messages. It was pro- 
 per for him, (Mr. T.) having first referred to him, 
 to repel these attempts to tarnish his fair fame. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE moved that the committee rise 
 and report. Lost, ayes 39, nays 41. 
 
 Mr. BROWN suggested that perhaps the gen- 
 tleman desired to address the committee on this 
 question, and that it was but courtesy, as he had 
 not been heard before, that he should have the 
 opportunity. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE had no desire to speak himself. 
 
 Several gentlemen here expressed a desire to 
 be heard, when the committee rose and reported 
 progress. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN had leave of absence for 
 three days ; Mr. JONES for five. 
 
 Adjourned to 10 o'clock to morrow morning. 
 
 THURSDAY, (3lst day) July 9. 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. HARRINGTON. 
 Mr. GARDINER presented the petition of citi- 
 zens of Niagara county, in relation to the Canal 
 policy ot the State, and the improvements, which 
 was referred and ordered printed. 
 
 The Secretary of State transmitted an answer to 
 the resolution as t > the duration of ihe legislative 
 Sdssious ot 1841-2-3-4 and 1845. 
 
 Mr. S.VH i'ii^of Cnenango, ftttd leave ot absence 
 for ten days. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved that all debate terminate in 
 committee ol me whole at 1 o'clock to day, on the 
 2d secuon ot' the leporl of the committee on the 
 Executive department. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to extend the time until 
 quarter bef>re 2. 
 
 Mr. BAKER assent d. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS suggested that speakers should be 
 limited in the tune ihey should occupy mere 
 should be only three hours to speak; several were 
 peculiarly situated, and warned to speak, and they 
 were entitled to it. Hi> colleague was one. 
 
 Mr. SvVACKtiAMER moved to limit each 
 member 10 2U minutes. 
 
 Mr. CONELY moved to lay the resolution on 
 the table. Carried, 42 10 41. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to print 650 additional 
 copies of Uie abstracts of returns from county 
 clerks, auirogaies, masters in chancery, &c., as to 
 expense of judicial pioceedings. Mr. B. explain- 
 ed that this would" only make the number the 
 same of all other documents, and the absiracts 
 were the most important part of these returns. 
 Agreed io. 
 
 THE VIVA VOCW VOTE. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved the following resolu- 
 tions, which were adopted: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 powers ana dunes of the Legislature, &c., to inquire into 
 the propriety ot providing for the viva voce selection of all 
 officers that may devolve ou eitner branch ot the Legis- 
 lature. 
 
 ^Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on the 
 appointment or election of all officers whose functions are 
 local, &c., to inquire into the propriety of providing that 
 all legislative bodies or official boards for the State, or ior 
 any county, town, city or ward, ot two or more persons, 
 ou whom appointment to office or employment ina/ de- 
 volve, shall make such appointment viva voce, requiring 
 record to be kept, showing the vote of each member of 
 such body or board ou making appointments* 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER laid on the table a reso. 
 lution, fliat on and after Monday next the Con. 
 vention meet at 9 o'clock, A. M. 
 
 The Comptroller transmitted an answer to the 
 resolution as to amount paid lor breaches of the 
 contracts on the canals. &c. 
 
 POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE EXECUTIVE. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole, on the above named report. Mr. 
 CHATFIELD in the chair. 
 
 Mr. PORTER said : As a member of the Exec- 
 utive committee 1 desire to submit a few observa- 
 dons on the subject under discussion. It may be 
 necessary to prevent misconstruction. Important 
 principles are involved in tne dvci-ion of the ques- 
 tion; aad the subject deceives still gt eater impor- 
 tance from theunusUdl character of ihe arguments 
 adduced. I propose to offer a few suggestions in 
 vindication of the course pursued by the commit- 
 iee, and in opposition to the amendment now un- 
 der consideration. The committee did not feel 
 tneaiselves authorized to originate any change in 
 the restrictions imposed by this section of the con- 
 stitution. It would have been a stretch of power 
 on the part of the committee when the general 
 subject of eligibility to office had been expressly 
 referred to another standing committee. It would 
 have been on their part a gratuitous assumption 
 as the public attention had not been directed to 
 :he subject no complaint had been made either 
 in the Convention or by the people and a recent 
 vote of the electors had clearly signified the extent 
 to which they thought proper to modify this pro- 
 vision, by abolishing the freehold qualification and 
 leaving the rest untouched. But as a member of 
 this Convention I mo*t cordially acquiesce in the 
 removal of the restriction of American nativity as 
 a test of eligibility. I have no fear ot danger 
 from throwing open to naturalized citizens the 
 doors either of our legislative halls or of the Ex- 
 ecutive mansion. We have an abundant guaran- 
 tee of their fidelity to our institutions, and their 
 patriotic regaid for the country of their adoption. 
 Sir, if you and I are Americans, it is ihe result of 
 the Ofcere accident of birth. It is no merit of 
 yours, that youi ancestors were exposed to the 
 wintry blast which swept over the Mayflower. It 
 is no merit of others that they are descended from 
 those who shared in the penis of Bunker Hill and 
 of Lexing : on. But there are those here who can 
 claim some merit. One side of this house we see 
 the honorable gentleman from Orange, (MR. 
 BROWN) a native of the land of Bruce and of 
 Burns. On the other side of tnis chamber 
 sits the honorable gentleman from Steuben, (MR. 
 KERNAN) a native of the land of the harp and 
 ihe shamrock. Born in far oh* cliaies, they have 
 left their paternal hearthstones, the homes of their 
 ancestors, the scenes of early association, the land 
 of their nativity. Attracted by the spirit of lib- 
 erty, they selected this fiom all ihe lands of the 
 eaith, as that in which they would choose to pass 
 the vigor of their manhood, and the evening of 
 their days; and now we s^e them both, in advao- 
 cing years, with the well eained confidence of 
 their respective constituent, coming up together 
 as the representatives of a free people to assist in 
 laying anew the foundations of the commonwealth . 
 I know these men to be patriots. I know how 
 well they merit the confidenca of their adopted 
 
249 
 
 ( ry. I would confide to either of them the 
 Executive power of the State. As one of the 
 members ot this Convention, I am in favor of re- 
 moving as far as possible every invidious distinc- 
 tion between the naturalized citizen and the citi- 
 zen by birth; and shall record my vote in favor 
 of removing the restriction to native citizens. As 
 a member "of the committee, I did not ft-el at lib- 
 erty to originate, but as a member of this house I 
 shall coidially support the proposition ; and if I 
 am not misinformed, the able chairman of our com- 
 mittee (Mr. MORRIS) concurs with me in opinion. 
 But deeming the other gratifications of vital im- 
 portance, I cannot vote to undo utterly the work 
 of our fathers. It seems somewhat novel that 
 among those members of this body, who would 
 discard the restriction of age, are gray haired 
 men, who have been the cotemporaries of the 
 Frst Consul of France, and seen in their own time 
 the desolating strides of military conquest; and 
 that it should devolve on the younger delegates 
 to warn their seniors of the influence upon the 
 youthful mind, of the seductions of power, and 
 the blandishments of ambition. Sir, did the gen- 
 tleman from Ontario consult the records of the 
 past, when he expressed the apprehension that 
 \ve had more to fear from the dotage of age than 
 from.the impetuosity of youth ? Such is not the 
 lesson which the historian has recorded. There 
 is wisdom in the fable, fear nothing from King 
 Log, fear much from King Stork. In a repre- 
 sentative democracy, let the young man and the 
 old man meet in council in the representative 
 hall. Infuse into your legislation the energy ot 
 youth, and the wisdom of age ; but clothe no 
 .young man with executive power. Let no young 
 man be enabled to throw open your prison doors, 
 to declare your counties at his pleasure in a state 
 of insurrection, to pour in upon the insurgents 
 the military power of the State, to exercise the 
 mighty prerogative of the Roman Tribune, in ar- 
 resting the mandate of the popular will and for- 
 bidding the laws which the people have ordain- 
 ed. It is the right of every citizen to have a 
 voice in the selection of his rulers. It is not the 
 right of every citizen to be selected as a ruler. 
 The enjoyment of freedom is a natural right. The 
 enjoyment of office is a derivative right. It can 
 only* be conferred by the voice of the people, anc 
 under such restrictions as they choose to impose 
 The gentleman from Oneida (Mr. KIRKLAND) in 
 his argument yesterday, contended that the effec 
 of this restrict on would be to exclude from eligi 
 bility to the office of Governor 170,000 electors 
 who are between the ages of twenty-one and thirty 
 years. But I submit to the gentleman that th< 
 argument is fallacious. The people do not ex 
 elude us from the enjoyment of an office which i 
 our right, but merely decline for a period to con 
 fer upon us a privilege which they may eithe 
 grant or withhold. There is no exclusion, for the 
 right is not ours, until it is vested in us by the 
 people. Arid is any practical injury sustained 
 Is there any reason to apprehend that in th 
 residue of the electoral body, candidates will b 
 wanting who are competent for the office ? Yoi 
 need apprehend from us no complaint of exclu 
 sion, or of abridgment of our rights. The you 
 men have cordially acquiesced in the propriet 
 of a restriction, imposed for the common benefi 
 
 16 
 
 f all. Claiming to be one of the representatives 
 f the young men of this State, let me in their 
 ehalf remind you that we have at no time de- 
 manded this change, and that we have a deeper 
 take than our seniors in the result of these delib- 
 rations. We hope to live under the protection 
 if this constitution, when others shall have passed 
 rom this chamber to the grave. Let us consider 
 veil before we remove these ancient barriers. 
 7hey were reared in our own State by those who 
 vad read and reflected on the history of the past. 
 They were erected in our National Constitution 
 iy Washington and Hamilton both venerated 
 lames the one then in the vale of declining 
 fears ; the other in the full vigor of youthful en- 
 ergy and ambition, and himself within the limits 
 f the restriction he imposed. They were ap- 
 iroved by Jefferson and by Madison, the ancient 
 athers of democracy. The purpose of the re- 
 triction as to residence, in the existing Consti- 
 ution, has been entirely misconceived. Even 
 he eminent gentleman from New-York (Mr. 0'- 
 }ONOR) has discussed it as if it were directed at 
 naturalized citizens, and characterized it as a 
 jroscriptive and illiberal provision. But it will 
 )e remembered that under the present Constitu- 
 tion, the native citizen is alone qualified. No 
 naturalized citizen is now eligible to the office of 
 Governor, whatever the period of his residence. 
 The sole purpose of the provision was the exclu- 
 sion, for a limited period, of citizens of other 
 States. The restriction of nativity having now 
 seen removed, we wish a qualification which will 
 place on an equal footing the naturalized citizen 
 and the citizen by birth. I shall accordingly, at 
 a proper time, propose, as a substitute for the 
 amendment under consideration, a provision that 
 every elector shall be eligible to the offices of 
 overnor and Lieutenant-Governor, who shall 
 have attained the age of thirty years, and shall 
 have been for five years a citizen of the State of 
 New-York. I put the section in the affirmative 
 and not the negative form, because the provision 
 is properly not a restriction by the people, but a 
 grant from the people. The Lieutenant-Gover- 
 nor is embraced because the same principle is ap- 
 plicable to both, and by most of the States the 
 provision is extended to both. I make no dis- 
 tinction between the native of Massachusetts and 
 the native of Ireland : between the child of France 
 and the child of Virginia. But we require some 
 security that the man who within twenty-five 
 years is to wield the executive power of five mil- 
 lions of freemen whatever may be the land of his 
 lineage or of his nativity shall be familiar with 
 our vast commercial interests, with our local in- 
 stitutions ; that he shall be known to the electors 
 who are to confide to his charge the executive 
 power of the commonwealth The propriety of 
 the provision is too apparent for argument ; and 
 the only question for discussion is as to the power 
 of the people to impose the restriction. The de- 
 nial of this power overrides all qualifications. 
 Where did this denial originate ? Was it with 
 the people ? No. Who has heard the bugle note 
 of alarm ? Have the young men risen up, and 
 demanded that they should rule over you ? Have 
 old men complained that they could not select 
 boys to govern them ? Have the electors mur- 
 mured that they were not permitted to select 
 
250 
 
 their chief magistrate from among the citizens of 
 Pennsylvania or the citizens of Rhode Island ? 
 Sir, it is a new doctrine. It is a doctrine which 
 originated not w T ith the people, but with those 
 who expected to be candidates for the people's 
 votes. When was it before heard in the coun- 
 cils of this Republic, that the People had not 
 the right to restrict themselves ? for this is the 
 bold front which the argument has assumed. 
 We are here as the people. Our action is only 
 provisional, and until ratified by them, is nuga- 
 tory and void. As their representatives we have 
 convened to enter into a compact for our mutual 
 government. We vest the power in a single plu- 
 rality, against the voice of a majority, to select a 
 Chief Magistrate, who is to preside over the 
 whole. While we allow a plurality to prevail 
 over the majority, we require constitutional gua- 
 rantees that the right shall not be abused. We 
 are now regulating by compact, the relative rights 
 of a plurality in power, and a majority out of 
 power. Do gentlemen mean to insist that the 
 sovereign people in Convention assembled, have 
 not the right to restrict the power of a plurality 
 of the electors. Sir, that plurality has no power 
 itself, except by grant from the people ; and shall 
 the people who grant, not be permitted to re- 
 strict ? The most masterly argument made against 
 restriction was that made by the gentleman from 
 New York on the other side of the house (Mr. 
 O'CONOR) and I submit to that gentleman that 
 even in his argument there was a fatal fallacy. 
 The gentleman says it is pur right to determine 
 who the people are, by fixing the qualifications of 
 electors. That having determined who the peo- 
 ple are, we cannot restrict their power to elect. 
 Sir, the electors are not the people. They are 
 only a part of the great whole. The people com- 
 prise all. You have a Bill of Rights to protect 
 them in the enjoyment of life property and liber- 
 ty. Does this extend only to qualified electors ? 
 No, but to every man, woman and child within the 
 dominion of your laws. These constitute the 
 people, and we are their representatives. The 
 gentlemen from Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) and from 
 Albany (Mr. HARRIS) deny our right to restrict 
 any but delegated power. Why, sir, the power 
 of the electoral body itself is a delegated power- 
 not in form but in effect by the necessity of the 
 social compact. We were elected only by quali- 
 fied voters. But we are the representatives of all. 
 Those electors themselves were but the represen- 
 tatives of the people. Four hundred and fifty 
 thousand electors act for two millions and a half 
 of citizens. Nay more, two hundred thousand 
 electors may constitute a plurality. Shall those 
 two hundred thousand, a minority even of the 
 electoral body, without restriction or barrier, se- 
 lect whomsoever they please, to rule over two 
 and a half millions of freemen ? Every man that 
 voted for you and me, represented in his turn five 
 unqualified citizens. W e have a female popula- 
 tion of one million two hundred and ninety-three 
 thousand, three times the number of your whole 
 electoral body. They have as deep an interest in 
 this government as you nay, a deeper interest. 
 If your laws prove dangerous to liberty, you can 
 unmake the work of your own hands. You are 
 clothed with the power of the ballot box. You 
 have the strong arm to resist unto blood. They 
 
 are voiceless, powerless, defenceless. Are not 
 we their representatives here ? There are more 
 citizens under than over the age of twenty-one 
 years. They have more interest than we, in the 
 Constitution we are to frame. They are to survive 
 us, and the electors who sent us here. If we sow 
 the wind they are to reap the whirlwind. Nay 
 more, we are constitutionally legislating for ad- 
 vancing millions. We are assuming to act for gen- 
 erations to come. We represent, not the mere 
 party which nominated, not the mere voters who 
 elected us, but the whole people of New-York, of 
 each sex, and of every age and condition aye, 
 and the succeeding millions, whose constitutional 
 rights we are now asserting, around whom we are 
 erecting in advance, constitutional barriers and 
 entrenchments for the security of their liberties. 
 Was Magna Charta extorted at Runnymede, by 
 the iron handed barons of Normandy for them- 
 selves alone ? No, but for every freeman and serf 
 within the limits of England for every child of 
 English lineage who has since been born yes, 
 and for every colony which has been planted in 
 the wilderness by their descendants, and which 
 has burst in its growth the bonds of colonial vas- 
 salage. Even in the Declaration of our own In- 
 dependence, are contained those doctrines of hu- 
 man rights, which were first conceded by power 
 to the spirit of liberty in the Magna Charta of 
 England. When, therefore, we convene as the 
 Representatives of a free people, to discuss ele- 
 mentary principles of constitutional law, let us 
 discard the spirit of the demagogue, and invoke 
 that other spirit of expansive patriotism of man- 
 ly independence under a just sense of responsi- 
 bility of devotion to the great and permanent 
 interests of the people. It devolves upon us to 
 perpetuate the privileges of our citizens, and to 
 guard our institutions from danger in the distance 
 whether menaced by legislative corruption, by 
 popular excitement, by partizan frenzy, or by the 
 encroachments of power. I trust this question 
 will be met as one of principle ; that gentlemen 
 will prove by their votes, that love of the people 
 which they profess in their speeches. Rely upon 
 it, the electors will prefer the substance to the 
 shadow. The time of this Convention, for nearly 
 half the period of its session, has been occupied 
 by professions of patriotism, of love for economy, 
 of devotion to the people. I. do not complain of 
 these professions. I believe every word of them,, 
 We are bound to suppose that the repeated as- 
 saults which have been directed at this report, 
 have originated only in the most ardent patrio- 
 tism. By some we have been denounced for ev- 
 ery article of the old Constitution upon which we 
 did not feel authorised to lay violent hands. Pro- 
 minent members of this house have charged us 
 with alarming innovation in reporting sections 
 which have been a part of our Constitutional law, 
 for nearly a quarter of a century. Some gentle- 
 men were utterly bewildered. They were sure 
 the report was wrong, but knew neither what 
 ;hey approved, nor what they disapproved, until 
 >y italicising the old provisions, we enabled them 
 to discriminate between the present Constitution 
 and the amendments proposed. They were then 
 relieved from their patriotic embarrassment, and 
 is others had denounced every old provision re- 
 ained, they with equally fervent zeal denounced 
 
251 
 
 every new provision inserted. Many gentlemen 
 have discussed these questions with fairness 
 and liberality, and none more so than the emi- 
 nent gentlemen from New- York, from Or- 
 ange, Ontario, Rensselaer, and Albany, with 
 whom I am compelled to differ in whole or in 
 part as to the merits of this particular section. 
 If some gentlemen have exhibited in the course 
 of these discussions a less ingenious spirit, I at- 
 tribute it only to the exuberance of patriotic feel- 
 ing. A high sense of duty, with perhaps a slight 
 dash of this pure love of the people, led my 
 friend from Oneida into his original onslaught on 
 committee No. 5. It was like the memorable 
 war waged against the windmill by the Knight 
 of La Mancha. The result was disastrous. The 
 windmill stood firm ; but as for the assailant, my 
 friend from Orleans has written his epitaph : 
 The Knight of Oneida Requiescat in pace. 
 But I must not do that gentleman injustice. 
 There is no member of this House for whom I 
 entertain a higher respect. He raised a ques- 
 tion, involving an important principle. He dis- 
 cussed it with ability, and though this body dif- 
 fered from him in opinion, I respect him for his 
 manly independence. And upon the important 
 issue presented in this discussion, the gentleman 
 from 'Oneida has made one of the ablest argu- 
 ments in favor of the doctrine of popular restric- 
 tions. Then came my honorable friend from 
 Chautauque, in the humbler character of Sancho 
 Panza, the ready Squire of the Knight of Oneida. 
 He was gallantly mounted on his favorite dapple, 
 ready to wage fierce battle on committee No. 5, 
 on the side, of course, of the suffering people. 
 It was strongly suspected of his gallant proto- 
 type of old, that his love was stronger for the 
 cheese and the curds than for the goatherds and 
 shepherds on the hillsides of Arragon. Not so 
 with myhonorable friend from Chautauque. We all 
 know that he loves the people ; at least it is fairly 
 presumed that in common with every gentleman 
 he loves one half of them, that dear portion of the 
 dear people who are not qualified electors of 
 whom my bachelor friend from Schoharie assures 
 me, we may see from day to day many beautiful 
 representatives in the ladies' gallery ; and if the 
 gentleman from Chautauque refused them a door- 
 keeper to protect them from the intrusion of in- 
 dependent voters, it was not because he loved the 
 ladies less, but only because he loved the voters 
 more. Sir, I have no professions to make of love 
 for the people. It is sufficient for me to say that I 
 am one of the people, and perhaps in that behalf, 
 entitled to a share of the regard which gentlemen 
 profess for the people their interest is my inter- 
 est. The gentlemen loves the people if he does 
 let him love me. Their prosperity is my prosperi- 
 ty. I trust I shall never have occasion to proclaim 
 from the housetop my devotion to their interests. 
 I have no purposes to serve which require profes- 
 sions. They will judge me as they judge all, by 
 deeds, not words. Knowing something of my own 
 defects of character, I know something of the de- 
 fects in the popular character ; knowing the re- 
 ceipts of individual self-restraint, I know the re- 
 ceipts of popular self-restraint. I believe in the 
 doctrine of voluntary restriction, the very funda- 
 mental doctrine of self government. A distin- 
 guished gentleman from St. Lawrence (Mr. PER- 
 
 KINS) insisted in his argument of yesterday, that 
 these restrictions were utterly useless, for the 
 reason that no party would ever be guilty of the 
 folly of selecting a candidate under thirty, or who 
 had resided less than five years in the State. Yet 
 the gentleman insists that the restrictions may 
 work harm. How work harm, unless the con- 
 tingency arise ? And if the contingency arise, 
 then the restriction is needful, and the argument 
 falls. Another gentleman fromSt.Lawrence (Mr. 
 RUSSELL) denounces with great force and ability 
 the mode in which nominations are made, and says 
 the power is not with the people, but with polit- 
 ical parties, whr> seek to obtain the most availa- 
 ble candidates. I admit it, and for that very rea- 
 son the people in Convention assembled should 
 restrain the power of parties, and guard against 
 those admitted abuses by which our rights are en- 
 dangered. It is supposed that the political millen- 
 nium has arrived th*t parties are no longer to 
 retain their partisan character that the lion and 
 the lamb are to lie down together in peace ? His 
 colleague apprehends that the principle of re- 
 striction as to age may be next imposed upon our 
 judges; and that no man can be elected chief jus- 
 tice until he has reached his thirtieth year. Is 
 it then proposed to elect boys to our Supreme 
 bench i And is it expected that the People will 
 ratify our action? Shall the property and liberty 
 of two millions of men be confided to the charge 
 of heated youthful partisans? The gentleman 
 apprehends that we have more reason to fear the 
 incautious selection of a Lieut. Governor than a 
 Governor under thirty years of age. The sug- 
 gestion is of great force, and he had adopted it 
 in his proposed amendment. But was not this 
 an argument for extending the restriction to both, 
 instead of removing it from either ? His eloquent 
 friend from Rensselaer (Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN) 
 contended that the people are able to judge and 
 act for themselves. That was precisely what the 
 people now proposed to do. In the exercise of 
 their judgment they are proceeding to secure their 
 righis against infringement, by limiting, or rath- 
 er by retaining the old limitations upon the 
 power of political parties and or nominating 
 conventions The gentleman from Albany 
 (Mr HARRIS) in an argument distinguished by 
 his usual torce and ability, conceded the propri- 
 ety of the qualification considered them enti- 
 tled to full weight in a nominating convention 
 and thinks it would be the highest evidence of 
 the folly of a party to elect a candidate destitute 
 of either of these qualifications. Then what is 
 the objection to the provision? Why exclude it 
 from the palladium of our rights? Why throw 
 down one of ;he admitted safeguards of the Con- 
 stitution? The gentleman from Ontario (Mr. 
 WORDEN) insisted that we had not the powr 
 to impose restrictions on the people in their se- 
 lection of a candidate for Governor. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN disclaimed having, taken this 
 position, and insisted that he had not used this 
 language in his argument. 
 
 Mr. PORTER proceeded. The gentleman 
 disclaims this position. But will he disclaim the 
 argument which of necessity must lead to that 
 position ? After his explanation, I readily con- 
 cede that I have mistaken his language. But 
 have I mistaken the effect of his language ? Will 
 
252 
 
 the gentlmeau now concede that the people have 
 the power to impose these restrictions? If not, 
 I must follow his argument. He contended that 
 restrictions could only be applied to delegated 
 power. That we must repose the entire sove- 
 reignty in the hands of the people that the doc- 
 trine of balances and guards only applied to dele- 
 gated power. What is this, but a denial of the 
 right ot the people to impose restrictions upon 
 their own power. Sir, we stand in the place 
 of the people. For the purposes of this Conven- 
 tion, we are the people. Cannot two men make 
 a compact. 
 
 Mr. VVORDEN They can, certainly. 
 
 Mr. PORTER Then cannot two millions of 
 men ? 
 
 Mr. WORDEN They can. 
 
 Mr. PORTER That is conceding all I ask. 
 We are here to make that compact. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN It is absurd to suppose that 
 two millions of men will make an absurd compact, 
 and therefore they are to be trusted to select just 
 such a candidate for their suffrages as they please. 
 
 Mr. PORTER Absurd as it is, two millions of 
 men have made precisely such a compact, and it 
 has stood in your constitution for twenty-five 
 years. Whether the compact is altogether absurd, 
 is a question between the gentleman and the con- 
 vention of '21 between the gentleman and the 
 people of the State of New York. But if the con- 
 tract was absurd, it was their right to make it. 
 It is their right to renew it. The gentleman from 
 Ontario pronounces it absurd. The people ot 
 New York have not discovered its absurdity. We 
 are here to enter into a compact* to examine the 
 ancient landmarks, and if needful to erect new 
 monuments to define the boundaries oi executive, 
 of legislative, aye, and of electoral power. Such 
 a compact is our bill of rights. If we go behind 
 the social compact and the doctrine of restric- 
 tions, it is my natural right to hunt in every for- 
 est, to dig in every valley, to reap on every hill- 
 side. But by that compact, we agree to respect 
 the vested rights of property, and to recognize the 
 exclusive dominion of the landholder. The peo- 
 ple have the power to elect a King to rule over 
 them, and make his eldest son successor to the 
 throne. If gentlemen deny that, they deny the 
 doctrine for which they contend, the unlimited 
 power of the people. But by this compact we 
 surrender that power, and declare for us and our 
 descendants, that we will have a Governor but no 
 King. He shall wear no crown. Two years shall 
 be the limit of his dynasty. He shall not be elect- 
 ed for life even by the voice of the people. The 
 gentleman from Ontario, and the genileman from 
 Seneca, (Mr. BASCOM) insist that the question is 
 involved, whether we will not entrust power to 
 the people. Not so, Mr. Chairman, but that 
 other question is involved, whether we. standing 
 in the place of the whole people, will leave unli- 
 mited power in the hands of the electoral body. 
 The question is involved whether a plurality of 
 200,000 shall exercise absolute dominion over two 
 millions of citizens. The genileman from Onta- 
 rio seems to censure the committee for not ex- 
 tending the restriction to the dotard of eighty 
 years. Sir, no such provision was reported, for 
 none such was needed. Did the gentleman ever 
 read of ambition upon crutches ? In what age and , 
 
 in what land was liberty ever subverted by a do- 
 tard of eighty years ? Can the gentleman answer? 
 In the course of the able argument of one of the 
 gentlemen from New York, (Mr. NICOLL) he in- 
 sisted on the right of the minority to demand that 
 the majority should not elect a boy to the 
 Chief Magistracy. The gentleman from On- 
 tario (Mr. C.) in reply contends that if the 
 majority have a right to impose upon the minority 
 an unwelcome Governor over thirty years of age, 
 they have the same right to impose upon the mi- 
 nority an unacceptable Governor under the age of 
 thirty years. Not so, Mr. Chairman. The gen- 
 tleman confuses an important distinction. The 
 minority have not a right to select the Governor 
 of their choice, but they have a right to demand 
 that no Governor shall be selected who will jeo- 
 pardize their security, and the security of the 
 commonwealth. The gentleman from Ontario 
 says that this principle of restriction upon the 
 power of the electors is not to be found in any 
 State Constitution of recent formation ; that the 
 doctrine has been lony since abandoned and ex- 
 ploded. Sir, when it was it abandoned ? By 
 whom was it exploded ? Abandoned and explo- 
 ded ! It stands firm in your State Constitution 
 in your National Constitution and there at least, 
 if not here, it will stand until the great principle 
 of representative democracy shall fall The doc. 
 trine is recognized in the constitution ot every 
 state within the limits of the Union. The extent 
 of restriction differs in different States. But in 
 every Siate the principle is maintained. Even in 
 little Rhode Island, with a population scarce lar- 
 ger than that ot the county of Albany, they ha- e 
 thought some restriction necessary and permit the 
 electors to select no man, without all the qualifi- 
 cations of an elector, and that under an electoral 
 law far more stringent and vigorous than that of 
 the State of New- York. The doctrine of popular 
 restriction abandoned and exploded ! Why sir, 
 the provisional constitution of Iowa, adopted but 
 twelve days before our session commenced, re- 
 quires the Governor to have attained the age of 
 thirty years, and to have been two years a resi- 
 dent of the state, and citizen of the United States. 
 The constitution of Florida adopted in 1838, 
 requires the candidate to be thirty years f age 
 five years a resident of the State ten years a 
 citizen of the United States. The Constitution 
 of Louisiana, adopted by the people within the 
 present year, requires ten years citizenship, five 
 years citizenship, and the age of thirty-five years. 
 The Constitution of New Jersey, adopted in 1844, 
 requires twenty years citizenship, seven years re- 
 sidence, and the age of thirty years. Similar 
 provisions are contained in the Constitution 
 adopted within the last year by the people of 
 Texas ; aye, even of Texas, the land of the largest 
 and of the youngest liberty, if I may borrow an 
 expression of my eloquent friend from Columbia, 
 (Mr. JORDAN) the land of the lone star no 
 longer lone, for though it rose in blood, it has as- 
 cended to its place in the zenith, and joined the 
 glorious constellation of the old thirteen. Final- 
 ly, the Constitution of democratic Missouri, re- 
 q'uires the Governor to have attaind the age of 
 thirty years, to have been five years a resident of 
 the State, and ten years a citizen of the United 
 States ; and carrying the doctrine still further. 
 
253 
 
 prohibits his election for two successive terms, 
 even by the people's voice. Who is it that thus 
 fetters the sovereign people of Missouri ? Why, 
 sir, the sovereign people of Missouri, in Conven- 
 tion assembled, at the city of Jefferson, in the 
 year 1845. Once more I ask when was the doc- 
 trine of self-imposed restriction abandoned and 
 exploded, for adhering to which our committee 
 have been so often denounced ? It is the doc- 
 trine of the Union the doctrine of the States ; 
 and if expunged by us, will be restored by our 
 descendants. But the gentleman from Ontario, 
 after his able argument against the power of re- 
 striction, declares himself in favor of the five 
 years residence. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : No, sir. 
 Mr, PORTER: Then, sir, I misapprehended 
 the gentleman, and will pass on to other matters. 
 Mr. WORDEN would repeat what he did say, 
 which was that he would have been content him- 
 self in regard to the second section, if the com- 
 mittee that brought it forward had simply strick- 
 en out the word native and the age which was 
 prescribed. 
 
 Mr. PORTER : That is substantially as I un- 
 derstood it, and all that is material to my argu- 
 ment. The section imposes three restrictions. 
 The third of these relates to residence. Two of 
 these being stricken out, and the third restriction 
 retained, the gentleman would be content with 
 the section. Yet he holds each of the restrictions 
 to be an infringement upon the people's sovereign- 
 ty. If he leaves one restriction he concedes the 
 power to restrain. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : The gentleman does not give 
 my language. He does not comprehend me. The 
 position is absurdity. 
 
 Mr. PORTER : If I do not give the language, 
 I give its substance. If I do not comprehend 
 him, the gentleman will remember that I am one 
 of the people, and I fear he will find the rest ol 
 the people in precisely the same condition. If 
 the position is absurd, its absurdities can be 
 shown. Will the gentleman, if he can, oblige 
 me by showing it? I will tell the gentleman oJ 
 one absurdity, to use his favorite phrase, of which 
 I shall not be guilty. If I believe that a proposi- 
 tion is submitted to this Convention which is 
 plainly subversive of popular sovereignty I wil] 
 neither be content with the provision, nor per- 
 mit it to pass without objection. If the gentle- 
 man adheres to his doctrine as to the broad prin- 
 ciple of restriction, this is no question of expedi- 
 ency, on which our action is unimportant, on 
 which we may act or decline to act, speak or be 
 silent. Every sentinel who is placed by the peo- 
 ple upon the watch-tower, is bound to give the 
 alarm, when popular rights are invaded. Th< 
 gentleman will pardon me, if I do not entirely 
 comprehend either his argument or explanation 
 But I leave the gentleman from Ontario and in 
 conclusion have a suggestion to offer in reply to 
 other gentlemen. It is said that the majority are 
 always in the right, and that when they tramme" 
 themselves, they trammel the truth. If gentle 
 men are right in this, they are wrong in the ar 
 gument ; for the section we have reported ha 
 been already subjected to the test. It was incor 
 porated by the Convention in the Constitution o 
 ; 21. At the close of the deliberations of that dis 
 
 inguished body, the question was taken shall 
 his Constitution pass ? The ayes were 99. The 
 iocs were 9. It was submitted to the people. 
 The ayes were 75,000, the noes were 41,000. 
 The majority has approved it, and according to 
 he doctrine of gentlemen, their fiat is irrevoca- 
 le. What do gentleman mean by the majority : 
 V majority of the electors of the county of Sara- 
 oga approve the tariff of '42. Then the tariff of 
 42 is right. A majority of the electors of the 
 State of New York disapprove the tariff of '42. 
 Then the tariff is wrong. A majority of the elec- 
 ors of the United States approve the tariff of '42, 
 3 rsto, change, and the tariff is right again. The 
 heory is utterly untenable. I am a full believer 
 n the doctrine of the government of a majority. 
 t is because it is the best practicable mode which 
 iiynan wisdom has devised for the government of 
 mankind. It is not because the judgment of the 
 majority is immaculate. The very fundamental 
 principle of representative democracy is, that the 
 decision of the majority of to day, if found to be 
 erroneous, will be reversed by the decision of the 
 majority of to-morrow. If the majority is always 
 n the right, then Silas Wright should not be 
 r our Governor to-day, for a majority of the elec- 
 ors voted against him as a candidate. But I be- 
 ieve in the wisdom of that time honored provis- 
 ori, by which the vote of a plurality of the elec- 
 tors makes that distinguished citizen chief mag- 
 istrate of this State. One word of admonition to 
 those who have been so kindly warning gentle- 
 men on this side of the house, of the risk of popu- 
 .ar displeasure. Let the man who mounts the 
 dapple to run the race of popularity, be he who 
 le may, beware lest he receive a fall. Let him 
 who would remove the accustomed checks of 
 popular government beware lest he hear the doom 
 af popular condemnation. That man will find 
 Little favor in the eyes of the electors of New 
 York, who is willing in their name or otherwise 
 to destroy one barrier against partisan violence 
 to strike down one safeguard of popular rights. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said there were many subjects 
 which had been embraced within the range of this 
 debate on which he did not propose to say a word. 
 Those subjects had been fully and amply discussed, 
 and therefore he proposed to direct his attention 
 to a single proposition which he was unwilling to 
 allow to go to the world without giving it a more 
 express contradiction than it had hitheito receiv- 
 ed. He alluded to the position of the honorable 
 gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS,) as to self- 
 expatriation, and the rule of perpetual allegiance. 
 He regarded that as a distinctive principle, calcu- 
 lated to produce the worst possible consequences. 
 If the position had been avowed at a political meet- 
 ing, or if it had fallen from a gentleman less dis- 
 tinguished than the delegate from Essex, or if it 
 had been uttered in a body of lessiniportance than 
 this Convention, and it he were not sure that the 
 opinion would go down to posterity in the publish- 
 ed debates of this body, he might have hesitated 
 to rise to say any thing on the subject ; but he was 
 aware of the great influence any opinion of the 
 gentleman trom Essex had, both here and else- 
 where; he desired therefore to place on record, 
 side by side, with that gentleman's opinion, his 
 own unqualified dissent. He would proceed to 
 quote from the remarks made by the gentleman 
 
254 
 
 from Essex on the 1st July and the gentleman 
 would do him the favor to believe that he did -it 
 in no unkind spirit. Mr. B. was not the man to 
 take advantage of any incautious expression, and 
 make it the subject of remark ; but he regarded 
 this as the sentiment of the gentleman's enlight- 
 ened intellect, and he should proceed to quote 
 what he had said on the occasion referred to : 
 On the first July, the gentleman said in debate 
 
 * It was an old settled rule of international law, 
 
 * Blacks-tone says it is the law of the world, and 
 1 Peters tells us it is the law of America (3, 
 ' Peters's Reports) that a person coming from 
 
 * a foreign country, an alien born though natural- 
 ' ized here, was not discharged from the allegi- 
 ' ance to the country whence he came. Expatri- 
 
 * ation was not recognized by the international law 
 ' of the world." On the 7th July, the gentleman 
 
 again spoke on this subject : " He desired permis- 
 ' sion to explain,to prevent misunderstanding. He 
 
 * intended to affirm, that the subject of perpetual 
 
 * allegiance was the doctrine of the old world, so 
 ' far as we know though it was growing 
 ' weaker, and is becoming obsolete in practice, it 
 ' would seem, in every nation. He found in the 
 
 * Code Napoleon it was laid down in very strong 
 ' terms, and we know it has always been the doc- 
 ' trine of England and of the ancient world, the 
 
 * Romans and the Greeks." The rule if it real- 
 ly existed did not affect the foreign born citizen 
 alone. It also embraced within its influence and 
 application the native citizen who might emigrate 
 to Europe, to India, to China, to North America, 
 to the islands and shores of the Pacific Ocean, or 
 wherever else his fortune might lead him. Now 
 if it be the law of this country he admitted it to 
 be the law of England and to prevail there if it 
 is a principle of American jurisprudence, that a 
 person coming from abroad, or a citizen going 
 abroad, is never to be discharged from this claim 
 of perpetual allegiance if this rule is still up- 
 held in this enlightened age, in the middle of the 
 19th century, with the tide of foreign emigration, 
 enlarging the boundaries of civilization, over the 
 wide extent of this great continent with a po- 
 pulation carrying their enterprize, their energy, 
 their language, their laws, their arts and arms 
 and the flag of their country, to the utmost ex- 
 tremities of the habitable earth, it was time it 
 should be distinctly understood, that the people 
 themselves the fountain of all just power 
 might apply the appropriate remedy. But 
 with all proper respect for the superior learn- 
 ing of the gentleman from Essex, Mr. B. submit- 
 ted that the gentleman was mistaken. That it 
 was the principle of international law, or the 
 Roman law, or of American law, he would now 
 take occasion distinctly and deliberately to deny, 
 and to put his denial on record that he might ap- 
 peal to it hereafter. The case, (said Mr. B.) 
 to which the Hon. gentleman from Essex had re- 
 ferred as authority for the rule that the law of 
 perpetual allegiance prevails in this country, is 
 that of Shanks and others vs. Dupont and others, 
 3 Peter's Rep. 242. I have looked into the re- 
 port of that case, and it fails wholly to support 
 the principle asserted. The plaintiffs were the 
 children of Ann Scott, who intermarried with a 
 British officer during the occupation of the city 
 of Charleston by the enemy. She was a native 
 
 of that city, and removed with her husband upon 
 its evacuation in 1762, to England, where the 
 plaintiffs were born, and where she died. The 
 suit was brought to recover lands upon James' 
 Island, of which her father died seized in 1752. 
 Judge Story delivered the opinion of the court 
 and as he read it, nothing more i.s settled than that 
 the plaintiff's title was protected by the 7th arti- 
 cle of the treaty of 1763. It is worthy of remark 
 that the learned judge speaks of a double allegi- 
 ance, wh : ch might be due from the ancestoi of 
 the plaintiffs that to South Can-lin?, the place 
 of her birth and that to Great Britain, under 
 whose government she waa horn. He solves the 
 difficulty by declaring that those who adhered to 
 Great Britain were to be considered British sub- 
 jects, and those who adhered to America were to 
 be deemed American citizens. His friend from 
 Essex, for whose powers of research and varied 
 learning he entertained profound respect,may have 
 been misled by the opinion of Judge Johnston, 
 who dissented. He does say that the doctrine of 
 perpetual allegiance was the rule of the common 
 law, and that the common law had been adopted 
 into the code of South Carolina. He does howev- 
 ever admit that the acts of South Carolina, when 
 asserting her independence, must be looked into, 
 to determine whether she may not then have mo- 
 dified the rigor of the common law, and substi- 
 tuted principles of greater liberality. This learn- 
 ed judge arrives at the conclusion that the rigcr 
 of the common law upon the question of allegi- 
 ance in South Carolina, has suffered no abatement. 
 Such however was not, and never had been, the 
 judgment of the high and dignified tribunal of 
 which he was a member, and such never can be 
 
 1 he judgment of any enlightened American court 
 animated by a just regard for the great principles 
 of public liberty which lie at the foundation of 
 our political institutions. Such was the case in 
 Peters' Reports. And as to the docti ine of the Ro. 
 mans, (Mr B.) had not had time to examine the 
 subject as fully as it deserved ; but he had referred 
 to an able writer whose opinion was entitled to 
 great weight (Chancellor Kent), and he found 
 
 2 Kent, 42 this language : " Cicero regarded it 
 as one of the firmest foundations of Roman liber- 
 ty, that the Roman citizen had the privilege to 
 stay or renounce his residence at pleasure." This 
 eloquent and profound jurist used this term resi- 
 dence, in no narrow or limited sense. He design- 
 ed to assert, and does assert the right of his 
 countrymen, to expatriate themselves, to re- 
 move from one country to another, and to re. 
 n unce if they choose that mc.'St valuable of 
 all political fights the right to the rank 
 and privileges of a Roman citizen. Its aa- 
 thority derives no small consequence from the 
 consideration, that it was uttered at a time when 
 Rome was in the plenitude of her power; when she 
 embraced within her limits many powerful na- 
 tions, and while her eagles were planted beyond 
 the confines of civilization. The rule of perpet- 
 ual allegiance was not therefore the doctrine of 
 the Rpmans in the days of Cicero, and in regard 
 to the international law of the present day, his 
 friend from Essex would again find himself mis- 
 taken. He would quote again from the same wri- 
 ter 2 Kent's Commentaries, 43 : " The writers 
 
 on public law have spoken rather loosely, but 
 
255 
 
 " generally in favor of the right of a subject to 
 " emigrate and abandon his native country, unless 
 " there be some positive law, or he is at the time 
 ** in possession of * public trust, or unless his 
 *' country be in distress, or in war, and stands in 
 " need of his assistance. The principle which 
 " has been declared in some of our state consti- 
 " tutions, that the citizens have a natural and in- 
 * herent right to emigrate, goes far towards a re- 
 " nunciation of the doctrine of the common law, 
 *' as being repugnant to the natural liberty of jnan- 
 ' kind, provided we are to consider expatriation 
 ' and emigration as words intended in those ca- 
 ' ses to be of synonymous import." The same 
 vriter says : " This question has been frequently 
 ' discussed in the courts of the United States, but 
 'it remains to be definitely settled by judicial 
 'decision." It is worthy of observation that 
 in all the reported cases some five or six in 
 number that have engaged the attention of 
 the federal courts, during the last forty years, 
 the judges have carefully abstained from ex- 
 pressing any opinion upon the question, whe- 
 ther the rule of perpetual allegiance prevail- 
 ed iti this country. This hesitation and un- 
 willingness to meet and determine the question, 
 arose di ubtless out of the consideration that such 
 was the rule of the English Common law which 
 had been adopted info the code of the American 
 States. And the judges had remained silent rath- 
 er than declare what it was not possible to con- 
 trovert that its existence was wholly incompati- 
 ble with the theory of popular government. As 
 a rule to determine the rights of property, and lo 
 regulnte the descent and inheritance of real estate, 
 it would cio'Jbtless be maintained ; but as a mere 
 question of political right, as a rule to determine 
 the mutual relations and the mutual obligations 
 between men, and the government under which 
 they were born, it must perish arid pass away a- 
 xnongst the false doctrines of past aes. The right 
 of expatriation, was not an absolute unqualified 
 right, to be exercised at all limes and under all 
 circumstances. It was restrained and limited by 
 circumstances the force of which all must admit". 
 No man could be permitted to abandon his coun- 
 try while ii was in distress, in a state uf war, or 
 when his services, or property, were absolutely 
 needed for its defence, and protection. The 
 American citizen who*e residence was upon the 
 Rio Grande, or any where else upon the Southern 
 border, could not at this moment be allowed to re- 
 nounce his country and unite with the Mexicans 
 He could not do so, without contributing to the 
 strength of the public enemy and thus to some 
 extent endangering the public safety. His 
 right to emigrate is therefore very properly 
 suspended until a more propitious season. 
 On this nearly every writer on international law 
 would agree. But, again, if this rule of perpetu- 
 al allegiance should be admitted, to what it would 
 lead? If a man, in whatever land he may have 
 been born, wherever providence may have cast his 
 lot, on whatever soil he may have drawn his first 
 breath, were to be forbidden, without the con- 
 sent of his government, to change his allegiance, 
 he would be subject to a despotism like that which 
 binds the serf of eastern Europe, to the soil on 
 which he lives which makes him part and par- 
 cel of the estate, and fails to recognize that he is 
 
 endowed with the attributes of humanity. It 
 would be a rule oppressive and infamous in its 
 nature, for it would circumscribe human effort, 
 set limits to human enterprise, and counteract the 
 divine command given to man, " to multiply and 
 replenish the earth, and to subdue it. It was the 
 doctrine, as the gentleman from Rensselaer, (Mr. 
 VAN SCHOONHOVEN) said yesterday, of divine 
 right and passive obedience, which was put down 
 by the English revolution of 1642. It was a law 
 at war with the law of progress, with human li- 
 berty and happiness, which never had the sanc- 
 tion of the popular will, and finds no response in 
 the popular mind. He would therefore allow no 
 occasion to pass without marking it with his 
 hatred and detestation. He would look for a mo- 
 ment into the origin of this law of allegiance. It 
 comes down to us with the feudal tenures of the 
 dark ages. It signified the tie or ligament which 
 bound the vassal to his superior, in return for the 
 lands which the superior had granted to the vas- 
 sal. Under the feudal system, lands the spoils 
 of conquered nations were held in subjection to 
 the chief or superior lord, upon the trust and con- 
 fidence that he would protect the vassal, who in 
 return should defend his superior. To fulfil this 
 obligation, the tenant or vassal took an oath of 
 fealty or allegiance. And when, in process of 
 time, it became a settled principle of English 
 tenure that all the lands were holden of the King, 
 the oath of allegiance was necessarily confined to 
 the King alone. The government in its origin 
 was purely military. The age was one of force, 
 of violence, and of bloodshed and the mass- 
 es of the people, whom we now regard as 
 the only source of just government, and their 
 happiness its sole object, were not recog- 
 nized and were in a manner unknown. Gov- 
 ernment had no reference whatever, to their im- 
 provement, their elevation, and the cultivation 
 and developement of their faculties as rational 
 and immortal beings. It was in short an iron 
 rule. A crushing military despotism. Such 
 was the origin of the doctrine of allegiance. 
 And as such it comes down to us among the rules 
 of the common law. What had been the action 
 of the people of England themselves upon this 
 rule of perpetual, indissoluble allegiance ? He 
 had shown how it became the doctrine of the 
 common law, how it was the tenure by which 
 estates in land, were held. Did the people of 
 England adhere to it ? Does their history, from 
 the Norman Conquest to the present day, exhib- 
 t a long line of unbroken attachment to it ? It 
 does not. On more occasions than one, did they 
 signify their impatience of its restraints and 
 their hostility to its existence. As early as the 
 reign of Elizabeth, the House of Commons be- 
 gan to collect its energies, for a struggle with the 
 Crown. And we behold the controversy, grow- 
 ing in magnitude every year, continually going 
 on between principle on the one side and pre- 
 rogative on the other, until it terminated in the 
 revolution of 1642, a revolution memorable for 
 the maintenance of the principles on which we 
 have always stood, the principles of human lib- 
 erty, human rights, and the promotion of human 
 happiness. These were the doctrines of Hamp- 
 den, of Vane, St. John, of Oliver Cromwell. At 
 that time the doctrine of perpetual allegi- 
 
256 
 
 ance was repudiated by the English peo- 
 ple. It was extinguished for a time in the 
 blood of Charles the 1st, who perished on 
 the scaffold in the city of London. In 1688 the 
 same principles were again successfully asserted. 
 The common law doctrine, in its political sense, 
 as applied to the resigning family, was again put 
 aside, and the masses again reiterated that it be- 
 longed to them, on great occasions, and in try- 
 ing emergencies, to say how they should be go- 
 verned, and by what forms, and under what in- 
 stitutions, their freedom and happiness should be 
 secured. They expelled the reigning family in 
 the face of this doctrine of perpetual allegiance, 
 and by means of a Convention Parliament a body 
 bearing no small resemblance to that which as- 
 sembled here they transferred their allegiance 
 to a new family, and placed the reins of govern- 
 ment into new hands. We have the authority of 
 Blackstone, one of their most elegant writers 
 and eminent jurists, for saying that the oath 
 of all allegiance subsequent to the revolution was 
 very different from the oath which was taken for 
 600 years before that time. Its nature was left 
 in a great measure undefined, it was uncertain in 
 its terms, and imperfect and almost senseless in 
 its language. It was during the progress of these 
 struggles that the States along our Atlantic bor- 
 der were settled. In Virginia, Massachusetts, 
 Connecticut and Rhode Island, the seeds of sound 
 government were early planted by those who had 
 served in the ranks of the long parliament, who 
 had seen Russell and Sidney perish upon the 
 scaffold, whose minds were deeply embued 
 with the political doctrines of that period. The 
 patriots whom he had mentioned, who were the 
 Washingtons, the Franklins, and the Hancocks 
 of their day and generation whose names were 
 memorable in the early struggles for civil liberty 
 were not the men to submit to the law of indis- 
 soluble allegiance. For a moment he desired 
 again to advert to the history of this country. 
 Take for instance the memorable day and year 
 the 4th of July, 1776. Then three millions of 
 people, scattered along the shores of the Atlantic 
 Ocean, composed the colonists of this country, and 
 were the subjects of the British crown. Now if 
 the rule of perpetual allegiance was the stern, 
 steadfast irrevocable law, these colonists could 
 not be relieved from its obligation by any act of 
 theirs without the concurrence of parliament. 
 Yet, although when the sun rose upon that me- 
 morable day, they were colonists and subjects 
 of the crown long before its light faded away in 
 the western horizon ; by their own act they 
 had become a free people. By the single 
 effort of their own indomitable will they had 
 severed the tie which bound them to the 
 mother country, and asserted their right to create 
 government for themselves, and to promote 
 and extend their own happiness. What they did 
 then may be done again by individuals and by 
 communities, whenever circumstances shall justi- 
 fy it. They then asserted the principle of hosti- 
 lity to the law of perpetual allegiance, and they 
 thereby afforded an example to all future ages. 
 They showed that they did not regard allegiance 
 as indissoluble ; for they asserted the right to se- 
 ver their allegiance at their own pleasure. And 
 how was it done ? Did they wait until they ob- 
 
 tained consent of the parent country ? By n . 
 means. They asserted their right to do it them- 
 selves, and they did it by their own unqualifie-i 
 sovereign act, depending on no other earthly 
 power or person. They did it in defiance of all 
 the power and influence of the British crown. 
 He knew quite well that there was a wide dis- 
 tinction between the courts of Great Britain and 
 the courts of America, as to the point of 
 time, when the tie of allegiance was real- 
 ly broken the British courts, dating the 
 separation from the treaty of peace, while our 
 own tribunals, date it from the signing of the 
 Declaration of Independence. And what had 
 been the manner in which Great Britian had 
 treated this question in later times ? The gen- 
 tleman from Dutchess (Mr. TALLMADGE) had 
 mentioned in the course of the debate, the 23 
 adopted citizens, taken prisoners during the war 
 of 1812, and held by the British Government, 
 upon a charge of treason. The circumstance was 
 fresh in his recollection. Some of these men 
 were from Newburgh, the place of his residence. 
 They were taken prisoners while serving in the 
 regular army at the battle of Queenston. The 
 threat to execute them upon the claim of per- 
 petual allegiance, was promptly met by measure? 
 of retaliation on the part of our government, and 
 Great Britain was compelled to abandon the 
 ground she had assumed, and treat these men as 
 prisoners of war. He would also refer to the 
 case of Mr. Laurens, the President of the Con- 
 tinental Congress. He was sent to negotiate a 
 loan with Holland, some time about the year 17SO. 
 He was captured by the enemy on the high seas, 
 and committed to the tower on a charge of trea- 
 son, upon the ground that he could not discharge 
 himself from the obligation of allegiance. His 
 confinement was long and rigorous, but they dared 
 not execute him, for they well knew ttiat the 
 doctrine of perpetual allegiance could not be 
 maintained, and that the civilized world would 
 behold the death of this distinguished patriot 
 with indignation and horror Mr. B. desired to 
 advert to another fact. The Constitution, the act 
 of all the States, confers upon Congress power 
 to establish uniform rules of naturalization. Con- 
 gress has exercised that power for more than 50 
 years. This provision of the Constitution and 
 these laws of naturalization, are not mere idle, 
 useless forms. They are designed to accom- 
 plish some substantial and useful purpose, and 
 to confer upon the citizen of foreign birth, a< 
 well as upon the Government itself, some 
 substantial and useful benefit. Naturalization, 
 is in the nature of if it is not in point of fact 
 a contract. The advantages, the obligations, 
 and the duties are mutual between the contract- 
 ing parties. The government acquires an ad- 
 ditional citizen, and the citizen obtains a new 
 and a permanent home. The obligation on the 
 part of the citizen, is obedience to the law and 
 to support and maintain the government to the 
 utmost of his ability and strength, while the 
 duty of the government is to protect and defend him 
 to the extent of its pcwer. The solemnity of thi> 
 compact, the duties and the obligations which it 
 imposes, are wholly incompatible with the doc- 
 trine of perpetual allegiance. They cannot all 
 exist at the same time. Nor does the doctrine 
 
257 
 
 derive the slightest countenance or support from 
 the course of our own government towards its 
 citizens emigrating to other countries. It is 
 well known that the State of Texas was mainly 
 settled by emigrants from the Western States. 
 Its independence was won by American rifles in 
 the hands of those who had been American cit- 
 izens. In their struggle with Mexico they had 
 no aid, or co-operation from this government, it 
 is true, but they had the sympathies and the best 
 wishes of a large portion of the American people. 
 So far from setting up a claim to the allegiance 
 of these men by virtue of their birth upon Amer- 
 ican soil, the general Government treated them as 
 entirely discharged from their original obligations 
 acknowledged the independence ot their adopted 
 country and dealt with them as the citizens of a 
 new and independent sovereignty. He there- 
 fore had long since adopted the opinion that 
 no such law as the law of perpetual allegiance 
 had a place in the code of this country. And 
 whenever the question of its existence shall be 
 fairly brought before the Supreme Court of the 
 United States, for its judgment hereafter, he en- 
 tertained no doubt the decision would be in har- 
 mony with our legislation for the last seventy 
 years, and the arguments it had been his duty to 
 submit. The question before the committee was 
 upon striking out the word native from the section 
 of the constitution which defines the qualifica- 
 tions of the Governor, and what he had said was 
 only incidental to that question. But he felt it 
 was due to a numerous and most useful portion 
 of the American people, whose devotion to the 
 interests and the honor of the country had always 
 been conspicuous, that the doctrine set up in the 
 progress of this debate, should not go forth un- 
 controverted among the published proceedings of 
 this Convention. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON should not have trespassed 
 again upon the time of the committee, but for re- 
 marks made by others in relation to what he had 
 heretofore said. Gentlemen would bear witness 
 that he had thus far, at least, acted on the prin- 
 ciple which he had prescribed to himself, not to 
 discuss any proposition that was not directly un- 
 der consideration. If he departed from that rule 
 now, it was because he had been driven to it by 
 others. It had been alleged that he had taken 
 the ground that the people had no right to impose 
 restrictions on themselves in any mannei 
 whatever. Now he said no such thing as 
 that, or that by a fair construction of his 
 language could have been imputed to him, but he 
 did say in regard to the restriction upon the choice 
 of the people for Governor, that he would im- 
 pose none ; but be said nothing about the 
 people restricting themselves. When a proposi- 
 tion came up, recommending restrictions in re- 
 gard to other officers, he would give the matter 
 due consideration, and vote as his judgment dic- 
 tated at the time but now he should say nothing 
 beyond what related to the qualifications for Go- 
 vernor the matter under C9nsideration. Com- 
 plaint had been made by some of the members o] 
 committee No. 5 that their report had been un- 
 fairly attacked by him among others. Now all 
 that had been said in relation to that report was 
 in reference to the word native. He (Mr. P.) 
 said then that it seemed to him that the commit- 
 
 ee could not fully have considered the subject or 
 hey would not have reported it with that word 
 n. But his friend from Orleans (Mr. PENNI- 
 MAN) told us that it had been fully considered by 
 the committee and that every member had agreed 
 to it precisely in the shape in which it was re- 
 ported. Now a wonderful change seemed to have 
 come over him at least, for the gentleman told us 
 on the floor yesterday that this word native was 
 odious, and that he was in favor of having this 
 odious provision stricken out. 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN meant to be understood as 
 saying that others regarded it as odious. But the 
 drift of his remarks was in favor of sustaining the 
 word native, and if the gentleman from Chautau- 
 que or any other gentleman would give him the 
 opportunity, he should vote to retain it. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE : I will give you the op- 
 portunity. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON -If I misunderstood you, so 
 did the reporters. I understood you to say that 
 the report was fully considered by the commitiee, 
 and that every member agreed to the whole of it. 
 
 Mr PENNIMAN had never said a word as to 
 the veto power, but there were those who knew 
 that he and one other member of the committee 
 did not agree to that, part of the report. In other 
 respects ail agreed to it. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN Is not the gentleman's name 
 appended to the report ? It is a little too late to 
 say now that he does not agree to it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that such was his un- 
 derstanding. He read the report of the gentle- 
 man's remarks in the Argus and he believed 
 those reports were considered good reports ; fair 
 reports. In the Argus of this morning, the gen- 
 tleman was repealed as having said, in speaking 
 of the native qualification, " Nor in this had he 
 any idea of reversing the vote to strike out that 
 odious qualification " Whether he intended to 
 say that it was odious in the eyes of the Conven- 
 tion or of the committee No, five, he (Mr. P.) 
 would not say. It was enough that he found the 
 word in a report signed by Mr. PENNIMAN and 
 others, and which was said to be unanimous. As 
 to the gentleman from Saratoga (Mr. PORTER) 
 another member of committee No. five, Mr. P. 
 was exceedingly gratified to hear him this morn- 
 ing, and all would agree in saying that that gen- 
 tleman had furnished a very conclusive illustra- 
 tion ot the position that a man under 30 was at 
 least qualified to make a most admirable speech 
 He had presented the best argument he (Mr. P.) 
 had heard in favor of restricting the people in re- 
 gard to qualifications for Governor. But he, too, 
 admitted in fact thai the committee had not very 
 thoroughly considered their report inasmuch as 
 he had himself proposed an amendment which 
 changed the whole character of the report. Why, 
 the gentleman from Orleans insisted that the re- 
 port required the Governor to be a resident of the 
 State. It required no such thing; no. not even 
 as much as did the amendment of the gentlemen 
 from St. Lawrence, on Monday ; for a resident of 
 South Carolina, if he had formerly resided here 
 five years, might under this section as reported, 
 be Governor. And yet this was one of the sec- 
 tions that had been so fully considered by commit- 
 tee number five, and unanimously concurred in ! 
 And one of the members of the committee (Mr 
 
258 
 
 PORTER,) had actually come forward now with 
 an amendment requiring a man to be a qualified 
 elector and a resident of five years' standing. He 
 supposed that the truth of the whole matter was 
 that the committee copied the provision in the 
 old Constitution, without much attention. But 
 where did the committee get the authority for 
 reporting a single word of that section it was 
 not referred to them at all, and they might just 
 as well have taken up the whole Constitution as 
 that. The subject of the qualifications for office 
 was referred to committee No. 4 instead of 5. 
 Mr. P. had but a very few remarks further to 
 make. He must say that in reference to the very 
 able speech of the gentleman from Saratoga, (Mr. 
 PORTER,) he was perfectly delighted with the 
 flights ot fancy andaguuddealof the argument that 
 he used. But he had supposed that it was reserved 
 to the gentleman (rum Monroe (Mr. STRONG) to 
 impugn the motives of members of this house, and 
 that he alone would have the whole glory of that. 
 But even the gentleman from Saratoga, in the 
 heat of debate, must impugn the motives of gen- 
 tlemen who took a different view of this subject 
 from him and insist that they did so because 
 they wanted to be candidates tor office. Mr. P 
 left that matter with the gentlemen from Saratoga 
 and Monroe, trusting that no other gentlemen 
 would be found impugning the motives of those 
 who disagreed with them in matters of this kind. 
 . There w as one other remark of the gentleman from 
 Saratoga requiring a word of reply. And thai 
 was this that when a gentleman travels out 
 his way to make an insinuation against his,Mr.P.'s 
 private character, as a man, as a citizen, as a hus 
 band and a father, he cast the imputation back 
 upon him with contempt. 
 
 Mr. PORTER wished to know to what remark 
 of his he referred as implying ihe slightest irnpu 
 tation on the gentleman's -private charactei ? He 
 certainly had designed no such imputation 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : The gentleman from Sarato 
 ga must certainly have spoken without knowing 
 what he said not only in reference to the gen 
 tlernan from Chautauque, but to myself for the 
 gentleman made but an imputation upon me tha 
 was nevei before thrown upon me by any respect 
 able gentleman here or elsewhere. 
 
 Mr. PORTER : I cb not hear the remarks of thi 
 gentleman from Ontario. [Mr. P. sat in the oppo 
 site side of the chamber.] 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : The gentleman will hear from 
 me in the course of this debate. 
 
 Mr. PORTER: I am ready to hear the gentle 
 man from Ontario now or hereafter. As to th 
 gentleman Irotn Chautauque, he entirely misun 
 ders'ood me. I spoke of his admiration for th 
 sex in a general way, in jest, as did the gentlema 
 from Onondaga (Mr. RHOADES) the other day. 
 supposed the admiration he spoke of was mutuz 
 nothing more. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON: I am willing to take th 
 explanation. But the manner of the remark, 
 misunderstood by me, was also mistaken by other; 
 And I have only to say that an insinuation of the 
 kii.d will never be made here or elsewhere, a 
 gainst me, by any man in or out of the hous 
 without calling down on that man the expressio 
 of such feelings as I entertain. I am happy th 
 the gentleman did not mean any more than he h 
 
 xplained. But he was extremely unfortunate in 
 s language, if he did not mean to convey a di- 
 et charge on me, entirely different from any- 
 ing implied in the remark of the gentleman trom 
 nondaga. I did suppose and had a right to sup- 
 >se the gentleman intended a direct attack on 
 e, and no man shall do that without hearing 
 om me. I am ha; py however, to hear that the 
 ri'lernan did not intend it 
 
 Mr. RHOADES: I di'd not allege that the gentle- 
 
 an from Chautauque admired the sex Lut only 
 
 limated that they admired him [Laughter] 
 
 Mr. PORTER. I state distinctly that it never 
 
 ntered my mind to make an imputation ora the 
 
 entlernan's private characier,directly or indirect- 
 
 ,or of any nature whatever. He entirely misuri- 
 
 erstood me, and 1 hope he is satisfied that no such 
 
 sign was entertained by me. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON was satisfied with the ex- 
 
 lanation. But he would say, that the reason why 
 
 e supposed that he was not mistaken was te- 
 
 ausc the gentleman previously reiterated the 
 
 harge of the gentleman from Monroe that his 
 
 ourse here was taken for the purpose of getting 
 
 ofes. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that as he should be gov- 
 rned by views differing from any that he heard 
 xpressed by others, he might be permitted to 
 ay a word in explanation of his position. He 
 hould not only vote against all amendments, but 
 gainst the whole section itself, in the position in 
 vhich it now stood. And this he said without 
 .ny intention of offending the committee, No. 5. 
 le said this in advance, because it had been inti- 
 mated by the rebuke which had been administer- 
 ed by one of its members, (Mr. PENXIMAKT) how 
 well that committee were capable of taking care 
 if themselves, and more particularly as he learned 
 hat the same gentleman had a rod in pickle for 
 him, for what he had already siid on a previous 
 occasion. He should vote against this section, 
 >ecause it was a business which did not belong 
 ;o committee No. 5, but justly to No. 4. Not on 
 ;he ground that it was imposing restrictions upon 
 he people and there had been doctrines pro- 
 mulgated here on that subject to which he could 
 not subscribe. The verv duty for which we were 
 sent here, was to impose these restrictions. The 
 very Constitution which we are called upon to 
 amend, shows that we have been living all the 
 while under these restrictions. The very preamble 
 of that instrument, reading as it does" We, the 
 people of the State of New- York, acknowledging 
 with gratitude the grace and benificence of God, in 
 permitting us to make choice of our form of gov- 
 ernment, do establish this Constitution" ac- 
 knowledges this. The very word Governor, or 
 the establishing of the office was a restriction- 
 there could be no governor else. The restricting 
 of the legislative power to the Senate and Assem- 
 bly, instead of to the people was a restriction. 
 So with the judiciary, and indeed there was hard- 
 ly a section in the Constitution in which there 
 was not some restriction imposed upon the peo- 
 ple He did not believe either in the doctrine 
 which had been avowed here, that if these resolu- 
 tions were adopted that the people would disre- 
 gard them. So far as the history of this State could 
 show, the people had always paid the highest re- 
 spect to their Constitution. In no instance with- 
 
259 
 
 in his knowledge, and he thought none could be 
 produced, had they shown a disposition to violate 
 it. The only channel through which it could be 
 violated, was through legislation, or by miscon- 
 struction on the part of the Executive, in con- 
 strueing it as he understood it, instead of as set- 
 tled by judicial decision. And also in some in- 
 stances by the judiciary themselves, because of 
 their attachment to some principle they wish to 
 see carried out. From these sources, he re- 
 garded, was the only danger that could result 
 from this cause, for the people would never 
 violate it. Whatever might be the character 
 of the Constitution, whether restrictive or giv- 
 ing the largest liberty, they would adhere to 
 it until changed by a legally constituted assem- 
 bly. If we were sent here to place no restrictions 
 upon the people then we are sent here for the 
 purpose of destroying the Constitution, and to let 
 society be resolved into its original elements 
 without government or law. He should not there 
 fore vote against this section because it restricted 
 the people. We saw in our social state the ne- 
 cessity of adopting some restrictions upon our in- 
 dividual action, and without it no real substantial 
 liberty could be preserved. It had been admitted 
 by almost every gentleman who had argued, that 
 even if these restrictions were adopted that they 
 would be of no account and virtually of no use. 
 They attribute a great deal of wisdom to the peo- 
 ple, and entertain no idea that they will ever 
 elect a man to govern them who did not possess 
 the requisite qualifications. They seemed to be 
 satisfied that there would be no practical danger 
 even if the restrictions were stricken out. 
 Another reason was that the section did not go 
 far enough- -there was nothing of restriction in 
 it. In his judgment they were not such as the 
 people would demand, provided they felt that 
 there was any necessity for restricting themselves 
 on the subject at all. If we were to assemble a 
 Convention of sound, plain, honest and in- 
 leligent men in the cuuntiy, without reference f> 
 party feeling, with the sole charge of selecting a 
 good candidate for Givernoi in his opinion, the 
 consideration with them would be, was he a man 
 of sound intellect and mind, of good moral cha- 
 racter, who had received a good education, who 
 had studied the principles of government, who 
 was well acquainted with the interests of the 
 country, and who was of physical health, to sus- 
 tain in whatever station he might be placed, whe- 
 ther as Governor, or as Admiral of the Navy and 
 Commander of the forces whether on the ex- 
 treme verge of 54 40 , or on the Rio Grande ? 
 And he did not know whether they would say 
 that h^ should he 30 years of age but he would 
 care nothing for that. If they found the other 
 qualifications that were necessary, it mattered 
 little it he was only 29 years and 6 months of age. 
 or had resided in the State only 4 years and 364 
 days. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND would ask if the gentleman 
 would not have him honest too ! 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said he had provided for the 
 Convention being composed oT honest men; and 
 he believed that such men would only select hon- 
 est men, when not under the influence of party 
 feeling. Under thfs view of the subject he regar- 
 ded the section as entirely, in regard to its practi- 
 
 cal utility, unnecessary. This Convention so far 
 as he was acquainted with it contained a great 
 amount of sound common sense, intelligence and 
 wisdom, yet he did not believe that all of those 
 qualities that belonged to the state were astern, 
 bled here, and would he dissipated when we clos* d 
 our labors. There would still be enough left 
 among the people to judge whether we had sub- 
 mitted to them a good Constitution. He had now 
 given the reasons why he would not vote for the 
 section in the position it occupied. But in saying 
 thus, he did not mean to say that he would not 
 vote for the section if' it came from a proper com- 
 mittee, \\hoseduty it was to prescribe qualifica- 
 tions for all officers. There w is no reason why the 
 Governor should be an exception to the general 
 rule-, particularly at this time, when there 
 was such a feeling- in the community to strip him 
 of all power and importance. Now it might be 
 well enough to provide some such qualification to 
 hold the office, but he did not believe it was ab- 
 solutely ncessary to place such an article in the 
 Constitution. It would be lather of ornamenial 
 effect in that instrument than of practical effect, 
 and would show that the Convention in their ac- 
 tion were governed by sound, good common sense. 
 It would show that they did not distrust the ca- 
 pacity or intelligence of the people, but that they 
 were willing to spread before the world, some of 
 tne qualifications that they would require if they 
 had to select a man. Therefore he should not 
 vote for the section of the report of the committee 
 though as he said before he had the most profound 
 respect and veneration for it- 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that it had been some- 
 what the practice heie when gentlemen got up 
 to make a speech to state that they did not 
 design to trespass long upon the attention of the 
 committee, and then to go on, passing from 
 point to point, with a Word only on each, and 
 then some general remarks on the question, until 
 they had inflicted very long speeches upon the 
 body. He (Mr. R ) did not propose to make any 
 excuses ; he only promised not to speak more 
 than fifteen minutes, perhaps not that. Nor did 
 he mean to pursue an argument that had been 
 several days ago exhausted though he might say 
 not without one good result. Gentlemen had 
 taken their positions here as to reform, and we 
 should know where to fi-id them hereafter. And 
 when he saw so many men of talent and experience 
 in legislation, avow themselves so strongly and 
 decidedly in favor of a reform, like this, which 
 so far as his knowledge extended had never been 
 agitated among the people, he was assured that 
 when they come to consider the great questions of 
 reform which the people had sent them there to 
 consider, he should find them with him on those 
 subjects. He made these remarks for the pur- 
 pose of showing that at the commencement of 
 this discussion, upon this question was made to 
 turn the one as to whether the Convention would 
 make any reform at all. That those who went 
 for striking out the obnoxious provision might 
 be calculated on for other reforms, and those who 
 opposed it, as being opposed to other reforms. 
 He considered it in a different light. He believed 
 this to be a matter purely of expediency, upon 
 which members had not been at all instructed by 
 the people. Where are the county conventions 
 
260 
 
 that have spoken out upon the subject, or the 
 public journal that has ever held up the idea ? 
 So far as the word native was concerned, there 
 had been some considerable expression of opin- 
 ion, and he should vote therefore to expunge that 
 word. But he should also vote to retain the five 
 and the thirty years' provision, unless something 
 better was introduced. He did not view that as 
 a restriction on the people, for if he did he should 
 vote against it. But he looked upon it as a re- 
 striction upon the demagogues who controlled and 
 made the party nominations, and who always se- 
 lected the men they could make the most out of. 
 And if they could by their machinery get dele- 
 gates to go for a younger man, who might better 
 answer their purposes, they would do it. And a 
 nomination, as all know, generally carried with it 
 the party vote, for there were few, very few men 
 who had the nerve or the strength of resolution 
 and character to make head against a party no- 
 mination, and very few who could be found to 
 sustain a person in such a stand against his party. 
 Hence the necessity of putting in a guard against 
 intriguing demagogues controlling the nomina- 
 tions. So far would he go, and no farther ; and 
 that was the light in which he viewed this mat- 
 ter. Many people had come to the conclusion 
 that this Convention was doing nothing; but he 
 thought that they were doing much. He regarded 
 this discussion as all-important, as it indicated 
 strongly that the feeling which existed to strike 
 out a clause which the people never asked to have 
 struck out, would continue when we came to re- 
 forms which the people had demanded beyond 
 mistake. For himself, though a friend of radical 
 reform, he should vote for 5 and 30. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he should not haveari. 
 sen but for some remarks which he felt it his duty 
 to answer, and therefore he felt it to be his right to 
 ask the indulgence of the committee. He should 
 not undertake to argue this question, because from 
 the first day that the subject was under discus- 
 sion, he was satisfied that no argument sound in 
 itself and based on just principles, would proba- 
 bly have any influence here. This question was 
 not to be decided altogether by the force of argu- 
 ment or of reason. Mankind have not yet be- 
 come so enlightened as to lose all the influence of 
 education, the force of habit, or the controlling 
 power of prejudice, and since the formation of 
 this government, since ils first inception, both 
 state and national, although there have been ad- 
 mitted certain great and leading fundamental 
 principles connected with republican liberty, it 
 appeared to him that there had been great diffi- 
 culty in giving them application. It was true 
 that the great charter of American Libejty de- 
 clared all men to be free and equal, and were en- 
 dowed by their creator with certain inalienable 
 rights these rights being of necessity, of them- 
 selves equal, and no one possessing higher rights 
 0( especial privileges over another. Although 
 this great principle has long been recognized, 
 they had not been fully and practically applied 
 to the condition of mankind in this country We 
 have seen in every form of government, national 
 as well as state, a class of men some of them 
 proceeding on grounds which they deemed reason 
 able, who have denied to the people the exercise 
 of full equal political rights. They have declared 
 
 it to be essential and necessary in regard to the 
 elementary sovereign power ve'sted in the people 
 that it should be controlled, and not exercised 
 by all and every man that there should bq 
 some artificial rule or test by which the exer- 
 cise of that power must be determined. And in 
 applying this principle of restriction to the elec 
 tive franchise, the notion prevails that there must 
 be retained in the machinery of the organization 
 of the government, a minority or body to repre. 
 sent the aristocracy or landed interests of the 
 Country. That we must have a Senate a privi- 
 leged body to have for its constituency the 
 wealthy and landed interests of the country. A 
 body permanent, in order to check the caprices 
 or whims of the people So in regard to the elec- 
 tive franchise ; it was long an idea in this State 
 that all men are not to be permitted to enjoy that 
 right that its exercise must depend on one of 
 these accidental circumstances that a man roust 
 be the owner of a certain piece of land before he 
 could exercise the right to vote for a Senator. 
 That rule has been abolished, yet men have not 
 given up willingly or without reluctance the prin- 
 ciple upon which that idea was based. They 
 have not given up the idea that these old re- 
 strictions were without foundation or without 
 right. These old habits and prejudices still 
 clin-? to them, and they have brought them here, 
 and the very arguments that are put forth here, 
 are the very arguments that ever will and ever 
 have been put forth for restrictions on popu- 
 lar liberty. It is the last strangling effort of 
 dying old Federalism that we were witnessing on 
 this floor, for incorporating into the constitution 
 this exploded restrictive principle as to the exercise 
 of the popular power. Not one gentleman who 
 has spoken here in favor of these restrictions, has 
 made an argument that would not be refuted in 
 any common school house in any common school 
 district in the land. Nothing even approaching 
 the dignity of an argument had been put forth in 
 that quarter, or in support of the principle 
 sought to be retained in the Constitution. 
 And it was not to he decided upon that ground 
 but upon these old prejudices. His friend from 
 Essex, (Mr. SIMMONS) the other day argued 
 gravely that we must have these restrictions, be- 
 cause some " raw boy" might be elected (he, 
 Mr. W. wondered he did not say a " raw Jona- 
 than") and be thrust into the Executive chair. 
 That was the argument on one day, put forth bv 
 the gentleman, as if it was to have weight 
 with sensible men, with himself. What did we 
 hear then from him on the next day. It was then 
 urged that these raw boys should be placed under 
 these restrictions, lest the educated young men of 
 our colleges should force themselves into the of- 
 fice. His friend,when he had a cause in hand, nev- 
 er involved himself in these absurdities. He has aj- 
 gyed more from his prejudices and education, his 
 old thoughts and habits, than from principle. 
 And the gentleman from Chautauque, ( Mr. 
 MARVIN,) had said that this restriction must 
 be inserted in the Constitution by us, or else 
 forsooth, the President of the United States, if he 
 had a boy, might send that boy into this State ; and 
 by the aid of the great Executive influence and 
 patronage, he would cause that boy to be elected 
 governor of New- York, and in this way he could 
 
261 
 
 rt the liberties of the people of this state. 
 And this kind of argument is presented to a grave 
 and deliberate body of men,assembled here to form 
 a Constitution for 2,000,000 of intelligent people ! 
 And yet the members here sit and listen to it as 
 if it was potent and convincing. And gentlemen 
 go on to say that we must put these restric- 
 tions into the Constitution, or else an improper 
 man will be elected. But how is it with regard to 
 the various other officers of the State ? Have they 
 proposed to apply this rule to anyot the other officers 
 of the government of this state? Have they said any 
 thing about whether a Judge of the Supreme court 
 or a chancellor (and they have more than twice 
 the power over the interests and the welfare of 
 the people that the Governor has) shall be over 
 or under thirty years of age. Oh, no. You pro- 
 pose thus to restrict the Governor, but you never 
 propose any sort of restriction upon the Lt. Gov- 
 ernor. Until the gentleman from Saratoga was 
 inclosed in an absurdity, nothing of ihe kind had 
 been said in regard to the Lt. Governor. And vet 
 the very next day atter his election, he may be 
 installed into all the powers and duties of the 
 Governor without having a single one of these 
 qualifications. Nor have you guarded against the 
 incompetency which may arise from putting a 
 man who is too old theie; you restrict as to youth 
 whilst you would leave men to be eligible, and 
 place them in the gubernatorial chair, who had 
 none of their former powers to enable them to dis- 
 charge the duties of the office. But he (Mr. W.) 
 had wandered somewhat trom the course he had 
 prepare 1 to follow. He had not intended to go 
 into an argument upon this question. He had 
 proposed mainly 'to answer some some he knew 
 not what to call them "remarks" that fell trom 
 the gentleman from Saratoga (Mr. PORTER) and 
 he did not know but that he might answer some- 
 thing that fell from the member from Monroe 
 (Mr. STRONG.) The gentlemen from Saratoga, 
 after commenting on something that he had said, in 
 answer to what fell from another gentleman, un- 
 dertook to read him (Mr. W.) a lecture; and to 
 inform him that " gentlemen who mounted hob- 
 bies were very likely to be thrown." Now, he 
 could tell that young gentleman 
 
 Mr. PORTER said that he had made no appli- 
 cation oi that remark to the gentleman from On. 
 lario, but expressly stated that the gentleman had 
 argued the question with ability, fairness, and li- 
 berality. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN knew the gentleman made such 
 a remark ; but after reviewing what he called his 
 argument, the gentleman proceeded, in the con- 
 clusion of his remarks, to warn gentlemen against 
 riding popular hobbies j evidently making the ap 
 plication general. 
 
 Mr. PORTER said that if the gentleman insisted 
 on having the remark bear that application, he 
 had no objection ; but if he desired to know the 
 truth, he repeated that his remarks followed a 
 reference to an argument which he distinctly stated 
 was not used by the gentleman from Ontario. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN presumed the gentleman did not 
 understand precisely what he meant himself. It 
 was very apparent to whom the gentleman's re 
 marks applied, even if he did not understand their 
 application. But he (Mr. W.) would say to the 
 young gentleman from Saratoga, that he had not 
 
 been in the habit of riding hobbies, neither did he 
 know how to manage them. He had known but 
 one way to public favor or consideration, either in 
 public or private life; and from the rematks and 
 manner of the gentleman from Saratoga, it might 
 not be useless or uncharitable to advise him what 
 that way was. And from the exhibition the young 
 gentleman had made, Mr. W. thought it might be 
 well for him, in the outset of his career, to turn 
 his attention to it. The only way Mr. W knew 
 of to public or private distinction, was by a high, 
 minded, honorable, and ingenious course of con- 
 duct, in public and in private life If by pursuing 
 that course heretofore, Mr W. had secured the 
 esteem of his fellow citizens, he was grateful for 
 it. If the continuance of that course should se- 
 cure to him any greater amount of that esteem, he 
 should be equally grateful. But he should neither 
 mount hobbies nor be deferred from advocating, 
 here or elsewhere, eVery principle which he 
 deemed souml or just in itself, whatever impres- 
 sion that course might make on the public mind, 
 whether favorable or unfavorable. Nor should he 
 be influenced in any way by the estimation of the 
 gentleman from Saratoga, as to his conduct or opin- 
 ions. Mr. W would say, in conclusion, to the 
 gentleman from Saratoga, that he had mistaken 
 his position and his powers, when he undertook 
 to read him lectures. And that it would be the 
 wiser course for him to pursue hereafter, or at least 
 until he had secured some position in the world, 
 to criticise his own conduct and motives, rather 
 than the conduct and motives of others. Mr. W. 
 said it had been his duty before to stand up thei e and 
 advocate measures and principles contrary to the 
 public sentiment of the day. He did not there, 
 and should not here, flinch from his duty, or what 
 he thought his duty. He nad had sharp political 
 contests on that floor with gentlemen who now 
 occupied seats there, and the honorable chairman 
 (Mr. CHATFIELD) and his honorable friend from 
 Onondaga, (Mr. TAYLOR,) and with both the gen- 
 tlemen from St. Lawrence, (Messrs. PERKINS and 
 RUSSELL,) those contests had been carried on with 
 something of the heat and asperity of political 
 controversy ; but it had never been his fortune 
 until now, even from his political opponents, to 
 have his motives aspersed or his arguments im- 
 pugned by the charge that they were intended to 
 affect political objects, or to gain popular ap- 
 plause. And never were they so ungentlemanly, 
 he would not say base, as to charge him with sel- 
 fish purposes. That had been reserved for the gen- 
 tleman from Saratoga and the gentleman from 
 Momoe. The latter had in broad and most of- 
 tensive terms, chirged him with having in view 
 a high and honorable office, and that his argu- 
 ments on this subject were the result of selfish 
 and ambitious views If such a charge had been 
 made bv one who had the right to lay claim to 
 the character of a gentleman, or if it had fallen 
 from a high-minded and honorable man, he (Mr. 
 W.) would have felt the force of the rebuke. If it 
 had come from one who had never set his sail for 
 t he popular breeze blow from what quarter it might, 
 who had never pandered to popular prejudice, he 
 ^Mr. W.) might have mistrusted that in some un- 
 guarded moment he might have rendered himself 
 obnoxious to the charge. If it had fallen from a 
 man who had never stooped to a low and vulgar 
 
262 
 
 popular delusion, he (Mr. W.,) should have been 
 apprehensive he was liable to the aspersion. 
 And so also had they fallen from a man who had 
 never even on that floor appealed to higher mo- 
 tives than such prejudices as he supposed rested 
 in the bosoms of members here v\ho had never 
 endeavored to array the lay members against those 
 of the legal and other professions he might have 
 been apprehensive that he had unconsciously been 
 guilty oi some gross impropriety; but when he COR- 
 sidered from whence the insinuation proceeded, he 
 doubted whether proper self respect jus tifiecihim 
 in taking the least notice ot it. He would, how- 
 ever, say both to the gentlemen from Saratoga and 
 Monroe, that he did'not believe it necessary tor 
 him, at this day, to undertake to speak merely with 
 a view to popular favor He trusted he had been 
 too long before his constituents, and too long in the 
 discharge ot public duty, to make it necessary, 
 even if he desired the honor which they charged 
 him with aspiring to, to undertake to speak disin- 
 genuously or contrary to his own convictions of 
 right and wrong any where. But he could tell 
 both gentlemen, what neither of them would 
 say in his place that he knew ot'no political office 
 that the people of the state could confer on him, thai 
 he would accept. His political life wasc-nded with 
 this Convention, so far as his present and firm pur- 
 pose was concerned and he knew of no consider- 
 ation, ot no contingency that could arise, thai 
 would ever induce him again to take a public po- 
 litical station. Mr. W. did not say this here for 
 the first time. There were those among the con- 
 stituents of the gentleman from Monroe, who 
 knew and had the evidence of this, his firm deter 
 mination in regard to this matter. A word as t< 
 another argument of the gentleman from Sara 
 toga, who found (ault with him because he 
 said he would have been content to have le 
 this section stand, as it probably would, after 
 the vote on the proposi'ion of the gentleman 
 from St. Lawrence had been taken. And the 
 gentleman read him a lecture, and thankee 
 God that he (Mr. P.) would never be guiltv 
 ot the absurdity of allowing a provision t 
 stand which he thought objectionable. Wh 
 then did the gentleman assent to this report 
 yes and sign his name to it which contains 
 a provision that he now moved to strike out 
 Why did he report this provision ? Was it hi 
 intention to commit a fraud on this body to pas 
 through it a provision which he did not himsel 
 approve ? Why did he move to strike out th< 
 word native, after approving it by signing the re 
 port? -Where was the gentleman's consistency 
 Nay, where is his boasted integrity in this re 
 spect ? He either undertook to palm off on thi 
 body a clause which he did not approve, or t 
 smuggle into the constitution a provision wMcl 
 he clung to and hoped might pass without com 
 ment or observation. The gentleman might tak 
 either horn of the dilemma that he thought pro 
 per. But Mr. W. hoped the gentleman woul 
 consider this before undertaking to read him an 
 other lecture on consistency. Mr W. was alto 
 gether not indebted to the gentleman from Mon 
 roe or Saratoga for these imputations on his mo 
 tives. The gentleman from Orleans (Mr. PEN 
 NIMAN) branched out on this subject yesterday 
 charging him and all others on his side of th 
 
 uestion, with speaking for and courting popular 
 ivor. Mr. W. would do the gentleman from 
 rleans the justice to say that he did not fall into 
 lat error himself, and the reason for it was easily 
 und ; he (Mr. W.) had just been reading his 
 ng speech of yesterday and he found it was made 
 p, with the excption oef some five lines, of 
 raises of himself, [laughter,] and consequently 
 icre was no room for any praises of the " dear 
 eople." [Laughter.] He had given us in his 
 Deech a schedule of his own good qualities his 
 igh political attainments and his peculiar fitness 
 or his position here. Having taken on himself 
 lat labor, it was not to be wondered at that he 
 id not allude to the " dear people." He appa- 
 ently took too much pleasure in lauding himself 
 o allow him even to praise his own constituents. 
 Ir. W. regretted that this debate had extended 
 ius far. He regretted the character of the de- 
 ate itself. It had unnecessarily and unprofita- 
 ly consumed the time of the Convention, and 
 ,vas well calculated to give an impression to the 
 mblic unfavorable to a propitious or fortunate 
 esult to our deliberations. It had served already 
 o create the belief that we were frittering away 
 he time he would not say with senseless decla- 
 mation but with arguments and positions that 
 arry with them their own want of force and ap- 
 ilication. But he hoped that the time wasted in 
 his debate, the personalities it had engendered, 
 svould induce the Convention to pause and reflect, 
 md go to the consideration of the great business 
 Before us with calmness and a proper sense of our 
 esponsibilities to the present and to future gen- 
 erations. That they would go on and frame a 
 Constitution under which millions now living 
 are to enjoy the best fruits of freedom ; and which 
 shall confer in its future operation untold bles- 
 sings upon millions yet unborn. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that the gentlemanj from 
 Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) seemed to have lost his ba- 
 .ance ; he had made a very strong attack on him, 
 Mr. STRONG) and charged him with having 
 abused him (WORDEN) in an improper manner. 
 Now he (Mr. STRONG) felt sorry for it if what 
 he had said, had ever hurt his (Mr. WORDEN'S) 
 feelings. He was very sorry, too, that if, as was 
 the report that the gentleman from Ontario had 
 ever had an eye on the Governorship, what he 
 (Mr. STRONG) had said should be the means of 
 taking him off the track. [Laughter.] Now he 
 had certainly heard that the gentleman fron On- 
 tario was a prominent candidate, for the office of 
 Governor ; he had heard of it at home, before he 
 started, and he had heard of it since he had been 
 here ; why, it was regularly spoken of in the Le- 
 gislature last winter. Now he was sorry if his 
 speech had crushed such high born hopes. And 
 he had a word to say about the language which 
 the gentleman from Ontario used towards him in 
 this debate. He had the politeness for to call the 
 gentleman from Saratoga a " gentleman," and he 
 only called me a "member" (much laughter.) 
 But, sir, it is better after all, that I should bear 
 that than that he should lose his manners. And as 
 to the abuse which the gentleman from Ontario, 
 (Mr. WORDEN) thought proper to pour on to him, 
 why he did not mind it a bit ; it did not trouble 
 him, not in the least he did not regard it at all; be- 
 cause nothing that that gentleman could say about 
 
263 
 
 him or do would give him any less opinion of 
 that gentleman, (Laughter.). Because he knew 
 that that gentleman did not mean any thing by all 
 that abuse which he said about him; and he 
 thought it was best to let that gentleman go on and 
 get through with all he had got to say ; because he 
 knew when that gentleman had got through with 
 his speech that he would feel a good deal better. 
 (Laughter.) But that gentleman had made one 
 serious charge against him, (Mr. STRONG) that he 
 must say a word about. That gentleman had 
 charged him with what he called a crime that 
 of arraying the lay members of this house against 
 the profession ; or of having done so in the legis- 
 lature. Now he had never done any such thing. 
 It was true that when the people in 1840, 
 came and declared it to be their will to have 
 the large fees- of lawyers reduced, that he 
 did all that he could to get a bill passed agreea- 
 ble to the people's wishes ; and if that was ar- 
 raying the lay members against the profession, 
 then he had done so, in carrying out the will of 
 the people. And in 1841, and again in 1843, 
 when the profession had tried to get the fees 
 raised up again to the high notch that they were 
 before, then the people had declared against it 
 and he had, both of these times, helped to carry 
 out the will of the people. And if that was a 
 crime, for to carry out the will of the people, 
 why then he was guilty of it, and was chargeable 
 with a crime. But still he did not think that in 
 that body any member would have been charg 
 ed with committing such a great crime, and of 
 arraying the lay members against the profession, 
 merely for the carrying out of the will of the 
 people. He had never, purposely, arrayed any 
 of them ag.'inst each other. But it may be that 
 when ^hey come to get that great report of theirs 
 from that great committee of 13, which we hear 
 so much about, then perhaps it will become ne- 
 cessary to draw wide and broad the line for to 
 carry out the will of the people now, in getting 
 all their great legal reforms in operation that the 
 people all so loudly call for. And then, in spite 
 of all these charges, and in spite of all these 
 abuses, and in spite of all that the gentleman 
 from Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) tries, not all that he 
 can say, nor all that he can do, can stop it. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS rose and expressed his regre 
 that he had to occupy the time of the Convention 
 he had but a very remarks to make ; and he woulc 
 have kept his seat but for many inconsistencies 
 and false inferences draw r n by members who dif- 
 fered with his views ; these gentlemen have ex- 
 pressed their entire confidence in the people for 
 self-government; but the people know their own 
 liability to err ; and they have always desired to 
 have checks and proper restraints put upon their 
 actions. And this has always been the case from 
 the beginning of time, and it always will be th 
 case unto the end of time. And if the necessit, 
 tor some restraint exists with regard to individu- 
 als, does it not exist to a greater degree with re 
 gard to governments and to the people at large 
 Is the tendency or disposition to be carried awaj 
 by our own impulses liable to be lessened by the 
 aggregation of numbers. No, for the reverse o 
 this is generally the case. The masses are more 
 liable to err impulsively than individuals. The 
 aggregation of numbers increases the liability to 
 
 io wrong in times of excitement. The gentle- 
 men have said that we cannot point to any abuses 
 hat have occurred under our State government 
 hat call for any of these restrictions. A good 
 eason why. There has been no opportunity for 
 he abuses to occur, on account of these very re- 
 itrictions. No abuse could occur under them, 
 and that is why they wished to retain them. Gen- 
 lemen pointed to Gov. Tompkins as an instance 
 of a Governor under 30 under this system, who had 
 done well ; Gov. Tompkins would have been 72 
 ears old had he lived till now ; and he was first 
 elected Governor in 1806 (when he was 33 years 
 old). He would not have alluded to this, had 
 not gentlemen erroneously cited it to sustain a 
 principle. His colleague had said that argu- 
 nents would no longer avail here ; that the minds 
 of members were made up. Now, that was a 
 ood argument in favor of his side of the ques- 
 ton ; the very fact thus admitted, that men sent 
 there to that high deliberative body, that men 
 occupying a high position, who ought to argue 
 and reason and calmly examine this point, should 
 ae led astray by force of habit, and by prejudice, 
 was a strong argument in favor of these restric- 
 tions ; and he would ask his honorable colleague 
 . WORDEN) if men so situated, and men sent 
 here under the circumstances surrounding them, 
 are so proof against all fair argument, as to act 
 here now under prejudice and impulse and ha- 
 bit, what we are to expect from the great assem- 
 bled masses of the community at large in times 
 of high political excitement ? This very fact is a 
 most conclusive argument in favor of self-im- 
 posed restraints in the exercise of this power. 
 It had been wisely said that to deny the right of 
 the people to make these restrictions, is to deny 
 to them one of their most valuable possessions I 
 and he looked upon the doctrine, should it pre- 
 vail, as subversive of our government ; he looked 
 on it as subversive of our institutions ; he looked 
 on it as the first move towards the downward 
 course that would end in anarchy and despot- 
 ism. This has been the case in all the past 
 ages of the world among all the nations 
 of the earth, and in saying this he meant no per- 
 sonal imputation or reflection. It was the course 
 which all tyrants had adopted to perpetuate their 
 own despotism ; flattering the people with false- 
 hoods to effect their ruin. His friend from On- 
 ondaga had spoken about the folly of laying down 
 rules. He would ask him to look at the biogra- 
 phy of Gen. Washington ; and he would there 
 find about some 60 rules which that great man 
 had laid down for his own self government. And 
 yet the advocates of the non-restriction doctrine, 
 he supposed, would say that a man like Wash- 
 ington would not need any restrictions. One of 
 his rules was that he would " never be a flatterer." 
 Another was that he would " always look a man 
 in the face when he was speaking to him." Now 
 who could ever have supposed it possible that a 
 man like Gen. Washington of such a fine,noble, 
 commanding appearance, should ever be under 
 the necessity of so laboring to overcome his natu- 
 ral diffidence, as to have to prescribe a rule for 
 his conduct that he should always compel him- 
 self to look a man in the face when he was speakj 
 ing to him. Or who that knew the man, or has 
 read his history, could ever suppose that it was 
 
264 
 
 necessary for him to lay down a rule that he would 
 avoid that most foolish of all modes of conduct, to 
 be a flatterer. But Washington was a man of sense 
 and knew his own weaknesses, and he adopted 
 this plan to check and control them. He would 
 say a word or two in answer to the argument of the 
 gentleman from Oneida (Mr. KIRKL.AND) about 
 this power being an elementary one. He (Mr. N. ) 
 contended that ttus was as much a delegated as an 
 elementary power, We have 5UO,UOO votes in the 
 State; they make choice of one or other of the 
 candidates that are brought forward for their sup- 
 puit by delegates. These delegates are chosen by 
 the voters in their respective counties. When 
 the Convention of those delegates meets, it will 
 always be found that its members have neither 
 fully nor recently communicated with ihe people 
 so as to know their present wants and desires. 
 They have neither any intimate knowledge gen- 
 erally of the qualifications of the men placed be- 
 fore them for their selection; and when they meet 
 although each has a voice iu the matter, yet they 
 are controlled by a few leading spirits, who have 
 generally arranged the whole business before the 
 Convention meets. And therefore this is not an 
 elementary power exercistd by the people in their 
 primary capacity, but a delegated power, and 
 hence the necessity of proper restrictions on those 
 who exercise it. Doubtless in the course of events 
 you may bring forward some few yo.ung men of 
 high talents in the State; but still as a general 
 rule you do not expect to find your best men among 
 the youth of the country. You may occasionally 
 meet with a few such ; but even in the history of 
 the world they have been scarce. True, there 
 have been a few great warriors, and two or three 
 great statesmen and men of learning, under the 
 age of 30 ; but that is no argument against the 
 retention of these restrictions; and gentlemen 
 have no right to use it a* such here, to endeavor 
 to influence members to do away with these re- 
 strictions. My colleague, (Mr. WORDEN,) has 
 asked me why we have imposed no restrictions 
 as to the old men ? For a very good reason. Old 
 men do not need these restrictions. Old mert are 
 not flexible enough for politicians, their opinions 
 are too sound, too firm, too fixed ; they are rank- 
 ed among that class which trading politicians are 
 apt to term impracticable. And there is another 
 reason why there is no clause inserted with a res 
 triction as to age. Old men are not liable to be 
 selected, or to serve if they are selected. For 
 they have generally lest all iclish for politica' 
 turmoil. His colleague had alluded to the spirit o 
 old federalism, of which he said these restric- 
 tions were a relic; but he (Mr. N.) thought tha 
 they both might derive a valuable lesson from the 
 democracy of 1798; particularly as regarded State 
 rights, with regard to the interference of the ge 
 neral government, or of other States in the bu 
 siness of this State. He thought that they migh 
 also be able to take a valuable lesson from 
 the new Constitutions recently adopted by othe 
 States, and the wholesome restrictions which the 
 wisdom of the present day had thought proper tc 
 insert therein. He deeply regretted to see such 
 frequent and apparently studied efforts made her 
 to disparage the piesent Constitution. To be sur 
 it is by no means perfect. No man had pretend 
 ed that it was. But (said Mr. N.) it is as it is 
 
 id as he had just described things to be with the 
 est cf the human family all over Ihe world; it 
 as iis faults, but it is as it is; and in the main 
 t is pretty well adapted after all to secure the 
 ;reatest possible amount of happiness to thegrear. 
 st possible number. It is in short, a system of 
 ;overnment under which there has been an un- 
 taralleled increase to the population of the State, 
 .nd to its advancement in all those arts, and to all 
 hose improvements of the scientific nature, and to 
 ts general prosperity. For his own part, this 
 ,vas a point that he gloried exceedingly in. He 
 gloried in the present Constitution. Gentlemen 
 night disparage it as much as they had a mind to; 
 till he would glory in it. He gloried in all the 
 American Constitutions which secured to us the 
 iberties for which our forefathers fought and bled 
 during the American Revolution ; and also that 
 vhich was got from the Runnymede, as had 
 >een alluded to this morning, at the revolution in 
 England in 1668, in which John Hampden, and 
 Tohn Locke and other kindred spirits figured so 
 conspicuous and fought so nobly ; and all which 
 las been brought about by the example of the 
 American Revolution, And therefore, instead of 
 disparaging these Constitutions, we ought to glory 
 in the whole of them. And we ought to restore 
 to the people as much of that revered and vene- 
 rated instrument, as it would admit of; and there- 
 "ore he intended to vote for the amendment of the 
 gentleman from Saratoga (Mr. PORTER,) offered 
 :his morning. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said that every gentleman who 
 had risen here to make a long speech had stated 
 that he deeply regretted to be under the necessi- 
 ty of consuming the time of the Convention ; 
 (laughter,) and that they would do so as little as 
 possible ; and after that they would speak nearly 
 half a dozen long speeches. So, in order to be 
 in the fashion, he should state in advance, that he 
 was not going to " consume the time of the Con- 
 vention;" (laughter,) yet, he was not going to 
 make a speech. Now, it was very ridiculous to 
 be sitting there for days together talking upon a 
 subject that in itself was of no sort of consequence, 
 and about which every man had made up his mind 
 how he was going to vote. To him it did not matter 
 a copper which way the vote went. He had made 
 up his mind how he should vote when the ques- 
 tion was first started, but that was so long ago 
 that really he had forgotten how he intended to 
 vote. (Laughter.) And he wished to sit this out 
 if it was to be all day, and by the time gentlemen 
 had got through talking, he probably might call 
 to his recollection how he had intended to vote. 
 (Laughter.) It was very little matter what was 
 said the whole discussion was on two points 
 tweedle-dum and tweedle-dee. (Laughter.) And 
 it is a matter of very little consequence how the 
 matter goes ; the people care nothing about it ; 
 but if the debating is to be kept up and carri- 
 ed on in this way, the people will care, and 
 it will be a matter of some consequence, how 
 the time of the Convention is taken up and 
 wasted, and why the work they were sent to 
 do is not done. And if this discussion is to 
 go on any longer, he would suggest that the Repor- 
 ters be respectfully requested to read to the Con- 
 vention the speeches made by the members the 
 previous day ; for they were the same thing over 
 
265 
 
 and over again day after day; and the whole] The PRESIDENT submitted a memorial that 
 of them amounted to nothing after all. He had been sent to the Convention through him, 
 h>ped for Heaven's sake that the gentlemen would from Burtis ^Skidmore of New York, charging 
 vote on this question some time or other; they VVm Paxton Ha'llett with corrupt conduct on as- 
 had talkt-d an immense deal about sending down sessing property taxing his own costs acting as 
 to the people a "sound Constitution !" And God clerk of the Supreme Court, commissioner on as- 
 knows, that, as to doing that it would be impos- sessments, &c., &c. 
 
 sible in the way they were going on. For if time Mr. TOWNSEND thought the judiciary com. 
 bad any effect on an instrument of that character, mittee was the proper reference, 
 one end of it would rot, before they got the other Mr. CAMBRELENG suggested the one on Mu- 
 end perfected (much laughter) and as to the reJ nicipal corporations. 
 
 strictiou of 30- years; why at the rate they had Mr. KIRKLAND said this complained of abuses 
 been going on, there was not a young man in the by an officer from the same appointing power, tax- 
 State, who was now only 21 years of age, who ing his own costs, &c. The judiciary committee 
 would not be qualified for the office of Governor, W as not the proper reference, 
 with this restriction of thirty years of age, be/ore Mr. MANN said it was one of those gross 
 they could present the Constitution to the people, abuses of which so many exist in the cify ; it 
 (Increased laughter.) Do for Heaven's sake, let ought to go to a committee; the abuses have 
 us have a vote upon it. been committed by Hallett through the Supreme 
 
 Mr. JVI ANN wished to make a few remarks to Court, who made him a commissioner. He thought 
 explain the way in which he should vote on this committee No. 14 the proper one. 
 question. He did not intend to make a speech Mr. BASCOM said he had not owed his ap. 
 but he would state at once, that he wish- pointment to himself, but to the Supreme Court, 
 d to have the whole section stricken out ; and and the judiciary committee was the proper one 
 the subject referred to committee No 4, to whom to enquire into the abuses arising under this mode 
 the consideration properly belonged.as he consider- O f appointment 
 
 ed committee No. 5 had not of right any power to Mr. WARD would ask how far we were author- 
 report on the subject. ised to enquire into a matter of this kind. Here 
 Loud cries of " Question question !" A mo- W as a charge against a public officer; was it proper 
 tion that the committee rise was voted down. I to receive a communication of this nature reflect- 
 Mr. MORRIS wished to say but a very few words j n g O n the character of a public officer with whom 
 in explanation of some points that had been rais- W e have nothing to do; and whom we cannot 
 ed during this discussion. It was very evident remove ? What has the Convention to do with it? 
 that the committee No. 5 had transcended their To entertain it will be to give encouragement to 
 authority in reporting at all on the qualifications charges of a like nature, or even graver against 
 for the cand date for the office of Governor ; and other persons, when there were proper tribunals 
 also that they had evidently transcended their au- before which they could be arraigned, if they had 
 thority in reporting upon the veto power in con- done wrong, 
 nection with the action of the Legislature con- Mr. TAGGART differed with the gentleman. 
 
 trolling the same; and he would state 1 We ought to enquire into this and all other abuses; 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR hoped the gentleman would give lo see if an officer can thus hold two or three of- 
 way that he might renew the motion to rise. Sev- aces, from the same appointing power, and thus 
 eral gentlemen wished yet to speak on this ques- practice gross abuses without any one to check 
 tion; and he hoped they would not pass a vote on him; to impose assessments act as a Commission- 
 it to-da>. er then tax his own costs and sit in judgment 
 Mr. TOWNSEND hoped that if his colleague on his acts. It was high time to take cognizance 
 (Mr. MORRIS) was only going to occupy about O f sucn abuses. 
 
 15 minutes, that the convention would sit it out Mr. WARD said at any rate he wanted time to 
 
 and lake a vote on the question to-day. enquire into the truth or falsehood of the charges; 
 
 Cries of " Committee rise !" and to examine into this whole matter. For that 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS honed that the Chairman of the reas on he would move to lay the communication 
 
 committee would be allowed the privilege of on the table. 
 
 making the remarks he desired to submit. The motion to lay it on the table was then put, 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD, in the Chair, said that he w i t h the following vote ayes 38, noes 26. 
 wished to mak some observations on this ques- The PRESIDENT: There is no quorum vot- 
 tion himself. ing. 
 
 And then, in consideration of this, the motion A second count was had, and resulted ayes 50, 
 :hat the committee rise was carried. noes 32. It was carried. 
 
 rose, reported progress, and Mr. TOWNSEND hoped that as the gentleman 
 wished it to be examined that he would not ob- 
 ject to have it printed. He moved that it be 
 printed. The motion was rejected. 
 
 The committee 
 obtained leave to sit again. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, (32nd day) July 10 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. HARRINGTON. 
 
 Mr. HUNT presented a petition from the cen- 
 tral committee of the National Reform Associa 
 tion of the city of New York, relative to the pro. 
 
 . r i * . :*: ii_ _ i /> r 1 l 
 
 APPORTIONMENT, ELECTION AND TENURE OF 
 THE LEGISLATURE. 
 
 Mr. W, TAYLOR, from the committee (No. 1) 
 on the above subject, presented the following : 
 
 i The standing committee on the apportionment, election. 
 
 pnety of limiting the number of acres of land L* ur e e ooffic an d compentation of the legislature, hav- 
 that shall be owed by any one person at any time. i ng considered the subjects referred to them, beg leave to 
 Referred to the anti-rent committee. ' report the following proposed amendments to the consti- 
 
 17 
 
266 
 
 tution, it connection with the sections to which they be- 
 long. 
 
 ARTICLE FIRST. ' 
 
 t} 1. The legislative power of this state shall be vested in 
 a Senate and Assembly. 
 
 (j2. The Senate shall consist of thirty-two members, and 
 the senators shall be chosen for two years. The Assem- 
 bly shall consist of one hundred and twenty-eight mem- 
 bers, who shall be annually elected. 
 
 Substitute the following for section five : 
 The state shall be divided into thirty-two districts, to be 
 called senate districts, each of which shall choose one 
 senator. The districts shall be numbered from one to 
 thirty-two inclusive, and shall be divided into two classes, 
 to be called the first and second class. Numbers 1, 3, 5, 7, 
 9 11 13, 15, 17, 19, 21,23, 25, 27, 29 and 31, shall constitute 
 the first class ; and numbers 2, 4, 6, 3, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 
 22, 24, 26, 28, 30 and 32, shall constitute the second class. 
 The seats of the Senators first elected pursuant to this 
 Constitution of the first class, shall be vacated at the end 
 of the first year, and of the second class at the end of the 
 second year ; in order that sixteen senators shall be an- 
 nually elected. [The representative population for a sin- 
 gle senate district is 74,985.] 
 District No. 1, shall consist of the counties of Suffolk and 
 
 Queens. 58,657. 
 < No. 2, shall consist of the counties of Kings and 
 
 Richmond. 74,024. 
 
 < No. 3, shall consist of the first, second, third,fourth, 
 fifth and sixth wards of the city and county of 
 New York. 67,828. 
 
 ' No. 4, shall consist of the seventh, tenth, thir- 
 teenth, and fourteenth wards. 75,845. 
 " No. 5 shall consist of the eighth, ninth and fifteenth 
 
 wards. 70,020. 
 
 " No. 6, shall consist of the eleventh, twelfth, six- 
 teenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth wards. 
 
 No. 7, shall consist of the counties of Westchester, 
 
 Putnam and Rockland. 68,342. 
 No. 8, shall consist of the counties of Dutchess 
 
 and Columbia. 91,062. 
 No. 9, shall consist of the counties of Orange and 
 
 Sullivan. 66,840. 
 No. 10, shall consist of the counties of Ulster and 
 
 Greene. 75,900. 
 No. 11, shall consist of the counties of Albany and 
 
 Schenectady. 84,332. 
 No. 12, shall consist of the county of Reasselaer. 
 
 58671 
 
 No. 13, shall consist of the counties of Washington 
 and Saratoga. 78,921. 
 
 No. 14, shall consist of the counties of Warren, Es- 
 sex, and Clinton. 65,277. 
 No. 15, shall consist of the counties of St. Law- 
 
 rence and Franklin. 75,2-22. 
 No. 16, shall consist of the counties of Herkimer, 
 
 Hamilton, Fulton and Montgomery. 84,815. 
 No. 17, shall consist of the counties of Schoharie 
 
 and Otsego. 81,646. 
 No 18, shall consist of the counties of Delaware and 
 
 Chenango. 75,545. 
 No. 19 shall consist of the county of Oneida. 
 
 78,696. 
 No. 20, shall consist of the counties of Madison and 
 
 Oswego. 86.822. 
 No. 21, shall consist of the counties of Jeflerson 
 
 and Lewis. 81,760. 
 No. 22, shall consist of the county of Onondaga. 
 
 67419 
 No. 23. shall consist of the counties ofCortland, 
 
 Broome and Tioga. 72,166. 
 No. 24, shall consist of the counties of Cayuga and 
 
 Wayne. 89.532. 
 No. 25, shall consist of the counties of Tompkins, 
 
 Seneca and Chemung. 85,037. 
 No. 26, shall consist of the counties of Steuben 
 
 and Yates. 71,237. 
 No. 27, shall consist of the county of Monroe. 
 
 63,586. 
 No. 28, shall consist of the counties of Orleans, 
 
 Geneseeand Niagara. 85.028. 
 No. 29, shall consist of the counties of Ontario and 
 
 Livingston. 72,99f. 
 No. 80, shall consist of the counties of Allegany 
 
 and Wyoming. 65,891. 
 No. 31, shall consist of the county of Erie. 68,672 . 
 
 " No. 32, shall consist of the counties of Chautauquc 
 and Cattaraugus. 75.750. 
 
 6. An enumeration of the inhabitants of the state shall 
 be taken under the direction of the legislature, in the year 
 one thousand eight hundred and fifty-Jive, and at the end 
 of ten years thereafter; and the said districts shall be so 
 altered by the legislature at the first session after the re- 
 turn of every enumeration, that each Senate district shall 
 contain, as nearly as may be, an equal number of inhabi- 
 tants, excluding aliens, paupers, and persons of color not 
 taxed, and shall remain unaltered until the return of ano- 
 ther enumeration, and shall at all times consist of contig- 
 uous territory; and no county shall be divided, in the for- 
 mation of a Senate district, except such county shall be enti 
 tied to two or more senators. 
 
 7. The members of the Assembly shall be apportioned 
 among the several counties of the state, as nearly as may 
 be, according to the number ol their respective inhabitants, 
 excluding aliens, paupers, and persons of color not taxed, 
 and shall be chosen by districts. The legislature, at its next 
 annual meeting, shall divide the several coimtirs of the State 
 into as many districts as each county respectively is now by 
 law entitled to members of Jlsnembly, to be called Jlssembly 
 districts; and shall number the samt in each county entitled 
 to more than one member, from iiumber one, to the number 
 such county is entitled to, numbers inclusive, each of which 
 districts shall choose one member of Jlssembly. Each Jlsstm- 
 bly district shall at all times contain, as nearly as may be, an 
 equal number of inhabitants, and shall consist of contiguovt 
 territory; and no town or ward shall be divided in the forma- 
 tion oj an Jlssembly district, except such town or ward may 
 be entitled to two or more members. An apportionment of 
 members of Assembly shall be made by the legislature at 
 its first session after the return of every enumeration; and 
 the Jlssembly districts in the several counties of the State 
 shall be so altered as to conform in number to the t,aid appor- 
 tionment, and shall be constituted as herein before directed; 
 and the apportionment and the districts shall remain unal- 
 tered, until another enumeration shall have been taken. 
 Every county heretofore established, and separately or- 
 ganized, shall always be entitled to one member of the As- 
 sembly; and no new county shall hereafter be erected, un 
 less its population shall entitle it to a member. 
 
 5)9. The members of the Legislature shall receive for 
 their services a compensation, to be ascertained by law, 
 and paid out of the public treasury ; which compensation 
 shall not exceed the sum of. three dollars per day; and after 
 the year 1847, shall not exceed the sum of three dollars per 
 day, for the period of ninety days from the commencement 
 of the session. When convened in extra stssion, by the Go- 
 vernor, they shall receive such sum as shall be fixed for the 
 ordinary session. They shall also receive the sum of one dol- 
 lar for every ten milts they shall travel, in going to and re- 
 turning from their place of mefting, on the most usual 
 route. The Speaker of the Jlssembly shall, in virtue of hit 
 office, receive an additional compensation, equal to one-third 
 of his per diem as member. 
 
 ^ 10. No member o( the Legislature shall receive any 
 civil appointment within this State, or to the Senate of 
 the United States, from the Governor, the Governor and 
 Senate, or from the Legislature, during the term for which 
 he shall have been elected. 
 
 fc 11. No person being a member of Congress, or holding 
 any judicial or military office under the United States, 
 shall hold a seat in the Legislature. And, if any person 
 shall, after his election as a member of the Legislature, b 
 elected to Congress, or appointed to any office, civil or 
 military, under the government of the United States, his 
 acceptance thereof shall vacate his seat. 
 
 Substitute for sections 15 and 16, so far as relates to Se- 
 nators and Members of Assembly, the following: 
 
 6 15. The first election of Senators and Members of As- 
 sembly, pursuant to the provisions of this Constitution, 
 shall be held on the Tuesday succeeding the first Monday 
 of November one thousand eight hundred and forty-Severn, 
 and all subsequent elections shall be held on the Tuesday 
 succeeding the first Monday of November in each year, 
 unless otherwise directed by the Legislature. The Sena- 
 tors and members of Assembly who may be in office on the 
 first day of January one thousand eight hundred and forty- 
 seven, shall hold their offices until the thirty-first day of 
 December following, and no longer. 
 
 WM. TAYLOR Chairman. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR said that it was proper perhaps 
 for him now to state that every proposition in this 
 report had been agreed to by the vote of a majori- 
 ty of the committee. And that the whole report 
 
267 
 
 itselt vvus a report of a majority.' The minority 
 had assented to the report being made, reserving 
 to themselves the right to submit their views 
 when in committee of the whole. Indeed he 
 would add that every individual member of the 
 committee tho' he has signed it would feel him- 
 self at liberty, after reflection and discussion, to 
 vote in accordance with his sense of duty, even 
 though it might be that he should take opposite 
 
 B-ou.id to that taken by himself in committee. 
 e moved that the report be committed to the 
 committee of the whole and printed, together with 
 the accompanying table of apportionment. 
 
 Air. TALLMADGE asked if it would be a very 
 great Ubor, for the committee to add to the sena- 
 torial districts, the amount of population which 
 each contains. 
 
 Mr TAYLOR said that had already been done. 
 
 The report was sent to committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to print 400 additional copies, 
 as it was a very valuable report; making 1200 in 
 all. 
 
 This .was unanimously agreed to, with the ex- 
 ception of Mr. PATTERSON, who rose to say 
 something when the president declared ihe ques- 
 tion carried, and the gentleman from Chautauque 
 took his seat amid some laughter. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD offered the following resolu 
 tion: , 
 
 Resolved, That when this Convention adjourns it ad- 
 journ to meet again at 4 o'clock tfiis afternoon, and that 
 it will hold afternoon sessions, commencing at 4 o'clock 
 each day, until the further order of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said he was induced to offer 
 this, from the disposition he saw yesterday in ma- 
 ny gentleman to sit out the debate ; for his own 
 part, his health would not allow him to go long 
 past his regular dinner time. But he was wil- 
 ling to sit after dinner. 
 
 Much dissent to this was observed. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said he must move to lay 
 this on the table. It was yet too early for after- 
 noon sessions. The standing committees have 
 not got through with their reports ; when they 
 had he was willing to sit afternoons. His own 
 committee were to meet this afternoon at half 
 past 3 o'clock ; since their organization they had 
 met every day at 8 or 9 ; adjourned at 11 ; gone 
 into committee again when the Convention ad- 
 journed before 2, and sat till 2 o'clock; met again 
 at half past 3 ; and sat until 8 at 'night. And if 
 this resolution was to be adopted, he must ask to 
 be excused from serving on that committee any 
 longer. For he had made it a rule of his public 
 life, always to be present in every deliberate bo- 
 dy of which he had the honor to be a member, 
 upon every occasion when there was a rote to be 
 taken. When all the committees had reported 
 he had no objections to vote for this resolution, 
 but it would not be proper now. 
 
 The resolution was laid on the table. 
 
 THE TERMINATION OF DEBATE IN COMMITTEE 
 OF THE WHOLE. 
 
 Mr. BAKER called for the consideration of his 
 resolution lo fix the time to terminate debate in 
 committee of the whole on the second section oi 
 the report of the fifth standing committee, at 15 
 minutes to two o'clock. 
 
 After some conversation, Mr. WRIGHT (of 
 Erie) moved to lay the resolution on the table. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN called for the ayes and noes on 
 this. 
 
 They were ordered and resulted thus : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ayrault, Bascom, Bouck,Bowdish, Bray- 
 on, Brown, Cambreleng, D D. Campbell, Chatfield, Clyde, 
 Jonely, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana, Dauibrth, Dorlpn, 
 Glanders, Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, 
 Hunt, A. Huntington, Kennedy, Kirkland, Nicholas, Ni- 
 coll, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Rhoadws, 
 Kichmond, Riker, Ruggles, Shaver, Shephard, Simmons, 
 E. Spencer, W.R. Spencer, Stantjn, Stephens, Strong, 
 Taggart, Tallmaclge, W. Tuylor, Tilden, Tuthill, Vache, 
 Van Schoonhoven, Ward Warren, White, Willard, Wood, 
 A. Wright, W.B. Wright, A. W. Young-63. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Archer.F. F. Backus, H. Backus, 
 Baker, Bergen, Bruce, Brundage, Bull, Burr, R. Camp- 
 bell, jr. Candee, Clark, Cook, Crocker, Dubois, Forsyth, 
 Gardner, Harrison, Hunter, E. Huntington, Jordan, Kem- 
 ble, Kernan, Kingsley, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Powers, 
 Russell, Salisbury, Sanford, Shaw, Sheldon, Stetson, 
 Stow, Taft, Townsend, Mr. President. 33. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH offered the following resolution: 
 
 Resolved, That the debate in the committee of the whole 
 upon the second section oi the report of committee No. five, 
 terminate on Tuesday next at two o'clock, and that the 
 question be then taken on all amendments then pending. 
 
 On the motion ot Mr. NICOLL it was laid on 
 the table. 
 
 LITERATURE, &c., FUND. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL offered the following, which was 
 adopted: 
 
 Resolved, That the Secretary of the Regents of the Uni- 
 versity be requested to communicate to this Convention 
 the number of academies participating in the distribution 
 of the public moneys subsequently to the year 184-2, with 
 the aggregate amount of money distributed and the aggre- 
 gate number of pupils instructed in each year, and that he 
 also state the amount of money distributed to the said aca- 
 demies, or to any of them, in each year, for the purpose o f 
 educating common school teachers, with the number of 
 pupils so educated in each. 
 
 THE PASSAGE OF BILLS. 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR offered the following, as the 
 suggestion of an eminent legal gentleman of great 
 experience in legislation, and desired that it might 
 be considered by the appropriate committee: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to committee No. two, to 
 inquire into the expediency of providing that whenever a 
 bill shall have been read for the third time in either house 
 of the legislature, no other business shall be donp by the 
 House until the question upon that bill shall be decided, 
 and that such question shall not be reconsidered during the 
 session; and also that every bill, upon its third reading 
 shall be read in full and at length, 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND suggested that the resolution 
 should be amended so as to provide that no bill 
 should pass except by the vote of a majority of all 
 the members elected. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR assented to such a modifica- 
 tion and afterwards consented that the resolution 
 should lie on the table. 
 
 ELECTION OF U. S. SENATORS. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES offered the following, and it was 
 adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the standing committee 
 No. two, to enquire into the expediency of requiring the 
 legislature of this State to amend the law for the election 'of 
 Senators in Congress in such manner that in case either 
 House shall fail to make a nomination within ten days af- 
 ter a nomination by the other House, to fill a vacancy the 
 election shall be made without further delay by joint bal- 
 lot. 
 
268 
 
 APPROPRIATIONS FOR LITERARY PURPOSES. 
 
 Mi. LOOMIS offered the following and it wa 
 
 adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee on co] 
 leges, academies and common schools to enquire and re 
 port upon the expediency of securing by ccnstitutiona 
 provision that appropriations lor colleges, academies anc 
 other institutions ot learning shall be made on some jus 
 principles of proportion, and forbidding special appropria 
 tiens to particular institutions, to the exclusion ol others 
 Also to consider whether the office of Regent of the Uni 
 versity may not be dispensed with without public detri 
 ment, and whether the present mode of appointing trustees 
 of such institutions ought not to be abolished. 
 
 POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE EXECUTIVE. 
 The committee of the whole, Mr. CHATFIELD 
 in the chair, again took up the Article in relatior 
 to the Executive powers and duties. 
 
 The question being on Mr. W. TAYLOR'S sub- 
 stitute for the second section providing that nc 
 person not a qualified elector of this State, except 
 as to residence in the county or town, shall be 
 eligible lo the office of Governor, 
 
 Mr. MURRIS, had the floor, but said he woul 
 waive his right, if any other gentleman desired 
 to speak. He undeistood that the CHAIRMAN ol 
 the committee desired to speak ? 
 
 The CHAIR had not determined whether he 
 sbould speak at all. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that he had certainly 
 been misunderstood and he knew that he 
 had been misrepresented, in the printed re- 
 port of some remarks . made by a highly re- 
 spectable member of this house, and he there- 
 ore wished to say a few words. He found him 
 self represented in a printed report of some re- 
 marks made by a gentleman in this house who 
 certainly deserved to stand as high in -the estima- 
 tion of the members of this body as any other, 
 with having put forth certain doctrines or opin- 
 ions that he should suppose no man in this house 
 would think could be advocated with success or 
 deserve even the refutation of- a simple denial. 
 And it was from this, that he asked leave to add a 
 few words to what he had formerly said on this 
 subject. He did attach great importance to the 
 question before the committee because although 
 it was practically insignificant, he thought 
 that the insertion of this five years qualification 
 or its rejection involved a principle vitally con- 
 nected with a proper understanding of the true 
 nature of a democratic form of government. And 
 it was in this point of view and in this only that he 
 regarded the question as worthy of investigation. 
 Most certainly the people of the State of New 
 York would never elect a man to a public office 
 so important as that of governor, who had not at- 
 tained the age of 30 years,unless he was an individ- 
 ual of most distinguished merit, and most distin- 
 guished precocity. If such an individual should 
 present- himself, then it would be a case to which 
 no rule of this kind ought to present an impedi- 
 ment to the exercise of the will of the people, in 
 promoting him to that station for which the God 
 who created him pronounced him worthy. He 
 made the same remark in relation to the qualifi- 
 cation of five years residence. This was a mere 
 arbitrary thing. The worst man who could pos- 
 sibly be elected for this high office, would be 
 most likely to possess that paltry insignificant 
 qualification. The most worthy man who could 
 be selected from this great Union to hold the sta- 
 
 tion might be destitute of it. If common fame 
 was not a common liar, this very second section 
 owed its existence to the influence of a distin- 
 guished member of the Convention which sat here 
 m 1821, but whose name does not appear as con- 
 nected with the introduction of any part of it 
 That very distinguished citizen had a son', 
 born he believed in the city of New York, in the 
 ripe maturity of vigor, enjoying in the completest 
 degree, the coi'Sdence of all classes of his 
 fellow citizens eminently qualified for the 
 high station of governor eminently qualified 
 by reason of his intimate relation and ac- 
 quaintance with financial matters, by reason ot 
 his intimate relation, with ail the arts of peace 
 if not of the arts of war, and fortunately we had 
 most occasion for knowledge of ihe arts ot peace 
 in our government intimately connected with the 
 business of the State during his whole life, and 
 yet who for the last five and twenty years he 
 thought, had been a resident of New Jersey, mere- 
 ly across the river, but spending some ten or 
 eleven hours of the 24, every day, and probably 
 part of each Sabbath in the Ciry of New- 
 York. He therefore said it was a most insignifi 
 caut qualification because the most unworthy are 
 apt to possess it, and the most worthy likelv 
 to be without it. We had been told by some 
 gentlemen that if no restrictions were imposed, we 
 might elect Gen. Jackson, renowned for ability in 
 peace not less than in ^ar that Gen. Zachary Tay. 
 lor whose path of life, had before been so inobtru- 
 sive, that his name had scarce reached the public 
 ear, and who but yesterday so gloriously asserted 
 the supremacy of the American arms, and main- 
 aincd their honor and glory, against the calumny 
 hat individuals in our own and rther climes had 
 sought to cast upon them we are told 
 that but for some restriction to confiue the 
 people, they might call to the station of 
 governor a Jackson or a Taylor, who had not the 
 high qualification of five years residence. He 
 should like 'o know what evil would ensue, if the 
 >eople of the State had happened on some occa- 
 sion to have selected the distinguished civilian 
 )l whom he spoke just now, or either of those dis- 
 :inguished military chieftains. For all practical 
 jnrposes it was a most idle qualification to intro- 
 duce, and a most idle disqualification to interpose 
 igainst the free choice that the electors might 
 make of a Governor, lo hold the helm of State. But 
 although it was practically of no sort of importance, 
 and although the course of this debate had pro- 
 duced but this single change in his opinion upon 
 he subject that we ought rather to liberalize 
 he common law in relation to holding office he 
 itill thought it well enough to adhere to the com- 
 non rule that every elector should be eligible to 
 he office. He would rather liberalize the rule 
 ather say that any citizen ol the United Stales 
 hough he might not happen to enjoy the advan- 
 age of residing a single year within the State, so 
 is to be eligible to vote and consequently eligible 
 o office, who should satisfy a majority of the elec- 
 ors of the State, that he was fit to be our first 
 magistrate, should be eligible to hold that high 
 ffice. And if the evil that should result, should 
 e that on some occasion a hero like Jackson or 
 'aylor should be called to be Governor of 
 he State, in God's name let that evil come. 
 
269 
 
 He thought that the Empire State would 
 be able to endure all the misery that would 
 result from the operation. The proposition with 
 which he started in this case, referring to the ele- 
 meniary principled <>i 'representative democracy 
 whose basis is absolute equality in all the mem 
 bers of the State was that it was improper, un 
 wise, and unbecoming in the people to impose 
 these restrictions upon their free choice. We 
 here, acting for them preparatory to their final 
 judgment, ought not to recommend to them the 
 adoption of such a restriction. No man rrere, he 
 trusted was so ignorant as not to know that we 
 could impose no restrictions on the people, or so 
 ignorant as not to know that our action was per- 
 fectly void unless the people ratified it. We all 
 know that and require not to be taught it at this 
 late of day. We also know, and no man could 
 deny it, that the people have a right to impose 
 these qualifications, and so far to restrain their 
 own free action, in any respect that at a luture 
 time a majority might agree to. But the question 
 was, ought they to agree to it. They ought 
 if any good would result from it and it was 
 not repugnant to the true principles of represen- 
 tative democracy, where all the free citizens of the 
 Slate are equal. Now he would say that no good 
 would result from it, to begin with; and in 
 the second place, that it was repugnant to the 
 true principles of a democratic State, where 
 equality was the first principle of government. 
 It one part of the citizens of the State were 
 competent to hold office, and another part were 
 not, the electoral body would be divided into two 
 classes the class of patricians, who are compe- 
 tent to he id office, and the class of plebeians who 
 are not competent to hold office. Was such a rule, 
 no rnatier in how slight a degree it might be in- 
 troduced, consistent with the principles of abso- 
 lute equality among all the members of the State? 
 He apprehended that it was not, and that we 
 should act most absurdly in introducing a qualifi- 
 cation, so usele.se, and so insignificant as here 
 mentioned, for the mere purpose of declaring in 
 the fundamental law that the constituent body 
 was divisible into two classes the competent 
 and incompetent, to hold the station of Governor. 
 This was his opinion and not the idle one that 
 was in print imputed to him most singularly, by 
 a gentleman of very high intelligence. In de- 
 fence of this proposition against the remarks ot 
 a distinguished gentleman from Saratoga (Mr. 
 PORTER,) who as was well said, had in his own 
 person furnished the best evidence of the 
 claims of early youth to honorable distinction, 
 he (Mr.O'C.) had a word to say. The honor- 
 able gentleman was pleased to say, and the 
 honorable* gentleman, (Mr. MORRIS,) who had 
 claimed the privilege of closing the debate 
 he believed intended to say the same thing that 
 there was a certain inconsistency in that doctrine, 
 inasmuch as the constituent body was not the whole 
 people. That they themselves acted merely inasort 
 of representative position that they form but a 
 small portion of the peope.and that they themselves 
 represented the aliens, the Indians, and the ne- 
 groes, who are not allowed to vote, and the 
 fair ladies and infants. We had been told 
 that they not only represented these, but unborn 
 IZljllions who were to come upon the stage of life 
 
 after us, and to be governed by the laws which 
 we shall create. All this was true in a 
 poetical sense, but not in a political sense. The 
 electors of this State did no more represent all 
 these classes of persons, than did Ihe Emperor o( 
 Russia, the Sultan of Turkey, or any other despot, 
 represent the people of his country. We represent 
 the free white citizens of the State over 21 years 
 of age, and those negroes who happen to have 
 $250 -.vorth of real estate. We did not represent 
 the other classes at all. We constituted the poli- 
 tical body, and wjih us resided the whole power 
 )f government. We control those classes, not by 
 their choice ; not by representation, but by reason 
 of '.our mental and physical superiority: either 
 by our superiority in mental power for the pur- 
 poses of government, or by our mental and physi. 
 cal superiority combined. We control the Indians 
 because they are fewer in nun.ber the ne- 
 groes for fhe same reasons and the fair ladies 
 because we have chosen to deprive them of 
 the right of representation. We do not sit here 
 as the representatives of the Indians upon the floor 
 of this Convention; we had no evidence of their 
 appointment. We did not represent the infants ; 
 none of them had selected us to represent them 
 here. Neither did we represent the ladies. All 
 these classes of persons constituted the subjects of 
 government, and not the members of the political 
 body, and the bringing forward of this argument 
 served to show how entirely the paities bringing 
 it forward, misunderstand the nature and character 
 of representative democracy. It might be injus- 
 tice that the men above 21 years of age shmild. 
 thus grasp and control all the powers of govern- 
 ment, but they have done it, and let gentlemen if 
 they think proper, bring in a resolution to enfran- 
 chise all these classes, and then we could debate 
 the question as to whether they ought to take part 
 in the government. All he had to say was that 
 when the ladies were permitted to vote, he shovld 
 insist upon the right of voting for one of them for 
 Governor. We had the right beyond all question 
 to recommend this or any other measure having a 
 restrictive tendency, because we should not cease 
 to be a republic and a free state, though we should 
 travel some distance from the true principles of a 
 democratic state. We should still be a represen- 
 tative democracy, but so far as we introduced in 
 any respect, however slight, a deviation from the 
 true principles of democratic equality, which 
 maintains that all citizens shall be permitted to 
 participate in the government of the country, so 
 far, no matter how small, do we deviate from the 
 true principles of represenlative democracy. 
 Some reference had been made to the bill of rights 
 as providing for all these persons. It was intro- 
 duced to restrain our officers and agents with deal- 
 ing unjustly, cruelly and improperly with these 
 subjects of the law, in the discharge of the duties 
 the people had entrusted to them. These were 
 ihe principles upon which he based his argument, 
 and he was willing to stand or fall by them. One 
 single point further and he had done. A great 
 deal had been said about the people not calling for 
 this alteration. Now he should like to know how 
 we were find out what the people had called for. 
 Have we no juri?diciion to examine a question 
 presented to this Convention unless we could point 
 to the editorial article or the communication in 
 
270 
 
 some paper in some quarter of the state in favor 
 of that reform? Must he produce a county con- 
 vention resolution to justify his examination of any 
 part of the Constitution ? Where was that written 
 in the law ? Why each one of us was responsible for 
 at least to some twenty thousand inhabitants, and 
 he s'ood here speaking the voice of those twenty 
 thousand. And let no man say that the people do 
 not demand these alterations, when twenty thousand 
 of them speaking by the lips of their representa- 
 tives, invite you to the examination, and to the 
 application of your judgment, before you permit 
 it to stand, or make any alteration. But it was 
 not true that the people had not complained of 
 this second section and most strange would it 
 have been had they not. Why in 121, the hon- 
 orable gentleman from Orange, who has been fre- 
 quently alluded to, and sometimes rather erro- 
 neously in respect to his history, when that Con- 
 stitution was adopted, had just about attained the 
 full age and ability to be a candidate for the office 
 of Governor. And although history informs him 
 that he drew his first breath in a foreign land, yet 
 he has never known any country but the free 
 land of America. He was fully competent to be 
 Governor if the people chose to elect him he 
 was fully competent. But that Convention dis- 
 qualified him, and for five and twenty years he 
 has stood disqualified, although the negro who 
 blackened his boots was competent to be elected 
 to the office, if he owned but $250 worth of wild 
 land. The same remark he might apply to a 
 case of an old soldier of the revolutionary war, 
 who was wounded in the battle of Trenton under 
 the immortal WASHINGTON, and who at that very 
 lime, and to him (Mr. O'CoNOR) exclaimed 
 in terms .of the utmost indignation against 
 this disfranchisement. He was past all 
 hope of being Governor, but he did not 
 like being disfranchised. He expressed the ut- 
 most indignation at it. He was competent to be 
 elected to the highest office in the Union to be 
 President of the United States to sit where his 
 illustrious leader had first sat and yet he was 
 not eligible to the comparatively insignificant of- 
 fice of governor of this state. Though his first 
 breath had been drawn in a foreign land, yet he 
 had a double birth in the birth of the nation. 
 Twenty years ago, therefore this second section 
 was a subject of the deepest indignation. And 
 this man had a right to be indignant against it. 
 He had a right to be indignant at the most mon- 
 strous absurdity of declaring him eligible to sit 
 in the seat of Washington, but not here. An old 
 , man, almost on the verge of the grave, to whom 
 he (Mr. O'C.) stood in the nearest relationship, 
 it was possible for one man to stand to another, 
 pointed to that act at this time, and pronounced 
 its author hostile to the few surviving Revolu- 
 tionary heroes, who had left the old world to die 
 or conquer in the new. He would never be Go- 
 vernor, but he (Mr. O'C.) hoped that he would 
 live long enough, as he trusted he would, to be 
 qualified for the station, if the free citizens of 
 the state should see fit to elect him. The 
 party in this state, usually in a minority he 
 granted, but which embraced the greatest 
 amount of wealth, certainly, undoubtedly the 
 greatest amount of attainments and high order 
 of education, and for aught he knew the 
 
 most respectable, and in all things but politics the 
 most influential that party duiing the last five 
 and twenty years in seeking for a candidate, hod 
 settled upon a venerable and distinguished citizen 
 of the State, eminent for his attainments and his 
 knowledge of our institutions, but who under that 
 law was disfranchised by reason of his foreign 
 birth and they were obliged to give up the idea 
 of naming and presenting him as a candidate ft r 
 that high office. He alluded to an illustrious and 
 distinguished citizen, whose name was connected 
 with the public history of the Union who 
 brought eminent talents and ability to the aid of 
 our country when they were greatly needed and 
 who helped to build up rur national constitution 
 who was the choice and favorite now, if they 
 could elect a Governor, of the Conservative part' , 
 and who stands at the head of the chief literary 
 institution in that city, so remarkable for her 
 growth and importance as a commercial err.- 
 porium, and which he trusted would become 
 equally remarkable tor her literary achieve- 
 ment that seat of all the genius and enterprise 
 the city of New York. He alluded to Albert 
 Gallatin, and he (Mr. O'C.) trusted that lie would 
 be blessed with length of days sufficient to be- 
 come qualified for all offices. Again he did ex- 
 claim against this cry of reverence for what has 
 been written. What has preceded us ought to 
 stand unless we find something absolutely mis- 
 chievous in the workings of it of the peo. 
 pie crying out against it. For his own par', 
 he was a conservative. He was for the preserva- 
 tion of every safe-guard of private right, of pro- 
 perty, of steadiness, and uniformity in our laws 
 and their administration. But he was radical in the 
 correcting of all antiquated evils, and principles 
 akin to, an-d connected with, unequal disqualifica- 
 tions, and to the creation of one class of people 
 above another in the State. He would have a 
 free, perfect, representative democracy, where all 
 men, who had any share in the government, should 
 stand equal, in order that the true principles of 
 the revolution might be carried out to their full- 
 est extent. Why should we reverence this law 
 of 1821 ? It was only about half as old as he was 
 himself, and he should be very sorry to claim rev- 
 erence for age. It was quite a modern law in- 
 tended for God knows what useful purpose. But 
 if it were as old as the law which declares the 
 right of Kingly Government to be Divine, he 
 would root it out the more for its antiquity, think- 
 ing that it had lived full long enough. If it was 
 as old as the detestable law whose eulogy was pro. 
 nounced by the gentleman from Oranse, (Mr. 
 BROWN) that no man should go out of the coun- 
 tiy in which destiny had placed his birth which 
 destroyed patriotism and rendered eve"ry land of 
 which a man is native, his prison, and of which 
 the despot might well be called the jailor. If it 
 was as old as this, because it was inconsistent and 
 incompatible with the spirit and genius of our 
 Government though there never might occur in 
 a million of years an instance of practical incon. 
 venience resulting from it yet it it was incon- 
 sistent with the true principles of government, 
 he would root it out and condemn it. He trusted 
 in the good sense of the Convention, in its thor- 
 ough understanding of the great principles of go- 
 vernment that in making a fundamental law 
 
271 
 
 which is to live long or short according to its 
 soundness to sweep from the Constitution this 
 paltry liftle restriction, never again to bar the 
 warrior of the revolution from the highest, office 
 in the State and never again to occupy eight days 
 of the precious time of a Convention of the State 
 of New York. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said, that as there appeared to be 
 no other gentleman who wished to speak, he 
 would himself submit a few remarks before this 
 question was taken. And he would start where 
 he started yesterday, for the purpose of bringing 
 himself up. He stated then, and he repeated 
 now, that in his judgment this subject of the 
 qualification of the Governor did not appertain to 
 committee number 5, and that that part of the 
 Veto power, as it is denominated, which speaks of 
 the power of the Legislature to pass a law not- 
 withstanding the veto of the Governor, also did 
 not belong to the committee No. 5. But, it was 
 also due to state the reasons why it was supposed 
 by many that both of these subjects did belong to 
 committee No. 5 and that they were right in pre- 
 senting them to the convention. The resolution 
 under which the committee was appointed reier- 
 red to them the consideration of the election, te- 
 nure of office, and compensation, &c., of the Ex- 
 ecutive. Now, the word tenure, as it was fre- 
 quently used, meant not only the length of the 
 term, but the conditions under which it was held, 
 and consequently no one's judgment would be 
 questioned who should be of the opinion that this 
 matter did belong to committee No. 5. He was 
 of a different opinion himself, though the ques- 
 tion was not discussed in committee, but his im- 
 pressions were that it was best to report it as it 
 then :he purpose of enabling the Con- 
 
 vention itself to dispose of a subject where minds 
 were divided as to which committee it be- 
 longed. In relation to that part of the re- 
 port, which the committee had not yet reached, 
 and which referred to the veto power, it was put 
 in because of the difference of opinion as to 
 which committee it belonged, and that the ques- 
 tion might be settled by the Convention itself. 
 There was a question, and therefore this measure 
 was introduced. This debate had been so long 
 continued, that gentleman had not only been ex- 
 cused in making corrections, but it had been ab- 
 solutely necessary that they should make them. 
 One gentleman has alluded to another expression, 
 which would appear in the papers either of the 
 evening or the morning, and the rest of the 
 house would discuss it, and turn and bow, and 
 gesticulate and emphasize towards this gentle- 
 man as though he had actually used it when in 
 fact the expression had never passed his lips. 
 Mr. M. said that he Lad himself sat still, until he 
 was actually poked out to make a speech, con- 
 vinced that not only was it unnecessary at that 
 time, but that it would be in bad taste. And 
 when he thus rose to speak, he did it with caution 
 and deliberation because he knew this house 
 better than did his colleague (Mr. TOWJVSEND,) 
 
 who supposed that bnly one man out of five could 
 speak. He (Mr. M.) knew as soon as he saw 
 them all that he who supposed that there was not 
 a man there, who could not rise and fully and 
 clearly express his ideas on any subject, was not 
 a physiognomist^ and did not understand bump- 
 
 ology. (Laughter.) He therefore spoke with a 
 deliberation that he was not generally noted for, 
 n the few remarks that he had made on that oc- 
 casion. He studied and measured his words, 
 and almost weighed his sentences, because 
 he knew where he was, and also knew from the 
 smiling faces around him, that " Bob" was to 
 take it. [Laughter.] And yet in the course of 
 that debate (without alluding to any particular 
 gentleman) words were put in his mouth he had 
 never uttered, and sentiments which had never 
 entered his mind. Yet he sat silent, for he was 
 one who had lived long enough to learn to bide 
 his time. Now, he was charged with having used 
 the words " checks and bits upon the peo- 
 ple," when in fact he had never uttered them 
 and no idea of the kind had ever entered his 
 brain. These charges were reiterated, and had 
 he not a good memory and better principles, he 
 would have been convinced that he had used 
 them, so uniform and consistent was the testimo- 
 ny. What he did use was " checks and guards'' 
 these were the words that he uttered, and the 
 signification of them he understood checksupon 
 the delegates, and guards for the protection of 
 the people. That was the meaning of the words 
 as he used them and as he intended to use them. 
 Another expression was used by a gentleman, 
 not now in his seat. That gentleman turned to- 
 wards him (Mr. M.) with an emphasis of look 
 and an emphasis of utterance and said "the 
 gentleman from New- York does not want a fo- 
 reign Governor" using it as though he (Mr. M.) 
 had made use of the expression. And yet 
 he had never used it. He believed he had 
 now got through with all the points in this 
 general explanation, except one. Why he 
 was even put in print as having used the 
 words " 30 years and a native." Neither of them 
 passed his lips. He trusted it was not the inten- 
 tion of the reporter to misrepresent him he did 
 not believe it was. It might have grown entirely 
 out of an error in printing but these two words 
 were put in his mouth, when he had used neither. 
 And his whole past life was conclusive testimony 
 that such narrow sentiments were never enter- 
 tained by him. But that was gone; he believed 
 he could not be injured by it in any manner or 
 shape. The question before the committee was 
 precisely what it was when he last had the honor 
 of addressing it. Because the word " native" and 
 " 30 years" had been stricken out when he then 
 spoke. And although the discussion had since 
 continued mainly on these two qualifications, yet 
 as he understood them, they had been both set- 
 tled some time before he last had the honor of 
 addressing this committee. He understood the 
 section, as amended, to require that the can- 
 didate for Governor should be a citizen of the 
 State of New-York, and a resident of the State 
 for five years. The proposition now pending, 
 was to strike that out, and to substitute what 
 has been proposed by the gentleman from St. 
 Lawrence. Now he would state further as 
 gentlemen seemed to conceive that there was 
 something very wrong in a member of a com- 
 mittee who has signed his name to a report 
 which has been brought in here in his capacity 
 as a member of the Convention entertaining views 
 different from those presented there that the 
 
272 
 
 chairman of the committee had stated before, that 
 this report was only unanimous for the purpose 
 of presenting it to the Convention. -They were 
 only responsible for the report so far as its pre- 
 sentation was concerned. When he (Mr. M.) 
 introduced the report, he expressly stated 
 and by the sanction of his colleagues, that al- 
 though it was unanimous yet that the committee 
 did not come here wedded to the particular no- 
 tions that it presented, and that they would not 
 consider it any imputation against them, if other 
 views should be advanced and adopted and that 
 they did not consider themselves prevented from 
 making suggestions also. They were not gentle- 
 men who wished to come here bound down by 
 any notions they might have, before hearing the 
 argument here. This was the spirit in which 
 the report was brought in here some gentlemen 
 approving of some features in it which others did 
 not for the purpose of bringing the subject be- 
 fore the Convention. He had now come to the 
 question of the propriety of requiring these qua- 
 lifications as to whether any were required for 
 governor or not. We are told by gentlemen that 
 it was not democratic to do it he used the word 
 in its broadest signification, not as a party nick- 
 name, for he did not believe it should be used 
 here as such. Gentlemen had said that it was 
 contrary to the spirit of our institutions that any 
 qualification should be required of the candidate 
 for governor because it would be casting an im- 
 putation upon the people, who are to make the 
 selection. Now his friend and associate was 
 right when he said that he (Mr. M.) enter- 
 tained the idea that the electors were not the 
 whole body of the people, but only a part of it. 
 He denied that we came here only for the pur- 
 pose of representing the electors of the State ; 
 they had other, and as dear, or dearer, interests 
 than theirs, to represent. They had the people 
 to represent. The 2,500,000 of the people ; no 
 merely the 400,000 electors. And he insisted in 
 assembling here to frame a Constitution, they re- 
 presented the whining infant and the mother tha 1 
 bore it ; the male from infancy to manhood, anc 
 the woman from the cradle to the grave ; and al" 
 human nature, whether disfranchised as an elec 
 tor or not, form part of the people ; and we are 
 here as their representatives here for the pro 
 tection of those who have no means for the pro 
 tecting of their own rights. They were there t< 
 make a Constitution to protect those who had m 
 privilege to vote at all, as well as those whi 
 were electors. They were there to represen 
 the widow, who could not go to the ballo 
 box to deposit a vote for the protection of her in 
 dividual rights. They were there to protect the 
 witness; be he adult or child, female, negro o 
 Indian. They were there to frame an organi 
 law for the protecti&n of all these, and of all class 
 es of society. Each man who votes, acts in a re 
 presentative capacity. In depositing his vote, h 
 acts as the representative of some five or si: 
 others ; and therefore it is that it becomes neces 
 sary to use great caution as to whom they mad 
 electors. He would ask, were the human right 
 spoken of in the Declaration of Independence an 
 the less, because the party concerned Was an in 
 fant ? Is the individual excluded from th 
 full enjoyment of those human rights be 
 
 ause she is a female ? or because he is a 
 oung man under 21 years of age ? We are not 
 
 free democracy pure democracy does not 
 well here ! nor does it dwell anywhere ; unless 
 t be in some of the Indian tribes. For in a pure 
 emocracy every human being within the territory 
 f the State would be allowed to go up to the bal- 
 ot box and deposite his vote. We are a repre- 
 entative democracy in this country ; and we 
 ave a right to recommend to the good people of 
 ills State that each and every man, woman, and 
 hild, should each for himself possess this privi- 
 ege. Then each and every one would vote for 
 timself. But if this was to be extended to every 
 ne, then the system of representative democra- 
 y would be done away with. But for his own 
 art, tho' he would not recommend this, he should 
 ike to see it go down a little way below 21 years 
 fage, and he would like to see it extended to 
 he widow who had property to protect ; who 
 s oftentimes better qualified to attend to her own 
 flairs than the drunken husband, who rendered 
 limself incapable by a course of dissipation,. 
 whilst living, and died from the effects of it. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM hoped he did not intend by this 
 o advocate the insertion of a property qualifica- 
 ion on this point. (A laugh.) 
 
 Mr. MORRIS: No, he did not. belong to that 
 r ibe to that band of politicians. But we are 
 iere making qualifications; and yet gentlemen 
 ;ay that it is an imputation upon the people to 
 luggest them, or to recommend to them who ought 
 ,o be allowed to vote, and who not; to put those 
 checks and guards, not bits, around them at all. 
 Very well ; and yet we have here the first check; 
 the qualification of 21 years for an elector then 
 we have the residence in the state and county ; 
 and surely there was no one so ultra democratic 
 as to desire to do away with these ? Well, the 
 qualification required here for Governor was only 
 carrying out the same principle. Man lordly 
 man w ill take good care of himself. But it was 
 necessary to have these checks and guards not 
 bits for* the protection of women and children, 
 He was not afraid that even without the restric- 
 tion of age, we should ever have too young a man 
 in the Governor's chair He was a young 
 man himself, and was enrolled in the Young 
 Men's Committee. But he was much be- 
 yond that age, (30 years) He was much beyond 
 that. And a man beyond that was not too old to 
 learn; unless he happened to be one of those pre- 
 cocious lamps of learning one of those Jonah's 
 o-oui-ds, that grow up in a night, and wither 
 m the morning. [Laughter.] The reason that 
 this debate had^been so extended was, that 
 o-entlemen considered that this principle here 
 adopted at the start was to go through the 
 whole system of the organic law, which 
 they had met to frame. And it was evident 
 that the necessity of these restrictions had 
 been seen and regarded as sound doctrine. For 
 the present chairman of the committee of the 
 whole, in reporting from the special committee 
 of which he was the chairman, had reported in 
 favor of this wise and salutary principle. He 
 reported that there should be a State engineer 
 elected, and they also reported certain qualifica- 
 tions in regard to him ; he must have been a prac- 
 tical engineer for at least seven years ; was not 
 
273 
 
 this imposing restrictions on the people ? If they 
 are to choose as they please with regard to a gov- 
 ernor, why not let them choose as they please 
 with regard to an engineer ? Select any 
 body at random. Gentlemen say that we cannot 
 bind the people. You can bind the engineer 
 when he is made, but you cannot bind the 
 aggregate who is to select this engineer. 
 An engineer, it is true, may run your State down 
 hill as well as up ; and unless he is careful, he 
 may burst your boiler. They were very cautious 
 about the selecting of an engineer, but they cared 
 little about the Governor, whose power was far 
 greater. For he was the " veriest engineer of 
 them all ;" he would not say the " veriest Roman 
 of them all," because some gentlemen might say 
 this w*as anti-democratic. Now, we might boast 
 as much as we pleased about this point, but still 
 the fact is that the people do not, after all, govern 
 us ; we are governed by the electors, who control 
 the people. It was uncomfortable to admit this, 
 but still it was the fact. He was one of 16 from 
 the city of New York, who represented that en- 
 tire county; he considered himself the sixteenth 
 part of the essence of the people of the city and 
 county of New York. (Laughter.) If the peo- 
 ple had all voted, we would not have been 
 sitting here as a Convention at this time. 
 If the representatives of the people proper had 
 had the control of this matter, we should not have 
 been here. But it was brought about by chi- 
 canery and trickery the " tickle my elbow and 
 I'll tickle your's" system the political manoeu- 
 vreing that had gone through this whole State, 
 set in motion by men who were working solely 
 for their own political aggrandizement. That 
 had brought that Convention together there. 
 [Mr. M. here stated that he had no doubt that 
 this subject had also been talked over by the 
 wives and daughters of the State, to their im- 
 mediate representatives, desiring to reform all 
 existing abuses.] He hoped that all the neces- 
 sary reforms would be carefully carried out. He 
 was here as much the representative of all as of 
 a few. He represented all; aye, even the con- 
 vict ; for he was willing to admit that convicts 
 are represented in this Convention ; they were 
 there to protect human nature as much if fal- 
 len by chicanery or misfortune, as if it had dis- 
 troyed itself by intention. But he, (Mr. M.) had 
 pretty well run his rope out; he could not say 
 more if he spoke an hour ; some might think 
 that this restriction of citizenship and 5 years re- 
 sidence were not necessary; he thought they were; 
 he did not wish to leave it to our friends down 
 east, or to our friends out west, to come here and 
 relieve us from this dilemma of ignorance which 
 an absence of all restrictions would seem to im- 
 ply. He wished to have it declared that the peo- 
 ple of this State are competent to take care of 
 themselves ; and we must confess ourselves won- 
 derfully lacking in material, if from the Atlantic 
 to the Lakes we could not find a man capable of 
 tilling the office of Governor of this State. And 
 if this be so, then strike out the qualification and 
 go to Massachusetts or New Hampshire. (Laugh- 
 ter) and he would admit that they did furnish a 
 great number of men a great many very wonder- 
 tul men for filling offices. (Laughter.) But he did 
 not wish to declare by a cognovit at the start thus 
 
 confessing judgment that we had to look beyond 
 the borders of our own State. For these reasons he 
 should vote against all these amendments, and in 
 favor of the original section; and hereafter he 
 vrould like to see the gentleman, his friend from 
 Saratoga, offer an amendment to extend the same 
 qualifications and restrictions to the candidate for 
 Lieut. Governor. 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN asked indulgence to answer 
 a question put to him yesterday by Mr. PATTER- 
 SON, as to where he found authority to report 
 this section of the Constitution. He considered 
 that this was embraced in the matter which had 
 been referred to that commi tee. He and his 
 colleagues admitted that it more properly belong- 
 ed to committee No. 4, but that committee No. 5 
 also had jurisdiction in the matter. He had nev- 
 er heard this jurisdiction denied until within 
 three days. He believed his colleagues were still 
 of the same opinion. And he found by looking 
 at the report of the committee, of which the gen- 
 tleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIEI..D) is chair- 
 man, that that committee had taken a similar 
 view of the same question in principle, for when 
 passing upon the qualifications of State Engineer 
 they had exercised this power. He made this 
 explanation in justice to himself and others. He 
 would repeat that the committee were unanimous 
 on every point except that in relation to the Veto 
 power, on which at the proper time he should 
 have something to say. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD (having called Mr. PAT- 
 TERSON to the chair) said, although during the 
 progress of this debate, he was free to confess he 
 felt a strong desire to address the committee on 
 the pending proposition, yet he was led from the 
 indications this morning upon the resolution to 
 terminate debate at a quarter to 2 o'clock, to con- 
 clude that it would not be expedient, nor in ac- 
 cordance with the feelings of the committee, nor 
 desirable, to add any further remarks on the sub- 
 ject. But in consequence of the kindness exten- 
 ded to him yesterday, when there was a manifest 
 and strong desire to sit there till the question was 
 taken upon this section by the committee 
 rising for the purpose of enabling him to ad- 
 dress them to-day he had felt it to be his duty to 
 come down from the Chair, to offer an apology 
 for not availing himself of that kindness so exten- 
 ded to him. (Cries of " go on" from all parts of 
 the house.) He could not with any consistency, 
 n his judgment, occupy the time of the commit- 
 tee at the present moment with further remarks on 
 the subject before them, for he always felt an un- 
 willingness to address any body of sensible men 
 whom, he knew, felt impatient to get at the ques- 
 tion before them, and who were unwilling or had 
 a disinclination to hear further debate. It was an 
 unpleasant position to occupy, and he should be 
 very loth to detain a body of reluctant hearers ; 
 therefore he would allow the question to be taken 
 without protracting the debate further with any 
 remarks of his. (Cries of " go on,," " go on.") 
 [f it was the desire of the committee he would 
 yield the floor and allow the questitm to be taken. 
 ^Renewed cries of " go on.") He had certainly 
 desired to express his views as to certain mon- 
 strous political heresies which had been put be- 
 ? ore the committee during this debate. He had 
 been astonished to hear it urged that no change 
 
274 
 
 should be made so long as no practical evil exist- 
 ed or had arisen from the provisions of the pres- 
 ent Constitution. He confessed he had no rever- 
 ence for existing institutions merely as such. He 
 had there on th .t floor as a member of that body, 
 no reverence for individuals or for men He was 
 not here fer that purpose. As he had taken 
 occasion on a former day to say, they stood there 
 on the elements of society, with the princi- 
 ples of government scattered around them, with 
 out order, or arrangement, and they were in 
 duty bound, it was their business so to arrange 
 and apply them as to secure the best interests of 
 the people whom they represented. He felt it 
 his duty to do that, without in any manner being 
 tied down to existing institutions. For if they 
 owed a reverence to one of them, they owed a 
 reverence to all. If they were not to touch pro- 
 visions, from a reverence for existing things if 
 they were averse to touching them because there 
 w.as shown to be no existing evils or because the 
 change may work error, then they were there 
 without an 'errand or motive, or work to accom- 
 plish, and they had better all go home at once. 
 Now, whenever he had found anything in the 
 Constitution opposed to the leading principles 
 of our government though gentlemen may say 
 that no practical evil has arisen he was just 
 as free to strike if out, and to insert a principle, 
 in consonance with his views, as though it had 
 never found a place there, and was i.ot known 
 in the Constitution. What is the length and 
 breadth ot the argument which they had heard 
 there ? Why, if the spirit or doctrine which pre- 
 vailed here, had always existed in this country, 
 we should have been in a state of colonial vassal- 
 age to this very day, and subject to tbemonarchi- 
 al bondage of the British crown. Reverence fm 
 existing things would have made them slaves to 
 monarchial power. Why were they here this 
 day? We are here to day because the spirit of 
 liberty, which is favorable to change, had burs 
 the bands which bound us in former days, anc 
 recognised a principle more consistent wiih the 
 happiness of man, and of the whole human fam- 
 ily. But enough on that subject. He wished to 
 answer a remark of some gentlemen of this house 
 which he conceived to be either unjust or dis- 
 ingenuous. It was this, viz: that every gentle, 
 man who sought to liberalize the Constitution 
 and to strike from it its present obnoxiou: 
 provisions, is a demagogue, and is tickling 
 the ear of the "dear people," from the petty 
 contemptible motive of self- aggrandisement. 
 He was happy in having been placed where he 
 heard every word which had fallen from gentle- 
 men in this debate, and he could therefore state 
 no such remarks had. fallen from the liberal por- 
 tion of the Convention. These illiberal senti- 
 ments came from the illiberal side of the argument. 
 The charge is thrown upon us, and he inferred the 
 principle advocated is supposed or known to be 
 sustained by public sentiment. If so, he asked how 
 such gentlemen can escape the charge they ap- 
 ply to us? Why did those gentlemen seek to 
 make restrictions ? Why did they seek to impose 
 " guards and bits," as remarked by the gentle- 
 man from New-York (Mr. MORRIS)? Was it be- 
 cause this was actually in accordance with pub- 
 lic sentiment . ? It they believed what they said, 
 
 hen he asked if those gentlemen were not as 
 nuch demagogues as those upon whom they had 
 last the accusation during this debate ? But they 
 enow this is repugnant to public sentiment; if 
 hey do not, then they escape the charge of being 
 demagogues. If they are sincere, they are dem- 
 agogues as well as any of us so charged. He, (Mr. 
 ^.) had the right, to throw back the imputation 
 >n them, which, however, he did not believe at- 
 acned to any one. He took a different view of it. 
 3e believed every gentleman was acting with a 
 consciousness of his own responsibility to his con- 
 stituents j and with the best of motives, and the 
 firmest purpose to carxy those radical reforms in- 
 o full effect, which the people so loudly called for 
 n constituting this Convention But they were 
 old, and the most so, by the gentleman ffom Es- 
 sex (Mr SIMMONS), that the people have not call- 
 ed for these particular reforms. Now he asked 
 hat gentleman, how he could determine what in- 
 fluenced the mind of every voter when he voted lor 
 this Convention? How can the gentleman from Es- 
 sex undertake to say what influenced his, Mr. C's 
 vote, and the voters in his own section of the coun- 
 try, in favor of the Convention ? Can he look into 
 the mind and heart of his nearest neighbor who sent 
 him to this Convention, or into those of the people 
 of any county and read their motives in so doing ? 
 He cannot, sir. It might be that very different 
 motives influenced those in different sections. 
 He denied to the gentleman from Essex the right 
 to sit in judgment on his vote ; and on fllQ mn - 
 
 the mo- 
 
 tives which influenced his conduct in voting for 
 these great measures of reform. Again, when 
 the charge of demagoguism was thrown upon 
 them, he desired to look at the conduct of gentle- 
 men on the other side of this question, to see how 
 they escaped the imputation. Gentlemen had 
 taken pains to declare before-hand how desirous, 
 how exceedingly anxious they were that the 
 word " native" should be stricken from this sec- 
 tion. Why were gentlemen so particularly anx- 
 ious to be the advocates of that measure ? Why, 
 if there was danger to be apprehended from any 
 part of the section reported, it certainly was to 
 be apprehended from that particular portion of it. 
 If danger was to come from any quarter, it cer- 
 tainly was to come from that. If the door was to 
 be opened so wide then is not danger to be appre- 
 hended from the attempts of demagogues, (as they 
 are termed) to concentrate what is called the na- 
 tive vote on the one hand, or the naturalized for- 
 eigner to vote on the other, in order to carry the 
 popular feeling of the people along with it ? He 
 wished gentlemen to answer that. It was well 
 known to every one, that the German or the Irish 
 portion of the population at any time held the 
 
 * *. ,1 ' OJ._i-^ V,~4- .~ *U ,, 4-,wr rt 
 
 balance of power in this 
 
 State between the two 
 
 political parties ; and if the demagogues at whcm 
 gentlemen were so much frightened, did really 
 superintend and control the nominating conven- 
 tions, then they could put forward a foreigner, 
 they could nominate a German or an Irishman 
 for the express purpose of securing the votes of 
 the foreign population ; and who did not see that 
 by party drill a combination could be thus effect- 
 ed which must result in the election ot such a 
 person to the office of Governor. Of the course 
 pursued by the gentlemen then, he might say to 
 use a vulgar expression that they had taken ex- 
 
275 
 
 ceeding pains to stop up the tap, but they had 
 left the bung-hole open. [Laughter.] He must 
 not, however, be understood as applying these 
 remarks to the committee for striking out the 
 word " native," but he (Mr. C.) would never be 
 so wanting in gratitude, so shamefully unjust, 
 or so destitute of magnanimity as to sanction the 
 imposition of restrictions of so odious and infa- 
 mous a character upon the generous emigrants 
 who landed upon our shores. It would give him 
 no uneasiness, if the people should be pleased to 
 elect a man who did not happen to be born on 
 this side of the water, and he would leave the 
 people entirely free to make such a selection. 
 He had no doubt that many men could be found 
 of that class who would administer with 
 fidelity and ability the Executive functions 
 of this State. He knew many distinguish- 
 ed citizens who were not native born, for 
 whom he should feel it a privilege to vote. But 
 in alluding to this subject now he had only done 
 it to show that gentleman on the other side 
 were running the same race of demagoguism 
 which they charged against others. He would 
 now pass on to other suggestions. And what did 
 we hear from the advocates of restriction ? 
 Why gentlemen had argued all the way through 
 on the assumption that the people will, without 
 consideration, nolens volens, act wrong. That 
 is the basis of all their arguments ; and therefore 
 they wish to throw checks and guards around the 
 people to prevent the people from acting wrong. 
 Now on this subject entirely different views were 
 entertained by the opposite sides of the house. 
 He held that the only proper repository of political 
 power was the people, who as a general rule 
 would a "t right and take care of their own inter- 
 ests. Why what was the length and breadth of 
 the opposite argument ? Was it that a man would 
 go to the poll and vote contrary to his own inter- 
 ests ? Such a course would be suicidal. His 
 side of the house held that the people would act 
 right, and they therefore said it was proper to en- 
 trust them with power. He never would con- 
 sent to put restrictions in the constitution unless 
 they were to accomplish some great good by it. 
 He never would place himself in the attitude of 
 hampering the people unless some great good 
 was to result. But what was the contemplated 
 good here? Was it to prevent the election of 
 some young man under 30 as their Governor ? It 
 had been said that practically there would be 
 found to be no force in the proposed limitation, 
 for the people never would elect a young man un- 
 der 30 ; but if an individual should stand out from 
 the community , distinguished above all others, giv- 
 ing evidence of capacity and talent to induce the 
 people to elect him, where would be the danger ? 
 History was replete with useful lessons on this 
 subject. If any period of our judicial history 
 was distinguished above all others, it was when 
 our bench was occupied by young men. Look 
 at a Tompkins, a Spencer, and a Kent. 
 At what age was Tompkins placed on the Su- 
 preme Bench ? At the age of 30. At what age 
 was Spencer placed there ? At about 32. What 
 was the age of Chancellor Kent ? About 34, and 
 who was there that did not believe he was as com- 
 petent at the age of 30 as at 34 ? At what age 
 did the distinguished member of this body repre- 
 
 senting the county he came from, (Mr. NELSON) 
 take his seat on the judicial bench as circuit 
 judge? At the age of 27. What was the age of 
 John Bivdsall when he was appointed judge of 
 the 8th circuit ? Twenty-six. And he might go 
 on to enumerate other names to show that our ju- 
 dicial history is most brilliant when we had 
 young, talented, vigorous men on the bench, ra- 
 ther than when we had impaired old age and men 
 in a state of dotage. Again, who penned the Dec- 
 laration of Independence ? At what age was the 
 distinguished author of that instrument when he 
 wrote it ? But 33. And who was there that did 
 not believe that three years before when he was 
 preparing his notes on Virginia, he was not as 
 well qualified for the important task ? Our mili- 
 tary history is also replete with useful instruc- 
 tion. What was our condition when the Hulls, 
 the Dearborns, the Wilkinsons, the Smyths, and 
 others were in command on the lines ? Was it 
 not one of uniform reverses and disasters ? Who 
 redeemed the country from those unpropitious 
 circumstances ; this reign of grannydom ? Was 
 it your old men your men of experience ? Men 
 who had fallen into the sere and yellow leaf? 
 No, sir no, it was not men whose vigor had 
 waned. It was your Browns, Scotts, your Crog- 
 hans, your Izzards, your Perrys, your McDo- 
 noughs, who stepped forth and redeemed your ar- 
 my from the infamy and disgrace into which they 
 had fallen, and not men who had passed the vi- 
 gor of their days, he might almost say, their dis- 
 cretion. There was another individual (supposed 
 to be an allusion to Gen. Scott) who while young, 
 when in the vigor of his faculties, his bosom 
 swelled with patriotism, and he could go out and 
 successfully fight the battles of his country ; but 
 when his head became whitened, when he ^ob- 
 tained all that experience in which gentlemen 
 here contended there was so much safety, they 
 found him more distinguished in handling the 
 soup ladle than the sword. He asked gentlemen 
 to turn their attention to the list of immortal men 
 of 1776, whose names are affixed to that instru- 
 ment, [pointing to a copy of the Declaration of 
 Independence.] What was the age of the mem- 
 bers of the Congress of that period ? Who were its 
 most acave and inrluental members? He could 
 show them that it was the men who were under 
 30 years of age. Again, who have been the 
 most distinguished men in the service of the 
 people at large ? Was it not your men who com- 
 menced their career under the prescribed age? 
 At what age did Mr. Clay enter the United 
 States Seriate? The charge had been made that 
 he was within the prescribed limit ; it has never 
 been denied and we are to assume that it is true. 
 At what age was Mr. Webster when he repre- 
 sented New-Hampshire in the great representa- 
 tive body of the country? Thirty? No, he had 
 not attained that &ge. At what age was Tomp- 
 kins when he succeeded to the gubernatorial chair 
 of this state? But 32. When our present Go- 
 vernor entered upon his career in another body 
 in this hall, what age had he attained? But 28. 
 And was he not then qualified to discharge the 
 duties of Governor, or of every relation of life, or 
 of any station to which his partial country might 
 have elevated him ? He was as fit at 28 to dis- 
 charge the duties of Governor of the state as he is 
 
276 
 
 at this day. At what age was the ex-President of 
 this state, (Martin Van* Buren) when he' was one 
 ot" the leading men in the senate of fhis state, 
 and most ably sustained the Executive arm in carry- 
 ing on the war in which this country was involved ? 
 He was about 30 when he look his seat tb<Te. 
 He would point to another illustrious instance, 
 which no one wo'ild gainsay ; he alluded !o his 
 ingenious and eloquent friend from Saratoga (Mr. 
 PORTER), whose speech yesterday, so full ot argu. 
 ment, so replete with eloquence, so lad^n down 
 with tropes of poesy, so ornate with figures of 
 rhetoric, led them to believe that he would be 
 come one of the most useful members of .this 
 body. Did any one doubt his ability to administer 
 the affairs of the executive office of this state? 
 The exhibition he had afforded of talent left no 
 doubt on that subject, and yet the record showed 
 him to be under the age of 30. Yet what was the 
 argument of that gentleman himself? Why 
 speaking of gentlemen ot this body of foreign 
 birth, he said he saw them coming here with the 
 confidence of their constituents to lay the foun- 
 dation of the commonwealth anew. Now was 
 not the gentleman from Saratoga here with the 
 confidence of his constituents and by the will of a 
 free people ? By what other right was he there ? 
 Was not he at less than the age of 30 there with 
 as much of the confidence of his constituents as 
 he would have been if he were two or three years 
 older ? That gentleman was now doubtless in 
 the full vigor of his intellectual powers. No af- 
 ter years will strengthen them. He may add to 
 his fund of knowledge, and to his acquaintance 
 with things, but the strength and vigor of his in- 
 tellect will never receive any acquisition in Mr. 
 C.'s judgment. But there were other proposi- 
 tions to be examined which he thought they 
 should find to be non sequiturs. He would be- 
 gin with the gentleman from Essex who was the 
 very personification of logic, who could never 
 open his mouth without uttering an axiom that 
 was self-evident ; and what was the propositions 
 he laid down and what were the conclusions 
 which were drawn from those propositions ? Why 
 if he was to employ a man to do business for him 
 to carry goods from New York for instance 
 he would like the widest latitude of selection ; 
 ergo the people are to be placed under restric- 
 tions. If he was to appoint an agent to carry his 
 will into execution he would require the widest 
 latitude of selection ; ergo the people are to be 
 curtailed. Why this was evidently a noa sequi- 
 tur, zfelo de se, for it destroyed itself. Nor was 
 his friend from New York (Mr. MORRIS) more 
 happy. He would place checks and guards. 
 Why ? Because the electors are not the people 
 they are only a part of the people ; ergo the peo- 
 ple should not elect their Governor. We are 
 here to protect those that cannot vote ; ergo the 
 people should be restricted in their choice of a 
 Governor. The men who vote act in a represen- 
 tative capacity; ergo the people should be check- 
 ed and guarded by the Constitution. He would 
 bring in widows who have large property to be 
 protected ; ergo the people should not be allow- 
 ed to choose their Governor, only a portion of 
 them. The gentleman from New York went on 
 further to say he would not allow the people to 
 elect " Jonah's gourds," and therefore restric- 
 
 tions were to be placed in the Constitution. By 
 all this he was reminded of an ancient syllo- 
 gism it undoubtedly had its origin in a classic 
 age which was equally as consistent. " Adam 
 was the first man. Jonah was in the whale's 
 belly ; ergo Sampson caught the foxes." 
 [Laughter.] His friend from Ontario (Mr. 
 WORDEN) had taken the only view of the ques- 
 tion the other day of which it was susceptible. 
 There was perhaps nothing practically beneficial 
 to be attained by it, but as he understood it a 
 great principle was involved, and that was most 
 pertinently put by the gentleman from Ontario, 
 who showed that it was the remains of old feder- 
 alism. What had been the doctrine of that party 
 while it was in existence ? What was the doc- 
 trine of Alexander Hamilton ? It was that the 
 people were not to be trusted and that checks and 
 guards must be placed around them and that you 
 should elect your Governor for life. There was 
 a fear exhibited of too much democracy ; when 
 the Governor was to be elected he must be "rich 
 and w T ell-born." Senators, too, must be elected 
 for life for the same reason, for the people were 
 not competent to govern themselves. Such was 
 the doctrine of old federalism ; and of a like cha- 
 racter were some of the restrictions imposed by 
 the Convention of 1821, and those who were anx- 
 ious to impose checks and guards on the elective 
 franchise at any time and under all circumstances 
 were entitled to the term of federalists as much 
 at this day as 25 years ago. Look at all the chan- 
 ges made since 1777 up to the proposed amend- 
 ments now offered and it would be seen the peo- 
 ple had not gone backward. All the changes 
 have been in favor of popular liberty. All the 
 steps taken have been to secure to the people 
 those rights which were denied to them by the 
 doctrines of Federal concoction. Evidence was 
 afforded of- the progress of liberal opinions among 
 the people by the fact that justices of the peace 
 were now elected by the people instead of being 
 appointed by a council of appointment. In that 
 matter federalism had to give way. Also in the 
 matter of a property qualification in connection 
 with the elective franchise. He would impose 
 no other restriction on the eligibility to the office 
 of governor than that of being an elector or one of 
 the people. Beyond that he would trust every 
 thing to the people to make their own selection. 
 But there were other matters to which gentlemen 
 had referred ; and in reference to some remarks 
 made, he said no one would hear him urge that 
 this Convention had not the power to place guards 
 and checks and restrictions. It doubtless had the 
 power, but it was unwise, unjust and inexpedient 
 to exercise it here. This Convention had to pro- 
 pose to the people to adopt or reject; it was for 
 them then to determine whether they would send 
 down to the people a liberal constitution compat- 
 ible with their views to adopt, or one of a restric- 
 live character which the people could not con- 
 sistently take. He confessed he was for going 
 to the people with a most liberal constitution. 
 He was willing to trust the people in the elec- 
 tion of their officers. He was willing to have the 
 170,000 young men of this state under thirty years 
 of age pass their judgment on our action, for ev- 
 ery gentleman knew that very soon that class of 
 voters would be the controlling majority. He 
 
277 
 
 was willing they should say by their votes what 
 kind of a government they would live under. 
 for himself he was advanced to the middle period 
 of life; and it was more important to those that 
 were to follow him than to those whose heads 
 were already whitened with the frosts of winter 
 what the Constitution was to be. He would send 
 a Constitution embodying those liberal principles 
 which he had cherished through life, and if the 
 people approved them he should be grateful. 
 The gentleman from Saratoga had charged that 
 those who were in favor of the removal 
 of the restrictions were old men. Now, 
 on looking around, he found the charge was un- 
 true there was no dividing line. Mr. C. spoke 
 briefly of the intelligence of the people and their 
 fitness to possess the power of electing their offi- 
 cers and managing their own State affairs. The 
 school district libraries had converted them 
 into a reading and thinking people, which had 
 banished the sottish habits which consumed the 
 time with the cider cup and the pipe. They 
 were conversant with and able to argue on the 
 questions of the day and the abstract subject of 
 government. And yet they were not to be en- 
 trusted with self-government, lest they should 
 elect some green, raw, long-legged gawkey of a 
 boy who cannot read or write. Such was the 
 fear of the gentleman from Essex ; but the con- 
 stituents Mr. C. represented would no more elect 
 a raw boy than the gentleman from Essex would 
 adopt democratic sentiments. While the pro- 
 gress of events in this country had led them to 
 make changes, they were stigmatized as the 
 " progressive democracy." And there was more 
 in that than was contemplated. It is an age of 
 progression. Every step is a progressive one, 
 based on increasing knowledge among the people ; 
 and every step had demonstrated that the people 
 can be entrusted with the carrying out of the 
 fundamental, radical principles of self-govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS had been alluded to a great ma- 
 ny times, and he felt bound to notice some of 
 these allusions. He had thrown out the sugges- 
 tion here, and had not heard it answered yet 
 that the removal of this restriction of age, would 
 work disadvantageously in its application to the 
 people and to the very existence of our government 
 and institutiens. Mr. S. said that the young men 
 of the poorer classes from whom all our great 
 public men emanated, in general did not receive 
 that public education necessary to bring them for- 
 ward, until the age of 30, and then it would be 
 giving the sons of the rich a decided advantage 
 over them in the contest for popular favor. The 
 throwing open of the door in this way, would be 
 an invitation to young politicians to form combi- 
 nations to elect the rich son, who might, by 
 means of his wealth obtain sufficient prominence. 
 The effect would be, to say, that the age of 30 
 should be prescribed for the farmers' son, but if 
 the candidate happened to be born wealthy, and 
 has therefore friends and influence, he may be 
 governor when he was 21. A great many in- 
 stances had been produced by the candid gentle- 
 man from Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIELD) that there 
 had been great many public men, a little over the 
 age of 30, and ergo, as he would say, the .doors 
 had better been thrown open to 21. If they were 
 
 great at that age, they were greater a little older, 
 and more eminent still at 40. Mr. S. regretted 
 that a political turn had been given to the debate, 
 and he was sorry that the gentleman had consen- 
 ted to give it that direction. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD suggested that the first in- 
 timation of that kind came from the gentleman 
 on the other side of the house. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was aware of thai, and he regret- 
 ted it, and he found a perfect apology for the gen- 
 tleman from Otsego.in the (act. It wa.s ihe gentle- 
 man from Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) who had, 
 in the opening of the Convention, made the first 
 suggestion of party politics that hid been heard 
 here. There had been found in thisSOyeai qualifi. 
 cation, by some gentlemen, a remnant of old fed- 
 eralism ; then a majority of the people of "2!, and 
 of the Union then, and down to this time, must 
 have been old federalist*, and he had had no idea 
 before that there were so many of them. In his 
 own views Mr. S. was naturally conservative, and 
 in favor of continuing the established order of 
 things, when no actual, visible mischief could be 
 shown to have resulted therefrom He would not 
 do it alone from mere speculative theory. Again 
 he desired to see no laws in the Stale which pre- 
 supposed that brilliant talents and acquirements 
 were requisite qualifications for public office. Great 
 talent he believed had done mote harm than good 
 in the woild. The true kind of talent which had 
 improved and was perfecting the world was that 
 contained in the average sense of the mass, 
 known generally as common sense. The true 
 foundation of our government, and of a represen- 
 'ative demociacy was based on this idea, on the 
 fact that the people had capability within th>in- 
 selves to discharge the duties of all their own 
 offices. And this would not be canied out until 
 much less impuitance was attached to office, 
 Mr. S. said it would be doing a great injury to a 
 young man to make him Governor before thirty, 
 it would kill him off-', and he would be laid on the 
 shelf. There had been instances of this in this 
 State. It was therefore an injury to young men 
 to invite them to become politicians. Mr. S. urged 
 that these restrictions were to be found in every 
 State Constitution in the Union, and were wise 
 and salutary. This Convention evinced but little 
 modesty in thus assuming to be above the wisdom 
 of every other body. We were told that the Con- 
 vention of '21 were old federalists, that the peo- 
 ple who ratified that Constitution were the same, 
 and that they were absurd and incapable of com- 
 prehending an argument. This was the drift of 
 the whole argument on the other side. 
 
 Mr CHATFIELD, would ask the gentleman 
 upon that subject, whether or no? the people had 
 by a slow progression discovered the absurdity of 
 many provisions of that Constitution and correct- 
 ed them. And this Convention was to lop off ail 
 that was left of this absurdity. Mr. C. dissented 
 from another proposition that we should not in- 
 vite young men to be politicians What had dis- 
 tinguished this country ? It was that the people 
 were required to understand their institutions and 
 laws and to examine them. And there must be a 
 motive to induce any man to make an examina- 
 tion. These examinations were a kind of public 
 school in which men were preparing to become 
 public men. He had heard the fate of the 
 
278 
 
 Scythian and Sardmarian slaves over which Charl 
 XII of Sweden ruled, alluded to as an evidenc 
 of the danger resulting from a young ruler. Th 
 illustration was a most unfortunate one he woul 
 not compare the people of this country for on 
 moment to such a horde ot slaves. The idea tha 
 there would be any less an invitation to men t 
 become politicians with this v section stricken ou 
 than if retained, was absurd* and idle. Men un 
 der thirty talked just as much now about offic 
 and were politicians to an equal extent, with th 
 restriction on, that they would be if it was re 
 moved. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved that the committee rise 
 and report progress. Lost. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN suggested that if the gentleman 
 from Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) desired to addres 
 the Convention that the committee should rise 
 and the Convention afterwards adjourn to meet a 
 4 this afternoon. 
 
 Mr. WARD enquired if the gentleman from 
 Columbia wished to address the Convention again 
 upon this question. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN would answer the question in 
 this way. There were gentlemen in his quarter 
 ot the house who desired to address the Conven 
 tion. Mr J. said that about three-fourths of the 
 house had now left for dinner, and he urged tha 
 there should be a full house when the final ques- 
 tion was taken. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that if any gentleman would 
 rise up and say he desired to speak again, he, so 
 far as he was concerned, would be willing that the 
 committee should r ; se. But he was desirous ol 
 taking the question. He averred that this whole 
 discussion, except so much of it as related to the 
 five years residence had been out of order. Not a 
 word had been heard upon that point, and yet it 
 was the only question before the house. The 
 other qualifications having been stricken out some 
 days ago. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD, (as chairman of the com- 
 mittee) said that the gentleman was mistaken on 
 the subject as to the question of order. The mo- 
 tion pending was to strike out the whole section, 
 and to insert other matter, and this opened the 
 whole question. 
 
 Mr. WARD intended no disrespect to the chair- 
 man, but still he must insist on his point. Mr. W. 
 urged that the question should be taken without 
 further debate, and also advocated the qualifica- 
 tion of 5 years residence. 
 
 After some further conversation on this point, 
 between Messrs. STETSON and JORDAN, 
 
 The CHAIR announced the ques'ion to be on 
 the motion to strike out and insert the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from Onondaga. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN insisted that that was not the 
 question before the Convention. The question 
 was simply on striking ouf the five years resi- 
 dence the others had been struck out days ago. 
 The point of order was briefly discussed by 
 Messrs. JORDON,0'CONOR, RUSSELL, BROWN 
 and W. TAYLOR, when the motion was varied 
 so as to make it a mere proposition to strike out 
 the whole of the second section. It was lost 
 ayes 41, nays 56. [By count.] 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR then renewed his amend- 
 ment. 
 Mr. PATTERSON suggested that the commit- 
 
 tee having refused to strike out, it was equivalent 
 to adopting the section as it then stood. It was 
 therefore not amendable. 
 
 The CHAIR thought the motion to be in or- 
 der. 
 
 The question being taken, Mr. TAYLOR'S 
 amendment was rejected. 
 
 And then, on motion of Mr. RUSSELL, the 
 committee rose and reported progress 49 to 46. 
 
 And the Convention adjourned. 
 
 SATURDAY, (33d day,) July 11. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. HUNTING-TON. 
 
 A communication was received from the Re- 
 gents of the University through their Secretary, 
 relative to the affairs connected with the Univer- 
 sities, &c. in this State. Referred to the com- 
 mittee on education, and ordered to be printed. 
 A NEW RULE. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to adopt a new rule, 
 as a substitute for the 19th Rule, which would au- 
 :horize the reconsideration at any time in commit- 
 tee of the whole, of any subject. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to have this referred 
 :o the committee on rules, in order that it might 
 be examined. 
 
 There being no objections to this, it was so re- 
 r erred. 
 
 RULE FOR SHORT SPEECHES. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered a resolution that 
 no member should be allowed to speak in commit- 
 ee of the whole or in convention more than 30 
 uinutes for the first time on any question, and not 
 o exceed 15 minutes in any subsequent (much 
 aughter,) remarks on the same subject. 
 
 After some conversation, on the motion of Mr. 
 HOFFMAN, the resolution was referred to the 
 ommittee on rules. 
 
 ABUSES BY CLERKS OF THE SUPREME COURT. 
 
 Mr. MANN called up the memorial of Burtis 
 Skidmore, which was laid on the table yesterday, 
 elative to certain abuses and acts of corruption 
 lleged to have been committed by William P ax- 
 on Hallett, Clerk of the Supreme Court of the 
 ity of New -York. 
 The memorial was read. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to refer it to the Judiciary 
 ommittee. He said since the subject was under 
 iscussion yesteiday, he had- more fully examined 
 t, and came to the conclu&ion that the memorial 
 e properly belonged to the judiciary commit- 
 ee, and preferred it should have this reference to 
 he committee No 14, as proposed by him yesler- 
 ay. The honorable gentleman from Westchester 
 ,ave yesterday as a reason why this memorial 
 bould not be referred at all, because it made a di- 
 et charge against Mr. Hallet, who was a very 
 espectable citizen and public officer. Mr. MANN 
 epudiated such a reason, and that he, Mr. H., 
 fas a public officer, was his (Mr. M.'s) reason for 
 proper reference and a thorough investigation of 
 le statements set forth in the memorial. He had 
 idea of screening any public functionary for any 
 uch reason, and hoped the memorial would be 
 eferred to the judiciary committee, and be pro- 
 erly considered. 
 Mr. NICOLL considered the abuse here alleged 
 
279 
 
 and complained of as one that called for a decided 
 correction ; but it had grown out of abuses in as- 
 lents in New-York, and he thought theiefore 
 th:it the consideration of it more properly belong- 
 ed to municipal corporations, and there was a good 
 reason why it should take that course ; the Judi- 
 ciary committee had a very great quantity of oth- 
 er business to attend to, which occupied all of its 
 time ; whereas the committee on municipal cor- 
 porations was in a fit state to attend to this matter 
 at once. 
 
 Mr, SHEPARD hoped that this memorial 
 would not be referred to any committee whatever. 
 His colleague, he thought misapprehended the 
 communication. It accuses Mr. H ALL ETT of cor- 
 ruption, and that is all there is of it. This com- 
 mittee therefore had nothing whatever to do with 
 the memorial. It charges Mr. HALL.ETT as Clerk 
 ot the Supreme Court, with taxing his own costs 
 as commissioner and allowing himself a large sum 
 fur nominal services. They were not thereto try 
 an individual case of corruption, such as is here 
 alleged ; or to enquire into such cases. There 
 was another tribunal to redress these cases. The 
 consideration or reference of it at all, in any way, 
 would be a useless waste of time ; and he there- 
 fore moved that it be again laid upon the table. 
 
 The motion to lay on the table was lust. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL then moved to refer it to the com- 
 inittee on municipal corporations. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that he wished the endorsement 
 read before he voted on if. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD. The endosement does not 
 give the character of the memorial. 
 
 The endorsement and memorial were then both 
 read by consent. This is the endorsement : 
 
 Comm'inicKtion of Burtis Skidmore of the city of New 
 York h reference to the acts of the Clerk of the Supreme 
 Court in said city, in officiating as commissioner of stieets 
 and making extravagant charges as such, and appearing 
 before himself as Clerk of the Supreme Court, and taxing 
 his own costs and charges as commissioner.having receiv- 
 e 1 both appointments from the same tribunal, and acting 
 as party and judge at the same time. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that if this memorial con- 
 tained merely a charge of mal. conduct on the part 
 of Mr. Haliett, or if it called for any action on the 
 part of this Convention against Mr. Hallett, it 
 might be as well to let it lie on the table. But it 
 merely cited certain abuses which had grown up 
 out of the practices (allowed by law) on the part 
 of the clerks ot the Supreme Court, and brought 
 facts to the notice of the Convention. He did not 
 understand that it charged Mr. Hallett with the 
 commission of any fraud. He had, it appears, 
 acted as a Commissioner in the assessment of da 
 mages for opening ot streets, and whilst in that 
 capacity he, acting also as Clerk of the Supreme 
 Court, had taxed his own costs, or fees as Com- 
 missioner. It aho appears that he was appointed 
 a Commissioner by the Supreme Court, to whom 
 also he owed his appointment of Clerk; and as a 
 Clerk, he sat to tax the costs which he had him 
 self charged whilst acting as Commissioner. 
 This was an abuse of power, doubtless, but it had 
 at the same time the sanction of lav/. There is 
 no accusation of fraud or oppression on the part 
 of Mr Hallett, but a statement made of facts, to 
 prevent a repetition of which, for the future, the 
 Convention should insert mose provision in the 
 Constitution. In respect to all these clerks of 
 
 courts, many abuses existed that required correc- 
 tion. In his part of the country the sums paid to 
 clerks were much too large, anJ the system ope- 
 rated most oppressively. But this is not the fault 
 of the clerks, but of the law. He, therefore, 
 thought it extremely proper that a reference 
 should be had of this memorial, in order that they 
 might see whether they could not by a change in 
 the mode of appointment, and in the mode of com- 
 pensating those officers, hereafter prevent the 
 abuses which have so frequently occurred, and 
 which in this, as well as in many other cases, 
 has been properly complained of. And he ap- 
 pealed to the good sense of the friends of Mr. 
 Hallett, whether it wo-. Id not be the better plan 
 for them to adopt, to have I his matter fully in- 
 vestigated, and not to suppress any of those facts, 
 but let them be referred and examined, and a plan 
 reported to put a stop to this evident abuse of 
 power. He had heard some gentlemen around 
 him insinuate that Mr. Skidmore was not a re- 
 spectable man. Now, of this point he knew no- 
 thing whatever, but 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND wished to correct any such 
 impression as that at once ; he knew Mr. Skid- 
 more to be a highly respectable gentleman ; he 
 was of different politics from himself, (Mr. T.) 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD hoped that the gentleman from 
 Orange (Mr. BROWN) did not labor under the im- 
 pression that he had said any thing of the kind. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said he would not charge any one 
 in particular ; but it was a kind of insinuation 
 around him in a sort of under tone ; probably no 
 gentleman seriously meant anything in so saying. 
 But he was about to say that he desired to see a 
 different mode of compensating these officers 
 adopted. This subject is now before the Judici- 
 ary committee to provide for an annual salary for 
 them. He was in favor of paying them a stated 
 annual salary; and of prohibiting them from 
 touching a single dollar of fee for their own use, 
 except that annual salary, and he would do his 
 utmost to effect this object. Justice to all per- 
 sons in the state required that if in this particular 
 there be a legislative or a judicial wrong, that it 
 should be corrected; and under these circumstan- 
 ces he felt that this memorial ought to be treated 
 respectfully by this Convention, and that it was 
 fully entitled to their serious considerations. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND fully concurred in the senti- 
 ments which had been advanced by the gentle- 
 man from Orange ; there was no slander or 
 charge of corruption in the paper; the memorial 
 charged that certain distinct abuses had grown out 
 of the exercise of the powers of two distinct and 
 conflicting offices by one person ; and that this 
 was sanctioned by the law as it now stands. A 
 complete correction of this abuse was therefore 
 called for by the people at the hands of the Con- 
 vention. And it was therefore exceedingly pro- 
 per this memorial should be referred, the abuses 
 enquired into,and a remedy provided for the same 
 by the committee. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS agreed with the gentleman from 
 Orange ; a reference was all very proper ; it stated 
 facts in a matter on which they were now acting 
 and should be properly referred so that they might 
 use the facts ; but he differed with gentlemen as 
 to the proper committee to which the paper should 
 be sent. He had thought that perhaps commit- 
 
280 
 
 tee No. 7 would be the proper reference ; the 
 committee on the appointment, duties and com- 
 pensation of local officers. The subject here in- 
 volved was whether an officer should be allowed 
 to hold a second official station, the duties of 
 which would conflict with the duties of the first 
 and yet perform the duties of both. He did not 
 know that the Convention could consider the 
 clerk of the Supreme Court a judicial officer ; he 
 thought that they could not. And on further re- 
 flection he thought probably that committee No. 
 6, on the appointment, duties, powers and com- 
 pensation of officers other than legal and judicial, 
 whose functions are not local, was the appropri- 
 ate reference. The duties of the clerks of the Su- 
 preme Court were not all strictly local ; and he 
 thought perhaps No. 6 was the proper com- 
 mittee for the reference. The difficulty appear- 
 ed to be this. Here is an officer who is plac- 
 ed by the law to exercise checks and guards 
 over other officers ; and at the same time it is al- 
 leged, that he has been the judge of his own acts. 
 There would not have been this difficulty if the 
 Constitution had said that the clerk of the Su- 
 preme Court should hold no other office of trust or 
 emolument. That is the point ; and to enquire 
 into this committee No. 6 seemed to him to be the 
 proper one. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD was opposed to having it re- 
 ferred to committee No. 6, of which he was the 
 chairman ; and he thought that if the gentleman 
 reflected a little, he would not press that mode of 
 reference. As it was a matter relating to the 
 powers of judges it ought to go first to the judi- 
 ciary committee. This committee supposed the 
 judiciary committee would bring in a report rel- 
 ative to this matter ; and so they delayed action 
 on it. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS : I withdraw it, then, sir, if the 
 gentleman objects. I withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. STOW wished to enquire if any one could 
 tell him whether there were any other officers 
 appointed to tax these costs alluded to, besides 
 the clerk of the Supreme Court ? 
 
 Messrs. MORRIS and SHEPARD Yes, sir, 
 there are two others with whom he acts in this 
 matter. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that in this instance it was 
 evident that this Mr. Paxton Hallett had no au- 
 thority of law to act in the matter ; by accepting 
 the one office he was by law evidently disquali- 
 fied from accepting the other, or from acting in 
 the business, because the duties of the one con- 
 flicted with the duties of the other ; and the ac- 
 ceptance of the office of commissioner to assess 
 these damages, disqualified him from acting as 
 clerk of the supreme court to tax his own costs 
 accruing to him from this exercise of the office of 
 commissioner. And the acceptance of the latter 
 office, vacated the first. Mr. Hallett has thus 
 acted contrary to law ; and this question there- 
 fore does involve the character of Hallett ; for 
 he has acted illegally. And it ought to go to a 
 general committee which had power to overlook 
 all abuses of all officers, but as there was no com- 
 mittee to consider this specially, perhaps the best 
 reference would be to committee No. 6. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES was of the same opinion as the 
 gentleman from New York (Mr. SHEPARD) that 
 this was a matter with which the Convention had 
 
 nothing to do. If there had been any abuse com- 
 mitted in this matter by the clerk, Mr. Hallett, 
 here was a remedy provided for it by law. And 
 f Mr. Skidruore had applied to the Supreme 
 Jmirt, that body would have ordered a relaxation 
 of the costs. It was similar 10 a case in which a 
 Supreme Court commissioner had taxed costs, a 
 considerable portion ot which might be coming 
 o himself. There was abundant remedy for this 
 n the Supreme Court, which had full power to 
 correct the evil. It was not a case lor the consi- 
 deration of the convention at all; but merely one 
 n which an error has been committed in the ex- 
 action of the duties of an officer, (where he has 
 acted in his own case,) and where the law had 
 already provided a superintending power capable 
 ot correcting the error. Several officers had here 
 taxed costs having a right to do so, and Mr. Hallett 
 was one of them. It was very improper, no doubt, 
 aut still it was not a case lor the Convention. 
 They were already possessed of the facts in the 
 case; and if any action was necessary to prevent 
 his impropiiety it would be had hereafter with- 
 out reference to the charge against this particular 
 >fficer. Let it lie on the table, and the general 
 acts in the case can go to be considered by some 
 appropriate committee he eafter without the ne- 
 cessity of a reference. But there were means of 
 correction elsewhere. 
 
 Mr. WARD was of the same opinion. They 
 outfit to let it lie on the table. He did not know 
 n what manner these commissioners were appoint- 
 ed how the office was obtained, but evidently 
 the clerks ot the supreme court do not apply for 
 
 them. They aie given by 
 
 Mr. MANN Moat certainly they do apply for 
 these offices of commissioners, in every instance; 
 they make use of every means to obtain this ap- 
 pointment: find in almost every other case the 
 Clerks of the Supreme Court are sure to get the 
 appointment of commissioners ; when the offices 
 ought to be given to other citizens, not connected 
 with these courts, and who are much more wor- 
 thy and deserving of them. 
 
 Mr. WARD explained that the present case was 
 probably one where Ihe cost of two or three com- 
 missioners were taxed altogether; and Mr. Hel- 
 lett, with two other officers all legally appointed, 
 might have sat in judgment upon a large amount 
 of costs tor several commissioners in the aggre- 
 gate, and of which his own might have formed a 
 very considerable part. He presumed this to be 
 the" way in which the alleged abuses occurred. 
 But apart from this, the matter before them could 
 only be regarded as a private grievance of Mr. 
 Skidmore's, and out of this he makes a charge 
 against a respectable citizen, who is not here to 
 defend himself; and it would be exceedingly un- 
 dignified in this convention to notice any such a 
 matter. Mr. Skidmore, as had beet; shown, had 
 abundant remedy for any real grievance elsewhere; 
 the law had provided a proper tribunal; this was 
 not it ; and the convention ought not, by enter- 
 taining this memorial, thus to sanction this attack 
 upon the character of so worthy and respectable a 
 citizen as Mr. Hallet. 
 
 Mr. STOW would state, in order that hie pre. 
 vious remark might not be misunderstood, that in 
 one point he entirely concurred with the gentle- 
 men from Westchester and Dutchess (Messrs. 
 
281 
 
 WARD and RUGGLES) viz., that charges of fraud 
 ist public officers were not proper subjects 
 for the consideration of that body. He had not 
 intended, nor did he intend, for a moment to im- 
 pugn the character of Mr. Paxton Hallett, or of 
 any other man who was not there to defend him- 
 self. He had only spoken of the statements in 
 the memorial, and of what he considered as the 
 proper course to be pursued in regard to that do- 
 cument. 
 
 Mr. STETSON rose (holding in his hand a 
 small bundle of manuscript documents) . He said 
 that he held in his hand some dozen resolutions 
 which had been referred to the committee of 
 which he had the honor to be chairman, for the 
 purpose of consideration ; they had looked over 
 them, and decided that some six or seven of them 
 were not legitimate subjects for the action of that 
 committee. He mentioned them to show that 
 they establish this axiom ; that the reference of a 
 subject-matter does not carry with it a duty tore- 
 port thereon ! It is merely a reference of a cer- 
 tain subject for the consideration of a committee, 
 and a reference only. Now the arguments that 
 have been advanced here to-day, on the contrary 
 seem to anticipate the action of the committee. 
 The committee's action on a memorial proposed 
 to be sent to them, is very unwisely anticipated 
 here in the speeches of certain gentlemen. What 
 does the memorial contain ? It imports a charge 
 made by an individual against a public officer in 
 the transaction of certain duties ; showing a sys- 
 tem that is liable to abuses ; and which abuses 
 certainly can be corrected by the action of 
 this Convention; which they are fully autho- 
 rised to take cognizance ot, and which they, 
 certainly have full power and authority and dis. 
 position to correct and put a stop to. This me. 
 morial imports a charge. Gentlemen ask to have 
 it laid on the table or withdrawn ; but the with- 
 drawal of this memorial or the laying of it on the 
 table, does not do away with the charge. If all 
 the matters that have been or shall be presented 
 to this Convention for its serious consideration 
 and its careful action, are to be thrown out, arid 
 not to be entertained tor a moment, but to be re- 
 jected as contemptuously as some gentlemen de- 
 sire to reject this memorial, merely because they 
 may contain certain coarges (real or only im- 
 plied) against various individuals, then, the gravest 
 abuses ihat now exist and have existed for years 
 in this State, will not only be not corrected, but 
 they will not even be considered by this Conven- 
 tion. And that is the reason why the Convention 
 ought not, by a debate of this character, to antici 
 pate the action of any committee upon any sub- 
 ject ibut is proposed to be referred to it. It is 
 the reason why the Contention should not discuss 
 the propriety of a constitutional provision before 
 they had a report upon the subjoct. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that if any gentleman had 
 shown or asserted that th's memorial contained 
 nothing which called for the action of any com- 
 inittee of this Convention, there might be a rea- 
 son for laying it on the table. But the distinguish 
 ed gentleman from Dutchess (Mr. RUGGLES) had 
 not gone further than to express doubts whether it 
 contained any such thing a prevailing impres. 
 sion that it does not. It there was any doubt, it 
 certainly ought to be referred. A committee 
 
 18 
 
 could more conveniently examine thequestion than 
 the Convention ; and for this reason propositions 
 .ire daily referred which probably do not require 
 any Constitutional provisions, and in regard to the 
 merits of which the Convention express no opin- 
 ion. 
 
 Mr. WARD would ask the gentleman from New 
 York, how Mr H ALLETT.supposing that he should 
 be injured by this reference how he was to ob- 
 tain redress and place himself again in the proud 
 and honorable position which he occupied before 
 the community at present. 
 
 SEVERAL VOICES Mr. Hallett can be heard 
 in person before the committee. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN would ask the honorable gentle- 
 man from Westchester (Mr. WARD) whether Mr. 
 Hallett was not more likely to be injured by his 
 friends refusing to refer this memorial for inves- 
 tigation, than by having it referred. It was noto- 
 rious that great evils and abuses existed in the 
 assessments for opening or improving streets in 
 the cities. They had been the subject of much 
 complaint had been brought before the Conven- 
 tion, and a standing committee appointed to con- 
 sider them and other questions of municipal ad- 
 ministration. A memorial from a respectable citi- 
 zen of New York, alledging an abuse in this sys- 
 tem is presented, and instead of quietly sending 
 it to the committee having charge of the 
 general subject, gentlemen would refuse to 
 refer it at all would deny it any considera- 
 tion whatever! The object of the memorial, 
 if he understood it, was not, as gentlemen 
 seemed to suppose, to obtain redress for a private 
 wrong, but to point out an evil which could Be 
 prevented for the future. Whether any such evil 
 existed, and if it did, whether it were a fit sub- 
 ject for constitutional rather than legislative pro- 
 vision, he did not know ; these were questions to 
 be investigated and decided by a committee. He 
 did not know that the memorial inculpated a pub- 
 lic officer, as was alledged ; but if it did, so long 
 as it presented or might present matter for the 
 action of this body, it was entitled to a respectful 
 consideration. He expressed no opinion as to 
 the conduct or motives of the officer referred to, 
 both of which had been unnecessarily introduced 
 into this discussion. . He knew nothing about 
 them. He would assume that both were right. 
 Still the reference ought to be made. He thought 
 it should be to the committee on municipal cor- 
 porations, but as the gentleman who introduced 
 the memorial preferred a different direction, he 
 should not object. 
 
 Mr. BROWN really thought that certain gen- 
 tlemen exhibited an unnecessary degree of alarm 
 upon this subject. For his own part he did not 
 understand the memorial to impute anything 
 wrong, any crime, to Mr. Hallett. Gentlemen 
 were assuming what really did not have an exist- 
 ence. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : No, the memorial only 
 showed that the system of shaving was about as 
 fashionable in the marble chambers of the City 
 Hall, as it was in the high ways and by ways of 
 Wall street. (Much laughter.) 
 
 Mr. SHKPARD was very unwilling to take up 
 the valuable time of the convention for a single 
 moment. But in relation to this matter he had 
 Ven placed in a very peculiar position, by the re- 
 
282 
 
 marks ol gentlemen who had preceded him, and 
 it was due to himself to make a few remarks in 
 explanation. The gentleman from Orange (Mr. 
 BROWN) had referred to him (Mr. S. ) in such a 
 manner as to lead to the inference that he was a 
 warm personal and political friend of Mr. HAL- 
 LETT'S. But if he had been so, he trusted that he 
 had at least, too high a regard for his position as 
 a member of this body too keen a sense of his 
 duties as a member of society too high a regard 
 for his character as a man to allow any consid 
 eration of that nature, or indeed of any other than 
 his duty to his constitutnts and his country to in- 
 fluence his conduct in the proceedings of that 
 Convention. The gentleman from Orange (Mr. 
 BROWN) had said that gentlemen were assuming 
 what did not in reality exist - T that (his memorial 
 did not actually impute anything wrong to Mr. 
 HALLETT Now, he would ask what was the lan- 
 guage of the memorial ? Why that " the said Wil- 
 liam Paxton Hallett, appeared before himself, and 
 awaided to himself large sums of money, on the 
 ground of nominal services." Was not this an im- 
 putation as gross as could be put forward against 
 any gentleman of character and standing in the 
 community? It was as direct an imputation as 
 could be advanced If Mr SKIDMORE'S conceiv- 
 ed himself injured or unjustly treated by Mr. HAL 
 LETT, he had a clear legal remedy. He could 
 have appealed to the Supierne Court for a revision 
 of the taxation of the costs in this case. Why, 
 then, did he not go to a tribunal piovided by you; 
 own laws for the remedy ol any and all of these 
 alleged abuses ? No. But he conu>9 here with a 
 statement of his grievances. Now he either has 
 or has not been before that court ; and 
 
 Two OR THREE MEMBERS : He did apply to 
 the supreme court. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD : Well, then it is very evi- 
 dent that they decided against him, and that 
 therefore we have nothing to do with it. There 
 certainly is no appeal from that court to this 
 body. It is an adjudicated matter ; and we ought 
 not to take cognizance of it. If Mr. Skidmore 
 has not gone to that court, it was his duty to have 
 done so in order to obtain his legal and proper 
 redress, and if he has gone there, it is 
 very evident that they have considered that 
 he has . not good ground of complaint, and 
 therefore have decided against him, or he 
 would not have come to this body with his 
 complaints in the endeavor to obtain redress for 
 fancied grievances. And therefore, in either case 
 this body can have nothing to do with the memo- 
 rial. And what specific charges does he attempt 
 to make out after all. He says that the expenses 
 of these courts are enormous. How are they 
 enormous ? Does he state ? Not at all. There 
 are no particulars given by this petitioner, but 
 only a general allegation arising out of some pri- 
 vate grievances; and if we are to entertain these 
 private griefs from every individual in the state, 
 then the Convention would be literally run down 
 with details of private grievances, and vague 
 statements of alleged abuses arising from what 
 will be termed over assessments. He thought 
 that the'best course for the Convention to pursue 
 would be to allow the petitioner to have leave to 
 withdraw his memorial. If we entertain it, what 
 are the committee to, do with it ? Are they to re- 
 
 port specially upon it? No, that they cannot do 
 the charge is made the charge is referred, and 
 the acquital can never follow either. Again, 
 it should be remembered, that, in connec- 
 tion with one branch of the subject, the 
 whole matter of the complaints is already under 
 full consideration by one of the committees; how 
 assessments are to be made and how individuals 
 are to be taxed ; and by whom the amount of 
 damages is to be assessed ; as far as regards this 
 branch of the complaint, therefore, in the memo- 
 rial, the subject is already provided for. He 
 prays that this exercise of power may be restrain- 
 ed. What exercise of power ? The mode of 
 taxation of these costs. Well, that is. a matter 
 which one of the committees have already under 
 consideration. But he would trouble the commit- 
 tee no farther ; he thanked them from the bottom 
 of his heart, for the patience with which they had 
 listened to him ; he would not have spoken, but 
 that he felt he was personally involved by the 
 course of the debate ; and the best way in which 
 he could evince his gratitude to the Convention 
 for the kind indulgence they had extended to him 
 would be by taking his seat, 
 
 Mi. HAKR1SOIN staled in a very few words that 
 he was in favor of the reference. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said that the question was not 
 whether this memorial contained an imputation 
 upon Mr. Hallett on not; for they came not here 
 for the purpose of considering any such matter. 
 But they came there tu consider and redress the 
 grivances that were complained of, or that were 
 lound to exist in any or every corner of the State ; 
 and to prevent their recurrence for the future. He 
 did not care, as a mere abstract question, whether 
 these alleged abuj-es had taken place under the color 
 of the law, or in defiance cf it; whether frauds had 
 been legally or illegally committed. They were 
 then present in that Convention, not to apply re- 
 medies for the past, but to provide remedies for 
 the future. The complaint or abuse alleged here 
 was, that the Clerk had taxed his own bill of costs 
 arising out of his acting as a coramisbtoner he 
 receiving both appointments from the Supreme 
 Court judges. That mode of appointment con- 
 cerns the present .system of the judiciary. And it 
 becomes a very important matter to redress these 
 grievances, or rather to prevent any of them 
 arising hereaft< r out of the m de of appointing the 
 commissioners for the assessment of taxes in 
 opening streets, &c. They came to that conven- 
 tion (o act upon that. And he, for one, was de- 
 sirous to take away the power of these appoint- 
 ments from the judges ol the Supreme Court, and 
 place it somewh re else. And he thought it 
 w : ould be best to refer that subject to committee 
 No 7. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH said that if there was anything 
 in the existing Constitution which rendered the 
 conduct of Mr. Haflett in regard to this matter il- 
 legal or improper (presuming the statements 
 made in this memorial were true) then the me- 
 morial might perhaps be considered a proper sub- 
 ject for reference. But there was not. Neither 
 was there anything in the law apparently, to for- 
 bid the alleged action of Mr. Hallett. Now, 
 there were many abuses that were justified under 
 color of the law ; but if the alleged facts in this 
 memorial are true, then there has been a fraud 
 
283 
 
 aitted by Mr. Hallett upon Mr. Skidmore, 
 and he is liable for the same to the criminal law ; 
 this man says he has h?d his money taken from 
 him by a fraud ; well, the Convention certainly 
 cannot take cognizance of that; for as well might 
 a man who has had his money stolen from him on 
 the highway, come here and ask redress at our 
 hands, as the complainant in this case. He should 
 therefore move to lay the memorial on the table. 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped the gentleman from Ul- 
 ste*r (Mr. FORSYTH) would withdraw his motion 
 for a few minutes. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH consented to do so. 
 Mr, SIMMONS said that one great and leading 
 feature ought to be observed in all petitions ; and 
 that was an utter avoidance of all personalties. 
 Now, in relation to this matter he had supposed 
 that it arose from some error complained of in (he 
 taxing of a bill of the attorney for the corpora. 
 lion. He (Mr. S.) could not see how it could 
 have occurred in any other way, than through 
 the taxing of the bill of ihe Attorney for the 
 Corporation including the commissioner's fees; 
 and that he (the Commissioner) had taxed this 
 bill himself. He could not suppose that the mere 
 bill of the commissioner's fees had been present- 
 ed to that commissioner, and that he had himse4f 
 taxed his own bill. Now, it certainly ought to be 
 part of the constitutional law, that no man 
 should be allowed to be a judge in his own case; 
 and although that has been cc osidered of the law, 
 yet it has been decided by judges that it as part of 
 the unwritten Constitutional Law. Now what 
 he (Mr S.) desired, was to see this form part of 
 the written constitutional law of the State. He 
 considered that ilia subject matter of this petition 
 was most certainly worthy of a reference ; but it 
 ought to have been made more general in its 
 statements. One point that ought to have been 
 stated was, whether Mr. Hallett had been taken 
 off his guard or not, by a request on the part of 
 the parties, that he would consent to act as he had 
 done or in consenting to the course of action in 
 this case. He had known of some such cases. 
 All knew that complaints had been made before 
 in relation to these matters it was hardly neces- 
 sary to go into a long examination of this matter ; 
 their tables had been loaded since the commence- 
 ment of the session with these municipal books 
 to which reference has been more than once made 
 in this memorial of Mr. Skidmore's. The tables 
 of the Court of Eirors, and of other courts thro'- 
 out the State, had for some time past been loaded 
 with detailed accounts of these various controver- 
 sies ; and he hoped that the tables of members 
 here were not to be loaded down with them all 
 over again. And as this memorial embraced per 
 sonal matters, which, if they should be referred 
 to a committee, would necessarily involve a hear- 
 ing of both parties, he thought perhaps it would 
 be best to let the subject lie on the table for the 
 present. There might be some understanding on 
 the part of members, as to the subject of any 
 evils arising out of the mode of appointment of 
 these officers, or any abuses that they would be 
 able to exercise from holding two or more offices ; 
 there might be some general understanding as to 
 taking these points up in committee hereafter, 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH said that his remarks had been 
 made not upon any presumption, or aupposable 
 
 case that might or might not arise, but on the 
 statement of alleged facts set forth in the memo- 
 rial ; and he therefore moved again to lay it on 
 the table. 
 
 Mr. MANN said : And I give you all fair DO. 
 tice. that if it is laid there, that I shall move to 
 call it up every day till the close of the session, 
 unless it is called up before. 
 
 The mo'iori to lay it on (he table was then put 
 and lost. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM thought that the proper reference 
 of it was to the judiciaiy committee. They had 
 to enquire into the mode of compensation of clerks 
 to the Supreme Courts. Now, it was, and had 
 long been notorious to all, that the abuses perpe- 
 trated under the present system were very gene- 
 ral ; the clerks of these courts had been accus. 
 tomed to tax their own cos^s up te the year 1840, 
 throughout the State. And up to that period the 
 great, bulk of those costs had been taxed by the 
 clerks themselves. Now, it was very evident, in 
 the case before them, thai Mr. Hallett had only 
 followed out the general practice of these clerksj 
 but he had applied the system to a new class of 
 cases peculiar to the city of New- York. The evil 
 here complained of was only one of the results of 
 allowing clerks to receive fees and perquisites. 
 This point, at least, called for the ac;ion of the 
 Convention. The proper reference for this he, 
 therefore, conceived to be the judiciary commit- 
 tee j that body had to investigate and report upon 
 the power ot appointment of the judges, and of 
 the mode of compensation and duties of the clerk's 
 courts; and he considered a reference of this me- 
 morial to the judiciary committee as the proper 
 one, 
 
 Mr. WARD again expressed his earnest hope 
 that the Convention would not consider this me- 
 morial a proper subject for its consideration. 
 And he would renew the motion to lay it on the 
 table. And on this he called for the ayes and 
 noes. 
 
 Mr. STETSON asked if there had been any in- 
 tervening business since the motion to lay this on 
 the table was rejected, that would justify this 
 renewed motion. The motion to lay on the table 
 certainly had been rejected. 
 
 Mr. MANN : Yes, it has been rejected twice. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : The debate has been con- 
 tinued since the last vote. 
 
 The question on the call for the ayes and noes 
 was then put. 
 
 The PRESIDENT: Not a sufficient number up. 
 
 The ayes and noes were not ordered. 
 
 The motion to lay on the table was then put 
 and lost ; and the memorial was, after a two 
 hour's debate, referred to the judiciary committee. 
 BILLS TO PASS ONLY BY A MAJORITY. 
 
 Mr. W.TAYLOR called up his resolution which 
 he ottered yesterday, and which was, by his con 
 sent, laid on the table. It is as follows: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to committee No. 2, to in- 
 quire into th- expediency of providing that whenever a 
 bill shall have been rad for the thirl time in either House 
 of the Legislature, no other business shall be done by the 
 House until the question upon that bill shall be decided, 
 and that such question shall not be recons;dered during 
 th>- session, and also that every bill, upon its third reading, 
 shall be read in lull and at length. 
 
 Mr. RICHMON 7 D then moved that the amend- 
 ment which he offered yesterday, and which had 
 
284 
 
 been accepted by the mover, should be taken u 
 also. It was to this effect that all bills passe 
 by the Legislature hereafter, shall be passed onl 
 by a majority of the members of both branches i 
 all cases ; and that this s-hall be ascertained b 
 the calling of (he ayes and noes and the recordin 
 of them in all cases. 
 
 The resolution with this amendment was then 
 adopted. 
 
 THE LIMITING OF DEBATE. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered a resolution tha 
 in order to save time, and prevent useless debate 
 all motions of reference to standing committee 
 should hereafter be taken without debate ; and he 
 would include his present motion. 
 
 A count was called for on this. Only 26 votet 
 aye. Lost. 
 
 RECONSIDERING A RULE. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD gave notice that on Wednesday 
 next he should move for a reconsideration of th< 
 vote of this Convention on the passage of th< 
 rule that to "strike out and insert should there 
 after be one motion." 
 
 WOMEN AND PARSONS TO BE VOTERS AND 
 HOLD OFFICE. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said that some days since he had 
 offered a somewhat important memoiial, very nu. 
 merously and respectably signed by some of the 
 first citizens of Albany; it was then laid on the 
 table. He now called lor its consideration. If 
 related to thedisfranchisement of clergymen from 
 holding office, and of women from voting at elec- 
 tions. 
 
 On the motion of Mr. H. the first part of it 
 was referred to the committee on the judiciary, 
 and the last part to committee No. 4. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued in relation to 
 the noise that arose from the travel of wagons 
 over the adjoining streets, when without taking 
 any action thereon, the matter was dropped. 
 
 EXPENSES OF THE LEGISLATURE. 
 
 A communication was received from the Comp- 
 troller relative to the sums of money received by 
 the Legislature for pay and mileage during the 
 sessions of 1841, '2> '3, '4, and 1845. 
 
 It was referred to committee No. 1. 
 CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. 
 
 A communication was received from James 
 Richmond of Columbia county relative to an en- 
 quiry into the expediency of abolishing Capital 
 Punishment. Referred to the Judiciary commit- 
 tee. 
 THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE EXECUTIVE. 
 
 The Committee of the Whole, Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD in the Chau, resumed the consideration 
 of the report of Committee No. 5. 
 
 The third section having been read as follows: 
 ^ 3. The Governor and Lieut Governor shall be elected 
 at the times and places oi choosing members of the Legis- 
 lature. The persons respectively having the highest num- 
 ber of votes tor Governor and Lieut, Governor, shall be 
 elected: but in case two or more shall have an equal and 
 the highest number ol votes for Governor, or for Lieut. 
 Governor, the two houses of the Legislature shall, by 
 joint ballot, choose one of the said persons so having an 
 equal and the highest number of votes lor Governor 01 Lt. 
 Govtrnor. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to insert after the words 
 h Legislature shall," the words "immediately af- 
 ter their meeting." 
 
 Mr PATTERSON thought the section was 
 well enough as it was. Nobody supposed that the 
 old Legisjature would convene alter the elec- 
 tion of the new one. They could not do it unless- 
 the Gov then in office should require them to do 
 it. This proposition was in the present constitu- 
 tion and had always been understood. 
 
 Mr CROCKER thought a better amendment 
 would be ' =it the next annual session" and tbi& 
 amendment prevailed. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to add the woid " forth 
 with" afier " session." Agreed to. 
 
 The 4th section was then read a& follows : 
 
 ^4. The Governor shall be general and commander-in 
 chief ol all the militia, and admiral of the navy of the 
 State. He shall have power ta convene the Legislature 
 (or the Senate only) on extraordinary occasions. He 
 shall communicate by message to the Legislature at every 
 session, the condition of the State ; BBC) recommend such 
 matters to them as he shall judge expedient. He bhall 
 transact all necessary business with the officers of the go- 
 vernment, civil and military. He shall expedite all such 
 measures as iray be resolved upon by the Legislature, and 
 shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed. He 
 shall receive for his services the following compensation, 
 viz: Four thousand dollars annually , to be paid in equal 
 quarterly payments. Six hundred dollars annually, to be 
 paid in equal quarterly payments, for the cemjiensa ion 
 of his private secretary; and the rent for, and the taxes 
 and assessments of his dwelling house, shall be paid by the 
 State. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to amend by striking 
 out all atter the word '* executed," and insert the 
 anguage of the present "Consti ution:""He shall, 
 at stated times, receive tor his services a compen- 
 sation which shall neither be increased nordimin- 
 shed during the term lor which he shall have 
 been elected." Mr. T. would not bind up theac- 
 ion of the people in a matter of this kind. Ifc 
 was not the amount of the salaries ol public offi- 
 cers in regard to which there was complaint, it 
 was their perquisites or fees, the amount of which 
 hey had no knowledge. The committee, also, he 
 bought, might have discharged their duty with- 
 out reporting a specific compensation, but a gene- 
 ral provision for that purpose, leaving it for the 
 >gislature to adjust the details. He thought it 
 would be found inexpedient to fix the salary or 
 ompensation in the constitution, and he there- 
 ore proposed his amendment. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said the Convention required the 
 committee to present the salary to be paid to the 
 jroverncr. They had therefore turned to the sta- 
 utes to ascertain what he did receive now, and 
 he part of the section which the gentleman 
 ought to strike out was taken fr<m the existing 
 aws of the State. He gave as his individual 
 pinion, that il would be invariably better if the 
 alary of each and every officer to be appointed 
 mder this Constitution should be incorporated in 
 he instrument itself, and that so far as practice- 
 le, the question should be submitted to the peo~ 
 le with the Constitution. Apprehension had 
 >een expressed that if that was done, it might em- 
 arrass the adoption of the Constitution itself, be- 
 ause the people would then see the immense 
 urns, in the way of salaries, that they are com- 
 piled to pay for the support ot government, and 
 night object to it. He did not think so, a:..d be. 
 ieved that the people were ever desirous to pay a 
 roper compensation to their officials, and more 
 eady to do it than their representatives in the 
 egislature. There were certain officers whe 
 
285 
 
 should receive a full compensation, and among 
 them the Governor, who should not receive a less 
 compensation than that provided for here. H 
 apprehended that when the Convention had done 
 what he presumed they would tied up the pow 
 erofthe legislature and limited their discretion 
 to pass such laws as they chose men sent to tha 
 body having but little to do, would exert them- 
 selves for the purpose of reducing these ccmpen- 
 sations. He thought, therefore, that the people 
 themselves, en masse, were the persons to say 
 what they would pay their officers, and would be 
 better satisfied to have the salary fixed in the 
 Constitution. It was for these reasons that the 
 committee presented the repoit they did. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS could see no reason why the sal 
 ary of the Governor and the Legislature should 
 be fixed by the constitution which did not apply 
 to other officers, and he was prepared to go for 
 the amendment of the gentleman from Genesee, 
 and to strike out the provision. And it was on a 
 principle the very opposite to that assigned by the 
 chairman of the committee for leaving it in. It 
 was a subject upon which the people themselves 
 through the legislature, could at a future time ex- 
 press themselves more clearly and distinctly ,than 
 they could even in a direct vote on the constitu 
 tion. He imagined the rejection or adoption of 
 that instrument did not depend on such a question 
 as this, and that they would not express their pre- 
 ference for one mode or the other in any consider- 
 able degree. The minds of many would differ on 
 this point,some would think the compensation too 
 high and others too low, and yet the same men 
 preferring the new instrument to the old, would 
 vote for it,against their own judgments in the oth 
 er resp 3ct. Whereas if it was left to future legis- 
 latures they could arrange the salary in accord- 
 ance with the exigencies of the times, and the 
 will of the people. Besides he desired to have 
 left to the legislature such matters as appertained 
 properly to legislation, and would enact none of 
 them in the constitution. The proposition to 
 prevent the legislature from altering the salary of 
 the Governor, then, incumbent of the office, was 
 very proper,because the Executive might exercise 
 an influence upon them through his high office in 
 the matter. But with great propriety they might 
 consider the compensation to be allowed thereaf- 
 ter. He hoped further that in framing this Con- 
 stitution every matter that was not necessarily 
 embraced within it, would be left out, so as to 
 leave the question as directly as possible upon the 
 amendments that are necessary. He desired to 
 see reforms adopted in this Constitution which 
 he apprehended might be hazarded by proposing 
 too many of these restrictions which might just as 
 well as not be left to the legislature, especially 
 where such laws might be required to be altered 
 during the existence of the Constitution. It 
 might be that at times the people would desire to 
 raise or to reduce the salary, and this could be bet- 
 ter done through the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES was in favor of the proposition 
 of the gentleman Irom Seneca, and for the addi- 
 tional reason that there was a disposition among 
 the people to divest the Executive of an impor- 
 tant part of his powers and duties, which 
 might make it less important that his salary should 
 be so large. This section also fixed the salary of 
 
 his private Secretary. And perhaps ii was not 
 too high, but if the Executive was divested of the 
 appointing power, the necessity for such an assis- 
 tant would be very much diminished. He was 
 opposed to the fixing of salaries in the Constitu- 
 tion, as he thought it might be much better left 
 to the Legislature. Again, it might be, as some 
 of us hoped, that the time was not far distant 
 when it would be requisite for the Governor to 
 reside further west, where he could live at a much 
 less expense, and where the habiis of the people 
 were much more simple. Perhaps it might be 
 where his friend from Oneida resided, (Utica;) 
 or perhaps where he (Mr. R.) lived, (Syracuse,) 
 and he hoped it might be so. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND Perhaps he would be able 
 to live there without any money. There is salt 
 enough to save him. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES Salt had saved the State a 
 vast amount, and may yet save to it the expenses 
 of a Governor. Salt Point might, (said Mr. R.) 
 if the Capital was located there, save in the sala- 
 ries now paid to the officers of government an 
 amount very important to the people. He did not 
 know how much importance might be attached to 
 this argument, but he felt bound to allude to it 
 as an event likely to take place. 
 
 Mr. 1 ILDEN hoped that the amendment would 
 not prevail. If the" Convention was not going to 
 fix the salary, as he presumed it would not, he 
 hoped that it would not fix a minimum or a maxi- 
 mum to the amount which the Legislature might be 
 authorized to pay. He did not suppose, when the 
 subject of the compensation of the Governor was 
 referred to the committee, that it implied any 
 instruction to them to report a particular compen- 
 sation, but merely what provision was necessary 
 and proper to be inserted in the Constitution in 
 regard to the subject. He thought they would 
 have answered the object, as well, if they had 
 reported the general provision in the existing Con. 
 stitufion, that the compensation of the Governor 
 should not be altered while his term was unexpir- 
 ed, although he supposed that the whole subject 
 was before the committee, and that they acted 
 very properly in making their report as they did, 
 it being, in their judgment, necessary to specify 
 the compensation. It might be expedient to fix 
 the salaries of the judge?, but he was clear that 
 'n all other cases the matter would be most \vise- 
 y lett to the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. WOOD moved to amend so as to provide 
 hat in no case should the Governor receive more 
 than four thousand dollars annually. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY thought that the salary should 
 be fixed at what, in any supposable case whatever, 
 would be a fair and just compensation, and he 
 toped that some such amendment would be adpted. 
 The amendment did not cover a sufficient amount 
 o pay all the Governor's expenses for rent of 
 dwelling furniture, and for the pay of his Private 
 Secretary. He was not in favor of reducing his 
 salary, for he was as poorly paid as any officer in 
 he State. The county clerks of some of the 
 counties got more than he did that of Erie, for 
 nstance, who received $6,000 per annum. He 
 would suggest to the gentleman that the amount 
 .vas not farge enough. 
 
 Mr. WOOD was willing to make it any amount 
 
286 
 
 that would be deemed reasonable. All he desired 
 was to provide tor some fixed compensation. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN thought that even if the Go- 
 vernor was divested of a large share of his 
 appointing power, that in a state like this, 
 with its accumulating business, he would 
 have as much to do as he could attend 
 to; He had not yet, heard any proposition to 
 divest him of the pardoning power, or to vest that 
 disagreeable duty in any other officer, and he 
 understood that generally that there were sorffe 
 eight petitions received every day for the exer- 
 cise of this power. If then he was divested of 
 every other authority and duty, his time would 
 still be very fully occupied. He hoped that the 
 maximum would not be fixed, because it might 
 become necessary 1o vary it according to circum- 
 stances, which we could not now anticipate. 
 He did not suppose that any proposition that 
 might be adopted here to diminish his duties, 
 would enable him to devote any time to his pri- 
 vate affairs. He was in favor of moderate sala- 
 ries and yet such as would command the requi- 
 site abilities for the service of the State. He pre- 
 ferred no.t to attempt to fix the salary here. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART suggested a modification to 
 his amendment so as to provide that the Gov- 
 ernor should receive a compensation to be estab- 
 lished by law, which should not be altered du- 
 ring his term of service. This would leave it 
 to the legislature to fix the amount as in its 
 judgment it might deem expedient, and he trust- 
 ed that the officers of Government would be pro- 
 hibited from any compensation or perquisites by 
 way of fees &c., other than their salaries. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that the present com- 
 pensation of the Governor was $'4,000 per annum 
 and his house rent, taxes and assessments. He 
 supposed that the committee in making their 
 report intended to allow him the compensation 
 that he now received. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that that was the intention. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON believed they had not in- 
 cluded all the items yet. There was the ex- 
 pense of postage which was a very considerable 
 one, and which he understood heretofore had 
 amounted to some seven or eight hundred dollars 
 per annum. He did not know to what it amount- 
 ed now, but he presumed it was a very consid- 
 erable item. And in fixing the compensation 
 hereafter, all these matters should be taken into 
 consideration, so that the compensation should 
 be sufficient to command the best talent necessa- 
 ry for the discharge of the duties, and so that the 
 officer would not be obliged to draw on his pri- 
 vate funds to pay his family expenses. His own 
 opinion was and it was but an opinion, that no 
 man discharging the duties of Governor with a 
 family to support, his rent, assessments, taxes 
 and postage to pay, could live here on $4,000 per 
 annum. If he could he must be a very econom- 
 ical man indeed. He did not know what the 
 State now paid for house rent, he presumed it 
 must be some $800 or $1,000. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK : A thousand dollars. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON supposed so. And those 
 who thought the Governor could get along with- 
 out a private secretary, had only to step 'into the 
 Executive Chamber, no matter at what time of 
 day, to be satisfied to the contrary. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL : There were 700 applications 
 for pardon alone in a year. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Yes. And on the most 
 of these, some five or six a day, the applicants 
 generally forget to pay the postage, having an 
 idea which generally prevailed, that there was 
 no need of paying postage on public business, or 
 on letters sent to public officers. This the Gov- 
 ernor had to pay in some shape or other. He 
 did not know or care who would be Governor 
 another term, but he did not wish to see any 
 man placed there who might be forced to borrow 
 money of his friends to get along. The State 
 ought to pay a just compensation, not to say any 
 thing about liberality, to its Executive officer. 
 He thought that provided in the amendment of 
 the gentleman from Rockland not to be sufficient. 
 
 Mr. WOOD was willing to increase it to what 
 would be deemed just. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that there were very 
 many items to which the Governor was liable, 
 over and above his salary, and applications he 
 was forced from his station to make of money f 
 which very few people thought of. Almost 
 every poor person in the State who happens to 
 go through Albany thinks that the Governor can 
 well afford to divide a portion of his salary with 
 them, not knowing that any body else would ever 
 think of the same thing, and he is continually run 
 down with applications of this kind. And his- 
 business being so pressing, he does not find time 
 to argue the question with them, and he general- 
 ly finds that the cheapest way of getting rid of 
 them, is to put his hand in his pocket and give 
 them a dollar or two. It might be said that this 
 had nothing to do with the question of salary, but 
 if the people placed a man in that position, the cir- 
 cumstances connected with it should be taken 
 into consideration. He did not wish to give an 
 extravagant salary, but it should be sufficient to 
 command the best talents at the helm of State. 
 Although he did not care whether the salary was 
 fixed here or elsewhere, he desired that mem- 
 bers should vote understandingly, and know what 
 the Governor was compelled to pay out. 
 
 Mr. STETSON wished the gentleman from 
 Genesee would alter the phraseology of his 
 amendment so as-to strike out the words, "du- 
 ring the time for which he is elected," and sub- 
 stitute, "after his election and during his con- 
 tinuance in office." 
 
 Mr. TAGGART had no objection. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE would take the liberty of 
 submitting a remark or two in the hope of 
 bringing the question back to where it ought to 
 be a discussion of the first principles com- 
 prised in a Constitution, and not the mere details 
 of legislation, good in themselves and at a proper 
 time and place. He had no fault to find with 
 the committee in their report, and he thought 
 the salary of $4,000 little enough, and he who- 
 received it ought to be worthy of it. The Gov- 
 ernor often hired a house, furniture and all, and 
 this would probably cost $2,000 per annum in- 
 stead of the $1,000 now allowed him for house 
 rent. He was opposed to this whole system of 
 incorporating salaries into the Constitution, ex- 
 cept so far as that of members of the Legisla- 
 
287 
 
 ture was concerned. He would free the Legis- 
 lature from being subject to the imputation of 
 Kiting for themselves. But not in regard to 
 other officers. The Constitution. of '21 had stood 
 for a quarter of a century, and might we not 
 hope to frame a Constitution that might at least 
 stand as long. And was it not arrogating to 
 ourselves more than was proper in thus going 
 into the details of fixing the salaries of officers 
 under the administration of Government. In 
 his judgment it would be an arrogation, and he 
 took this occasion to express his dissent from 
 this principle. The prohibition against the 
 Governor's salary being altered during his 
 term of office was a great principle, and one 
 which he was in favor of. He had lived to see 
 a Governor through the agency of lobby mem- 
 bers, endeavoring to raise his salary by a law 
 passed during his term of office. And he desir- 
 ed not to see it happen again. The honor of the 
 government and the dignity of the State required 
 this. The postage question was one that ought 
 not to be discussed here. Every officer of the 
 Government received his official letters without 
 being subjected to the expense of postage that 
 was a part of the expense of Government. 
 Therefore it was not a matter for the considera- 
 tion of this Convention. The amendment reads 
 that the Governor shall for his services receive 
 not "a salary," that is not the word. All our 
 literary institutions defined the word salary to 
 mean a fixed compensation, but such did not 
 seem to be the definition as applied to our offi- 
 cials. They received besides fees and perqui- 
 sites which amounted in some cases to more than 
 half the salary. The modern term was com- 
 pensation, which was a discreet and cautious 
 word, and very properly introduced. This 
 should neither be altered or changed during the 
 period of the term for which the officer had been 
 elected. This fixing of the salary ; he repeated, 
 had better be left to the Legislature to arrange, 
 as prosperity or adversity in the affairs of the 
 State might determine. $4,000 was not too 
 much, on the contrary, he said that the man who 
 would discharge the duties for less, would be 
 able to do it for nothing at all. Again, in re- 
 lation to matters of changing the salary, suppose 
 that the Governor should veto a law that the 
 Legislature should pass, they might if they had 
 the power, desire to pay him, to punish him, by 
 reducing his salary. He wished to have no 
 chance for such a contingency to arise. He 
 desired to see the Executive, the representative 
 of the whole people, to stand there overlooking 
 the Legislature, and beyond the elevation of 
 their guns, in high times of party feeling. And 
 this could be attained best by preventing them 
 from altering or changing his salary during his 
 continuance in office. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that his own views had been 
 expressed by the gentleman from Dutchess and 
 Genesee. He thought it would be the sentiment 
 of the majority of the Convention, to leave 
 the Constitution in this respect pretty much as 
 it stood now. The amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Genesee was a very good one. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said it would seem from 
 the remarks of the gentleman from Dutchess 
 (Mr, TAIJLMADGE) that even under the pres- 
 
 ent Constitution, there had been room for im- 
 proper influences to be exerted in this matter of 
 the Governor's compensation. He would sug- 
 gest that the compensation should be fixed with- 
 in a limit say not to exceed five or six thou- 
 sand dollars; leaving the Governor to arrange 
 his contingent expenses himself. This hiring 
 of houses, and furniture and furnishing deer 
 parks, &c., for officials, was a bad principle in 
 government. He was in favor of preventing any 
 alteration or change in the salary during the 
 term of office according to the political or other 
 notions of the legislature. He believed in the 
 principle of delivering men from temptation. 
 
 Mr. BAbCOM disapproved ot fixing an amount 
 beyond which the compensation should not go. It 
 was the way that a great many fees and salaries 
 had run up in this State. His experience about it 
 was that they would soon crawl up to the maxi- 
 mum, if a margin was lelt. It was so in relation 
 to lawyer's fee;:, as all know. He apprehended 
 that if the convention and the people fixed a maxi- 
 mum, the Legislature would regard I hat as the 
 amount they should fix. He admitted that he 
 would like well to see these salaries fixed in the 
 Constitution, but there was great force in the ar- 
 gument of the gen'leman from Dutchess, "that dur- 
 ing a quarter ot a century, circumstances might 
 arise which would render it very proper to' take 
 into consideration the question ot increasing or re- 
 ducing the compensation. It there was to be a 
 convention once in every seven or ten years, there 
 would be more propriety in designating ihe sala- 
 ry in the Constitution, but until ihe committee on 
 that subject should report, and the question offu. 
 lure constitutional amendment was considered and 
 disposed of, that could not be decided. 
 
 Mr BRUCE was opposed to leaving any part of 
 this question to the Legislature, as he believed 
 very serious difficulties would grow out of it. 
 He was disposed to fix the salary of the Governor 
 here. Gentlemen talked as if v\e were sent here 
 o make an unalterable constitution but he sup- 
 posed we were sent here to form one that should 
 be the ground work of law, and if it was necessa- 
 ry after to alter it, let the people send delegates 
 to do it. He would not leave the matter to" the 
 Legislature, for the reason that in times of high 
 political excitement, it would be very easy for 
 demagogues to say that ihey went for reducing 
 the salary of the Governor, and that sometimes 
 was a very populai cry among the people, and 
 thus their attention would be drawn from subjects 
 of far greater importance directly before them. 
 He was for making a matter of fact instrument. 
 It the salary was too high, twenty yeais hence, 
 let that be one cause for remodeling the Constitu- 
 tion. He did not propose to say what that should 
 be, but he knew that ihe officer was an important 
 one. and he was willing to give him a liberal sa- 
 laiy. When that was fixed, he would allow him 
 nothing further in the way of fees or perquisites. 
 He believed that a great cause of complaint among 
 ihe people was was that things wet e left at loose 
 ends. 
 
 . Mr. SALISBURY was nol exactly satisfied with 
 tne proposed amendments, it (here was one part 
 of the government moie than another where a 
 strong guard was necessary, it was at the door of 
 the treasury. That was the point here, and it 
 
288 
 
 
 fixing a limit beyond which the legislature should 
 
 not go, in the way of compensation of officers - ts veneance on th p 
 
 He was disposed to give them a sufficient com- g a i arv g It w a s bn? Executlve by leducmehi. 
 pensation but no perquisites whatever. S^ftttim of^Jr c n80M J e with the ordi- 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH agreed substantially with the fixed n "th fco^Lu^ l M'? "^ , 
 two gentlemen last up & The compensation of the beyond this t nDtatinn ' H" 1 t e h g ' S / 1 atUre WOU * d be 
 governor should be fixed by constitutional prov ls - its reach He d^sf^'t \h* 
 
 ion. He might be mistaken, but his own opinion both made inden nH t se them bo <h tied up, 
 was that it was the sentiment of his constituents Lch othe? P ** * actlon toward 
 
 that a great source of complaint had been that the Mr :TPTQrkiM *v, w* 
 
 legislature had too much business, that they want- shou d be t ?H f g ' V^ \ e * I8la , tu u re 
 
 ed restrictions, checks and guards, put upon the r Governor Tl ented f mactln S n the salary of the 
 action in regard to the treasury. It was a subject J Hn n'ffiL ^h ^ Umbent con ' 
 that had occupied the public attention to a very three term? V, { ! , 
 great extent, and he would therefore take this re. n the co^tuH n f t , b J ectedto . 
 sponsible as well as perplexing duty from thelegJ ^ish th af f f salaries and did not 
 
 islature. At a reaLSble computation, ^ ^ 
 
 proportion of the biennial sessions would be occu- Thp iPoiinr * 
 
 pied m fixing salar.es, Suppose that the Governor amendnleM a"d "was ?e ecfe "" ' 
 
 did not agree in political sentiment with the ma- Thp , 
 jo, ity of'.he Jo ho U3 e 3 , there might a 
 
 conu ' 
 De ' ' woor 
 
 versy arise, and he would guard against any evil 
 resulting by it, by fixing the salary of the Govern- 
 or in the organic law, and submit it to the people. 
 He thought that they would pass upon it under- 
 standingly. He thought also they would pass 
 wisely not only this, but on the salaries of other 
 
 MONDAY (24th dm* Tnlv i i 
 Pr , ., MONDAY (34^ day) July 13. 
 
 ria y er b 7 the Rev. Mr. HUNTING-TON. 
 
 EARLY MEETING. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that from and after 
 
 officers, the legislative as well as the judiciary. to-day the Convention shall meet at 9A.M. 
 This was bis opinion, and he should vote accord- Mr. SIMMONS opposed this at present. 
 ingly. He should therefore vote to sustain the There were too many committees hard at work 
 report. who had much business to transact, and who met 
 
 The question was then taken on {he amend- regularly every morning; there was too much 
 ment of Mr. WOOD, and it was rejected. time wasted here in idle discussion and in unne- 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY proposed that the salary cessarily debating subjects, whereas more time 
 should not exceed $0000. This was lost. ' ought to be spent in maturing them elsewhere. 
 
 Mr BRUCE wished to propose an amendment, This was a very bad division of time ; from nine 
 but the CHAIR decided it out of order, as cover- to two or three ; so as to be sitting here in the 
 ing matter which had already been acted upon. hotest part of the day. He moved to amend by 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved to amend by providing inserting "to sit from 8 to 12," and on this he 
 that the salary should not be less than $'2,500, nor called for the ayes and noes. If we deliberated 
 more than $5000. This, he said, would be a more in committee, we should have some new 
 sort of equal ground, and would cover all ideas to advance, instead of repeating the same 
 the changes that might arise in the course of twen- things over and over again each day as we do now. 
 ty years. This would also not induce the legis- Mr. LOOMIS was deeply pained to see so much 
 lature to tamper with this matter. He would nei- time wasted in unnecessary discussion as had been 
 ther not allow the legislature to undertake to le- the case during the sittings of this Convention. -r- 
 gislate a co-ordinate branch out of existence by They were now in the seventh week of the ses- 
 redycing his salary to 25 cents, as was the case in sion ; and what had been done ? And this was 
 Kentucky in their action towards their Supreme owing to the course of debating pursued. There 
 Court. were only 96 working days left between this and 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that the legislature although the election take from this one month for the peo- 
 called a co-ordinate branch with the governor, pie to consider the Constitution, and it only left 
 was also sometimes a conflicting one. And this four days for the consideration of each of the re- 
 was an admirable reason why the legislature ports of the committee ; and yet two weeks have 
 should not fix his pay. The gentleman from Essex been spent in debating and speeches on the two 
 had proposed a salary of $2,500 ; but he (Mr. M.) fisrt sections of this report. He hoped hereafter 
 would say that no Governor, unless he would sleep they would make short, and of course .the best of 
 in the park and live on crackers and cheese could speeches. 
 
 support himself on that sum. It had been urged A MEMBER : Some gentlemen seem to intend 
 that all evil would be prevented by not permitting by delays of this kind to prevent all amendments 
 the legislature to reduce the salary during the term in the Constitution. 
 
 for which the officer was elected. He was old This trifling resolution appearing likely to lead 
 enough to remember, and not so old as to have for- to another very long discussion, Mr. STETSON 
 gotten that very frequently in high party times moved the " previous question" and the resolu- 
 strong conflicts arose between the governor and the tion was carried. 
 majority in the Legislature. And there had been COMMON SCHOOLS. 
 
 sometimes accidental majorities in the legislature, Mr PENN IMAN offered a resolution that the 
 and in these controversies the legislature had felt j committee on Education inquire into the expedi- 
 
289 
 
 ency of abolishing the office of Superintendent of 
 Common Schools. Adopted. 
 
 BANKS STOCKHOLDERS, &c. 
 Mr. MURPHY offered the following resolution: 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to cause to 
 be prepared and furnished to this Convention a statement, 
 showing the amount of the capital stock actually puid in, 
 and secured to be paid in, of the moneyed or stock corpo- 
 rations deriving an income or profit from their capital or 
 otherwise, including free banking associations, and hav- 
 ing their principal office, or place for transacting their 
 financial concerns, in the city and county of New-York; 
 and also showing what portions of such capital stock are 
 held by persons residing respectively in said city and 
 county, elsewhere in the S'ate of New-York, elsewhere 
 in the United Statts, and by persons residing out of the 
 limits of the United States, and also the amount of such 
 stock, if any, belonging to the State, and to incorporated 
 literary and charitable institutions; and that such state- 
 ment distinguish the amount so held by each of said cor- 
 porations and associations. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART wished to hear some reason 
 for offering this resolution. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that he could give the gen- 
 tleman various reasons for offering this. They 
 were approaching a discussion when it would be 
 well to know how much of the stock of the in- 
 corporated companies of this state are held else- 
 where than in this state and by whom this stock 
 is held. His particular object in offering this 
 resolution was in regard to the duties of the spe- 
 cial committee, which Was raised on the motion 
 of the gentleman from New York (Mr. MORRIS) 
 who proposed some days ago for the consideration 
 of this Convention, a proposition to be inserted in 
 the constitution to tax personal property where 
 it was in use in business and not at the domicil 
 of the owr-er. There are in the city of New York 
 many incorporated companies and associations the 
 capital ! wliich is not all held by the people of 
 the city of New York, but by persons residing 
 elsewhere in the state and out of the state and 
 even out of the United States. The capital of 
 those companies and associations exceeds thirty 
 millions of dollars, which is more than the whole 
 amount of personal property assessed in the city 
 of New York. That city has drawn together that 
 capital from the natural advantages she possesses, 
 and must continue to draw it; and she enjoys the 
 benefit of it, and he was willing she should ; but 
 some persons nevertheless might object that after 
 having drawn in all this capital from all other parts 
 of the state, she should have the right to tax other 
 personal property, viz., that of non-residents, 
 which is now exempt. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART was satisfied with the expla- 
 nation. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND had no objection to the re- 
 solution ; but it would contain a great many de- 
 tails, and occupy much time in preparing ; and if 
 we could not get any return to it before the 1st of 
 October, it would be too late for the action of the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that he had consulted the 
 Comptroller before he prepared the resolution, 
 and he found that it could be easily furnished. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 UNIFORM TAXATION. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES offered the following: 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the standing committee 
 number two, to inquire into the expediency of adopting a 
 permanent and uniform system of taxation which shall op- 
 erate equally upon ail cla&ses of citizens} which shall re- 
 
 gard actual property, whether real or personal, including 
 all debts due from insolvent debtors, as the only legitimate 
 objtct of taxation; which shall define what is real and 
 what personal property, and shall take from the Legisla- 
 ture the power of converting the one into the other, and 
 thereby interfering with private and vested rig. its; which 
 shall protect the citizen against double taxation in any 
 form, or under any pretence whatever; which shall se- 
 cure to resident citizens the Hght to be assessed for their 
 personal estate in the city, town and county where they 
 reside, and not elsewhere; and which shall assert and per- 
 petuate the principle of assessing all property at its lull 
 value, subject, however, to a deduction on account of any 
 debts which the owner may in good faith have contracted, 
 and be liable to pay; so that each one may bear his due 
 proportionate f hare of the public burthens, according to 
 the value of what he really possesses. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said this had been forwarded 
 to him by a highly respectable citizen of this 
 State, and it contained some details of enquiry 
 that were not embraced in any former resolution, 
 relative to taxation, arfc he wished this to go to 
 Committee No. 2, who already had that subject 
 before them. The object of this resolution was 
 to have a permanent and uniform system of tax- 
 ation, to operate equally on all persons and all 
 property, real or personal ; and prevent the citi- 
 zens from double taxation. 
 
 It was referred. 
 
 N. Y. CITY CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved that tvso copies of the 
 Journal and Documents of this Convention be 
 transmitted to the corporation of the city of New 
 York, as last as published- The Convention be- 
 ing now in session, they would be of great ser- 
 vice to that body. 
 
 Mr. COiNELY moved to amend so that one of 
 the copies be sent to the President of the City 
 Convention now in session. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD assented to this. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that the gentleman's object, 
 that of furnishing information to the New York 
 Convention, would not be accomplished, unices 
 the documents accompanying the journal were 
 sent also. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON differed; he thought that send- 
 ing the journal would ans'-vei every purpose; be- 
 cause he saw that they had just got into a new 
 system of printing, (laughter) and the new print- 
 er just lumped all the documents bodily into the 
 journal ; they had, first, all the long reports 
 printed and laid on their tables in the form of 
 documents; and then the printers (Carroll & 
 Cook) went to work and put all these bulky 
 documents into the journal (Much laughter.) 
 They were printed twice over ; and thus the 
 printers got double pay fur the same work. 
 (Laughter.) This was a new system ; they had 
 800 copies of the document, and 600 copies of the 
 journal; so they got 1400 copies of each docu- 
 ment. He desired to call the attention of 
 the Convention to this mode of doing busi- 
 ness, which was wholly unprecedented as well.as 
 useless, except for the sole purpose of putting 
 money in the pockets of the printers. He knew 
 not how it was such a contract was made with 
 these gentlemen? He thought it time this 
 mode of proceeding, and these abuses were stop- 
 ped. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole on the 
 
290 
 
 POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE EXECUTIVE, 
 Mr. CHATFIELD in the chair. 
 
 Mr. STOW asked if he could offer an amend- 
 ment in the House which had not been submitted 
 to the committee of the whole ? 
 
 The CHAIR said he could not. 
 
 Several members asked the gentleman to speak 
 louder ; they could not hear. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that it was impossible to speak 
 so as to be heard all over the House. There was 
 so much noise. 
 
 The CHAIR called to order. 
 
 Mr. STOW said I hat this rule resulted from a 
 special Legislative Rule, and not from pailiamen- 
 tary law. He wanted to call the attention of the 
 Committee to this matter, as he believed they 
 would find it necessary to depart from this rule. 
 
 discussion. He denied entirely that the parlia- 
 mentary rule was, as had been stated by the 
 Chair, viz : that you cannot move that in the 
 House which has not been offered first in com- 
 mittee of the whole. He denied that this was at 
 all a parliamentary rule. It would be lamenta- 
 ble indeed, if they had not the power to do this 
 in the House upon the great and important pro- 
 positions that would come up before them in the 
 preparation of this Constitution. The rule was 
 adopted in legislature on account of bills that were 
 pretty much local in their character, and which 
 there had been great difficulty in getting hugger- 
 muggered through the committee of the whole ; 
 bills of a private nature ; and this rule was inten- 
 ded to protect the parties, so that they should 
 not be surprised in the house, by any new prop- 
 
 He would now off, r an amendment pro forma,, so j osition calculated to defeat the bill. Our best 
 as to secure himself this^pnvilege in the House 
 hereafter. He supposed tnis would be voted down 
 as it ought to be; unless, in our subsequent action 
 the appointing power was taken away from the 
 Senate in connection with the Governor. He 
 moved to strike out of the 3d line of sec. 4 the 
 words '' or the Senate only," in connection with 
 the authority of the Governor to convene the Le- 
 gislature on special occasions. < His object was 
 this; if the Committee adopted (and he thought 
 they would, though he was not fully in favor of it) 
 this clause that the Senate shall not, partake 
 of the appointing powers, then his amendmen' 
 would come in properly ; because the provision lo 
 convene the Senate in such a case would be use- 
 less. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS supposed tin object of the 
 learned gentleman was, that the Committee 
 should prepare to make this article comport with 
 such subsequent articles of the Constitution as 
 might be hereafter reported and adopted by the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. STOW said it was. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he would then inform 
 the committee that when they shall have got 
 through this article he intended to move that any 
 further action in relation to it, be suspended un- 
 til the Convention shall have passed upon other 
 articles; and for the reason he formerly assigned, 
 when he introduced the article now before the 
 committee ; namely, that he had no doubt the 
 action of the Convention on other articles would 
 make it necessary to alter this in some important 
 particulars; and to allow the Convention an op- 
 portunity to do this, he would ask that in rela 
 tion to this article it be laid aside, after it shall 
 be amended by the committee of the whole be 
 laid on the table; and leave to sit again not grant- 
 ed. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that, after all, that was 
 only another mode of arriving at the result he de- 
 sired to effect ; yet he did not see how, according 
 to^the rules under which they were acting at pre- 
 sent, they could arrive at his or any other amend- 
 ment, unless they were offered first in committee 
 of the whole. He did not wish to press his mo 
 tipn further than was necessary to keep it within 
 his power to offer hereafter, unless the rule was 
 changed. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that he would no 
 trouble the committee but a moment : but he rose 
 to make a statement that would cut short much 
 
 vay is to discuss all these motions as they arise 
 icre in the committee now, and then meet the 
 ither things in the house and dispose of them 
 egularly and fairly as they occur. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR was precisely of this opinion. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that he had accomplished his 
 ibject; and roused the attention of the commit- 
 ee. He withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS moved to strike out the fol- 
 owing words : 
 
 4. The Governor shall be General and Oommander-in- 
 "hief of all the Militia, anfl Admiral 01 the Navy of the 
 tate. 
 
 and insert the following : 
 
 The Governor shall be Commander-in-Chief of the mil- 
 tary and naval forces of the State." Agreed to. 
 
 No farther amendments were offered to the 4th ; 
 and the committee passed to the 5th section on 
 
 THE PARDONING POWER. 
 
 The 5th section was then read as follows : 
 5. The Governor shall have power to grant reprieves 
 and pardons after conviction, for all oflences except trea- 
 son and cases. of impeachment. He may commute sen- 
 vnce of death to imprisonment in a State prison for life, 
 rle may grant pardons upon such conditions, and with such 
 estrictions and limitations", as he may think proper. Upon 
 conviction for treason, he shall have power to suspend the 
 execution oi the sentence,until the case shall be reported to 
 he Legislature at its next meeting, when the Legislature 
 shall either pardon, or direct the execution of the criminal, 
 or dnect a futher reprieve. He shall in his annual mes- 
 sage communicate to the Legislature each case of reprieve, 
 commutation and pai don granted since the next previous 
 annual message of the Governor, stating the name of the 
 convict, the crime of which he was convicted, the sen- 
 tence and its date, and the date of the commutation, \ ardon 
 and reprieve. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS offered the following amend- 
 ment : 
 
 After the word " reprieve," in the 5th line, insert as fol- 
 lows." But no reprieve, pardon or commutation shall 
 be granted except notice of the application therefor, with 
 the grounds or reasons thereof, and the names of the ap- 
 plicants be given for two weeks prior to such application, 
 in such manner as the Legislature shall determine." 
 
 The amendment was offered in behalf of his col- 
 league, (Mr. NICOL.L,,) who was unable to be pre- 
 sent to-day. He said this however not with any 
 desire to avoid the responsibility, on the contrary 
 it seemed to him that there was a great necessity 
 for some restriction on the pardoning power; in- 
 deed in his own mind it was somewhat question- 
 able whether it was not advisable to strike it alto, 
 gether from the Constitution. The certainty of 
 punishment was deemed to be a greater preventa- 
 
291 
 
 tive of crime than its severitv, ami ^s the tendency 
 of our laws was towards mildness, certainty of pu. 
 nishment was more necessary. But as the law 
 now stands, there is no certainty. The statistic- 
 
 there was no responsibility about it. The appli- 
 cations are handed around, and men from a faci- 
 lity of disposition or willingness to oblige, or a 
 strong feeling of sympathy with misery, every 
 
 of our prisons show that within the last 10 yeais, {where the result of crime, sign it. Politi- 
 
 ' c 1! ' L ' cians were always applied to they were gener- 
 ally the first to whom the papers were presented, 
 and perhaps it was true that in many cases they 
 did sign them, actuated by motives of political 
 interest. The facility and the secrecy with 
 which it was done, encouraged carelessness, 
 and the chances were a thousand to one that 
 
 60 persons sentenced to imprisonment for life, had 
 been pardoned, their average term of imprison- 
 ment was but about seven years Of these con. 
 fined for lesser crimes the average pardons was as 
 as one t" eighteen. He made no impufa 
 tion upon the Executive, either the present in- 
 cumbent or any of his predecessors. He knew the 
 
 difficulties he had to contend against, and the j the signers would never be known. But if eve- 
 powerful influences that were brought to bear upon | ry man knew that when he signed an appli- 
 
 him. 
 him. 
 
 He knew that prayers and tears assailed 
 But it seemed to him that there must be a 
 
 remedy for it, and this amendment in his 
 opinion went as far as any thing to accomplish it. 
 It required notice of the application to be given. 
 As it now stood the proceedings were secret and 
 exparte, the convict, or his friends for him, gets 
 up a statement always exaggerated and no doubt 
 often false, and instances had occurred where the 
 whole application rested on false and forged pa- 
 pers. The distinguished gentleman who now 
 occupied the Executive chair has called atten- 
 tion to the great extent to which exparte state- 
 
 cation of this kind, the whole would be put 
 before the public, he would pause and hesitate, 
 for no one who valued the good opinion of his fel- 
 low-citizens, would go before the public as asking 
 the Governor to let loose upon society a convict- 
 ed felon, unless the circumstances were such as 
 fully to justify it. This would cut off a vast class 
 of those applications, and the Governor would be 
 embarrassed with but few of them. Then there 
 would be no such thing as exparte evidence alone 
 to act upon. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY concurred entirely with the 
 gentleman from New York in the views that he 
 
 ments are carried. He states in his report that out had presented, as to the propriety of some limita- 
 of 700 applications for pardons presented last j tion and restriction on the pardoning power. They 
 vear but sixteen were accompanied by counter had all seen in the respective sections in which 
 
 year 
 
 statements, or unfavorable expression of any kind. 
 And there was reason to believe that all the 
 rest, being almost the whole number, were made 
 and perhaps acted upon, and without any know- 
 ledge of the fact being brought home to the party 
 
 against whom 
 to the peopl 
 
 the crime was committed or 
 of the State. Now it was mon- 
 
 strous tht.t a convicted felon who had had all the 
 benefits of the provisions of the laws, court, jury, 
 counsel and the examination of his own witnes- 
 ses, and been found guilty by a jury and senten- 
 ced to a punishment, should on the bare state- 
 ments of himself and his own friends be again let 
 loose upon society to commit crimes anew. It 
 was a mockery of the court that tried him of 
 the witnesses that proved his guilt, and of the 
 whole paraphernalia of justice, and of the rights 
 and privileges of the citizens who incurred the 
 expense of convicting him. The notice propo- 
 sed would inform the person wronged that this 
 application was pending, and that perhaps he 
 would be compelled to try his cause over again 
 before another tribunal, and an opportunity affor- 
 ded him of bringing forward new evidence. It 
 was but fair and right that he should have this 
 
 opportunity 
 stands exactly 
 
 He may 
 as it did 
 
 show that the case 
 at the trial, that the 
 
 convicted is no more entitled to a pardon than 
 he was to a verdict of acquittal. Then, the 
 Governor would be responsible for the grant- 
 ing of the pardon and then be would be placed 
 in a position which he could not now be he 
 would have heard the other side. The amend- 
 ment contemplated something further. It not 
 only required notice of the application to be pub- 
 lished, but also a statement of the grounds or rea- 
 sons upon, which it was founded, with the names 
 of the applicants. This would bring the whole 
 matter under the authority of responsible names, 
 at the bar of public opinion. As it stood now, 
 
 they resided, the evil of politicians and others who 
 were supposed to possess influence at Albany en- 
 gaging themselves in these applications. And 
 if as often happens, the pardon should be an im- 
 proper one, and the community indignant there- 
 at, these men are the first to join in the hue and 
 cry in denunciation of the Executive. He would 
 ask the gentleman to allow him to amend his 
 amendment, by inserting after the word "appli- 
 cants," the words, "and other persons recom- 
 mending the same, directly or indirectly." 
 
 The amendment, as proposed by the gentleman 
 from New York, (Mr. STEPHENS,) requires the 
 application forthe pardon to be published two 
 weeks before its consideration by the Executive. 
 This was too limited a time. There were many 
 persons who approached the Executive by letter 
 and through other means which would not be 
 considered strictly as applications, and yet who 
 have strong influence upon the question. He 
 wished to include every person who either direct- 
 ly or indirectly was connected with it, and de- 
 sired that the governor should not consider any 
 communication written or verbal unless under the 
 notice required. Then the community might 
 know who it was in conspicuous places in socie- 
 ty, who are going to release these felons upon 
 them. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL suggested that it was better to 
 leave these details to the legislature, and merely 
 to insert in the Constitution a general provision 
 on the subject. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that if it was proper to en- 
 trust the governor with the pardoning power, it 
 should be done without undertaking to spread out 
 in the constitution the rules of practice by which 
 he should be governed in its exercise. Embar- 
 rassments, difficulties and unnecessary expense, 
 could be the only result of the success of this pro- 
 position. He doubted very much whether it 
 
292 
 
 would throw any material difficulty in the way of 
 making the applications, so as to reduce the num- 
 ber. And if the Governor is required to give se- 
 ven or eight hundred notices a year to the District 
 Attorney of the counties, it would raise a new 
 system of practice over the State. In effect, it 
 would be a notification to these officers to show 
 cause why a new trial should not be had. Was 
 it supposed that they would fail to do so, or to 
 find it convenient to come here for that purpose, 
 and with the travelling fees and expenses, and all 
 that sort of thing, to be heard from when their an- 
 nual bills were allowed. Mr. B. said that as to 
 the proposition to require a notice of the applica- 
 tion to be published in the newspapers, the ex- 
 penses of that character were already heavy and 
 did very little good, and it was improper to in- 
 crease them. The Governor could regulate all 
 this matter, and where the case was proper, he 
 would undoubtedly give full opportunity to the 
 prosecuting Attorney to be heard in opposition. 
 
 Mr. BROWN thought the amendment should not 
 be adopted without consideration. It was gene- 
 rally conceded that great evils existed with regard 
 to the exercise ol the pardoning power, and that 
 there should be some limitation of it- But it seern 
 ed to him that by requiring these preliminary no- 
 tices, gentleman would wholly fail in securing the 
 object they designed to accomplish. They desir- 
 ed that pardons should not be granted to the ex- 
 tent which they have been, and that gentlemen in 
 high places, exercising political influence should 
 be obliged to put themselves on record in their 
 connection with the matter. Would -that follow 
 from the adoption of this rule? This influence 
 would be exercised still, and in such a way as 
 would not appear in the application. Thig pow. 
 er had been abus-d verj much, not from a desire 
 to do wrong, or to commit an abuse, but from the 
 exercise of (he best feelings of the human heart. 
 The governor had been assailed by application, 
 and frequently misled, in this matter and all 
 would unite in that opinion. Tfoere \vere great 
 principles lying at the bottom of the pardoning 
 power. In this country it was lodged with the 
 Governor or President in Great Britain with the 
 Crown, so that whenever a case occurred where 
 through the perjury of the witnesses, or the bring- 
 ing to light of circumstances having a material 
 bearing in the convict's favor it would justify an 
 interposition in his favor, the power to do that 
 should be lodged somewhere. He would consider 
 this subject fully before he proceeded to establish 
 arule'in the fundamental law over which legisla- 
 tion would have no power. He would suppose a 
 case that the legislature required a six week's no. 
 tice of the application that a man was convict- 
 ed of murder that his sentence was to be execu- 
 ted to-morrow, and that two hours before then 
 it should be discovered that he was innocent. 
 Was that Convention prepared to say it should not 
 avail him he should not be pardoned, because six 
 weeks notice of the application had not been given. 
 God forbid that any man should have such a de- 
 sire. This matter should be considered, for it 
 hasty action was had upon it, it might lead to re 
 suits which gentlemen would regret for all future 
 time. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that gentlemen had considered 
 the pardoning power simply, as an act of mercy 
 
 towards the convict. The great error was that 
 gentlemen overlooked the fact that it was a great 
 political power, to be exercised as expediency 
 might require. It was often for the benefit of 
 government, where a conspiracy existed, to secure 
 witnesses, or in any other case where it was ne- 
 cessary, that all the movements and the parties 
 should be kept secret. It never would answer to 
 give publicity to the names and purposes through 
 which and for which a pardon was exercised. It 
 often happened too, that men would not suffer 
 their names to be made public, although it 
 might be of vast consequence to the people that 
 the information they possess should be communi- 
 cated to the Executive. This was therefore not 
 a mere question of mercy to the accused. He 
 thought himself, however, that there must be some 
 restriction on the exercise of the pardoning pow- 
 er, and he should propose a modification of this 
 amendment to carry out his views. The Legis- 
 lature might require the Governor to give notice 
 of the application to the District Attorney or 
 Judge before whom the case was tried and to as- 
 sign the reasons for interposing the pardoning 
 power, and to require their being filled in the 
 Secretary of State's office. He did not propose 
 to make it obligatory on the Legislature to do 
 this, but to leave it to their experience to apply 
 the remedy to the improvident exercise of the 
 power. The safety and security of our institu- 
 tions and the development of wide spread con- 
 spiracy might depend, and often had depended in 
 history, upon a sort of arrangement to be made 
 with the felon. He would certainly not now 
 adopt a rule which would give to the guilty no- 
 tice of this fact. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said the subject before the 
 Convention interested the people of the county 
 in which he resided, deeply. And he regretted 
 that he was forced to say that nineteen of the 
 citizens of that county were convicts in the State 
 Prison, two of them having before been under 
 sentence of death. They were put there under 
 mere pleas of guilty, some of them wdthout a 
 trial. And this he believed, too, when the laws 
 would have allowed them to go free. Such was 
 his firm conviction, although perhaps it might be 
 the result of prejudice. The facts were not on 
 record, and it could not be proved, however. 
 With some others, he had occasion to appeal to 
 the Executive to mitigate the punishment df the 
 two men under sentence of death. Mr. W. went 
 to deprecate the manner in which the men were 
 convicted, and to urge that in all cases men 
 should be put upon their trial, without regard to 
 their pleas. 
 
 Mr. WARD did not see the necessity for the 
 amendment. It was due to the Executive to 
 state that so far as his (Mr. W.) observation had 
 extended, that he has always pursued the very 
 course that gentlemen now propose should be 
 made obligatory upon him by the Constitution. 
 It had been his practice before granting a pardon 
 to address a note to the judge who tried the cause, 
 requiring his notes of the proceedings on the 
 trial, and not only that, but information from the 
 agents of the prison in respect to the conduct of 
 the convict. This had been the uniform practice 
 of the Executive for many years past. He thought 
 therefore it would not be advisable to insert this 
 
293 
 
 amendment in the Constitution, and he should 
 ii the report of the committee. 
 
 STETSON aid not consider the pardoning 
 power merely as an instrument of mercy. It had 
 a very imp>rtant duty to perform, which in his 
 opinion, had not been adverted to by gentlemen. 
 It was an instrument of justice in one of its as- 
 pects. It performed the duty of equalizing pun- 
 ishments a very important duty and one which 
 he hoped might be frequently exercised, until the 
 unequalities which are given to crime by the 
 Kevised Statues, shall be more nearly reconciled 
 to the moral turpitude ol the crimes themselves. 
 There was but a general classification of crimes, 
 punishments and courts, and lawyers Knew that 
 frequently an individual was brought within the 
 statute provisions, by which he would be subject 
 to the same punishment awarded to a person of 
 much higher conceded guilt. He could refer to 
 many instances of the kind where it had been prop- 
 er for the Executive to interfere, not as an act of 
 clemency but of justice itself, to mitigate the pun- 
 ishment. He referred to a remarkable case of a 
 constructive attempt to kill, where a Canadian 
 shot his gun through a fence and killed a horse, 
 and upon the principle that he was bound to know 
 the result of his act, he was convicted of an at- 
 tempt to kill. He was accordingly sentenced to 
 the shortest period, five years in the State Prison, 
 but after a brief imprisonment, he was very 
 properly pardoned out by Governor Seward. 
 There were many instances of this kind, where 
 under the classification of the Revised Statutes, 
 the punishment of an offence would be so dispro- 
 portionate, and without regard to the circumstances 
 under which it was committed, that it was but jus- 
 tice for the Governor to interpose. To the politi- 
 cal consideration he would not give so great a 
 weight as did the gentleman from Erie. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that the feeling which 
 prevailed in reference to the pardoning power, 
 was not unnatural. It is the almost necessary 
 struggle that arises from the feeling of equality 
 and consultation of many persons and the little 
 remnant of monarchy that must be in some form 
 or other retained in every Constitution. There 
 was something that must after all, be left to a 
 one man power. Andj the fact that it was a one 
 man power, rendered the Governor liable to the 
 suspicion that it was abused. And yet he had 
 not known an instance where it had been abused 
 from a knowledge of the facts and circumstances, 
 and he doubted not that it had been discreetly 
 exercised. Mr. S. suggested a plan that was in 
 operation in the New England States, and which 
 had operated well there to form a sort of cabi- 
 net council to aid the Governor. Let it be com- 
 posed of the heads of departments. He consi- 
 dered a pardon before conviction, as the same as 
 entering a nolle pr sequi, and that power he 
 would at any rate retain with the Governor. But 
 when a man was convicted, the case was differ- 
 ent, and he would then have the Governor under 
 some control. But unless this pardoning power 
 was lodged some where, it would be exercised 
 by juries on trial, in cases like that instanced by 
 the gentleman from Ontario, (Mr. STETSOJV.) 
 All he desired was to subject the Executive to 
 some rule which should be most satisfactory to 
 all, and tend to promote uniformity of practice 
 
 and strengthen the law. He thought that for the 
 purpose of exercising the pardoning power as 
 well as others, that there should always be asso- 
 ciated with the Governor the heads of depart- 
 ments, to advise him, but not to control. He 
 thought this would tend to give public satisfac- 
 tion in all cases of pardons. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was at first somewhat in fayor 
 of the gentleman's proposition, but after hearing 
 the remarks that had followed he was satisfied 
 that it was inexpedient. It was on the whole 
 nothing more than legislation upon this subject, 
 it was doing by this body what the Governor 
 already had power to do. He supposed it was 
 perfectly competent for the Governor to say 
 hereafter that ne would grant no pardon, unless 
 accompanied by what was required in this prop- 
 osition. No doubt there had been occasional 
 abuses in the exercise of this power, and that it 
 had occasionally been unduly exercised. It was 
 a necessary result of the excessive severity of 
 the criminal law. The exercise of the par- 
 doning power was a high prerogative of the 
 State, to be vested in some individual represent- 
 ing the whole whole power of the State, and 
 there was no more fitter person than its chief 
 executive officer. Mr. L. went on to remark 
 that although he might be in favor of an advisory 
 council, yet he would riot suffer them to overrule 
 the Governor. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that the Constitution as it 
 now stands, gave to the Governor the power to 
 grant pardons after conviction, for all offences ex- 
 cept treason or impeachment. It seemed to be 
 an absolute power in the discretion of the Gover- 
 nor, but there is no mode prescribed in the Con- 
 stitution through which that power is to be exer- 
 cised. In the Governor's report it is stated that 
 the larger part of these applications were exparte, 
 and most of them were granted without those who 
 felt an interest in the question, having a know- 
 ledge of the application ; and in some instances 
 these pardons took effect without the knowledge 
 of those who took a deep interest in them, and 
 applications were made without the attention of 
 the people.being called towards it. There might 
 undoubtedly, if notice was required in all in- 
 stances, be inconvenience resulting therefrom. 
 It might exist in capital cases, but he could per- 
 ceive no objection that authority should be 
 given to the Legislature to require notice 
 to be given, in all cases not capital, of ap- 
 plications for pardon. There might be power in 
 the legislature to provide for that now, and there 
 might be doubt about it. If so it ought to be re- 
 moved by a provision in the Constitution itself. 
 He thought that to require notices of the applica- 
 tion to be given in the county where the crime 
 was committed, except in capital cases, ought 
 to meet with the approbation of the Con- 
 vention, and it seemed to him that it would 
 remedy the evil complained of now, that pardons 
 were granted without knowledge of the facts in 
 the case. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES rose to make a suggestion to 
 the gentleman from New York, that he 
 adopt the proposition he (Mr. R.) had made, that 
 the committee enquire into the expediency 
 of incorporating into the Constitution a provision 
 for a board of commissioners of the state prison 
 
294 
 
 officers, who should have the general power 
 and control of the prisons, and be associated 
 with the governor and constitute the pardoning 
 power for all cfterices punishable by in. prison 
 tnent in the State Prison. He should, at a proper 
 time make this motion. He would suggest to the 
 gentleman from New York now, that he suffer the 
 question to be taken on his proposition. It was a 
 matter ot little consequence how it was decided in 
 committee. This provision which he had suggest- 
 ed would at least leave the pardoning power free 
 from the imputation of being hastily and without 
 due consideration exercised. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS thought this to be the proper 
 time and place to dispose of this question. He 
 thought any such connection of the State Prison 
 Inspectors with the governor as proposed by the go. 
 vernor, would be very inexpedient for several rea- 
 sons. The officers of the prison could not be 
 conveniently here, to attend to these daily appli- 
 cations for pardon without neglecting their other 
 duties. He thought the amendment of the gen- 
 tleman from New York would not attain the 
 object he had in view. He could not conceive 
 how it would be the mears of bringing before 
 the Governor the necessary information to enable 
 him to act discreetly in the exercise of this 
 power, An excitement might be got up in the 
 neighborhood and lead to counter memorials and 
 statements, but after all, this was not the kind 
 of information that the Governor should rely 
 upon. He did not belive that there was ever 
 any intentional abuse of this power, it preceded 
 entirely from the exercise of the best sym- 
 pathies of our nature. But this power must 
 be lodged somewhere, and he did not believe 
 it could be so safely invested in any other 
 hands as in that in which it was now vested. To 
 divide the responsibility it appeared to him, would 
 be to fritter it away, and it would not be observed 
 with that care and discretion that it has been by 
 one man. And if the duties of the Governor should 
 be curtailed, he would have more leisure hereaf- 
 ter than heretofore to examine these matters. 
 Mr. N. repeated his objections to the association 
 of the State Prison Inspectors with the Governor 
 in this matter. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY was well aware from per- 
 sonal knowledge, that the Governor required the 
 most full and satisfactory evidence of the proprie- 
 ty of ihe pardon, before a reprieve was given. 
 He believed there was no dangtrto be apprehend- 
 ed from leaving with him the responsibility or 
 the exeicise of the pardoning power, while by 
 giving it lo a halt dozen, the lights of the criminal 
 to a lair hearing would be much restricted, by 
 the chances of the different opinions which differ- 
 ent persons would form from the same testimony. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE w<is in f <vor of the section 
 as it sN.o.l in the existing constitution. The 
 power of pardon was an essential power in a gov- 
 ernment, which must be lodged somewhere, and 
 no where could it be more safely lodged than 
 where it had been, for so long a period with the 
 Governor who was icsponsible, at stated periods-, 
 to the people. Though he confessed this power 
 had been indiscreetly exercised in some instances, 
 yet he did not believe that it was from bad mo- 
 tives nor were they cases of such importance as 
 to i equ ire essential changes in the existing con- 
 
 stitution. It was better to putup with occasional in. 
 discretions, than to place embarrassing or prohibi- 
 tory restraints upon its exeicise or to interfere 
 with the proper jurisdiction of the executive. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS would agree to the suggestion 
 of the gentleman from Onondaga, that his proposi- 
 tion should be voted on now. 
 
 Mr. STOW thought this the proper time and 
 place to dispose of the amendment, and of the 
 question as to where the pardoning power should 
 be vested. And he now gave notice that he 
 should follow up this proposition with another 
 which he should insist on having adopted. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS then said that he regarded all 
 that had been said in regard to district attorneys, 
 and an increase of lawyers' fees as entirely inap- 
 plicable to his amendment requiring as it did, 
 nothing that might not be done by the convict or 
 his friends. As to the case stated by the gentle- 
 man from Orange, it was an|extreme one, not likely 
 to occur. As a general rule certainly, the mat- 
 ter could be safely left to the Governor, with the 
 statements on both sides before him and if it 
 should appear that the person was rightly con- 
 victed, by a proper tribunal, he ought to abide 
 the punishment prescribed by law. But he 
 would not follow the gentleman further. It was 
 a subject, he confessed, with which he was not 
 familiar in all its bearings and he acquieced in 
 the suggestion of the gentleman from Onondaga 
 very cheerfully. 
 
 Mr TALLMADGE here said that he should 
 move at the proper time to strike out all the new 
 matter in this section, leaving it as it stood in 
 the old Constitution. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that if he understood the 
 gentleman from New York (Mr. STEPHENS) cor- 
 rectly, he was contending that when all the pro- 
 ceedings had been technically legal, every indi- 
 vidual convicted must suffer the penalty. He could 
 imagine cases of conviction where the proceed- 
 ings were legal, but where great injustice might 
 be done by the infliction of the penalty. A man 
 might be convicted on the testimony of a witness, 
 who it might turn out, might be mistaken. The 
 proceedings might all be legal, and yet great 
 wrong be done. One word, as to the idea of the 
 gentleman from Onondaga, that we should have a 
 board composed of the governor and the inspec- 
 tors of the prisons 
 
 Mr. RHOADES would explain. He had ad- 
 vocated no such thing. He merely alluded to 
 an enquiry he had proposed but avowed no at- 
 tachment to any plan of the kind. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND understood the gentleman to 
 say that when the time arrived, he would press 
 his plan. Before any board was to be associated 
 with the Governor whether composed of the 
 State Prison officers or of the Inspectors he 
 wished first to know in what way they were to be 
 appointed ; if by the people, then he was disposed 
 to be in favor of it. There was no doubt, at all 
 events, but that the pardoning power should be 
 placed somewhere. 
 
 Mi. ISiMMOINfc) concurred in the opinion that 
 had been expressed in relation to the preservation 
 ot the pardoning power as the attribute of mercy. 
 And why should we seek to get out of this princi- 
 ple because it wassuppogd to have something of 
 monarchy in it.__Tht idea of Montesquieu that the 
 
295 
 
 government was a Republic disguised un- ' 
 dt-r the fortn ol'.i monarchy, was to some ext> tit 
 true, compared with some other monarchies of 
 Europe. And on the other hand, it was a matter 
 of surprise that our government, under the form 
 of republicanism, was perhaps the only kind of 
 government in the world, that had real monarchy 
 in it. A convi t in England wa-s pardoned by the 
 Queen ; but she never knew any thing about it ; 
 it was done by a cabinet. The King arid Q ieen 
 were persons of straw. Why shouU we be so 
 peculiar when a monarchy repudiated this one 
 man power and turned it into a creaiure of straw? 
 Why should we insist on having a real man ex. 
 Brewing the whole power alone? And this too 
 where the general feeling inlhe country was a- 
 gainst these one-man decisions, whether by a 
 
 judge or an Executive? As t<> dispensing 
 with this power altogethe 
 
 this preroga- 
 
 tive of mercy he would not do it he would 
 rather go for having it precisely as it was. 
 Never, until the principal was established that a 
 bird in the hand was worth two in the bush, would 
 he give it up for a moment. He recollected that 
 in Vermont some two years since, two men were 
 sentenced to be hung on their own confession, as 
 having murdered a man, who was before the day 
 of execution found alive and brought into Ver- 
 mont. The people, without waiting for the 
 formality of a pardon, opened the prison doors 
 and let them out. There must exist the pardon- 
 ing power to interpose, for evidences of the in- 
 nocence of a convict might come to light even 
 but a few moments before the time of execution 
 he would not leave the lives of persons to stand 
 on the mere naked law. It would be found that 
 if it d- ; d not exist elsewhere that juries would 
 exercise it. There were strong suspicions pre- 
 vailing of an abuse in the exercise of the pardon- 
 ing power, and the effect of it may be to control 
 the Executive to the great injury of the cause of 
 humanity and mercy. And in order to avoid such 
 a state of things he was in favor of an Executive 
 council, not merely for this purpose but for some 
 others he would not now mention. It was al- 
 ready in existence in many of the New England 
 States where it worked well. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE- did not know that he 
 should object to this proposition for an Executive 
 
 punishments. He would not go as far as the 
 gentleman from New York, who said, and per- 
 haps he spoke hastily, that it never should be 
 exercised as an act of mercy. It was not for frail 
 and erring humanity, whose dependence on the 
 Divine forbearance and mercy was daily recog- 
 nized, to assert or act on such a principle. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved a substitute for the proposi- 
 tion of Mr. STEPHENS, as follows: 
 
 Aftcrthe word " proper," add " But the Legislature may, 
 by law, require that notice shall be given to a judge before 
 whom the convict was tried, or to the district attorney of 
 the county where the conviction was had, or to both such 
 judge and district attorney, before a pardon shall be grant- 
 ed; and, also, that the Governor shHil file his reasons for 
 granting a pardon, and the documentary evidence on 
 which he acted, with the Secretary of State." 
 
 Mr. S. said the pardoning power, as he had 
 shown before, was indispt3nsable, as a matter of 
 public policy. The notoriety proposed to be given 
 to applications for pardon, and the grounds for 
 them, would often defeat the object and endanger 
 the public safety, as for instance, in a case of wide 
 spread conspiracy against society. He preferred 
 also to see the power vested in the Executive, 
 where experience had shown it generally to have 
 worked well. Any errors that had arisen, were 
 from misinformation, or want of information, and 
 
 this he proposed to remedy 'by his amendment. 
 
 He was opp sed to the proposition for an execu- 
 tive council as tending to divide and thus to frit- 
 ter away if not destroy the responsibiliiy. The 
 State Prison Inspectors were the last men he 
 should select to compose such a board. If he 
 wanted to select a ma.i to assist n Spanish priest 
 in improving on torture, he would apply to those 
 vho had had the keeping and managing of state 
 prison convicts. Mr. S. would give The Legisla 
 
 ture some slight power over the mode in which 
 the Governor should exercise this power, and this 
 was the only modification he would make. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS opposed the amendment. It 
 made delay necessary. He had another objection. 
 and he spoke from practical observation when 
 
 he said that when a man had been convicted b 
 
 conspiracy, and that conclusively shown, the effect 
 of such a notice as this would be to add perjury 
 upon perjury. Again, it was unnecessary, for he 
 knew the fact to be that the Executive always 
 took the precautions suggested in this amend- 
 
 Council when it came properly b?fore the Con- ment applying always to the judges and the dis- 
 vention, but it was hardly in order to discuss it ! trict attorneys for their notes of testimony and their 
 
 now. But the policy of this State, Mr. T. said, 
 since the formation of this government, had been 
 to choose men capable for their places, and to 
 hold them responsible, and for their action. She 
 stood on the same rock now. If New England 
 had her Executive council, be it so, far be it from 
 him to say that it was wrong. But he did not feel 
 the necessity for this new radical change in the 
 principles upon which our Government had been 
 based from its foundation down to the present 
 time. And when it was in order he should pro- 
 pose his amendment with a view of restoring this 
 section to the shape in which it stoo* in the 
 present Constitution. 
 
 Mr. STOW went on to sustain this amendment. 
 He regarded the pardoning power as indispensa- 
 ble not merely as an exercise of mercy but as 
 often a matter of absolute right that the convict 
 should be pardoned and to prevent excessive 
 
 opinions upon the case. No doubt Executives 
 had erred sometimes; but these errors were on 
 the side of mercy, and for that human nature 
 should not be censured. He trusted the commit- 
 tee would not adopt the amendment. 
 
 The question was here taken, and Mr. STE- 
 PHEN'S amendment negatived. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR offered the following, on 
 behalf of Mr. CHATFIELD : 
 
 Alter the word "proepe' mserrt " but before any such 
 pardon shail be granted, the Inspectors of the State prison 
 shall inquire >mo the case of every convict for whom a 
 pirJon shail be asked, and i-hall communicate to the Go- 
 vernor all the facts and circumstances in relation thereto.' 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said his impressions were in 
 favor of leaving the section as it was reported. 
 There could no evil however result from this, as 
 it required nothing more than the Governor had 
 felt it incumbent on him to do without it. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS did not believe that gny pub 
 
296 
 
 lie officer ever withheld such information when 
 applied to for it ? This amendment then could 
 have no other effect than to subject the officers 
 designated, to importunities from the friends of 
 convicts. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON remarked that the keepers 
 of the prisons were to be applied to for this infor- 
 mation, if any one. The inspectors knew nothing 
 of these cases ; nor in all cases, were persons for 
 whom pardons were asked, confined in the State 
 prison. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was 
 rejected. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON moved the following amend- 
 ment to this 5th section : 
 
 But no person convicted of murder, whose sentence of 
 death has been commuted into imprisonment for life in a 
 State Prison, shall be pardoned afterwards, exct pt upon 
 proof of innocence, insanity of the convict at the time the 
 crime was committed, or such irregularities in the pro- 
 ceedings of the court, or mitigating circumstances in the 
 case, as shall render the interference of the Executive ne- 
 cessary. Every such case it shall be the duty of the Go- 
 vernor, in his discretion, to report to the Senate, with a 
 comprehensive statement of facts and circumstances, for 
 their determination thereon; and a majority of the Senate 
 may direct the sentence to be reversed, or that a pardon 
 be granted to the criminal. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to strike out of the 
 4th section these words: "He may commute 
 sentence of death to imprisonment in a State 
 prison for life. He may grant pardons upon such 
 conditions, and with such restrictions and limita- 
 tions as he may think proper." He said that the 
 Constitution of 1777 gave the Governor the power 
 to pardon in all cases except those of treason and 
 murder. And in 1821 " murder" was put in the 
 general list of pardons which he might grant, and 
 " treason and impeachment" were made excep- 
 tions. In 1777 the Governor had the power to 
 reprieve until the Legislature met, and they had 
 the power to pardon. So that the jewel, the dia- 
 mond of mercy, might hang upon the crown of 
 power ; the power to suspend execution given to 
 the immediate and active agent of power, the 
 Executive leaving the details of the pardon to 
 the Legislature, from time to time. The princi- 
 ple of mercy, the power to reprieve, being in the 
 hands of the Executive, and leaving the details 
 of pardon to the Legislature, from time to time. 
 
 Mr. BROWN was opposed to having this mat- 
 ter left to the Legislature, at all. He hoped the 
 motion to strike out would not prevail. He had 
 occasion to look at the Constitution, last winter, 
 while the case of the Delaware county prisoners 
 engaged the public attention, and he was sur- 
 prised to find no express authority in the Consti- 
 tution to the Executive to commute sentence of 
 death to imprisonment in the State prison. He 
 however found the power in the statute. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN begged to ask the gentleman 
 from Orange if he was not aware that doubts ex- 
 isted as to the Constitutionality of the statute ? 
 
 Mr. BROWN said he was aware of that diffi- 
 culty, and he therefore was glad to find the com- 
 mittee had embodied the power in the article of 
 the Constitution under consideration. He hoped 
 it would be suffered to remain where it was, as 
 necessarily connected with the just and prudent 
 exercise of the pardoning power. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend the section by in- 
 serting after the word " proper" in the 6th line, 
 
 the words following to wit : " But the legisla- 
 ture may, by law, require that notice shall begiv- 
 en to a judge before whom the convict was tried, 
 or to the District Attorney of the county where 
 the conviction was had, or to both such Judge and 
 District Attorney, before a pardon shall be grant, 
 ed j and also that the Gov. shall file his reasons 
 for granting a pardon, and the documentary evi- 
 dences on which he acted, with the Secretary of 
 State." 
 
 Mr. BROWN in reply to a question from some 
 member stated the course pursued now was to call 
 on the governor tor this information, and he was 
 always willing to furnish it. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that great difficulty and much 
 evil had arisen in many cases from the Governor 
 negleciing to give notice of his intention to pardon, 
 to the Judge or District Attorney before whom a 
 criminal was tried. 
 
 The amendment was rejected, 43 noes to 38 
 ayes. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER then moved to strike out the 
 sixth section and insert the following: 
 
 " The governor shall have the power to giant reprieves 
 and pardons, or may commute the sentence to imprison 
 ment lor life, or a term of years, and with such restric- 
 tions and limitations as he may think proper, after con 
 viction in ail cases, except treason, where the penalty of 
 the crime is death, An I upon convictions lor treason he 
 shall have power to suspend the execution ol the sentence 
 until the case shall be reported by him to the legislature 
 at its next session, when the legislature shall either pai- 
 don or direct the execution ot the sentence or grant a fur- 
 ther reprieve " 
 
 Mr. MORRIS asked Mr. CROOKER if he meant 
 to include impeachments. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said that he did. He also said 
 several gentlemen have complained of abuses in 
 the exercise of the pardoning power, and we 
 have been told of the great numbers who have 
 been the subjects of executive clemency in former 
 years. He was one of those who do not believe 
 that too many pardons have been granted. On 
 the contrary he believed there have been by far 
 too few. He admitted that oftentimes the wrong 
 individuals have been set at liberty. No com- 
 plaints of an undue exercise of the pardoning 
 power comes from the country. The cases where 
 abuses have occurred, it any, are those arising in 
 large towns and cities. And who are the indivi- 
 duals who in almost all cases are the subjects of 
 executive tavor ? They are the rich and the rela- 
 tives of the rich and powerful, and not the hum- 
 ble poor- They are oftentimes of the worst class 
 of convicts. Such convicts can always procure 
 the means of reaching the Governor's ear, while 
 by far the largest class of convicts are placed en- 
 tirely beyond the executive clemency by poverty. 
 But a few years since he wa* present at the trial 
 and conviction of an aged and ignorant man for 
 the crime of offering to pass a counterfeit fifty- 
 cent piece. The evidence was insufficient to 
 procure a conviction under any circumstances. 
 The old man was poor and a stranger, and he 
 served a term in the prison at Auburn. He also 
 knew aifother case where three individuals were 
 concerned in stealing a few bushels of wheat from 
 a barn. The principal rogue escaped a trial by means 
 of his money. The second man was convicted 
 and sentenced to two years imprisonment. The 
 humble and ignorant hireling teamster was con- 
 victed and sentenced to seven years confinement, 
 
297 
 
 and is now serving his last year in Auburn. He 
 i mere driver not the owner of the team 
 the most ignorant, and least guilty of all. But 
 he was poor, and without influential friends to 
 intercede ia his behalf. Another, and a stronger 
 case, was one occurring in his own county, and 
 in which he had a humble share. It was tried in 
 January last, and he acted as counsel for the peo- 
 
 Ele. The individual was tried for attempting to 
 ire a man to burn a mill. The only witness was 
 the accomplice; and instead of that witness being 
 supported by evidence of any kind, he was im- 
 peached, both by his bad character, (since found 
 to have been notorious,) and by his own repeated 
 declarations, out of court, that his charge w r as 
 false. But the individual was convicted, and is 
 now in Auburn. In this case, he apprehended 
 there was but one opinion, in the place of trial 
 and that was, that the prisoner was entirely inno- 
 cent of the crime for which he was convicted. 
 If a petition for his pardon should be presented 
 to him, he should feel bound to sign it. But he 
 too is poor, and no arm of power is raised for him. 
 There is no way now to bring the poor convict's 
 case within the pale of Executive clemency. He 
 desired to remedy this evil. He proposed to take 
 away from the Governor the pardoning power, in 
 all cases of conviction for offences punishable in 
 a state prison. His amendment, if adopted, will 
 relieve him from this onerous duty. The 
 Governor is usually elected from other con- 
 siderations than his ability to judge and de- 
 termine nice legal questions. He is also a 
 politician and may by possibility be biassed in 
 the exercise of this important power by political 
 or other improper considerations. He proposed 
 to relieve him from both the labor and the sus- 
 picion of partiality. If his amendment should be 
 adopted, he proposed to confide the pardoning 
 power in all State prison cases to a Board ot Com- 
 missioners to be located either at the prisons or 
 in this city, he cared not which. This Board 
 should be composed of able and learned men and 
 placed if possible beyond the reach of the sus- 
 picion of favoritism or the influence of political 
 considerations. To this Board he would require 
 the court before whom a convict was tried, to re- 
 turn a full copy of the evidence in the case, to- 
 gether with a copy of the indictment and the de- 
 cisions of the court on all questions decided at 
 the trial whenever required to do so by the coun- 
 sel for the convict. By this or some similar 
 course the case of the poor convict could be 
 brought within the reach of mercy. That mercy 
 is now denied him. By the present system, how- 
 ever innocent the poor convict may be, of the of- 
 fence of which he is convicted, no door of relief 
 is open for him. He goes into prison guiltless, 
 serves out his term, and comes out for revenge 
 and educated for crime. The State of New York 
 owes it to the poor convict to bring his case with- 
 in the power of pardon. In effecting this object 
 he cared but little who shall be the Commission- 
 ers or where they shall be located. But he would 
 require them patiently to examine every case pre- 
 sented for their decision. 
 The amendment was put and lost. 
 Mr. BROWN moved to strike out in the 10th 
 line all after the word "reprieve," and down to 
 the end of the section thus : to strike out all 
 
 19 
 
 this : "He shall in his annual message commu- 
 nicate to the Legislature each case of reprieve, 
 commutation, and pardon granted since the next 
 previous annual message of the Governor, stat- 
 ing the name of the convict, the crime of which 
 he was convicted, the sentence and its date, and 
 the date of the commutation, pardon or reprieve " 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked if the Legislature had 
 not the power to get at this information now. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that they had; but there 
 were other reasons why the Governor should not 
 communicate this information to the people in 
 this way. The message of the Governor is a 
 grave and important state paper ; and it should 
 not be disfigured with the names of criminals 
 who may have been pardoned within the preced- 
 ing year. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that the committee had put 
 that clause there to operate as a check on the op- 
 erations of the Governor in respect to the pardons 
 he may have granted during the preceding year. 
 And they inserted the proviso that he should 
 communicate this information relative to these 
 pardons in his annual message, so that the whole 
 community might have this information before 
 them. He would therefore in order to meet the 
 objections of the gentleman from Orange (Mr. 
 BROWN) strike out these words, " in his annual 
 message," and insert annually. 
 
 Finally, after various suggestions, the words 
 " in his annual message" were stricken out, and 
 also the words " granted since the next previous 
 annual message of the Governor." This was 
 adopted without dissent. j 
 
 Mr. CROOKER then moved to insert after this 
 sentence " He may commute sentence of death 
 to imprisonment in a State prison for life," the 
 words " or for a term of years." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON was opposed to this; where 
 the Governor is allowed to commute sentence of 
 death, he would confine his power to imprison- 
 ment for life. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER : Suppose it was a boy ? 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Well, if it was a boy who 
 committed murder I would punish him 
 
 Mr. >WATERBURY said he liked the words 
 " a term of years" better. 
 
 Mr. UAsCUAl said that, it may well be conten- 
 ded that after ihe Gov. shall have gratjted a re- 
 prieve or conditional pardon that the pardoning 
 power is expended, and a lull pacdon denied in a 
 c;:se when the innocence of a partv may be appa- 
 rent. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that his colleague (Mr.SHEp- 
 ARD) had a resolution containing this whole sub- 
 ject 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD submitted his resolution to 
 be considered hereafter. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER'S amendment was put and lost. 
 
 Mr. ARCHER moved to amend by adding after 
 section 5, the words: 
 
 " In case the Legislature should abolish capital punish- 
 ments, the Governor shall have 110 power to pardon or 
 shorten the term of imprisonment of such persons as may 
 be convicted ot murder, except with the unanimous con- 
 sent of both branches of the Legislature." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER suggested the word " unani- 
 mous" should he stricken out. This was done 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said he hoped they would 
 have it so as that it should be by a majority of all 
 
298 
 
 was 
 
 th 
 
 the members of the Legislature elected. He 
 wanted that fixed all through the Constitution, 
 
 The amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved to amend the 5th sec- 
 tion, by adding after the word "offences" in the 
 2d line the words, " except for which the 
 offender may be sentenced to the State prison, 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD then called up his amendment. proper> 
 It was as follows ; 
 
 Substitute lor the first part of the section down to and 
 including the word "limitations," these words: "1 he 
 Governor shall have power to grant commutations, and 
 nardons after conviction, except in cases of treason and 
 impeachment, in such manner, on such terms, and under 
 such restrictions as he may think proper." 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that this was an impor- 
 tant alteration in the phraseology; and rendered 
 the matter clear as to the general power of com- 
 mutations. As it stood in the statute they were 
 controlled by the Constitution. The committee 
 seemed to have been in a fog here. They gave 
 the power to commute for treason. 
 
 Mr WORDEN thought the phraseology 
 better the language and meaning clearer 
 that of the committee; and he hoped it would be 
 
 a Mr . G MORRIS assured his young colleague (Mr 
 SHEPARD) that the committee had not been in 
 a fog- they had not reported this without knowing 
 something of what they were about 
 
 Mr SHEPARD begged to explain. He had 
 no intention to impute ignorance to any member 
 of committee No. 5 nothing could be farther from 
 his feelings -but he did think that the provisions 
 reported in regard to commutation of sentence o 
 death to imprisonment in a State Prison for life 
 was inconsistent, with the exception of reprieves 
 and pardons after conviction in cases of treason. 
 The power to commute sentence of death, being 
 given generally, he had no doubt it was applica- 
 ble to cases of treason, yet the policy of our gov- 
 ernment was against such a commutation and in 
 favor of keeping that right to the legislature It 
 was true the new provision reported, was taken 
 from a Statute of the State, but as a statute it 
 would be overidden by the Consitution, while as 
 a pait of that instrument, it must stand so long as it 
 could be construed with the other parts. Upon this 
 mode of construction the power to pardon in cases 
 of treason might be exercised by the Governor and 
 he (Mr. S.) did not suppose that to be the design 
 of the committee. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD gave way to a motion to rise; 
 and the committee rose and reported. 
 
 The Convention then adjoumed till to-morrow 
 morning at 9 o'clock. 
 
 POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE GOVERNOR, &C. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD in the Chair. 
 
 The question was upon the following amend- 
 ment by Mr. SHEPARD, to the first part of the 
 fifth section: 
 
 The Governor shall have power to grant reprieves, 
 jommutations and pardons after conviction, except in 
 cases of treason and impeachment, in such manner, on 
 ;uch terms, and under such restrictions as he may think 
 
 TUESDAY, (35M day,) July 14. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. HUNTING-TON. 
 
 noyci uj v* 
 
 Mr TOWNSEND moved an enquiry as to the 
 establishment of a State Board of Assessors with 
 power to equitably adjust the relative appraise- 
 ment of the real and personal estate in the several 
 counties, with reference to a just and uniform levy 
 of the State or National direct taxation. Agreed 
 
 t0 *0n motion of Mr. BAKER, the convention went 
 into committee of the whole on the report rela- 
 tive to the 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD begged the indulgence of the 
 committee in defence of the amendment offered 
 ay him yesterday. It did not differ materially 
 from the proposition reported by the committee 
 of which his colleague (Mr. MORRIS) was chair- 
 man, except in bestowing upon the Executive 
 the power to commute sentence of death, with- 
 out imposing any limitation as to the penalty that 
 should be substituted. Mr. S. regretted that the 
 expediency of the pardoning power had been ques- 
 tioned. This power had been exercised in all coun- 
 tries, in all ages, and under every Constitution 
 and form of government. Its necessity was ap- 
 parent in a vast number of cases, where injustice 
 had been done to the prisoner by a wrongful 
 conviction where it was an instrument in the 
 due administration of some branch of the govern- 
 ment, and where it was required by the policy of 
 our criminal system. It was painful to consider 
 that the innocent were sometimes convicted. ' 
 The forms of law, though wisely framed, often- 
 failed to answer the ends of justice, and became 
 subversive of the first principles of right ; and 
 even if this were not so, they were administer- 
 ed by the hands of men whose common lot 
 it was to err. Thus the innocent fell vic- 
 tims to those rules of law that were instituted 
 for their protection. There were many convic- 
 tions, on record, upon the testimony of perjured 
 witnesses many upon the testimony ot mistaken 
 witnesses. The cases of identity attested how 
 prone men were to mistake and how fatal mistakes 
 had been. Then there was another class of cases, 
 swelled into peculiar consideration by a calender 
 of gloomy examples almost too shocking to con~ 
 template. He alluded to that where convictions 
 had been founded upon circumstantial evidence. 
 And there was still another class unhappily a 
 large class where the public sat in judgment up- 
 on the accused and without the testimony of wit- 
 nesses or the forms of trial by the mere force of 
 their own sentiment fastened the crime upon him 
 beyond ail opportunity all hope of resistance.- 
 To deny a pardon speedy and unconditional in 
 these cases would not only be an act of simple 
 injustice, but one revolting to the human heart. 
 Again the pardoning power was often necessary 
 to the due administration of some branch of the 
 government. He would put but one instance. 
 Crimes were generally achieved by concert. 
 Instances of solitary crime were much more 
 rare. Society too, had most to fear from such of- 
 
 [ alt; 9 owv**wij *w| 
 
 fences, for foresight, skill, and boldness were in a 
 great degree the results of combination and con- 
 fidence in associates. There was a pride, too, in 
 compassing the object and mutuality of danger 
 rendering it less fearful. The pardoning power 
 broke into these leagues and discovered the secret 
 paths of crime by bestowing immunity upon one 
 of the offenders, if he wcmld expose his associate* 
 
299 
 
 and save the public from their aggression. Again 
 the pardoning power was often called for by the 
 policy of our criminal system. He supposed pun- 
 ishment had two objects, Ihe prevention of crime 
 and the reformation of the offender. That the 
 latter in many cases and the former in a few 
 might be answered by the extension of mercy to 
 criminals when a reformation was complete, he 
 had no doubt But aside from this consideration 
 the remark of the gentleman from Clinton (Mr. 
 STETSON) ought not be forgotten that there were 
 great inequalities in our criminal system, and that 
 punishments were by no means wisely adjusted to 
 the grade of offences. He would add that the 
 character of the prisoners, whether just fallen or 
 confirmedly bad, the degree of temptation and all 
 those matters in short which went to aggravate or 
 modify a crime were not and could not be regard, 
 ed by the law. He was therefore decidedly in fa- 
 vor of the pardoning power but he had made this 
 classification in order the better to determine in 
 whose hands this power should be lodged and to this 
 branch of the subject he should presently allude. 
 But whoever might exercise the power of par- 
 don it should be speedy. In the first class of 
 cases he had put, a sudden reparation should be 
 made for the worst injury that could be inflicted 
 on the citizen punishment of the innocent and 
 that ignominy that follows punishment clings to 
 the reputation and too often blasts it forever. In 
 the second it might be requisite to discover and 
 reach criminals before they could elude the grasp 
 of justice. It ought also in many instances to be 
 secret that would often be the case when the 
 due administration of the government demanded 
 the pardon indeed he thought in most cases 
 where the pardon was upon condition to discover 
 joint criminals. Publicity in this case might de- 
 teat the object of the pardon. When fellows in 
 rrime heard that their associate was to be par- 
 doned they might fly, knowing how prone human 
 nature is to purchase personal liberty at the ex- 
 pense of plighted faith. He was therefore op- 
 posed to the amendment of his colleague (Mr. 
 STEPHENS), which provided for the publication 
 of notices of the application for pardon in all 
 cases. So far as notice could be given to the 
 public to courts to district attornies, he was 
 favorable to it. It would constitute a great pro- 
 tection to society against pardons that ought not 
 to be granted. And such he regretted to say were 
 too frequent this was a necessary an insepara 
 ble consequence, from the ex part e nature of ap 
 plications for pardons. But whoever exercisec 
 the pardoning power might establish rules to se 
 cure this object without destroying the efficacy o 
 that power for some of its most useful purposes 
 He now came to consider in whose hands th 
 pardoning power should be vested.' That it woul( 
 be best exercised when granted in mercy, by thos 
 -who had seen most of the criminal and could bes 
 judge of the sincerity of his repentance he had n 
 doubt and in this case the keepers or Inspectors o 
 the prisons were the best judges. So in a case o 
 extreme punishment in consequence of the undu 
 severity of the law the court could judge better 
 but in the larger number of cases the Executiv 
 was clearly better qualified to determine than an 
 other officer could possible be. When a convi 
 tion had been found upon the perjury or mistak 
 
 witnesses against the supposed criminal, those 
 cts which showed the perjury or mistake, must 
 ave been unknown to the court or the convic- 
 on would not have taken place. When they 
 ime to light they could as easily be presented to 
 ic officer as another. Whoever might examine 
 lem could and would consult the minutes of the 
 estimony on the trial. This was the practice of 
 he present Executive, and had been the practice 
 f those who went before. But when a convic- 
 on had been found under the influence of public 
 xcitement in any one quarter of the State, jus- 
 ce could only be sought with confidence i'n a 
 uarter not liable to be moved by the fluctuating 
 assions of the day. A board for pardons chosen 
 rom all parts of the State a court sitting in the 
 egipn where excitement might prevail, would 
 ot in his judgment so eminently meet the re- 
 uirements to the best exercise ot the pardoning 
 ower as a single Executive chosen by the whole 
 eople representing all caring for all capable 
 f speedy and secret action and able at once to 
 onsult all those persons who best knew the facts 
 
 hich called for the exercise of this mighty pow- 
 r. Where a pardon was granted as a condition 
 o discover other offenders, the chief Executive 
 fficer could better determine whether it was re- 
 uired. It was his duty to execute the laws and 
 n his great office he was the centre of the whole 
 ystem. He would acquire his knowledge of the 
 ^articular case from the best sources, and he 
 vould act with unity, consistency, and in short 
 or the best interests of the State, so far as they 
 ould be subserved by human hands. He was in 
 avor of giving the power of commutation as pro- 
 dded in the amendment. What circumstances 
 might call for its exercise he could not foresee. 
 The power to pardon was given. It was a greater 
 jower than that of commutation and ought to in- 
 clude it. la the various phases of criminal in- 
 ention in the weakness with which the strong- 
 est hands execute laws in the defects of laws 
 hemselves, and above all, in the numberless oc- 
 casions that might call for the exercise of the par- 
 doning power, he saw powerful reasons against 
 such a restriction. He therefore hoped the com- 
 mittee would not adopt the restrictions, but take 
 he amendment as it stood. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said that he also had an amend- 
 ment to offer ; and he had hoped that the gentle- 
 man from New- York (Mr. SHEPAHD) would have 
 shown the preference for his own amendment 
 over the original section, but instead, he had fa- 
 vored us with a dissertation upon the pardoning 
 power. Mr. T. believed there were very few in 
 this Convention disposed to remove this power 
 from where it was now deputed. He objected to 
 the provision which said that the Governor might 
 " grant pardons upon such conditions and with 
 such restrictions and limitations as he may think 
 proper." It was an universal rule, that we were 
 not to use our own so as to injure our neighbors. 
 This provision meant that the Governor might 
 impose his own conditions for pardon ; for in- 
 stance, that the criminal should leave the State. 
 Was this right or just to other States ? Certainly 
 not. Hence he would not make this a part of the 
 Constitution, so that it could not be changed by 
 the Legislature hereafter. He would leave this 
 important power where it was now a provision o j 
 
300 
 
 the statutes, and not of the Constitution. He 
 should offer an amendment, at the proper time, 
 embodying his views on this point. There was 
 also another amendment which he should present. 
 There was but little doubt but that, in a few years, 
 the last relic of other ages in the criminal code 
 Capital Punishment would be obliterated from 
 our statute books. Whenever this should be 
 done, he would provide that the Legislature might 
 impose such restrictions as they might think pro- 
 per upon the pardoning power, in cases of con- 
 viction in cases of murder. As to the effect of 
 conditional pardons in this State, he would cite 
 an instance or two, and then close. He was in- 
 formed that the present Executive had granted 
 but two conditional pardons. One of these per- 
 sons, after being again arrested, finally agreed to 
 comply with the terms of his pardon, and went 
 to Canada. In a fortnight he returned with a 
 large quantity of counterfeit money, which he 
 very liberally distributed in the community, and 
 for which he was again tried, and sent to the state 
 prison. In the other case, there was good evi- 
 dence to believe that the individual committed a 
 robbery on the boat which was conveying him 
 from Sing Sing to New-York, after his pardon. 
 He was now again in the state prison. Nei- 
 ther of the two was now at large. This was 
 a fair comment upon the propriety of conditional 
 pardons. He wished gentlemen to take warning 
 by them. 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved to amend Mr. SHEPARD'S 
 amendment by inserting after '* as he may think 
 proper," in the 6th line, the words " or as may 
 be provided by law." 
 
 The CHAIR said that this was out of order. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR referred to the Governor's pow- 
 er to pardon under the Constitution of 1777, in 
 all cases except those of treason and murder ; and 
 to the alterations of the Constitution of 1821, 
 where the power to pardon in cases of murder 
 was given to him. But doubts arose under this 
 about his power to make " commutations" in cer- 
 tain cases, aside from reprieves and pardons. For 
 his own part, he thought that the Governor ought 
 to have that power ; it would be a matter of good 
 policy to give the Governor the privilege to par- 
 don or to commute in some cases under certain 
 conditions. He ought to have it in cases where 
 paupers had been sent into this State from foreign 
 countries ; and where he had committed a felony 
 and been convicted of the crime it would be very 
 proper perhaps to grant a pardon upon condition 
 that the criminal should transport himself out of 
 the United States, never to enter it again. The 
 power of commutation was certainly narrowed by 
 the provisions of the constitution, which pre- 
 scribed that in cases of murder the prisoner was 
 to be imprisoned for life instead of suffering death; 
 and it might be well to givp a wider latitude. 
 He was disposed to favor the amendment of his 
 colleague (Mr. SHEPARD) as making the section 
 distinct in its meaning and purposes, and as 
 adopting a long established principle existing in 
 the Constitution of South Carolina. He suggest- 
 ed to Mr. TAGGART that he might effect his ob- 
 ject, in preventing the conditional pardon from 
 converting our sister States into Botany Bays, to 
 which our criminals are to be banished, by insert- 
 ing after the amendment of Mr. SHEPARD, if it 
 
 should be adopted, a provision that the prisoners 
 pardoned upon condition of leaving the State, 
 should also be obliged to leave the United States, 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he much preferred the 
 original section, as it now stood. The committee 
 in drawing this article, where it was intended to 
 preserve the power as it was, purposely retained 
 the language of the old Constitution. That lan- 
 guage being known and settled, and although the 
 verbiage might be improved, yet a change of lan- 
 guage might unsettle the meaning and only lead 
 to doubt and litigation. AH lawyers knew that 
 the change of a single word in a statute had led to 
 excessive litigation. And he conld appeal to his 
 lay friends to say if they had not in the course of 
 their dear bought experience often paid large fee* 
 to settle the question whether a change ot lan- 
 guage was not a change of the law. In the new 
 matter introduced as to the commutation, the com- 
 mittee had endeavored to embody the precise pro- 
 vision of the existing statute, under which, as a 
 law only, a doubt had arisen whether the Govern- 
 or had this power. The committee thought it 
 best to remove this doubt by making this at once 
 a positive provision of the new Constitution. Ai.d 
 he would, in reply to the remarks ol his le;ir;ied 
 and eloquent friend from New York state that the 
 committee intended to give the executive the 
 power to commute punishment als > in all cases 
 of treason', whilst they would by no me-ins al- 
 low him the full power to pardon in cases of 
 treason, they wouid allow him to commute. 
 Above all things the committee did rot wish to 
 leave any part of this to the bias or caprice of the 
 Legislature. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR replied, pointing out wherein 
 the language of the amendment was obscure as to 
 its meaning. The whole scope of the section was 
 to extend the commutation power of the Governor 
 to cases of treason and impeachment. If that 
 was really intended, it ought to have been more 
 clearly expressed. Mr. O'C. contended also that 
 the different portions of the section were incom- 
 patible with each other. One part of it provided 
 that the Governor upon conviction for treason 
 should have power to suspend the execution of 
 the sentence until he shall report the case to the 
 legislature at its next sitting, who, if they think 
 proper, may pardon or grant a further reprieve. 
 This in one part of it the Govern or would have the 
 power to commute sentence of death to imprison- 
 ment for life, while in another part of the sec- 
 tion, he would only be empowered to suspend the 
 execution until the sitting of the legislature. 
 The obscurity should be remedied in order to pre- 
 vent future controversies in relation to the con- 
 struction of the section. And if the Convention 
 intended to adopt the idea of the committee, to 
 give the Governor power to suspend the execu- 
 tion of the sentence in cases of treason, it would 
 be necessary to make some very material altera- 
 tion in the language of the section. 
 
 Mr. TALLM ADGE urged the importance of a 
 close attention to this question, and of the strong- 
 est powers of intellect being exercised in the ad- 
 justment of its details. Had the question occur- 
 red to gentlemen as to what was the condition 
 and extent of the pardoning power and where it 
 rested? Did the legislature possess a concurrent 
 pardoning power with the Executive, or was it 
 
301 
 
 given exclusively to the Executive ? The ques- 
 tion should be fully understood, and we should 
 be very careful how a single letter of the old Con- 
 stitution was altered in this particular. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that when this question 
 was before the Legislature, the better opinion 
 seemed to be that the whole pardoning power was 
 vested in the Executive. That where the Con- 
 stitution confers exclusively upon one department 
 the exercise of a specified power, it by implication 
 at least restricted its exercise by any other. This 
 case was decided in the Senate last winter, and 
 the better opinion of the body seemed to be, and 
 was, that the legislature had no control whatever 
 over the pardoning power. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN : That was not so. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : Well, I will nof say better 
 opinion I said so because it concurred with my 
 opinion. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said the decision 
 and opinion was the other way. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that it would be seen 
 that this little explanation, and what had 
 already occurred, confirmed the idea he had sug- 
 gested of the momentous importance of gentle- 
 men applying their minds to this precise point, 
 and laying aside of all collateral considerations. 
 Mr. T. urged that nothing should be done to dis- 
 turb long established construction. The statute 
 law, he had thought, was created under a doubt 
 of the meaning of the old Constitution, and in it 
 the legislature delegated further power to the 
 Executive, Therefore, although it was not re- 
 quired to be placed here, yet doubt having been 
 -expressed as to the meaning of the statute, he was 
 willing to have it remain. What was the result' 
 That all ri^ht belonging to the people is inherent in 
 them, to delegate it or to reserve it as they choose, 
 was the fundamental principle of every govern- 
 ment. Mr. T. read from the constitution the pro- 
 vision that the Governor " shall have power," &c., 
 in relation to granting of pardons, contending that 
 the exclusive exercise of this power was not 
 thereby conferred on the Governor. It was only 
 delegated so far as certain objects were concern- 
 ed. If it should be written that the Governor 
 should have the power, c., the insertion of that 
 little article would have given him entirely and 
 exclusively the power. But as it is, the omission 
 jf it shows that this power of pardoning was pos- 
 sessed by the co-ordinate branch of the legislature. 
 It was therefore a subject for consideration whe- 
 ther we would not put the word the in the sec- 
 tion. In his own judgment it was better not to 
 do it leave it as it stood in the present constitu- 
 tion. In relation to the power of commutation of 
 sentence of death to imprisonment for life, there 
 was a question in which doubts had already been 
 expressed as to construction. His idea was that 
 power, although delegated, yet the residuary re- 
 mained with the people ; and he had no doubt, 
 that leaving the section as it was, that if the Go- 
 vernor did not see fit to go on, and ii they thought 
 it proper and their duty to pardon, the power was 
 in his judgment left with the people through the 
 legislature. Such was the present constitution, 
 as established by long established rules of con- 
 struction, which he would but lightly disturb 
 and so he would have it, with the slight modifi- 
 cation, so as to provide that the Governor shall 
 
 | have power in all cases to commute the sentence 
 
 'of death to imprisonment for life. When the 
 
 amendment was in order, he should propose it. 
 
 Mr. STETSON should not have risen but for 
 the remark of the chairman of the committee, 
 j (Mr. MONROE,) made worse by the gentleman 
 from Dutchess. He now regarded the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from New-York (Mr. 
 SHEPARD) fcs of some importance, which he had 
 not before, because under his reading of the sec- 
 tion, there was no change from the old Constitu- 
 tion in regard to the power of the Governor in 
 cases of treason. As he had read it, the Govern- 
 or upon conviction of treason had power to sus- 
 pend the sentence until the case was reported to 
 the next legislature, when they might either par- 
 don or direct the execution of the criminal, or 
 grant a further reprieve. The chairman of the 
 committee had since, however, stated it to be the 
 design to give this power to the Governor to com- 
 mute the sentence in cases of impeachment. Mr. 
 S. then alluded to the incompatibilities pointed put 
 by Mr. O'CoNOR, contending that the section 
 could be so construed as to empower the Govern- 
 or to pardon and reprieve, as well as to commute 
 the sentence of death for treason. By the intro- 
 duction of this into the Constitution, it would 
 have established a new principle, and destroyed 
 the exclusive power of the Legislature in cases 
 of treason, and brought it within Executive con- 
 trol. Treason was a political offence against the 
 sovereignty of the State, and it was very proper 
 that the representatives of the sovereign power 
 of the people should punish it, and hence the 
 distinction in the Constitution. This proposition 
 was to destroy this, and to give the power exclu- 
 sively to the Governor. To this Mr. S. expressed 
 his opposition. He also deprecated the possi- 
 bility of a contradictory construction of the Con- 
 stitution ; and to remove all doubts on this point, 
 he proposed to amend so as to read that upon con- 
 viction for treason he shall " only" have power 
 to suspend the execution of the sentence. The 
 insertion of the word only would settle the whole 
 matter. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN could not agree 
 with his friend trom Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) that 
 the question was ever settled by the legislature. 
 So fu from that the indications were all the other 
 way. There was an application brought before 
 the Senate to interfere in behalt of the Delaware 
 prisoners, and he (Mr. V.S.) himself introduced a 
 resolution into that body calling upon the circuit 
 court to report at length the testimony taken on 
 (he occasion, with a view of having the legisla- 
 ture interfere in their behalf. During the debate, 
 it was suggested A hether the legislature had the 
 povve;- to do this, and alter further discussion, it 
 was deemed proper to send the question to theju- 
 diciaiy committee. -And as he believed, at the 
 close of the session, (hey made a report he did 
 recollect precisely what it was but thought it 
 was an expression of doubt as to the power of the 
 legislature leaving the matter pretty much as it 
 stood before. This matter should be settled as to 
 whet her the legislature had any control, or wheth- 
 er it was left exclusively to the governor or not. 
 His own opinion always had been that the legis- 
 lature did have that power under the present con- 
 stitution. But this was the body and the 
 
302 
 
 time to settle any doubt that might arise on the 
 subject now. He was opposed to giving the 
 Governor of the State, be he whom he might, 
 exclusive power and control in all cases, be- 
 cause he could conceive cases where his pre- 
 judices might interfere with justice. Was it not 
 a fact that many men who were convicted and 
 sent to prison were sent there wrongfully ? Not 
 that the jury failed to do its duty, or the judge, 
 but in the imperfection of judgment and examin- 
 ation, and perhaps, through perjury. It was not 
 at all to be assumed that because a man went to 
 State prison that he was necessarily a felon. He 
 had no sort of doubt in relation to the cases al- 
 luded to by the gentleman from Delaware that 
 those men now in prison were wrongfully 
 there, and he thought if the time was one to 
 examine the subject he could fully prore that. 
 Supposing that hut a single individual case occur- 
 red in the course of a year, and that of the 1500 
 or 1600, but one man was sent wrongfully to pri- 
 son, and that the Governor either from a wrong 
 view of the subject, from the manner in which 
 the case was presented to him or from prejudice, 
 for he is as liable to its influence as others, from 
 political reasons, or any other, should refuse to 
 interfere. Should there not be power vested in 
 some body of men to look into and supervise such 
 a presentment of facts. It was contrary to the 
 spirit and genius ot our institutions that there 
 should not be. Where should this right then be 
 vested except in the legislature. He trusted the 
 convention would make some provision on this 
 subject. When the occasion should offer (Mr. 
 V. S ) avowed his intention to offer an amend- 
 ment to this purport- He only made these re- 
 marks to suggest to the Convention that this was 
 not by any means a settled question, as he contend- 
 ed was evinced by the action ot the Legislature 
 list winter. 
 
 The question being taken, Mr. SHEPARD'S 
 amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. O'CONORsaid that the question was no* 
 generally understood. It certainly was not in his 
 quarter. 
 
 The CHAIR had no objections to putting the 
 vote again. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL strenuously objected to this. 
 
 The CHAIR was obliged to declare the ques- 
 tion to be decided. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to strike out the words, 
 " He may grant pardons upon such conditions, 
 and with such restrictions and limitatious, as he 
 may think proper." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL was one of those who believed 
 that the original report of the committee was cor- 
 rect without any amendment whatever. But 
 still he was willing to admit that a trifling amend- 
 ment might render it more definite and less lia- 
 ble to any possible misconception. He under- 
 stood that in the old constitution the Governor 
 had power to grant pardons generally except in 
 cases of treason and impeachment upon such 
 considerations, restrictions and limitations as he 
 might think proper. That he might commute 
 the punishment of death in any case to imprison- 
 ment for life. And lastly upon cases of treason 
 he might suspend sentence until the action of the 
 legislature was had thereupon. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : Did the gentleman under- 
 stand that from the old Constitution ? 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL : I understand that the old 
 Constitution gives the Governor the power oi 
 suspending the sentence. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : But not of commutation. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said only to suspend the sen- 
 tence until the Legislature should act upon it. 
 This, to his mind, was the best exposition of the 
 pardoning power that could be given. The Go- 
 vernor had unlimited power, except in cases of 
 treason and impeachment, and then that he might 
 commute the punishment in any case, including 
 treason and impeachment, to imprisonment for 
 life. And who was not willing that he should 
 have that power ? 
 
 Mr. TILDEN would like to ask his friend from 
 St. Lawrence if it was the intent of this section 
 to give to the Governor the power to commute 
 the sentence in cases of treason and impeachment, 
 what then was the meaning of the subsequent, 
 section, which said that upon convictions for trea- 
 son, he should have the power to suspend the 
 sentence until the case should be reported to the 
 Legislature, when they might either pardon, di- 
 rect the Executive, or grant a further reprieve I 
 What was the object of giving the Governor the 
 power to commute, and in another place to sus- 
 pend the sentence until the Legislature should 
 assemble ? 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL thought the answer was obvi- 
 ous. He might, rather than commute, think bet- 
 ter to give it to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : If he can commute, why not 
 pardon ? The effect of the section would be to 
 change the present Constitution entirely. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said the gentleman had not 
 heard him through. He proposed to have it read 
 in effect, that the Governor might grant pardons* 
 except in cases of treason, &c., in which case he 
 might commute the sentence. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. TAGGART was then 
 rejected. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote upon Mr. SHEPARD'S amendment. 
 
 Mr. WARD suggested that the motion was not 
 in order now. 
 
 Some conservation ensued between the CHAIR 
 and Messrs. TILDEN and WARD on this point, 
 when 
 
 Mr. TILDEN continued. We were in this 
 predicament in the arrangement of an important 
 clause in the Constitution. We find that gentle- 
 men of acknowledged legal attainments and ex- 
 perience are unable to agree as to the legal effect 
 of the clause we propose to adopt. And yet gen- 
 tlemen tell us it is not of the slightest .conse- 
 quence, that it was a mere matter of verbal 
 change. He confessed he did not regard any part 
 of the Constitution we were about to adopt as un- 
 important. And when the fact was presented 
 that gentlemen of the Convention did not agree 
 as to the effect of a proposition, he thought it in- 
 cumbent on the Convention to consider and adopt 
 something that would be intelligible. He would 
 not here give the slightest occasion for difficulty in 
 construction hereafter; and as the section was re- 
 ported by the committee, it did give rise to seri- 
 ous apprehension on the subject. In this debate 
 we found his learned colleague (Mr. O'CONOR) 
 
303 
 
 putting on this clause in relation to the commu- 
 tation of sentences, a construction which the 
 chairman of the committee (Mr. MORRIS) wholly 
 repudiated. In this state of things was it pro- 
 posed to vote down all amendments and adopt at 
 once a section so unintelligible! Mr. T. proceed- 
 ed to show the difference of opinion as to the 
 construction of this section, as evinced by the 
 remarks of the gentleman from St. Lawrence and 
 others. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL had said that to prevent any 
 doubt, he had proposed to give the power to the 
 Governor to commute the sentence in any case. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that then the question rose 
 to the dignity of a question of principle shall we 
 confer upon the Governor the power of commuta- 
 tion' in cases of treason and imprisonment. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN asked the gentleman to sus- 
 pend his remarks, until he enquired how he 
 voted. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN did not vote at all. 
 
 The CHAIR Then the gentleman is under- 
 stood as having voted in the affirmative the mi- 
 nority and it was not competent for him to move 
 a reconsideration. Such was the strict parlia- 
 mentary rule. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELING briefly suggested that this 
 question of reconsideration should be here ar- 
 rested and be left to the decision of the conven- 
 tion, when we came out of the committee of the 
 whole. There every question would be reconsi- 
 dered. To allow of the contrary course, would 
 only lead to endless debate, with no useful result, 
 
 After some further conversation on this point. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN resumed. The amendment pro- 
 posed by his colleague (Mr. SHEPARD) followed 
 the principle of the old constitution and did not 
 give the Governor the power to commute the 
 sentence in cases of treason and impeachment. 
 And in that respect it differs wisely and safely 
 from the report of the committee. It was a simple 
 intelligent provision which all might understand 
 and which might be safely inserted in the Constitu- 
 tion. It provided that the Governor should have 
 power to grant reprieves, commutation and par- 
 dons after conviction, except in cases of treason 
 and impeachment, in such manner, at such times 
 and under such restrictions as he may think pro- 
 per. His was a proposition such as ought to be 
 in the Constitution, and was in explicit and in- 
 telligible in its language. Mr. T. said he should 
 not have made the motion to reconsider had not 
 the gentleman who summoned him informed him 
 that when the vote was taken, they did not under- 
 stand the question to be on that amendment, but 
 on some amendment to it. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that as a general rule no 
 reconsideration should be had for slight cause as 
 the example was a bad one. Even if the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from New- York was re- 
 jected, it did not preclude further propositions to 
 amend. Mr. R. sustained the report of the com- 
 mittee, which pressed the matter so far as practi- 
 cable in the language arid spirit of the old con- 
 stitution. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that the combined effect of 
 the old and new language was what was imper- 
 fect and complained of. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL would admit that the new lan- 
 guage was susceptible of criticism, but he be- 
 
 lieved any fair construction of it would be the 
 same as he gave it. He thought it might be 
 amended so as to provide that all pardons or com- 
 mutation without exception, might be granted as 
 the Governor thought proper. He was one of 
 those who did not believe in the taking of life by 
 the hands of the law. Yet still as a majority of 
 the people might not agree with him, he would 
 give the Governor power to commute the punish- 
 ment to imprisonment for life, or if a majority 
 of the Convention should say so, for a term of 
 years. This would make the whole article clear 
 and explicit. It would then provide that the 
 Governor should have power to grant pardons and 
 reprieves with such limitations and restrictions 
 as he might think proper, or commute sentence 
 of death to imprisonment for life in any case 
 whatever. And upon conviction for treason he 
 should have power to suspend the execution of 
 the sentence until the case was reported to the 
 legislature at the next meeting, when they may 
 either pardon, grant a further reprieve or direct 
 the execution of the sentence. This would be 
 clearly explicit and definite. The report of the 
 committee in other respects was what it should be, 
 and with this trifling amendment to make it more 
 distinct and definite, it seemed to him should 
 meet the approbation' of every member. He was 
 therefore opposed to the motion for reconsidera- 
 tion, and hoped it would be voted down. 
 
 The question being taken, the committee re- 
 fused to reconsider. 
 
 Mr. DANA said that he wanted to prohibit the 
 governor expressly from ever commuting a sen. 
 tence for treason or impeachment. He moved to 
 amend so as in the 6th line to insert after word 
 "proper," the words " lor all cases except im- 
 peachment and treason. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said the word " only," as sug- 
 gested by Mr. STETSON, inserted at the end of that 
 line would answer every purpose: thus, "upon 
 convictions for treason, he shall only have power 
 to suspend the sentence." 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that the difficulty in this 
 case was that gentlemen combined a question of 
 verbiage with a question of principle; they were 
 acting at cross purposes ; they wanted to effect the 
 same end, but they took widely different means to 
 get at it. The question was, who shall exercise 
 this power to pardon for treason ? the Governor 
 or the Legislature? He wanted the Legislature only 
 to do it. The other gentlemen were producing 
 the double result of doing what he did want, and 
 of doing something else worse which he did not 
 want. 
 
 Mr PENNIMAN did not understand the sen- 
 tence in the report as Mr. MORRIS did, viz: that 
 the Governor should have power to commute for 
 treason. 
 
 Mr. STETSON wanted to prevent any combined 
 purpose ; on the word " only" all could agree, 
 and it expressed all that they wanted. 
 
 The amendment was read. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that it appeared to be the same 
 that had previously been voted down. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said it was not. 
 
 Mr. WARD : In what particular is it not ? 
 
 Mr. TILDEN : The word ' commutation" is 
 left out. 
 
 The amendment was then put and lost. 
 
304 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to amend that the Gov- 
 ernor in cases of treason, and all cases, &c., 
 should have power to commute the sentence of 
 death to imprisonment for life. Thus : 
 
 Strike out, " He may commute sentence of death to im- 
 prison in a state prisonlor lii'e. He may grant pardons up- 
 ou such conditions, and with such restrictions and limita- 
 tions as he may think proper" and insert "He may grant 
 such pardons upon such conditions, and with such restric- 
 tions and limitations as he may think proper ^ and he may 
 commute sentence of death, in any case, to imprisonment 
 in a state prison for iife." 
 
 Lost 35 to 52. 
 
 Mr. STETSON moved to insert the word 'only' 
 at the end of the 6th line, as above stated. 
 
 Mr. STOW hoped this amendwent would pre- 
 vail. The Governor and his agents may be guilty 
 of treason, and this power should be vested with 
 the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN also hoped the amendment 
 would be agreed to. It was a very proper one ; 
 both the Governor and Lieutenant Governor and 
 their emissaries may be guilty of treason. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : That's the very reason why I 
 want it in. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to amend so as to for- 
 bid the Governor to grant pardons on conditions 
 that the convict should leave this State or the 
 United States. 
 
 Mr. STOW hoped this would not prevail ; for 
 whilst we were desirous to protect other States 
 from rogues, we must not therefore fail to protect 
 our own. He wished rogues pardoned on condi- 
 tion that they left the country never to return. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said it was only an act of jus- 
 tice to other States that he wished as a duty we 
 owed; if we did this, other States will act justly 
 towards us. 
 It was lost. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART then moved to amend so that 
 the Legislature miiiht restrain, restrict, or limit 
 the paidoning power in cases of conviction for 
 murder Lust. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend, by adding alter 
 " pardon" in the 9fh line, u or commute the sen- 
 tence," so that the Legislature might commute as 
 well as pardon in cases ol treason. 
 This was adopted. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to strike ( ut all af 
 
 ter the word "granted " ia the 12th line. It was a 
 
 mere tautology. To suike out " Stating the 
 
 name of the convict, the crime of which he was 
 
 convicted, the sentence and its date, and the date 
 
 of the commutation, pardon or reprive." 
 
 The motion was lost. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that there was now, as the 
 
 section stood, no limitation uf time as to when 
 
 the Governor should repoit to the Legislature. 
 
 xMr. MURPHY That can be added afterwards. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL hoped lhat ihe Clerk would read 
 
 the section as it stood. He was certain nobody 
 
 there understood it. 
 
 The CHAIR read it. 
 
 . Mr. RUSSELL I see the word "granted," in 
 the 12th line, is out. 
 
 The CHAIR It was left out by mistake. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN How does it read now ? 
 
 It was read again. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN wished some time specified 
 
 when the Governor must repoit. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD also desired this inserted. 
 Mr. TALLMADGE The word ''annually" co- 
 vers all that is wanted. 
 It was lost. 
 
 The section was then set aside. 
 The 6th section was then read as follows : 
 j 6. In case of the impeachment of the Governor, or his 
 removal from office, death, inability from mental or phy- 
 sical disease, resignation or absence from the State, the 
 >ower and duties shall devolve upon the Lieut. Governor 
 x>r the residue of the term, or until the Governor absent 
 or impeached shall return or the disability shall cease 
 But when the Governor shall, with the consent of the le- 
 gislature, be out of the State in time of war, at the head of 
 a military force thereof, he shall continue Commander-in- 
 Chief of all the military force of the State. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to insert " disability" 
 instead of " inability." Lnst. 
 
 Mr. T. moved farther to amend by inserting 
 after the word " disease," the words " to dis- 
 charge the duties of his office." 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that by and by he should 
 move to strike out the words " from mental or 
 physical disease," and he would give a reason, 
 therefor. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART' S second amendment was put 
 and lost. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN now made the above motion. 
 He .said the Governor might be unable to dis- 
 charge the duties of his office from other causes 
 than mental and physical disease. He might be 
 convicted of a crime ; he might be shut up in the 
 State Prison, and thus be incapacitated for per- 
 forming the duties of the office. The indictment 
 for a crime, or the imprisonment for a crime, 
 might precede impeachment, and therefore those 
 words are unnecessary, they are restrictive and 
 restrictive only. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said the new matter, which the 
 committee had introduced into the section under 
 consideration was exposed in his judgment, to a 
 more serious objection than that named by tne 
 gentleman from Columbia, (Mr. JORDAN.) One 
 of the contingencies upon the occurrence ol which 
 the Lieutenani-Governor is o exercise the execu- 
 live duties, is the inability of the Governor " from 
 mental or physic.il incapacity." This language is 
 certainly liable to great uncertainty, acd may lead 
 o contention and controversy. By mental incapa- 
 city he supposed the committee meant lunacy, 
 insanity, or such infirmity of mind as would ren- 
 def the'mcumbant incapable of governing hin.seli, 
 and therefore unfit to "execute a trust; but what 
 was meant by physical incapacity he was at some 
 loss to determine. So long as the chief magis. 
 trate had sufficient mind to discharge his public 
 duties it was scarcely possible to imagine such an 
 entire prostration of physical ability as would 
 justify or demand ihe interposition of another 
 functionary. The contingencies which must hap. 
 pen under the present Constitution to pl.tce the 
 executive power in the hands of the Lieutenant- 
 Governor are impeachment, removal from office, 
 death, resignation, or absence from the state, of 
 the Governor. These facts, if they do exist, are 
 susceptible of clear and unequivocal proof, and 
 can hardly become thesuiject of any doubt j but 
 v\hat shall amount to physical or mental incapa- 
 city, or what shall be the evidence of disa. 
 billty arising from these causes is quite an- 
 other question. Who shall pay that the Go- 
 vernor has lost his mental faculties? How 
 
305 
 
 shall the degree of incapacity be ascertained, and 
 to what effect must it prevail in order to amount 
 to the disability contemplated by the words of 
 the section ? Shall it be ascertained by a com- 
 mission de lunatico inquircndo., or by a vote of 
 the Senate and Assembly ? No more controvert- 
 ed question can occupy the time of a court of jus- 
 tice than this same question of incapacity. You 
 cannot deprive a man of the control of his person 
 or property, nor take away from him the power 
 to execute a private trust, without establishing 
 his incapacity by due process of law and the 
 judgment of a competent tribunal. Will you 
 suspend the execution of a great public trust, in 
 the hands of the Chief Magistrate of the State, 
 without some judgment or resolution founded up- 
 on evidence of his incapacity. The Convention, 
 he trusted, would pause before they adopted these 
 words into the fundamental law. He would re- 
 mind the committee of a historical incident which 
 might serve to illustrate the danger of adopting 
 such uncertain language. In October, 1778, the 
 King of Great Britain was taken suddenly ill, 
 and betrayed symptoms of that most terrible of 
 all human maladies, insanity. Parliament as- 
 sembled in the month of November; and the phy- 
 sicians in attendance were examined before the 
 privy council, and also before committees of both 
 nouses. It being ascertained from these exami- 
 nations, that a temporary incapacity existed from 
 the insanity of the King, another committee 
 was appointed to examine into the journals of 
 Parliament for precedents in similar analagous 
 cases. No precedents could be anywhere found, 
 and it became apparent that a new and dangerous 
 crisis had occurred in the suspension of the Ex- 
 ecutive authority, for which the Constitution had 
 emitted to provide an adequate remedy. When 
 the regular exercise of the powers of government 
 was from any cause suspended, to whom belonged 
 the right of providing a remedy for the existing 
 defect? Mr. Fox for once forgot the principles 
 to which his life had been devoted, and took the 
 ground that there was an inherent right in the 
 Prince of Wales, the heir apparent to the Crown, 
 to assume the reins of government. Mr. Pitt, on 
 the other hand, denied this, and successfully con- 
 tended that these ideas of divine right and inde- 
 leasable authority of Princes had justly sunk into 
 contempt, and almost into oblivion. That the 
 people were the only true source of power, and 
 to them, through their representatives, belonged 
 the right to supply the absence of executive au- 
 thority. Parliament thereupon proceeded to 
 adopt two resolutions. 1st That the executive 
 authority was, for the present, interrupted. 2d 
 That it belonged to Parliament to provide for its 
 exercise, during the existing contingency ; and 
 to determine on the means of giving the execu- 
 tive assent to such bills as Parliament might pass 
 during the illness and insanity of the King. He 
 (Mr. B.) adverted to this analagous case for the 
 purpose of showing the uncertain, if not danger - 
 'ous tendency of the words which the committee 
 proposed to introduce. He would greatly prefer 
 to leave the instrument as it was. In a govern- 
 ment like ours, founded upon the popular will 
 and upheld by the popular love and respect, it 
 possessed a vitality which would carry it safely 
 through any emergency arising out of temporary 
 
 executive incapacity. He therefore submitted 
 that the words to which he had excepted should 
 either be stricken out, and the Constitution, in 
 that respect, left as it had been for the last 25 
 years, or that provision should be made for ascer 
 taining the fact of inability. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR said the words "inability to dig. 
 charge the duties of said office" would be much 
 better. If the amendment of the gentleman from 
 Orange v Mr. BROWN) prevailed, then there would 
 be no provision made for I he Governor becoming 
 insane. Now his words were the best; they were 
 contained in the Constitution of the U. S.: and 
 many instances must arise, when under various 
 circumstances, the duties of ihe Governor would 
 have to devolve by insanity on the Lt. Governor. 
 Sometimes there would be palpable cases in 
 which there could be no doubt, and in others the 
 Legislature might decide. He would have this 
 section conform to the phraseology of tne Con- 
 stitution of the U. S , the language of which he 
 had sent up to the Chair. 
 
 Mr VVORDEN: How ascertain that inability 
 to act? Who is to decide? 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR: A palpable case would 
 require no formal adjudication. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN: Suppose it is not a palpable 
 case ? 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR: Then he would continue 
 in the discharge of his duty. The Legislature 
 would nrjke provision however for such cases. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : But there might be a contro- 
 versy between the Governor and Lieut. Cover, 
 nor, and the latter m'ght undertake in high party 
 times to declare the Governor insane for the pur- 
 pose of displacing him. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON: This can all be remedied, 
 by inserting after the word "death" the words 
 "inability to serve." 
 
 Mr SIMMONS thought that the word "ina- 
 bility" was sufficient, but he was willing to agree 
 to the words "inability to serve." He should be 
 sorry to have ihe words "from mental or physic- 
 al disease" stricken out. They would remember 
 the case of a Governor of Maryland who was in- 
 sane, but recently ; tfeen there was the Governor 
 or President of Mexico [Santa Anna] who, when 
 he was at San Jaciuto could not perform his duties 
 for some time at least. So a Governor may be inca- 
 pacitated from being in durance vile from an enemy 
 in this very state. They ought to provide tor all pos- 
 sible cases of inability; as to asceitaining the fact 
 of the Governor's inability that could be provided 
 for by law. The U. S. gave Congress the 
 power of pioviding for the removal of the Pres- 
 ident, and to decide on his disability to serve. 
 
 The question was here taken on striking out 
 " from mental or physical disease," (as moved by 
 Mr. JORDAN) and carried. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY proposed to strike out " or im- 
 peached," as unnecessary the word inability in- 
 cluding it. 
 
 Mr. JONES suggested that those words should 
 be retained, and the words " or be acquitted," 
 added. 
 
 The committee refused to strike out as moved 
 by Mr. KENNEDY. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to insert after " ina. 
 bility," in the third line, the words of the Consti. 
 
306 
 
 tution of the United Slates, " to discharge the 
 powers and duties of his office." 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he would vote for that 
 if the gentleman would add also the provision ot 
 the United States Constitution for ascertaining the 
 disability making it the duty of the Legislature 
 to provide a mode. Otherwise, there would be no 
 legal body competent to say where the disability 
 arose. Provide some legal mode to determine 
 where this inability actually exists. The Consti- 
 tution ot the United States requires Congress to 
 inquire into and determine this. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR replied that the United States 
 Constitution provided that Congress should pre- 
 scribe the mode ot filling the place of Piesident, 
 not for ascertaining the tact of inability. We had 
 here already a provision for filling the place of 
 Governor. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES would suggest these words: 
 " Or inability to discharge the powers and duties 
 of his office, to be declared by joint resolution of 
 the two Houses of the Legislature." He did not 
 know that this was the best way, but it was the 
 only mode that then occurred to him in which 
 this difficulty could be met. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR agreed to accept this. 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said that this amendment was 
 not adapted to the object in view. A Governor, 
 in a fit of mental alienation in the spring or sum 
 mer, might, in a very philanthropic mood, par 
 don all the convicts in the prisons ; (laughter) 
 and if his insanity is to be determined oniy by the 
 Legislature, he might, when bereft of his reason 
 do this and much more mischief, during the six 
 months which would intervene before the meeting 
 of the Legislature. If the mode ot ascertaining 
 and defining this disability is not specified in the 
 Constitution, the power and duty of course rests 
 with the Legislature. It may and should be de- give 
 termined by statute. The words to provide for a 
 Governor being crazy must be retained, or there i 
 no telling what may happen. 
 
 Mr. STOW suggested this clause : 
 
 " The legislature may declare the inability of the Go 
 vernor, or of the person administering the duties of th 
 office of Governor, by a vote of four-fifths of all the mem 
 bers elected to each house; and for this purpose the Chie 
 Justice of the Supreme Court may convene the legisla 
 ture." 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR would not, upon reflection 
 accept Mr. RUGGLES' modification. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved to add to Mr. TAY 
 LOR'S amendment these words, (which he rea( 
 from his book,) the provision of the United State 
 b- Constitution: 
 
 " And the legislature may by law provide for the case 
 the removal, death, resignation, or inability of the Gove 
 nor and Lieut. Governor, and of each of them, declarir 
 what officer shall act in both cases, or in either of them 
 Mr. S. would write it down from the book 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR : That is provided for in th 
 very next section of the report. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY (while Mr. S. was penning his 
 amendment) moved to strike out " the Governor 
 absent or impeached, shall retuin, or" so that 
 the clause should read, " for the residue of the 
 term, or until the disability shall cease." 
 
 This motion was agreed to, whilst Mr. TAY- 
 LOR'S still remained undecided. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS' amendment now came up 
 f' and the legislature may provide," &c. 
 
 Mr. JONES remarked that the case of the 
 Lieut. Governor was provided for in the Consti- 
 tution the President of the Senate taking his 
 place. The Constitution of the United States had 
 no such provision in it, and therefore it required 
 Congress to provide for it. The next section con- 
 tains what the gentleman (Mr. SIMMONS) desired 
 to insert. 
 
 Mr. STETSON wished to call their attention 
 what he denounced as the serious, important, ra- 
 dical change suggested by Mr. SIMMONS. It was 
 quivalent to the power of impeachment vested 
 xclusively in the legislature. They might drive 
 ut the Governor for causes less than the cause of 
 mpeachment. The legislature (or members of 
 ;) could be removed for less cause than a Gover- 
 or could be removed for. And this was saying 
 lat the legislature at any time, in their caprice, 
 may declare the office vacant from disability, at 
 heir caprice, when no disability may exist, and 
 when they have not the power to supply the va- 
 ancy. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said this matter was not in the 
 eport;andif this word inability was retained, 
 we must require the legislature to provide by 
 aw, not as the case might arise, but prospective- 
 y, for ascertaining this inability. The word 
 hould be in, but not unless accompanied with 
 his provision. It is not provided for in the next 
 ection, nor at all ; it is not in this Constitution, 
 t is a casus omissus. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that the difficulty was that 
 the proposition would give the legislature the 
 dreadful and dangerous power, not to supply a 
 vacancy, but to make one, to create a vacancy ,and 
 not provide they should supply it. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that the gentleman misap- 
 Di-ehended entirely his amendment. It did not 
 rive the legislature power to act upon cases mere- 
 ly as they arose but to provide for determining 
 such questions in future. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND: Why not decide such 
 questions, as others were by a commission of 
 lunacy ? Why not leave it to be determined by 
 the general law, as now ! 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS : Because it would be very in- 
 convenient to throw all things that differed as far 
 as heaven and earth, and which are as diverse as 
 the four Beasts in Daniel, into one and the same 
 mill. [Much laughter.] We want ear marks 
 to things in this country to distinguish one 
 from another, and in matters of government 
 particularly, to distinguish the individualties here 
 from the " transcendentalisms of Germany. 
 And at any rate you cannot leave this out of the 
 great system of nature. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. SIMMONS was then put 
 and lost. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR'S amendment was then put 
 and agreed to. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN then moved in line nine,tostnk< 
 out "all the," and in lines 10 to strike out ot the 
 State;" s<> as to read thus: 
 
 But when the Governor shall, with the consent of the 
 legislature, be out of the state in time of war, at the head 
 of a military force, he shall continue commander-m-ch 
 of such military force " 
 
 Mr. JORDAN explained that in the absence of 
 the Governor, it might be necessary that the per*, 
 son filling his place should have command of the 
 
307 
 
 military force left. The Governor might be away 
 with a force in Louisiana or elsewheiej and un 
 less this was provided for, he would still be the 
 only commander of the forces left behind j he 
 could not really act as comm.mder of these, when 
 he might be 3000 miles away. He might be ai 
 the head of a force in the service of the United 
 States. He did not know that there was anything 
 in this; but he thought it ought to be looked to. 
 
 Mr. WARD said the gentleman would not at- 
 tain his object by sinking this out 
 
 Mr. WOKDEN supposed the object ought to be 
 to give the Governor thus absent the power to call 
 after him the residue of the militia, which the ac- 
 ting Governor might prevent. Suppose the Go- 
 vernor was just over the line in Canada, and just 
 about to engage with an enemy of a very superior 
 force; and it might be absolutely necessary that 
 he should have power to convene the forces that 
 he has left behind. Now, a jealous acting Cover 
 nor might prevent his so doLig, and sacrifice him. 
 Mr.JORDAN had in his view an entirely different 
 case a case when a requisition might be made 
 on the State for an additional military force, and 
 when the emergency would not admit ot delay 
 for orders from the absent Governor. There 
 would be no difficulty if the Governor of the 
 State commanding the militia out of the Stale, 
 should make a requisition for the militia left 
 behind in this State; if the United States was 
 then to make a requiaition for a military force 
 ou this Sta'e, there would be difficulty in th 
 acting Governor's complying and ordering itouW 
 Or whilst a Governor was away in Louisiana, 
 and trouble occurs here; before news could be 
 sent to the Governor there, and his orders be 
 got br<rk, :'l the difficulty might be over, and 
 the mischief be all done. He wanted to pro. 
 vide for this. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS said he believed we had 
 had once a Governor who was on the borders of 
 our State near to Canada (laughter) and who was 
 exceedingly afraid of falling into the hands of the 
 enemy afraid that "the Aaa>acutive woald fall 
 into the enemy !" (Much laughter.) 
 
 Mr. JORDAN : suppose the governor was 2000 
 miles off; and an irruption from Canada took 
 place, who was to call out the military? 
 
 Mr. WORDEN: The person acting as Govern- 
 or the Lt Governor. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN'S amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. DANA offered this : 
 
 " In case of the impeachment of the Governor or his re 
 moral from office, death, inability to discharge the powers 
 and duties of his office, resignation, or absence, from the 
 State, (except with the consent of the legislature in time 
 of war at the head of a military force of the State,) the 
 powers and duties of his office shall devolve on the Lieut. 
 Governor for the residue of the terra or until the disability 
 cease." 
 
 Mr DANA said that to avoid misunderstand- 
 ing he offered this as a substitute for the whole 
 section; to provide that the Governor whilst ab- 
 sent should still be Governor of the State, and 
 Commander in Chief of the State. 
 
 The amendment was lost- 
 
 Mr. STOW now renewed his proposition (be- 
 fore given) modified so as to give two-thirds of the 
 Legislature power to decide on a case of inability 
 when the Governor should be considered incom- 
 petent, and giving the speaker of the assembly 
 
 power to convene the legislature tor that purpose. 
 Mr.S said hecould never consent to leave the word 
 "inability" there, without providing son.e tribunal 
 for ascertaining it. It was such a question as this 
 that shook the British throne to its centre, be- 
 cause they did not provide means to decide when 
 ihe king was disabled. The safest tribunal he 
 could devise was the legislature, by a two-third 
 vote. He was loth to take up time by a single re- 
 mark ; but he could not consent to involve the 
 country in the danger of revolution because it might 
 take a little time to make provision lor this con- 
 tingency. He would not consent to omit to guard 
 against this evil ; he would provide a tribunal that 
 should decide when this inability shall commence, 
 and when it shall cease. He would place it 
 where it would be safest ; that is to be decided by 
 a two-third vote in the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART hoped the Convention would 
 not vote down this from the habit they had got 
 into of voting down every thing. [Laughter.] 
 It was a proposition that deserved consideration. 
 It was proper some tribunal should have to decide 
 on the matter. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said its propriety was obvious. 
 Leave in this word "inability," and provide no 
 mode of determining the question of inability, and 
 it may lead to anarchy it may lead to confusion 
 of the worst kind. The propriety of the resolu- 
 tion is obvious the power to decide must remain 
 somewhere. 
 
 Mr. STETSON insisted that it was a quasi im- 
 peachment, and that it gave the legislature pri- 
 vilege to expel the Executive, from factious con- 
 siderations. It destroyed the whole symmetry of 
 the system of impeachment. Why not make it 
 conform more nearly to that system ? It would 
 be a much more formidable power even than im- 
 peachment. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN replied that it was more guard- 
 ed than the mode of impeachment. A majority 
 of one branch might impeach. This required 
 two-thirds of both houses. And it was hardly to 
 be supposed that two-thirds of any legislature 
 would venture to remove a Governor, from fac- 
 tious or party considerations. Would the gen- 
 tleman leave this word inability to stand, without 
 any power any where to define and regulate it ? 
 What case could arise to the effect spoken of? 
 
 Mr. STETSON : A case of partial paraylis ; 
 and look at the case of Senator Niles, in Con- 
 gress ; in times of high political heat some men 
 would do any thing. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG thought there could be 
 no difficulty in leaving this section precisely where 
 it stands. In case of the lunacy of the Governor, 
 the constitution provided who should be Gover- 
 nor. The constitution provides our Regent ; there 
 never occurred here a vacancy as in England ; and 
 we wanted no Regent proper ; the Lt. Governor 
 must act in such a case. The Constitution com- 
 pels him. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : But when and how is the fact 
 of lunacy to be ascertained ? Who is to decide ? 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG replied that the fact 
 would be notorious. What. Lt. Governor would 
 wait a moment if the Governor was sent to a Lu- 
 natic Asylum. 
 
 Mr. STOW : Suppose he was not sent. 
 
308 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG: Well, or suppose he was 
 confined in his own house, was not the Constitu- 
 tion sufficient ? It is easily determined. Would 
 not the legislature under this word " inability," 
 be at liberty to make explanatory clauses ? Our 
 Constitution provides our regent. The British 
 Constitution had no such provision and therefore 
 Parliament had to act and provide a Regent. The 
 Lieut. Governor must act. 
 
 Mr. STOW : Suppose the Lieut. Governor him- 
 self is insane ? [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR remarked that if the Lieut. 
 Governor usurps authority, he would be liable 
 to impeachment and would be impeached and be 
 punished. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : You would throw on the Lt. 
 Governor the responsibility of judging of the case 
 in which he shall act, with the peril of an im- 
 peachment hanging over his head ? 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR : And if he goes wrong he will 
 be punished the people will punish him he 
 would not dare (cries of order order,) that is 
 a palpable case. 
 
 Rap rap rap went the Chairman's hammer, 
 and Mr. TAYLOR took his seat. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that it was true that if the 
 Lieut. Governor usurped the power he would be 
 liable to be impeached and to be tried by the legis- 
 lature but how long would it be before he was 
 tried. It might be as long as the trial of Warren 
 Hastings, which lasted 13 years, or that of Judge 
 Peck in Congress, which lasted one session. 
 What would become of the government in the in- 
 terim, He would not consent to the introduction 
 in the Constitution of any provisions that might 
 lead to the introduction of difficulties such as he 
 had anticipated. The gentleman from Suffolk 
 was undoubtedly right that the Constitution pro- 
 vided that when the office became vacant it should 
 it should be supplied by the Lieutenant Governor. 
 In that respect, it differed from the British con- 
 stitution, but in the case he (Mr. B.) put, the si- 
 militude was exact. The question was, how was 
 this liability to be ascertained. That was an open 
 question, out of which might grow great doubt and 
 difficulty, and he insisted that the safest and most 
 prudent course to pursue was, to let the constitu- 
 tion stand in that respect as it now was, and as 
 it had stood for twenty odd years, without a word 
 of complaint. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS was in favor of making pro- 
 vision for disability not in the Constitution, but 
 he would let the Legislature specify by a general 
 statute what should constitute it. 
 
 Mr. MANN was in favor of the proposition of 
 the gentleman from Orange. He believed the 
 wisest course was to leave the constitution as it 
 stood in this respect. 
 
 Mr. STOW was willing to have the question 
 now decided on the proposition of the gentleman 
 from Orange, and to allow that, he would now 
 withdraw his proposition for the present. 
 Mr. BASCOM I hope not. 
 Mr. BROWN would now propose to strike out 
 the word "inability," so as to leave the section as 
 it now stood in the present constitution. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS could not see that any thing 
 was to be made by that. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR rose to a question of order. 
 
 The proposition that had just been adopted could 
 not be striken out without a reconsideration. 
 
 The CHAIR thought the motion to be in ordei , 
 inasmuch as it proposed to stiike out more matter. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS could not conceive that any- 
 thing was to be gained by this course. Where 
 was the tribunal that was to try this question. Mr. 
 S. urged the necessity of providing some provis- 
 ion in the Constitution to declare what should 
 when it might lead to disputes, and such scenes 
 constitute disability, rather than to leave it open, 
 as were witnessed in Pennsylvania a few yesar 
 on a different question. The conflicts of party and 
 irregularity of election returns would happen 
 and it was the business of wise men to provide a- 
 gainst them The amendment of the gentleman 
 from Erie, ought not lobe withdrawn. The com- 
 mittee had got into that predicament, which we 
 all do when we inadvertently commit an error, 
 in voting down his amendment (a laugh ) Gen- 
 'ileman had taken up this question as though it 
 was fif to leave the matter entirely unprovided for 
 until the event should occur to be decided amid 
 the conflicts of party under a special rule to be 
 provided for the occasion the same as was adopt, 
 ed in England, when they expelled James the 
 First from the government, and declared the 
 throne vacant. We did not want such a mode, 
 when it was possible to have a mode of pro- 
 ceeding prospective. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that this particular section 
 flanged more properly to the committee on the 
 duties and powers of the Legislature. They 
 should provide for the passage of some law in 
 relation to an exigency of this kind. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said the ques- 
 tion of forming the Constitution was, should 
 there not be a provision for every defect that ex- 
 isted ? Mr. V. S. went on briefly to urge that the 
 question should be left to the people through the 
 Legislature to determine. 
 
 Mr. STOW varied his amendment, so as to re- 
 quire a vote of three-fourths of the legislature, 
 instead of four-fifths, at the suggestion of others. 
 
 A brief debate followed between Messrs. VAN 
 SCHOONHOVEN, RHOADES, LOOM1S, WOR- 
 DEN and STOW, when the question being taken 
 the amendment was rejected ayes 28, nays not 
 counted. 
 
 The 7th section was then read as follows : 
 
 ^ 7 The Lieutenant Governor shall be President of the 
 Senate, but shall have only a casting vote theiem. It dur- 
 ing a vacancy of the uflice of Governor, the Lieutenant 
 Governor shall bs impeached, displaced, resign, di< j , or be. 
 come incapable of performing the duties ot his office, or 
 be absent from the State, the President of the Senate shall 
 act as Governor until the vacancy be filled, or the disabil. 
 ity shall cease. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to strike out the words 
 " from mental or physical disease." Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS moved to amend so as to 
 require of the Lieutenant Governor the same 
 qualifications of eligibility as of the Governor. 
 Agreed to, 35 to 34. 
 
 The 8th section was then read as follows : 
 
 8 The Lieut. Governor shall receive six dollars for 
 every day's attendance as President of the Senate; and he 
 shall also receive the like compensation for every twenty 
 miles travel in going to and returning from the place of 
 meeting of the Stnate in the discharge of his duties. 
 
 Mr. BAKER proposed an amendment fixing the 
 
309 
 
 mileage of the Lieutenant Governor at the sauue 
 !1 >\vi>i] to I he members of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN suggested that inasmuch as the 
 provision in relation to the compensation of the 
 Governor had been stricken out, it would undoubt- 
 edly be deeined proper to strike the whole section 
 out also. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND did vote or should have voted 
 in favor of not fixing the salary of the Governor, 
 and he should vote to-day to strikeout this section 
 but not for the same reason. He wished to call 
 at'en ion to this matter of salaries. He would 
 not give the Legislature the power to increase or 
 diminish the salary of governor at their will, 
 from political or any other considerations. 
 When we came to the other officers to the Judi- 
 ciary of which it was said there was to be a 
 large increase some said to 30, other 50 and 
 others again to 70 all of which were salaried 
 officers he supposed that the same rule would 
 be adopted as in relation to the Governor. Their 
 terms may be seven years, others say ten, and 
 some again five. Otherwise if the first legislature 
 should fix them too low it would lead to the same 
 difficulties,and men would be canvassing the coun- 
 ties for election on the ground that they were lib- 
 eral minded men, and in favor of few salaries. 
 
 The CH.AIR felt bound to invest this debate as 
 not being in order. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said he had accomplished his 
 object. 
 
 Mr BAKER in accordance with the general 
 suggestion withdrew his amendment and moved 
 to stiike out the whole section 
 
 Mr- RHOADES moved to amend so as to pro- 
 vide that 'he Lieutenant Governor should while 
 acting as such receive a compensation to be fixed 
 by law, not to be increased or diminished by law 
 during his continuance in office. 
 
 The CHAIR said the question was first on the 
 motion to s'nke '>ut. 
 
 The question being taken the section was strick- 
 en out. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES then proposed his substitute 
 and it was adopted. 
 
 The commute then rose and reported. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD wished to return an act of 
 kindness. He wished to ask leave of absence for 
 Mr. STRONG for two weeks. It was granted, as 
 was leave of absence to Mr. MANN for one week. 
 
 And the Convention then adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (36th day) July 15. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. HITCHCOCK. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK presented a memorial from Mr. 
 Samuel White, and many other citizens of Scho- 
 harie, in regard to the public debt, and State 
 finances. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK presented a plan for a judiciary, 
 proposed by one of the Judges of the Schoharie 
 Common Pleas. 
 
 ELECTIVE FRANCHISE. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK, from committee No. 4, presented 
 the following report : 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 ^ 1. Every white male citizen of the age of twenty-one 
 years, who shall have been a citizen (or sixty days, and an 
 inhabitant ol this State one year next preceding any elec- 
 tion, and for the last six months a resident of the county 
 where he may offer his vote, shall be entitled to vote at 
 
 such election, in the election district of which he shall 
 have been an actual resident during the last preceding 
 sixty days, and not elsewhere; for allofficers that noware 
 or hereafter may be elective by the People. 
 
 2. Laws may be passed excluding from the right of sul- 
 frage all persons who have been, or may be convicted ol 
 bribery, of larceny, or of any infamous crime, and for de- 
 priving every person who shall have a bet or wager de- 
 pending upon the direct or indirect result of any election, 
 from the right to vote at such election. 
 
 3. Laws may be passed providing that after the year 
 one thousand eight hundred and fifty -five, no person shall 
 have the right ol suffrage under this Constitution unless 
 he can read the English language. 
 
 4. For the purpose of voting, no person shall be deem- 
 ed to have gained or lost a residence by reason of his pre- 
 sence or absence while employed in the service of the 
 United States, nor while engaged in the navigation of the 
 waters of this State, or of the United States, or ol the high 
 seas, nor while a student of any seminary of learning, nor 
 while kept at any alms-house or other asylum at public 
 expense, nor while confined in any public prison. 
 
 5 Laws shall be made for ascertaining by proper procf 
 the citizens who shall be entitled to the right of suffrage 
 hereby established. 
 
 6. All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot, ex 
 cept for such town officers as may by law be directed to 
 be otherwise chosen. 
 
 ^ 7. Every elector of this State shall be eligible to any 
 office under the Constitution except as herein otherwise 
 provided But no person shall be elected or appointed to 
 a local office who is not an elector in the district, county, 
 city, town or ward lor which he may be elected or ap- 
 pointed. 
 
 8. No person holding any office orplace of public trust, 
 in, or under the government of the United States, shall be 
 eligible to, or hold any office or place of public trust under 
 the Constitution or laws of this State. 
 
 The following is submitted to the consideration 
 of the Convention, and recommended to be sub- 
 mitted separately : 
 
 Colored male citizens, possessing the qualifications 
 required by the first section of this article, shall also have 
 the right to vote lor alt officers that are or hereafter may- 
 be elective by the people. 
 
 W. C. BOUCK, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK said that the report met the unan- 
 imous approbation of the committee ; but all the 
 members of the committee did not agree to all the 
 details ; and each member reserved to himself the 
 right to dissent hereafter. 
 
 Report ordered printed and sent to committee 
 of the whole. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to have 1200 printed 
 instead of 800. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON opposed this; there were 
 1200 printed of the last report, and before they 
 were laid on their tables, the report had reached 
 Chautauque county through the newspapers. 
 
 800 were ordered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. DORLON, as a member of this committee, 
 submitted the following substitute for the 1st sec- 
 tion of this report : 
 
 ij 1. Every mile citizen of the age of twenty-one years 
 who shall have been a citizen for sixty da\ s, and an in- 
 habitant of this State one year next preceding any election, 
 and for the last six months a resident of the county where 
 he may offer his vote, anl sha.l have within the year next 
 preceding such election, paid a tax to the State or county 
 assessed upon his estate, or can r^ad the English ianguag ' 
 shall be entitled to vote at such election in the election uis- 
 trict of which he shall have teen an actual resident during 
 the last preceding sixty days, and not elsewhere, lor all 
 officers that now are or hereafter may be elective by the 
 people. 
 
 On motion of Mr. CHATFIELD, this was re- 
 ferred to the same committee of the whole, and 
 ordered printed with the report of the committeej 
 
310 
 
 LOCAL OFFICERS. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL from committee No. 7, submitted 
 the following report : 
 
 ARTICLE 
 
 & 1. Sheriff's, lerks of counties, including the register 
 and clerk of the city and county of New York, coroners, 
 not exceeding four in each county, and district attorneys, 
 shall be chosen by the electors of the respective counties, 
 once in every two years, and as olten as vacancies shall 
 happen. Sheriffs shall hold no other office, and be ineligi- 
 ble for the next two years after the termination of their 
 offices. They may be required by law to renew their se- 
 curity from time to time, and in default of giving such< 
 new security, their offices shall be demed vacant. But 
 the coun:y shall never be mads responsible for the acts of 
 the sheriff ; and the Governor may remove any such offi- 
 cer, except district attorney, within the term for which he 
 shall have been elected, giving to such officer a copy of 
 the charge against him and an opportunity of being heard 
 in his defence. 
 
 & 2. District attorneys may be removed from office at any 
 time within the term lor which they shall have been elect- 
 ed by the county courts of the respective counties of this 
 State giving to such district attorney a copy of the charges 
 against him, and an opportunity of being heard in his de- 
 
 & 3. The Board of Supervisors shall fix the number of super 
 intendents of the poor who shall be chosen by the electors, 
 not exceeding three in each county; and when more than 
 one shall be chosen in each county they shall divide them 
 into classes so that one shall be chosen each year, after 
 the first election. 
 
 &4. A County Treasurer shall be annually chosen by the 
 e/ectors of each county. He shall hold his office for one 
 year unless sooner removed. He may be required by the 
 Board of Supervisors to give such security as they shall 
 approve, and to renew the same from time to time; and in 
 case of default in giving or renewing such security, when 
 required, his office shah be deemed vacant. The Board of 
 Supervisors ot each county shall have power to remove 
 such Treasurer from office, whenever they shall deem such 
 removal necessary for the safety of the county, giving such 
 Treasurer a copy of the charges against him, and an oppor- 
 tunity of being heard in his defence; and shall have pow- 
 er to fill vacancies in the office of County Treasurer by 
 appointment, until the next annual election. 
 
 & 5. Mayors of cities, in the several cities of the State, 
 shall be chosen annually by the electors entitled to vote 
 for members of the Common Councils of such cities re- 
 ft 6. All officers now elected by the people shall continue to 
 be elected. All county officers whose election or appoint. 
 ment is not provided for, by this constitution, shall be elec- 
 ted by the electors of the respective counties or appointed 
 by the boards of supervisors, as the legislature shall direct. 
 All city, town and village officers, whose election or ap- 
 pointment is not provided for by this constitution, shall be 
 elected by the electors of such cities.towns and.villages, or 
 appointed by such authorities thereof as the legislature 
 shall designate for that purpose All other officers whose 
 election or appointment is not provided for hy this consti- 
 tution, and all officers whose offices may hereafter be cre- 
 ated by law, shall be elected by the people, or appointed, 
 as the legislature may by law direct. 
 
 & 7. The several officers in this article alluded to, shall 
 possess the powers and perform the duties now provided 
 by law, and such as the legislature shall hereafter, from 
 time to'time, by law direct. 
 
 & 8. The Legislature shall regulate by law the fees or 
 compensation of all county, town or other officers for 
 whose compensation no other provision is made in this 
 constitution. 
 
 &9. The Board of Supervisors in each county, shall fix 
 the annual compensation of the District Attorney, which 
 shall not be changed, after his election, during the term for 
 which he shall have been chosen. 
 
 10. Where the duration of any office is not provided by 
 this constitution, it may be declared by law; and if not so 
 declared, such office shall be held during the pleasure of 
 the authority making the appointment. 
 By order of the Committee, 
 
 W. G. ANGEL, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said that it was proper for him to 
 say that the committee were unanimous in ma- 
 king the report, but they were not unanimous in 
 the details ; and that each member would reserve 
 
 to himself the right to express his views upon or 
 m opposition to any of the details when they 
 should come up for consideration hereafter. The 
 committee had found it impracticable to incorpo- 
 rate the names and titles of all the officers whose 
 powers and duties are local in this report. For it 
 would make a book larger than the Constitution 
 itself. They had said nothing about judicial offi- 
 cers whose powers and duties were local ; for 
 they had had a conference with the Judiciary 
 committee and learned from that body that its 
 members intended to report in relation to Surro- 
 gates, County Judges, Clerks of Courts, &c.,whom 
 this committee had omitted to mention ; although 
 their powers and duties are local. They had not 
 said anything about weighers, measurers, &c. ; 
 regarding them as a class of officers whose duties 
 were similar to those of inspectors ; and as an- 
 other committee had already reported in relation 
 to the powers and duties of inspectors ; therefore 
 they left them to be disposed of as the Legislature 
 might see fit. There was still another class, that 
 of harbor-masters, port- wardens, &c.; the com- 
 mittee had not thought proper to recommend that 
 they should be elected by the people, as it 
 would very much encumber a ticket, and be 
 unwise, impolitic and unnecessary. And there 
 was still another class of officers, such as 
 health officers, resident physicians, health war- 
 dens, &c.; those also the committee had left- 
 to be disposed of by the legislature in its wisdom. 
 And there was yet another class, [a laugh.] that 
 of turnpike inspectors, pilots, Indian peace 
 makers, &c., &c., [laughter,] and a whole host of 
 them, that they had left for the regulation of the 
 legislature when they were not provided for else- 
 where. He hoped the report would meet the ap- 
 probation of the Convention and when the time 
 arrived for its discussion, the members of the 
 committee would endeavor to explain it to the 
 best of their ability. The committee knew the 
 report was imperfect ; but they had acted accord- 
 ing to the best lights they could gel on the sub- 
 ject. He hoped the Convention would view it in 
 as favorable light as possible. 
 
 It was referred to the committee of the whole 
 and printed. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to appoint a committee of 
 five to consider and report upon the order in 
 which the reports of committees should be taken 
 up and considered by the Convention. Mr. L. 
 said there were seven important reports now be- 
 fore them, and two or three others to come. And 
 as it was evident the Convention would not have 
 time to consider them all as fully as was desira- 
 ble, he would propose a plan by which the most 
 important shonld be considered first. 
 
 This was adopted. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON moved a resolution of inquiry 
 as to whether the definition of Treason, as given 
 in the Revised Statutes, should not be incorpora- 
 ted into the new Constitution. 
 
 Agreed to, and referred to committee No 10. 
 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 
 
 The committee of ihe \\hole, Mr. CHATFIELD 
 in the Chair, resumed the consideration of there- 
 port on this subject. 
 
 The 9th section was read as follows: 
 
 $5 9 The Governor and Lieut. Governor, or either of 
 them shall not) ex-officio or otherwise, hold any other office 
 
311 
 
 of trust, honor, profit or emolument under the State or Uni- 
 ted States, or any other State of the Union, or any foreign 
 State or Government; the acceptance by the person hold- 
 ing the office of Governor or Lieut. Governor, of any other 
 office of trust, honor, profit or emolument under the State 
 or the United States, or any other State of the Union, or 
 any foreign State or Government, shall vacate his said of- 
 fice of Governor or Lieut. Governor. 
 
 Mr. NELLIS moved to strike out all from the 
 word " emolument," in line three, to " govern- 
 ment," in line five. He could see no need for 
 these words they were entirely unnecessary, 
 and a foolish tautology. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said the phrase was a very 
 proper one ; and very wisely discriminated be- 
 tween the offices held under the government of 
 the U. States or other States, and those held 
 in this State of honor or trust; such as a trus- 
 tee, of a college, a director in a literary insti- 
 tution, &c. Now if a gentleman happens to be 
 a trustee of a college, and is a very useful man 
 there, if he should happen to be made gov- 
 ernor, he would not remove him from his trus- 
 teeship on that account. 
 
 Mr. NELLIS withdrew his amendment after 
 this explanation. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND asked if the governor would 
 be capable or qualified under this section to hold 
 the office of a trustee of a college. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said he thought that he would. 
 At any rate, he wanted to see him a Trustee of 
 some of them. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND had a word or two to say 
 about this. He knew of instances where thou- 
 sands upon thousands of dollars had been lavish- 
 ed and frittered away upon these institutions, to 
 pay proie*sors and officers of the same. The 
 usual rule with some of these colleges and higher 
 seminaries of learning, had been to come to the Le 
 gislature and get an appropriation as large as they 
 could possibly get out and out, and then come the 
 next year and get a loan of five or ten thousand dol- 
 lars out of the deposite fund, and when pay day 
 came,come to theLegislature and ask to be released 
 from the payment of said loan, which relief was 
 always granted. There was a case where a pro- 
 fessor in one of the Colleges, receiving a salary, 
 spent a whole winter in this city, lobbying a bill 
 through to appropriate several thousand dollars 
 from the deposite fund to endow a Professorship 
 in his institution, and that bill passed and received 
 the sanction of the Governor. 
 
 The CHAIR. That part of the discussion is 
 out of order at present. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR would ask of Mr. ANGEL 
 if his committee had reported any clause disquali- 
 fying the officers under the State government from 
 holding office under the general government ? 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said they had not. 
 
 A MEMBER. That is reported by committee 
 No. 4. (Mr. BOUCK'S). 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that he desired to take the 
 sense of the committee on the propriety of re- 
 taining this section. This section designed to for- 
 bid the Governor and the Lieutenant Governor 
 to hold any other office of trust, honor, profit, or 
 emolument under the state or the United States. 
 In this respect he thought it was of very question- 
 able propriety. 
 
 The CHAIR. Does the gentleman from Or- 
 ange propose to offer any amendment. 
 
 Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir, I intend to move to 
 have the whole of it stricken out of the article. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR requested the Chair to read 
 a provision which was in the report of the fourth 
 standing committee, relative to other offices. 
 
 The Secretary read the 8th section of the re- 
 port alluded to, as follows : 
 
 ^ 8. No person holding any office or place of public 
 trust, in or under the government of the United States, 
 shall be eligible to, or hold any office or place of public 
 trust under the Constitution or laws of this State. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that, being desirous to have 
 this section stricken out, he had made the mo- 
 tion now, so that he might have the privilege, if 
 he failed here, to renew his motion when they 
 got back into the House. The provision was a 
 very questionable one, considering the structure 
 and economy of our government. The several 
 States of the Union were sovereign and indepen- 
 dent in themselves ; but there might be emergen- 
 cies, in case of war for instance, when the Gov- 
 ernors of frontier States, and particularly of this 
 State, might be called upon to take important 
 parts in such wars. The contingency might be 
 of this character; there might be a war with 
 Great Britain of which, however, he did not see 
 any probability at present ; he hoped there never 
 would be ; and yet it was proper that we should 
 be prepared and the Governor might be called 
 upon to take such a part in it as the Governor of 
 this State, Daniel D. Tompkins, took in the late 
 war. The Governor might be called upon by the 
 President of the United States to take charge of 
 the U. S. troops in this State, or to negotiate 
 with the authorities of Canada or Great Britain;, 
 and the Governor ought not to be prevented from 
 accepting that delegated authority. Such a pow- 
 er was not inconsistent with the Constitution un- 
 der which we have lived for many years without 
 any particular evil having arisen. And yet this 
 section would prevent the Governor of this State, 
 in the event of such a contingency, from filling 
 the important station to which the emergency of 
 the occasion might call him. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS was desirous to have the section 
 stricken out ; but not for the reasons assigned by 
 the gentleman from Orange, but because he un- 
 derstood that committee No. 7 had reported a 
 provision similar in effect. 
 
 A MEMBER : Committee No. 4. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS : Well, committee No. 4. 
 A MEMBER: But that does not reach this matter," 
 
 Mr. MORRIS : Then I hope it will not be 
 stricken out 
 
 Mr. RHOADES wished the 9th and 17th rules 
 read ; he could not hear what was said. They 
 were read, amid much laughter. 
 
 9. While the President is putting a question, no member 
 shall walk out of, or across the house j nor when a mem- 
 ber is speaking, shall any member be engaged in conver- 
 sation, or pass between him and the chair. 
 
 17. No member shall speak more than twice to the same 
 question, without leave, nor more than once until every 
 member choosing to speak, shall have spoken. 
 
 The CHAIR said that members really must 
 obey the rules and preserve order. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS then said that he hoped the com- 
 mittee would not strike out this provision. He 
 firmly believed it to be a wise and proper provi- 
 sion. Those gentlemen who might be honored by 
 holding office under the State Government, should 
 
312 
 
 not be trammelled by holding office under the gen- 
 eral government, and especially by engagements 
 with any other states and foreign governments. 
 He saw that his learned friend from New York 
 was laughing, probably because he (Mr. MORRIS) 
 was in a peculiar anomolous position, as well as 
 his friend, "the admiral," (Mr. HOFFMAN) both 
 being officers under the general government, 
 [Post-Master of New York, and Naval officer 
 of that port,] and delegates of the people of 
 this state to this Convention. But he was 
 one of that class whom this did not effect ; and 
 it had ever been a sacred principle with him that 
 he was not to be deterred from doing his duty 
 from any fear of personal ridicule. He was not 
 unconscious of the position in which he stood ; 
 and he would tell the committee what his views 
 were on that subject. He held that no obligation 
 to th3 general government should interfere 
 with the sacred duty due to the people. He 
 thought they should not be subjected to the in- 
 fluence of the general government that they 
 should not certainly be subjected to the influ- 
 ence of any adjoining state or a foreign power,and 
 that no gentleman holding an office under the 
 state should be placed in such a position. Now 
 a word as to the suggestion of his friend from 
 Orange, (Mr. BROWN.) They were acting upon 
 principle, and the individual mentioned might 
 properly discharge these duties to the state, and 
 to the general government; but he asked, whe- 
 ther, as a principle, it would riot be dangerous in 
 the extreme to allow this to be done ? Might it 
 not be dangerous in the extreme to permit the 
 Governor of the state to be at the head of 100,- 
 000 regular hired troops within this State ? And 
 would it not be better whenever the national go- 
 vernment might find it necessary to send within 
 our limits, a band of 100,000 regular hired troops 
 that the militia should be separated from them, 
 and that our Governor should be at their head ? 
 Would there not be greater protection for the popu- 
 lace, by the militia against those very regular 
 troops? It struck him a case of that sort might 
 arise when it would be very advantageous to 
 have the Governor the commander-inchief 
 of the militia, when particularly called 
 on to defend our rights, but not at the same 
 time the commander of the 100,000 United States 
 troops that might be sent here. He trusted the 
 section would not be stricken out. He believed 
 this in his best judgment to be best for the inter- 
 ests of the people. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN was opposed to striking out the 
 section ; for he proposed to offer an amendment 
 which should read thus : 
 
 " Neither the Governor nor Lieut. Governor shall hold 
 any other office ot profit or emolument, or military com- 
 mand under this or any other state ur foreign government; 
 the acceptance by either of any such office or command 
 shall vacate his said office ot Governor or Lieut. Governor.', 
 
 It was objected that it would be proper that the 
 Governor should hold such an office as that of 
 Regent of the University or any other where no 
 emolument and only honor could accrue. His 
 amendment would steer clear of that objection. 
 There were other objections which he thought 
 were obviated by his amendment. He would 
 only be commander of the militia of the State as 
 before. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON preferred this amendment 
 to any other that had been offered; that is, if we 
 considered it necessary to retain any thing of the 
 kind, as reported by committee No. 5 ; it would 
 conflict with the report of the committee No. 6, 
 of which the gentleman from Otsego (Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD) was chairman. He thought, however, 
 some modification might be necessary ; for if the 
 Governor and Lieut. Governor were to hold no 
 office of trust, honor or profit, the Lieut. Gover- 
 nor would not be able to act with tlie Speaker of 
 the Assembly, Comptroller, Secretary of State, 
 Treasurer, and Surveyor General, as Commission- 
 ers of the Land Office ; nor would he be able to 
 act with the Secretary of State, Comptroller, 
 Treasurer, and Attorney General, as Commission- 
 ers of the Canal Fund. He contended that it 
 would not answer to adopt the provision proposed 
 by committee No. 5, and then adopt those propo- 
 sed by committee No. 6. The Lieut. Governor, 
 for many years, had been one of the commission- 
 ers of the canal fund ; he was also one of the ca- 
 nal board, as a matter of course, and likewise of 
 the land office. If then they were to retain any 
 thing of this, it seemed to him the amendment of 
 the gentleman from Columbia would be prefera- 
 ble ; but it would be necessary to make some fur- 
 ther amendment even in that. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said members talked as 
 though the person who happened to be elected 
 Governor was the only one fit to discharge the 
 duties of an office in the several literary and be- 
 nevolent institutions of this State. He was op- 
 posed, from high considerations of principle, to 
 the Executive holding any office or trust, not 
 strictly compatible with, and necessary to, the 
 faithful discharge of the duties of that important 
 station. He would not deny but that there are 
 institutions of learning and benevolence in this 
 State which stand as proud monuments to the 
 generous and enterprising spirit of our citizens. 
 Neither could it be denied but that many, exclu- 
 sive in their character, had grown fat on dona- 
 tions made from the money of the masses, by- 
 partial, if not corrupt, legislation ; while other 
 institutions, equally meritorious, could not get 
 one cent from the State, and our common schools 
 had been neglected. If it should be found im- 
 practicable, which he very much doubted, to take 
 from government the power to make special ap- 
 propriations for the purposes alluded to, then he 
 would remove as far as possible the temptation 
 from the Legislature and the Governor. The 
 Executive was liable, like all other men, to be- 
 come biassed in favor of those with whom he as- 
 sociated, and who have done him the most honor, 
 by appointments to places of distinction or other- 
 wise. In relation to holding office under other 
 governments, he was also opposed to that. " No 
 man could serve two masters." In reply to the 
 charge of inconsistency, to which some might 
 consider him obnoxious, in occupying a seat in 
 this Convention, under the circumstances, he 
 would merely say that it was a matter about which 
 his judgment was not consulted by the people or 
 Kings county. It was, none the less, a false 
 principle it had proven injurious, and even de- 
 structive, to ancient republics, and therefore 
 should be guarded against in our own. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that this would not 
 
313 
 
 prohibit him from holding any other office of 
 honor or trust only ; but it would from any 
 one of profit or emolument in this or any 
 other State. Now gentlemen were evi- 
 dently mistaken in supposing that anything was 
 drawn from the treasury for literary institutions 
 of which the Governor is ex-officio trustee. He 
 thought the gentleman from Genesee (Mr. RICH- 
 MOND) would find it difficult to point out any one 
 which the Governor had recommended, of which 
 he wus trustee. The office of the Governor in 
 those institutions was advisory, but he had never 
 come here and recommended appropriations for 
 their benefit; and the Governor might advanta- 
 geously retain a position in which he could give 
 salutary advice to those institutions. He would 
 favor the proposition of the gentleman from Co- 
 lumbia so far as to prevent the Governor from 
 receiving any appointment under the General 
 Government, whether of trust, honor, or profit, 
 but not so in regard to this State. And in the 
 case supposed by the gentleman from Orange (Mr. 
 BROWN) he thought the Governor might be use- 
 fully employed, and consistently with the char- 
 acter of the Governor. With regard to this state, 
 he thought the Executive should hold no other 
 office of profit or emolument, but a trust or post 
 of honor he would not prohibit. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : The gentleman from On- 
 ondaga (Mr. W. TAYLOR) says that we have no 
 evidence of the governor ever coming here to the 
 legislature and recommending appropriations for 
 these colleges and other institutions. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR : Not as a trustee of any of 
 them. He had never made such recommenda- 
 tions as trustee. Generally in his capacity as 
 governor, he doubtless did recommend institu- 
 tions to favor for the welfare of the state. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : Not as trustee? He agreed 
 with the gentleman that the governor has never 
 done so as a trustee. He would accept that ex- 
 planation. He would not be so imprudent as to 
 do this. But the recommendation of the gover- 
 nor, without saying that he was a trustee, would 
 have great weight with the legislature and be 
 very apt to carry a bill through. He would keep 
 back the fact that he was a trustee, lest it should 
 excite suspicion. If he were a shrewd, calculat- 
 ing man he would keep it back so that it might 
 have more weight. But suppose the governor did 
 not make any recommendation of appropriation ; 
 still gentlemen made propositions to appropriate 
 thousands of dollars to these higher seminaries of 
 the money belonging to all the people, and which 
 should go to sustain the free and common schools 
 and governors had been and might again be- 
 come members of the legislative body and if it 
 was referred to him to sanction, could he act upon 
 it as an independent man ? When such a mea 
 sure too was put into his hands to sign as gover- 
 nor he might sign it when he ought to have put 
 his veto on it. No governor would even venture 
 to reject such a bill after he had recommended 
 it. If the veto power were lodged in the gover- 
 nor, it was necessary that he should be untram- 
 melled to act, without being subjected to the in 
 fluence that would be thrown around him in con- 
 sequence of being a trustee of one of these insti- 
 tutions. Mr. R. would not charge corruption on 
 the present governor nor on any past governor 
 
 20 
 
 or he believed they had generally acted as other 
 men would act. But there had been great abuses 
 of the public money carried out through this sys- 
 tem. Mr. R. did not charge any bad motives 
 upon any governor but he would ask what man 
 there was who, were he governor would be like- 
 ly to resist a bill passed for the benefit of an in- 
 stitution of which he was trustee, especially when 
 there was as is always the case a great array of 
 talented men to back up the application. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said as to the substance of the 
 clause as reported it was very desirable that it 
 should be embodied in the Constitution ; but it 
 seemed to him that the amendment of the gen- 
 tleman from Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) did not 
 reach the object in the most unexpectionable and 
 best manner. He desired that the Governor and 
 Lieut. Governor should hold no office from any 
 other State or government ; no office whatever ; 
 of any kind or description. A Governor of this 
 State should allow that office alone to be sufficient 
 to satisfy his ambition whilst he was governor 
 that alone was honor enough and ought to be suf- 
 ficient to fill his mind with care and to occupy all 
 his time and solicitude ; and he hoped the gentle- 
 man from Columbia would amend his amendment 
 while it was in his power, so as to exclude those 
 two officers the Governor and Lieut. Gov. from 
 holding any other office under any other govern- 
 ment whatever. He himself was here now hold- 
 ing office under the people of the State while he 
 was a public functionary. But if in drawina, up 
 the Convention act every federal functionary had 
 been excluded, where would have been the harm? 
 There would have been no injury. No gentle- 
 man here would have regarded that as an injury ; 
 he would have resigned his place and come here, 
 for it was only once in a long life time that a man 
 could participate in the proceedings of a body 
 like this, and therefore such a restriction would 
 not have excluded any man who was fit to hold a 
 seat there. And he held that no man who would 
 not resign his post under the general government, 
 if necessary, to come here, or that would not 
 come here to serve the people of his State, des- 
 pite his federal obligations, was not fit to be a 
 delegate to this Convention. He repeated then 
 that he hoped the gentleman from Columbia 
 would so amend his amendment as to exclude 
 these two officers from holding any office under 
 the federal or any other government charter. 
 That could be done by a slight alteration. Some 
 gentlemen however seemed to be exceedingly 
 anxious to exclude the Governor and Lieut. Gov. 
 from the administrative offices or boards of the 
 State. Now as soon as they did that, they would 
 defeat the end those gentleman had in view. If 
 their Governor had always been more intimately 
 related to the finances of the State, if he had al- 
 ways been in these boards, they would have been 
 less in debt by many millions. If he had been 
 a commissioner of the canal fund, like every oth- 
 er man who had been put into that commission, 
 he would have stood for the interest of the whole 
 state against the interest of localities. Ifthegov- 
 ernor had been more intimately connected with 
 the finances, he would, as the Comptroller had 
 uniformly done, have stood against the claims of 
 localities, and solicitations from literary and 
 charitable institutions. And it has been their 
 
314 
 
 misfortune, not that their governor had been too 
 intimately connected with the finances of the 
 State, but that he had not been sufficiently con- 
 nected with them. If you will entirely and utter- 
 ly separate your Govemorand Lieut. Gov. from all 
 connection with any office in our own or any other 
 State,or the United States, or any foreign govern- 
 ment then you can make the office in regard to this 
 state, or the clause, just as you please. If the 
 gentleman from Columbia would amend his 
 amendment so as to provide a general disqualifi- 
 cation, he should be glad. He would submit to 
 the Convention the propriety of making the Gov- 
 ernor and the Lieut. Governor commissioners of 
 the canal fund, trustees of your school fund, and 
 your colleges, and otherwise connect him with 
 the state finances, the distribution of its gifts and 
 charities, and its donations to colleges and aca- 
 demies. He ought to be most intimately acquaint- 
 ed with all your financial matters throughout the 
 state, and inspect them frequently. He would 
 much rather that the Governor, from his station, 
 was compelled to look after the public funds, and 
 guard against improper gifts and charities anddo- 
 nations,than that he should stand with folded arms, 
 causually looking over the ground, without know- 
 ing how many evils had grown out of their admin- 
 istration. He would make that matter part of his 
 duty as Governor, to participate in the adminis- 
 trative boards of the state; unite both the Gov- 
 ernor and Lieut. Governor more closely with your 
 administrative boards, financial and otherwise, 
 and you add greatly to their usefulness, and en- 
 sure to a much greater extent the welfare and 
 prosperity of your state, 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that he acceded to the pro- 
 position of the gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN,) but as to the other branch that we 
 should not let the Governor hold any other office 
 of honor or trust under this State government, 
 there was evidently a great difference of opinion. 
 This he would not accede to ; but would take the 
 sense of the Convention on his propositions as it 
 stood. He would modify his amendment so as to 
 meet the views of the gentleman from Herkimer. 
 
 Mr. WARD would, with the permission of the 
 gentleman from Columbia, (Mr. JORDAN,) send 
 up an amendment that would answer every pur- 
 pose: 
 
 Neither the Governor nor Lieutenant Governor snal 
 bold any other office of profit or emolument, or military 
 command under this or any other State or Government 
 except the Lieutenant Governor shall ex-oflicio be or re- 
 main a commissioner of the land office, or commissioner o 
 the canal fund, and a member of the canal board. The ac 
 ceptance by either, of such office or command, shall ra 
 cate his said office of Governor or Lieutenant Governor. 
 Mr. WARD said there ought to be some altera 
 tion in relation to the Governor's military com 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said if he understood the gentle 
 man from Herkimer, (Mr. HOFFMAN,) that gen 
 tleman desired that neither the Governor nor th< 
 Lieutenant Governor should hold any office of ho 
 nor, profit, emolument or trust, under the genera 
 government. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN Under any government, bu 
 that of this State. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN had no objection to that, and i 
 could be easily provided for by introducing tw< 
 or three words. In respect to the amendmea 
 
 roposed by another delegate, he could not assent 
 o it. He would let his amendment stand as it 
 was, after making it conform to the views of the 
 'entleman from Herkimer. Mr. J. then sent up 
 vis amendment so altered as to permit the Lieu- 
 enant Governor ex qfficio to be a commissioner 
 f the land office, a commissioner of the canal 
 und, and a member of the canal board. This 
 [id away with the necessity of Mr. WARD'S 
 mendment ; he inserted, " or any other office of 
 >rofit, honor, trust or emolument, under any 
 ther government." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that there were certain 
 ffices in this State which the Governor ought to 
 >e excluded from ; and certain others which he 1 
 tught not to be ; our sister States have shadowed 
 hese out, and he greatly wondered we had not 
 ot them in ottr constitution. He read a clause 
 rom the New Hampshire constitution, and said 
 le could see there had got to be a little more re- 
 lection on this section, although he was inclined 
 o agree mainly with the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer (Mr. HOFFMAN.) But it was evident they 
 must distinguish between two things; they must 
 ender the Governor incapable of holding any 
 >ffice whatever under any other State or the Uni- 
 ed States; and then there were a certain class of 
 >ffices from which he should be excluded in this' 
 State. You must exclude him from any other ju- 
 dicial or legislative office, and leave the rest to* 
 the people. You must preserve a general divi- 
 sion of Executive, legislative and general duties,, 
 )ut he thought the Executive should not be alto- 
 gether separated from the administrative. He 
 would point to the Erie Canal as one fruit of the 
 abor of De Witt Clinton, apart from his Execu- 
 ive duty. Look at that great work, and say if 
 the Governor should be excluded from all ? He 
 said what he had heard recently would seem to 
 show that they were trying to see if they could 
 not have a sort of constructive nobility here a* 
 sort of nominal Governor, who was to stand, dis- 
 connected with the business and interests of the 
 State, with his arms folded, looking on like a 
 sentinel, and let this constructive nobility 
 do all the work. There was so much out- 
 cry and horror against centralization,, that he 
 did not see that there was any thing to be left for 
 the Governor to do; though he had supposed that 
 the people when they elected a Governor, did it 
 on account of his qualifications of some kind, 
 and that they thought they ought to have the ad- 
 vantage of them. He wanted to have the Gover- 
 nor's influence and skill brought to bear on the 
 various administrative departments, and great 
 utility would be found to follow therefrom, for the 
 Governor would become acquainted with all these 
 matters in detail. He had confidence enough in 
 a Governor for this and all proper administrative 
 duties. The connection of the Governor with 
 these things would give a moral weight and pow- 
 er, for there was something besides the mere co- 
 ercion of law and force necessary to have a gov- 
 ernment go on well. He regretted much to see 
 here the members of this Convention set the ex- 
 ample, by way of approving of the- exclusion of 
 public men from coll eges-&c., -giving countenance 
 to the idea that Governors and Supreme Court 
 Judges, and other high functionaries, should 
 not be patrons of learning. It reminded him of 
 
315 
 
 a speech said to have been made recently in Con- 1 precisely the causes which during the last war 
 a which a gentleman there said he hoped induced the U. S. Government to confer the 
 use would not hold him responsible for command of its troops upon the Governor of this 
 being born in Vermont ; and that he was opposed State. He had expected that other gentlemen 
 to receiving the Smithsonian bequest, because it in the Convention better acquainted with the 
 was anti-democratic, and he added that he well military relations then existing between us and 
 remembered how much trouble it cost him to get the United States, would have opposed the adop- 
 rid of the little education he had before he could tion of the provision now before the committee, 
 be purely democratic. He hoped they had no or given reasons why it should not be adopted 
 such men here ; he believed there were none. by the Convention. He recollected however, 
 Mr. J ORDAN then read his amendment as mo- that there were controversies between the mili- 
 dified^ " Or any office of profit or emolument, tia and the army officers during the last war. 
 except that of Governor and Lieut. Governor of It was found expedient, on the part of the 
 this State." United States to invest the Governor of this 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR wished to strike out from State with a Major Generags command, and 
 after " or any of office of" the words profit or he ventured to say that no act of the United 
 emolument." It had been usual to connect the States Government, was more heartily ap- 
 Lieutenant Governor with the administrative de- proved in the whole course of the war than 
 partment, particularly the canal fund-, and if he that act was by the people of this State. 
 travelled to meet the canal board it was proper The defence of the city of New York on the 
 that he should be paid for it. The amendment, south was immediately made more secure. He 
 therefore, required further amendment. No one was made Major General of the U. S. army, and 
 could object to this as a matter of justice. the northern frontier was immediately rendered 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES understood that this amend- more secure, and public confidence was immedi- 
 inent disqualified the Governor of this state from ately restored in the capacity of the state for self- 
 taking command of the U. S. troops in time of defence, by the measures he took. In the event 
 war. Now he could not but think the commit- of another war with England, the militia force 
 tee would act unadvisedly and unwisely in a- to be immediately raised would be very large, not 
 dopting a provision which was to have that ef- only for the city of New York, but for the long 
 feet. It originated in a jealousy that had no real line of the Canada frontier,(far exceeding any U. 
 foundation, of the Executive, who was chosen S. force to be sent here,) and for the purpose of 
 by the people for a short period. Before they securing the united and concerted action of the 
 adopted such a provision, it might be necessary State and United States forces, it will be iadis- 
 to recur back to the transactions which took pensably necessary to put both under one com- 
 place in the late war with Great Britain and mand. Now, he asked where is the danger of 
 to advert to the possibility that we might have giving this command, as was done during the last 
 another war hereafter, or before long. He hop- war, to our own Governor ? Is the power and in- 
 d there would not ; ^but there might be ; and fluence of the United States government more to 
 -we have a long frontier on the north, and we be feared when our chief magistrate shall have 
 find the British Government fortifying their the command of its troops, than when that go- 
 side of it from end to end. Every act of that vernment commands ours ? We must either put 
 power indicates an expectation that an occur- the militia under U. S. officers, or else the U. S. 
 rence of that kind will take place at some time troops must come under the command of our Go- 
 hereafter, and we therefore ought to act in refer- vernor ; or there will be a divided action ; and 
 ence to the possibility of such an event. Nay our militia will never act in concert with the U. 
 we ought not to forget that it was not only a pos- S. troops unless they consent to serve under U 
 sible event, but we ought to act as though we S. officers ; and where is the danger more likely 
 regarded it as a certain event, at some future pe- to arise? It seemed to him that there were mis- 
 nod. How then should we be situated in case taken views and unfounded jealousies on this 
 of a war of that kind ? He always supposed at subject : that this disqualification might weaken 
 the commencement of a war, that this state must the power of the state in an emergency when ifcj 
 take care of itself. It may be necessary she strength would be most needed. He had not risen 
 should take care of herself all through. She in the confident expectation of changing the opin- 
 may be compelled to do so. This is a border Ions which the committee seemed at present to 
 state, and it might be compelled to take care of entertain, but he hoped the provision would not 
 itself. When the last war occurred, the United be adopted now in committee. For great danger 
 States was weak on the frontier; and the state to this State may arise unless we choose to allow 
 and the United States were unprepared; and our Governor to take command of the U. S. 
 this state was driven to self protection, though troops here in time of war. If it should, he still 
 she also at that time was unprepared. If -such hoped that the members of the Convention might 
 an event should ever occur again, whatever be satisfied of its impropriety when they come to 
 might be our condition in preparation and re- reflect on it more before they passed upo"n it in the 
 sources, a unity of action between this state and House. 
 
 the United States government would be highly Mr W. TAYLOR said that the apprehensions 
 important; and nothing ought to take place in of the gentlemen were unfounded. To place 
 this Convention which should lead to separate United States Troops under the command of the 
 and discordant action. Both should act through- Governor of this State in time of war, would not 
 
 out with a thorough unity of action. There is be conferring a new appointment upon him. 
 
 nothing in the fundamental law to prevent a The objection therefore was not valid. He was 
 unity of action. He was not prepared to state I of opinion that a Governor exercising the com- 
 
316 
 
 inand over any troops of the United States whic 
 might be placed under his command by request c 
 the general government, would be only exercis 
 ing his functions as Governor of the State o 
 New York. It would be no new commission; n 
 new command ; no violation of the provisio 
 proposed to the Convention by Mr. JORDAN n 
 new appointment, to ask the Governor of thi 
 State to command, together with the militia, sue 
 troops as might be placed under his control, ] 
 it be not a new office, then he can command thes 
 troops, and there is no fear of the restriction. 
 This is in the Constitution of other States. An 
 yet that was the only objection which had bee 
 urged against the Jfc-ohibition of his receiving ar 
 appointment from the United States. 
 
 Mr. WARD : Mr. Chairman, what is the ques 
 tion? 
 
 The CHAIR said there was so much noise made 
 by members that it was impossible to transac 
 business. The question is on striking out. 
 
 Messrs. WARD and TALLMADGE spoke on 
 this question. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE said that no one ever had o 
 could doubt the patriotism of Daniel D. Tomp 
 kins. But the question now is whether his as 
 sumption of the course he took was necessary at 
 the time ; and if it was necessary by reason of a 
 difficulty then, that difficulty and necessity may 
 occur again. He hoped, therefore, that nothing 
 would be done to prevent the governor from per- 
 forming such a duty hereafter. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought it would be much 
 wiser to expunge the whole of the article ; and 
 come back to what it was in the old Constitution. 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that as one good turn 
 deserved another, it was his purpose to say a word 
 in explanation ot this matter. He would leave 
 the gentlemen from Herkimer ar d Essex to set 
 tie their differences among themselves The gen. 
 tleman from Essex goes away off to Congress to 
 show that a man had a little too much education 
 to be a democrat He (Mr. S.) believed there was 
 as much enlightenment and talent required to 
 make a democrat as any other creed. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS: It requires more than any 
 other. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER was in lavor of the most 
 wide spread and extensive education, but it was a 
 question with him, whether the support of the 
 exclusive institutions the colleges and academies 
 were so beneficial to ihe public good, as tore- 
 quire the whole patronage of the State to the in- 
 jury of the general interests. Whether it was 
 better to educate a man in the notions of King 
 Jame3, Blackstone, or Peters' reports, he would 
 leave for the gentleman to say. 
 
 Mr. STETSON could see force and propriety in 
 the argument of the gentleman from Dutchess and 
 Orange that the governor should not be disabled 
 from taking command of the U. States troops 
 under certain circumstances. It might perhaps 
 safely be made an exception in order to avoid 
 what might bean inconvenience. It was yester- 
 day provided that while thi Governor was 
 out of the State he should cease to be Gov- 
 ernor, yet that he should retain command of the 
 militia. Now in the event of an insurrection 
 in an adjoining State, and the Governor should 
 be ordered out, it might be necessary that he 
 
 should be allowed to take the command of a few 
 U. S troops in addition. He concurred with the 
 gentleman from Columbia and Herkimer, most 
 fully in the great principle of State, sovereignty 
 which required the separation of the State offi- 
 cers from those of the general government. And 
 he would free the State sovereignty from all fed- 
 eral patronage, and not allow it to be controlled 
 at all by such influence. Particularly should this 
 be so in relation to the Ex<?cutive,who was strict- 
 ly the representative of the sovereignty ot the 
 State. The gentleman from Essex fears that it 
 will deprive him of the right to exercise certain 
 duties sometimes imposed by acts of Congress. 
 Well let it be so, if H would have that effect. 
 Let the federal power provide its own agents 
 but do not amalgamate the system of federal au- 
 thority and reserved power of the State. The 
 object of American statesman ever had been to 
 preserve the distinction. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS asked if the gentleman would 
 go the full length, and deprive the United States 
 of their privilege of using the subordinate agents 
 and our prisons it was every day using. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that question was not em- 
 araced in this proposition, and it was another 
 question which he would meet when it rose. 
 With respect to the judiciary power to which the 
 gentleman refened, he thought the gentleman 
 would find it laid down that Congress had the 
 right to confer a ministerial power upon them. 
 fudge Conklin, in one of his decisions in which 
 le made, surrendered this point, previously en- 
 ertained by him, and he was sorry to see the 
 gentleman from Essex the last of that guard to pre- 
 serve it. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS referred to the action of thesu- 
 >reme court in the case of a perjury in Kentucky, 
 s sustaining his position. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that was before the deci - 
 ion of Judge Story before this doctrine was ex- 
 lained away. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that in regard to civil 
 ppointmenf. and duties, whenever the general 
 overnment saw fit to employ an officer of the 
 Itate to discharge those duties, most clearly it was 
 
 distinct appointment. In regard to military du. 
 ies assigned by the general government the 
 atural jealously existing between State rights and. 
 hose o! the United States, produced some ariom- 
 ly. The U. S. by their constituiion was well as 
 y our own, have the right to call out to take part 
 n the national conflicts, the militia of the State, 
 ut, the Governor would not be accepting 
 nother office he would stand still as commander 
 f the State militia and not as an officei of the 
 eneral government He hoped with the expi- 
 ation that the destinction which he urged would 
 e fully understood. It would, therefore be capa- 
 le (Mr. T.) urged to provide that the Governor 
 lould accept no office frcm the general govern- 
 ment, and yet still retain his command of the 
 tate militia even in the service of the U. S. 
 
 Mr RUGGLES said that the Constitution of the 
 r . S. provided that it should be the power of 
 ongress to provide for organizing, arming, and 
 isciplining the militia, and governing such as 
 }ay be employed in the service of the United 
 tates, reserving to the States, the appointment 
 
 officers, &c. We had agreed by the Consti- 
 
317 
 
 tution to place our militia under the com main 
 of the Governor, and he did not understand tha 
 the Governor would have any authority, except 
 under a commision from the U. S., to take corn, 
 mand of the troops. The Government had not beet 
 willing in the last war, it was not likely that it 
 would be any more hereafter, to place their troops 
 under any command except of the officers com- 
 rnis>iioned by themselves. The reason for it was 
 that they were disciplined and veteran troops, 
 while ihtt militia were not. It seemed to him 
 that the question was this. We have consented 
 that our militia shall be under the command of 
 the U. S., and now we were endeavoring to pre- 
 vent the U. S. from putting their army under our 
 comander in chief. When under our own Gov- 
 ernor, our troops were under the command of a 
 friend, and it seemed to him passing strange that 
 we should pass laws by which the troops of our 
 own State when in sen ice of the U S. uhould not 
 be put under the command of our State officer. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said that our troops could 
 be put under the command of the Governor, 
 as such, without involving the necessity for 
 a commission. As to the Governor, except in 
 extreme cases, going into the field and assu- 
 ming the active command of the military forces 
 in the time of war, he had better as commander- 
 iri-chiet, devolve this duty upon an experienced 
 general. But if it becomes necessary for him to 
 assume the command, it may extend to United 
 States troops without conflicting at all with this 
 restriction, as he would do so as Governor of this 
 State and our commander-in-chiet, and not under 
 any commission from the United States. But the 
 Governor vi fhis State has duties enough of im- 
 portance, witnout discharging the duties of an of- 
 fice received from any other Governor in the coun- 
 try. In regard to extending the restriction within 
 our own State he was decidedly of the opinion that 
 that should not be. A Governor may have served 
 for years as a trustee of literary and benevolent 
 institutions ; and there was no good reason for 
 compelling him when elected to this office, to 
 relinquish such trusts, in which by his example 
 he may still exert an influence beneficial to the 
 community., and such a restriction in his (Mr. 
 N.'s) opinion would be unnecessarily infringing 
 on a man's personal rights and privileges. He 
 would not permit a Governor to receive any office 
 from any other Government, as the rights and in- 
 terests of the State should not be liable to be 
 blended with those of other governments. With 
 this modification, Mr. N. was in favor of the sec- 
 tion. 
 
 iVlr. BASCOM was inclined to (he opinion that 
 we had better strike out .the whole of the section. 
 Tne history of our own country was somewhat in- 
 * ructive,flo far as concerned the striking out of 
 that part of it in relation to the military com- 
 mand of the Governor. At the darkest period 
 this country ever saw, except in the revolution 
 now, an officer took command of the troops 
 on our northwestern frontier, who as governor of 
 that territory commanded one portion as an offi- 
 cer of the general government, took command ot 
 Jhe United Stales troops, and as maj.,r-general, 
 appointed by the state of Kentucky, he command- 
 ed the gallant troops of that state, arid led them 
 io ihc' most exposed position on our frontier, 
 
 turned the tide of war from our own borders, and 
 carried it into I he enemy's country, and captured 
 the first British army during the last war. Mr. 
 B. referred to this to show that his general's suc- 
 cess depended on his three commands, or different 
 appointments, in order to possess the entire con- 
 fidence of the various classes of troops. Gentle Jien 
 might talk as much as they please about the policy 
 of this country being a peaceful one, but if he had 
 read aright the signs of the times we had enough 
 already on our hands. What meant the martial nuu- 
 sic which sometimes even disturbed their delibera. 
 tions there and these expeditions around Cape 
 Horn? was it supposed that all this should goon 
 and we not be in as great danger of a war as in 1811. 
 Was it supposed that the world would calmly look 
 on, did it do so now? Mr. B. alluded to the 
 movements making by Great Britain, and said that 
 it was the note of preparation for a war. There 
 was in the public mind he feared, a disposition to 
 rush into a war with one power or another. We 
 had a war now, and he very much feared although 
 not carried on in a constitutional manner and de- 
 clared in a constitutional 'way, that it was sus- 
 tained by the present public opinion of the coun- 
 try. If not, why was the Executive permitted to 
 plunge the country into it? that Congress not 
 daring to dec'are war itself, declares it to exist 
 &C. Under these apprehensions he was unwil- 
 ling that we should be placed in a position where 
 the commander-in chief of our state force could 
 not command the force of the Union that might 
 be sent to our aid, as Gov. Tompkins did in the 
 late war. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY felt that we stood here as 
 an independent republic, with great internal inte- 
 resls, and he held the services of the Governor 
 were fully needed here. Look at the page of his- 
 tory ! Would it not have been better for France, 
 if Bonaparte had spent his life legislating for the 
 Benefit of his country. Would it not have been 
 quite as well for the State of New York, if in the 
 last war, she had not sent her own Governor off'at 
 the head of the troops f The services of the Go- 
 vernor in a population like ours, of 3,000,000, 
 were always needed, and he would not have him 
 mour.t the first horse and ride off to the wars. 
 No he would keep him at home, to look after 
 he home interest. If so much power was to be 
 vested in the Governor, he would soon be in the 
 position that the old man in Dutchess county was, 
 vho, when they presented a paper to him to sign 
 for the benefit of the Gospel, said that he had 
 more than twenty kinds of business on hand, and 
 could riot attend to it 
 
 The question was then -taken on the 9th section, 
 and it was stricken out. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN then called for the question on 
 iissubstitute r as follows: 
 
 Neither the Governor nor Lieutenant Governor shall 
 hold any office under the Government of the United States, 
 >r-any foreign Government; or any office of profit oremo- 
 ument, (other than that of Governor or Lieutenant Go- 
 vernor) under this State. The acceptance of any such 
 >riice shall vacate his said office of Governor or Lieute- 
 nant Governor. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to insert the 
 
 words " honor and trust," so that it would read, 
 
 any office of honor, trust, profit or emolument." 
 
 Mr. MANN hoped the amendment would not 
 
318 
 
 be adopted, as it would only have the effect of 
 bringing the section back where it started. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND hoped it would prevail; and 
 while up, he would take occasion to answer the 
 gentleman from Essex, who seemed to suppose 
 that education, learning and science were gone 
 unless the Governor was permitted to hold these 
 trusteeships. He had not so much distrust of the 
 people as that he (Mr. R.) believed that all those 
 institutions could be sustained without the offi- 
 cer of dignity to back them up. He (Mr R.) de- 
 nied that those who opposed this section were 
 thereby evincing their hostility to education. He 
 wanted these institutions to stand on their owri 
 merits. The Governor, as a part of the legisla- 
 tive power, if associated with these institutions, 
 would be liable to be swayed as against the peo. 
 pie in their connection with them. They were 
 often applicants for favor from the legislature for 
 funds and the Governor would not be likely to 
 act upon the subject with that unprejudiced and 
 impartial irind so necessary when the question to 
 be decided as between them and the people, was 
 whether they should have a large appropriation or 
 not. 
 
 Mr PATTERSON wished the committee to 
 understand distinctly that this amendment if 
 adopted, would prohibit Ihe Lieut. Governor from 
 exercising his duties heretofore necessary as a 
 member of the Canal Board, and of the Board of 
 Commissioners of the Canal Fund. It was held 
 by some that no man should hold more than one 
 office now these two boards to which he had al- 
 luded had to be made up of some officers if those 
 who constituted them now would not do, then a 
 new batch would have to be provided. He saw 
 no objection in adding these duties to those 
 that were now specifically devolved on the Lieut 
 Governor. He would not allow these officers tt 
 hold any office under the general Government or 
 that of any other State, but could see no objection 
 to their discharging the trusts heretofore im- 
 posed upon them by the Jaw* of the State. As 
 to the fear that the institutions with which he 
 was connected would be sure to get a large 
 appropriation of the public monies, il was entire- 
 ly groundless. Ihe appropriations that had 
 been heretofore made to institutions of learning 
 and public charities* he hoped no gentleman here 
 would say that he was opposed to. Adopting th 
 principle advocated here by some gentlemen, anc 
 the Deaf and Dumb Asylum, the Lunatic Asylum, 
 would long ago, have all gone by the board. These 
 appropriations in his opinion were all right 
 every one of them, and he would not here 01 
 elsewhere attempt to prevent the Legislature 
 from making them for such beneficent purposes 
 There was no danger of their giving too much. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN agreed with the gentleman 
 from Kings (Mr. SWACKHAMER) that it was ex 
 ceedingly desirable to keep thes* h,igh executive 
 officers from being officers in private charities or 
 incorporations, that were likely to come to the 
 legislature for favors. Andii the gentleman would 
 shape his amendment so as to secure directly that 
 end he would feel great pleasure in giving his vote 
 for it. But the course he takes on this occasion 
 in his (Mr. H.) opinion was directly against the 
 duty of the Convention. If the charities were prop- 
 erly public charities under public management 
 
 t it were right to have them to endow them 
 >y the State then he asked, where could there 
 be constituted a better officer than the governor 
 >f the Siate, to act as one of ihe givers ot them 
 hat he may be in a situation to know what they 
 cost,and what they did by way of good, and that 
 
 may present their situation before the country 
 precisely, in his annual message. But in relation 
 o Colleges, Academies, and all these matters of 
 private charities, under private and local govern 
 merit, the rule was directly the reverse. He ough- 
 not to be participator in their local government 
 and eome here by message and recommend iul 
 vors to them. But if the charity was one 
 proper for State care, then he submitted the gov- 
 ernor and lieutenant governor, were the persons 
 to be made governors of them ex-officio !o guard 
 and care for ihe interests of the people. To adopt 
 this amendment would be to strike at these, and 
 leave untouched the very class of private eorpo 
 rations it was desirable to have excluded. He 
 would advise the utmost caution in this particular. 
 He had no objection to the governor serving the 
 State in all cases where' it was right and proper 
 that he should. He did not see but that he would 
 make as good an executive officer as any other, 
 and he wished that the legislature might be able 
 to employ him for such purposes. While on this 
 subject, he would be allowed to say a wojd that 
 might extend this debate. You have State Prisons 
 and probably will continue to have them. In his- 
 popr opinion, experience would compel you in the 
 end to make your governor the governor of the 
 State Prison, and to confer upon him the appoint- 
 ing power, and make him responsible for every 
 thing done, arid omitted in reference to them. lie 
 believed that this would be your condition even- 
 tuallyand that some man answerable to the 
 whole State, and chosen by the whole State, will 
 be obliged to stand personally responsible for the 
 performance of the whole administration of the 
 State Government in the State Prison. And he 
 hoped therefore that the Constitution might not be 
 got in such a position as to deprive you of his ser- 
 vices. If you did, you would- under what appear- 
 ed to him to be the inevitable result, be obliged 
 to elect as-other governor, responsible tothe whole 
 people to receive another salary and to divide 
 the duties with the one we already have to take 
 charge of the State Prisons as an especial matter of 
 administration. He (Mr. W.) would exclude him 
 from being an officer in all local charities, who 
 came here for favoys, but he would also be care- 
 ful to keep him as a servant to do the will of the 
 people who elect him, in the discharge of those 
 duties where an administrative officer was re- 
 quired ; and which he could discharge better than 
 any other officer that could be selected, and which 
 would save a vast expense. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY concurred in the views of the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, and in order to meet 
 his suggestions, would propose the following a- 
 mendment, to be added to Mr. JORDAN'S, and in, 
 lieu of the one offered by his colleague : 
 
 " Nor shall they be appointed by virtue of their office 
 or otherwise, to sny place in any corporation or in any in- 
 stitution of a local or private character." 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER withdrew his amend- 
 ment 'all he wanted to secure was the principle. 
 
 Mr. MURPH-Y said there wece tw& kinds of of- 
 
319 
 
 fices which the Governor was allowed to hold, 
 which did not strictly apply to his gubernatorial 
 duties. Those in relation to public boards and 
 institutions, it was proper perhaps to retain. But 
 when he was placed in such private corporations 
 as the Sailors' Snug Harbor, or Union College, or 
 any other local body, then it was making him in 
 some measure a partial officer, and although he 
 might not exert a positive, yet he might exert a ne- 
 gative influence in favor of* such institution, to 
 the detriment of others. To this he was opposed, 
 and he would prevent it by the constitution and 
 the laws. This would be attained by the adop- 
 tion of his amendment, and which would also per- 
 fect the amendment of the gentleman from Co- 
 lumbia. After this last shall have been done, it 
 would then be a question to determine whether 
 we should or not have any restriction on the sub- 
 ject. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES preferred that the Governor, 
 instead of being excluded from being trustee of 
 any college, should be a trustee of all. This 
 would do away with any suspicion of unfairness 
 or partiality, and would make him feel an inter- 
 est in all our literary institutions. The arguments 
 of the gentlemen from Kings and Genesee, if they 
 proved anything, proved that something that was 
 already engrafted in our present Constitution 
 should be stricken out It was objected that the 
 Governor, if a trustee of a college, would become 
 fully acquainted with it, and would therefore re- 
 commend it to the attention of the Legislature. 
 This argument would go to show that the Gover- 
 nor should be kept in total ignorance of every 
 thing that was passing. A section had been 
 already adopted requiring the Governor to recom- 
 mend annually what he considered for the wel- 
 fare of the State. Now, Union College and the 
 other institutions were portions of the State. And 
 yet gentlemen would, for fear he should be biased, 
 have him in utter ignorance of this and every 
 other matter, until the bill should be presented 
 for his signature. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that if he understood the 
 argument of the gentleman from Onnondaga (Mr. 
 RHOADES) it was this. That the governor could 
 not understand anything as to the wants and wish- 
 es of these institutions unless he was an officer of 
 them. If that proved anything it was this after 
 jail, that these institutions were but secret socie- 
 ties whose objects were not known to the public. 
 He should never vote for a Governor unless he 
 knew enough of these institutions without being 
 a trustee. The gentleman says he would make 
 the Governor a trustee of all the academies. Why 
 not go farther, if that was the doctrine, and make 
 him a trustee of every school district of the State ? 
 Then his argument would hold good. The holding 
 up of the idea that these colleges nd academies 
 should receive the special care of the government 
 and that nothing should be done for common 
 school was behind the intelligence of the age. 
 But the common schools wanted no such trustee, 
 they could take care of themselves. No one had 
 ever heard the trustee of a school district coming 
 down here and lobbying all winter, receiving too 
 a salary of $1500 per annum from the people's 
 money and applying for more funds. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said the gentleman misinter- 
 preted or misrepresented his argument. He did 
 
 not undertake to intimate that these colleges were 
 secret institutions, and therefore needed to be 
 looked to by the Executive 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND: I said that your arguments 
 seemed to carry that impression. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that they did not seem or 
 intend to carry that impression. All he said was, 
 that in order that the Governor might recommend 
 such measures as were calculated to promote the 
 interests of the Stale, he would have him under- 
 stand (he interests of the State connected with 
 education, as well as every other. It was absurd 
 to suppose that the Governor should be a trustee 
 of all the school districts in the State. Mr. R. said 
 that to De Witt Clinton, and the course, as laid 
 down by him, pursued by subsequent Governors, 
 the common schools were indebted foi much of 
 their prosperity. He was desirous that these 
 schools should receive the attention which they 
 deserved, and such favors of legislation as they 
 were entitled to. Nor was he desirous ot allow- 
 ing the colleges and academies to overshadow 
 these humble institutions 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was replying to Mr. R. when 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS rose, and said that he must ! 
 allowed to ask whether this debate was in order. 
 If the whole merits of the Common School sys- 
 tem was to be discussed, the debate would never 
 terminate. 
 
 The CHAIR said that as the debate had al- 
 ready taken a wide latitude, he would not feel 
 bound to arrest it now. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND continued in contending that 
 the Common Schools had not received thes->me 
 advantages as had the highfer institutions, but 
 rather had been treated disadvantageous^. 
 
 The question being taken on Mr. MURPHY'S 
 amendment it was adopted, 47 to 42. 
 
 Mr. ,V. TAYLOR moved to add after the word 
 "State," the words "except such that are other- 
 wise provided for in the Constitution." Agreed 
 to. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES oflered the following further 
 amendment : 
 
 Nothing in this section contained, shall prevent the 
 Governor from taking command of the troops of the U. S. 
 in time of war, or case of invasion or insurrection, under 
 a commission from the United States or otherwise. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that if he stood alone he 
 must say a word on the adoption of this amend- 
 ment. It would, if adopted, exclude the adop- 
 tion of the other principle that the powers of our 
 State officers could be extended to such ser- 
 vices as the General Government might consti- 
 tutionally require of them. Of this character 
 were the execution of the naturalization laws of 
 Congress the pilot laws, and many others of a 
 similar character He could see no evil that had 
 or would result irom it, and the courts and offi- 
 cers could only exercise those duties only by vir- 
 tue of an appointment from the General Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR : How do they now do it as 
 officers of the general government of the State? 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that th'^y did it as commis- 
 sioners of the United States the same as every 
 inferior officer acted under his superior. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR : But not by appointment. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS: Yes, by appointment. He took 
 it for granted that when the Executive carried out 
 an act of Congress, be did it by authority of the 
 
320 
 
 federal government. Under this section he ap- 
 prehended the governor could not even give a no- 
 tice that might be required by Congress 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that if (he services ot a man 
 who was governor of the Slate became so very 
 essential to the general government, wnv it would 
 be very easy for him to resign, and a man could 
 be elected to take his place. The Constitution 
 does not force him to accept either 
 
 Mr. DANA had looked over the Constitutions of 
 some of the other States, and found that this pro- 
 position was not peculiar, or a new one. Just as 
 stringent, and in several instances much more 
 stringent provisions of the kind were found in 
 the Constitution of other States. Mr. D. quoted 
 from the Constitutions of Ohio, Vermont, Louisi- 
 ana, Alabama, and Arkansas to show this. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH wished to enquire whether 
 it was in order to move a reconsideration of the 
 vote by which the amendment of Mr. MURPHY 
 was adopted. He had voted to strike out the sec- 
 tion reported by the committee, for the purpose 
 of securing the amendment of Mr. JORDAN'S, 
 which he considered embarrassed by that of Mr. 
 M.'s. 
 
 The CHAIR said the motion was in order when 
 the one pending was decided. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. RUGGLES was adopted, 
 ayes 49, nays not counted. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH then made his motion for a 
 reconsideration. He would prefer to have the 
 motion laid on the table for to-day. 
 
 The CHAIR said that could not be done in com- 
 mittee. The gentlr man could as well however, 
 move the reconsideration to-morrow as to-day. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH, at the suggestion of those 
 around him, was willing to take the question 
 now. 
 
 Mr. BAKER enquired how the gentleman 
 voted. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH was not aware that there 
 was any rule on that subject. 
 
 The Chair said that in the absence of any rule 
 on the subject, the ordinary parliamentary rule 
 governed. That required" a gentleman to have 
 voted with the majority, in order to move a re- 
 consideration. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH had voted with the minority. 
 
 Mr. E, SPENCER. I voted with the majority 
 and I move a reconsideration. 
 
 The committee refused to reconsider. Ayes 
 33, nays 49. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER thought the section as it now 
 stood was too unwieldy, and would therefore offer 
 the following as a substitute : 
 
 "Neither the Governor or LieutenantGovernor shall hold 
 any office under any other Government, except a military 
 command under the United States In time of war, or in 
 case of invasion or insurrection ;nor any office or place in 
 any corporation or institution of a local or private charac- 
 ter : and the acceptance by either of any office hereby 
 prohibited to them, shall vacate the office of Governor or 
 Lieut. Governor, so held by him." 
 
 Mr. JORDAN, understanding that this merely 
 corrected the phraseology of his amendment as 
 amended was willing to adopt it. 
 
 The amendment was adopted after some con- 
 versation between Messrs. LOOMIS, BERGEN, 
 and JONES, as to whether the section should not 
 be incorporated elsewhere ayes 52, nays 29. 
 
 The 10th section was then read, as follows : 
 
 10. The governor may in his discretion deliver over tc 
 ustice any person found in he state, who shall be charged 
 with having committed, without the jurisdiction of the 
 United States, any crime except treason, which by the 
 laws of this state, it committed therein, is punishable by 
 death, or by imprisonment in the state prison. Such deii- 
 very can only be made on the requisition of the duly au- 
 thorized minister or officers of the government within the 
 urisdiction of which the crime shall be charged to have 
 :>een committed ; and upon such evidence of the guilt of 
 the person so charged as would be necessary to justify his 
 apprehension and commitment for trial, had the crime 
 charged been committed in this state. 
 
 Mr. WARD did not know that it was the In- 
 tention of the chairman to press the amendment 
 " which authorizes the Governor to deliver over 
 to justice, on the requisition of the duly author- 
 ized minister or officer, any person found in the 
 State, who shall be charged with having commit- 
 ted without the jurisdiction of the U. S., any 
 crime except treason, which by the laws of this 
 State, if committed therein, is punished by death, 
 or by imprisonment in that State." It was a pro- 
 position to place an entirely new feature in the 
 Constitution, and one in his impression repug- 
 nant to the Constitution of the United States. 
 The Constitution confers upon the President, in 
 article 2, 2d section, these powers : 
 
 " The President shall have power, by and with the advite 
 and consent of the. Senate, to make treaties, provided two- 
 thirds of the Senate concur : and he shall nominate by and 
 and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall ap- 
 point ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls, 
 Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the 
 United States whose appointments are not herein other- 
 wise provided for, and which shall be established by law. 
 But the Congre&s may by law vest the appointment of 
 such inferior officers as they think proper, in the Presi- 
 dent alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of depart- 
 ments." 
 
 Now, the power was, in his opinion, conferred 
 upon the Executive of the United States. Not 
 only that, but the Constitution went further and 
 prohibited the States from exercising this power. 
 He would read from article 1st, section 10 : 
 
 " No State shall, without the consent of Congress, levy 
 any imposts or duties on imports or exports, except what 
 may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection 
 law; and the nett produce of all duties and imposts laid by 
 any State on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the 
 Treasury of the United States: and all such laws shall be 
 subject to the revision and control of Congress. No State 
 shall, without the consent of Congress, levy any duty or 
 tonnage; keep troops or ships of war in time of peace; e'nter 
 into any agreement or compact with any other State, or 
 with a foreign power; or engage in a war, unless actually 
 existing or in such imminent clanger as will not admit of 
 delay." 
 
 He did not believe that the honorable gentleman 
 at the head of the committee, intended strictly to 
 pursue this question. He (Mr. W.) confessed 
 that he might be altogether deceived in the view 
 he had of it, but his own examination and the views 
 on the question so clearly presented, by the gen- 
 tleman from Oneida, (Mr. KIRKLAND) the other 
 day,had satisfied his mind on the point. He, (Mr. 
 W.) did not intend to discuss this point at length, 
 all he desired was to present his views, leaving 
 others to express theirs, if they pleased. Mr. W. 
 then referred to the case of Holmes against the 
 governor of Vermont, where, a person named 
 Holmes had committed the crime of murder in Ca- 
 nada, and was arrested in the State of Vermont 
 by a warrant from the Governor of that State, for 
 the purpose of delivery to the Government of Ca- 
 nada. He obtained a writ of Habeas Corpus, and 
 the Supreme Court of Vermont refused to dis- 
 
321 
 
 charge him. He then brought a writ of error on that 
 decision to the Supreme Court of the U. S. A 
 preliminary question was made as to the right of 
 a party to bring a writ of error in such a case 
 on this formal question the court was equally di- 
 vided, but the majority of the court were clearly 
 of the opinion that the Governor of Vermont had 
 no authority to deliver up Holmes,on the ground 
 that that power had been conferred by the Consti- 
 tution of the U. S. in the President alone. The 
 case was argued by that court with much ability, 
 and the opinion of the court was read by Chief 
 Justice Taney, upon their decision being made. 
 If that was sound law then it seemed to him that 
 this proposition ought not to be adopted, as not 
 only repugnant to, but in violation of the Consti- 
 tution of the United States. When the States 
 met together by delegates at Philadelphia, for the 
 purpose of forming a Constitution they agreed 
 to abide by that instrument, and presented it to 
 the States with their names signed to it. After 
 that, conventions were held in the States, and 
 these passed on it, and confirmed the acts of their 
 delegates. It therefore seemed to him unwise 
 to introduce such a provision at this time. It 
 would be better to let it remain as did the first 
 Constitution of '77, and the last one of '21. It 
 was the first time within his recollection that 
 an attempt had been made to place such a feature 
 in any one of our Constitutions. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that this provision was taken 
 from the existing laws of the State, and not in- 
 vented by committee No. 5. He would refer gen- 
 tleman to the third edition of R. S. vol. 1 page 170 
 sec. 8 : Now one of two things was true that law 
 should not be retained on the statute book, or it 
 should be placed in the Constitution, because it 
 was too high a power to be left a mere statute. 
 If it was right that it should exist, it should be in- 
 corporated into the Constitution. It was upon 
 this view therefore that it was introduced here, 
 to test the judgment of the Convention as to whe- 
 ther it was or not the law_of the land, and if not, 
 that it should go forth and be stricken from our sta- 
 tutes. Now the principle that a governor should 
 possess the power to deliver up depredators, on 
 individual right, to the laws from which they 
 fled, for punishment, was established and ac- 
 knowledged by all civilized governments The 
 United States had by the treaty of Washington 
 and subsequently by a treaty with France, enter- 
 ed into precisely this arrangement that England 
 and France may demand of us individuals who had, 
 within their territories, committed an offence 
 against individual rights and violated their laws 
 and our government gives them up. They have 
 conceded to us by this compact the same right to 
 demand of them individuals who have violated 
 our laws. But there were other governments of 
 Europe with whom no treaty ot the kind had 
 been made. As regards England and France, 
 the State of New York would have a right to 
 call upon the Executive of the Union to com- 
 ply with the demand made, but not so in re- 
 lation to all governments from which criminals 
 might come. And the question was whether, 
 where a treaty was not made between the general 
 government and other governments, the States 
 were not authorised to protect themselves ? In 
 giving up criminals to justice, we did not do it 
 
 for the purpose so much of vindicating the laws 
 of other countries, as to protect ourselves against 
 the example and education transmitted to this 
 country by the individuals who come. He was 
 perfectly satisfied with the decision of the com- 
 mittee, whether they struck out the whole sec- 
 tion or not. It was put in to call public atten- 
 tion to it. If it was in violation of the constitu- 
 tion of the United States, he was willing that it 
 should be stricken out,and if it was, public atten- 
 tion should be called*to the fact, and the law no 
 longer disgrace the statute book. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that this section gave the 
 power absolutely to the Governor of the State, in 
 his discretion, to deliver up fugitives when pro- 
 perly demanded by other governments. He arose 
 now to call the attention of the committee to the 
 fact that this was not an unsettled question, but 
 one which had been settled by the highest judi- 
 cature in the land, to the decisions of which we 
 are all bound to bow. Mr. K. here referred to 
 the case of Holmes vs. Jennison, in the Supreme 
 Court of the United States, the circumstances of 
 which were cited by Mr. WARD. It ought to be 
 remarked, said Mr. K., that in consequence of a 
 formal question as to whether a writ of error 
 could be brought from the State courts to the Su- 
 preme Court, that the Court was divided, and 
 that therefore no judgment in point of form was 
 rendered, but it was, a decision in point of fact. 
 Chief Justice Taney says : " The general govern- 
 ment possesses the power in question, and it re- 
 mains to inquire whether it has been surrendered 
 by the States. We think it has, and on two 
 grounds. 1. According to the express word of 
 the Constitution, it is one of the powers that the 
 States are forbidden to exercise. 2. It is incom- 
 patible and inconsistent with the powers confer- 
 red on the federal government." Again : " Such 
 being the policy of the general government, the 
 possession of this power by the State is totally 
 contradictory and repugnant to the authority con- 
 ferred on the federal government." Again : * On 
 the whole, on the most mature and careful deli- 
 beration, we are of opinion that the power to sur- 
 render fugitives who having committed offences 
 in a foreign country, have fled to this for shelter, 
 belongs under the Constitution of the United 
 States, exclusively to the federal government, and 
 that the authority exercised in this instance by 
 the Governor of Vermont, is repugnant to the 
 Constitution of the United States." Therefore, 
 although no final judgment was rendered in the 
 case, Mr.K.considered the question, to be authori- 
 atively decided by the highest tribunal in the land, 
 and a decision of that court as all were aware was 
 definitive in matters of this kind. In his opinion 
 therefore the section ought not to be inserted in 
 the State Constitution. It was a matter left to the 
 genera] government. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE thought that the clause 
 was right and proper to stand in the statute book, 
 and yet that it ought not to be incorporated into 
 the constitution. His proposition was this. 
 That by treaty arrangements the general govern- 
 ment was bound to give up these persons charged 
 with crimes and fleeing from another country. 
 If its officers should come here and make the ar- 
 rests, open collisions of course would arise. 
 With great propriety therefore, was this clause 
 
322 
 
 in the statutes providing that the Governor should 
 in his discretion deliver over to justice as the 
 general government might demand. It presented 
 merely a matter of form and consistent course of 
 conduct to be pursued. But to provide in the 
 6onstitution that the Governor should have this 
 power co-ordinate with the general government 
 was what the constitution of the U. S. prohibited, 
 as decided by the Supreme Court of the U. S. 
 He would therefore strike it out and leave the 
 matter where it now was. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that the surrendering by 
 one Government to another of persons charged 
 with crimes, was always a matter of treaty of na- 
 tional comity, and had never been considered as 
 international law. This section, then might ma- 
 terially conflict with what might be the settled 
 policy of the country in certain emergencies. 
 Take for instance Mexico, between whom and the 
 U. States all the relations of national comity were 
 at an end. Should the Mexican government de- 
 mand from the government of this State a person 
 charged with a crime, adopt this provision, and 
 the governor would be warranted in giving 
 hira up, while at the same time there could be 
 no reciprocity on the part of Mexico. This was 
 a part of the treaty making power in all civilized 
 nations, and inasmuch as we had surrendered that 
 power to the federal government, was it right or 
 prudent to leave this matter at the discretion of 
 the governor. A state of things might exist 
 between the United States and another govern- 
 ment, where it would be entirely against the 
 policy of the government that this power should 
 be exercised at all. He was opposed therefore to 
 leaving it to the governor to act at his own 
 discretion, in what may tend to this conflict of 
 policy. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was not so clear as to the pro- 
 priety of striking out this section. He would 
 amend the section so as to require the Governor 
 to deliver over criminals to the President of the 
 U. S. and the General Government on his requisi- 
 tion. He would do it because he was satisfied 
 that no gentleman would vote for the section as 
 it stood, not merely because it was an attempt to 
 interfere with the functions of the General Gov- 
 ernment, but from the further reason as laid 
 down by Mr. Jefferson's letter,that if the Governor 
 had the power, he could not venture to exercise it 
 without becoming in a degree, accessory to the 
 criminal laws of all nations, whether we ap- 
 proved of them or not. We could not. do it any 
 more than the Sublime Porte, who when 
 the Spanish Government sent to Constantinople 
 for the delivery of the political refugees after the 
 insurrection of 1821, replied through the Reis 
 Effendi, that they did not believe in such offen- 
 ces that it was contrary to the faith of the 
 prophet to surrender up to any Christian nation, 
 a political refugee who had fled to them, for 
 a sanctuary. But he was unwilling to say that 
 the Governor should not be made use of in the 
 case of a requisition from the National Govern- 
 ment. It was only carrying out his notion of 
 allowing the State Government to be a little aux- 
 iliary instead of being an alien or enemy, to the 
 General Government. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : Let us leave it to the Legis- 
 lature. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS, upon reflection, had no objec- 
 tion. Perhaps it was better to leave it with the 
 Legislature ; and he would withdraw his amend- 
 ment. 
 
 The question being taken, the section was 
 stricken out. 
 
 The llth section was then read, as follows : 
 
 11. Every provision in the constitution and laws In rej 
 lationto the powers and duties of the governor, and in re- 
 lation to acts and duties to be performed by other officers 
 or persons towards him, shall be construed to extend to 
 the person administering lor the time being the govern- 
 ment of this state. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out this sec- 
 tion, inasmuch as by a slight verbal alteration of 
 the 6th section, the same object would be attain- 
 ed. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued, as to whether 
 the 6th section could be taken up which was 
 objected to, as being unnecessary when the 
 question was taken on Mr. CROOKER'S motion, 
 and the section stricken out. 
 
 The 12th section was then read, as follows : 
 
 12. The governor may, upon the application of the 
 sheriff of any county in the state, order such a military 
 force from any other county or counties of the state, as 
 may be necessary to enable such sheriffto execute process 
 delivered to him. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to rise and report pro- 
 gress, as he was satisfied that this section would 
 give rise to a long discussion. 
 
 The motion was rejected. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to strike out this section 
 also, as the Governor had power enough now. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS explained the reasons for putting 
 this section in. As matters now stand the gover- 
 nor had not the power to send a military force 
 into a county until its whole power in the ser- 
 vice of civil process . was exhausted. It was to 
 avoid conflicts between neighbors in this matter 
 of serving civil process. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER was in favor of striking out the 
 section. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : We are all in favor of it. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER would not then make any re- 
 marks. They had had enough of calling out 
 troops in his (Cattaraugus) county. They had 
 there subjected the county to the expense of call- 
 ing out two or three thousand men, to serve pro- 
 cess on one man who was bed-ridden. 
 
 The question being taken the section was strick- 
 en out. 
 
 The 13th section was then read: 
 
 13. The governor may remove from office any sheriff 
 at any time within the period for which such sheriff was 
 elected. He shall first give to such sheriff a copy of the 
 charges against him, and an opportunity of being heard in 
 his defence, before any removal shall be made. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLS suggested that the section 
 should be passed by, inasmuch as there were 
 various other officers to whom this power would 
 a pply_ a nd the matter could better be arranged 
 hereafter. 
 
 Mr. STETSON believed thatone of the reports 
 made this morning, (in relation to local affairs,) 
 covered this whole ground. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS enquired by what authority that 
 committee reported on the duties and powers of 
 the Governor in this respect. This authority was 
 given to his committee, No. 5. That committee 
 did not consider that the Governor ought to ha.ve 
 
323 
 
 the power to turn out Clerks, &c. The Sheriff 
 lie Executive's officer, the representative of 
 the Governor in the several counties, and he 
 should therefore have some control over him. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY urged that the Governor 
 should have control over the Sheriff, in order to 
 secure an efficient discharge of the duties of the 
 office. 
 
 The question being taken, the committee re- 
 fused to strike out the section. 
 
 And then the committee rose and reported pro- 
 gresss. 
 
 The PRESIDENT announced a communication 
 from WILLIAM C. BOUCK, President of the New 
 York State Temperance Convention, transmitting 
 a resolution of invitation to the State Convention 
 to attend the annual meeting of that body. 
 
 On motion of Mr. TALLMADGE, it was ac- 
 cepted. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned to 9 o'clock 
 to-morrow morning. 
 
 THURSDAY, (31th day,) July 16. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. KNAPP. 
 
 Mr. BROWN offered a resolution that on and 
 after Monday next the Convention shall hold af- 
 ternoon sessions, to commence at 4 o'clock, be- 
 side the morning sessions to commence at 9 o'- 
 clock. 
 
 Mr. JONES wished this deferred for a week, 
 by which time all the reports of committees 
 would be in. 
 
 Mr. WARD moved to substitute half past 6 P. 
 M. for 4P.M. 
 
 This was lost and the resolution was adopted. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY offered the following resolu- 
 tion, which vas adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to report 
 to the Convention the respective sums borrowed and loans 
 made by virtue of section number four, and subdivisions 
 number one. two, three, four, live and six of section num- 
 ber five or the act " to provide for paying the debt and 
 preserving the credit of the State," passed March 29th, 
 1342, and to what purposes the several sums thus loaned 
 have respectively been applied. Also, the several sums 
 invested in certain specific funds of the State, authorized 
 by sections numbered eight, nine and ten respectively, 
 and the amount paid into the treasury as avails of the di- 
 rect tax authorized by section number one of said act. 
 And to what purpose or purposes such funds have been 
 applied. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES complained that gentlemen who 
 were invited inside the bar, took the member's 
 seats away. And he offered a resolution to the 
 effect that the rule authorizing members to invite 
 citizens within the bar, did not authorize such 
 persons to occupy the seats of members. 
 
 Mi-. FORSYTE wanted to know what they 
 were to do with their friends when they got them 
 inside the bar, unless they were to give them 
 seats. This was a most extraordinary resolution. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that no member had a 
 ri^ r ht to give away his seat ; he might as well 
 give away h;s dinner to his friend, because he has 
 no dinner himself. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMMER moved to lay the reso- 
 lution on the table. Lost. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that these abuses of per- 
 sons coming inside and taking seats, were at 
 times very great; it was particularly the case 
 when the Albany and Troy bridge business was 
 before the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER ottered a resolution that no per- 
 son should be admitted inside the bar, but nitm- 
 bers, reporters and officers. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that members them- 
 selves were to blame for most of the noise and 
 confusion that took place ; the people behavtd 
 very well ; the members made all the noise. 
 
 Mr. FOKSYTH said that there were several 
 seats in his neighborhood, and elsewhere that had 
 not been occupied during the entire session ; 
 these they could offer to their friends. It' they 
 asked a friend inside under the rule,. and then 
 could not present him a chair for him to sit down, 
 it would be like asking a man home to dinner, 
 and giving him nothing to eat. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS said that sometimes for half a 
 day they would hear nothing around him, on ac- 
 count of the noise from conversation. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS from the select committee as to 
 the order of business, reported that the subjects 
 be considered in the following order: 
 
 1. Executive Department. 
 
 2. Election, apportionment, pay, &c., of the Legislature. 
 
 3. Incorporation, other than banking and municipal. 
 
 4. Currency and banking. 
 
 5. Canals, internal improvements, public debt, &c. 
 
 6. The judiciary, 
 
 7 Powers and duties of the Legislature. 
 
 8. Appointment or election of local officers. 
 
 9. Election or appointment of officers whose powers are 
 not local. 
 
 10. Powers of counties, towns, &c., except cities and in- 
 corporated villages. 
 
 11. Organization and powers of cities and incorporated 
 villages, &c. 
 
 12. The elective franchise. 
 
 13. Education, common schools, &c. 
 
 14. Creation and division of estates in land. 
 
 15. Official oaths and affirmations. 
 
 16. The militia and military affairs. 
 
 17. Rights and privileges of citizens. 
 
 18. Future amendments. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD stated that he did not 
 approve of the order; there were two subjects, 
 the Elective Franchise and Human Rights that 
 ought to be considered before any other; they 
 ought to be as high as Nos. 3 or 4. The subject 
 of the "Rights and Privileges" was generally put 
 first in all constitutions; it is not so in our own, 
 but it ought to be. 
 
 On motion of Mr. KIRKLAND, the report was 
 laid on the table and ordered printed. 
 
 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 
 
 The committee of the whole, Mr. CHATFIELD 
 in the chair, took up the report on this subject. 
 
 The 13th section was under consideration. 
 
 (} 13. The Governor may remove from office any sheriff 
 at any time within the period for which such Sheriff was 
 elected. He shall first give to such sheriff a copy of the 
 charges against him and an opportunity of being heard in 
 his defence, before any removal shall be made. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to insert afier the word 
 "elected" the words "lor inal-feasance or non- 
 feasance of office." He did not wish a Sheriff to 
 be removed by a Governor for any little peccadil- 
 los, that afflicted morality, &c. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said the clause was in the very 
 words of the present Constitution, and their adop. 
 tion had been justified by past practice. The 
 Governor under this had removed many sheriffs, 
 but none for any peccadillos, he believed. 
 
 Mr CROOKER: No. But I do not want him 
 to have the power to do so, over so many 
 
3:24 
 
 He may now remove one for mere assault and bat- 
 tery. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : Suppose he is convicted of an 
 infamous crime ? 
 
 Mr. CROOKER: Well, then, remove him. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that this section had 
 stood through two Constitutions, and he hoped it 
 would be adopted again. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER'S amendment was rejected. 
 
 The 14th section was then read as follows : 
 
 14 Every bill which shall have passed the Senate and 
 Assembly, shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to 
 the Governor: if he approve, he shall sign it; but if not, he 
 shall return it with his objections to that House in which 
 it shall have originated, who shall enter his objections at 
 large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If, 
 after such reconsideration, two-thirds of the members pre- 
 sent shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together 
 with the objections, to the other House, by which it shall 
 likewise be reconsidered; arid if approved by two-thirds 
 of the members present, it shall become a law. If not ap- 
 proved by two-thirds of the members present, and if, at 
 the next ensuing session of the legislature, the same bill 
 shall be again passed by the vote of the majority ol all the 
 members elected in each branch of the legislature, such 
 bill shall become a law notwithstanding the objections of 
 the Governor; and upon the final passage of every bill, the 
 votes of both houses shall be determined by yeas and 
 nays, and the names of the members voting for and against 
 the bill shall be entered on the journal of each House re- 
 spectively. II any bill shall not be returned within ten 
 days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been present- 
 ed to him, the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he 
 had signed it, unless the legislature shall by their adjourn- 
 ment prevent its return; in which case it shall not be a 
 law, unless the Governor shall approve the same within 
 ten days after the adjournment. The omission of the Go- 
 vernor in such case to approve of a bill within ten days 
 after the adjournment shall have the same effect as if such 
 bill had been returned to the legislature with his objec- 
 tions. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to insert after the word 
 *' bill" in the first line, the words, " order or re- 
 solution, except for a resolution for an adjourn- 
 ment." 
 
 CHAIR: The Governor does not sign all joint 
 resolutions. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL deprecated the practice of voting 
 away money, books, &c., by the concurrent reso- 
 lutions of the two houses of the Legislature. Noth- 
 ing of the kind should be done without the assent 
 of the Executive power ; this ought always to be 
 required to these concurrent resolutions ; as much 
 so as to any other matter that was passed by the 
 Legislature. This was now a provision of the 
 constitution of the United States. 
 
 Mr. JONES said there were many concurrent 
 resolutions, which ought not to receive the ac- 
 tion of the Governor. He instanced the case of 
 instructions to Senators in Congress. Where they 
 had the effect and force of law, they ought to be 
 signed by the Governor. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL would modify his amendment so 
 as to apply only to such resolutions as had the 
 force of a law. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON wished to know what kind 
 of resolutions the gentleman from New York 
 wanted this to apply to. Now, there was often a 
 concurrent resolution to supply stationery, &c. ; 
 he had never "known an instance yet of the passage 
 of a joint resolution to appropriate money ; that 
 required a law. Joint resolutions, such as he 
 had mentioned, needed not the Governor's signa- 
 ture. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that under these joint re- 
 solutions, untold thousands had been voted away 
 
 in Congress. And there was nothing now to pre- 
 vent, our legislature from voting away any amount 
 of money by concurrent resolution. True, the 
 spirit of the constitution says it shall not be so ; 
 but that instrument does not say so in terms. 
 And under this, the Comptroller has been known 
 to neglect to enforce a law, and released a large 
 debt of the State. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that these resolutions were 
 very often drawn too loosely. He would have 
 this section so drawn that no money or public 
 property should be appropriated without authori- 
 ty of law, under no contingency whatever. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL modified his amendment as fol- 
 lows : " Order or resolution having the force of 
 law, to which the concurrence of both Houses 
 may be necessary, except a resolution for ad- 
 journment." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he would say a few 
 words, by way of explanation which would enable 
 the committee to view this point in a somewhat 
 clearer light ; this matter arose under different 
 governments in whose legislative bodies there 
 was ordinarily some rule which required that a 
 bill should not be originated or passed during the 
 last days of the session. The technical term used 
 was " bill." Now it did sometimes happen that in 
 those last days of asession, it sometimes becomes 
 necessary that there should be an appropriation of 
 money ; and thus when a bill cannot be origina- 
 ted (under the rules) for the purpose of making 
 such an appropriation the majority in favor of it, 
 instead of asking the unanimous consent to dp 
 so, effect this object by the passage of a joint re- 
 solution. Now it has often been supposed (how 
 correctly, he did not say) that such a joint reso- 
 lution, signed by the executive, had precisely the 
 same effect as a law. Now these joint resolutions 
 are resorted to in order to supply any omission, 
 arid to prevent any mischief arising from what 
 may have escaped observation during the previ- 
 ous days of the session. It is in this way that the 
 two houses of this legislature have been able not- 
 withstanding the rule against bringing in bills, 
 during the last days of a session, to make partic- 
 ular and sometimes even large appropriations. 
 And he would submit to the committee whether, 
 whenever a joint resolution is to have the same 
 effect as a law, is to vote away public money, or 
 to dispose of public property it ought not to 
 have the signature of the executive the same as 
 a bill ? And he was firmly convinced that reso- 
 lutions having these objects, ought to come with- 
 in the rule, and we ought to ask to have the Con- 
 stitution say so in terms. Why he very well 
 recollected, and others must recollect, a few 
 years since, that a Railroad was advertised for 
 sale by the Comptroller, because the Company 
 did not pay its two per cent interest on a loan to 
 the Sinking Fund. Well, the agents of this rail- 
 road came on to this city, and asked the Legisla- 
 ture for relief, under the circumstances ; now, a 
 law for this purpose would have required a two- 
 third vote; so, it was in vain to attempt it in that 
 way ; but & joint resolution to effect the object 
 was passed, and the.railroad remained unsold. 
 And this resolution, in fact, had the effect of sus- 
 pending the execution of a law of the State. 
 Now, he disliked this mode of whipping around 
 the constitution ; this illegal mode of suspending 
 
325 
 
 the operation of laws, and of riding over them 
 at random for interested purposes. He would 
 insist that wherever a resolution is to become in 
 effect a law, wherever a resolution is to have the 
 force of executing a law, or wherever it is to have 
 the force of suspending the operation of a law, it 
 should have the signature of the Executive ; and 
 if a resolution of any such a character, which is 
 to have the effect of suspending the operation or 
 the execution of an act of the Legislature, can be 
 passed by the two houses, and put in force with- 
 out the signature of the Executive, then this is 
 no longer a government of law. And he did in- 
 sist that whenever a resolution is to have the ef- 
 fect of a law affirmatively, or to have the effect of 
 a law by suspending the execution of an act of 
 the Legislature, then we ought to have it so sta- 
 ted in terms in the Constitution, that all such re- 
 solutions must be signed by the Executive, and 
 we ought to make it imperative on the Executive 
 and Legislature to do this ; so that the Executive 
 on all these important matters can speak directly 
 to the people. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that the difficulty which his 
 colleaguge (Mr. NICOLL) had complained of and 
 desired to obviate, and which the gentleman from 
 Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) had just presented so 
 strongly to the committee, was one that certainly 
 ought to be provided for in some way ; but he 
 asked those two gentleman to reflect for a moment 
 upon one result which would be produced by his 
 colleague's amendment. He (Mr. M.) admitted 
 that no authority should ever be given to a legis- 
 lature to pass that by a resolution which is to have 
 the effect of a law. Now the gentleman from 
 Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) had told them that 
 though it requires a two third vote, for instance, 
 to create a corporation, a legislature might evade 
 and create by resolution. But will the learned 
 gentleman from Herkimer contend, and I am sure 
 he will not, sir ? [Mr. HOFFMAN. You do not 
 know yet.] I am sure he will not sir. That 
 this can be done ? And yet the argument 
 might be used if they put this amendment into 
 the clause in the veto power, it would be con- 
 strued as giving power to create a corporation by 
 resolution. Now Mr. M. contended that no law 
 could be created except by bill. He was sure 
 that under the old act a two-third vote was neces- 
 sary for the creation of a corporation ; and could 
 the legislature now create a corporation by resolu- 
 tion ? Certainly not, sir ; certainly not. In every 
 instance of the Constitution speaking of the 
 legislature it speaks of a bill ; wherever 
 tneir act was 10 have the foice ot law, 
 it was always by bills; and all bills rMist be sub. 
 mitted to the Governor for his approval, or for 
 him to assign reasons for his disapproval. He re. 
 peated then, that if this amendment of his col- 
 league was made, it would be construed to au- 
 thorize the doing that by resolution which should 
 only be done by law, arid that should never be 
 permitted. The gentleman trom Herkimer (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN) says that this mode has been resort- 
 ed to by the Legislature in order to get rid of one 
 of their own rulea. Now they ought never to be 
 allowed to do this?. We should never allow them 
 by these careless random resolutions to pass laws 
 should never permit that to be done in a careless, 
 loose way, which required deliberation and care. 
 
 He was opposed therefore to the amendment, for 
 if we adopt it, if will give the impression abroad 
 that the Legislature may make laws in this care- 
 less manner, without the intervention of the 
 Executive, and any thing tending to do this he 
 would never plare in the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he would a^ree nith 
 the conclusions of the gentleman from New York 
 if he could agree with his premises. If Legis- 
 lative bodies did not pass joint resolutions that 
 had the aspect ot laws if they had not already 
 passed such resolutions he might be inclined to 
 stand with that gentleman; but the only objec- 
 tion applied by the present Constitution in the 
 word "bill" has not prevented the Legislature 
 passing resolutions having these results, nor 
 did he know that they could there overthrow 
 the system by mere arguments to show that it 
 was improper. The system was entirely im. 
 proper; but still it is done; and Legislatures for 
 300 years have claimed and exercised this right 
 to make lav\s by resolutions; and it could not by 
 any argument here now be overthrown How was 
 it? Was every act to make a corporation passed 
 by a tw(,-third vote. No. He wished it was 80. 
 The Constitution had said that no such act should 
 be passed but by two-thirds, and to get rid of this 
 they had resorted to joint resolutions; shall this 
 be continued ? Shall another small loan of $70,- 
 000 at 2 per cent, sinking fund be released ? He 
 hoped not. He was not tenacious as to how the evil 
 was remedied. He was indebted to the commit- 
 tee No. 5 for bringing in their report as they had, 
 and thus bringing attention to this subject. He 
 thought the proposition of the gentleman from 
 New York would effect his purpose ; without it, 
 he believed resolutions to operate as laws de 
 facto would find their way through the Legisla- 
 ture as heretofore, during the next twenty years. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON had no objection to the in- 
 sertion of a clause to amount to a prohibition that 
 no money should be drawn from the treasury ex- 
 cept by the authority of law. But he would put 
 nothing in the Constitution that would seem to 
 tolerate the idea that money might be so drawn 
 by a mere concurrent resolution. He disapproved 
 of this altogether. He moved an amendment to 
 meet the case as follows : 
 
 " No money shall Le drawn from the treasury but by 
 authority of law." 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR thought that there ought to 
 be such a provision in our Constitution as was 
 found in the Constitution of the United States, 
 providing that^no money should be drawn from 
 the treasury except by the authority of law ; and 
 he suggested an addition to the amendment which 
 the gentleman from Chautauque had intimated he 
 should offer; if it was apprehended that money 
 might be drawn from the treasury without au- 
 thority of law, then add the words, " unless pass- 
 ed by bill in the usual manner." In such a case, 
 the amendment of the gentleman from New York 
 would be unnecessary. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said this last remedy would only 
 meet the difficulty half way ; when the legisla- 
 ture took upon themselves by joint resolution to 
 suspend the operation of a law, we should see if 
 they really possess this power ; and if they do, it 
 is of vital importance that we define a restriction, 
 in terms, in the Constitution. 
 
326 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that every step we 
 take every move we make was of vast import- 
 ance to the people; and he hoped gentlemen 
 Would stop talking and reading newspapers, and 
 attend to business. He regretted to hear of the 
 legislative usage of acting by concurrent resolution 
 in appropriating money, &c., which only should be 
 done by the consent of the governor. It was a prac- 
 tice that was not to be endured ; and he hoped an 
 amendment would be provided to prevent such 
 gross and disgusting misconduct. What ! could 
 the two houses undertake to evade the Executive 
 disapprobation ? The Executive had formerly un- 
 der the old Constitution, not only power to veto, 
 but power to prorogue the legislature in cases of 
 legislative corruption, and one instance of its ex- 
 ercise [understood to be in 1812] was based on 
 the notoriety of corruption that was common talk 
 to the disgrace of our history. Daniel D. Tomp- 
 kins, on the 13th of March, 1812, prorogued the 
 legislatures, noticing as a reason the notoriety of 
 the corruptions in passing bills at that day. If 
 they would read the papers of the day, they 
 would find that there was cause in 1821 for sweep- 
 ing away the council of revision. It had been 
 asked why the reasons had not been given ? It 
 was not proper to do so ; under the state of feel- 
 ing in 1821, it was left out. But he thought 
 however that the power of prorogation should be 
 restored, and he should hereafter move a provi- 
 sion to affect that purpose, for it was a high, 
 salutary power, of the abuse of which there was 
 no danger ; every bill that opened the treasury 
 should come under the action of the Executive, 
 and thus go through the ordeal of the three de- 
 partments of the legislature. He regretted to 
 near that a course of conduct had been pursued 
 of getting resolutions through having the force of 
 law. He would not insert the amendment; it 
 would assume the right of all the rest of powers 
 not strictly enumerated to be used. Let us have 
 none of this no party ties ; he belonged to no 
 party now; but he saw the wisdom of caution, 
 arid of checks to restrain party action. Let us 
 reject all amendments to this, and hold to the 
 statute regulation, and to nothing else. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY thought the amendment unne- 
 cessary. As explained by those who sustained it, 
 it sought to effect a double purpose, to prevent 
 the passage of resolutions having the force of law 
 in themselves, and to correct a practice which 
 might arise of resolutions of the legislature con- 
 trolling the execution of other laws properly pas- 
 sed. He submitted that no resolution having the 
 force of law can now be passed without the sig- 
 nature of the governor. He ventured to say that 
 no example of that kind could be found. We 
 were not to anticipate a violation of the constitu- 
 tion. If the abuse existed, he would go with the 
 furthest to correct it. The only instance which 
 had been cited, was the one given by the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer, as happening in Congress. 
 But we had nothing to do with the practice of Con- 
 gress ; but even there the instance alluded to 
 was not as that gentleman declared. He (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN) had said that thousands of dollars had 
 been drawn out of the Treasury of the United 
 States for the public printing simply by joint re- 
 solution ; but he, Mr. W. would remind that hon- 
 orable gentleman that the joint resolution of 1818 
 
 to which reference was made, was signed by the 
 President, and went through all the forms of leg 
 islation as a law, as provided by the Constitution 
 of the United States. It was therefore not a case in 
 point. He did not believe that any instance could 
 be found of money being drawn out of the treasury 
 of the U.S. or of this State,except by a bill or reso- 
 lution which went through all the forms of legis- 
 lation, and was in many respects a law. The 
 contingent funds of Congress and of the legisla- 
 ture were always appropriated by law. After 
 that they were properly disbursed by resolution. 
 The other evil which the amendment seeks to 
 remedy is certainly of an extraordinary character. 
 Should any public officer refuse to carry a law 
 into effect because the legislature may have'pass- 
 ed a joint resolution which the Governor has not 
 sanctioned, of a different character from the law, 
 he would be unworthy of the place. It was very 
 well for such an officer to differ to the opinion of 
 the legislature in a doubtful case ; but he would 
 not allow any such resolution to conflict with his 
 duty in carrying the law into effect. Deeming it 
 therefore, unnecessary in either view, he concur- 
 red with the gentleman from Dutchess, (Mr. 
 TALLMADGE,) that it would be impolitic to 
 change the language of the present Constitution, 
 which provided that every bill which shall have 
 passed the Senate and Assembly shall, before it be- 
 comes a law, be presented to the Governor. The 
 word "bill" has a settled signification, and the 
 introduction of the new words contemplated by 
 the amendment may have the effect to change 
 the whole practice of our legislation. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that it was remarkable that a 
 proposition like this was introduced by Mr. Jay in 
 the Convention of 1821, but was withdrawn for 
 the purpose of inserting, in its appropriate place, 
 a prohibition against legislation in the form of 
 joint resolutions or orders. He did not find, how- 
 ever, in the examination he had been able to 
 make during the debate, that the attention of that 
 body was ever afterwards brought to the subject. 
 Since that time, as before, it seems that public 
 money and property have been appropriated 
 debts to the State have been released or extended 
 and laws have been suspended, by joint resolu- 
 tions. There is, therefore, a clear necessity for 
 some provision of this character. But it might be 
 inconvenient if all joint resolutions those of in- 
 struction or advisement to our Senators or Repre- 
 sentatives in Congress, or merely expressing the 
 opinions of the legislature, for instance were 
 required to be approved by the Executive. If 
 the mover of the amendment will modify it so as 
 to make it apply only to resolutions " intended to 
 have the force of law," it will be in the proper 
 form. Gentlemen suggest tfratthe object may be 
 better attained by a provision that no money shall 
 be drawn from the treasury by a joint resolution. 
 That would not go far enough. If laws may be sus- 
 pended or varied, in this mode, the evil is no less 
 than in the appropriation of money. He hoped 
 that all abuses of this nature would be effectually 
 prevented, and no legislation by joint resolution 
 permitted, but he was inclined to think it could 
 be more properly done by a restraint on the legis- 
 lative power. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said there could be no doubt that 
 it had been the practice for many years, for the 
 
327 
 
 legislature to pass resolutions joint resolutions 
 Which have the effect of law, and thus dispose of 
 the public property. Such was his impression 
 when this debate commenced ; but he went to 
 the library, and taking up one volume of the jour- 
 nals, he found three concurrent resolutions, pass- 
 ed in 1813, appropriating books and property, 
 and in 1-vU he found four ; thus evading 
 that part of the Constitution which requires all 
 this to be by bill in the legal way. He took up 
 the next year's proceedings and there he found 
 four such resolutions ; and there was no doubt 
 but it had been the practice of the legislature, to 
 pass resolutions evading that part of the constitu- 
 tion which required the sanction of law. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY : Did not the officer entrusted 
 with the execution of these joint resolutions deny 
 their validity. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS : Certainly not. Besides they 
 were not always directed to the same officers. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN called the attention of his friend 
 from Herkimer to a statement of Mr. JONES as to 
 the practice under the former Constitution. He 
 said, "The journals of the Legislature abound 
 with resolutions which have had the effect of laws. 
 There were at least twenty cases last winter of 
 this kind. He found resolutions directing the 
 Comptroller to suspend the sale of lands for tax- 
 es directing the Adjutant General to distribute a 
 publication relative to the discipline of the mili- 
 tia throughout the State at the public expense, 
 &c., &c. And in 1814, he found a joint resolu- 
 tion directing the Treasurer to pay over to certain 
 gentlemen appointed commissioners for that pu/&- 
 pose, $50 3 0t/0 for the relief of the Niagara suffer- 
 ers." 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS continued : There had been some 
 pretty large appropriations made in this way 
 He thought every one here would be in favor o 
 stopping such a system, and therefore that the 
 only question was, whether they should put in an 
 amendment here in this report, or wait until they 
 came to act on the report on the powers and du- 
 ties of the legislature. If they did it as here pro- 
 posed, he feared it would have the effect of sanc- 
 tioning legislation by resolution instead of by bill 
 Then the Constitution would seem to anticipate 
 that the legislature would hereafter vote money 
 and property and suspend the operation of laws fr 
 joint resolution. He thought they had bette 
 make the prohibition in the subsequent article tc 
 pass a law other than in the form of law and in 
 sert it in the other report. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS joined in requesting the gen 
 tleman from New York to withdraw his amend 
 ment so as to insert it hereafter as suggested. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE stated an instance of $40 
 having been appropriated to buy books, from 
 person named Disturnell,to be distributed amongs 
 members of the legislature. He said the prac 
 tice of voting themselves gifts in this manner 
 was an abominable one. It was unworthy of men 
 unworthy of the legislative body, and unworth 
 of this great State that there was no law for a] 
 this. It was disgraceful. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN said it was the uniform 
 practice at the close of a session to do this. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER thought the amendment coul 
 be appropriately made here. 
 
 Mr. DANA thought it more properly belonge 
 
 the legislative department ; could it be trans- 
 erred hereafter to another committee if it should 
 ow be inserted here ? 
 
 The CHAIRMAN thought not, unless the Con- 
 ention should again return to this section. 
 
 Mr CROOKER wished to insert " resolution or 
 rder," and this will give the governor full power 
 nd yet not infringe on the rights or duties of the 
 egislature. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Then you make a resolu- 
 on or order a law. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE would Vote against all these 
 mendments, but would insert the principle in 
 nother article at some subsequent period. 
 
 Mr STElfcON opposed all these amendments, 
 ""hey -anctioned the very course which was con- 
 einned, and would not remedy the evil, which 
 
 e was as desirous as others to remedy. 
 
 Jut none of these amendments now proposed, 
 vould, if adopted, reach the case. The legisla- 
 ure have exclusive control of their contingent 
 unds; and these appropriations are generally'made 
 herefrom ; but this is really an abuse of legisla- 
 ion ; and is in reality equivalent to taking it out 
 if the public treasury. As to joint resolutions 
 .cting so as to suspend a law, or create a new 
 aw, instances of the kind equivalent to legisla- 
 ive practice may be found, and they call loudly 
 or remedy. The only remedy is to insert the 
 ;heck in this section fully and clearly, and thus 
 emedy the evil. He (Mr, S.) would rather have 
 t worded so that no joint resolution shall ever 
 lave the force of law except under .certain cir- 
 cumstances. But if you pass the proposed amend- 
 ment you then, by the Constitution, virtually 
 sanction the voting away of money and property 
 
 y the Legislature through the means of joint re 
 solutions. ModernConstitutions prescribe the style 
 and the form which all bills should have, to have 
 ;he effect and force of a law. And this should be 
 adhered to. But we have nothing in the existing 
 
 onstitution that requires we should put our 
 .aws into the form of a bill. And hence arises 
 ;his whipping around the Constitution in the in- 
 stances complained of. There is no prohibition 
 
 n the present Constitution that this shall not be 
 done; but it is certainly high time that there 
 was. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE had sent to the library for 
 a journal ol the Legislature, in which he found 
 that there had been nn appropriation to the mem- 
 bers themselves, by resolution, of copies of Dis- 
 tui nail's Register. (He read Me resolution.) 
 This abominable practice of voting gifts to them- 
 selves was most disgraceful. To put a stop to 
 such outrageous proceedings as this, he believed 
 there was a disposition in the minds ot every 
 member of the Convention, and when we have ar- 
 rived at the article designating the poweisand du- 
 ties of the Legislature, it would be proper to con- 
 aider it. He hoped they would not insert it here 
 80 as to confuse the veto power, but put it in at 
 the proper time and place. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL then withdrew his amendment, 
 so that it might be offered to the committee on the 
 powers and duties of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr RHOADES next submitted an amendment, 
 as follows : 
 
 Strike out all after the word " it," at the end of the first 
 sentence, and insert as follows :*" If, after such reconsj- 
 
328 
 
 deration, a majority of all the numbers elected shall agree 
 to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objec- 
 t,ons totne other House, by which it shall likewise be 
 reconsidered, and if approved by a majority of all the 
 members elected, it shall become a law, no withstanding 
 the objections of the Governor. But in all such cases 
 the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and 
 nays and the names voting for and against the bill be en- 
 entered on the journal of each House respectively 
 
 His object was to strike out all that part which 
 required two-third vote after a veto, and also that 
 part which says a bill may be passed by a subse- 
 quent Legislature. He thought the majority 
 principle was much the best, and that it ought to 
 rule here It was the opinion of many that this 
 clause had been the means of more corrupt legis- 
 lation than any other feature. He would not in- 
 terfere with the veto power of the Governor, but 
 he would allow the Legislature, upon calm re- 
 consideration to pass the bill by a majority of the 
 members of both branches. If the Governor 
 should interpose his objections on the ground of 
 unconstitutionality or want of consideration, there 
 would be abundant security in trusting all to the 
 sober reconsideration of both houses. He could 
 not subscribe to the doctrine that the Governor 
 was the more immediate representative of the 
 people, than the Legislature. He referred to in- 
 stances where the Veto power had been abused by 
 the occupant of the Presidential Chair, recently, 
 (John Tyler ) He had exercised this power, not 
 with a view to promote the public good, but to 
 gain for himself a little popularity. And we had 
 the disgusting spectacle of his son passing thro 
 the State, endeavoring to manufacture some littL 
 capital for his father calling him "Old Veto.'' 
 He trusted something would be adopted that 
 would guard us from such abuses. He would 
 leave the whole matter under the comrol of a 
 majority of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES explained that he did not in- 
 tend to say anything with a view to impeach the 
 capacity of the present Governor for administer- 
 ing the" affairs of this State. 
 
 Mr W. TAYLOR differed from his colleague, 
 (Mr RHOADES.) The gentleman from Onondaga 
 had said that he did not wish to destroy the veto 
 power, and yet his amendment did in effect de- 
 stroy it Legislators once having framed a law, 
 would always be likely to adhere to their former 
 vote, for the pride of opinion, if for no other rea- 
 son ; and if the same majority could destroy the 
 veto of the Governor, it would virtually be a 
 breaking down of the constitutional barrier to 
 improper legislation. And as to the singular re- 
 marks of his colleague, (Mr. RHOADES) that the 
 present highly talented and distinguished Chief 
 Magistrate of this State had been chosen because 
 he was thoroughly conversant with the national 
 politics of the country, and not acquainted with 
 the affairs of this State, he would only tell his 
 
 colleague that 
 
 Mr RHOADES continued : He believed that the 
 two-third principle in regard to bills adopted 
 in the old Constitution had been of little or no 
 use ; on the contrary it had been the source of a 
 great deal of corruption. It had made more lobbj 
 agents than anything else. He did not desire tc 
 destroy the veto power ; he believed it to have 
 been very useful ; it had often prevented the pas 
 sa*e of laws that were frequently the result o 
 
 lasty and improvident legislation ; laws that were 
 unconstitutional and contrary to the public inter- 
 ests ; and a majority of the members of the Le- 
 gislature would always be found to be sufficient 
 o decide upon all these. If they are unconsti- 
 utional they can decide to that effect ; and if they 
 lave been hastily passed, under unnatural excite- 
 ment, there will be time for members to get cool, 
 >y the time the Governor's veto reaches the Legis- 
 ature. If they were contrary to the public inter- 
 ests, it would always be safe, after the veto comes, 
 to submit the measures to the consideration of the 
 same body again ; and this course would be much 
 more in harmony with the general principles 
 adopted throughout the whole State. And he 
 would therefore be willing at all times to allow 
 ;he legislature upon a certain consideration to 
 Dass the bill by a majority of both branches not- 
 withstanding the veto. He could not subscribe 
 ;o the doctrine, that the governor was the more 
 mmediate representative of the people than the 
 egislature. The assembly in its aggregate capa- 
 city is the more immediate representative of 
 the will and wishes of the people ; and it will be 
 much more so, when we come to have single elec- 
 tion districts as reported by the committee No. 1. 
 He thought the Governor was sometimes chosen 
 because he was identified with great, questions of 
 National policy, more than S ate policy. It was even 
 said that this was the case with the present incum- 
 Dent who had been chosen contrary to his own wish- 
 es, and the wishes of his friends, to run as candidate 
 n this State, in ord* r to secure the presidential 
 ;lction. He had been long in Congress and 
 nerefore his wishes upon all questions of national 
 policy were well known. And thus as it 
 had been it might be again that a man would 
 be selected more for his being connected with 
 the national interests, than for those of this State. 
 Mr. TAYLOR continued He trusted not. No 
 man could do so. The present Governor was 
 chosen because he was peculiarly qualified to ad- 
 minister the executive duties of this State. He 
 had long been known to have been thoroughly 
 identified with all its best and dearest interests ; 
 and most eminently fitted by nature, education, 
 energy of character, commanding talents,untiring 
 application to his public duties to fill the distin- 
 guished office of Governor of the great State of 
 New York. With regard to the veto power, he 
 repeated that the abrogation would, in his judgment 
 be breaking down the most important barrier that 
 the people had against improper, imprudent, or 
 illegal legislation. He believed that this power 
 could not be intrusted in safer hands, or to a per- 
 son both qualified by integrity, discretion and dis- 
 cernment to use it, or to a person who was bet- 
 ter acquainted with the interests of the State, 
 than by vesting it with the present Governor of 
 this State. He denied that the veto had been 
 very often exercised by President JACKSON. 
 General JACKSON had only exercised it some two 
 or three times; and nothing was ever more popu- 
 lar with the people than in each instance of his 
 exercise of this power; it was wisely exercised, 
 and loudly applauded by the mass of the people. 
 The first time that he used it, it was the veto on 
 the Maysville Road Bill; and the principles upon 
 which he based his honest and independent con- 
 duct in relation to thai act, became aturwards the 
 
329 
 
 universal sentiment of the people of the United 
 States. His second veto, also, met with the ap- 
 probation of a very large majority of the people 
 of this country; and they from that time became 
 more attached to the exercise, and more sensible 
 to the importance of the veto power than ever. 
 The successor of General Jackson had also wise- 
 ly exercised it ; in but one or two instances 
 And Mr. TYLER had also exercised it, as 
 he believed twice, and upon the same questions, 
 and the same principles as Gen. Jackson had ex- 
 ercised it ; and .in each case, as the gentlemen 
 iv&]] i-nr-xv fhp nponle had aDDroved of it. His 
 
 been abused, although it existed in the Constitu- 
 tion of the U. S., of this State, and of several 
 other States, in a degree more or less stringent. 
 No man could rise in his place, and say in a man- 
 ner that would be corroborated by history and the 
 opinion of mankind hereafter, that the power had 
 ever been injuriously exercised. Its exercise had 
 always been in favor of popular rights. The 
 gentleman from Onondaga (Mr. RHOADES) had 
 said that the veto power might be, and had been, 
 exercised for the sake of popularity. How, for 
 the sake of popularity ? How could it be popular 
 unless a majority of the people were opposed to the 
 
 vote on this bank was sustained by public senti- vetoed law? And in such a case was the gentleman 
 ment ; and he also vetoed the harbor bill, or bill prepared to say that the Governor ought not to in- 
 making appropriations for the improvement of terpose his veto ? It appeared to him to be the 
 rivers; and this he had done upon what he be- very best reason for its exercise. If he became 
 lieved to be constitutional grounds. In this State satisfied that a majority of the people were opposed 
 it has been exercised but rarely ; only on one oc- to the law it was his duty to veto it. If he supposed 
 casion by the present Governor, and that exercise that undue influences were exerted upon the le- 
 of it had met with the approbation of the people gislature, which were not felt by the people, it 
 of the State, so far as they could judge by their was time for him to interpose his veto. As a 
 popular meetings, their resolutions, and in other proof that it was not abused, no law that was ever 
 vvavs. Strike from the Constitution this power, vetoed had passed a second time, either in this 
 and he could assure them they would find hasty, State or the general government. The U. S. 
 inconsiderate, inexpedient, unconstitutional le- Bank bill had been vetoed several times and might 
 gislation frequent enough. They would have we not say with eminent and popular success, 
 log-rolling of all kinds, and measures palpably Fortunately it had saved the country from that 
 unconstitutional, if not entirely inexpedient ; and institution, and at this day whatever party was in 
 it is as necessary to guard against inexpedient power would not succeed in passing suc^h a law. 
 measures as unconstitutional ones. He desired to I \Vas not that in favor of the veto power ? Mr. 
 preserve the veto power especially to check inex- L. concurred in the views of the gentleman frorri 
 pedient legislation, for men would scarcely ever Onondaga (Mr. W. TAYLOR) and was not dis- 
 pass measures that were palpably unconstitutional posed to argue this question at length. He con- 
 while the ve'.o power remained, whilst they might sidered that where the Constitution had been in 
 often pass those that were inexpedient, and f u il force ever since the organization of this go- 
 which would jeopardise the interests of the State; vernment, precisely in this form, and there had 
 and this salutary check should be left to counter- been no public complaint, or at least it had been 
 act such measures. He believed that the veto but of a partial and he might say of a party cha- 
 power should be left precisely where it was in ra cter, and not general even with any one politi- 
 the Constitution of 1821. It was perfectly safe ca i party, it was safer to leave it as it stood. He 
 to allow it to remain in its present form, as the would therefore leave this veto power precisely 
 people could always send back another year re- where it stood. 
 
 presentatives who would pass any law which Mr. BROWN regretted the necessity he was 
 they deemed desirable. If a good and proper bill under to detain the committee at this time.' But 
 sho'uld be vetoed, the people before a second the question of retaining the veto power in its 
 election could have the time to reflect, and if present vigor, was one upon which the people he 
 they re-elected a decided majority in favor of that na cl the honor in .part to represent, had scarcely 
 measure, they would undoubtedly pass it again. a divided opinion. Whatever some of them might 
 In the mean while the Governor would have had think, of the propriety of its exercise upon the 
 time to reflect,and considering what was the will of bills to which it had been applied in times past, 
 the people he would undoubtedly yield ; and he with regard to the necessity of its existence as a' 
 would not be likely to veto it a second time, after ru i e of the fundamental law as far as he could 
 they had sent majorities a second time to adopt co llect their sentiments, they were almost unani- 
 it. Therefore he thought the veto power had mo us. He should therefore, be forgetful of his 
 better be left as it is. duty to them, did he suffer the proposition before 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS looked upon the veto power, as the committee to pass unnoticed. The veto pow- 
 oitablished in this government, as one of the ev j n some form or other was to be found in everv 
 highest safe guards against improvident and cor- W ell constructed representative government. The 
 rupt legislation. In order to pass a bill into a executive branch of some exerted an absolute 
 law, it had to pass through two separate branches veto, which was a total prohibition upon the pas- 
 of the legislature, and be examined by each. And sage of laws without its asssent. Such was the 
 yet improvident legislation was not arrested, and p OW er of the crown in Great Britain. In our own 
 therefore a third power and branch of the govern- state Constitution, as well as in that of the gen- 
 ment was provided by the people the Executive era i government, the veto power was qualified 
 it was left to him to consider whether the law an( j could be overruled by a vote of two-thirds of 
 was a provident one or not, and to decide upon the legislative body. It was the great conserva- 
 it. He represented the whole people and this tive power of both governments. It was design - 
 veto power was the highest safeguard against the eo ; to keep the several departments in their ap- 
 passage of bad laws He denied that it had ever j p r0 priate sphere of action, and especially to pro- 
 
 21 
 
330 
 
 tect the executive and judicial branches from the 
 encroachment of the legislative department. It 
 was designed to shield the minority, from the ag- 
 gressive and unrestained power of the majority. 
 It vyas the constitutional safeguard of the people 
 against precipitate, improvident and c&rrupt leg- 
 islation, and should therefore be preserved in all 
 its native vigor. He trusted the committee 
 would not overlook some of the causes to which 
 this Convention owed its existence. The lapse 
 of 25 years, and the progress of knowledge in the 
 science of government, with a more just appreci- 
 ation of personal rights, had disclosed errors in 
 the fundamental law which demanded correction, 
 and powers had been exerted during that time- 
 some of them of very doubtful authority, which 
 demanded restraint and limitation. Amongst the 
 most prominent of these powers and those which 
 excited the public disapprobation were the pow- 
 ers of legislation. The power to appropriate the 
 public money to create debt to loan the public 
 credit, and to give away the public property. 
 His own constituents had, with great unanimity, 
 united in the call for this Convention in the hope 
 that this power, so offensive in the manner of its 
 exercise, so destructive of the public prosperity, 
 so oppressive upon the people and their rights of 
 property, might be limited and restrained and 
 placed in subjection to the popular will. His 
 constituents, he knew, would unite with him in 
 the expression of his surprise to observe that the 
 very first report, which came from one of the 
 standing committees of this Convention, proposed 
 to enlarge the authority of the Legislature, to 
 open still wider the field of their operations and 
 to mitigate, if not wholly disarm the executive 
 of the power of the veto. The committee pro- 
 posed that a bill upon which the Governor had 
 placed his negative, should become a law upo*n 
 the vote of a bare majority of the next Legisla- 
 ture, while the amendment of the gentleman 
 from Onondaga (Mr. RHOADES) proposed that 
 it should become a law if it could command 
 a majority of the two houses that passed 
 the biH. Both these propositions had his un- 
 qualified dissent. Has the exercise of the Exec- 
 utive veto been detrimental to the public inte- 
 rests, either here or at the seat of the general go- 
 vernment ? It has not. Public sentiment has 
 been in singular harmony with its exercise for 
 the last 15 years. On no question has the opin- 
 ion of the people, been so resolute he might say 
 so unanimous as those to which he would now 
 refer. Gen. Jackson during his first term inter- 
 rupted the bill to aid in the construction of the 
 Maysville road. The general government at that 
 time proposed to take into its own hands the 
 power to construct roads, canals and other public 
 works, throughout the various States and Terri- 
 tories of the Union. Bills appropriating more 
 than one hundred millions of dollars for works of 
 internal improvement, were, at the date of the 
 President's Veto lying upon the tables of the 
 members of Congress. Had the government suc- 
 ceeded in obtaining a firm hold oi this power to 
 say nthing of the waste of public treasure it 
 would have been fatal to the rights of the States, 
 if not to the perpetuity of the Union. To the 
 courage and resolution of the President, coupled 
 with the Veto power, does the country owe its es- 
 
 cape from so great a calamity. In 1832, Gen. 
 Jackson again interposed the Executive authori- 
 ty, between the people and the re-charter of the 
 Bank. The propriety of that act was distinctly 
 brought before the people in the fall of that year. 
 It was th.e only issue made at the election, and the 
 people of the Union with a degree of unanimity, 
 never before witnessed, confirmed the act of the 
 President. His own constituents then,composing 
 the electors of the 6th Congressional District a 
 people remarkable for their attachment to demo- 
 cratic doctrines and sound principles of administra- 
 tion signified their approbation by a majority of 
 more than 1200 votes. Never before was the pub- 
 lic judgment so determined and unanimous as up- 
 on that memorable occasion. In the summer of 
 1841, the person then administering the Govern- 
 ment at Washington, placed his Veto on the Bill 
 to re-establish the Bank of the United States, un- 
 der a new name, which is not now in my memory. 
 [Voices from members "Fiscal Agent."] This 
 was one of the very few acts of that administra- 
 tion which commanded the approbation of the 
 country, and the only act he might say tor which 
 it would be gratei'ullv remembered by posterity. 
 In May, 1S45, the present chief magistrate of the 
 Slate was constrained by a sense of his public 
 duty to the people of the Stale, to withhold hi& 
 assent from the "Act in relation to the Canals." 
 It- was not his purpose to furnish the Committee 
 with a history or a commentary upon the cir- 
 cumstances attending that transaction. It would 
 answer all the objects of this aigumerit, to say, 
 that the Executive Veto was wisely exerted in 
 favor of maintaining oneot the soundest measures 
 ot finance, ever adopted in this country in tavor 
 of the rights of the public credit, and o' preserv- 
 ing unsullied the public faith and honor. Such 
 he would confidently say 7 was the opinion the 
 almost unanimous opinion ot his own conslitu^ 
 ents, and such he had every reason to think was 
 the opinion of a large majority ot the people of 
 the State. Finding that the public judgment 
 whenever it had been pronounced, concurred with 
 his own y upon the w sdom of retaining the Veto 
 Power, he should therefore resist to the extent of 
 his ability, all attempts to take it out of the Con- 
 stitution, or to qualify, or impair its influence by 
 the introduction of new limitations. 
 
 Mr. W. B. WRIGHT said : I voted the other 
 day, when the question in relation to the quali- 
 fications for governor was under consideration, to- 
 strike out the section imposing restrictions. 
 Practically I did not deem the question of much 
 importance, but a principle seemed to me to be 
 involved in it to which I could neither subscribe 
 nor entertain. I did not consider myself as com- 
 ing here to propose restrictions either on popular 
 sovereignty or delegated power, unless experience 
 and the history and career of representative de- 
 mocracy had fully demonstrated to me that there 
 was a stern, necessity to do it. I am in favor of 
 the amendment of the gentleman from Onondaga 
 (Mr. RHOADES) and I may say in imitation of the 
 gentleman from Orange (Mr. BROWN) that if there 
 w r as any particular feature in the present Consti- 
 tution, more than any other, to which the people I 
 have the honor to represent expressly dissent, it 
 was this two- thirds provision. We are all im-. 
 pressed with the belief that a system of guards 
 
331 
 
 and checks upon delegated power is of vital im- 
 portance in a representative government, but they 
 should be so arranged as to be of practical utility, 
 and consistent with the genius and spirit of the 
 government itself. Now no man will contend in 
 this enlightened age, and with our experience of 
 half a century on the subject of self-government, 
 that the Executive should possess a direct,unqual- 
 ified negative upon the acts of the legislature, 
 for that would be for the time being to invest a 
 single individual elevated by the popular will, 
 with the power of a despot. Nor will it be con- 
 tended that that universally admitted and usually 
 safe rule that the majority should govern, should 
 by any system be abrogated, unless a stern neces- 
 sity demonstrated its wisdom. Nor should a sys- 
 tem of balances and checks clothe a department 
 of the government with a power, which from its 
 odious character, or from any other cause, was 
 not of practical utility because rarely exerted, or 
 was expected to be rarely exerted. This section 
 as reported by the committee, practically propos- 
 ed to do all of these things, and to my mind it is but 
 another exemplification of the truth, that howev- 
 er enlarged or liberal our views and democratic 
 feelings, and our sentiments, there is a magic 
 clear in precedent, and that many look upon even 
 errors with complacency, if it but have the dust 
 of .antiquity upon it. Suppose, this system of Ex- 
 ecutive negation upon legislative action was now 
 broached for the first time, after an experience of 
 seventy years in representative democratic gov- 
 ernment, who of us would stand forth here to ad- 
 vance the principle, even so far as the committee 
 here had goue. I venture to say no one. Yet it 
 may be because this anti-republican principle is 
 found hi the Constitution of the United States, 
 and in other states of the union, and perhaps has 
 done no essential harm, that a majority of the com- 
 mittee will say let it remain. I am not one of those. 
 It it had never had been exercised from the 
 foundation of tne Government, I would place it 
 out of the reach of ihe Executive, what is in et 
 feet an unqualified negation upon the acts of an- 
 other branch of the Government. I would dc 
 this, because it is inconsistent with the genius and 
 spirit of republican institutions, and directly 
 against, the salutary rule that the majorily should 
 govern, and lodges omnipotent power in the hands 
 of cne man, upon the action of the people's rep- 
 tatives, who best know the will ot the peo- 
 ple they represent. I know that it is said lobe 
 but a qualified negative.. This is true in words 
 but in effect, it is as all must see, unqualified. It 
 the experience of legislation, in how many in 
 stances in this State, or any ether, have two* 
 thirds of both houses been obtained for the pas 
 sage of a bi4l negatived and teturned by the Guv 
 ernor with his objections? The instances are 
 rare wherein two-thirds of the Legislature have 
 had the boldness and firmness to stand up agains 
 the action of the Executive. Whilst parties exi- 
 and the Governor is the acknowledged leader am 
 head of one or the other of them, ins power an< 
 influence can at all times prevent such a result 
 unless it might be the case ot a charter of a cor 
 poration, where peculiar influences have beei 
 brought to bear upon (he legislature, and then (h 
 .chances are thai similar appliances have been ex 
 tended to the Executive. PracticaJ.lv, therefore 
 
 ic negative proposed is an unqualified one. In 
 inety-nine cases out of a hundred, the power of 
 despot would be successfully exerted. Yet a 
 reposition to confer directly upon an individual 
 power thus successfully exercised indirectly, 
 ould perhaps be scouted at by the committee. 
 efore we adopt the two-third provision reported 
 y the committee, let us see that we did not act 
 ncorisistently in another particular. The uni- 
 ersal sentiment seemed to be that too much pow- 
 r is now lodged in the hands of the Expcutive. 
 And yet while you are stripping him of the power 
 f dispensing office and place, you would still 
 eave in his hands a power above and beyond the 
 ^egislature a power to overrule and restrict the 
 avv making power a power which in its scope 
 nd influence is infinitely beyond that of confer- 
 ing office and place on the scycophants who 
 ! ance attendance around the throne. And when 
 ou can see danger and compulsion in the dis- 
 tensation of favors or rewards to favorites, you 
 an see no danger whatever in the exercise of a 
 tower akin to that which has enabled despots to 
 onvert men into slaves in every age of the world. 
 The proposition requiring a two-thirds vote to 
 :ounteract the effects of an Executive neg- 
 tive, is also inconsistent with that safe rule 
 n a representative democr.icy that the majority 
 hould govern, whether exercising elementary 
 lovereignty, or delegated power and in my judg- 
 ment, in no position of delegated authority can 
 't be more safely exercised than in the'Legisla- 
 ure, more especially as it is proposed by district- 
 ng the State, to break up even the chance of 
 combination for corrupt purposes. One branch 
 of it comes annually from the people, the other, 
 is is proposed, simultaneously with the Execu- 
 tive ; and each member is elected in his district 
 as a part of the law making power. From their 
 jroximity to the constituent body, they are sup- 
 Dosed, and with reason, to best understand the 
 eelings and views of the constituency they rep- 
 resent, and they come to these halls with the pop- 
 ular confidence freshly stamped upon them. Al- 
 though each representative is in some sense a 
 representative of the entire State, yet they are re- 
 arded and regard themselves as the more imme- 
 iate representatives of the constituency that elects 
 them. It must be apparent then, that unless we ' 
 abandon entirely the idea of human integrity, 
 no bill can be passed through the Legislature 
 by a majority of all the members elected in both 
 branches, without peculiar merit. But, were it 
 otherwise, a majority of the people, acting thro' 
 their representatives, have for the time sanctioned 
 it, and unless in contravention of those great natu- 
 ral unalienable rights, endowed by the Creator on 
 man, and which no human government can right- 
 ly subvert the exercise of, who will say that in 
 this, as in the exercise of elementary and delega- 
 ted power in other cases, the majority should not 
 govern ? But what would be the effect of the 
 proposition of committee No. 5, and of this sec- 
 tion ? A bill passed both branches of the Legis- 
 lature it is returned by the Governor with his 
 objections the popular branch may reconsider 
 and pass it unanimously it may require but one 
 vote to have secured two-thirds in the other 
 branch, yet it is lost. The law, however saluta- 
 ry, is rejected the legislative arm is paralyzed 
 
332 
 
 by the potency of the one man power. It> is not 
 enough that one branch of the legislature shall 
 act as a restriction or check upon the excesses of 
 the other, but the Executive arm must intervene 
 to save the people from their immediate repre- 
 sentatives in truth, to save the people from 
 themselves ! I know that a principal reason as- 
 signed for lodging this dangerous power with the 
 Executive is, that the legislative department may 
 through excitement, haste, inadvertence or de- 
 sign, lend itself to the passage of bad laws ! But 
 if a case can be conceived in which a majority of 
 the legislature shall so far forget their duty and' 
 responsibility to their constituents, as to trifle 
 with or sacrifice the great interests entrusted to 
 them, and defy and despise the popular condem- 
 nation, certain speedily to visit them, what secu- 
 rity is there that a single individual, not so im- 
 mediately or so directly responsible to the peo- 
 ple, will not partake of similar feelings? What 
 shall exempt him from the same infirmities ? 
 May not corruption or excitement assail, aye, 
 more easily assail, one than twenty, or fifty or an 
 hundred ? But the proposed amendment guards 
 against hasty and inconsiderate legislation. It 
 proposes to give time for excitement to subside, 
 and calm, deliberate reflection to intervene it 
 goes further, and asks that the legislature shall 
 deliberately consider the objections of the Exe- 
 cutive. The amendment provides that no bill 
 can become a law until it has been presented to 
 the Governor he may return it with his objec- 
 tions, and then should a majority of all the mem- 
 bers elected to both houses solemnly reconsider 
 and approve it, it shall be a law notwithstanding 
 the objections. The same formality and delibe- 
 ration is required under the amendment of the 
 gentleman, as in the section reported by commit- 
 tee No. 5. The Legislature will not only have 
 time, but the benefit and influence of the Gover- 
 nor's objections,to allay excitement, correct inad- 
 vertence,and stifle culpable design. It is an axiom 
 of free government, that the departments of 
 p 0wer the executive, legislative and judicial 
 should be kept separate and distinct that to 
 mingle them together would be attended with 
 danger to the government that in proportion 
 as they were mingled together, would be destroy - 
 . ed the checks and balances of each upon the 
 ' other, necessary to keep up the system. 
 In this point of view the Executive negation 
 upon legislation has ever seemed to me to be an 
 anamoly. I am aware that it is said there is a 
 tendency in the legislative department to grasp the 
 powers of the other departments, and to subject 
 them to their control that they might humble 
 the Executive by diminishing his salary, or break 
 up the courts, by withholding the compensation 
 of the judges. But so far as the Executive is con- 
 cerned, the committee had already provided 
 against a contingency of this character, in the 
 amendments to the fourth section of the report, 
 which places it out of the reach of their power to 
 'increase or diminish his salary during his continu- 
 ance in office, and I have no doubt that a similar 
 provision will be made in relation to the judges. 
 The principle, that a majority of all the members 
 elected to the legislature may pass a bill notwith- 
 standing the objections of the Governor, is not a 
 novel one. It is a prominent feature in ten of the 
 
 Constitutions of our sister states. It was incor- 
 porated into the Constitution of Kentucky in 
 1799; into that of Indiana in 1816; into those of 
 Illinois and Connecticut, in 1818; into that of 
 Alabama, in 1819 ; into those of Vermont and Ar- 
 kansas in 1836; into that of Florida in 1838; in- 
 to that of New- Jersey in 1844; and into that of 
 Missouri in 1820, and re-adopted in 1846. Be- 
 sides a more liberal rule also prevails in eight of 
 the states : In Tennessee, Ohio, Virginia, Rhode 
 Island, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina and 
 SouthCarolina,they have repudiated the executive 
 negation in any form. Virginia repudiates the 
 doctrine of Executive negation in any form, and 
 although a distinguished member of the Conven- 
 tion of 1821 confidently expressed the opinion 
 that she would, on a remodelling of her organic 
 law, embrace the principle, yet a Convention as- 
 sembled in 1830 again repudiated it. Little Rhode 
 Island also repudiates the principle, a state which 
 it has been exceedingly fashionable recently, in 
 certain quarters, to denounce as anti-democratic,, 
 and as governed by " JLlgerines." I am aware, 
 that committee No, 5 can appeal to precedent to 
 justify the insertion of the two-third provision in 
 their report. The error, if error it be, is rendered 
 venerable by age. As had been remarked by the 
 gentleman fromOrange,the power of executive ne- 
 gation has ever been a prerogative of the King of 
 Great Britain, in its direct, unqualified form. In 
 the early period of our existence as a free people, 
 it was incorporated into the Constitution of Mas- 
 sachusetts in the form now proposed by commit- 
 tee No. 5 from thence it was engrafted upon the 
 Constitution of the Union, and it is now a distin- 
 guishing feature of several of the Constitutions of 
 the old thirteen states ; and yet all of these in- 
 struments declare the supreme power to be in 
 the people, and all, if not in terms, do in spirit, 
 disavow this one man power. The principle 
 was also engrafted on our old Constitution in 1821 f 
 by the instrument then adopted. Previous to that 
 the same power had been exercised by a council,, 
 consisting of the Governor,Chancellors and Judges 
 of the Supreme Court, which was transferred to 
 the Governor alone, and although I may admire 
 the wisdom which induced that body to remove 
 the judiciary from the political arena, yet I 
 cannot equally admire the wisdom which yielded 
 up a majority of the legislature the law-making 
 power to the caprice of a single individual. The 
 principle I look upon as correct is, that in fram- 
 ing the fundamental law, it is proper and right 
 to look to example where no great principle is 
 violated ; but in this enlightened period in the 
 history of self-government, charged as the Con- 
 vention were, with the grave and important duty 
 of preparing and submitting to the adoption of 
 the people, a plan of government which should 
 secure the greatest sum of human freedom con- 
 sistent with the safety of society, gentlemen 
 ought to be well assured before they become firm- 
 ly wedded to a principle, that it is not only 
 founded in wisdom, but is in consonance with 
 the great principle to be attained. Now, I sub- 
 mit whether we should blindly adhere to prece- 
 dent, and disregard all experience on the subject. 
 As time rolls on, men grow wiser so tar as the sci- 
 ence of government is concerned. At least hu- , 
 man rights come to be better understood and their 
 
333 
 
 area extended. It is by no means certain that if 
 the illustrious mep who framed the Constitution 
 of the Union, with our experience and progress 
 in self-government, were called upon to-day to 
 discharge that duty, they would recommend for 
 the popular adoption, the Executive veto power. 
 It is well understood that many of those distin- 
 guished men were, at the time, disposed to give 
 extraordinary powers to the Executive whilst 
 others dreaded legislative interference with the 
 rights and powers of the other departments of the 
 government; experience, however, had shown 
 that it required not this shield to the Executive, 
 and that instead of that, the people have had in 
 numberless instances, reason to deplore Execu- 
 tive encroachment. The Constitution of the 
 United States was adopted as a compromise, not 
 only between the people of the different sections 
 of the Union, but also between the States. The 
 smaller States might well require the Executive 
 arm to be strong enough to shield them against 
 the majority of the larger and more populous 
 States. I have alluded to the Constitution of the 
 United States, and the circumstances under which 
 it was formed, for the reason that in my opinion, 
 the sanction which that instrument gives to this 
 two-third provision, had done more than any cir- 
 cumstance to lead to the adoption of a similar prin- 
 ciple by many of the States. The committee, who 
 made this report, whilst they retain the two-third 
 provision, introduce an amendment to the exist- 
 ing Constitution recognizing in part the principle 
 for which I contend. Although two-thirds are 
 required to pass a bill after it has been vetoed, 
 yet the roxt legislature may pass it by a ma- 
 jority. Now the justness of the principle that 
 a majority shall in any case interfere to pre- 
 vent the introduction of the Executive nega- 
 tive, being recognized, why not introduce 
 the principle at the threshhold, in all cases ? 
 'Can it be that the committee moved by the magic 
 charm of precedent, dreaded boldly to present 
 the innovation ? And will, by the same influ- 
 ence, the convention be deterred from imposing it 
 in the orgaic law? I hope not. I know not 
 what will be the action of a majority of the com- 
 mittee, but for my own part I will never consent 
 by my vote to vest the Executive with the power 
 of arbitrarily opposing the popular will, as ex- 
 pressed through their immediate representatives, 
 and of blocking the wheels of legislation when it 
 shall to him seem expedient. I will go as far as 
 any man to clear these halls from corruption, by 
 breaking up that great source of it, official patron- 
 age, and special legislation, but I will never 
 consent to place an omnipotent power over a ma- 
 jority of the people's representatives. In any 
 .government, the investure and exercise of the 
 one man power is dangerous to human li- 
 berty ; but in a government like ours, found- 
 ed upon popular sovereignty, it is not only 
 dangerous., but diametrically opposed to its ge- 
 nius and spirit. Aside from principle, there 
 was not that man on earth, upright and 
 and pure as he might seem to be, to whom I 
 would entrust a power, so supreme; but, 
 npon principle, holding as I do, to the sovereign- 
 ty of numbers, it would not only be improbable, 
 but impossible that I should do it. I can never 
 consent to incorporate in the Constitution of the 
 
 State, a principal so repugnant to all idea of pop- 
 ular freedom so despotic in its character, that 
 even in England, where the prerogatives of the 
 Crown are in most cases respected and exercised, 
 no sovereign has ventured to exercise it for more 
 than a century. It may be, and had been 
 said by gentlemen, that this power had not 
 been abused, but what security was there 
 that it would not be. When was our legisla- 
 ture ever converted into an excited, unre- 
 strained mob, impelled solely by impulse and 
 passion, without reflection or deliberation ? 
 Yet the advocates of this two-thirds provision, 
 find reasons for its adoption in the supposition 
 that such a state of things may arise. The prin- 
 ciple is either right or wrong. If right, retain it, 
 if wrong it should be expunged. I would ex- 
 punge it for the mischief it may do. I am there- 
 fore in favor of, and shall cheerfully give my vote 
 for the amendment of the gentleman from Onon- 
 daga, who sits before me, (Mr. RHOADES.) 
 
 Mr. STETSON believed that it would be found 
 that the remarks of the gentleman from Sullivan 
 (Mr. WRIGHT) were exceedingly specious. He 
 asserts the principle that the majority should go- 
 vern ; to that Mr. S. yielded his assent. But he 
 would ask him how govern when govern for 
 what and how long govern ? Allusion had been 
 made to a monarchy, and heretofore gentle- 
 men had been eloque'nt in denunciation of the 
 one man power, but let us not be misled ; let us 
 remember that the worst of all despotisms was 
 that of oligarchy. He considered that a majority 
 of the legislature should govern in its legitimate 
 sphere, and for the purposes intended, that is by 
 faithfully representing the will of the people ; but 
 not to load down for all coming time, by one single 
 act,those who came after them. If that was the 
 will, gentlemen in getting rid of a monarchy 
 would introduce a more odious oligarchy, and in 
 that was the specious character of the gentleman's 
 remarks. He denied that it was adverse to the 
 principle that a majority should govern, to vest 
 in the Governor, the representative of the whole 
 people, the power to check the action of the le- 
 gislature, in cases where he believed there had 
 been collusion between the two branches. Did 
 the legislature never do wrong ? In old coun- 
 tries it was maintained that the King could do no 
 wrong, but they would not venture to imply that 
 of our Executive. But the remark that the 
 majority was always right in every given case was 
 equal to that monarchial doctrine as applied to 
 the legislature. He knew that it was proposed 
 to restrict legislative power, but was there not a 
 large field where human foresight could not reach 
 the evils through a Constitution and when le- 
 gislation might bind all posterity irrevocably 
 through the influences of politicians, and the 
 combination of localities. What is there in 
 the present Constitution to prevent a mere ma- 
 jority in the legislature from pledging the pro- 
 perty of the State for millions untold and uncount- 
 ed? This was safe enough with the mass of the 
 people and in the will of its majority he would 
 trust, but not in that of a mere temporary depo- 
 sitory of delegated power, of no higher authority 
 so far as respected the source of power, than the 
 governor. The gentleman was under a delusion 
 when he assumed that the delegates of power 
 
334 
 
 were the people themselves and their sole rep- 
 resentatives. He confounded the legislature with 
 the people. What was the governor, and by 
 whom was he elected ? Was he not the repre- 
 sentative of the people, and was it not their 
 united voice that put him there. The legislature 
 represented an aggregation of localities, and not 
 the whole people themselves. This qualified 
 veto power in the hands of the governor, the 
 representative of the whole people and respon- 
 sible to them, was their protection against the 
 ..acts of a majoritv of the legislature the aggre- 
 gation of localities. But the gentlemen had as- 
 sumed that it was an unqualified veto. And 
 why ? Because no instances had come to his 
 knowledge, where two-thirds of the legisla- 
 ture have been found to overrule the Execu- 
 tive Veto. This was an assumption that they 
 ought to have been overruled, and in answer to 
 that, he would refer him to the argument of the 
 gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS.) Let 
 him show an instance where the people had not 
 approved of its exercise. To adopt the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from Onondaga (Mr. 
 RHOADES) and leave it to the majority of the Leg 
 islature to overthrow the Veto and re-affirm their 
 own acts, would be to destroy the Executive 
 negative entirely. The gentleman had referred 
 to England and had said that even there, the 
 sovereign had never ventured to exercise the 
 veto power. But a greater power that of pro 
 roguing parliament, after the passage of a bill 
 through the Commons and before it reached the 
 Lords, was often exercised. Reference had -also 
 been made to the United States Constitution 
 on this point, but he warned gentlemen on 
 this and the other illus-tration not to be mis- 
 led by false analogies. The veto power should 
 be considered in reference to the tenure of office of 
 the legislature and the Executive, and the 
 means of popular correction, should an error 
 occur. In the United States Government both the 
 Legislature and the Executive power was stron- 
 ger than it is here. The President held his office 
 for four years, the members of the House for two 
 years and the senators for six. What might there 
 be an objection then would not be here. 
 Their appeals to the people, the' source of 
 power were not so frequent. One object and de- 
 sign of the veto power, was to interpose between 
 misguided legislation and tiie people themselves, 
 for the latter. When the Executive ventures up- 
 on a negative of the legislative acts he as well as 
 the latter trusted to the people, who was the um- 
 pire between them. They might approve of it 
 or they might not, but let not gentlemen under- 
 take to put this security beyond all reach by at- 
 tempting to make it one-sided. Independent ol 
 that, as regarded Congress, its members represen- 
 ted different states and were elected at different 
 times, some of them one year before they took 
 their seats, and therefore there was little resemb- 
 lance between them and the legislature, who were 
 annually responsible to the people. The gentle- 
 men mistakes the legislature for the people that 
 was his delusion. The question was finally to be 
 decided by the people, the source of power 
 who would put both the Governor and the le 
 gislature right, if wrong. What is the occa 
 sion (Mr. S.) asked for a change what grea 
 
 ublic mischief had called for action against 
 \ny supposed evil arising from the exercise of 
 ;lie veto power ? It had only been exercised 
 n this State to preserve the public from im- 
 )ending debt, and who would complain of that ? 
 And let gentlemen remember there was a dis- 
 inction between DEBT and REVENUES. The 
 gentleman from Onondaga, (Mr. RHOADES) 
 lad called up the political prejudices of this 
 Convention in his allusions to the exciting 
 :imes of the bank veto, but he, (Mr. S.) would, 
 isk if it had not met the general acceptance of 
 the people ? But the gentleman had been an- 
 swered fully by the gentleman from Herkimer 
 (Mr. LOOMIS). They were approved by the peo- 
 }le, and he would ask whether at this day, it 
 was so much the fear of another veto, as it was 
 the fixed popular opinion against any such 
 nstitution that prevented any attempt to in- 
 corporate a U. S. Bank. He hoped that this 
 amendment would be voted down, and also 
 the proposition of the committee which threw 
 aver to the next legislature the exercise of 
 this power. He believed that more evils would 
 engendered out of that proposition than 
 almost any other conceivable form. Its effect 
 would be to crowd matter that the Governor 
 might veto any bills which, though rotten 
 at the bottom, was plausible on its surface, 
 and which if well considered by the legislative 
 body would fail into the heel of the session, 
 that great source of iniquitous legislation with 
 a view to evade the two-thirds, requiied for the 
 present, end encounter only the majority reconsi- 
 deration provided for the next session. Such 
 Dills would be crowded in such numbers upoii 
 the Executive as to escape that scrutiny which 
 they should receive, and thus perhaps get 
 through or if vetoed by him, to force a new el- 
 ement into politics, in getting up a fight with the 
 Governor through' the disappointed feeling in 
 locations where the measure was a favorite per- 
 haps from a combination sufficiently strong enough 
 !o affect the general result. But why this con- 
 secutive legislation, from session to session. 
 What was there now in the present Constitution 
 to prevent the Legislature from taking up a ve- 
 toe'd bill of the previous session, and passing it 
 exactly in the form it passed before; there was 
 nothing. It might be said that the dread of an- 
 other veto would prevent it. It might not be the 
 same Executive, but should a second Legisla- 
 ture pass a bill a second time, probably no Exe- 
 cutive would interpose his veto again. Was 
 there an instance of the kind where the Gover- 
 nor had not yielded The amendment ihen was 
 unnecessary. Bat the Legislature on such occa. 
 sions would most likely incorporate new matter 
 in such a bill. Each legislature thinking itself 
 a little wiser than its predecessors, would take up 
 the old bill as vetoed, introduce new features in 
 it, and perhaps change its material ones. But if it 
 was a different bill, why should not the Execu- 
 tive be left free to exercise the veto ? He 
 ardently hoped for the feelings of his con- 
 stituents on the subject were the same as ; 
 described by the gentleman from Orange of his 
 that this old landmark of the sovereignly of the 
 people, for the protection of themselves will not 
 be obliterated by the action of this Convention, 
 
He hoped that all amendments would be voted 
 down, and the Constitution of 1821, in this partic- 
 ular be left untouched. 
 
 Mr. l'KX?s !M.\N .said he had been mainly an- 
 ticipated in the remarks he intended to make, 
 particularly in reference to the constitutional 
 provisions of other States, by the gentlemen from 
 Sullivan and Onondaga (Messrs. WRIGHT and 
 RHOADES,) and having said this, it was necessary 
 that he should say further, that this was the only 
 provision in regard to which committee number 
 five were not unanimous the gentleman from 
 Oswego and himself differing from the rest of the 
 committee, he (Mr P.) agreeing substantially 
 with the gentleman from Onondaga, and the oth- 
 er dissenting member holding to the existing con- 
 stitution in this respect. Mr. P. was aware that 
 he might have offered his views when this articl. 
 was presented, as suggested by the gentleman 
 from Ontario (Mr. WORDEN.) Perhaps, however, 
 he was right in leaving that duty to the chairman 
 (Mr. MORRIS.) But Mr. P. had one remark to 
 make in answer to the gentleman from Ontario, 
 who admonished him of his egotism and his 
 praise of himself and that was that Mr. P. was 
 profoundly grateful for the kind and gentlemanly 
 manner in which he and the Convention wer'e 
 treated by that gentleman and wished to recip- 
 rocate such kindness. Mr. P. only wanted the 
 gentleman to review his own printed speech. 
 llu wanted the gentleman to understand it for 
 if ever there was an instance in which the old 
 proverb could apply physician heal thyself it 
 was to that gentleman. Mr. P. went on to say 
 that the state of his health barely permitted, him 
 to sit there until now, and he should be brief. 
 He was decidedly opposed to the provision of the 
 old constitution, and measurably to the propo- 
 sition of the committee of which he was one. 
 He was decidedly in favor of the amendment, 
 because he held it to be the only true democratic 
 ground and doctrine that a majority of the people 
 should govern. He held also tiiat a L.ajority ot 
 the legislature for the time being were the people 
 virtually, and he was opposed to giving the Gov- 
 ernor or any human being on earth, a controlling 
 influence over the m,ij<,uly of the people. This 
 provision o! the old Constitution made the Gov- 
 ernor equal to two-thirds of the people. Mr. P. 
 regretted that his friend Irom Ouondaga had re 
 fen cd to certain measures in the manner he had, 
 lor it had raised the ire of certain gentlemen to 
 a high pitch. But he must be permitted to say 
 thbt there had never been an instance in his 
 recollection, when a prominent measure affect- 
 ing the general interests of the whole Union, or 
 a Sute, which could have passed against a veto 
 by a majority o: two-thirds. The war measure ot 
 1312, was i, oi canied by two-thirds and could 
 not have been. Had it been vetoed, it would 
 have gone by the board. So with the tariff. 
 About the policy of that measure, gentlemen dif- 
 feired no doubt from him. But he spoke of it 
 only as an important measure as well to the gov- 
 ernment as to the whole countiy. Bur thai 
 measure could not have been carried by two-third* 
 ihougli it h.td a. decided majority in its favor, 
 The use he desired to imke ot the circumstance 
 was this. All knew taut there wasabill pending 
 in Cougre*s to repeal that law. All knew tha 
 
 f Mr. Clay was President no such bill could pass. 
 All knew that a very slight change in this State 
 >r in a neighboring state, would have elected Mr, 
 
 lay. And AJr. P asset ted that if Mr. Clay had 
 lot written ton many letters, Mr. Clay would 
 lave been President. The abolitionists of this 
 late could alone have done it. And if it had 
 lot been for the humbuggety and huggerrnuggery 
 if nativism, Mr. Clay would have been elected 
 Resident. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES hoped the gentleman, after re- 
 juking him for alluding to Gen. Jackson's vetoes, 
 ras not going to canvass the whole campaign of 
 MJ. 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN understood himself, if the 
 yentleman did not understand him. Other gen- 
 lemen had alluded to these matters, and had 
 raveled over party ground. But he had no such 
 ntention. He simply took facts as they existed, 
 .rid the only use he made of them was this that 
 he tariff bill could not be repealed with Mr. Clay 
 n the chair, and that it was as likely he should 
 )e then President as any other man, and that 
 without a single alteration in the members of Con- 
 gress. So in our own State, the facts showed 
 hat the bill for the construction of the Erie Canal 
 ould not have become a law but for the fact that 
 ;he veto power was not in the hands of the then 
 Governor, but in a council of revision. And all 
 .hat saved the bill was Vice-President Tompkins 
 attending the council and endeavoring to defeat 
 he bill, and the arguments which he used to per- 
 uade Chancellor Kent to go against the bill car- 
 ied him in favor of it. The vote in the Assem- 
 >ly stood 51 to 40; in the Senate two-thirds for 
 t. After controverting Mr. BROWN'S assertion 
 hat the amount of bills for internal improvements 
 aying on the table in Congress was one hundred 
 millions, Mr. PENNIMAN said the bills were not 
 or construction only, but partly for mere surveys 
 and partly estimates, when the Maysville road 
 nil was vetoed. Mr. P. went on to controvert 
 nother position of that gentleman, to the effect 
 that Gen. Jackson's popularity was owing to his 
 veto of the bank bill insisting that it was his 
 Dreviously acquired popularity that carried him 
 through that struggle,, and that nothing but that 
 swayed down the bank. He cited as an illustra- 
 tion of the influence of Old Hickory, the alleged 
 change in the views and course of Mr. Dallas, 
 who he said, from being an ardent bank man in 
 the U. S. Senate, was found soon after at Phila- 
 delphia sustaining the veto. But to return to the 
 question. True we might cripple the Governor 
 in point of patronage by our action but of what 
 avail is this, when you left him with pow r er 
 equivalent to two-thirds of the people. He was 
 in favor of some restriction upon hasty legislation 
 but he did insist that after a bill had been re- 
 turned with objections, and those objections had 
 been duly considered, and a majority of all elect- 
 ed was found to be in favor of it, it should become 
 a law, the veto notwithstanding. In that respect 
 he preferred the amendment to the section re- 
 ported by the committee.. And he thought it not 
 a little inconsistent in those who objected to this 
 as crippling the power of the Executive, and yet 
 who objected strongly to any restrictions on the 
 popular will in the selection of a candidate for 
 Governor. With mere party politics he desired 
 
356 
 
 not to meddle here but he must be permitted 
 to allude in conclusion to the course of Gen. Root 
 and Peter R. Livingston, m the Convention of 
 1821. He believed they were as sound and pure 
 democrats, and men of as great sagacity and tal- 
 ent, as this State had ever furnished. They took 
 the same ground that the gentleman 'from Onon- 
 daga now did and so did a large portion of the 
 democrats in that. Convention. But the state of 
 his health admonished him that it was time to 
 bring his remarks to a close. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON would leave the discussion 
 of the propriety of the previous exercise of the 
 veto power to those who pleased to engage in it, 
 he should speak only of the practical operations 
 of the two plans proposed. The proposition as it 
 stands in the report of the committee, requires 
 the assent of two-thirds of all the members pre- 
 sent to pass a bill after its veto by the Governor. 
 The amendment proposed by the gentleman from 
 Onondaga (Mr. RHOADES) requires a majority of 
 all elected to pass it. That was the only question 
 before the committee, and what then would be 
 the difference of the practical operation of the 
 two ? A majority of all elected to the Assembly 
 would be 65, of the Senate 17 and this vote 
 would be required to pass a bill after its veto 
 by the Governor. The section as reported by the 
 committee requires two-thirds of those present to 
 pass the bill. If the House was as full as it usu- 
 ally was, that would require a less number to 
 pass the bill than would the majority provision, 
 because if the journals of the Assembly for 
 the last ten years were examined,, it would be 
 seen that the number in attendance would not 
 average any thing like one hundred mem- 
 bers. Sixty-five was a quorum for the 
 transaction of business, and two-thirds of that 
 would be but forty-four. So that under the pro- 
 vision of the section as reported by the commit- 
 tee, a case might occur where forty members of 
 the Assembly and twelve of the Senate, could 
 pass a bill notwithstanding the veto of the Go- 
 vernor. If the amendment was adopted, it would 
 require sixty- five members of the Assembly and 
 seventeen of the Senate, always while this two- 
 thirds requisition would always present a kind of 
 swinging scale it might be forty-four or it might 
 be eighty-six as the number present might hap- 
 pen to be, when the question was taken. He had 
 examined the journals of the house during the 
 month of March, and had counted the number of 
 questions taken by ayes and nays most of them 
 on two-third bills and there were but fourteen 
 occasions where one hundred members were pre- 
 sent while in three times that number of in- 
 stances, there was a less number in the house. 
 Virtually, therefore, it would require a larger 
 number on an average to pass a bill after its veto 
 under the amendment, than it would under the 
 section requiring the assent of two-thirds of 
 those present. His experience, when in the le- 
 gislature, was different from that of Mr. TAYLOR. 
 During the eight years he was there, but two bills 
 were vetoed one by gov. Marcy,and one by gov. 
 Seward. The gentleman insisted that when a bill 
 was vetoed and sent back to the House, that the 
 members who originally voted for the bill, are 
 likely to come up to the mark and vote for it 
 again. In the case of the bill vetoed by governor 
 
 Seward, it was returned to the Senate, and they 
 ordered the message to be printed, and laid the 
 bill on the table, where it lays yet. The one 
 vetoed by gov. Marcy, returned to the Assembly, 
 and the question being taken whether the bill 
 should pass, it was decided in the negative by a 
 unanimous vote. These were the only two in- 
 stances of the exercise of the veto power, during 
 the eight years that he was in the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR explained that his proposi- 
 tion was, that when a majority might be able to 
 pass a bill, the requisition of two-thirds would 
 prevent it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON repeated that two-thirds 
 present might be but forty-four. That was the 
 objection he had to the proposition, and he pre- 
 ferred that a definite number should be required. 
 That could be attained better by requiring the 
 vote of a majority elected, than by two-thirds of 
 those present. He was not opposed to the veto 
 power he was satisfied, from experience, that it 
 had generally been exercised only when proper 
 and the result had shown most conclusively 
 that when bills had been returned that the mem- 
 bers were satisfied that they ought not to pass. 
 He preferred the amendment, for the reason he 
 had stated. 
 
 Mr. MANN was opposed to this amendment 
 and in favor of the original section with some 
 slight amendment, which he proposed to offer af- 
 ter the pending question was disposed of. He 
 proposed to adopt the section of the present con- 
 stitution amended so as to require the vote of 
 two-thirds of those elected instead of present. 
 
 Tiie CHAIR said the gentleman's amendment 
 was now in order. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE said that the gentleman had antici- 
 pated him. He had an amendment to propose 
 which adopted Mr. C.'s amendment in substance 
 was the same as that proposed by Mr. MAXN. 
 The CHAIR said it was not strictly in order. 
 Mr. MANN proposed his amendment as an 
 amendment to that of Mr. RHOADES. 
 
 Mr. STOW could not concur with the senti- 
 ment that because the majority should rule that 
 we should have no veto power. He deemed that 
 the authority of this government was not in an un- 
 checked, uncontrolled majority. The whole theo- 
 ry of our institutions was a system of checks and 
 balances. It was for this that it was divided in- 
 to three branches. The Assembly and Senate 
 did not as a matter of course represent the whole 
 people, so much as the Governor himself. The 
 members of those bodies represented merely dis- 
 tricts of the people. The Governor was the only 
 representative of the whole body of the people, 
 and he therefore ought to have some check 
 upon the Legislature. We should have some 
 voice in legislation but if that was allowed to 
 be overruled by a mere majority of the Legisla- 
 ture it was of no effect at all. This veto power 
 was also necessary as ' a measure of protec- 
 tion of the Executive against the legisla- 
 ture or other departments. The judiciary pos- 
 sessed this power in an eminent degree. No- 
 law could be carried into effect without their 
 consent, supposing that the legislature should 
 pass a law directly infringing upon the executive 
 department for instance to release all the con- 
 victs in the State Prison. Where would be his 
 
337 
 
 power to arrest this if he should be stripped of 
 his veto power. The veto power was but a refer- 
 ence of the issue to the people themselves for their 
 decision, and it was but proper that they should 
 possess that power. In conclusion, Mr. S. ex- 
 pressed his preference for the proposition in re- 
 lation to it as reported by the committee. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR should vote in favor of the 
 amendment, preserving as it did the Veto power 
 as it now existed in all its force and integrity 
 adding to the force of it a requisition for an exact 
 and uniform vote on all questions of the kind. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS concurred in this amendment. 
 He thought it a decided improvement and should 
 vote for it. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE thought the amendment 
 would make the Veto an absolute prohibition,ra- 
 ther than an intimation to the two houses of the 
 governor's apprehension that they had made a 
 mistake The present system had worked well 
 for seventy years, and he would not change it ex- 
 cept for strong reasons. 
 
 The question being taken, Mr. MANN'S amend- 
 ment was adopted ayes 56, nays 45. 
 
 The question was then on Mr. RHOADES' amend- 
 ment as amended, and being taken, it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that the section, as 
 printed, required the vote on the final passage of 
 every bill to be taken by ayes and nays. This 
 would only tend to lumber up the journals. The 
 committee could have moved this. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that such was the intention 
 of the committee in reporting the section it was 
 to require a responsibility for every bill. 
 
 After sorr-p conversation as to the effect of the 
 section, it wa^ ; amended so as to require the ayes 
 and nays to be recorded only on the bills returned 
 by the Governor. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE called attention to the pro- 
 vision which allowed the Governor ten days after 
 the adjournment, to sign bills. To this he was 
 opposed, and he moved to strike out that clause. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said the object of this clause was 
 this. A very large number of bills were passed 
 at the last stage of the session, the Governor was 
 not able to examine them in season to return them 
 to the Legislature before its adjournment, and 
 they were thereiore lost. It was to obviate this 
 difficulty that the clause was reported ; and what 
 harm would grow out of it ? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : A great deal. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS would like to know what it was. 
 
 Mr. STETSON thought it was better to provide 
 that he should have time during the session of 
 the Legislature to examine bills, than to adopt 
 this section. If he should desire to veto a bill, 
 no opportunity would be offered him to do so un- 
 til the next session. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said that the section as it now 
 stood, gave the Governor an unqualified veto. 
 No matter by what majority a bill may have pass- 
 ed, all he had to do was to pocket it. 
 
 SEVERAL : It is so now. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN objected to this clause, as or- 
 dering the Legislature at the last of the session to 
 pass, without examination being had, measures in 
 favor of which there were many local interests, 
 with a view of throwing the responsibility of 
 defeat upon the executive, and thus get up an is- 
 sue. The executive could not get his veto in, be- 
 
 fore the next session, and would therefore have 
 no opportunity to defend his action. The legis- 
 lature were not bound to adjourn until all the 
 measures had been examined by him, and he 
 would rather if any provision was now to be made 
 to provide for that. 
 
 The motion to strikeout prevailed, and the 
 amendment of Mr. RHOADES as amended, was 
 adopted. 
 
 And then the committee rose and reported the 
 Article to the Convention. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS suggested that the question on 
 agreeing with the report should lie on the table 
 for the present; as further amendments might be 
 required after the action of the Convention on the 
 reports of other committees. 
 
 After some conversation, it was agreed that 
 the report should be printed. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, (3Sth day) July 17. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. KNAPP. 
 
 MONEY IN CHANCERY. 
 
 A communication was received from the Chan- 
 cellor as to the amount of money under his con- 
 trol. There is in his hands $2,921, 900.38, which 
 is thus disposed of: balance in bank, $210,802.77 : 
 in trust companies on interest, $832,171.16 ; in 
 bonds and mortgages, $1,781,931. 93 ; in other se- 
 curities, $96,934.52. Of this amount $1,083.- 
 479.65 is in the First Circuit. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD objected to these long doc- 
 uments being printed as documents and also on 
 the journal. It was an unnecessary expense. 
 He offered this resolution : 
 
 Resolved: That the answers from the several officers 
 and public functionaries to the enquiries directed to, and 
 calls made upon them respectively by this Convention, 
 shall not be entered at length upon the journal, nor shall 
 the same be printed as a part of the journal of this Con- 
 vention. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON also warmly opposed their 
 being printed twice. It was only a job to put 
 money into the pockets of the printers. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL thought the best way to pre- 
 serve these important documents was to have 
 them in the book form among the regular proceed- 
 ings of the journal. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY was of the same opinion. 
 
 Mr. STETSON wanted to know if the printers 
 charged twice for the setting up of the type, 
 which in fact they only set it up once. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that they did do so ; he 
 has thus been informed by the Secretary. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that the printers, Car- 
 roll & Cook, were terribly behind with their 
 printing; they had the journal printed only rap to 
 the 25th of June, and only one page of that ; and 
 it was now the 17th of July. All this shameful 
 delay should be prevented, and the double charges 
 for single work put a stop to. 
 
 The debate was further continued by Messrs. 
 RUSSELL, F. F. BACKUS, STETSON, HOFF- 
 MAN, TALLMADGE, and MURPHY. 
 
 The resolution and document were referred to 
 a select committee of five. The document was 
 also referred to the judiciary committee. 
 
 The committee appointed under this resolu- 
 tion were Messrs. CHATFIELD, PATTERSON, 
 MURPHY, STETSON, and AYRAULT. 
 
338 
 
 ORDER OF BUSINESS. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS called for the consideration of his 
 resolution reported yesterday from the special 
 committee, of which he was chairman, which 
 prescribed the order in which the various reports 
 of committees should be acted upon as follows : 
 
 1. Executive Department. 
 
 2. Election, apportionment, pay, &c , of the legislature. 
 
 3. Incorporation, other than banking and municipal. 
 
 4. Currency and banking. 
 
 5. Canals, internal improvements, public debt, &c. 
 
 6. The judiciary. 
 
 7. Powers and duties of the Legislature. 
 
 8. Appointment or election of local officers. 
 
 9 Election or appointment of officers whose powers are 
 not local. 
 
 10. Powers of counties, towns, &c., except cities and in- 
 corporated villages. 
 
 11. Organization and powers of cities and incorporated 
 villages, &c. 
 
 li. The elective franchise. 
 
 13. Education, common schools &c 
 
 14. Creation and division of estates in land. 
 
 15. Official oaths and affirmations. 
 
 16. The militia and military affairs. 
 
 17. Rights and privileges of citizens. 
 
 18. Future amendments. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD opposed this, and moved to 
 make number seven stand as number three num- 
 ber seventeen to stand as number four and num- 
 ber twelve to stand as number five ; and in that 
 order to be taken up. 
 
 Mr. STETSON opposed this for that would 
 bring his committee (which stands here as num- 
 ber seven) the third in order. Now it was a rear 
 guard committee, and the success of its provi- 
 sions depended upon what is done by other com- 
 mittees 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said it was a van-guard com- 
 mittee ; the legislative power stands first in the 
 government. 
 
 Mr. STETSON Yes, but most of those pow- 
 ers have been deducted from it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said they had better leave 
 all this to the Convention ; and take them in th 
 order they were reported. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said they had much better 
 do this ; for several committees were put down 
 here such as that on canals, &c., the judiciary 
 &c., (important committees,) that have not ye 
 reported. Now, if gentlemen are not so com 
 pletely absorbed in their zeal for party feelin< 
 and purposes, they would accede to this ; tin 
 rights and privileges of citizens ought to take pre 
 cedence of the miserable squabbles about offic 
 and its paltry perquisites. Let this be the thin 
 in order ; the committee had labored most inde 
 fatigably, and frequently had three meeting 
 a-day, to get it ready. 
 
 Messrs. MORRIS and PATTERSON made 
 few remarks, and on motion of Mr. KIRKLANI 
 the subject was laid on the table 57 to 24. 
 DEBATE IN COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. 
 Mr. MANN offered the following : 
 Resolved, That when in committee ot the whole, n 
 member shall speak more than once to any question, unt 
 fevery member choosing to spnak has spoken, or by unan 
 mous consent of the convention. 
 
 He said he offered this resolution to give eac 
 modest gentleman in the convention an opport 
 nity to be heard. He found that when they wei 
 in committee of the whole, a certain number c 
 gentlemen, some five or six, monopolized all th 
 
 me. They managed some how to get the floor, 
 nd others were precluded who might have a 
 ord to say, because they were too modest tocon- 
 md for the floor ; and when ultimately they did 
 ucceed, they were put down by cries of" ques- 
 on" by those gentlemen who had consumed all 
 
 e time in debate, and wearied all the members. 
 
 A debate ensued in which Messrs. W1LLARD, 
 ATTERSON, RUSSELL, MURPHY, CHAT- 
 IELD, W. TAYLOR, CLYDE, &c. engaged. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said he had endeavored- to 
 o his duty impartially, whilst in the Chair, and 
 ad given the floor always to the first person he 
 ecognized, whether it was an imprudent member 
 r a lay member. 
 
 Mr. MANN withdrew it, on reflection. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE said that unless that rule was to 
 e enforced hereafter, he would renew it. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY It is the rule now, only it has 
 ot been enforced. 
 
 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 
 The Convention then took up the report of the 
 ommittee of the whole on the article reported by 
 ic 5'h standing committee, on the powers and 
 uties df the Governor. The question was on 
 greeing to the report of the committee of the 
 whole. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that the report be 
 
 aken up by sections. He added that any gentle. 
 
 man could now otter his amendments whicn, were 
 
 oted down in committee of the whole. 
 
 The 1st section v\as read accordingly as follows: 
 
 (j 1. The Executive power shall be vested in a Gover- 
 or. He shall hold his office (or two years; and a Lieu- 
 
 enant Governor shall be chosen at the same time and for 
 
 he same term. 
 
 Mr. YOUNG moved an amendment which was 
 ,greed to. so that the section stands thus: 
 
 5) 1. The Executive power shall be vested in a Gover- 
 ior, who shall hold his office for two years. A Lieuten- 
 int Governor shall be chosen at the same time and for the 
 ame term. 
 
 Mr DANA said he had offered this in commit- 
 ee, but they got into a habit just then of voting 
 io\vn every thiug. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOK thought the words "at the same 
 ime and'' in the las! line, were unectssary, as 
 here wa* a suitable provision in another section. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said this ;:njendrnent might 
 be troublesome if. we desired always to elect a 
 overnor and Lieutenant Governor at the same 
 tune. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY: I should like to 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR: Oh, I withdraw it I with- 
 draw it, if there is to be a discussion . 
 
 It was withdrawn and the 1st section was 
 passed. 
 
 The 2d section was then read, as follows: 
 
 & 2. x o person except a citizen of the United States shall 
 be eligible to the office of Governor; nor shall any person 
 be eligible to that office who shall not have been live years 
 a resident within the State: unless he shall have been 
 absent during that time on public business of the United 
 States or of this State. 
 
 Mr. HUNTINGTON of Suffolk moved to insert 
 in I he 3rd line, alter the words "eligible to that 
 office" the words, ''who shall not have attained 
 the age of 30 years." 
 
 Mr. MILLER demanded the yeas and nays and 
 they were ordered, and being taken resulted thus 
 
339 
 
 yeas 01, nays 49. So the amendment was car- 
 ried. 
 
 AYKS-Messrs. Angel, Ayrault, F.F- Backus, H. Backup, 
 Bouck, Biayton, Bull, D. I), Campbell, Catl'lee, Clark, 
 Clyde, Conely, Crocker, Cuddebnck, Dann, Dubois, For- 
 syth, Gardner, Grbhard. Graham, Greene, Harrison, IIa\v- 
 ley, Hoihnaii, Hunter, A. Humington, E. Ilnntington, 
 Hyie, Jordan, Kemble, King.sley, Sic.Nitt, Maxwell, Miller, 
 Morns, Murphy, Ni.'holas. Parish, Pennimsm, Porter, Pich- 
 xn.jiui, St. John, Salisbury, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Sim 
 nions E Spencer, Stanton, Stow, Strong, Twfgart, Tall 
 madge, J. J. Taylor, Tuthill, Water; ury, Wiilard, Wood, 
 A. U rijrht, Yawger, A. W. Young 61. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Archer, Bascom, Bergen, Bowdish, 
 Brown, Bnice, Brundage, Burr, Cambreleng, 11. Camp- 
 bell, jr.. Ch;itfi--l<!, ( ook. Cornell Danlbrth, Dodd, Dprlon, 
 Fiandeis, Harris, Hart, Hotchki&s, Hunt, Hutchinson, 
 Jones, Reman, Kirkland, Loomis, Mann, Nellis, Nicoll. 
 O'Conor, Patterson, Power?, Rhoades, Hiker, Russell, 
 SheparJ, Stephens, Stetson, Swackhamer, T^ft't, W. Tay- 
 lor, Townseud, Vanschoonhoven, Warren, White, Wit- 
 beck, Worden, J. Youngs 49. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY had voted "no." He now wish- 
 ed to change his vote 
 
 Mr. STRONG: Can a member change his vote 
 merely tor the purposeof moving a reconsideration 
 herf after? 
 
 Mr. MURPHY : I find I can move to reconsid- 
 er without changing my vote ; so I wish it record- 
 ed back to the nays. 
 
 Mr. STRONG : Now, sir, I wish to know if a 
 member can change his vote more than once on 
 the same subject? 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH desired to vote. He was al- 
 lowed, as was Mr. CORNELL. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said there was no rule to 
 prevent them. 
 
 Mr. C AMBRELING hoped that upon so grave 
 a matter as emending the Constitution they ought 
 not to be tied down to strict parliamentary rules 
 in the rec .rdirg a vote. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said his name was called as 
 voting on both sides the question. He had not 
 done so. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said the practice was neither 
 a parliamentary one, nor a convenient one of 
 changing the votes. The best way was this : a 
 member rises in his place, and asks to be called. 
 The President asks if he was within the bar ; he 
 answered " yes," his name is called, he votes, and 
 in this way a change of vote is effected without 
 confusion. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON moved the insertion of the 
 word " native," to follow the words" no person 
 except a," in the first line of the 3d section. 
 
 Mr. MANN demanded the yeas and nays and 
 they were taken and resulted thus yeas G, nays 
 106. 
 
 Mr HARRISON desired to offer another amend- 
 ment as a substitute for the whole section as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor un- 
 less he shall be 30 years of age, and shall have been 10 
 years a resident of the United states, and five years a resi- 
 dent ol this state, unless he shall have been absent on pub 
 lie business of this state, or the United Sta'.es. And no per- 
 son shall be constitutionally eligible to the office of Lieut- 
 Governor who shall not be eligible to the office of Gov. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND enquired if this amendment 
 was offered in committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON said, substantially it was, 
 though not in this precise form. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON. Even if it had not been, 
 there is no rule to prevent its being offered now. 
 
 The PRESIDENT. The rule is first to con- 
 
 sider those offered in committee of the whole, and 
 then any new ones. 
 
 Mr. HUNT desired then to offer an amendment 
 to the section as it stood, and it took precedence 
 of all others. It was to insert after the 30 year's 
 qualification, which had been agreed to, the 
 words " or who shall have passed the age of 70." 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend by strik- 
 ing out 70 and inserting 60. 
 
 Mr. HUNT accepted the amendment. 
 
 The amendment as amended was lost, the vote 
 being 6 in the affirmative and 103 in the negative. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said it was known that all 
 the way through this controversy he had been in 
 favor of the most unlimited eligibility for the 
 candidate for Governor. But as the convention 
 had begun to establish limitations and checks, he 
 thought they ought to guard against the danger 
 from the other side, of drivelling dotage as well 
 as the inexperience of youth. Having disposed 
 of those questions he now moved,that there might 
 be no misunderstanding on the subject, the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 Every qualified elector of this state shall be eligible to 
 the office of Governor. 
 
 The PRESIDENT decided that the substitute 
 of the gentleman from Richmond (Mr. HARRI- 
 SON) would be first in order if there were no other 
 amendments to the section. 
 
 Mr. RIKER said he had an amendment to offer 
 which he submitted as follows : to add the words 
 " or Lieut. Governor" after the word "Governor" 
 in the second line. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said the 7th section made ample 
 provision for the qualifications of the Lieut. Gov- 
 ernor. 
 
 M.. CROOKER thought that it would be more 
 proper to insert the words here, and strike them 
 out of the seventh section. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said, no. The seventh section 
 related exclusively to the Lieut. Governor, and 
 his qualifications should be prescribed by one 
 section. 
 
 The amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL moved to insert the words " next 
 proceeding his election" after the words " five 
 years" in the third article. 
 
 Mr. STETSON thought this qualification of 
 residence might be susceptible of a construction 
 which miht not meet with the approbation of the 
 Convention. The designation of the absence gives 
 a kind of character to " term of residence." An 
 absence once in every 5 years would thus dis- 
 qualify a man. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE hoped the amendment would pre- 
 vail, otherwise a man might become a citizen, go 
 away for many years ; return, and in twenty-four 
 hours be qualified to and be elected Governor. 
 If he had ever at any time resided here 5 years, 
 he could be Governor without this amendment. 
 He could see no objection to this amendment. 
 
 Mr. BROWN now rose and asked the Conven- 
 tion to give him the opportunity to record his 
 vote on file question already taken. It would be 
 a favor which he should be willing to extend to 
 other gentlemen at any time. The ground on 
 which he asked it was, that he had been detained 
 that morning on the business of the House. 
 
 The PRESIDENT put the question on grant- 
 ing leave.. 
 
340 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS asked the gentleman from Or 
 
 ange, if his detention had been occasioned b} 
 
 business connected with the Convention. 
 
 Mr. BROWN replied that such was the case 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought then that no bad pre 
 
 cedent would be established, and he hoped leave 
 
 would be given. 
 
 Leave was unanimously given accordingly, and 
 
 Mr. BROWN voted no on the two first questions 
 
 taken. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : Well, I may as well vote on 
 
 them all, since you are so clever. I vote " No,' 
 
 on the third question. 
 
 Mr. DANA spoke in favor of the amendment 
 
 He thought if a man was absent from the State on 
 
 his own business he ought to lose his privilege 
 The amendment was agreed to. 
 Mr. ANGEL then moved the insertion of the 
 
 word " citizen" after the word resident in the 
 
 third line. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD called for the yeas and nays 
 
 upon this. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said this would provide 5 years 
 before and 5 years after naturalization. It was 
 
 getting in about as much of nativeism "as could 
 be got in without the name. He thought 
 those who voted for the 30 years' qualification 
 ought to vote for this; he hoped they would. 
 He wished members distinctly to understand this 
 amendment before voting. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said he would ask the indul- 
 gence of the convention for a few remarks in re- 
 gard to the amendment of the gentleman from 
 Allegany, (Mr. ANGEL) because it was a new 
 proposition which had not been offered when in 
 committee of the whole, and which had a very 
 important bearing. He hoped it would be rej ect- 
 ed, and that those who had sustained the pro- 
 vision requiring the qualification of thirty years 
 of age, would not, as the gentleman from New- 
 York (Mr. O'CoNOR) had suggested, also vote 
 for this. Two wrongs did not make a right; 
 and this was too important a matter to be hasti- 
 ly or inconsiderately voted upon. He was op- 
 posed to the amendment because its effect would 
 be to require a ten years residence in certain ca- 
 ses before adopted citizens would be eligible. 
 Thus a foreigner landing in this state with the 
 bonafide intention to become a citizen,, and ac- 
 tually becoming such after a residence of five 
 years, would, according to our present constitu- 
 tion, and according to the section under consid- 
 eration as it now stands, be eligible to the office 
 of Governor ; but if this amendment be adopted 
 you will require a further residence of an addi- 
 tional five years before he would be eligible. 
 Now this was making a distinction between na- 
 tive and adopted citizens which he did not wish 
 to see admitted. They had with great unanimity 
 just stricken out the word native and abolished 
 that odious interpolation in the constitution, and 
 he trusted they would adhere to the principle of 
 that vote. He called upon those who had voted 
 with him on his motion for that purpose, because 
 it created two classes of citizens, to come up and 
 vote down the specious amendment of the gen- 
 tlemen from Allegany. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said he had not offered this amend- 
 ment without due reflection. He thought it would 
 be doing no injustice to the truth were he to say 
 
 that he had as much regard for foreigners and as 
 much kind feeling towards them as the gentleman 
 from Kings (Mr. MURPHY). He had a due 
 regard for them. He was pleased with their 
 emigrating to this country. They come here 
 and do our work for us and they often 
 come well qualified to fill our offices and 
 we give them a full share of them. They 
 flee from oppression at home, and then find 
 an asylum here. We afford them all the pri- 
 vileges we can afford, but it must be borne in 
 mind that every foreigner brings with him some 
 lingering feeling from the land 'of his nativity in 
 favor of monarchical governments and institutions 
 which may be adverse to his duty here if he were 
 put in this office too speedily. And is it a hard- 
 ship to say that he shall not be governor till he 
 has been here five years ? The gentleman from 
 Kings (Mr. MURPHY) said in substance he did 
 not recollect the precise words that it was an op- 
 pressive restriction on foreigners to make them 
 wait five years after naturalization before they 
 could become eligible for the office of Governor. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY denied that he had said any 
 thing of the kind. He had said he was opposed 
 to the amendment because it established a dis- 
 tinction between native and naturalized citizens. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL continued. Well, what kind of 
 oppression was that ? When they selected a 
 chief magistrate for three millions of people to 
 preside over the Empire State, was it an hard- 
 ship to say to a man, " because you have not been 
 a citizen five years, you shall not be Governor ?" 
 Some period should be fixed, and he thought ten 
 years residence was short enough, in all con- 
 science five before and five after acquiring citi- 
 zenship. The Convention had just passed a vote 
 excluding the word " native," and they had made 
 hirty years a qualification of a native born citi- 
 zen thus establishing a complete nine year quar- 
 rantine for the native born ; and he really hoped 
 t would not be considered as indicating an un- 
 dnd feeling towards foreigners, to require that 
 hey should have a five years citizenship to be 
 eligible. He had no unkind feeling for foreign- 
 ers at all ; but he wished to ask if there was any 
 American feeling left in this Convention, or 
 vhether they would give up every thing to, men 
 vhe> had but recently come into the country ? 
 le firmly believed it would not be safe to adopt 
 he resolution without this restriction. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON had a few remarks to offer to 
 
 he Convention, and he regretted that he was not 
 
 able to offer them in a better form. ' There were 
 
 lere two distinct propositions which must pre- 
 
 ent themselves to the Convention. The first was 
 
 hat gentlemen either meant to adopt such dis- 
 
 inctive qualifications as should stand forth prom- 
 
 nently and be clearly perceptible in the consti- 
 
 ution, or they would abandon the ground entire- 
 
 y and throw themselves back on the proposition 
 
 ome time since made by the gentlemen from St. 
 
 ^awrence, which he thought was the only right- 
 
 ul one, if they did not make this restriction. 
 
 Singly to adopt a 5 years residence would be, 
 
 merely trifling and a mockery; fora foreigner 
 
 might land on our shores and in 5 years he would 
 
 e eligible to be our Governor. Now, with the 
 
 entleman from Allegany (Mr. ANGEL) he would 
 
 ask if they had abandoned all our American feel-. 
 
341 
 
 ings ? He was not ashamed to stand up there and 
 contend for those principles that should charac- 
 terize and distinguish us as Americans. He had 
 no desire to encourage the ambitious views of a 
 foreigner who should come to our shores with as- 
 pirations for the chair of the chief magistrate of 
 this state. Many formidable evils might arise 
 from this indulgence of foreigners. Had the peo- 
 ple of this State forgotten that we had a large 
 protestant body within our bosom, who were 
 looking with great interest on this question ? 
 And could the feelings and opinions of that large 
 and respectable class be disregarded ? It must 
 be familiar to every member of the Convention 
 that there had been for some time going on in 
 this country, a controversy that however we 
 might be disposed to look upon it, to a large 
 portion of our people was an important one 
 indeed. He should not have called the atten- 
 tion of the Convention to this matter, but for that 
 remarkable and extraordinary indifference which 
 he saw here manifested upon this question. 
 He hoped then the Convention would give them 
 reasonable restrictions and reasonable qualifi- 
 cations, or abandon them altogether and adopt 
 the theoretical principles, which he admitted 
 however were just in themselves, of the gentleman 
 from St. Lawrence (Mr. RUSSELL,) and the gen- 
 tleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD ) That 
 would be right, but this would be a mockery. 
 There had been much talk in the Convention 
 about reciprocity; but was there any reciprocity 
 in this matter ? In what manner were American 
 citizens treated abroad ? What right had we to 
 rely on the justice of the Biitish government when 
 we go abroad : They had been told that that go- 
 vernment claimr-d perpetual allegiance from her 
 sub jecis, arid no American, whatever may have 
 been his service, can hold the most trifling office 
 there. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL: That is not so. 
 
 Mr. HARRiSON : He would ask if we would 
 now throw open every office in the state could 
 we especially throw open the chair of the Execu- 
 tive chief magistrate to foreigners, who anticipate, 
 when they land on our shores, that they shall be 
 eligible to it after 5 years' residence ? It was un 
 just, in every view ot the subject, and hence he 
 approved of the proposition from Allegany (Mr. 
 ANGEL.) Again, on our frontier we have one 
 or two millions of people who may be arrayed in 
 hostility against us. They are the subjects of a 
 foreign power, the most formidable on ihe globe, 
 and yet we are called upon to place at the head of 
 our army, in time of war, a man who might only 
 have been here 5 years, and who could never di- 
 vest himselt of his allegiance to the country 
 whence he came. Fur a foreigner can never 
 throw off his allegiance. He trusted the Con- 
 vention would hesilate before they fixed in the 
 constitution such a provision, which would place 
 them at the disposition of a foreigner, who had 
 not been a resident within the bosom of this 
 country for more than 5 years. In conclusion, hi 
 repeated that we ought, from regard to the digni 
 ty of our state, to adopt some restriction, which 
 would in itself be respectable, and shield us from 
 the evil that might justly be apprehended ; or on 
 the other hand, adopt the reasonable abstract 
 principles which had been laid down by the gen- 
 
 leman from St. Lawrence, which threw it open 
 o all freeholders. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD. There is no property qua- 
 ification required by that proposition. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said I am astonished to hear the 
 sentiments uttered by the honorable t.enilemen 
 who have just addressed the house. I am sorry to 
 witness the feelings displayed upon a question 
 that I had hoped was settled here finally With 
 the fullest concurience of opinion with a unani- 
 mity of sentiment almost unparalleled in the an- 
 nals of legislative bodies and worthy the dignity 
 of this house and the occasion the odious distinc- 
 tion between the native and the adopted citizen 
 has been stricken from the Constitution. The 
 honorable gentleman from Richmond (Mr. HAR- 
 RISON) appeals to the American feeling of this 
 house to place the word " native " again in that 
 instrument. Sir, I am sure he will not arouse the 
 feeling he seeks. I am sure we are too much im- 
 bued with the tree spirit of our institutions too 
 full of the remembrance of our national history 
 too grateful for the services of those who in the 
 darkest period of our country's existence perilled 
 every thing to serve the cause of liberty too 
 mindful of the sources of our population and our 
 prosperity to indulge any feeling so far beneath the 
 dignity of freemen. No sir, if the gentleman's 
 appeal moves us at all, it awakens that ether 
 American feeling which flows from the contem. 
 plation of our country the home ot more than 
 18,000,000 of free people spreading over millions 
 of acres stretching from ocean to ocean em- 
 bracing almost a continent in its expanse and the 
 consideration that it has grown to this extended 
 greatness from an inconsideiable beginning, with- 
 in a tew years, by the infusion of the persecuted 
 of every clime,and that those who came made this 
 their home and liberty their condition, vindicating 
 both, in peace by the pursuits that make our national 
 wealth, strength and dignity, and in war upon every 
 battle field. The honorable gentleman tells us that 
 the eyes of the protestants are upon us and heap- 
 peals to us against the catholic sect. Sir, it is the pe- 
 culiar glory of this country that every man may 
 worship afier the wishes of his own heart. He may 
 bow down before his God at morn at noon or at 
 night, as his conscience or even his prejudices 
 may dictate, and no man shall question him 
 therefor. I ask then, how dare the honora. 
 ble gentleman strike a blow at religious free- 
 dom. He employs those fatal appeals that 
 have wrought the desecration of religious 
 temples in one of the cities of this land 
 that have spread death and desolation amidst 
 peaceful citizens and happy homes that have 
 shaken by their frantic injustice the confidence 
 of mankind in free governments. Here is no 
 place to utter them here they fall not on willing 
 ears. But the honorable gentleman fears that a 
 foreigner may lead our armies if the word " na- 
 tive" is not restored so he may. If the people 
 choose to confide the defence of our State to his 
 hands why should he not ? I believe they will 
 judge wisely in their choice. They can defend 
 themselves and rest assured they will not long 
 employ a weak or a wicked agent whether for- 
 eigner or native. A foreigner can be true and a 
 native can be false. Glance at our history. 
 Were not the people nobly led by Montgomery 
 
 
342 
 
 by Steuben by Lafayette,- whose blood flowed 
 freely for the great principles of the Revolution ? 
 Were these great men not able, were they not 
 brave were they not true ? And on the other 
 hand look at Benedict Arnold educated with us, 
 the full recipient of our bounty our own in all 
 his earlier associations, and if one could have 
 known the soul of man in all his earlier sympa- 
 thies look at him, I say, and behold how black 
 the treachery of a native heart can be. I will not 
 dwell upon the contrast language is inadequate 
 to present its full force. I leave the subject 
 hoping that these sentiments of the honorable 
 gentlemen will not again be spoken. They dis- 
 grace those who utter and those who hear, and I 
 trust in God they will no more be repeated for- 
 ever. . 
 
 Mr. HARRISON said he wished to reply if he 
 had the right to do so. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that he had. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON said that he would then tell 
 that young gentlemen from New- York, (Mr. 
 SHEPARD) that he (Mr. H.) was an American. 
 He was proud of this ; and what was more, he 
 would tell him that his ancestors and connexions 
 had at various times in this country given demon- 
 strations of their patriotism in various ways ; and 
 when " whigism" was really a distinctive quali- 
 ty he was a whig. Such reflections as had been 
 indulged in by that young gentleman (Mr. SHE- 
 PARD) did not come with great propriety from 
 him, towards one who stood here to espouse that 
 which he believed to be the true interest of the 
 people of this state. He had no idea that his mo- 
 tives should be aspersed, and his principles, whe- 
 ther as a man or a politician, should thus be 
 called in question. He was a Republican and 
 had always been so. He was a friend to Repub- 
 lican institutions, and would go as far to support 
 them as that young gentleman, (Mr. SHEPARD.) 
 He was a friend also to aliens and would 
 concede to them every office to which they rea- 
 sonably ought to aspire; but he had no idea that 
 a foreigner should come here indulging aspira- 
 tions towards the chief magistracy from the very 
 first moment he landed upon our shores. 
 He had no idea that an ambitious foreign- 
 er should come here with the expectation 
 that he should be entrusted with the chief power 
 of the State, both civil and military, either on the 
 arrival or at any time after. If to question the 
 propriety of such a concession was to occasion 
 the indulgence of such language and such insin- 
 uations as they had just heard from the gentle- 
 man from New-York (Mr. SHEPARD), then he 
 must submit to the charge. But he had yet to 
 learn that those principles which governed the 
 wise and and able men of the Convention of 1821 
 are to be deemed heretical in this body, and to be 
 considered as no longer republican in this state. 
 That section for which he was now contending 
 was advocated in the Convention of 1821 by such 
 men as Daniel D. Tompkins, General Root, and 
 Rufus King ; and the latter, though a federalist, 
 was a man of undisputed patriotism. Was it 
 then, he asked, heretical to contend for princi- 
 ples for which such men gave their voices and 
 their votes in that Convention, and which they 
 always constantly adhered to ? And was he for 
 the expression of his opinion to be admonished 
 
 by a young man so much his junior as the gentle- 
 man from New York (SHEPARD.)? He would 
 tell that young man that he was not thus to be 
 restrained from the advocacy of those principles 
 which were held by our revolutionary fathers, 
 and have been entertained by the republicans of 
 the country ever since. He had a few more words 
 to say. and merely to reiterate an expression he 
 had before used in speaking. For that purpose 
 he begged permission to trespass a moment longer 
 upon the indulgence of the committee. He had 
 made allusion to the Protestant interest : he did 
 not by that intend to array Protestants and Catho- 
 lics against each other. It was merely from a 
 respectful deference to a large body of citizens 
 that he had thus spoken a body that entertains 
 great apprehensions from the Catholics on this 
 ground, whether well or ill founded was not for 
 him to say. And he appealed to the Convention 
 if they should not respect so large and respect- 
 able a body as these Protestants, who though they 
 could not be heard here, would, they might de- 
 pend upon it, if the question were submitted to 
 them, give expression to an opinion which would 
 have some weight elsewhere. In conclusion he 
 would again say, either adopt such distinctive 
 qualifications as would stand out boldly the native 
 born, or ten years residence or abandon all other 
 qualifications altogether, and insert the proposi- 
 tion that every mere elector shall be qualified. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that it was very evident they 
 were getting back again to the days of Buncombe 
 speeches ; they had had enough of these in com- 
 mittee of the whole on this article, and they 
 were beginning again just where they had left off', 
 after so many day's talking. Now he hated to 
 move the previous question ; because it would 
 cut off' all amendments not then pending, and if 
 the committee would take the question, he would 
 not move it. 
 
 The ayes and noes were then ordered and the 
 question was taken. It was negatived. Ayes 
 36, nays 73, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer. Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish, 
 Brown, Bruce, Brundage,' Burr, Cambreleng, Candee, 
 Chattield, Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cook, ornell, Dodd, 
 Dorlon, Flanders, Forsyth, Greene, Harris, Hart, Hawley, 
 Hoftman, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, E. 
 Huntington, H)de, Jones, Kornble, Kernan, Kingsiey, 
 Kirkland, Loomis, Mann, McNitt, Maxwell, Morris, Mur- 
 phy, Nellis Nicoll, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Powers, 
 President, Rhoades, Riker, Russell, Salisbury, Sears, Shaw, 
 Sheldon, Shepard, Staaton, Sietson, Swackhamer, Tafft, 
 J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, 1 ownsend, Vsche, Van 
 Schoonhoven, Warren, White, Wi'beck, Worden, Yaw- 
 ger, Youngs 78. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Back- 
 us, Bascom, Brayton, Bull, D. D. Campbell, Crooker, Cud- 
 deback, Dana, Dubois. Gardner, Gebhard, Graham, Harri- 
 son, Hutchmson, Jordan, Miller, Nicholas, Penniman, 
 Richmond. St. John, Simmons, Smith, E. Spencer, Stow, 
 Strong. Taggart, Tailmadg*, Tuthill, \Vaterbury, Willard, 
 Wood, A. Wright, Young- 36. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to add after the words 
 " unless he shall have been absent during that 
 time on public business of the U. S., or of this 
 State" the words " or on business of his own." 
 
 Mr. STETSON suggested that the branch of 
 the sentence should be stricken out which Mr. 
 BASCOM proposed to amend. 
 
 Mr. B. withdrew his amendment, and the ques- 
 tion being taken on Mr. STETSON'S proposition 
 it prevailed. 
 
343 
 
 Mr. JONES would like to have the question 
 taken on a motion which he had moved in com- 
 mittee of the whole. He therefore moved to 
 strike out the words "who shall not have been 
 five years a resident within the State," together 
 with the words " next preceding his election," 
 which had been introduced on the motion of Mr. 
 i. after the words " five years." 
 
 Mr. DANA would inquire then if this amend- 
 ment was adopted, whether we could have any 
 candidate for Governor. No person would be 
 eligible to the office. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that it would still provide 
 a qualification for eligibility. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN rose to point out the situation in 
 which we would be placed if this amendment pre- 
 vailed. The laws of naturalization are beyond 
 the power of this State, and Congress might pass 
 to-morrow, a law by which foreigners might be 
 naturalized sixty days, or even six hours, after 
 they had landed, and at that very moment be eli- 
 gible to the office of. Governor. He knew it 
 would be said that we were not compelled to vote 
 for them, and on that question he had no disposi- 
 tion to renew a discussion w T hich had already been 
 protracted ; but this placed us entirely within the 
 disposition of the general government, and he had 
 some little regard For State rights yet. He thought 
 it would be perfectly suicidal, as we had passed 
 the section requiring a residence for thirty years, 
 to vote for this. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said he would not have risen to 
 speak, had not gentlemen repeatedly attempted 
 to state the position of things before the Conven- 
 tion. And having consumed none of the time of 
 the ten d;<ys occupied in determining merely 
 whether the citizens of the State were competent 
 to select a candidate for Governor, he would now 
 be permitted to state his opinion of the question 
 before us now. It was could we trust the great 
 body of tne electors of the State within the 
 limits of citizenship, to select a candidate for 
 Governor. He did not deny that the people had 
 a right to restrict themselves as to the qualifica- 
 tions they would require of the chief magistrate, 
 but the great question was, was it necessary for 
 them to do so. He did not believe that the peo- 
 ple ever would select a candidate who would be 
 excluded by these propositions. He would not 
 vote for , a Governor unless under extraordinary 
 circumstances, who did not possess those qualifi- 
 cations, but he would extend the same right of 
 forming a judgment, to the people themselves as 
 he then claimed for himself. It was the only 
 correct principle consistent with true democracy. 
 
 The question being taken by ayes and nays 
 the amendment was rejected, ayes 44, nays 66, 
 as follows : 
 
 AYrS Messrs. Archer, Bascom, Bergen, Bowdish, 
 Brown, Burr, CambMeng, R. Campbell, jr. Chiitnell, 
 Clark, Cook, Coa.ell, Daalbrth, Dodd, Dorlon, Flanders, 
 li-jr.is, lldrusou. Hart, Hu.chn.iss, -tuut, Jones, Kernan, 
 Looinis, Mann, Murphy, Nellis, O'Gonor, Patterson, Pow- 
 ers, Russell, Shepard, Stetson, Swackhamer, Tatt, W. 
 Taylor, Tilden, Townsemi, Vaehe, Van Schoonhoven, 
 Warmi, White, Wiibeck, Women 44. 
 
 NOi^J Messrs Angel, Ayrault, V. ft. Backus, II Back- 
 us, Bouck, Bray ton. Bruce, Bruadage, Bull, D.D. Camp. 
 bel] ) Candee,Conley,Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, Dubois, 
 Forsjth, Gardner, Gebhard, Graham, Hawley, Hortman, 
 Hunter, A. iluutin^tou, E. Huntington, Hutchinson.Hyde, 
 Jordan Kemble, Kmgsley, Kirkland, McNitt, Maxwell, 
 Miller, Morris, Nicholas, NicoJl, Parish, Fenniman, Prt*i 
 
 den'., Rhoades, Richmond, Hiker, St. Joi.a, SalL-Ku/y, 
 Sears, Shaw, Sht Iduii, Simmons, Smith, E Spencer, Stan 
 ton, Stow, Strong, Taggart, Talhnadge, J J. Taylor, Tut- 
 hill. Willard, Waterbury. Wood, A. Wright, Yawger, 
 Young. Youngs. 6t> 
 
 Some conversation here arose as to the priori-' 
 ty of amendments, between Messrs. CHATFIELD, 
 and HARRISON, when Mr. C's was decided to be 
 the first in order. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then moved to strike out 
 the second section, and insert the following : 
 
 Ev< ry qualified elector cf this state shall be eligible to 
 the otfice of Governor. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN liked this proposition, because 
 it was bringing a direct vote upon the question of 
 restrictions. He suggested that Mr. C. would at- 
 tain his object perhaps more directly, by modify- 
 ing his proposition as follows : 
 
 The qualified electors of the state are hereby declared 
 competent, an I may in the manner prescribed in this arti 
 cle, elect any one of their number Governor of this state. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD would very cheerfully ex- 
 cept the amendment. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that the Convention had 
 voted sub.stdiitiallj upon this proposition twice 
 before. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS : There is no danger of its adop- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS: There is too much meta- 
 physics about il. 
 
 Mr. A. WRIGHT called for a division on the 
 question of striking out and inserting. 
 
 The PRESIDENT decided the amendment to 
 be in order, and the question not to be divisible. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER would like to know what the 
 committee on the elective franchise were going 
 to do in retard to the p.iupers, lunatics and idiots, 
 before he voted on this proposition. He would 
 not like to vote them competent tor Governer. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: Yes, those also, if the 
 people ch lose to elect them. 
 
 Mr. S 1'ETSON suggested that the word com 
 peterit, had a meaning beyond mere eligibility. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN thought/there could be no doubt 
 as to the meaning of the section. 
 
 Mr. MILLER hoped the Convention would not 
 be taken by surprise. Did we want to allow peo- 
 ple like pauoers ;:n:l vagabonds, ot every kind, to 
 be Governor ? He had no such wisn at any rate. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that it had already been 
 determined by the debaies here that there was a 
 number of candidates for governor on the floor. 
 He wanted members to understand that in voting 
 for this amendment, they would disqualify mem- 
 bers of this convention from being a candidate 
 Cor that office. His friend on his left (Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN) was not a voter, having changed his resi- 
 dence, and he (Mr. R.) would appeal tohisdemo- 
 craiic friends at any rale, in the present division 
 of sentiment, as to a candidate for gorernor,not to 
 disqualify him. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend the substitute by 
 introducing ihe words "as no restrictions of any 
 kind either as to age, citizenship, residence, or 
 profession are reasonable, therefore." 
 
 Mr BASCOM said that then the proposition 
 would be entirely antagonistic to itself, because 
 the next line did go on to assert the restrictions 
 of electors. 
 
 Mr. STOWS amendment waa here rejected. 
 
344 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that it (here were any 
 gentlemen on the floor, so situated as alluded to 
 by the gentleman from Onondaga (Mr. RHOADES,) 
 to provide for such ?n unforeseen and unfortunate 
 contingency, he would be willing to add to the 
 end of his amendment *' and no person shall be- 
 come ineligible in consequence of having remov- 
 ed from one part of the state to the other." It his 
 friend from Herkimer was desirous to be a candi- 
 date tor goveinor he would press his motion. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS thought this amendment better 
 adapted to another part of their business than to 
 the present section. He would with great pleas- 
 ure go tor having the amendment put in the bill 
 of rights, where the rights and powers of the cit- 
 izens were defined. To his mind it seemed to be 
 rather ad captandum then to desire to express in 
 this article the restrictions intend to be imposed 
 on this subject. He had nodoubt but what thisCon- 
 vention acting as a committee of the whole peo 
 pie, might lay down such rules and regulations 
 with respect to the exercise of the popular will, 
 for their approval in the adoption of the constitu-- 
 tion, as it might be supposed that they would ap- 
 prove. We propose certain measures, which they 
 cannot amend, but either must approve or disap 
 prove. The system of nomination by informal 
 eaucusses had in effect become a part of our sys- 
 tem of government ihe people delegate to these 
 bodies the power to nominate and place before 
 them candidates for Governor. Therefore, the 
 question here appeared to him to be, between this 
 Coav ntion and the ones for nominating candidates 
 for office. And this convention might with per. 
 f ct propiiety secure the electors of the State 
 against the improper acts of nominating conven- 
 tions. He regarded it however, as a mere ques- 
 tion of expediency as to how far we should re- 
 strict the action of the nominating conventions 
 not the actions of the people. It was to prescribe 
 for those conventions rules of proceeding precise, 
 ly analogous to the adoption of rules by this con 
 veRtion. He should therefore vote against insert 
 ing the amendment in this article. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN, on the suggestion of some gen- 
 tlemen, agreed to substitute the words " in this 
 Constitution" for the word " Article." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped this amendment would 
 not prevail because it was ultra, and because it 
 assumed what was false in fact. Mr. S. contend- 
 ed further that the question had already been 
 voted down two or three times. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that upon reflection 
 he must prefer now his own proposition and he 
 confessed that he regretted having accepted th 
 substitute. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that if the gentleman woulc 
 allow him he would withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD hoped not, for if he did he 
 (Mr. S.) would offer precisely the same thing. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN was bound after what the" gen 
 tleman had said to withdraw it as a matter of par- 
 liamentary courtesy. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then proposed his original 
 amendment. He did it because it was a simpL 
 and distinct proposition, and because he was sen 
 sible that it would secure more votes than would 
 that of the gentleman from Ontario. For himsel 
 however he was perfectly free to vote for the other 
 for he conceived it to be the affirmance of the 
 
 p-eat and distinct principle, to which he was 
 ommitted over and over again in feeling, prin- 
 iple and expression, that the people of the State 
 re competent to select any and every body they 
 may choose as their officers. A great error in 
 he argument of Mr. LOOMIS was the assumption 
 hat it was not the people themselves, but a nomi- 
 lating convention who decide the selection. He 
 mdertook to say that those conventions could 
 ontrol nothing, did control nothing but merely 
 ent a nomination down to the people for ratifi- 
 cation. And did the gentleman suppose that 
 hey would ratify any other than a man of intelli- 
 gence and integrity. And it was by no means 
 certain that this business would always be done 
 n this way. The gentleman from Essex said that 
 ;his amendment was ult<-a. Every reform that 
 lad been suggested had been combatted as ultra. 
 :Ie was sorry that the gentleman had not discov- 
 ered that these reforms, ultra and radical as they 
 vere, were the darling doctrines and measures of 
 ;he people. Public opinion was all one way and 
 .n affirmance of the principle that the people were 
 competent to select their own officers, and to go- 
 vern themselves. He warned that gentleman 
 and every other man here who took this high 
 federal ground here, that they were digging their 
 own political graves. And he would say to the 
 gentleman from Essex that if he intended to stand 
 with the people and well with them, that he must 
 ^0 with them, and act with them, and not stand 
 up here to oppose great reforms in our organic 
 iaw which the people demand and approve. He 
 could not do it without incurring the risk of be- 
 ing condemned by the people. The proposition 
 tie (Mr. C.) made was but the assertion of the 
 great inherent principle that the people were 
 competent to govern themselves. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that capacity, discre- 
 tion, integrity and patriotism in a chief magis- 
 trate were the great qualities for which he should 
 be selected. No resolution that we could make 
 here would direct public attention to these quali- 
 ties. Having therefore to trust the people in par- 
 ticulars, much higher than the one now sought to 
 be imposed it was scarcely worth while to in- 
 sist, on these minor qualifications of age and resi- 
 dence. If the people would regard one they 
 would the other. These were his views, and he 
 should vote for the amendment, although he 
 did not think it of much importance, and he feared 
 it would tend to divert the public attention from 
 matters of much more importance. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL urged that the time should 
 not be taken up in a further discussion of this 
 question gentleman were assuming a great deal 
 who supposed that they could instruct the Con- 
 vention in regard to it. It was high time we stop- 
 ped talking and went to work. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN rose simply to say that the very 
 question now presented had been voted on and 
 decided by the convention, and he had heard no 
 reason offered to change the vote that was given 
 on the subject, unless it was the awful maledic- 
 tion of the gentleman from Otsego, (Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD.) warning his political friends who dared 
 to vote right, that they were digging their own 
 political graves in voting for this section in this 
 form. So far as concerned himself, he (Mr. J.) 
 would tell that gentleman he had no fears on the 
 
345 
 
 subject. His political grave was dug 15 years 
 ago, and dug by himself, by retiring voluntary 
 from public life. He voted against the proposi- 
 tion in another form, and should vote against it 
 in its present form. He therefore hoped that the 
 ghost of federalism, digging of political graves, 
 and the denunciation of the leader of the" respon- 
 sible majority, or he who assumed to be such here, 
 would not frighten gentlemen from voting pre- 
 cisely as their convictions lead them. For one, 
 he was willing to place himself before the people 
 on these restrictions of 30 years of age and five 
 years residence, and to have it understood that 
 in voting against this amendment he voted for 
 those restrictions. This being understood, he 
 had nothing more to offer, and was willing to re- 
 cord his vote. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that as the attitude in 
 which he stood on this question, had been grossly 
 misrepresented, if not misunderstood, it was prop- 
 er for him now to explain his position. We had 
 voted already to have 30 years of age, and five 
 years residence, and he insisted that having 
 done that it could only be revoked by a reconsid- 
 eration. It had been said that he was not willing 
 to trust the people. He would go as far as any Jaco- 
 bin in this country or any radical, though even 
 not on this floor, in trusting them. But that was 
 not the question involved in proposing these res- 
 trictions. Had not gentleman heard of Shay's 
 insurrection, which rent Massachusetts asunder, 
 and overruled the State government. Had they 
 not seen Rhode Island torn asunder on a question 
 of government. Could we not suppose a military 
 force of the United States of one hundred thou- 
 sand mtn, in this State, and might not there be 
 clanger 01 the State government being thereby 
 overawed. He would therefore, have the pub 
 lie guarded against such contingencies, and not 
 that he distrusted the capacity of the people. 
 At the proper time, he gave notice that he should 
 move to amend, so as to provide, in addition to 
 these qualifications of age and residence, that no 
 person shall be eligible who is not a natural born 
 citizen, or who shall not be a citizen at the time 
 of the adoption of this constitution. And he 
 wished it to be distinctly understood that in do- 
 ing so he did not distrust the capacity of the peo- 
 ple. 
 
 Mr, BRUNDAGE said he desired to explain an 
 apparent inconsistency. He had voted agains 
 retaining this qualification of age, not so much 
 because he thought it important whether it was 
 retained or not but because he thought all these 
 matters would be attended to by the people, whe 
 ther their attention was specially called to it o 
 not, in the constitution. Yesterday, he had re 
 ceived a letter from oae of his constituents, wh< 
 stood so high in the public estimation for his wis- 
 dom and discretion, that he felt bound to defer tc 
 his judgment, which was favorable to these res 
 trictions, and believing that such also were th 
 views entertained by his constituents generally 
 though his own were different, h should accord 
 ingly go for the qualification of five years resi 
 dence. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said this amendment was unex 
 ceptionable in its form, and he was free to sa 
 that he should prefer it to the proposition now i 
 the article, but for one thing. It made no provi 
 
 22 
 
 sion for persons who, although competent and ca- 
 pable electors, have changed their residence just 
 before the election, and were consequently not 
 oters. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD suggested that that difficul- 
 y could be avoided by striking out ** qualified." 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS thought not. The word qualified 
 
 as mere surplusage. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD replied th*t the temporary 
 oss of one's vote, at a single election by a change 
 f residence, did not make him any the less an 
 lector. 
 
 Mi. LOOMIS said that that was a disputed 
 uestion. This amendment he did not regard as 
 material, for he looked upon all these restrictions 
 n the Constitution iti relation to competency as 
 mall matters, compared with the great questions 
 f capacity, integrity and patriotism. And if the 
 ime should ever come as suggested by the gen- 
 leman from Dutchess, when we are to^e threat- 
 med by military assumption, if he supposed such 
 'ords as these would protect the people, he was 
 greatly mistaken. 
 
 Mr' W. TAYLOR to relieve the amendment 
 rom thie objection, suggested as a modification, 
 
 is proposition, offered in committee of the whole 
 to say, every person who had the qualifications 
 f an elector, save those of county and town resi- 
 lence. 
 
 Mr, CHATFIELD proposed to add that no 
 change of residence within this S'ate, should dis- 
 qualify. 
 
 Mr, W. TAYLOR then withdrew his amend, 
 raent. 
 
 Mr BRUCE could not vote for this amend- 
 ment for these reasons: He had voted to strike 
 mt the thirty years because he deemed it a mat- 
 er of no sort of importance and he had voted for 
 he five years' residence because he did attach 
 some importance to it. Therefore if he went 
 for this resolution he should be overturning that 
 vote. Mr B. went 011 to disapprove of this 
 continual reversing of votes, as occupying time, 
 arid putting the action of the Convention before 
 the people in a ridiculous hght. He was willing 
 to submit now to what seemed to be the clear- 
 ly expressed will of the majority. 
 
 Mr. R, CAMPBELL called for the previous 
 question, but at the request of several gentle- 
 men, withdrew it. 
 
 The question being then taken on Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD'S amendment, it was rejected, ayes 43, nays 
 7U as follows: 
 
 O'Conor, Patterson, Powers, Russell, Shepard Ster ens' 
 Stetson, Swackhamer, Taft, W. Taylor, Tildeu Townsend' 
 Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, Whitt,, Witbeck Wor' 
 den, W. B. Wnght-43. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, Ayrault, F. F. Backus H Back 
 us, Bouck, BraytoB, Bruce, Brundage, Bull, D D rmrL 
 bell, Candee, Clark, Clyde, Conely, Crocker, Cuddeback* 
 Dana, Dubois, Forsyth. Gardner, Gebhard Grab* 
 Greene, Harrison, Hawley, Hoffman, Hotchkiss Huutpr 
 A. Huntington, E Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde Jordan' 
 Kemble, Kmgsley, Kirkland, McNitt, Maxwell MilW* 
 Morris, Nicholas, Nicoll, Parish, Penniman Pivsi iA,V 
 Rhoades, Richmond, Riker, Ruggles, St John SaSbW 
 Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Simmons, Smith, E Spencer Stan' 
 ton, Stow, Strong, Taggart, Tallmadee J J Tuvlnr " 
 hill', Waterbury, Willard, Wood, A WrighT *~ ' 
 Young, Youug 71. 
 
346 
 
 Mr. HARRISON then moved to amend try 
 striking out and inserting as follows : 
 
 No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor, ex 
 cept he shall be thirty years of age, and shall have been 
 for ten years a citizen of the United States, and for five 
 years a resident of this state next preceding his election 
 and no person shall be eligible to the office of Lieutenan 
 Governor, who is not eligible to that of Governor. 
 
 Mr. H. however withdrew his amendment a 
 the suggestion of others, that the question hac 
 been sufficiently tested. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE offered the following as a 
 substitute for the section : 
 
 Every citizen who has been a resident of this state fo 
 five years next preceding the election, unless absent dur 
 ing that time on public business of tnis state, or the Unitec 
 States, shall be eligible to the office of Governor. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : We have already voted on 
 that three times. 
 
 The amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr, TALLMADGE offered the following sub- 
 stitute : 
 
 No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen o 
 this state at the time of the adoption ot this constitution 
 shall be eligible to the office of Governor ; neither shaL 
 any person be eligible to that office who shall not have 
 attained to the age of 30 years, and been five years nex 
 preceding, a resident within this state. 
 
 This amendment was lost. 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved to strike out and insert 
 "The electors of this state are competent to, and may 
 elect any one of their number to the office of Governor , 
 and no elector shall be rendered ineligible to such office 
 by any change of residence in this state." 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : We have only voted on 
 that four times this morning. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD asked for the ayes and noes 
 on the amendment, and they were ordered. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said this seemed to him to be 
 very egregious trifling. He hoped the vote on 
 this proposition would evince the sense of the 
 Convention in regard to it. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS asked if it was in order. It was 
 substantially the some proposition as voted down. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL asked the mover to withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said there seemed to be a 
 strange disposition to drive gentlemen to a vote 
 on this word competent. He moved to strike it 
 out. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES : The question of order should 
 be first decided before any question is put. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN also urged that the question of 
 order, having been raised by the gentleman from 
 Herkimer, should be first determined. 
 
 The PRESIDENT ruled that the proposition 
 being substantially that of the gentleman from 
 Otsego, was not in order. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to insert after the word state : 
 " But no person shall be deemed to have lost his resi- 
 dence by reason ot having been absent during that time on 
 business of this state or of the United States." 
 
 The PRESIDENT ruled that this was substan- 
 tially what had been struck out and could only 
 be reinserted by a motion to reconsider. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved a reconsideration for that 
 purpose, which motion, under the rule, lies over. 
 
 The second second was then adopted. 
 
 The third section was then read, as follows : 
 &3. The governor and lieutenant governor shall be 
 elected at the times and places of choosing members of 
 the legislature. The persons respectively having the 
 highest number of votes for governor and lieutenant go- 
 vernor shall be elected y but in case two or more shall 
 
 have an equal and the highest number of votes for gover- 
 nor, or for lieutenant governor, the two houses of the leg- 
 islature shall, by joint ballot, choose one of the said per- 
 sons so having an equal and the highest number oi votes 
 for governor or lieutenant governor. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS offered the following : 
 Strike out all after the word legislature, in the second 
 line, and insert " The persons respectively having a ma- 
 jority of all the votes given respectively for Governor and 
 Lieut. Governor, shall be elected: But in case no two per- 
 sons shall have received respectively a majority of votes 
 the two houses of the legislature at its next annual session, 
 shall forthwith proceed to choose by I allot a Governor and 
 Lieut. Governor, from all the persons voted for by the 
 people; and if no choice is made upon the first ballot, the 
 two houses in joint ballot, shall continue to ballot, until a 
 choice is made, rejecting, afttr each such successive bal- 
 loting, all votes given in the next balloting for the two per- 
 sons who received respectively the lowest number of vote* 
 by the people and not before rejected." 
 
 Mr. SIMxMONS then went on to explain his 
 amendment, not with any hope he saiu of having 
 it adopted, but to test the strength of the princi- 
 ple that the majority should govern. The ten- 
 dency of the plurality system was to keep up a 
 a sort of triangular, if not inultrangular state of 
 paities very much to the public detriment. If 
 that was democracy then democracy had got 
 down to very narrow limits. He might be entire. 
 ly alone in this vote. But that was of no conse- 
 quence to him. For notwithstanding the saluta- 
 ry warning of the gentleman from Otsego, he was 
 inclined to think that old Moriah and some other 
 towns in this county, would take care of him. It 
 was like the late Mr. Van Rensselaer of this city, 
 who when asked to head a subscription for a 
 church or some such object, generally told the 
 applicants first to get all they could from others, 
 and then to draw on him for the balance. Such 
 
 as old Moriah. His amendment proposed to 
 2[ive the control to the majority and not to a mere 
 faction or plurality, and by the vote on it we 
 should see who were the patent right democrat* 
 here. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG urged that there should be 
 no more discussion o r i this article. 
 
 The question being taken, Mr. SIMMON'S 
 amendment was voted down. 
 
 The third section was then adopted. 
 
 The fourth section was then read as follows ? 
 
 4. The governor shall be commander-in-chief of the wu'it> 
 tary and naval forces of the state. He shall have power to 
 convene the legislature, (or the Senate only,) on extra- 
 ordinary occasions. He shall communicate by message, 
 ,o the legislature at every session, the condition of the 
 itate, and recommend such matters to them as he shall 
 ,udge expedient. He shall transact all necessary business 
 with the officers of government, civil and military. He 
 hall expedite all such measures as may be resolved upon 
 >y the legislature, and shall take care that the laws are 
 aithfully executed. He shall, at stated times, receive for 
 lis services, a compensation to be established by law, which 
 ihall neither be increased or diminished after his election 
 and during his continuance in office. 
 
 Mr. WOOD moved to add, 
 
 " But ia no case shall he receive more than $4,000 an- 
 nually." 
 
 This was voted down, 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to strike out " con- 
 inuance in office," and insert " term of office" 
 aying that the word continuance might imply 
 he continuance of a Governor in office for a se- 
 ;ond or third term. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said these words-were inserted 
 t his instance, and avowedly for the purpose of 
 
347 
 
 avoiding the construction the gentleman proposed 
 to give to the section. 
 
 Mr. T.'s amendment was rejected. 
 
 The fourth section was then adopted. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 SATURDAY, (39th day,) July 18. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. KNAPP. 
 Mr BURR offerred the following resolution : 
 Resolved, That for the future members will voluntarily 
 restrict themselves in speaking, so that no member on any 
 question- will occupy more than fifteen minutes. 
 
 Mr. BURR said that the great propriety of 
 adopting some such resolution as this, must be 
 apparent to every gentlemen in Ihis Convention. 
 Up to this day they had been there 48 days, this 
 was of course including Sundays, and the three 
 days in July (3d, 4th and 6th,) which they had 
 appropriated to themselves as holidays, and 39 
 working days (so-called) were left; out of these 
 20 had been spent only in hardly arranging the 
 business; and 19 in the discussion of this celebra 
 ted report of commitiee No. 5. On last.Thurs- 
 day they succeeded in getting through this report 
 in committee of the whole; yesterday they took 
 it up in the House and spent the whole day in 
 getting through only as far as to the 4th section, 
 and it was extremely doubtful whether they would 
 finish it up to-day But supposing they did, then 
 how far had they advanced ? It was but reason- 
 able to suppose that this report was but one 
 eighteenth part of what would come before them. 
 Assuming this to be the fact, then if we were to 
 sit here until the first of October, and beyond that 
 day, VK> should not and could not stay, then we 
 should h;*ve but about three days to each report. 
 For one he would say that his constituents did 
 not send him here to make long speeches. They 
 would not look over the daily proceedings for his 
 speeches They knew him as one who was not 
 famous for much speaking, but they believed he 
 had a little common sense and some business ca 
 pacity, and desired to comply with their expecta 
 ttons. He said from the experience of past days 
 it was evident, that certain gentlemen on the floor 
 of that house thought that no proposition, no mat- 
 ter how trivial it might be, could be understooc 
 by the lay members, unless three or four speeches 
 were made on each side Now he had person- 
 ally been very much gratified with the eloquen 
 speeches which had been made, and, did time 
 allow, he would like to hear still more of the 
 same kind. But he would submit to these 
 learned gentlemen to say whether such torrents o 
 eloquence were necessary to enable lay members 
 to understand and vote upon every proposition 
 presented ? He would tell them that he believec 
 that himself and others, though they were but far 
 mers, could read these reports and understam 
 them without being deluged with such a flood o 
 speeches, and so could their constituents. He 
 submitted to the sound sense of the Conventior 
 whether they should not from this time ou 
 restrict themselves in some such manner as he hac 
 indicated in this resolution ? 
 
 Mr. NICOLL considered that the object of th 
 mover of the resolution was entitled to praise. Al 
 were agreed that there had been too much speak 
 ing. But the gentleman must be aware that i 
 was impracticable to adopt it ; for there were ma 
 
 iy subjects which would come before the Con- 
 ention that could not be explained properly m,a 
 peech of 15 minutes. He hoped therefore, as 
 he object of the mover was attained, that the re- 
 olution would bewithdrawn; otherwise he should 
 e obliged to move to lay it on the table. 
 
 Mr. BURR had no objections to withdraw his 
 esolutinn. It had served his purpose, which was 
 o call the attention of the Convention to the 
 hameful consumption of time in speech-making. 
 
 The resolution was then withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved the following resolution: 
 
 Resolved, That it is the duty of the Convention to pro- 
 :eed without delay to the consideration of the restrictions 
 iroperto be established against special legislation, and the 
 ;reation of public debts, and the reorganization of the leg- 
 slative and judicial departments of the government. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that in consequence of the 
 ery unceremonious manner in which the report 
 of his select committee was yesterday laid on the 
 able, on the motion of the gentleman from Onei- 
 da, (Mr. KIRKLAJOJ,) after his argument, with- 
 out hearing the other side, he was constrained to 
 jring this subject up again to-day. It appeared 
 :o him, (Mr. L.) that the convention must be sa- 
 tisfied that it was callsd for the purpose of dis- 
 cussing and settling certain great and important 
 questions that there were particular and promi- 
 nent questions before the people, which induced 
 them to call this convention together ; among 
 which were those subjects that were likely to 
 come up first for consideration, and which he had 
 pointed out in his report. The length of time 
 that had elapsed since they first met, was now 
 seven weeks half the time, perhaps, that ought 
 to be spent on the whole subject of the Conven- 
 tion and yet they had not yet touched any one 
 of those questions which the convention was call- 
 ed here to consider. The powers and duties of 
 the Executive, so far as they had been settled in 
 the debate which they had been going through 
 for the last few weeks, were not subjects that had 
 been agitated by the people or brought to the 
 public attention, and might have been left to the 
 last to be considered. The subject which would 
 come up next, if the Convention should fail to es- 
 tablish an order, was one to which the public at- 
 tention had not been called, and yet it was a sub- 
 ject that would be fruitful |of debate, more than 
 any other he alluded to the bill of rights. That 
 was the next in order ^Cries of" Oh, no, that is 
 not so; the report of committee No. 6.) Now 
 who ever heard as an inducement to call this con- 
 vention, any lack of declaration on that subject? 
 It was not fair, then, when they were called to 
 effect certain great and important objects, to com- 
 mence their business with those of less impor- 
 tance, to which the public attention has not been 
 called, or on which the people have not spoken. 
 He thought it was time and in that opinion he 
 hoped the convention would concur to take up 
 those subjects to which public attention had been 
 universally called. The gentleman from Oneida, 
 (Mr. KIRKLAND) yesterday, in moving to lay the 
 report on the table, after making a speech him- 
 self, did it under color that it would take up too 
 much time to consider it. What ? Take up time to 
 settle the order of business, after taking up three 
 weeks on questions f >r which the Convention was 
 not called together? He hoped the resolution 
 would be adopted, and then these questions of lesj 
 
348 
 
 importance could be discussed if they pleased, 
 after they had got through with the lest. It was 
 with this view a few days ago he felt constrained 
 and he did so with the advice of many members 
 here to offer his resolution for the purpose of 
 settling the order of business He had no parti- 
 cular choice as to precedence of the reports, ex- 
 cept to take up first the great subjects which have 
 agitated the public mind those subjects on 
 which delegated power has been abused, and in 
 which we have hitherto lacked constitutional 
 provisions and he should not have the slightest 
 feeling if the Convention should establish 'any 
 other order than that reported by the special com- 
 mittee, only let some order be adopted at once. 
 He had felt bound to offer this resolution, that be 
 might submit these remarks on this question, for 
 in merely calling for ihe order of business he 
 would not have been at liberty to do so; and he 
 was free to say that his object was to take p this 
 question this morning and dispose of it. They 
 would probably to-day get through the report of 
 the committee of the whole on the Executive now 
 before the Convention ; and then proceed to the 
 next subject; and he deemed it important to settle 
 what shall be the order, and what f hall be the 
 next subject. He hoped that there would be no 
 serious debate on this question ot priority of busi 
 hess. It did not become him, with that view to 
 state the reasons why he had placed them in the 
 order in which they stood in the resolution, but he 
 would do so if it were desired by the Convention. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that the gentleman had 
 announced that his purpose in offering the reso- 
 lotion was to allow him to have a speech upon 
 the subject. Mr. K. believed that there was no 
 utility or practical good in the discussion of 
 mere abstract questions of this kind. There was 
 no time to be spared to such a discu.-sion ; too 
 much had been spent in thrs way already. If Ihe 
 gentleman desires to have a report taken up at a 
 particular time, he could effect his object at any 
 time by moving to go in'o committee of the whole 
 upon it. But his resolution proposes no mode of 
 action. Now is it not competent for members to 
 decide as to the questions that arise what shall or 
 shall not be the order of business ? Why certain- 
 ly it is. We need not prescribe it in advance. 
 He (Mr. K.) wished to have every thing here 
 take the regular course; and the Convention 
 could easily pass on them without much discus- 
 sion, whereas if they should attempt to prescribe 
 an inflexible rule the entire day would be con- 
 sumed in discussing the various propositions and 
 their respective merits. The resolution of the 
 gentleman from Herkirner, (Mr. LOOMIS,) as it 
 now stood, would tend to no good nor any practi- 
 cal result ; it does not advise or recommend any 
 particular action ; it merely says abstractly that 
 so and so should be done ; recommends a mere 
 abstract proposition. Now he (Mr. K.) thought 
 that at this late day the Convention really could 
 not afford to spread its valuable time in discussing 
 mere abstract propositions, which led to no de- 
 sirable result. He moved to lay the resolution on 
 the table, as he had done with a similar one yes- 
 terday. He (Mr. K.) withdrew it at the request 
 of Mr. WARD. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that gentlemen well knew he 
 had cot taken up in 7 weeks half an hour of the 
 
 time ot the Convention. There was at present 
 no rule regulating the order of business; and oo 
 that account, the gentleman from Heikimer (Mr. 
 LOOMIS,) had done perfectly right in presenting 
 the resolution to lay down a rule for the order in 
 which business was to be observed. What waa 
 the case in all olher legislative bodies ? Why, 
 that a general order should be adopted; and on 
 this order every bill was entered in the order IB 
 which they were reported ; and they were all 
 taken up in that order. But in this Convention 
 there is at present no such order. Therefore it 
 was important that some rule should be adopted 
 in relation to it, rather than that the subjects 
 should be left tobe taken op at the caprice of any 
 person. He wished this resolution therefore to 
 be considered; and not laid on the table ; he had 
 no wish to see it adopted j by no means; but by 
 tar the best course was to establish at once either 
 this, or some good general rule ior the disposal of 
 thib business. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE hoped the resolution would 
 be laid on the table. He hoped, however, that 
 the Convention would decide to take up first 
 those reports which were of the most importance 
 to our constituents. The two great committees, 
 that on Canals and on the Judiciary have not yet 
 reported There was no necessity for anticipate 
 ing the action of committees who had not yet 
 reported, but who were laboring assiduously to 
 bring the subjects, which have been submitted to 
 them to completion, by taking up reports which 
 had no connection with these committt-es in ad- 
 vance. The report upon the rights and privi- 
 leges of citizens was of eminent importance to 
 the people, as much or more so than all these r 
 the rights of witnesses for instance : a man comes 
 from Philadelphia in the rail cars; his pocket 
 is picked of all that he has in the world; he 
 reaches New York ; he is a stranger ; he is put 
 into jail to be preserved as a witness; the pick- 
 pocket by means of the money he has stolen, fees 
 a lawyer, hires bail, and goes at large to rob again. 
 Ought not this great evil tobe remedied? 
 A short time since a young woman was lav- 
 ished by three villains a short distance from this 
 city, in Greenbush; the three villains were bailed 
 by means of money and are still at large; whilst 
 the poor woman 'has been locked up in jail for 
 fifteen months, as a witness; and it was not till 
 the chairman of this committee (Mr. T.) heard 
 of it, and obtained the interference of some hu- 
 mane persons that she was released. When all 
 the real develcpements were made on this subject 
 the Convention would be astounded. And yet 
 gentlemen here talk of the reports of Commit- 
 tees on the mere petty squabbles for office and 
 private incorporations taking the precedence of 
 this all important subject. 
 
 The motion to lay on the table was carried, 49 
 to 32. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS then moved to proceed to the 
 consideration of his report in relation to the or- 
 der of business and demanded the ayes and noes. 
 The House refused to consider, ayes47,noes 57. 
 Mr. BROWN moved that resolutions should 
 only be considered on Monday morning's, except 
 such as were reported by standing or select com- 
 mittees. 
 
 
 
349 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to add " and shall be 
 decided without debate." 
 
 Mr. BROWN said there was an obvious reason 
 why this resolution should pass ; they had had at 
 least 1000 resolutions presented there. 
 
 Mr. STRONG. Say 500 (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. BROWN. Well, that was certainly with- 
 in bounds ; and 400 of these never would be heard 
 of again. An hour every morning was consumed 
 by them. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM hoped the resolution would pass; 
 but not the amendment to it; many resolutions 
 might be offered there of a character that ought 
 not to be adopted or passed over in silence ; the 
 committee ought not thus to be committed by any 
 such a course. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD replied that there was no 
 danger of this. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that this was a very im- 
 portant rule, and it ought to go to the committee 
 on rules, to be considered carefully before such 
 a precedent was adopted ; or such a stringent 
 rule put in practice. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that this rule had been 
 adopted in the House of Representatives at Wash- 
 ington from time immemorial. They had found 
 it absolutely necessary to have such a rule as this 
 in order to get along with their business. 
 
 Mr SALISBURY said that at any rate he hoped 
 that some plan would be adopted in order to re- 
 strict unnecessary debate on mere resolutions of 
 enquiry. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH considered it a reflection on 
 the intelligence of the Convention. 
 
 The resolution was sent to the committee on 
 rules 
 
 A communication was received from Wm. P. 
 Hallett, inviting an investigation into the charges 
 preferred against him. 
 
 The committee of the whole, Mr.CHATFIELD 
 in the chair, then resumed the consideration of 
 the article in relation to the 
 
 POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE EXECUTIVE 
 DEPARTMENT. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS moved a slight alteration of 
 the phraseology of the first part of the 4th section 
 so that it would read as follows : " The Gov- 
 ernor shall be commander in-chief of the military 
 and naval forces and of the militia of the State, 
 except when they shall be called into the actual 
 service of the United States" (The proposed 
 amendment is in italic.) 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS said that he had been induced 
 to make this motion (although the phraseology 
 had been fixed in committee before on his own 
 motion,) at the suggestion of his friend, Mr. 
 WA.RD, and the gentleman from New York, 
 (Mr. O'CoNOR,) who said the section was not 
 comprehensive enough. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY asked if this fourth section 
 had not already been passed on. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said it had not. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS called for the reading of it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON objected to the amendment. 
 He wanted the governor to be at all times the 
 Comrnandr-in-Chief of the militia of this State; 
 as well in time of peace, as when they should be 
 called into the service of the United States. As 
 to the governor not being commander, &c., of our 
 militia in time of war 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS said the gentleman had mis- 
 understood him. 
 
 The section was read again. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Then I am right ; and I 
 should like to know what is the difference be- 
 tween the military of the State and the militia of 
 the State ? We have no military force but the 
 militia. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that all this discussion had 
 been idle, for that this very section had been pass- 
 ed upon. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that he was in faver of the 
 amendment. Hitherto he had not trespassed five 
 minutes on the time of the Convention. But he 
 was compelled to make a single remark here. 
 The term admiral of the navy was very properly 
 inserted in the Constitution of 1777, because be- 
 ing an independent colony at that time, we were 
 entitled to have both our own land and naval 
 forces ; but subsequently all such power was con- 
 ferred on the United States government. The 
 governor is now commander-in-chief of all our 
 militia ; yet a small portion of our militia might 
 be called into the service of the general govern- 
 ment, and the governor could not then be their 
 commander-in-chief, that power being vested 
 solely in the President of the United States. The 
 amendment, therefore, was necessary to obviate 
 any difficulty that might occur in the construction. 
 
 Mr. BROWN opposed the amendment; this 
 proposition was to continue the governor of this 
 State in command of troops, even after they had 
 been mustered into the service of the United 
 States ; when by the Constitution the President 
 of the United States became commander-in-chief 
 of them ; now there could not be two command- 
 ers-in-chief of the same forces. The section was 
 right as it stood now. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS said that the time of the Con- 
 vention was by far too valuable to be taken up in 
 unnecessary discussion ; six weeks of its valuable 
 time had been almost wasted in long speeches ; 
 and as he only offered it against his own convic- 
 tions, but in deference to the judgment of the 
 honorable chairman of military affairs (Mr. 
 WARD) he would now withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. WARD : Then, sir, I certainly shall re- 
 new it. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS rose to speak amidst loud long 
 and vociferous cries of "Question, question." He 
 said that the amendment was a very proper one. 
 There was nothing in the Constitution to prevent 
 this State from having an army or navy in time of 
 peace ; nothing whatever ; or having them both 
 even in time of war by the assent of Congress. 
 The phraseology of the 4th section was all wrong; 
 and would be unconstitutional without this amend- 
 ment or something like it. He preferred to have 
 the word " militia" omitted, but he would rather 
 have it there than lose the whole amendment. 
 What, he would ask, was the meaning of the 
 words "commander in chief?" If the organic law 
 of this state declared the Governor to be comman- 
 der-in-chief of the forces of the State, absolutely 
 and unqalifiedlv, without distinction of time, 
 whether of war or peace, then the Governor was 
 Commander-in-chief to all interests and purposes, 
 as far as the constitution could make him so ; and 
 the only way he could cease to be commander-in- 
 chjef and subordinate to the President, in coa- 
 
350 
 
 formity to the United States constitution, was by 
 construction. He thought the language of the 
 constitution should be plain and unambiguous, 
 and not liable to any misconstruction from any 
 quarter. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR rose amid loud cries of" Ques- 
 tion. " He said there seemed just now to be a 
 great row made about letting a member speak ; 
 although for one, he had been for the first twen- 
 ty odd days a silent and a listening member. He 
 was in favor of the amendment. By the 4th sec- 
 tion of the second article of the Constitution of 
 the United States, the first clause, the President 
 is Commander-in-Chief not only of the Army and 
 Navy of the United States, but also of the militia 
 of the several States when called into the actual 
 service of the United States ; of the several States 
 not of the whole of them in the aggregate ; but of 
 each separately. Now, are -they also to be under 
 the chief command at that time of the Governor 
 of this State, as well as the chief command of the 
 President. There cannot be two c^ie/coinmand- 
 ers. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN thought the sec- 
 tion read right without any alteration. When the 
 militia were called into actual service by the Pre- 
 sident, they become de facto United States troops 
 and are under command of the President. 
 Messrs. RUSSELL and W. TAYLOR lollowed. 
 Mr. CONELY saw no necessity tor the word 
 rnilitia, nor for the other amendment. The mo- 
 moment the troops go into the U. S. service they 
 cease to be our militia. 
 
 The amendment was then negatived, and the 
 fourth section was adopted-. 
 
 The fifth section was then read as follows: 
 ^ 5. The Governor shall have power to grant reprieves 
 and pardons after conviction for all offences except treasoi 
 and cases of impeachment. He may commute sentence o 
 death to imprisonment in a state prison for life. He maj 
 grant pardons upon such conditions and with such restric 
 tions and limitations as he may think proper. Upon con 
 victions for treason, he shall power to suspend the sen 
 tence until the case shall be reported to thu Legislature a 
 its next meeting. He shall in his annual message commu 
 nicate to the Legislature each such case of reprieve, com 
 mutation and pardon granted by him since his next previ 
 ous annual message, stating the name of the convict, the 
 crime of which he was convicted, the sentence and its date 
 and the date of the commutation, pardon or reprieve. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved to amend by inserting 
 the word "commutations" in the first line, afte 
 the words " the Governor shall have power t 
 grant reprieves" and to strike out the words in 
 the 3d, 4th, 5th and 6th lines as follows: " He 
 may commute sentence of death to imprisonmen 
 in a state prison for life. He may grant pardon; 
 upon such conditions, and with such restriction 
 and limitations as he may deem proper." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL thought this wholly unnecessa 
 ry; it was to be found in the 4th, 5th, and 6th 
 lines. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said they were to be stricken 
 out. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN deemed the amendment, am 
 also the section, worthy of some little considera 
 tion. They conferred the unlimited power o 
 pardon upon the Governor, to the entire exclusion 
 of the action of the Legislature. He doubted 
 whether the Convention were prepared to go tha 
 length, to let the Governor exclusively mark ou 
 the term of pardons or reprieves as he alone sav 
 St. The Convention never intended to gran 
 
 his power exclusively to the Governor without 
 etting the Legislature have power to modify it 
 iy law. But if we insert the words of the pres- 
 nt law in the Constitution, we shall give him 
 hat power. He was opposed to doing so. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD thought this could all be 
 rovided for by the committee on the Legislative 
 lepartment. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR suggested a modification of the 
 amendment, viz: to strikeout the words "he 
 may commute sentence of death to imprisonment 
 n a state prison for lite. He may grant pardons. 1 * 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD accepted the modification. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said the general practice had 
 been for the Executive \o commute sentences and 
 grant pardons as he thought proper, thai power 
 >eing supposed to be derived from the clause, 
 giving him authority to grant pardons and re- 
 prieves generally. Pardons had also been t rant- 
 ed to take effect after the lapse of a specified tinve 
 rom one to tour years; other Governors have com- 
 muted four to two years, and two to one years 
 mprisonment. This had the effect of shortening 
 or commuting a sentence, though it was of very 
 doubtful signification. He desired that all doubts 
 should now be settled; and he agreed with the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. HOFFMAN) thst 
 some power should be reserved to the legislature 
 to prescribe rules by which the Executive should 
 grant pardons. In small cases of offences this 
 might be left to the Legislature to interfere with. 
 This might tend to lessen the n.wltiplicity of 
 applications for Executive clemency, and the 
 duty of the Governor in that respect. He hoped 
 the amendment would prevail. He wanted the 
 section put in clear and definite terms. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said it was highly proper this 
 matter should be understood. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said it was not settled in commit- 
 tee whether the commutation in cases of death 
 should extent to cases of treason. The word 
 ''only," that has been inserted, refers to impeach- 
 ments and not to treason. As the clause now 
 stands he can commute for treason. 
 Mr STETSON said he differed. 
 Mr. TILDEN said it was so. 
 Mr. STETSON said that there was no punish- 
 ment 'of death lor impeachment j so the word 
 " only" must apply in respect to cases of trea- 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said this amendment went fur- 
 ther than some of its advocates apprehended. It 
 provided in substance what he had proposed the 
 other day to give the Governor power to com- 
 mute a sentence for death to imprisonment for a 
 term of years, as well as for life He approved 
 of the amendment, and should vote for it. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that the Governor had been 
 supposed to possess the power of commuting for 
 a term of years, as well as to pardon, under the 
 present Constitution. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER was however not satisfied 
 to retain in the hands of the Governor alone so 
 enormous a duty and so tremendous a power. He 
 understood the applications for pardon amounted 
 to 600 per annum, or three per diem. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said there were often SOO or 
 
 'Mr'. CROOKER said that if that was so, they 
 were made upon petition, affidavit, or state- 
 
351 
 
 tnent, and letteis liom all pails t i the slate ; and 
 much time would be occupied in their considers 
 tion, and in the correspondence necessarily at- 
 tendant thereon; this would infringe on his othei 
 businrs-i. He thought the Governor should be 
 greatly relieved from the burden ot that duty; 01 
 that if the power should still be left with him, 
 that he should be controlled, or guided or aided 
 therein by some other tribunal. 
 
 Mr. STETSON asked how it changed the sec- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER would not tie the Governor up 
 to the words "for life," but let him commute foi 
 "a term of years." 
 
 Mr. TILDEN: The Governor even now does 
 do this. * 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD knew that it had been the 
 practice of the Executive heretofore to first com 
 mute the sentence of death to imprisonment for 
 life, and afterwards to pardon entirely. Such an 
 instance had occurred in Otse,o Co. in the case 
 of Darby, who killed his master. His sentence 
 was commuted to imprisonment for life, and at the 
 end ot four years, he was pardoned. By the read- 
 ing of the section, he believed the same privi 
 lege would be construed. The 5th and 6th lines 
 gives the Governor now power to commote for 
 a term of years. Now he (Mr. C.) wished to 
 have some limitation in terms upon this some, 
 what extraordinary power of pardon, so that the 
 Legislatuie should at all times have control over 
 it, and prevent such a construction by courts of 
 law as would give the Governor full power to 
 commute a pardon. He would change the words 
 "such re^i fictions as he may deem proper," to 
 "as mav be prescribed by law," by striking out 
 in the tth line the words, "as he may think prop- 
 er " It has been said that it requires a two-third 
 vote to pass an incorporation bill, and yet they 
 are passed by construction by a bare majority; 
 and who knows how far or where constitution 
 may go in ihis matter. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND thought there was no power 
 given to the Governor, in the present Constitu- 
 tion, farther than to commute a sentence of death 
 TO imprisonment for life. By the terms of the 
 Constitution, he could have no further authority 
 to release the convict, or to commute for a term 
 of years 
 
 Mr. TILDEN: There is such an authority 
 given by the law, not only to pardon, but aJso to 
 reduce even sentences of imprisonment to shorter 
 sentences. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND That may be. But the ques- 
 tion then is, whether the law is a constitutional 
 one. He believed that no such power should be 
 given to the Governor, and would therefore vote 
 against the amendment. It was necessary to fix 
 this. The words " to imprisonment for life" does 
 this. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN The construction now is to do 
 this, or to commute for a term of years. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND But it is not in the present 
 Constitution. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN It is in the law. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND wanted it in the constitution. 
 He doubted if the Legislature had the power to 
 pass a law affecting the subject in question. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN hoped they would not leave the 
 section in its present confused state. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN wished to have a 
 provision by which an appeal might be made to 
 the Legislature for pardon or commutation, and 
 giving to the legislature at all times control over 
 the pardoning power. The time was fast ap- 
 proaching when capital punishment would be 
 abolished. Arrangements should be made to meet 
 this. There were many individuals now in jail 
 who ought to be released at once. 
 
 Mr. S IETSON was in favor of the amendment 
 of Mr. SHEPARD. It settled the principle of the 
 section, which was to give to the Governor the 
 power to grant pardons. He was Rot prepared lo 
 say that the Legislature should control the man- 
 ner in which the Governor should exercise the 
 pardoning power As to the Executive being al- 
 ways at the control of the legislature in relation 
 to all pardons for all cases of all grades, he did 
 not know. He wisheu to think of this. 
 
 Mr TAGGART said this provision takes away 
 all power from the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that the Legislature have 
 no power now in the case of absolute pardons for 
 sentence of death. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD : But the Legislature have 
 interfered and passed laws in relation to the Gov- 
 ernor's power to pardon. 
 
 Mr. DANA wished the 8th rule read. 
 
 It was read; and relates to the interruption of a 
 member whilst speaking. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART thought if they passed this sec- 
 tion as it now stands it would be disgraceful to the 
 Convention. Thirty State Constitutions have it 
 not. He hoped the Convention would not tie up 
 the hands of the Legislature so that they could 
 not alter the provisions of this section, nor tie 
 them up from hereafter, in obedience to public 
 opinion, abolishing entirely capital punishment. 
 He was also opposed to allowing the Governor to 
 convert our sister states into Botany Bays for the 
 banishment ot our criminals. We are not here 
 to give the Governor unconditional power, in the 
 matter of pardons, unrestrained by Legislative ac- 
 tion, or without any restraint by the people. He 
 hoped the Convention would allow the Legisla- 
 ture to pass laws relating to the punishment in 
 case ot conviction for murder, provided the Leg- 
 islature by and by abolish capital punishment. 
 For he believed that soon would be abolished, and 
 he would allow the Legislature full power to pass 
 laws to meet all the cases that might arise hereat- 
 ter. They should pause and reflect before adopt- 
 ing either the section or the amendment without 
 that of the gentleman from Otsego, (Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD). 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN expressed himself in iavor of 
 Mr. CHATFIELD'S amendment. He could see 
 no danger in permitting the Legislature to be as- 
 sociated with the Governor, so far as to prescrib- 
 ing the manner in which the pardoning power 
 should be exercised. Such had been the effect 
 under the Constitution The Governor was a 
 part of the legislative power. He was not one of 
 those who believed that the exigencies of society 
 required the abolition of capital punishment he. 
 was not here to argue that question now but he 
 desired to give the idea a fair opportunity to be 
 heard and to be examined. But what heretofore 
 had been the main difficulty in attempting to abo- 
 lish capital punishment ? It had been the power 
 
352 
 
 of pardon and commutation the power to take 
 the criminal from the jail, and to throw him 
 again upon society to the endingerment of its 
 peace. The fear of this had prevailed upon the 
 minds of men, who were otherw se disposed to 
 come to that generous and humane conclusion. 
 And so long as this power was left unrestricted 
 in the Executive, so long had the proposition to 
 abolish capital punishment no chance of success. 
 But if the principle was adopted that the commu- 
 tation should extend only to imprisonment for life, 
 then the argument would have fair play. For if 
 the murderer, guilty of blood, was to be returned 
 back upon society, men must, men would, take 
 arms to defend themselves. He would not ex- 
 tend the same rule to pardons as to commutation. 
 Pardon was on the ground of innocence or strong 
 doubts of guilt. With these remarks, Mr. H. 
 said that he should vote for the amendment to re- 
 tain in the Legislature a power of control over 
 the limits and conditions under which pardons 
 *>hall be granted, and because he desired that the 
 advocates of the abolition of capital punishment 
 should have some chance to carry out their idea. 
 Mr. SIMMONS was in favor of the amendment 
 of Mr. SHEPARD, but opposed to that of Mr. 
 CHATFIELD. He would not give to the Legisla- 
 ture control over the exercise of the Executive 
 power, and thus, in the language of Mr. JEFFER- 
 SON, convert the Executive office into a mere 
 directory. He would leave the power of pardon 
 without the restriction of imprisonment for life. 
 Mr. S. urged that the adoption of this amendment 
 would be in effect to provide on one page of our 
 laws how crime should be punished, and on the 
 other, how the criminal might escape from the 
 punishment. The dividing of the pardoning 
 power would also divide and destroy the respon- 
 sibility. He would allow the legislature to have 
 no control over this power except in great cases 
 like treason. He would leave it unfettered in the 
 hands of the Executive. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS then went on to explain the sec- 
 tion as he understood it. He would not adopt an 
 amendment like this the effect of which was to 
 convert the Executive office into a court of rehear- 
 sing, where the decisions of the judges shall be 
 set aside, except in cases where the innocence of 
 convict shall be proved. He would allow the 
 Governor the power of placing a condition upon 
 his pardon to send out of the State those crimin- 
 als who had been disgorged upon us from some 
 other state or foreign country to depredate upon 
 us. Gentlemen from New- York were aware that 
 in that city there was a class of pickpockets, who 
 came from London, and who were among the 
 most genteel citizens. It was not to be used to 
 send our criminals to other countries, but for the 
 purpose of sending back criminals that had been 
 disgorged upon us. It was a well known fact 
 that criminals from other countries were sent 
 here. In the case of the German who murdered 
 a whole family on Long Island, the murderer was 
 found to be a convict from another country who 
 had committed the same crime at home. In in- 
 stances like these, the Governor should have pow- 
 er to send such persons back from where they 
 came and to send out of the State those who had 
 been sent or had come here to depredate upon our 
 citizens. The condition of restoring freedom, 
 
 without the privilege of being a witness wa* 
 also very proper in many cases; for there- 
 were persons who had been proved so en- 
 tirely destitute of veracity that they ought 
 not to be trusted in giving evidence against 
 ihe liberty or property of other persons. 
 He would leave the section giving the power to 
 commute sentence of death to imprisonment 
 for life, and gave his reasons for retaining it. He 
 regretted that the word only had been inserted to 
 restrict in the case of treason. The argument 
 used in favor of the amendment, that the Govern- 
 or might be guilty of the treason, was an anoma- 
 ly. After the Governor had been tried and con- 
 victed for treason, it would be strange if he could 
 still be Governor of the State and have power to 
 commute his sentence to imprisonment of life. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : I said the emissaries of the 
 overnor. The gentleman's wit has obscured a 
 good argument on the other side. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS : Yes. Then we will take the 
 case of the emissaries of the Senate, who might 
 >e found guilty of treason. If that branch of the 
 Legislature should happen to be very much im- 
 bued with partizan feeling, the unfortunate indi- 
 vidual, who might have been guilty only of an 
 act of patriotism and this question of treason 
 was very much like one as to orthodoxy and 
 heterodoxy it depended very much as to whose 
 " doxy" it was would have no chance for his 
 life, by the dissent, from motives of political hos- 
 tility, of one branch of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELJ3 here called the gentleman 
 to order for wandering from the question. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS believed the gentleman was cor- 
 rect, and felt obliged to him, for he had already 
 spoken longer than he had intended; and if the 
 same kindness was extended to all alike, he 
 would not have had the speech from his learned 
 friend, (Mr. BURR) about the consumption of 
 time. He then alluded again to Mr. SHEPARD'S 
 amendment, and said it was not a mere question 
 of verbiage. He should vote against it, and would 
 hereafter offer an amendment in accordance with 
 his views. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that it was the opinion of 
 many that the pardoning power in the Governor* 
 was a dangerous one and should be restricted. 
 If this were so, then the power of commutation 
 was equally dangerous. If these amenaments 
 should be voted down, he should offer one asso- 
 ciating the Chief Justice and Attorney General 
 with the Governor in passing upon the question 
 of the commutation of a sentence of death, to 
 imprisonment for life. He would also have it in 
 the power of the legislature to prescribe the 
 form of application for pardon for he believed 
 that it would very much diminish the number, if 
 it was known that publicity would be given to 
 them, and to the names of those signing the ap- 
 plication. He should vote for Mr. CHATFIELD'S 
 amendment, and if that failed, he should offer 
 one to carry out the views he had indicated. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said the amendment did not 
 propose to give the legislature entire control in 
 this matter. The Constitution vests the pardon- 
 ing power in the Governor, with such restrictions^ 
 limitations, and conditions as shall be prescribed 
 by i aw _and the legislature was to pass laws for 
 the purpose of carrying that provision into effect. 
 
353 
 
 When this Constitution was adopted, it would be 
 the duty of the next legislature under it to pass 
 general laws to that effect. If this was not done, 
 Juries would be found to be exercising the same 
 power. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS renewed his opposition to the 
 amendment. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was 
 rejected, ayes 30, nays 57. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to amend by adding af- 
 ter the word proper : 
 
 " But the legislature may by law limit, regulate or pro- 
 hibit the exercise by the Governor of the power to grant 
 pardons after convictions for murder, or to grant condi- 
 tional pardons " 
 
 SEVERAL ; Why this is the same thing we 
 have just voted down. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said this related to two par- 
 ticular cases the other was general. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. SHEPARD'S 
 amendment, and it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES then offered the amendment 
 indicated by him, as follows : To insert after the 
 word" proper": 
 
 " But commutation of thesentence of death to imprison 
 ment in the state prison, shall be made bj the Governor, 
 by and with the advice and consent of the Chief Justice 
 of the Supreme Court and the Attornej General of this 
 state; ard in such cases the power of pardon shall not be 
 exercised by the Governor except with the advice and 
 consent ot the Chief Justice and Attorney General." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS : That will never do. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said it was better to vote 
 a comp-'tent man into the office of governor, as 
 that would cover the whole case. 
 
 Tb ; amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE moved to ameud so that (he wofd 
 '* only" should follow " treason." 
 
 Mr. TILDEN : it ia not necessary to insert it ai 
 all. 
 
 The amendment was voted down. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE then moved to strike out 
 the word only." 
 
 This prevailed ayes 47. nays 21. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to insert after the word pro- 
 per 
 
 " But the Legislature may by law require that notice 
 ahall be given to the district attorney of the county where 
 the trial was had, or to the judge before whom the cause 
 was tried, or to both said district attorney and ju:ge, before 
 a pardon shall be granted; and the Legislature may re 
 quire the Governor to communicate to them the reasons for 
 which a pardon was granted." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON did not think that anything 
 could be gained by that. The Governor's reasons 
 were his own. 
 
 Mr. STOW desired to have the Governor's rea- 
 sons before the people. If that functionary was 
 compelled to furnish them he would be more 
 careful in the exercise of his duties. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said, if the amendment of th 
 gentleman trom Otsego had prevailed, then there 
 would have been force and propriety in th 
 amendment. But as the Convention had settled 
 that the terms, limitations and conditions on 
 which the pardoning power should be exercised 
 should rest exclusively with the Executive, wh) 
 should the legislature call on him for infonnatior 
 in the matter He was to make the rules, regula 
 tions, &c. that was to be given him and after he 
 had done that, what use would it be to call on him 
 
 or information. It would be entirely useless. And 
 vhen the information was received, the legisla- 
 ure could take no step to correct the error. They 
 ould no nothing in the matter. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL urged the adoption of the amend- 
 ment as tending to make the governor responsible 
 o the bar of public opinion for the exercise of the 
 >ower. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to strike out the 
 ast part of the amendment. 
 
 Mr. STOW replied in support of his amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN briefly opposed it. 
 
 No mischief could be prevented by it as it could 
 
 only take effect after the mischief, if any was done. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS urged the adoption ot the 
 
 amendment. The Governor was now obliged to 
 
 ;ive his reasons to the public for the exercise of 
 
 he velo power. And the effect was to restrain 
 
 .he Executive from any arbitrary exercise of hi8 
 
 veto power. So this provision, whilst it made the 
 
 governor responsible at the bar of public opin- 
 
 on, would also induce on his part, extreme cau- 
 
 ion in the exercise of this power uf pardon. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS opposed the amendment as un- 
 
 The question being taken, Mr. STOW'S amend- 
 ment was voted down ayes 29, noes 71, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. H. Backus. Bouck, Brayton. Bull, Can- 
 dee, Conely, Flanders, Gardner, Harris, Jordan, Kemble, 
 Miller, Murphy, Nicoll, Parish, Towers, Rhoadss, Salisbu- 
 ry, Shaver, Sheldon, Stephens, Stow, Strong, Taggart, 
 Tallmadge, W T ard, Waterbuiy, Worden, A. Wright, 
 Young 29. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 Bascom, Bowdish, Brown, Brundage, Burr, Cambieleng, 
 
 D, D. Campbell. Chatneld, Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cornell, 
 Crocker, Duddeback, Dana, Danforth, Dorlon, Dubois, 
 Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Harrison, Hart, Hawley, Hoff- 
 man, Hotchkiss.A. Humington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, 
 Kernan, Kingsley, Mann, McNitt, Maxwell, Morris, Nel- 
 lis, Nicholas, O'Conor, Patterson, the President, Biker, 
 Russell, St. John, Sears, Shaw, Shepard. Simmons, Smith, 
 
 E. Spencer, Stetson, Swackhamer, TaflV J. J. Taylor, W. 
 Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, Vache, Van Schoonhoven, War- 
 ren, White, WUlard, Wood, W. B. Wright, Yawger, 
 Youngs 71. 
 
 Mr. HART moved a reconsideration of the vote 
 just taken. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD thought the question on the 
 motion had better not be taken to-day. 
 
 It was laid over, under the rule. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY moved to add after the word 
 proper : 
 
 " But no pardon, reprieve or commutation shall be gran- 
 ted, unless notice of the intended application for such par- 
 don, reprieve, or commutation shall have been published 
 in the state paper, and in one or more of the newspapers 
 published in the county in which the offence shall have 
 been committed, at least six weeks successively, prior t 
 such application." 
 
 Mr. H. wished the community to know some- 
 thing of what was going on. He knew of at least 
 one instance, where, although the people living 
 where the crime was committed were watching 
 the case with an eagle eye, yet before they knew 
 of it, the pardon was granted. This was what he 
 desired to guard against. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART biitfly opposed this amend- 
 ment, as a better one had just been voted down. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to strike out all down to 
 and including the word proper, and. inseu; 
 
354 
 
 " The Governor shall have power according to the pro- 
 visions ot law to erant reprieves and pardons after convic- 
 tion, for all offences except those punishable with death, 
 and cases of impeachment. He may commute sentence of 
 death to imprisonment for life." 
 
 This was voted down. 
 
 Mr. VACHE moved to change the phraseology 
 of the section first by striking out " for all of- 
 fences except treason and cases of impeachment," 
 and inserting " except in cases of treason or of 
 impeachment." 
 
 The question being taken, Mr. Vs. amendment 
 was voted down. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG moved to amend Mr. 
 VACHE'S amendment by substituting " and" for 
 " or." Lost. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN suggested that it would be bet- 
 ter still to say " all offences except treason and 
 uch as are the subjects of impeachment." 
 
 Mr. VACHE moved to strike out " or," where 
 it occurs in the clause " shall either pardon, or 
 commute the sentence, or direct, &c. 
 
 This was adopted. 
 
 Mr. VACHE then moved to strike out all after 
 the words " pardon granted" in the twelfth line. 
 This was voted down. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out all down 
 to and including the word proper and insert : 
 
 " The Governor shall have power to grant reprieves, 
 commutations and pardons, after conviction, for all offen- 
 ces punishable with death, except treason " 
 
 Tho amendment was lost, ayes 10 noes 84. 
 The Convention then adjourned to 9 o'clock on 
 Monday morning. 
 
 MONDAY, (40th day,) July 20. 
 Prayer by Dr. KENNEDY. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK presented a petition in relation to 
 the enlargement of the Erie canal, its comple- 
 tion, its resources, &c. Referred. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a communication 
 from Mr. Armes, asking the use of the Assembly 
 Chamber this evening to deliver a lecture on 
 Phreno Mnemotechny. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to grant the application. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to h.y it on the table. 
 
 Two votes vveie taken on this motron, but no 
 quorum voted either lima. 
 
 The ayes and noes were called for, but not or 
 dered. The House was called and 81 members 
 answered. 
 
 Mr. JONES said the Convention had no power 
 to graht the use of this Hall. They were here as 
 it were on suffrance. 
 
 Mr. STETSON moved to lay aside all inter- 
 vening business. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER wanted to offer a reso- 
 lution. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said it was not in order. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM hoped that if Monday was to be 
 set apart for the presentation of resolutions, tha 
 members would not be choked off. 
 
 Mr. STETSON moved to lay aside every thing 
 except reports. 
 
 Ayes 46. No nays voted. 
 
 The PRESIDENT: No quorum yet. 
 
 Question was put again. 
 
 Ayes 56 ; noes 1369. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER withdrew his motion, remark 
 ing that if the Convention saw fit to give its sane 
 
 ion to every travelling lecturer, he would not ob- 
 
 ct, but would wash his hands of it. 
 
 The motion to grant the application was op 
 josed by Messrs. JONES and STETSON, and lost. 
 
 Mr. McNEIL had leave of absence for 1 week; 
 Vir. BRAYTON for the same. 
 
 Mr. STETSON again moved to lay intervening 
 rders on the tuble and proceed to the considera- 
 ion ot the report on the Executive Depaitment. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 The Convention then took up the report on 
 HE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE EXECUTIVE 
 DEPARTMENT. 
 
 The first question was upon the reconsideration 
 >fthe vote rejecting the amendment of Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD, to strike out the words, " as he may think 
 roper," and insert "as may be provided by law," 
 n the 6th section. 
 
 Mr. CHATF1ELD then called up the question 
 m this, and demanded the ayes and nays, and they 
 vere ordered, and resulted yeas 42, nays 40, as 
 ollows: 
 
 AYES Messrs Angel, Archer, Bascorn, Chamberlain, 
 Chatfield, Conely, Cornell, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, 
 Danforth, Flanders, Gebhard, Hart, Hawley, Hotchkiss, 
 lutchinson, Jones, Maxwell, Nellis, Nicoll, Patterson, Pre- 
 ident, Richmond, St. John, Salisbury, Shaver, W. H. 
 Spencer, Stephens, Strong, Swackhamer, Tait, Taggart, 
 Tallmadge, W. Taylor, Townsend, Waterbury, Willard, 
 Witbeck, W. B. Wright, Yawger, J. Youngs-42. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Ayrault, H. Backus, Bouck, Bray ton, 
 3rundage, Bull, Burr, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr., Can- 
 dee, Clark, Greene, A. Huntington, Hyde, Kernan, Kings- 
 ey, Kirkland, Mann, McNitt, Miller, Morris, Murphy, 
 Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Penniman, Riker, Russell, 
 Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Simmons, Smith, Stetson, 
 Stow, J. J. Taylor, Tuthill, Wood, A. W. Young 40, 
 
 So the Convention reconsidered the subject. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN thought the Convention had 
 reserved to the Legislature the regulation of this 
 pardoning power, though he was opposed to tak- 
 ing the power from the Executive. He was sa- 
 tisfied that on Saturday the difference between 
 members was more as to a matter of form, than 
 of substance. He supposed no one wished to give 
 to the Legislature the pardoning power. It should 
 be left with the Executive, and with him alone. 
 The courts had the adjudication of all cases ; the 
 Executive after sentence had the power to par- 
 don. But as the Legislature prescribes the mocte 
 in which the courts shall act, and the rule of law 
 for their guidance, so he considered the Legisla- 
 ture should by law regulate the exercise of this 
 pardoning power ; the times and modes and man- 
 ner of exercising this pardoning power. The le- 
 gislature by its construction is entirely unfit for 
 the exercise of this power ; he would no more 
 give it to them, than to allow them to overturn 
 the judgments of Courts. Under the present con- 
 stitution, the Legislature have exercised the pow- 
 er of regulating the manner, &c., in which the 
 pardoning power shall be exercised by the Exe- 
 cutive ; and it is very proper that they should 
 have this power, to regulate the sort of evidence, 
 &c., under which this clemency is to be exer- 
 cised. He instanced the forgeries, in the case of 
 , who was pardoned, and upon his re- 
 
 turn to the place of conviction, application was 
 made to the Governor for the reasons of his ac- 
 tion. He returned in answer, a certificate and 
 opinion of the judge, of the jury, a statement of 
 the district attorney who had acted in his case, 
 and a petition signed by a large number of as re- 
 
355 
 
 spectable people as could be found on both side 
 of the Mohawk. And yet every word of all the; 
 papers was an entire forgery. He would allo 
 the Legislature to declare such an act a crim 
 and punishable accordingly. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL enquired if the Legislator 
 could not now pass a law declaring the fabrica 
 tion of such persons to be forgery ? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN Yes; under the Constitutio 
 of 1824, the legislature did pass a law regulatin, 
 this matter. But unless this amendment prevail 
 the legislature cannot control the Executive i 
 this. " He may grant pardons, &c., a* he ma 
 think proper." One way to get out of this diffi 
 culty is to adopt Mr. CHATFIELD'S amendment 
 the other is to strike out the words of the act c 
 the legislature giving the Governor this exclusiv 
 power, and bring it back to what it is in the con 
 stitution o' 1S21. The Executive was as desirou 
 that this should be the case, as he (Mr. H.) was 
 Mr. SIMMONS said his object was similar t( 
 Mr. HOFFMAN'S ; he did not wish, by a mistaken 
 phraseology, tc convey back to the Legislatur 
 what had properly been taken from them. The 
 exercise of this power was the vetoing of the act 
 of the Supreme Court and the Court of Errors. 
 He wished to preserve to the legislature thepow 
 er to regulate the exercise of the pardoning pow 
 er without impairing its substance. They have 
 the right te perform by a general law what th 
 gentleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIEI.D) and the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. HOFFMAN,) de 
 sire. They have the power to require Circui 
 Judges and petitioners to send in their documents 
 to the Governor within a certain time. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN would ask the gentleman 
 from Essex, (Mr. SIMMONS,) if the Constitution 
 was to make a cettain rule, and the Legislature 
 was to make another rule, which rule would the 
 Governor obey ? 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS. The governor ought to mind 
 his own rule. The pardoning power then would 
 be in the party who prescribes the rule. They 
 who prescribe rules exercise the power, and 
 bring them round to be acted on. By submitting 
 to the terms of the law prescribed by the legisla^ 
 
 ture, a man should be pardoned, and not else. 
 
 Give them power of prescribing as to the notices 
 to be furnished, and to the time, and form, and 
 manner in which it should be done. But the 
 power to pardon, to control the action of courts on 
 this point, he would rest exclusively in the Gov- 
 ernor. He desired the Governer to have the pow- 
 er in such a manner that it could not be taken 
 away from him, nor modified, except as to the 
 manner and form of its exercise. Now what was 
 the pardoning power ? It was the power to dis- 
 pense with the laws. It was a high power. It 
 
 was the same as the veto power in legislation 
 
 for by this provision they armed the Executive 
 with the power to negative the action of the ju- 
 diciary. It must therefore, in its very nature, be 
 exclusive and absolute. How then could the 
 legislature regulate it by law? If the legisla- 
 ture might prescribe the conditions, limitations 
 and restrictions by which he should exorcise it, 
 there would be a superior power over the Gover- 
 nor. At the same time he was willing to reserve 
 to the legislature the regulation of the manner of 
 exercising it, if that could be done without inju- 
 
 ry to the substance. How then could that be 
 done ? The legislature might provide by a 
 general law that every person applying for 
 a pardon shall give such and such a notice 
 and apply in such and such a manner ; they 
 might prescribe the manner in which the neces- 
 sary information shall be provided. They had 
 certainly the power to require circuit judges, who 
 tried the criminal, to make a report of al-1 the evi- 
 dence to the Governor, and the petitioners to show 
 the reasons why the pardon should be granted 
 within a certain time, and after due notice had 
 been given. He would not object to the exercise 
 of this power by the legislature, but he would 
 not consent that the pardoning power itself should 
 be infringed or taken away by the legislature 
 from the Governor. But if this amendment pre- 
 vailed, the legislature could veto the Governor's 
 pardon ; and then the Executive would be situa- 
 ted somewhat like the witness before a Dutch jus- 
 tice, who had a right " to dink provided he dink 
 wid de court !" The Governor could think, but 
 he must think with the Legislature. He believed 
 the Legislature had power sufficient already. He 
 was opposed to the amendment. 
 
 Mr. STETSON was opposed to the amendment. 
 There was no difference between an absolute pow. 
 er and a commutation. There never has been a 
 general interference by the legislature with the 
 pardoning power possessed by the Governor. It 
 was only done to enable the Governor to carry out 
 a case of a conditional pardon. If he could grant 
 a conditional pardon, how could he order the jails 
 of the country to be open without the interference 
 of the Legislaiure ? The amendment is substan- 
 tially a transfer of the pardoning power 10 the 
 Legislature. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS thought that this question was 
 definitely settled. And he hoped the Convention 
 would pause btfore they adopted this amendment. 
 He wished the power to rest exclusively in the 
 ~nvernor as a check to the present oppressive 
 rriminal code. Tne salmary effect of all laws has 
 depended more on the certainty of their execu- 
 ion than on the seventy of the punishment. 
 This power to pardon this exercise of mercy had 
 better rest exclusively with the Governor. "And 
 f we give the. Legislature power to direct hoto 
 his pardoning powershall be exercised, you great- 
 y increase the uncertainly of the punishment 
 Arid all the evil disposed men of I he country im- 
 nediarely turn their attention to this uncertainty 
 md regulate their conduct accordingly. And 
 herefore, you cannot safely thus hold up before 
 ''irrupt men a graduated scale of minimum pun- 
 shments. And this scheme of virtually leaving 
 11 this power to the regulation of the Legisla- 
 ure must fall to the ground. He could not be- 
 eve any part of this power had ever been invested 
 n or entrusted to the exercise of the Legislature, 
 his power. however, cannot be dispensed with or 
 aken away from the governor. The various mo- 
 ives which induce the commission of crime, the 
 ncertain nature and character of testimony, and 
 ometimes a development of facts, subsequent to 
 le trial, will render a change of sentence right 
 nd proper. For these and other causes, justice 
 nd humanity require that the pardoning power 
 lall continue to be lodged somewhere. It ie 
 enerally conceded by most of the members that 
 
this power is well reposed in the governor, but 
 from an apprehension of its abuse, it is now pro- 
 posed that the legislature shall control the gover- 
 nor in the exercise of the power ; that he shall 
 act only under rules prescribed by the legislature. 
 Such a control must still further impair the cer- 
 tainty of punishment, and in his (Mr. N.'s) opin- 
 ion, renders the criminal laws almost a nullity. 
 The criminal code which should be a terror to 
 evil doers, in prescribing punishments for differ- 
 ent crimes, usually fixes both a maximum and a 
 minimum limit ; that is, a man who commits a 
 certain crime shall be imprisoned for a term not 
 greater than, say for illustration, eight years, and 
 not less than five years. Now men in plotting 
 crime, generally take in account the penalty ; 
 they estimate their chances of escape, or a miti- 
 gation of their sentence ; and rely upon it they al- 
 ways keep out of view the longest, and base their 
 hopes upon the shortest term of imprisonment. 
 Should the legislature prescribe by statute, terms 
 and conditions upon which the governor shall ex- 
 ercise this power, they will lessen the restrain- 
 ing influence of the criminal laws by introducing 
 a new and reduced scale of minimum punish- 
 ments, which of course will impair the certainty 
 of punishment and necessarily lessen the restraints 
 upon malefactors. These changes in, and abate- 
 ments of punishment, as made under this pardon- 
 ing power, will, after all the changes proposed, 
 have to be left to the discretion of the executive ; 
 for should the interference of the legislature be 
 allowed by the Constitution, felons would under- 
 stand as the lawyers, your statutes reducing the 
 minimum scale of punishments, and would at 
 once become more adroit and reckless in the 
 commission of crime. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that having offered this 
 amendment, he could not consent to have a vote 
 taken upon it without endeavoring to explain his 
 own views in reference to it and if possible to 
 show to the Convention that the views and ob- 
 jections of gentlemen who were opposed to it were 
 fallacious. If these views were the settled sense 
 of this body then he apprehended it had met here 
 to very little purpose. One object he supposed 
 of calling this Convention was to limit the exe- 
 cutive patronage, about which so much complaint 
 had existed. Another was to limit the abuse of 
 delegated power, whether vested in the Execu- 
 tive or the legislature. Mr. C. alluded to the fact 
 of the executive power having been strengthened 
 rather than weakened, as was instanced in the 
 amendment adopted in relation to the veto pow- 
 er. And it was now sought to put the whole par- 
 doning power unlimited and uncontrolled in the 
 hands of the executive. Mr.C's. predilections were 
 the other way ; he never was a strong advocate of 
 the one man power, and in relation to the veto 
 he was for giving a majority of all elected, the 
 power to pass a bill. Mr. C. said that the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer, (Mr. HOFFMAN) had put 
 the question in a clear light, rle only proposed 
 that the legislature should have the power to pre- 
 scribe the manner and mode and form, and to 
 avoid misconstruction, he would change the 
 phraseology of his amendment, and substitute 
 " as shall have been provided by law," for " as 
 may be provided by law." This would obviate 
 the objection that might be entertained, to legis 
 
 lation for a particular case, and would require 
 the legislation to be general. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that if any gentleman had 
 conveyed the idea impressed on his mind, as to 
 the necessity for the words contained in the sec- 
 tion as it is, he would not have troubled the Con- 
 vention with another word. It was necessary that 
 a pardon should be final, and that there should be 
 no question as to its validity afterwards. If the 
 Executive was guilty of corruption, he should be 
 "mpeached, but the pardon should be effective. 
 Under this amendment, the legality of the par- 
 don could be tested, and the judiciary would 
 have to settle it. But if the Governor puts his 
 signature to a pardon, it should be effectual 
 there should be nothing to invalidate that. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that the gentleman was not 
 altogether sound in his law, when he said that the 
 pardon should be effectual. A pardon granted 
 by the Governor may be impeached, as the law 
 now stands, if obtained by fraud or corruption. 
 This was the law as settled by the Court of Er- 
 rors. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that there was then great- 
 er necessity for the words in the original sec- 
 tion, for this reason: If you permit your door ^to 
 be opened for such enquiries, you may leave the 
 most honest pardon to be tested by legislation. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : Such a case is pending before 
 the Court of Errors. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS contended that these words 
 should be in for the express power of prevent- 
 ing this. The Executive may act corruptedly, 
 but if the door was opened, no matter how hon- 
 estly he acted, the pardon might be contested. 
 He would rather have errors escape uncorrected, 
 than truth questioned and made the subject of 
 persecution under excitement. As to the ques- 
 tion of the rules to be prescribed, in relation to 
 the practice of exercising this pardon the modus 
 operandi he was of opinion that the legislature 
 should have the power to do that. This should 
 be provided for while upon the powers and du- 
 ties of the legislature, and not in this article. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD was opposed to the amend- 
 ment because it did in terms strip the Executive 
 of the pardoning power. It gave to the legisla- 
 ture the power to impose any restrictions or limi- 
 tations it may see fit, and compelled them to 
 employ the Governor only as their agent for the 
 exercise of .this power. They could, under it, 
 compel the Governor not to grant a pardon un- 
 less assented to by two-thirds of the legislature, 
 or unless under the direction of a legislative com- 
 mittee. These were conditions, limitations and 
 conditions. If the Executive was to be stripped 
 entirely of this power, it was better in a bold and 
 manly way to do it, and to confer it upon the le- 
 gislature and then to direct the application so 
 made to where the power lies, and where it was 
 in reality exercised. This consideration alone 
 would render him opposed to the amendment. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said the gentleman last up had 
 given the *rue exposition of the amendment, and 
 such as every governor would be bound to give it 
 if adopted in the Constitution, The great evil will 
 be that the legislature never could adopt certain 
 general resolutions and limitations on the pardon- 
 ing power, that would be safe and proper. A gen- 
 eral rule would open the door too wide, and they 
 
357 
 
 would be obliged to act on every special case. 
 He would suppose a case that had been and may 
 be again. He would suppose a case where a peo- 
 ple disgusted by grievances for which they have 
 sought redress at the hands of the legislature 
 that legislature too telling them there was power 
 to alleviate those grievances. He would suppose 
 that under this state of things, the people thus 
 suffering, that many of them were impelled to 
 violate those laws which they felt to be an in- 
 fringement of their rights their rights of pro- 
 perty too. And if in the general conditions pro- 
 vided by the legislature there were none that 
 would reach such a case as this, was it supposed 
 that the governor would interfere when that 
 legislature had refused to alleviate these 
 grievances, out of which the crimes arose. 
 The sentiment in favor of the abolition of 
 capital punishment was gaining strength and 
 might soon force the governor never to allow 
 the execution of a criminal. That could not be 
 settled by general rules of legislation. He would 
 leave it to the people only to decide as to the 
 rectitude of the exercise of this power. Could 
 this power rightfully be placed any where else ? 
 The governor was amenable to a power which 
 would judge him, and judge him correctly the 
 whole people. He granted that it have been oc- 
 casionally exercised through mistake, but he did 
 not believe even through corruption. But even 
 admitting this, was the legislature exempt from 
 the commission of mistakes, or the influence o: 
 corruption. With the great mass of business con- 
 tinually before the legislature would the case be 
 as fully examined as if left to the governor. They 
 would never have time, and the applicants for 
 panlons would throng the lobbies, and press the 
 legislature to exercise it whether they had tim~ 
 for examination or not. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: Who supposes that the 
 legislature is to have power to pardon. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL saul u was to have power u 
 impose the relictions, which was the same thing 
 in effect. The Executive power of mercy thoulc 
 be left pure and unsullied. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR thought the amendment gav< 
 to the Legislature too much latitude. The pat 
 dining power must rest as a whole with some 
 body who should be responsible tor its exercise 
 This amendment gives lo the Legislature the 
 power of putting away this power by condition 
 and limitations He agreed that there should bf 
 some conditions relative to the manner of apply 
 ing the power, and he would offer an amendmen 
 to carry his idea out in relation to that. Thi 
 would leave the Legislature to provide rules to 
 its carrying out, leaving the exercise of th 
 power entirely with the Governor. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY asked tor the previous question 
 but withdrew it, at the request of 
 
 Mr. SIOW, tor an explanation. He wishec 
 merely tocoir.-ct what he thought might be amis 
 apprehension, and might be cited hereafter as th 
 opinion of this body. He denied that the Icgislatur 
 ever had or would have under the present Con 
 dtitution the power of limiting or restricting th 
 exerci-e of the pardoning power, Mr. S. re 
 newed the call for the previous question. 
 
 The PRESIDENT, in reply t> several enqui 
 ries as to the effect of the previous question, de 
 
 led that it wiuid cut <.ff no amendments pertp- 
 ng, or that had been offered in committee of tne 
 * hole. 
 
 The yeas and nays were called for on the mo- 
 on to second the call for the previous question 
 nd there was a second, ayes 54, nays 36, as fol- 
 
 w9 : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault. Bouck, Brown, Brun* 
 age.Bull.Cambreleng, R, Campbell, jr., Candee, Chamber' 
 ain, Clark, Dorlon, Flanders, Greene, Hart, Ilotchkiss A. 
 luntmgton, Hutchinaon, Hyde, Jones, Jordon. Kern'an 
 Kingsley, Kirkland, Mann, McNitt, Maxwell, Miller, Mor- 
 is, Murphy, Nellis, Nicoll, Parish, Penniman, Perkins 
 President, Riker, Russell, St. John Salisbury, Sear?' 
 >haw, Sheldon, Simmons, Smith, Stephens, Stetson' 
 Strong, Swackhamer, Taft, J. J. Taylor, Tuthill, VacKe' 
 tVorden 64. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, H. Backus, Bascom, Brayton, 
 Chattield, Conely, Cornell, Crocker, Cuddeback, Dana 
 Danforth.Oebhard, Harris, Hawley, Hoffman, Nicholas' 
 O' Jonor, Patterson, Shaver, Shepard, E. Spencer, W H. 
 Spencer, Stow, Taggart, Tallmadge, W. Taylor, Tilden, 
 fownsend, Van Schoonhoven,Wdterbury, Willard,Wood 
 
 . B. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 36. 
 
 The main question was then ordered, and the 
 question being taken, on the amendment of the 
 gentleman from Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIELD) it was 
 rejected ayes 39 nays 55, as follows : 
 
 AYKS Messrs. Angel, Archer, Bascom, Burr, Chamb*r- 
 ain. Chatfield, Conely, Cornell, Crooker, Cuddeback, Da- 
 na, Danforth, Flanders, Gebhard, Harris, Hart, Hawley 
 rloft'man, Hotchkiss, Jones, Maxwell, Nellis, Patterson, St. 
 John Salisbury, Shaver, W. H. Spencer, Strong Swa'ck- 
 haraer, Tal't, Taggart, Tallmadge, Tilden, Van Schoon- 
 loven, Waterbury, W.B. Wright, Yawger, Youngs 39. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, H. Backus, Bouck, Brayton. 
 Brown, Brundage, Bull, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr., 
 Clark, Dorlon Greene, A. Huntington, Hutchinson Hyde, 
 Jordan, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirkland, Mann, McNitt, Miller, 
 Morris, Murphy, Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, Parish, Pen- 
 niman, Perkins, President, Richmond, Riker, Russell. 
 Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Simmons, Smith, E Spen- 
 cer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson. Stow, J. J. Taylor, W. 
 Taylor, Townsend, Tuthill, Vache, Willard, Wood, Wor- 
 den, Young 55. 
 
 The question was then on the amendment of the 
 gentleman from Onondaga (Mr. W, TAYLOR) to 
 add "subject" to such regulations as may be pro- 
 vided by law, relative to the manner of applying 
 pardons, and it was adopted. Ayes 57, nays 24. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE proposed to add the word 
 the' before the word "power" in the 5th line, 
 so as to read " the Governor shall have the pow- 
 er &c." and so as to prevent a joint exercise of 
 the power. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN enquired if that 
 would not have the effect to divest the legislature 
 of a joint power in this power. 
 
 Mr; TALLMADGE said that such was the in- 
 tention. 
 
 The amendment was adopted. 
 
 Mr. STOW wished to ask a reconsideration of 
 the vote, on the proposition to allow the legisla- 
 ture to regulate the manner of applying for par- 
 don. He did not wish the petitioning power regu> 
 lated. Laid over under the rule. 
 
 The fifth section was then adopted. 
 
 The sixth section was then read. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to change the phrase- 
 ology, so as to provide that the Lieut. Governor 
 should be governor in the absence of the Execu- 
 tive. This was rejected. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to add to the 9th 
 line, after the word military, the words " and 
 naval forces." 
 
358 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 The sixth section was then agreed to. 
 
 The seventh section was then read. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that there was no pro- 
 vision for the election of a President of the Sen- 
 ate, in the case of the absence of the Lieutenant 
 Governor. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that was to be provided 
 for, when regulating the powers and duties of the 
 Senate. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to strike out from the 
 first and second lines, the words which provided 
 that the Lieutenant Governor should " possess the 
 same qualifications of eligibility for office as the 
 Governor," and he called for the ayes and nays, 
 which were ordered. This, Mr. O'C said, was 
 the introduction of a set of new disqualifications 
 not provided in the Constitution of .'21, and he 
 therefore desired that the ayes and nays might be 
 called. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG said that as the Lieuten- 
 ant Governor was in case of a contingency to be 
 the Governor, it was but proper that he should 
 be subject to the same restrictions. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR replied that there should be the 
 same provision extended to the President pro 
 tern, of the Senate, for he might also be called 
 upon to discharge the duties of Governor. If 
 that was done, it then would be necessary to ex- 
 tend the same provision to every member of the 
 Senate, for each would be eligible to be selected 
 for that post. 
 
 The question being taken the amendment was 
 voted down ayes 34, nays 59, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Bascom, Brown, Camfereleng, 
 D. Campbell, jr , Chatneld, Conely, Danlorth, Dorlon, 
 Flanders, Harris, Hart, Jones. Kernan. Mann, Murphy. 
 Nellis, O'Conor, Patterson, Perkins, Russell, Shepi rd, 
 Stephens, Swackhamer, W. Taylor, Townsend, Vache, 
 Van Schoonhoven, Witbeck, Worden, W.B. Wright 34. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Ayrault, H. Backus, Bouck, 
 Brayton, Bull, Candee, Chamberlain, Clark, Croeker, 
 Cucldeback, Dana, Gebkard, Greene, Hawley, Hoffman, 
 Hotcbkiss, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jordan. 
 Kingsley, Kirkland, McNitt, Maxwell, Miller, Morris, 
 Nicholas, Nicoll, Parish, Penniman, President, Richmond. 
 Riker, St. John, Salisbury, Sears, Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon^ 
 Simmons, Smith, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, 
 Stetson, Stow, btrong, Taft, Taggart, Talhnadge, J. J. 
 Taylor, Tuthill, Waterbury, Wiliard, Wood, Yawger, 
 Young, Youngs 69. 
 
 The seventh section was then agreed to. 
 
 The eighth section was then read and adopted. 
 
 The ninth section was then read. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY proposed an amendment, de- 
 signed to prevent the governor from being ex 
 officio an officer of any corporation of a private or 
 local character. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that the amendment ought 
 to be adopted, for as the section now stood it 
 would prevent the governor from attending to his 
 private business. It would even prevent him 
 from being an officer in a religious association. 
 This difficulty would be obviated by the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from Kings, while it would 
 at the same time, prohibit him from being ex of- 
 ficio an officer in any of those private corpora- 
 tions of which there might soon be some com- 
 plaint. As the section now stands the Governor 
 would not be free to exercise the ordinary rights 
 of his fellow citizens in reference to his own pri- 
 vate affairs. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said the only institution in 
 the state that he was aware of, where the gover- 
 nor was ex officio, trustee or officer, was Union 
 College. This was the only end that would be 
 attained by the adoption of this amendment, and 
 he thought it to be rather small business to be put 
 in here. 
 
 Mr. STOW said if he understood correctly the 
 charter of Union College, the Governor was made 
 an officer of that institution by that grant. That 
 could not be changed without a violation of the 
 U. S. Constitution, as decided in the case of Dart- 
 mouth College. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY wished to guard from what 
 might happen, as well as what had happened in 
 this matter. The question instanced in relation 
 lo Dartmouth College was of no application here 
 If it was, the people could not, even if they saw 
 fit, dispense with the office of Governor, because 
 that officer was made ex-officio a trustee of that 
 corporation, and it would be a violation of private 
 rights so to do. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND opposed the amendment. He 
 was satisfied with the section as it stood. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN was opposed to the amend- 
 ment. The section was well considered in com- 
 mittee of the whole the other day, and the object 
 of prohibiting the Governor from being an officer 
 of these private institutions, was he apprehended 
 well understood, when that vote was taken. *It 
 was to prevent an undue influence that migbt be 
 exerted in the discharge ot the official duties by 
 his connection with these institutions. This 
 amendment would bring back the same evils 
 sought to be guarded against, by allowing them 
 to be elected to such stations by these corpora- 
 tions. Besides, even religious corporations often 
 had pecuniary interests involved before the Leg- 
 islature. He preferred to leave the section as it 
 is. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS could see no difference in the 
 principle of allowing a governor to hold an office 
 that he held prior to his election, and permitting 
 him to be elected to one afterwards. It there was 
 evil in the latter case, it applied equally to the 
 former. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that the electors in the one 
 case were supposed to have full knowledge of the 
 fart of his being an officer or trustee of such ia- 
 siitution. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that perhaps the reason 
 why he could see no reason tor the amendment, 
 was in the fact that he could see no reason for the 
 entire section. Mr. S. went on to urge that this 
 power was reserved in the Constitution, for the 
 benefit of the State as against those institutions, ra- 
 ther than for the benefit of the institutions. Mr. 
 S. argued generally against this idea of dissolving 
 the connection between these high offices of State, 
 and these literary institutions. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was 
 vo'ed down. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend so as to 
 strike out the word "or place" It was too 
 general in its meaning, and would even prevent 
 he governor from being a member of the church. 
 
 The amendment was adopted. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to strike out the 
 words, " Or any office or place in a private cor- 
 poration." Was it possible that the Convention 
 
359 
 
 meant to say that the Governor should not even 
 be an officer of a church. That if he accepted 
 the office of a deacon, or a ruling elder in a 
 church, that he was to vacate the executive chair ? 
 Could the Convention mean to be so illiberal to- 
 wards their Executive officer as that. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER knew what he was vo- 
 ting for when he voted for this amendment. It 
 was not absolutely necessary that the Governor 
 should hold those offices. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS coincided in the views of the 
 gentleman from Onondaga. The gentleman elec- 
 ted might have a sum of money which he might 
 wish to invest in a private institution, and he 
 saw no reason why he should be prevented from 
 going in that institution as an officer, the same as 
 any private individual, and look to his own in- 
 terests the same as a private individual. He 
 thought this would be a most ungenerous tres- 
 pass on his private rights. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that (he ordinary duties 
 of the Executive would be quite sufficient to take 
 up his whole time. In the mailer of a religious* 
 society, the church would be just as well off in 
 selecting another man for an officer as the Cover, 
 nor. Neither would he have the Governor an 
 officer in a corporation because he might invest 
 funds therein. Every man who held stock in a 
 corporation could not be an officer in it, and he 
 would leave the Governor to take the same chance 
 an such stockholders. 
 
 Mr A. W. YOUNG would ask whether the 
 fact of a man being a stockholder would not in- 
 fluence him in favor of the institution ? Why not 
 strike that out ? 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that the whole of the 
 argument o r the gentleman from Gentsee went 
 to affe t the rights of conscience. The gentle- 
 man had but one step to go and say that he should 
 not be a member of a religious society at all. If 
 a Governor was a stockholder, he would just as 
 much be interested in an institution as if he was 
 a director. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND wished to be distinctly un- 
 derstood that he was in favor of the Goveinor be- 
 ing a member of the church and ot any one that 
 he pleased. 
 
 Mr. VV. TAYLOR called for the ayes and nays 
 on his amendment and they were ordered. It 
 was carried ayes 47, nays 43 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ayrault, Bascom, Bouck, B^yton. Bull, 
 Cambreleng, il. Campbell, jr., Candee, Conely, Danlbrth, 
 Dorlon, Greene, Harris, Hart, Hawiey, Hotchkiss. Jones, 
 Jordan, Kingsley, Kirkland, McNitt, Maxwell, Miller Ni- 
 cholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, Farish, Patterson, Perkins, Presi 
 dent, Riker, Russell, Salisbury, Shaver, Sheldon, Sim 
 mons, Smith, K. Spencer, Stephens, Stow, J. J. Taylor, 
 W. Taylor, Witbeck, Worden, W. B. Wright, Young, 
 Youngs 47. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angle. H. Backus, Brown, Brundage 
 Burr, Chatfield, Clark, Cook, Cornell, Crooker, Cudde- 
 back, Dana, Flanders, Gebhard, Hoffman, A. Huntington 
 Hutchinson, Kernan, Mann, Morris, Murphy, Nellis, Pen- 
 niman, Richmond, St. John, Sears, Shaw, Shepard, W. H 
 Spencer, Stanton, Stetson. Strong, Swackhamer, Taggart 
 Tallma.ige, Towosend, Tuthill, Vache, VanSchoonhoven 
 Warren, Waterbury, Wood, Yawg r 43. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN to correct a clerical error 
 moved to amend by changing the word <: the," in 
 the 6th line; to '"his," and striking out the words 
 "to them," in the same line; and also, from the 
 word "office," in the same line, to the end of the 
 sentence. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND saw nothing now worth pre- 
 serving in the section, and moved to strike it all 
 out. 
 
 The question being taken, Mr. WORDEW'S 
 amendment was adopted. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that it struck him that this 
 was a very bad section, and ought to be stricken 
 out. In the introduction of provisions of this 
 dnd, evils should be suggested that had occur- 
 ed, and which would serve as a reason for the 
 change. He had heard of no evil ever having 
 arisen from the Governor being eligible to office 
 under the general government. To introduce 
 such a change from the mere fancied possibility 
 of such an evil occurring, would, it seemed to 
 lim, be unwise. Independent of that, the re- 
 striction against holding an office under the gen- 
 eral government, might be found inconvenient 
 Hie could conceive a case, in which it would be 
 found a very great detriment to the convenience 
 of justice. There were also frequently contro- 
 verses arising between States, and under a law of 
 "ongress, it might be deemed proper to submit 
 the case to the arbitration of the Governors of the 
 neighboring States. And who more likely than 
 the Governor of the great and majestic State of 
 New-York ? What mischief could arise from 
 that ? As to holding office under a foreign State, 
 it seemed to him to be idle to suppose that the 
 Governor would ever hold such an office. There 
 was a very nice point of law involved in the ques- 
 tion of what should constitute an officer, and to 
 what that appellation strictly applied. He thought 
 the entire section unwise, and moved to strike it 
 out ; and on that motion he called for the ayes 
 and nays. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL said that the same pro- 
 vision existed in regard to members of the legis- 
 lature, and it seemed to him the propriety of it 
 was so manifest that it should be retained. It 
 would be right that if the governor should hold an 
 office under the general government which should 
 occupy a large portion of time, he should be 
 obliged to vacate the latter. Another reason was 
 that there might be a conflict in the discharge of 
 the functions of the officers. 
 
 Mr. STETSON would agree that we had lost 
 a very valuable feature in the section one which 
 had not been fairly considered, he admitted. But 
 he hoped what was still of value would be re- 
 tained, and perhaps what of value was lost, might 
 be regained. He voted to sustain all the local in- 
 stitutions when he voted against allowing any lo- 
 cality to usurp all the influence which the Gov- 
 ernor by virtue of his office has obtained. The 
 question was whether localities should monopo- 
 lize all this influence. As governor, he owed 
 his influence to all, and he should use it for the 
 benefit of all. What was the success of one in- 
 stitution was often the death of another. No one 
 he presumed objected to the governor being an 
 officer in a religious incorporation; this proposi- 
 tion was not aimed at that. To prevent the ac- 
 ceptance of office at the hands of the general gov- 
 ernment was to prevent a fusion of the powers of 
 the two governments. He would move a recon- 
 sideration of the last vote. 
 
 This motion under the rule lies over one day. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought the most valuable 
 part of the section stricken out now, and there- 
 
360 
 
 fore they had better strike it all out. Are the 
 gentlemen who say that the Governor shall hold 
 no office in any College here, in this State, dis- 
 posed to say that the Governor shall hold no of- 
 fice in the Smithsonian Institute ? He gave gen- 
 tlemen full credit for sincerity in the votes they 
 had given, but he did not wish them to stultify 
 themselves. 
 
 Cries of " Question," " question." 
 Mr. SIMMONS did not want the section so to 
 stand as to prevent the Governor from holding 
 any office pro hac vice, under the General Gov- 
 ernment, and it would be unwise to prohibit him 
 from doing what the General Government re- 
 quired him to do on pain of forfeiting his office. 
 Such duties as an examiner of the Cadets of the 
 West Point, and other similar duties under the 
 general government, he ought to have privilege 
 to perform. This was belittleing our Executive 
 and ourselves. Why, they would not under this, 
 allow our Governor to execute the duties of deli- 
 vering up criminals under the law of the United 
 States. He hoped the whole section would be 
 stricken out. 
 
 Mi. BASCOM said that governors sometime^ 
 were boundary commissioners, and Indian com- 
 missioners. He thought it desirable to let them 
 be eligible to such offices. 
 
 Mi. TAYLOR asked for an instance of this 
 kind. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said the governor of Maine was 
 a boundary commissioner. 
 
 Mr O'CONOR demanded the ayes and noes. 
 They were ordered, 
 
 Mr. STOW hoped this section would be stricken 
 out. It would all come up hereafter under th. 
 bth section of the repoit ot committee No 4, 
 (Mr. HOUCK'S) Document, No. 51, where the 
 whole inatier was fully provided for 
 
 The question was taken on the adoption of the 
 9;h section as thus amended: 
 
 fc 9. Neither the Governor or Lieutenant-Governor shal 
 hold any office under any other government except a mil- 
 itary command under the United States in time ot war, or 
 in case of insurrection. And the acceptance by either o. 
 any office hereby prohibited,, shall vacate his office. 
 
 And it was lost ayes 46, noes 46 as follows 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, Brayton 
 Brown, Brundage, Burr, Cambreleng, R Campbell, jr. 
 Chatfield Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback, Flanders, Gebhard 
 Hart, Hoffman, A. Huntington, Jordan, Kernan, Mann 
 Miller, Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, Penniman, Rus 
 eell St John Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Stanton, Stetson 
 Strong,' Taft/Tallmadge, J. J Taylor, W. Taylor, Tuthill 
 Van Schoonhoven, Waterbury, Wood, Yawger, Young 
 Youngs 46. 
 
 jxOES Messrs. H Backus, Bascom,Bouck, Bull, Cham 
 
 berlain, Clark, Conely, Crooket, Dana, Danforth, Dorlon 
 Greene, Harris, Haw ley, Hotchkiss, Hutchinson, Hyde 
 Jones Kingsley, Kirkland, McNitt, Maxwell, Murphy 
 O'Conor Parish, Patterson, Pre ident, Richmond, Rikei 
 
 was an ample provision made for the matter by 
 committee No. 7. Sheriffs and all officers were 
 hen provided for. The 10th section was then 
 'ricken out ayes 41, noes 46. 
 The llth section was then read on the veto. 
 11. Every bi.l which shall have passed the Senate and 
 ssembly, shall, beiore it becomes a law, be presented to 
 ie Governor; if he approve, he shall sign it; but it not he 
 hall return it with his objection* to that house in which 
 shall have originated; who shall enter the objections at 
 irge on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. It 
 Tier such reconsideration two thirds of all the members 
 ecte<i shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together 
 ith tne objections, to the other house, by which it shall 
 kewisebe reconsidered, and it approved by two thirds of 
 lithe members elected, it shall become a law, notwith- 
 anding the objections of the Governor. But in all such 
 ases, the votes of both houses shall be determined by yeas 
 nd nays, and the names of the members vo ing for and 
 gainst the bill s-hall be entered on the journal of each 
 ouse respectively If any bill shall not be returned by 
 le Governor within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it 
 nil have been presented to "him, the s,ime shall be a law, 
 like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Legislature 
 ill by their adjournment prevent its return; in which 
 ase it shall not be a law. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS moved to strike out " all" in 
 he 6th line, and the words " elected" in the 7th 
 nd 10th line; and to insert in the 7th line in 
 dace of the word " elected" the word " present," 
 o as to let two-thirds of all the members present 
 epass a bill after the Executive has vetoed it. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend further by 
 triking out the words '* two-thirds" in the 6th 
 nd 9th line, and insert in lieu thereof the words 
 * a majority." He believed this a fair reflection 
 f the popular will. He was in favor of the ma- 
 ority principle he believed there was always a 
 iisposition in the legislature to harmonize with 
 he Executive. He was opposed to the one-man 
 jower. It was not in harmony with the genius 
 if our institutions, and he thought that if a majo- 
 ity of all the members elected were allowed to 
 pass a bill a second time, the Governor 
 .vould then have sufficient power left in his 
 lands in relation to the veto. No one man 
 should ever stand between the popular will and 
 ;he act of the Legislature in carrying it out. 
 Some of the States gave no veto power to their 
 Governor. In Iowa the majority principle pre- 
 
 ailed, and in some the two-third principle. He 
 would strip the Executive of this power, so long 
 as he was a co-ordinate branch of the Legislature, 
 He would not make him a mere clerk to sign bills, 
 without any discretionary power over them. But 
 ordinarily the power to arrest the passage of a 
 bill, unless repassed by a majority of those elected 
 to the two houses, was power enough for one 
 man. To say that it should require two-thirds 
 of all elected to pass a bill against a veto, would 
 
 Jones, Kingsley 
 
 O'Conor, Parish, 
 
 Salisbury, Sears, Shaver, Simmons, Smith, E. Spencer, W 
 
 H Spencer, Stephens, S<ow, Swackhamer, Taggart, Town 
 
 send, V ache, Warren, Willard, Worden, W.B. Wright- 
 
 ' Mr, STETSON gave notice that he woul 
 move for a reconsideration. 
 
 The 10th section was then read : 
 
 fe 10- The Governor may remove from office any sheri 
 at any time within the period for which such sheriff wa 
 elected He shall first give to such sherifi' a copy of th 
 charges against him and an opportunity of being heard ' 
 his defence, before any removal shall be made. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to strike it out. Ther 
 
 be to give the Executive all power over the le- 
 gislation of the State for the influence of any 
 administration in the legislature the desire there 
 to harmonise with the Executive was of itself 
 equal to at least one-third of the house. He al- 
 ways had been and always should be opposed to 
 this one man power, which was only a relic of 
 the monarchical institutions of the old world. 
 
 Mr. MANN was also opposed lo the one-man 
 power ; and he 4 wished to have a clause inserted 
 in the constitution so that no bill should be allow, 
 ed to pass the Legislature unless it had a majority 
 of all the members elected. (Cries of " that's 
 right.") As the constitution stands at present, a 
 
361 
 
 mere majority of all those present in the le- 
 gislature can now pass any law; some 33 members 
 can do so; and instances have been known where 
 very few more in number of members than 33 have 
 passed very important laws through the legisla- 
 ture of this State. This must be put a stop to. 
 And if no other member would do so, he would, 
 at the proper time, move an amendment to effect 
 this, when the report of (lie committee on the 
 powers and duties of the Legislature should come 
 under consideration. And 'it this measure was 
 adopted, as he was firmly convinced it would be, 
 by this Convention, then he would ask the gen- 
 tleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD,) wha' 
 would become of the Veto power, should his (Mr. 
 CHATFIELD'S) amendment pass? He (Mr. M ) 
 therefore wished the section to stand as it passed 
 through the committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said the Convention would bear 
 him witness that he had not often forced himself 
 upon their attention. Most of the questions which 
 had hitherto been the subject of discussion, he 
 regarded as of little importance but it was not 
 so with regard to the question under considera- 
 tion. Had the section remained as it was report- 
 ed by the committee, he might have contented 
 himself with giving a silent vote on the proposi- 
 tion but since the section had been amended in 
 committee of the whole, so as to require two- 
 thirds of all the members elected to each branch 
 of the Legislature to pass a law after it had been 
 returned by the Governor, he could not reconcile 
 it with his sense of duty to suffer it to be adopted 
 without further discussion. If he understood the 
 popular sentiment in regard to the object of this 
 convention, it aad been demanded with great una- 
 nimity that the Executive power and patronage 
 should be greatly curtailed and restricted. And 
 he confessed he had anticipated, that provision 
 would have been made in the new constitution by 
 an almost unanimous rote of the Convention, 
 whereby a majority of all the members elected to 
 each branch of the Legislature might pass a law 
 notwithstanding the Executive Veto. It had been 
 with some surprise that he had seen those who 
 occupied the position of the progressive democra- 
 cy in this body, not only taking ground agains 
 any further restriction of the veto power, but ac 
 tually voting to extend and strengthen the con 
 trol of the Executive over the legislative depart 
 ment. He might perhaps have known better hat 
 he reflected that this two-third principle formed 
 a prominent feature in the creed put forth by th 
 celebrated Baltimore Convention. It was upon 
 this ground alone that he could account for th< 
 position he found gentlemen occupying on thi 
 question. It is a sound maxim, that in order long 
 to preserve any free government, it must occa 
 sionally be brought back to first principles. Am 
 it is peculiarly fit, in a body like this, convened 
 for the express purpose of revising the funda 
 mental law of the State, that we should recur ti 
 the cardinal principles upon which our govern 
 ment was founded that we should review thi 
 past, and see what progress we have made, in or 
 der that we may be the better prepared to tak> 
 observations for our future course, and determine 
 what changes are required. This question, of th 
 veto power, was much discussed in the conven 
 tion which framed the Constitution of the Unitei 
 
 23 
 
 tates. Some of the wisest statesmen in that 
 ody among whom was Dr. Franklin were op- 
 osed to vesting a negative power in the nation- 
 1 Executive. A majority, however, determined 
 therwise. They thought the Executive branch 
 f the government, as compared with the legisla- 
 ive, would be too weak, and this power was 
 herefore vested in the Executive for the purpose 
 f self-protection. Experience had shewn, he 
 hought, that this was a mistake. The formi- 
 able and overshadowing power of the national 
 Executive had already become the subject of 
 eep apprehension, and he predicted, that unless 
 t should be materially checked and restricted, it 
 .vould result in the most fearful consequences. 
 The encroachments of power had always been 
 gradual. The history of our national government 
 brmed no exception to this rule. A recurrence 
 o the circumstances under which the veto pow- 
 er had been exercised by the national Executive, 
 rom time to time, would show this. Before Ge- 
 neral Washington would resort to it, he required 
 he written opinions of Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Madi- 
 on, and Mr. Randolph, then Attorney General, 
 hat the law, in reference to which it was pro- 
 )osed to exercise this extraordinary power, was 
 clearly unconstitutional On one other occasion 
 during his eight years administration, and but 
 one, was this power employed by General Wash- 
 ngton. Neither the elder Adams nor Mr. Jeffer- 
 son employed it at all. Mr. Madison vetoed six 
 jills and Mr. Monroe one, during their adminis- 
 :rations always upon the ground that the laws 
 were unconstitutional. Even General Jackson, 
 in his eleven vetoes, had never ventured to place 
 tiis objections upon other than constitutional 
 grounds. It remained for John Tyler to exercise 
 this prerogative on the ground of expediency. It 
 was left for one who had accidentally become 
 President who had been elevated to that office, 
 without any popular election, by a sad dispensa- 
 tion of Providence, to set up his will against that 
 of the people, and by a series of Executive vetoes 
 to defeat and nullify the whole action of the le- 
 gislative authority of the Union, with reference 
 to the most important interests of the nation. 
 Measures involving the credit and the best good 
 of the Union, had been defeated and annulled by 
 the weak and wavering obstinacy of one man, as- 
 suming the right to obstruct the people in the 
 process of self government. It is the part of wis- 
 dom to profit by experience and such an abuse 
 of this power in the national Executive admo- 
 nishes us to beware lest we expose ourselves to 
 the like abuse, by giving too wide a scope for its 
 exercise. Mr. H. had, he said, examined 
 the twenty nine Constitutions of the States 
 of the union, including Iowa, with refer- 
 ence to this question, and he found that there 
 were nine States which did not allow the governor 
 any negative upon the acts of the Legislature. 
 In ten others the majority principle had been 
 adopted. In five, including our own State it had 
 been provided that two-thirds of the members 
 present might pass a law notwithstanding the 
 executive veto. In four others the same phraseo- 
 logy, found in the Constitution of the United 
 Statos, had been adopted, providing that a bill if 
 vetoed should become a law if subsequently 
 passed by two-thirds of each house of the Legis 
 
362 
 
 lature and that, in the constitution of Louisiana 
 alone, was fount! the provision adopted in commit- 
 tee of the whole requiring two-thirds of all the 
 members elected to each branch of the Legisla. 
 ture to overcome the negative of the governor. 
 The history of other countries also furnished use- 
 ful lessons of instruction on the point- The veto 
 power was first instituted under the Roman Re- 
 public. Its object was to protect the people 
 against the edicts of the Roman Senate an aris- 
 tocratic body, having but little sympathy for the 
 people, and with which the masses had but little 
 affinity. ' Upon the demand of the people they 
 were permitted to elect annually officers called 
 Tribunes, to whom was committed the pro 
 tection of the rights ot the people. It was 
 in its origin a democratic institution design, 
 ed to protect the oeople against thft tyran- 
 ny of Roman nobility. For a time it work- 
 ed well but subsequently its operation was dis- 
 astrousat first it protected the people gave 
 them a voice in the legislative assemblies, and 
 secured their liberties. But it ended in greater 
 evils than those it was intended to remedy. The 
 power of the Tribune was to give peace and uni- 
 ty in the Roman nation. But its authority, too 
 great to be vested in any one man, falling into 
 the hands of " power-lusting demagogues," be- 
 came more tyrannical and oppressive than the 
 edicts of the nobility. Indeed, it contributed 
 more than any thing else to produce that state of 
 things which ended in the ruin of the Republic. 
 Augustus, having already the control of the mili- 
 tary, and the treasury, procured the office of Tri- 
 bune to be conferred on himself, and thus assum- 
 ing the popular name and the veto power of that 
 office secured to himself the whole force and en- 
 gy of the government under a republican name. 
 He learned and practiced the art of disguising ty- , 
 ranny under constitutional forms. And thus it ' 
 was, that he was able to check, control, counter- 
 act and degrade every other legitimate authority, 
 until he became an absolute tyrant, exercising 
 uncontrolled and despotic power. The liberties 
 of Rome fell an easy prey to his ambition. 
 The constitutional Assembly of France in re-or- 
 ganising their government in 1789, conferred the 
 veto power upon the King. But its first exercise 
 cost Louis XVI his life and though the power 
 is still possessed, it has never since been exerci- 
 sed. The same power contributed greatly to the 
 destruction of the Polish republic. Each mem- 
 ber of its Diet, possessed an absolute negative 
 upon its decrees. The Emperor of Russia avail- 
 ing himself of this feature in their government, 
 threw into that body his emissaries, who in the 
 distracted state of that country, prevented all effec- 
 tive legislation, and thus brought upon that 
 noble people their misfortunes, which ended 
 in the dismemberment of their country. In 
 Norway, too, the King possesses a qualified 
 negative, but if three successive Diets pass a law 
 by a majority, the royal veto becomes inoperative. 
 It was thus that their nobility was abolished some 
 twenty years since, notwithstanding the efforts of 
 the King to prevent it. It was this power to 
 overcome the royal veto, which had, he believed, 
 saved that country from a revolution, for there 
 was not a constitutional government in Europe 
 where the people would tolerate an arbitrary ex- 
 
 ercise of this prerogative. No one would be 
 found at this day who would advocate the doc- 
 trine of investing the Governor with power to 
 thwart the direct and expressed will of the peo- 
 ple ; and yet this is the effect of the provision 
 which, in committee of the whole, has been in- 
 serted in the Constitution. It enables the Gover- 
 nor to say, " this may be the will of the people 
 but it is not my will and mine must prevail.' ' 
 Such a provision assumes that a majority of both 
 branches of the Legislature, assembling from 
 every part of the State, coming fresh from the 
 people, representing the diversified interests of 
 the various localities of the State, would wilfully 
 persevere in the passage of a law fatal to the pub- 
 lic interests. To guard against a contingency so- 
 improbable, it is proposed to give to a single in- 
 dividual a power, the obstinate or capricious ex- 
 ercise of which will enable him at all times to 
 defeat the popular will. Such power he admitted 
 had not often been abused, nor did he apprehend 
 consequences so fatal from its abuse as had attend- 
 ed it in other countries, yet the fact that it had been 
 the instrument of abuse, furnished a sound reason 
 why it should be restricted. The question involved 
 a great fundamental principle, whether the will of 
 a majority should govern : whether the people 
 by their own chosen representatives, possessing 
 an intimate acquaintance with their varied views, 
 interests and sentiments, should be permitted to 
 determine what was their will and to execute it. 
 Could there be any danger in assuming that a 
 majority of the representatives in each branch of 
 the Legislature, would express and maintain the 
 popular will, with the certainty that if they erred 
 a succeeding Legislature would correct their er- 
 ror ? Had any one heard of any evils resulting 
 from the want of this power in those States where 
 it does not exist ? The provision was founded 
 upon the assumption that a majority of a Legisla- 
 ture, who may be supposed to be the best judges 
 of what is conducive to the public good will de- 
 liberately persist in passing a law against the pub- 
 lic interests and for that reason it is proposed to 
 interpose this attribute of monarchy bel ween the 
 people and their own representatives. It had 
 been said that the Governor could have no induce- 
 ment to defeat the will or oppose the interests of 
 the people. But this argument proved quite too 
 much for if the Governor could have no such 
 inducement might not the same be asserted, with 
 at least equal force of eighty-two members of the 
 Legislature constituting a majority. The Gov- 
 ernor is not always above the influences of party 
 zeal, more than others. Is it safe, he would ask, 
 to confer upon him this high power by which, 
 when even a state of things should arise, which 
 rendered it necessary, in order to subserve his 
 purposes, he could always prevent the pas- 
 sage of a law however loudly called for, and 
 however salutary in its provisions ? Is there 
 not danger that when it shall happen that the 
 Legislature is opposed to the Governor, he may 
 avail himself, as did John Tyler, of his constitu- 
 tional power, to defeat the will of the people. 
 In England, though the veto power is a royai 
 prerogative, it has not been exercised for more 
 than one hundred and fifty years, and yet in 
 democratic America the emphatic decision of 
 the people has been intercepted by the arbi- 
 
363 
 
 trary will, of one wan and that too, a nun th'- 
 
 feople never intended should exercise that office, 
 nstead of huilding up a '-one man power," he 
 desired to see our government firmly established 
 upon democratic principles. The Governor should 
 be allowed to return to the Legislature bills, 
 which in his judgment were unconstitutional or 
 which had been nastily or unadvisedly passed; 
 but if alter a review and reconsideration a major- 
 ity of each branch of the Legislature should see 
 
 (Mr. CHATFIELD). He did not believe it would 
 prove to be any check upon improvident uncon- 
 stitutional legislation. He instanced a recent case 
 in Connecticut where a railroad company had 
 its stock owned chiefly out of that State, and be- 
 seiged the legislature for power to bridge the 
 Connecticut river. The Governor deemed it both 
 unconstitutional and inexpedient, as destructive 
 of the rights and interests of citizens above the 
 bridge and therefore he vetoed it. But the same 
 
 fat to re-enact the bill, it should become a law, majority which passed the bill,under the influence 
 
 ., i- .. .. _!_' ^.: "T^U.,- _ r : ! i i * l~i_l i 
 
 notwithstanding the executive objection. Thus 
 he would vest in the Governor a supervisory 
 power merely, and not clothe him with authority 
 "to save the people from themselves." Such a 
 provision in the Constitution, would be a check 
 of sufficient energy to control the evils resulting 
 from hasty or inconsiderate legislation and would 
 effectually call back the attention of the Legis- 
 lature to any error they might have committed. 
 But if. after the Executive had expressed to the 
 Legislature his opinions as to the unconsiitution 
 aliiy or inexpediency of the law, a majority of 
 all elected, should still be in its tavor, they should 
 be permitted to take the responsibility of passing 
 it and stand upon the measure before their com- 
 mon constituency. There could be no s^fer rule 
 
 to adopt than to 
 in the hands of a 
 
 vest the power of Legislation 
 majority of the people's repre- 
 
 of injurious overwhelming lobby members, re- 
 passed the bill and it was soon a law. And the 
 result was seen in threats of mob-violence, and 
 great local excitement and the probability was 
 that no bridge could be built there, or if built, 
 that it would be torn down. This was the result 
 of the majority principle. He would have a veto, 
 if any, that should be effectual, leaving the Gov- 
 ernor responsible to the people for his acts and 
 there could be no doubt that if he exercised tho 
 power corruptly or improperly, the people would 
 correct the error the very first moment they had 
 
 the chance. 
 The PRESIDENT 
 
 presented a communica- 
 
 sentatives. He hoped therefore that instead of 
 enlarging executive power over the Legislature, it 
 would be leduced within proper limits. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG remarked, that it was 
 wholly immaterial which of these two amend- 
 ments were adopted as a majority of all elected, 
 would practically be as effective as two-thirds ol 
 all eiecied. He should probably vote with the 
 gentleman from Albany (Mr. HARRIS,) and he 
 only rose to correct a fundamental error; and to 
 show how completely that gentleman's arguments 
 were at variance with his position. The object of 
 the veto power in all governments is this. It is 
 a check on absolute power. Supreme legislative 
 power was vested by the constitution in the 
 hands of the legislature. There was limitation 
 to this. But where is the check ! in the veto de- 
 signated for the protec;ion of the people against 
 the abuse ot that power; and it would be strange 
 indeed, if, after fhe experience of severity years, 
 this safeguard against the encroachments of abso- 
 lute power, were now to be discharged entirely, 
 or robbed of its vitality. It was an old maxim, 
 that in Republics, the legislature was the tyrant; 
 and it was only on that ground that the veto 
 could be defended. The veto power is a check 
 on that tyrant. The British constitution is 
 just what parliament pleases, says Blackstone ; 
 and your constitution is just what your Legisla- 
 tnre pleases, without this check. It was one of the 
 greatest popular safeguards in our constitution 
 and in his judgment its results had been benefi 
 cial. In Rome and in Poland, and in every 
 instance which had been cited, it was designed as 
 a check on absolute powei. It was on tha 
 ground that he voted for it, with the atnendmfen 
 of 'he gentleman from Otsego which he though 
 full as strong as that of the gentleman from On 
 tario. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that he was opposed to 
 the amendment of the gentleman from Otsego 
 
 tion from the Convention of the city of New York 
 relative to judicial officers in the city. Referred 
 to the judiciary committee. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned until 4 o'clock 
 this afternoon. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the llth section 
 was under consideration. 
 
 It was read : 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that he wished to say a 
 ew words as to a majority instead of two-thirds 
 if the legislature over-ruling the veto of the Gov- 
 ernor. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that was not the prop- 
 >sition. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS took his seat. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved as an amendment to Mr. 
 NICHOLAS'S amendment, that a mere majority of 
 the legislature shall have power to re-pass a veto- 
 ed bill. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said the Constitution was a law 
 superior to all others; and all inferior laws were 
 subordinate to it. We had divided the govern- 
 ment into three distinct branches the Legisla- 
 tive, Executive, and Judicial and no one branch 
 could override the other, but all should co-op- 
 erate. He agreed with Gen. JACKSON, who said 
 that the Executive was not permitted to put a 
 Law in force, unless he believed it to be in con- 
 formity with the superior law which he was 
 sworn to execute. We had placed the whole 
 Executive power in the hands of one man, in or- 
 der to secure fidelity, secrecy and despatch in the 
 administration of the laws. He stands alone in 
 his power, though acting in accordance with 
 Legislation, in enforcing the laws. To say that 
 he should have power to refuse to allow the pas- 
 sage of a law whenever he chooses to oppose it, 
 would be to say that one branch shall have power 
 to overthrow the other. He was not yet willing to 
 give the Governor the right to a completely 
 absolute and unqualified veto. But yet he 
 should be willing to give tbe Governor an 
 unqualified veto, if things are to work a* 
 
364 
 
 we have seen them work in Connecticut, where 
 two-thirds can be found to force a law through 
 even against the*opinion of the Governor, that it 
 
 a' unconstitutional; and the dilemma that he is 
 aced in is, that he is thus compelled to enforce 
 the execution of a law which he has declared 
 to be unconstitutional; and he would give the 
 Governor therefore an unqualified veto always on 
 the ground of constitutionality. He wanted the 
 Governor's veto to protect the minority against 
 the encroachments of the majority. He would 
 not let a mere majority override the Governor's 
 veto on the mere ground of expediency alone 
 He did not want the one-man power to overshad- 
 ow the community. The Convention have the 
 power to separate the question of constitutionali- 
 ty from that of mere expediency. He wished lo 
 have this done. The Judiciary have power over 
 laws which are unconstitutional, and when laws 
 of this character come before them, they say noth- 
 ing about iheir expediency. If it could be sup- 
 posed that two-thirds of the Legislature ever 
 would pass a law which was unconstitutional, he 
 would give the Governor the power of absolute 
 veto; but he did not suppose they would ever do 
 this. As regards the veto upon the mere grounds 
 of expediency, he was willing to retain this fea- 
 ture provided that one of two things should occur 
 here, which there was some prospect would take 
 place One sine qua non was the division of 
 the State into single Senate districts By electing 
 members of both branches of the legislature by 
 single districts, the people would be more direct- 
 ly represented. While he was willing that the 
 maiority should govern, he still desired that the 
 minority should have a chance to be heard. In a 
 matter coming before us for our individual decis- 
 ion we like to hear both sides; although the de- 
 cision will be but one way, that decision will be 
 materially assisted by hearing both sides of the 
 question. So, in the single distnct system, the 
 rights of the minority would be more directly 
 represented, and they would have an oppuituni- 
 ty to be heard; while in the system of electing by 
 a sweeping ticket, either in assembly or senate, 
 one side has the advantage over the other. It 
 single districts can be secured in both branches ot 
 the Legislature by the Convention, there will be 
 one great safeguard for the protection of the rights 
 of the minority, and we might more safely give 
 the Governor the power to veto bills, and give 
 the Legislature the power to set it aside by a 
 maiotity vote. He wished to protect the minori- 
 ty against the encioachments of the majority; 
 but if this protection cannot be secured, he be- 
 lieved the veto power had better remain where it is 
 He wished now to allude to the Constitution as 
 it existed prior to and down to 1821 . It was then 
 required that three departments should concur at 
 the same time in the passage of all laws, under 
 he form of a Council ot Revision. Thus laws 
 nassed by the Legislature were submitted to their 
 examination, and received their sanction before 
 they were allowed to go into operation. This 
 proved a safeguard in some respects, but in 
 others it got to be very injurious in some oi its 
 workings. We now give the judiciary the power 
 to annul every law which is passed and is regarded 
 as unconstitutional ; and the Convention had bet- 
 tor pause before it declared that the Executive 
 
 should have no voice against the passage of laws 
 which may lay the axe at the root of ail Execu- 
 tive power. Was all the learning ot antiquity, 
 all the learning to be found in writings upon 
 constitutional law for the last half century v mere 
 idle talk, or to be set aside as the mere imitation 
 of European stuff? and are we to assume that we 
 are the ones with whom all wisdom is to die? 
 Are we to set ourselves up as the only patterns of 
 learning? He thought gentlemen had better 
 pause before they consented to place the whole 
 Executive power in the hands of the Legislature. 
 They had come very near it, on Saturday, as re. 
 gards one branch of that power, that of pardon. 
 It would never do to adopt an amendent which 
 would place the Executive in the power of the 
 Legislature, and if gentlemen would go with him 
 in making the Legislature elective by single dis- 
 tricts, and in arming rhe Executive against the 
 encroachments of the other branch of the govern- 
 ment, he would go with them in giving the Go. 
 vernor the power to exercise the veto in questions 
 of expediency. He would not give the Legisla- 
 ture the power to pass a law and make the Go- 
 vernor go to work and execute that law to cut his 
 own throat ? (Laughter.) A jury could always 
 understand questions of fact much better than the 
 court, as the court could always understand the 
 law better than the jury. Therefore he should 
 vote to restore this power as it was in the old 
 Constitution. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON regarded this as a simple 
 question, and one which came home to every 
 member. It was whether we should give to the 
 Governor the power to veto a bill which should 
 not receive a vote of two-thirds of those present 
 in both branches of the Legislature, or whether a 
 majority of the whole number elected should set 
 aside the veto. He would not have spoken on 
 this, but for a great error committed by his friend 
 before him. The gentlemen from Essex (Mr. 
 SIMMONS) he believed was in error in one res- 
 pect. He proposes to make one man here equal 
 to 128 representatives directly from the people, 
 so far as law making is concerned. He had read 
 an amendment which he was about to propose, 
 which provides that when the Governor shall ve- 
 to a bill as unconstitutional, which has been pass- 
 ed by a majority of all elected in both branches, 
 it should be returned, and if passed again by two- 
 thirds it should become a law. The gentleman 
 from Essex was a lawyer, and he asked him as a 
 lawyer, if a law which was unconstitutional 
 should be passed by two-thirds; would it become 
 as binding as if constitutional ? 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS It would, until it was de- 
 clared unconstitutional. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON Yes, and it would be so 
 declared very soon. The gentleman proposes to 
 make the legislative branch of the government 
 subservient to the Executive to shut down the 
 gate upon legislation except by consent of one 
 man. He (Mr. P.) was opposed to the one man 
 power to that extent. He (Mr. S.,) wished to 
 make one man equal to 128 representatives of the 
 people. On Saturday, he (Mr. P.) had given his 
 views of the veto power, and had allowed that it 
 was wise and expedient to allow the Governor to 
 return a bill with his objections, and then that a 
 majority of the representatives of the people 
 
365 
 
 should have the power to pass the bill. He was 
 willing to let a majority of the people's repre- 
 sentatives pass a bill notwithstanding the veto of 
 the Governor. It was never intended by the peo- 
 ple to give the Governor this great law-making 
 power. In Ohio and in other States, the Gover- 
 nor had no veto power at all. In no State, ex 
 cept in Louisiana, was the veto exercised to such 
 an extent as was proposed by the gentleman 
 from Essex. He (Mr. P.) would have the majo- 
 rity rule, as well among the people's representa- 
 tives as among the people themselves. As he 
 had stated on Saturday, there was a difference be- 
 tween two-thirds of those present, and a majority 
 of all elected, decidedly in favor of the latter. 
 He therefore preferred the majority principle,, 
 and should vote for that if allowed an opportuni- 
 ty. The gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) 
 says he would allow two-thirds of those present 
 to pass a bill that had been vetoed. Now, two- 
 thirds of those present may be any number be- 
 tween 44 and 86. He was not in favor of the 
 passage of unconstitutional laws, and if one should 
 be passed and returned, it should not be made a 
 law by two-thirds, but should never be heard 
 of again ; as was the case with the one returned 
 by Governor Marcy, to which he alluded on Sa- 
 turday. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said : This subject was so ful- 
 ly debated and so perfectly exhausted in 1821, 
 that I have not heretofore had courage to attempt 
 any thing like a discussion of it. I have not 
 now been able to bring myself to any thing like 
 a review of its extended merits, but there are 
 some things in relation to it, to which I beg leave 
 to call the attention of the Convention. What is 
 this veto power? In the first place it is purely 
 negative, and in no degree affirmative. Gentle- 
 men talk about the one man power, as if that pow- 
 er could do something, could originate a measure, 
 and could carry it. And they object to the one 
 man power upon this very broad principle. Now 
 sir, there is nothing of that kind in the veto pow- 
 er. It is a perfectly negative power a power to 
 hinder some proposed measure from being carried 
 into effect to retain things in the state in which 
 they are a state that society has tried, knows 
 the value of and can judge of thoroughly. If you 
 should propose to confer a one man power of an 
 affimative character a power to make a law or 
 to suspend one to appropriate money and a 
 power to affect the rights of labor and property 
 I apprehend it would find no advocates here 
 or elsewhere, in this State. It is of such a pow- 
 er I have understood gentleman to speak in ob- 
 jecting to the one man power, but I believe that 
 to be a thing not brought in here, and not in agi- 
 tation. Again, what is this veto power practical- 
 ly, really, and when it is exerted. Is it a power 
 to restrain the rights of the people ? No sir. Is 
 it a power to prevent the exercise of the sober 
 judgment of a majority of the people ? No, sir ; 
 no such thing. What is it, then ? Why, 
 practically, it has been, in every instance that 
 can be named, as it has been exercised for more 
 than half a century in the State and Union, a 
 power in direct vindication of the rights of the 
 masses, indirect support of public liberty, and of 
 individual rights, and against monopoly, against 
 expenditure, and profligacy. This is whatlt has 
 
 been, practically, and what it is in its nature ; and 
 this is the reason why it has been popular, ar *. 
 why the masses have stood by it. This is the rea- 
 son why the late President of the U. States was 
 supposed to have used it because it had been 
 found to be popular. A power like this, exerted 
 for these purposes, ever has been, and ever will be, 
 popular, so long as men have sense and discretion 
 enough to know their own rights, and to avow 
 them. Is this not practically true of every veto 
 that has been put forth in the government of the 
 UnitedStates,whether upon constitutional grounds 
 or upon grounds of expediency? Gentlemen have 
 said here, and I have heard them, say so else- 
 where, that they supposed that it was the great 
 popularity of Gen. Jackson that rendered the 
 veto popular. A perfect subversion of all truth 
 and all logic. It was because the veto stood by 
 the rights of the masses, against monopoly, pro- 
 fligacy, expenditure, and debt, that it was popu- 
 lar, and the popularity of the officer using it was 
 increased. I occupied the humble condition of a 
 member of Congress, when some of these vetoes 
 were put forth, and I had an opportunity of see- 
 ing what was done, and of knowing what was in- 
 tended. When the veto on the Maysville Road 
 Bill was called forth from the Executive Cham- 
 ber, what was going on ? Day after day, and 
 week after week, the committee on internal im- 
 provements, as if installed monarch, was coming 
 into the house with new schemes, and projected 
 surveys, one after the other. Estimates were 
 piled one upon another, until not even an hun- 
 dred millions would satisfy the estimates alone, 
 and estimates there, fall as short of the real ex- 
 penditure, as they do here never reaching one- 
 half of it. Sir, this was seen in that House of 
 Representatives it was seen by the constituent 
 body throughout the Union, and when the veto 
 came, it was understood as the strong arm, and as 
 the voice of the multitude themselves, in vindi- 
 cation of their rights and property. It was seen 
 and known of all men, that if this vast system 
 of internal improvements, spreading itself over 
 the whole Union, with an army of surveyors and 
 engineers, the one bill here and another there, 
 offering the largest rewards to localities, giving 
 the whole public treasury over to^the rapacity of 
 particular places and districts it was seen and 
 understood, sir, that a government armed with the 
 strong power of universal and unlimited taxation, 
 direct and indirect would be able by its strong 
 arm to draw the wealth and property of every 
 citizen into the treasury and that to go on in 
 that career of internal improvement, the rights 
 of property would be swept away, and the gov- 
 ernment itself become the grand pensioner, the 
 purchaser of votes and support in every quarter. 
 Yes, sir ; when that veto appeared in the House 
 of Representatives, and the country saw it, they 
 saw it was brought in to meet all these formida'- 
 ble evils, and dangers. And it did meet them, 
 and scatter them. What danger is there then in the 
 one-man power? What did it do on that 
 occasion ? Why sir, if that splendid scheme 
 i)f internal improvement had gone on, with 
 its one or two hundred millions of expendi- 
 ture, it was the very man who vetoed the 
 measure, that would,if he had permitted it tofpass, 
 have appointed the Engineers, the Surveyois, tha 
 
366 
 
 Commissioners, and the countless thousands of 
 agents to execute it. He might, if he had let leg- 
 islation have taken its course, secured patronage 
 without measure. He might have installed hun- 
 selt King, if patronage could make a man King*. 
 He would have gained a host of friends and depen. 
 dents, compared to which, the Custom-house, the 
 light.house, the piers and harbor-rnen, anp^ the 
 post-masters, would have been an insignificant 
 corporal's guard. Yes sir, the one-rnan power, 
 holding the Veto for the people of the United 
 Statesfand not for localities!, not for patronage 
 the one-man power standing there, like the tri- 
 bunitian power of the Roman people, scattered 
 and dissipated all those splendid schemes of inter- 
 nal improvements, but of real debt, enormous pat- 
 ronage, and of overshadowing government. That 
 is what the one-man power did, when entrusted 
 with this Veto power. Sir, do we effect to be 
 alarmed at the exercise of this power, when we 
 see that it is the only power ever exerted in this 
 government, that has had the moral courage 
 to protect the rights of the masses, and the virtue 
 to deny the splendid offers of empire in the shape 
 of patronage and influence and to abide and stand 
 by the Constitution and private right? When or 
 where in all these numerous governments has leg- 
 islation resisted in this manner, where it could 
 have grasped as the Executive power of the Uni- 
 ted States could have done, this immense patron 
 age this disbursing and collecting of millions. 
 If there was any place where we could trust a 
 power to defend the rights of the multitude, of 
 the million, of the masses, against the encroach- 
 ments of delegated power if we are to be gui- 
 ded by example in our own and other countries, 
 I submit it is when you give it in irs nega'ive 
 form to a single man, who must stand or fall on 
 the merits of the measure, and who can divide 
 no responsibility with one hundred Aye, there is 
 the rub. A moral responsibility cut up into one 
 or two hundred fractions, has through experience 
 in our own and other countries, been found to be 
 a falsehood. But here, in the exercise of this 
 clear negative power the executive stands upon 
 a responsibility that is undivided. He is obliged 
 to select tenable grounds for his veto, and rea- 
 sons obvious and applicable in their nature, so 
 that all men who run may read and understand 
 them. Well, sir, I ask has the veto power done 
 any mischief in this State ? I submit the ques- 
 tion to the Convention has the veto done any 
 mischief in this State? Has it despoiled the 
 widow or the orphan has it taxed the poor has 
 it enfeebled the energies of society, or endanger- 
 ed the security of property or of labor ? While 
 it has been in force in our Constitution for a half 
 or three-quarters of a century ,has it done you any 
 mischief you, or your father, or your children ? 
 
 No, sir, you 
 
 cannot answer that it has. You 
 
 may not approve of its exercise in all cases, but 
 can you lay your hand on any robbery of proper- 
 ty, any fraud it has committed on any popularity 
 that it has sought to purchase or any locality that 
 it has attempted to reward, or any attempt to 
 pension dependents or to reward followers ? 
 When exercised, has it not in the main stood 
 by the rights of the masses? Sir, it has 
 stood by the character of the State. Two 
 sessions since, and a majority a majority of a 
 
 quorum, perhaps of the two houses united, sup- 
 posed that there were surplus canal funds on 
 hand, and that the public interests required their 
 appropriation for works of internal improvement. 
 They passed the bill to that effect. I say they be- 
 lieved that there was a surplus, and therefore they 
 felt anxious to apply them. The employment of 
 them might have done good, but whether it would 
 have done good or not, it might have pensioned 
 dependents, rewarded followers, or purchased 
 popularity, as I am afraid it has too often times 
 done in this and every other government. The 
 executive of the State believing that the faith of 
 the State required him to do so, vetoed the bill 
 and in this Convention, sitting here, it is proposed 
 to take from him the power to defend the faith 
 and credit of the State. Suppose it had been 
 taken away then, what would have been the con- 
 sequences ! Sir, since you have been sitting here 
 since this Convention has been installed, a por- 
 tion of the public debt has become due interest 
 and principal, I think, amounting to about $800,- 
 000. If that favorite bill of the majority of that 
 house had passed, no set of men upon earth would 
 have had more occasion to regret it than them- 
 selves, except it might be the members of this 
 Convention. For if that bill had passed, notwith- 
 standing the great influx of tolls, in the last Au- 
 tumn and Spring, through apprehended dangers in 
 the Gulf on the one side, and in Canada and else- 
 where, on the other, most inevitably must our gov- 
 ernment have gone down into the market and adop- 
 ted the expedient, shameful and disgraceful as it 
 is, of borrowing more than $200,000 in addition 
 to the tolls on hand, to have sustained the credit 
 of the State, and to have saved you from practi- 
 cal repudiation for the hour. Sir, was it a mis- 
 fortune for this Convention that this disgrace did 
 not overtake the State, while we are sitting here 
 to deliberate upon public affairs ? Certainly not. 
 Could any misfortune have been greater? I think 
 not, and this veto, let me say to the gentleman 
 from Essex, (Mr. SIMMONS) was not upon strict 
 Constitutional principles, but upon principles as 
 just, as high, and as holy as any other can be 
 the preservation of the public faith in which I 
 know he agrees with me. Yes, if that bill 
 making those apportionments had passed, and 
 ;hose funds had gone from our hands, notwith- 
 standing all the tolls that had came in during the 
 [ast autumn and spring notwithstanding they 
 were gathered up as they were on that occasion 
 as clean as possible, bringing down the gathering 
 to the 22d of June to be used on the 1st of July, 
 you must have gone into the market to borrow 
 money upon interest, to pay interest upon money 
 borrowed. And I appeal to the house, and to the 
 country,if there could be any thing more disgrace- 
 ful ? Whether in this government, or in that of 
 the United States, this clear negative power has 
 been used entirely in the affirmance of private 
 right the rights of equality and of the masses, 
 and against monopoly against expenditure 
 against patronage and against pensioning de- 
 pendants and rewarding followers, ami in 
 favor of public faith ? Why then should we 
 be alarmed at leaving it in the Consti'ulion as 
 strong as we found it? Why then disturb (his 
 part of the Constitution, and fritter away what 
 has proved serviceable here and elsewhere? From 
 
367 
 
 any thing I can understand the only reason is 
 that it is supposed that the members of the two 
 houses are exclusively the representatives of the 
 people. No such ihing! The members of the 
 Senate at best represent small districts only 
 the house represented counties. It is the Gover- 
 nor, and the Governor alone, in this State, that 
 represents the entire people of the State. And 
 whose judgment is it for J speak of no one man's 
 will no will of the majority or no will of the 
 minority I ask whose judgment is it you desire 
 should prevail? The judgment of the People of 
 the State, and not of localities not of districts 
 not of counties. That is what you desire that 
 is what all men desire and that is what so- 
 ciety demands. Who then will be most likely to 
 represent that judgment ? Is not the Governor as 
 responsible to the whole people, as a member 
 of Assembly is to the people of his county ? 
 Is not the governor as responsible to the whole 
 people, as a Senator to the people of his small 
 Senate district ? And is it not an entire fallacy 
 to say as the gentleman on his right (Mr. HAR- 
 RIS) did the other day, by implication, that the 
 governor is not a representative of the whole 
 people and that it was only the members of the 
 Senate and Assembly, who represented the whole 
 people ? No such thing, sir. And how does the 
 governor represent the people in this matter ? 
 Not affirmatively, or to do for them. You trust 
 the doing,by the provisions of the Constitution in 
 in the Senate and Assembly, and you give to the 
 governor a mere negative power to prevent them, 
 thro' hasty conclusions, and indiscretion, or from 
 folly and vice, from affecting the rights of the 
 masses. He is emphatically the tribune of the 
 people, chosen for that very purpose. And the 
 dfficulty and danger was not that he will exercise 
 this power too frequently, but that he will not 
 exercise it sufficiently. Sir, I have no unusual 
 distrust of legislation no unusual confidence in 
 it no unusual distrust of the executive no un- 
 usual confidence in him. Confidence in matters of 
 this kind, have a slow growth, and in the rapid 
 mutations and changes of parties and men, a 
 man must be exceedingly fortunate who acquires 
 any great share of it, to carry with him. I have 
 no expectation that any administration here, will 
 by its standing with me, overrule to any great ex- 
 tent, the judgment I may form upon a measure. 
 We must therefore view the legislative power as 
 it is developed by its history take it as it 
 has been, hope a little for the better, 
 be content when that better comes, and if 
 evil comes, make ourselves bold and firm to re- 
 sist it. Sir, what has been the acts of assump- 
 tion in all governments of the world ? They 
 have been alluded to in this debate, and I may 
 state them briefly. Whenever the legislative 
 power has not been checked and restricted, each 
 and every of its assumptions, has added new 
 strength to the executive government, until le- 
 gislation was swallowed up in the grave it had 
 dug for itself. This is the history of every na- 
 tion of antiquity. It is the history that comes to 
 us from the graves of nations recently buried. 
 Popular governments begin by instituting a sin- 
 gle house, for in no other way can they clearly 
 exist. The first step in improvement is to get 
 up a second house, and giving it a negative over 
 
 the other. This was the commencement of ?!* 
 representative governments. The gentleman 
 from Albany, (Mr. HARRIS,) had spoken of this 
 veto, this negative power of the Executive, as 
 having been unwisely engrafted upon the system 
 in late years. This thing had grownup from hu- 
 man experience, and must have grown up to 
 make free governments any thing. The gentle- 
 man also said that the power existed in Rome, 
 and for a period did very well. I would add that 
 when this power no longer existed, its represen- 
 tation swallowed up the liberties of Rome and 
 taxation went into the provinces and devoured the 
 whole body of the nation. And the Huns, Goths 
 and Vandals, instead of conquering the Empire, 
 found it a mere shell. The Caesars succeeded the 
 veto power, and the Empire was at last sold 
 at auction. Sir, this may be the case with 
 other ages and other countries when the Veto 
 power shall be annihilated. I apprehend it is 
 essential to the being, and had grown up with 
 the idea and institution of free governments that 
 it was necessary that there should be these checks 
 and balances. Human experience had settled the 
 question, and I therefore conclude that we should 
 establish in this Constitution a Veto power at 
 least as strong as that found in it. Sir, have 
 there been any complaints of the exercise of the 
 Veto power in this State ? No but let me call 
 attention to what has been said of legislation. 
 Sir, I ask members here to recollect when a ses- 
 sion adjourns if they had not heard in the cities,in 
 the villages, in the hamlets, and by the men upon 
 the fields and in the work shops for I have heard 
 them again and again thank God that the legis- 
 lature had adjourned without doing more mis- 
 chief. And I appeal to every member here if he 
 has not heard the expression again and again from 
 the constituent body. I have heard it repeatedly, 
 and it means something. Because if the consti- 
 tuent body begin to thank God that the legislature 
 has adjourned without doing mischief, it will not 
 be long before it is forbidden to meet at all. What- 
 ever torments and tortures human society, can- 
 not exist, must give way will give way, and no- 
 thing can retain it but reformation. If I am wrong 
 in this, why are we here anxious to limit the time 
 of legislation ? Why have we here talked of having 
 only a biennial session, and of notalJowingthe pay 
 of members if they remained here any length of 
 time. Has there been any proposition of this kind 
 to deal in this rnanner,by the people.among the con- 
 stituent body, with the Veto power. I apprehend 
 not It has ne\er tormented them it never has 
 given an insecurity to law and has never 
 overturned to-day what it built up yesterday 
 Sir, I will give an example of the course legis- 
 lative encroachments always take If there be any 
 one power which it would seem that legislature 
 would retain it is the power of specific appro- 
 priation thut no money shall be paid out except 
 upon appropriation acta, passed from time to time 
 by the legislative body. One would have supposed 
 that a power like this, so vital to the continuance 
 of legislation, would have been regarded by the 
 legislature of the State. But they had abandoned 
 it, and without going into history, let me say that 
 as early as 1830, the legislature of the State, by 
 general laws, had conferred so much power upon 
 the Executive officers of the government, that 
 
368 
 
 they could go on here with the government 
 for fifty years or more, without the aid of a 
 legislature, and might also in that time have 
 multiplied a debt of fifty millions. The danger 
 then came not from the veto power the difficul- 
 ty was in bringing the veto against these abuses. 
 Yes sir, when the Legislature of the State thought 
 propei , they passed such general acts that every 
 one of the public servants of the State could be 
 paid year after year for a century out of the pub- 
 lic treasury, without any new law or authority 
 from the Legislature appropriating a dollar. In 
 stead of being annual arid specific, the laws h;td 
 been made general and forever. And a power 
 was given and left with the corrnttoller, when 
 ever any thing became due at the the treasury, to 
 borrow money to pay it,^and to give his bond for 
 it, and when that became due, to borrow again 
 and to give another bond, and so ad infinitum., 
 Sir,-this is the course of legislation that has called 
 us together, and this was a course of legislation 
 that the veto power has not prevented. There 
 may well be difficulty in specifying fully the ex- 
 ercise of this duty, but before this Convention ad- 
 journs, I hope that an effort will be made, to 
 compel the Governor himself, when proffers of this 
 kind of power are made, to veto the bill, and to 
 compel the Legislature to retain the power of ap- 
 propriation over the public money. Sir, it is not 
 the veto power, or the abuse of it, or the clamor, 
 or just complaint against it, that has brought us 
 together. It is the abuse of other powers. I 
 have alluded to this abuse of legislative powers 
 the most essential, the most extraordinary, and I 
 may add the most unaccountable among all others 
 in human anticipation. That legislation should 
 have appropriated power like this that would 
 have compelled the Executive to call them toge- 
 ther annually may seem to you most incredible 
 and extraordinary. Yet when you look over the 
 Revised Statutes, you will find that the power has 
 been complete since 1830. As to the amendment 
 now before the house, I am entirely willing anc 
 content with the veto as it stands. 1 would prefei 
 tin- strengthening of it, in the manner proposed by 
 the commi'tee of the whole, but I will not urge it 
 for the leasonthat what has proved invariably sa!< 
 and has not been injurious, I feel quite contented 
 to abide by. And instead ot devoting time tc 
 amend what is assumed to be good, I would rathei 
 devote it to amending what is clearly evi 
 and deficient. I shall therefore be content wit! 
 either the Veto as is proposed by the committee 
 of the whole, on the veto as adopted in the pre- 
 sent Constitution. I do not believe there would 
 be any reasonable danger of an abuse under either 
 Having these conviclions, I have no desire t< 
 press the matter beyond what experience prove 
 to be necessary and advantageous 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said he would not occupy 
 much time with this subject, it having been ful 
 ly discussed on a former occasion. The import 
 ance of the veto power has not been questionec 
 even by those who desire that it should be cur 
 tailed. A qualified negative on the legislative 
 power, although it has been liable to abuse, ha 
 heretofore been considered an indispensable Ex 
 ecutive* prerogative. It is an important guar< 
 against unconstitutional, corrupt, and improvi 
 dent legislation, and it is also necessary to pro 
 
 ect the judicial and executive departments 
 gainst legislative encroachments. The veto 
 >ower, as it exists in the Constitution, has been 
 ound to be quite strong enough, sufficiently strin- 
 r ent for all exigencies requiring its interposition ; 
 and when a power has attained this point, it should 
 tever be made stronger. And should it be 
 trengthened, as by this section adopted when in 
 ommittee of the whole, it may be practically 
 ess effective than it now is. For if a Governor, 
 appening to be a sensitive, timid man, feels that 
 lis veto must be (as it would be with this acces- 
 ion of strength) fatal to a bill, he would some- 
 imes be deterred from exercising this power, 
 A r hen the public interests required it. He (Mr. 
 <J.) offered this amendment restoring the provi- 
 ion of the present Constitution, as a medium be- 
 ween the extremes now proposed to us a strong- 
 r veto as provided for by this section, which he 
 wished to amend, and a diminution of the power, 
 y the amendment which the gentleman from 
 Otsego informs us he intends to offer. He hoped 
 :he Convention would, by adopting this amend- 
 ment, retain the veto power as it now exists, and 
 hereby avoid all extremes. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN agreed with the gentleman from 
 lerkimer that this Veto power had been so often 
 nd so elaborately discussed, that an apology was 
 due to the committee for renewing the discussion 
 again. Nor should he do so now had the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer (Mr.HoFFMAir) confined him- 
 elf to the real question. For the purposes of a con- 
 vincing, satisfactory argument to gentlemen who 
 met to frame a Constitution upon principle, the 
 instances he cited were most unfortunate, for 
 they were precisely calculated if not intended to 
 divide us, by going into questions which had for- 
 merly given rise to great political excitements. 
 And although it may be proved as the gentleman 
 had remarked, that Jackson did exercise the Veto 
 power, with great discretion, and with reference 
 to the best interests of the country, yet his learn- 
 ed friend must have known that a very consider- 
 able portion of the members upon this floor, utter- 
 ly and entirely dissented with many particulars 
 in reference to that. So also in reference to some 
 other instances of the exercise of the Veto power 
 to which the gentleman had alluded. And it did 
 seem to him, that the gentleman from Herkimer 
 intended to draw the Convention aside from the 
 question before it, to discuss these irrelevant, and 
 so far as this case was concerned, immaterial mat- 
 ters. And he (Mr. W.) apprehended that it was 
 not the design of the gentleman to discuss alto- 
 gether either the merits of Jackson's Vetoes or the 
 particular merits of the question under considera- 
 tion; Another and an ulterior object, he appre- 
 hended, was in the mind of the gentleman, and if 
 not conscious to him, it was very apparent to 
 others. It was not the vindication of the Veto 
 power j but it was an assault upon the legislative 
 power. It was an attempt to bring into disrepute 
 and contempt before this body and the people, the 
 legislative power of this State. Not for the pur- 
 pose of deciding the question of the Veto here 
 to-day, but of affecting ulterior objects, and other 
 questions to be decided here atsorrie future time. 
 He (Mr. W.) agreed with the gentleman that 
 there had been much improvident legislation in 
 this state, and that at the time he referred to in 
 
369 
 
 Congress, there was much improvident, he would 
 not say, corrupt, legislation. Because he well 
 remembered that at that time the learned gentle- 
 man from Herkimer, with his political associates, 
 were in a majority in that Congress, and had the 
 power to control the action of that body. It 
 would, therefore, be uncourteous in him (Mr.W.) 
 to say, that there was any danger of corrupt le- 
 gislation on that occasion, but the assaults upon 
 that Congress came most ungracefully from the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, and if he intended to 
 have made an argument against the exercise of le- 
 gislative power and to prejudice the public mind 
 against that power, he, (Mr. W.) apprehended 
 that he should not have fallen into the inconsis- 
 tency of condemning himself and his political as- 
 sociates. Again, the gentleman in seeking for 
 illustrations of the efficacy and necessity of the 
 veto power, had adverted to the last veto of the 
 Governor of this State, and he (Mr. W.) confessed 
 that he was astonished when he found his learned 
 friend undertaking to support his arguments by 
 facts that were not true. He asserted that unless 
 the veto power had been interposed, the public 
 officers of the State would not have had the abili- 
 ty to redeem the Canal Stocks of this State, fall- 
 ing due on the first of January and July last. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : I said nothing about Jan- 
 uary. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN would say to the gentleman 
 that notwithstanding the commissioners of the 
 canal fund did report to the legislature during 
 the last session a deficiency at the end of the 
 fiscal year of means to redeem the stocks falling 
 due on the first of January and July, now last 
 past, yet, during the last session of the Legisla- 
 ture, it wa-3 drawn out from them and was now a 
 matter of record, that on the 30th of September 
 last, they had under their control the means to 
 pay every dollar of the stock due on those days, 
 and yet have a sufficiency to meet all the appro- 
 priations made in that vetoed bill. Similar state- 
 ments would be found, in most of the reports 
 in relation to the public debt. Though they 
 might be true in sense, yet they were not true as 
 matters upon which to base legislation. For in- 
 stance, he found on his table a document from 
 the Comptroller giving the total amount of the 
 canal debt at $17,516,11947. Now, that was 
 not the amount of the canal debt at that date. 
 The canal debt of this State due that day did not 
 amount to that sum. For all practical purposes of 
 legislation, and to govern and lead this body, that 
 statement is untrue. At the time of that state- 
 ment there was almost a half a million of the pub- 
 lic stocks cancelled, paid, and in the office of an 
 agent of the State, who had paid them with the 
 public funds and with the money of the State. 
 To all intents and purposes they were paid, and 
 yet they were put down here as part of the ex- 
 isting and outstanding debt against the State. 
 And this has been somewhat the manner of state- 
 ments from the public officers in times past. So 
 much in regard to this argument of the gentleman 
 in support of the veto power. He (Mr.W.) regret- 
 ted io SL-U tiom that gentleman not only here but 
 elsewhere, an utter di*trust,and he might say con- 
 temp' for the legislative power. He would cite 
 one uu;sr memoiable instance of the disregard of 
 law in this slate by its high public functionaries, 
 
 as well the Governor, as others. In 1834 he 
 thought it was, a law was passed directing the 
 Canal Commissioners to enlarge the locks on the 
 Erie canal, and to extend their capacity. At the 
 next succeeding session of the legislature, those 
 Commissioners say in their report that they disre- 
 garded the law, arid had i'ailed to carry it out because 
 there was an irresistible and imperious necessity, 
 not onlv for the doubling of the locks, but for I he 
 enlargement of the canal, on a plan something like 
 the contemplated present enlargement. This im- 
 perious necessity justified these public officers, or 
 rather they justified themselves in refusing to obey 
 the law, and they came here before the legislature 
 justifying their action upon that ground, and urging 
 the necessity of an immediate enlargement ot the 
 Erie canal. And from that day and that hour the 
 fiscal embarrassments of the State may be dated. 
 In the first place, when we undertake to create a 
 power in the government.no matter for what pur- 
 pose, we should see that occasion existed for that 
 power. Why do we make a Governor at all un- 
 less it is necessary in the arrangement of the gov- 
 ernment that there should be such an officer? 
 Why do we confer certain powers upon him unless 
 satisfied that their exercise is necessary ? Why do 
 we confer upon him the Veto power, and why 
 create it at all ? There must be some reason for it, 
 and what is that reason ? Now he (Mr. W. ) ap- 
 prehended it would be found in this: It is on 
 the supposition or presumption what experience 
 teaches us may exist, that there will be unwise, 
 corrupt and mischievous legislation. We have, 
 heretofore reposed this power in the Executive. 
 But when WHS this power to be exercised ? It was 
 only upon thesuppposition that the Legislature has 
 been corrupt, unwise, or has passed some bill that 
 is mischievous in its character or conclusions. 
 The power then when exercised, ought to be, in 
 the very nature of things, an effective power, to 
 the end that it may remedy the mischief and ex- 
 cesses that it is designed to prevent. Now would it 
 be wise under such circumstances, and looking 
 at the emergency in which it ought to be exer- 
 cised, to make this power nugatory and of no 
 effect, and utterly powerless to reach the evil, it 
 was intended to reach and correct, and to pre- 
 vent the mischief it was intended to prevent? 
 It struck him that it would not. Therefore it was 
 that it was wise in his judgment, when we created 
 this power to make it effective for the end 
 designed to arrest corrupt, improvident, and 
 unconstitutional legislation*. Therefore it must 
 go beyond a bare majority, because a bare ma 
 jorify could pass at any lime, and most usually, did 
 pass a bill. There were very few bills, which call 
 out debate, which would fail to pass in a legisla- 
 tive body by a majority. The very bill the gentle. 
 man alluded to, passed'by a majority of all the mem- 
 bers elected to the House. And he (Mr. W.) only 
 regretted that sickness prevented his being there 
 and voting against that bill, as he deemed it 
 inexpedient to begin the public works upon the 
 miserable pittance of $100,000. He thought all 
 would acknowledge that a majority might act in 
 this matter. Then it would be unwise to say that 
 a majority should pass a bill, for it would be to 
 render the veto power nugatory in every case 
 where it ought to be effective. This veto power 
 may be abused and gentlemen seemed throughout 
 
370 
 
 to have argued against the abuse of the pow- 
 er, rather than against the power itself. All pow- 
 er entrusted to public functionaries might be a- 
 bused, but that was no reason why we should not 
 entrust them at all. The governor may abuse 
 the veto power, and the legislature may abuse its 
 power ? But where was the remedy ? Whenev- 
 er the executive vetoes a bill, whether properly 
 or improperly, he is to go before the people for 
 their judgment. He is to assign his reasons, and 
 we must bear in mind that the people would be 
 astute and vigilant in looking at the exercise of 
 this very extraordinary prerogative, and they will 
 condemn or justify him upon what may be the 
 merits of the case. If the veto power arrest- 
 ed or embarrassed a bill that was right 
 and proper, it could only defer it for a future 
 time (and here he thanked the gentleman from 
 Herkimer for his argument.) It may prevent for 
 a limited period a positive good, and it may pre- 
 vent for all time to cotpe the enactment and do- 
 ing of a positive injury. Therefore it was better 
 to give the Governor this power, evon if its exer- 
 cise was sometimes abused, than to deprive him 
 of it and to allow bad legislation to take effect, 
 where there would be no correction for it. We 
 had this veto power ever since our first constitu- 
 tion was ad >pted, in this precise language, and we 
 had lived under it seventy years without finding 
 any practical evil resulting from its exercise. 
 We might however have found practical evil, if j the legislature, and having then cases of apprai 
 
 what was in my mind better than I did myself he 
 might be right, yet if I know what was in rny 
 mind, he was extremely wrong, I will not say false, 
 in his knowledge. And if in the progress of this 
 Convention the question of legislative [tower 
 should be raised, and God spares my health and 
 enables me to do it justice, I will satisfy the 
 gentleman and the house, that any thing I have 
 yet said on the subject, is the language of mercy 
 and kindness. The gentleman had taken up do- 
 cument No. 47, and has directly charged the pub- 
 lic officers with making a false return of the canal 
 debt. Tha^call went to the public officers in the 
 month of June, and the statement reached up to 
 that time. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN: The express terms of the call 
 were up to the first of June. 
 
 Mr.HOFFMAN: Yes, and knowing that to be so, 
 they took it into consideration in making up the ac- 
 count. Now, sir, here the gentleman is exceedingly 
 unfortunate again. The fact was that the canal com- 
 missioners (of which at that time I was one) pro- 
 ceeded with too much industry to execute the act 
 of the Legislature ; they went on to appraise the 
 land for the double locks, and did all that they 
 were authorised to do, with the utmost possible 
 diligence ; and remained at their post, until driv- 
 en away by the approach of winter. They staid 
 there until the canal froze, and came here only 
 in time to prepare their result for the meeting of 
 
 we had permitted a bare majority to pass the act, 
 notwithstanding the veto. Not long since a po- 
 litical majority in the legislature, passed a bill 
 positively violating a solemn contract made by 
 the State. What was the result ? The Execu- 
 tive veto interposed, and the State was saved 
 from the odium of repudiating its own contract, 
 and violating its own constitutional obligations. 
 He (Mr. W.) did not know of any other instance 
 of a bill being vetoed precisely upon party grounds 
 other than that. Leave this majority clause in 
 the constitution, and if occasion should occur 
 again, the veto power would be powerless to ar- 
 rest mere party legislation. He was content that 
 the veto power should remain as it is, and he 
 should therefore vote against the proposition of 
 the gentleman from Otsego, and. -in favor of that 
 of his colleague. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN would not have troubled the 
 Convention with another word on this subject, if 
 the gentleman from Ontario had not alluded to 
 two or three particular matters with a personal 
 reference to him. He could not be drawn in any 
 legislative body, into an altercation with any mem- 
 ber of it. The gentleman had said (said Mr. H.) 
 that I had in my mind, he admits that I may have 
 been unconscious of it, and I admit that it is a 
 gre;it curiosity that a man should have a meaning 
 in his mind tor such objects as that and not know 
 it. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : The gentleman will allow me 
 to correct 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN: No sir, I will not allow the 
 gentleman to correct himself. He stated that 1 
 had in my mind not so much the right of the 
 veto power of the Executive, as the holding uj 
 of the letHlahve power to contempt. These 
 might not be his exact words, but it was the sub 
 stance of what he said. If the gentleman kneu 
 
 al that lasted until the 1st of May. Again the 
 entleman says that the Fund Commissioners had 
 unds in January to meet the debt that was due in 
 uly. Now, sir, as to the funds that were in 
 land to meet that debt, I know the fact to be that 
 he comptroller was actually compelled, in order 
 .o meet that debt, to rake and scrape the canal 
 oils, not up to any usual or regular time, but up 
 o the 22d of June ; and he thus barely got the 
 800,000 to meet that debt. So, sir, in all his 
 bur personal allusions the gentleman is entirely 
 mistaken, and when he tries again, I hope 
 will be more fortunate. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD followed. 
 
 At a quarter past 6 o'clock, 
 
 Mr. St. JOHN, with a view to stop this long 
 debate, moved the previous question. 
 
 This was seconded 41 to 26. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS'S amendment to allow two- 
 thirds of all present to repass a bill after a veto 
 was then put. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG demanded the ayes and 
 noes. Agreed. They resulted thus. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, H. Backus, 
 Bakt-r Bascom. Bouek, Bull, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, 
 jr.. Cande, Clark, Cl>de, Crooker. Dana, Dodd, Dubois, 
 Klanders, Forsyth, Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Hoftman, 
 Hotchkiss A. Huntington, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble, Kings- 
 
 y, Marvin, Maxwell, Murphy, Nellis, Nicholas, Micoll, 
 arish, Pattemwi, Perkins, Porter Pres-ident, Hiker, Salis- 
 bury, Sears, Shepaid, Simmons, E. Spencer, Stephens, 
 Stetson, Stow, Stroner, Swackhamer, Taggart, J. J. Tay- 
 lor, Tilden, Warren.Waterbury.Willard, Witbeck, Wood, 
 Worden, Young 61. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Brown, Brundage, Burr, Chatfield,Con- 
 ely, Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback, Daniorth, Dorlon, t- arris, 
 Hutchinson, Jones, Kirkland, Maun.McNitt, Miller, Mor- 
 ris O'Conor, Fenniman, Kuggles, Russell, St. John, Sha- 
 ver. Shaw, Sheldon, smith, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Tall- 
 maue, W. Taylor, Townsend, Tuthiil, Vache, W. Ji. 
 Wright, Yawger 36. 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then moved his amendment, 
 
371 
 
 allowing a majority of all the members elected 
 to pass a bill after a veto. 
 
 The same was lost as follows : 
 
 AYKS Messrs. .Archer, H Backus, Ba?com, Bouck, 
 Burr, Candee, Chatfield, Cook, Crooker, Doilon, Geb- 
 hard, Harris, H^twley, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Sails- 
 bury, Shaver, K. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Taggart, War- 
 ren, Willard, W. B. Wiight, Yawger 25. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Ayrau'.t, Brown, Brundage 
 Bull, Cambi eli ng, R Campbell, jr. Cla:k, Clyde, Conely, 
 Cornell, Cuddebaek, Dana, Danlurth, Dodd, Dubois, Flan- 
 ders, Korsyth, Graham, Greene, Hart, Hoffman, Hotch- 
 kiss, A. Huntingtun, Hntchinson, Hyde. Jones, Jordan, 
 Kemble, Kii.gsley, Kirkland, Mann, McNitt, Marvin, 
 Maxwell, Miller, Mori is. Murphy, Nellis, Nicholas, Ni 
 coll, O'Conor, Perkins, Porter, President Richmond. Hi- 
 ker, Rnggles, Russell, St. John, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Shepard, Simmons, Smi h, Stmton. Stephens, Stetson, 
 Stow Strong, Swackhamer, Tail, Tallmadpe, J. J. Tay- 
 lor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Towns.-nd, Tuthill, Vache, Water- 
 bury, Wood, Worden, loung 74. 
 
 Mr. MANN gave notice of a motion to recon- 
 sider the vote on Mr. NICHOLAS'S amendment. 
 Laid over. 
 
 Mr. JONES said as there was no likelihood to 
 be any changes made in this article, he moved to 
 have it printed as it had just been adopted. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that as the subsequent 
 action of the Convention might lead to the neces- 
 sity of some alterations hereafter in this article, 
 it had better be laid on the table for the present 
 and printed. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : The question is on the 
 adoption of the report as it is. 
 
 Mr. STOW would like now to move his amend- 
 ment that if a person goes abroad on business con- 
 nected with the State, it shall not disqualify him 
 for the office of governor. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said they could not as matters 
 stood at present, go back to any part of the re- 
 port without a motion to reconsider. The best 
 way for them to adopt would be to have the point 
 referred to the committee on rules, so that that 
 committee might determine upon some plan by 
 which a section might now be laid aside so as to 
 be reached hereafter. 
 
 The article was then adopted, as follows : 
 
 ARTICLE. 
 On the election, tenure of office, compensation, powers and 
 
 duties {except the power to appoint or nominate to office.) 
 
 of the Governor and Lieutenant- Governor. 
 
 SKCTIOI* 1. The executive power shull be vested in a 
 Governor, who shall hold his office for two years. A 
 Lieutenant-Governoi shall be chosen at the same time, aiid 
 lor the same teirn. 
 
 ij 2 No person except a citizen of the United States, 
 shall be eligible to the office of Governor; nor shall any 
 person be eligible to that office who shall not have attain- 
 ed the age of 30 ^years, and who shall not have been five 
 years next preceding his election, a resident within this 
 Sta'e. 
 
 3. The Governor and Lieutenant-Governor shall be 
 elected at the times and places ol choosing members of the 
 Legislature. The persons respectively having the highest 
 number of votes for Governor and Lieutenant Governor, 
 ihali be elected; but in case two or more shall have an 
 equal and tre higest number of votes for Governor, or lor 
 Lieutenant Governor, the two houses of the Legislature, 
 at its next annual session, shall, forthwith, by jjint ballot, 
 choose one ol the said persons so having an equal and the 
 highest number of votes for Governor, or Lieutenant- 
 Go vernor. 
 
 4. The Governor shall be commander-in-chief of the 
 mt'litary and t.aval forces of the State.. He shall have 
 power to convene the Legislature (or the Senate only) on 
 extraordinary occasions. Ht shall communicate by'mes- 
 sage to the Legislature at every session, the condition of 
 the State; an- 1 recommend such matters to them as he 
 shall judge expedient. He shall transact all necessary 
 
 business with the officers of government, civil and mili- 
 tary. He shall expedite all such measures, as may be re- 
 solved upon by the Legislature, and shall take cure that 
 the laws are faithfully executed. 1 e shall, at stated times, 
 receive for his services, a compensation to be established 
 bylaw, which shall neither be increased or diminished 
 after his election and during his continuance in office. 
 
 ^ 5. The Governor shall have the power to grant re- 
 prieves, commutations, and pardons, after conviction, for 
 all oflences except treason and cases of impeachment, up- 
 on such conditions, and with such restrictions and limit- 
 ations, as he may think proper, subject to such regula- 
 tions as may be provided by law, relative to the manner of 
 applying for pardon. Upon conviction lor treason, he 
 shall have power to suspend the execution of the sentence 
 un'il the case shall be reported to the Legislature at its 
 next meeting, when the Legislature shall either pardon, 
 commute the sentence, direct the execution thereof, or 
 grant further reprieve. He shall annually communicate 
 to the Legislature each case of reprieve, commutation or 
 pardon granted; stating the name of the convict, the crime 
 of which he was convicted, the sentence and its date, and 
 the date of the commutation, pardon or reprieve. 
 
 6. In case of the impeachment of the Governor or his 
 removal from office, death, inability to discharge the 
 powers and duties of the said office, resignation or absence 
 from the State, the powers and duties of the office shall 
 devolve upon the Lieutenant Governor for the residue of 
 the term, or until the disability shall cease. But when the 
 Governor shall with the consent of the legislature, be out 
 of the State in time of war, at the head of a military force 
 thereof, he shall continue commander-in-chiei of all the 
 military force of the State 
 
 7. The Lieutenant-Governor shall possess the same 
 qualifications of eligibility for office s the Governor. He 
 shall be President of the Senate, but shall have only a 
 casting vote therein. If during a vacancy ol the office of 
 Governor, the Lieutenant Governor shall be impeached, 
 displaced, resign, die, or become incapable of performing 
 the duties of his office, or be absent from the State, the 
 President of the Senate, shall act as Governor until the 
 vacancy be filled, or the disability shall cease. 
 
 $8 The Lieutenant Governor shill, while acting as 
 such, receive a compensation which shall be fixed by law, 
 and which shall not be increased or diminished during his 
 continuance in office. 
 
 15 9. Kvei y bill which shall have passed the Senate and 
 Assembly, shall before it becomes a law, be presented to 
 the Governor : if he approve, he shall sign it ; but if not, 
 he shall return it with his objections to that house in 
 which it shall have originated; who shall enter the objec- 
 tions at large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider 
 it. If after such consideration two-third* of the members 
 present shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, toge- 
 ther with the objections to the other house, by which it 
 shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two 
 thirds of the members present, it shall become a law not 
 withstanding the objections oi the Governor. But in all 
 such cases, the votes of both houses shall be determined 
 by yeas and nays., and the names of the members voting 
 for and against the bill, shall be en'ered on the journal of 
 each house respectively. If any bill shall not be returned 
 by the Governor within ten days (Sundays excepted) af- 
 ter it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be 
 a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Le- 
 gislature shall by their adjournment prevent its return; in 
 which case it shall not be a law. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned till to-morrow. 
 
 TUESDAY, (41st day,) July 21. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. KENNEDY. 
 The PRESIDENT presented a communication 
 from P. Shapter, of Willi.imsburgh, in relation to 
 the rendition clause in our piesent Constiiution, 
 &c. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD movec! to lay it on the table 
 as it was indecorous. Carried. 
 CURRENCY. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG reported the following 
 
 resolutions as amendments which he said (hat he 
 
 should offer when in committee of the whole, on 
 
 the report on currency and banking: 
 
 All incorporated companies and associations exercising 
 
372 
 
 banking powers shall be subject to visitation and exami- 
 nation at the instance of their shareholders, or of their cre- 
 ditors, under regulations to be established by the Legisla- 
 ture; and in case of the failure of any such incorporation 
 or association to discharge its debts or liabilities, or oi 
 any of its members to discharge its debts for which they 
 may be personally liable as members ot such incorpora- 
 tion or association, provision shall be made for the speedy 
 and equitable settlement of the aflairs of such incorporation 
 or association and. for dissolving the same. 
 
 The Legislature shall provide by law lor the exclusion 
 of the notes of Banks of other States from circulation with- 
 in this State. 
 
 The Legislature shall limit the aggregate amount of 
 Bank notes to be issued by all the Banks and joint stock 
 associations in this State, now existing or which may 
 be hereafter established. 
 
 Referred to the committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. RICHiMOND asked leave to correct the 
 journal. He had voted for the reconsideration 
 yesterday of the Veto on the pardoning power, 
 and also with Mr. CHATFIELD, on the pending 
 question. Leave granted. 
 
 MAJORITY LEGISLATION. 
 Mr. MANN offered the following resolution, 
 which was adopted: 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to the committee No 2, on 
 the powers and duties of the Legislature, except a^ to mat- 
 ters otherwise referred, to consider the propriety and ex- 
 pediency of reporting a section to the constitution re- 
 quiring the vote of a majority of all the members elected 
 > both branches of the legislature to pass any bill or 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved that a copy of the 
 manual, red book, &c. &c. be given to each of the 
 messengers, Adopted. 
 
 LOANS TO COLLEGES, &o. 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered the following: 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be respectfully request- 
 ed to furnish to the convention a statement of the amount 
 of money or property appropriated or loaned to the seve- 
 ral Colleges, Seminaries, Institutes and Academies of the 
 State, and the University of the city of New York since 
 1821. And also the amount appropriated to these institu- 
 tions respectively from the Literature Fund; and as far as 
 practicable, what proportion of the sums appropriated has 
 been used lor the benefit of females. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said this would require a review 
 of all that had passed and been done at these col- 
 leges, since 1821. Was it worth while to go to 
 this trouble without a compensatory object. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said he had a double ob- 
 ject in view, in offering the resolution First in 
 adopting, as he trusted we would, an uniform en- 
 lightened and just system of education, it was im- 
 portant to know how the money of the State had 
 been appropriated for this purpose under the pre- 
 sent Constitution. His next object, was to show 
 when the proper time arrived that females 
 had not only been most unjustly deprived of their 
 rights of property, by those who arrogated to 
 themselves the exclusive prerogation of govern- 
 ment, but that even the terms levied upon their 
 property, for the promotion of the higher branch- 
 es of education, had been almost exclusively used 
 for the instruction of males, while the education 
 of females, in similar branches of learning, was 
 shamefully neglected. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said it might be desirable to get 
 the information, but he wished to have it referred 
 to the committee on education so as to have the 
 subject examined. 
 
 Mr. WJLLARD hoped not. He wanted it sent 
 direct to the Comptroller, so that the whole sub- 
 
 ject might be opened up, so as to show how the 
 people have been defrauded. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG could see no use in it. 
 
 It was referred to the Education committee. 
 REGULATION OF AMENDMENTS. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That no amendment to a proposition which 
 shall have been considered in committee of the whole, 
 shall be in order in the Convention, unless the substance 
 of the amendment shall have been oflered and decided in 
 committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr HAWLEY said there had been so much 
 time wasted in idle speeches by members, that it 
 was necessary to have some more straight rules in 
 committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. A. WRIGHT moved to refer this to the 
 committee on rules. Agreed to. 
 
 REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved that they proceed to the 
 unfinished business of yesterday. 
 
 The PRESIDENT stated that yesterday the 
 Convention passed through all the sections of the 
 article on the duties and powers of the Execu. 
 live. 
 
 Mr. MANN said he would call up his motion. 
 There were several motions ot reconsideration 
 yesterday still pending, and he called for the vote 
 on the motion he made to reconsider the vote on 
 the veto section. 
 
 SEVERAL : Oh, no ! 
 
 Mr. MANN then said it had been suggested to 
 him to withdraw his motion and let the subject 
 lie over until the committee reported on the sub 
 ject of majority legislation. He did not know 
 what necessary connection there was between the 
 two subjects, but he yielded to the wishes of his 
 friends, and withdrew his motion. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said with a view of ascertaining 
 the desires of gentlemen, as there appeared to be 
 differences of opinion on the subject, as to what 
 really would be the proper course to pursue in 
 relation to this article which had been passed 
 through, he would suggest that the article lie over 
 for the present, with the view of hereafter ap. 
 pointing some committee whose duty it shall be 
 to take all the articles that may be passed upon 
 by the Convention, and make them conform to 
 each other, by striking out such conflicting pro- 
 visions as may be in them. He moved according, 
 ly that article lie over. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL: And that it be printed. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS: Very well, sir. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that was not the proper 
 course, and suggested that the motion should be 
 simply to lay on the table. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said he would make that motion. 
 
 Mr- CLYDE suggested that the article should 
 be printed. 
 
 Mr. MANN hoped not. It had been printed 
 several times already. Let it be finished first. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said he would have it printed 
 ten times if it was necessary. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON hoped that ihevote on the 
 reconsideration would be taken now. The House 
 was as full as jt ever would be. 
 
 There were 85 members present. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD hoped that the motion to re- 
 consider would be withdrawn. He had had the 
 honor of submitting two of the propositions which 
 it was now moved to reconsider, and he was satis- 
 
373 
 
 gained by pressing the motion 
 
 that gentlemen would not be likely to c 
 
 minds, he did not know. A very decisive vote 
 
 fied that nothing could be gained by pressing the ^g?^^ M ooMraNSATlON OF THE LEGISLA-- 
 motions to reconsider at this time as gentlemen . TURE . 
 
 would not change their minds. The comm ittee of the whole, Mr. PATTER- 
 
 Mr. MANN was not so confident up n tna j SO N being called to the chair, took up the report 
 point as the gentleman from Otsego. He hoped O f committee No . 1} ( M r. W. TAYLOR'S) on the 
 they would have a clause inserted in the Consti- L iglaturej &, c . 
 
 tution that a majority of the legislature only sr The firgj . sect j on wag rea( j and passed without 
 
 legislate, and if so the Veto should be strengthen- ! ^ follow8 ._ 
 
 od. In relation to the observation of the gent legislative power of this State shall be vested in 
 
 man, (Mr. CHATFIELD,) that n thin S_ w ^_ to ^f | a senate and Assembly. 
 
 The second section having been read, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 loot TTVi I 62. The Senate shall consist of thirty-two members, and 
 
 was taken on the Veto power one way last .- th ^g en ^ e ors ghall be chosen lor two year*. The Assem 
 day and they had changed considerably by yester- bl shall consi8t O f one hundred and twenty-eight mem- 
 day for just as decisive a vote was then taken the b ers, who shall be annually elected, 
 other way. Mr. W. TAYLOR b-aid that the only amend- 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON, for the purpose of dispos- ment wn ich the committee had made in this sec- 
 ing of the question, called for the consideration t j on> was (ne alteration of one word, to substitute 
 of the motion to reconsider the vote on Mr. Ni- two for lour y ear s, as the term of service of Sen- 
 CHOLAS' motion yesterday, and intimated how- ators> j t wou ld be proper that he should say, 
 ever that he should vote against the motion to re- tnat a3 the comm ittee had resolved on the plan of 
 consider. single districts, they deemed it proper that the 
 
 Mr. MANN opposed the decision being made term O f 86 nators be shortened in order that they 
 at this time, and moved to lay the resolution to L n0 uld become immediately responsible to their 
 reconsider on the table. Lost. constituents tor their acts. This and the follow- 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion to \\ ng , section were so much involved, as necessa- 
 reconsider, and it was negatived. rily to some extent to require to be considered 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that he had moved to re- loge ther. He would say however that by the 
 consider the vote on the 9th section. But he present p i an the senators were chosen every four 
 would defer the taking any further action until y ear s one being chosen in each district annually, 
 the Convention had acted on the report of com- by wn i c h means there is an annual expression of 
 mittee No. 7, which provided generally for the (ne gen timents of the people (o that branch of the 
 holding of office. legislature. If the single Senate district system 
 
 Mr. TAGGART coincided with this, were adopted without changing the term, there 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved that they should take wou id be a lapse of three years, during which the 
 the fins! vcte on the article to-day. Let us at p p U [ ar sentiment could n< t be expressed by an 
 least say before two months is past, we have set- e i ec t K >n as far as regarded the election of. Senators, 
 tied at least one thin? in the Constitution. g ut lne committee had decided that that terra 
 
 Mr. STETSON asked if they could hereafter was too | ongi j t was true there were some ad 
 insert the p-cvision he had desired, relative to van t a ges in the four year system. The Senate 
 the Governor, when they came to discuss the ar- wag designed as a sort of check on the more pop- 
 ticle reported by committe No. 7 ? u l ar branch of the Legislature, and hence it was 
 
 The PRESIDENT said he could. advisable that that body should be composed of a 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: Was it not lost by a tie less nurn ber; that it should have more stabiiiiy in 
 vote ? its organization, and should have some members 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND: No, sir, it was on the adop- cons tantly present possessing some experience in 
 tion of the whole section. . p as t legislation. But the advantages ol the single 
 
 Mr. PERKINS called for the reading of it as it district system, and shorter terms, it was believed, 
 stood. would counterbalance the loss of the other ad- 
 
 Mr. STETSON: It does not stand at all. ^vantages. It was important that there should not 
 is stricken out. (Laughter.) be so long an interval as four years from the 
 
 Mr; TOWNSEND did not want the question e [ ecl i on O f a senator until the expiration of his 
 taken now. They could amend the article at any O ffi ce> A senator might entertain opinions con- 
 time. He would move to let it rest at present. trar y to tne we |i known wishes of his constitu- 
 They could call it up by and by. enfs and frequently did misrepresent them. He 
 
 Mr. STETSON withdrew his motion to recon- mighl nave se if} 3n designs, contrary to the public 
 sider. interests, and it was possible he might be corrupt; 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to lay the article on and jj the p er j o d O f four years were to stand as the 
 the table, and that it be printed. I lerrn'of his office, the people would cease to 
 
 Mr. BROWN then said that in order to test the trou bl e themselves about him; or they would in. 
 sense of the Convention as to the propriety of dis- dulge in useless regrets that they had no means 
 patching its business a little more promptly, he Q f reacn mg him till the term of his office ex- 
 moved that the Convention now go into commit- pj re d_ gy lessening the term one-half, and 
 tee of the whole, and take up Document 48, on adopting the single district system, they brought 
 the report of committee No. 1, (on the apportion- lne 8eDa t or more immediately within the knowl- 
 ment, &c., of the legislature.) Agreed to. e dg e and observation ot his constituents and more 
 
 immediately responsible to them. The people 
 
 could reach him if they desired, sooner, by half, 
 
 ' than by the present system, and still they pre- 
 
374 
 
 served the essential feature ol a senate, stability 
 in its organization, and experience in one por-- 
 lion of its members; every year, too, one half of 
 them would come in fresh trom the people, and 
 from all parts of the state, the plan being to take 
 them trom alternate districts, and hence they 
 would annually have afresh infusion of public 
 sentiment, intermingled wiih stability and ex- 
 perience in the Senate of the State. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said he would move to strike 
 out two in the 1st line, and insert nine, so as to 
 increase the number of senators from thirty-two 
 to thirty-nine. He also proposed to amend by 
 striking out two in the 2d line, and inserting 
 three, to make the term of service three years in- 
 stead of two. He agreed in part with the chair- 
 man of the committee, in reference to the proprie- 
 ty of bringing senators oftener before the tribu- 
 nal of public opinion ; but he thought a change of 
 from 4 to 3 years, was a pretty big change and 
 would be sufficient for all practical purposes, es- 
 peciallv as it would, with his other amendment, 
 be accompanied with other advantages. His pur- 
 pose in increasing the number of senators from 
 thirty-two to thirty-nine, was not so much to have 
 a larger body, as to do more equal justice to all 
 parts of the state in the distribution of senators. 
 On looking over the report of the committee and 
 comparing it with the map of the State, he had 
 come to the conclusion (although he would give 
 the committee credit for having done the best 
 they could in reference to the particular number 
 of which the Senate was composed,) that great- 
 er justice would be done to the largest number of 
 counties by increasing the number to thirty-nine. 
 He had prepared an apportionment to demon- 
 strate this position; but not expecting this sub- 
 ject to be taken up to-day, he had it not at hand. 
 He would however produce it hereafter. Gen- 
 tlemen might be a little frightened at his propos 
 ed inciease of 7. It might be supposed that by 
 an increase of seven senators, there would be a 
 startling increase of expense. But on this point 
 he wished them to bear in mind, that it was un- 
 derstood that the Senate was not to meet as a court 
 of errors two or three times a year hereafter, and 
 charge fees for travelling and constructive jour 
 nies as they always do now (laughter.) He would 
 show the advantages of this by and by. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD must vote against this 
 amendment, in order to get at a better one which 
 he intended to offer; and after the vote was taken 
 on this, if it should fail, he would offer one which 
 would authorise the legislature to increase the 
 number of Senators not to exceed 48 ; at any time 
 after enumeration of the inhabitants. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought that his objection 
 was one which would weigh much with the peo- 
 plethe public would expect them definitely to 
 settle the number in this convention. It shoulc 
 be definitely fixed here. As to the term of three 
 years, the committee would perceive that it was 
 a number which would afford facilities for elect- 
 ing annually precisely one-third, three times lc 
 being 39. He had taken that number, because h< 
 could find no other number that would so wel 
 answer that purpose, and by which the popula 
 tion would be so equally represented ; and it was 
 desirable to get an equality of senatorial repre 
 sentation as near as possible without dividing 
 
 ounties. It was the only just division, as he 
 would show by and by, when he had his schedule 
 here. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said there must be a re-or- 
 ganization of every Senate district once in ten 
 ears ; and that was why he would allow the 
 change to be made from time to time. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND insisted that the number 
 ihould be definitely fixed now by them, and in- 
 serted in the Constitution. His plan was equita- 
 )le and based on a ratio of 60,000 population. 
 
 Mr. BURR said he should oppose the amend- 
 ment, although he was in favor ultimately of in- 
 creasing the number of Senators. He should vote 
 n favor of the proposition of the gentleman from 
 Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIELD) which as a humble 
 member of committee No. 1, he had offered in 
 hat committee. 
 
 Mr. WHITE said New- York city was entitled 
 o one-eighth of the representation in the Senate. 
 3e was opposed to the amendment, to change it 
 rom 32 to 39, as by that plan, injustice would be 
 done to New- York city ; she being entitled to 
 one-eighth of the representation. He cared not 
 whetherthe number was fixed at 32, or 40, or 48, 
 or any number that would do justice to New- York. 
 If it was designed to cut that city off from a Se- 
 nator, let gentlemen say so ; but 39 would not do 
 ustice to that city. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said New- York would have 5 
 under that apportionment, as the ratio was 60,- 
 000 ; so she would have her share, and a little 
 over. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : New- York lacks 6,000 in- 
 habitants of the requisite number. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG hoped the Convention 
 would favor the proposition of the gentleman 
 from Genesee, (Mr. RICHMOND.) He wished the 
 number to be increased. He believed that in 
 few of the other States was there as great a dis- 
 proportion between the Senate and House of Re- 
 presentatives as in this State. In some States the 
 Senate was half the size of the popular branch. 
 He believed the people would be satisfied with 
 an increase, and thirty-nine was quite few enough. 
 There was now an inequality in the representa- 
 tion of some districts of 10,000 or 12,000 too 
 many or too little. If they could arrive at a grea- 
 ter equality in representation by having 30 or 40 
 or more, he thought that would be a strong reason 
 for increasing the number of Senators ; and he 
 hoped this plan would be adopted. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY : Why, there is no use in 
 all this fuss ; there is the Congressional Districts 
 all cut out. Why do you not rush right into 
 them, and take hold of them, already made to 
 your hand ? (Laughter ) 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called for a division of the ques- 
 tion, so that the vote might be first taken on the 
 number of senators; he v\as in favor of this, but 
 not of the extent of the term of office ; 39 was a 
 good number. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE inquired if it was intended 
 to propose any change in the number of the mem- 
 bers of Assembly ? 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR replied in the negative. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE wished to continue thirty- 
 two as ihe number of senators; and he wished that 
 the four year terra should be continued If this 
 government should be assailed, and its liberties 
 
375 
 
 invaded, it would certainly come in moments^ of 
 popular excitement and frequent elections. The 
 present number of 32 multiplied by 4, gives a ra- 
 tio eq'ial to 128, the number <>t members of the 
 A-i.-mbly ; and that reason influenced the Con- 
 vention < f 1821, instead ot letainmg the number 
 tit 125, ot which the Assembly once consisted. 
 There were originally four districts returning 
 eight senHtou- each; but the districts were divi- 
 ded, making eight with lour senators each, 4 times 
 8 being 32, and 4 times 32 made 128, the number 
 of the other house. This was the mathematical 
 umber and reason for their action on this point. 
 He was opposed to too largea representative body, 
 because great numbers led to disorder in the woik 
 of legislation. When such a body is much swel- 
 led, it must lead to great confusion, even with this 
 body of but 128 members, with the continued en- 
 croachments of conversation with each other, writ- 
 ing letters.and send ing off' packages.and the talking- 
 ot members to their friends, it -vas almost impos- 
 sible lor them to do their business; and he thought 
 there would be great wisdom in adhering to the 
 number as it now stands in both houses, for if they 
 depart from 32 senators they would be likely to 
 depart from 128 Assemblymen. 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN said that he was in favor of 
 increasing both the number of Senators and Re- 
 presentatives ; and that if no other member 
 should ofier such an amendment, he would offer 
 it himself. The present division of Assembly 
 Districts does not at all allow of a fair or proper 
 representation of counties, as may be seen from 
 their position. Many parts of the country are 
 very vafairly represented. In too many places 
 there are large portions of population unrepre- 
 sented. In Richmond, Putnam, and Rockland, 
 there is an excess of only 12 or 13,000; but in 
 Genesee, Orleans, and Wyoming, the fractions 
 are about equal to a member. As to an increase 
 of Legislators, there was no difficulty. A large 
 body could always transact business better anc 
 quicker than a smaller one. Look at New Hamp- 
 shire, with some 220 or 130 Representatives. So 
 in Massachusetts, when Maine belonged to her 
 there were several hundred ; and they despatch 
 business with great rapidity, and so in this House 
 we do business quicker when a large numbe 
 is present, than when there is only a small num 
 ber. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM had at times been impatient a 
 the dilatory proceedings of this body, but he nov 
 regretted the disposition he thought he saw, t 
 press on the subject under consideration to a vote 
 without that consideration and discussion that it 
 importance, in his judgment demanded. Th 
 question of representation, how large in proper 
 tion to the constituency, how apportioned an 
 how designated or elected, must always remai 
 questions of first importance in a representativ 
 government, and questions, he trusted, not to b 
 settled in this body without careful deliberation 
 Without having had any opportunity for the ne 
 cessary examination and consideration of the sub 
 ject that he hoped others might have improvec 
 he had no wish to enter at large into the debat 
 which he hoped would be had, but he was wi 
 ling to avow himself in favor of a liberal increas 
 of representation in both branches of the legisla 
 ture. He would hardly be satisfied with less tha 
 
 irty-eight in the upper branch. Most of the 
 
 ther States had provided much larger represen- 
 
 tion than we had. The framers of the Consti- 
 
 ution of 1777, seemed to contemplate a much 
 
 arger representation than provided by the Con- 
 
 itution of 1821. The limits by the Constitution 
 
 1777, were one hundred for the Senate and 
 
 hree hundred for the House, and the framers 
 
 ould hardly have anticipated the increase of po- 
 
 ulation that has become matter of history. The 
 
 eport of the committee provides for continuing 
 
 le representation deemed sufficient in 1821, for 
 
 t least half a century. Would gentlemen con- 
 
 ider the actual increase of the constituency up 
 
 > the present period, and that, that must be an- 
 
 cipated during the existence of the Constitution 
 
 re are framing ? The purity of legislation re- 
 
 ;uired an increase of the upper branch. How 
 
 lany important propositions had been adopted or 
 
 'efeatedby seventeen men in a full Senate, and 
 
 y a smaller number when the Senate was not 
 
 ull ; too small a number to settle the destinies 
 
 nd interests of this great State. He should op- 
 
 jose the number proposed by the gentleman from 
 
 ienesee, in the hope that when the matter came 
 
 o be duly considered, a larger number of the Se- 
 
 late would be agreed upon. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS had not been in the Convention 
 or several days, and was not prepared to give his 
 iews at length on this subject, at present. He was 
 if opinion, that a moderate increase of the number 
 if members of the Senate and Assembly, would 
 ie both necessary and satisfactory, but he did not 
 hink a very large increase would be either desi- 
 able or acceptable. Perhaps it would be well to 
 dothe the Legislature with a discretionary power 
 o increase the number of Senators, so that there 
 should not be less than 32 nor more than 48 
 elected ; and that the members of Assembly shall 
 not be less than 144, or more than 192. He was 
 also in favor of a- term of three years instead of 
 wo, for the reasons assigned by Mr. Taylor. 
 As the Senate occupied the position of an adviso- 
 ry branch of the Legislature, the members should 
 lave some experience in legislation, and they 
 would not get enough in one or two years. But 
 f one half were to go out every year, this design 
 would measurably fail. The plan of the com- 
 mittee required great disproportion in the appor- 
 tionment. There would be a difference in the 
 population of the districts of about 23,000. 
 Some districts have an excess of 16,000, and others 
 a deficit of 16,000. So great a disproportion 
 should not be sanctioned by the Convention, un- 
 less it was absolutely required. He trusted we 
 were not here to arrange districts with a political 
 object in view. Some inequalities must exist. 
 But such great inequalities must be avoided, by 
 altering either the number of Senators, or the 
 number of the districts. We then should be care- 
 ful how we set anexample which might be gross- 
 ly abused by some future legislature, and we may 
 find in times of great party excitement that dis- 
 tricts may be so divided as to give only one-third 
 of what another has. But if we divide the State 
 into 12 districts with 36 senators or 16 dis- 
 tricts with 48 senators, then there will be a unity 
 of feeling in the districts ; the senators will be 
 divided into three classes and the people will be 
 able to express their feelings and to vote for 
 
376 
 
 senator annually. If the proposition of the gen- 
 tleman from Genesee prevails, then only one -third 
 of the voters of a district can be heard in any one 
 year at the polls, or in the Senate on any great 
 question, and this certainly is not in accordance 
 with democratic doctrines. He would move that 
 the number should not be less than 36 or more 
 than 48. 
 
 Air. TILDEN hoped the amendment would 
 not prevail. It proposed that the term of the Sen- 
 ators should be of three years duration. If. with 
 this term, the single district system were adopted, 
 but one third of the people would vote at any one 
 election for Senators. This he considered to be a 
 very great delect. The theory of the Senate is 
 that it represents the judgment of the people in 
 successive years, which must concur in legisla- 
 tion. Each year, there came to it accessions of 
 members im'using into it the popular sentiment 
 prevailing at the time, not absolutely controll- 
 ing but influencing its legislation ; a sentiment 
 coming not from a third of the localities, but 
 from the whole people now in. He regarded it 
 as extremely desirable that this branch of the leg- 
 islature should annually hear trom their constit- 
 uents, and from all their constituents. He con- 
 sidered it extremely desirable that the attention 
 of the electors throughout the whole State should 
 be annually turned to the doings of the Senate. 
 He agreed that it was necessary to lessen the size of 
 the Senatorial districts ; and to biing the repre- 
 sentatives nearer lo the local constituencies by 
 which they are elected. But he could not consent 
 to disregard other objects, to violate other prin 
 ciples still more impoitant. He was not willing 
 to depart from that wise and salutary usage which 
 gives'a voice to all the people of the State every 
 year in both branches of the legislature. This 
 principle is not compatible with the single dis- 
 trict system, unless the senatorial term is re- 
 duced to a single year, which this Convention 
 evidently does not design to do. It seemed to him 
 wise to construct the Senate with reference to 
 all these objec:s. Increase the number to forty, 
 reduce the term to two years, and form twenty 
 districts, in which halt of the Senators will be ai 
 ternately elected- This would be a wise and fair 
 comproaiise between the principles which ought 
 to be embraced in the structure of the Senate. 
 He spoke without much consideration of the de- 
 tails. He threw out the suggestion now, because 
 the proposition!, under discussion involved the 
 principles of the whole system. 
 
 Mr. STRONG could not see that the objection 
 was correct; that only one-third would vote if 
 we had it for three years, and only one-half it 
 we had it for two years. The idea that this propo 
 sition cut off the right of the people tu vote, was 
 strange. All of the people could vote erery year 
 He should vote in favor of the motion to strike 
 out and to increase the number of Senators. 
 They could put in any number the committee 
 could agree upon. He could see no force in the 
 reasoning of the chaiiman, that the Senate should 
 be just one fourth as numerous as the Assembly 
 nor that a small body would be a greater check 
 upon the Assembly than a larger one. He 
 thought the reverse of this would be found to be 
 true. A small number of Senators would not be 
 
 o good a check lo hasty and inconsiderate leg- 
 slation as a larger one. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said he did not mean now to 
 ebate this ; but that if this amendment prevailed 
 t might be necessary to refer back this report to 
 he committee for the purpose of completing the 
 apportionment, if the number of members should 
 e changed, and the single district system retain- 
 ed ; or so to alter it as to leave this matter to the 
 egislature. He wished it left to the legislature 
 o determine what the number shall be ; provided 
 t be not more than 48. There were in some 
 Bounties fractions as large as 16,000, and in 
 iome a deficiency of that amount. He enumerat- 
 ed various counties in which these disproportions 
 existed. Now, he wished these fractions reme- 
 died ; and if this cannot be done in any other way, 
 ic was willing to go back to the present system, 
 "t was not fair to cut off so large a portion of the 
 eople from any representative, and if the sin- 
 gle district system cannot be agreed upon without 
 his gross unfairness, then he certainly preferred 
 he present system of 8 districts, and 4 senators to 
 each. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that he had already re- 
 )lied to the proposition of the gentleman from 
 3-enesee, (MR. RICHMOND) but other suggestions 
 lave been made, to which he wished to reply so 
 s to place himself and the committee right. He 
 and the committee regretted the existence of these 
 rregularities,and if they could have been remedi- 
 ed without violating the principle laid down, they 
 The co 
 
 have done so. They could be remedied, 
 should it be determined to cut up counties or de- 
 jart from the rule that the districts should consist 
 of contiguous territory. The committee thought 
 his would be unadvisable. They determined not 
 :o cut up counties; or to make districts of coun- 
 ties not contiguous. They believed that these prin- 
 ciples should be maintained. He believed if any 
 reform had been called for by the people it was 
 ;he single district system. But he could show 
 low the inequalities could be remedied. For in- 
 stance, Dutchess and Columbiaavere put togeth- 
 er, making a large excess, while Rensselaer stood 
 alone, with about an equal deficiency. Now cut 
 Columbia in two and you would make two pretty 
 even districts. Or place Schenectady on to Rens- 
 selaer, and then you would about equalize the 
 districts. So Richmond might be placed with 
 Suffolk and Queens, leaving Kings to stand alone 
 and be almost equal to it. But all these were not 
 contiguous. But gentlemen would find, take any 
 number they please 39, 40 or 48 they 
 would find equal difficulty in getting rid of these 
 excesses and deficiencies. Gentlemen might go 
 to work and make a district to suit themselves 
 very well at first, but as they progressed into the 
 state, they would be involved an much greater dif- 
 ficulties. The committee had made their divi- 
 sion, because it was the most convenient one. 
 There would be a still greater inequality in 
 the aggregate in 39 Senators than in 32. 
 The committee had tried 40, and also 48; and 
 they found in the aggregate that there was far 
 greater inequality in tho?e numbers than in 32. 
 The gentleman from Genesse (Mr. RICHMOND) 
 says his ratio is 60,000; now with 39 it should be 
 61,528 ; divide by that and it will make a material 
 difference in his results. The committee had ex 
 
377 
 
 amined this very carefully. In some points their 
 r.'pori was lift as it should be ; but at the proper 
 lime, he would show how the defects could be re- 
 im-died. Columbia and Dutchess showed the grea- 
 :ccessj but you cannot put them to any other 
 counties contiguous t'j them without making a 
 larger excess. And it you divide them you would 
 afford room for inhoducing the bad system of ger- 
 rymandering for political purposes. He believed 
 the Convention did not wish to leave this to the 
 legislature And if gentlemen presented a plan 
 lie '.vishid them to present a whole plan and not 
 abstiftct propositions. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said that he did not feel any 
 great degree of anxiety about this question, yet 
 he should vote in favor of the proposition of the 
 gentleman from Genesee, (Mr. RICHMOND.) He 
 would not greatly increase the number, but seven 
 would not be an objectionable increase. He 
 would not divide counties ; he would prefer 
 rather some inequalities in^ representation, be- 
 cause such were our associations in counties that 
 he apprehended the people would prefer that they 
 should not be divided. He liked the plan just in- 
 troduced by the gentleman from Genesee (Mr. 
 RICHMOND,) because the slight examination he 
 had given to it had satisfied him that by fixing 
 that number of senators, they should be able to 
 accommodate a greater number of counties with 
 separate senatorial representations. But under 
 the report of the committee, only five counties 
 could be made separate senatorial districts, while 
 by adopting thirty-nine as the number, they 
 might have~one-third of the districts made up of 
 arid of the remaining two-thirds, 
 with . vception. the senatorial districts 
 
 won! >!p of only two counties each. 
 
 ranklin alone would be the 
 of which he had spoken. Those three 
 would form a district, and by this there would 
 not be such great inequalities in the representa- 
 tion ; which was an important point and worthy 
 of attention. He was decidedly in favor of bring- 
 ing the representation as nearly, home to the 
 people as was practicable ; and when they could 
 form senatorial districts by single counties he 
 thought it would be desirable that it should be 
 done, even though there might be some inequal- 
 ities in the ratio of representation. Since the 
 discussion had i 0:1 he had taken up 
 
 the report of the committee, and he had selected 
 .(s in which the plan of the gentleman 
 -ee, (Mr. RICHMOND,) might be car- 
 ried out, if they should agree on having 
 thirty-nine senators. He found that single 
 districts might be made of Kings, Albany, 
 Rensselaer, St. Lawrence, Oncida, JcL'er- 
 son, Onondaga, Monroe, Otsego, Erie, Orange, 
 Oswego, and Cayuga. Double districts might be 
 made out of the following counties : Dutchess 
 and Putnam, Steuben and Chemung, Suffolk and 
 Queens, Westchester and Rockland, Ulster and 
 Sullivan, Columbia and Greene, Delaware and 
 Schoharie, Saratoga and Schenectady, Washing- 
 ton and Warren, Fulton and Montgomery, Her- 
 kimer and Lewis, Chenango and Broome, -Madi- 
 son and Cortland, Tompkins and Tioga, Seneca 
 and Wayne, Ontario and Yat.es, Livingston and 
 Allegany, Genesee and Wyomi. * and 
 
 
 
 York and Richmond would have between them 5 
 senators. He did not say this was the best division 
 that could be made. There may be very great 
 inequalities in it ; but he had merely drawn it 
 out whilst sitting there ; and believed it would 
 be much more satisfactory to the people generally 
 than the report of the committee. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL agreed entirely with the gentle- 
 man (Mr. HARRIS). His views were entirely 
 sound, and they rested on a sound basis. The 
 committee have made a very great mistake in lim- 
 iting the number of senators to 32. It produces 
 very great inequalities and great unfairness. It 
 throws a very large fraction of excess where smal- 
 ler counties are united. The injustice tails chief, 
 ly on these. He had drawn out a table of theae 
 deficiencies. Thus: 
 
 Erie, deficient of rep. population 6,314 
 
 Monroe, do do 11,399 
 
 Onondaga, do do 7,566 
 
 Rensselaer, do do 16,314 
 
 Oneida, with a surplus of 3,711 
 
 Smaller counties united in single districts pre- 
 sent large excesses, as 
 
 Cayuga and Wayne, an excess of 
 Madison and Oswego, do 
 Dutchess arid Columbia, do 
 
 14,547 
 11,837 
 16,077 
 
 By adopting forty as the number of Senators, 
 twelve counties may each constitute a single dis- 
 trict, with a very small excess or deficiency, ex- 
 cept in two counties, Oneida on the one hand and 
 Otsego on the other. 
 
 Erie, excess of 8,671 
 
 Monroe, do 3,536 
 
 Onondaga, do 7.419 
 
 Oneida, do 18,696 
 
 JeftVrson, do 2,635 
 
 Kings, do 1,611 
 
 Albany, do 8,582 
 
 Dutch'ess with a deficiency of 8.724 
 
 St. Lawrence, do 1,374 
 
 Otsego, do 10,239 
 
 Steuben, do 9,229 
 
 Rensseiaer, do 1,329 
 
 The smaller counties can easily be arranged in 
 single districts. He strongly desired to see some 
 plan adopted so as to give to each district as near 
 as possible the precise amount of representa- 
 tion it ou^ht to have and to make all equal. 
 There can be no doubt that extending this num- 
 ber to 39, 40 or upwards, one-third of them would 
 be composed of entire counties, without any 
 great inequality, and then the smaller counties 
 could be combined into districts much more favor- 
 ably. It could be done also more satisfactorily by 
 40 senators elected i^ 20 double districts; one to be 
 chosen each year, So that all the people would 
 every year vote for a senator instead of one-half 
 one year, and another half the next year, which 
 would undoubtedly be, looking at its practical 
 working, mischievous in its tendency. If we adopt 
 this system of half voting one year, one-half of 
 the population, and the next year the other half, 
 but half would vote. This must be obviated. He 
 agreed in the principle that the Senate should be 
 increased, possessed as it was of so much power. 
 Forty would be the number he should prefer in 
 consequence of convenience of alloting the dis- 
 tricts. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said the great question il appear, 
 fd to him WHS one of !>rmriv) w^rMi-i n f 
 
378 
 
 nearly to the great principle of popular represen- 
 tation or not. The other was a mere question of 
 convenience. He was prepared to vote lor forty 
 if that was sufficient. He was however, fully 
 aware of the difficulties of getting an equal appor- 
 tionment. Mr. N. pointed out the inequalities in 
 the apportionment under the report of the com 
 
 December, the close of the political year, one- 
 half of the Senators would go out, and an equal 
 number remain. Was that providing a sta- 
 ble form of Government ? He thought not. 
 It would strike from the Senate its principle of 
 popular representation. It would be but a " ride 
 and tie" system. Mr. S. explained that in new 
 
 mittee, particularly in relation to the city of New countries of the west where horses were few, it 
 York. We should take cognizance of the pecu- was customary for two men in travelling, to ride 
 liar character of our population what to-day is j alternately the other walking. This was what 
 an agricultural district, may to-morrow be a dense- 
 ly populated one. This should be carefully ex- 
 amined. He concurred in the remarks of his col- 
 league, and insisted on the proposition being so 
 amended as to enable the people of the whole dis- 
 trict to pass judgment on their senators in every 
 year. 
 
 Mr. RHOADKS alluded to the unanimous call 
 that had come up from the people for an amend, 
 ment of the constitution in this particular of sin- 
 gle districts. But with the present arrangement 
 
 was called " ride and tie." He hoped that the 
 system would not be adopted here. He conceded 
 there was a demand for single districts, but had, 
 in all the discussion that had taken place on this 
 subject, this objection been considered. He 
 thought not. By an increase of the number of 
 Senators to 40, there might be an approximation 
 to equality. By forming twenty districts, and 
 putting two Senators in each, classifiying them, so 
 that one should be elected every year, stability 
 would be attained, and then also the popular 
 
 of the members of Assembly and Senators, (he will from all part of the state, would reach the 
 people have been perfectly' satisfied, he had | Senate every year. The whole people would 
 seen no call for a change. If we should j then be heard, and the expression not left to be 
 increase the number to 39 it would of course j controlled by mere accident. Another reason, 
 involve the necessity of increasing the Assem-jMr. S. had for desiring an increase. It would 
 bly. He was for letting well enough alone, | tend to increase the number of members of As- 
 and for leaving the Assembly as it was. j sembly, which he also desired. There was great 
 We should provide our government so as to en- inequality of representation there also. There 
 sure among the people a respect for all its j were such things as bodies of the people standing 
 departments. Although it could not be conceal- | in an unequal position, for a long time, and not 
 ed however that the senate as a judicial body had making it a subject of complaint, because they 
 
 So with 
 the one 
 
 fallen into disrepute somewhat, yet throughout 
 our State, it was found that the people always 
 had a greater respect for the smaller bodies the 
 
 Senates. So for instance with the Senate of the this being an opportunity to correct the 
 United States and why ? Because in a small body I they looked now for that correction. Mr. S. re- 
 there was more decorum and deliberation. He I ferred to the fact that Clinton Co. with an ex- 
 
 could see no remedy at hand for it. 
 certain counties of this State, and 
 he represented was of that description. But 
 
 - L evil, 
 
 therefore hoped it would not be desired to change 
 the present number. 
 
 Mr. STETSON thought there was a variety of 
 good reasons why the Senate should be increased. 
 As the number now stands, it often happens that 
 the position of a single Senator was of too much 
 importance. By increasing the number of Sena- 
 tors, that evil would be diminished. That was 
 one reason for it. Another is, that the number 
 
 cess often thousand or thereabouts, v\as entitled 
 to no larger representation than other counties 
 whose deficiency was equal to or exceeded that 
 amount. This could be obviated by increasing 
 the number of members of Assembly. As it is 
 now, he urged that those counties were unjustly 
 placed in that position where they had a large un- 
 represented faction, and but one member, where- 
 as other counties had the same with but half the 
 
 of members should be in some sort of proportion j population. This was in opposition to the fea. 
 to the ^increase of population. Another is, that | tares of republican representative Guven 
 
 the people demanded the formation of single Se- 
 nate districts. The opinions he entertained, he 
 had long held, and he felt it his duty to express 
 them here let their fate be as it may. The sub- 
 ject had been already alluded to, and that was 
 the very extraordinary features in the plan of 
 the committee by which the expression of public 
 opinion is not come to the Senate as a whole,annu- 
 ally, from the people, but in an accidental frag- 
 mentary form. There should be a general, uni- 
 versal relation between the members of that body 
 and the people. He was so irreconcilably op- 
 posed to that feature, that he did not see how to 
 go for single districts, unless by duplicate in- 
 crease, so as to give a Senator to be elected in 
 each district every year. If single districts pre- 
 vailed, and the number should be fixed at 32, 
 then he should go for a single or a two year term, 
 in order to meet this to him controlling objection. 
 The report sacrifices the representative feature 
 to the stability of the system. On the last of 
 
 it was an approximation to the rotten borough 
 system of England. Was it proper that Clinton 
 county should he compelled to stand with a frac. 
 tion often thousand unrepresented and New York 
 be allowed to have her fraction divided on her 
 delegation as a whole, instead ot on each of the 
 single members ? He urged that there should be 
 some change in this. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND considered that this system 
 of inequality would always exist as long as the 
 present apportionment existed.. Mr. R. went on 
 to refer to vhat he considered the inequalities of 
 the present system Of representation some coun- 
 ties having large fractions of surplus and others of 
 deficit. It was to obviate these discrepancies 
 that he went for increasing the number ot Sena- 
 tors, and so long as thai end was attained he cared 
 not for what plan he went. But if they were not 
 increased, then he should go for single assembly 
 districts. If the same principle was applied to Or- 
 leans and Wyoming who were now allowed 
 
379 
 
 but to members between them, as was applied 
 to New-Yoik, and the fractions made up on each 
 representation, New- York would have had a less 
 number. Mr. R. referred to other counties as 
 showing the inequality that existed. 
 
 Mr W. B. WRIGHT as a member of the com- 
 mittee,with the general features of the report,most 
 cheerfully concurred. It was only in the details 
 of it thai he felt the necessity of disagreeing with 
 them. The popular will had been unequivocally 
 and fully expressed in favor of single districts 
 and he had proposed the number of 48 districts. 
 The Senate as was often observed, was too large 
 and unwieldy for a court, and too small (or legis- 
 lation. It was generally believed that its judicial 
 powers would be abrogated, and this was a ques. 
 tion that should be considered in constituting it 
 hereafter. In most of the Constitutions of the states 
 other than in New England, the proportion or the 
 Senate was* in the ratio to the Assembly 
 one-third, and in others one-half. Another rea. 
 son he had for (he increase was that the represen- 
 tation should be brought nearer to the people. 
 Some had supposed that the report of the commit- 
 tee presented the fairest and most equal apportion- 
 ment that could be obtained. In his opinion the 
 great difficulty in making an equal apportionment 
 arose with the larger counties and that \vouldbe 
 obviated by an increase of population as it was 
 provided that whenever a county was large enough 
 it should be divided into two districts He (Mr. 
 W.) saw no reason why these county lines should 
 be so particularly observed to the disadvantage of 
 the great principle of equality of representation. 
 And he was in favor of breaking up the system, as 
 it would tpnd to break up the petty party regen. 
 cies that congregated at the capital of every coun- 
 ty. But a more equal plan of representation could 
 be attained than this report. By the report, sev- 
 enteen senators would be elected by a population 
 60,000 less than that which elected only 17. This 
 evil should certainly be a\oided, and he was for 
 any proposition that should etfectualy attain that 
 object. Mr. W proceeded to point out further 
 
 dispensed, and this would save a great share of 
 the present expense of the legislature, with 
 perhaps equal to its increase through an increase 
 of members. It had been said that the people had 
 not asked for this increase. Mr. W. apprehended 
 if the Convention had decided to adopt only such 
 amendments as the whole people had asked for, 
 that it had better adjourn at once. But he urged 
 that the people had asked for it a universal sen- 
 timent has prevailed in the southern section of 
 
 the state, in favor of the increase of the Senate. 
 
 He was opposed to the rule adopted in some 
 states, of allowing the legislature to fix these 
 numbers. He would have it settled here. He 
 also denied that an increase of the Senate involv- 
 ed an increase of the Assembly. He could not 
 see, where the necessity was consequently in- 
 volved. Still he was willing to go with the gen- 
 tleman from Clinton, for the increase of the num- 
 ber of members of Assembly, if that would tend 
 to break up the disparity of representation exis- 
 ting. He was, therefore, for increasing the num- 
 ber to 48, without reference to county lines But 
 if the matter was left to the legislature in making 
 the apportionment, they would preserve these 
 county lines, so far as possible, but he would not 
 make it obligatory for them so to do without re- 
 ference to the great principle of equality of popu- 
 lar representation. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG said if a member in con- 
 stituency felt an interest in this question, it must 
 be himself and those he represented. His coun- 
 ty had a fraction of nearly 12,000, about equal to 
 the whole population of some single counties re- 
 presented here by single members. Mr. Y. then 
 referred to the inequality of representation, as 
 presented in the following instances : Chau- 
 taque, under the present apportionment, has a 
 representative for every 22,991 of her representa- 
 tive population ; Queens, one for every 26,837- 
 Ulster, for every 22,814; Clinton, for 27,115- 
 Essex, for 23,451; Cortland, for 24,861; Broome' 
 for 24,266 ; Seneca, for 24,243 ; Oswego, one for 
 
 discrepancies between 1 he districts, as provided in every 23,400; and Wyoming, a single member 
 the plan of the committee. More than one third for a b ut 30 ' 500 ! Whlle on th e other hand,Rich- 
 of the Senate would be represented by counties | mond nas a representative for 12,425; Putnam, 
 embracing cities, s> that 11 senators would be I for I 2 . 842 ; Rockland, for 12,209; Warren, for 
 
 13,711 ; Greene, one for every 15.136 ; Genesee, 
 one for every ?14,070 ; and several others, in 
 which there is nearly the same inequality. He 
 thought a principle could be arrived at far more 
 equitable than this, and he could not see how, in 
 any way than by increasing the Senate. He be- 
 
 elected by ihem. And yet it was pioposed that 
 the larger fractions should exist in the rural pop- 
 ulation, where no rapid increase was to he expect- 
 ed. For example, five from the city arid county 
 of New York, one from the county of Kings, em- 
 bracing the city o[ Brooklyn, one from thn coun- 
 
 ty of Albany, embracing the Capital, one from the 
 
 lieved an increased representation to be more desi- 
 
 county of Oneida, embracing the city of Utica, one! rable ' and more safe to the people. If danger 
 from the county of Monroe, embracing the city of I was to " e apprehended from corruption, it would 
 Rochester, one'from the couniy of Rensseiaer, em- be lessened by this increase. He believed that 
 bracing th city of Troy, and one from the coun- the P e P le desired, in any event, a more equal 
 ty of Buffalo. While these counties have now representation, and the larger a number in a body, 
 but a small exccfs. ami n many instances a <ie- ! tne more equal the representation. And this was 
 ficienry, the agriculture counr'ips v t-p- fmmii to I wnat tne counties who were injured by the pres- 
 havethe largest dr-ficiertcy. Mr. W. urged that ent system, were here contending for. He believ- 
 the balanc-' srn.uid be the other way, the .igncul- ed . tn .at the representation in point of population 
 tural population being about stationary, and that of ftoui state, was less than any other of the states 
 of the CiMes greatly and constantly mcn-asin^. in the Union, and, as the population was still in- 
 the matter " of expense in settling this great ! creasing, that would seem alone to render a slight 
 question of equality of representation, was not j increase of representation desirable. Whether 
 worthy of account. Mr. W. said that the Court of! tnat was soor not the otner reasons given were 
 Errors in its present form, would undoubtedly be ! full y sufficient. 
 
380 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL Jr., said that it was not 
 his intention to have addressed the committee at 
 this time upon the subject under consideration. 
 He should not have done so had not the discussion 
 upon a particular section involved the whole 
 subject of the report, and had not he regarded 
 the number of Senators proposed to be stricken 
 out of the section (to use a mathematical phrase) 
 as an indicia which was to govern in the forma- 
 tion of all the subsequent sections of the report. 
 The delegate from St. Lawrence has inform- 
 ed this committee that the standing committee 
 who submitted this report, had made a great 
 mistake in limiting the number of Senators to 
 thirty two, and in undertaking the formation ot 
 single senate districts. He (Mr. C.) apprehend- 
 ed that he should be able to satisfy that gentle- 
 man that the mistake was in another quarter. 
 He said that if any one fact was prominent in 
 the discussions of the people which preceded this 
 Convention, it was the complaint made of mis- 
 representation under the present system of elect- 
 ing senators. And who ever would take the 
 trouble to luok into the proceedings of the con- 
 ventions nominating candidates for a seat in this 
 House, would find that in nearly all of such con- 
 ventions a resolution was passed in favor of single 
 senate districts. He said he regarded himself 
 as instructed by his constituents to support the 
 single district system, for the election of senators, 
 and he also considered it as a measure clearly 
 indicated by popular will. The district sys- 
 tem as now organized, he said, was a system of 
 misrepresentation and not of representation. 
 Some of the present senate districts embrace 
 a territory of fiom 200 to 300 miles, and it was 
 obvious that not one elector in 100, could be 
 acquainted with the qualifications or opinions 
 of their senatorial candidate. The standing com- 
 mittee, No. 1 had theretore felt bound in accord- 
 ance with public sentiment to report in favor of 
 the single district system. He enquired what was 
 the object and duties of the Legislature, but to 
 reflect the will of the people and protect then 
 interests in the making of laws, arid how could 
 this be done unless the candidate and the consti- 
 tuent were brought nearer together than by the pre- 
 sent system, so as to enable the constituent to 
 judge of the qualifications and fitness of the can- 
 didate to discharge the duties of the office of Sena- 
 tor and to say whether such candidate would be a 
 proper person to be consumed their representative 
 in the law making power of government. He said 
 it has been objected to this report that it contem- 
 plated only a biennial election of senators, and 
 that by such elections a portion of the senators 
 would be placed beyond the re;.ch of the people, 
 and that the sentiment of but a portion of the peo- 
 ple of the State would be expressed in the Legis- 
 lative halls. He would enquire how it was 
 now. Were not three <>f the four senators from 
 each senatorial district, beyond the reach of the 
 popular will, and are they not often found to be 
 the very antipodes in politics ot the newly elected 
 incumbent tresh from the people and, equally 
 opposed to the representatives in the popular 
 branch of the Legislature. He said that he regarded 
 the present system of large districts, or any other 
 than single senatorial districts as not calculated to 
 carry out the system of representative government 
 
 which supposes every elector to express his views 
 on public matters in the vote he gives. And how 
 could this be done unless you bring home to the 
 people a knowledge of the candidate. He said 
 the people regarded it as but a poor boon to vote 
 for a candidate for senator of whom they never 
 heard, and whose qualifications for the office were 
 entirely unknown to them. He (Mr. C.) averred 
 that if thesmglefdistrict system was adopted by the 
 committee that then a better or more equal appor- 
 tionment could not be made than by deciding in 
 favor of the present number of districts, (32) 
 which number would leave as small a num- 
 ber of electors unrepresented, and produce 
 as much equality of representation as any other 
 number. He believed that no division could be 
 found that would produce greater equality 
 in representation, there was no way of avoiding 
 inequality to some extent, but by the division of 
 counties for that purpose. He said he felt upon 
 the subject of the integrity of counties as did the 
 state rights party upon the subject of States. He 
 said the counties were a sort of local government 
 by themselves ; possessing very general and ex- 
 tensive powers of legislation, and criminal juris- 
 diction; they were invested with power to legis- 
 late in relation to county property, upon all 
 claims against the counties and towns within 
 their territory of the assessment and collection 
 of taxes, of highways and bridges in relation to 
 the county poor, and upon various other matters. 
 That the 'courts of the counties had exclusive 
 jurisdiction over all crimes committed within the 
 county lines, and the town and county offi- 
 cers had the exclusive control of all elections 
 within the county, and the citizens of the coun- 
 ties must pay the expenses of the same. He said, 
 that if county lines were broken over in the for- 
 mation of Senate districts, and the integrity of 
 counties disregarded that it would lead to great 
 confusion in the financial affairs of the counties. 
 He enquired how it would be in case a few 
 towns were taken from one county, and affixed 
 to another for the purposes of a Senatorial district? 
 Who would pay the expenses of the election 
 within such towns as were to be set off; and who 
 elect the board of county canvassers, and in case 
 a crime or crimes were committed at such elec- 
 tion, who would defray the expenses of an indict- 
 ment and trial for such offence, (and of all other 
 indictments, he said they were the most vexa- 
 tious and expensive?) To what jail, should 
 the inspectors of election in such district send 
 persons who were guilty of disorder at the polls ? 
 Surely these expenses should not be borne by 
 those who had no interest whatever in the elec- 
 tion, as would often be the case, if county lines 
 were disregarded in the forming of Senatorial 
 districts ; and particularly if the same towns were 
 also formed into or made a part of an assembly 
 district embracing towns in different counties. 
 He said that some of these objections could be 
 obviated by proper legislative enactment ; but it 
 was contemplated to give still further legislative 
 powers to counties, and if so they would become 
 a separate sectional government, whose jurisdic- 
 tion and territory could not be arbitrarily invaded 
 without the most serious consequences, ending 
 in an entire breaking up of the system of 
 county legislation. He said that he WLS not 
 
381 
 
 iho particular apportionment report- 
 ed that if any member could show how 
 riot could be altered for the better, he would 
 be in favor of the change, but that it was easier 
 :k about a lair and equal apportionment, 
 ! o make one. He said that the honorable 
 member from Sullivan (Mr WRIGHT) had advo- 
 single assembly districts, upon the ground 
 that they would tend 'to break up, or break down, 
 ntral power of the counties. He (Mr. C.) 
 ir.it no such effect would be produced 
 by single assembly districts, and that members 
 . would in many cases misrepresent their 
 counties or districts. He said, to illustrate, sup- 
 ; off a few towns from the county ofRens- 
 ; to the county of Albany, leaving the balance 
 e electors in the latter county, and then in 
 ', he vexed question of the bridge was to come 
 up. would not the representative, if from Al- 
 bany county, misrepresent his constituents in 
 Eeaaselaer county? Most assuredly he would. 
 ,id the interests of counties were such as to 
 \4 require a county representation, and not 
 tional representation he could not see 
 how single assembly districts would destroy 
 the central influence of the politicians ; the peo- 
 ple of their county would still have to go to the 
 county seat to transact all their county business 
 to attend the meetings of the local legislature, 
 ; o hold county Conventions. And if the po- 
 litici;>ns residing at the centre, had any undue 
 political influence, it could be as well exer- 
 : rough sepal-ate districts, as any other system 
 of representation. He (Mr. C.) said that if the 
 committee wished to preserve the peace and har- 
 mony ot c Aunties in their social and political re- 
 lation >, they should not set one section at wai 
 wii'h another, as would be done by adopting 
 the single district system, for members of as- 
 sembly. He said it might be well to divide 
 
 the assembly districts of 
 York, whose delegation 
 
 the county of New- 
 had an overwhelm- 
 
 ing influence in the halls of our State Legisla- 
 ture ; but beyond that he would not go. He saic 
 one honorable member had challenged the com- 
 mittee to show how the division of towns anc 
 counties in the formation of election districts 
 would encourage gerymandering. To him (Mr 
 C.) it was self evident that such would be th< 
 result, for if a town or county was to be dividec 
 either of its parts, it would in the presen 
 of political parties, require no great skill t( 
 favor the party who should have the power t< 
 make the apportionment, and to give to sucl 
 jority of the Senators and members o 
 . He (Mr. C.) was satisfied that there 
 ts in the system reported by the stand 
 :;miittee, but he would support it until a 
 one wus presented. If we adopt the single 
 stem, then lie believed no better or 
 I apportionment of Senators could be 
 in the report. And by necessity we must 
 adopt the system of biennial elections of 
 
 ton or the election of a part of the Senators 
 year, in the manner pointed out in the re- 
 . i- \se must limit the term of the office of 
 Sena: or to one year. He repeated that it was 
 very easy to talk about a fair and equal represen- 
 
 ur former Constitutions, and in all the appor- 
 
 ionments of the members of the Legislature and 
 
 f Congrfes, heretofore made, the lines of coun- 
 
 les were preserved as land marks that were not to 
 
 ie infringed upon, and he (Mr. C.) apprehend- 
 
 d the people 'would not sanction any system of 
 
 ipportionment by this Convention of the mem- 
 
 ers of the legislature which contemplated 
 
 in interference with the local government of 
 
 Bounties as now established, or which presented 
 
 reat inducements to fraud in the formation of 
 
 Senate and Assembly districts, or might tend to 
 
 iolation of the representative system of govern- 
 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND, by consent, varied his mo- 
 tion so as to allow the question to be taken di- 
 rectly on the motion to strike out 32. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that upon examining 
 the proposition of the gentleman from Albany 
 (Mr. HARRIS) he found that the deficiencies there 
 were larger by almost 3000 than the report of the 
 committee. Mr. T. went on to refer to particu- 
 lar instances of the kind in the proposition of Mr. 
 H. He insisted that taking any of the members' 
 propositions that had been suggested, that the in- 
 equalities in the apportionment would be as erreat 
 if not greater than in the report presented by the 
 committee. In relation to the largest deficiency 
 presented in that report, the district comprising 
 Suffolk and Queens he would move to add Rich- 
 mond to it, which would not be inconsistent with 
 the principle of forming a district of contiguous 
 territory. Some inequalities must exist under 
 any proposition, and he stood justified by figures 
 in the assertion that the report of the committee 
 did not present greater or even as great deficien- 
 cies as in the plans that were presented by the 
 gentlemen from Albany and Genesee. So, if the 
 object was to get rid ot inequality, gentlemen 
 must fall back on to thirty-two, as the number. _ 
 If it was proposed to increase the Senate for other 
 reasons than to secure equality of representation, 
 that was another question but he had not as yet 
 heard any reason that would induce him to go 
 for it. Mr. T. said that he had taken the pains to 
 look into the constitution of other States, with 
 regard to the relative proportion of the Senate to 
 the Assembly, and he found tiiat many of the 
 States had a far greater disproportion "than we 
 had in this State. Defects, so far as n :;. r< led 
 equality, must always exist. Mr. T. urged -that it 
 could only be avoided by breaking up town and 
 county lines, which would present a state of 
 tilings with which neither the members of the 
 Convention or the people would ;. He 
 
 believed that the inequalities : i,<} i n 
 
 the report, would be found to be much less than 
 in other plans. 
 
 Mr. DANA said that a blind man on heing a <k- 
 cd ti >\v lie was able to vvuiu sab I , ; j,,,. 
 
 he alwa\s put his cane < > e ne 
 
 had labored mure and talked h>s 
 v,i,;,i (he excess and 
 
 stfj.ped. If w 
 
 we taitrht featfe deleimin 
 
 deficiency oJ a system might be-. 
 
 noi i" done ,-o nu\v. 
 go tor any number, 
 
 -I' equality in 
 a;way s he 
 
 but that could 
 'hat he should 
 ve the 
 
 . Care 8ij(,ulcl 
 to regulate (toe excises so that 
 
 I\!i . D. 
 that would 
 
 laiion, but not so'easy to make the apportionmeni live to the dis!;rolu)rlu) 
 
 Without dividing county hues. He said that m j l)U | allun . u.iitss he could see a more rqual reprel 
 
382 
 
 senutiou it) some other plan, he should g>> to 
 thir'y-two. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE was as a principle in favor 
 of retaining the representation both in Senate anc 
 Assembly as it is. He insisted upon equality of rep- 
 re^entation as ne*r as could he obtained withoul 
 dividing county lines. He was opposed to an in- 
 crease of number, but a decided advocate for sin- 
 gle districts. He liked four years better for the 
 term because it was better as a check against 
 hasty and excited legislation. He would have a 
 stable body in the Senate that was not to be influ- 
 enced by local temporary excitements that would 
 not be influenced by anti-masonry in one place, 
 and anti-rent in another. In the ratio of repre- 
 sentation there were counties that were sinking 
 and others that were growing in population. 
 Therefore he insisted that the deficiency should 
 be as against those increasing counties. In mak- 
 ing this ratio, if there must be a surplus this con- 
 sideration should not be overlooked. If there 
 was to be any deficiency, it should be in those 
 places that were growing rapidly. 
 
 Mr. WILLARD moved that the committee rise 
 and report progress. Carried. 
 
 And the Convention adjourned. 
 
 AFTEROON SKSSION. 
 
 Mr. CH ATFIELD moved that the roll be called. 
 
 Forty-seven members present. 
 
 Ultimately 87 members appeared. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved that the Convention again 
 resolve itself into committee of the whole, on 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR'S report, from committee No. 1. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he would make a mo- 
 tion with the view and hope of expediting the 
 business of the Convention. They had been all 
 the morning occupied in discussing merely wheth- 
 er they should have 32 or 39 Senators. Now, 
 they had much better settle this matter before 
 proceeding to dispose of any other portion of this 
 article. He also thought that the reorganization 
 and apportionment of Senate districts, being a 
 single question, had much better be settled in 
 the Convention, where the previous question 
 could be used to put an end to an otherwise in- 
 terminable debate. He was about to make a sug- 
 gestion which, if it met the views of the Conven- 
 tion, he believed would decide this question much 
 sooner than if the present course was continued, 
 and he had no reason to suppose that this article 
 might not be disposed of this afternoon. It would 
 also settle the course which wasjx> be taken with 
 many other reports. He would move to discharge 
 the committee of the whole from the further con- 
 sideration of this article, and recommit it to com- 
 mittee No. 1, and instruct that committee to re- 
 port a section that there shall be 50 Senators 
 the term of office for Senators to be two years 
 to be elected in single districts ; that there be 150 
 Assemblymen, and a new system of apportion- 
 ment in reference to the Senators; and that the 
 Legislature divide the assembly districts so that 
 one assemblyman shall be elected in each. They 
 could then take the question on the highest num- 
 ber of Senators first; and these two questions 
 settled, the rest could easily be got along with. 
 He threw this out as a suggestion merely. He 
 would not commit himself to these numbers 
 neither did he wish to commit any body else. 
 
 Mr. R CAMPBELL, JR. believed this would 
 HOI fnswer the purpose the gentleman (Mr. 
 WORDEN) designs. In either case there will be 
 a difficulty. It would be a very difficult matter to 
 apportion the state. They may commence at the 
 bottom of the state and get along to the middle of it 
 pretty well. But there they would meet with 
 great inequality ; now it is better to pass over this 
 2d section take up the 3d then so divide the 
 counties as to produce the least inequality, and that 
 will settle the number of Senators we are to have. 
 Arrange the districts first, with the greatest equal- 
 ity ; fiom this point the number of Senators ought, 
 at leas' to depend ; and they must calculate con- 
 siderably and fairly on this; divide the districts; 
 fix them, and then find the division by which the 
 t)tst and fairest division and ratio of representation 
 could be secured. All this required careful en- 
 quiry and could be best accomplished in the Con- 
 vention not in committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN agreed that the number of Sen- 
 ators should be first fixed , to this should be done at 
 the start. Cannot we settle here in Conven- 
 tion whether we will have 30, 40, or 50 Senators 
 without a long or tedious debate. The house 
 could decide this in half an hour. He thought 
 for'y would be best but he would put the high- 
 est number first, so as to cover the whole ground. 
 In committee of the whole, the Chairman cannor 
 keep members up to the direct question under 
 discussion; in the house it can be dona by the 
 previous question. 
 
 Mr. CH ATFIELD said that he considered that 
 the time of this Convention should not betaken 
 up in the discussion of the question of apportion- 
 ing the State into Senate districts. A month 
 might be expended in this way without the least 
 benefit. This had better be left to the Legisla- 
 ture who were to follow us. He was a member 
 of the Legislature some time back, when the 
 State had to be divided into Congressional dis- 
 ricts, and six weeks weie consumed here upon 
 hat question alone. It was alvvavs a question of 
 nuch difficulty. He moved to amend the motion 
 of Mr. WORDEN, so as to recommit the 2d and 5th 
 sections of the report only, throwing out those 
 which referred to the apportionment, that is the 
 2d and 5th sections, and then proceed to discuss 
 he balance in committee of the whole- 
 Mr. WORDEN accepted this amendment, and 
 noved to re-commit sections 2 and 5 to commii- 
 ee No., with instructions to report a new ratio, 
 &c. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that he would strike 
 
 ut the ratio altogether. He did not want the 
 
 committee to setlle the apportionment. We 
 
 hould decide on the number of Senators and 
 
 Assemblymen and leave the Legislature to arrange 
 
 he apportionment. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved to increase the Senators 
 o 40 ; and to have 128 Assemblymen. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that there should be 
 48 senators. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said they had better leave it in 
 lank, and then the gentleman from Ontario (Mr. 
 VORDEN) could move afterwards to fill it with 
 .ny number he pleased. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said he wanted time to reflect 
 >n this ; and particularly on the number of sena- 
 ors and the districts: he suggested to Mr, WORDED 
 
383 
 
 that he should withdraw his motion for the pre- 
 sent, and allow the committee of the whole to 
 pass over the 2d and 5th sections, and to take up 
 the 6th section of the report, which had no con- 
 nection with the subject of apportionment, upon 
 which he and others who had spoken to him on 
 the subject, were not prepared to act, this being 
 one of the last reports that had been presented to 
 the Convention. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN agreed to this, and withdrew 
 his motion ; but he would tell his colleague (Mr. 
 NICHOLAS) that unless the committee got on a 
 little faster than they had done, he would renew 
 it to-morrow. Many of these questions ought to 
 be decided in Convention and never go into com- 
 mittee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS then moved to go into com- 
 mittee of the whole and take up the 6th section. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole on the report of committee No. 1, Mr. 
 PATTERSON in the Chair. 
 
 ON THE ENUMERATION. 
 
 The report was passed over to the 6th section 
 which was read, as follows : 
 
 6. An enumeration of the inhabitants ef the State shall 
 be taken unler the direction of the Legislature in the year 
 one thousand eight hundred and fifty-five and at the end of 
 every ten yeais^thereafter; and the said districts shall be 
 so altered by the Legislature at the first session after the 
 return oi every enumeration that each Senate district shall 
 contain, as nearly as may be, an equal number of inhabit- 
 ants, excluding aliens, paupers and persons of color not 
 taxed; and shall remain unalterrd until the return of ano 
 ther ^numeration, and shall at all times consist of contigu- 
 ous territory, and no county shall be divided in the forma- 
 tion of a :->eiate district, except such county shall be enti- 
 tled to two or more Senators. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD wanted to know upon what 
 grounds the committee had introduced the words', 
 "excluding aliens, paupers, and persons of color not 
 taxed ?" Why were they to be excluded from the 
 basis of representation. He should likp to know ; 
 and to get at tr is point, he moved to strike these 
 words out of the section. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that question was very 
 fully discussed in committee, and a proposition 
 was there made to insert only the words " aliens, 
 and persons of d>]or not taxed,'' and this met 
 with a iiood deal of favor, but the words were 
 found in the present Constitution, and although 
 the proposition to strike out found some favor 
 they were allowed to remain There was a con- 
 sideration in favor of retaining it, in the fact that 
 in the city of New-York, where there were large 
 numbers of aliens landed every year, an influx ot 
 these persons might make a difference of one 
 member of Assembly, and the next year that same 
 population of aliens might be scattered over the 
 country. There were some rights of proper'.y 
 concerned in the representation of aliens, and but 
 for the reason stated, those words would not have 
 been retained. Persons of color not taxed and 
 paupers have certain rights ard might be con- 
 sidered entitled to representation; they a're fit 
 subjects of legislation, and ought perhaps be 
 taken into the account. The committee had left 
 this for the Convention to do as it pleased about 
 it. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD did not consider this a good 
 reason for retaining the language of the present 
 Constitution. The fluctuation of the population 
 
 of New-York city was affected in a much greater 
 degree on the commerce of that city and on the 
 maritime people, who are constantly changing, 
 than by the aliens arriving annually. He believ- 
 ed that the basis of representation should be upon 
 the entire population. The tax paying class, 
 whether aliens or not should be included in the 
 basis of representation. There were aliens in 
 other parts of the country besides New-York, who 
 were interested in the basis of representation, 
 and he hoped they would not be excluded from 
 partaking of their rights in this matter. And 
 why should they exclude persons of color from 
 the basis of representation ? They had rights to 
 be respected. Aliens who hold real estate. The 
 aliens are a greater producing class than the na- 
 tive born. Again, paupers have a right to vote, , 
 and ought to be included in their basis of repre- 
 sentation. Because a man has been unfortunate, 
 is he to be thus excluded ? He trusted not. He 
 also saw no reason why the representation should 
 not be based also on the man of color on the 
 whole people. His county would be one of the 
 least benefitted by making this class the basis ; 
 so he spoke from no disinterested motives, but 
 from a sense of justice to all. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN sai'i he hoped the Convention 
 would do justice to all parties concerned. That 
 they would take as a basis for the formation of 
 Senate districts the actual residents who formed 
 the natural basis. If they departed from this, an 
 arbitrary basis would be formed, and the greater 
 the departure the more arbitrary and unjust it 
 would become. Suppose New York should gain 
 a member in the Assembly by including aliens 
 who may riot have fixed residences, is that a good 
 reason for depriving otherportions of the Staie of 
 their just rights rights which they ate clearly 
 entitled to? The aliens in Kings county are 
 nearly all permanent ai.d constant residents and 
 they are continually becoming naturalized cit- 
 izens. Many o( them have resided there five 
 years, and are men of property, many are females 
 who seldom become naturalized. When emi- 
 grating trom Europe they are not landed there, 
 and consequently do not so assist in swelling the 
 population. There are other portions of the State 
 in the same position. The General Government 
 in fixing the basis of representation includes ail 
 the inhabitants, thus following the just and correct 
 rule, and he also found that the Stales who have 
 lately formed new constitutions, including even 
 Rhode Island, do the same. Under these cncum. 
 stances, he hoped that the Convention in founinK 
 a Consiilution for this State, tor iVar the city of 
 New York might gain a little by including alien*, 
 would not saciificea just and correct principle; 
 one by whicti the county ot Kings would have 
 14,000 of h-T natural population obliterated from 
 the basis ol representation, and one which would 
 also operate nnj'isily in other places. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that it was proper for 
 him to state that lie had proposed to the commit- 
 tee to sirike out the words " paupers and persons 
 of color riot taxed," so as to exclude only aliens 
 from the basis of representation. These were his 
 own personal views. He thought it was proper to 
 include paupers and persons of color .not taxed. 
 Many who are paupers have been in better cir- 
 cu stances, have been useful and respectable cit- 
 
384 
 
 izens; many of them are voters, and he could see no 
 good reason why their misfortune should exclude 
 them from being taken into account, in settling 
 the basis of representation, or why this unjust dis- 
 tinction should be made; and as to persons of co- 
 lor not taxed, he said they constituted a portion 
 of the population who are for the most part per- 
 manent residents, who had personal rights and 
 interests to be secured and protected in common 
 with others, and might properly be included; 
 they were so included in many other states, and 
 in some of the southern states slaves constituted a 
 portion of the basis of representation. The honor- 
 able gentleman from Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIELD,) 
 had inquired what reasons were assigned in the 
 Convention of 1821 for this provision of the Con- 
 stitution. Mr. T. said in answer to that inquiry 
 he would say, that he believed the chief reason 
 assigned was that without it the large cities, and 
 particularly New York, would have an undue 
 share of representation. He stated that it appear- 
 ed by the last census that the whole number of 
 aliens in the state was 164,717, and of these New- 
 York had 60,940 ; there were 42,321 persons ot co- 
 lor; of these New- York had 12,658 ; and 971 r OS 
 paupers, of which New-York had 1957; making 
 a total of 75,561, of these people, in New- York 
 alone. This was more than one-third of the 
 whole, and would give that city three additional 
 members of Assembly and one Senator. This po- 
 pulation to some extent were more fluctuating and 
 'unsettled than others ; a large number of them 
 are annually landed in the city of New- York, 
 many of them remaining there for a time, uncer- 
 tain as to future residence, and it may so happen 
 that an unusual number might be found there at 
 the time of taking a census, who might be em- 
 braced in the enumeration, and perhaps in a short 
 time be scattered over the state or in other states ; 
 and many land in the country and remain a while, 
 who do not intend to make this their permanent 
 residence. The facilities for naturalization are 
 so easy that it is at all times available for such as 
 desire it to become naturalized -citizens, and if 
 they decline or neglect to avail themselves of this 
 privilege, the presumption is that they feel not 
 that interest in our institutions common to our 
 citizens, or that they do not intend to remain per- 
 manently among us. And thesefore it was but 
 proper to exclude them from the basis of repre- 
 sentation ; they have no interest in our laws, and 
 never will have. It would be unjust to include 
 them. He did not at all object to paupers and 
 persons of color ; these classes are included in 
 the basis of congressional representation, but for 
 very different reasons. To embrace this popula- 
 tion in the basis of representation, so large a pro- 
 portion of which is found in the city of New- 
 York, from causes which would be permanent in 
 their operation, would give that city an undue 
 share of representation, which would be unequal 
 and unjust to other parts of the State. For these 
 reasons Mr. T. said he was opposed to striking 
 out the word aliens. 
 
 Mr. 0'CONOR adverted to the elemental 
 principles on which this doctrine of representa- 
 tion is based. We had established as a basis, not 
 the electors but the inhabitants, the persons sub- 
 ject to the law, who were to be governed with- 
 in the district which elected the representative. 
 
 We have included all the non-voting classes 
 and with great propriety; because the electors 
 taking part in the government in the particular 
 district, had charge over them, exercising all the 
 duty of government in relation to them. Aliens 
 ought to be included with the rest, because all 
 the burthens of their government, so far as these 
 burthens were of a local character, such as police 
 expenses, &c. fell upon the electors ofthe district. 
 The gentleman from Onondaga (Mr. TAYLOR) 
 had treated this subject, as if there was an effort, 
 by including aliens in the basis of representa- 
 tion, to give them a representation here. This 
 was not so, unless the gentleman meant to say 
 that aliens were allowed to vote in New- York. 
 The gentleman's argument proceeded upon the 
 ground that aliens might be naturalized, and that 
 if they neglected so to do, they should not have a 
 representation. This is true, but it proved noth- 
 ing here, since no person proposed to allow them 
 a representation. It was the electors of the dis- 
 trict within which they resided, who claimed a 
 voice in the government corresponding with the 
 population of the- district. The large number of 
 aliens in the district of New York, imposed heavy 
 burthens upon the electors to maintain the 
 law over them. In all the districts of the state 
 there was a class of non-voting inhabitants inclu- 
 ded in the basis of representation lunatics and 
 felons, as well as women and children. Again, 
 if you adopted the electors, instead of inhabitants, 
 as the basis of representation, you would do toN. 
 York measureably another great piece of injus- 
 tice for there resided many families, the heads 
 of which were often permanently absent, such as 
 sea-faring men and others. In other words the 
 relative proportion of males and females in New- 
 York and the rural portions of the state, would 
 show a large disproportion of the latter against 
 New York. Without claiming for aliens a right 
 to representation for they had no right but 
 claiming for the electors of New-York a right of 
 representation corresponding with the burthens 
 cast on them he insisted that aliens should be 
 included in the population which was to form 
 the basis of representation. As to paupers, we 
 in New- York had a still stronger right for in ad- 
 dition to the burthen of sustaining a police to re- 
 strain them from violations of law T , we had the 
 burthen of actually maintaining them and they 
 could not be deprived of the right of voting, if 
 any exclusion whatever was to be introduced, 
 paupers clearly should not be excluded, and so 
 as to persons of color not taxed. The latter v>\uv 
 excluded because they did not exercise the elec- 
 tive franchise. In that respect they were in the 
 condition of aliens, and all the burthens incident 
 to the existence of one class in a district were 
 incident to the existence ofthe other. And the dis- 
 trict had just the same right to a voice in the coun- 
 cils of state, in proportion to the number thus char- 
 ged upon it, as it had to a voice in proportion to 
 the number of non-voting women and children 
 in it. Again, persons^ of color not taxed, he in- 
 sisted, ought not to be excluded from the basis of 
 representation any more than women and chil- 
 dren. They were equally members of society 
 equally burthens upon the electors. He objected 
 to this exclusion because it recognized a dci: 
 that had bfrt) rpp"d ; a' 
 
385 
 
 taxes was the circumstance which gave a man a 
 rUht to be represented. We had gone far beyond 
 the doctrine ot those early days in the struggle for 
 civil liberty, when it was claimed that taxation 
 and repreBen'ation ought to go together We 
 now permit persons to vote who not only did 
 not contribute to the public burthens, but who 
 were actually maintained by the state. Why 
 should we preserve in I he Constitution an appli- 
 cation of the rule, alter having abolished the rule 
 itsell? This was a strong additional reason for 
 striking oui from the exception " persons of color 
 not taxed." He regarded it as a blot upon our 
 Constitution. He took it also to be the last de. 
 gree of injustice to say to New- York, because you 
 are so circumstanced ihat you are burthened with 
 the greatest number of paupers, whom you must 
 admit to an equality with you in the exercise of 
 the electoral righ', still you shall have all the 
 burthens consequent upon their bein^ among you 
 and yet you shall not be allowed a voice in the 
 councils of the state, corresponding with their 
 number as a part of your population. He suppos- 
 ed however, there would be little objection to 
 striking out paupers and persons of color not tax- 
 ed, because it would give but a slight advantage 
 to New- York over other parts of the state. But 
 on the subject of aliens he anticipated more diffi- 
 culty. And on a question like this, the city of 
 New- York being mainly interested in it, her del- 
 egation stood here perfectly at the mercy of the 
 rest of the state. They had no power but that of 
 expostulation the power of the weak against the 
 strong. But he did hope that whatever jealousy 
 might exist in reference to the represention of 
 the city here, the great and just principle which 
 he had e ought to maintain, would prevail and 
 that was that the electors of each district should 
 have a voice in the councils of the state in pro- 
 portion to the number of inhabitants in each dis- 
 trict, and the consequent burthens that fall upon 
 them without reference to the question whether 
 they were electors or not. Again, he contended 
 that the aliens in question were not transient per- 
 sons for transient persons were not included in 
 the census. He did deny but there were some 
 resident aliens who doing business in New- York 
 might be included in the census, who yet were 
 properly speaking transient persons, or foreign 
 agents, &c. but thai WHS an extremely sma 1 num- 
 ber of persons. The class of aliens included in 
 the census was mainly composed of persons as per- 
 manently domiciliated here as the natives. Persons 
 awaiting the five year's probationary term beinre 
 natmalization entered into it, their wives and 
 their chiklren, not unfrequently very numerous, 
 entered into it. Women ot foreign birth perma- 
 nently settling m the country scarcely ever be- 
 came naturalized. Women do not u-ually think 
 of political matters or of assuming or putting off 
 na'ion.,1 character. These, even when they in- 
 termarried with imtive citizens, remained aliens, 
 and were included in that class- To exclude all 
 the>e prisons fiom the basis of representation, 
 was unjust and improper. He did not claim are. 
 pre entaiion lor iliens, but merely that they should 
 be included in the basis ot representation. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said the gentleman had based 
 his argument on the supposition that he (Mr. T.) 
 went for excluding aliens hereto prevent their be 
 
 25 
 
 ing represented. His position wis Hie) should 
 nof form a part of the basis of representation. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR did not doubt Ihe gentleman 
 meant to present this matter properly. Mr C. 
 thought that the matter in which he presented it, 
 tended to produce an impression that those who 
 went for striking out, wished to secure for aliens 
 some voice in our legislative halls and thai he 
 wished to repudiate. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that it by striking out this 
 provision, it would result advantageously to the 
 persons named, he would be inclined to go for if. 
 But he thought on the contrary it would result in an 
 encroachementon the political rights of those per- 
 sons. All conceded that the true basis of represen- 
 tation was the electoral body-the voters. And why? 
 Because they were the responsible body resoon- 
 sible for the acts of their representatives. That 
 being a cardinal principle, we should as near as 
 possible have reference to this body as the basis 
 of representation. The gentleman conceded 
 that to strike out this proposition would be to re- 
 ult beneficially to the city of New York. This 
 population in that district was as one to six 
 in the rural districts from one to thitty. 
 So it would enable the city upon that accidental 
 basis to have a voice in the councils of the State 
 superior when compared to the agricultural coun- 
 ties. The voting people in the city was as as one 
 to six, whereas in the agricultural counties it is 
 less than one to five. The city of New York in 
 that respect enjoys greater advantages than the 
 country. But the most serious objection that he 
 had to it was that it was radically wrong in prin- 
 ciple. It raised a barrier calculated to exclude 
 these persons who of right ought to enjoy it. As 
 a general thing, he held that all men who submit 
 themselves to the government under which they 
 live, with an honest intention, ought to have a 
 voice through the ballot box. Every intelligent 
 man should enjoy that privilege. But if you en- 
 able them to be the basis of representation 
 then you build up an interest to exclude them. 
 Take for instance, the federal Constitution. The 
 fact of making the slaves the basis of representa- 
 tion was in itself an almost unconquerable barrier 
 to the emancipation of the slaves. These per- 
 sons who thereby enjoy this exclusive power will 
 not extend it to those to whom it is denied. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD asked it the black popula- 
 tion of the north were not the basis of represen- 
 tation in the Congress and if Slavery was abo- 
 lished, the blacks would not continue also to form 
 the basis of that representation there ? 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that might be true, but it 
 found no good ground of argument in the view in 
 which he was considering this question. This 
 very exclusion, and their being the basis of rep- 
 resentation, without being voters, tended to ex- 
 clude the people. To apply the principle 60,- 
 000 voters in New York send here 16 members. 
 Give them a right to send twenty on the 70,000 
 tha' are now disfranchised, and they will not 
 move a step towards the extension of a participa- 
 tion in these rights to those 70,000. Inasmuch 
 as New York has the honor of making the first 
 attempt at excluding aliens from the rights of ci- 
 tizenship, he would not introduce any principle 
 here that 'would excite that feeling, to raise 
 again the hydra-head of persecution to exclude 
 
380 
 
 again those persons from citizenship. It would 
 have the effect, to make this sixty thousand use 
 their exertions to prevent the seventy thousand 
 from uniting with them to elect the four additional 
 members. He would amend this, so as to make 
 the basis the electoral body at all events, he 
 would not put a provision in the Constitution that 
 would exclude any portion from the rights of ci- 
 tizenship. Such would be the effects of this pro- 
 position. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said this part of the article which 
 proposed to exclude persons of color not taxed, 
 carried out a doctrine which we did not recognize 
 in this age. It was the qualified electors ef the 
 State who constituted the government who com- 
 prised about one-fifth of the whole. They ex- 
 cluded entirely the voice of the rest in the govern- 
 ment. In that view of the subject, to carry out 
 the principle, those electors should every one 
 have an equal voice in the government. There- 
 fore by giving to a particular district, who has a 
 large class of population, not voters, an equal 
 voice with a district who has an equal number 
 that are voters, it would be unjust to the last dis- 
 trict. He was willing to do equal justice to all, 
 but in that view of the case, one elector in New 
 York has a greater voice than one in the country. 
 No matter whether the man had a greater burthen 
 of taxation or not, for if that was the ground, it 
 would be the representation of property. That idea 
 was exploded in our government. If aliens and 
 persons of color, whether taxed or not, who have 
 no right to vote, are included, he saw no way to 
 escape from the fact that the government was re- 
 solved into a representative of property, or taxa- 
 tion. If we adopt the principle that one elector 
 has an equal voice with another, then we must 
 strike out the whole of this section, and substi- 
 tute qualified electors. Paupers should not be 
 excluded, for they are voters, and their poverty 
 was but their misfortune. He could see nothing 
 wrong, in not allowing this non-voting popula- 
 tion to constitute the basis of representation. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN considered his question of some 
 importance as to the principle involved: He un- 
 derstood the basis of representation to be that 
 which was represented. In accordance with 
 this principle, he went for the article with the 
 exception of the word paupers. Neither aliens, 
 persons of color not taxed, or paupers, were re- 
 presentatives in this body. The voting popula- 
 tion were the legitimate basis of representation. 
 The females and children are represented through 
 their natural protectors and guardians. There- 
 fore he was not against the provision that the basis 
 of representation should include women and child- 
 ren. But who was the representative of the alien 
 on this floor ? He had none. Twenty thousand 
 aliens upon this basis, would give that city an ad- 
 ditional representative. Who would he repre- 
 sent ? No one, and New-York would have 
 one member more than other counties. So with 
 the colored population. They had no claim in 
 the representation. The pauper stands on a dif- 
 ferent ground he may well be supposed to have 
 been a valuable member of society who has ser- 
 ved his country, but no man was exempt from 
 misfortune. They were voters, and represented 
 here, and ought to form the basis of representation. 
 Including the aliens in the basis of representation, 
 
 he agreed with the gentleman from Ontario, (Mr, 
 WORDEN) only riveted their chains which 
 bound them down and would prevent them the 
 longer from becoming citizens. He should go- 
 for striking out the word pauper, but for retain- 
 ing the alien and colored persons not taxed. 
 
 Mr. MUHPHY said that we should keep dis- 
 tinctly in mind this distinction, that the question 
 was one as to the basis of representation "and not 
 as to representation itself. He would confine hi 
 observations lathe reasons which had been urged 
 in favor of the plan proposed by the committee. 
 He had waited to hear, in answer to the inquiry 
 ol the gentleman from Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIELD,") 
 such reasons from that committee, but none had 
 been given except that of precedent; but when 
 pushed a iittl. iiirther, the honorable chairman, 
 (Mr TAYLOR,) had admitted that he did not re- 
 gard the exclusion which it was now sought to 
 strike out as entirely proper, and that he himself 
 was in favor of striking out " paupers and persons 
 of^color not taxed," but of retaining the exclusion 
 f aliens from the basis of representation. But 
 though the committee had riot favored us with 
 an argument in support of their report, gentle- 
 men not of the committee had come to the res- 
 cue and endeavored to sustain it. For himself 
 he regarded it as a question of might against 
 righl. He believed it was a foregone conclusion 
 that the basis of representation in thoee coun- 
 tries where there were large cities, was to be 
 reduced in order to strip them of their legiti- 
 mate influence and power in these halls. The 
 gentleman from Herkimer who has just takea 
 his seat (Mr. LOOMIS,) has earnestly advoca- 
 ted this exclusion, on the ground that it is neces- 
 sary in order to preserve an equality of power 
 in the electo-rs, that is, if he understood him, to 
 y,ive to each elector the same influence in the 
 government, as anj other may have ; and con- 
 tended that if aliens were included in the basis 
 of representation,, each voter in New. York, for 
 insfance, would in consequence of the enlarged 
 basis, have a power, as compared with the voter 
 in the country, of six to five. He (Mr. M.) would 
 not deny this ; but he called upon that gentle- 
 man to go on and carry out his own principle. 
 If equality of power in the voter were to be the 
 test, it would be found that as great inequalities 
 now exist among the counties, other than New 
 York, as would exist between New York and the 
 most favored of the rural districts. He had dur- 
 ing the remarks of the gentleman, hastily run 
 over the tables of population in some of the other 
 counties, to see how the principle would work. 
 He had before him the abstract of the census fur- 
 nished the last legislature by the Secretary of 
 State, and from that he made his calculations. 
 He regretted that this abstract had not been print- 
 ed for the use of the Convention, as the tables 
 appended to the report of the committee were en- 
 tirely useless on this question. He found, then, 
 that in Niagara and Erie and perhaps others, the 
 proportion of power in the elector was as com- 
 pared with Delaware, Columbia, Dutchess and 
 Putnam, for instance, as five and three-tenths to 
 four and live-tenths, or thereabouts. Now if the 
 gentleman was truly desirous of preserving elec- 
 toral equality, why did he not carry out his pria- 
 ciple, and seek to correct this disparity also ? 
 
387 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS interposed to say that these facts 
 only showed more strongly the correctness of his 
 principle. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY turned. He said he did not 
 complain ot the gealleman's principle, but of the 
 partial maniuM in which he applied it. The 
 tables show that as great dinVrences exist in the 
 lelauve power of voters in different sections of 
 the country, as between the cities and average of 
 the country. He therefore could not subscribe to 
 the reasoning of the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 unless he would give his principle a general ap- 
 plication. The gentleman from Ontario (Mr. 
 WORDEN) had also undertaken to justify the ex- 
 clusion. He asserts that the basis of representa- 
 tion is the electoral body. This is not so. The 
 old constitution of 1 777 did so provide. But no\\ 
 the whoie population, including electors, women, 
 minors, idiots, lunatics, and all other residents, 
 except aliens, paupers and persons of color not 
 taxed, constitutes the basis. The gentleman was 
 therefore wrong in the premises of his argument; 
 and the gentleman from Columbia had partially 
 endorsed the same erroneous view. Now, if wo- 
 men, children, lunatics and other non-voting per 
 sons, are admitted in the basis of representation, 
 he asked on what principle can we exclude aliens, 
 paupers and persons of color not taxed ? Are not 
 the latter as much the objects of government 
 as the former? Are they not as much the 
 subjects of local protection in the community in 
 which they live as the other ? For his part he 
 conceived it great injustice to require from that 
 community to extend to them all the advantages 
 of their protection, and then to deprive that com- 
 munity of the reciprocal advantage which they 
 ought to derive froM them in the direction of the 
 government o the state. Some gentlemen con- 
 sidered the alien population a curse instead of a 
 blessing, and as a burden upon the society in which 
 they live, filling up the alms houses, yet at the 
 same time, they are unwilling to let that society 
 defend itself in the only way in which it can do 
 so that is, by a due representation in the state 
 councils. The gentleman from Ontario had ad 
 vanced another reason of a most extraordinary cha 
 racter for him. He said that he wished to protect 
 the rights of this unenfranchised portion of the 
 population. He would, if he could, let aliens vote 
 even without the present time of probation for 
 naturalization ; but as he could not do that, he 
 wished to protect them from the rest of the com- 
 munity in which they live. And for what reason ? 
 Because if the other part of the community were 
 allowed more representatives, they would exer- 
 cise a power which they would be loth to give 
 up, and would have an interest to prevent the 
 enfranchisement of aliens. In this the gentle- 
 man displayed an extraordinary regard for our 
 foreign population; but he thought he had over- 
 shot tne mark. His zeal was too warm; for at 
 the same time that he manifested a regard for the 
 non-voting aliens, he was guilty of gross injus- 
 tice towards the naturalized citizen. He forgot 
 that in those communities where these non-vo. 
 ting aliens resided, there was, for that very reason, 
 necessarily the largest proportion of adopted cit- 
 izens. The former, therefore, were in a great 
 degree, in the power of their own countrymen 
 and friends, if those communities would have any 
 
 power at all which he (Mr. M.) could not ad- 
 mit to keep them in their unenfranchised state. 
 The argument of the gentleman was simply this, 
 hat the power in the hands of the adopted citi- 
 zens would be in the hands of fratricides, turned 
 against their own brethren. 
 
 As to the precedent alluded to by the chair- 
 man of the committe, contained in the present 
 constitution, he did not consider it of any weight* 
 rle had not looked lo see how it came to be in- 
 roduced. Considering it wrong in principle, it 
 :iad no force with him. Yet if we are to be re- 
 erred to precedent, there was one much strong- 
 er in favor of his position, and that was the 
 3asis of representation in the Congress of the 
 U. States There, no distinction prevails, but the 
 whole population, of every and whatever descrip- 
 tion, is included. Now, he asked, what proprie- 
 ty is there in adopting a different basis for your 
 State representation, from that fixed for the fede- 
 ral representation ? To his mind, there was none. 
 If there were any, it would be to reverse the dis- 
 tinction, because it was the State government on- 
 ly that took cognizance of our internal and local 
 affairs. He had thus briefly replied to the argu- 
 ments adduced in favor of the report of the com- 
 mittee, without any expectation of changing that 
 report. As he had before observed, the question 
 appeared to him to be made here, one of the 
 strong against the weak. The numerical interest 
 was against the amendment. He had arisen only 
 from a sense of duty to that constituency which 
 had sent him here ; and he could not allow a pro- 
 vision to pass which deprived the county he in 
 part represented, of its just influence in the legis- 
 lature, without raising his voice against it. The 
 decision, however, rested with the Convention. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY felt himself bound to ad- 
 vocate equal rights and so far as he could he would 
 extend them to every man. But this proposition 
 to get an additional representative from New 
 York to vote to crush this class more and more, 
 would be like reaching out one hand while you 
 stab them with the other. That he would not 
 consent to. He would go as far as any man to 
 raise up these oppressed people, but not to add 
 strength to the hand that was crushing them to 
 the dust. 
 
 Mr. STOW said if he should vote for this mo- 
 tion, he must confess it would be from pure, una- 
 dulterated selfishness. There were in his coun- 
 ty a large number of Indians, and it might be very 
 gratifying to make these a part of the basis of rep- 
 resentation. He could conceive of no other rea- 
 son for favoring the motion, nor did he believe 
 there was any. For one he did not desire to 
 place himself upon record upon such a reason: 
 
 On motion of Mr. TILDEN the committee rose 
 and reported progress. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (42nd day,) July 23. 
 
 Prayer by Dr. KENNEDY. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL presented a memorial from the 
 people of Rochester, assembled in convention 
 there, relative to (be canals, and the unfinished 
 public works of this State. It was referred and 
 printed. 
 
388 
 
 The judge ot the 1st circuit presented a report | APPORTIONMENT, TENURE AND DUTIES AND 
 with the amount of his fees. COMPENSATION OF THE LEGISLATURE 
 
 Mr. PATTt RSON resumed the chair. 
 The CHAIR stated the question to be on sfrik- 
 ing out of section 6th the words, * excluding 
 aliens, paupers and persons of color not tax-^d." 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND . pposed the amendment to 
 . The proceds of lands belonging to this State, ex 
 cepi such parts tueieuf as m ,y be re.-ei ved or appropriated 
 te public uie, or ceded to the United States, which shall 
 
 EDUCATION-SCHOOL FUNDS, &c. &c. 
 Mr. NICOLL, from committee No. 12, .submit- 
 ted l he following report : 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 hereaiter be sold or disposed of, together with the lund de- 
 
 Strike oui iht>8e words. 
 
 Mr- CHATF1ELD moved to strike out the 
 word "paupers" first. He wished the question 
 
 invested and to preserve from loss or waste all moneys I the word 
 
 arising from the sales of the said lands in the said first 
 
 section mentioned, and all moneys now belonging or 
 
 which hereaiter may belong to tke said Common School 
 
 Funl. 
 
 persons of color." 
 
 nominated the Common school Kuud, and all moneys fe be taken on that separately; and then leave 
 
 htrealter appropriated by law to the use and benefit of the the rest of the amendment to be tested bv ihe 
 
 aid fund, shall be and remain a perpetual lund, the inter- committee afterwards. 
 
 est of which shall be inviolably appropriated and applied iu_ Tv/rn-DUTo u <. T 
 
 to the supj ort ot common schools throughout the Sta;e. _ Mn MUK ^i* rose, but gave way to loud cries 
 
 ^ 2. It shall be the duty ol the Legislature to pass such of " question." 
 
 laws as may be necessary to keep at uli times securely | The question was then taken on striking out 
 
 e word " paupers." 
 This was carried ayes 65, noes 32. 
 Mr. BERGEN moved to strike out " aliens and 
 Mr. B. said this convention 
 leans endeavor to do what is just 
 
 wi.h this sta'te, upon the terms specified in an act of C. n- 1 ana ri g nc - *ty adopting this amendment, he 
 gross of the Uuited States entitled, "An act to regulate the thought it could be clearly demonstrated thatjus- 
 deposites of the public moneys, approved the 23d ot June, tice would be far more nearly approached, than it 
 1836," after retaining so much thereo as may from time to ,,i j UK ^ 
 
 time be necessary to make good any deficiency in the prin W uld , be b ? adopting the provisions in the re- 
 cipal, shall hereaft r be inviolably applied to the purposes P ort ot the committee. I o do this, for lllustra- 
 of Common School education; subject to the limitation.- tion, he would take for a basis either the propo- 
 and reitrictioHi in the next : succeeding sections contained. s i t i on reported by the committee, or the electo- 
 
 o^n,^^ 
 
 mentioned, lor terms of years, which have nut yet expired, tano. In forming districts, he supposed that no 
 hah continue to be made until tne ex, iration of said terms one would question that justice required them to 
 
 to be annually paid over to the Literature Fund^hah *be" should remain so, and this equality exist at every 
 o paid in the year one thousand eight hundred and fort>- election. In practice, he admitted it could not 
 seven and not afterwards ; and alter that period all exist- well be carried out, without disregarding coun- 
 
 out of the revenues in the said preceding third smu!n operation of which would burden the people with 
 
 mentioned, until otherwise ordered by the Legislature. considerable additional expense. This course, 
 
 The committee recommend the following to be for one > he believed to be impracticable; and 
 
 submitted to the people separately: therefore he did not advocate it. All must ad- 
 
 (56. The legislature shall, at its first session after the mit ' howeve ^' that the nearer we arrived to it, 
 
 adoption ol this Constitution, and from time to time there- the greater the amount of justice would be done, 
 
 fer, as shall be ne"sary. provide by jaw for the free By our present system a census was taken and 
 
 education and instruction of every child between the ages rlictviftc fived pverv ten vpars In rnr>pni-]n/*/ 
 
 ct four and sixteen years, whose pa, en's, guardians or J 8 *, J7, <. 7,?3L- sequence 
 
 employers shall be residents of the State, in the Common * the impracticability of forming these districts 
 
 Schools now established, or which shall hereafter be es- exactly equal at the time of their formation, and 
 
 tublished therein. The expense olsucn education and in- so as to continue the equality until the next enu- 
 
 the same manner^may be provided by la^forThVSquT- rived at ** near as possible, and that in doing this 
 
 dation ol town and county charges. the average population of the district for the term, 
 
 HENKY NICOLL, Chairman. should be taken into consideration. A district 
 
 Mr. NICOLL stated that it was due to the nieui- containing a present population of 60,000, which 
 bers of thb committee, in whose behalf he had former enumerations show us to be in a stationary 
 presented the report just read, to say that some state, is not entitled to the same representation 
 difference of opinion existed in the committee on with one which is rapidly progressing in popula- 
 the subject maiter referred to them, and that pro- tion. The rule for forming the basis should be 
 bably at some future day a substitute lor a part of one which would work most justly during the 
 the plan might be offered by one of the committee, whole ten years. By including aliens and per- 
 He wished it t be understood that when the re- sons of color not taxed in the representative basis, 
 port should be under consideration in the Conven the Convention will arrive nearer to what equity 
 tion, the members of the committee would feel requires than by excluding them, for these class- 
 themselves at perfect liberty to withhold their es are mostly found in our growing cities and vil- 
 aupport from their report, should it in their judg- lages, where a demand for labor exists to prepare 
 ment appear proper to do so. the surface and erect dwellings for the inhabi- 
 
 The report was then leftrred to the committee tants. That they are to be found in such locali- 
 of the whole, and ordered to be printed. ties no one can well deny, the census proves it. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of Now although the effect of including them would 
 the whole on the report of the commiitee No. 1, be a small present advantage to these growing 
 relative to the places, yet the advantage obtained would as a gen- 
 
 eral rule fall short of giving them what their ave- 
 J rage population for the term between the differ- 
 
389 
 
 ent enumerations entitle them to. Kings, for in- 
 stance, now has three members ; if a census should 
 be taken at the end of five years she would be at 
 least entitled to four, at the end of ten years to 
 five. Bv including the persons proposed she 
 would at the taking of the census obtain four 
 members, which at the best would not be more 
 than her fair average. It would most probably be 
 short of it. He hoped therefore that the Conven- 
 tion would see the propriety of including these 
 classes; that they would take the natural in- 
 stead of the artificial basis proposed by the com- 
 mittee; that they would take the inhabitants, the 
 basis adopted by the general government, and by 
 the States which have formed new Constitutions. 
 
 Mr. TOWN^END rose to correct an error he 
 had just lallen into. He had misunderstood 'he 
 question upon which a vote had just been taken; 
 he had supposed it 10 be upon an amendment to 
 exclude paupers from voting and not aliens and 
 persons ol color. He was glad to find himself in 
 a small minority in voting against the motion. 
 He had already expressed a regret that those 
 committees which had in charge tt.e subject of the 
 powers which are to be granted to muni, ipal cor- 
 porations, had not brought in their reports before 
 this; because he believed that when that matter 
 was settled, this one, as compared with the sub- 
 ject of these corporations would be comparatively 
 insignificant The cities ot New York, Brooklyn, 
 Albany, Buffalo, &c. contained a large per cent- 
 age, as high as 20, 25 and 16, of foreigners, and 
 would desire to have their just rights by includ- 
 ing them in Ihe basis of representation ; and he 
 hoped a liberal teelmg would prevent their being 
 deprived oi ih se advantages, because other sec 
 tioQi ot Ihe s:ate were without them. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS followed in favor ot allowing the 
 representation to be based upon all the inhabitants 
 . paupers, aliens, and persons of color not taxed at 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that he alwavs rejoiced 
 when be saw his friend (Mr. MORRIS) get up 
 and express his great regard lor the rights of the 
 people, for he always exhibited so much universal 
 love and respect for the rights ol the people; and 
 in this, he harmonized with his own feelings. 
 He only hoped this feeling would be exhibited 
 when a motion should be made to amend the re. 
 port ot committee No. 4, by striking out the word 
 "white" and thu* extend the elective franchise 
 to some &000 or 10,000 inhabitants who Acre now 
 excluded by the m^eition ot that word Bui he 
 could not agree with the gentleman in his ar- 
 gument on this section He was in favor of 
 striking out these words, and of inserting the 
 word ''electois" as the only thing calculated to 
 produce any thing like equality He believed 
 the electors held power in ti ust to be exercised 
 for the benefit of all ihe people of the State, toi 
 every individual. This right had not been given 
 to them, but they had taken it upon themselves, 
 and when they exercised that power, they exer- 
 cised it for all. He believed that every other 
 plan, except that proposed by him, was liable to 
 objection He was in ftvor of making the elec 
 tots the basis of representation. If we make the 
 inhabitants the rule, then theie would be injus- 
 tice, tor we had a large cUss of floating popula 
 lion, constantly changing, and who had no title 
 
 to be repiesenied here or elsewhere, lor tney nad 
 no intention of residing here By retaining: only 
 the word " inhabitants," they would give certain 
 parts ot the Stale most undue advantages. This 
 floating population would alwaxs gather at cer- 
 tain point* in the Stale, such as New York, Al- 
 bany, Utica, Rochestej, Buffalo, &c., and these 
 growing cities would have a great advantage over 
 other places. And such a basis would be formed 
 n wrong principle*; by taking in people that 
 weie not entitled to representation; aas for in- 
 siance thousands of persons just passm through 
 this state on their way to Canada, or the far West. 
 If we exclude aliens-, we exclude a class of peo- 
 ple that have come here with the intention ot re- 
 siding with us, arid they are as much entitled 
 to form part of the basis of representation, when 
 they should become natural <z d, as if they had 
 been born here, and thev ought to have the same 
 rights as the native born, and are entitled to 
 an equal representation. If we retain the word 
 ran pen?, we do great injustice, though the number 
 be small; for by examining the return?, it would 
 be found that nearly one. half of this class were 
 either aliens or persons of color not taxed, who 
 t is contended, should not be reckoned, as they 
 are not entitled to be electors. Many are going 
 out west who are poor, and fall or sink by the 
 way, and have to ask chantv. These ought not 
 to be included. The gentleman from Columbia 
 wishes to strike out "persons of color," not 
 taxed, with a view of retaining persons ot color 
 who are taxed. Il this is done, and the c] >U3e 
 leported by a member of committee No. 4 be 
 rejected by the peoule, then we shall have a class 
 of men form the basis of representation, who are 
 notentiiled in any sense to be electois. Now 
 if you strike out all this part and insert merely 
 'electors," you will go on the proper basis 
 We are sitting here to carry out the will of the 
 electors. And there is no principle they can 
 establish that will be so satisfactory as this, or 
 liable to so few objections. And this will secure 
 the most fair, the most just and equal repre-enta- 
 tion to all parts ol the State; and at the proper 
 time, he would move to insert in this and the 
 7th section, the word ''electors" for all the rest. 
 
 Here there were very loud and repeated cries 
 of " Question question question." 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that he saw there was a very 
 great desire to have the question taken at once, 
 but still he desired to get the question into such 
 a shape that it would be available hereafter. He 
 called attention to the report of the committee 
 on the elective franchise, who had reported a sec- 
 tion which would, if adopted, place the people 
 of color not taxed and white people not taxed on 
 the same footing ; and for the purpose of making 
 this section compare with that reported by that 
 committee, he moved that the question be taken 
 separately on these two points aliens and per- 
 sons of color not taxed so that if the former sec- 
 tion was passed, this could be again recurred to. 
 In answer to the eloquent argument of the gen- 
 tleman from New- York, (Mr. O'CONOR) in favor 
 of giving to New-York a representation equal to 
 the burthens which she had to bear for the sup- 
 port of government, in consequence of the for- 
 eigners who were among her population, he would 
 say that New-York already possessed upon this 
 
390 
 
 1 Clinton, 
 
 2 Essex, 
 
 3 Montgomery, 
 
 4 Cortland, 
 6 Broome, 
 
 6 Chemung, 
 
 floor, and in the Legislature, greater power than 
 they were in reality equitably entitled to by the 
 ratio of representation. With a population less 
 than that of the counties of Clinton, Essex, Mont- 
 gomery, Cortland, Broome. Chemung, Queens, 
 Tioga, Seneca, Orleans, Wyoming, and Yates, 
 who send 12 members, New- York sends her 16. 
 Here was the data : 
 
 27,115 7 Queens, 26,837 
 
 23,451 8 Tioga. 22,039 
 
 28,425 9 Seneca, 24,243 
 
 24,861 10 Orleans, 24-143 
 
 26,266 11 Wyoming, 26,238 
 
 23,282 12 Yates, 20,466 
 
 296,716 
 
 Here are 12 counties, with an aggregate popula- 
 tion of 296,716, which send only 12 members 
 here ; whilst New-York, with only 295,662 re- 
 presentative population, sends 16 members here. 
 Aud they talk of injustice and inequality. (A 
 laugh.) They already have an advantage a 
 much greater advantage than that which we 
 seek to deprive them of in this clause. If, as the 
 gentleman from New York contended, thev were 
 entitled to a representation in accordance with 
 the burthens of government imposed by their for- 
 eign population, such as the expenses of police 
 against foreign rogues, and thieves that prowl at 
 nights, &c., and the gentleman from the forests 
 of Hamilton, and the gentleman from Essex might 
 perhaps, claim that they have in their wild lands 
 a great number of badgers, wolves, bears, for the 
 taking of which they were obliged to keep a 
 quantity of traps and hunting materials, and de- 
 mand that the necessity for keeping these instru- 
 ments, and the burthens which these badgers and 
 wolves and bears imposed upon them should be 
 taken into consideration in settling the basis of 
 representation. He would not now give his rea- 
 sons in full for the vote he should give on this 
 question. He had no intention to detain the 
 committee with a speech upon it, but merely de- 
 sired to have the question taken upon the amend- 
 ment separately, so that by and by, if in settling 
 the question of the elective franchise, the Con- 
 vention should decide to abolish the distinction 
 between black and white, the committee might 
 be able to return to this section and alter it. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD was in favor of striking out 
 the words " aliens and persons of color not taxed." 
 He believed the best interests of his constituents 
 demanded this amendment. They were, it was 
 true, burthened with the support of great num- 
 bers of both classes ; but he did not favor the 
 amendment upon this view of the question. He 
 was sure it could be supported upon a much 
 sounder ground than that the true nature and 
 character of the represented body. He agreed 
 with the gentleman from Oneida, (Mr KIRKLAND) 
 that the representative represented the whole peo 
 pie, and he supposed this concession was perlectly 
 fatal to the conclusion of that gentleman as he 
 should presently show. The gentleman from Co- 
 lumbia (Mr. JORDAN) had drawn a line excluding 
 aliens and pei sons ot color not taxed from the rep- 
 resented body, but including women and children. 
 He had however urged no reason upon which 
 such a division could besupported. It was entirely 
 arbitrary. Now he (Mr. S.) did not believe the 
 represented body to be one which could only be 
 
 determined by arbitiary rules. What constituted 
 that body was to be ascertained by the objects and 
 purposes of government. The gentleman from 
 Onondaga (Mr. RHOADES) had found himself utter- 
 ly embarrassed by the unreasonable distinctions of 
 the gentleman from Oneida and Columbia, and 
 had avoided this difficulty by proposing that the 
 electoral body should constitute the basis of rep- 
 resentation. This at all events was consistent, 
 and he (Mr. S.) thought gentleman had no middle 
 choice between the electoral body and the whole 
 people. Representation should be apportioned 
 according to one or the other He (Mr. S.) was 
 in favor of an apportionment according to the num. 
 bers of the whole body of the people. He was 
 sure they were represented by the representative, 
 although gentleman had doubted it. Government 
 is not established for the electoral bodies alone. 
 Other rights than theirs, are embraced in the 
 mighty circle of its protection. The elective 
 franchise though amongst the most sacred is 
 not the only franchise secured by constitutions. 
 He would read from the Declaration of our Inde- 
 pendence a truth that had become graven upon 
 the hearts our people. " Among these rights 
 are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 
 That to secure these rights, governments are in- 
 stituted among men, deriving their just powers 
 from the consent of the governed." " Govern- 
 ment" as Burke had said, "is a contrivance of 
 human wisdom to provide for human wants." 
 Now, sir, aliens, and person of color, not taxed, 
 had rights, the rights to life, liberty, and the pur- 
 suit of happiness. So had females so had chil- 
 dren. He spoke of course in the general, and as 
 the necessities of Society might qualify them. 
 But it was indisputable that these rights existed. 
 Could females or children be regarded as part of 
 the constituent body on any other view. No. 
 Yet they were and had been so for many years, 
 No sir, in his judgment the only just rule of rep- 
 resentation was in proportion to the "human 
 wants" represented not property, but the rights 
 to " life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" 
 human souls and their personal interests in Gov- 
 ment. The moment an alien set his foot upon 
 our soil he owed a local and temporary allegiance 
 to our government. He was bound by our laws 
 and we were bouud to protect him. He had the 
 rights, he (Mr. S.) had spoken of, and those rights 
 demanded representation. Gentlemen had said 
 he was not represented, but he (Mr. S.) submit- 
 ted that the representative was acting for the 
 alien on his behalf and with the power to bind 
 him, and if this did not constitute representation 
 he (Mr. S.) did not know the meaning of the 
 term. It was true the alien could not choose his 
 representative neither eould the common people 
 of England, yet we are told by the most enlight- 
 ened English authors that the House of Commons 
 was the representation of the whole English peo- 
 ple. He (Mr. S.) was sorry that the. gentleman 
 from Washington (Mr. BAKER,) had compared 
 aliens to bears, wolves and panthers. He would 
 only advert to such a comparison to say 
 
 Mr. BAKER would explain. He was misun- 
 derstood. The gentleman from New-York (Mr. 
 O'CoNOR,) had said that New-York should have 
 an increased representation on account of the bur- 
 thens that city had to bear from aliens and per- 
 
391 
 
 sons of color not taxed. He (Mr. B.) had said 
 that this argument would prove that the people 
 of the country ought to have an increased repre- 
 sentation, since they were burthened with wolves 
 and bears. ' 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD was glad he had misunderstood 
 the gentleman his respect had been increased by 
 the explanation. He would now finish with the 
 sentiment that consistency of opinion, a just view 
 of the ends of human government, and a just re- 
 gard to the rights of every man, whether alien or 
 citizen, demanded that the basis of representation 
 should be the rights of that portion of mankind 
 who dwell within the limits of our country. 
 
 Mr. VVATERBTJRY thought the amendment of 
 Mr. RHOADES a most capital one, and advocated 
 making the electors the b.isis of representation. 
 
 The question was then taken on striking out 
 the word " aliens," and it was lost, 20 only rising 
 in the affirmative. 
 
 The motion to strike out the words, " persons 
 of color not taxed," was lost, 31 only rising in fa- 
 vor. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved the following amendment 
 to come in after the words " persons of color not 
 taxed : 
 
 So long only as persons of color shall be precluded from 
 enjoying the rights of suffrage upon the same terms as 
 "white persons. 
 
 Mr. B. said he would provide that if ever per- 
 sons of color should become voters, they might 
 form a portion of the basis of representation. This 
 was offered by him in anticipation of the possibi- 
 lity that persons of color might become eligible as 
 voters ; he would not now commit himself on this 
 subject. He merely wished to provide for a con- 
 tingency. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said the amendment was un- 
 necessary ; it would be decided in the action on 
 the report of committee No. 4, on the Elective 
 Franchise. 
 
 The amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved to amend by striking 
 out the words " inhabitants, excluding aliens and 
 persons of color not taxed," and inserting the 
 words " electors." 
 
 This was ultimately yielded. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to amend by inserting al- 
 ter the word " thereafter," the following: 
 
 The Legislature shall, at its next session after the adop 
 tionof this Constitution, divide the State into districts, ac- 
 cording to the 6th section of this article. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said it appeared to him that 
 the Convention had got to settle the question of 
 senate districts, whether they should be single or 
 double. This point being settled, it appeared to 
 him that there then could be presented some pro- 
 position for an apportionment that would carry 
 out and meet the views of a majority of the Con- 
 vention. Mr. T. urged that the Convention could 
 go on and speedily dispose of this question. It 
 was disposed of in the Convention of IS'21. It 
 would obviate the imposition upon the legislature 
 of an immense mass of business,and a consequent 
 embarrassment of the public mind. He thought 
 it could be as well adopted here. 
 
 Mr. STETSON liked the proposition of the 
 gentleman from Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) and he 
 (Mr. S.) was instrumental yesterday in getting it 
 before the house. He would like to see devolved 
 
 upon the legislature this duty of districting the 
 State. But the question as to the equality of rep- 
 resentation between the counties could not be 
 avoided. It would come up under the question 
 as to what the number of districts should be. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN did not propose to adopt the 5th 
 section as it stood, in referring to it in his amend- 
 ment. He trusted if this section was passed with 
 this amendment, that it would lie on the table for 
 the purpose of being made to harmonise with the 
 other sections of the Constitution, if necessary. 
 Then the committee could go back to the fifth sec- 
 tion, and could decide on the motion to strike out. 
 Mr. J. urged that if the Convention had time, it 
 might be well to follow the example of .theConven- 
 tionof'21,andtodistrictthe State here. Butstillhe 
 conceived that the legislature would be j ust as fully 
 competent to district the State at its session nrxt 
 after the Constitution shall be adopted as at next 
 enumeration. Taking into consideration the varie- 
 ty of subjects to be acted upon here, was it to be ex- 
 rted that there would be time to attend to this ? 
 order to submit this constitution in time to 
 the people, it should be ready by the first of Oc- 
 tober. It was obvious, therefore, there was not 
 time to do this work, unimportant too, as he con- 
 sidered it. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that it seemed that, there 
 were two or three questions to settle before the 
 Convention could enter upon the discussion which 
 :VIr. JORDAN had opened. In the first place, as to 
 the number of senators; next, as to the represen- 
 tation; and then whether there should be single or 
 double districts. Atler that it would be proper to 
 consider whether the Convention should dis- 
 trict the State, or throw the burden upon the 
 Legislature. He therefore was in favor of 
 returning to the discussion of the other questions, 
 important as he believed they were conceded to 
 he. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL urged, it was a duty of this Con- 
 vention to the people to establish definitely the 
 senate districts. If it is left to the senate oi next 
 winter, she power of fixing not only the districts 
 from which'their own body is to com*?, but to dic- 
 tate as to the other body, a scene would be en. 
 acted that would almost "force the people to drive 
 the Legislature from the capitol- 
 
 Mr. JORDAN rose to a question of order ; the 
 amendment of the gentleman from Orange having 
 been wi'hdrawn, it was not in order 10 discuss it. 
 Mr. RUSSELL insisted .that he was in order; 
 the proposition pending was to amend the section. 
 He insisted that Mr. J. should reduce his point oi 
 order to writing. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN'S desire was to prevent these 
 endless discussions which consumed so much of 
 the time of the house. He would comply with 
 the rule. Mr. J. accordingly reduced his point of 
 order to writing. 
 
 The CHAIR decided the question to be on the 
 amendment of the gentleman fiom Columbia, (Mr. 
 JORDAN ) 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL insisted that that was the point 
 he was discussing. Mr. R. continued, urging it 
 to be the duty of the convention definitely to ar- 
 range this matter ; so at least that there should 
 be one body of the legislature interested in the 
 subject. The objection would not be so forcible, 
 if both branches of the Legislature were to be 
 
392 
 
 elected anew next winter, and were therefore 
 wholly uninterested in the matter. Many of the 
 Senators would be removed from office by the op- 
 eration of the new constitution, and would there- 
 fore have a direct interest in the arrangement of 
 the new districts. 
 
 Mr. BROWN suggested that the objection 
 would apply with equal force to the Assembly 
 who as a part of the Legislature were to arrange 
 the Assembly districts. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL was aware of that, and would 
 therefore arrange the whole business here,if there 
 was time. But he desired to see the Senate dis- 
 tricts, at least, arranged. He thought this con- 
 vention could arrange all its business by the 25th 
 of September, if in no other way, by the holding 
 of evening sesssons, and working more diligently. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS was in favor of dividing the State 
 into Senatorial districts, if it was practicable. 
 He was persuaded now that it was not, and he 
 should consent to have it thrown over to the next 
 legislature. He thought therefore we should now 
 fix the number of Senators and Assemblymen by 
 going back to the 2d section, and striking out the 
 whole of the 6th section, and substituting a new 
 one devolving this business upon the next legis- 
 lature. This would make the entire subject com- 
 plete it would fix the number of Senators and 
 Assemblymen, and provide for the future appor- 
 tionment by the legislature. 
 
 Mr. WARD would have no objection to the 
 suggestion of the gentleman from Albany, but it 
 would then be necessary for the gentleman from 
 Columbia to withdraw his amendment. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN thought the question had better 
 be decided now. 
 
 Mi WARD expressed himself in favor of the 
 single district system, and in favor of having the 
 dn nets arranged by the Convention here. 
 No matter what time it occupied. It was a duty 
 i hey owed to ihe people. He appiehended, also, 
 f nat it would not defeat the object ol the Conven- 
 tion. As to the number ol Senators, he saw no 
 reason, at present, to increase the number. But 
 whether thnt was so or not, he saw no reason to 
 fear from the consumption f time Nothing 
 would be gained, either, by ihis committee rising 
 and taking up the resolution ot the gentleman 
 from Ontario It could be disposed of here He 
 hoped, therefore, the second section would be 
 taken up now. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR, urgtd that this question ol 
 the number of Senators, necessnrily involved 'he 
 other question as to the manner of arrangement 
 oH he districts. Such was the course adopted in 
 1821, and in his judgment the proper course 
 It was the time wasted in the discussion of col- 
 lateial questions, that consumed the sittings. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN thought the proposition of Mr 
 JORDAN altogether premature. It was impossible 
 to do justice to any system, until the committees 
 were through with, to see it that system would 
 wotk. Mr. T. urged that the proper course was 
 first to decide what general rule should govern 
 in retard to representation. A great cause foi 
 the unprofitable consumption ol time, Mr T. as- 
 ciihed, to the want of the adoption of some gener- 
 al rules a-< to order of business. 
 Some conversation here ensued between Messrs. 
 CHATFIELD and JORDAN, as to the effect of 
 
 the amendment. Mr. J. also further urged the 
 propriety of adopting his proposition. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR again urged the gentleman 
 from Columbia, (Mr. JORDAN,) to withdraw his 
 amendment, in order to facilitate business. 
 
 Mr, JORDAN was willing to suspend action on 
 his amendment, on this appeal from the chair- 
 man of the committee, and would withdraw it for 
 the present. 
 
 The CHAIR stated the question to be on the 
 amendment of the gentleman from Albany, (Mr 
 HARRIS,) as follows : 
 
 " Strike out all after the word " thereafter," in the 4'h 
 line, to and including the word " district," in the 6th line, 
 and in.=ert, " The Legislature at its next annual fession, 
 and at the fi'st session after the return of every enumera- 
 tion, shall divide the Stale into Senate Distiict*, 
 
 which." 
 
 Mr PERKINS moved to pass over section No. 
 5, and return to the consideration of section 2. 
 This was agreed to. 
 
 The second section was then read. 
 
 The question was on Mr. RICHMOND'S mo- 
 tion, to strike out. the words " thirty-two." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL rose "amid loud cries of "ques- 
 tion, question." He said he would be heard on 
 this question, as on it was dependent all the others. 
 He had made a distribution of twenty Senate dis- 
 tricts with a view of having forty senators, with a 
 two year's term, and one to be elected in each dis- 
 trict every year. This would give a fair allott- 
 ment of districts without dividing county lines, 
 except in New- York. In no district under this 
 plan would there be a variation from the average 
 ratio of more than 4,000, and in only a single dis- 
 trict would it reach that. He apprehended the 
 single district system would have to be abandoned 
 from the impracticability of aranging forty single 
 districts without dividing county lines. A com- 
 promise of this kind, it seemed to him, would 
 have to be adopted. He was willing to strike 
 out 32, and then consider as to the number to be 
 agreed on. So in regard to the length of the 
 term of office of the Senators, there would have 
 to be a compromise affected between the different 
 views on the subject. It was therefore that he 
 desired that the question should be opened. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that taking any number, 
 and making double districts, there could be a 
 more equal apportionment provided. He did not 
 believe that it was desired by the people to in- 
 crease either senate or assembly, but single dis- 
 tricts, he believed, was most emphatically called 
 for by them. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN insisted that the 
 people had never called for an increase of the le- 
 gislative power. The general feeling was rather 
 opposed to it. In the changes that were to be 
 made as to the powers and duties of the legisla- 
 ture, the present force would be amply sufficient. 
 An increase of force would also involve an in- 
 crease of expenditure. He believed that there 
 would be no difficulty in making this matter equal. 
 He believed the great object desired by the peo- 
 ple was the establishment of single districts, and 
 the bringing of the representatives nearer to the 
 people. He was prepared to go for the report a? 
 introduced by the committee, 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said, no wonder the gentle- 
 man was satisfied with the report of the commit- 
 
393 
 
 tee, for it gave to Rensaelaer a Senator with only 
 some 53,000 inhabitants, when the ratio was 
 nearly 80,000, while Albany county with 68,000 
 had to take on another county, having other and 
 conflictino; interests, in order to be entitled to the 
 same privilege. And Mr. R. could point out sev- 
 eral other as palpably unjust divisions. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought, the question, as to con- 
 venience of any particular locality in districting, 
 should not be involved with that as to what legis- 
 lative force should be provided. He thought that 
 taking away from the Senate its judicial power 
 would be to decrease its standard of knowledge 
 as a political body. The fact that it was a judi- 
 cial body, now induced the people to select men 
 of a higher standard of attainment for it than they 
 ordinarily did for the Assembly. This point 
 should be considered. In relation to the Assem- 
 bly there was great security in a large body the 
 larger the better, and it was less liable* to be 
 lobbied with. His own experience had taught 
 him to believe that for this very reason the 
 House was the most conservative branch of the 
 Legislature. He was, therefore, unwilling to 
 change the Senate, so far as was proposed, for 
 mere purposes of stability. Forty Senators were 
 little enough, and in his opinion the House should 
 be increased proportionably. The increase of 
 population alone demanded this. The smaller 
 the body, the more danger there was to guard 
 against. In adjusting this matter, we should lay 
 out of view these questions of mere local conve- 
 nience. He also could never vote for this system 
 of the people's voting half arid half, by years. It 
 was a new idea, this matter of electing Senators 
 by turnip patches over the State. He preferred 
 biennial sessions of the legislature, with power to 
 the Governor to call them together in an emer- 
 gency. There was too mucn legislation, and 
 there was much truth in the sentiment, that "the 
 world was governed too much" and he had no 
 doubt that the people generally were in favor of 
 such change. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER expressed himself in 
 favor of biennial sessions and single districts. 
 The people in his section had expressed them- 
 selves most emphatically in favor of these two 
 great reforms. He hoped therefore that question 
 would be considered. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN confessed that on this question 
 of increasing the legislative force, his ideas were 
 rather crude, as he had never heard of it before he 
 came here. He had never known that any such 
 measure of reform was called for by the people, 
 and he should therefore discuss it as an open 
 question. And it was not on that ground that it 
 was proposed, but merely for the convenience of 
 apportionment. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : For the equality of repre- 
 sentation. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said, the evils that would result 
 from it was to be looked at, and among them 
 would be the increase of expense to the people. 
 This was a day of retrenchment rather than of 
 extravagance, but still if measures had been call- 
 ed for by the people although it increased the 
 expense, they would sanction them, if not, they 
 would not. If the senate should be increased 
 from thirty-two to thirty-nine members, for in- 
 stance, and the assembly in proportion, the rep- 
 
 26 
 
 resentation would be increased in both branches 
 to thirty-five additional members. This would 
 lead to no inconsiderable item of expense. The 
 pay of this increase of members at the ordinary 
 price paid them under the old Constitution, at 
 the usual length of a session, and including the 
 travel fees, would not be less than $15,000 per 
 annum. This was an item not to be disregarded, 
 or thrown away in the present condition of the 
 finances of the State. Putting this amount into a 
 sinking fund, and with a silent operation and 
 without any additional trouble at the end of twen- 
 ty years, it would furnish a fund of more than. 
 $1,000,000, saved by that operation. And if there 
 was no call for this increase of legislative force, 
 he would prefer to have that sum appropriated 
 to the common school fund. Mr. J. said 
 there were many other items of expense, which, 
 suggested themselves, such as an alteration, or re- 
 building of the Capitol, to accommodate the in- 
 crease, &c. which it was immaterial to refer to. 
 Mr. J said that neither did the safety of legisla- 
 tion require this increase. If 128 members could 
 be corrupted, so could 158. And to get rid of 
 this danger you must go on increasing the num- 
 ber, until the Lobby could not bring a force 
 laige enough to operate upon them. And then 
 you would have a number about equal to half 
 i he adult population of the State. We had 128 
 wise men here, who were abundantly competent, 
 as was apparent, to discuss every proposition that 
 could be presented, and assist, and examine every 
 bone and muscle in its body, and expend those 
 debates upon it, and waste a great deal more time 
 than was consumed in the original creation of the 
 world. If rhere was not wisdom enough in 128 
 men to take care of the interests of the slate, then, 
 there would not be in 158. An increase of num- 
 ber would also tend the greater to divide respon. 
 sibility. Thirty-two men in ihe Senate may be 
 bribed and corrupted, and if we were to frame a 
 government on that supposition, then he appre- 
 hended it was better not to have a government at 
 all Arid forty men were fully as liable to cor- 
 ruption and impurity, as thirty-two. The Assem- 
 bly coming from every section, and every locality 
 of the state, were the immediate representatives 
 of the people, and every member knew the wants 
 of every neighborhood he represented. Where 
 then the necessity for its increase? Why, 
 gentlemen ay, because the population has in- 
 creased. Wa-< that any reason fur it, go long: 
 as each member was found to be acquainted with 
 the minutest wants, almost, of his constituents. 
 When the number secures that, then we have- 
 constituted a sufficiently large house of assembly. 
 The senate was a check upon improvident, 
 unconstitutional, or unwise legislation, and when, 
 the house passed a law of that description the 
 senate, being a less numerous body, and looking- 
 upon it calmly andcooly, have the power of veto- 
 ing it. It had a veto upon the assembly precisely 
 as the governor had upon the legislature. I f 
 therefore it required some forty members to ex- 
 ercise that power, the governor being a check 
 upon both branches, there ought then to be two 
 governors, to prevent one from being corrupted. 
 There was nothing in the argument that met his 
 | approbation, and these bodies be believed were 
 ! sufficiently numerous now. As to the equality 
 
394 
 
 of representation, even if there were some dis- 
 tricts with a large fraction of excess, there was 
 no very great danger of their being here unrepre- 
 sented. There could be no perfect equality at- 
 tained, it might be approached, perhaps, for the 
 present, by increasing the number of representa- 
 tives, but whether at the next census it would be 
 any more equal, was altogether a problem. 
 No human being on Earth could decide as to 
 that, and it was therefore a mere experiment 
 based upon the present, without reference to the 
 future. He submitted that even if the number 
 of Senators was increased, the representation 
 would be just as unequal as by leaving it as it is, 
 for in proportion as the number of members was 
 increased, was magnified the importance of the 
 fraction. By doubling the representation, a frac- 
 tion of 8,000 would' present just as much in- 
 equality as would a fraction of 16,000 at present, 
 because if a fraction of 16,000 was left now with- 
 out one member, if the number of members was 
 doubled, it would be left then without two mem- 
 bers. And so on in proportion to any greater or 
 less number. A good deal had been said about the 
 people not voting every year, but if they did not 
 vote, they would certainly be represented. Even 
 if they did not vote but once in four years, yet they 
 would be represented every year the same as they 
 now are by the Executive. What mischiet then 
 could grow of that, except where the people elect 
 oneyear in one district and another year in another. 
 Then there may be colonization, and he could not 
 undertake to answer for New- York as to pipe- 
 laying or of Brooklyn, her cousin-german. 
 Mr! MURPHY : Not in that respect. 
 Mr. JORDAN continued But we were to look 
 at the great interests of the State, and not those 
 merely of localities. Whatever system of elec- 
 tion should be adopted, he was in favor of retain- 
 ing the term of the Senate as it now is. It was 
 the conservative branch of the legislature the 
 check upon the Assembly and its members 
 ought to understand well the course of legisla- 
 tion. And the very object of the four year's term 
 was to enable that body to have among its 
 members those who understood the legislation 
 and the operations of previous years. And he 
 saw no reason for altering it, when its present 
 organization had not operated unfavorably. This 
 vice, sublimated , and Utopian notion of gentlemen, 
 of securing equal representation, was all well 
 enough if it could be reduced to practical 
 operation. 
 
 Mr. STETSON: It can. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN would like to have the gentle- 
 man set down and undertake to tell him how he 
 would do it without dividing towns and counties 
 and single districts. And then at the end of ten 
 years, it was just as likely to be unequal as now. 
 These were Mr. J 's present impressions, and he 
 preferred single districts because it brought the 
 representative nearer home to the people and 
 enabled them the better to understand his qualifi- 
 cations and capacity. 
 
 Mr. PEKK-iN^siiid that the number of Senators 
 xnut be governed in some degree by the length 
 of the term of office. If for tour years, we must 
 have a number that will divide by lour, it tor 
 three years, a number that will divide by three, 
 ?md o on. He did not think it of much conse- 
 
 quence whether ihe <xxt proportion between the 
 Senate and Assembly should be continued as four 
 to one, and it the number of Senators were in- 
 creased a little, it did not involve the necessity of 
 increasing the Assemblymen. He should be glad 
 to have the words "thirty two" stricken out and 
 a blank left until the period of time for which 
 the Senators should be elected should be deter- 
 mined. For himself he was in favor of three 
 years, and then a number of Senators that would 
 divide by three either 30, 33, 36 or 39 He did 
 not desire any rna'erial increase, and indeed, 
 thought about the present number as nearly right 
 as could be got at. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD believed it to be the duty of 
 the convention here in forming these Senate dis- 
 tricts, to equalize the representation of the peo- 
 ple in that branch of the Legislature. And he 
 believed also that the project of the committee 
 was one showing great inequality, injustice, and 
 which sould be obviated by fixing upon some 
 other number, without destroying the principle 
 of single districts. The gentleman from Colum- 
 bia, (Mr. JORDAN) had called these notions of 
 equal representation Utopian. To his (Mr. S.'s) 
 ears a declaration of that kind, he must confess, 
 sounded rather grating. He believed that it was 
 this idea of equality of representation that gave 
 us liberty, and enabled us to be here, discussing 
 the organic law. And he was yet to learn that 
 that principle was to be treated here as elsewhere 
 as Utopian, wild and visionary, and not fit to 
 be entertained by patriots and sensible men. Mr. 
 C. then referred to the report of the committee as 
 showing great inequalities. He alluded to the 
 fact that his own county, Oj;sego, by the congres- 
 sional apportionment, was left with a large frac- 
 tion unrepresented ; and now it was sought to re- 
 peat the injury again. As to the matter of ex- 
 pense, he would not stop to consider the expen- 
 diture of a few dollars, when the great principle 
 of equality of representation, the one that lay at 
 the very base of the foundation and carrying out 
 of true republican government, was involved. 
 But there was no weight in that argument. It 
 was proposed to divest the Senate of its judicial 
 character ,which leads to more than half its expense 
 to take from the Legislature many subjects 
 which now lead to a protraction of the session 
 and to limit the session to three months, instead 
 of allowing them to extend it to four or five, by 
 requiring them to be paid full pay for only three 
 months, and then to cut it down one half, which 
 would effectually produce that end. When these 
 considerations were observed, it would be seen 
 that the people would gain largely even if the 
 number of the Senate was increased to forty-eight. 
 If, as was contended, the equalization of repre- 
 sentation was not possible, why was it provided 
 that an enumeration should betaken of the popu- 
 lation every ten years, and then that a new ap- 
 portionment should be made. What was the ob- 
 ject of it, if not that a new apportionment was re- 
 quired every ten years from the fact that while 
 some portions of the State were standing still in 
 point of population, others were falling back, and 
 thereby producing an inequality in representa- 
 tion. It was for this object, and no other. And 
 if it was desirable to do this ten years from hence, 
 it was desirable to do it to-day. Again, as to the 
 
395 
 
 increase of number prior to the Constitution of 
 1^-21, the Assembly consisted of 70 members, and 
 the Senate of "2 1, and why was the number then 
 increased ? It was only because the State had in- 
 creased in population. And if that was a good 
 reason then, was it not now ? If seventy 
 members was sufficient for half a million, 
 was 128 a requisite number of representa- 
 tion of 3,000,000 of people ? The legislative 
 power of this state, he believed, was less than 
 that of any other in the Union, and where, he 
 asked, was there a state with such great and di- 
 versified interests as this ? An increase of num- 
 bers he urged would also tend to decrease the 
 chances for corruption. It was easier to corrupt 
 one man than ten; and by parity of reason- 
 ing it was easier to corrupt a majority of thirty- 
 two, than of forty-eight. An increased number 
 would also render corruption much more expen- 
 sive, and thus would the chances for it be dimin- 
 ished. The danger of corruption was always in 
 small bodies, in oligarchies. He might instance 
 the republics of Genoa and Venice, where the 
 Council of Ten became omnipotent and finally de- 
 stroyed the republics, as evidences of this. The 
 senate, he also urged, was not merely a check upon 
 the assembly, it was a co-ordinate branch of the 
 legislature, and had the same power to originate 
 bills. Therefore the assembly was as much a 
 check upon the senate as the senate was upon the 
 assembly. And experience had shown that the 
 assembly had oftener corrected the senate than 
 the senate had the assembly. In conclusion, Mr. 
 C. said, he wished to have justice done not only 
 to his county but to all, and if that could be done 
 by single districts he was willing to go for them, 
 if not, then l.e was willing to go for double dis- 
 tricts. He would yield the first principle to se- 
 cure the great end of equal representation. He 
 came here without any instructions or pledges 
 upon the subject, and he was ready to act upon the 
 dictates of his own judgment and upon that he 
 was willing to stand or fall. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved that the committee rise and 
 report progress. 
 
 This was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN opposed granting leave to sit 
 again, and renewed the motion to recommit with 
 instuctiorvs as moved by him yesterday afternoon. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to lay the motion on the 
 table. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved to adjourn. Lost ayes 
 50, noes 52. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN withdrew his motion and the 
 committee had leave to sit again ayes 57, noes 
 37. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 Mr. MURPHY orlered the following: 
 "Resolved, That when this Convention s-hall be resolved 
 into cOiiiinittee ot the whole on the report of committee 
 number one, member* engaged in debate shall not b-- al- 
 lowed to speak more than live minutes on any one ques- 
 tion." 
 
 On t'ns he demanded the previous question. 
 Mr. CliATFISLD said that this was not iu or- 
 
 h.> PRESIDENT said that as it relaied to the 
 pending business n was in order. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then moved to insert ten 
 minutes instead ot five minutes. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY would not accede to this. 
 
 On a count (o second the previous question, only 
 49 rose in all. 
 
 The ayes and noes were demanded. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that could not be done. 
 
 e raised 'he question of order. 
 
 The PRESIDENT: If is too late. (A laugh.) 
 
 The ayes and noes were demanded on it. 
 
 The previous question was seconded. Ayes 
 61, noes 33. 
 
 The question was then taken, on " shall the 
 main question be now put ?" Carried ayes 54, 
 noes 42. 
 
 The resolution of Mr. MURPHY was carried 
 Ayes 59, noes 43. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD, (who had demanded the 
 ayes and noes on the two last calls) then offered 
 the following : 
 
 Resolved, That this Convention do now finally ad- 
 journ without delay." 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS called for the ayes and noe* 
 on the resolution. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved to lay it on the table. 
 
 The ayes and noes were again called for on it. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN also moved to lay it on the ta- 
 ble. 
 
 Mr. STRONG withdrew the motion to lay it on 
 the table. 
 
 Mr SHEPARD renewed it. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN begged the gentleman from Ot- 
 sego to withdraw it. 
 
 Finall, Mr. CHATFIELD withdrew it. 
 
 Mr. BAKER then offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee of the whole having 
 charge of the report of commit ee number One, be in- 
 structed so to settle said report, that the Senate shall con- 
 
 gist of members, to be elected in districts, 
 
 and for a term of years." 
 
 Mr. B. said that he had offered this in blank, 
 so as to enable the Convention to come to a vote 
 on these several propositions, that this body may 
 provide for the number as soon as possible, and 
 take the vote on the highest number ; and not only 
 provide as to the number of Senators, their term, 
 arid the size of the districts, but also allow every 
 member to present his proposition, and have a 
 vote on it even though the previous question 
 should be moved here ; and the question of single 
 or double districts could be settled hereafter. 
 
 Mr. BAKER had first moved to leave the Sena- 
 tors in blank ; and on Mr. RUSSELL'S suggestion, 
 
 he put in " districts," and on Mr PERKIN'S 
 
 he put in " years." 
 
 The PRESIDENT : The question is then on 
 adopting the resolution in blank. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN hoped the gentleman would 
 put in 50 Senators ! 
 
 Mr. BAKER would accept that, unless the 
 question was to be taken on each blank sepa- 
 rately. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON: The question must be 
 taken on filling the blanks first. 
 
 Mr. STETSON called the ayes and noes on 
 
 der. 
 
 ! this. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD : The question is first on 
 
396 
 
 the passage of the resolution ; and then on filling 
 the blanks. 
 The PRESIDENT : The question is first on 
 filling the blanks. 
 Mr. BAKER proposed 50 Senators. He would 
 not say, however, that he would vote for that. 
 Mr. CHATFIELD proposed 48 Senators ; Mr. 
 BASCOM, 46 ; Mr. RUSSELL, 42 ; Mr. WOR- 
 DEN, 40; Mr. RICHMOND, 39; Mr. WHITE, 
 36 ; Mr. ST. JOHN, 32. 
 Mr. CROOKER proposed to take the ayes and 
 .noes on each number, so that they could see 
 -whether they could get 56 to vote on any one of 
 them, so as to get them out of the fog. 
 The PRESIDENT : The question will be first 
 on the highest number. 
 Mr. TAGGART said he wished to present 
 some facts. He wanted an increase of Senators, 
 but 50 was too large ; he thought that whatever 
 number was fixed on now must hereafter be in- 
 creased by the Legislature under a new ratio. The 
 number thirty-two left too many large fractional 
 deficiencies and excesses. It would perhaps be 
 impossible to divide the State into single Senate 
 districts without great inequalities, unless we di- 
 vide counties. But a plan could be adopted much 
 more just and uniform than that of the commit- 
 tee. He had drawn one out for single districts, 
 and an increased number of Senators, and he 
 would refer to it, thus : 
 APPORTIONMENT WITH THE RATIO AT 61,500. 
 1 Suffolk. 31,820 Excess. Deficiencies. 
 ' Queens, 26,857-68,677 2,823 
 2. Kings, 61,611 161 
 3-7 New- York, 295,662 2,363 
 8. Richmond, 12,413 
 Westchester. 43,23165,644 6,856 
 9. Orange, 48,741 
 Rockland, 12,269-61,070 490 
 10. Ulster. 45,6-29 
 Sullivan, 18,09963,728 2,228 
 11. Putnam, 12,842 
 Dutchess, 51,27664,118 2,618 
 12. Columbia, 39,786 
 Greene, 30,27170,057 8,567 
 13. Albany, 68,582 7,082 
 14. Rensselaer, 58,671 2,829 
 16. Washington, 39,078 
 Warren, 14,71153,789 7,711 
 16. Clinton. 27,115 
 Essex, -38,415 
 Franklin, 16,696-67,162 5,662 
 J7. St. Lawrence, 58,6-26 2,874 
 IS. Herkimer, 36,366 
 Fulton, 18,210 
 Hamilton, 1,814-56,399 6,110 
 19. Saratoga, 39,843 
 Schenectady, 15,80055,643 6,857 
 20. Montgomery, 23,425 
 Schoharie, 31,885-60,310 
 21. Otsego, 49,761 11,739 
 22. Delaware, 36,118 
 Chenango, 39,4-25-75,543 14,043 
 23. Madison, 40.021 
 Cortland, 24,86164,882 3,382 
 24. Jefferson, 62,625 1,136 
 26. Oneida, 78,696 17,196 
 26. Lewis, 19,1-25 
 Oswego, 46,801-66,9-26 4,426 
 37. Onondaga, 67,419 6,919 
 ;38. Broorae, 25 ,-266 
 Tioea, 22,039 
 Chemung, 23,28-2-70,687 9,087 
 99. Cayuga, 48.338 IV 62 
 30. Seneca, 24-243 
 Wayne, 41,194-65,437 3,937 
 31. Tompkins, 37.512 
 Yates. -20,466-57,978 3,622 
 33. Ontario, 40,717 
 Livingston, 36,04876,816 16,316 
 
 33. Mnroe, 63,588 2,089 
 4. Steuben, 60,771 10,739 
 5. Orleans, 25,443 
 Niagara, 31,445-56,888 4.61S 
 36 Genesee, -28,140 
 Wyoming, 31,108-69,248 2,252 
 37. Alh-gany, 80.955 
 Catiaraugus, 29,76760,722 778 
 38. Erie, 63,7l 7,171 
 39. Chautauque, 45,933 16,617 
 
 PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF APPORTIONMENT. 
 22. Delaware, 36,118 
 Broome, 25 266 
 
 61,334 116 
 23. Madison, 40.021 
 [In Oneida] 
 Sangerfield, BrMgewa- 
 ter, Augusta, Markhall, 
 Paris, Vernon, Kirk- 
 land and New-Hart* 
 ford, 21,056 
 
 61 077 423 
 25. Balance of Oneidn, 67.640 3,360 
 27. Balance, of Onoudagh, 59,863 1,637 
 28. Chenango, 39 J-24 
 Cortland, 24,861 
 
 64,236 2,786 
 29. Tioga, 22,030 
 Toropkins, 37,612 
 
 69,551 1,949 
 30. Cayuga, 48,338 
 [In Onondaga.] 
 Skaneatelas and 
 Elbridge, 7,666 
 
 66,944 6,609 
 32. Ontario, 40,717 
 Yates, 20,466 
 
 61,183 317 
 34. Chemung, 23,282 
 Steuben, 60,771 
 
 74,063 12,553 
 37. Livinerston, 36,098 
 Allegany, 30,955 
 
 67,053 &653 
 39. Cattaraugus, 29,767 
 Chautauque, 46,983 
 
 75,760 14.2fO 
 TABLE OF INEQUALITIES. 
 
 TO THE AJSEMBLT. 
 
 Caynga, 48,338 | 9g Q99 6Members> 
 Otsego, 49,761 $ 
 Wyoming, 26,283 
 Queens, 26,837 
 Clinton, 27,1 ' 6 j, Ifi5 81Q g Membera . 
 Cortland, 24,861 
 Brcome, 25,266 1 
 Orleans, 26,443 J 
 
 57,721 
 Richmond, 12,413 ^ 
 Putnam, 
 Rockland, 12,269 j. 84 g31 fi Mombcrf 
 Schfnectady, 18.ROQ { 
 Franklin, 16,69^ | 
 Warren, 14,711 J 
 Wyoming, Queens, and Clinton 80.240 3 Members. 
 Richmond, Putnam, & Rockland 37 624 3 
 
 42.716 
 Cavuea. 4,'3S 3 Members. 
 
 ^ ja j " t jc QAI n 1C 
 
 Oswego, 40,sui * 
 Genesee, 28 '40 2 " 
 Clinton, 27,115 1 
 Clinton, 27,115 1 Richmond and Rockland, 24,682-^ 
 
397 
 
 Representative population in 1845, 2,389,548 
 
 Increase from 1840 to 1845, 175674 
 
 Supposed increase from 1945 to 1855, 35,1 148 
 
 2750696 
 
 The following will show the total increase ot 
 population in 9 counties, in which are cities and 
 large villages : 
 
 Pop. 1S40. Pop. 1345. Increase. 
 
 Albany, 68536 77268 8732 
 
 Erie, 62251 79635 16384 
 
 Kings, 47613 79691 31078 
 
 Monroe. 64912 70999 5987 
 
 New-York, 212932 371223 58291 
 
 Onondaga, 67915 70175 2260 
 
 Oswego, 43S20 48441 4621 
 
 Bensselaer, 60303 62333 2036 
 
 Niagara, 31114 34550 3436 
 
 Total increase, 132824 
 
 Increase in other parts of the State 42,750 
 
 176,574 
 
 Ratio now for member of Assembly, 18,746 
 In 1855, upon same ratio of increase, it would be21,490 
 COUNTIES THAT MAY LOSE A MEMBER, 
 Members. Pop. Supposed frac. 1 
 
 Suffolk, 2 31820 10330 
 
 Orange, 3 48714 4734 
 
 Greene, 2 30271 S7S1 
 
 Montgomery, 3 28425 6605 
 
 Schoharie, 2 31885 10385 
 
 Otsego, 3 49761 5781 
 
 Cayuga, 3 48338 4358 
 
 Genesee, 2 28140 6630 
 
 Livingston, 2 32-270 10780 
 
 AUegany, 2 30955 9465 
 
 Cattaraugus, 2 29767 8270 
 
 UNREPRESENTED FRACTIONS FOR ASSEMBLY 
 
 IN EIGHT COUNTIES. 
 
 Queens, 29S37 1 8091 
 
 Ulster, 456292 8187 
 
 Coitlat.J. 648611 6115 
 
 Broone, 262661 6520 
 
 Sen ca, 242431 6497 
 
 Orleans, 254431 7697 
 
 Wyoming, 262881 7542 
 
 Clinton, 271151 8369 
 
 57966 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said that his plan had fewer 
 inequalities than any he had seen. Mr. T. then 
 went on to sustain his proposition as present ing 
 less inequalities lhan any other yet before the 
 committee. He pointed out the disparity in the 
 increase of p< pulation, between the several coun- 
 ties in the State the increase being greatest in 
 cities and villnges, while in the rural counties 
 the population wa nearly stationary. Arid in 
 makit g an apportionment of representatives he 
 ur^d 'hat these facts should he taken into con- 
 sideration. The agricultural counties ne 
 contended should have secured to them their 
 fair representation which he asserted would 
 in time be encroached upon by the commer- 
 cial counties, having within them the large 
 cities and villages. An increase of represen- 
 tation would lend to greatly obviate th'jse diffi- 
 cu'ties He preferred lhat the senate shauld 
 be fixed at thiry-nine n< w, and then providing 
 that ,he leeislmuie should fix the number ab^o 
 lutely in 1853. or 1645, or else leave it to a future 
 legislature. The same principle he would also 
 apt ly to the assembly, increasing its number in 
 the same proportion as the senate. He called 
 upon gentlemen to examine this question, and see 
 whe her the general principles he had stated were 
 not correct, and supposed by facts of undoubted 
 and unquestionable character. 
 
 The proposition on filling the blank with 50 
 was here withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL here proposed to fill the blank 
 with 42. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that the apportionment 
 as mentioned by the gentleman Irom Genesee, 
 produced the most glaring inequalities presented. 
 In two adjoining counties it left an excess of 
 17,000 in one county, and a deficiency in the other 
 county of 71,000. Was that equality, and would 
 any system like that produce satisfaction. And 
 the gentleman proposes to create that inequality 
 still further by dismembering one of the oldest 
 counties in the State. It was impossible to divide 
 the State in equal districts; it was not in the 
 power of man to do it. But this question was 
 not rightly here the only legitimate one here 
 was, shall the legislative forre to increased ? As 
 to that he denied that the people had at any time, 
 in any manner on any occasion demanded this 
 increase. It was undoubtedly the design to di- 
 minish the duties of the senate, and yet when 
 about to deprive this body ot about half its powers 
 and duties, we are asked to increase its number. 
 What consideration of propriety or necessity 
 should induce this increase under such circum- 
 stances? It would not tend, as had been amply 
 shown, to promote an equality, and an in- 
 crease of number instead of facilitating business 
 he believed would retard it, and lengthen the 
 session of the Legislature. It would also in- 
 crease the expense to the people. Why then in- 
 crease it? There was no reason for it; and he 
 hoped gentlemen would adhere to the present 
 Constitution. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE deprecated the increase of 
 legislative force as tending to add some $3,000,- 
 000 or more of expense to the State in the matter 
 of legislation in the course of twenty years. No 
 number but 32 and none above it would get his 
 vote. He should also prefer if the term was to 
 be made 3 years, that the Senate should consist 
 of 24. He urged that it was impossible to agree 
 upon any basis of representation, and any attempt 
 to arrange it here could be but unsuccessful so far 
 as giving general satisfaction, was concerned. He 
 urged also against the proposition for dividing 
 counties for single Assembly districts as tending 
 to produce confusion. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN was in favor of an increase of 
 the Senate. In his argument, he should assume 
 that hereafter that body would cease to be a ju- 
 dicial tribunal. He believed that every legisla- 
 tive body should be sufficiently large to make it 
 sympathize somewhat with the feelings of the 
 people. Look at our State, stretching from the 
 ocean to the lakes, and soon to have a population 
 of 5,000,000, and he would ask if 32 was a suffi- 
 cient number to represent all the interests of such 
 a State? Under the Constitution of 1777, it was 
 contemplated that the Senate might consist of 
 100 members Why was it kept down to 32 in 
 our present Constitution ? He had always sup- 
 posed that it was because that was large enough 
 for a court. But as a mere legislative body, it 
 was too small. If the gentleman from Oneida 
 had heard nothing of the call for an increase Mr.M. 
 could tell him that hisconstituents had agitated this* 
 subject and were in favor of increase of the senate. 
 Mr. M. proceeded to examine the principle upon 
 
398 
 
 which legislative bodies were organized. In a 
 State the legislature legislated for all the inte- 
 rests of the people ; for schools and town affairs, 
 and all the interests of the people. Before the 
 Constitution of '21 was adopted there was a se- 
 nator to every 40,000 inhabitants. Now it was 
 proposed to have one for only every 70,000. His 
 own opinion was that there should be 48 mem- 
 bers. Were 48 too many to legislate for the in- 
 terests of the state ? Should those interests be 
 entrusted to the decision of a quorum of a majori- 
 ty of 32, which would be only 9 ? The people 
 must and would be heard through the legislature. 
 Impose all the restrictions you may and the day 
 would come when all plans for incorporations 
 would find their way into the senate, and then 
 the votes of so small a number would be an ob- 
 ject for the approach of certain appliances. He 
 would not say but what our previous legislation 
 had been as pure as that of any other State. But 
 he referred to facts to show that large numbers 
 were less likely to be unduly influenced. He 
 wanted the people proper]y represented, and the 
 representation to be so enlarged that each senator 
 should feel himself responsible to all his consti- 
 tuents. Why did he come here prepared to vote 
 for single districts, but because the people were 
 dissatisfied with four senate districts ? They 
 had been compelled to vote for men living a hun- 
 dred miles off who knew nothing of their inte- 
 rests, and who would often vote against them. 
 They wanted to know their senator to shake 
 hands with him. He would not stop to consider 
 expense merely in this great question of equal 
 and full representation. He would make the as- 
 sembly consist of 144. 48 in one house and 144 
 in the other would be the plan that would suit 
 him best. If the Court of Errors was to be re- 
 tained, he would oppose an increase of the se- 
 nate. But a legislature should consider all the 
 interests of the people, and he would make it as 
 popular as possible. He would give as full a 
 representation to the people as he could. 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR liked to see a proposition made 
 in detail, like that of the gentleman from Gene- 
 see. It was very easy for a man to make up a 
 speech which would loqk very well, on a propo- 
 sition without any details. Mr. T. then went on 
 to compare that proposition with the one intro- 
 duced by the committee, showing the inequalities 
 to be far greater in the plan of Mr. TAGGART, 
 than in that of the committee. So also in regard 
 to the proposition of Mr. CHATFIELD, for 46 Se- 
 nators; he had made a comparison there, and 
 found the inequalities to be quite as great. Mr. 
 T. referred to eight particular counties, as show- 
 ing this, remarking that if the whole plan was 
 gone through with, even greater discrepancies 
 would be found. Now he said he did not suppose 
 the gentleman had Otsego on his mind, but it 
 happened that Otsego came out exactly even. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD supposed the gentleman did 
 not think of Onondaga when he made out this 
 apportionment. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR defied the gentleman to place 
 Onondaga with any other county around it, with- 
 out making an excess of some 25,000. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said Onondaga was happy 
 in its locality. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR: Certainly. Nature put us there, 
 
 and we have no wish to get away from it. Mr. 
 T. urged that it could not be avoided under any 
 plan of single districts, unless a division of coun- 
 ties was resorted to. He did not believe that the 
 Convention was disposed to do this. 
 
 Mr. STETSON thought that the gentleman 
 from Dutchess (Mr. TALLMADGE) was mistaken, 
 as to the increased expense involved in an in- 
 creased legislative force. If the Senate was in- 
 er< ased to 40, the House to 150, and adopting the 
 proposition for a 90 days session, he had found 
 that the increased expense would not be over 
 $10,080 or $1 1,000 per annum. And further 
 this great question of popular representation, as- 
 serted by our forefathers through so much toil and 
 blood, was not to be put in opposition to the expense 
 of enlarging or repairing this miserable old capitol 
 already falling down about our ears. When ar- 
 guments like these were put forth against a mea- 
 sure, it was an acknowledgment of a deficiency 
 of better matter. But leaving this, he would ask 
 any gentleman here whether a population of 16,- 
 000 was not large enough for any man to repre- 
 sent faithfully ? This was as many as formed the 
 basis in 1821. And were not 60,000 enough for 
 the ambition of a Senator ? This was a question 
 in which the people were interested. It might 
 be wise to spend nine days in the discussion of 
 the question whether the Governor should be 30 
 years of age, and then throw out this proposition 
 as unworthy of consideration. But such was not 
 the opinion of Mr. S. He trusted this conven- 
 tion would consent to a limited increase ol legis- 
 lative representation. The people did want sin- 
 gle districts, but tj accomplish that, the) did not 
 want a violation of every principle of harmony. 
 He objected to the plan of the committee, that it. 
 would lead to monstrous frauds in New York by 
 colonizing. He would increase the number to 
 40, make double districts, and have one Senator 
 elected every year. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH desired .to say a very few words 
 in reply to Mr. KIRKL.AND. In at gentleman had 
 asked in a very significant manner, when, where, 
 and in what manner, the people had demanded 
 an increase of the number of Senators. Mr. F. 
 would admit thai, this might not have been de. 
 rnanded in terms, but the people have insisted 
 that the Senate should be popularized. N'>nr- 
 would deny but what the voice of the people had 
 C'ime to us in favor <,f single Senate disuu'ts. 
 Difficulties had been urged in the way t,f ac- 
 complishing this, but he fusied they would not 
 be found to be insurmountable 1C we look at th 
 history of the Senate, we should find that it had 
 never been a popular body, nor had it ever en- 
 joyed to any extent the popular confidence or 
 regard. No system can be devised, no number 
 fixed upon that would not present irregularities 
 which could not be remedied, unless we disregard- 
 ed county lines He had figured until he was 
 tired, and had not been able lo fix upon any 
 number that could avoid that difficulty. He 
 could discover a sound reason tor an increase 
 in the number of Senators What had been 
 the history of the Senate ? In the early history of 
 our Republic, it was thought necessary to inter- 
 pose that body as a barrier between the properly 
 holders of the State and the great body of the peo- 
 ple. This was the reason that that body was con- 
 
399 
 
 ot a ^inall Dumber. It was necessary lor 
 (hat ohj-ct th.it it should be small. But DOW tliat 
 the doctrine of checks and bits and bridles upon 
 the people was no longer tolerated, the time had 
 come when this body must be made more repie- 
 sentative and more assimilated 10 the wants of the 
 people. He found that the number of 32 was first 
 fixed upon in 1801, when it was increased to that 
 
 the present system was very unequal, as much so 
 as the rotten borough system of England. There 
 were now counties who with less than 70,000 
 electors, sent one-eighth of the members of the 
 Assembly, while the eight other counties, with 
 double that number of electors, had only the 
 same number of members. The majority of the 
 legislature represented a minority of the'people, 
 
 number from 24, tha number fixed in 1777. He of some 400,000. The people fully understood 
 
 mt - 
 
 not do the men ot 1&01 the injustice to sup- 1 this subject, and had demanded a reform. 
 
 reason this inequality had got into the 
 
 pose that they acted without reference to some 
 principle. What was then the principle upon 
 which they adopted that number .' It was because 
 32 weie I hen enough, taking into consideration 
 the then population of the Slate, and the interests 
 which they were to repitsent. If 32 were enough 
 now, then the number was infinitely too grea' 
 in 1801. Is a body large enough to represent the 
 people 45 years ago, a sufficiency for a population 
 of 3,000,000 ? The idea is absurd. If the Senate 
 is to have any reference to the interests of the 
 people, the number must be increased. There 
 was another consideration in the fact that in num- 
 bers there is safety. The principle of safety is to 
 give the right ot suffrage to every man. He would 
 extend equal privileges to all. He did not be- 
 lieve tha; any class should exist which had inte- 
 rests adverse to another class. For the very rea- 
 son that would lead him to increase the number 
 of electors, he would increase the number of rep- 
 resentatives. It would never be found by refe- 
 rence to history that any bulwark of freedom had 
 been secured by an oligarchy. Every small body 
 tends to an oligarchy and to the promotion of ex- 
 clusive feelings. It was easier to be corrupted. 
 He believed with the gentleman from Essex (Mr. 
 SIMMC NS) that the assembly, notwithstanding 
 the torrents of abuse which had been heaped upon 
 it, had been the true conservative body, and that 
 the people have the greatest amount of safety in 
 the assembly. The senate now represented no- 
 body. It did not represent the whole people for 
 they did not vote for it. It did not, in fact, rep 
 resent the districts, for the four senators repre- 
 sented diverse interests. There was no congruity 
 of feelings between them, but they may be ad- 
 verse to one another. They did not possess the 
 public confidence. No one county felt that it 
 was represented, hence it turned to its member of 
 assembly and the senate was left without care. 
 He said there was one body in this Union, which, 
 amid all the strifes of party arid political zeal, 
 had maintained its integrity, and the confidence 
 of the people. This was the senate of the United 
 States. And what was the reason ? Its consti- 
 tuency is singular, and the principle is one which 
 we should measurably imitate. Its numbers in- 
 
 The 
 pre- 
 sent Constitution, he ascribed to the fact that 
 the presiding officer of the Convention of 1821 
 was himself a representative of a county which 
 had not half the population required to give 
 it a representative on this floor. Was the Con- 
 stitution then again to be iramed so to dis.ian. 
 chi.se 400,000 ot the people of this Slate, and 
 gave the election of a majority of the Leyislaiure 
 to a minority ot the people? Was there any man 
 who could give a reason why the Senate shall not 
 he as laige as the Assembly? The idea that it re- 
 quired property and money was long since explod- 
 ed. Mr. W. urged that equality of representation 
 ould be secured by an increase of representation. 
 There was no necessity of legarding county lines 
 they were but imaginary handmaids to carry 
 out the popular will. Take and divide the State 
 into 144 Assembly districts, by towns. Let the 
 inspectors of election of the towns decide the 
 result of ihe election in the several towns. Then 
 make every three assembly districts constitute a 
 single senate district, and an equality of represen 
 tation would be attained at once. He warned 
 gentleman that the people would no longer sub- 
 mit to the inequalities under which they had been 
 laboring for the last quaiter of a centurv. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN here called for the * previous 
 question, and there was a second ayes 46, nays 
 36 and the main question ordered. 
 
 The first question being upon filling the blank 
 with 48 it was lost. Aves 29, nays 78, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Baker, Bascom, Burr, 
 Chatfield, Crocker, Forsy.th, Gardner, Gebhard, Graham, 
 Hawley, Kennedy, Marvin, Mo.-ris, Nicoli, O'Conor, Pat- 
 
 terson, Pennirnan, Russell, Shaver, Simmons, W. H. S 
 
 pen- 
 
 B. 
 
 crease with the increase of the States. Every 
 
 cer. Stephens, Taft, laggart, White, A. Wright, W. 
 Wright -29. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Ayrault, H Backus, Bergen, Bouck, 
 Bowdish, Brown, Brundage. Bull. Camhreleng, D. D. 
 Campbell, 11. Campbell, jr., Candee. Clark, Clyde, Conely, 
 Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana Danforth, Dodd.Dubois, 
 Flanders, Greene, Harris, Hotchkiss, Hunt. Hunter, A. 
 Huntington, E Huntington, Hutrhinson, Hyde, Jones, 
 Jordan, Kemble, Kingsley, Kirkland, Loomis, McNitt, 
 Maxwell, Miller, Murphy, Nellis, Nicholas, Parish, Per- 
 k.ns. Powers, President, Khoad. s. Richmond. Riker, Rug. 
 g'e-, St. John, Sal sbury, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, s-hepard, 
 
 Smith, Stanton, Stetson.-Stow, Strong. Tallmadge. "J. J. 
 
 Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, TMthili. Ward, 
 
 n. w interest and constituency introduced into the Warren, Waterbury. WiUard, Wituecx, Wood, Worden, 
 Union immediately had its two senators in that Yawger, Young 78. 
 
 body. Mr. F. considered this a sufficient argu- 
 ment in refutation of the absurd position that our 
 senate should be 32 because it had always been 
 32. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN, assumed that if the people 
 who sent us here manifested more partiality of 
 feeling on any one subject of reform than another, 
 it was in relation to the division of the State into 
 single districts. And for what reasons ? To 
 popularize representation. He contended that 
 
 Mr. WORDEN laid on the table a motion for a 
 reconsideration. 
 
 The question was then taken on filling the 
 blank with 42, and it was lost ayes 23, noes 84. 
 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs, Archer, Bascom, Chatfield, Crocker, 
 Danforth, Gardner, Gebhaid, Hawley, Jones, Marvin' 
 Morris, O'Couor, Patterson, Penniman, Perkins, Russell, 
 W. H Spencer, stow, Tait, Taggart, Worden, A. Wright 
 W. B. Wright-23. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, Ayr&ult, H. Backus, Bakor, 
 
400 
 
 Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish Biown, Brundage. Bull, Burn 
 cambreleng, D D Campbell, R Campbell, jr., Caiulee> 
 Clark, Ciyde, Conely, Cook, Cornell, Cudiieback, Dana> 
 Dodd, Dubois. Flanders, Fo-'syth, G aham, Greene, 
 Wa.ris, Hotchkiss. Hunt, Hunter, A Huntington, E. Hunt- 
 ing on, Hmchinson, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble, Kennedy, 
 Kinjfsl-y, Kirkland, Loomu, McNitt, Maxwell, Miller, 
 Murphy, Nellis. Nicholas, Nicoll, Parish, Powers, Presi- 
 dent, Ruoades, Richmond, Riker, Ru^gles, St. John, Sa 
 lisbury, Sears Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Simmons, Smith, 
 S.anton, Stephens, Stetson, Strong, Swackhamer, Tall- 
 mad 'e, J. J. Taylor, W. Tayior, Tilden. Townsend, Tot 
 hill, Vnche, Ward, Warren, Waterbury, White, Willard, 
 Wiibevk, Wood, Yawger, Young 84. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL laid on the table a motion for 
 a reconsideration. 
 
 The question was next taken on filling the 
 blank with 40, and it was lost ayes 46, nays 63, 
 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, Baker, Ba- 
 com, Burr, D D Campbell, Chattield, C nely, Crooker, 
 Da.iiortb, Dodd, Imbois, Forsyth, Gar.lner, O- bhard 
 Greene, Hawl^y, Jones, Marvin, filler, Morri , Murphy, 
 O'Conor, I'atter?on, Pennimari, Riciimund, Ruggles. Rn. 
 sell, Salisbury, Shaver, Simmons, Smith, W. H. Spencer, 
 Stets-on, Scow, Swackhamer, Taft, Taggart, Tilden, 
 Townsend, Willard, Woiden, A. Wright, W. B. Wright, 
 Young 46. 
 
 NAYS Messrs H. Backus, Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish, 
 Brown, Brundage, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr. Cnndee, 
 Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana, Dorlon, 
 Flanders, Graham, Harris, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, Hunt. 
 Hunter, A. Huntington,K. Hnntingion, Hutchmson.Hyde, 
 Jordan,' Kemble, Kennedy, King&ley, Kirkland, Loomis, 
 McNitt, Maxwell, Nellis, Nicholas.Nicoll, Parisli, Powers, 
 President, Rhoades, Riker St. John, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Shepard, SUnton, Stephens, Strong, Tallmadge, J. J. 
 Taylor, W Taylor, Tuthili, Vache, Ward, Warren, Wa. 
 terbtiry. White, Witbeck, Wood, Yawger 63. 
 
 On filling the blank with thirty-nine, there 
 were ayes 42, nays 67, as follows : 
 
 AYES-Messrs. Angel, Archer, H. Backus, Baker, Bas- 
 com Bergen, Bowdish, Bull D.D Campbell, Conely, Dan- 
 forth Dodd, Dubois, Gar.Jner, Gebbard, Harris, Kemble, 
 Marvin, Miller, Morris, Murphy, Nelli*, O'Conor, Patter- 
 son Penniman, Perkins, Richmond, Rugdles, Russell, 
 Salisbury, Shaver, Smith, W. H. Spencer, Stow, Strong, 
 Taft't, Taggart, Townsend, Worden, A. Wright, W. B. 
 Wright, Young 42. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, Bouck, Brown, Brundage, 
 Burr, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, Jr. Candee, Chatfteld, 
 Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cornell, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, 
 Dorlon, Flanders, Graham, Hawley v Hoffman. Hotchkiss, 
 Hunt, Hunter.A. Huntington, E. Iluntington, Hutchinson, 
 Hyde Jones, Jordan, Kennedy, Kingsley, Kirkland, Loo- 
 mis McNitt, Maxwell. Nicholas, Nicoll, Parish, Poweis, 
 President, Khoades, Riker, St. John, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Shepard Simmons, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Swack- 
 hamer Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, W Taylor, Tilden, Tut- 
 hili, Vache, Ward, Warren. Waterbury, White, Willard, 
 Witbeck, Wood, Yawger 67. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND laid on the table a motion for 
 a reconsideration. 
 
 The motion to fill the blank with 36 was also 
 lost ayes 44, noes 62. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS laid on the table a motion for a 
 reconsideration. 
 
 The question then recurred on filling the blank 
 with 32, the present number of Senators. This 
 was carried ayes 63, noes 43, as follows : 
 
 \YES-Messrs. Angel, Ayrault, H. Backus, Bergen. 
 \ck, Brown, Brundage, Burr, Lambreleng, R. Camp- 
 Jr Candee, Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback. 
 v Flanders, Graham, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunier, A- 
 inston, E. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jordan, 
 \^dy Kingsley, Kirklanci, Loomis, MoNitt, Maxwell, 
 W Nicholas, Nicoll, Parish, Patterson, Powers, Pre- 
 Rhoades, Riker, Ruggles, St. John, Sears, Shaw, 
 i Shepard, Stanton, btephens, Strong, Tallmadge, 
 ,lor W. Taylor, Townsend, Tu thill, Ward, War- 
 terbury, White, Witbeck, Wood, Yawger 63. 
 
 NOES --.Messrs Archer. Baker. Basrom. Bowdish Bull, 
 D. D. < ampbe 1, CluthVld, Crooker Danlorth Dodd Dor- 
 Ion Dubois Gardner Gebhard, Harris. Hwlev, Hoftman, 
 Jones. Kemble. Marvi. ., Miller. Morris, Nellis 0'< onor, 
 Penniman Perkins Richmond. Russell. Salisbury, Shav* r, 
 Smith W H Spencer. Stetson. Stow. Swackhamer Tafl, 
 Taggart, Tilden, Vache, Willard, Worden, A. Wright, W. 
 " Weight, Young- 43. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD laid on the table a motion 
 for a reconsideration. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned to 9 o'clock to 
 morrow morning. 
 
 THURSDAY, (43d day,} July 23. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. HITCHCOCK. 
 
 Mr. TU I HILL presented a petition from citi- 
 zens of Orange county, in relation to the right of 
 railroad corporations to take property of individu- 
 als 
 
 Mr. BROWN approved of the memorial, and 
 stated at length many grievances the people of 
 Orange had endured from the N. Y. and Erie rail 
 road Co He moved its reference to committee 
 No. 7. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said the committee on Rights 
 &c. had considered and reported on that very sub- 
 ject, that no private property shall be taken with- 
 out proper compensation. 
 
 Mr. BROWN desired to print the petition. 
 This was opposed and lost. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND would ask the Chairman 
 of committees No. 14 and No. 15, when they 
 meant to report. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said, in answer to the inquiry 
 of the gentleman from New York, that the com- 
 mittee on municipal corporations, was ready to 
 report, except that one of its members of more 
 experience on the subject than any other upon 
 the committee, (Mr. ALLEN,) being absent, in 
 consequence of sickness, and perhaps other un- 
 controlable reasons, the report could not be sub- 
 mitted to him, as was desirable, before it was made 
 to the house. He said he would embrace the op- 
 portunity to correct a statement which had gone 
 forth in one of the public prints, founded, it was 
 said in that journal, upon the remark of a mem- 
 ber of the committee, that the committee had 
 met but once. He felt bound to say that such 
 statement was not true. The committee had 
 held various meetings before that time, and as 
 many as any other committee of the Convention, 
 before the gentleman from New- York, to whom 
 he had alluded, had left the sittings of the Con- 
 vention, except the judiciary committee. Since 
 then his absence, connected with a desire to obtain 
 certain statistical information which had been 
 asked ibr in relation to city expenditures and tax- 
 ation, had delayed ihe action of the committee. 
 Some of its members wished to wait for the result 
 of the deliberations ot the Convention now sitting 
 in New-York for the purpose of revising its char- 
 ter. But though the other considerations to which, 
 he had referred, served to reconcile the committee 
 to the delay which the absence of the gentleman 
 from New- \ oik had caused, yet he would repeat 
 that the committee had agreed upon a report 
 which only awaited his return to be made to the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he held in his hand a 
 letter from Mr. ALLEN, stating that he was still 
 
401 
 
 unwell, and that it was uncertain when he would 
 be able to leave home. 
 
 Mr MURPHY continued: In view of the in- 
 formation just communicated he would inform the 
 house that the committee would bring in its report 
 on Tuesday. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS read part of a letter from Mr, 
 
 ALLEN, who was sick. 
 Mr. MURPHY said then 
 
 that committee No. 
 
 14 would report next Tuesday. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to the consid- 
 eration of the resolution submitted yesterday af- 
 ternoon, in relation to the number of Senators, 
 term, &c. 
 
 As to the term Mr. CROOKER moved to fill 
 the blank with one year ; Mr. WHITE with^wo 
 years ; Mr. MURPHY with three years ; Mr. 
 TALLMADGE with four years. 
 
 The question was first put on filling the blank 
 with four years. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE desired to explain the rea- 
 son for his motion. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the subject was not de- 
 bateable, as the previous question ordered yester- 
 day applied to the whole resolution. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS insisted that the previous ques- 
 tion was only upon filling the first blank, and he 
 appealed from the decision of the Chair. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said if objections were made, 
 motions to fill the remaining blanks could not be 
 entertained, and he therefore decided the question 
 to be upon the resolution as it stood, with one 
 blank filled and two unfilled. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said the subject had better be 
 divided into three resolutions, or the previous 
 question would apply to the whole of them. 
 
 Mr. JONES said the appeal was not debateable. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said it was. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN had anticipated this trouble 
 yesterday ; and then understood the chair to de- 
 cide that the previous question would apply only 
 to the first blank. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : No motion for filling those 
 other blanks was made before the motion for the 
 previous question was made and seconded. Un- 
 der the parliamentary rule, no motion for filling 
 other blanks would be in order now. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE hoped the Chair would 
 be sustained . 
 
 Mr. PERKINS: Will not the committee feel in- 
 structed to report no terms &c., at all under this 
 instruction of the resolution in blank. 
 
 Mr. WHITE would ask the general consent of 
 the house to allow these blanks to be filled. 
 
 The PRESIDENT: The question is on 
 sage of the resolution. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD demanded the ayes and noes 
 and the resolution was adopted as it stood, ayes 
 70, noes 45. 
 
 Mr. BAKER now moved a reconsideration of 
 the vote filling the blank with 32. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE demanded the ayes and 
 noes on this. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved a resolution instructing 
 committee No. 1, to make the Senatorial term 
 three years. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELING moved to strike out three 
 and insert two 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON was in favor of striking out 
 the three years, but he would make the term for 
 a single year. Senators should be as directly ac- 
 countable to their constituents as Assemblymen. 
 As long as the Senate formed a portion of the 
 court of last resort, there was a propriety in hav- 
 ing them elected for a long term. But he trust- 
 ed no member would vote to retain that body as 
 part of the Court of Errors or any other court. 
 
 those 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON sustained 
 
 the decision of 
 
 to be a purely legislative 
 should be brought directly 
 
 And when it was 
 body, the members 
 
 responsible to the people. If they discharged 
 their duty faithfully, they would be sure to be 
 re-elected. If they were unfaithful they should 
 not be entrusted wiih power a second year. He 
 would move to make the term one year. He 
 would do so now, because if he yielded the floor 
 without doing it, the previous question might be 
 sprung upon him. 
 
 After some conversation, 
 
 Mr. JONES said that he was in favor of limit- 
 ing the term of senators to two years, in order 
 that they might be brought more immediately 
 home to their constituents, as regarded the ac- 
 countability for th%ir acts. He preferred two 
 years to a one year's term. If gentlemen were so 
 exceedingly desirous of having the members of 
 
 the chair. The question is on the resolution with I both branches elected annually ,they could accom- 
 
 one of the blanks filled and the other two not filled. 
 
 Mr. BROWN asked a question relative to the 
 effect of the previous question. 
 
 The PRESIDENT repeated his former decis- 
 
 ion. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS: 
 
 Then this is a kind of a 
 
 double gag law ; that is all I can say about it. 
 (Cries of" order" and laughter.) 
 
 The PRESIDENT : It is not now in order to 
 fill the blanks. 
 
 Mr. N1CHOL\S: Can I appeal fiom the Cr. air? 
 
 The PRESIDENT: Yes sir. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS: Then I do appeal. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE: If we adopt this resolu- 
 tion with two of the blanks not filled, th^n it will 
 go the committee of the whole; the subjects of 
 filling the blanks will then be the subject of dis- 
 cussion there, subject to the five minute rule of 
 debate. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : That will be the case. 
 
 27 
 
 plish their object by a much simpler mode than 
 any he had as yet heard proposed. Elect a larger 
 number of assemblymen, and then divide them 
 into two bodies ; send one into the senate and keep 
 the other here in the assembly chamber. But he 
 (Mr. J.) considered that the senators and assem- 
 blymen ought to be elected by different constitu- 
 encies, and he preferred the two years' terra to 
 any other. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG could not agree with the 
 gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON). 
 He wanted a longer term for the senators than 
 one year. He was willing to admit that if the 
 people were never to be subject to popular com- 
 motion, there might be some strength in his argu- 
 ment. The great object to be obtained by a long- 
 er term was stability in legislation. Four years 
 might be too long, but one year was not to be 
 thought of. He desired a stable Senate ; one in 
 which we should have security against frequent 
 changes in the laws. He would refer to the se- 
 
402 
 
 nate of the United States as the standard of past 
 legislation in this respect. He should go for a 
 three years term. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES moved to strike out " one 
 month," and insert "four years." He insisted 
 that the principal objections to that term being 
 two long, would be entirely removed when the 
 power of appointment was taken away from the 
 Senate. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that he wished to have the 
 term fixed ar 3 years. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN believed that the true conserva- 
 tive body of this government was the people, and 
 that the Assembly, coming more directly from 
 the people, was the conservative body in contra- 
 distinction from the Senate. He did not say this 
 for the purpose of flattering the public ear ; but 
 he believed that representatives of the people 
 should merely reflect the popular will. He did 
 not say that the people were always right. He 
 had for several years of his public life for the 
 last 16 years been proclaiming to his constitu- 
 ents that they were wrong in many or most of the 
 measures they adopted or desired to adopt. But 
 the people must correct their own errors. There 
 was a necessity for making the Senate, which 
 was a legislative body, and nothing else, feel a 
 direct responsibility to their constituents. They 
 must conform to public interests, and they must 
 conform to public will; and the representative 
 body ought not to be formed on a principle that 
 removed the Senate from the action of the public 
 will. There had been instances, and he asked 
 the gentleman from Dutchess (Mr. TALLMADGE) 
 if he could not remember a memorable instance 
 of a departure from the expressed will of the 
 people, when the Senate, in a time of great party 
 and popular excitement, committed a high out- 
 rage on the public will ? Why then not correct 
 this evil by shortening the term for which they 
 are elected ? They would not commit any such 
 outrage if they had to go home at the end of the 
 session, and surrender their trust immediately to 
 the people. He concurred with the gentleman 
 from Essex, that the House of Assembly was 
 the conservative body of the Legislature. They 
 always would be so; and a reason for it was 
 their immediate responsibility to the people. 
 He would, therefore, be in favor of a term of one 
 year for the Senate, elected by single districts. 
 Give us a Senate of a sufficiently large number, 
 representing fairly the public will, and he would 
 go for the one year term. There was a manifest 
 impropriety in the proposition of the gentleman 
 from New-York, (Mr. JONES) to elect a large 
 number and divide them into two Houses. There 
 would then be no distinction between them, and 
 there might as well be but a single House. A 
 Senate for a longer term has a less sense of re- 
 sponsibility than one would have if elected only 
 for a year. The Senate of the United States had 
 been referred to, as holding over for six years. 
 But that Senate represented various independent 
 sovereignties ; and not the body of the people at 
 large ; there was no analogy between the two 
 bodies. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS advocated the three year term. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD asked if the proposition of 
 the gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) 
 would not necessarily do away with single dis- 
 
 tricts. Either one-third must be elected annual- 
 ly, or the whole body of the Senate must be fresh 
 every three years. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said if we had 30 Senators, he 
 would have 10 districts ; or if they had 36 Sena- 
 tors, he would have 12 districts, and elect one- 
 third each year, 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD was in favor of having 24 
 double districts ; 48 Senators, to be elected for a 
 two years' term , and one to be elected for each 
 district every year. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE was opposed to the pre- 
 sent Jacobin and revolutionary spirit that was- 
 abroad in the land. He wished not to have all 
 the old landmarks of the Constitution and the 
 great institutions of the country destroyed. He 
 believed in the wisdom of our ancestors, and that 
 we ought not to destroy all that is good in our 
 land, because it was a quarter or a half century 
 old. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said the gentleman from 
 Dutchess (Mr. TALLMADGE) had so repeatedly 
 denounced the friends of reform as revolutionary, 
 he felt called up n, as one of the denounced, to 
 vindicate the cause. The gentleman had made 
 frequent appeals to the Convention, defending the 
 wisdom of our ancestors. No one had a higher 
 veneration than he had for the patriotic framers 
 of our Constitutions ; but we should be unworthy 
 of them, and of ourselves, if we should sanctify 
 and perpetuate error, on account of its antiquity, 
 especially when they themselves acknowledged 
 that the science of government was in its infancy. 
 The proposition introduced recently by the gen- 
 tleman himself, to abolish imprisonment for debt, 
 is an admirable illustration that it is still in its 
 infancy. It is the very principle established by 
 Solon, twenty-five hundred years ago that the 
 body of the man should not answer for his civil 
 debts. The only difference is, that in Athen* 
 the debtor was the slave of the creditor ; and in 
 this enlightened age, he is still, in some coun- 
 tries and in some parts of our own a state 
 prisoner. Government not in its infancy ? Why, 
 sir, we have not yet applied the immortal truths 
 and principles recorded by Montesquieu, a hun- 
 dred years ago. He tells us that " the people, in 
 whom the supreme power resides, ought to have 
 the management of every thing within their reach 
 what exceeds their abilities, must be conducted 
 by their ministers. The inhabitants of a town 
 are best acquainted with its wants and interests, 
 and are the best judges of the capacity of their 
 neighbors. It is fit the people should transact 
 by their representatives, what they cannot trans- 
 act themselves. The deputy ought to be account- 
 able to his constituents. The people are extreme- 
 ly well qualified tor choosing those whom they 
 are to entrust with part of their authority. Thay 
 are very capable of electing a General and a Judge 
 who has been assidious in his office, gives general 
 satisfaction, and has never been charged with 
 bribery." Yes, sir; this very question which is 
 to come before us the popular election of judges 
 even at this enlightened period, so startling to 
 some gentlemen, jbut to continue he further 
 tells us " all the inhabitants ought to have a right 
 of voting, except those who are so mean as to 
 have no will of their own ; when the common 
 people adopt good maxims, they adhere to them 
 
403 
 
 steadier than those we call gentlemen. It is very 
 rare that corruption commences with the former. 
 Where the legislative, executive, and judiciary 
 powers are not separated, liberty is not secure. 
 A constitution that has all the internal advanta- 
 ges of a republican, with the external force of a 
 monarchical government : a confederate republic." 
 Here sir, we have all the elements ot a popular 
 and limited government founded on unlimited 
 confidence, in the soutid maxims and incorrupti- 
 bility of the peop], as the supreme power on 
 theii capacity for self-government from a lown to 
 a confederacy all laid down in propositions so 
 concise and terms so simple, it is impossible to 
 misapprehend them. Was Montesquieu a dem- 
 agogue ? Was he a revolutionist? No sir, he 
 was the benefactor of his age. and of all future 
 ages an inspired philosopher, contemplating, at 
 no distant period, a confederation ot popular 
 republics. These simple and concise principles 
 were however, litlle understood by many of our 
 enlightened men, who had all the prejudices of a 
 British Colonial education, little confluence in 
 popular virtue or intelligence, and who believed 
 that property was the primary object of govern, 
 ment. The proceedings of the Federal Conven- 
 tion prove, as was declared by many of its mem- 
 bers, that the science of government was in its 
 infancy. One distinguished gentleman proposed 
 as a qualification for President, that he should 
 possess one hundred thousand dollars in property 
 the supreme judges fifty thousand dollars and 
 members of Congress in proportion. Another 
 pronounced the trial by jury an absurdity, and 
 another, afterwards, a prominent democrat that 
 democracy w;.s the worst of all possible evils. 
 Such we e a tew, only, of the extraordinary opin- 
 ions of some of the most prominent men in that 
 convention. We have now been engaged for 
 seventy years in framing our constitutions, state 
 a"d federal, and in all our conventions, the con- 
 test has been between popular rights and slate 
 rights on the one side and property and power on 
 the other. Leading men'of both parties have 
 been, by turns, the advocates of power or right, 
 according to their political position. The first 
 important contest began in the federal Conven- 
 tion. What confidence had some of its most en- 
 lightened members in popular election or ap- 
 pointment? The very first proposition was made 
 by Virginia one of its provisions was that the 
 House of Representatives should be chosen by the 
 people the Senate by the House, and the Presi- 
 dent by both Houses carrying out the princi- 
 ple of Mr Madison, who, to use his own language, 
 as recorded by himself, was for "refining pop- 
 ular appointments by successive filtrations." 
 Hs considered the pure fountain of all power 
 as turbid so much so, as to require successive 
 filtrations through that purest of refiners, dele- 
 gated power. But the people were not without 
 their advocates in that Convention there was a 
 Franklin to defend " the virtue and intelligence 
 of the common people" and a Wilson to pro- 
 claim them " the legitimate source of all autho- 
 rity," and that " the difference between a medi- 
 ate and an immediate election was immense." 
 Again, sir, what were the opinions then about 
 State rights ? Hamilton thought that " as States 
 they ought to be abolished" the bolder Gouver- 
 
 neur Morris exclaims " What if all the charters 
 and constitutions of the States were thrown into 
 the fire and all their demagogues into the Ocean ?" 
 And the more prudent and cautious Madison says 
 " supposing a tendency in the general govern- 
 ment to absorb the State governments, no fatal 
 consequence could result." Not a vestige of State 
 power would have been left had it depended on 
 those gentlemen. But, sir, there was a mighty 
 struggle there between the large States and the 
 small between power and right and our con- 
 federacy was saved by such old federalists as Ol- 
 iver Ellsworth and Roger Sherman by your 
 Johnsons and Pattersons of the small States who 
 were responded to by other distinguished fede- 
 ralists in the Conventions held to ratify the Con- 
 stitution by Patrick Henry of Virginia who 
 dreaded " the ropes and chains of consolidation" 
 and in whose view the States were " the soul 
 of the confederation" by Fisher Ames in the 
 east, who told us that " too much provision could 
 not be made against consolidation. The State go- 
 vernments represent the feelings, wishes and in- 
 terests of the people. They are the safeguard 
 and ornament of the Constitution. They will 
 protract the period of our liberties they will af- 
 ford a shelter against the abuse of power and will 
 be the natural avengers of our violated rights.'* 
 Such were the doctrines of federalism in 1787 
 and 1788 had they and their successors ad- 
 hered to these principies the principles of 
 Jefferson how many abuses of power and fed- 
 eral usurpations would have been avoided. 
 Our State Constitutions even at this day prove 
 that the science ol Government is in its inlancy. 
 VV hat is the history of our conventions but a series 
 of struggles to strip property and power of their 
 usurpations and to vindicate popular rights ? And 
 what progress has been made I Take the two old- 
 est governments on this continent Massachu- 
 setts and Virginia. Massachusetts was originally 
 a slrictdemooracy all the male inhabitants voted 
 then it became a representative government 
 then none but a member of a church could vote, 
 and it became a Hierarchy. Subsequently a union 
 was formed between property and religion, which 
 governed that commonwealth for generations. 
 VVhy sir, so late as 1321, when their last Conven- 
 tion was held all the ability and all the eloquence 
 of that Convention led on by their most distin- 
 guished orator, were employed to carry through a 
 proposition to make wealth the basis of power in 
 the Senate assessment of property was to be the 
 ratio of representation in that body in other words 
 the agricultural counties were to be controlled by 
 the wealth of the cities especially Boston. This 
 abominable proposition was carried in that en- 
 lightened Convention; but the yeomanry of that 
 old commonwealth proved that they understood 
 the principles of popular government, better than 
 their wise and able representatives, by defeating 
 it by an overwhelming majority. And in Virginia 
 what have we seen ? A long and never ending 
 struggle between property and right between the 
 freeholder and the freeman. At the origin of that 
 government and lor half a century all the freemen 
 were generally entitled to vote until 1677 when 
 Charles the II. having quarreled with the govern- 
 ment, sent an order to his Governor backed by 
 two regiments, directing that none but freeholders 
 
404 
 
 should vote, and that the Assembly should only 
 meet biennally- Notwithstanding the disgraceful 
 origin of this freehold qualification, it continued 
 for more than a century and a half. In the Con- 
 vention of 1829-30, all the eloquence and ability 
 of the Old Dominion were exhausted to perpetu. 
 ate the decree ot Charles the lid. And even now 
 sir, to vote in Virginia the man must belong to the 
 House or the land, and the provision relating to 
 the right of suffrage is almost as long as a bill in 
 chancery this too in the oldest government in 
 the Western Hemisphere. We can have no bet- 
 ter evidence that the science of government is in 
 its infancy, when we find, that in the oldest of 
 our governments the Executive and the Judiciary 
 are both the offsprings of the Legislature still 
 perpetuating Mr. Madison's principle of " refin- 
 ing popular appointments by successive fillra- 
 tions" and violating that fundamental principle 
 of Irea government, the mutual independence of 
 the Legislative, Executive and Judicial powers. 
 And what progress has the science of government 
 made in our own State ? We have had for seven- 
 ty years annual sessions of the Legislature, and we 
 have had three Conventions and what is the re- 
 sult ? We find ourselves, as we began, with a 
 constitution giving the supreme legislative power 
 of the State to the Legislature unrestricted and 
 unlimited. And sir, for seventy years no effort 
 has been made to specify the powers which should 
 be delegated, and no provision that all powers not 
 delegated are reserved to the people. No. On 
 the contrary the whole power of the State is in 
 the hands of the Legislature a power which no 
 monarch in any well regulated monarchy in Eu- 
 rope possesses, has been by a single clause in our 
 constitution conferred on our Legislature. And 
 what has baen the consequence? What has ever 
 attended absolute power a legislative despo- 
 tism ? Instead of having a limited constitu- 
 tion prescribing the f--w general and high duties 
 belonging to the State as we now propose 
 to do, we left the Legislature with unlimited 
 power they have undertaken not only to reg- 
 ulate the general concerns ot the State but 
 they have descended to the affairs of counties 
 and towns, nay even to regulating the private bu- 
 siness of men. Not a creek can be bridged with- 
 out the special permission of the legislature, and 
 we have had statute upon statute, privilege on 
 privilege, incorporation on incorporation and mo- 
 nopoly on monopoly. Why, sir, in earlier times 
 the driving of a stage from Utica to Canandaigua 
 was a monopoly ! Such were the results of un- 
 limited power. Had we started with a Consti- 
 tution framed upon the principles of government 
 advocated by Jefferson and by every profound po- 
 litical philosopher of France and England in the 
 last century had the state legislature been re- 
 stricted to a few high and general powers pro- 
 perly belonging to the State, leaving the local af- 
 fairs of counties and towns to their own regula- 
 tion, and men to the management of all their 
 private affairs, unaided and unrestricted by the 
 legislature had our government been founded on 
 this simple,wise and just plan, how different would 
 have been the result at this day. Again, sir, had 
 all appointments been given to the people from 
 the beginning as they should have been had all 
 these reforms been provided for what scene? 
 
 would have been avoided ? This lobby would not 
 lave been annually crowded for seventy years 
 with the agents of wealth this capital would not 
 [live been visited annually by hosts of office-hold- 
 ers and office-seekers your legislation would 
 not have been corrupted noryour government dis- 
 jraced. I did not rise, however, to go into this 
 ;reat constitutional question, but to vindicate the 
 cause of reform and to show that the science of 
 overnment was still in its 'infancy. 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said he wished to continue the 
 Senate pretty much on its present footing. He 
 had heard no good reason assigned for shortening 
 the term as has been here proposed. It is a new 
 question, one which so far as he knew had not 
 3een thought of by the people. The senate has 
 always been made a. more permanent body than 
 the Assembly for various reasons, to guard legis- 
 lation against the effects of high temporary excite- 
 ments, and the influence of faction ; to secure at 
 all times in one branch, a class of experienced 
 representatives ; also that they may have greater 
 freedom of action as the representatives of the 
 whole State, and and not merely of their own im- 
 mediate district or county. These are objects 
 virtually important to the well being of the State,, 
 and if they have not been always properly attain- 
 ed, the defect has been in improper selections of 
 men sometimes made by the people to represent 
 them in the Senate, and not in the system itself. 
 He believed this had been the case more or less 
 and from a cause to which he will presently allude. 
 Mr. N. said he must differ with those gentlemen 
 who had expressed the opinion that practically 
 the Assembly was a mote conservative body than 
 the Senate. Upon a retrospect they will find that 
 more rash and improvident legislation has been 
 checked in the latter than the former branch; and 
 if we are to suppose them equally honest, how can 
 it be otherwise ? A member of the Assembly, al- 
 though in fact representing the State, and in an 
 emergency might be true to her interests, still, as 
 the immediate representative of his own county, 
 he feels it incumbent on him to allow no object 
 to conflict with the interest of his county. He 
 may unconsciously take an improper course on a 
 question of general interest to the State, from a 
 fear of arraying an opposition to some question af- 
 fecting, perhaps, the division of a county or the 
 erection of a bridge. A devotion to the interests 
 of nis immediate representatives is highly com- 
 mendable when kept within proper limits, but the 
 State may always sufftt from its excess. Senators 
 who are faithful men during their longer term do 
 not lose their local attachment ; they continue 
 their supervision of the interests o! their immedi. 
 ate constituents, and at the same time their views 
 become generalized or enlarged j they look more to 
 the interests of the State at large. Gentlemen 
 think that the duties of the Senate v\ hen its judi- 
 cial duties cease, will be of less importance than 
 formerly j there certainly can be no duty more im- 
 portant than to conduct the legislation ot a great 
 State, having a rapidly increasing population of 
 three millions with all its diversified interests. 
 When the present court of errors no longer exists, 
 the Senate will be in a different position, and he 
 (Mr. N.) predicted that there will be a larger 
 and better range in which to select candidates 
 for the Senate. Legislative and Judicial duties, 
 
405 
 
 together, have required the senator who has ai 
 tended to them to be absent from horr.e at least nine 
 months in the year. A few competent men en 
 gasc^d in business may make the necessary sac 
 nfice to serve one term, hut the most capable pro 
 fessional and business men generally do not fee 
 able to abandon their own pursuits to fill a sta 
 ti<>n which will occupy them three-fourths o 
 the year. The consequence has been that in too 
 many cases men become candidates for the Sen 
 ate because they have but little business to de 
 tain them at home ; and, generally speaking, mei 
 who are without employment at home, should not 
 be the men to have in charge the business of the 
 public. Hereafter, the occupation of a Sena- 
 tor will be reversed ; he may in future attend to 
 his own business three-quarters of the year, anc 
 be absent only three months. This change will 
 induce a greater number of competent men to 
 consent to assume the responsible duties of a 
 Senator, when it can be done with so much less 
 inconvenience and sacrifice than formerly. Mr. 
 N. alluded to this change to show not only that 
 from a discontinuance of the judicial functions ol 
 the Senate, no gentleman here should deprecate 
 the importance of the Senate, but that this change 
 affords a strong additional inducement to continue 
 the Senate on its present stable basis. He, Mr. 
 N., preferred to make no change in its term of 
 office, but if it should be decided not to continue 
 it at four years, he should vote for the term near- 
 est to it. Mr. N. said the second question in this 
 resolution he would now refer to, as it was con- 
 nected with the first, that is, the division of the 
 State into Senatorial districts. He thought the 
 single district system should be adopted as in all 
 respects preferable to our present system. In 
 single districts the people have a better opportu- 
 nity to know candidates for the Senate, and there 
 is less opportunity for intrigue in a small than a 
 large district. And the Senator, when knowing 
 his constituents, may with greater facility com- 
 municate with them on subjects of business. 
 
 There is one other question connected with this 
 subject which has been discussed, and will be 
 agam considered, and that is an increase of the 
 number of Senators. He, Mr. N., had as yet ad- 
 hered to the present number. There were circum- 
 stances, however, connected with the arrange- 
 ment of the districts, and the considerations re- 
 ferring to the relative position of the cities and 
 the rural sections of the State, which mi-ht yet 
 induce him to vote for a small addition to the pre- 
 sent number of Senators. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS advocated a term of 3 years for 
 the term of Senators as being a period which 
 would ensure stability to our legislation, and yet 
 bring the Senators so within the reach of the peo- 
 )le, as to be amenable to them ; and at the same 
 time render them sufficiently permanent to with- 
 stand any local temporary excitement that might 
 arise in the public mind. The term of one or 
 two years would not attain this end. There were 
 also conviencies of election which would be at- 
 tained. I he Senate should be elected for a differ- 
 nt period of time from either of the other bodies 
 The expression of the public mind in favor of 
 shortening the term of office of Senators was very 
 feeble. The public mind in calling this Con- 
 vention was mainly occupied with the consid- 
 
 eration of some three or four prominent evils. 
 He was not afraid of reform in government, 
 but he thought the proceeding should be cautious, 
 and careful. He was not aware that there had 
 been a general call for single districts, although 
 there had been that the present districts were in- 
 convenient. The report had been made in favor of 
 electing the State officers for two years, the gov- 
 ernor was to be elected for the same term, and 
 now to make the Senate election at the same term, 
 would be to make a clear sweep in the g9vern- 
 ment every two years. And if that was so, very 
 little attention would be paid to the intervening 
 elections for the people would not come out, 
 perceiving at once that they could do nothing then 
 to change the policy of the State government. But 
 if there should be a division of these elections, 
 there would be a general expression of voters 
 at other elections besides that of the election 
 when the Governor was elected. If not, this 
 could not be attained.' In electing the Sena- 
 tors for two years, it would destroy the stability 
 and permanency of the body, and destroy also, its 
 features as the representative of a fair expression 
 of the popular will. The biennial election, too, 
 he urged would destroy the great berefits of the 
 Senate as a check upon the popular body. It 
 would prevent also its members from attaining 
 that experience in legislation which it was desir- 
 able that they should have. As to annual elec- 
 tions, that was subversive of all the theory upon 
 which the institution of a Senate has been based. 
 These, Mr. P. said were his views of the practical 
 wordings of the various systems that had been 
 proposed. Mr. P. urged that a Senator should 
 represent a different and a more extended local- 
 ty, as tending to make their views in regard to 
 measures of political economy more general, and 
 more divested of peculiarly local and sectional 
 feeling. If the Senators were to elected for three 
 years, of course it would be necessary to increase 
 the number from 32 to some that would di- 
 vide by three. Whether that was 39 or 42 he 
 cared very little. 
 
 Mr. STRONG wished to say a few. words to 
 save time. Were gentlemen aware that a record 
 was kept of the number of speeches made ? One 
 gentleman had made eleven speeches in one day 
 on the same subject, and what a picture would that 
 present if published. He did not believe that all 
 :he talk that could be had would change a single 
 vote. Men's minds were were already made up. 
 Was the object of doing this to prevent the Conven- 
 tion from doing any thing and to defeat the pur- 
 pose for which it was called ? If it was, then 
 t was time that it should be checked. With a 
 view of testing the sense of the Convention as to 
 hat, he moved the previous question. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL, jr. urged that the motion 
 should be withdrawn, inasmuch as the chairman 
 f the committee, who reported this proposition 
 tfas absent through illness. It was but due to 
 iim that he should have an opportunity of being 
 present. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called for the ayes and nays on 
 econding the call. They were ordered. 
 
 The previous question was not seconded ayes 
 0, nays 73. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that the Chairman of the 
 
406 
 
 committee, al hough not well, did not desire that 
 the question should be suspended on that ac- 
 count. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE denied there was truth in the as- 
 sertion that the people had not called for the sin- 
 gle district system. In his county the former 
 political parties, each passed resolutions in favor 
 of this proposition. He should, therefore mis- 
 represent them did he not go for it. He urged 
 that it did not require a service in legislation to 
 make a man competent to the discharge of the du- 
 ties of Senator. The history of the Senate, shows 
 that never in the history of this state, had such 
 scenes transpired in a legislative body as were 
 witnessed there, and this was from men old in 
 legislative experience. The objection of the gen- 
 tleman from St. Lawrence, to limit the time to 
 two years, as to inconvenience in election, could 
 be easily obviated. It would tend also to render 
 that body more pure. Experience taught us that 
 long continuance in office rendered men as well 
 as parties, liable to corruption. He was distinct- 
 ly opposed to electing Senators for more than two 
 years. It would be placing them in the same po- 
 sition as was Congress, and it was quite as im- 
 portant to have honesty in the Senate as in Con- 
 gress. Mr. B. further sustained the single dis- 
 trict. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that some time ago he im- 
 posed a restriction upon himself that would for- 
 bid him to occupy the time of the Convention 
 until another committee should have reported ; 
 but when he heard the gentleman from Dutchess 
 congratulate the Convention and the country, 
 that two months of the Convention had been ex- 
 pended without harm, because nothing had been 
 done, and when the same gentleman had as- 
 sured us that we were now upon the brink of a 
 precipice, he thought a little consideration might 
 be indulged and perhaps a little attention paid 
 to personal security before we take the plunge. 
 He thanked the gentleman for the congratulations 
 m which he had indulged, because he hoped that 
 when it came to be understood that there were 
 strong and influential men in this body, whose re- 
 verence for the past prevented them from desir- 
 ing changes and reforms, the responsibility of the 
 delay would not all rest upon the few men that 
 had consumed some portion of its time in endea- 
 vors to bring its consideration to the reforms that 
 the public voice, the public interests, and he would 
 add the public security demand. He had borne a 
 humble but somewhat active part in the agitation 
 that had prepared the public mind for constitution- 
 al changes through the agency of a convention, 
 and he felt no little regret that the time had come 
 when the opponents of reform, could with some 
 propriety, congratulate themselves, that so little 
 had been done, and more than intimate the hope 
 that little or nothing was to be accomplished here- 
 aiter. There v\ ere many he hoped, there was one ne 
 knew, that bad come here wiih the honest inten- 
 tion of proposing such radical and effectual altera. 
 tions as ttie public interests and the cause of pop- 
 ular ngiils and safety required, who were not to 
 be detetred by the epithets not now for the first 
 tune used, upon thisfloor, of Democrat or Jacobin. 
 One of those epithets had ceased to be opprobri- 
 ous, and he had not such acquaintance with the 
 gentleman's early political history as to know 
 
 whether he had learned iis use before it ceased 10 
 be so er since. But not only had the word Jaco. 
 bin been used, but the French Revolution, with 
 its Jacobin assembly, and its bloody Guillotine, 
 had been brought up for our review to deter us 
 from the adoption of such propositions as our 
 judgments might otherwise approve. It is but a 
 few days ago that the sepulchre ot Tom Paine was 
 invaded and his bones rattled about our ears by 
 the charm of the same gent leman's eloquence, and 
 now when suchlike arguments were again pre- 
 sented, might he not ask gentlemen for a moment 
 to consider, that the French Revolution itself, 
 with all its wild anarchy and blood, was but a 
 result, of causes, and that wise governmental re. 
 forms and prudent changes would have pre- 
 vented the world from witnessing that terri. 
 ble catastrophe, and that awful as was the 
 sacrifice of human life, that conservatism slaugh- 
 tered more men at St. Bartholomew in a 
 single day, than fell under the axe of the 
 Guillotine during the whole revolutionary period. 
 It had been his fortune to commence the con- 
 sideration of political subjects at about the peri- 
 od when the people's party, with the gentleman 
 from Dutchess for its champion, avenged as far 
 as in their power the wrong to popular rights, 
 that had been committed by seventeen men in the 
 Senate Chamber, in withholding the Electoral 
 ballot box ; when the gentleman's eloquent ap- 
 peals in behalf of popular rights and his vindica- 
 tion of popular intelligence constituted the reci- 
 tations for the school boy's oratory, and some 
 opinions and feelings thus early formed had clung 
 to him still and had been strengthened by expe- 
 rience. And he would here say in answer to the 
 repeated declarations we had heard upon this floor 
 to the contrary, that from that period to this, no 
 part of the government had been watched with 
 more jealousy, none more frequently the subject 
 of complaint, and none the subject ot more pro- 
 posed reforms than the Senate itself. It was not 
 long ago that the State was unrepresented in the 
 Senate of the Union, because a bare majority of 
 this small body willed it to be so. If gentlemen 
 do not remember the popular indignation of 1824, 
 have they forgotten the popular condemnation 
 that followed this act of Senatorial power? Why 
 this branch of the legislature is practically of 
 such a character so that it is common in contra- 
 distinction to call the Assembly the popular 
 branch. The gentleman from Ontario (Mr. NI- 
 CHOLAS) called it so to-day. Is it not time that 
 both branches of your legislature should be pop- 
 ular departments ? The time was when the Sen- 
 ate was so constituted as that it was not proper to 
 call it a popular branch. Before 1821, the mem- 
 bers were elected by property holders, and of the 
 Assembly by a more numerous class of voters; but 
 the Constitution of 1821 abolished that distinction, 
 and the Senate would then have been popularized 
 by increasing its numbers, reducing the term, and 
 increasing the numberof districts, but for the sup- 
 posed necessity of continuing its judicial powers. 
 What intrinsic necessity, or what propriety was 
 there now, when its judicial powers were to be 
 taken away, when its members are to be elected 
 by the same class of voters as the members of the 
 other House, for giving its members a longer term 
 than those of the other branch ? Why not elect 
 
407 
 
 Senators annually, and in districts as numerous 
 as the members themselves ? He apprehended 
 gentlemen would find it difficult to answer these 
 questions. Some, if not all of the New England 
 States, elected the members of both branches for 
 the same term, and in many other States the same 
 rule prevailed. It had been objected to short 
 terms, that experience was necessary for a proper 
 discharge of the duties of this office. The gen- 
 tleman from Madison (Mr. BRUCE) had met this 
 argument and showed that great experience had 
 not always been conducive to the good order or 
 integrity" of the body. But suppose experience 
 is as important as is supposed, will not popular 
 sagacity appreciate its importance and secure it 
 by the re-election of such as are faithful to the 
 public interest ? In Vermont, the Judges of the 
 Supreme Court are elected annually by the Le- 
 gislature. Experience in judicial duty was re- 
 garded an important qualification, and the practice 
 was uniform to re-elect every year all the judges 
 who had discharged their duties with ability. If 
 experience was necessary,the people would find it 
 out, and the single district system would enable 
 them to avail themselves of it. Now, when from 
 seven to ten or twelve counties were embraced in a 
 district, county rights required a rotation and 
 generally prevented che re-election of a Senator. 
 But there are other reasons for single districts 
 and short terms. In small counties or districts, 
 the people could assemble in mass at the centre, 
 or in different parts of the district, and them- 
 selves indicate who should be their candidate. 
 They sometimes had done so. But when the dis- 
 trict was large the intervention of delegates be- 
 came necessary, and the people were left the glo- 
 rious piivilege of deciding which set of candidates 
 are the least objectionable, upon the evidence 
 furnished by partizans, who have generally a per- 
 sonal interest in the matter. If Senators are elect- 
 ed for a longer term than one year, there is op- 
 portunity that has been and will be improved, of 
 influential persons having large interests involved 
 in legislative questions, of approaching and influ- 
 encing the fixed part of this body to a favorable 
 consideration of their interests. These were 
 some of the considerations that inclined him to 
 the support of the proposition of the gentleman 
 from Chautauque, for a term of one year. Was 
 there any thing more important than to secure 
 the purity of the legislative department ? And 
 could there be any better security than to bring 
 it under the control of the popular will, and make 
 it as responsible as possible to the popular will. 
 There was an important question, to a meat ex- 
 tent, in our hands; an important problem that 
 had in other times, and in other countries, been 
 answered differently 1'iotn what the friends of free 
 institutions desired. That problem was whe- 
 ther man was, capable of sfilf-governmeni ?" He 
 expressed no opinion upon the abstract question 
 itself, but he telt bound, here and elsewhere, to 
 do all in his power to prove by the success of the 
 experiment we are trying, that the faci is as the 
 friends of popular institutions hope. And his 
 mode was to eradicate, uproot, leform, or destroy, 
 what was vicious and bad, and cherish and pre- 
 serve all that was good. For good government, 
 as well as good husbandry, the ures must be de. 
 stroyed, that the wheat may grow. For when a 
 
 people can nor, or will not, or dare not, make the 
 necessary changes or reform* to correct the abuses 
 that experience has shown to result from their 
 system of government, or the manner of its ad- 
 ministration, the end of their freedom draws nigh. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL briefly urged that thequestion as 
 to the number of Senators should be first passed 
 upon before the length of term was decided upon. 
 To get at that question he would move to lay the 
 resolution on the table. Mr. N. waived the 
 motion however at the request of 
 
 Mr. MARVIN who desired to submit the fol- 
 lowing compromise, of the various views of mem- 
 bers. 
 
 The Senate shall consist of 42 members, and the Sena- 
 tors shall be chosen for 3 years. The Assembly shall con- 
 sist of 1-26, who shall be annually elected. The State shall 
 be divided into 126 districts, to be called Assembly Dis- 
 tiicts, each of which shall choose one Member of Assem- 
 bly. Each Assembly District shall contain as nearly as 
 maybe an equal number of inhabitants, excluding aliens, 
 and shall consist of contiguous territory in as compact and 
 regular a form as may be, and no town or ward shall be 
 divided in the formation of an Assembly District except 
 such town or ward may be entitled to two or more mem- 
 bers. 
 
 Three Assembly districts, contiguous and in as compact 
 and regular a form as may be, shall compose a Senate dis- 
 trict, which shall choose one Senator every three years. 
 The Senate districts shall be numbered from one to forty 
 two inclusive, and shall be divided into three classes to be 
 called the first, second and third class. Nos. 1, 4, 7, 10, 13 
 16, 19, 22, 25, 2S, 31, 34, 37 and 36, shall constitute the first 
 class; Nos. 2, 5, 8, J 1, 14, 17, 20, 23, 26, 29, ?2, 35, 38 and 41, 
 shall constitute the second class; and Nos. 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 
 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 33, 36, 39 and 42, shall constitute the third 
 class. The seats of the Senators first elected pursuant to 
 this Constitution of the first class, shall be vacated at the 
 end of the first year, and of the second class at the end of 
 the second year, and the third class at the end of the third 
 year, in order that 14 senators shall be annually elected. 
 
 The Assembly districts shall be composed as follows: 
 
 No. one shall consist of the followingtown^ in county, 
 
 (and so on throughout the State ) Senate district No. one* 
 shall be composed of Assembly districts Nos. 1,2 and 3, 
 (and so on through the State,) every three Assembly dis- 
 tricts making one Senate district. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL withdrew his motion. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN denied that the sentiment of the 
 people of New York had been expressed in favor 
 of any districts. He urged that the people should 
 vote for Senators throughout the State at the same 
 time, and expressed himself in favor of shorten- 
 ing the term of office to three or even two years 
 if necessary. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE briefly explained an allu- 
 sion to him by Mr. CAMBRELENG. He had not 
 said that the science of government was perfect 
 seventy years since. He had also been misappre- 
 hended in the supposition that he had applied 
 the term Jacobin to this house. He had referred 
 to the National Assembly of France in illustration 
 of his position, and as referred to, his remark was 
 apt and he did not take it back. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG congratulated the Con- 
 vention and hirnsslf that he had misunderstood 
 the remarks of the gentleman from Dutchess. 
 He was happy to find that the gentleman did not 
 think our constitutional government as perfect as 
 he (Mr. C.) thought he did. The gentleman had 
 said so much about the wisdom of our ancestors, 
 and appealed to us so often to rely on their au- 
 thority, that Mr. C. had supposed that in his 
 opinion the Constitution 70 years ago, was the 
 perfection of human wisdom. 
 
408 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND continued the debate in re- 
 ply to Mr. TALLMADGE. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 TERMS OF SENATORS. 
 
 The unfinished business of the morning was 
 taken up. 
 
 The question being upon filling the blank in 
 Mr. LOOMIS' resolution with four years : 
 
 The motion was lost ayes 17, nays 76, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Brundage, Cornell, Hunt, A. Hunting 
 ton, E. Huntington, Jordan, Kemble, Kennedy, Nelson, 
 Nicholas, O'Conor, Rhoades, Ruggles, Shepard, Smith, 
 Stephens, Tallmadge 17 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Ayrault, H. Backus, Bascom, 
 Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish, Brown, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Cam- 
 breleng, D. D. Campbell, R. Campbell, jr., Candee, Chat- 
 field, Clyde, Conely. Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, Danforth, 
 Dubois, Flanders, Forsyth, Gardner, Graham, Harrison, 
 Hart, Hawley, Hotchkiss, Hunter, Hutchmson, Hyde, 
 Jones. Kernan, Loomis, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Morris, 
 Murphy, Nelhs, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, President, 
 Richmond, Riker, St. John, Salisbury, Shaver, Shaw, 
 Sheldon, Simmons, E. Spencer, W". H Spencer. Stanton, 
 Stetson, Stow, Strong, lai't, Taggart, J. J. Taylor, Town- 
 send, Tuthill, Warren, Waterbury, White, Willard, Wood, 
 Worden, W. B. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 76. 
 
 The question was then taken upon filling with 
 three >ears, which was also lost : ayes 42, nays 
 60, 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Bergen, Bowdish, Brundage, 
 Bull, D. D. Campbell, Conely, Cornell, Dodd, Graham, 
 Greene, Harrison, Hoff.nan, Hunter. A. Huntington, E. 
 Huntington, Jordan, Kemble, Kennedy, Keinan, Loomis, 
 Marvin, Morris, Murphy, Nellis, Nelson, Nicholas, Ni- 
 co:l. O'Conor, Penniman, Perkins, Powers, Rhoades, Rug- 
 glis, Shepard, Simmons, Smith, E. Spencer. Stephens, 
 Taggart, Tallmadge, Young 42. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Ayrault, H. Backus, Bascom, Bouck, 
 Bi-..>wn, Biuce, Burr, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr., Chat- 
 field, Clyde, Crooker, Cuddebark, Dana, Danforth, Du- 
 bois, Flanders, Forsyth, Gardner, Harris, Hart, Hawley, 
 Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hutchh.son, Hyde, Jones, Kingsley, 
 Kirklaud, McNitt, Maxwell, Miller, Parish, Patterson, 
 President, Richmond, Riker, St. John, Salisbury, Shaver, 
 Shaw, Sheldon, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, 
 Strong, Taft, J. J. Taylor, Townsen.l, Tuthill, Warren, 
 Water bury, White. Willard, Wood, Wordeu, W. B. 
 Wright, Yawger, Youngs- 60. 
 
 The blank was then filled with two years: ayes 
 79, nays 24. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ayrault, H Backus, Bergen, Bouck, 
 Bowdish, Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Burr, Cambreleng, D. 
 D. Campbell, R. Campbell, jr. Candee. Chatfield, Clyde, 
 Conely, Cuddeback, Dana, Danfonh, Dodd, Dubois. For- 
 syth, Gardner, Graham, Harris, Harrison, Hait, Hotchkiss, 
 A. Huntington, Hutchinsun, Hyde, Jones, Jordan, Kemble, 
 Kernan, King.sley, Kirkland, Loomis, McNitt, Marvin, 
 Maxwell, Miller, Morris, Murphy, Nt His, Nicoll, O'Conor, 
 Parish, Penniman, Powers, President, Richmond, Riker, 
 St. John, Salisbury, Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, 
 Simmons, E. Spencer, W.H. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, 
 Stetson, Stow, Strong, Taft, J J Taylor, Tuthill, Ward, 
 Waterbury, White, Willard, W. B. Wright, Yawger, 
 Young, Youngs 79. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Bascom, Bull, Cornell, Crooker, 
 Flanders, Greene, Hawley, Horlman, Hunt. Hunter, Ken- 
 nedy, Nelson, Nicholas, Patterson, Perkins, Rhoades, 
 Rugbies, Smith, Taggart, TaLmadge, Townsend, War 
 ren, Wood 24. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved a reconsideration of the 
 last vote. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote rejecting the proposition to fill with three 
 years. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY made the same motion with 
 regard to [be four years' term. 
 
 These motions lie over. 
 
 Mr. WHITE now moved to amend Mr LOOMIS' 
 resolution, so that committee No. 1 be instructed 
 to report, that there shall be 1G districts. 
 
 Mr RICHMOND moved that there be 32 dis- 
 tricts, or single districts. 
 
 Mr. STOW said he was reluctant to take up 
 the time of the Convention, as he had at all times 
 been reluctant to do, upon this subject, but con- 
 sidering the great importance of this question, 
 and the result which would follow the adoption 
 of single districts, as far as the rights of his own 
 constituents were concerned, he felt that he 
 should not do justice to himself, and would be- 
 tray the interests of his own county, did he not 
 earnestly appeal against the adoption of this pro- 
 position. He should endeavor to be concise, as 
 he always had been, as the House would bear 
 him witness ; and in all his speeches, he had never 
 spoken for effect beyond its walls. The proposi- 
 tion now before them was to advocate single dis- 
 tricts. If single districts were agreed upon, and 
 such an apportionment and division as was re- 
 ported by the committee was made, the counties 
 which were to compose single districts, would 
 suffer great injustice unless they were to be di- 
 vided. Equality he was aware, was not to be 
 obtained except by a division of counties slight 
 inequalities always exist. Mathematical accura- 
 cy cannot be always obtained in these divisions ; 
 and if the injury to his constituents should arise 
 from accidental causes, the people of Erie county 
 would not complain of any inequality which they 
 might be made to suffer by reason of incidental or 
 accidental circumstances. They would not com- 
 plain at the adoption of any general rule which 
 did them injustice, if it worked well for the State 
 at large. But by the adoption of this rule, it 
 would be found necessary to divide county lines, 
 in order to approach equality, or else if they do 
 not, and stick to single districts gross injustice 
 must be done. He would show why Erie county 
 would suffer from being placed f in a single dis- 
 trict. She had now as represented in the census, 
 a deficit, under the ratio, of 6,314 ; this is alleged ; 
 aut in fact there is no doubt that this day she has 
 tiad an actual excess. Now, while the counties 
 which were united in forming a district, under 
 this report, were entitled to all the increase 
 which they could show in the years between one 
 apportionment and another which is to be regu- 
 lated from time to time by the Legislature, the 
 single districts were not supposed to increase a 
 single human being, until their increase should 
 entitle them to an additional number. That is, 
 Erie county, as a single district, will never be 
 deemed to have increased one until they double 
 their present population. He would appeal to 
 :he common sense of justice on the part of this 
 Convention, against the adoption of a system 
 which would apply so unjustly to his constituents, 
 and to every county which would compose a sin- 
 le district. No county which shall not have in- 
 creased to double their present population, would 
 3e entitled to have the benefit of a single soul's 
 additional population. But where two or more 
 counties are joined together their increase is to 
 be taken regularly into the account. He would 
 
409 
 
 not object to any accidental injustice which Erie 
 county might be subjected to in the arrangement 
 of districts, but he did protest that single coun- 
 ties should be allowed the same rights that they 
 in common with others, were now entitled to. 
 Would the other plan be just ? Is it to be tolerat- 
 They should have no allowance till they had 
 carried it on the hard terms of doubling their 
 population. He asked gentlemen to go with him 
 for double districts, so that we should not have 
 an entire change in the Senate in a single year, 
 or otherwise divide counties. He asked them to 
 come up like men, and go for double districts, or 
 else divide counties. He would endeavor here- 
 after, and he believed, he could satisfactorily 
 show that it would be better for the whole State 
 to have double districts, than to adopt this sys- 
 tem ; and he certainly desired to avoid this injus- 
 tice to the county which he represented, and it 
 wad possible he would do so, in this very article. 
 Mr. SHEPARD was opposed to single Senate 
 districts. He could not, of course, forsee their 
 effects upon those parts of the State with which 
 he was not familiar. He had heard arguments of 
 great weight and consideration from gentlemen 
 who advocated the measure, but his judgment 
 was quite clear, that an election in the manner 
 proposed by the committee would be liable to 
 two substantial objections; it would fail to repre- 
 sent as fully as was desirable the interests of the 
 people, and it would be liable to the mst exten- 
 sive abuses. He (Mr. S.) desired to speak only 
 of its effect upon the city of New-York, and he 
 did not wish to be otherwise understood. He 
 could not ! brought to favor any system of Sena- 
 torial representation which precluded the whole 
 body of electors from voting at every election. The 
 yearly infusion of representatives from the peo- 
 ple into the Senate was one of the soundest and 
 most democratic features of our government a 
 feature the destruction of which, he was per- 
 suaded, would do great injury ; but he was satis- 
 fied that an injury of far greater magnitude would 
 be achieved in a yearly election of Senators by 
 one half of the people, in alternate districts. He 
 thought it was necessary to a true balance and 
 adjustment of the popular interests that the Se- 
 nate and Assembly should represent different 
 constituencies. Such was the theory of every 
 State government in the Union, and its reasons 
 and wisdom were sufficiently obvious. But no 
 portion of the electors should be excluded from 
 the choice of a Senator because it was desirable 
 that the voice of the whole people should be 
 heard in the annual infusion of Senators into the 
 Senate. If one half only made the election, a 
 sentiment directly the reverse of that entertained 
 by the whole people might prevail. A conside- 
 rable minority holding opinions totally at variance 
 with those of the majority might acquire or 
 retain power by the selection of their agents. 
 He (.Mr. S ) would now call the attention of the 
 Convention to the great frauds that might be 
 perpetrated under the proposed system. In his 
 judgment they would constitute an msunnoutiu. 
 ble objection to its successful operation. The 
 Convention would recollect that important elec- 
 tions, involving great and active iniens's and de- 
 veloping the most intense emotions, were held, 
 in the city of New York, amidst a densely crowd- 
 
 28 
 
 ded population and within a small circumference 
 of territory. It would be impossible to elect 
 Senators in two districts of that city, without 
 waking in the bosom of every citizen in the oth- 
 er two, those anxieties that are inseparable from 
 such a contest. And did gentlemen think that 
 designing men would remain quiet ? Were they 
 not rather assured that the places of the election 
 would be a common battle ground whereon to 
 determine the interests it involved, and that all 
 he enginery of election frauds would be set in 
 operation with an increase of power proportioned 
 to the importance of the occasion and the violence 
 
 party feeling? He did not need to answer. 
 But he had heard it urged that all the Senators 
 might be chosen at the same time. Very true and 
 :hat would answer the arguments he had urged 
 against the proposition under consideration. 
 But such a mode of choice opened a new e?il it 
 was radically defective in another respect. He 
 regarded a choice by classes as of the highest 
 mportance. In our Republican Constitutions the 
 Senate was designed lobe made up in the main from 
 the older more experienced members of t he com- 
 munity to be a body thoroughly acquainted with 
 the public business stable in character from the 
 firm and w r eil matured. opinions of its members and 
 rendered yet more so by the slowness with which 
 t could be changed. The advantage of classes 
 consisted in the necessary presence of experienced 
 members at all times. He (Mr. S.) could illus- 
 trate this from his own experience. He had been 
 diligent to acquire information, since he had been 
 a member of this convention, upon those subjects 
 that were involved in our labors. Yet he had of- 
 ten examined in vain, until gentlemen of legisla- 
 tive experience had drawn it forth from the num- 
 berless volumes of the Clerk's room, There was 
 vast information contained in the hidden docu- 
 ments that lay there, and it would be a great work 
 to obtain it without the kind advice of those who 
 had had occasion to use it before. It was possi- 
 ble in this way that a new house might overlook 
 data tending to the most weighty and useful re- 
 sults. There was also much in that knowledge 
 of the course and policy of legislation which 
 is the fruit of more matured experience, and 
 which renders the public servant more valuable in 
 proportion to its extent. He would never will- 
 ingly give up the principle of a new election of 
 some part of the Senate at every State election.- 
 The omission of this frequent delegation would 
 tend to remove the Senate farther from the peo- 
 ple, and to render it deaf to the voice of its con- 
 stituents. For two years that representive body 
 might close its ears against the most urgent ap- : 
 peals. But he would not proceed further he 
 would conclude with the hope that the proposi- 
 tion might fail of success, and thus the dangers of 
 a defective and unfortunate system might be 
 averted. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved to modify it, so as to pro- 
 vide that there shall be two elected in each Sen- 
 ate district. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that he had not inten- 
 ded to say a single word upon this subject; but 
 when he came to this Convention, he had suppo- 
 sed that if there was a single question which had 
 been fully decided upon by the people of this 
 State, it was that of single districts for Senators 
 
410 
 
 He had never seen any other view advocated in 
 any newspaper throughout the state; neither had he 
 heard any man oppose this plan. Under the pre- 
 sent system, men are frequently called to vote for 
 candidates who have resided all their lives at least 
 150 miles off from a large portion of their constit- 
 uents. Is not this frequently the case under the 
 present system? (Several members, "yes it is 
 so.") And to vote for men of whom they had 
 ' never heard before ; of whom they knew nothing 
 whatever, not even their names, until they heard 
 of their being nominated as candidates. Now, 
 he liad but a word or two to say to the gentleman 
 from Erie (Mr. STOW) who spoke, as if he believed 
 that the county of Erie was to be prostrated en- 
 tirely that she was to be trodden under foot, and 
 
 her interests utterly disregarded. The report of 
 the gentleman from Onondaga (Mr. TAYLOR) 
 gives to Erie county a Senator to represent it by 
 itself, with a population of 08,000. Yet Erie 
 county is trodden under foot and her rights dis- 
 regarded ! He would look a moment at this mat- 
 ter and see in what this injustice existed. Is 
 Erie the only county that is to go forward; and 
 is every other county to go backward? The 
 county of Erie has a population of 68,071, which 
 with a representation of four members on this 
 floor, makes a deficiency in the ratio. Chautau- 
 que county, with 45,983 in population, and a 
 large excess over the ratio of, about 12,000, had 
 but two. Now Erie has but a little over 18,000 
 more than Chautauque and yet has double the 
 number of representatives. And Wyoming coun- 
 ty whose population was 31,000 and over at the last 
 census, had but a single member. He could not 
 see what reason the gentleman had for complaint; 
 and he would not say a single word further, for 
 if Erie county with four members has not had jus- 
 tice done her, then he knew nothing of figures. 
 Mr. CROOKERsaid he had no apology to make 
 for rising to take part in this debate. He had 
 heretofore occupied but a very small portion of 
 the time of the Convention. The question now 
 under discussion was one most deeply interest- 
 in ' to the people of Cattaraugus. Their district, 
 asgentleinen would perceive by looking at the 
 map, embraced a single range of counties, com- 
 mencing with Chenango and ending with Catta- 
 raugus. With an average breadth of about forty 
 miles, the length was not far from two hundred 
 and thirty. In shape, it resembled a piece of 
 ordinary shirting stretched to its utmost limit. 
 The people of Cattaraugus had for a series of 
 years, been compelled to vote for senators of whom 
 they knew nothing. He ventured to assert that 
 nineteen-twentieths of the people of that county, 
 ever y three cases out of four, had never heard 
 f their candidate for Senator until they found 
 his nomination in the newspapers. Such, with 
 all his advantages and knowledge of men in the 
 district, had been his own condition. And for all 
 m-actical purposes of representation, Cattaraugus 
 m io-ht as well have been connected with Suilblk 
 and the counties on Long Island. There was no 
 communion of feeling between the people of 
 Cattaraugus and Chenango. There was no union 
 of interest between them, except upon those 
 " reat Questions that afreet and interest the State 
 as a whole The people of these counties on 
 questions of a local character, often the most 
 
 deeply felt, were antipodes of each other. If 
 there was any one question upon which the peo- 
 ple of that county were unanimous, it was in de- 
 manding the single district system. The ex- 
 pression of their opinion had on this subject been 
 universal. They desired the privilege of know- 
 ing the candidates for the Senatorial office. And 
 they demanded it as a right of this Convention. 
 But the gentleman from New-York (Mr. SHEP- 
 ARD) raises, as also other gentlemen, objections 
 against the district system. His first objection 
 was that if the Senators should be divided into 
 two classes, one-half elected annually, then but 
 one-half of the districts would have a senatorial 
 election each year. He also urges that in the 
 city of New York the colonizing system would 
 be practiced to a great extent. Sir, there is 
 great force in these objections. I can never con- 
 sent to engraft upon the Constitution a pro- 
 vision like that reported by the committee. The 
 provision that the people shall vote in one-half 
 of the districts in one year, and the other half in 
 the next, I cannot subscribe to. It is not only 
 absurd but dangerous. I can very easily imagine 
 that there are many thousands of unmarried vo- 
 ters in the city of New- York who would change 
 their residence Irom one district to another to en- 
 ble themselves to vote every year for senators if 
 that plan is adopted. This class are mere board- 
 ers, and in many cases would only have to cross 
 the street to reach another district. All parties 
 are ready to resort to colonizing. This is an evil 
 that must be overcome. But, sir, both of these 
 objections of the gentleman from New-York are 
 easily obviated. Let the whole people vote in 
 the same year. Let us have annually a full and 
 free expression from the electoral body. To ac- 
 complish this object, and to avoid both the objec- 
 tions of the gentleman from New- York, we must 
 elect the whole senatorial body at the same elec- 
 ion. Let them be elected for one or two years, 
 and let them all go out of office with the other 
 tate officers. And with every new administra- 
 :ion let us have an entire new Senate fresh from 
 the people. But it is strongly urged that we 
 ought to have a long term of office for senators in 
 order to avail ourselves of their experience in le- 
 gislation. I ask the Convention to look at the 
 New England States. In Massachusetts, Con- 
 necticut and Vermont, aye, and in democratic 
 Maine and New Hampshire, the Senate and As- 
 sembly are elected annually, and severally hold 
 heir offices for a single year. In Rhode Island al- 
 so, the same principle prevails. But Rhode 
 Island has so far swerved from the democratic 
 line, that I will not hang much of weight upon 
 her example. In the states of North Carolina, 
 Georgia, and even in Tennessee, the prolific mo- 
 ther of presidents, the same principle obtains. 
 The Senate and Assembly are elected for equal 
 terms of office. They come in and go out 
 together. I appeal to the recollection and can- 
 dor of gentleman to say whether any portion 
 of our Union is better governed than New-Eng- 
 land. Have not their laws been as wise and well 
 considered as oui own. Have gentlemen heard 
 of any outbreaks or outrages committed by their 
 legislators upon popular rights. If they have, 
 then they have been more fortunate than myself. 
 So far as my information extends, there is no por- 
 
411 
 
 tion of our Union that has been governed by wiser 
 . or whore the rights of the people have been 
 better regarded or maintained. Many i^'ntlemen 
 on the other side of this question insist that we 
 must have experienced legislators in the senate. 
 Sir, but a few days ago, the same gentlemen pro- 
 fessed great and unlimited confidence in both the 
 intelligence and virtue of the people. From the 
 little experience that I have had in legislation, I 
 am of opinion that it is more desirable to get rid 
 of that veiy experience for which gentlemen con- 
 tend. I should prefer a legislature fresh from the 
 plough, the workshop and the body of the peo- 
 ple, to most of your experienced members of the 
 Senate. They acquire but little of useful know- 
 ledge here. They learn, it is true, the quips and 
 quirks of legislation on rules and questions of or- 
 der, by which they are enabled to overreach and 
 defraud the junior members. This I submit is an 
 intelligence and experience that are neither use- 
 ful nor desirable, but better lost than gained. 
 But, sir, I have no doubt that the people are com- 
 petent to select senators that will be capable of 
 discharging their legitimate duties If they 
 should fail to do so ; if they should be incapable 
 of discharging the duties of their station when 
 they get here ; then let them employ some itine- 
 rant lecturer upon legislation and questions of or- 
 der and parliamentary law to instruct them. Let 
 him take his place in the speaker's chair and 
 school them in legislation. There is no more ne- 
 cessity for this experience in the Senate than in 
 the Assembly. We have got along without it in 
 the latter body for years. What we have lost by 
 the want of experience is more than made up by 
 an honesty of purpose fresh from the body of the 
 people. I feel a deep solicitude for the result of 
 the vote v.pon the question before us. I stronglv 
 Tiope the amendment in favor of single senate dis*- 
 tricts will prevail. If it does prevail, that vote 
 will cheer the hearts not only of the people of 
 Cattaraugus but of the state at large. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that in reply to the gentleman 
 from Chautauque, (Mr. PATTERSON) he would 
 merely say that he had not complained of the in- 
 justice of the division proposed in the report, be- 
 cause of the- inequality which Erie county now 
 suffered; but of the injustice of the principle of 
 the report. He had complained that while all 
 other counties in the State had been allowed for 
 their increase in population, those composing 
 single districts were not allowed anything at all, 
 unless that increase was sufficient to entitle them 
 to two members. He held that this was mani- 
 festly unjust, and in spite of all that the gentle- 
 man from Chautauque had said he still declared 
 its injustice. Eire is set down at 0,314 deficien- 
 cy. In Erie county, there were 13,000 aliens na- 
 turalized within the last five years, and this would 
 more than overbalance the deficit in Erie county 
 under the ratio. A fair calculation, he believed, 
 would give to Erie county an excess instead of a 
 deficit. In five years it had increased 1G,3S 1 ; 
 and he believed that an increase of population 
 should always be taken into consideration in fix- 
 ing prospective representation representation 
 should increase with population. Chautauque 
 county in the same years had decreased over 
 1000, whilst Erie had increased over 10,000. If 
 the gentleman from Chautauque county desired to 
 
 take the mathematical view of this question, he 
 would enquire of him how Chautauque would be 
 entitled even to her two members, if she went on 
 decreasing for the next five years as she had done 
 for the five previous ? Ought those who decrease 
 to have prospectively the same ratio of represen- 
 tation as one which increases? Erie county would 
 number 95,000 in five years ; taking that ratio, 
 Chautauque but 43,000 and yet Erie would have 
 but four members and Chautauque would have 
 t\vo members. But he would allow that gentle- 
 man to take either the mathematical or the com- 
 mon sense view of this matter, and asked him if 
 there was not injustice in the principle of single 
 districts under these circumstances ? Is the gen- 
 tleman answered in his mathematics ? 
 
 Mr. RIRKLAiN'D said that in behalf of his 
 county which suffered more than any other per- 
 haps, in this apportionment, he claimed the right 
 to be heard in behalf of single districts. Could 
 the gentleman from Erie (Mr. STOW,) who was 
 last up, complain, his county now having a defi. 
 cieney, when the county of Oneida, having an ex- 
 cess of 10,000, demands single districts? Can he 
 appeal with any success, when Oneida and oth- 
 ers urgently ask lor single districts. What in- 
 justice is done to Erie county? None, whatever. 
 That county with her deficiency, and having less 
 representation basis than Oneida by 16,000, has the 
 same number of members on this floor. He could 
 not possibly see or understand how the people of 
 Erie county was to suffer prospectively under the 
 system that had been proposed, any more than if 
 they had livrd in a district formed" of two coun- 
 ties. No county would be entitled to two Sena- 
 tors until it has a population more than one half 
 beyond the ratio. And when Erie county in- 
 creases to that number, she will be entitled to two 
 ^enators, the same as any other county. 
 
 Mr. STOW: when we get enough'population 
 to double the present in number, we shall have 
 two, and not before; neither will any of our in- 
 crease be taken into account till then, no matter 
 how rapidly we may advance; whereas other 
 counties, where two form a district, will have 
 their increase regularly, fairly, and periodically 
 calculated and allowed for by jhe Legislature 
 
 Mr. KIKKLAND: That gentleman's (Mr. 
 STOW) county will be entitled to two senators as 
 soon as it gets the requisite amount of population; 
 and it will be so in any other district that is 
 double, or has two counties. And this is the feel- 
 ing that prevails all over the great State of New 
 Yoik; the great mass of the people have 'called 
 aloud and earnestly desire to have single districts. 
 If injustice was done to Erie county in the pre- 
 sent apportionment under the single district sys- 
 tem, still greater injustice was done to Oneida; 
 and yet he, on behalf of that county, asked that 
 single districts should be made. The people de- 
 manded that this reform should be made. He re- 
 pudiated the idea representing as he did, the se. 
 cond county in the State, that the people desired 
 to have double dis'ricts. 
 
 Mr. STOW: I did not advocate that we shoald 
 have double districts. I only showed that it was 
 impossible to have single districts on a systeso of 
 anything like equality or justice without dividing; 
 counties. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND : That is not the qttestioa ; 
 
412 
 
 neither does it follow. The question that is to 
 be settled is, whether we are to have the Sena- 
 tors elected by single districts or not. And he 
 (Mr. K.) should advocate the single district sys- 
 tem as strongly as any one. Every consideration 
 required this, although there might be some ine- 
 qualities occasioned by it. But there would be 
 inequalities under any system that could be 
 adopted or devised, unless counties were divided. 
 This he thought was not desirable, although he 
 was not committed on that point ; and he would 
 not now discuss it. The gentleman's (Mr. STOW) 
 argument was unsound and untenable ; that be- 
 cause a few comparatively small inequalities were 
 produced by a sound and just system, which the 
 whole people had loudly demanded, that there- 
 fore that system was to be abandoned and anoth- 
 er substituted for it, which the people who sent 
 us here did not desire, and which probably would 
 represent nearly as many inequalities as the 
 other. He regretted to take up any of the 
 valuable time of the Convention, but he was 
 induced solely to speak because he was there 
 as one representing the second county in 
 the State, and which had loudly demanded the 
 single district system ; although as much injus- 
 tice would be done to her by it, . as to any other 
 county in the state. A county also that is only 
 to have one Senator under this apportionment 
 that is to have no more than a 'county (Erie) 
 which has 15,000 less in population than the 
 county that I have the honor to represent in part. 
 There is an imperious necessity for the establish- 
 ment of these single Senate districts, and it is the 
 only way in which you bring the representative 
 nearer or more directly home to his constituents. 
 And this fact alone is an overpowering argument 
 in favor of single districts. The voter would 
 know for whom he was voting, and the delegate 
 would know the wants of his constituency. We 
 have heard much about the absurdity of voting 
 for senators only once in two years. Why at this 
 very time, under the existing system, practically, 
 we only voted for senators once in every four 
 years. What interest have the people living in 
 Cattaraugus, I would ask the honorable gentleman 
 from that county (Mr. CROOKER) in the candidate 
 put up for senator in Chemung county or any ol 
 the remote counties in that Senate district. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER: None whatever. That's the 
 trouble. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND: Or what interest has the 
 elector who lives in Jefferson county, in the man 
 frotu Oswego, for whom he is called upon to vote. 
 That candidate knows nothing about most of his 
 constituents nothing about their wants nor has 
 he any sympathy with his interests. Belter vote 
 for your'own man once in two, thiee or even lour 
 years, than to go through the idle form of voting 
 for the candidates of others, three out of eveiv 
 four years. Let them all vole in one year if you 
 please; but don't di-prive the people <>t Laving 
 single districts. It was objected thai this would 
 operate badly in New York on account oi" coloniz- 
 ing. This would be remedied by adopting the 
 principle presented in the report of another com- 
 mittee and provide for the 60 days residence. 
 But if this was so veiy objectionable, then adopt 
 the suggestion of the gentleman from Cattarau 
 gus and elect the whole Senate every two years. 
 
 He had thus far trespassed because he represent- 
 eJ a large and valuable constituency that were en- 
 titled to be heard, and he trusted this proposition 
 would prevail; for if there was anything for 
 which the people had called from this Convention, 
 it was this -ingle district system. 
 . jMr. MORRIS was in favor of single districts 
 both for Senate and Assembly. The great cause 
 of calling this body together "was that the consti- 
 tuency wt-re misrepresented by the delegates 
 elected. They were elected, under promises and 
 pledges they never kept, and used the power 
 given them to make money, and to advance 
 aspirants to political favor. And why, because 
 the constituency did not know them, and were 
 compelled by political organization to vote for 
 men they did not know, and principles they con- 
 demned. Whether there was given to New-York 
 either single or double districts there would be four 
 senators, and that would give us two districts. So 
 that we would be equally exposed to colonization 
 whether from four or two districts. We were not 
 here to apprehend a fraud but to guard against it 
 New-York had for years sent thirteen members 
 without one man in 100 knowing who all the de- 
 legation were. Mr. M. knew a young man to have 
 been sent here from New-York, when those 
 who voted for him supposed they were voting 
 either for his uncle or his grand father. They 
 never discovered their mistake until the delega- 
 tion got together, when they found they had 
 elected a very clever boy of 21, instead of a man 
 of experience. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : The mistake was not dis- 
 covered until he came here to be sworn. I was 
 here then. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that when these things oc- 
 curred, the nomination must be for other reasons 
 than for executing the laws. The time came 
 round for instance, when a flour inspector, or a 
 beef inspector, or a tobacco inspector was to be 
 appointed. One wanted to be judge,another notary 
 public, another master in chancery, another com- 
 missioner of deeds, and so on ; and they clubbed 
 together, each man picked out his own friend 
 and by a combination for office and office alone, 
 they packed your committee, controlled your con- 
 ventions, made your nominations, and elected 
 your delegates. It was that made New- York cry 
 out for a Convention and for single senate dis- 
 tricts. 
 
 Mr KENNEDY : Where was there any such in- 
 structions ? 
 
 Mr. MORRIS: First, in the 15th Ward, and 
 next, in Tammany Hall. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY: That is not so. The gen- 
 tleman is all wrong. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS : A printed circular was sent to 
 us I received one. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY : There was no answer asked 
 to it. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN explained that his understanding 
 as to the inquiry, was-merely whether they would 
 go for Senators being elected in districts not as 
 to single districts. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS asked whether the circular sent 
 to us did not ask us a question of course not say- 
 ing sir, you shall go it ; but implying that. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN : Senate districts ? 
 
413 
 
 Mr. MORRIS : Single districts single dis- 
 tricts. 
 
 Mr. JONES remarked that he had a copy of the 
 circular, and if the gentlemen would allow him, 
 he would read the interrogatories. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS : Is it in print, or manuscript ? 
 
 Mr. J ONES said it was a correct copy addressed 
 to one of the delegates not to himself, and not 
 in his handwriting. It was " Are you in favor 
 of Senate and Assembly districts, to elect one 
 member each at each election ?" 
 
 Mr. MORRIS ; That is it, sir that is it exact- 
 ly. That was the substance of the interrogatory 
 adroitly drawn to meet the views of a committee 
 who were loud in the demands for single dis- 
 tricts. Adroitly drawn, he repeated, so that one 
 man might read it one way, another another. To 
 be sure, that was one which merely asked a ques- 
 tion. But every intelligent, honest democrat who 
 received it, must have known, if he expected the 
 votes of those who proposed the interrogatory, he 
 was to answer favorably. And what honest de- 
 mocrat would not, if opposed to the project con- 
 templated, say so plainly and aboveboard, before 
 his nomination that his constituents might se- 
 lect some other who could and would represent 
 their wishes ? The circular he received was pre- 
 cisely in the words read, and they conveyed to 
 his mind what he believed his constituents in- 
 tended and that was that they demanded single 
 districts, and for the reasons he had stated. He 
 had known persons here of the central power, 
 sending down to New- York, saying you must 
 elect this man and he had known the constitu- 
 ency to be perfectly hoodwinked with the idea 
 that they w ere nominating the man they really 
 desired. And at last they resorted to pledges. 
 For they found that they might nominate the cle- 
 verest fellow in the world, and yet when he came 
 here, they found him going point blank against 
 their wishes. We in New- York, as the Conven- 
 tion was aware, from the defects in the report of 
 committee No. 5 did not always write exactly 
 as we intended and the pledges we sometimes 
 drew were so porously drawn, that there were 
 holes where some might creep out at; and men 
 did make promises to the ear and break them to 
 the hope. This single district system would ob- 
 viate all these difficulties. To be sure, our po- 
 litical opponents might carry some of the districts 
 provided they colonized sufficiently to do it. 
 But if they should, it would but be an expression 
 of the opinion of those who voted, and what rea- 
 son was there that a fair majority in a political 
 district should not have a voice here ? What rea- 
 son was there that because the mass of New- York 
 was democratic, that that majority should bear 
 down upon the minority. What to-day was a de- 
 mocratic district might be whig to-morrow, and 
 vice versa. He believed that the great mass of 
 community were essentially democratic, call them 
 what you will ; and if we succeeded in making 
 the Constitution, as he truoted they would, de~- 
 mocratic from its core to its extremities, we 
 should hear nothing of the names of political 
 parties. We shall all march forward to the same 
 great end to secure the rights of man and the 
 perfection of free government, and if party name 
 were kept up, it would only be for the purpose of 
 bringing forward those who got them up. For 
 
 these reasons he should vote in. favor of single 
 listricts, and he would be very happy to increase 
 the Senate, so that the districts might be made 
 much smaller than they now are, so that the re- 
 presentatives might be brought nearer home to 
 the constituency, and so that when they voted for 
 them they would require no other pledge than a 
 life of honesty and fai hful integrity. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN would be sorry to think that the 
 members of this body could for one moment be- 
 lieve that the remarks of his colleague were a 
 fair presentation of the mode in which the politi- 
 cal affairs of the city of New-York are conduc- 
 ted. Evils and abuses there undoubtedly were, 
 yet not to the extent described by his colleague, 
 nor to an extent that marked out New-York as 
 the peculiar object of such infliction. He (Mr. 
 T.) had never, during the short time he had had 
 the honor to sit as a representative for part of the 
 city of New- York, been accustomed to draw any 
 question between himself and his constituents, 
 oefore this or any other body. He would not do 
 so now, except that it had been done by his col- 
 league, under circumstances, and in a manner 
 that might subject him, (Mr. T.) as well as the 
 rest of the representation from New- York, on 
 this floor, to misrepresentation. He (Mr. T.) re- 
 ceived a letter, similar to that which had been 
 read, when he was here, about the close of the 
 last session of the legislature, and he wished to 
 state the manner in which he answered it, in or- 
 der to except himself from the general imputa- 
 tion of disingenuousness, which seemed to be cast 
 upon all of us from New- York, who do not go 
 for single Senate districts. He (Mr. T.) certain- 
 ly understood it, and he was sure any man who 
 would read the language, would so understand it 
 that in regard to single districts, the principle 
 about which the nominating convention was so- 
 licitous, was, that at every Senatorial election, 
 the whole people should vote. It was for that 
 reason that he felt it to be his duty on this floor 
 to maintain that opinion, and vindicate that 
 principle. He supposed that his constituency 
 would expect that in case we should adopt 
 a term of two years duration, to elect a rep- 
 resentative from a double district, and of the 
 three years term from treble districts, each of 
 which would have two or three representatives. 
 That New-York was not solicitous to diminish 
 the senatorial term or at all events to bring it 
 down to a single year, a Convention to remodel 
 the city charter is now in session; and it seems to 
 be generally understood that one of the purposes 
 for which it was called was to make one of the 
 boards of the local legislature elective for a longer 
 period than one or two years. And also to insert 
 in the constitution a provision for a two-thirds 
 veto, instead of the mere majority one that now 
 exists there. In regard to single Assembly dis- 
 tricts when he received that letter, he answered 
 that he should probably vote against them ; and 
 that his predisposition and opinion, so far as he 
 had formed any, was averse to single Assembly 
 districts. And it was with a full knowledge of 
 these facts that he was sent here in part to rep- 
 resent the city of New- York. He stated this 
 simply for the purpose of removing the erroneous 
 impression that seemed in a vague and general 
 way to have been created by his colleague, that the 
 
414 
 
 representatives from the city in opposing on this 
 floor the single senatorial district system were 
 violating their pledges to their constituents. 
 It was due to those of us, who without occa- 
 sion, and without justice, have had an imputa- 
 tion of this kind thrown upon them, that 
 this statement should be made If the course 
 of this discussion would convince him that it 
 would be wise to depart from the old organi- 
 zation of the State, so far as to establish sin- 
 gle Assembly districts, he should vote for the 
 measure, and not without. And whichever way, 
 upon conviction after discussion, he should feel 
 it his duty to vote, he was ready to account to 
 his constituents. It seemed to him that through- 
 out the whole of this discussion great, evil had 
 grown from the ground gentlemen had assumed, 
 that there must be single districts, and that with- 
 out any sort of regard to old county boundaries. 
 If that system should be adopted in the widest 
 latitude, the representation in the Senate and As- 
 Simbly will be at the mercy of an accidental ma- 
 jority, making the apportionment in each ten 
 years. He did not doubt but that the party with 
 which he acted would, under the Constitution we 
 are about to frame, have the exercise of that pow- 
 er, and it may use this power for its own benefit, 
 but he hoped that excellent care would be taken 
 that the power would not to any unnecessary ex- 
 tent be conferred upon any accidental majority. 
 Mr. T. expressed himself in favor of an increase 
 of the Senate, and then of having 20 or 24 double 
 districts, which would have the effect of bringing 
 the representatives in more contiguity to the con- 
 stituency which he represented. It would also 
 provide a constituency that would distinguish it 
 from the Assembly, and which would be a check | 
 upon its legislation. And there would be at each 
 annual election an accession of members to the 
 body, being fresh to the will of the whole people 
 of the State. Mr. T. deprecated the idea of hav- 
 ing single districts, as tending to break up all the 
 boundaries of counties and towns, and as throw- 
 ing open the whole matter of apportionment once 
 every ten years. He should, therefore, if he had 
 an opportunity, vote for the other system, and 
 leave it to his constituents to say whether he had 
 fulfilled his duty towards them or not. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY wished to say a few words 
 in reply to some things which fell from his col 
 league. As one ol the committee he had assent- 
 ed to this report, but it was understood that all 
 were not committed to the details. He was in 
 favor of the proposition to divide the St<ite into 
 single districts. As to details he was not commit- 
 ted. He denied that the report did an injustice 
 to his constituents. He understood them to have 
 commanded him to do this very thing, and he had 
 carried out what he supposed to be their will and 
 pleasure in reference to the single district system. 
 His colleague had said that the injury would not 
 result to his county now, but prospect ively thai 
 at the next enumeration there would be a large 
 excess over the ratio. Mr. S contended that it 
 was utterly impossible fo preserve the single dis 
 trict system, and al the sune time secure a per- 
 fect equality in representation. 
 
 Mr. STOW did nut understand that his col- 
 league was comrmled against the division of coun- 
 
 ties. Without that he conceded a perfect equali- 
 ty could not be attained. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY had felt opposed to this di- 
 vision of counties, and had assented to the intro- 
 duction of the report as it is. Nor could lie see 
 how his constituents would be much better. off, 
 if the principle of disregarding county lines was 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved that the Convention ad- 
 journ. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called the ayes and nays on this 
 motion, and it was negatived ayes 2S, nays 77. 
 
 Here there were loud cries of " question, ques- 
 tion." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL, at some length, expressed his 
 preference for a three years term for senator. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND continued the debate in fa- 
 vor of the single district system. 
 
 Mr. St. JOHN moved iheprevious question. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved an adjournment. 
 Lost, 44 to 62. 
 
 The previous question was not seconded ayes 
 40, nays 55. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. RICH- 
 MOND'S motion in favor of single senate districts, 
 and it prevailed, ayes 79, nays 31, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault. H. Backus, Baker, Bas- 
 com, Bouck, Bowdish, Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, 
 11. Campbell, jr., Candee, Clark. Clyde, Cook, Crocker, 
 Dana, Danforth.Dodd, Dorlon, Flanders. Forsyth, Graham, 
 Greene, Harris, Harrison, Hotchkiss, Hunter, E. Hunting- 
 ton, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jordan, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirk- 
 land, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller. Morris, Nellis, 
 Smith, E. Spencer, "VV. H. Spencer, Stanton, Strong, 
 Nelson, Nicholas, Parish, Patterson. Penniman, Povers, 
 Khoades, Richmond, Riker, St. John, Salisbury, Sears, 
 Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon, Simmons, S\vackha;ner, Tat't, Tag- 
 gait, Tallmadge, J. J Taylor, W. Taylor, Townsend, 
 Ward, Warren, "Waterbury, Willard, Witleck, "Wood, 
 Worden, W. B. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs SO. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Bergen, Brown, Bull, Chatfield, 
 Conely, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dubois, Hart, Hoft'man, Hunt, 
 A. Huntington. Jones, Kemble, Kennedy, Loomis, Mur- 
 phy, Nieoll. O'Conor, Perkins, President, Ruggles. Rus- 
 sell, Shrpard, Stephens, Stetson, Tilden, TuthiU, Vache, 
 White 31. 
 
 Mr. SMITH laid on the table a motion for a re- 
 consideration. 
 
 Adj. to 9 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 FRIDAY, (Uth day,} July 24. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. HITCHCOCK. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART offered the following resolu- 
 tion : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee of the whole having in 
 charge the report of committee No. 1, be instructed to 
 repoit to this Convention a provision that Senate districts 
 shall be composed of contiguous territory, in as nearly as 
 practicable a compact form, and shall cont&in a s nearly 
 as may be, an equal number cf inhabitants; but in the for 
 mation ol Senate distiicts.no town or ward shall be divided 
 unless such town or ward shall be entitled to more than 
 one Senator. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to lay it on the ta- 
 ble for the time being. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART consented to do so. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE presented a petition for 
 the enlargement of the Erie canal. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE offer- ed the following reso- 
 lution: 
 
 Rc.sclved, That the city comptroller of the city of N*nv- 
 York report to this Convention copies of the bills winch 
 make up the item of $4,748,24 set forth in his iormer state- 
 ment, as paid for " printing rnd posting of registry and 
 maps cf districts for registiation, expenses of election of 
 
415 
 
 Novcmt'c:-, HUi:' 1 also, copies of bills which compose the 
 item of $3,319 IS, set forth in said former statement, as 
 paid for " printing mil posting li-t of rt::ri>tiy and map of 
 districts for registration, expense-; of election of -\piil, 
 l^th" .tn 1 ,d<o, cop o> of hills which compose the item ot 
 $3 099 39, sot forth in his former statement, as ' paid for 
 second registration expenses of November election ot ' lb 11 .' 
 
 Mr NICOLL called f-r some reasons for this 
 inquiry. He wished to know the object of the 
 mover. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that the expenses re- 
 turned in the report from the city of New York, 
 were quite large, and others had been urged here 
 as a bar to the registration of voters. Here was 
 one item put down of $4000 for printing a lot of 
 maps, and he would undertake to do this for 
 $1000, and make money by the operation. When 
 the call for a registration was made, it was imme- 
 diately met by this call for the expenses of regis- 
 tration, and from the way in which the items were 
 made out, he suspected some wrong play. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL hoped the gentleman would with- 
 draw the resolution. It embraced much, and 
 would be very expensive to get the returns. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY hoped his colleague would 
 not object. If the information was procured, it 
 would be seen that the greater part of the money 
 had gone into the hands of the gentleman's (Mr. 
 TALLMADGE'S) political friends, if he had any. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE begged to say to the gen- 
 tleman that he had not said he had no political 
 friends for he had many. He had said that no 
 corrupt party would own him, because he would 
 tell them the truth. And he begged here to say 
 to that gentleman, that this habit of misquoting 
 gentlemen was only worthy of mere creatures of 
 party, third rate lawyers, and bar-room politi- 
 cians. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND called to order. He was sa- 
 tisfied that in his cooler moments he would re- 
 gret having made use of such expressions. 
 
 TALLMADGE was through with his re- 
 marks. He took nothing back, but had plenty 
 more of the same kind, whenever gentlemen saw 
 fit to ball it out ; and any gentleman who chooses 
 to advance in any of these matters, will pretty- 
 soon find me at his heels. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON also wished the enquiry made, 
 so that all the facts could be ascertained ; and he 
 did not wish that the advantages of a registry law 
 should be borne down by any garbled statements. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : I rise, Mr. President, for the 
 purpose of putting a stop to this debate. It ap- 
 pears that the information here sought for is quite 
 voluminous, and I move the reference of the reso- 
 lution to the committee on the elective franchise 
 at once, so as to dispose of the matter, and save 
 the time of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE : My purpose is answered, 
 by this debate. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON explained. 
 
 Some one called him to order. 
 
 The resolution was referred. 
 
 The unlinish<>d businc>- was then taken up. 
 
 Mr. STETSON moved an amendment to the 
 
 amendment of Mr. WHITE, fixing the term of 
 
 office of Senator at two years, so as to declare 
 
 that the whole people should be allowed to vote 
 
 inters at every general election. 
 
 Mr: CHATFIELD explained his vote against 
 single districts. If the number of 32 was to be 
 
 retained, he should favor single districts. But he 
 \v.mted the number increased to -1 s , and to have 
 double districts. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS: Except in cases to supply a 
 vacancy. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND wished to know Mr. STET- 
 soiv's object in offering the amendment. 
 
 Mr. STETSON moved to amend Mr. WHITE'S 
 amendment, by adding thereto the following : 
 
 " And so that all the electors of the State shall be al 
 lowed to vote ut every election of Senators." 
 
 So that when amended it would read thus : 
 " And the said committee be also instructed so to settle 
 said r.'port as to provide that one Senator shall he elected 
 in each district : and so that all the electors of the State 
 shall he allowed to vote at every election of Senators." 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said he would like to hear 
 the gentleman from Clinton (Mr. STETSON,) ex- 
 plain the object of his amendment. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said his object was to have the 
 whole senate elected at one time, every two years, 
 so as to avoid the " ride and tie" system recom- 
 mended by the committee, by which one-half the 
 senate would be elected every year, in alternate 
 districts of the odd and even numbers ; and the 
 electors of all the districts be biennally disfran- 
 chised. He did not like either mode, but he 
 thought his plan the better of the two alterna- 
 tives now left to us. He (Mr. S.) had voted 
 against four years, and also against three years, 
 in selecting the duration of a Senatoi's office. 
 He voted for a term of two years. He voted 
 also in favor ot an increase of' Senators to for- 
 ty. By thus increasing the Senate we could 
 make twenty double districts, and approximate 
 to the popular demand for single districts, with- 
 out being compelled, as we now aie, to adopt 
 a system 'grossly unequal in representation, and 
 incapable of being made equal, lor we must take 
 county lines as we found them, and they could 
 not be moved lo meet equality in the division 
 of representation. By the double district plan, 
 we could secure the desirable feature of sta- 
 bility by electing one-half annually, and per- 
 mit every elector to vote at every election, which 
 with him, was indispensable in any wise plan. 
 These were the advantages which he had hoped 
 to have preserved by an increase of Senators and 
 double districts: But yes erday the Convention 
 had decided by a strong vo;e to stand upon the 
 number "thirty-two," and by a still stronger vote 
 not to elect them in double but in single districts. 
 All hopes of forming districts with any degree of 
 equality m representation, were then, entirely 
 gone; this unequal system, of immense excess in 
 some districts and immense deficiency in others, 
 was to pass into the revised Constitution. 
 He could now only choose between a biennial elec- 
 tion of the whole body, which he did riot like, 
 and the mode, which he had ventured to christen 
 11 ride and tic" and against which he had made 
 war from the time he first he heard ot it. In his 
 judgment it was the wor^r of all the modes sug- 
 gested. What was it ? Why, the single districts 
 were to be numbered frun one to thirty two in- 
 clusive ; and sixteen Senators were to be elected 
 anfcjially ; in one vear the electors in the districts 
 bearixr the odd numbers of 1,3, 5, 7, and sa on, 
 were to vote and fill up the Senate; the next 
 year the dis'ricls having the even number.", would 
 
416 
 
 politicians at least, to bring improper and corrupt 
 influences upon the doubtful districts which do 
 vote ? The mode too, helps to designate the 
 very places when the election is to be carried. 
 Indeed, said Mr. S. is it not easy to foresee 
 plainly as though it were written in letters of 
 living light upon the walls of this chamber, that a 
 few uncertain small single districts, will under 
 the "ride and tie" system always be the Palo 
 Alto, and Palm Ravine of all future contests for 
 power in the senate ? It seemed plain to him, 
 and if he was in error he hoped to be enlightened. 
 If this objection was not obviated he did not see 
 how he could vote for the single district system 
 at all ; but he believed the Convention would 
 consent to make it more acceptable by adopting 
 his amendment, to elect the body together once in 
 two years. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES hoped this amendment would 
 not prevail. He (Mr. STETSON) said he would 
 rely on the wisdom and intelligence of the Senate. 
 If his mode is adopted, we shall have the system 
 of an entire new Senate every two years. He (Mr, 
 R.) would put it beyond the power of party dema- 
 gogues to change the character of the Senate ev- 
 ery election. He feared not the use of money to 
 corrupt electors. The Senate would have noth- 
 
 the suggestion to change our election laws ; but ing to do with the appointing power, and not 
 that would be imposing great inconvenience upon form part of the Court of Errors. We shall have 
 electors and would too often unjustly forfeit their 1 Sheriffs, District Attorneys, Clerks and Surro- 
 right of suffrage. But the other objection was the ! gates and other local officers to elect every year; 
 
 remain respectfully silem, and so on alternately. 
 One year the electors in the odd districts were to 
 exercise the exclusive power of popular sovereign 
 ty in the Senate, and the even distiicfs in the 
 same year were to hold the reins of stability. 
 The next year they would exchange places; but 
 the voice of the whole people could never reach 
 the annual accession to the Senate, nor would the 
 stability which was intended to be secured by 
 this alternation, have any relation to the will of 
 all the electors of the State, unless from acciden- 
 tal coincidence of majorities between districts 
 which would, and districts which would not vote. 
 But there were other and greater objections. If 
 he was not mistaken it would produce, in its prac- 
 tical working, more corruption of the elective 
 franchise than any system he ever heard suggest- 
 ed. Indeed to him, it looked like an invitation 
 from us to the electors to operate on the elections 
 by means of corruption funds and also by coloniza- 
 tion. In New York there would be four districts, 
 and two of them only would vote annually. It 
 would be hardly possible, with the present elec- 
 tion laws relating to county and ward residence to 
 prevent voters in the silent districts from changing 
 their residence so as to vote every year. He would 
 admit that this objection had been partially met by 
 ' " ' but 
 
 one to which he wished 
 the Convention he had 
 
 to draw the attention of 
 not heard any reference 
 
 to it the probable use of corruption funds with- 
 in the districts which would vote. He would en- 
 deavor to show how it would work practically. 
 First, it was quite possible that there would be 
 great amelioration of partizan feeling but 
 the people would hereafter be divided into 
 parties of some kinds. All public questions 
 of interest naturally resolved themselves in- 
 to affirmative and negative positions, as much 
 so as did different plans for the construction 
 of a house or other work in the end it came to 
 the division of those for and those against. This 
 showed that new parties would spring up, even if 
 present ones should cease to exist. We were 
 then to have political parties ; and he begged gen- 
 Uemen to look ahead and see the position in 
 which parties would be placed, in order to ac- 
 quire or retain the power of that body if the 
 " ride and tie" system prevailed. Sixteen se- 
 nators would hold over, and we will suppose them 
 divided equally, or very near equally, in pplitical 
 sentiment. Sixteen are to be elected in the dis- 
 tricts of odd numbers he meant 1, 3, 5 and so 
 on of these sixteen, twelve may be supposed to 
 be divided in politics equally and to have a fixed 
 political character that could not be changed ; but 
 the remaining four districts are known to be 
 doubtful and uncertain. These then would be 
 the key to the power, of the Senate, and 
 it would be known all over the state long before 
 an election, which were the uncertain and doubt- 
 ful districts and how many of them a party would 
 have to carry to secure the power. Is it not plain, 
 that as by your " ride and tie," system you will 
 take away from the other half of the districts the 
 right to vote and thus decide this question of 
 power, you will create a motive in them, or with 
 
 so voters \vould stay at home, and would not col- 
 onize. And the 60 days residence would break 
 up all that. He wished to have men of experi- 
 ence in the Senate. The importance of this would 
 overrule any and every objection that could be 
 urged. It was said that the people might be trus- 
 ted, and that they would select experienced men. 
 But reference should be had to the system of 
 management by parties, which would not always 
 look at this object. And he feared if this propo- 
 sition should be adopted, its tendency would be 
 to elect an entire Senate of new men. As to the 
 objection that alternate elections would lead to 
 the use of corruption funds in particular locali- 
 ties, Mr. R. thought the stripping of that body of 
 
 all 
 ject 
 
 ppointing pow 
 for using such 
 
 rer, would do away with all ob- 
 j o funds. And when the mem- 
 
 bers looked^ at what the people would have to 
 do at home in their several counties periodically 
 in relation to electing the office he had named (as- 
 was proposed they should do under the new sys- 
 tem,) he thought they would have little time for 
 colonizing, and gentlemen need therefore have 
 no fear of that, to say nothing of the 60 days res- 
 idence that had been proposed. He should under 
 all these circumstances vote against the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr SIMMONS strongly desired to see the 
 amendment adopted. He could not see the force 
 of the arguments in favor of retaining one-half 
 of the Senate perpetually in office. It seemed 
 to be a habit of imitation, that was unwise and 
 unnecessary. We had such an arrangement in 
 the U. S. Senate, which was a peculiarly consti- 
 tuted 'body ; but experience was against it in the 
 State Governments. In the New England States 
 the Senate were elected every year, and there 
 were no examples of the election of persons who 
 were not qualified and experienced. Safety, he 
 
417 
 
 believed, was more in the annually elected Le- 
 gislatures, than in any other. As tar as experi- 
 ence went, he believed the House proceeded with 
 more parliamentary order than the Senate. They 
 were obliged to do so, because of their number. 
 While in the Senate, where there was no previ- 
 ous question, they had long-winded personal con- 
 versations, enough to fill a volume of 20 year's 
 political biography. Generally, it would be found 
 that men of experience in legislation would be 
 returned to the Senate. He concurred with Mr. 
 STETSON, in his argument against the chequer- 
 board system of district elections. He thought 
 it certainly a very strong one. He believed the 
 difference between the condition of things now 
 and what they were when the Constitution was 
 adopted, would make two years now equal to four 
 then in the Senatorial term. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said it was evident from our ac- 
 tion yesterday, that the sense of the Convention 
 was in favor of the single district system for Sena- 
 tors. He had opposed that system, but after the 
 derisive vote which had been given, he was dis- 
 posed to acquiesce with the majority. He had 
 voted against it, however, because we had previ- 
 ously determined that the term should be two 
 years. That determination drove us upon one cr 
 other of two evils, either upon the "ride and tie," 
 system, as it had been denominated, by which 
 one-half of the districts would vote one year, and 
 the other half the next year, thus depriving the 
 whole people trom voting annually for Senators, 
 and inviting colonization dr the transfer of voters 
 from one district to another merely to secure po 
 litical majorities; or upon the plan ol electing 
 the whole L>o iy of .Senators at the same election. 
 The 1-ittp! corr.se will give us an entire new body, 
 and the experience which it was desirable to have in 
 Ihe Senate, would not be secured so well as by hav 
 ing a portion of the body coining in and part only go 
 ing out. For those who like him opposed the singli 
 district system, was no v reduced to a choice ol 
 these two evils Relying upon the people tore- 
 elect members of I he Senate when they should be 
 worthy, and deeming that alternate district elec- 
 tions would imperfectly represent public senti- 
 ment and lead to corruption, he would vote for th 
 amendment of his friend from Clinton. He 
 had however a suggestion to make, so as to ren- 
 der the proposition more acceptable. The whole 
 theory of our legislation is founded on the idea o 
 checks and balances. The creation of two bodies 
 is intended to prevent hasty legislation by making 
 one a check to the other, while the conferring o 
 the veto upon the Governor is designed as anothei 
 
 Erotection agains improvident action by thelegis 
 itive department. His suggestion was this U 
 provide that the Senators should be elected at a 
 different period from that of the Governor wh 
 was also elected for the same term. He therefore 
 asked his friend to extend his amendment so a 
 to make the Governor and Senate elective alter 
 uately. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said I hat such a result woul< 
 naturally be brought about. The G-.vernor wil 
 now be elected next fall, while the Senators woul< 
 not be elected until the following year that beinj 
 the first year after the new Constitution, if adopt 
 ed, would o into effect. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY cosi'.mued: If that be so under 
 
 tood he had nothing rnoie t> say, as his object 
 vnuld in that way he accomplished. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG said he had declared him- 
 elf in favor of retaining the principle of dura- 
 ility upon which the Senate is at present form- 
 al. He still preferred this, so far as it may be 
 lone consistently with other objects. The Con- 
 vention had decided that we should have single 
 Senate districts. It remained to determine what 
 iiul been called by a gentleman the choice of two 
 ;vils; that is to say, whether the Senators in all 
 he districts shall be elected the same year, and 
 hus allow the whole Senate to come into and go 
 jut of office at the same time; or whether one 
 Senator should be chosen every year in one half 
 )f the districts. He therefore thought it advisa- 
 )le that, without the farther discussion of other 
 questions, a vote should be taken at once to as- 
 certain the sense of the Convention upon the 
 sections he had mentioned. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said he should support the 
 imendment of the gentleman from Clinton. He 
 .lad himself first suggested this proposition to the 
 committee in the debate on the single district 
 question. He was utterly opposed to the " ride 
 and tie " system reported by the committee. He 
 desired a full expression of the popular vote to 
 Dear upon the senate in a single year. By the 
 system reported, but one-half of the electoral 
 3ody would annually vote for senators. This was 
 a most objectionable and dangerous feature. 
 w T ould greatly endanger the purity of the ballot 
 box. Appliances might be brought to bear npon 
 close districts to defeat a fair expression of the 
 public will. In large towns and cities the colo- 
 nization system could not be prevented. . The 
 gentleman from Onondaga (Mr. RHOADES,) insists 
 that " we sufficiently guard against colonization 
 by requiring sixty da) 's residence in ihe wards 
 before election." He (Mr. C.) apprehended^ that 
 would by no means afford an adequate remedy. 
 Nor would a residence of six months remedy the 
 objection. It might lessen the amount of corrrp- 
 tion, not wholly prevent it. In the city of New. 
 York there weie thousands of voters who had no 
 tarnilies and were merely boarders in the families 
 of others. How easy for them to vote in the first 
 district this fall, and then sixty days or sixty 
 months, if vou please, before the next election 
 change their boarding place into District No. 2. 
 In doing this many would perhaps only change 
 sidrs of the same street, and thus they would vote 
 for senators every year. There is no way to pro- 
 tect the rights of the whole people and to get a 
 fair and full expression of the popular will under 
 ihe system reported by the committee. The 
 amendment under consideration fully remedies 
 the evil. It proposes to elect the whole number 
 of senators at one and the same election. The 
 senators would come in and go out together. But 
 the gentleman from Onondaga says we ' must 
 have experienced men in the senate" "That 
 the people will elect an entirely new senate at 
 each election." The gentleman from Onondaga 
 seems to have forgotten his former confidence 
 in the correctness of the popular judgment. 
 But a few days since, he insisted that the peo- 
 ple should be left entirely free in the choice of a 
 Governor. But with all his confidence in their 
 honesty of purpose; he is unwilling to trust them 
 
418 
 
 with the choice of their Senators at the same 
 election. The cry that we must have great expe- 
 rience in the Senate has been often rung in this 
 hall. He denied its correctness. The past his- 
 tory of legislation would demonstrate that long 
 experience in the Senatorial body had been any- 
 thing but useful to the interests of the people. In 
 their first years of office, the Senators came there 
 upright and pure. They generally came, he had 
 no doubt, intent upon the public good. They did 
 not come there to learn what the people demand- 
 ed, but to carry out their will. The Senators 
 have seldom improved in their long term of office 
 in the principles of honesty and integrity. They 
 soon learned to forget all they ought to remem- 
 ber, and retained only the mere quibbles of legis- 
 lation. He (Mr. C.)' appealed to the history of 
 the Senate for the proof of his position. What 
 had been the spectacle exhibited to us in that 
 body in the year past and in former times ? It 
 was that very experience that he desired to avoid. 
 If it was possible, he desired to get rid of the 
 whole of it at least once in two years. He be- 
 lieved the Senate had been the greatest Dema- 
 gogue factory in the State. It was time that some 
 remedy should be applied. But, Mr. Chairman, 
 said Mr. C., if we must have Senators learned, 
 and the people will elect men ignorant of the 
 forms as legislation, as was said by John Ran- 
 dolph, " I have found the philosopher's stone;" 
 We will send the Senators after their election for 
 a term to the State Normal School, to instruct 
 them in the science of legislation ; and to perfect 
 them in the forms, we could hire some old and 
 experienced Senator, (my friend from Onondaga 
 for instance,) to act as drill sergeant to that body. 
 In this way we could ensure a sufficiency of 
 knowledge in the Senate, and take them honest and 
 fresh once in two years from the body of the people. 
 It had been proposed to hold the gubernatorial 
 and senatorial elections in different years. This 
 principle he was opposed to. He was in favor of 
 electing the governor, legislature and state of- 
 ficers in the same year. He would have them 
 come in and go out of office together to preserve 
 harmony of action. He wanted none of these bo- 
 dies holding office for a long term of years to save 
 the people, in the language of the olden time, 
 " from their worst enemies, themselves." This 
 sentiment had long since exploded. He had every 
 confidence that the people could be safely trusted 
 with the election of the senate once in two years. 
 With all the senatorial talent and experience that 
 we have on this floor, and here are very many an- 
 cient and able senators, we have found ourselves 
 several times involved in difficulties on questions 
 of order from which they could not very readily 
 extricate us. Let us look with confidence to the 
 intelligence of the people. They will send you 
 honesty and integrity. They will send you all 
 the talent that is necessary to carry out their wish- 
 es by legislation. When have they ever failed to 
 do so. The assembly is chosen annually. Did 
 we ever find a dearth of talent in that body. Who 
 has met an assembly that had not in its composi- 
 tion a sufficient degree of experience to go on 
 with the forms of legislation to do all that the 
 popular voice required. The amendment of the 
 gentleman from Clinton fully accords with my 
 views. It proposes to elect them all together ; 
 
 :he whole people voting at every election. I 
 therefore give it my cordial support and I humbly 
 hope it may prevail. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES regretted that he was obliged 
 to differ in this matter from friends with whom 
 he had previously acted. He regarded the prop- 
 osition now under consideration, as the very 
 worst of all possible plans, that could be devised, 
 or adopted ; for by electing all the members of 
 the Senate in one year, you abandon the idea the 
 Senate is to be a continuous body, or that there 
 should be a difference between the two houses. 
 It appeared to him to be a valuable system to 
 have a portion of the Senate remain whilst others 
 were coming in. He might allude to many in- 
 stances to sustain his opinion. Our practice is 
 totally different from that of the Eastern states. 
 If we elect the Senate for one year only, we are 
 much more likely to have a continuous body, 
 than by electing all of them every two years. 
 There were many interests of the State, such as 
 its financial concerns, which could not be under- 
 stood by a member coming in for a 60 days ses- 
 sion. There were various institutions ; our schools 
 and colleges prison system, &c. and a vast 
 amount of business with whose concerns it re- 
 quired a knowledge of greater extent, in relation 
 to the former legislation in regard to them, than 
 could be obtained in a single session. If single 
 districts were to be adopted, he believed that 
 by an annual election, there would be more 
 chance of .have a permanent body than by 
 an election for two years. Because, if elected for a 
 single term, very many of them would probably be 
 returned, which would not be the case with a Sen- 
 tor elected lor tvso yeais. The proposed system 
 would so operate that the check of the Senate on 
 the House would be lost. Both Houses would be 
 in the same condition; we should lose all that 
 was valuable in the difference between the (wo 
 bodies, and gain substantially nothing. He was in 
 favor of a three years term, but as the sense of 
 the Convention was against him, upon that ques. 
 lion, he would have the election so arranged that 
 two years experience should be provided before 
 one-half was succeeded by another. This would 
 secure that experience in relation to our numer- 
 ous and important Slate interests which was im- 
 portant for a Senator to have. He had always 
 thought it was best to break up the time when 
 members of the Senate were elected, or were to 
 corne in, so that they might have the experience 
 of one portion, and also have another portion 
 fresh from the people He would vastly prefer 
 the one year system, because by the other, we 
 give up all that is valuable and gain nothing. 
 Verv few would be elected after a two year's term ; 
 many ,\ould be elected after one year's term. If 
 we are to take the shorter term, I would take that 
 which presents the most advantages; in order 
 that Senators should have some knowledge and 
 experience to enable them to commence business 
 
 th a t all may not have to learn the duties of the 
 
 station after they accept office whose duties they 
 have to perform 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment of 
 Mr. STETSON was adopted, ayes 104, nays 12. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ansel, Archer, Ayrault, H. Backus, 
 Ba.com Bouck. Bowdish. Brown, Bruce, Bruhdage, Bull, 
 Burr Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, R. Campbell, jr. Can- 
 
419 
 
 doe, rhumb >rlain, Chatftvld, Clark, Clydw, Cook, Cornell, 
 Crouk^r, Cuddeback, Dana, Daniorth, Dodd, Dorlon, 
 Flanders, Forsyth. Gardner, Gebhard, Graham. Greene, 
 Harris, Harrison, Hart, Hawley, HoirV.ian, Hotchkiss, 
 Hunt, IJu'iU'i-, A. Ilmv.ington. Hntchinson, Hycie, Jones, 
 Kemble, Kennedy, K^' nan, Kingsley, Kirkland, Loomis, 
 Mo.Nitt, Maxwell, Miller, Morris, Murphy, Nwllis, Nelson, 
 Nicoll, Parish, Pa'.teison, Pennirvan, Perkins, Po\\ ers, Pre- 
 sident, Richmond, Riker, Russell, St. John, Sali-bury. 
 Shaver, Sh ;w, Sheldon, Shepard, Simmons, Smith, 
 W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stephen*, Stetson. Stow, Strong, 
 Swackh'imer, Talt, Taggait, J. J. Taylor, Townsend, 
 Tuthill, Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Wa*d, Warren, Wa- 
 tcrlr.iry, White, Willard, Witln-ck, Wood, Worden, W. 
 B. V/iight, Yawger, Young, Youngs 104. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Bergen, Conely, Dubois.E. Hunting- 
 ton, Jordan, Marvin, Nicholas, O'Cenor, Rhoades, Rug- 
 gles, E. Spencer, Tallmadge 12. 
 
 The question was then taken on the resolution 
 as amended, instructing the committee of the 
 whole to make 32 single Senate districts ; the 
 term of office to be two years, and all the Sena- 
 tors to be elected at once, was then adopted, ayes 
 92, noes 19. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued, as to the pro- 
 per course now to be pursued, in relation to the 
 report, when, on motion of Mr. BROWN, the 
 Convention went into committee of the whole, 
 Mr. PATTERSON in the Chair, on the report. 
 
 The CHAIR stated that it would amend the 
 report in, the first section (in relation to the elec- 
 tion, &c., of Senators) in pursuance to the direc- 
 tions of the House. The Chair put the question 
 whether there was to be any further amendment 
 to the section as amended. 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved to amend so as to provide 
 that the Sen;; f r and Assembly should be elected 
 biennially, 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to amend so that the 
 Assembly should consist of 136 members. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved 14S members. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD suggested that the question 
 should be taken first on striking out. 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN moved 144. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. MURPHY received 21 
 votes that of Mr. PENNIMAN was also nega- 
 tived. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG briefly supported the a- 
 mendment of 130, as it would do justice to some 
 counties that were now unequally represented. 
 
 Mr. J. TAYLOR said while the evil v\as re- 
 dured as to one county it would be increased in 
 others. He had yet to hear the first man out of 
 this Convention ur^e this view. 
 
 Mr A. W. YOUNG thought that it would tend 
 greatly to lessen the evil. 
 
 Mr. CONELY proposed 140. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said if the number of thir- 
 ty. two was to comprise the Senate and that of'12S 
 was kept in the Assembly, the proportion ol 
 furrn to one another would be preserved. 
 
 Mr RUSSELL briefly advocated the amend, 
 ment as tending to equalize the representation. 
 
 The question being taken, the number 140 was 
 rejected. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG proposed the number of 
 132. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE had voted in favor of single Sen- 
 ate and Assembly districts, but was opposed to 
 ony division of county lines. 
 
 The number 132 was r* jected. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend so as to 
 
 p-ovide for biennial sessions. They wure voted 
 ilo.vn. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved an amendment, pro\ id- 
 ins that the Senate should consist of 32 members, 
 to b^ elected every four yeiirs. 
 
 The CHAIRsaid it was nut in order. 
 
 The next section was then read as follows : 
 
 5. The State shall be divided into thirty-two districts, 
 to be called Senate districts, each of which shall chose one 
 Senator. The districts shall be numbered from one to thir- 
 ty-two inclusive. 
 
 District No. 1, shall consist of the counties of Suffolk and 
 Queens. 
 
 11 No. -2, shall consist of the counties of Kings and 
 Richmond. 
 
 'f No. 3, shall consist oi the first, second, third,fourth, 
 fifth and sixth war.is of the city and county of 
 Ne.w York. 
 
 " No. 4, shall consist of the seventh, tenth, thir- 
 teenth, and fourteenth wards. 
 
 " No. 5, shall consist of the eighth, ninth and fifteenth 
 wards. 
 
 " No. 6, shall consist of the eleventh, twelfth, six- 
 teenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth wards. 
 
 " No. 7, shall consist of the counties of Westchester, 
 Putnam and Rockland. 
 
 " No. 8, shall consist of the counties of Dutchess 
 and Columbia. 
 
 No 9, shall consist of the counties of Orange and 
 Sullivan. 
 
 " No. 10, shall consist of the counties of Ulster and 
 Greene. 
 
 " No. II, shall consist of the counties of Albany and 
 Schemctady. 
 
 ' No. 12, shall consist of the county of E.eiisselaer. 
 
 No. 13, shall consist ol the counties of Washington 
 and Saratoga. 
 
 " No. 14, shall consist cf the counties of Wairen, Es- 
 sex, and Clinton. 
 
 " No. 15, shall consist of the counties of St. Law- 
 rence and Krarikliu. 
 
 No. 16, shall consist of the counties of Herkimer, 
 Hamilton, Fulton and Montgomery. 
 
 -< No. 17, shall consist of the counties of Schoharie 
 and Otsego. 
 
 " No IS, shall consist of the counties of Delaware and 
 Chenango. 
 
 " No. 19, shall consist of the county ofOnenla. 
 
 " No. 20, .-hail consist of the counties of Madison and 
 Oswego. 
 
 " No. 21, shall consist of the counties of Jeflerson 
 and Lewis. 
 
 " No. 22, shall consist of the county of Onondaga. 
 
 " No. 23. shall consist of the counties of Cortland, 
 Broome and Tioga. 
 
 " No. 24, shall consist of the counties of Cayuga and 
 Wayne. 
 
 " No. 25, shall consist of the counties of Tompkins, 
 
 Seneca and Chemung. 
 .. sist of 
 and Yates 
 
 No. 26, shall consist 
 
 the counties of Steuben 
 
 ' No. 27, shall consist of the county of Monroe. 
 " No. 28, shall consist of the counties of Oileans, 
 
 Geneseeand Niagara. 
 No. 29, shall consist ot the counties of Ontario and 
 
 Livingston. 
 11 No. 30, shall consist of the counties of Allegany 
 
 and Wyoming. 
 
 ' No. 31, shall consist of the county of Erie. 
 " No. 32 shall consist ofthe counties of Chautauque 
 
 and Cattaraugus. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN offered the following amendment: 
 
 To strike out all after the word ' Senator" in the third 
 line and insert as follows: "The Legislature shall, at its 
 next session, divide the State into 32 Senatorial districts, to 
 be composed of contiguous territory, as nearly in a com- 
 pact form as may be, without dividing counties." 
 
 Mr. STETSON objected to this amendment as 
 not being in order. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN insisted he was in order, and 
 after some conversation as to the point of order, 
 the Chair decided it to be in order. 
 
 MB. R. CAMP13ELL, Jr., in the absence ofthe 
 
420 
 
 chairman of the committee, felt it to be his duty 
 to express the hope that the amendment would 
 not prevail. Mr. C. urged that the apportion- 
 ment of the districts should be made in Conven- 
 tion, and he could 1iot vote to throw it over un- 
 til the next meeting of the legislature. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend the amendment by 
 striking out the words " without dividing coun- 
 ties," and inserting " without dividing Assembly 
 districts." Mr. S. addressed the Convention in 
 explanation of his amendment, and of the votes 
 which he felt bound to give. The Convention 
 having determined to have single districts, he 
 would yield up the division of counties, and make 
 each Senate district out of every four Assembly 
 districts. 
 
 Mr.TAGGART proceeded to refer to a mass of 
 statistics and figures as showing the inequality of 
 representation in the present system. When ha- 
 ving spoken five minutes, 
 
 The CHAIR called him to order, in pursuance 
 of the 5 minuses rule. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved that, he have leave to 
 proceed. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY inquired if the committee 
 could repeal a rule of the Convention ? 
 
 The CHAIR replied that it could only be done 
 by unanimous consent. 
 Mr. KENNEDY objected. 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved to rise and report pro- 
 gress in order to move to rescind this rule. This 
 was lost, 2G only rising in the affirmative. 
 
 A long desultory debate took place on points o 
 order, and on an appeal from the decision ot the 
 Chair, during which several motions to rise am 
 report were rejected, when 
 
 Mr. STOW modified his amendment, so as mere 
 ly to strike out the words " without dividing coun^ 
 ties " 
 
 Mr. TAGGART (this being a new proposition; 
 resumed and concluded his remarks. 
 
 Mr.LOOMIS opposed any proposition that woulc 
 break up town and county lines. He considerec 
 the system ot town and county municipal go- 
 vernments as the foundation of our system of go 
 vernment, and that therefore it ought not to be 
 interfered with, without great care. Mr. L.hopec 
 the Convention would yet agiee upon double dis 
 tricts, as tending to equalize representation an< 
 satisfy the people. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES referred to some inequality ii 
 the propositions, and urged that it would be bet 
 ter that the committee should rise and report pro 
 gre?s in order that gentlemen might have an op 
 portunity to look over and examine the question 
 He made that motion and it prevailed, ayes 49, 
 nays 35. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved to rescind the five mi- 
 nutes rule. 
 
 Here ensued a debate, in which R. CAMPBELL, 
 Jr. CLYDE, BURR, JOXES, KARRIS, and others par- 
 ticipa'ed, when the motion prevailed, ayes 61, 
 nays 15. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON* SESSION. 
 
 APPORTIONMENT OF THE LEGISLATURE. 
 The committee of the whole, Mr. PATTER- 
 SON in the Chair, took up the report of commit- 
 
 ee No. 1, on the apportionment, tenure of office, 
 tc. of the Legislature. 
 
 The question recurred on Mr. JORDAN'S 
 mendment, as follows : 
 
 To strike out all after the word " senator," in the third 
 ine, and insert as follows: "The legislature shall at its 
 ext session, divide the state into 3-2 senatorial districts, to 
 e composed of contiguous territory, as nearly in a com- 
 pact form as may be, without dividing counties." 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. STOWS 
 mendment, to strike out the three last words, 
 
 without dividing counties." This was lost. 
 
 The question then came up on the amendment 
 t Mr. JORDAN. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that before striking 
 iut, as proposed by Mr. JORDAN, they had much 
 Better endeavor to perfect the section. If they 
 could not arrange the apportionment of the Senate 
 Hstncts then they could impose that duty on the 
 Legislature. He hoped that all who had plans to 
 mprove the section would repeat them now. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said he thought this apportion- 
 ment was as fair a one as could be made, by any 
 one, and only required a few small corrections. 
 He believed it would be quite as easy for this 
 
 onvention to arrange these districts, as it would 
 for the next Legislature to do it. And there 
 would be much more reason to believe that it 
 would be done here with impartiality. It would 
 be a remarkable piece of good fortune if the next 
 Legislature should not be much more controlled 
 by "party interests than this body was ; and, while 
 that was 'the case, an apportionment made by 
 them would be made to subserve party purposes, 
 so far as possible. It would also be likely to con- 
 sume more time then than now, and a heavy ex- 
 pense would be the consequence. Half an hour 
 would be sufficient to perfect this matter, if debate 
 was waived. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL, Jr., said he hoped the 
 committee would not make the reference asked 
 for by the gentleman from Dutchess. Having 
 settled the question as to the number of Senators, 
 how chosen, and the term of their office, and 
 having decided in favor of the single district sys- 
 tem, and that no countv was to be divided in the 
 formation of a district, he apprehended the labor 
 of making the apportionment by this Convention 
 could not be difficult. He did not believe an ap- 
 portionment upon the principles settled could be 
 made so as to have each district contain an equal 
 representative population, nor if so made could it 
 long remain equal. Whoever was at all acquaint- 
 ed with the statistics of this State and its varied 
 business relations and changes, must know that 
 however equal the Senatorial districts might be 
 this year, the next year the greatest inequality in 
 representative population in those districts would 
 exist. He said that a few years since the legisla- 
 ture of this State had apportioned this State into 
 Congressional districts, and that the apportion- 
 ment was a popular one ; out of which little or 
 no discontent arose. And it would now be found 
 by reference to a document of the last Assembly, 
 exhibiting the representative population in those 
 districts, (^ which document had just been kindly 
 furnished him,) that such Congressional districts 
 were vastly more unequal in representative po- 
 pulation than the Senatorial districts reported by 
 the standing committee ; that some of those Con- 
 
421 
 
 -i-mal districts have a population of from 20,- 
 030 ti> >re than others, or that is required 
 
 for a member of Congress. He said a delegate near 
 him remarked that such documents exhibited only 
 i-.-srnt j)opulation of those districts. If so, 
 it proved that but a few years were required to 
 produce the greatest inequality in representation. 
 He said the Convention of 1777, and of IS'H, had 
 both formed the Senatorial districts of the State, 
 and he hoped this Convention would not be less 
 wise, and that they would not send the matter of 
 apportionment to the legislature. He said the 
 members of this Convention had already bestow- 
 ed considerable time and labor upon the section 
 under consideration ; that he (Mr. C.) had ascer- 
 tained that several of the districts formed by 
 such section could be made more equal in rep- 
 resentative population by a change of counties 
 from one district to another,without violating any 
 of the principles settled upon, by the Convention. 
 He said the deficiency of population in district 
 No. 1 could be obviated by taking the county of 
 Richmond from district No. 2 and by attaching it 
 to district No. 1 leaving the county of Kings 
 which was a county rapidly increasing in popu- 
 lation and he therefore moved so to amend the 
 section under consideration. 
 
 M. HARRISON hoped the proposed amend 
 ment, by the gentleman from Steuben, would 
 not prevail. It would be attended with the 
 grossest injustice to the county of Richmond, 
 which he represented here, and he could perceive, 
 that he would attain by it the object which he 
 has in view. In the first place, if you take Rich- 
 mond from Kings and affix it to Suffolk and 
 Queens, the d^/rict will still fall short of the ra- 
 tio, nearly fcur thousand, and Kings as a district 
 will be deficient between thirteen and fourteen 
 thousand. The object will fail entirely therefore 
 of producing the equalization which is professed- 
 ly intended by it, and if you take the deficiencies 
 of the two districts together, they will be found 
 to amount to upwards of seventeen thousand. 
 Besides, if we adopted this amendment, we shall 
 violate the principle laid down by the committee 
 as the one which should govern in all these cases, 
 and which they say shall not be departed from 
 namely, that the districts shall always be formec 
 of continuous or contiguous territory. Kings is 
 justly to be considered as continuous with Rich 
 mond county, as it is the next county and adjoin- 
 ing to it, with only the Narrows interposing be- 
 tween them. The connection therefore of Rich- 
 mond and Kings is perfectly natural and entirely 
 in accordance with the principle laid down bj 
 the committee, to wit, that districts shall bernad( 
 from contiguous or continuous counties, butadopi 
 the amendment and you must either leap ov.ei 
 Kings, or pass along its shore on one side of the 
 whole county to arrive at Queens for the neares 
 point of that county is at least twelve or fourteen 
 miles distant from Richmond. Again, the 
 people of Richmond have but little, perhaps h< 
 might say no intercourse with the citizens o 
 Queens and Suffolk, and no knowledge or ac 
 quaintance with either and, in that respec 
 we might almost as well be associated with Erie 
 or the county so ably represented by yourself 
 With the people of Kings we have been associa 
 ted in a Congressional district for several year 
 
 nd will it not be better for the two to be asso- 
 iated still in the senatorial district about to be 
 ramed, as our interests are more identical and 
 ur acquaintance and intercourse much more fa- 
 miliar than it ever can be with Suffolk or Queens ? 
 IVlr. BERGEN said he could noi without doing 
 njustice to the county he represented, let the 
 t marks of the gentleman from Richmond (Mr. 
 IARRIS-ON) pass unnoticed. In reply to his 
 issertiun that the counties of Richmond and 
 intrs were contiguous, he would say that the 
 gentleman was mistaken; they were far from be- 
 ng united, for they were separated by a broad ex. 
 >an?e of water, an arm of the sea navigated by 
 ,he largest class of vessels. If this was contigu- 
 ty, then he knew not what contiguity was. Heap- 
 )roved of the amendment offered by the commitiee 
 hrough the gentleman from Steuben (Mr. CAMP- 
 BELL, jr.) It was nothing more than what they, 
 )n a re-examination, had corne to the conclusion 
 :h:it justice demanded. Richmond, might with- 
 out impropriety, be said to have the same kind 
 f contiguity with Queens and Suffolk as with 
 Kings. A water communication connected her 
 with them all. There was very little commu- 
 nication between Kings and Richmond, no ferries, 
 no mercantile or other business transitions to 
 bring, the inhabitants in contact, consequently 
 hey were generally s\ caking, complete strangers 
 to each other He, himself, all hough a native of 
 Kings, and for the last seventeen years a resident 
 m the borders of the bay immediately opposite 
 he quarantine ground, was not personally ac- 
 quainted with more than about 20 individuals 
 residing in Richmond, He supposed that few 
 n his county were as extensively acquainted as 
 he was, and he was also satisfi d that the great 
 mass had not a solitary acquaintance there. 
 If Richmond had any natural connection at all 
 /vitli any part of the State, it was with the City 
 of N. York, for there were regular passengers be- 
 tween the two places, boats running, if he was not 
 mistaken, every half hour. Many of the citizens 
 of New York also, had their country seats and vil- 
 las on her elevated heights. Nature however in- 
 tended her for a part of New Jersey, from which 
 she is separated in many places by only a narrow 
 stream. He did not recommend her secession, 
 having too much regard for his friend, and the 
 respectable inhabitants of that county, to be wil- 
 ling to see them entirely cut off from the Empire 
 State. The last census showed a decrease in the 
 population of Richmond, an increase of about 1-2 
 per cent in that of Queens, and 3-4 per cent in 
 that of Suffolk, for the past 5 years. Their popu- 
 lation thus appears to be mainly stationary. By 
 placing them in one district, they -would have no 
 just cause for complaint, their united representa- 
 tive population being 71,070, which is 3,915 less 
 than the ratio. It would also reduce the fractions 
 in the 1st and 2d district. Kings on the other 
 hand, in 1845 had a representative population of 
 61,611, which is now more than that of Suffolk 
 and Queens united, theirs being only r)S/>f)7. Her 
 increase for 5 years, preceding IS 1-3, was 66 per 
 cent, more than double any other portion of the 
 State. That of the city of New York during tli e 
 same period, was only 19 per cent. Ifshe should 
 continue at the same rate for the next 'lO 
 years as she has for the past, her represen- 
 
422 
 
 tative population will then be 150,000, giv- 
 ing an average during the term of more than 
 100,000. If the prosperity of our country conti- 
 nues, he saw no reason to prevent this being in 
 a great measure realized. From the great num- 
 ber of dwellings erected, and in process of erec- 
 tion in the city of Brooklyn, and village of Wil- 
 liamsburgh, during the past and present year, he 
 was fully persuaded, so far no diminution of the 
 rate of increase had taken place. If the new cen- 
 sus was taken, there would at this moment be 
 found a greater representative population in the 
 county than the rates required. If the probable 
 average until the next censns was taken into con- 
 sideration, she would nearly be entitled to two 
 members. She requires however, but one, to be 
 left as a single district, if single districts we are 
 to have. She asks nothing unreasonable, nothing 
 but the justice which every member of this Con- 
 vention must clearly perceive she is entitled to. 
 No doubt Richmond too, will be fairly dealt with. 
 With these remarks he would submit the matter, 
 trusting to the good sense of the committee. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON : The gentleman from Kings 
 is mistaken, notwithstanding his reference to 
 the Red Book. The population of Richmond has 
 not diminished, and there is an error in the au- 
 thority which he consults. On the contrary, the 
 population of Richmond, is steadily increasing,and 
 has been increasing for the last ten years, and has 
 nearly doubled since 1830. Perhaps, the increase 
 may not be as great with us, as in the county of 
 Kings yet it has been such, as to give us quite 
 as strong a claim on that score, as the county of 
 Kings, if prospective increase is to be taken into 
 the account. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS thought this cross-firing was 
 to no purpose, and there was little probability 
 that these districts will be arranged here in com- 
 mittee of the whole. He therefore moved to rise 
 and report, with the purpose of moving after- 
 wards to refer this matter to a committee of one 
 from each Senate district to arrange and report 
 complete. 
 
 The motion to rise and report was lost. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN withdrew his amendment. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. R. CAMPBELL, jr. was 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL, jr. If in order, Mr. 
 CHAIRMAN, I now move a reconsideration of the 
 vote just now taken as I trust a little farther re- 
 flection will convince the Convention that it ought 
 to be reversed, and the District, embracing Rich- 
 mond and Kings, should be left as it is. There 
 was no intercourse by Richmond between the 
 counties of Suffolk and Queens, while with 
 Kings it was constant. Richmond and Kings had 
 also for years been connected as a Congressional 
 District. He believed it would be doing violence 
 to the natural relations between the counties, and 
 contrary to the feelings of his constituents, and 
 therefore he hoped the motion would not pre- 
 vail. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS thought all would be con- 
 vinced by this time, that these conflicting interests 
 could not be settled here, and he therefore moved 
 to pass over to the 7th section. Agreed to. 
 
 And the 7th section was read, as follows : 
 ^7. The members of Assembly shall be apportioned 
 among the several counties of the state, as nearly as may 
 
 be, according to the number of their respective inhabitants, 
 excluding aliens, paupers, and persons of color not taxed, 
 and shall be chosen by districts. The legislature, at its next 
 annual meeting, shall divide, the several counties of the State 
 into as many districts as each county respectively is now by 
 law entitled to members of Assembly, to be called Assembly 
 districts; and shall number the same in each county entitled 
 to more than one member, from i.umber oie, to the number 
 such county is entitled to, members inclusive, each of which 
 districts shall choose one member of Jlssembly. Each Jlssem- 
 bly district shall at all times contain, as nearly as may be, an 
 equal number of inhabitants, and shall consist of contiguous 
 territory; and no town or ward shall be divided in the forma- 
 tion of an Jlssembly district, except such town or ward may 
 I>K entitled to two or more members- An apportionment of 
 members of Assembly shall be made by the legislature at 
 its session after the return of every enumeration; and 
 the Jlssembly districts in the several counties of the State 
 shall be so altered a* to conform in number to the iaid appor- 
 tionment, and shall be constituted as herein before directed; 
 and the apportionment and the districts shall remain unal- 
 tered, until another enumeration shall have been taken. 
 Every county heretofore established, and separately or- 
 ganized, shall always be entitled to one member of the As- 
 sembly; and no new county shall hereafter be erected, un- 
 less its population shall entitle it to a member. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to strike out in the 
 4th line the word " paupers." Agreed to. 
 
 He then moved to strike out from the word 
 " taxed," in the 4th line, down to and including 
 the word " members," in the 7th line. 
 
 Mr. COOK moved as an amendment to this 
 amendment, to strike out in the 5th and 6th lines, 
 the words, " The Legislature, at its next annual 
 meeting, shall divide the several counties of the 
 State," and insert, " The Board of Supervisors in 
 each of the counties in this State shall, on the first 
 Tuesday in June next, divide their counties." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS thanked the gentleman from Sara- 
 toga for his suggestion. It was a new one, and 
 appeared to him to be worthy of consideration, 
 and struck him as more favorable than any he had 
 heard. It would greatly relieve the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved to amend, so that the 
 apportionment should be made by the Supervisors 
 as soon as practicable after the adoption of the 
 Constitution. But this was not now in order. 
 He added that it would be a very long and labo- 
 rious process in the city of New- York. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD inquired if the gentleman 
 had prepared other matters of detail to carry out 
 his plan. 
 
 Mr. COOK had another amendment prepared; 
 but it would not be in order now. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said he should like to know 
 how the gentleman proposed to establish the dis- 
 tricts, furnish proof of them, and give them the 
 force of law for the proposition struck him as a 
 peculiar one. He was opposed to it in toto, for 
 several reasons. We had already an apportion- 
 ment for the counties, and there was no need of 
 incurring this additional expense of special meet- 
 ings of boards of supervisors all over the State. 
 But the more serious objections were that you 
 would get up 59 gerrymandering bodies, to cut up 
 counties with reference rather to party objects 
 than any thing else that the election of supervi- 
 sors would turn on this question of cutting up 
 counties so as to procure certain party objects 
 and instead of diminishing corruption and base 
 political conduct of men in office, you would in 
 fact offer a premium for it ! 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER did not suppose this 
 proposition would be seriously entertained or he 
 should oppose it strenuously. He would only re- 
 
423 
 
 mark now that if gentlemen supposed the people 
 favored the idea of having as many 'little local le- 
 gislatures as there were counties, they were en- 
 tirely mistaken. In Kings county they were fair- 
 ly ridden down with local legislation. Besides, 
 there was nothing like equality of representation 
 in the board of supervisors. One of the five 
 towns in Kings (exclusive of Brooklyn) had a 
 population of nearly double that of the other 
 four and yet had but one supervisor to their four. 
 This was too important a matter to be entrusted 
 to a little knot of men elected for other purposes. 
 It was a matter they had nothing to do* with, and 
 should not have, if his vote would prevent it. 
 
 Mr. STRONG had confidence in the boards ot 
 supervisors, and he did not believe that any injus- 
 tice would be done by them. The boards alrea- 
 dy settled the matter of the equalization of taxes, 
 and there could be no instance pointed out where 
 a board of supenisors had abused the exercise ol 
 that power towards a minoiity. He should there- 
 lore vote for the amendment. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that he prefeired 
 that this matter should be settled by the Legisla- 
 ture. There was this advantage the whole Le- 
 gislature would act upon the matter, and being an 
 uninterested body they would be most likely to 
 make an impartial arrangement. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART proposed first to test the ques- 
 tion whether members of the assembly should be 
 elected by sin^e districts, by -adding to the sec- 
 tion, " The Stale shall be divided into 128 dis- 
 tricts, each of which shall elect one member of 
 Assembly. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said he would withdraw his 
 amendmer.' for the present, for that purpose. 
 
 Mr. CONELY was suggesting an amendment, 
 when 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said that the purpose could bet- 
 ter be attained, by adding the word "single" be- 
 fore districts in the fourth line, and then by mov- 
 ing to strike out "and shall be elected by single 
 districts." Mr. C. said he should vote against the 
 motion, but was willing to test the question. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART assented to this motion in lieu 
 of his own. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that there were doubts 
 as to the propriety of this change, which ought 
 to make us cautious before we adopt it. For 
 himself he could not perceive what great good 
 would be accomplished by it. It may be, as said 
 by the gentleman from New- York, to correct the 
 action of political parties, but he thought this 
 body should bestow its time and attention on no 
 matters of that kind. It was not its province to cor- 
 rect the acts of political partizans. But would 
 this matter accomplish that end ? Did gentlemen 
 remember that notwithstanding the counties were 
 divided into districts, there would still remain a 
 great many officers to be selected by county con- 
 ventions, and in all human probability the nomina 
 tion of members would there be settled not- 
 withstanding they were to be elected by districts. 
 There were to be delegations to Senatorial and 
 Congressional Conventions, nomination of She- 
 riffs, &c., and a great variety of officers, where 
 there was more interest felt than in the nomina- 
 tion for the Assembly. A county was an iden- 
 tity ; an individual, so far as its interests were 
 represented on this floor. The boards of Super- 
 
 visors were charged with the duty of legislating 
 for the whole county, in matters of taxation 
 and in settling accounts in all of which the 
 board acted as a whole. Why then seek to dis- 
 tract this identity of interests by breaking up its 
 representation on this floor ? The effect of the 
 representation coming here divided would be to 
 cause the interests of the county to suffer, as each 
 man would hold himself responsible only to the 
 constituency of his district. If the people had 
 demanded the reform, it had never reached his 
 ears or been brought to his attention. They had 
 sent him no resolution on the subject, and in his 
 county none such was passed in the Convention 
 which nominated him, or any other assembly he 
 had heard of there. And if the people had not 
 asked for it, why seek to impose it upon them ? 
 Mr. C. urged that the Convention had better 
 pause upon this matter and not break up county 
 lines and make mince meat of the counties 
 for mere political ends. He thought he saw the 
 obj ect of all this maneuvering where it tended 
 could divine its origin and appreciate its object 
 and so far as he was concerned he was not here 
 to play second fiddle to any such project. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG dissented tiom the propo- 
 sition of Mr. CHATFIELD that it was riot the bu- 
 siness of this body to correct the political action 
 of political parties. He thought it was the legiti. 
 mate business of this body in preparing a Consti- 
 tution to guard against the evils of such action so 
 far as they could consistently do it. The rights 
 of minorities were entitled to some attention, and 
 should be represented on this floor. In single 
 counties there was otten a greater diversity of in- 
 terest between the two sections than there was be- 
 tween two adjoining counties He believed, al- 
 though public opinion had not been so unanimous 
 in favor of single assembly districts, yet that it 
 had been so expressed in favor of the system, that he 
 would hardly dare return to his constituents with- 
 out having at least made an effort to secure it. 
 He had seen resolutions in favor of the system 
 adopted in several counties of the State, although 
 he could not say to what extent the expression 
 had been given throughout the State. And he 
 believed it to be the most equal way of securing 
 the interests ot the people throughout the State* 
 
 Mr. PERKINS agreed that it was the duty c f 
 the Convention to guard against the effecfs of par- - 
 ty spirit, as far as possible in framing a Constitu- 
 tion. We had already formed, without respect 
 to party, lines of division through the Slate and 
 cut it up into convenient locations of popula- 
 tion and business. And if we put into the Con- 
 stitution, any thing, the tendency of which is to 
 induce a disregard of these municipal divisions, 
 it was holding up to supervisors and legislators 
 an inducement to act upon party principles in the 
 formation of lines and divisions of counties. The 
 great evil he apprehended was involved in the 
 remote consequences which would result from 
 the formation of single districts. We should 
 have instead of 5G counties as now, within ten 
 years, a hundred counties-, involving all the ad- 
 ditional expense, &c. for a division for political 
 purposes, would inevitably lead to a division for 
 county purposes. He considered the tendency of 
 small counties to be to increase the expense to 
 the people. Quarrels in the boards of supervisors 
 
424 
 
 in relation lo the division ol districts would lead 
 to the division of counties. And he thought al- 
 so it. would tend to engender political feelings and 
 piejudices in those boards. Mr. P. in conclusion 
 expressed himself opposed to the division of 
 counties at all. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY briefly expressed himself 
 in favor of leaving this matter to ihe boards of 
 superv isors. 
 
 On motion of Mr. SWACKHAMER the com. 
 mittee rose and reported progress. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 Si. TURDAY, (45th day,) July 25. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. HITCHCOCK. 
 Mr. DORLON presented the petition of cer- 
 tain colored citizens for the extension to them of 
 the Right of Suffrage. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved that there be no Afternoon 
 Session to-day. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved that afternoon sessions 
 be dispensed with on every Saturday. Agreed to ; 
 44 to 27. 
 
 APPORTIONMENT &c. OF THE LEGISLATURE. 
 The committee of the whole, Mr. PATTER- 
 SON in the Chair, resumed the consideration of 
 committee No. 1. 
 
 The amendment to strike out the provision for 
 single districts, was rejected 21 to 50. So the 
 committee resolved that there should be single 
 Assembly districts. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved to except the city and 
 county of New York. Lost. 
 
 Mr. COOK now renewed his amendment as to 
 the division of the districts by the supervisors, 
 which he offered yesterday. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to strike out the 
 words " 1st Tuesday of June next," and insert 
 " at their next annual meeting." 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved further to amend, so 
 that this Convention should make the first divi- 
 sion into Assembly districts, and that all subse- 
 que-nt ones be made by the supervisors. 
 
 A MEMBER : We cannot do it. We have tried. 
 (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. PERKINS : Then no other body of men 
 in the country can. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE asked how the supervisors when 
 they next met would know if the people had ac- 
 cepted or rejected the new Constitution ? 
 
 Mr. BASCOM : In many counties the annual 
 meetings of the supervisors are in October. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY said that some definite time 
 should be fixed for all; and not say at a next an- 
 nual meeting. 
 
 Mr. COOK said the Boards would not be able 
 to tell at their next meeting, if the Constitution 
 had been adopted. 
 
 Mr. STRONG: Of course not; for they meet in 
 October. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL : If the counties now electing 
 more than one member of Assembly, are to be 
 divided into single Assembly districts as the 
 present judgment of the Convention pretty clear- 
 ly indicates the plan for carrying this principle 
 into practical effect, which is proposed by the 
 honorable gentleman from Saratoga, (Mr. COOK) 
 is undoubtedly the best. In the opinion of Mr. 
 R., the reference of this division of Assembly 
 districts to the next Legislature, was the worst 
 
 possible mode. Experience has fully proved this 
 position. The only duty of the kind heretofore 
 performed by the Legislature, has been the allot- 
 ment of our eight Senate districts, and our Con- 
 gressional districts ; and he would ask members, 
 if, in this limited exercise of log-rolling power 
 by legislators, in fixing boundaries of local con- 
 stituencies, great abuses had not been committed 
 at every periodical change of districts? Well 
 founded complaints had arisen from many sections 
 of the State. Besides, the next Legislature would 
 be compelled to hold a six months' session, to 
 discharge the indispensable duties imposed upon 
 it by the new Constitution, in addition to ordinary 
 legislation. The gentleman from Saratoga, to 
 avoid this great objection to single Assembly dis- 
 tricts in large counties, proposes a safe and 
 practicable plan, which, Mr. R. trusted, would 
 be adopted by the Convention, if the single dis- 
 trict plan should be carried into effect. The 
 Convention would then declare the principle that 
 large counties should be divided into separate dis- 
 tricts for election of members of Assembly, and 
 that the local representatives of the several 
 towns of such counties should be a body to fix the 
 boundaries of such districts, to comprise contigu- 
 ous convenient territory, and as nearly as practi- 
 cable, without dividing town lines, equal repre- 
 sentative population. Mr. R. was forcibly im- 
 pressed with the idea that the Boards of Su- 
 pervisors of these counties were the best and 
 safest class of public officers who could be 
 selected to carry out this provision of the new 
 constitution. Some gentlemen object that this 
 plan confers legislative powers upon the boards 
 jf Supervisors, touching upon rights of the Legis- 
 lature ; and others, that the people are unequally 
 represented by these Supervisors of towns. 
 These objections were of no moment, if the duty 
 could be better performed than by the Legisla- 
 ture. How could 128 members of Assembly and 
 32 Senators have the necessary practical infor- 
 mation to determine the most equal, convenient, 
 and judicious divisions of these counties ? Shall 
 the citizens of different sections of the State be 
 compelled to come to the Capitol as lobby mem- 
 bers to give the requisite information ? or shall 
 the delegation from each county dictate the divi- 
 sion of the several counties? Probably a combi- 
 nation of both influences would prevail. Lob- 
 bies would explain, and members would dictate 
 for their own counties, until a majority of the 
 members of the whole Legislature could be log- 
 rolled together upon a general plan, which would 
 subserve the views of the majority, and leave the 
 minority to console themselves, in the best way 
 they could, for the wanton injuries inflicted upon 
 their respective localities. Better far is it to give 
 this power of local district division to local au- 
 thorities. The boards of supervisors of the coun- 
 ties always comprise a fair representation of the 
 intelligence, integrity and sound practical judg- 
 ment, of the whole constituency. Supervisors of 
 towns are selected as business men, with a view 
 to their duties in equalizing assessments, and in 
 shielding the people from excessive taxation 
 growing out of our poor laws, and other munici- 
 pal regulations. In all our towns, the office is 
 considered a highly honorable position. Mr. R. 
 knew several gentlemen in his own section who 
 
425 
 
 had accepted this office, but who would not ac- 
 cept the office f member of Assembly, with all 
 its honors and emolument. He presumed this 
 remark would apply to other sections. But the 
 strongest argument for committing this duty 
 to the Boards of Supervisors, was, that these bo- 
 dies possessed the superior knowledge of locali- 
 ties, their convenience and general interests. 
 Suppose this Convention were to divide the coun- 
 ties into districts. Mr. R. did not doubt that the 
 judgment of the three members from St. Law- 
 rence would dictate the division of that county 
 into its three districts ; but he must say the 28 
 Supervisors of the county were much more com- 
 petent. Such must be the casein other counties. 
 Mr. R. preferred that the present Supervisors 
 should make these Assembly districts. He did 
 not like to throw such a bone of political contest 
 into the next town elections. Restless politi- 
 cians, ambitious of being returned to the Assem- 
 bly, might be stirred up to patriotic exertions to 
 influence the constitution of the Boards of Super- 
 visors. It was a new exercise by the towns, and 
 public attention might not, in its first exercise, 
 be sufficiently drawn toward improper influences 
 in the next town elections. He had no doubt the 
 existing Boards of Supervisors would perform the 
 duty wisely and honorably. In his own county, 
 he felt satisfied his plan would best suit the 
 opinions of his constituents. So far as his expe- 
 rience extended, Supervisors of towns always act 
 under a strong sense of responsibility to the judg- 
 ments and interests of their constituents. The] 
 certainly have superior knowledge of the subjec 
 entrusted tc them, and this new and importan 
 power would impose upon these local Boards a 
 high obligation to execute it faithfully. The 
 would do so. He concluded by saying that the 
 Convention were under obligation to the gentle 
 man from Saratoga for presenting this safe prac 
 tical plan, and hoped it would be adopted as par 
 of the single district system. 
 
 Mr. (JhA'IKiLLD modified his amendment 
 thai (l;e division should be on the l-.t ot January 
 Mr. CROOKER asked him to modiiy his -amend 
 mem, so that the division should be made be 
 tweMi Ihe first oi DfCAtttfeef and l..st of January 
 This would sj.ive some counties the expense <>f 
 special meeting. Two or three sensible men get 
 ting together, with honest purposes, could soo 
 dis:nci a couniy. He would undertake to hav 
 Cmtaiaugus fairly districted in 30 mmuies by th 
 watch. 
 
 Mr. MANN did n<-t want this laid over to th 
 next board of supervisor*; for if it was, it woul 
 produce much lo^.rul.ing, and not a little corruj 
 political scrambling. 
 
 Mr. MILLER wanted to have it laid over t 
 the next b->ard of supervisors. He wanted then 
 elected with this verv object of distnctit e th 
 State. 
 
 Mr. SHAVER said he thought the reasons urg 
 by t tie gentleman from Coril.tnd (Mr MILLER 
 lor postponing the division of the Hate into a 
 st-mbly district, until a new board of supfrvio 
 should be elected, woie the very reasons why th 
 division should be made by the present boards. 
 The present supervisors had been elected with 
 reference to political considerations, and for tr 
 most part on account of the fi'nesa to distharg 
 
 29 
 
 e duties ot that office There would be great 
 inger if this question should be referred to a 
 ard of supervisors to be hereafter elected that a 
 evv element of party strife would be infused into 
 ic election. He believed the present boards of 
 ipervisors fully compelent to discharge this inc- 
 :n-tant duty with jus'ice and impartiality and to 
 le entire satisfaction of the community. 
 he gentleman from St. Lawrence, (Mr. PER- 
 INS) has referred to evils arising from the ap- 
 ointment of Justices of the Peace by the Board 
 Supervisors. But that evil was the result of 
 onnecting with the supervisors in making such 
 Dpointments the county judges, officers deriv- 
 ig their authority from the central power of the 
 ate, and who had received the office as a reward 
 ir political services. It was because the will of 
 le people as expressed by their representatives 
 n the board of supervisors, was often over-ruled 
 y these county judges, that that mode of ap- 
 ointment became odious. For these reasons, Mr. 
 . said he should vote to have the Assembly dis- 
 ricts made by the present board of supervisors. 
 Mr. BERGEN objected to the doctrine present- 
 d by the gentleman from Albany (Mr. SHAVER.) 
 According to his (Mr.BERGEN's) belief the Boards 
 f Supervisors were elected with reference to po- 
 itical views. At all events, it was generally so 
 n the southern part of the State 
 
 The member from Albany explained. 
 
 Mr. B, repeated they were in general, elected 
 ,vith particular reference to political views. Ex- 
 eptions were rare. He believed the committee 
 tfould concur with him in this view. Their pu- 
 ity, patriotism, and capacity he would not ques- 
 ion. He would not object to them on these 
 grounds, but on an entirely different one 
 
 He was called to order by a member. 
 
 The CHAIR stated that the question was not 
 on authorizing the Board of Supervisors to di- 
 vide the counties, but on fixing the time. 
 
 Mr B. stated he had no intention or desire to 
 depart from the question before the committee. 
 He supposed he was only taking the same lati- 
 tude which others had. Under the circumstances 
 he would take some other opportunity of expres- 
 sing his views upon the point on which he had 
 been interupted. Before taking his seat he would 
 however state, that if it should be determined that 
 the Board of Supervisors should perform this 
 duty, he had no objections to the amendment it- 
 self under consideration. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH wanted the work done by the 
 present Board of Supervisors ; if it is turned over 
 to the next Board, political considerations will 
 enter into the elections of those men, who are 
 now supported for many other reasons than their 
 political views. He hoped therefore, that Janu- 
 ary instead of June, would he inserted as the time 
 when the Supervisors should district the same. 
 
 Mr. COOK accepted Mr. CHATFIELD'S amend- 
 ment to have it on the 1st of January. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND hoped he would withdraw 
 that. The votes for the Constitution would be 
 counted in December, and the Constitution if 
 adopted, would go into effect on the 1st of April. 
 Mr. CONELY moved to amend so that the di- 
 vision should be made on or before the 1st of 
 April next. Lost. 
 
426 
 
 Mr. JONES moved that the first apportionment 
 be made by this Convention. 
 Mr. RICHMOND: Let us 
 alike at one time; there are no elections for Su- 
 pervisors in January ; but there are some in Feb- 
 uary, March, April and May ; so they would have 
 part new boards and part old boards, to do it, if 
 it was postponed over January. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM wanted this done as soon as 
 possible and should move when in order to that 
 effect. 
 
 Mr. CONELY'S amendment was lost. 
 Mr. JONES then renewed his amendment. 
 He wanted the Convention to make the Assembly 
 districts and not the Board of Supervisors or the 
 Legislature. Many of the Boards of Supervisors 
 are elected on political grounds ; and their duties 
 should be strictly of a county nature, and not of a 
 State character. They were all there as an inde- 
 pendent body of public men, each one acting on 
 the responsibility of his own character and his 
 duty to his constituents. No party feeling exist- 
 ed in the Convention, and they could district the 
 State more fairly than any other body. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that the object of the 
 amendment offered by the gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. JONES) was to defeat the principles of 
 the amendment of the gentleman from Saratoga 
 (Mr. COOK) which refers this matter of the di- 
 vision of the several counties, into assembly dis- 
 tricts to the boards of supervisors. To this amend- 
 ment therefore he was opposed. Mr. R. said that 
 he was astonished at the ground taken by some of 
 the gentlemen who have opposed the plan of re- 
 ference to the boards of supervisors. It was but 
 the other day that these same gentlemen were for 
 bringing every thing as near to the people as pos- 
 sible. According to their then doctrines the peo- 
 ple had all the honesty, all the integrity and all 
 the patriotism qualities, which from the scope 
 of their arguments were never to be found in the 
 people's representatives ! Now, when a great 
 question of vital importance the mode in which 
 their immediate representatives were to be ap- 
 portioned and elected the people were not to be 
 trusted, and when a proposition that the boards 
 of supervisors of each county elected with 
 special reference to the division of the county 
 into single assembly districts, shall be entrus- 
 ted to perform that duty, is before us, they 
 oppose it on the ground that fraud and corrup- 
 tion, a system of log-rolling and party spirit 
 will be carried into the town elections, and 
 will influence the conduct of the boards of 
 supervisors. It was but yesieidjy that his friend 
 from Kings, (Mr. SWACKHAMER) was kind 
 enough to admonish him, (Mi. R.) (while advo. 
 eating the election of Senators, one halt in one 
 year, and the other half the nex',) that iie had 
 gone off from the true democratic track and 
 evinced a distrust of the people in not subini.tmg 
 the election of the whole feenate to ihem.at ihesarm 
 time, and his fiend very kindly offered to turn 
 the switch and thus get him right again Now, 
 to-day, the same gentleman dare not trust the 
 peopie to elect their board of supemsois to per 
 form the duty proposed by the gentleman fn-m 
 Saratoga, because of its absurdity, and txposuit 
 to corrupt practices. Mr. R. said there was ont 
 class of our constituents that be bad no doubt 
 
 would oppose the amendment of the gentleman 
 from Saratoga, but they were a small number corn- 
 have it done all pared with the vast portion who would approve 
 it. That class w<;re those persons who expected 
 to live on the avails of office. They were parti- 
 zan leaders spoil hunters, who were always 
 alarmed when party discipline and party or- 
 ganization were likely to be disturbed. They 
 were devoted to the principle of helping up 
 and maintaini.jg|4a powerful central influence 
 at the capital it was from this that thej 
 derived all the political consequence with which 
 they -were invested. They wished all po- 
 litical action to originate at Albany or wher- 
 ever the capital of your State was located. 
 Now he hoped his friend did not represent that 
 class he hoped they had no representation on 
 i his floor. The gentleman from New York had 
 said that the members of Assembly were Slate of- 
 ficers, and therefore this measure of districting 
 the State should be done by the representatives of 
 the whole Stale in a body that the boards of su- 
 pervisors were too local in their character to be 
 entrusted with State interests. If the gentlenran 
 from New York will examine, he will see that 
 these are man subjects in which the interests of 
 the whole State are involved, which are referred 
 lo the boards of supervisors the assessments of 
 direct taxes the appointment of county super- 
 intendents of schools, and other matters in which- 
 the State at large are interested. Powers and 
 duties had been very often devolved by the legis. 
 lature on the boards of supervisors in which the 
 whole State were interested Now it was for the 
 very reason of their better acquaintance with the 
 localities from which the members come, that: he 
 (Mr. R.) was in favor of the proposition This 
 body was not sufficiently acquainted with the situ- 
 ation of the different counties of this Slate to 
 make a proper division. What does the Riembo? 
 from New York mean about the propriety oi the 
 district arrangements of Cattaraugus, of Chao- 
 tauque and St. Lawrence ? We were elected 
 and sent here for the purpose of providing in 
 the Constitution for the division ot the State 
 into single Assembly districts, but not our- 
 selves to perform that duty. Mr. R. said he 
 did not believe there was a single member here, 
 except from the cities, who had ever looked at 
 his county with a view to the manner it should 
 be cut up into Assembly districts, or had taken 
 the pains to learn the wishes of his constituents 
 on that subject. The gentleman from New- York 
 (Mr. JONES,) says this is a measure which must 
 involve questions of a political and party charac- 
 ter, and if the division is done by the several 
 counties,attempts will be made to secure the pre- 
 dominance of party by these divisions. He there- 
 fore thought that it should be done here. The 
 gentleman has congratulated the Convention that 
 nothing of a party character has yet appeared in 
 this body; and that no great political or party- 
 leader has yet found himself with power enough 
 to control any parties in this Convention this is 
 true, and is a source of gratification to every one. 
 And it was for the vey reason that he (Mr. R.) 
 would desire to preserve the existing state of 
 things in this Convention, that he would not 
 make the attempt to introduce a subject of action 
 acre which would more or less involve party con- 
 
427 
 
 sideration. He would not have it done by the I whether, under such circumstances, it would be 
 Legislature, because it would then be made the just and equitable to leave the performance of 
 instrument of building up and strengthening a this high act, one in which the interests of all 
 central influence. The Legislature would be the people were so deeply involved, to public 
 borne down by this influence and by an army of bodies thus constituted ? For one, he was too 
 lobby agents from the different counties when ac- much the friend of equnl rights to assent to it. 
 ting on this subject, and whenever we undertook He hoped the committee would never consent to 
 this matter, we should soon find that kind of in- it. He had no objection to have it done in the 
 fluence attempting to control the action of this counties, provided it was done by agents selected 
 body. Mr. R. said he trusted there were strong by a majority of the inhabitants. If it should be 
 reasons existing in the minds of members here for decided to have it done in the counties, make a 
 rejecting the amendment, of the gentleman from provision for the election, by a majority of those 
 New- York, and equally strong for adopting that concerned, of commissioners for the express pur- 
 of the gentleman from Saratoga. pose. Do this, and all objections would vanish 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that it being already settled all would bow in submission to the will of the 
 how many members there were to be, there was majority. 
 
 no difficulty in making out the districts; and he Mr. JONES' motion was lost, 
 was in favor of the Supervisors doing that duty. Mr. STETSON called for a division. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN said under other circumstances The CHAIR : To strike out and insert are in- 
 he would fully concur with the gentleman from divisible. 
 
 New-York, (Mr. JONES) in believing that this Mr. BASCOM moved to amend Mr. COOK'S 
 body was one of the most proper ones to form amendment as follows : 
 
 these Assembly districts He rejoiced to find po- Tfae B<rrf Qf s isors in each of the connties of 
 litical feeling banished from these walls. Want this Slate shall meet on the lst Tu esday O f January 
 of time to perform the work induced him, how^-J next, and proceed without adjournment, except from 
 ever, to vote against the proposed amendment. day to day to district the several counties. 
 If done as proposed, it would produce much dis- Mr. ANGEL thought it should be postponed 
 cussion, the valuable time of this Convention until after the next annual meeting. Some say 
 would be wasted, and more important matters be the present boards of supervisors should do this 
 left undone, or otherwise completed in a hurried to prevent log-rolling, &c> The supervisors who 
 and imperfect manner. So much time having al- are to perform this duty in January, were elected 
 ready been wasted in entering on the threshold last Spring, without any reference to this matter, 
 of the work, made it necessary to economise the and if they had known that this question was to 
 little which was left as much as possible. It have been submitted to them, they might have 
 would bp much better to leave it to the next le- elected very different men. II y^ou let the people 
 gislature. He however could not oppose the choose the supervisors next Spring to district the 
 amendment on the ground assumed by the gen- State, they would go to work honestly. He was 
 tleman from Onondaga, (Mr. RHOADES.) He un- i n favor of confiding this to the people, 
 derstood that gentleman's objection to be, that it Mr. TALLMADGE said if they would refer 
 would set the Convention above a measure, of a this matter to the members of each county in the 
 party and political character. To be consistent, Convention, they would report the ratio of ap- 
 the gentleman should also condemn the division portionment and district their counties by Mon- 
 by this Convention of the State into Senatoiral day morning next. He would do so for Dutchess. 
 districts. If there was any thing leading to par- If we cannot agree to this, let us agree to refer; 
 tizan action in the one, there was also in the oth- this to the Board of Supervisors ; for they are 
 er. [The gentleman from Onondago explained.] honest men ; and if we cannot agree to that, let 
 He was also opposed to the plan proposed by us agree to leave it to the next legislature. But 
 the gentleman from Saratoga [Mr, COOK.] for Heaven's sake, let us get at some result, and 
 The Boards of Supervisors in the several not be running counter to each other all the time, 
 counties were composed of members represent- with diversified opinions, and transacting or fi- 
 ing towns instead of population. [Here he nishing no business at all. 
 was interrupted by the gentleman from Clin- Mr. BASCOM'S amendment was carried, 
 ton, (Mr. STETSON) who inquired whether the Mr. STETSON said il the making of single As- 
 gentleman was in order, in his reference to the Uembly districts could be made impartially, and 
 Boards of Supervisors. The CHAIR stated it to without gerrymandering, it would be one of the 
 be in order.] Although composed of gentlemen most valuable reforms that has been brought for- 
 of high standing and character, yet, in conse- ward for half a century. 
 
 quence of these boards being thus instituted, the Mr. TALLMADGE alluded to the confusion 
 people were very unequally represented in them. an d conflicting views entertained by members, 
 This he understood to be the case throughout the and urged that the time was wasted in attempt- 
 whole State. The present division of the State ing to renovate them here. He alluded to the 
 into towns, prevented the evil from being past action of the Convention, as showin- how- 
 altogether avoided. To give an instance of the time was occupied, and urged that if this course 
 inequality, he would refer to the county of Kings, was to be continued, as definite a result could be 
 There, five towns, with a population in round attained by adjourning over to the end of the 
 numbers of about 9,000, were represented by five week. At the instance of several friends he said, 
 Supervisors one, with a population of about he moved that it be left to the delegates of the 
 12,000, with one Supervisor, and the city of several counties to report to the Convention a 
 Brooklyn, with a population of 60,000, by six plan for the division of their respective counties 
 Supervisors. He would appeal to the committee I Mr, HARRIS deprecated too frequent lectures 
 
428 
 
 of the house by gentleman, and urged that the 
 question should be taken now, without further 
 debate. The mind of every member he believed 
 was decided as to how he should vote, and he al- 
 so believed that a large majority of the committee 
 were in favor of the sensible democratic principle 
 of having the districts disposed of by the Board of 
 Supervisors. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment con- 
 ferring the power on the Board of Supervisors, 
 was adopted. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to strike out the words 
 " or ward," so as to allow wards to be divided in 
 the formation of Assembly districts. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG : Why not towns also. 
 Mr. NICOLL could only speak of his own con- 
 stituency. It would be utterly impossible to dis- 
 trict the city with any degree of fairness unless 
 the supervisors had the power to divide the 
 wards. By reference to the population of the 
 wards it would be seen that several of these had 
 a population of 30,000, 27,000, &c., and were con- 
 stantly increasing, and with a ratio of 19,000 how 
 was it possible to give a fair representation By 
 a combination of election districts this might be 
 done with perfect fairness, and an entire equality 
 of representation secured. 
 
 After some conversation the amendment of Mr. 
 N was adopted. Ayes 66, nays not counted. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that the objec- 
 tions in relation to not dividing wards would ap- 
 ply equally to towns. He would therefore move 
 to strike out the words " and no town shall be 
 divided in the formation of an Assembly district." 
 This was rejected. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to amend so as to read 
 "no town shall be divided, &c., except such 
 town be entitled to more than one member." 
 This was also rejected. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN mo^ed to strike out ail of (he 
 15th line "except such town or ward, be entitled 
 to two or more members. 
 This was carried. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to add after the wotd 
 county Mn as compact and square a form as pos- 
 
 SEVERAL: " Square form " [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said the object was to avoid 
 gerrymandering;. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS suggested that it would be im- 
 possible to divide the State into ' square districts." 
 
 Alter some further conversation, 
 
 Mr. CROOKER assented to striking out the 
 words " square lorm." 
 
 Messrs LOOMIS and KIRKLAND opposed the 
 amendment, briefly saying that it was a matter to 
 be left to the boards of supervisors, the restric- 
 tions already provided being sufficient, when the 
 amendment was voted down. 
 
 Mr CROOKER had another amendment to 
 submit, which he supposed would call out dis- 
 cussion. The object was to secure equality of 
 representation. He proposed to amend the 7th 
 section, by inserting at the end of the 4th line 
 
 The State shall be divided into four grand divisions. 
 
 The count es of shall constitute the Northern Dm- 
 
 on -the counties of shall constitute the Southern 
 
 Son; the counties of. : 8haUc ^^^^ 
 
 divi ion- and the counties of -shall constl ute the 
 
 Western division; each division to elect 32 Member, of 
 Assembly. 
 
 There was between different portions of the 
 State somewhat of a diversity of interests, and he 
 proposed an equal representation in the legisla- 
 tive body. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS was gratified at last to see a 
 proposition to cut up and divide the State into 
 Assembly districts, according to territory. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER : Not according to territory, 
 but population. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS : The gentleman spoke of ter- 
 ritory. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was 
 rejected. 
 
 Mr. COOK offered an amendment providing in 
 effect, that after every apportionment, the boards 
 'of Supervisors should arrange the Assembly dis- 
 tricts, filing a description of the same in the of- 
 fice of Secretary of State. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued as to whether 
 the amendment in its present form secured the 
 object desired, when a substitute was proposed 
 by Mr. HARRIS, substantially embodying the 
 same principles as that of Mr. COOK. 
 
 It was adopted, ayes 51. 
 
 Mr. STETSON then moved to substitute the 
 following for the first lines of the section : 
 
 " The members of Assembly shall be apportioned 
 among the several Assembly district counties, so that un- 
 represented fractions shall be equal, as nearly as may be, 
 according to the number of their respective inhabitants, "&c. 
 
 The object, Mr. S. stated, was to secure that 
 equality of representation he had all along been 
 contending for. 
 
 After some conversation the amendment was 
 voted down. 
 
 Mr. HUTCHINSON moved to amend so as to 
 provide that Fulton and Hamilton should be one 
 Assembly district as heretofore. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN concurred in the opinion that 
 some amendment was needed to this section. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS contended that Hamilton coun- 
 ty had been for the last five years perfectly orga- 
 nized as a county and was as much entitled to a 
 representation in the Assembly as the city of 
 New-York. The only evidence against it was 
 the census returns that she did not possess a suf- 
 ficient population,but that had ought not to be urg- 
 ed, he said, to operate against the solemn acts of 
 legislation. He would not therefore deprive 
 Hamilton of its vested rights. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLE3 said that under the present 
 Constitution, Hamilton Co. was set apart until its 
 population should reach the requisite amount. It 
 was never organized until 1838. As the consti- 
 tution therefore now stands, Hamilton was not 
 entitled to a member, and the Convention would 
 ertainly never confer the right of electing a 
 member on 2000 inhabitants. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS was q lite sure that in the act or- 
 ganizing Hamilton, it was expressly provided 
 that she should not be entitled to a representa- 
 tion until she passed the requisite population. 
 
 Mr. HUTCHINSON said that if it was the opin- 
 ion of the committee that Hamilton was entitled 
 to a member, he would withdraw his amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND renewed it. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that before Hamilton was 
 deprived of a right to a member, it would be well 
 to look at the matter. In the constitution of 1821 
 
429 
 
 was found this language" The 4th District 
 shall consist of the counties of Saratoga, Montgo- 
 mery, Hamilton, &c." Then afterwards in that 
 constitution the language, " Every county here- 
 after established and separately organized, shall 
 always be entitled to one member of Assembly, 
 and no new county shall hereafter be erected un- 
 less its population shall entitle it to a member." 
 Mr. T. then urged that as Hamilton had been or- 
 ganized as a county, to all effects and purposes, 
 except the right of electing a representative 
 that therefore she was entitled to one now, or else 
 there had been a violation of the Constitution on 
 the part of the legislature passing the act for its 
 organization. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that there could be no 
 doubt about the subject. The Constitution ex. 
 pressly provided that no new county should be 
 erected alter the adoption of that instrument 
 without possessing the requisite population. 
 And if the Legislature had undertaken to do so, 
 it was certainly against the constitution, and an 
 act which this Convention would not concur in. 
 
 Mr. LOOMS offered an amendment to guard 
 against this, and it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM offered the same amendment to 
 this section as he did to a previous one, to the 
 effect, that if the right of suffrage should be ex. 
 tended to persons of color, they should then form 
 a portion of the basis of representation. 
 
 This was voted down. 
 
 Mr. BEKGEN moved to strike out the words 
 "excluding aliens and persons of color not taxed." 
 
 This was rejected. 
 
 Mr. A.W. YOUNG moved to amend, so that 
 where the bounds of any county had been al. 
 tertd since the passage of the apportionment law 
 of last winter, the appnrtionrnent of members 
 should be made to accord with such alteration. 
 This was to meet the case of Wyoming county, 
 which in such case would be entitled to an addi- 
 tional member. 
 
 Messrs. TAGGART and RICHMOND objected 
 to this, and Mr. A. W. YOUNG uiged its adop- 
 tion, when it was voted down. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS proposed a substitute tor the 
 7th section embracing all the principles which 
 the committee had agreed upon. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD. >ffered another substitute for 
 the section. [In terms reporting all the principles 
 that had boen adopted by the committee.] 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said this proposed in effect 
 to reject all that had been done by the committee, 
 and he hoped that the question would be first tak- 
 en on it, and it be voted down. 
 
 This was assented to and the amendment of 
 Mr. C. was voted down. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART then offered a substitute, pro- 
 viding for 128 Assembly districts, without refer- 
 ence to county lines. This was also voted down. 
 
 There was a general assent then that the sec- 
 tion should be passed over. 
 
 The 9th section was then taken up as follows : 
 
 ^ 9. The members of the legislature shall receive for 
 their services a comjens.ition to be ascertained by law, 
 and paid out of the public tte-isury ; which compensation 
 shall not exceed the sum of three dollars a day, and after 
 the year 1847, shall not exceed the sum of three dollars a 
 day lor the period of ninety days from the commencement 
 ot the session. Wlien convened in extra session by the 
 Governor they shall receive such sum as shall be fixed for 
 the ordinary session. They shall also receive the sum of 
 
 one dollar for every ten mi.es they shall travel, In going 
 to and returning from thir place of mi eting, on the most 
 usual route. The Speaker of the Assembly shall, in vir- 
 tue of his office, receive an additional compensation equal 
 to one-third of his per diem as member. 
 
 Nr. NICHOLAS moved to strike out the words 
 " which compensation shall not exceed the sum 
 of $3 a day, and after the year 1847, shall not ex- 
 ceed the sum of $3 a day for a period of 90 days 
 from the commencement of the session," and to 
 insert, "the Legislature shall pass no law increas- 
 ing the compensation of its members beyond the 
 sum of $3 a day." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER opposed the proposed reduc- 
 tion of pay. It was not too much now, and he 
 hoped it would not be cut down for the mere 
 sake of popularity. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND urged the propriety of giv- 
 ing the members of the Assembly a stated, fixed 
 Salary. It appeared by the reports called forth 
 from the Comptroller's office, in answer to a reso- 
 lution from this body that the average amount 
 paid to each member for the few years last past 
 was about $450. He was disposed to be liberal 
 in this matter, and thought that about $500 a 
 session would be a small enough compensation. 
 This he thought would be better than limiting the. 
 session which might at times render the people 
 liable to a great many inconveniences. He should 
 when occasion occurred offer an amendment in 
 accordance with these suggestions. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend, so that 
 incase the session should exceed 90 days, the 
 pay of members thereof should only be $1,50 each 
 per day. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS considered this a reflection 
 on the integrity of the legislature. Mr. N. then 
 varied his amendment so as merely to strike out 
 after the words " $3 a day." Mr. N. considered 
 that there was a principle involved in this ques- 
 tion which should be discussed. He moved 
 that the committee rise and report progress. 
 
 This was agreed to, and the Convention ad- 
 journed. 
 
 MONDAY, (4Gth day,) July 27. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. KIP. 
 
 Mr. WARD, from the committee on rules, re- 
 ported a rule that the previous question might 
 apply to any particular section without affecting 
 the whole report. This was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that so much of sec- 
 tion No. 5, of the report of committee No. 1, as 
 relates to the apportionment of senators be refer- 
 red to a select committee of two from each senate 
 
 Mr CROOKER moved to strike out " select" 
 and insert " committee No. 1." He was opposed 
 to having this matter referred to a select commit- 
 tee at this *ime of day. There was both difficulty 
 and danger in it. 
 
 Mr. DANA : Have they not already done that 
 duty : committee No. 1 ? 
 
 Mr. JONES hoped the gentleman from Otsego 
 (Mr CHATFIELD) would allow his resolution to 
 lie on the table for a day or two, as a motion to 
 reconsider the vote on the number of senators 
 would be probably made in a day or two. 
 
 Mr CHATFIELD did not distrust either the 
 ability or the willingness of committee No. 1 , but 
 
430 
 
 he desired that every part of the State may be 
 represented in the committee making the appor- 
 tionment. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said.it would be idle and 
 useless to fix the senate districts, until they had 
 decided definitely on the number of senators they 
 intended to have. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said (hat three separate prop- 
 ositions had been settlpd by three strong votes 
 here; viz: the number of senators the term of 
 Senators and the question of single districts. 
 He hoped that no atempt would now be made to 
 alter either of these three, after the very decided 
 votes that have been had here upon them. There 
 is no necesaiiy for sending this to a select com- 
 mittee. If votes decided hete by twenty or forty 
 majority are to stand, then all this opposition is a 
 waste of time, and worse than useless. He be- 
 lieved that there was hut about four or five Sen- 
 ate districts in the report of the committee to 
 which there had been any objection made; and 
 that nutter could soon be settled in committee of 
 the whole. And therefore it was of no use to 
 refer this matler at this late period, back to com- 
 mittee No. 1, or to refer it to a select committee 
 of any kind, He hoped therefore that the motion 
 to strike out would not prevail. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN agreed with Mr. KIRKLAND, in 
 the main, but he did not agree with him in some 
 of his results. It was proposed to send this back 
 to committee No. 1 , for them to revise their own 
 proceedings. Now it seemed to be a settled 
 point that this Convention was to district and ap- 
 portion the State. Then why send this matter 
 back to a select committee, or to committee No. 
 1 ? There are but two or three districts, it is 
 true, about which there would primarily be any 
 trouble ; but the fact was, that in re-organizing 
 those two or three, it would become necessary to 
 alter several others, in all of which probably 
 there w r ould be a great deal of trouble. Now he 
 (Mr. J.) considered that the whole body of mem- 
 bers was perfectly competent to the task, and he, 
 for one, was forgoing directly into that work, ei- 
 ther in Convention or in committee of the whole 
 and finishing it up. Let there be no more delay 
 about it. There must be some trouble, in any 
 cause. And all who took the trouble to overlook 
 the matter carefully, would see the difficulty. 
 But they had got the work to do at last, and unless 
 that committee could so re-arrange the districts 
 as to do away with all possible objections from 
 all quarters, it was idle to talk about re-referring 
 the matter to them. The Convention had got the 
 matter before them, and they might as well grapple 
 with it first as last. That they were to adhere to 
 the plan of single districts, he sincerely hoped 
 But as for equalizing them, or making them sat 
 isfactory to all parts of the State that was en 
 tirely out of the question. Therefore they hac 
 better go right to work, and make the fairest anc 
 best apportionment that they possibly could. 
 
 Mr. (JROOKER said that it this must pass, h 
 wanted it to pass in the leas' objectionable form 
 that was possible. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that it had been whim- 
 pered about that \h\sprofet for a select commit 
 tee was to be voted down ; because if it was not 
 he (Mr. C ) would, as a matter of course, be pu 
 at the head of it, and he would gerrymander lh< 
 
 tate. (Laughter.) He therefore fell it due to 
 imself to slate that if such a committee should 
 e raised, under no circumstances could or would 
 ie consent to serve on it, At the same lime he 
 onsidered this a highly insulting couise to sup. 
 iose that 16 honorable gentlemen of this body 
 ould so far forget themselves as to consent to cut 
 p the State into unfair districts for selfish pur- 
 IOSFS ; and he regretted sincerely that any such 
 mproper remarks should ever have been made. 
 The only object he (Mr. C ) had in view, was 
 hat of doing justice to the whole State. To 
 qualize the districts as nearly as possible, and to 
 lo away with the present loudly and properly 
 omplained of inequality. If they attempt to do 
 his in the House, a week or two may go over 
 hem, without their being able to effect their 
 bject ; or should they succeed at last, it will be 
 done by the force of will and by might, and not 
 iy right or justice. Much dissatisfaction would 
 till exist, And the apportioning of the State 
 >ven if made in the House was not to pass over 
 A r ithout a great deal of discussion. On the other 
 land 16 men would do it properly and do it fairly ; 
 and in much less time than it would be done in 
 any other way ; and they would be ready with 
 heir part of the work, by the time that the Con- 
 tention had got through with the other parts of the 
 eport. The only reason why he wished to see 
 he matter take this course was from a sense of 
 ustice and with a view to expedite the business 
 >f the Convention. 
 
 Mr. MANN wished to have the whole delega- 
 ion of each county consulted in this matter of 
 districting each of the different portions of the 
 State. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN rose to protest against the first 
 dawning of an intimation to cut the county of 
 Columbia in two, for the benefit of Dutchess and 
 Rensselaer. The gentleman from Otsego (Mr. 
 CHATFIELD) wanted to have this matter settled 
 a committee of 16. Now he (Mr. J.) had 
 bad some experience on a large committee. 
 And under that experience he felt bound to state 
 that if there was anything that would produce a 
 want of agreement it would be a large committee 
 of some 16 members. Three men were much 
 more likely to agree quickly if they were to sit 
 down with fair intentions and to go into the cal- 
 culations and examine the districts with the aid 
 of the map and the census tables, that had been 
 furnished. He (Mr. J.) had himself sat down 
 and deliberately and carefully gone all over the 
 State, to see if he could possibly devise any better 
 arrangement of the districts than that, which had 
 been presented to them ; and by the exercise of 
 all the patience, industry, calculation and infor- 
 mation which he could possibly bring to bear on 
 the subjeet,he could not succeed in making an ap- 
 portionment approximating very near to equality. 
 He began at the lower end of the State Suffolk 
 and Queens and he found he could get along tol- 
 erably for some distance ; but when became up 
 to the centre of the State to Ontario, Oneida, 
 Genessee, &c. he found that he could not get 
 along very well. He then began at the other 
 end a t Cattaraugus and Chautauque and before 
 he got into the centre of the State, he found him- 
 self .in the same difficulty again. He then be 
 gan in the centre, to try and see if h 
 
431 
 
 could not biai ch oft right and left, in some way, 
 different from the arrangement of the committee 
 so as to remove the inequalities cmnplaimd of; 
 and hf found that it was utterly impossible to do 
 it without making other and greater inequali 
 ties, unless counties were divided. There is not an 
 inti'llect in the State that can do it, because it is not 
 a mere matter of calculation and figures. It yields 
 to nothing butcornbinations of localities and they 
 cannot be s<> combined as to produce equality. The 
 wisest men in the stale could not perform the task. 
 The wisest men in the Convention or in the State, 
 could not so divide the state as not to leave large 
 excesses, or large fractional deficits. The injus- 
 tice complained of (or to give it a right name) the 
 misfortune must fall on some few districts There 
 was no possible help for it. And since this must 
 be the result, adopt what course they might, the 
 best plan was to take up the subject and dispose 
 of if at once in Convention, a reference would 
 produce a useless want of time. 
 
 Mr. WARD thought it would be best to let this 
 matter rest for a day or two, in order to give mem- 
 bers more time to reflect on this and consult about 
 it. He therefore moved to lay Mr. CHATFIELD'S 
 resolution on the table. 
 
 This was carried, 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then moved a reconsidera- 
 tion of the vote taken some days since upon fill- 
 ing the blank with the number of 48 Senators. 
 He however, at the suggestion of one of the mem- 
 bers, withdrew it, because of the few members 
 that there were in the House not over 70 he 
 wished to have a full and fair expression of sen- 
 timent c n this motion to reconsider, when the 
 House was full. 
 
 The House then went into committee of the 
 whole, on the 
 APPORTIONMENT &c. OF THE LEGISLATURE. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON, in the Chair, said that the 
 Convention had ordered the printing of the 7th 
 section as amended, and also the amendment of 
 the gentleman from Albany, (Mr. HARRIS) but 
 (hey had not yet come from the printers ; so the 
 9th section would be under consideration. 
 
 The 9th section was then read : 
 
 ^ 9. The members of the Legislature shall receive for 
 their services a compensation, to be ascertained by law, 
 and paid out of the public treasury, which compensation 
 shall not txcetd the sum of three dollars per day; and after 
 the year 1847, shall not exceed the sum of three dollars pel- 
 day, for the period of ninety days from the commencement 
 of ihe session. Jl hen convened in extra stss>on, by the Go- 
 rirnor, thty shall receive such sum as shall be fixedfor the 
 ordinary session. They shall also receive the swn of one dol. 
 larfor every ten miles they shall travel, in going to and re- 
 turning from their place of metting, on the niost usual 
 route. The ~ 
 
 long the session, lor the mere purpose of receiv- 
 ing that sum They also say indirectly that 90 
 days is long enough time Jo do all the business in ; 
 and that with these words in, the members will 
 not hereaf'er stay here ovei 90 days, because if 
 they do, they will only get half pay. Now this 
 would be proceeding on a very wrong principle. 
 He would not cast such an imputation upon the 
 representatives of the people He would not so 
 distrust bis fellow-citizens; he would not say to 
 them, " we cannot trust you with the paltry consi- 
 deration of $3 a day, in your hands for fear it will 
 make you corrupt." He believed that a very large 
 majority of the people were honest, and he believed 
 the same wish regard fo the people's representa- 
 tives. Much complaint had been made of the 
 great length of the legislative sessions. He ap- 
 prehended it the people had nothing to complain 
 of that occurred in our Legislative Halls, worse 
 than the mere length of the sessions, that but lit- 
 tle cause of complaint would exist. He called 
 upon gentlemen to point to a single instance 
 where they believed a session had been prolonged, 
 even for a day, for the mere consideration of the 
 pay of members. After they have got fairly into 
 their work they have always been found to de- 
 vote a sufficient amount of time to their duties; 
 and towards the close ot the session, the busi- 
 ness has frequently been carried through with 
 a rush, derogatory to safety in legislation. 
 True, there was much unnecessary legislation; 
 but there never had been so much as the people 
 or portions of them, had called on their particu- 
 lar representatives for at any one session- A vast 
 amount ot legislation had been called for at every 
 session, by particular constituencies, which had 
 never been acted on. And here is the mistake 
 made by those who cry out against the length of 
 the sessions. There has been too much of this 
 local legislation there has been too much of it 
 with regard to municipal and other corpora- 
 tions, and private rights ; and he hoped that 
 the Convention vyould apply some remedy 
 in relation to this, so as to restrict the 
 Legislature on all these points. But whilst 
 he wished to see all proper restrictions placed 
 upon that body, he never would place him- 
 self on record, as saying that he would 
 not trust them with the sum of $3 a day in their 
 
 hands for over 90 days, 
 make them corrupt. And 
 
 for fear it should 
 besides he had too 
 
 much state pride not to oppose such a step being 
 taken. He would not send out to our sister states 
 a degrading imputation upon the character of our 
 own people ; virtually saying that we could not 
 e Speaker of the Assembly 'shall, in wrtue O/AM | trust our fellow citizens with more than 
 
 receive an additional compensation, equal to one-third | twelve shillings a day for fear they would 
 
 / his per ditm as member. 
 
 The question was upon the amendment of Mr. 
 NICHOLAS to strike out the words, " and after 
 the year 1817, shall not exceed the sum of $3 a 
 day for the period of 90 days from the commence- 
 ment of the session." 
 
 Mr. JORDAN *aid that he was decidedly in fa 
 vor of the amendment; as if adopted, it would 
 leave the Constitution pret'y much as it is in re- 
 spect to the compensation of the Legislature 
 Tl.-e words proposed 10 be stricken out, if they 
 meant anything, meant that as long as the pay 
 was $3 a day the Legislature would corruptly pro- 
 
 cheat us of Another twelve shillings. Any such 
 an imputation if put on record by this Convention 
 would be a disgrace to the State. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that the convention must be 
 well aware they could not safely restrict the ses- 
 sions to 90 days. If it was to be supposed that 
 members would prolong the sessions for the 
 sake of pay, then it was no less supposable that 
 they would adjourn at the end of 90 days, because 
 there was no pay. He had ascertained by com- 
 putation, taking the average length of legislative 
 sessions, that the saving would be only about $30 
 or $40 to a member by this restriction. Now he 
 
432 
 
 had sufficient confidence in the integrity of the 
 representatives of the people, to trust with them 
 this mere question of pay. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND moved to strike out the en- 
 tire section and insert as follows : 
 
 " The members of the Legislature shall, after the year 
 1847, receive for their services an annual compensation af 
 four hundred dollars. The Speaker ol the Assembly shall, 
 after the year 1847, receive for his services an annual com- 
 pensation of five hundred dollars." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved to strike out from 1847 
 to the end of the sentence, and insert, " The an- 
 nual sessions shall not exceed the period of 90 
 days each." He wished to get rid of the sup- 
 posed reproach upon the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that he would suggest a bet- 
 ter way by which the object of the gentleman 
 would be obtained, and by which it would be done 
 too in a more dignified and gentlemanly manner 
 lie meant no reproach to that gentleman, or any 
 other member. (A laugh.) 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS bowed very pleasantly. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN. Instead of restricting the leg- 
 islature to a 90 days session, just ask them to come 
 here about the 2d Monday in February as their 
 first day of meeting ; and my word for it, they 
 will all be ready to leave here and go home by 
 the early part of May at the end of about 90 days. 
 
 Mr. STETSON. Why so? 
 
 Mr. JORDAN. Because then they could do 
 much better at home. 
 
 Mr. STETSON. The gentleman then admits 
 the principle of self interest ? 
 
 Mr. JORDAN. Any man who will deny that 
 is behind the intelligence of the age. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that he was willing to ad- 
 mit all the honor and dignity that was claimed 
 for the legislature, but none the more so from 
 hearing it preached up so often on that floor. 
 (A laugh.) He was in favor of this amendment. 
 For his own part he much preferred biennial ses- 
 sions; but if he could not get them, then he would 
 secure the substance of the reform by a limit of 
 the annual sessions. In Congress, there was one 
 short session ending on the 4th of March, and the 
 other extending through the summer. He believ- 
 ed that as much real business was done at the 
 short as at the long session. He liked the princi- 
 ple of the report of the committee in this parti- 
 cular. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that if there was 
 anything which the people had imperatively de- 
 manded at their hands, it was that they should do 
 something that would tend to restrict the excess- 
 ive legislation. For years, the time of the people 
 and then- money had been expended in the dis- 
 cussion of questions that are entirely irrelevant, 
 and which ought to be decided at home Gen- 
 tlemen were guilty of a siiange inconsistency; 
 they had voted to place restrictions on the people 
 in their choice for a Governor, and yet now they 
 are opposed to any restrictions upon the Legisla- 
 ture who are the mere servants of the people. 
 He had no more confidence in the L^gi.-lalure than 
 in any other 128 men in the State. Yet he had nev 
 er proposed that they should haveoiily 12 shillings 
 a day after a certain time; in older to reflect on the 
 character ot those men. At thesame tune thn gen- 
 tleman from Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) had admitted 
 that if the legislature was to meet here first in 
 
 February, that then they would go home early in 
 May, because they could do better at home than 
 here in Albany; and what he would ask was this r 
 but a direct reflection on the honor and dignity 
 of those very men whom he wanted to whitewash 
 over but a very few minutes ago. No one could 
 deny that the sessions were now very much and 
 unnecessarily prolonged ; and a good part of the 
 time was consumed m President making three 
 years in advance ; and governor making one 
 year in advance) Now he did not wish to occu- 
 py the attention of the committee, but he would 
 do any thing that could be done, properly, with 
 a view to put a stop to this corrupt legislation. 
 If the report of the committee No. 1, be adopted, 
 the business of the legislature will be more like- 
 ly to be done right, and done far better in a limi- 
 ted period of time than it is now done. 
 
 Mr. J. YOUNG sent up an amendment pro- 
 viding that travel fees should be only 10 cents a 
 mile, and the legislative sessions be limited to 90 
 days, except in time of war, insurrection or in- 
 vasion. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR regretted the necessity that 
 had existed for his absence during the discussion 
 of this report for the past few days. He was gra- 
 tified, , however, to find that it received in its 
 principle features, the assent of the convention. 
 The proposition now under consideration was not 
 one which he very greatly favored ; but it was ge- 
 nerally felt by the committee that there was a ne- 
 cessity for adopting some measure by which the 
 annual sessions of the legislature shall be limited 
 to a certain term, and the only measure which 
 came within their duty, for effecting this, seems to 
 be the clause adopted in this section. There had 
 been a general complaint throughout the country 
 that the sessions were all too long. One member 
 had proposed the section in the New Jersey consti- 
 tution, which was not, however, adopted. He 
 did not know but the amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Essex was a better way of effecting the 
 end proposed. He thought however, that 100 
 days might be a better term than 90, and suggest- 
 ed that the amendment should be so changed. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS then said that he would so alter 
 his amendment as to put at the end thereof the 
 words "from the commencement of the session;" 
 and at the suggestion of the gentleman from On- 
 ondaga, (Mr. TAYLOR) he would make it " 100 
 days." The difference between 90 and 100 days 
 was a matter of little consequence. It was the 
 limitation that he looked at. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES hoped that he would retain the 
 90 days ; and unless that time was retained, he 
 would move so to amend. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said he had made the altera- 
 tion at the request of his friend from Onondaga. 
 We have all seen how thin the cloud of glory 
 was. New Jersey had seen through it, and now 
 had clear sunshine upon this question. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN was opposed to any limitation in 
 this way upon the action of the legislature. He 
 was in favor of striking out all these restrictions 
 upon the legislature as to the time during which 
 they should hold their sessions. He would not 
 intentionally give any vote that would belittle the 
 State of New York or have a tendency to do so. 
 The only mode in which the people could speak 
 was through the legislature. That was the very 
 
433 
 
 corner stone of our liberties. Through it the 
 people could alone speak their wishes and wants 
 and opinions. It was their parliament. All 
 other officers are administrative. The legislature 
 represents the people, through whom and by 
 whom alone the people can speak their wants 
 and wishes. And to propose restrictions on the 
 action of this body this, the true organ of the 
 people, is the most anti-democratic course that 
 
 can be pursued. 
 the 
 
 he proper sense of that wo 
 vould restrict the period 
 
 He was a State's Rights man in 
 at word. The idea that you 
 
 in which the people 
 
 might thus make their own laws, seemed to him 
 to be anti-democratic. But his main objection 
 was that this was belittleing our State. He drew 
 a striking contrast between the rank, influence 
 and pay of a member of congress and of the legis- 
 ture of this State. The latter office was scarcel 
 respected and little sought for, whilst the othe 
 was considered a post of the highest respectabili 
 ty, and was desired by the most eminent men i 
 the country. He would elevate our own servants 
 And could you do that, by a paltry provision tha 
 only a 90 days' session should be held, becaus 
 too much compensation was received ? Thi 
 whole system was wrong, and he could not con 
 sent for one moment to give sanction to any o 
 these propositions. If the legislature does sit to( 
 many days in the year is that any reason why thi: 
 unwise attempt should be made to restrict them 
 and you should say they shall never sit more than 
 90 days. He never himself expected to be a mem 
 ber of the assembly or any thing but a constituen 
 after this Convention was over. But he claimet 
 for that legislature the right to sit here as long as 
 the wants of the people required them to make 
 laws for then!. The passage of the resolution 
 would be a great blow upon free institutions. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that they were going the 
 wrong way to work ; if they would remedy the 
 disease, they must look at the causes thereof. 
 And limiting the pay of members to $1,50 or 
 reducing the length of the sessions would not do 
 this. This clause conveys the imputation that 
 the members of the legislature will lose sight of 
 the public good for the sake of private gain or 
 private benefit. Now rather than vote for any of 
 these amendments, he would prefer to strike out 
 entirely all these limitations. He would, how- 
 ever, say that no legislature should be allowed to 
 fix its own compensation. He wouid prefer to 
 fix the period beyond which they shall not sit to 
 the other limitations ; but there were also great 
 objections to that. The next session must neces- 
 sarily be a long one ; as they would have to pass 
 many laws relative to the carrying into effect the 
 various provisions of this constitution, as well as 
 other laws that were not required by former leg- 
 islatures, it had much better be left to the usual 
 mode of the determining the length of the session 
 than to adopt any restrictive clause. 
 
 Mr. VYOKDEN said (hat he very much 
 ted that his friend from Essex (Mr. SI 
 had not bestowed upon this section a liiile nu-re 
 of tile rifled ions of his sagacious mind. Howev- 
 er desirable it might b-.- to limit I he sessions of the 
 Legislature, he would have seen tlrdt this partic 
 ular mode of effecting it was objectionable. Let 
 those who will, alter reflecting upon I he bu-iutfs 
 which has thus tar been accomplished here, cen- 
 
 regret- 
 
 sure the Legislature for delays. He believed that 
 the Legislature was generally an industrious borfy, 
 and the only surprise that should be felt, after ex- 
 amining the labor they did perform, was that they 
 were able to accomplish so much. The only 
 practical way of limiting the term of the sessions 
 would be to prohibit any member from rising on 
 this floor for the first 90 days, and moving to fix 
 the time of adjournment, for the purpose of mak- 
 ing speeches upon it and political capital at home. 
 By adopting this provision, it would be giving in. 
 to the hands of a minority the power to defeat the 
 passage of good laws, which had been matured 
 and delayed until the end of the session. And 
 there might be contingencies arising within a few 
 days before the day of adjournment, which would 
 require that the Legislature should remain in ses- 
 sion; but a constitutional provision met them here 
 by declaring that they should adjourn upon a cer- 
 tain day. He said thtre was a great deal too 
 much said about long session?, corrupt and inal- 
 legislation. There could be no instances shown 
 of such ki d of legislation. We ought to be 
 grateful to those who had preceded us for the 
 wise laws which they had passed, and more wise 
 legislation was to be found in no other country. 
 He hoped the amendment of his friend and col- 
 league (Mr. NICHOLAS) would b-e adopted. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that he could not agree 
 with the argument of Mr. WORDEN. It was a 
 mere accident, he had no doubt, that such a pro- 
 vision had been omitted in the, Constitutions of 
 other States. The terms of Courts and the times 
 of their sittings, were now limited by law; so 
 ought those of legislatures. He had occupied a 
 seat in the legislature of this State for three ses- 
 sions, and well knew how the business was piled 
 up and accumulated at the end of the session, and 
 
 time for reflection. 
 
 see the view that 
 
 then rushed through without 
 He regretted exceedingly to 
 
 bad been taken of this subject by the gentleman 
 "rorn Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS,) knowing and feei- 
 ng his influence here. But as far as regarded 
 the suggestions made by that gentleman, that the 
 next session of the legislature would have an un- 
 usual amount of business that there was to be 
 something like a codification of the laws, &c. 
 y, all this might be provided for by an extra 
 session ; and this was the better plan, rather than 
 eave this question open, and not have any re- 
 itriction on the legislature. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY was decidedly in favor of 
 iome plan that should limit and also shorten the 
 annual sessions of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that he had voluntarily 
 >romised to his constituents (and that too in wri- 
 ing) that he would advocate a limitation of the 
 ;nnual sessions of the Legislature ; and as far as 
 le could ascertain the fact, this proposition had 
 met with their unanimous approbation. The ear- 
 y days of most of their sessions were more devo- 
 ed to political discussions than to the business 
 f the people. He did not speak of this as a re- 
 iroach. It was the case in the great legislature 
 f the nation. It has been seen frequently that to- 
 vards the close of a session there was generally 
 great rush of business so as to make legislation 
 nsafe. Something ought to be done to remedy 
 lis matter, and to make legislation more safe ; 
 nd also to equalize the time through which it 
 
434 
 
 should be distributed. They could not keep a 
 calendar of business the same as in the courts ; 
 much must be left to their discretion ; but 
 still a limitation of some sort would be found 
 to act beneficially on the legislature, and pro- 
 bably might compel them to resort to some 
 sort of a calendar, for the regulation and dis- 
 posal of their business and their time, so that 
 the first part should not be devoted to political 
 discussions, and thus cause a great rush of busi- 
 ness towards the heel of the session. It has been 
 said that a restriction of the pay is a reflection on 
 the honor and dignity of the State. But he would 
 ask of gentlemen, " are we not a little too tender 
 on this point." Are not all legislatures founded on 
 the principle that all men are prone to err ? Is 
 not our assembling here at this time Is not all 
 the assembling of our legislatures a reflection on 
 the honesty of the people ? Restrictions on leg- 
 islative bodies do not necessarily imply a charge of 
 dishonesty on the legislature. By no means. It is 
 not the hope of gain that induces them to pro- 
 tract their sessions. For there is no gain in long 
 sessions. But when you introduce this sliding 
 scale you point them to a positive loss. And 
 that may curtail the time. He was in favor 
 of a limitation of some sort. We find it 
 in the Constitutions of Jersey, and of Iowa, 
 recently adopted; and gentlemen the other 
 day declared that the Constitution of New Jersey 
 was one of the wisest that had yet been made. 
 In that of New Jersey, the pay is $3 for 40 days, 
 and $1.50 for the balance of the session. In that 
 of Iowa, it is $2 for 50 days ; and $1 for the re- 
 mainder of the session. Some ask us, why we 
 do no not make it absolute. I answer, because 
 the duration of a session is not always a matter of 
 intent. The machine cannot be always be made 
 to work right, so as to finish the work at the right 
 time. It is a sort of law into itself; and the mem- 
 bers may be compelled to stay over 90 days, and 
 the $1.50 is inserted to cover actual disbursements. 
 It is much better to make it so than to make this 
 matter absolute; you would thus have a fair and 
 reasonable check on the length of a session He 
 hoped this amendment or something almost anal- 
 aguus to it, would receive the consent of the com- 
 mittee. It was very desirable that it should do so. 
 For he was satisfied that there was quite as great 
 a demand for short sessions, for the restriction on 
 the general waste oi the people's time and money, 
 as for single districts, or any other reform that had 
 been loudly demanded. Here we should intro- 
 duce real reforms and economy. It was a ques- 
 tion in which all the tax-pa) eis of the State were 
 interested. He hoped not to see it slid by with 
 the formidable influence that could be brought 
 to bear from bolh sides ngainst it. He wished his 
 voice could put the same limitation on the 1st 
 session of Congress. He would soon do it All 
 who had been in the Legislature knew well that 
 for several of the first weeks ot the session no 
 progress whatever was* made except the eternal 
 committee of the whole, and the everlasting dis 
 cussions of the Governor's Message made for the 
 purpose of cieating political capital. Now, he 
 would ask, is this an incurable evil ? He sincere 
 ly hoped not. He hoped the amendment would 
 prevail; and he einceiely hoped that those een- 
 tleuien who had done so much to consume the 
 
 lime of this body, would not new, by their votes, 
 invite future legislators to imitate the example of 
 their illustrious predecessors in this hall. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS had not intended to say a word 
 on this subject; but he agreed with other gentle- 
 men, that this country generally was afflicted with 
 excessive legislation. He regarded the protract- 
 ed sessions of our Congress as a great and crying 
 evil. It would be better for this State and better 
 for the United States, if we had less legislation. 
 But at the same time it must be remembered that 
 we had in this nation more minds and more time 
 devoted to legislation than in all the world beside. 
 This was proper to a certain extent, but we are 
 carrying the thing to an extreme. He would be 
 in favor of some remedy. He did not like the 
 appearance of the proposition of the committee, 
 for it looked like incorporating a reproach against 
 the Legislature into the organic law. He would 
 prefer to fix a stated salary say $300 a year 
 with a reasonable allowance for travelling fees 
 as the gentleman from Chautauque should have 
 more than he, who lived in Albany. This might 
 restrict the sessions to 60 days. He did not doubt 
 that under such a provision, the sessions would 
 be much shortened, for it would be for the inter- 
 est of members to get through business as spee- 
 dily as possible. He did not believe the people 
 would be satisfied if we should terminate our 
 session without doing something to remedy what 
 all agreed to be an evil. They ought to have 
 something incorporated in the Constitution to re- 
 strict this excessive legislation, and these pro- 
 tracted sessions of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. STETSON inquired if the proposition of 
 the gentleman would not produce another evil by 
 inducing the members to adjourn before public 
 business should be finished ? A single day will 
 enable them to secure their salary. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS apprehended that any Legislature 
 that should take the responsibility of such a 
 course, would, by this means terminate their 
 public duties for life, as well as terminate the ses- 
 sion. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. STETSON : I should, rather think they 
 would. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY was opposed to the amend- 
 ments. That very clause by which it was in- 
 tended to restrict the term of the legislature to 90 
 days, might be the means of lengthening the du- 
 ration of the session. The act of Congress li- 
 mits the duration of the members to the office. 
 Well, in the 2d session of a Congress they never 
 rise till the consummation of the time, and fre- 
 quently sit for some hours afterwards. And if 
 our legislature was limited to 90 days, they might 
 be under the impression that their constituents 
 desire them to sit a full 90 days, business or no 
 business. 
 
 Mr. STRONG was in favor of the proposition of 
 the gentleman from Albany, to have a fixed sala- 
 ry for the Legislature, ami he hoped they would 
 take a vote on that point right aw*y. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL was very unwilling that this 
 amendment should be adopted. The legislature 
 wanted room to work as well as the Convention, 
 and the experience which they had had there was 
 sufficient to satisfy most of them that such a limi- 
 tation as that proposed would be highly improper. 
 He would call the attention of the members of the 
 
435 
 
 Convention to their own action here in order to 
 guide their judgment. Before they arrived here, 
 or started frorcThome no one supposed but that 60 
 days would be sufficient time for them to be here, 
 and to transact all the business required of them. 
 And no one supposed that they would under any 
 circumstances remain here over 90 days. They 
 had now been here nearly GO days and they could 
 all see where they were ! [Laughter.] Now if 
 they were to tie the legislature down to 90 days, 
 when they came to report on the business that 
 was then on the carpet, this restriction might cut 
 them off' in the middle of it, and be exceedingly 
 injurious to the public interests. And he thought 
 that those who were thus proposed to be restrict- 
 ed, might, with very great propriety, turn round 
 upon those members of the Convention, who had 
 made this proposition and wasted the time and 
 money of the people most shamefully and say, 
 "Physician, heal thyself!" [Laughter.] He 
 was in favor of a reasonable annual salary and a 
 fair allowance of travelling fees. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS opposed the salary system. He 
 was in favor of having the members prepare a bill 
 of pmticulars, so that the people could see how 
 and what was done. He would not suffer them 
 to l>e present or absent when ihey pleased. 
 Members of the Legislature were like other peo- 
 ple in this ii.atter and inducements must be held 
 out to them to do their duty. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was 
 rejected, 
 
 Mr. JORDAN further supported the amend- 
 ment of Mr. NICHOLAS. 
 
 When the question hefng taken, it was voted 
 down, ayes o3, na\s 45. 
 
 Mr. HA'IRIS moved to strike out all of the 
 section i;> the end of the 10th line, and to substi- 
 tute an amendment, allowing a salary of $300 a 
 year, and $1 for every t<-n miles of travel. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND then withdrew his amend 
 ment in favor of this. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved an amendment so as to 
 provide for extra sessions. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND considered this a proposition 
 to let legislation out to the lowest bidder. The 
 effect would be to stifle debate, and to hurry 
 through bills without due examination, in order 
 to do up business in the shortest space* of time. 
 Rather than give it out in this way by the job he 
 would prefer to give it to some one or two 
 competent individuals, who, if mere cheapness 
 was the object could be got to do it for $2500. 
 He knew many men capable of drawing bills 
 who would do it for that sum. If we were 
 really going into this sjstern of jobbing, here was 
 a plan which would save $100,000 to the State, 
 although the S'ate might be the loser in the long 
 run. The people had long since decided against 
 the salary principle, in the matter of paying re 
 preoeniativea to Congress. They decided it in 
 1818, on i he question of giving members of Con- 
 gress $1500 per annum, and that public opinion 
 had never reacted since. The sessions for the 
 last few years might have been too long, but not 
 in pioportion to the increasing business and popu- 
 lation of the Srate. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE admitted that there was 
 very little done in legislation for the first month. 
 But the members coming from different parts of 
 
 the State were engaged in comparing expressions 
 of the public throughout the State, and ascertain- 
 ing the wants of the different sections. Much bu- 
 siness was done in that way. He had no objec- 
 tion to a salary, but the trouble would be in get- 
 ting a quorum here to work. If we should treat 
 members of the legislature as we do Boards of 
 Supervisors give them $2 a day and require 
 them to make affidavit of the number of days of 
 their personal attendance, then the amendment 
 of the gentleman might be made practicable. 
 There was too much legislation now. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND intended to offer an amend- 
 ment to the effect that every day's absence should 
 be deducted, unless a sufficient excuse should be 
 rendered. He was in favor of the proposition for 
 a salary, and thought the sum named to be about 
 right. The reason the law prescribing a salary 
 for the members of Congress, was condemned, 
 was because of the large sum which they voted 
 to themselves $1500 or $2500 per annum. 
 Had it been a more reasonable sum, the people 
 would never have objected to it. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said the great evil was in the 
 absence of members from the House. Last win- 
 ter the session was prolonged more than three 
 weeks on account of the want of a sufficient num- 
 ber to constitute a two-thirds quorum. He would 
 provide in the Constitution that when there 
 should be no work there should be no pay. He 
 offered the following amendment : 
 
 " The members of the Legislature shall receive for their 
 services a sum not exceeding three dollars a day from the 
 commencement of the session; but such pay shall not ex 
 ceed in the aggregate three hundred dollars for per diem 
 allowance; and no member shall receive any compensa- 
 tion for the time he n.ay be absent from actual attendance 
 upon the legislature, unless such absence is occasioned 
 by sickness." 
 
 Mr HARRIS liked the principle of this amend- 
 ment better than his own, and he therefore with- 
 drew his own. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH was in favor of restricting 
 the length of the session, and he believed it was 
 called for by public sentiment. One cause of the 
 length of the sessions, was the example set by 
 morning sessions. He thought the evil would be 
 corrected, by divesting the Legislature of a large 
 portion of its duties as was proposed, and also, by 
 restricting the session to ninety days. Mr. D. 
 expressed his surprise that after what the gen- 
 tleman from Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) had suid as 
 to the casting of imputations on the Legislature, 
 that he should now offvr such an amendment as 
 '.his, which he considered a most direct reflec- 
 tion on the legislative body He was in favor of 
 a limitation of the session. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said his friend from Jefferson 
 had misunderstood him. He had said that by re- 
 stricting the session to 100 days, it would throw 
 it into the power of a factious minority to block 
 up the wheels of legislation, by the interruptions 
 they could throw in the way of the passage of 
 bills at the close of the session. 
 
 After some further conversation between 
 Messrs. DANFORTH and WORDEN on this 
 point, 
 
 Mr. BASCOM doubted the propriety of either 
 restricting the session, or of requiring the legisla- 
 ture to serve for nothing. Another objection he 
 had to this proposition was, the opportunity af- 
 
436 
 
 forded to the members to avoid incurring the res- 
 ponsibility of voting directly on a measure, by ar- 
 ranging business so that important measures 
 vrould be thrown into the heel of the session and 
 thus escape action. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS briefly opposed the amendment. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD felt compelled to vote against 
 the limitation of the term and the proposition to 
 fix a salary, in order that he might not be charge- 
 able with inconsistency, hereafter. At a fitting 
 season he intended to bring before the Conven- 
 tion what seemed to him to be the only true way 
 of guarding against excessive legislation a pro- 
 vision fo"r biennial sessions of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH moved to amend the amend- 
 ment of Mr. WORDEIST, by striking out all after 
 the word " allowance." This was lost. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. WORDEN was then 
 adopted, 40 to 31. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that in case of extra 
 session the pay should be $3 a day. This was 
 agreed to. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to make the pay of members 
 $2 1-2, instead of $3 a day. This was lost. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to strike out the fol- 
 lowing words : " The Speaker of the Assembly 
 shall, in virtue of his office, receive an additional 
 compensation equal to one-third of his per diem 
 as member." 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that the compensation 
 provided by the committee was not adequate to 
 the duties of the office of Speaker. His duties 
 were much more arduous than those of the other 
 members, and not only that, but there were a cer- 
 tain class of charges thrown upon him, for which 
 he received no compensation. Mr. C. referred to 
 the postage bill of the Speaker, amounting in his 
 own experience to $78 during the session, &c. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER after alluding to the expenses 
 to which members of the Legislature were also 
 subjected in the payment of postage, moved to in- 
 sert in lieu of these words, that the official post- 
 age of members of Legislature should be paid out 
 of the State Treasury. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS opposed this as being an at- 
 tempt to revive the odious franking privilege. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. CROOKER was then 
 voted down, as was that of Mr. KIRXLAND. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD referred to the inequalities 
 that now existed under the present system of 
 mileage, and the one now proposed by the com- 
 mittee. In order to avoid this, and to bring down 
 the allowance to something like what the mem- 
 bers had to pay, he moved to reduce the mileage 
 from ten to rive cents per mile. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said the disproportion in the 
 mileage of distant members of the Legislature and 
 those living in the vicinity of the Capitol is more 
 than balanced by the advantage of going home oc- 
 casionally, to have an eye to their own affairs, 
 which privilege members a short distance from 
 their residence avail themselves of; whereas the 
 distant members, if they are called home once 
 during the session, it must be at much greater ex- 
 pense, and they generally remain there only long 
 enough to see that their affairs will need their at- 
 tention before they return home at the end of the 
 session. In a pecuniary point of view, therefore, 
 the distant members are the greafer losers. The 
 amendment for this reason should not be adopted. 
 
 The amendment was r3Jected. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to amend so that the 
 limitation prescribed by the proposition of Mr. 
 WORDEN, should not apply until the year 1848. 
 The legislation after the adoption of the constitu- 
 tion would be so overwhelmed with business, as 
 not to be able to get through in season. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN concurred in the suggestion,and 
 
 The amendment was adopted. 
 
 The 10th section was then agreed to, as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 fj 10. No member of the legislature shall receive any ci- 
 vil appointment within this >-tate, or to the Senate of the 
 Fnited States from the Governor, the Governor a-id Sen- 
 ate, or from the Legislature, during the term for which he 
 shall have been elected. 
 
 The llth section was then read, as follows: 
 t} 11. No person being amemher of Congress, or holding 
 any judicial or military office under the United States, 
 shall hold a seat in the Legislature. And if any person 
 shall, after his el -ction as a rnem'.er of the Legisla'ure, he 
 elected to Congress, or appointed to any office, civil 0' mi- 
 litary, under the government of the United Stjtes, his ac 
 ceptance thereof shall vacant his seat. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR, explained that all the amend- 
 ments that the committee had proposed to this 
 section, was for the purpose of making it more 
 explicit and clear than was expressed in the old 
 Constitution, and that the object was to prevent 
 a member of the legislature being appointed in 
 any case while a member, to an office under the 
 United States government. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that the difficulty was that this 
 would come in conflict with the United States 
 Constitution, which prescribed the qualifications 
 of members of the senate. This was an attempt 
 to add another qualification which this state had 
 no power to do. Mr. Jefferson himself had con- 
 ceded this. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR knew of no provisions in the 
 Constitution of the United States, which prohi- 
 bited the State of New York from imposing such 
 restrictions and limitations as they please, in re- 
 gard to the appointment of members of the legis- 
 lature to such offices. The object was to prevent 
 any intriguing and managing on the part of the 
 members of the legislature to get themselves places 
 and appointments to office Irom their own body. 
 He saw no reason why they could not do this, as 
 well as to prohibit the members of the Legisla- 
 ture from accepting any other office within the 
 gift of theii own body. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved to amend the tenth sec- 
 lion by striking out the words " or to the Senate 
 of the United States," and addressed the commit- 
 tee in favor of the amendment, contending that 
 this restriction was in virtual violation cf the Con- 
 stitution of the U. States. 
 
 Mr. STETSON replied, and the debate was 
 continued by Messrs STOW, TAGGART, LOOMIS, 
 WORDEN, and others, when the committee rose 
 and reported progress. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The Convention, as soon as they assembled, 
 went into committee of the whole, on the report 
 of committee No. 1. 
 
 The question was upon the motion of Mr. 
 SIMMONS, to strike out the words in the 10th 
 section, " or to the Senate of the United States." 
 
437 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON in the Chair : Is the com- 
 mittee ready for the question ? 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES : The argument in favor of 
 striking out that part of the section which pro- 
 hibits the Legislature of this Slate from electing 
 one of its own members to the United States Se- 
 nate, proceeds on the ground that the State has 
 not the power to exclude any person from eligi- 
 bility, who is not excluded by the Constitution of 
 the United States. It is founded on the position 
 that the State Legislature derives its power to 
 elect a Senator from that Constitution. It is ad- 
 mitted that the power is contained in that Con- 
 stitution. The clause is as follows : " The Se- 
 " nate of the United States shall be composed of 
 " two Senators from each State, chosen by the 
 " Legislatures thereof, for six years." And the 
 same section provides that no one shall be elected 
 who does not possess certain qualifications in re- 
 gard to age, citizenship, and residence. But this 
 power arises out of the compact between the 
 States and the Union. It is established by mu- 
 tual consent and agreement. It is not a power 
 granted by the general government to the state. 
 It was reserved or secured, but not granted by 
 the federal constitution. The argument that this 
 convention has no authority to regulate the le- 
 gislature in the exercise of the power of choos- 
 ing a Senator, fails, unless it shows not only, that 
 the Legislature derives its power from the fe- 
 deral constitution, but that it acts as the agent 
 of that government, in its exercise. It is in no 
 sense the agent of the federal government. 
 The right of choosing Senators in Congress be- 
 longs to the State sovereignty. It is that sov- 
 ereignty which 13 represented in the Senate. The 
 
 legislature is the 
 electing Senators. 
 
 igent of that sovereignty in 
 The State sovereignty is the 
 
 constituent of the United States Senate not its 
 agent; and the legislature is in no case responsi- 
 ble to the federal government for the mariner in 
 which the power of electing is exercised, pro- 
 vided it is exercised in conformity with the con- 
 stitution of the United States. In what body of 
 men does the State sovereignty reside ? Undoubt- 
 edly in the people, who are now represented in 
 this Convention. To whom is the exercise of the 
 power 01 electing a Senator entrusted ? To the 
 legislature which ordinarily represents that sov- 
 ereignty ; and which was created by it and is sub- 
 ject to its regulation and control. The power of 
 election must be exercised in conformity with 
 the provisions of the constitution of the United 
 States ; but in all other respects according to the 
 free will of the State government as the constitu- 
 ent power. There is no restraint updh that pow- 
 er, excepting that which is imposed by the fed- 
 eral constitution. The State cannot elect a man 
 under thirty years of age ; because that age is one 
 of the qualifications prescribed by the federal 
 constitution. But if the legislature should choose 
 to say that they will elect no Senator under the 
 age of 40 years, they have a perfect right to do 
 so, and the Senate of the United States could not 
 reject him. The constitution of the United States 
 is not violated by such an exercise of the power. 
 It has been said by the gentleman from Genesee, 
 (Mr. TAGGART,) that we cannot enforce the pro- 
 hibition which the section now under considera- 
 tion imposes on the legislature. It may be ad- 
 
 mitted that if the legislature should disregard the 
 prohibition, and elect one of its own members as 
 a Senator in Congress, and the Senate should ad- 
 mit him to a seat in that body the State is with- 
 out remedy. This results from the nature of the 
 connexion and relation between the two govern- 
 ments. So if we should fail in our duty to our- 
 selves and to the general government by refusing or 
 neglecting to make an election, that government is 
 equally remediless from the same cause. But 
 this does not affect the question of our duty to 
 them, or of theirs to us. The election of a Sena- 
 tor in obedience to the requirements of the State 
 Constitution, cannot be enforced by any action 
 against the general government. But it may be 
 enforced against its own agents who are to exer- 
 cise the power. If it could be supposed that the 
 legislature would so far forget its duty to the au- 
 thority which created it as to act in disobedience 
 of its declared will, its members might be sub- 
 jected to impeachment, for misconduct or 
 
 even to punishment as for an ordinary misdemean- 
 or. Who can complain of the restriction, we are 
 about to impose on our own agents ? Certainly 
 not, the United States Senate, or the federal gov- 
 ernment so long as this State sends them a 
 Senator with the qualifications required by that 
 Constitution our duty is fulfilled. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN wished to be distinctly under- 
 stood upon this question. If the gentleman from 
 Dutchess (Mr. RUGGLES) had understood him 
 (Mr. M.) as advancing the proposition that the 
 legislature of a state in choosing a senator of the 
 United States acted as the agent of the United 
 States he (Mr. R.) had misunderstood him. What 
 :ie had said was that the legislatures of the States 
 n choosing senators of the United States acted 
 under the authority of the Constitution of the 
 United States and in pursuance of its provisions. 
 [t was true that the legislature acting in behalf 
 of the state was the agent of the state but it does 
 
 an act provided for by the Constitution of the 
 United States. The Constitution of the United 
 States contemplated that each state would have a 
 legislature a republican government could not 
 exist without a legislature and upon such legis- 
 lature when enacted by state action, the Consti- 
 tution of the United States imposed the power of 
 appointing senators. That power was derived 
 from the United States Constitution, and it goes 
 on and declares that we may choose a senator in 
 the congress of the United States, and then pre- 
 scribes certain qualifications for the senator. To 
 those qualifications, he contended, it was not in 
 the power of the state governments either to add 
 or diminish. Because, if the legislature may add 
 to those qualifications, or diminish them, at their 
 pleasure, they may be entirely frittered away, 
 and the United States government may be impair- 
 ed or overturned. That was the whole extent of 
 the argument. The question might come up in 
 relation to the state laws which declare that a 
 member of congress shall reside in the district 
 from which he is chosen. If the state choose to 
 elect a man who is not a resident, would he not 
 still be a member of congress ? There is nothing 
 in the Constitution w r hich prohibits it. If gen- 
 tlemen were satisfied that we had the power to 
 incorporate this, provision in the Constitution, 
 and make it effective, he did not object to it. He 
 
 
438 
 
 did not wish to see any thing inserted here which 
 would be inoperative. It would be unsafe to in- 
 sert a provision here which would not be binding 
 or obligatory. It was our duty to guard against 
 such an evil. Errors which the people commit 
 may be corrected by themselves ; but in prescrib- 
 ing rules, by which the agents of the people are 
 to act, our duty was to make only such provisions 
 as could be carried out and made effective. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said he did not intend to say 
 that the right of electing a Senator in Congress 
 was a reserved right, but that it was a right se- 
 cured to the state sovereignty, by the compact 
 contained in the Constitution of the United States. 
 That the legislature was the agent through 
 which the state exercised the right of electing. 
 In this as in all other acts and duties the legisla- 
 ture is subject to the control of the sovereign power 
 of the state. With regard to officers appointed by 
 the government of the United States, this state 
 had no control over them except to exclude them 
 from office under us. Nor have we any control 
 over the people in their choice of a member of 
 the house of representatives. In that case the 
 state government can place no restriction upon 
 their choice; because in electing a member of 
 congress the people act as the people of the 
 United States, and not as the people of the state 
 of New- York. The States elect the senate 
 the people elect the house of representatives. 
 The Staie government has the right in ciuectiug 
 the election of a Senator to superadd qualification* 
 \ in the candidate beyond those prescribed in the 
 federal constitution : but with this limitation that 
 such superadded qualifications shall nut be re- 
 quired by the State for the purpose of ernbarra-s- 
 ing the action or injuring the strength of the gen- 
 eral government. This would be an abuse of the 
 power of electing. But such restrictions as are 
 included to preseive the purity and integiity oi 
 the State goveinment, and to prevent its members 
 from u>itig ihe influence of their stations for the 
 purpose of intrigue and the gratification of ambi- 
 tion, ate necessary for our own safely and jus- 
 tifi.ible towards the United States. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said he apprehended that the 
 gentlemen who had spoken in favor of the mo- 
 tion to strike out the words utuicr consideration 
 were mistaken. I do not (said he) understand thc- 
 powers of the General Government and Ihe re- 
 served rights of the States as they do. The gen- 
 eral Government has no power except such as ha* 
 been granted by the States; its authority is wholl) 
 derivative, and it can exercise no power no; 
 granted to it. If the power of the State to pro- 
 hibit its Legislature from appointing one of its 
 members to the office of U. S. Senator has not 
 been granted to the general Government or pro- 
 hibited by the Constitution it still resides in the 
 State 2nd" the S ate has full pov\er to exercise it. 
 I think the gentlemen upon the other side of the 
 question can no where find the grant of this pow- 
 er. 1 will invite the attention of the Conven- 
 tion to the Constitution (here Mr. A. read the 
 clauses of the Constitution relating to the appoint- 
 ment and qualifications Jo U . S. Senators) and 
 then proceeded to state here is no express grant 
 oi prohibition of the power as contended for ; no 
 such grant or prohibition car. be implied with 
 out the widest and most dangerous lautude of 
 
 construction. The rule ot c instruction coniei.d. 
 ed for by the gentlemen who advocate the mo. 
 tion under consideration is more latiluclinous than 
 any I have ever heard before urged. It opens fhe 
 door of federal power to its \\idest exteni and if 
 adopted and acted upon it will swallow up 
 the sovereignty of all the Siates. The only 
 limitation in the Constitution in regard to the 
 appointment of Senators is tt at which requires 
 that they shall he thirty years of age, shall have 
 been ci'izeris nine years and shall reside in the 
 Stale at the time of their appointment. If we 
 appoint Senators with these qualifications it is all 
 the general government can require. That govern- 
 ment has no right or authority to look into the 
 internal regulations of a State or to dictate to a 
 State what classes ot its citizens it shall declare 
 eligible or ineligible to office. I insist thai in the 
 exeicise of her sovereign power the Sta'e has a 
 right to insert the words in question in her Con- 
 stitution or to leave them out, as she may choose. 
 [Mr. A. then read the amendments to the U. S. 
 Constitution declaring that the enumeration of 
 certain rights shall not be construed to deny or 
 disparage others retained, and declaiing that the 
 powers not delegated to the U. S. by the Consti- 
 tution nor prohibited by it to the States, are re- 
 served, &c.] By these amendments, said Mr. A., 
 the peo-ple intended to limit the power of the ge- 
 neral government to the expressed rights and 
 powers gtanted. The general government have 
 the right to require us to appoint Senators who 
 are thirty years old, who have been citizens of the 
 United States nine years, and who shall reside in 
 the State at the time of their appointment. These 
 rights are enumerated and they are all that the 
 general government can claim; their enumeration 
 does not deny or disparage the right of sovereign 
 power of a State to declare the members of her 
 Legislature ineligible to the office of U. S. Sena- 
 tor. It is with deference that I differ with the 
 genflemen who Advocate the contiary doctrine, but 
 while I express my regard for the gentlemen 
 themselves, I must be permitted to say tha' I es- 
 teem the doctrine they advocate on this occasion 
 as hostile to the sovereign rights of the State, 
 subversive of the intention of the framers of the 
 U. S. Consti'ution and highly dangerous to the 
 free institutions of out country. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that this expediency of this 
 inhibition might be all very well, if we have 
 the power to place it in our Constitution ; but 
 that is not now the question. We'are now to de- 
 termine as to our authority to prescribe the quali- 
 fications of a U. S. Senator. If we have that au- 
 thority then tne pending provision was very fit 
 and^ proper; if on the other hand we have no 
 such" power, then this prohibition should find no 
 place in our Constitution. This did not involve 
 State rights, but it w r as a question ot con- 
 stitutional power. He did not wish to be 
 understood as surrendering State rights; he 
 had always been an advocate of those rights ; 
 and with all deference, he claimed to have 
 been the only one who had .stood up in de- 
 fence of the State rights heretofore. The only 
 two propositions which had been made for the 
 protection of State interests, by the separation of 
 the State from the National Government, he had 
 the honor to introduce himself. First, that the 
 
439 
 
 election of Governor should be upon differen 
 years from those when a President was elected 
 so that the people of the State might be free fron 
 any influences connected with that election whet 
 they chose their State officers. Second, that if 
 officers of the general government should hold of 
 fice under this State. Now the question for them 
 to define was what is the constitution of the U 
 States, and then they should strictly conform t 
 it. He contended that the government of the U 
 States and of each State government was in itsel 
 independent. Acting in its own sphere, the pro 
 visions of each had the same efficiency precisely 
 In the Constitution of this State when the qualifi 
 cations of the Governor are prescribed they ne 
 cessarily imply that no others shall be added ; s< 
 in the Constitution of the U. S.; when that pre 
 scribes qualification they are the only rule of ac 
 tion, no inhibitives can be superadded. 
 The gentleman from Allegany, (Mr. AN 
 GEL,) had met the question fairly, and ask 
 how it can be supposed that a prohibition 
 exists, when none is expressed in the Consti 
 tution ? Upon this question he cited an opinioi 
 by Judge Story, which he contended was the true 
 common sense view of it. It had been declarec 
 by this Convention that the Governor should be 
 30 years of age and five years a resident of the 
 State; and the Legislature had no right to add to 
 those qualifications one jot or tittle. Nor had w< 
 any authority to add to the qualifications pre 
 scribed by the Constitution of the U. States for a 
 Senator. The argument used by gentlemen on 
 the other side was that the power to elect a Sena- 
 tor was not derived from the U. S. Constitution 
 but from our reserved rights. He asked how we 
 came to have a Senator at all except from the 
 Constitution ? If it is a reserved right, what is 
 the meaning of reserved rights ? If the Legisla- 
 ture had this power under a reserved right it must 
 have existed prior to the U. S. Constitution ; anc 
 no one will pretend this to have been the case. 
 It had no existence before the Constitution and 
 thus the argument destroys itself It had been 
 said tgo, that in the election of Senator, the Le- 
 gislature obeyed no mandate of the Constitution 
 of the United States. This he did not agree to at 
 all. The language of that Constitution is manda- 
 tory; in obeying it they executed a mandate, and 
 one too they were not authorised to disobey. IJ 
 this was not so then one-third of the State by re- 
 fusing to elect any Senators, might overthrow the 
 U. S. Senate of course the Congress, and thus 
 upset the U. S. Government. As to the distinc- 
 tions drawn by the gentleman for Clinton, (Mr. 
 STETSON,) between eligibility to the office of U. 
 S. Senator, and the qualifications therefore, he 
 could not comprehend it. 
 
 Mr. Sl'ETbON : The distinction between these 
 two is made in the Constitution of the United 
 States. 
 
 Mr. STOW : But in practice thee are certain- 
 ly conveitible terms; if a citizen be disqualified 
 from filling an office, he is certainly ineligible. 
 The Constitution provides that the States shall 
 choose two Senators each, who shall be elected 
 by the Legislature. Each member takes an oath 
 that he will obey the Constitution of the United 
 States, ana they are bound by that oath ; although 
 they are not under its immediate auihoriiy they 
 
 ,ire bound to obey it by the highest considerations 
 of duty. If it was true that this provision in the 
 Constitution was not obligatory, then one-third of 
 the States might overturn the government of the 
 United States, by refusing to elect Senators. If 
 there are no Senators elected, then there is no go- 
 vernment ; because it requires a vote of two- 
 thirds tor some purposes. The passage of 
 this inhibition seemed to settle a principle which 
 \voul 1 allow the Stites to proceed and extinguish 
 the National Government. It needs but to go one 
 step further, and assume the right to rob the U. S. 
 Government of the services of all its citizens a 
 government to which we all owe allegiance. 
 This inhibition would apply as well to all officers 
 of the State as well as to members of the Legis- 
 lature, and to all the officers of the United States 
 as well as to a U. S. Senator. He would put it 
 to the gentleman from Duichess, and began an- 
 swer, whether the Constitution might not, upon 
 his principle, declare that no member of the Le- 
 gislature should receive votes for Piesident of the 
 United States? And if this provision may apply 
 to the U. S Senate, why not apply it to the House 
 of Representatives? [He proceeded further to 
 ommenl on this subject, and cited, in answer to 
 arguments previously urged on the other side, va- 
 lious authorities, but we are compelled to short- 
 en our report ] 
 
 Mr. WORDEN, like the gentleman from Erie, 
 (Mr. STOW) had not supposed that this question 
 would arise, or he might have given more consi- 
 deration to it. It was insisted that the proposed 
 provision, preventing the legislature from elect- 
 ing any one of its members a Senator in Congress, 
 was in conflict with the Constitution of the United 
 States. That instrument provides that the Sena- 
 tors shall be chosen bv the Legislatures of the 
 several States, and " that no person shall be a 
 Senator who shall not have attained to the age of 
 thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the 
 United States, and be an inhabitant of that State 
 for which he shall be chosen." Gentlemen had 
 read from the commentaries of Mr. Story, to 
 show that the States could not impose other con- 
 ditions of eligibility than are provided in the 
 United States Constitution, and they contend the 
 provision in question conflicts with that doctrine. 
 Mr. W. said he did not so understand the doc- 
 trine of Judge Story, or that it conflicted with, 
 or had any relation to, the proposition under con- 
 sideration. It is not proposed to add any new 
 qualifications, but simply to declare that persons 
 holding a particular station under the state gov- 
 ernment, shall be ineligible to that office. The 
 United States Constitution does not declare that 
 every person having the requisite qualifications 
 may be chosen, but that no one is eligible without 
 them. It does not provide that the states may 
 not, in reference to their own policy, or interest, 
 or security, say that other qualifications shall be 
 equisite, or that every person having them, 
 iiuler all circumstances, and v\ hen occupying 
 high stations of trust and responsibility in the 
 state Government may be chosen. Unless the 
 tales have this power to impose tlm restiiction 
 m the Legislature, they may be unable to organ- 
 de their own governments so that they sliuu i 
 eyond the action or influence of the feder.il gov- 
 rnment. He considered^ every slate perfectly 
 
440 
 
 competent and at lull libei ty to do this, and to im- 
 pose upon all its public officers the condition that 
 they should not abandon their trusts to the preju- 
 dice of the interesis of the State, in order to ac- 
 cept more lucrative appointments elsewhere. 
 Unless this was so, the best interests of the Slate 
 might be sacrificed and thu^e to whom high duties 
 were entrusted, a;d necessary lo be performed 
 for i he public good, might be induced to abandon 
 them, when iheir performance was most essen- 
 tial. The doctrine contended fur was subver. 
 sive of state interests and would impair the in- 
 tegrity of State Governments. It would leave 
 them disarranged, and greatly embarrassed 
 whenever the federal government chose to do so. 
 Gentlemen might have carried their arguments 
 still further, and insist that in declaring a 
 member of the Legislature ineligible, we assert 
 the right of declaring every citizen of the State 
 ineligible; but that would not be a reasonable 
 i-ule no public necessity would justify it and 
 it would not be in accordance with a just 
 and sound construction of the federal Constitution. 
 That instrument, like all other*, is to have a sen. 
 sible construction with reference to its objects, 
 which are consistent with the integrity of iht 
 State governments. In 'his view, and foi this 
 purpose 1 , if we deem it impolitic or unwise that 
 the governor of this State shah not abandon his 
 office or surrender up his trust, we may say so 
 without violating any duty we owe the federal go- 
 vernment, or conflicting with any provision of the 
 federal constitution. We may apply the same 
 rule to the mtinoers of the legislature. This pow- 
 er was necessary to preserve State rights, State 
 governments, and prevent their being broken in 
 upon, or disturbed by the action of the lederal 
 government or the observance of any supposed 
 obligation to that government. To avoid any 
 suca consequences we impose these restrictions 
 upon the Legislature. The constuution of the 
 United Slates was not to be so construed as to pre- 
 vent us from imposing such obligations and re- 
 su ictions on our own Stale officers, as in our judg- 
 mtnis ,v ere consistent with the integrity of our own 
 State government and a just and proper adminis- 
 (ration of it. It all resolved itselt into the pro. 
 position sustained by the gentleman from Dutchess 
 (Mr. KUGGLES,) ar,d the gen 1 If man from Herki- 
 mer, (Mr. LOOMIS) that the State had the light to 
 impost: rulfS upon its public officers in the dis. 
 cliaige of their official duties. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES followed in reply to Mr. STOW. 
 He had not intended to say that this was a re- 
 sewed right, under which we have this power ; 
 but uponthe same footing, a right as strong and 
 stable, secured to us by the compact between the 
 States and the Federal Government. The gen- 
 tleman from Erie had said that in electing a Se- 
 nator of the U. S. the State government executed 
 a mandate in the Constitution of the U. S. The 
 language of the Constitution was, that the Senate 
 shall consist of two Senators from each State, 
 elected by the legislature thereof, and prescribes 
 the qualifications which they shall possess. Far 
 be it from him (Mr. R.) to say that the State might 
 refuse to elect a Senator and still do their duty to 
 the general government. But still, they exercised 
 a right which secured to them a representation in 
 t'ie Senate of the U.States, when they choose a Se- 
 
 nator, and not a right secured to the U. S. govern- 
 ment to have Senators from each State. And they 
 could not be compelled to exercise that right, any 
 more than an individual voter might be compelled 
 to exercise his right to enjoy the elective franchise. 
 It was said that the State Government cannot 
 prescribe any other qualifications than those laid 
 down in the Constitution of the United States. 
 This argument would come to this that the leg- 
 islature of the United States could not exercise 
 the free privilege of choice. The legislatures 
 could net, be admitted, if they should deem prop- 
 er to elect a man who is not 30 years of age nor a 
 9 years resident ; but if they preferred to elect a 
 man who was 40 years of age, instead of one who 
 was 30, did any one doubt that they had the 
 power to do so ? And if they choose to combine 
 under any general rule for the purpose of mak- 
 ing a selection, they had the right to do that. 
 It was exclusively in the power of this Conven- 
 tion to say to the legislature that they should not 
 elect one of their own members a Senator of the 
 U. States. In this they did no injury to U. S. 
 government, nor violated its Constitution. No 
 person would undertake to say that in so doing 
 they at all impaired the strength of the Govern- 
 ment of the U. States. And he could not see that 
 in imposing this rule upon the legislature, we 
 were violating the Constitution or transcending 
 our own powers. 
 
 Mr. WHITE then rose and said : I rise very 
 reluctantly to express my sentiments uprn the 
 important subjtct under consideration, and the 
 magnitude of the con-equences. which it involves, 
 must plead mv apology lor trespassing upon the 
 attention of the committee at this time. I may 
 premise that I have uniformly maintained the 
 principles of Stale Rights, and I should be the 
 last person in this assembly to surrender them. 
 But I hold that, to be perfectly consistent with 
 another doctrine which I entertain, that the 
 Government of the United States possesses certain 
 enumerated and limited powers; and that so far 
 as those powers are delegated in the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, the authority thus 
 specifically granted by the States and people 
 is sovereign) and carries with it all the means that 
 are necessary and proper to execute its purpose. 
 I think it will be conceded as a general principle, 
 that every gevernment must have the means of 
 providing for its existence and preservation, and 
 the carrying out of its own powers. It cannot 
 be that matters involving that existence can be 
 safely confided to any other authority or govern- 
 ment whatsoever. This principle which is vital- 
 ly connected with all political institutions 
 is inherent in the Constitution of the United 
 States. This power is not however exercised, as 
 some gentlemen who have preceded me allege,by a 
 mandate from the government of the U. States, but 
 under a solemn compact into which this State has 
 entered with the sovereign States of this Union. 
 What, let us inquiie, is the nature of that com- 
 pact ? The Constitution declares that " the Se- 
 nate of the United States shall be composed of 
 two Senators from each State, chosen by the Le- 
 gislature thereof, for six years." It declares, 
 still farther, that " no person shall be a Senator 
 who shall not have attained to the age of thirty 
 years, and been nine years a citizen of the United 
 
441 
 
 States ; and who shall not when elected be an in- 
 habitant of that State for which he shall be cho- 
 sen." These qualifications, in my humble judg- 
 ment, can neither be increased or diminished by 
 any action of this honorable body, without a vio- 
 lation of the Constitution of the United States, 
 which we are all bound to support and defend. 
 And what are the powers that by the same in- 
 strument are reserved to the States ? That "the 
 times, places, and manner of holding elections 
 for Senators and Representatives, shall be pre- 
 scribed in each State by the Legislature thereof: 
 but the Congress may, at any time, by law, make 
 or alter such regulations, except as to the place 
 of chosing Senators." From this provision of 
 the Constitution, it will appear manifest in what 
 case the States can exercise their authority, and 
 it will be remarked that two of these powers are 
 conditional and dependent upon the legislation of 
 the Congress of the U. S. and that as to the other, 
 the determination as to the place of choosing Sena- 
 tors, is the only power reserved by the constitution 
 to the Legislature of this State. In order to elu- 
 cidate and illnstrate the position I take upon this 
 question, allow me to state, for the information of 
 the committee the construction which has been 
 given to this provision of the Constitution, by 
 the House of Representatives of the United States. 
 Many years since when I was a resident of the 
 State of Maryland, the Legislature passed an act 
 dividing that State into election districts, and 
 among other things provided that the city and 
 county of Baltimore should form one district, and 
 return two representatives to the Congress of the 
 United States,, one of whom should reside in the 
 city, and the other in the county of Baltimore. 
 The candidates at a subsequent election consisted 
 of two gentlemen who were residents of the 
 county, and one who was a resident of the city of 
 Baltimore. The election was determined by the 
 election of the candidates residing in the county 
 of Baltimore. A petition was presented to Con- 
 gress by the unsuccessful candidate, who resided 
 in the city, against the candidate who resided in 
 the county, upon the ground that the member re- 
 turned was not duly qualified under the law of 
 the State in such cases made and provided. The 
 section was referred to the committee of elections 
 in the House, who reported unanimously that 
 the member elected was entitled to his seat, and 
 that the State law which increased the qualifica- 
 tion, fixed and prescribed by the Constitution of 
 the United States, was unconstitutional and void. 
 With all the consideration that I have been able 
 to give this subject in the brief time I have had 
 to examine it, I am of opinion that the limita- 
 tion proposed by the section as reported by the 
 committee, namely, " that no member of the Le- 
 gislature of this State shall receive an appoint- 
 ment to the Senate of the United States," is un- 
 constitutional, and ought to be stricken out. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that no man could deny 
 that it would be highly indiscreet at any 
 time in the legislature of the State, to elect one 
 of their own body to the place of Senator in Con- 
 gress, and consequently if it is intended to insert 
 in this Constitution a quantity of advice, for the 
 good government and good conduct of our legis- 
 lature, he had no objection to the insertion of this 
 provision. If this clause was to act merely by 
 
 30 
 
 way of advice of injunction, and not to have 
 the force or obligation of a law, then he had no 
 objection to it, but if it was intended to be in 
 serted as a binding and obligatory law then he 
 had a great objection to it, and should vote 
 against it. On the first point, it was proper to 
 say, our Constitution ought not to contain only 
 mere advice; it should contain nothing which 
 would not have the force and obligation of a law, 
 because, as has been said, every thing in the nature 
 of a law should have force and binding obligation; 
 and nothing should be put in the form or guise of 
 a law, and be placed in company with the bind- 
 ing laws of the country, that was mere advice, in- 
 capable of being enforced, and its violation at- 
 tended with no consequences. Therefore, al- 
 though he had no objection, should the policy be 
 introduced, of putting advice in our Constitution 
 instead of obligatory laws, to this particular case, 
 he begged to enter his protest against a departure 
 from that general system which had obtain- 
 ed in general legislation in this respect. This 
 clause he apprehended if inserted would be whol- 
 ly without force. In the first place, how would 
 the question rise in case the legislature saw fit to 
 violate it ? It could only rise under the govern- 
 ment of the United Stales, and would present it- 
 self as a question to be determined by the U. S. 
 Senate, under the 5th section of the first article 
 of the Constitution of the United States, which 
 declares that " each House shall be the judge of 
 the elections, returns and qualifications of its 
 own members." In case our State legislature 
 were to elect as a member of that Senate, one of 
 their own body, the question under this section 
 might rise on a petition against his admission to 
 a seat in that body, and he would ask of those in 
 favor of retaining this addition to the old Consti- 
 tution, whether they meant to assert that the Se- 
 nate of the United States would preclude such a 
 person from taking a seat in that body, provided 
 he was elected in due form by the legislature of 
 the State ? He had not yet heard the assertion or 
 the venture of a doubt but what that Senate 
 would permit such an individual to take his seat. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS : They would not. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that the position, in his 
 humble judgment, was unsound, and he thought 
 that the gentleman was the only man who had 
 attempted to take that ground. He knew that 
 the gentleman from Dutchess (Mr. RUGGLES,) 
 had shown a disinclination to place it upon that, 
 and had assumed another ground. His colleague 
 (Mr. JOKES,) who last addressed the House, has 
 presumed a case of a gentleman who attained the 
 age of 40 years, and who had been elected under 
 a law forbidding the election of a man not 40. It 
 was not a proper case the one he should have 
 presented was this : Suppose that our Constitu- 
 tion required 40 years of age, ten years more than 
 the Constitution of the United States, and we 
 were to elect a person aged 35, in that case would 
 the Senate of the United States refuse him his 
 seat ? 
 
 Mr. JONES said thai would depend entirely on 
 the fact whether our con.ititution was in conflict 
 with lhatnt the United States in thai respect. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR stated ihat the gentleman pre- 
 sented the case in an easier positiou than n really 
 was, and the case he (Mr. O'C.) presented would 
 
442 
 
 really raise the question. And the supposition 
 was that inasmuch as these superadded qualifica- 
 tions might stand together witn the qualifications 
 required Dy the Constitution of the U. S., thai 
 therefore the U. S. Sena'e would not only execute 
 the constitution of the U. S. by requiring all ire 
 qualifications there pit-senled, but also t host- 
 presented by the Constitution of our State. 
 He humbly conceived it would not; and for 
 these reasons it had been well said by the 
 highest authority that when two legislative pow- 
 ers, one of higher and the other of lower authority 
 undertake to legislate upon the same subject, 
 that the legislation of the interior authority must 
 necessarily be void. When subjects are legislated 
 upon by any legislative power we learn and un- 
 derstand the will ol the law giver, as much b> 
 perceiving what he has not done, as by reading 
 that whicn he has done. Now in this case ihe 
 constitution of the United States, has enacted that 
 the full age of thirty years is requisite in a senator, 
 and the same law which declares that, declare- 
 that no greater age is requisite in order to secure 
 all the maturity, according to the judgment of the 
 Constitution necessary in a Senator. So as to the 
 nine years' residence, and so in relation to all 
 other qualifications. If others had been deemed 
 requisite they would have been defined, each and 
 all of them. It would be observed that not only had 
 these qualifications been prescribed in the Con- 
 stitution of the U. S. but that it also directed that 
 each house should be the sole judge of the elec- 
 tion and qualification of its members. It was al- 
 so prescribed in the 4th section of the first article 
 of that Constitution that" the times, places and 
 * manner of holding elections for Senator and 
 " Representatives, shall be prescribed in each 
 State by the legislature thereof, but the Con- 
 * gress m^y at any time, by law make or alter 
 " such regulations except as to the places 
 'ul clioosli.^ benatois." 1 hey thus reserve to them- 
 selves the whole control over the matter. In the 
 fiist place the qualifications are defined with great 
 perspicuity, and in the second place they retain 
 complete and permanent control as to the mani.er 
 of choice, except as to the place where the Leg- 
 islature shall sit and finally, it would be obsei v 
 ed that each house has the power ot judging re- 
 specting the qualifications of its members. Noih- 
 i,,g therefore could be plainer, in hi* judgment, 
 than that the Government of the U. S. had taken 
 to themselves the whole subject and most neces- 
 sary was it tor them to do so. A'a was well ob- 
 served by his colleague, Mr. WHITE, every govern- 
 ment must be allowed ihe power and right of sup- 
 porting and sustaining itself, k must have all 
 the functions necessary to create its own depart- 
 ments, &c. Otherwise it would not be a Gov- 
 ernment. Therefore it was with great propriety 
 that the Government of the U. S. declined to give 
 to the States any power over the subj.-ct, i-xcept 
 it be in subordination and obedience to the Con- 
 stitution ot the U. S. They leaving Ihe matter to 
 the action in the first instance ol the States, but 
 if they did not do all that was necessary for the 
 purpose of re-supplying this department of the 
 U S Government, u can doit itself. All the 
 po'wer that was left to the Stales, was to have or 
 not to have a legislature. If they have one, they 
 have the power and can exercise it under no other 
 
 restrictions than these presented by tneU. S. Con- 
 stitution in creating and appointingSenators. Upon 
 this subject, he could entertain no riouh', and 
 he could hardly bring himself to the belief that 
 any gentleman would have a, serious doubt upon 
 the subject, except for a case occurring with- 
 in our own experience, where the passions and 
 emotions of honorable men were inflamed by the 
 performance of an act by the legislature, highly 
 indiscreet, improper, and well calculated to ex- 
 cite those feelings, and the memory of which 
 still continued to do so. It was said by lawyers 
 that bad cases made bad precedents. They in- 
 flame the passions and lead us to act not in con- 
 formance to law but tc the dictates of a high 
 and honorable indignation. And we should be 
 cautious, how we permitted those emotions to in- 
 duce us to engraft on the Constitution a provision 
 that would remain there as a reproach on our 
 wisdom and discretion. We ought not to make a 
 law which would not be binding and obligatory 
 somewhere. Having shown that the government of 
 the United States would not pay the least 
 attention to the qualifications imposed by this 
 State, he would call the attention of mem- 
 bers to the other side of the question, as 
 presented by the gentleman from Dutchess. 
 That gentleman declined to enter the lists, and to 
 suggest as broadly as did the gentleman from 
 Herkimer that the Senate of the United States 
 would enforce our superadded qualifications, 
 yet he supposed that although it would not be 
 binding on the Senate of the United States that 
 we might enforce it by the laws of our own 
 State making it a penal offence against the 
 State for the Assembly to dare to vote for one of 
 themselves, or to accept office. If that was the 
 way we were to enforce it, what kind of penalty 
 would we impose, a fine of a few dollars, or not as 
 but merely a misdemeanor, but as a felony punish- 
 able with imprisonment, or with death if gentle- 
 men pleased. Let us see then what a state of 
 affairs we would have, if a member of the 
 Legislature could be rightfully elected, accord- 
 ing to the Constitution of the United States, 
 a Senator in Congress. The United States 
 Senate would declare him to have been legally 
 elected a member of that body, but the judicial 
 department of the State of New-York acting un- 
 der this Constitution and the laws, would declare 
 that by voting for himself and taking the office 
 he was guilty of a felony, and liable to be con- 
 victed and sentenced to State prison. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES : Does the gentleman under- 
 stand me as using any such extravagance ? 
 
 iVir O'CONOK said not; but be understood the 
 gentleman to siy that it might be made penal for 
 the legislature to vote one of their own body into 
 Congie<s, and he wi>s only fllowing the proposi- 
 tion out to its lull extent. If we could make a 
 law, we could punish its violation by any penally 
 we might impose. But without carrying the mat- 
 ter to this extravagant length, which only served 
 to show the eX'ravagance of the piopocutiob in 
 more glaring colots, and supposing that only a lit- 
 tle ignominy would be heaped upon them, would 
 it be proper that such a collision should be produ- 
 ced between the Constitution of the State and that 
 of the United States. That a man was duly, regu- 
 larly and properly elected as to be admitted to a 
 
443 
 
 seat in the Senate according to the judgment of 
 that body, to whose judgment the question is sub- 
 milled by the Constitution of the U S-, and yet be 
 judged guilty of a misdemeanor and liable topun- 
 i-ihmeni by t h at of th i^si ate. Such a collision outjht 
 not io exist, and conceiving therefore in the first 
 place, that we should put nothing in the consti- 
 tution which had not the full force and obligation 
 of law that nothing WAS law which could not be 
 enforced by sanctions or penalties and that the 
 whole business of enforcing the laws in relation 
 to the qualifications of Senators, must necessarily 
 belong to the government of the U. S., unless in- 
 deed we are willing to permit a collision and con- 
 flict of the kind he had leferred to, he hoped that 
 uninfluenced by the conduct of the legislature on 
 a former occasion he hoped that this subject 
 would be left where it ought to be, under the sole 
 and exclusive control and government of the Uni- 
 ted States. Under this view of fh-- matter he sub- 
 mitted that it was most inexpedient to insert this 
 restrictive proposition 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY briefly supported the pro- 
 position. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS further opposed it, denying 
 that there was a single state constitution which 
 had such a restriction as this. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN argued in favor of 
 the retention of the provision, 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE, in reply to Mr. SIMMONS, 
 referred to the constitutions of Florida, Texas, 
 and Mississippi, as containing similar provisions 
 tb the one reported here. He also argued in fa- 
 vor of the retention of the clause. 
 
 The question being then taken, the motion to 
 strike out was negatived by a strong vote. 
 
 And the Convention adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, (47M day,) July 28. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. KIP. 
 
 Mr SHAW presented tne petition of W. T. 
 Wuiden, presenting the plan of a new Court, &c. 
 containing also certain facts as to the proceedings 
 of the Common Ple^s of Cayuga county. 
 THE MILITIA, fcc. 
 
 Mr. WAKD.Jrom (he committee on military af- 
 faiis, submitted the following report: 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 $1. Militia office r-f shall be chosen or appointed as fol- 
 lows: Captains, Subalterns and Non-Coinmissioned offi- 
 cers shall be chosen by the written votes of the members 
 of the respective companies. Field officers of regiments 
 and separate battalions by the written vott-s of the com- 
 missioned officers of the respective regiments and battal- 
 ions. Brigadier Generals and commanding officers of reg- 
 iments or separate battalions sh;dl appoint the starfofficers 
 to their respective divisions, brigades, regiments or sepa- 
 rate battalions 
 
 2 1 he Governor shall nominate, and with the consent 
 of the Senate, appoint all Major Generals, and the Commis- 
 sary General. The Adjutant General and other chiefs of 
 stafl departments, and the aid-de-camp of the commander 
 in chiet. shall be appointed by the Governor, and their 
 commissions shall expire with the time lor which the Go 
 vernor shall have been elected The Commissary Gene- 
 ral shall hold his ..ffice for two years. 
 
 3 The Legislature shall by law direct the time and 
 manner of electing militia officers, and of certitying their 
 elections to the Governor. 
 
 $ 4. The commissioned officers of the militia shall be 
 commissioned by the Governor; and no commissioned of- 
 ficer shall bo removed from office unless by the Senate on 
 the recommendation of the Governor, stating the grounds 
 on which such removal is recommended or by the deci- 
 sion *f a Court Mirtfal pursuant to Ivv. The pre?ent offi- 
 
 cers of the militia shall hold their commissions subject to 
 removal as before provided. 
 
 ^ 5. In case the mode of election and appointment of mi- 
 litia officers hereby directed, shall not be found conducive 
 to the improvement of the militia, the Legislature may 
 abolish the same and provide by law for their appointment 
 and removal, if two-thirds of the members present in each 
 House shall concur therein. 
 
 AARON WARD, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. WHITE offered a resolution of inquiry as 
 to the propriety of a provision that all moneys 
 that now are or hereafter may be paid into the 
 courts of law or equity, shall be deposited into 
 the State Treasury for safe keeping. Agreed to, 
 Mr. MANN offered the following resolution: 
 Resolved, That the Chancellor of this State be request- 
 ed to direct the Register, Assistant Register and Clerks, 
 to furnish to this Convention the separate and distinct 
 items, with the names ol all the estates, heirs, owners and 
 parties claiming and interested, for whose benefit and for 
 what purposes the funds are held, whether in trust or oth 
 erwise, with the dates of the receipt, of all funds, compris- 
 ing and making the aggregate amounts reported or fur- 
 nished to this Convention, by the Chancellor, as subject 
 to the order and control of the Court of Chancery up to 
 January, 1846, which aggregate amounts were furnished 
 by the Chancellor in compliance with the resolution offer- 
 ed by Mr. Khoades and adopted by this Convention June 
 26th inst. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL hoped the resolution would not 
 pass. It was of an inquisitorial character $ would 
 give a great deal of trouble in furnishing there- 
 quisite information as to what estates, persons, &c. 
 &c. had money, and make a voluminous book; 
 and all without any obi responding benefit. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLESdid not object because it was of 
 an inquisitorial character, but it would entail such 
 a vast amount of labor on the chief officer of 
 that court; it would make a large book, and he 
 could not see what use the committee could make 
 of the information when they got il. 
 
 It was laid on the table for the present, with 
 the consent of the mover. 
 
 APPORTIONMENT, &c., OF THE LEGISLATURE. 
 
 The committee of the whole, Mr. PATTER- 
 SON in the chair, resumed the consideration of 
 the report of committee No. 1. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR moved to amend so as to 
 declare that all appointments of members of the 
 legislature to offices prohibited in this section, 
 and all votes given for them, shall be void. 
 Adopted. 
 
 The last section was then read, as follows : 
 
 Substitute lor .-ectioiis 15 nnd 16, KO far as relates to Se 
 nators and members ot Assembly, the lollowing: 
 
 <}15. The first el ction of Scfiritois and members of As 
 sembly, pursuant to the provisions of this Constitution, 
 shall W held on the firs'. Tuesday succeeding the first Mon- 
 day of November one thousand eight hundred and forty- 
 seven, and all subsequent elections shall be held on the 
 first Tuesday succeeding the first Monday ol November in 
 each year, unless otherwise directed by the Legislature. 
 The Senators and meml'ers of Assembly who may be in 
 office on the first day ot January one thousand eight hun- 
 dred and forty-seven, shall hold their offices unu'l ihe 
 thirty-first day ot December following, and no longer. 
 
 The same was agreed to after a verbal correc 
 tion by striking out the word " first" before the 
 word " Tuesday" in two lines. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON moved to strike out " suc- 
 ceeding" and insert " following." Rejected. 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved to strike out of the 8th line 
 of the 6th sectio- the words " not taxed," so that 
 all persons of color should be excluded from the 
 basis of representation. Lost, 26 only voting 
 therefor 
 
444 
 
 The committee returned to section seven. 
 
 The section as amended was then read : 
 $ 7. The members of the Assembly shall be apportioned 
 among the several counties ot the State, as nearly as may 
 be, according to the number of their respective inhabi- 
 tants excluding aliens and persons of color not taxed; and 
 shall be chosen by single districts. The Boards of Super- 
 visors in each of the counties of this State shall, on the 
 first Tuesday of January next, meet and proceed without 
 adjournment, except from day to day, to divide their re- 
 spective counties into as many districts of contiguous ter- 
 ritory, and as nearly equal in population as may be, as 
 each county respectively is no.w by law entitled to mem- 
 bers of Assembly, to be called assembly districts and 
 shall number the same in each county entitled to more 
 than one member, frum No. I. to the number such county 
 is entitled to members inclusive ; each of which districts 
 shall choose one member of Assembly. Each Assembly 
 district shall contain as nearly as may be, an equal num- 
 ber of inhabitants, and shall consist of contiguous territo- 
 ry, and no town shall be divided in the formation of an 
 Assembly district. An apportionment oi members of As- 
 sembly among the several counties shall be m;ide by the 
 Legislature at its first session after the return of every 
 enumeration, and the board of supervisors in each county 
 entitled to more than one member shall, at such time as 
 shall be prescribed by law, so alter the Assembly districts 
 as to conform in number to the said apportionment, in the 
 manner herein before provided; and the apportionment 
 and the districts shall remain unaltered, until another enu- 
 meration shall have been taken. Every county heretofore 
 represented in the Assembly by one or more members, 
 shall continue to be entitled to a member, but no county 
 shall hereafter be created or entitled to a member, unless 
 its population shall be equal to the ratio ol population re- 
 quisite for a member. 
 
 The following substitute, offered by Mr. HAR- 
 RIS, was then read. 
 
 ^7. The members of Assembly shall be apportioned among 
 the several counties of this State, BY THK LKGISLATURK, as 
 nearly as may be, according 10 the num'erof their re- 
 spective inhabitants, excluding aliens, and persw us of color 
 not taxed, and shall be chosen by single districts. 
 
 The several boards of supervisors in such counties of 
 this State, as are now entitled to more than one member 
 of Assembly, sball assemble on the first Tuesday of Jan 
 uary next, and divide their respective counties into Assem- 
 bly districts eqvr-1 to the number of members of Assembly 
 to which such counties are now severally entitled by law, 
 and shall cause to be filed in the office ot the Secretary of 
 State and the cleric if their respective counties, a descrip- 
 tion of such Assembly districts, specifying the number ol 
 each district and the population tnereof according to the 
 last State enumeration, as near as can be ascertained. 
 Each Assembly district shall contain as nearly as may be 
 an equal number of inhabitants, excluding aliens and per- 
 sons of color not taxed, and shall consist ot contiguous 
 territory, but no town shall be divided in the formation of 
 Assembly districts. 
 
 The Legislature, at its first session after the return of 
 every enumeration, shall re-apportion the members of As- 
 sembly among the several counties of this State, in man- 
 ner aforesaid ; and the board 01 supervi-ors in such coun- 
 ties as may be entitled, under su h re-apportionment, to 
 more than one member, shall assemble at such time, as the 
 Legislature making such re-apportionment shall prescribe, 
 and divide such counties into Assembly districts in the 
 manner herein directed, and the apportionment and dis- 
 tricts so to be made, shall remain unaltered until another 
 enumeration shall be taken under the provisions of the 
 I receding section. 
 
 fcvery county heretofore represented in the Assembly 
 by one or more members shall continue to be entitled to a 
 member, but no county shall hereafter be created, unless 
 its population shall be equal to the ratio of population re- 
 quisite lor a member. 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved tostrikf out the words ' not 
 taxed," from this section. H<; said that .ill tax 
 are paid by the consumer, and consequently every 
 person pa>s taxes unless he subsists by robbery o 
 charity. 
 
 Lost ayp 20, noes not c minted 
 
 Mr HARRIS'S jinienJiNpnt was ihen carried. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR said t^.it bv and by in Conven. 
 
 tion, he would move to alter the time when the 
 Supervisors should meet to do this districting. 
 
 Mr, LOOMIS moved to strike out in fourteenth 
 line the words "and the population thereof." 
 
 Mr.'RUGGLES suggested instead, 1o add after 
 the word " thereof," the words, " according to 
 the last preieding State enumeration." This 
 v^ould enable all to see what that enumeration 
 was, and whether the districting had been done 
 with fairness. 
 
 Mr STOW s^id that as they were to divide 
 towns and wards, it 'vas irapossib'e for them to 
 have a correct data from the last census ; there 
 should be some rule adapted in respect to the ter- 
 ritory in cities; either election districts or some 
 other plan 
 
 Mr.'W. H. SPENCER said that thc-ie would be 
 a great difficulty w here towns or parts of towns 
 had been set of!" since the last ci-nsbs. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES'S amendment wa< then adopted 
 
 It was moved to amend the 30ih line but no 
 new county hereafter created shall be entitb d ta 
 i member unless its population shall be equal, &c. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR Why not take Ihe old Consti- 
 ution as it stands. 
 
 Mr. STOW There is no enumeiation by elec- 
 toral districts, nor less than by towns and wards; 
 or can the supervisors have, any correct data by 
 which to district the counties. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved to strike out ot the 
 30th line the words " or entitled to a member." 
 
 This was accepted, and adopted. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to strike out in the 1st 
 line, thp words " shall be," and insert " as now." 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY suggested to insert the words 
 
 by law" in the llth line, after the words "en- 
 titled." 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND accepted this; and it was a- 
 dopted. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR moved to insert at the end of the 
 !5ih line, the words ' excluding aliens, and per- 
 sons of color no! taxed." 
 
 This \va- -trreed to. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to amend the 30th, 
 31st, and 32d lines : that no county hereafter 
 created shall be entitled to a member unless its 
 population shall be equal to the ratio of popula- 
 tion requisite for a member. This would reserve 
 the right for the Legislature to district the remote 
 counties for their domestic convenience, in re- 
 gard to their police arrangements. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND objected to this ; he said the 
 gentleman wished to have this so arranged that 
 if any small district hereafter shall not be entitled 
 to form a county that the Legislature may make 
 one He did not want any measure of this kind 
 which was to benefit small new towns or villages 
 to rob the agricultural part of the county. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that the gentleman had 
 misrepresented him; but this was so much a 
 habit that he supposed it was unavoidable. 
 
 Mr RICHMOND wished to explain. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE would hear no explanation. 
 Gentlemen seemed determined to misquote him ; 
 and he would not put up with it, but would resent 
 it order or no order. They ought to treat each 
 other as gentlemen. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said he did net intend to 
 impute any improper motive to. the gentleman. 
 It v.a9 the farthest from his thoughts. 
 

 445 
 
 Mr TALLMADGEsuid he was not will n* tc 
 he held up as making assertions and holding 
 opinions which he never -entertained; and thus 
 go down to tutniiiy in a lalse position. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE'S amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. STETSON offered the following amend- 
 ment: 
 
 Add aft9 the 27th line: 
 
 But the Legislature mny at any time annul the divis 
 ion of a county made by supervisors, it it shall be made to 
 appear that the said county has been divided with any 
 reference to political or partizan objects, and shall ther 
 upon re-divide the same." 
 
 Mr, STETSON said the adoption of this would 
 only be the exercise of a wise, prudent arid prop, 
 er precaution, if you should re divide the count) 
 lines, do as to make party lines, &c; and it would 
 be perfectly harmless if they were not so divided. 
 If the supervisors should divide the counties lor 
 partizan purposes then it ought to he corrected; 
 and if ihe Legislature cannot correct this, then 
 we have a very serious evil that is remediless. 
 And unless this body shall make some such an 
 amendment as the provision that he had proposed, 
 he should believe that there was a desire in the 
 Convention to see a system of (Jerrymandering 
 carried our; and this was a matter that created 
 more uneasiness and disquiet over the country 
 than anything that had occurred before. He was 
 anxious to have nngle districts, provided that the 
 division could be made with perfect lairness and 
 impartiality. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to amend the amendment 
 by striking out the word "Legislature" and in- 
 sert " Supreme Court." L'-st. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. STETSON was rejected. 
 
 Mr. RHOAPES movtd to amend, by adding af- 
 
 ter the WLI-U " districts" in the 17th line, the fol- 
 io, ving : 
 
 " Members of Assembly may be chosen from any por- 
 tion ot the county in which such districts are situated, but 
 *hail be n iid^nts ol the county." 
 
 Mr. R. said there was now no prohibition. We 
 may go out ot the county lor a member but the 
 habit of riot doing .*o had almost acquired the 
 force of law He desired that if the inhabitants 
 of a coun'y desiied to go out of an election dis- 
 trict in search of a candidate, that they should 
 have a perfVct liberty to do so. 'I hat they should 
 have the whole range of the coumy to choose a 
 candidate for the Assembly from. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said that this would destroy 
 the object of single districts. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES' amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. HUN I 1 moved to amend so as to allow the 
 division in the city of New York to be m..de by 
 the city Convention m.w elec:ed, instead of by 
 the supervisors of said city. He wished the Con. 
 vention in the city of N. Y. to make the Assembly 
 disfrir-l*, as they wore about to make a new division 
 of ward lines. The board of supervisors in the 
 city was differently constituted from most of the 
 boards. A supervisor represented a ward ; he 
 was an alderman ; and thus a ward with only 6000 
 population had a voice in the board equal to a 
 ward that had 30,000 inhabituats. Now the city 
 
 convention represents the 
 parties in the city. 
 
 whole city, and all 
 
 Mr. JONES said that the Mayor and Recorder 
 were added to the board; and as it was so differ- 
 ently constituted, there was no impropriety in 
 
 haying this exception made relative to the city of 
 New- York. 
 
 This was lost ayes 34, noes 35. 
 Mr. HUNT insisted that the question was not 
 understood. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved to strike out in the 9th 
 line the words, " a member of." Adopted. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved to add after word 
 " town," in the 16th line, the words, "or elec- 
 tion district." 
 
 Mr. MANN suggested to add, " or election 
 district in cities" because there might be election 
 districts in some of the towns of the state. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY accepted this so as to read 
 virtually that no election district should be divi- 
 ded in the formation of an Assembly district. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend this by adding to 
 it the words " as they existed at the last enume- 
 ration." He wished this to refer to the districts 
 as they existed at the last census. 
 
 Mr. STOW contended that if they should decide 
 that they would not divide the election districts as 
 they existed at this day, it would have no good 
 practical result; for they had not the means of 
 ascertaining the number of persons in these dis- 
 tricts at the present time. In Buffalo since the 
 last census there have been new election districts 
 marked out; and they had there no data, from any 
 existing census to tell what was the amount of 
 population in those districts at the present day. 
 The knowledge of the whole subject, in the ag- 
 gregate, would not aid them at all. They had 
 nothing whatever to aid them or guide them, as a 
 data, in making their calculations, but the last 
 census ; and therefore under those circumstances 
 they must take the election districts with the 
 population as it was given by the last enumera- 
 :ion. What he most earnestly desired was that 
 whoever had the laying out of election districts or 
 " 'pportionment of members of Assembly should 
 have the fullest and most accurate returns of the 
 Dopulation in all those districts, in order that full 
 'ustice might be done to all parties. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY said that the election districts 
 n the city of New York were laid out in 1842, 
 wo years after the census was taken ; and at a. 
 ime when the population of those districts was 
 lot very well known. 
 
 Mr. MANN : - Two new districts were made 
 n the llth Ward. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY : The law of 1842 provided 
 or the laying out of the districts in sections that 
 hould not contain over 500 voters. The com- 
 missioners went on and did their duty, but they 
 could not so divide the districts as to reach down 
 to any thing like mathematical certainty. And 
 the result has been very unequal. This is shown 
 by the census of 1845, and also by the number of 
 votes polled in November, 1844. In some of the 
 election districts there were more than 1000 votes 
 polled, where it was originally intended that the 
 number should not exceed 500. In' the 2d dis- 
 trict of the 1st Ward there were 1005 votes poll- 
 ed ; in the 2nd district of the 2nd Ward there 
 were 950 votes polled; in the 2nd district of the 
 3rd Ward there were 970 votes polled ; in the 9th 
 Ward, in one district there were 1U81 votes 
 polled; in one in the llth Ward there were 
 1187 and in another 966 votes polled. In 
 several of tne districts there were over 10GU 
 
446 
 
 voles polled; and in '2 districts ofthe 16th Ward 
 there were over 1100 votes polled. And every 
 election district of the ciiy has cast more votes 
 than the number prescribed by law except some 5 
 or 6. And one of the principal objects of the city 
 Convention, now sitting in New York, is to cor- 
 rect these evils by re-dividing the city. One 
 proposition there made is to divide the city into 
 128 election districts, and to take 4 of these and 
 make a ward; and they also have thought serious- 
 ly about so re-arrangirm the wards as to divide 
 the city into 16 or into 32 Wards. The delegates 
 from the city of N. Y in this Convention had 
 nothing to do with this system of single districts, 
 except to offer their opposition fo it And if the 
 Convention was determined to saddle that system 
 on to the city of N. Y. all that the N. Y. city dele 
 gation could do would be to endeavor to make 
 their representation as equally as possible in their 
 assembly districts. He had hoped that no such 
 restriction as that proposed would have been out 
 in, unless it should be that hereafter no elec- 
 tion district shall for the future be divided. 
 He desired especially that this matter might 
 be so arranged as to operate only on the 
 future classification of their election districts, 
 and not upon the past. Otherwise it would 
 subject them in New- York to very great 
 difficulty. The wards by the new proposition are 
 to be cut up by levies not now known to any of 
 thn election districts ; and the result might be 
 that a person might be found voting for two as- 
 sembly tickets at one and the same election. He 
 hoped they would not adopt any plan to thwart 
 the valu ble intentions of the present N. York 
 city convention. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS remarked that the 16th Ward had 
 also been divided but recently. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. STOW was lost. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. KENNEDY was then 
 carried. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY offered^ substitute for that part 
 of the section which provides for the division of 
 the ^Late into Assembly districts by the Supervi- 
 sors. By the substitute it is proposed that there 
 should be elected at the next annual town meet- 
 ings and charter elections, one commissioner in 
 each election district, whose duty it shall be to 
 divide the counties. Mr. M. said that he was op- 
 posed entirely to sending this matter to the board of 
 Supervisors. For it would be putting on to them a 
 duty for which they were not originally designed 
 by the people when they were chosen. The people 
 ought to have the opportunity to select their 
 agents with a special reference to this important 
 work of dividing the state into assembly districts. 
 In many counties of the State there was the most 
 gross inequality with regard to the board of su- 
 pervisors. In Kings county, the city of Brooklyn 
 had six supervisors in that board ; the rest of the 
 county had another six, whilst Brooklyn had nine 
 tenths of the entire population of the county. 
 What he desired to effect was an equal represen 
 tation .f the people of each county. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND opposed this amendment, and 
 contended that the supervisors ought to district 
 the State. He was willing to trust them. 
 
 Mr. WARD doubted whether or no this debate 
 was in order ; the question having once been 
 definitely decided. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND contended the system pro- 
 posed by Mr. MURPHY would operate more un- 
 equally than if the division of the State was left 
 to the board of supervisors. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY was entirely of the same 
 opinion. 
 
 Mr. W.TAYLOR said that the proposition of Mr. 
 MURPHY, had some merits. He wanted the su- 
 Dervisors elected with a view to this very busi- 
 ness ; for with a decided democratic majority in 
 ;he State, yet a majority of the supervisors were 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said this proposition would not 
 De carried out. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said it would be the duty of the 
 Legislature to provide for having this matter car- 
 ied into effect, if the Convention should adopt it. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN opposed the 
 amendment, as did also Mr. COOK, it would 
 create a large body of 700 or 800 new officers. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY would so modify it that the 
 towns at town meetings should elect these com- 
 missioners. It would be the most feasible plan 
 to get a full and fair representation of the people. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER opposed it. It would be a 
 large and unwieldly body. Until 1840, he had 
 never heard of any political complexion being 
 given to any of those in the board of supervisors. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE hoped the amendment would not 
 prevail. We had so far proceeded without any 
 demonstration of political partizanship, and ws 
 it not desirable to carry that feeling out to its full 
 extent, so that the s^me feeling might pervade the 
 people in discussing the question of adopting the 
 Constitution. Mr. B. advocaied the reference 
 of this question to the Boards of Supervisors. 
 
 Mr. CHATF1ELD although gratified to see the 
 absence of parlizanship in this Come-ition, and 
 deeming the credit of it due to the dominant par- 
 ty, who were thus voluntarily throwing away the 
 power to which they were entitled, still was not 
 prepared logo to the length that some appeared 
 to be disposed. For this reason he was opposed 
 to that most miserable of all absurdities the di. 
 vision of counties into single districts. But that 
 having been adopted, we were now asked to make 
 a still further surrender of power, by giving the 
 formation of those districts into the hands of the 
 boards of Supervisors, a majority of which are now 
 Whigs. To be sure the districts were required to 
 be of contiguous territory, but that would have a 
 wide latitude. He was opposed to commuting 
 any sucn power to these boards, and would raine 
 his voice against any such act. If the counties are 
 to be divided into districts, let it be done here. 
 The question being taken, the amendment of 
 Mr. MURPHY was rejected. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS had no objection to the amend- 
 ment of Mr. KENNEDY so far as it related to the 
 city of New York, but he desired to see it amend- 
 ed so as to be confined to that city. His reasons 
 tor it, he thought his friend from Clinton would 
 appreciate It would be remembered that in 1512 
 when the Congressional, districts were formed it 
 became very important to accomplish certain pur- 
 poses, in which that gentleman was interested to 
 some extent, that Clinton should be united in 
 some way to Franklin. That would be contigu. 
 ous territory, but unfortunately Essex intervened, 
 and it became necessary to cut ofl part of th 
 
447 
 
 woo is ol Hamilton so as to join Clinton to War- 
 ren by continuous territory. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: I had nothing to do with 
 that. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS: I was referring to the gentleman 
 from Clinton. 
 
 Mr. STETSON: I will answer the gentleman 
 by and by. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS continued : Under the old Dutch 
 charier, a portion of ihe pine plains between the 
 city of Albany and Schenectady, belong to the 
 former ciiy, so that the two cities were joined to- 
 
 gether. There was not a city in the Stale where 
 the Assembly districts could be formed more natu- 
 rally and more to the satisfaction of the people 
 than in the city of Albany. It contains liitle 
 more than halt the population of the county, and 
 ot course is entitled to two members. Mr. H 
 then went on to show that unles-i power was given 
 to divide the pine plains he had alluded to, the 
 districts could not be conveniently formed 
 
 Mr. STETSON denied that he was personally 
 interested in the toimation of the 15th Congres- 
 sional district, ts imputed oy Mr. H. H<; consider- 
 ed thai district as improperly formed, and he^Mr. 
 S.) stood here three days battling against that 
 formation. He had endeavored to bring a union 
 ot Clinton, Essex and Warren, and he succeed- 
 ed in doing so in committee of the whole, 
 but in the house the district was formed as 
 it is, and against his will. It was a gerry. 
 Dander, and was made to keep Saratoga and 
 Washington from being united. And standing 
 as that district did, it only proved what would 
 be the resul- of the action of the boards of su- 
 pervisors 
 
 | this Convention upon this question. Had such 
 expression been given the other day, he would 
 not now have offered this amendment; but scarce- 
 ly a dozen members had voted upon the question, 
 and several had told him they had not fully un- 
 deistood it. He therefore felt that he should not 
 have discharged his duty to his constituents until 
 he had biought the Convention to a full and in- 
 telligent vote upon the question; and if the 
 Convention, with a full knowledge of all the facts 
 of the case, should deny what he believed justice 
 to his constituents demanded, they must submit to 
 
 urnirig ihe Assembly district* 
 
 the stupendous gerrymandering of the State 
 poliiical purposes. 
 
 for 
 
 Mr. MURPHY suggested that Albany should 
 be made; the exception instead of New York. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY explained that his object in 
 off.-rinji the amendment, was that ihere was doubt 
 as to whether the woid town was to be consid- 
 ered as applying to wards. He wished to have the 
 power of dividing wards if it should be desirable, 
 clearly expressed But if there was no doubt on 
 this point, he would withdraw his motion in or 
 der to give the gentleman full sweep. 
 
 After some further conversation, at the sugges 
 tion of Mr. CROOKER, Mr. HAKRIS withdrew 
 
 it Mr. Y. said the pi esent territory of Wyoming, 
 contained, when the apportionment law was pass- 
 ed, and had done for several years, a population 
 more numerous by several thousand than the pre- 
 sent territory of Genesee. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND called Jhe gentleman from 
 Wyoming to order. This amendment had once 
 been voted down ; and it was improper to waste 
 time in its further discussion. 
 
 The CHAIR decided Mr. YOUNG to be in order. 
 Mr. YOUNG proceeded: The gentleman from 
 Genesee, after having occupied so much of the 
 irne of the session, was becoming very economical 
 of the time of the Convention. The towns which 
 were annexed at the last session of the legislature, 
 lad for years been desirous to be annexed,but were 
 precluded, by what had been deemed a constitu- 
 ional objection that of belonging to a different 
 senatorial district ; and were therefore obliged to 
 wait until a hew census should be taken, and a 
 new arrangement of senatorial districts should be 
 made. Application was accordingly made to the 
 last legislature, the first after the enumeration, 
 for the annexation of these towns. So clear was 
 the justice of their claim, that the bill received 
 no serious objection in the senate, and was sent 
 down to the assembly, at ttye time the apportion- 
 ment bill was before the house. A request was 
 made to postpone for a few days the further con- 
 sideration of the apportionment bill, until action 
 could be had on the annexation bill, as Wyoming 
 would, in case of its passage, be entitled, by her 
 population, to an additional member. The appor- 
 tionment bill was for a very few days kept back ; 
 but as it was near the time when county conven- 
 tions were to be held for nominating candidates for 
 the state convention, and as members from those 
 counties which would be entitled to an additional 
 
 , 
 
 his motion and Mr. C. moved to strike out the 
 words added on motion of Mr. KENNEDY. This 
 was adopted. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered an amendment to 
 the effect that the decision of the boards of super- 
 visors should be, not according to the vote of the 
 said supervisors individually, but by the votes of 
 those representing a majority of the people of said 
 county. This was voted down. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to amend so as to re- 
 quire the supervisors to assemble at their usual 
 place of meeting. This was also voted down. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved that the supervisors meet 
 on the 1st of August instead of the 1st of January, 
 1S47. Rejected. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG moved to amend so that Wy- 
 oming should be divided into two districts and Gen- 
 esee into one. Mr. Y. was reluctant to bring this 
 subject again before the committee j but he desir- 
 ed to obtain a fair and intelligent expression of 
 
 number of representatives under the new appor- 
 tionment were anxious for the speedy passage of 
 the apportionment bill ; for these and other rea- 
 sons which he did think proper to mention, the 
 annexation bill could not be got up and acted on 
 before the other was passed. Thus gross injus- 
 tice had been done to Wyoming. We were then 
 told by gentlemen who aided in that act of injus- 
 tice, as well as by others, .that it would be a pro- 
 per subject for the consideration of the Conven- 
 tion and that the Convention would set the mat- 
 ter right. Justice, Mr. Y. said, could be had 
 only from this Convention, and his constituents 
 had reason to expect it. That these towns had a 
 right to be annexed, every body admitted. They 
 were inconveniently situated, the distance to their 
 county seat being nearly double the distance to 
 that of Wyoming, and directly out of the way of 
 their business. And if it were conceded that 
 their annexation was due to them as a matter of 
 
448 
 
 justice and right, then the concession followec 
 that they brought with them the right of repre 
 sentation. But the committee had been told tha 
 the Convention had no right to interfere withth< 
 apportionment law. So far from this being thi 
 case, he had supposed it to be one of the first du 
 ties of the Convention to equalize representation 
 to remove inequalities where they existed 
 Suppose one half of Allegany had been annexed 
 leaving her a population say of 20,OOGi barely 
 enough to entitle her to one member according 
 to the present ratio of representation, would it be 
 the duty of this Convention to leave that county to 
 be represented by two members, and Wyoming 
 with but one, for ten years to come ? Or suppose 
 any considerable number of counties had been 
 similarly affected, would it be contended that the 
 Convention ought not to interfere with the ap- 
 portionment law ? The rights of his constituents 
 were just as dear to them, and justice was as im- 
 periously demanded, as if half the counties of the 
 state were in a similar situation. It- had been 
 said the other day by the gentleman from Gene- 
 see (Mr. RICHMOND) that any other county might 
 with equal propriety present a claim for an ad- 
 ditional member, on the ground of an.increase of 
 population, since the last census was taken. But 
 such was not the fact the cases w-ere entirely 
 different. Wyoming did not claim any thing on 
 account of the natural increase of population. 
 Her boundary lines had been altered and her terri- 
 tory enlarged, and on that account she had become 
 entitled to additional representation ; this right of 
 representation having been transferred to Wyom- 
 ing with the towns that had been annexed. With 
 these remarks he submitted the matter to the 
 committee, and trusted this Convention would 
 grant what his constituents claimed as justly due 
 them. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER urged that the proposition of the 
 gentleman from Wyoming should commend itself 
 to the house. There was obviously great injustice 
 done to that county, and the only question here 
 was whether this body had power to interfere. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND wished to know if this de- 
 bate was in order, 
 
 The CHAIR decided that it was. 
 Mr. CROOKER went on further to urge this 
 point. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND replied, urging that if this 
 Convention went on to arrange the inequalities 
 between one county hi this matter it should do it 
 in all cases. He referred to several counties as 
 showing quite as great inequalities. The appor- 
 tionment was made before the annexation of the 
 towns from Allegany to Wyoming was consum- 
 
 action of the Legislature, last winter, on the sub- 
 ject. Genesee, at the time the apportionment bill 
 was passed,was entitled to two members,and altho' 
 the bill annexing the towns of Allegany to Wy- 
 oming had precedence on the calendar, still it 
 was kept back until the apportionment bill had 
 
 mated, and besides the county of Genesee he urged 
 was growing and increasing, while Wyoming was 
 falling back. He referred to the Tonawanda re- 
 servation as about to be settled, and which would 
 increase the population of Genesee. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN explained that accord- 
 ing to his understanding, at thettime this ques- 
 tion was up in the Senate last winter, it was con- 
 sidered that this Convention would do justice in 
 the matter. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend so as to 
 require the boards of supervisors of the two 
 counties to settle this matter. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS gave his understanding of the 
 
 Mr. WARD sustained the amendment of Mr. 
 Y., as demanded by justice to Wyoming 
 
 Mr. TAGGART followed at some length, 
 urging that the only true method of remedying 
 these difficulties would have been by single dis- 
 tricts, without regard to county lines. That hav- 
 ing been voted down, it would be unfair to other 
 counties who had presented similar inequalities, 
 for the Convention to interfere in this iustance. 
 Mr. YOUJSG begged the committee to indulge 
 him with a few words more on this question, m 
 ans-,vei to remarks of gentlemen. He wished 
 this Convention to consider what might be the 
 effect of carrying out this doctrine that no chang- 
 es made at any nine in the territory of counties, 
 as in !he case under consideration, should ever be 
 -.[lowed to affect their representation. How 
 could an aggrieved portion of a county in such 
 case ever obtain r lief? When could the difficul. 
 y be remedied ? If a division were prevented by 
 i constitutional prohibition, it must in the first 
 jlace be put oft until the next census, which 
 might be nearly ten years; and then, though ap- 
 >Ucatiou were made to the very first legislature 
 ifter the census, the petitions are a^ain met by 
 he objection that the legislature has no right to 
 ransfer any port ion of one county to another before 
 a new apportionment shall have been made; they 
 nust again be put off anoiher ten years! It it were 
 rue that the Legislature could not afford relief,ihen 
 utely the time to do it was now, by this Conven- 
 ion. If he had undei stood the gentleman Irorn St. 
 Lawrence (Mr. PERKINS,) he believed the gen- 
 leman was not quite correct in stating the pro- 
 gress of the two bills through the legislature. 
 The apportionment bill was before the House first. 
 The report of the standing committee had been 
 delayed several days to gratify one of the mem- 
 bers from Allegany who desired time to get pub- 
 lic sentiment from the territory to be anm-xed. 
 The gentleman from Allegany across the floor, 
 (Mr. CHAMBERLAIN) who had just spoken, and 
 who was a member of the Senate, was understood 
 to say that Senators contemplated the interference 
 of the Convention in the matter. Mr. Y. con- 
 curred with the gentleman in the fact stated by 
 him. It was so said at the time. The gentleman 
 from Genesee had spoken of the glory of " Old 
 Genesee," as a reason why she should retain the 
 member in question. He (Mr. Y.) well knew the 
 effect of such an appeal to members of the legis- 
 lature ; but he hoped no member of this body 
 would be influenced by such considerations. He 
 accorded to Genesee all the glory claimed for 
 ler. But he would remind the gentleman that 
 Wyoming had contributed her share to that 
 glory ; and she ought not now to be required 
 :o surrender any of her rights. P'or one, he 
 ejoiced that he had been a citizen ot "glorious 
 >ld Genesee," and he equally rejoiced in being 
 now a citizen of her sister, or rather, .perhaps, her 
 daughter, Wyoming. The gentleman expected 
 an increase of population to Genesee, from the 
 
449 
 
 spi-eily seriu-meiit of the Tonawanda Reservation. I principle of contiguity of territory was violated. 
 This rnifiht he the case, and it might not. Let Nor would the change- effect the object sought. 
 
 him wait nil the next census, and if ihe increase 
 should be as was expected, they would then take 
 the benefit of it; but this was not a subject for 
 the consideration of the Convention. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND had one word to say in rela- 
 tion to the glory of Genesee. Did not the gentle- 
 man go for having Genesee divided, when more 
 than four-fifths of the present county of Wyoming 
 was opposed to it ? 
 
 Mr YOUNG said with respect to Wyoming 
 having been placed at her own request in her 
 present position, that application had been 
 made to the Legislature for the removal of the 
 county seat to a more central part of the county. 
 So long as there was danger of the removal of (he 
 county buildings, the northern part of Genesee 
 favored the division of the county, but opposed it 
 after the danger was over. 
 
 The question being taken on the amendment, 
 there were ayes 31, nays 24 not a quorum voting. 
 
 Mr. WARD suggested that the amendment 
 should be passed over and the question taken in 
 
 the House. 
 
 Mr. STETSON could settle this question. 
 
 He 
 
 proposed to amend by stating that " the county of 
 Clinton shall hereafter be entitled to two mem- 
 bers, and the county of Genesee to one," &c. 
 
 After some further conversation Mr- SWACKHA- 
 MER'S amendment was voted down, and Mr. STET. 
 sow's withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that there was an 
 important question involved here. It was vvhe. 
 ther the Legislature should have power to change 
 the apportionment at any time, by taking towns 
 from one county and adding them to another- This 
 power, he urged wgjuld tend gieatly to corrupt 
 legislation. 
 
 Mr. A. VV. YOUNG said, that was not the ques- 
 tion here. It was whether this Convention would 
 take it into their hands to equalize representation- 
 
 The question was again taken, and the vote 
 was ayes 24, nays 25 not a quorum voting. 
 
 The CHAIR said that there evidently was a 
 
 quorum 
 be lost 
 
 present, and decided the amendment to 
 
 Mr. W. H. SPENCER moved to strike out the 
 words, " and the population thereof," in the 14th 
 line. It would be impossible in the case of Liv- 
 ingston and Allegany, for all the boards of 
 supervisors to make the returns required by this 
 section, without taking a new enumeration, as 
 several towns had been taken from one county 
 and added to the other. 
 
 After some conversation, this was voted down. 
 
 Mr. SPENCER then moved to add the words, 
 " as near as can be ascertained." 
 
 This, after some conversation, was agreed to. 
 " ^LANDERS desiied to suggest an amend- 
 
 Mr 
 
 merit in relation to the meeting of the Board of 
 Supervisors. 
 
 Mr WARD objected to its reception as having 
 been v u ud down two or three times already. 
 
 On motion of Mr. WARD the committee resu- 
 med the consideration ot the fifth section. 
 
 The question being upon adding the county of 
 Richmond to Queens and Suffolk 
 
 Mr. HARRISON at some length opposed the 
 amendment as doing injustice to Richmond. The 
 
 31 
 
 It would only transfer to the first district the large 
 excess now existing in the Second. Suffolk and 
 Queens contained as mnch population as Rensse- 
 laer county, which it was proposed to make a dis- 
 trict. Indeed, he preferred rather to have the 
 county annexed to New York. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY declined the proposition to 
 connect Richmond with New- York. The argu- 
 ments the gentleman had used against being an- 
 nexed to Queens and Suffolk applied with equal 
 force to the proposition to connect her with New 
 York. 
 
 Mr SHEPARD suggested that Richmond 
 should be added to Westchester. 
 
 M.r. HARRISON expressed his mortification at 
 witnessing the manner in which Richmond coun- 
 tv was discarded. Kings county declined the hon- 
 or, and now his friend from New York followed 
 suit. He did not know but what Richmond would 
 be compelled to make a declaration of Indepen- 
 dence! (Laughter.) Now he was content to let 
 the report of the committee stand and join Rich- 
 mond to Kings. They had always been associated 
 with that county and desired not to be dissev- 
 ered. They might as well put Richmond on to 
 Albany as to Suffolk, for it was easier to get to 
 Albany than to some parts of Suffolk. 
 
 Mr CAMBRELENG considered Richmond 
 as naturally belonging to the 1st ward of New- 
 York. There was one difficulty in attaching 
 it to Kings that had not been suggested. It 
 was now seriously proposed in Brooklyn and 
 thereabouts -although in Suffolk we were well 
 content to remain where we are to erect Long 
 Island into an independent State, and then where 
 would Richmond jjo? (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. MURPHY wished to call attention to one 
 or two facts connected with this matter. He had 
 supposed that this question on the adoption of the 
 motion of the chairman of the committee to an- 
 nex Richmond to Queens and Suffolk had been 
 settled. Mr. M. alluded to the fact that the pre- 
 sent population of Kings was 78,000, and that if it 
 continued in the same ratio (GO per cent.) as it 
 had the last five years, it would have a popula- 
 tion of 222,000. And yet she was to be tied 
 down to only one Senator. And notwithstand- 
 ing this, the gentleman from Richmond insist- 
 ed on bringing his county into that family, 
 and sitting down at their table. Let them 
 go where there would be more room. Mr. 
 M. further contended that there was as much 
 contiguity of territory between Queens and Rich- 
 mond, as between Richmond and Kings, in the 
 legal sense of the word. Justice, therefore, as no 
 principle of contiguity would be violated, he in- 
 sisted,, should be done to the growing county of 
 Kings. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES understood that his friend from 
 Richmond had no objection to being united to 
 Westchester. Mr. R. suggested that by some ar- 
 rangement of this kind there could be much of 
 the objection against the present apportionment 
 of the committee removed. Westchester, Rich- 
 mond andRockland could make one district with 
 a deficency of only 7,000. Then Putnam and 
 Dutchess with a deficiency of only 10,000 while 
 it appears that Dutchess and Columbia as appor- 
 
450 
 
 tioned by the committee would have an excess of 
 16,000. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that his friend from Richmond 
 need give himself no concern about being received 
 with open arms, but as it was rather late, and as 
 he understood that the gentleman from Otsego 
 was to make a motion that would refer this whole 
 matter ; he would move that the committee rise 
 and report progress. 
 
 This was agreed to, and the Convention ad- 
 journed. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 APPORTIONMENT, &c. OF THE LEGISLATURE. 
 The Convention again went into Committee ot 
 the Whole on the report of Committee No. 1. 
 
 The proposition of Mr. MURPHY to add Rich- 
 mond county to Queens and Suffolk was put and 
 lost. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved to adJ Richmond to 
 the 7th District, viz: Westchester, Putnam and 
 Ror kland counties. Lost. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES asked for a reconsideration, to 
 allow him to offer a table that he had made, by 
 which the apportionment would be much more 
 equal. He would thus place them : 
 
 7 Richmond, 12.413 
 
 Westchester, 43 -231 
 
 Rockland, 1-2,269 
 
 8 Putnam, 
 Dutchess, 
 
 10 Ulster, 
 Delaware, 
 
 11 Columbia, 
 Greeue, 
 
 12 Chenango, 
 Brooine, 
 
 Cortland, 
 
 Tioga, 
 
 Chemung, 
 
 Tompkins, 
 Seaeca, 
 
 67,913 
 12,84-2 
 51,276 
 
 64,118 
 45.6-29 
 36,116 
 
 81,745 
 39.786 
 30,271 
 
 70,067 
 39,4-29 
 25,-J66 
 
 64,t>95 
 24,861 
 22,039 
 23, -282 
 
 70,182 
 37.512 
 
 24,-243 
 
 61,755 
 
 There might be necessary thus to make one 
 more senate district. He would make another 
 calculation. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said this would throw the 
 deficiencies on to the southern tier of counties, 
 which were not increasing in population, and it 
 would throw the excess into the western coun- 
 ties, that were constantly increasing. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to reconsider the vote by 
 which Richmond was not put on to Queens and 
 Suffolk. 
 
 The CHAIR said this could only be done by 
 unanimous consent. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON objected. 
 
 Mr MURPHY said it had been carried the 
 other 'day, but was reconsidered merely to oblige 
 the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr HARRISON.) 
 He expected the same courtesy now. He would 
 
 move to amend by striking out Richmond as part 
 of the second district. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON said that he regretted very 
 much that the gentleman from Kings has again 
 thought fit to move in this matter. "The subject 
 has been lully discussed, and nothing furiher can 
 be said, he thought, in defence of ei;her its jus- 
 tice or propriety. It is unnecessary to pass over 
 the ground again which we traversed yesterday. 
 But he would endeavor to show its true aspect in a 
 different view ol the subject. Now, he would ask 
 what is the first point in the enquiry ? It was, he 
 thought, whether the committee adopted any par- 
 ticular rule to govern them in the apportionment 
 they were about, to make, and it they did, whether 
 that rule was applied in this case, or not ? That 
 a rule was adopted and applied by the committee, 
 was evident from the further provisions of the 6th 
 section, and that it was intended that it should not 
 only govern the action ol the committee in this 
 ca&e, but that the same principle should be the 
 controlling one in all further apportionments un- 
 der the Constitution, and in the adjustments of 
 the Assembly distikts also. Now, he would ask, 
 is this rule to be violated only in the case ol Rich- 
 mond county; or rather he would ask whether 
 there was any thing so peculiar in this case, as to 
 render its violation either just or necessary? That 
 it would be unjust is so obvious, that no argument 
 s required to demonstrate it, and ihat it is equal- 
 ly inexpedient and unnecessary is as clearly proved 
 by the fact that no benefit can be derived "from it, 
 for by no ingenuity in the way of figures can the 
 deficiencies in the representation be removed ; for 
 transfer Richmond as you may, either to one dis- 
 rict or the other, and the deficiencies remain the 
 same. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN said that justice to his constitu- 
 ents compelled him to trespass a few minutes 
 upon the Convention in answering the arguments 
 advanced by the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. 
 HARRISON). In doing so, it would become ne- 
 cessary to recapitulate some of the statements 
 made on a previous occasion. In the first place, 
 in the formation of Senate districts, contiguity is 
 admitted, it" possible to be a necessary requisite. 
 He would inquire why this contiguity is required? 
 Is it not that the territories which are the most 
 closely united, whose population intermingle the 
 most with each other, and who are known to each 
 other, may have an opportunity of selecting re- 
 presentatives, wilh whose characters and capaci- 
 ties if possible all the electors in the district are 
 acquainted representatives who most probably 
 would know all the wants and desires of their 
 constituents? This he supposed to be the main 
 object of contiguity of terriiory. [Here he was in- 
 terrupted by the gentleman from Richmond, (Mr. 
 HARRISON,) who wished to explain.] MI-.BERGEN 
 stated that the gentleman reiuseu lo grant that 
 courtesy to Kings which she had granted to him. 
 when the question was before under consideration; 
 he therefoie having the floor, chose not to be in- 
 terrupted, and would pioceed with his remarks, 
 the gentleman having the privilege of explaining 
 afterwards. This great and desirable object, 
 continued Mr. B., would not be accomplished by 
 uniting Richmond with Kings. There are no 
 ferries and scarcely any intercourse between the 
 two places, consequently the inhabitants know 
 
451 
 
 lntle oi each other. The mass of those in Kints 
 have never had their feet on the soil ot Rich- 
 mond It is well known they are separated by an 
 arm of the sea, a harrier which might be compar- 
 ed to (he Alps, Andes, or such ranges of moun- 
 tains as visually separate nations from each other. 
 Nature has interposed this barrier between her 
 and the rest of the State, and art, as far as Kings 
 is directly concerned, has not overcome it. 
 She has, however an artificial connection with a 
 portion of the State ; she is united by a bond 
 which time is continually strengthening, and 
 which will continue to strengthen. He referred 
 to the numerous steam ferry boats which were con- 
 tinually plying between various points from that 
 Island to the city of New-York. By these means 
 the inhabitants of Richmond were continually 
 mixing with those'of the great metropolis. Many, 
 of her permanent residents carried on mercantile 
 business there, and hundreds of the citizens of the 
 city have their country residences, their villas 
 and palaces erected on the commanding heights 
 of Richmond, in which they spend a portion of 
 the year. He doubted whether there was an 
 
 adult person residing in Richmond, who had not j cing as an incubus on her shoulders another coun- 
 visited^ the city. On the other hand, the road ty. % Instead of its being a gross violation of right 
 from Kings to Richmond went through New- j as asserted by the gentleman from Richmond (Mr. 
 York. Under these well known circumstances, j HARRISON) to separate Richmond from her, it 
 it must be evident to every member of the com- (would be a gross violation of justice to connect 
 mittee, that the great and main objects of contigu- them. The committee to which this matter was 
 ity would be sacrificed by connecting Richmond intrusted must have so viewed it, or else they 
 with Kings. No good could result from it ; the | would not have recommended the alteration. 
 
 Under these circumstances he appealed to every 
 member of the Convention for justice: he asked 
 no more. Let every one make the case his own, 
 and he would have no difficulty in determining 
 the proper course to pursue. With these obser- 
 
 Richmond to them, they would not be placed in as. 
 bad a position as some other portions of the State, 
 for they would only have have an excess of 5,256. 
 Add here to the seventh district consisting of the 
 counties of Westchester, Putnam and Rockland, 
 striking the latter from the same as proposed by 
 the gentleman from Dutchess (Mr. RUGGLES,) 
 and the population of the district will be 68,486. 
 Allow Rockland to remain in the district and it 
 will only be 80,755, showing an excess' of but 
 5,770 in a district which is nearly stationary. 
 Kings with a population increasing with more 
 than double the rapidity of any other county in 
 this State, a representative population at the pre- 
 sent moment above the ratio required, a county 
 judging from the past, which will probably at the 
 next State census have a representative popula- 
 tion of near 140,000, and an average representa- 
 tive population during the term of over 100,000, 
 is entitled, if even a shadow of equity is taken in- 
 to consideration (especially when it can so easily 
 be done without injury to other portions of the 
 State,) to be placed among those who have the 
 largest deficiencies. There is no justice in pla- 
 
 people of Kings did not desire her proffered embra- 
 ces. The legislature at their last session, when di- 
 viding the State understood this ; they were aware 
 that this imaginary contiguity of the gentleman 
 from Richmond, [Mr. HARRISON] had no existence, 
 
 for instead of linkigg the two counties together, vations he submitted the matter, trusting to the 
 they severed them and added Richmond to the 
 city of New- York. If this contiguity had existed 
 as pretended, they in their wisdom never would 
 
 The same principles opera- 
 operate now. If this just 
 
 have done this, 
 ted then which 
 
 amendment prevailed and it should be deem- 
 ed expedient not to connect this isolated is- 
 land with New York, which for one he would not 
 insist upon/then he held that there would be as 
 much propriety in connecting her with Queens 
 and Suffolk, or with Westchester as with Kings. 
 In either of those cases the common route of tra- 
 vel would be through the city, and in either of 
 them the distance by water would be trifling and 
 not great. Having noticed this point he would 
 now turn his attention to the second object which 
 if possible ought to be attained, and that is equal- 
 ity as near as possible in the districts not only at 
 
 good sense of the committee. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that this subject required 
 much more examination than could be given to it 
 by himself or any member here in committee of 
 the whole He would therefore move that the 
 committee rise and report ; and if this was done, 
 he would then move to send this subject to a 'se- 
 lect committee of three, to ascertain and decide 
 after a thorough examination of it, whether or not, 
 a better and more equal division could be made. 
 
 iVJr LQOMIS sid that most assuredly before 
 such a reference was made of any districts, the 
 comn.irtee ought to settle definitely the question 
 of 32 Senators, and vote on the motion to reconsi- 
 der That ought, to le set at rest without delay. 
 
 The commit lee then rose. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON reported to the President, 
 and asked leave for the committee to sit again. 
 
 the time of their formation but during the whole j Mr. HARRIS was opposed to the granting leave. 
 
 term of their existence. Kings alone had a rep 
 resentative population at the time of taking the 
 last census of 61,611, Suffolk and Queens coun- 
 ties a nearly stationary population of 58,657. 
 Richmond added to those counties would leave 
 only 3,91, a less deficiency in the first district 
 than that which would exist if she was added to 
 Kings. This he viewed as the most appropriate 
 connection for her, as tending to equality more 
 than any other. The 2d district, consisting of the 
 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, 5th and 6th Wards of New York, 
 have, as the different enumerations will show, a 
 nearly stationary population of 67,828. By adding 
 
 The apportionment made bv the commiltee he 
 had carefully examined ; and he was quite unbi- 
 assed, and had endeavored to come to a just opi- 
 nion in regard to its divisions, &c ; and lie felt 
 satisfied ii was as equal and as equitable a division 
 as could he made by any body of men. They 
 ought theietore to receive the report as it stood 
 and he with this view moved to discharge the 
 committee of the whole from the further conside- 
 ration of it. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL jr. said that although he was 
 a member of that committee, No. 1, he did not 
 desire to sec the report adopted without every en- 
 
452 
 
 deavor being made to make it as nearly perfect as 
 possible. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER was in favor of discussing the 
 report in committee of the whole, where they 
 
 could apply the previous question. 
 
 r. WARD was decidedly of opinion that eve- 
 
 Mr. 
 
 ry gentleman fully understood the whole subject, 
 It had been amply discussed, and he should vote 
 to discharge the committee from further conside- 
 ration of it. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD hoped the Convention would 
 pause before the motion of the gentleman from Al- 
 bany (Mr. HARRIS) was adopted. He was con- 
 fident the occasion was critical, and he desired 
 to be heard for a moment. Would gentlemen dis- 
 charge the committee of the whole from the fur- 
 ther consideration of the subject? If so, when 
 should it be considered ? In the house under 
 the spur of the " previous question" and with an 
 anxious desire to pass hastily by, the dry and un- 
 interesting details incident to the division of Sen- 
 ate districts ? He hoped not. No fit place re- 
 mained to settle and adjust the conflicting inter- 
 ests of various sections of the State, in the for- 
 mation of such districts, but the committee of the 
 whole. He, (Mr. S.) had wished that a select 
 committee would be appointed for this purpose, 
 or that the report would be referred again to the 
 judgment of the committee that reported it. The 
 great importance of the subject our duty to 
 every portion of the people, to make their rep- 
 resentation equal and satisfactory, demand that 
 our most mature reflection should be given to it, 
 and that all the means of analyzing it by commit- 
 tees or otherwise, that a body of that sort could 
 furnish, should be freely and fairly employed. 
 But he was satisfied that the sense of the 
 Convention was against the reference to the 
 standing or to a select committee, and he 
 would not now press upon their attention reasons 
 that did not meet their approbation. He would 
 appeal to another consideration of great weight 
 and influence upon his mind. We were not as- 
 sembled so much to discuss the political divisions 
 of the State, as the great fundamental principles 
 of a written, republican Constitution ; to impose 
 limits upon the legislative power; to arrange the 
 machinery of government so that it will work 
 beneficially, with ease and safety. We esteem it 
 of great importance, and we sincerely hope that 
 the Constitution we are framing will meet the 
 public approbation, and answer the public wants. 
 Would it be well to peril all the wise provisions 
 of their matured judgment by the dissatisfaction 
 that must inevitably grow out of an erroneous 
 adjustment of the Senate districts ? Clearly not. 
 Yet gentlemen were taking the surest course to 
 do it. He would not presume to say that other 
 parts of the State might be dissatisfied ; he would 
 be content to speak for his own constituents, and 
 on their behalf he asserted that the division re- 
 ported by the committee would not please the 
 electors of the city of New-York. There would 
 be deep and abiding dissatisfaction there ; and 
 here he would take occasion to say that no part 
 of the Constitution would awaken a hostility so 
 active and persevering as the 5th section of the 
 article reported. Yet gentlemen desired to set- 
 tle this most difficult of all the questions before 
 us in the House, when a hasty determination 
 
 would be final, unless the result of restlessness, of 
 impatience or engaging pursuits, could be reach- 
 ed by the uncertain and dilatory process of recon- 
 sideration a process, in this instance, that all of 
 us would approach with aversion, and most of u 
 would resist with disgust. An inconsiderate di- 
 vision of territory would appeal more strongly 
 than any other part of the Constitution to the 
 judgment and to the prejudices of the electors ; it 
 would be a great and ever present evil amongst 
 them ; and the fact that we did it hastily and 
 without calmness and attention would not tend to 
 allay the dissatisfaction we had raised. He hoped 
 they would still retain the subject within t,heir 
 own hands, with a tenacity proportioned to the 
 importance of the subject ; for if they suffered it 
 to escape, he was persuaded that the evils would 
 not only be heavy, but inevitable. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES differed with the gentleman 
 from Albany, (Mr. HARRIS.) He believed that 
 several changes would be made in this report and 
 in the apportionment, which would be more equi- 
 table to a large portion of the State than the con- 
 templated arrangement of the committe No, 1, 
 And for that reason it was (and not from any de- 
 sire to delay) that he strongly desired to see this 
 question of apportionment sent to a select com- 
 mittee. They could settle the districts satisfacto- 
 rily, in an hour or two, and he would therefore 
 make such a motion. 
 
 Mr. WARD hoped that if the motion to dis 
 charge the committee should fail, that the gen- 
 tleman from Dutchess (Mr. RUGGLES) would still 
 make the motion ; and he, for one, would vote for 
 it. For if they should allow the report to go 
 back into committee of the whole, there was 
 great danger that several days more would be con- 
 sumed in debating and ende^oring to re-arrange 
 this subject of the apportionment of the districts. 
 Now it was pretty generally understood that 
 although there was a motion to reconsider, yet 
 that there was to be no change of the number of 
 senators already voted for, viz : 32. He also had 
 supposed that there was to be no change with re- 
 gard to the single senate and assembly districts, 
 or any of those points which had been decided 
 here by a large vote in favor. For his own part, 
 he should not change his vote on any of these 
 subjects, and he believed that to be the general 
 feeling, and he moved to discharge the committee 
 at least he hoped that motion would prevail. 
 
 Mr. CHAi'i<'iELD contended that the gentle- 
 man from Westcbester (Mr. WARD) WHS in error. 
 This question of the apportionment of the several 
 counties into Senate Districts has not been fully 
 discussed; nay more, with the exception of the 
 taking ot Richmond out of iJs position, there had 
 been no discussion at all- And yet v\e were to be 
 stultified with the asssertion that this had been 
 fully discussed. Nor did he believe that there 
 would be en.tire satisfaction telt by the people 
 unless this question should receive full conside- 
 ration, with a view to do ample justice to all 
 He did not wish to leave in the Constitution any 
 latent clauses which should induce the people to 
 reject it when submitted to them. And they 
 certainly would do so if it did injustice to any part 
 of the State. Otsego Co. he knew, would not en- 
 dorse an injustice. The gentleman from West- 
 chester could decide only fur himself in this ques- 
 
453 
 
 tion of single districts. For his own part he (Mr 
 C.) was not satisfied that the number of Senators 
 would not be increased If mitrht was to prevail 
 over right, and this report was put through, 
 against the will and against the stomach of this 
 House, he feared that dissatisfaction would defeat 
 the adoption of the instrument which we should 
 submit to the people. He would give the subject 
 a full and deliberate discussion, and then allow it 
 to lie upon the table for a while as was done in 
 the Convention of 1821, that, after deliberation, 
 it might be recurred to again, and disposed ol 
 under the cool consideration ot this body. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR considered that it would be 
 unwise now to discharge the committee of the 
 whole ; he hoped leave to sit again would be 
 granted. If it was thought most desirable to send 
 this section to a select committee it could be done, 
 and then the subject could be again taken up in 
 committee of the whole. But though a select 
 committee might revise the apportionment, yet 
 for his own part, he never wanted in his life to 
 serve on such a committee again. He had had 
 enough of it. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES insisted that this subject of ap- 
 portioning senators had been discussed. Motion 
 after motion was made to have 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 
 42, 46, 48 and even 50 senators, and each man 
 had a plan of his own, and these were all discuss- 
 ed for days. And when they were before the 
 committee it must be remembered that the worthy 
 chairman (Mr. W. TAYLOR) had declared that 
 each one of them was more unequal than the one 
 that his committee had carefully prepared. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that although plans had 
 been presented and various members had spoken, 
 yet that the details of this subject of the appor- 
 tionment and Senate districts had not been fully 
 discussed. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES again contended that for days 
 the whole merits of the question had been fully 
 debated and investigated. And he supposed that 
 the number of senators had been definitely settled 
 and also the main features of the apportionment, 
 as the chairman ot the committee (Mr. TAYLOR) 
 had said in relation to all these propositions, and 
 he had not been contradicted, that they presented 
 as many excesses and deficiencies as the report of 
 the committee. The gentleman from New York 
 (Mr. SHEPARD) had endeavored to alarm us with 
 the predictions that the people would not sanc- 
 tion this apportionment of Senators and Assem- 
 blymen. Mr. R. could tell him whatever might 
 be the sentiment in New York, that in the coun- 
 try the people were almost unanimous in the sup- 
 port of single Senate and Assembly districts, and 
 they would be satisfied with this apportionment. 
 He had no doubt but what the vote in his region 
 of the State would be nearly unanimous. As to 
 these appeals to party which had been made, Mr. 
 R. thought they would be like the seed sown by 
 the way side. The fowls of the air would pick 
 them up, but our constituents would pay no sort 
 of attention to them. 
 
 Mr. STETSOiN corrected the gentleman in say- 
 ing that no plan of division had bueu ottered that 
 was more equal than the report of the committee 
 There were gross inequalities to be corrected. 
 This section, with the exception of the subdivi- 
 sion relating to Richmond and Kings, had not 
 
 been discussed at all in committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said it was obvious that it any 
 vo^e fixing the number of Scnatois was to be rt- 
 consulered, it would he labor lost to go on farther 
 with this report uniil that question was disposed 
 of. To allow these motions to be made, he would 
 withdraw his motion and move to lay the report 
 on the table. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to go into committee 
 of the whole on the report of the committee No. 
 1 1. Agreed to. 
 
 RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF THE CITIZENS. 
 
 The committee of the whole, Mr. MARVIN in 
 the Chair, then took up th>; report in relation to 
 the rights and privileges of the State. 
 
 The 1st section was read as follows: 
 
 (5 1. Men are by nature free and independent, and in 
 their social relations entitled to equal rights. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to insert the words "and 
 political," after the word "social " 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY hoped this would not be 
 adopted. He understood it as opening the ques- 
 tion of color. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM did not wish to pass upon a sec- 
 tion that meant nothing. In a Constitution he 
 was not willing tp say merely that man was enti- 
 tled to social rights. Here was the place for us 
 to say whether man was entitled to his political 
 rights If gentlemen were prepared to say this 
 was not so, here was the proper time to do it. 
 as to color, it was not in his mind, fle had no 
 intention to disturb the sensibilities of the gen- 
 tleman from New York. Mr. B. considered that 
 his own rights were equal to those of the gentle- 
 man, and he wanted them secured in this Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY considered that the Conven- 
 tion by its vote excluding aliens from the basis of 
 representation, had decided that all men were not 
 entitled to equal political rights. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH moved to amend the amend- 
 ment by striking out the word " social " and insert 
 ''political." It was not true to say that every 
 man was entitled to equal social rights. 
 
 The CHAIR ruled this motion not now in or- 
 der. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL was opposed to the insertion of 
 either of these first two sections in the Constitu- 
 tion. They were mere abstractions, and we had 
 enough business to transact without discussing 
 mere abstractions. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR believed a majority of the 
 onvention would agree with the gentleman last 
 up, that we had too much important business 
 on hand to waste time in the discussion of mere 
 abstractions. The mode of ploughing one hour, 
 hoeing one hour, then building a piece of fence 
 and then diving into the meadow, as he had seen 
 some farmers do would never accomplish any 
 thing. He wanted to dispose of the question of 
 :he apportionment first, before taking up an en- 
 :irely new subject. To test the sense of the House 
 tie would move to rise and report progress. 
 Agreed to, 55 to 34. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (48fA day,} July 29. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. KIPP. 
 Mr. KENNEDY said that he found himself re- 
 
454 
 
 ported improperly by the papers in Albany, in a 
 remark he made the other day, to a statement of 
 fact made by one of his colleagues. (Mr. MORRIS.) 
 His colleague had said, in substan'-e, that the 
 city of New- York had sent us all here instructed. 
 He denied it. That his colleague then alluded 
 to a circular that was addressed to the candidates, 
 calling on them to avow themselves in favor of 
 single districts. To this remark he was made to 
 say that " no answer was demanded." His re- 
 ply was that " it was not necessary to answer 
 it in the affirmative he had not done so." 
 
 Mr. TILDEN presented certain lesolutions of 
 the Convention of the city of Ni-w York against 
 any interference by the Legislature with the char- 
 teied privileges, rights and immunities of said 
 city. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN presented the memorial of the 
 Counsel of the Seneca Nation ot the Indians upon 
 the Allegany and Cattaraugus Reset vations. Or- 
 dered printed. 
 
 On motion the Convention proceeded to the 
 consideration of the several motions to reconsider 
 the votes proposing to increase the number of Se 
 nators. 
 
 Mr. W. TA YLOR earnestly wished the Conven- 
 tion to take the question on the pending motions 
 to reconsider the the several votes. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that after due reflection he 
 was satisfied that nothing could be done to better 
 the district, No. 8, arid after consulting with the 
 Chairman, he had concluded to withdraw his 
 proposition. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND wished all the amendments 
 to be printed and sent out to the people for their 
 consideration and suggestion before ultimately 
 disposing of the report. In the mean time they 
 could take up all the various motions to reconsider. 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that this was unnecessa- 
 rily precipitating the question ; and he wished 
 some delay in order to hear farther from his con- 
 stituents, and to obtain their views in relation to 
 this whole subject. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND then withdrew the motion 
 to vote on the motion to reconsider. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG thought that the gentle- 
 man from N. Y. (Mr. SHEPARD) was in error. 
 He thought that this Convention had precipitated 
 nothing this session. He hoped that the vote 
 would now be taken on the various motions to 
 reconsider. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : The question is on the 
 printing. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG : The gentleman from 
 Onondaga (Mr. TAYLOR) has not withdrawn his 
 motion. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : The motion to take the 
 vote on the several questions to reconsider is 
 withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG: the gentleman from 
 Ononda;a has not withdrawn his motion. 
 
 The PRESIDENT: The Chair did not under 
 stand that ihe gentleman from Onondaga made 
 any motion. 
 
 Mr TOWNSEND said he would withdraw his 
 motion to print, it they were desirous to vote or 
 motion to reconsider. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY: I make that motion. 
 Mr. STRONG: And I make it too, 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR: And I make it. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD: I hope gentlemen will be 
 jatient. This matter is too important to press so 
 lastily. A lew days delay will not surely pro- 
 note any more discussion than prudent action re- 
 quires, and it will give us an opportunity to catch 
 he sentiment of the people. I have seen but two 
 lewspapers which have spoken of the subject now 
 >ressed upon us and ihey were decidedly opposed 
 o the judgment of the Convention. I hope we 
 ihall pass on to some other order of business. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that we had spent a week 
 >r more in this matter ; and these various ques- 
 ions involved in the several motions to re-consid 
 ;r were each fully discussed by twenty or thirty 
 gentlemen on each side. The whole subject had 
 )een exhausted and the Convention can as well 
 come to a conclusion now, as at any other time ; 
 and he hoped the committee would take up the 
 matter at once, and dispose of each of these mo- 
 ions by an overwhelming majority against them. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR did not wish unnecessarily 
 to press this matter, but still he wished to throw 
 aff ; all the responsibility of any further delay in 
 ;his matter; but he hoped the Convention would 
 fix some day to dispose of this; say this day week, 
 or some other early day. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD hoped a delay of one week 
 would be agreed to in this matter. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR : Make it Monday. 
 
 Messrs. STETSON and STRONG: Oh, no ! 
 not Monday ; so many of you will be down in 
 New-York on that day. 
 
 This motion Was lost ayes 28, noes not count- 
 ed. 
 
 Mr. WARD then moved that the motions to 
 reconsider be acted upon in the order in which 
 they were made. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD wanted to know by what 
 kind of hocus pocus they had got into this busi- 
 ness. It was out of order. 
 
 The PRESIDENT thought not. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD differed from the Chair.- 
 He wanted a full house and a fair reflection of 
 public sentiment. The house was now proba- 
 bly as full as it ever would be or as they 
 would expect it to be this session. If so he had 
 no objection to take the vote to day. He ob- 
 served that the district of every member of 
 the committee was well taken care of. He meant 
 no reflection, but he wanted every member in the 
 house to have the same chance. 
 
 Mr. WARD was opposed to any farther post- 
 ponement. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR did not object to postpone to 
 Friday if this course would prevent all dissatis- 
 faction. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN hoped the subject would be post- 
 poned for a few days so that other gentlemen 
 who were busy on other subjects might have time 
 to examine this. He was surprised when so 
 many gentlemen wanted delay that an attempt 
 should be made to resist this. It was not neces- 
 sary always to finish one thing when they begin it 
 before they touched another. Many gentlemen 
 who have committee business have not had time 
 to attend this. He wished Tuesday to be the day 
 but he would take Friday, rather than to-day. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that committee No. 1 had 
 spent a great deal of time in examining this sub- 
 ject, and all the various combinations of numbers 
 
455 
 
 
 upon it, that were proposed here in connection | 
 with single districts ; and they had found that no 
 plan was so good as the one they had proposed. 
 
 Mr. VV. I AYLUK s,id they had found" that none 
 came out so well with regard to the excesses and 
 deficils as the plan of Com milfe No. 1. All 
 other plans have utterly tailed with respect to 
 single districts. They may have them more equal 
 with double districts, than the present plan. 
 Mr. STETSON: Ah, that's the point. 
 Mr. TiLDEN: In districting the city ot N. Y., 
 an error has been committed; it is to throw all 
 the increasing parts of the city into one district; 
 and before a new apportionment is made, the pop- 
 ulation in some of them will be 15U.OOO persons, 
 at least. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said he would hereafter 
 call all who delayed the business of the Conven- 
 tion, to order, without ceremony. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS hoped they would not postpone 
 this. True Mr. TILDEN had been much engaged 
 but fifteen other N. Y. city members have been 
 here; they heard the debate; one of them was 
 on committee No. 1, and assented to this distri- 
 bution of Senators tor i\. Y. city. If they post- 
 poned it there would be so many new plans start 
 up hy Friday, that they would discuss it for at 
 least a week longer. 
 
 Mr. HUNT: we cannot proceed to district 
 the city of New York now for the City Conven- 
 tion mean to alter tne ward boundaries of that 
 city. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that if they moved to postpone 
 it to Tuesday, he would vote for it j if only to 
 Friday, he would vote against it. 
 
 Mr. CH ATI'' I ELD was willing to do so he 
 was not tenacious about it. He asked this in re- 
 lation to this important question, as a matter of 
 courtesy from the House, which he should be 
 willing to concede to others. 
 
 The motip'i lo postpone to Friday was lost- 
 ayes 40. noes 54. 
 
 Mr. CHATF1ELD said that now he supposed 
 that each motion to reconsider is a specific motior 
 and stood independently, and the question would 
 therefore be on reconsidering the vote on filling 
 the blank with 4S Senators. 
 
 Mr. WARD said the first motion would be on 
 reconsidering the number thai had been fixed upoi 
 by the House ; that must be reconsidered before 
 anything else could be done. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON: That is correct. 
 Mr. CHATF1ELD denied this; and moved t< 
 reconsider the voie on 48. 
 
 Mr. PRESIDENT said none were privileged 
 but each must be taken inJhe order in which it i 
 made. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD (hen agreed to take the vot 
 on reconsidering the number of 32 Senators- 
 
 So the question was announced " Shall th 
 Convention reconsider its vote fixing the numbe 
 of Senators at 3<J" ': 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR should take the liberty to b 
 heard at considerable length on this proposition 
 and he proceeded to speak in fa?or of the recon 
 sideration and of a change in the number ol Se 
 Haters. He came here untramrneled by pledge 
 He had been in favor of single Assembly Districts 
 and was villins; his own county should be cu 
 and carved up at pleasure. But as the countr 
 
 members winced under this operation, he would 
 ield this principle and introduce a plan some- 
 ling like this. He would divide every county 
 .iving more (han^owr members, but none with a 
 ss number. This would divide New York into 
 
 Assembly Districts, and this would be favorable 
 o the minority. For thai county was now divi. 
 ed into four Congressional Districts, and it so 
 appened that though there was a Democratic ma- 
 >rity of 2000 in the city, we were now represent- 
 d in Congress by 3 Native Americans and 1 De- 
 mocrat. 
 
 Mr VVORDEN (in his seat.) Al! about the 
 ame thing ! ^ 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR then proceeded at some length 
 give his views on the organization &c. of the 
 wo Houses of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then proceeded to complain 
 n very harsh terms, of one of the letter writers 
 ipon the floor, whom he denominated a Report- 
 r. He said that unless the evil, as he termed 
 t, was corrected, it would be better not to have 
 ny reporters there at all. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that the gentleman from 
 Otsego (Mr. Chatfield) had alluded to what he 
 Mr. R.) had said on former occasions, reproba- 
 ing the introduction of party politics into the 
 Convention. He had intimated that the acquies- 
 ;ence of those who are denominated Whigs in this 
 Convention in favor of fixing the number of the 
 Senators at thirty-two, and dividing the State into 
 \ingle Senate districts, was with a view of deriv- 
 ng political advantage to the whig party. Now 
 le, Mr. R., could not imagine how the whig party 
 r any other party, were to be benefitted by fix- 
 ng the number of Senators at 32, and of dividing- 
 he States into single Senate districts. He could 
 not tell why that number was more favorable to 
 he whig party than that of any other for his 
 own part he would say that views of a party char- 
 acter had not entered into his mind in relation to 
 this subject, and he thought he might venture to 
 assert that no whig on this floor had acted with 
 that view or intent. He had no knowledge of any 
 consultation or concert of action which had re- 
 'erence to'any such subject, either on this or any 
 other subject, connected with the amendment of 
 the Constitution. He would say thus much of him 
 self. The gentleman from Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) 
 and the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMOXS,) 
 to whom the gentleman from Otsego had alluded 
 could speak for themselves in regard to this matter. 
 His friend from Otsego was now in favor of in- 
 creasing the senate fifty per cent., making the 
 number 48 instead of 32 ; to send for two years, 
 and of creating double districts, electing one-half 
 of the senate in one year and the other the next, 
 with a view of securing permanency and experi- 
 ence in that body in order to resist the influence 
 of hasty legislation and the influence of popular 
 excitement both among the people and in the 
 house of assembly. It was but two or three days 
 since that, in debate on this question he instituted 
 a comparison (in which he believed his friend 
 from Essex and his friend from Ontario, Mr. 
 WORDEN, united and concurred) between the two 
 branches of the legislature, the senate and assem- 
 bly, unfavorable to the morality and integrity of 
 the former body, and questioning the purity of 
 their legislative action in times past. Now he 
 
456 
 
 wishes to make the senate the more permanent 
 body, in order to resist the hasty and unsound le- 
 gislation which maybe brought about through the 
 action of the people and the assembly. (Mr. 
 CHATFIKLD here said it was evident that the gen- 
 tleman from Onondaga did not understand the 
 remarks of himself.) Mr. R. replied that he did 
 understand him as instituting the comparison to 
 which he alluded, and now clearly understood 
 him as advocating an increased number of se- 
 nators the doubling of the districts and the elect- 
 ing one-half of the senate at alternate periods, in 
 order to secure permanency and experience in 
 that body. Mr. R. said he would allude to an- 
 other fact* If our journals speak true, on the 
 15th of June last Mr. Chatfield offered the follow- 
 ing resolution : 
 
 " Resolved, That it be referred to standing committee 
 No 1 to inquire into the expediency of increasing the 
 number of Senators to 43, and dividing the State into sin- 
 gle districts, the Senators to be elected bienially, and to 
 hold their offices for two years." 
 
 Now, said Mr. R., this Convention have done 
 just what the gentleman from Otsego desires, ex- 
 cept to increase the number of Senators. On the 
 15th ot June, he desired the State to be divided 
 into single Senate districts. This the conven- 
 tion have done by a decided vote. He also de- 
 sired, at that time, that the Senators should "hold 
 their offices for two years" and " to be elected 
 bienially;" this also the Convention have deter- 
 mined should exist. The only difference, there- 
 fore, between the decision of the Convention and 
 the wishes of the gentleman from Otsego, is in 
 relation to the number of Senators. How the fix- 
 ing of these number was to affect party purposes, 
 he, (Mr. R.) was at a loss to determine. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped they would go there 
 with the single Assembly districts. The Super- 
 visors could do it, or the legislature could do it ; 
 but all must be done uniform, or some would be 
 elected by single districts, and some by general 
 ticket a plan, as Jefferson said, where there can 
 be no true democracy, but general tyranny to the 
 minority. He was in favor of 48 Senators and 
 double districts, to have two elected each year. 
 He did not want to leave the interests of the 
 State to the care of 17 men, the mere majority of 
 a majority. Minorities had always done more 
 good in his county than majorities, and more ho- 
 nor was due them. It was not necessary to drum 
 up votes to sustain the great whig party in this 
 
 Air". CHATFIELD said that gentlemen must 
 recollect that even motion lie had made on tins 
 floor since this report had come in, was tor 48 Se. 
 nators, double distiicts. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR had noticed in the papers, 
 during the period he was detained from the house, 
 thbt during the debate, one portion of the report 
 was denominated the "ride and tie" system that 
 it had received a K<*d deal ot harsh treatment, 
 and that it did not appear to have a friend even 
 among the members ot the committee, to use up 
 and speak one good v.oid lor it. He believed 
 however that his colleague (Mr. RHOADES) did 
 however at List come to the rescue. It had been 
 denounced again to da) ? and the- gentleman from 
 Oisego (Mr. CHATFIELD) had characterized it as a 
 monstrosity. Thissjsteui Mr. T. said was adopted 
 
 in order to secure the great and important object 
 of stability in the Senate, and at the same time to 
 conform to the public sentiment, so strongly ex- 
 pressed in' favor of single districts. And before 
 the provision was reported it was ascertained from 
 the committee that they were to provide ample 
 guards against any evils that might be apprehend, 
 ed from frauds and colonization, by reporting; a 
 provision requiring a man to have resided thirty 
 or sixty days in the district where he offered to 
 vote Mr. T. urged that this system would secure 
 the desired end ot bringing a fresh intusion ot 
 public sentiment from the people at large into the 
 S nate, annually. A healthy public sentiment 
 would be found to be generally diffused, and not 
 confined to one county. It was certainly better 
 than to have the whole Senate go out every two 
 years, and to have a fresh one elected. There 
 were strong objections to that, which he believed 
 the "ride and tie" system would. remedy. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said the whole debate of this 
 morning had not advanced a single new idea, and 
 if we went on this way, we should entirely fail 
 to complete any Constitution. There were ma- 
 ny gentlemen here who solemnly believed that 
 such would be the result. To test the sense of 
 the Convention whether more time should be 
 wasted in this debate on an exhausted subject, 
 he would move the previous question. 
 
 The House refused to second the call. Only 
 27 rising in favor. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said the gentleman from Otse- 
 go had alluded to him as having changed his 
 ground upon this question. He was in favor of a 
 larger number than 32, but he was equally in fa- 
 vor of single districts, and he would not hazard 
 the loss of the important principle which had al- 
 ready been settled in former votes, by voting for 
 a reconsideration. And although he was before 
 and was still, in favor of an increase of the Sen- 
 ate and an election by single districts, but he 
 should now vote to sustain the decision which 
 the Convention had already made. The gentle- 
 man from New York had alluded to the influence 
 of political excitement in an election by single 
 districts. He (Mr. W.) believed there was much 
 more to be feared from this when the Senators 
 were elected in double districts. Twenty-five 
 was a majority of 48, and with 24 going out and 
 coming in each year, it would be a miserable mi- 
 nority which could not carry 16 members in the 
 whole number ; and if a popular delusion should 
 sweep over the state, which was to effect its fi- 
 nancial interests, as the gentleman said there 
 might, was it not likely that it would influence 
 at least eight or nine of the districts ? and the 
 next year the election TOuld give them the con- 
 trol of the Senate. But all this talk about a pop- 
 ular delusion was a fallacy. We should have 
 confidence in the integrity and intelligence of the 
 people. Until they become too degraded and de- 
 based to be worthy of their institutions and the 
 good laws which we are here to form for them, 
 there need be no fear that they will be carried 
 away by any passing delusion. Thirty-two Sen- 
 ators and single districts, he thought better than 
 48 with double districts, because by single dis- 
 tricts the representative was brought nearer home 
 to his constituents, which was the desired object. 
 This question was involved in the reconsideration 
 
457 
 
 of the decision heretofore made, and he should 
 vote against the motion, for fear of losing the sin- 
 gle districts. He would be in favor of an in- 
 crease to 40 Senators, not 48, but he was satisfied 
 with 32, and single districts. 
 
 Mr MARVIN considered this question of pop- 
 ular representation one of the most important that 
 could come before us, and although it had been 
 said that considerable time had been spent on the 
 report, yet very little of it had been devoted to this 
 question of representation. He agreed generally 
 with the views of Mr. O'CpivoR, except that it 
 was a cardinal point with him that there should 
 be single Senate and Assembly districts, and he 
 would not consent, by any vote of his, to sacrifice 
 that principle. Every portion of the St?te enti- 
 tled by its members to a representation in the Se- 
 nate should have the liberty of choosing them 
 and so with the Assembly. He had urged the 
 other day that the Senate should be increased in 
 numbers, and that to entrust the Legislation o 
 this State in hands of so small a body was unsafe 
 History proved that oligarchies were unfriendly 
 to popular liberty. Our fathers understood this 
 in establishing our form of Government. Hence 
 they contended that the larger the body, within 
 certain limits, the better and safer. He would 
 appeal to members to say if 42 or 48 were too 
 many to constitute a safe legislative body ? In 
 the "small State of Connecticut 32 might be 
 enough, but not in this large State. As it was 
 now, 5 of the 32 Senators might be situated with- 
 in three miles of each other, leaving only 27 for 
 the rest of the State. Mr. M. alluded to the po- 
 sition of this Si. ite, its resources, trade &c , and 
 begged gerMeman to remember that nearly one- 
 fourth of the population of this State was within 
 the limits of our chartered cities. New- York and 
 Buffalo were built up with the commerce, not of 
 this State, but of the nation. Not a hundredth 
 part came from this State. Buffalo was destined 
 to become the second city of the State. Now was 
 it safe for the State, for the country, that the 
 whole power should tall within our cities ? His- 
 tory showed such not to be the fact, and he referr- 
 ed to Athens and Rome as an illustration. Mr. 
 M. then spoke of the proper mode to meet this 
 evil. New York sent now her four Senators, and 
 soon would have six, and so along up, and in ev- 
 ery question arising between that city and country 
 they would go together. He proceeded to exam- 
 ine the statistics presented by the recent census, 
 showing that one-eighth of the Senators would be 
 controlled by the cities. By increasing the num- 
 ber to 42 you widened the margin and gave the 
 country its just due in the division of all questions 
 in which the commercial interests of the cities 
 might not harmonize with those in the country. 
 He alluded to the tact that in other states, the 
 Conshluiion hai provided guards against the over- 
 shadowing influences ot cities, by limiting the 
 number ot their represeniation. This had been 
 deemed necessary to guard the agricultural coun- 
 ties from such influence, and the question was 
 one which d em a tided a seiirus consideration. 
 Mr. M. had not toured to see how political par- 
 ties might be 'dfifucu-d by this division. This was 
 a question infinitely above mere party considera- 
 tions. He exdmined the ratio of representation 
 under the different numbers suggested, arguing in 
 
 32 
 
 ! favor of an increase of Senators, that the constit- 
 j uent body might be reduced. He went on to 
 | speak against the principle of electing the Sena- 
 tors all at once. He would lengthen the term to 
 three years, and elect one-third every year. This 
 would give the people time to reflect and for the 
 "sober second thought." He wanted the number 
 increased. As it was now, with two or more 
 counties united in a district, there would be no 
 chance for the re-election of a Senator, though he 
 might be the Daniel Webster or the De Witt Clin- 
 ton of the State. When his two years were up, 
 there would be the end of him. The other coun- 
 ty would claim its turn, and this was the way 
 in which politicians always controlled this 
 matter. Mr. M. referred to the corapremise 
 offered by him the other day, and proceed- 
 ed to urge the adoption of a system, disre- 
 garding county lines and dividing the State 
 by towns which was a perfect organization. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS thougnt that the question of 
 securing stability in the Senate, as involved in the 
 two systems had not been fully considered. Bv 
 the system that had been adopted, the Senate was 
 to be elected all at once, and the whole body was 
 to come in on the same impulse whatever might 
 be the excitement at the Urne. The Assembly 
 being also elected at the same time both houses 
 would naturally act on the same impulse. Mr.S. 
 referred to the year 1839 when bills passed the 
 Assembly loaning the credit of the State to the 
 amount of $5,000,000 on account of wotks which 
 would have cost $50,000,000, and all of which the 
 Senate rejected, excepting one bill appropriating 
 $400,000. Had the two houses came'in together, 
 as was proposed in this system, those bills would 
 probably have passed, and the State involved in a 
 ruinous debt. The State had thus been saved by 
 the Senate, and might be again. He would prefeV 
 even the ride and tie system to this. Mr. S. said 
 he should go for the reconsideration in the hope of 
 securing single districts. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS should vote for the reconside- 
 ration in the hope of getting an increase of Sena- 
 tors, and thereby to restore the principle of perma- 
 nency in the Senate, as it now existed. He should 
 adhere to the single district system, while at the 
 same time he preferred a three \ears term, as se- 
 curing permanency and stability to the body. He 
 saw no objections to the ride and tie sys'em it 
 had been tested in other States arid found to work 
 well. Mr N. urged mat nothing but an increase 
 n representation would secure to the agricultural 
 counties their due representation as compared to 
 'he cities. 
 
 Mr. FORSVTH should vote against a reconsi- 
 deration, because he feared the single districtsys- 
 tem would be hazarded by it. He was however 
 still in favor of an increase of the Senate, but so 
 explicitly did he deem himself instructed, by the 
 mass of his constituents, in favor of the single dis- 
 ;rict system, that he could not consent to jeopard it 
 The Senate was no more a check upon the As- 
 sembly, than was the Assembly on the Senate, 
 and Mr. F. referred to a case where the Senate 
 appropriated $7,500,000 to certain banks, and in 
 which the House refused to concur. As to this 
 matter of popular impulses, he had no fears of 
 't. The people, if wrong, would soon correct 
 hemselves. 
 
458 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN supposed that if any 
 Question was settled by this Convention it was 
 that there should be but 32 Senators. This plan 
 Mr. C. supported as a measure of retrenchment, 
 as compared to the plans proposing an increase 
 of the Senate. He did not believe that the peo- 
 ple desired this increase of the Senate, and con- 
 sequent increase of the expenses of government, 
 and should therefore vote against the reconsider- 
 ation. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY was in favor of an increase of 
 the Senate, but opposed to the double district 
 system, and should therefore for this reason vote 
 against the reconsideration. Mr. H. also referred 
 to the past action of the legislature, as showing 
 that the Senate had been more disposed to in- 
 crease the State debt than the Assembly. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART briefly advocated the recon- 
 sideration and an increase of the Senate. He did 
 not regard the question of single districts as in- 
 volved in the motion. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM considered this question as de- 
 cided, and although he had been in favor of an in- 
 crease of the Senate, yet he should acquiesce in 
 what he considered the will of the majority. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR favored the reconsideration. 
 lie preferred even the ride and tie principle if se- 
 cured against fraud, to giving up the important 
 principle of stability and in the Senate. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN should vote 
 against the reconsideration. He believed that the 
 people had not called for an increase of the Sen- 
 ate, and that it would only tend to increase the 
 expenses of government. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE considered this question as settled, 
 and he would not open it again, no matter how 
 much he might desire an increase of the Senate 
 for fear of jeopardizing the single district princi- 
 ple. He should therefore vote against the recon- 
 sideration. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN here moved the previous ques- 
 tion, and there was a second, and 
 
 The main question was then put, and the Con- 
 vention refused to reconsider ayes 89, noes 79, 
 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Bergen. Bowdish Brundage, 
 Chatfield, Conely, Cornell, Danibrth, Dubois, (r.rdner, 
 Hart, Hunt, Jones, Kemble, Kennedy, Loomis, .viann, Mar- 
 vin, -Vhirphy, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, Perkins, 
 President, Ruggles, Shcparl, Simmons, \V. H. Spencer, 
 Stephens, stetson, Stow, Swackhamer, Taft, Taggart, J. J. 
 Taylor, Tiiden, Vache, White39. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, H. B/ickus, Bascom, Bouck, 
 Brayton, Brown, Bruce, bull. Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. 
 Campbell. Candee, Chamberlain, Cook. * rooker, Cudde- 
 back, Dana, Dodd, Dorlon. Klanders, Forsyth, uebhard, 
 Harris, Harrison, llawley, Hotchluss Hunter, X. Hunt- 
 ington, E. Huntinglon, Hutehinson, Hyde, Jordan, Kernan, 
 Kingsley , Kiikiaud, Maxwell, Aliller, Morris, Parish, Pat- 
 terson, Penniman, Portt.T. Powers. Ilh^ades, Richmond, 
 Hiker, St. John. Salisbury, Sears. Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 E hpencer, Stanton, r>trong, Talhnadgc, W. Taylor, 
 Townsend, TuthiU, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Warren, 
 Wateibury, Vviib. ck, U ooti, Vrorden, W. B. Wright, 
 Yawger, Voting, Youngs 70. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 Mr. TOWNSEND moved that the report of 
 committee No. 1. on the legislature be printed as 
 amended. And he then wished it to lay on the 
 table till the city delegation could hear from New 
 York as to what was going to be done in the way 
 
 of apportioning the districts there by the ityc 
 Convention or altering the Ward lines. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN hoped the motion would not pre- 
 vail. The city Convention had adjourned for a 
 month, and it must therefore be some time before 
 they district the city 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE hoped they would take the 
 vote at once on the double districts as proposed 
 yesterday. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR hoped they would go through 
 with and dispose of this report without delay. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND withdrew the motion to 
 print. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to go into committee 
 of the whole on the report on the legislature, so 
 that it might be reported to the Convention in 
 form. He did not believe there would be any 
 further motions to amend it in committee. 
 
 This was agreed to, and Mr. PATTERSON took 
 the chair. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to reconsider the vote 
 which refused to add Richmond county to Queens 
 and Suffolk. He had been detained in his com- 
 mittee room when the subject was up before. 
 The committee now present must understand the 
 situation of the two districts by putting Rich- 
 mond to Queens and Suffolk, it interferes with 
 the arrangements of no other counties ; it is mere 
 ly a question between the first and second dis- 
 tricts, and it meets the approbation of committee 
 No. 1. Queens and Suffolk have 38,000 repre- 
 sentative population Kings has 61,000. It is 
 most proper that Richmond should go with the 
 two first. Kings besides was a growing county, 
 and increased in population very fast. He had 
 so fully discussed the merits of this on former oc- 
 casions, that he wouldjnot go over the argument 
 again. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON said that gentleman desired 
 to put Richmond on to the first district not for 
 any good motives, but to make political capital. 
 They could not by any arrangement of figures 
 make anv better district than that made by com- 
 mittee No. 1. He did not feel it necessary now 
 to detain the committee by passing again over 
 the ground he went over yesterday. No other 
 arrangement could be made with propriety, and 
 the principle oi contiguity should be preserved 
 throughout. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that neither Queens 
 or Suffolk hai yet interfered in this quarrel be- 
 tween Kings and Richmond. Suffolk and Queens 
 have some few thousand less population than 
 Kings. The only question should be as to wheth- 
 er contiguous counties are to be placed in the 
 same district ; or whether you will travel with 
 one county over a second county, to place it in a 
 district with two centre counties. Suffolk and 
 Queen's have abt-ut 10,000 deficiency, and with 
 Richmond they will have still 2000 or 3000. It 
 is not a matter of the slighest moment in the 
 world ; because in either case it is not all proba- 
 ble that Richmond would ever have a member. 
 The argument of contiguity is the only one to be 
 observed; and as the gentleman from Richmond 
 was so very anxious to be united to Kings, he 
 hoped he would be accommodated. 
 
 A count was called on Mr. MURPHY'S mo- 
 tion. Ayes 17, noes 40 No quorum. 
 A second count gave ayes 32, noes 47. 
 
459 
 
 The motion was lost. 
 
 Mr CHATF1ELD moved that the committee 
 risf and report. 
 
 Mr SHEPARD hoped he would withdraw it 
 lor a few moments, as the N. Y. city delegation 
 desired to offer some amendments. 
 
 Mr C. did so. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY : Before this committee report 
 the article, it is necessary that some arrangemen 
 should be made of the senate districts, in the'cit; 
 of New- York, other than that reported by com 
 mittee No. 1. In submitting a plan of differen 
 arrangement, he was not of opinion that it wa 
 the very best disposition that could be effected 
 after a more careful examination, for if the di 
 vision is obliged to be made now, it is necessary 
 to consult ward boundaries, as they exist. In 
 that case, he thought, the plan he should have th< 
 honor of presenting, would prove the best, fo: 
 the present and prospective population of the city 
 He would concede, however, that a still hetter plar 
 could be made by dividing wards, without retjar 
 to any present lines, or even by following election 
 district boundaries. Jkit either of these miuh 
 lead to conf-ision, or other difficulties, in polling 
 the votes. He had had but slight opportunity o 
 Consulting his colleagues, and might say they are 
 brought to act on this matter, at a moment wher 
 they are totallv unprepared for it. Almos 
 *very member of his delegation had c^n' inner 
 to hope that the Convention would eventually 
 adopt double, or larger districts and that this 
 division would be rendered useless. Indeec 
 he still had faint hope that the Convention 
 before it adjourned, would see the injustice 
 done to tlw city of New York by obliging a di 
 vision of it into four separate districts, and retrace 
 its steps. But the alternative was now forced 
 upon them either to submit to the division pro- 
 posed by the standing committee, or to offer an 
 other, which latter he should do. He then pro- 
 posed to amend that portion which defined senate 
 districts Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6, so as to read as foi 
 lows : 
 
 " Dist. No, 3 shall consist of the 1st, 3d, 6th, 6th and 8th 
 Wards of the city of New York 
 
 Dist No. 4 sha'll consist of the 3d, 4th, 7th, 10th and 13th 
 Wards. 
 
 Dist. No. d shall consist of the llth, 14th, 15th and 17th 
 Wards. 
 
 Dist. No. 6 shall consist of the 9th, 12th, 16th and 18th 
 Words." 
 
 The committee, in laying out these districts, 
 seemed to be influenced solely by a desire to pre- 
 sent them in a form that would look well on the 
 map, without regard being paid in the slighest de- 
 gree to their several local interests, or their pre- 
 sent or prospective population. They had taken 
 the first six consecutive wards as district No. 3, 
 with ;i representative population of only (57,vJS ; 
 being deficient of the true ratio 7,436. This de- 
 ficiency is made to exist in a portion of the city 
 which is the oldest, where but few dwellings 
 more can be built, and where population is 
 rather on the decrease than increase. It is 
 that part of the city where dwelling houses 
 are continually being changed into stores, 
 and where, if dwelling houses are erected, the 
 new ones are not likely to be so populous as those 
 they are designed to replace. At the end of ten 
 years, the deficiency, most likely, would be found 
 
 to have been doubled : particularly when com- 
 pared with the portion of the city most effected 
 by the change made in the basis of the represen- 
 tative number, by 'this Convention, since the 
 committee made their report, and prepared the 
 j table of population annexed to it. The increase 
 made in the representative number, in the State, 
 by the change alluded to, is less than 9,000; of 
 which number the county of New-York gains 
 nearly two thousand [1957] or about one-fourth 
 of the whole amount of increase. The true ratio 
 of a Senate district is now 75,264, instead of 74,- 
 985 as calculated by the committee; and the rep- 
 resentative population in district No. 3, as he 
 proposed to form it, would be 73,439 reducing the 
 deficiency to only 1,825. The alteration of the 
 base of representation has made no sensible 
 change in the representative population in the 
 wards comprising this district ; although it has 
 increased the ratio, and thereby made the defi- 
 ciency greater than reported by the committee. 
 The increase in the 1st ward is but one; 2d ward 
 none ; in the 3d ward forty-one, in the 4th ward 
 two, in the 5th ward eight, in the 6th ward twen- 
 ty-four, and in the 8th ward 17. He would not 
 dispute that compactness of form may not be of 
 some importance to districts covering a large 
 territory ; but what gentlemen seemed most 
 to desire for themselves in so strongly insist- 
 ing on single districts, was that their several 
 local interests should be separated as much 
 as possible, and each allowed its peculiar rep- 
 resentation in the Senate. Now, he would in- 
 form gentlemen, that the city with its large 
 population, and their various occupations, has 
 
 distinctly marked, and as stion^lv lelt local 
 interests, PS any one portion of the State has to 
 another. He might say as strong as between the 
 i'y of New York and the county of Cnautauque. 
 [n his plan of an amendment these interest have 
 been consulted, and it has been constructed ac- 
 cordingly. The eighth, fitth, third and first wards 
 lie along the North River. The sixth lies behind 
 he third and filth, arid stretches along facing 
 ttiem nearly the entire length. Their interests 
 are identical, and known as the North River in- 
 erest. The 2d and 4th wards lie entirely on the 
 East River side, and along its margin. The in. 
 eresrs of these waid* ate totally di.stinct from 
 hose ot the other wards named; should not form 
 a part of the s.mio local district; and besides, con. 
 
 togei her only a representative population of 
 ^1,104, while the Sth ward has 26,039 and is lia- 
 ble to a considerable increase. '1 ht; committee 
 >ropose to form l\\e fourth district of the 7th, 10th, 
 3th and 14th ward?., which would undoubtedly 
 e near the ratio, if representative population 
 lone is considered; but coniiguity. as well as 
 dentity in interest, requires the 2d and 4th wards 
 o be united with a portion of these. For the 
 fh arid 13th wards are also on the East River, and 
 he 10'h immediately adjoining and paitially sur- 
 ounded by them. Theus is the East River inter- 
 st: a peculiarly disiinct local interest; one that 
 nay not only be said to have none in the Stale 
 ke it ; but none approaching a tesemblance to it. 
 'his district c mid not he formed by ward bound- 
 rics, without a considerable excess, it being 
 ,860. But with the exception of the7ih they are 
 erisely populated, and rot susceptible of increase. 
 
460 
 
 The Fifth District, consisting of the llth, 14th, 
 15th, and 17th wards, he presented with an ex- 
 cess of 3,328, instead of a deficiency of 4,965, 
 This excess was unavoidable in classing the cen- 
 tre wards of the city, who had .a similarity of inS 
 terest, distinct from that of the two lower dis- 
 tricts. The excess however, was smaller in his 
 plan than the deficiency was in that of the com- 
 mittee, and therefore more just. And the geo- 
 graphical position was equally proper, compris- 
 ing as it did the centre of the city. The Sixth 
 District was well formed of the remaining wards, 
 the 9th, 12th, 16th and 18th; taking in the whole 
 upper part of the city, with its peculiar interest. 
 It presented a deficiency of 9,900, and properly 
 so, for this is emphatically the increasing portion, 
 for where one dwelling house has been erected in 
 all the other wards, there has been three in these 
 wards. The future increase of the whole city is 
 to be mainly in their limits ; and at the next 
 arrangement of the Districts this would be found 
 to have an excess much larger than its present 
 deficiency possibly three fold. He was not anx- 
 ious to press this to a vote now. He preferred, 
 could it be done, to let it lie over and be examined 
 carefully. That it should be compared with the 
 map, and the propriety of this or any other ar- 
 rangement, if ward lines as they at present exist, 
 are to be observed. He would, however, much 
 rather the committee would defer final action un- 
 til the city convention would have full opportu- 
 nity to re-arrange the wards, which is one of the 
 main objects of holding that Convention. Should 
 these Districts be now deficiently fixed, he feared 
 the rotten borough system of wards, with which 
 the city of New- York has been long cursed, 
 would be continued for at least ten years longer. 
 This he would deplore, and so would every right 
 minded man. He then presented the following 
 table of the true representative number in each 
 ward, arranged according to the districts he pro- 
 posed to form. 
 
 Third Senate District. Fourth Senate District. 
 
 9,84-2 | 2d Ward, 
 
 8,851 | 4th do 
 
 14,915 7th do 
 
 13,192 10th do 
 
 1st Ward 
 3d do 
 5th do 
 6th do 
 8th do 
 
 26,639 | 13th do 
 
 5,246 
 15,858 
 21,935 
 18.019 
 19,036 
 
 73,439 | 
 
 Deficiency 1,825 j 
 
 Fifth. Senate District. 
 llth Ward, 21,940 j 9th Ward 
 
 14th do 17,llti I 12th do 
 
 loth do 17,098 | 16 &. 18th 
 
 17th do 22,124 | 
 
 80,124 
 
 Excess 4,860 
 
 Sixth Senate District. 
 26.308 
 10,340 
 28,716 
 
 Deficiency 
 
 65,364 
 9,900 
 
 78)592 | 
 Excess. 3,328 | 
 
 He concluded by saying that the great disparity 
 perceptible in the several wards, by the above, did 
 no .show to its full txtent that which existed in 
 actual population. The federal representative 
 number would greatly increase it ; and it was one 
 of the most desirable of reforms that the wards 
 should be equalized as near as may be, and provi- 
 sion made lor a re-arrangement oi them as.fre 
 quently as apportionment <>f representatives is 
 made for the' Legislature. It would undoubtedly 
 be best to defer acting on these lour disi riots until 
 the new boundaries of the wards could be known. 
 
 Mr. WARD asked Mr. KENNEDY if the New 
 
 York city delegation concurred with him in this 
 plan ? 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY answered that, all the gentle- 
 men of the delegation whom he had spoken to on 
 this matter agreed with him in the propriety of 
 presenting this plan at this time. 
 
 Mr. WARD remarked that he felt it his duty to 
 take that opportunity to say, in view of some re- 
 marks whch had fallen from members of the 
 New York delegation in relation to delegates from 
 the country, that there was no disposition on the 
 part of the latter to take any course which would 
 result in injury to the great commercial metropolis. 
 For one, he had no such desue others had no 
 desire lo intertere with the interests of that great 
 county; and those who supposed so did the other 
 members of the Convention great injustice, and 
 he believed that if the delegation from that city 
 could present a plan which they believed would 
 do them greater justice than that reported by the 
 committee, there would not be the least objec- 
 tion to adopting it. He wished lo say in justice 
 to the Hon. Chairman of committee No. 1, that 
 he retired to his chamber, prepared his tables and 
 perfected his airangement of the several districts, 
 without consulting a single member in relation 
 to their preferences. He had said nothing to 
 himself in relation to Weatchestei, a: d he believ- 
 ed that others could repeat the same declaration. 
 He had prepared the best plan that he could 
 possibly devise; and if the delegates could show 
 injustice or inequality, or point out a icmedy 
 therefor, no doubt it would beadopied. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD thought that the committee 
 had not reported a plan judicious in all respects. 
 He (Mr. S.) represented a district that had not 
 been well dealt with. The llth, 12th, 16th, 17th 
 and 18th Wards constituted a district wherein 
 the increase of population was rapid, yet here an 
 excess of over 6000 is awarded by the committee, 
 while a dsficiency of 7000 is made in a district 
 the population of which is increasing but slowly. 
 He (Mr. S.) would show this from a comparison- 
 ed statement of the population of several of the 
 Wards. The 1st. Ward had in 1830, a population 
 of 11, 237; in 1835, 10,380; in 1840, 10,029; in 
 1845,12,230; the 2d Ward in 1830, 8.202; in 
 1835, 7,549 ; in 1840, 6,408 ; and in 1845, 6,972; 
 the 3d Ward in 1830, 9,649 ; in 1835, 10,884 ; in 
 1840, 11,581 ; and in 1845, 11,900. The increase 
 in the 4th, 5th, and 6th Wards was large in pro- 
 portion, and would be found upon reference to 
 page 349 of the manual. It amounted in the five 
 years before 1845, to something over 8,500. At 
 this rate of increase the deficiency would be very 
 slowly made up. Now he, (Mr. S.) would look 
 at the*mcrease in the district No 6, where the com- 
 mittee had apportioned an excess of nearly 7000. 
 There the increase had been over 38,500. It was 
 clear therefore that the excess had been cast 
 where the deficiency should have been, and the 
 converse. The matter of dividing the territory 
 and allotting members of the Senate was 
 full of difficulties, but he (Mr. S.) was pre- 
 pared to give his assent to the plan of his col- 
 league (Mr. KENNEDY). The excesses and defi- 
 ciencies in that plan were, comparatively speak- 
 ing, small. The principal deficiency was thrown 
 into the 9th, 12th, 16th and 18th Wards, which 
 taken as a district increased more rapidly than 
 
461 
 
 any other part of the city, or he would say of the 
 State. Within the five years next before 1845 
 that increase had been within a slight fraction of 
 ', and within the next five years he was 
 confident that the increase would be far greater. 
 Here was where it ought to be thrown to answer 
 the purposes of a just rule of representation. It 
 was true that the districts were not so compact 
 in their form as they might be made in the coun- 
 try counties, but this grows out of the strange 
 shapes and different population and location of 
 the several wards. In those counties the towns 
 are generally laid out in a shape as nearly square 
 as practicable by the surveyor, and without much 
 reference to the number of population ; but it has 
 been otherwise with the wards in the city of New 
 York. He (Mr. S.) hoped the proposition of his 
 colleague would be adopted, unless the Conven- 
 tion would leave the matter to the City Conven- 
 tion or the Board of Supervisors. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND desired, before voting upon 
 this question, to inquire of the gentleman from 
 New- York who was a member of committee No. 
 1, the reason for his giving an assent to the re- 
 port of that committee. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS, after saying that he believed the 
 plan now proposed was far better than that origi- 
 nally made by the committee, (and he said this 
 without in any measure imputing a want of judg- 
 ment or fairness on the part of committee No. 1,) 
 moved to pass this subject over, that the delega- 
 tion from New-York might have opportunity to 
 examine it as he supposed all others would like 
 to have an opportunity to do with regard to their 
 own counties .nid come to some general agreement 
 upon an apportionment. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR was willing and desirous, if 
 any better or more satisfactory division could be 
 made in the city of New York, that it should be 
 done. But he suggested that a vote should be 
 taken in committee now, in order to dispose of 
 the subject in committee ; and subsequently in the 
 Convention any amendment might be made which 
 might be found necessary or proper. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR approved of the suggestion of 
 Mr. TAYLOR, and hoped it would prevail. He 
 also expressed his belief that the plan proposee 
 by Mr. KENNEDY was an improvement upon thd 
 report, from the slight examination he had been 
 able to give. 
 
 The debate was further briefly continued by 
 Messrs. O'CONOR and MANN . 
 
 Mr VVlil 1 K, in reply u> Mr. KIRKLAND, said 
 as one ot comn.ittee No 1, he had endeavored to 
 secure as just and equitable division ot the city as 
 he thought possible. He did not take into cons - 
 deration the fact that the upper part ot the city 
 was increasing the fas-test in population. II his 
 colleagues preferred the amendment, he would 
 not object, but he still insisted that the dm.-jon 
 reported by the committee was as just and equita- 
 ble as any other. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND, after a few remaiks, moved 
 to transler the 2d ward to the 3d Senatorial Dis- 
 trict. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved to pass over the four 
 New York distncis, to give time to the delegation 
 from that city lo consult together and agree upon 
 some division. 
 
 This was assented to. 
 
 No amendments were offered to any of the dis- 
 tricts from No. 7 to 24, inclusive. 
 
 Mr. MAXWELL moved to transfer Yates to 
 the 25th district, and Chemung to the 26th. A- 
 greed to. 
 
 The others were agreed to without change. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND moved to amend the first 
 section so that it would read : 
 
 ^ 1. The gtnerul Legislative power of this State shall be 
 vested in a Senate arid Assembly. 
 
 This was rejected. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to change the last sentence 
 of the Gth section so that it shall read as follows: 
 ** And no county shall be divided in the forma- 
 tion of a Senate district, except such county shall 
 be equitably entitled to two or more Senators." 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Some verbal alterations were made in some of 
 the sections. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to amend the 2d section, 
 so as to authorize the Legislature after 1855, to 
 increase the number of Senators to not exceeding 
 50, and the Assembly not exceeding 150. Lost. 
 
 The committee then rose and reported the ar- 
 ticle to the Convention, and it was laid on the 
 table and ordered printed as amended. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, (49th day,) July 30. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. MCDONOUGH. 
 CANALS, FINANCES, &c. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN rose and said that he had been 
 directed by the committee on finance, &c., No. 3, 
 to present the following report. The state of his 
 health would not permit him to read it out, and 
 he would therefore send it to the Clerk's desk: 
 
 ARTICE 
 
 O/i the existing debts and liabilities of the Slate, and to pro- 
 vide for the payiiLtnl thereof. 
 
 1. Alter paying the expenses 01 collection, superin- 
 tendence, and ordinary repans, one million and five hun- 
 dred thousand dollars "($1,600000) ot the revenues of the 
 State canals shall, in eacn fiscal year, and at that rate lor a 
 shorter period, commencing on the lirst day olJune, 1S46, 
 be set apart as a sinking tund to pay -he intere:i and re- 
 deem the principal of that part oi the state dr bt called the 
 canal debt, as it existed at the time aloresaid, an i includ- 
 ing three hundrea thousand dolUrs ihen to be borrowed, 
 until ihe same shall be wholly paid; and the principal and 
 income of the said sinking fund shall be sacredly applied 
 to that purpose. 
 
 ^ 2. In liquidation of the state claims for advances to, and 
 payments lor, the canals, six hundred and seventy -two 
 thousand anu five hundred dollars, (ri7'2 500) of the reve- 
 nues of said canals shall forever, in each fi-.c;iJ year, and 
 at that rate for a shorter period, commt ncins on the first 
 day of June, 1S46, be paid into the treasury lor the use of 
 the state; and if tlie pa\ meat ol that sura or any part there- 
 of shall be delayed by reason oi the priority estab isned in 
 the preceding section, die amount so delayed with a quar- 
 terly interest thereon at U;e then curreni rate, shall ue so 
 paid out 01 the sai.i revenues aj soon a*, can be done con- 
 sis'entiy with such priority 
 
 3. The surplus of the revenues cl 'he canals, after pay 
 ing the said expenses of the canals, an 1 the sums appropri- 
 ated by the two preceding sections, shall in each fiscal 
 year be applied to the improvement oi the Erie canal, 
 in such manner as may be directed by law, until such sur- 
 plus shall amount, in the aggregate, to the sum of two mil- 
 lions and five hundred thousand dollars. 
 
 (54. Of the sum of six hundred and seventy-two thousand 
 and live hundred dollars, required by the second section of 
 this article to be paid into the Treasury, live hundred thou- 
 sand dollars ($500,000) shall, in each fiscal year, and at 
 that rate for a shorter period, commencing on the fir.4 day 
 of June, 1846, be set apart as a sinking fund to pay the in- 
 terest and redeem the principal of that part of tue State 
 Debt called the General Fund Debt, including the debt for 
 
462 
 
 loans of tho State credit to Railroad Companies which hav e 
 failed to pay the interest thereon, and also the contingent 
 debt on State stocks loaned to incorporated companies, 
 which have hitherto paid the interest thereon, whenever 
 and as far as any part thereof may become a charge on the 
 Treasury or General Fund, until the same shall be wholly 
 paid; and the principal and income of the said last men- 
 tioned sinking fund shall be sacredly applied to the pur- 
 pose aforesaid; and if the payment of any part of the said 
 five hundred thousand dollars shall at any time be deferred 
 by reason of the priority recognized in the second section 
 of this article, the sum so deferred, with quarterly interest 
 thereon, at the then current rate, shall be paid to the last 
 mentioned sinking fund, as soon as the sum so deferred 
 shall be received into the Treasury. 
 
 ^ 5. The claims of the State against any incorporated 
 company to pay the interest and redeem the principal of 
 the stock of the State loaned or advanced to such company, 
 shall be fairly and duly enforced, and not deferred, released 
 or compromised; and the moneys arising from such claims 
 shall be set apart and applied as part of the sinking fund 
 provided in the fourth section of this article. 
 
 ^ 6. If the sinking fund, or either of them provided in this 
 aricle, shall prove insufficient to enable the State on the 
 credit of such fund, to procure the means to satisfy the 
 claims of the creditors of the State as they become payable, 
 the Legislature shall by equitable taxes so increase the re- 
 venues of the said fund as to make them respectively suf- 
 ficient perfectly to preserve the public faith. Every con- 
 tribution or advance to the canals or their debts from any 
 source other ihaii their direct revenues, shall, with quar- 
 terly interest, at the rates then current, be repaid into the 
 Treasury for the use of the state, out of the canal icven- 
 ues, as soon as can be done consistently with the just rights 
 ol the creditors holding the said canal debt. 
 
 7. The Legislature shall not sell, lease, or otherwise 
 dispose of any of the canals of this State, so far as the same 
 are now finished and navigable, but they shall remain the 
 property oithe state, and under its management jorever. 
 By order of the Committee. 
 
 MICHAEL HOFFMAN, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that after the decided opin- 
 ion of the Convention, expressed in the early part 
 of its session by a formal vote that it would be in- 
 expedient for a committee to accompany their re- 
 port with any extended remarks by way of assign- 
 ing their reasons, lengthened observations on the 
 merits of this measure at this time would be entire 
 ly out of place. He did not design to do this now, 
 but vyhen the subject should come before the Con- 
 vention in committee of the whole, or in the body 
 of the house, he would avail himself of that op- 
 portunity to lay before it the reasons that had in- 
 duced him to unite with the committee in this re- 
 port. In the end or ends to be attained by it 
 the payment of the state debt, and the settlement 
 of all claims between the canals on the one side 
 and the state on the other he believed the com- 
 mittee were unanimous. But on so vast a sub- 
 ject as the public debt and the finances of the 
 state, involving such complicated and minute cal- 
 culations, although he believed that every mem- 
 ber of the committee had endeavored as well as 
 his leisure would permit, and had used all possi- 
 ble industry to make calculations to aid his judg- 
 ment, yet some of them had not had the opportu- 
 nity to make those calculations as minute as they 
 desired, and they would therefore have it distinct- 
 ly understood that in the attempt to perfect these 
 provisions in giving to them more consideration 
 they reserved to themselves, what he supposed 
 was not only their right, but a right of which he 
 further supposed they could not divest themselves 
 the privilege of conforming to the last and best 
 convictions which they should arrive at in their 
 study of the subject. With these observations, 
 which he hoped would do justice to every member 
 of the committee, he moved that the report should 
 
 be printed, and referred to the committee of the 
 whole. 
 
 The motion was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN again rose, and said he was 
 directed by the committee on Finance. No, 3, to 
 make the following report. 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 On the power to create Juture Slate debts and liabilites, 
 and in restraint thereof. 
 
 1. No money shall ever be paid out of the Treasury o 
 this State, or any ot its funds, or any of the funds under its 
 management, except in pursuance of an appropriation by 
 law, nor unless such payment be ma.le within two years 
 next after the passage of such appropiiation act; and every 
 such law making a new appropriation or continuing or re- 
 viving an appropriation shall distinctly specify the sum 
 appropriated and the object to which it is to be applied} 
 and it shall noi be sufficient for such law to refer to any 
 other law to tixt-uch sum. 
 
 -2. TUe credit of the State shall not, in any manner, be 
 given or loaned to, or in aid of, any individual, a; sociation 
 or incorporation. 
 
 3. '1 he State may, to meet casual deficits or failures in 
 revenues, or for expenses not provided lor,- contract debts, 
 but. such debts, direct or contingent, singly or in theaggre- 
 gate, shall not, at any time, exceed one million of dollars, 
 and ihe moi eys arising from the loans creating such debts 
 shall be applii'd to the purpose for which they were obtain- 
 ed, or to repay the debt so contracted, and to no other pur 
 pose whatever. 
 
 & 4. In addition to the above limited powers to contract 
 debts the State may contract debts to repel invasion, sup- 
 press insurrection, or defend th Stat in uarj but the mo- 
 ney arising from the contracting of such debts shall be ap- 
 plied to the purpose for which it^was raised, or to repay 
 such debts, and to no other purpose whatever. 
 
 6. Except the debts specified m the third and fourth sec- 
 tions oi this article, no debtor liability shall be hereafter 
 contracted by or on behalf of this State, unless Mich debt 
 shall be authorized by a law for soiiie single work or ob- 
 ject, to be distinctly specified therein, and such law shall 
 impose and provide for the collection of a direct annual 
 tax, to pay, and sufficient to pay the interest on such debt 
 as it falis duf , and also to pay and discharge the principal 
 on such debt within eighteen years from the time ol the 
 contracting (hereof. ISo such law shall take effect until 
 it shall, at a general election, have been submitted to the 
 people and have received a majority of all the votes cast 
 lor or against it at such election. On the final passage of 
 such a bill in either House ot the Legislature, the question 
 shall be taken by ayes and noes, to be duly entered on the 
 journals thereof, and shall be: " Shall this bill pass, and 
 ought the same to receive the sanction of the people?" 
 The Legislature may at any time after the approvnl of 
 such law by the people, if no debt shall have been con- 
 tracted or liability incurred in pursuance thereof, repeal 
 the law; and may at any time by law forbid the contract- 
 ing of any further debt or liability under such Inw; but the 
 tax imposed by such act, in proportion to the deb', and lia- 
 bility which may have l>een contracted in pursuance of 
 such law shall remain in force and be inepealable, and be 
 annually collected until the proceeds thereof shall have 
 made the provision hereintofot e specified to pay and dis- 
 charge the interest and principal of such debt and liability. 
 
 The money arising from any loan or stock creating debt 
 or liability shall be applied to the work or object specified 
 in the act authorizing such debt or liabilii) , r for the re- 
 payment of such debt or liability, and lor no other pur. 
 pose whatever. 
 
 No such law shall be submitted to be acted on within 
 three months after its passage or at any general election, 
 when any other law or any bill or any amendment of the 
 Constitution, shall be submitted to be voted for or against. 
 
 (5 6. Every law which imposes, continues, or revives a 
 tax shall distinctly state the tax and the objtctto which it 
 is to be applied, and it shall not be sufficient to refer to 
 any other law to fix such tax or object. 
 
 7. On the final passage, in either House of the Legisla- 
 ture, of every act which imposes, continues or revives a 
 tax, or makes, continues, or revives any appropriation of 
 public or trust money or property or releases, discharges 
 or commutes any debt or demand of the State, the ques- 
 tion shall betaken by ayes and noes, which shall be duly 
 entered on the journals^ and three-fifths of all the members 
 
463 
 
 elected to either House shall, in all such cases, be neces- 
 sary to constitute a quorum therein. 
 
 By order of the committee, 
 
 MICHAEL HOFFMAN, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that upon this article the 
 committee were in the main, he believed, unani- 
 mous. In regard to the first clause, relative to 
 specific appropriations, and the means of enforc- 
 ing the same, he believed there was no dissent. 
 On the clause limiting casual debts to a million of 
 dollars, some gentlemen supposed that perhaps at 
 some future time it might be necessary in a great 
 State like this, containing some three to six mil- 
 lions of inhabitants, to enlarge the amount a small 
 extent. On the proposition which authorizes the 
 creation of a debt for particular purposes by a spe- 
 cial law, he was not aware that there was any seri- 
 ous difference of opinion. Some gentlemen might 
 think the same end might be attained by other 
 means than by submitting it to the people; and 
 some supposed that a provision making the debt 
 payable in 18 years was not sufficiently stringent; 
 but with some doubts and difficulties on the points 
 he had mentioned, he believed the committee was 
 unanimous in the opinion that the industry and 
 labor of the State should be defended as strongly 
 as was now proposed against debt ; at least against 
 extravagant expenditures and taxation the inevi- 
 table consequences of debt. With these explana- 
 tions, he moved that the report be referred to the 
 same committee of the whole, as the other had 
 been sent to, and that it be printed. Agreed to. 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 Mr. MURPHY, from committee No. 14, sub- 
 mitted the following report : 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 ^ 1. Private property shall not be taken for improvement 
 in cities and villages, unless the compensation therefor 
 shall be first determined before a judicial tribunal by a 
 jury of twelve freeholders of the city or village w'here 
 the same shall be situated, who shall ue chosen and quali- 
 fied us jurors in civil cases. 
 
 fj -.>. No local assesmeut for any improvement in any ci- 
 ty or village shall be laid unless a majority of all the own- 
 ers of the lands to be assessed shall apply lor such im- 
 provement, nor unless such improvement s'hall be order- 
 ed by a vote of two-thirds of the Common Council or 
 
 ^t^S!&K?Syi* or vm ag e co, | to V ne ," "* S 'f | e S eMte district P'^-ono 
 poration, excep; to suppress insurrection or to provide I on the ^Ulgle Assembly districts, and one on the 
 against existing pestilence or casualty, unless the same apportionment by the ]3oard of Supervisors, 
 shall be authorized by act of ihe legislature lor >ome sin- Mr. STRONG ihnntrht thi wmilH Ko ,, 
 
 ARTU LE - . 
 
 1. No charter or special act for the incorporation of nny 
 city or village shall be granted, but general and unilorn 
 laws shall be passed lor the incorporation ot cities and lik 
 laws for the incorporation of villages, subji-ct to such a- 
 terati.ms as the Legislavure shall irom time to time dfen 
 propi r to make. The boundaries and limits of the territory 
 included within any city or village corporation, shall le 
 determined in such manner as the Legislature shall pia. 
 scribe. 
 
 2. No assessment for any improvement in any city or 
 village shall be laid otherwise than by general tax uion 
 the taxable property of such city or village, levied ind 
 collected with an annual t;ix for other expenses. 
 
 3. Private property shall not be taken for any improve- 
 ment in any city or village other than lor State purpcses, 
 unless the compensation shall be first fixed by a jury in a 
 court proceeding: according to the course ol the coirmoii 
 law. 
 
 4. No debt shall be contracted by any city or village on 
 a longer credit than twenty years, nor unless there shall be 
 levied and collected in its annual tax of the preceding 
 year, one-twentieth part of such debt towards the -epay- 
 ment of the same, unless such debt be necessary to provide 
 against pestilence or casualty. After the creation of any 
 debt there shall be levied and collected in said annual 
 tax annually thereafter, one twentieth part or as near one 
 twentieth part as may be of such debt, towards its repay- 
 ment. 
 
 5. Money shall not be borrowed by any city or village 
 corporation in anticipation of its annual tax, except for the 
 pui pose of paying interest about to become due on any 
 debt now existing, or to be created under the limitation of 
 this article, nor unless the amount shall have bten previ- 
 ously levied in such annual tax. 
 
 6. No liability shall be contracted by any city or vil- 
 lage corporation unless provisions have previously been 
 made in its annual tax for discharging th same, or unless 
 the same be incurred under the limitations of tn'is article 
 
 H. C MURPHY. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved that these two reports 
 be referred to the committee of the whole, and 
 that they be printed. Agreed to. 
 
 APPORTIONMENT OF THE LEGISLATURE. 
 The Convention then proceeded to act upon the 
 report of the committee of the whole on the ap- 
 
 portionment of the legislature. 
 
 The 1st section was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND wished the house to proceed 
 to dispose of the various pending motions to re- 
 consider the votes taken in committee on the se- 
 veral sections of this report of committee No. 1. 
 There was one motion relative to the term of Se'na- 
 
 gl 
 la 
 
 le object or woi k to be distinctly specified therein, which 
 w shall provide the ways ai:d means exclusive of loans 
 to pay the interest of such debt as it shall fall due, and al- 
 so to pay and discharge the principal thereon within '20 
 yours by tax to be assessed and collected upon the taxable 
 property of such city or village in equal aniount> as near 
 as may be annually, and such law shall be irrepealable un- 
 til such debt and the interest thereon shall be fully paid 
 and discharged. And no such l.iw sliall take effect until 
 it shall have been approved by a majority of the electors 
 of such city or vil age; and no money so raised snail be 
 applied otherwise than to the object specified in such law. 
 By oider of the (.'omnut-.ee. 
 
 HENRY C. MURPHY, Ch'n. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY suid the committee were unani- 
 mous i'i rt'gard to ihe 1st section, but not ss to the 
 re- 1. Difftring hiri/self from the committee, arid 
 belii'Vinii that ihe provisions which ihey had sub- 
 nutted did ti't fr to the iont of the evils growing 
 out ot 'he defec s of our present system of rrmrii- 
 cii'.il corpoianons, he hr.d prepared a minority 
 report which he would now ask leave to submit. 
 This minority report was as follows: 
 
 Mr. STRONG thought this would be unneces- 
 sary, because if the Convention passed the report 
 of committee No. 1, without considering those 
 motions, they fell to the ground as a matter of 
 course that would dispose of the whole matter. 
 HeAsked the Chair for information? 
 
 TWe CHAIR said that they would. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND agreed with the gentleman 
 from Monroe ; but he had made his motion for the 
 sake of example. 
 
 Mr. STRONG then moved that the convention 
 proceed to the unfinished business. 
 
 This was carried, and the report was taken up 
 by sections. 
 
 Section 1 was passed, and section 2 was then 
 read. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to amend, by adding at 
 the end of the section the words following: 
 
 " The Legislature may, after the enumeration to be 
 made in the year IS.;.}, increase the number ol Senators to 
 any number not exceeding fifty, and the number of Mem- 
 bers of Assembly not exceeding 150." 
 
464 
 
 Mr. W. H. SPENCER called for the division 
 of this question, so as to take the vote first on in- 
 creasing the number of Senators. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY suggested the propriety of al- 
 tering the word " increase" to " change," for the 
 fegislature might hereafter deem it necessary to 
 iteduce the number of Senators. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said his object was to give the 
 legislature the power after the next enumeration in 
 1855, to increase the number if they thought pro- 
 per to do so. The legislature in 1855, may find 
 it /ery desirable to increase the number of Sena- 
 tors to 34, 36, 40, 42, or any number even up to 
 50. And his object was to give them this power. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said the object was a very 
 honorable one. But if it was desirable ever to 
 increase them, it could be done by amendments 
 to the constitution hereafter. He would not 
 leave this bone of contention to political aspi- 
 ranta It might render an extra session necessa- 
 ry and cause several thousands of dollars to be 
 spent by putting this hypothetical provision in 
 the constitution, to encourage strife among brawl- 
 ing political aspirants. He wished to Heaven 
 that gentlemen would allow the convention to 
 stay fixed somewhere, and also the constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN then modified his amendment, 
 go as to provide that 
 
 "The legislature alter the next state enumeration may 
 increase Uie number ot senators to any number riot ex- 
 ceeding LQ, and members ut assembly to any number not 
 exceeding J50 ; and may after every state enumeration fix 
 the number ot senators at any number between 32 and 60 
 inclusive, and the membe s ol assembly at any number 
 between 128 wnd 150 inclusive." 
 
 The question was then taken, first on increas- 
 ing the uuinbtrot Senators. Losf, ayes 35, noes 70. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, H. Backus, Bascom, Bull, Burr, 
 Chattield, Coneiy, Cornell, Crocker, Dorlon, Dubois, Gard- 
 ner, Gebhar.1, Hart, Jones, Kemble, Kennedy, Loomis, 
 Marvin, Neliis, O'Conor, Patterson, Porter, Powers, Presi- 
 dent, Richmond, Salisbury, Shepard W. H. Spencer, Ste- 
 phens, Swackhamer, Tatt, Taggart, Tildrn, Young 35. 
 
 NAYS Mesirs. Ayrault, F. F Backus, Bergen, Bouck, 
 Bowdisli, Brayton Brown, Bruce, Brundage, ( ambreieng, 
 D. D. Campbell, Candee, Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cuddeback, 
 Dana, Danlarih, Dodd, Flanders, Korsyth, Harrison, Haw- 
 ley, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huuungton, E. Hunting 
 ton, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jordan, Keinan, Kingsley, Kirk 
 land, McNeil, McNitt, Maxwell, Millet , Moms, Murphy, 
 Nicholas Nicoll, Parish, Penmman, Perkins, Rnoades, 
 Hiker, Iluggles, St John, Se^irs, Shaw Sheldon, Smith, E. 
 Spt-ncer, stanton, Stetson, Strong, Tallmadge. J. J. Taylor, 
 W. Taylor, Townsend, Tuthiil, Van Schoonhoven, \Vater- 
 hury, Wiil*rd, WLbeek, Wood, W. B. Wright, Yawger, 
 Youngs 70. 
 
 The question then vet urred on the other divis- 
 ion to provide for the prospective increase f (he 
 number of members <-f Assembly to 150. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said he supposed the vote just 
 taken st-t'led the question; he therefore wt uld not 
 trouble the Convention to take the yeas and nays. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE renewed the demand for 
 the veas and nays. Lost, ayes 22, noes 87. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to strike out Richmond 
 from the second distiict. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : Not in order. 
 
 Mr. W. B. WRIGHT moved to restore the words 
 " and the Senators," for which the word " who" 
 had been substituted. The amendment, which 
 was verbal merely, was adopted, 42 to 37. 
 
 The section was then agreed to. 
 
 The 5th section was then taken up and read. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to restore the section, 
 so that it would provide for the election of Sena- 
 tors in alternate districts in alternate years, as 
 the committee had first reported it. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY said that if this was done, 
 they would come back to the ride and tie system. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR advocated this He said ob- 
 jections had been made on account of its opening 
 the door to fraud by colonization ; but all this could 
 be avoided. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said he would like to hear some 
 good reasons from his friend from Onondaga (Mr. 
 TAYLOR) in support of his motion, for he always 
 took pleasure in following the lead of that gentle- 
 man when he could ; but under his present views 
 he must oppose the motion. The gentleman from 
 Onondaga (Mr. TAYLOR) proposes, by his motion 
 to restore I he ride and iie system of electing Sena- 
 tors, reported by his committee Now it would 
 be remembered that only a few days ago, when 
 that part of the report was under consideration, 
 he, Mr. S , offered an amendment providing that 
 all the electors ot the State should be allowed to 
 vote at every plection of Senators. On that 
 amendment the yeas and nays were called, and it 
 received precisely one hundred ayes, the strong- 
 est vote that has been taken in this Convention. 
 The adoption of that amendment abolished the 
 ride and tie mode of electing Senators, which the 
 gentleman from Onor,dnga (Mr. T.) now proposed 
 to restore. He (Mr T.) had assigned as a reason 
 lor restoring it, that without that the Senate 
 would no loi;ger be a continuous body ; and that 
 the objection that would lead to colonization 
 would be iully met by stringent provisions against 
 voting without a long previous residence in elec- 
 tion districts. As to the continuity of the body, 
 he, Mr. S. admitted its lorce, when it was based 
 upon a representation of the whole body of elec- 
 tors; but lhat was not the gentleman's proposition, 
 for by his system, we would never hear trom the 
 whole people at lh same time, but only from one- 
 half of them. The continuity then would be gained 
 by the disfranchisement ot one half the electors on 
 all questions which had arisen within the year 
 The principle on which his continuity was based 
 was wrong, and therefore the system would fail 
 in securing the object the gentleman had in view 
 that of stability founded on a previously express- 
 ed will of the whole people ; for we could not ar- 
 rive at a knowledge of that will on any question 
 except so far as one-half of the electors on one 
 question, this year, might be supposed to agree 
 with another half on another question the next ' 
 year. The gentleman (Mr. W. TAYLOR) had 
 dwelt on guards against colonization, as a re- 
 moval of all objections to the ride and tie system, 
 but those very guards so far as they contemplated 
 a long residence in an election district to give one 
 the right to vote, constituted a formidable objec- 
 tion ; for while he desired to prevent colonization, 
 he was at the same time opposed to the disfran- 
 chisement of honest laborers, who to obtain a 
 livelihood were often compelled to change their 
 residence from one election district to another, in 
 the same town, or from town to town, especially 
 in the season of haying and harvest. But in New 
 York, the most stringent provisions any one would 
 propose would not pevent colonization under the 
 gentleman's plan. Young men without families 
 
465 
 
 would only have to change their boarding houses 
 from one side of a street to another, sixty, 
 ninety, or one hundred days before an election. 
 But there was another objection besides these, 
 and still more formidable, to which the gentle- 
 man (Mr. T.) had not alluded ; he meant the ap- 
 plication of corrupting influences to resident, 
 doubtful voters within a district. Under the ride 
 and tie plan, the number of Senators to be se- 
 cured by a party to gain or hold power, would be 
 easily known ; and which, too, in even the uncer- 
 tain districts. These generally would be very 
 lew, and to incorporate this ride and tie system 
 in the constitution, would be to bring all the po- 
 litical gambling influences of the State to bear on 
 those districts. There was much security against 
 fraud and corruption at elections in an ignorance of 
 the precise points where, or the particular men 
 by whose votes the election was to be lost or 
 gained. He hoped the Convention would not 
 reconsider its vote and adopt the ride and tie 
 system. 
 
 Mr. LQOMIS would not support the motion of 
 Mr. TAYLOR, because he would rather have Sen- 
 ators elected for two years, and all go out at once, 
 to this chequered system which the committee 
 had proposed, although he desired to avoid even 
 the first conclusion. By the committee's plan, 
 half the state was every year to be disfranchised, 
 and yet they had to go through the whole form 
 and expense of the election every year. That 
 proposition too would afford facilities for coloni- 
 zation and corruption. He also called the atten- 
 tion of the Convention to the fact that, by the 
 committee's pi;jn, the elections for the cities 
 were brought together' in one year, and the elec 
 tions for the country in the other year. He point- 
 ed out how the Senate might be influenced by an 
 excitement got up in the cities, which were more 
 exposed to excitements than the rural districts, 
 and hoped the Convention would adhere to the 
 vote already given on this subject. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS was opposed to having any ol 
 these motions to reconsider, made or entertained 
 where there had been a very decided vote given 
 in favor of a provision or any when unless the 
 question .was decided by a small vote, or a very 
 close vote. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR insisted that his plan was th 
 best. 
 
 The yeas and nays were then taken on the 
 amendment and resulted yeas 21, nays 86 as fol 
 lows : 
 
 .AYES Messrs. Conely, Dorlon, Dubois, E. Huntington 
 Jordan, Kembla, Kingsley, Kirkland, Marvin, Nicholas 
 O'Conor, Rhoades, Haggles, E. Speucer, Stephens, T aft 
 Tallmadge.J. J. Taylor. W. Taylor. Vache, Young 21 
 NAYS Messrs Ayrault, F. K. Backus, H. Backus, Bus 
 com, Bergen, Bouck, Bo wdish, Bra> ton, Brown, Bruce 
 BrumJage, Bull, Burr, Cambieieng. D. D. Campbell, Car 
 dee, Chamberlain, ChatfidLl, Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cornell 
 Crooker, Cuddeback. Dana, Danfgrth, Flandeis, Forsyth 
 Gardner, Gebhard, Harris, Harrison, Hart, Hawley, Hotch 
 kiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde 
 Jones, Kennedy, Kernan, Looinis, McNeil. McNitt, Max 
 well, Miller, Morris, Murphy, Nellis, Nicoll, Parish, Pa 
 terson, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, Powers, President, Rich 
 mond, Riker, Sail-bury, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepare 
 Smith, W. H Spencer, Stunlon, Stetson, Stow, Strong 
 Taggart, Townsend, Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, Warren 
 Waterbury, White, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, Worden 
 W. B. Wright, Yawger, Youngs 86. 
 
 Mr. WHITE then moved to strike out all dow 
 to and including the 12th line, and insert : 
 
 33 
 
 The state shall be divided into 16 districts to be called 
 cnate Districts, each of which shall choose two Senators, 
 ml the Senators first elected shall be divided into two 
 lasses; the Senators of the first class shall serve one 
 ear, and the Senators of the second class two years, and 
 6 senators shall be elected annually thereafter" 
 
 Mr. STETSON said ho would detain the Con- 
 ention only one minute to explain why he should 
 ote against this amendment. Some days since 
 e had voted for this proposition ; but that vote 
 vas given under the hope that, if it prevailed, 
 ne Convention would reconsider their previous 
 ecision as to the number of Senators and enlarge 
 t so that by doubling the districts we would have 
 n the territory and population of a double district 
 bout the same quantity that would be assigned 
 o a single district, with thirty-two for the whole 
 lumber of the Senate. His motion had been to 
 ecure contiguity, stability and more experience 
 n the Senate, and also an equalization of repre- 
 entation. That hope was now gone, the com- 
 mittee had refused to reconsider and this was the 
 ast vote. He could notconsent to make the dis- 
 ricts so large as they would be, if doubled upon 
 he smaller number of thirty-two. 
 
 Mr. WHITE'S motion was lost, thus: ayes 
 20, noes 87. 
 
 AYES Bergen, Brown, Brundage, Conely, Cornell 
 Hunt, Jones, Kemble. Kennedy. Loomis, Murphy, Nicoll* 
 O'Conor, I'erkins, Ruggles, Shepard, Smith, Steohei 
 Vache, White 20. 
 
 NAYS Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, BascoM 
 Bouck, Bowdish, Bray ton, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Cambrelene' 
 D.D. Campbell, R. Campbell jr., Candee, Chamberlain 
 Chatfield, Clyde, Cook, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana Dan' 
 orlh, Dorlon, Dubois, Flanders, Forsyth, Gardner Geb- 
 hard, Harris, Harrison, Hart, Hawley, Hotchkiss Hunter 
 A. Huntington, E. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jordan' 
 Kernan. Kingsley, Kiikiand, McNeil, McNitt Marvin* 
 Maxwell. Miller. Morris, N*iJis, Nicholas, Parish Patter' 
 son, Penniman, Porter. Powers, President, Rhoades Rich- 
 mond, Riker, St. John, Salisbury, Sears, Shaw Sheldon 
 E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Strone' 
 Swackhamer, Taft. Taggart, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor W 
 Taylor, Townsend, Tuthill, Vanschoonhoven Warren' 
 Waterbury, Wiilard, Witbeck, Wood, W. B' Wrieht 
 Yawger, Young, Youngs 87. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to detach Richmond 
 county from Kings and place her- with Queens and 
 Suffolk. Carried ayes 53, noes 51. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bascom, Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish Brav- 
 ru n ' ?*"?' B y un ? a S?' B. Campbell, jr., Chamberlain, 
 Chatheld, Conely, Cook, Cornell Cuddeback, Danforth 
 Dodd, Flanders, Gardner, Hart, Hunt, Hunter E Huntimr* 
 ton, Hutchinson, Hyde, Kennedy, Kernan, Kirkland, Mc- 
 Neil, Maxwell, Murphy, Nellis, Nicoll, O'Conor Perkins 
 Porter. President, Ruggles, St. John, Shaw, Sheldon She- 
 pard, Smith, Stephens, Stetson, Swackhamer Talt Town- 
 send.Vache, Waterbury.White.Wood, Yawger, Youns 53 
 
 NOES-Messrs. Ayrault, F.F. Backus, H. Backus Bruce 
 Bull, Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, Clark, Crooker' 
 Dana, Dorlon, Dubois, Forsyth, Gebhard, Harris Harri- 
 son, Hawley, Hotckhiss. A. Huntington, Jordan, Kemble 
 Kingsley, Loomis, McNitt, Marvin, Miller, Morris Nicho- 
 las, Parish. Patterson, Penniman, 1'owers, Rhoade-- Rich- 
 mond, Riker, Salisbury, Sears, E. Spencer W.H Spen- 
 cer, Stanton, Stow, Strong, Taggart, Tallmadge, J. J Tav- 
 lor, Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, \V. B. Wliriff 
 Youngs-51. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved to amend by striking 
 out the word " district" in the 16th line, to the 
 word " wards" in the 23d line ; and insert as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 " Districts No. 3, No. 4, No. 5 and No. 6, shall consist of 
 the ity and county of New York. And the board of su- 
 pervisors ol said city and county shall on or|b.>fore the 1st 
 day of May. 1847, divide the city and county into the num- 
 ber ot Senate districts to which it is entitled as near as 
 may be of an equal number of inhabitants, and of contie-- 
 uous territory." 
 
466 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said this was adopting a 
 new principle, to go on and divide up the State 
 and then say that the board of supervisors shall 
 divide the city of New-York into four districts. 
 We had better go on and finish up this business. 
 Something had been said about political divisions, 
 >ut that he had disregarded. It was sufficient 
 for him to know that the districts were compact, 
 without looking to the returns which those dis- 
 .ricts had given. He thought the districts formed 
 >y the committee, were fair, and there was agen- 
 leman from New-York on the committee to whom 
 hey were satisfactory. 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR preferred that the Conven- 
 ion should go on and perfect the districts as they 
 lad begun, instead of leaving it to the board of 
 upervisors in New-York to district that city. 
 Mr. O'CONOR urged the adoption of this a- 
 nendment, on the ground that it was but carry - 
 ng out the principle which had been adopted in 
 elation to the formation of Assembly districts. 
 "hese were turned over to the county Boards of 
 >upervisors. New York city embracing as it 
 id. four Senate districts, the Board of Sunervi- 
 
 and the population thereof, to be filed in the of- 
 fice of the Secretary of State and the clerk of the 
 said county. 
 This was accepted by Mr KENNEDY, and his 
 amendment as amended adopted. 
 The other districts were then taken up in suc- 
 cession, and they were agreed to without debate 
 or amendment, from the '7th to the 16th, inclu- 
 sive. 
 Mr. SMITH moved to strike the word " Scho- 
 harie" from the 42nd line, and insert " Chenan- 
 go," so as to make the 17th district consist of 
 Chenango and Otsego. He also moved to strike 
 the word " Chenango" from the 47th line, and 
 insert " Schoharie," so as to make Delaware and 
 Schoharie the 18th district. 
 Mr. BOUCK opposed the amendment, contend- 
 ing that the result would be to make a still great- 
 er inequality than now existed between the dis- 
 tricts, while it would not at all add to the conve- 
 nience of the people. He should look to have 
 some reason for the change. 
 Mr. SMITH said this amendment was concur- 
 red in by the members from Chenanp-n and Oto. 
 
 sors could as well average those as the Assembly I go, and would be desired unanimously almost by 
 districts. All that they had to do was to divide a the people ot the two counties. Chenango and 
 
 single county into three or four legislative dis- 
 tricts, just as they were empowered for another 
 purpose, to divide the same county into sixteen 
 legislative districts 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that the city Convention, 
 now sitting in New York would in all probabili- 
 ty re-arrange the wards, and therefore if this 
 Convention was to proceed to district the city 
 now it would inevitably lead to contusion. There 
 were great inequalities in the wards now, which 
 that Convention was to arrange, and it was but 
 simple justice therefore, that the amendment 
 should be adopted. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said the real question was wheth- 
 er this Convention should proceed with its busi- 
 ness or whether it should wait for the city of 
 New York. If the rest of the State was to be dis- 
 tricted by this Convention, so ought New York, 
 and not be left to be gerrymandered by the Board 
 of Supervisors. He should vote against the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER briefly sustained the a- 
 mendment, as but an act of justice to the city. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON desired to guard against any 
 thing like gerymandering, and would therefore 
 ofler an amendment: add the words" of compact" 
 after the word " inhabitants," so as to make the 
 districts of " compact and contiguous territory." 
 
 Mr. KENNDEY had no objection. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR suggested that this matter 
 could be passed over until the Convention in 
 New York had completed their arrangement of 
 the wards. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said they had adjourned for a 
 month he believed. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that could not be done. The 
 result of the labors of the city convention was 
 first to be passed upon by the people and after- 
 wards ratified by the legislature. 
 
 After some further conversation, Mr. SHEP- 
 ARD offered an amendment, to require the board 
 of supervisors, when they shall have completed 
 such division, to cause a certificate thereof, stat- 
 ing the number and boundaries of the districts 
 
 Chenango and 
 
 Otsego had been long allied by a social and com- 
 mercial intercourse, and their interest were al- 
 most identical, while with Delaware, Chenango 
 had no intercourse at all, and indeed the people 
 of that county were obliged to pass through Otse- 
 go in order to get at Delaware. 
 
 Mr. BURR suggested that Delaware should be 
 erected into a single district, since there seemed 
 to be so much reluctance to be attached to her. 
 She could take care of herself in any position. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS should support the amendment of 
 the gentleman from Chenango, in the hope that 
 if it should prevail, another amendment would be 
 adopted which would relieve Albany of the weight 
 of Schenectady. He should move to take Sche- 
 nectady away from Albany, and add her to Dela- 
 ware and Schoharie, which would make a fair 
 district. 
 
 Mr. WATERS URY opposed the amendment- 
 insisting that there was full as much intercourse 
 between Delaware and Chenango, as between De- 
 laware and Schoharie. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND briefly supported the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK renewed his opposition to the mo. 
 tion, and insisted that ttiere was quite ;is much 
 intercourse between Delaware and Chenango as 
 between Delaware and Otsego. It rnnsl be some 
 other motive thdn the convenience of the people 
 which could induce the change. 
 
 Ivlr. CHATFIELD suppoited the amendment. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON opposed it. as did Mr 
 RHOADKS. 
 
 Alter some further conversation, the question 
 being taken, the amendment was i ejected, ayes 43, 
 nays 47 as follows: 
 
 AYES Angel, Brown, Chatfield, Clark, Cook, Cornell, 
 Dubois, Flanders, Forsyth, Gebhard, Harris, Hunt, Hunter' 
 Hjde, Kennedy, Kirkland, Maxwell, Morris, NicoJJ, O'-' 
 Conor, Perkins, Porter, Powers, President, Richmond, Hik- 
 er, St. John, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepaid, Smith, Stephens 
 Stetson, Stow, Swackhamer, Tait, 1 aggart, Tallmadee' 
 T J. Taylor, Vache, White, Willard, Youngs 43. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Backus 
 Jascom, Bouck, Bowdish, Brayton, Bruce, Camlneleng, 
 D. D. Campbell, Candee, Crooker, Dana, Danforth, Dodd, 
 
467 
 
 Dorlon, Gardner, Harrison, Hawley, Hotchkiss, A. Hunt- 
 ington, Jones, King^ley, Lootnis, McNitt, Marvin, Miller, 
 Ncilis, Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, lihoades, Salisbury, 
 S.-ars, E. Spencer, \V H. Spencer, Stantun, Strong, Town- 
 send. Tuthill, Yanschoonhoven, Waterbury, Wood, \V. 
 B. Wright, Yawger, Young 47. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON laid on the table a motion to 
 reconsider the vote by which Richmond was sepa- 
 rated from Kings. He said that he hoped the 
 New Yoik delegaiion, in arranging the districts, 
 would bear in tuiud that he might be obliged to 
 propose annexing Richmond to one of the lower 
 wards of the city. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved to strike out of the section 
 the words " excepting aliens and peisons of color 
 not taxed" so as to include these classes in the 
 i representation. 
 
 A division ol this question was asked to be first 
 nut on s'Hking out " not taxed." 
 
 Mr. DANA asked whether, it I his last amendment 
 was adopted, it would riot exclude from the basis 
 of voters all colored persons, whether voters or 
 not ? 
 
 Mr O'CONOR replied that it was intended to 
 abolish the present odious discrimination, between 
 persons tax< d and those untaxed and to deter- 
 mine whether we would have them all in or strike 
 them all out. Tne other question would come 
 up in the discus-ion of the report on the elective 
 franchise. 
 
 Mr. DANA said this motion, il it should pre- 
 vail, would cut off from the basis of representa- 
 tion, those persons of color who now had a vote- 
 It was intimated that this was to be lollowed up 
 by a motion to exclude all persons of color from 
 the right of suffrage. Against such monstrous 
 injustice he w.'uld protest as long as he lived. He 
 would evn iaie his voice in favor of exiending 
 the right of suffrage to every one of God's chil 
 dren, be they black or white. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY said that either the gentleman 
 misunderstood the question, or he (Mr. K.) mis- 
 undersiood him This was not a question of suf- 
 frage, but one which i elated merely to the basis 
 of representation, A portion of God's children 
 were now excluded. He would put them all on 
 a par, by s'riking out these words. There were 
 only some 2000 who were taxed, while nearly 40,- 
 000 were excluded. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that there was another as- 
 pect in which this question should be placed. He 
 supposed with due deference to the gentleman 
 from New York (Mr. KENNEDY) that the gentle- 
 man front Madison (Mr. DANA) did understand 
 the question; and that it was the intention of the 
 laMei gtMiilernan to protect a principle which was 
 attacked by the pending amendment, without 
 pretending that the right of suffrage was now di- 
 rectlv in issue. He differed, however, from both 
 the gentlemen. He should vote auamst the 
 amendment foi the reason to which he alluded 
 when he rose, and that was because it proposed 
 to narrow the basis of representation from cities 
 still more than it will be if the present provision 
 H retained. He believed that two wrongs never 
 did make a right, and cannot in the present in- 
 stance. He was opposed to the provision exclud. 
 ing persons of color whether taxed or not taxed. 
 If you exclude those faxed, you increase the num- 
 ber still more than before of persons excluded. 
 
 He would vote to include them all; that is, to 
 
 strike out the whole clause excluding persons of 
 color at all. As to the question of suffrage, which 
 had been alluded to,he had no hesitation in avowing 
 his opinion that he was in favor of retaining the pro- 
 visions of the presentconstitution upon that subject. 
 He would deprive no man ot a right which he alrea- 
 dy possessed, whether he be black or white. It was 
 another question whether we should enfranchise 
 those persons of color who had not hitherto en- 
 joyed the elective right. He would retain it in 
 those who were taxed, because he believed that 
 if they were made to contribute to the expenses 
 of the government, they should be represented. 
 Taxation and representation was the great princi- 
 ple for which our fathers in the Revolution con- 
 tended, and he could not consent to violate that 
 principle by taxing blacks, and refusing them the 
 right to vote. He would either exempt them 
 taxation, or, if that was denied, he would let such 
 of them vote as should be taxed. He did not 
 mean to confine representation to such as were 
 taxed, because he did not believe property was a 
 proper basis of representation ; and he could not 
 on the other hand deny representation to such as 
 had property, which was liable to the expenses 
 of the government. That question had, however, 
 been touched upon only incidentally ; as to the 
 amendment before the Convention, he should 
 vote against it for the reasons first given. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND would ask Mr. M. if after he 
 had taken all these aliens and persons of color 
 into the basis of representation, whether he would 
 let them vote for the officers nominated on account 
 of that representation ? 
 
 Mr. MURPHY was in favor of retaining the 
 Constitution as it was. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that for his own part, 
 whenever he should vote to make any class the 
 basis of representation, he desired also to extend 
 to them the right to vote. He had nothing to say 
 on this particular proposition. 
 
 Mr. HUNT wanted to strike out the words 
 " persons of color not taxed." There were none 
 such who were not taxed, unless they were in 
 State Prison, 
 
 Mr. PERKINS wanted this amended, so as to 
 make the right of representation co-extensive 
 with the right of suffrage. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN hoped all the 
 words in relation to persons of color would be 
 stricken out. To strike out the words " not tax- 
 ed," would be to make an odious distinction be- 
 tween the electors of the State. He was opposed 
 to the present distinction based upon property. 
 
 A VOICE : We propose to abrogate that. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that this was 
 indeed taking time by the forelock, and was pro- 
 posing to work a still greater wrong upon this 
 class. This was indeed openly proposing a re- 
 trogade step. He hoped the day was not far dis- 
 tant when, inasmuch as we had opened the door, 
 and admitted the colored man to be a citizen, that 
 we should place all on a par and admit all to the 
 right of suffrage without reference to color. But 
 the present proposition was a step backward in 
 this day of democratic progress and reform. He 
 trusted this Convention would not sanction such 
 a wrong as was here contemplated. 
 
 Mr. B A SCOM found it convenient to have a 
 rule to govern his action here. He had one ap- 
 
468 
 
 plicable to the case in point. He regarded it as 
 veil settled by this Convention that the basis of 
 representation should be co-extensive with the 
 elective franchise. As it was, persons of color 
 who were taxed were a part of the voting popu- 
 lation. He was not now saying that this was 
 right or wrong, nor should he consider whether 
 the Convention would change the rule or not. 
 He trusted, however, that we should not do as 
 some gentlemen propose, diminish the number of 
 the electoral class. ^What would be the result of 
 the rule established by the gentleman from Rens- 
 selaer, who would admit all the colored people to 
 the right of representation without allowing them 
 to vote ? Why, the same as is now seen in Con- 
 gress, where though the slave population was rep- 
 resented it was only by those who misrepresent- 
 ed their interests in every particular. He would 
 also refer to a case in point. The delegation from 
 New York represented a small portion of these 
 colored citizens, and yet we saw coming from 
 them propositions to strip them still farther of the 
 privileges which they now enjoy. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE felt bound to vote against this mo- 
 tion, because he considered it his duty, as a rep- 
 resentative, to protect as far as he could, the 
 rights of every American citizen. He believed 
 the success of this motion would strike at some 
 of these rights. This was too grave a subject to 
 be decided hastily, and to give time for delibera- 
 tion he moved to adjourn. Lost. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY denied that this question was 
 at all connected with the question of suffrage. He 
 would meet that question when it carne up. This 
 was only whether there should be still kept up 
 the distinction based on taxation. 
 
 The debate was briefly continued by Messrs. 
 BRUCE and KENNEDY, when the motion to strike 
 out the words " not taxed" was voted down. 
 Ayes 13, noes 33. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The roll was called. 
 
 Sixty-five members answered to their names. 
 
 PRESIDENT : A quorum is present. 
 
 Mr. MANN : What is the question, sir, be- 
 fore the House ? 
 
 PRESIDENT: On the motion of the gentle- 
 man from New- York, (Mr. WHITE,) to strike 
 out. 
 
 The motion of Mr. WHITE to strike out "per- 
 sons of color not taxed," in the 7th line of the 
 6th section, was negatived, ayes 29, noes 56, as 
 follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ayrault, Bergen, Brayton, Brown, 
 Bruce, R. Campbell, jr., Chatfield, Gonely, Crocker, Dana 
 Dodd, Flanders, Hunt, Miller, Morris, Nieoll, O'Conor, 
 Rhoades, Shepard, fctevens, Stetson, Swacxhamer, W. 
 Taylor, Townsend, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, White, 
 Witbeck, W. B. Wright-29. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, F. F. Backus, Bascom, Bouck, 
 Bowdish, Carabreleng, D. D. Campbell, Candee, Chamber- 
 lain, Clark, Clyde, Cornell, Cuddeback, Daniorth, Dubois, 
 Gebhard, Harrison, Hart, Hotchkirs, Hunter, A. Hunting- 
 ton, Hyde, Kerable, Kennedy, Kernan, Kirkland, Loomis, 
 Marvin, Maxwell, NeJlis, Nicholas, Parish, Patteison, 
 Penniman, President Richmond, Riker, Russell, Salisbu- 
 ry, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Smith, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, 
 Strong, Taft, Taggart, Taltmadgu, J. J. Taylor, Tuthill, 
 Waterbury, Wood, Yawger, Young, Youngs 56. 
 
 The other part of the motion to strike out the 
 
 word "aliens,' in the same line, was then put and 
 negatived. Ayes 12, noes 78. 
 
 Mr- BASCOM moved as an amendment to add 
 the words, "and excluding also," before "and," in 
 (he 7th line, and also to add the woids, "so long 
 only 39 persons of color shall be excluded from 
 the elective franchise, upon the same terms as 
 white persons." after the words "m>iiaxerl" in the 
 eighth line. He did this in or ier to provide toi 
 making the people of color a part of the basis of. 
 representation whenever they should be admitted 
 lo share the elective franchise upon equal terms 
 with white citizens, it tTiat should ever happen. 
 
 Lost ayes 36, noes 40. 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved to add after the word "ali- 
 ens" in the 8th line, "and except the tin natural- 
 ized wives and widows ol American citizens." 
 Lost, without a division. 
 
 The section was then agreed to. 
 
 The seventh section was then read. 
 
 Mr. W TAYLOR moved to strike out Janua- 
 ry and insert June, as the time when the super- 
 visors should meet to make a division of their 
 conn'ies. 
 
 Mr SHEPARD moved to ir>sert the words "on 
 or before' 7 previous to the word "June.*' He 
 however withdrew it by request. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER objected. Irs June, ail the men 
 in his part of the State engaged in the lumber- 
 is"; business would be down the 'river in and 
 about. New York ciiy. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN : Vote it down. We spent two 
 hours about it the other day. 
 
 Lost aves 39, noes 56. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL, jr., moved to strike out 
 from the 6th to the 17th line, inclusive, (contain- 
 ing the provision that the division of counties 
 shall be made by the board of supervisors.) He 
 did this with a view of having the apportionment 
 made by the Convention and not by the board of 
 Supervisors. 
 
 The motion was lost, as follows : 
 
 A.YKS Messrs. Alltel, Bergen, Bowdish. Brown, Brun- 
 dage, R. Campbell, jr.." Chatfield, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dan- 
 forth, Dubois, Hunt, Hntchinson, Kernan, Nellis.O'Conor, 
 Shaw, Sheldon, Shepaid, smith, btetsou, Swackhamer, J. 
 J. Taj lor, W. Taylor, Tuthill, Yawger ii6. 
 
 NAYS Messrs Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Eas- 
 com Bouck, Brayton, Bruce, Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. 
 Campbell, Chamberlain, Clark, Clyde, Conely, Crooker, 
 Dana, Dodd, Flanders, Gardner, Gebhard, Harrison, Hart, 
 Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Huntington, E. Huntington, Hyde, 
 Kemble, Kennedy, Kirkland, Loomis, Marvin, Maxwell, 
 Miller, Morris, Nicholas, Nicoll, Parish, I'atemHi, Penni- 
 man, Powers, President, Richmond, Riker, St. John, Salis- 
 bury, S firs, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Slow, 
 Strong, Taggart, Talimadge, Townsend, Van Schoonho- 
 veu.Wanen, Waterbury, White Willard, Witbeck.Wood, 
 Canute, Cook, Harris, W.B. Wright, Younir, Youngs 66. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUG moved to amend in the llth 
 line, by inserting after " entitled by law," as fol- 
 lows : Except the counties of Wyoming and 
 Genesee ; the former of which shall be divided 
 into two districts, and the latter shall constitute 
 one district." 
 
 Mr. YOUNG said that Wyoming had now 2000 
 more people than Genesee, and he wanted Wyo- 
 ming to have the additional representative. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said this was almost as great, a 
 gag as the live minute rule. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON, after expressing his regret 
 that the Convention had not consented to increase 
 the number of members of the assembly, and thu* 
 
469 
 
 equalize in some measure, the representation, so 
 as to give to the smaller counties, with large frac- 
 tions, their just weight went on to urge that, 
 taking things as we found them, we were bound 
 to remedy such gross inequalities as now existed 
 between these two counties. Wyoming had a 
 larger population than Genesee, by some 2,51)0, 
 and ought to have two members. We had under- 
 taken to vary the apportionment of senators made 
 last winter, and why not that for the assembly ? 
 New York had a small fraction over 15 members, 
 Clinton has 9000 over Queen's and Suffolk, 
 Wyoming and Genessee to be entitled to 2 mem- 
 bers each, until the last apportionment ; and then 
 Genesee having a few more population than 
 Wyoming, got the extra number ,since then Wyo- 
 mi'ng has had 5000 inhabitants added from Alle- 
 gany, &c. and now has 2500 more than Genesee. 
 Genesee having only a litHe over 28,000 and 
 Wyoming having about 31,000. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG insisted that the appor- 
 tionment of last winter being based upon the last 
 census, was right as it stood then, and ought not 
 to be changed, because by annexation, Wyoming 
 had since come to exceed Genesee. That appor- 
 tionment was constitutional and binding for ten 
 years, and could not and ought not to be disturb- 
 ed unless we went through the state, and con- 
 formed it to the existing population in all cases. 
 He urged also that it would be a mischievous pre- 
 cedent, and upon the recurrence of a new census 
 and apportionment, would justify a legislature in 
 changing county lines with a view to securing a 
 party advantage in the representation. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD urged that the last appor- 
 tionment should stand, or we ought to revise it 
 throughou . In that event, perhaps, both these 
 counties might lose the member, and Clinton get 
 it for we had a right to take into consideration 
 an increase from natural causes, as well as an in- 
 crease by legislative act. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER insisted that we were bound to 
 remedy existing inequalities, and especially where 
 such inequalities were glaring and were so upon 
 the census itself. The census showed that Wyom- 
 ing now had some 2500 greater population than 
 Genesee ; and she was justly entitled to the two 
 members. 
 
 Mr. STETSON, after some brief remarks in 
 which he insisted that Clinton, by natural in- 
 crease since the census, had a larger fraction than 
 either Wyoming or Genesee, moved to give Clin- 
 ton two and Genesee one member. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY enquired whether the gentle- 
 man had not had a legislative transfer of popula- 
 tion to his county by reason of the erection of the 
 state prison there. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that was more of a judicial 
 transfer. 
 
 Mr. MILLER insisted that this question had 
 been fully discussed and he would move the pre- 
 vious question. He waived it however and the 
 question being taken, Mr. STETSON'S amendment 
 was voted down. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY thought if Wyoming was to 
 gain a member at the expense of any county, it 
 should be at the expense of Allegany 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG replied that Allegany had 
 still enough to entitle her to two. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. YOUNG was negatived 
 ayes 17, noes 69 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. F. F. Backus. Bergen, Brundacce, Burr, 
 Chamberlnin, Crocker, Dana, Danibrth, Dorlon. Morris-, 
 Murphy, Patterson, Penniman, Swackhamcr, Tallmadge, 
 J.J.Taylor, Young 17. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, H. Backus, Bascom, Bowdish, 
 Brayton. Brown, Cambreleng, D. D Campbell, R Camp, 
 bell, jr., Candee, ChatfieH, Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cornell, 
 Cuddeback, Dubois, Flanders, Gardner, Gebhard", Harrison, 
 Hart, Hotchkiss, Hunt. Hunter, A. Huntington, E. Hun- 
 tington, Hntchinson, Hyde, Kemble, Kennedy, Kirkland, 
 Loomis, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Nellis, Nicholas, O'- 
 Conor, Parish, Powers, President, Richmond, Rii-er, Rus- 
 sell, St. John, Salisbury, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, 
 Smith, E. Spencer, W.H. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, 
 Taft, Tagerart. \V. Taylor, Townsend, Tuthill, Warren, 
 White, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, Yawger, Youngs-69. 
 
 Mr. COOK and Mr. HARRIS had permission 
 to record their votes in the negative on the pro- 
 position of Mr. CAMPBELL, that the Board of Su- 
 pervisors should not be allowed to make the ap- 
 portionment of members of Assembly. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to amend so that the 
 counties should be divided into districts of as 
 compact form as may be. 
 
 There was a brief debate on this, when at the 
 suggestion of Mr. LOOMIS, the word convenient 
 was substituted for compact and the amendment 
 thus varied was adopted. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM was confident that this word 
 " convenient" would rather tend to increase the 
 evil it sought to guard against. He laid on the 
 table a motion for the reconsideration of the vote. 
 
 The 7th section was then agreed to. 
 
 The 9th section (in relation to the pay of mem- 
 bers) was then read. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out that por- 
 tion which gives the Speaker of the Assembly an 
 additional compensation. 
 
 After a brief debate this was rejected. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to adjourn. 
 Lost. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved an amendment limiting 
 the sessions of the Legislature to 100 days, instead 
 of the section as it now stands. ($3 a day but the 
 aggregate not to exceed $300 ) Lost. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to strike out that portion 
 which declares that a member of the Legislature 
 shall receive no pay during his absence from the 
 Legislature, but before taking the question he 
 moved to adjourn, which was agreed to. 
 
 FRIDAY, (50th day,} July 31. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. McDoNOUGH. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that since the select 
 committee, appointed to prepare a digest of the 
 returns of fees and causes, &,c., from county 
 clerks, surrogates, judges, chancellors, &c., had 
 made their report to the Convention, a number of 
 other returns had been received. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY wished these also to be referred 
 and digested. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR thought they had better go 
 ot the judiciary commtttee. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND wanted them kept safely so 
 that the Convention could have the information 
 when needed. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE : Send them to the judiciary com- 
 mittee then ; they will be kept safely there ; for 
 you will never hear of them again. 
 
 They were sent to the select committee of five. 
 
470 
 
 APPORTIONMENT, &c., OF THE LEGISLATURE. 
 
 The motion of Mr. BROWN, to strike out the 
 restriction of pay to members of the assembly, be- 
 ing announced, 
 
 Mr. BROWN said he yesterday felt it to be his 
 duty to move to strike out so much of the report, 
 of the committee' of the whole, as proposed to 
 withhold the pay of members of the senate and 
 assembly during absence from legislative duty. 
 The provision which it was his purpose to ex- 
 punge does not he was happy to say come to 
 us from the standing committee, charged with 
 the subject, but was inserted, as he understood 
 upon the motion of the honorable gentleman from 
 Ontario, (Mr. WORDEN,) while the report was 
 under the consideration of the committee of the 
 whole. If he understood the object of the mover, 
 it was to compel the attendance of those members 
 who habitually absent themselves from their pub- 
 lic duties to the detriment of the public service. 
 The provision would accomplish no such pur- 
 pose. If there were a class of idlers amongst the 
 members who occupied their time in visiting the 
 various places of amusement in this city and its 
 vicinity and he was informed there were such 
 they would not be reached by this provision. 
 They would take care to attend in their places 
 and answer upon a call for the ayes and noes once 
 a day and thus make out a claim to the compen- 
 sation which could not be resisted, and the evil 
 of absence would remain wholly uncorrected. 
 The remedy for such irregularities lies with the 
 constituent body, and they will hardly fail to ap- 
 ply it with a readiness and a severity far more ef- 
 fectual than withholding a few day's pay. There 
 is however a class of members, like the honora- 
 ble mover of the provision itself, conscientious 
 men who devote their whole time to the service 
 of the state, except a day now and then given to 
 their families, who would be deprived of a por- 
 tion of their small, and he would say inadequate 
 compensation, should the provision be retained. 
 It was not however on their account alone, that 
 he moved to strike it out. It was an amend- 
 ment wholly unworthy of the dignity of this 
 Convention and of the really high" minded 
 man, to whom it owed its existence, and for one 
 he should not conceal his shame, if it was retained 
 in the Constitution. To say to a man, whatever 
 may be the value, and fidelity of his services, " if 
 you go home to visit your family, if you give up 
 a single day to the claims of friendship or private 
 interest, if you devote a moment to the happiness 
 of those who are near and dear to you, you shall 
 enter into a beggarly account with the state, for 
 the time thus withdrawn from the public, service" 
 is language he was sure the members of this Con- 
 vention, were not prepared to hold to any one. 
 The compensation established, by the Constitu- 
 tion of 1821, was three dollars per day a sum 
 small enough in all conscience, considering the 
 expenses incident to living in this city. If any 
 change was made, it should be, in favor, of a 
 a larger compensation. And he felt no hesita- 
 tion in saying, that a proposition to allow 
 the legislature liberty to increase if they saw 
 fit the per diem to four or over five dollars, 
 would command his concurrence and approba- 
 tion. He had never occupied a seat in the Sen- 
 ate or Assembly, and there was no probability 
 
 that he ever would do so. He could speak there, 
 (ore, from the convictions of his own mind, and 
 with the most perfect assurance, those he repre- 
 sented, would do justice to his motives. The ef- 
 fect of the provision under consideration, was to 
 reduce the compensation, and to make it really 
 less, than it had been, since the first few years 
 of the independence ot the State. He had never 
 been able to comprehend, why services rendered 
 in the Legislature, were valued so low. There 
 certainly was no wisdom in rhos depressing and 
 lessening the popular branch of the government. 
 There was certainly nothing in the character or 
 the capacity ot those who were expected to rep- 
 resent, and who did represent the country in the 
 legislative body, tojuslity such an estimate. They 
 were almost universally, a respectable, influential 
 and capable body of men, taken largely from the 
 agricultural classes, and would, he ventured to say, 
 compare advantageously with the legislators of 
 any other State in the Union. And they would 
 continue to maintain this position until their moral 
 and intellectual character was reduced by impu- 
 tations upon their honor and integrity engrafted 
 upon the fundamental law*. Is there any thing in 
 the business of legisldtion which demands or jus. 
 tifies a narrow measure of compensation ? By no 
 means. State legislation has been guilty of some 
 transgiessions and fallen into many errors, but the 
 remedy will not be found in withdrawing a lew 
 dollars from the pay of the members. The busi- 
 ness of making laws requires ^ood sense, a vigor- 
 ous understanding, some knowledge of public 
 business, some learning, purity of character, and 
 some industry and power of application. The 
 representative body is the depository of the 
 public will for the time being, and should always 
 reflect the judgment of the public mind. 
 Without a virtuous and upright legislature there 
 is little security for private rights or public liber- 
 ty. When the legislative body is habitually cor- 
 rupt, or habitually degraded, public liberty can 
 hardly be said to exist, and happiness, and moral 
 excellence, do not characterize the mass of the 
 people. Let us do no act to lessen the respect 
 due to this department of the government. In 
 the Convention of 1S21, the pay of the members 
 was reduced to $3 per day. The consequences 
 were felt for many years after. The legislature 
 established the salaries of the judicial officers 
 upon a scale somewhat similar to their own, and 
 for many years, refused to make any change. 
 The compensation of the circuit judge an office 
 of great labor and responsibility, and one which 
 subjects the incumbent to great expense remained 
 fora long time at $1250 His honorable friend from 
 Dutchess (Mr. RUGGLKS) discharg. <! the duties of 
 circuit jutltie, and vice chancellor >f the second cir- 
 cuit, with acknowledged ability Cor 15 years, at a 
 compensation of $1250 for a part of the time, and 
 $1600 for the residue. The duties of the office 
 w r ere laborious, and severe in the extreme, involv- 
 ing often times the loss of health, and if the in- 
 cumbent had been charged with the maintainence 
 of a family, the salary would have been wholly 
 insufficient for that purpose. This and similar 
 acts, were the natural and necessary consequences 
 of the limitation put upon legislative compensa- 
 tion, by the Constitution of '21. He was sure this 
 was not the way in which the people of New 
 
471 
 
 York designed to remunerate faithful public ser- 
 vices. He would look however and see whether, 
 upon this question of compensation equal and ex- 
 act justice had been observed to all men. Ante- 
 rior to the year 1840, while the members of the 
 Senate arid Assembly were paid at the rate of 
 $1095 a year, the clerk of the Supreme Court, 
 the Register and assistant Register in Chancery, 
 each received more than $10,000 a year, or public 
 rumor did them injustice. Since '40 these same offi- 
 cers are paid salaries of $2000,and $2500 a year for 
 services rendered in their own offices, and in the 
 immediate vicinity of their own homes. No one 
 has ventured to say the compensation is exhorbi- 
 tant, although it is twice as much as we propose 
 to give to members of the Senate and Assembly. 
 The Clerks of the Court of Chancery receive from 
 $1200 to $1600 per year. From the docu- 
 ments on the table, he saw that in 1845, the Sur- 
 rogate of the city of New York received in fees 
 $8179 67 the Surrogate of Dutchess $3,244 29 ; 
 the Surrogate of Orange $1738 38 and the Clerk 
 of the County of Orange $2891 24. He selected 
 these officers because they resided in his part of 
 the State, and not because their compensation was 
 greater than similar officers in other places ; for 
 he found such was not the case. The office of 
 Clerk and Surrogate and Register in Chancery, 
 required no more mind and no more labor, than 
 that of Senator or member of Assembly, and it 
 would be very difficult to establish to the satisfac- 
 tion of the people why there should be so wide a 
 difference in the measure of their compensation. 
 The true rule to apply to every Question of this 
 kind is that vvtich prevails in all the transactions 
 of private life If we require useful and valuable 
 services, and hope for beneficial results, true eco- 
 nomy best comports with a just and liberal mea- 
 sure of compensation, The provision which he 
 moved to strike out was obnoxious for another 
 reason. It was in hostility to the established 
 usage of every known government. Even the 
 most despotic do not require the entire time of 
 their public servants under pain of docking their 
 compensation. No such rule obtained in the ar- 
 my and navy, where the service was severe and 
 the discipline strict. When the Governor, the 
 State officers, the Chancellor or the Judges of the 
 Supreme Court,choose to abstract themselves from 
 their laborious official duties for recreation, relax- 
 ation, or tor any other purpose-, the public Uo not 
 look lor a corresponding deduction Irom iheir an- 
 nual compensation, although greatly larger than the 
 pay oi the Senators and members of Assembly. 
 There are upon this flooi geulb-men holding 
 places of no inconsiderable emolument under the 
 gL-ncr.il government. Tru-y intend doubtl.^s 10 
 be i euiuneraied lor the services rendered here. 
 It he failed iu stiikmg out this obnoxious amend- 
 ment, will these Hon. gentleman in the face of 
 the judgment of this Convention, cling to the 
 double compensation ? They would not, he was 
 sure. And if they wnulci not, to which govern- 
 ment that at Washington, or that at Albany- 
 will they account tor the excess? When citizens 
 are called into the public service and appointed 
 or elected to office it is always with the im- 
 plied undemanding, that they are at liberty 
 to employ a small portion of their time, 
 not incompatible with the performance of their 
 
 public duties in their private affairs without 
 such an understanding, who but a man nidifler-Mit 
 to the most s-olemn obligations of human life, 
 would consent fo take upon himself a public ern- 
 ploymen! ? Who would take an office, if such an 
 act implied the abandonment of home, the ne- 
 glect of children, and the severing even for a 
 time of those ties, which bind the human heart to 
 the fireside and the family altar? He had himself 
 been home during the session of this body, and 
 expected to go again, when it could be done with 
 propriety. He also expected to rec"ive his pay, 
 as he believed every other member did, who wag 
 in his situation, and he would do by the Senators 
 and members of Assembly as he would be done 
 by himself. Upon principle and universal usage, 
 the provision to withhold the pay of members du- 
 ring temporary absence, must be abandpned. He 
 therefore called upon every honorable man to 
 unite with him in voting to strike it out. If any 
 change was made in that part of the Constitution 
 which provides for the compensation of the mem- 
 bers of the legislature, let it be to enlarge the li- 
 mitation, and leave them power to increase it, to 
 a reasonable extent themselves, under their re- 
 sponsibility to the constituent body. He was sure 
 our action would meet with the approbation of 
 the great mass of the people who were too just 
 and too generous to accept the services of men 
 qualified to make theii laws without an adequate 
 remuneration 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said that he could not agree with 
 the gentleman from Orange, (Mr. BROWN.) He 
 had never heard that the State had ever suffered 
 since the present constitution was adopted for 
 want of legislators. He had never heard any 
 grumbling about the pay of legislators. In 25 
 years' experience under the present system, it 
 had not been found impossible to at all times ob 
 tain competent and able men to perform the duty 
 of legislators, nor had there been complaints oil 
 the part of the legislature itself, that the pay was 
 not sufficient. A great number of the members 
 are farmers ; they come here in the winter when 
 there is little to do; and consider $3 a day a good 
 equivalent for their services. There might have 
 been some gentleman of the profession, like the 
 gentleman from Orange, lawyers and others, who 
 were either more avaricious or deserved more fees 
 than others, but it was not a matter of general 
 complaint that the pay of a member was inade 
 quate. He thought the gentleman was dealing in 
 false thunder, when he compared that pay to the 
 enormous salaries received by some of the judi- 
 cial officers of the State. Was it not one of the 
 duties of this convention to provide a remedy for 
 this extravagance ? He did not believe the argu- 
 ment of the gentleman could have influence here. 
 Is it not a great cause of complaint that the offi- 
 cers of our government receive such large sala- 
 ries, make such exorbitant charges, in the shape 
 of fees? And he (Mr. B.) hoped that the Con- 
 vention would take means to give only a fair and 
 adequate compensation to officers of the govern- 
 ment; and beyond this he would not go. The 
 people would insist on this being done. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said they were detained the best 
 part of a day, a short time since, in listening to 
 tirades against the Legislature*. Attempts were 
 made to impeach the integrity of the Legislature 
 
472 
 
 and to restrict the sessions to 90 days. He had 
 then defended the Legislature and pronounced 
 the charges unjust. He voted to strike out the 
 restrictions on the Legislature, and to make the 
 pay $3 a day, all the time. He considered $3 a 
 day totally inadequate for their services ; but he 
 disapproved of inducing the Convention to increase 
 the pay. He went on to pay the highest possible 
 eulogium on the Legislatures of New- York. No 
 p'olicy could be so mischievous as to tie up the 
 action of the Legislature to 90 days' session, or 
 to restrict their pay too much. He regretted that 
 his friend (Mr. BROWN) had not been here when 
 this proposition was discussed. His able argu- 
 ments might have then had force. It was more 
 than intimated that the public time had been 
 wasted for the mere purpose of obtaining the 
 pittance of the per diem allowance. Propositions 
 were made conveying direct and unmerited im- 
 putations upon the Legislature. This Mr. W. 
 combatted, and here again reiterated that such 
 charges were unfounded. Public economy re- 
 quired that Legislators should be well paid. If 
 they did not get their pay from the State, they 
 would get it elsewhere. Look at the House of 
 Commons, where no pay was given, but where 
 often 20,000 or 30,000 is spent to obtain a seat. 
 What was the result? No one could hold a seat 
 there unless he possessed great wealth, and none 
 but the representatives of the aristocracy were 
 returned to that House and there the patronage 
 of office is a sufficient compensation. The great 
 mass of the people had no representation. So 
 here ; make the pay inadequate, and you fill 
 these halls with none but rich men. This sys- 
 tem will not answer in a free country like ours. 
 Mr. W. proceeded to speak of the proposition be- 
 fore the committee. It had been offered to defeat 
 an amendment limiting the sessions absolutely to 
 90 days. Such a proposition would have been 
 productive of bad results. There was much of 
 hasty and crude legislation growing out of too 
 short sessions. He trusted now we should come 
 back to the proposition of his colleague (Mr. NI- 
 CHOLAS) which left this matter where the pre- 
 sent Constitution left it. As to the question of 
 absenteeism, Mr. W. pointed to the great abuses 
 which had grown up during the past few years. 
 Last session, business was delayed more than 
 three weeks for want of a two-thirds quorum. 
 Members would absent themselves and could not 
 be kept here and then many questions had to be 
 reconsidered that had been decided in their ab- 
 sence. Mr. W. had offered this proposition as a 
 compromise. But after the very able and con- 
 vincing argument of the gentleman from Orange 
 he hoped we should reconsider this whole mat- 
 ter, and leave the question as it now stood in the 
 Constitution. Every member undoubtedly ought 
 to attend to his duties, but it was not always done 
 and could not be entirely corrected, and this pro- 
 position was a compromise between various ones 
 that were suggested. As to our legislature and 
 this Convention they would compare with the 
 first legislative bodies of Europe or any part of 
 the Union, and New York ought to be proud of 
 these bodies. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER hoped that this restric- 
 tion would not be put into the constitution, not to 
 allow members to go home and see their families 
 
 without deducting the per diem allowance for the 
 time they are absent. It was too small a matter 
 for the consideration of this convention. He 
 would not allow members of the legislature to fix 
 their own pay, but they were perfectly compe- 
 tent to fix the salaries of their successors. From 
 his peculiar and almost solitary position on this 
 subject, (as there was but one other member si- 
 milarly situated,) he had deemed it his duty to say 
 a word upon this question, although loth to take 
 up the time of the convention. He had made a 
 proposition heretofore to limit the pay of mem- 
 bers after a certain period of their session to $1 
 50 per day. But he was willing now to move that 
 their pay should be increased to $5 per day, that 
 the dignity of the State might be sustained, and 
 its public servants fully paid. His only object in 
 his previous motion was to limit the period of the 
 annual sessions. Nor did he believe it was a fair 
 or generous proposition that members should be 
 docked ior every day's absence from their seats in 
 this chamber. ' It was true that we had always 
 been able to obtain competent legislators, but of- 
 ten at the pecuniary loss of those who patrioti- 
 cally volunteered to give up a small business, for 
 the purpose of serving the people for a smaller 
 compensation than the income of their legitimate 
 business. As to the remark of the gentleman 
 from Orange, in regard to the officers of the Uni- 
 ted States Government who were members of this 
 body, he assured him that the rule adopted in the 
 Custom House at New York, where he held an 
 office, with regard to what some would term the 
 small fry ;" that is not the " big bugs," or first 
 class officers, was that when there was no work 
 there should be no pay a very good rule, too, ex- 
 cept when applied to the pay of the members of 
 the Legislature. So the gentleman from Orange 
 might be at ease in regard to his receiving double 
 pay- 
 Mi. BROWN said he did not make his remark 
 in an unkind spirit. He had sincerely hoped he 
 received pay lor both offices. He certainly thought 
 his services were worthy of it. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that as such were 
 the gentleman'* feelings towards him he certainly 
 couivi make no reply to that remark. 
 
 Mr.KlKKLAlSD Hn-imhi that this entire sec- 
 (ion and all us amendments were unworthy the 
 dignity ut this body and ot this State. Togo into 
 a paltry calculation ot a lew dollars and cents upon 
 the question of the ability of the members uf our 
 Legislature to serve their constituents, yr as to 
 the value of then services, he believed to be de- 
 ro^atorv to the people, and to this body a the re- 
 presentatives o; the people. He did not believe 
 I hat we should not have Confidence in ihose 
 .vhom the people have put in their own place, to 
 make then lavvs. We were not to supp<se that 
 they would at all times hold themselves amena- 
 ble to that public opinion which w.is the true cem- 
 servaior ot legislation and ot government He 
 wished to treat (lie Leyisiatuie wi'.h that respect 
 they were entitled lo i.s representatives of the 
 people; and not to have the Constitution incuni- 
 bered with paltiy details ot dollars and cents. To 
 get rid ot the wnoie detail ot this question, and 
 ,.ll discussion in relation to striking out threedol- 
 lars or three cents a day, or any other amount, he 
 had an amendment, which he would send up, 
 
473 
 
 and which he hoped wonld receive the assent of 
 the gentlemen who had spoken upon this question. 
 His amendment was as follows: 
 
 Strike out the entire section and insert 
 
 " The compensation of members of the Senate and As- 
 sembly shall be fixed by law ; but no Legislature shall in- 
 crease the compensation of its own members beyond the 
 amount established by law at the time of their election." 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was i-i favor of Mr. K 's plan. 
 This matter ought to be left to the Legislature ; 
 and employ merely dignified and proper limita- 
 tions. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR thought it would be much 
 the best to restore the section to what it was in 
 the old Constitution. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said after the sensible and just 
 view taken of this subject by several gentlemen 
 who have addressed the Convention this morning 
 it may be unnecessary for him to enlarge upon 
 what has been said, but he rose to say that if the 
 gentleman from Orange (Mr. BROWN) was dispos. 
 ed to withdraw his amendment, he Mr. N. would 
 be glad to renew his, to fix the maximum perdiem 
 pay of members at $3 and then leave the whole 
 matter as it now is in the Constitution. As to 
 the provision, preventing members from receiving 
 pay, should they be called home by the sickness 
 of their family, or any domestic calamity, he Mr. 
 N. had always disapproved of it. A man of in- 
 tegrity will not intermit his attention to his offi- 
 cial duties without good and sufficient reasons, but 
 when he is required by circumstances beyond his 
 control to incur the expense of a journey home, 
 and with the permission of the body of which he 
 is a member, he should not be subjected to an 
 abatement ot his pay on account of such absence 
 If the peo;.lew,il send men of loose morals fiere 
 they w'ill evade this restriction ; if you will impose 
 it, they will always feign excuses to bring them- 
 selves within the exception of sickness. Not one 
 day's pay will be withheld from such men, and 
 the only effect of the provision will be to do in- 
 justice to honest representatives, and to perpetuate 
 a temptation to men wanting integrity to evade 
 the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY had not heard complaints 
 among the people that the pay of members of the 
 Legislature was too much. But he had heart 
 complaints that they were spending too much time 
 in discussing subjects which had no relation to 
 their duties, and in making political capital. The 
 unnecessary length of the sessions would be avoid 
 ed, perhaps, when the Legislature should be re 
 lieved from much of the small matters of legisla 
 tion which now devolved upon them. The pa) 
 he believed to be a very fair compensation, and i 
 three dollars could obtain talent equal to that ir 
 Congress, at eight dollars, or in the Parliamen 
 of Great Britain, as the gentleman from Ontari 
 (Mr. WORDEN) had said, he could not go for in 
 creasing it. He thought the amendment offeree 
 by that gentleman, and adopted, a g^ood one, an 
 should vote to sustain it, believing it desirable, i 
 possible, to secure attention to public duty b 
 public servants. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN was himself abou 
 to propose to strike out. He did not believe th 
 proposition could be carried into effect so as^ t 
 effect a single dollar of the pay of members. Th 
 term sickness was unlimited in its meaning, an 
 
 34 
 
 ie members, if they desired, could always fur- 
 ish excuses of that kind, and no legislature 
 fould hesitate to receive such an excuse. He 
 bought it very small business to insert such a 
 revision in the Constitution. And further, where 
 ie State would save a dollar by this, they would 
 ose ten or fifteen in trying a case of this kind, 
 ""here were many men, members of the Legisla- 
 ure,who could make in their own business double 
 tie amount of their per diem, and he therefore 
 id not believe that any member ever desired to 
 xtend the session for the sake of his three dol- 
 ars a day. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART continued the debate, in favor 
 f striking out the amendment ot Mr. WORDEN. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG appealed to the Convention 
 gainst spending too much time in debate. Com- 
 laintswere coming in thicker and faster, that so 
 ittle progress was made. 
 
 Mr. E. SPENCER believed the subject had been 
 iscussed long enough ; and hoped the question 
 vould be taken. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH was in favor of limiting the 
 essionto 90 days, which he believed was a period 
 f sufficient length for all practical purposes. But 
 e hoped the Convention would, with a great de- 
 ree of unanimity, agree to strike out the obnox- 
 ous provision that men who come hereupon their 
 lonor shall be called to account for every hour 
 hat they find it necessary to be absent from the 
 Hou*e. Nor did he believe it just that the pay 
 hould be deducted when they were absent at their 
 lomes for a few days during the session. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY. And paying for board here 
 it the same time. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY would apply the same rule to 
 he public officers hat individuals did to their 
 igents. No one would pay their agent their regu- 
 ar per diem allowance while he was riding about 
 he counny, to New York or Boston. He demand, 
 ed the aves and noes. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS concluded the discussion, in fa- 
 or of retaining the present sec'ion ; when the mo- 
 ion of Mr. BROWN was agreed to ayes 81, nays 
 22, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Ayrault, F. F. Backus H. Back- 
 us, Bergen, Bouck, Bowdisb, Bray ton, Brown, BulJ. Cam- 
 breleng D. D. Capmbell, U. Campbell, jr. Candee. i ham- 
 berlain, Chatheld Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cook, Cornell 
 Crooker, Cuddebsck Danforth, Dorlon.Forsyth, GeMiard' 
 Harrison, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington E' 
 Huntmgton, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, Jordan, Kem'ble' 
 Kennedy, Reman, Kingsley, Kirkland, McNeil, McNitt 
 Marvin, Maxwell, Miller. Morris, Murphy, Nellis Nicho' 
 las, Nicoll, O'Conor. Parish, Perkins, Powers. Rhoades 
 Richmond, Riker, Russell, Seers, Shaw, Sheldon Shep-' 
 ard, Smith. E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stephens Strt- 
 son, Strong, Swackhnmer, Taggart, J. J. Taylor, W Tav- 
 lor. Tuthill.Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, White, 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Archer, Bascom, Burr, Dana Dodd 
 Dubois, Flanders, Gardner, Harris, Patterson, St. John* 
 Salisbury, Simmons, Stanton, Talt, Tallmadee. Town' 
 sefid, Waterbury, Willard, W. B. Wright, Yawfer.Youngs 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to strike out all the sec- 
 tion down to the word " route," and insert 
 
 " The members of the legislature shall receive for their 
 service, a compensation to be ascertained by law and paid 
 out ol the public treasury. But no increase of compensa 
 tion shall Uke effect during the year in which it shall 
 have been made, nor shall any law be passed increasing 
 the compensation of the members of the legislature be- 
 yond the cum of three dollars per day." 
 
474 
 
 Mr. WHITE called for the yeas and nays, and 
 they were ordered. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend the 
 amendment, by adding: 
 
 '' Nor shall any session of the legislature extend beyond 
 the period of ninety days, except in cases of war, insurrec- 
 tion, or invasion." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called for the yeas and nays, 
 and they were ordered. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL urged that as a large amount of 
 the business which had formerly occupied the le- 
 gislature would be withdrawn, that therefore 
 there was no necessity for limiting the session. 
 And also instances might arise where it would be 
 necessary for the public interests to extend the 
 session. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that it had always been 
 held that the Legislature was a barrier against 
 the encroachments on the freedom and liberty of 
 the people. To limit these sessions would there- 
 fore be to destroy the efficiency of its power. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that the Legislature was the 
 palladium of popular rights, and that restrictions 
 of this nature upon it would only tend to endan- 
 ger those rights and the liberties of the people. 
 If the sessions were too long, that was a matter to 
 be corrected by the people themselves, in their 
 action in electing members. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said thai if he should 
 remain silent after the almost overwhelming as- 
 saults made against his amendment by able mem- 
 bers of this body, it might be thought that he had 
 submitted an indefensible proposition, perhaps for 
 the amusement of members, and not with the ex- 
 pectation of accomplishing any good. He was 
 not, however, frightened from his propriety, nor 
 would he permit the proposition to be stifled 
 while breathing its first breath, without one ef- 
 fort at least to resuscitate it. This was the fiist 
 occasion on which he was compelled to differ, in 
 this manner, from his colleague (Mr. MURPHY.) 
 Although he was always pleased to co-operate 
 with his associate on this floor, yet duty required 
 that he should press IMS amendment now before 
 the Convention. His colleague (Mr. MURPHY) 
 had characterized his proposition as quack medi- 
 cine, unworthy the Convention, the Legislature or 
 the people ot this sjreat State that it reflected on 
 the Legislature which was sent here to protect 
 the people,and which was one of fh J ir safe-guards 
 and therefore we needed no such checks on their 
 action. He did not care about the name so long 
 as it proved a specific for the contagious malady 
 of long speech making, long sessions of the Le- 
 gislature, and the passage of innumerable acts so 
 ambiguous, intricate and ridiculous that those 
 who make them cannot understand their mean- 
 ing or appreciate their import. It was to 
 remedy these disorders in the government that 
 he would administer the dose of medicine which 
 it was feared by some would cure the evil too 
 soon. It was his opinion, with due deference to 
 his colleague, that it was a prerogative of the 
 Convention, in behalf of the people, to prescribe 
 the duty of the Legislature to say when it shall 
 meet and when it shall adjourn what it may, 
 and what it may not do. One of the greatest 
 causes of complaint was that the Legislature had 
 assumed too much power that our agents ' left 
 undone that which they ought to have done, and 
 
 done that which they should not do." They 
 have taxed some of our citizens for the benefit of 
 others they have granted special privileges to 
 the favored few, and refused them to the many. 
 They have neglected to pass general laws and 
 held long sessions, to make political capital for 
 Presidents and Governors in advance, for the peo- 
 ple. They have refused to simplify our laws and 
 reorganize the judiciary. They have created a 
 host of useless offices for the benefit of party. 
 Yes, all these evils and many more have been in- 
 flicted upon the community by the immaculate 
 Legislature, until one loud and deep voice has 
 gone up from every quarter of the State in favor 
 of anew Constitution, which will effect the re- 
 form demanded. Yet, we are told, that it is 
 sacrilegious even to look at this formidable power. 
 It was not material to him whether the amend- 
 ment he had just submitted passed or not. He 
 would prefer the section as it now stands, for it 
 provided in effect for the same thing, but if it was 
 to be amended as proposed by his colleague, then 
 he was anxious that his amendment should pass, 
 for he believed the Convention was ready to adopt 
 some such provision in conformity with the clear- 
 ly expressed wish of the people. The gentleman 
 from Ontario (Mr. MARVIN,) had also assailed his 
 proposition, but he (Mr. S.) would not admit that 
 declamation was argument, if it was there could 
 not be a shadow of his amendment left, for the 
 gentleman came down on it like a thunder shower 
 in a hot day. He (Mr. MARVIN,) had taken the 
 same track as his colleague, but he had gone one 
 step farther ; he could not stop short of dear 
 old England, as though she had any thing 
 to d^o with making a republican constiflkion. 
 The gentleman denounces this plan for limit- 
 ing the sessions of the Legislature as an anti- 
 republican, iron-bedstead rule, and as undignified. 
 He also speaks of the British parliament as the 
 great foundation of liberty and school of instruc- 
 tion for the people. This may be so, he would 
 not deny it, but if is true, the down-trodden mil- 
 lions of England have paid their masters well for 
 their instruction in political science. It was a 
 strange view of political ethics that taught op- 
 pressed and degraded man to respect free institu- 
 tions, yet compelled him to adore royal birth and 
 bow the head to the sceptre of despotism. That 
 teaches him to appreciate freedom of conscience, 
 while it virtually requires him to worship God 
 contrary to its dictates, or compels him to labor 
 for the support of ministers who have not his con- 
 fidence, and churches that he cannot attend. That 
 learns him submission to a government in defence 
 of which he must shed his blood but denies him 
 a voice in its administration. From such a school 
 he hoped the American people would never re- 
 ceive instructions. But the gentleman lias other 
 reasons American reasons for opposing the 
 amendment. He considered the legislature a 
 first rate school for our people, and therefore 
 the members must be allowed to sit here 
 five or six months for our benefit, and to enlight- 
 en the large children of this State. Perhaps it 
 would be well to erect another Normal School 
 one in the Capitol. But he thought the one 
 proposed to be continued was on too large a scale, 
 it would be too expensive. Ano'her objection was 
 that it excluded females to this he was also op- 
 
475 
 
 posed he went for equal rights. Besides the 
 largo boys to be connected with the new estab- 
 lishment, ought to be proud of the honor of 
 teaching the people of this state the theory of 
 go^einment, without the remuneration proposed 
 
 i;iven to the teachers in this new school. 
 But enough of this, for he was not in order in fol- 
 lowing members out of order. The gentleman 
 farther remarked that the Legislature was the 
 battle field of liberty, mid it was therefore neces- 
 sary that the members should not be restricted, 
 but heard, if they choose one continuous session, 
 and make laws ad libitum. He had been more 
 than once a member of that body, and he had 
 never yet seen any olher than political battles 
 fought there. True, some persons had sacrificed 
 
 political " lives, fortunes and, almost, their 
 sacred honors ;" but this was no reason why oth- 
 ers should be tempted in the same dangerous 
 path. The gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIM- 
 MO ITS) justly remarked that much of the time of 
 Legislation was occupied In the passage of special 
 acts; such, for instance, as changing the name of 
 Miss Nancy, Miss Susan, Miss Lucy Long, and 
 other strange names. Seven-eighths of all the 
 laws passed while he was a member, were of a 
 special character, and entirely unworthy the con- 
 sideration of the legislature. The battle-field 
 business reminded him of a speech made by a 
 gentleman from New-York, last winter, during 
 that long session of the legislature. He said, 
 " we need a standard bearer for the democracy at 
 the Capitol." Now, it was this standard bearing 
 at Albany that had borne down the people until 
 they would not bear under it any longer. They 
 would bear their own standard. What they 
 wanted - -.vas that their representatives should 
 come here and attend to the business for which 
 they are sent, and then adjourn. He had one 
 word more to say about the battle-field, the school 
 and the standard bearer. The field on which is 
 to be fought the great battle of human liberty was 
 the common school system of this -country, and 
 not the legislature. It was on this field that the 
 next enduring monument to national greatness 
 would be erected, and on its cap stone would be 
 borne the standard of American glory. In this 
 chool will our children learn to reverence the 
 institutions of our country, not on account of their 
 antiquity, but because they are founded on the 
 exalted principles of moral wisdom and sublime 
 truth. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH moved the previous question, 
 and it was seconded by a vote of 42 to 21, which 
 being less than a quorum, the vote was again ta- 
 ken, and 49 voted in the affirmative and 23 in the 
 negative. 
 
 The main question was then ordered, and the 
 yeas and nays taken on Mr. SWACKHAMER'S 
 amendment, and resulted yeas 52, nays 52, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ayrault, F. F. Backus, Bergen, Burr, 
 Cambrclenij, D. D.Campbell, R. Campbell, jr., Candee, 
 Clark, Cook, Dana, Dantorth, Dodd, Dorlon, Dubois, Gard- 
 ner, Harrison, Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Huntington, Jordan, 
 Kernan, Kingsley, NcNuil, McNitt, Maxwell, Morris, Pow- 
 ers, llichmond, Hiker, Russell, Salisbury, Sears, Shaw, 
 Sheldon, Simmons, E. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Strong, 
 Swnnkhamer, Taft, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, Townsend, 
 Vache, White, Willard, Wood, W. B. Wright, Yawger, 
 Youngs-63. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, H. Backus, Bascom, Bouck, 
 Bowdish, Brayton, Brown, Bull, Chamberlain, Chatfield, 
 Conely, Cornell, Crooker, Cuddeback. Flanders, Forsyth, 
 Gebhard, Harris, Hart, Hunt, E. Huntington, Hutchinson, 
 Hyde, Jones, Kemble, Kennedy, Kirkland, Loomis, Mar- 
 vin, Miller, Murphy, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, 
 Parish, Patterson, Perkins, President, Rhoades, St. John. 
 Shepard, Stephens, Taggart, W. Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, 
 Van Schoonhoven. Warren, Waterbury, Worden, Young 
 52. 
 
 So the amendment was lost 
 
 The question then recurred on Mr. MURPHY'S 
 amendment, and it was lost, ayes 45, noes 63, as 
 follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Bas- 
 com, Bouck, Bowdish, Brown, Brundage, Bull, Chamber- 
 lain, Chatfield, Conely, Cornell.Crooker.Cuddeback, Flan 
 ders, Gebhard, Hart, Hunt, Jones, Kemble, Kennedy, Loo- 
 mis, Marvin, Morris, Murphy, Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, 
 Parish, Perkins, President, Rhoades, Shepard, Smith, Ste- 
 phens, Stow, Tallmadge, W. Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, Van 
 Schoonhoven, Warren, Worden, Young 45. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, Bergen, Brayton, Bruce, Burr, 
 Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, R. Campbell, jr., Candee, 
 Clark, Clyde, Cook, Dana. Daniorth, Dodd, Dorlon, Du- 
 bois, Gardner, Harris, Harrison, Hotchkiss, Hunter,A. Hun- 
 tington, E. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jordan, Ker- 
 nan, Kingsley, Kirkland, McNeil, McJNitt, Maxwell, Mil- 
 ler, Nellis, Patterson, Powers, Richmond, Riker, Russell, 
 St. John, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Simmons. E. Spencer, 
 Stanton, Stetson, Strong, Swackhamer, Tafl't, Taggart, J. 
 J. Taylor, Townsend, Vache.Waterbury, White, Willard, 
 Wood, W. B. Wright, Yawyer, Youngs 63. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN then moved to amend by adding 
 after the word *' allowance," the following : 
 
 " Unless two-thirds of all the members elected shall as- 
 sent to the continuance of the session beyond the period 
 of 100 days." 
 
 Mr. W. only desired to draw the attention of 
 the Convention to what was the protection ot po- 
 pular liberty the legislative power. The Exec- 
 utive Department was in lull operation during the 
 entire year And yet it was now proposed to cripple 
 the Legislature which could alone check and con- 
 trol the exercise of that power. Gentlemen had 
 argued as it no other power could be corrupted 
 except the Legislature. He would call attention 
 to other departments. Suppose the executive 
 should commit acts of gross usurpation upon the 
 rights of the people, and the 90 days should ex- 
 pire, while the Legislature were engaged in the 
 examination of those acts with the view of apply- 
 ing a remedy, where would be the protection of 
 the rights of the people? He denied th^t this 
 measure had been called for by the people. It 
 had its origin with those demagogues, who, not 
 having any legitimate popularity to rely upon, 
 were always seeking to get up a little factitious 
 favor, by such movements as this. To limit and 
 restrict the legislative power was only limiting 
 popular power. He begged gentlemen to pause 
 before sanctioning this principle. Will they not 
 be willing to trust the correction with the people 
 where it belongs? 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said it was always with great 
 self distrust that he found himself coming to a 
 conclusion opposite to that of his friend from Onta- 
 rio (Mr. WORDKN.) But he certainly thought there 
 could be no better provision made in regard to this 
 subject, than that made by the gentleman himself 
 in his amendment heretofore adopted. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that amendment had been 
 often attributed to him ; and he wished it to be dis- 
 tinctly understood that he claimed no commenda- 
 tion for bringing it forward. He had offered it be- 
 cause he believed it a compromise between th 
 
476 
 
 worse amendments that were pro- 
 conceded that the fact was as 
 
 different and 
 posed. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS 
 stated by Mr. W. He was willing to admit, with 
 thatgentleman and the gentleman from Chautau- 
 que, (Mr. MARVIN,) that the Legislature was the 
 great conservator of ihe liberty of the People, 
 and he would place all confidence in its integrity. 
 But he did not suppose that byadopting the amend- 
 ment, we were limiting them to any certain peri- 
 od. If any great emergencies should arrive, call, 
 ing for an extension of the session, as had been 
 suggested, it would demand the exercise of pairi- 
 otism enough on the part of members of that 
 body to remain in session without pay. He be- 
 lieved they would always possess sufficient patri- 
 otism to induce (hem to do so. He desired to 
 take out of their way all temptation, however, to 
 continue their sessions a single day beyond the 
 period of 90 days, in ordinary circumstances. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND agreed' generally with Mr. 
 HARRIS. There would be time enough generally 
 to do up all the business in 100 days. And when 
 it becomes necessary to sit longer there will be 
 patriotism enough to stay here a few days with- 
 out pay. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN: There is patriotism enough in 
 the House of Lords and of Commons, in England, 
 to sit in Parliament, without any pay. Why not 
 apply the same principle here ? " 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND understood all about that. 
 He was saying that he believed there was patri- 
 otism enough in the Legislature to remain a few 
 days, it the public emergency required. And he 
 had little doubt but what in such a case the citi- 
 zens of Albany would be patriotic enough to throw 
 off a little from the expense of board, so that we 
 could have a little patriotism all around ! He only 
 rose to say that he should vote for the section as it 
 stood. He would have it in the Constitution that 
 sessions should generally be limited to 100days,but 
 he would not insert an absolute prohibition to far- 
 ther session if it was found necessary. The sec. 
 tion was right as it stood. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS continued the debate in op 
 
 duty to do what he could to prevent its adoption. 
 Mr. MORRIS was opposed to long sessions of 
 the legislature, and was also desirous that gen- 
 tlemen engaged in the discharge of public bust- 
 ness should receive a fair and proper compensa- 
 tion. He had desired to shorten the session, 
 therefore, in a manner which would not cast an 
 imputation upon the integrity of the legislature, 
 and had voted for a session of ninety days with 
 full pay, and after for the restoration of the pro- 
 vision of the old Constitution. But he (Mr. M.) 
 would not limit the session in the case of a trial 
 for impeachment. 
 
 A VOICE : Suppose they 
 ernor every year ? 
 
 impeach the Gov- 
 
 ^ po- 
 sition to any attempt to limit the sessions. 'Let 
 this section stand as it does, and every Legisla- 
 ture when it adjourned, would do so blackballed 
 by this Constitution and by the effects of dema- 
 gogues to make the people believe that the legis- 
 lature adjourned only because its pay was stop- 
 ped. He did not believe our legislation could be 
 decreased. It was said that we intend to confer 
 more power upon the boards of supervisors. He 
 did not say this could not be done, but his utmost 
 ingenuity could not devise a plan by which it 
 could be done. Short sessions instead of check- 
 ing improvident legislation would vastly increase 
 it. Those who had legislative experience would 
 concur with him in saying that the business of 
 the session hath rather than passing bills, is to 
 fight the bad and improvident bills that arebrought 
 in. Adopt this provision, and any man who attemp- 
 ted to fight a bad bill would be charged with at- 
 tempting to retard the business of legislation. 
 The result would be that many more of them 
 would be passed than is the case now. This sec- 
 tion in his opinion contained the most pernicious 
 destructive and deleterious proposition which 
 could be submitted, and he had felt it to be his 
 
 Mr. MORRIS : If the legislature is- to be so 
 corrupt as that, let us then in God's name abolish 
 the legislature. If that is so, and the legislature 
 is to be composed of men who would impeach 
 the Governor for the sake of getting three dollars 
 a day, it would be far better. 
 
 Mi. WORDEN: The question is as broad one 
 way as the other. If the Legislature is so corrupt 
 as to stay here when they have nothing to do, they 
 will be corrupt enough to impeach the Goveinor 
 lor the same purpose. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS did not believe that under the 
 single district system, from the knowledge the 
 people would then have of the men who were to 
 be elected, that any such apprehension should be 
 entertained. The amendment to limit the num- 
 ber of of days having been voted down, he should 
 vote for the next best proposition. He wished, 
 however, to offer an amendment to except the 
 sessions from any limitation when the legislature 
 should be engaged in proceedings for impeach- 
 ment. 
 
 After some conversation, Mr. WORDEN here 
 withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. DODD said this question had been elabo- 
 ately discussed in committee of the whole, and 
 now another day had been wasted in debate on 
 he same points. Believing no good would result 
 rom farther discussion, he would move the pre- 
 'ious question. 
 
 t The previous question was seconded ayes 49, 
 nays 19. The main question ordered, and IVlr. 
 MORRIS' amendment adopted ayes 44, nays '3G. 
 Mr. RUSSELL called for the ayes and nays on 
 the section as amended, and they were ordered. 
 The section was adopted, ayes 68, nays 35, as 
 follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Bray- 
 ton, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, R. 
 Campbell, jr., Candee, Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cuddeback, 
 Dana, Danforth, Dodd, Dorlon, Dubois, Gardner, Harri- 
 son, Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Huntington, E. Hunting- 
 ton, Hutchinson, Hyde, Kernan, Kingsley, McNeil, JVic- 
 Nitt, Maxwell, Miller, Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, 
 Powers, Richmond, Riker, Ruggles, Russell, St. John, 
 Salisbury, Shaw, Sheldon, Simmons, E. Spencer, Stanton, 
 Stetson, Strong, Swackhamer, Taft, Taggart, Tallmadge, 
 J J.Taylor. W. Taylor, Townsend, "W'ateibury, White, 
 Willard, Wood, W. B?Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 
 68. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Bascom, Bouck, Brown, Brundage, 
 Chambnrlain, Chatfield, Conely, Cornell, Crooker, Flan- 
 ders, Gebhard, Hart, Hunt. Jones, Jordan, Kemble, Kenne- 
 dy Kirkland, Loomis, Marvin, Murphy, O'Conor, Parish, 
 Patterson, Perkins, President, Rhoades, Sears, Shepard, 
 Smith, Stow, Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, Wor- 
 den-35. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER laid on the table a motion to 
 reconsider the vote. 
 
477 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER also laid on the table a 
 motion to reconsider the vote on his amendment. 
 The 10th section was then read. 
 Mr. WHITE moved to amend by striking out 
 " or to the Senate of the U. S." (the effect of 
 which would be to leave members of the legisla- 
 ture eligible to the U. S. Senate.) 
 
 The amendment was negatived, ayes 19, noes 
 85, as follows: 
 
 AYF.S Messrs. Bascom, Bergen, Brown. Candee, Gard- 
 ner, Hunt, Hunter, Kemble, Marvin, Murphy, Nicoll, O' 
 Conor, Russell, Simmons, Smith, Stow, Taggart, Vache, 
 White 19. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Ba- 
 ker, Bouck, Brayton, Bruce, Brundage, Burr. Cambre- 
 leng, D. D Campbell. R. Campbell, jr., Chamberlain, Chat- 
 fielil, Clark, Clyd< j . Concly, Cook, Cornell, Crooker, Cud- 
 deback, Dana, Danforth, Dodd, Dubois, Flanders, Geb- 
 hard, Harris, Harrison, Hart, Hotchkiss, A. Huntington, 
 E Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, Jordan, Kenne- 
 dy, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirkland Loomis, McNeil, McNitt, 
 Maxwell. Miller, Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Parish, Patter 
 son, Perkins, Powers, President, Richmond, Kiker, Rug- 
 
 tles, St. John, Salisbury, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard E. 
 pencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, W. Taylor, Town- 
 send, Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, Waterbury, 
 Willard, Wood, Worden, Yawger, Young, Youngs 85. 
 
 The tenth section was then adopted. 
 
 The eleventh section was then read. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved to amend by striking out 
 "judicial," in the 2nd line, and inserting " civil" 
 so that it should read : " No person being a 
 member of Congress or holding any judicial or 
 military office under the U. S., shall hold a seat 
 in the legislature." He desired to make it con- 
 form to the latter clause of the section which read 
 thus : 
 
 " And if any person shall, after his election as a member 
 of th legislature, t:e elected to Congress, or appointed to 
 any office c.vil or military, under the government of the 
 United States, his acceptance thereof shall vacate his seat." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that would exclude post- 
 masters from being members of the legislature. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was aware ot that. 
 
 Mr. CONELY moved lo amend so as to except 
 postmasters. This was rejected. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS' amendment after a brief debate 
 was rejected. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to strike out the words 
 " No person being a member of Congress, or 
 holding any judicial or military office under the 
 United States, shall hold a seat in the Legisla- 
 ture." Mr. B. said that the people might desire 
 to select some such individual. They had done 
 so in this Convention, in the case of a gentleman 
 from Otsego. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that was an illustrious 
 instance in favor of the section as it stood. That 
 gentleman had been here but seven days of the 
 whole session. 
 
 Mr. BASCOMS' amendment was rejected. 
 
 The section was then agreed to. 
 
 The 12th section was then read. 
 
 Mr. SMITH moved to amend the twelfth sec- 
 tion, so as to provide that the first election under 
 this constitution for members of the legislature 
 be held in October instead of November. This 
 was rejected. 
 
 Section fifteen was then agreed to. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to reconsider the vote 
 on the fifth section, with a view to amend that 
 part of it relating to Senate districts in New York, 
 so as to make it conform in regard to the word 
 
 " compact" with the clause relating to other 
 parts of the state. Laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. SMITH moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote in regard to the Chenango district. Laid on 
 the table. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN made some enquiries with a 
 view to ascertain the meaning intended by the 
 last clause of the fifteenth section arid whether 
 the intention was that the legislative term com- 
 menced on the first of January, or on the day of 
 the meeting of the legislature. He made no mo- 
 tion, but desired to call attention to it. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that he had prepared an 
 amendment to the seventh section, in relation to 
 unrepresented fractions, but as the hour was late, 
 he would waive it for an adjournment. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess until 4 P. M. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Some debate was had on a motion of Mr. BAS- 
 COM to suspend the rules, to leconsider the vole 
 accepting the invitation of Capts. Triger and 
 Frisbee, to be present at the departure ot the Cali- 
 fornia volunteers, but without taking any question 
 the discussion was dropped to consider the tullow- 
 ing proposition, by 
 
 Mr. STETSON, who wished to add this as a 
 new section to the report of committee No. 1 : 
 
 The first part of section seven shall be construed so that 
 members of the Assembly shall be apportioned as follows: 
 The aggregate representative population of the State shall 
 be divided by one hundred and twenty -eight, and the quo- 
 tient shall be a ratio upon which one member shall be ap- 
 portioned to each county of the State ; but the residue of 
 the members after that, shall be apportioned so that the 
 fraction ol a smaller county shall always be entitled to a 
 member in preference to the numtier equal to the first ra- 
 tio in a larger county, whenever the fraction of the small- 
 er county is larger in proportion to its whole representa- 
 tive population, than the fraction of the largtr county- 
 would be to its whole representative population, il the 
 whole number of the remainder of members were conti- 
 nued to be apportioned according to said first ratio. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN askfd the gentleman from Clin- 
 ton (Mr. STETSON) if he meant that his own 
 county, Clinton, tor example, was to he in-ode to 
 compare with New York county ; Clinton having 
 but 1 member, and nearly 10,000 fractional repre- 
 sentative population was to have another member 
 in preference to New York having 15 members, 
 and then a 16th member on a fraction of only 10,- 
 000 this being not 700 fraction to a member ? 
 
 Mr. STETSON satd this would be the result of 
 the operation, or very nearly so. At any rate, the 
 arrangement would be more just than the present 
 system. The counties in (he interior have 50 per 
 cent fractions, or two-thirds of the fractions over 
 the ratio on which they are entitled to one 
 member; and those two.thirds over the one 
 member go unrepresented ; whilst New York 
 has 15 members on lull ratios, and a IGih mem- 
 ber on a small fractional. Great injustice was 
 thus done to the country towns. An apportion- 
 ment was made on a sort of compound proposition 
 all the past apportionment seen s to have been 
 based on this, thit county lines are not to be di- 
 vided. The traction therefore! musr fall some- 
 ah^re. And on the principle that we are not to 
 disturb county lines, 'the greater number ot rep- 
 resentatives in the large counties have the fewest 
 numbers of fractional representation. He wanted 
 the country to have the benefit of this accumula- 
 tion of fractions, which is now monopolized by 
 
478 
 
 the city ot New York. He would have the 1st 
 part of section seven to read according; to his plan. 
 They would thus far be following out the plan 
 properly adopted by every .Legislative body here- 
 tofore. Thus, Warren, Franklin and other coun- 
 ties, having but one member each and also having 
 a large unrepresented fraction in each county 
 would be then represented. A number would 
 thus be taken out of the whole number of the po- 
 pulation, and we should get the balance of the 
 ratio for the other disposition. At present a 
 county has but one member with a large unrepre- 
 sented fraction ; that county is to stand thus 
 whilst New-York city is to be left without any 
 fraction, but to have one more than she is entitled 
 to. This must be remedied. That is the idea ; 
 there is no mistake about it, and the future wel- 
 fare of the whole state depends on the adoption 
 of this amendment. It is important in itself it 
 is important in another point of view; that of pre- 
 venting future evils, and doing justice present, 
 and prospectively. He felt no jealousy towards 
 New- York city; but it was too true that her in- 
 creasing population is rapidly absorbing tl. 
 whole representative population of the state. 
 The effect of his amendment will be to increase 
 the strength of those counties that have 
 but one member ; to do the same with those 
 that have but two; and to strengthen those 
 that had three members. In 1S21, she had but 
 ten members this New York city, and she 
 comes in this day of our Lord with no less than 
 16 of them on this floor, and as time rolls on at 
 this rate, if she increases in this way, she will 
 have a majority of all the members on this floor, 
 and no mistake at all about it. The country will 
 be swallowed up in the town ; and then we shall 
 see the evils depicted by the poet 
 " 111 fares the land to hastening ills a prey 
 Where wealth accumulates and men decay; 
 Princes and lords may nourish, or may fad, 
 A breath can make them as a breath has made; 
 But a bold peasantry, their country's pride, 
 When once destroyed, can never be supplied. 
 
 And he (Mr. STETSON) insisted that the truth ot 
 this beautiful sentiment was clearly elucidated 
 as between New York city and the other portions 
 of the State. And he considered that for the sake 
 of justice, and for the equalization of representa- 
 tion, his amendment ought to prevail. He might 
 fail now, because he had all N. York city against 
 him ; but 20 years hence, it would be a matter ol 
 wonder that no one had stood up here to defend 
 the interests of the country towns arid villages, 
 &e., in this country. And he (Mr. S ) would 
 'rather have his present position, and fail, by being 
 crowded down, than sit down and not protest 
 against the injustice. It ought to be done now, 
 lor in halt a century the matter would bri gone 
 beyond redress or hop: 1 . 
 
 Mr. JONES sympathised with his honorable 
 friend from Clinton, relative to his unfortunate 
 position. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS: You need not crow ; the time 
 has not come for that, yet. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said the appropriation was bet- 
 ter now for his county than for many others. Bu 
 it was not sympathy he asked. He demanded it 
 and they would have it, next census as a right 
 
 Mr. JONES would nevertheless extend his 
 sympathy to the gentleman Clinton was nodoub 
 
 unfortunate; but perhaps upon the next census, 
 ier fraction would be large enough to secure her 
 another member. 
 
 Mr. STETSON: That takes off the point of the 
 yrnpathy, and is going on another tack altogether. 
 We want to correct the injustice right away. 
 
 Mr. JONES hoped the gentleman's anticipa- 
 ions would be realized and went on to say that 
 listened to the gentleman's speech attentively, 
 rlis argument was exceedingly poetic, and it was 
 also sublimely impressive ; but unfortunately he 
 lad not been able to understand it. He could not 
 say of the gentleman's statistics, what had been 
 said of statistics in general, that they were after 
 ill nothing but fictions told in numerals, for it 
 would not be decorous to say so. But he certain- 
 y could not entirely and clearly understand all 
 ;he force of his statements. But it was a suffi- 
 cient answer to them to say that if New-York had 
 one eighth of the representation in the Assembly, 
 he had also one eighth of the representative pop- 
 ulation qf the State. And whilst this is the case 
 :here surely is no injustice. New- York city thus 
 las no more members than she is entitled to. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN remarked that there were none 
 so blind as those who would not see and went 
 on to explain his idea of the operation of the rule. 
 N"ew. York city has not now got one-eighth of the 
 representative population of the State, although 
 she claims one-eight of the 128 members. Take 
 a county with 64,000 inhabitants ; that county 
 would have 3 members and a fraction of 10,000; 
 or a county with 27,000 ; she would have 1 mem- 
 ber and a fraction of 9000 ; for the ratio is 18,000. 
 But N. Y. county has 15 members for her 230,000 
 and a member for her small fraction over that 
 number ; here your rule gives you a member for 
 every 16,000; whilst a county having 27,000 has 
 but 1 member ; if you give a county with 64,000, 
 three members, there is a fraction of only about 
 3,300 to each member; Wyoming has but 1 mem- 
 ber, and a fraction of 14,000 unrepresented ; N. Y. 
 has 15 members and a member for her fraction of 
 12,000. All this is decidedly unjust. N. Y. city 
 has a member to represent a fraction of 12,000 ; 
 and Wyoming and Clinton have 14,000, and 9000 
 a total of 23,000 not represented at all. And 
 so in many other counties. 
 
 Mr. BROWN was satisfied the proposition de- 
 served all consideration but it was a complicated 
 one, and ought to be printed before being acted 
 on. He suggested that it be postponed until to- 
 morrow and printed. 
 
 The section was ordered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR offered the following addi- 
 tional section which he said was a section of the 
 old Constitution, with the words "and legislative 
 term" added to prevent any misconstruction of 
 the political year : 
 
 tv 16. The political year and legislative term shall begin 
 on the first day of January; and the Legislature shall ev- 
 ery year assemble on the hrst Tuesday in January, un- 
 less a different day shall be appointed by law. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out "unless a 
 different day shall be appointed by law." Better 
 have it fixed, than fluctuating. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD suggested that some pestilence 
 might make it necessary to change the place and 
 tune of holding the legislature. 
 
479 
 
 CROOKER did not see how the legislature 
 would foresee when the pestilence was to come. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER'S motion was lost, and Mr. 
 TAYOK'Ssti.-ti'.ii ;d >j>ted. 
 
 ;\!r. W.TAYLOR I hen moved that the article as 
 perfected, be printed which was agreed to. 
 
 The following is the article in relation to the 
 Apportionment of the Legislature, as finally 
 adopted : 
 
 ARTICLE 
 
 SECTION 1. The Legislative power oi'this State shall be 
 vested in a Senate and Assembly. 
 
 {) -2. The Senate shall consist of thirty-two members, and 
 the Senators shall be chosen for two years. The Assem- 
 bly snail consist of one hundred and twenty-eight mem. 
 bers, who shall be annually elected. 
 
 Substitute the /blowing for section five: 
 
 fc 5. The State shall be divide 1 into thirty two districts, 
 to be called Senate districts, each ot'wnich shall choose 
 one senator. The districts shall be numbered Irom one to 
 thirty- two inclusive. 
 
 District No. 1 shall consist of the counties of Richmond, 
 Suffolk and Queens. 
 
 District No. -2 si; all consist of the county of Kings. 
 
 Districts Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6'. shall consist of the city and 
 county of New York; and the board of supervisors of said 
 city and county shall, on or before the first day of May, 
 1847, divide the- city and county into the number of Senate 
 districts to which u js entitled' as near as may be of an 
 equal number of inhabitants, of contiguous territory and 
 oi compact form. The board of supervisors when they 
 shall have completed such division, shall cause certificates 
 thereof, stating the number and boundaries of each dis- 
 trict and the population thereof, to be filed in the office of 
 me Secretary ol State and of the clerk of said city and 
 county. 
 
 District No. 7 shall consist of the counties of Westches- 
 ter, Putnam and Rockland. 
 
 l)i-trict No. 8 shall consist of the counties ofDutchess 
 and Columbia. 
 
 Distilct No. '.' shall consist of the counties of Orange and 
 Sullivan. 
 
 District No. 10 -Lall consist of the counties of Ulster and 
 Greene. 
 
 District No. 11 shall consist of the counties of Albany 
 and Schenectady. 
 
 Distri.-t AO. 1-2 shall consist ol the county of Remselaer. 
 
 D.sinct No. 13 shall consist of the counties of Washing- 
 ton am! Saratoga. 
 
 ict No. 14 shall consist of the counties of Warren, 
 IK! Clinton. 
 
 District No. 15 shall consist of the counties of St. Law. 
 rem-e and Franklin. 
 
 District No. 16 shall consist of the counties of Herki- 
 m. r, Hamilton, Ful-on an t Montgomery. 
 
 District No 17 sliall consist oi the counties oC Schoharie 
 end pti 
 
 District N'o. 18 shall consist of the counties of Delaware 
 
 llJll^O. 
 
 District No. 19 shall consist of the county of Oneida. 
 
 Dis in t No. 20 shall consist ot the couatits of Madison 
 and Oswfpo. 
 
 District No. 21 shall consist of the counties of Jeflerson 
 and Lewis. 
 
 Disti let No. 2-2 shall consist of the county of Ononda?a. 
 
 District No. 23 shall cousin ol the counties of Cortiand, 
 Btoome an.l Tioga 
 
 net No. 24bkall consist of the counties of Cayuea 
 and \V 
 
 District No. 25 shall consist of the counties of Tompkins 
 i ate.-. 
 
 iMsinct No. *6 shall consist of the counties of Steuben 
 mii.ig. 
 
 District No. v? sliall consist of the county of Monroe. 
 
 Di-tnct No. 28 shall consist of the counties of Orleans. 
 Geneaeu and Niagaia. 
 
 Distri.-t No 29 shall consist of the ceunties of Ontario 
 aud Livingston. 
 
 Di-tnct .so. 30 shall consist of the counties of Allegany 
 aud Wyoming. 
 
 l)i-tnct No'3l shall consist of the county of Erie. 
 
 District No. 32 -h,,ll consist of the counties of Chautau- 
 que and Cattaraugus. 
 
 ^ 6. An enumeration of the inhabitants of the state shall 
 be taken under the direction of the legislature in the year 
 
 one thousand eight hundred and fifty-five, and at the end 
 of every ten years thereafter; and tfie said districts shall 
 be so altered by the legislature at the tirst session alter the 
 return of every enuineration.that each senate district shall 
 contain, as nearly may be, an equal number of inhabitants, 
 excluding aliens, and persons ot color not taxed; and .shall 
 remain unaltered until the return of another enumeration, 
 and shall at all limes consist ot contiguous territory, 
 and no county shall be divided in the loimation of a senate 
 district, except such count}' .shall be equitably entitled to 
 two or more senators 
 
 7. The members of the assembly shall be apportioned 
 among the several counties of this state, by the legislature, 
 as nearly as may be, according to the number of their re- 
 spective inhabitants, excluding aliens, and persons of co- 
 lor not taxed, and shall be chosen by single districts. 
 
 The several boards of supervisors in such counties of 
 this state, as are now entitled to more than i.ne number of 
 assembly, shall assemble on the first Tuesday of January 
 next, arid divide their respective counties into assembly 
 districts equal to the number of mem hers of assembly to 
 which such counties are now severally entitled bylaw, 
 and shall cause to be filed in the offices of the Secretary of 
 State and the clerk of their respective counties, a descrip- 
 tion of such assembly districts, specifying the number of 
 each district and the population thereof, according to the 
 last state enumeration, as near as can be ascertained. 
 Each assembly district shall contain as nearly as may be, 
 an equal number of inhabitants, excluding aliens and per- 
 sons of color not taxed, and shall consist ot contiguous and 
 convenient territory, but no town shall be divided in the 
 formation of assembly districts. 
 
 S. The legislature, at its first session after the return 
 of every enumeration, shall re-apportion the members of 
 Assembly among the several counties of this State, in 
 manner aforesaid, and the boards of Supervisors in such 
 counties as may be entitled, under such re-apportionment, 
 to more than one member, shall assemble Ht such time as 
 the legislature making such re-apportionment shall pre- 
 scribe, and divide such counties into Assembly districts 
 in the manner herein directed, and the apportionment and 
 districts so to be made shall remain unaltered until an- 
 other enumeration shall be taken under the provisions of 
 the preceding section 
 
 Every county heretofore established and separately or- 
 ganized, except the county of Hamilton, shall always be 
 entitled to one member ol Assembly, and no new county 
 shall hereafter be erected, unless its population shall en- 
 title it to a member. The county o! Hamilton shall elect 
 with Fulton, until the population of HamiLon shall, ac- 
 cording to the ratio, be entitled to a member. 
 
 9. The members of the legisiatuie shall receive for 
 their services a sum not exceeding three dollars a day 
 from the commencement of the session; but such pay shall 
 not exceed in the aggregate three hundred dollars lor per 
 diem allowance, except in cases of impeachment. The li- 
 mitation as to the aggregate compensation shall not take 
 effect until 1S4S. When convcn. -d in extra se-sion by the 
 Governor, they shall receive $3 per day. They shall also 
 receive the sum of one dollar for every ten miles they 
 shall travel, in going to and returning from their places of 
 meeting on the most usual route. The Speaker of the As- 
 sembly shall, in virtue of his office, receive an additional 
 compensation equal to one-third of his per diem as a mem- 
 ber. 
 
 10. No member of tho legislature shnll receive any ci- 
 vii appointment within this state, or to the Senate of the 
 United States from ihe Governor, the Governor and Senate 
 or from the Legislature, during the term for which, ho 
 shall have been elected. 
 
 ^11 No person, being a member of congress, or holding 
 any judicial or military office under the United States, shall 
 hold a seat in the Legislature. And if any person shall, 
 after his election as a member of the I egislaturc, be elect 
 C'.i to Con.ress, or appointed to any oiiice, civil or milita 
 ry, under the government of the United .States, his accep 
 taiu-e thereof shall vacate his seat. 
 
 Substitute lor s ctions 15 and 16, so far as re- 
 laies (o senators and members ot Assembly, tin; 
 follow ing : 
 
 15. '] he first election of Senators and members of As- 
 sembly, pursuant to the provisions of this Constitution 
 shall be held on the Tuesday succeeding the first Monday 
 of November, one thousand eight hundred and forty -seven; 
 and all subsequent elections shall be held on the Tuesday 
 succeeding the first Monday of November in each year, 
 unless otherwise directed by the Legislature. The Sena- 
 
480 
 
 tors and members ot the Assembly who may be in office on 
 the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and 
 forty-seven, shall hold their offices until the thirty-first 
 day of December following, and no longer. 
 
 ^ 16 The polincal year and legislative term shall begin 
 on the first day of January; and the legislature shall every 
 year assemble on tne first Tuesday in January, unless a 
 difi'erent day shall be appointed by law. 
 
 APPOINTMENT OR ELECTION OF STATE OFFICERS 
 
 On motion of Mr. W. TAYLOR, the commit- 
 tee of the whole, Mr. WOKDEN in the chair, 
 took up the report of committee No. 6 (Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD'S,) on the appointment or election ot all 
 officers whose powers and duties are not local, &,:. 
 
 The first section was read, as follows : 
 
 ^ Che Secretary of State, Comptroller, Treasurer and 
 Attorney General snail be chosen by the people at an an- 
 nual gc-iieral election, and shall hold their offices for two 
 years. The Secretary of Slate and Comptroller shall re- 
 ceive an annual salary of two thousand and live hundred 
 dollars; the Treasurer shall receive an annual salary of 
 one thousand five hundred dollars; and the Attorney Gen- 
 eral shall receive an annual salary ol two thousand dol- 
 lars; but he shall not receive any other or further fees, 
 perquisites or compensation for any services peiforined by 
 kirn as Attorney General. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved to amend as follows: 
 
 Strike out from the 4th line, after the word " years," and 
 insert " and shall receive an annual salary, to be prescri- 
 bed by law. which shall not be aliered duiing their respec- 
 tive terms of office." 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to amend this amendment 
 oy retaining the clause ifter "dollars," in the 8th 
 line, restricting them from receiving fees or per- 
 quisites. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY suggested that this might pre- 
 vent the Attorney-General from receiving his 
 expenses, while travelling on official duty. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL withdrew nis amendment. 
 
 Mi. CHATFIELD was not prepared to let this 
 go i>v default. He went on to point out the irnpor- 
 lani changes proposed in the report. The com- 
 mittee proposed first to give the election of these 
 officers to the people. On that point he anticipa- 
 ted little if any, objection. Next they proposed 
 to shorten the term of these officers; and chit-fh 
 with a view that they might come in and go out 
 with the Executive and this because they were 
 to ssonie extent cabinet officers, and ii ^as due to 
 the Executive that he should have a cabinet who 
 accorded with him in regard to measures, that 
 his administration might be harmonious. The 
 committee also thought it important that the con- 
 stituent body should, as often as once in two yeais 
 have an opportunity of passing upon the acts ot 
 these officers. Mr. C. went on to explain and define 
 the object of fixing the salaries of these officers in 
 the constitution that they might not be the sub- 
 ject of change, with changes of party, and might 
 not be a matter of consideration in their election. 
 The committee had fixed them at the present sa. 
 laries believing that they were not too high. 
 As to the Attorney General, the committee thought 
 $20UO, cutting off extra compensation, would not 
 be too high, and that the state would be the gainer 
 at i h;it. Now the salary was $1000 together with 
 a large amount ot lees and perquisites, much of 
 which did not go upon the Comptroller's books. 
 The present incumbent had received somewhere 
 in the neighborhood of $4000, lo which would be 
 added compensation for some two months services 
 recently at Auburn. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought it would not look well , 
 
 j to put the Governor's salary in the power of the 
 legislature, and fix those of his cabinet in the 
 constitution. He should prefer to see all these 
 salaries left to the legislature, or all fixed in the 
 Constitution. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND remarked that we were lay- 
 ing the foundation for a large number of offices, 
 and this principle seemed thus far to have been 
 settled, that if we left these salaries to be fixed 
 by the legislature we should prohibit any change 
 in them to take effect upon an incumbent. Sup- 
 posing this to be the judgment of the Convention 
 we should then throw upon a single legislature 
 the power and duty of fixing the salaries of all 
 your judges, state officers, clerks of courts, &c. 
 &c. It was easy to see what a lobby this would 
 bring to bear upon the legislature and how ut- 
 terly this whole matter of salaries might be placed 
 beyond the reach of the people, for a long term 
 of years. He trusted if we did not fix salaries in 
 the constitution, we should at least place them 
 where the people could lay their hands on them, 
 if the legislature, under the influence of those in- 
 terested, should give too high salaries. But he 
 hoped we should fix them in the constitution ; 
 and he warned gentlemen that if we placed these 
 salaries beyond the reach of the people for along 
 term, that they never would receive such a con- 
 stitution. 
 
 On motion of Mr. CHAMBERLAIN, the com- 
 mittee rose and reported progress, and the Con- 
 vention 
 
 Adjourned to 9 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 SATURDAY, (51st day,') August 1. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. McDoNouGH. 
 
 STATE OFFICERS. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS presented a minority report 
 from committee No. 6. He said the report ex- 
 hibited his own views, for he did not claim that 
 they were the views of any other member of the 
 committee, though in some particulars others of 
 the committee agreed wiih him in some of his 
 differences from the report of the majority. He 
 read the report as lollops: 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 1. An Attorney General shall be elected at the times 
 and places of choosing the Governor, and shall hold his 
 office lor the same term. 
 
 2. The Treasurer shall be appointed annually, on the 
 first Tuesday in February, by the open viva cce vote of 
 the Legislature, and by a majority of all the * wies cast. 
 
 $3. There shall be elected, oy plurality of votes, ac the 
 times and places of choosing Members ot Assembly, a Se- 
 cretary of ^tate, a Comptroller^ State Engineer and Sur. 
 veyor, tnree Canal Commissioners, and three Inspectors 
 of State Prisons. Under their first election, they shall re- 
 spectively hold their offices for the term prescribed in 
 the next section of this article, and thertaiter for three 
 years respectively. 
 
 () 4. Ol the officers first elected under the preceding sec- 
 ion, the State Engineer and Surveyor shall hold his office 
 or one year, the Comptroller for two years, and the Sec- 
 retary of State for three years. The Canal Commissioners 
 and Inspectors of State Prisons having the greatest num- 
 ser of votes shall hold their offices for three years: those 
 laving the next greatest number of v.^tes shall hold their 
 offices lor two years; and the others for one year. In 
 case of an equalitv in the number of votes for either of the 
 offices of Commissioner or Inspector, who shall be first 
 elected, the term ot their office shall be determined by lot. 
 
 (j 5. Incase th -re shall be an equality in the number of 
 votes for any officer to be elected under this article, so 
 hat there shall be no choice; or in case ol the death, re- 
 _ignation, removal or other disability of either of the offi- 
 cers mentioned in the third section of this article, the Le - 
 
481 
 
 gislature shall.by open nomination and vote, choose a per- 
 son to perform the dutit* of the office for 'he term, or re- 
 sidue oi the unexpired term, as the case may be. 
 
 (56. The Lieut. Governor, Speaker of the Assembly, Se- 
 cretary ot Stat*-, Comptroller, Treasurer, Attorney Gene- 
 ral, and State K.nginecr and Surveyor, shall be the Com 
 mis^ione; s ol the Land Office. 
 
 The Lieut. Governor, Secretary of State, Comptroller, 
 Treasurer and Attorney General, shall be the Commis. 
 tioners of the Canal Fund. 
 
 The Canal Board shall consist of the Commissioners of 
 the Canal Fund, the State Engineer and Surveyor, and 
 the Canal Commissioners. 
 
 7. All officers the manner ofwwhose appointment is not 
 prescribed liy this Constitution, shall be chosen or ap. 
 pointed as shall be pi escribed by the law existing at the 
 time of their appointment. 
 
 *>3. Every officer having a stated salary shall account 
 for and pay to the Treasurer of the State all perquisites ol 
 office, he may receive. 
 
 ^ 9. All officers having salaries (except Judicial officers) 
 shall at stated times receive for their services a com- 
 pensation which shall not be increased or diminished dur- 
 ing the term for which they shall have been elected. But 
 thi> shall not be construed to prevent the passage of laws 
 at any time to regulate the compensation of future incum- 
 bents oi office. 
 
 10. All provisions of law authorizing the appointment 
 of Inspectors, Weighers and Measurers of merchandize, 
 (except salt) are abrogated. 
 
 BISHOP PERKINS. 
 
 Mr. P. said the principal differences were that 
 the Secretary of State, Comptroller, State Engin- 
 eer and surveyor, were by him proposed to be 
 elected for three years, and they were to be clas- 
 sified so that one of them would be elected an- 
 nually. The report ot the majority proposed to 
 elect them for two year*, and all go out at once. 
 His report also proposed to give to these officers a 
 salary which shall not be altered during the time 
 for which th.-y shall be elected ; but the legisla- 
 ture may prescribe the compensation of future in- 
 cumbents. These were the principal alterations, 
 except that the Treasurer was to be appointed 
 annually by the Legislature. Having made some 
 further explanations he moved that the report be 
 committed to the committee of the whole having 
 in charge, the majority report, and that it be 
 printed 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD made some complaints 
 which were not distinctly heard, that this report 
 should be brought in at this time. He doubted il 
 it could be now considered, and was understood 
 to intimate that the gentleman from St. Lawrence 
 had been wanting in respect to the committee. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said he was ever unfortunate in 
 the expression of his difference of opinion from 
 the chairman of the committee. Indeed, it seem- 
 ed to be a matter of great disrespect for any gen- 
 tleman of this Convention to venture to diflei 
 from him (Mr. CHATFIELD.) When the repor 
 of the majority was agreed to, he assented to the 
 report being made, though voting against some of 
 its provisions in committee; and he had nowfel 
 it to be his duty to submit his views, as they dif- 
 fered from the majority. At an early day, he pro- 
 posed, by resolution, something in the nature o 
 a minority report, and that was deemed ex 
 Ceedingly disrespectful ; and he received a lee 
 ture for that too. There was, on the par 
 of the chairman of the committee, a strange sen 
 sitiveness, which he could not understand. I 
 there was no imputation on that gentleman or hi: 
 actions if, when there existed a mere difference 
 O f opinion, a member took that mode of bringing 
 s views before the Convention it seemed t< 
 
 35 
 
 iim that, for a member to get up and complain of 
 laving been treated with disrespect, showed eith- 
 r a jealousy of other members, or a dyspeptic ner- 
 ousness which could not endure a mere difference 
 f opinion. Mr. P. had taken the course which 
 iis judgment dictated to be the proper one to 
 iring his views before the Convention. He had 
 exercised his right, which he was not at liberty to 
 acrifice to any jealousies, and while he remained 
 a member of a committee which made a report of 
 ,vhich he disapproved, he should not be deterred 
 rom presenting a counter report, and endeavor- 
 
 ng to amend the one om which he dissented. 
 
 ie might perhaps have presented this report at 
 in earlier day; although after the manner in which 
 he gentleman (Mr. CHATFIELD) received any in- 
 dication of a difference of opinion on the coin- 
 ng in of his report, he had finally determined to 
 waive any further expression of his opinion, un- 
 "l the matter was under the consideration of the 
 onvention. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD hoped the gentleman from 
 St. Lawrence would not understand him as say- 
 ing that there had been any disrespect to him per- 
 sonally. If he did say that, he had said what he 
 tiad not intended. All he had said was that the 
 committee had not been treated with the respect 
 to which they were entitled. Mr. C. proceeded 
 at some length to point out the parliamentary 
 course w r hich the gentleman from St. Lawrence 
 should have pursued. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS responded and showed what 
 course had been taken both by the majority and 
 minority of the committee and reiterated the 
 statement of his conviction that the offence com- 
 mitted was in daring to differ from the chairman 
 of the committee, whose great sensitiveness was 
 otherwise inexplicably mysterious. After some 
 other observations the motion to print and refer 
 was carried. 
 
 JUDICIAL SYSTEM. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES, from the committee on the ju- 
 diciary, presented a report, which was read by the 
 .-ecretary, asloliows: 
 
 Sec. 1. The Assembly shall have the power of impeach- 
 ment by a vote of the majority of all the members elected. 
 The coun lor the trial ol impeachments shall be compos- 
 ed of the president ol the Senate, the Senators, and the 
 judges of the court of appeals the major part ol whom 
 may hold the court. On the trial of an impeachment 
 against the Governor, the Lieut. Governor shall not act 
 as amemher ol the court. No judicial officer shall exer- 
 cise his office after he shall hfive been imi^acheci, until 
 his acquital. Before the trial of an impeachment the 
 members ot the court shall take an oath or affirmation 
 truly and impartially to try the impe achment according to 
 evidence, and no person shall be convicted without the 
 concurrence of two-thirds of the members present. Judg- 
 ment in cases of impeachmer.t shall not exttnd further 
 than to removal from office; but the party Convicted shall 
 be liable to indictment and punishment according to law. 
 
 -1. There shall be a court of appeals, composed of eight 
 juuges, ot whom four shall be elected by the electors of 
 the state for eight yebrs, and four selected from the class 
 ot justices cf the iupreme court having the shortest time 
 .to serve. Provision shall be made by law for designating 
 one of the members elected as chief judge, and lor selecf- 
 ing such justices ol the supreme court from time to time 
 and so classifying those elected that one shall be elected 
 every second year. 
 
 3. There shall be a supreme court having the same ju- 
 risdiction in law and equity which the supreme court and 
 court ot chancery now have subject to regulation by law 
 
 4. The state shall be divided into eight judicial dis- 
 tricts, of which the city of New York shall be one the 
 others to be bounded by county lines, and be compact and 
 
482 
 
 equal in population as nearly as may be. There shall be 
 four justices of the supreme court for^ach district, and as 
 many more in the distiict composed of the city of New 
 York as may from time to time be authorize d by law, but 
 not to exceed the number of justices in the other districts in 
 proportioH to their population. They shall be classified so 
 that one of the justices oi epch district shall go out of of- 
 fice at the end of every two years. After the expiration 
 of their terms under such classification, the term of their 
 office shall be eight years. 
 
 ^ 5. Any three of them may hold general terms of said 
 court in any district, and one of them may hold special 
 terms and circuit courts, and preside at the courts of oyer 
 and terminer in any county. 
 
 ^ 6 They shall seveially at stated times receive for their 
 services a compensation to be established by law, which 
 shall not be diminished during^their continuance in office 
 
 7. They shall not hold any other office er public trust. 
 A 11 votes tor either of them for any elective office, (except 
 that of justice of the supreme court, or judge of the court 
 of appeais,) given by the legislature or the people, shall 
 be void. They shall not exercise any power of appoint- 
 ment, except in licensing piactitioners in their courts. 
 
 8. Tue classification of the justices of the supreme 
 court, the times and places ot holding the terms of the 
 conrt of appeals, and of the general and special terms of 
 the supreme court within the several districts, and the 
 circuu courts and courts of oyer and terminer within the 
 several counties, shall be provided for by law. 
 
 9. The testimony in equity cases shall be taken before 
 the judge, who shall hear and decide the case in the same 
 manner bs testimony is taken upon the trial of an issue at 
 law. 
 
 ^ 10. Surrogates shall be elected for four years. They 
 shall b compensated by fixed salaries, and they snail no't 
 receive any lees or perquisites of office. 
 
 11. Justices ol the supreme court and judges of the 
 court of appeals may be removed by joint resolution of 
 both houses of the legislature, if two-thirds of all the 
 members elected to the assembly and a majority of all the 
 members elected to the senate, concur therein. Surrogates 
 an>l all judicial officers, except those mentioned in this sec- 
 tion, and except justices of the peace, may be removed by 
 the senate on the recommendation of the Governor, but 
 no such removal shall be made unless the causes thereof 
 be entered on the, journal, nor unless the party complained 
 of shall have been served with a copy ol the complaint 
 against him, and shall have had an opportunity of being 
 heard in kis defence. On the question of removal, the 
 ayes and noes shall be entered on the journals. 
 
 {(12. The justices oi the supreme court shall be nomi- 
 nated by the Governor and appointed by and with the con 
 sent of the senate, or 
 
 12. Tim justices of the supreme court shall be elected 
 by the electors ot the respective districts, at such time as 
 maybe provided by law, hut not within ninety days be- 
 fore or after the general annual election. 
 
 k 13. Inferior courts of civil and criminal jurisdiction 
 ma'y be established by the legislature, and appeals and 
 writs of error therefrom may be brought to the. supreme 
 court or court of appeals ss shall be provided by law. 
 
 14. The legislature may reorganize the judicial dis- 
 tricts at the first session alter the return of every enumera- 
 tion under this constitution in the manner provided ior in 
 section four, and at no other time; and they may at such 
 session increase or diminish the number of districts, but 
 such increase or diminution shall not be more than one 
 district at any one time. Each district shall have four jus- 
 tices of the supieme rouit, but no diminution of the dis- 
 triets shall have the effect to remove a judge from office. 
 
 ^ 15. The electors of the several towns shall at their 
 annual town meeting, and in such manner as the legisla- 
 ture may direct elect their justices of the peace. Their 
 number and classification may be related by law. 
 
 16. The court lor the trial ol impeachments and the 
 correction of errors, the court of chancery, the supreme 
 court, and the county courts as at present organized, are 
 abolished. 
 
 ^ 17. No judicial officer, except justices of the peace shall 
 receive any fees or perquisites of office. 
 By order ot the committee, 
 
 CHARLES H. RUGGLES, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES begged the indulgence of the 
 Convention, that he might occupy its time a few 
 minutes in making some explanations in regard to 
 the report which had just been read. T&ecom- 
 mittee to which he belonged was not unanimous 
 
 in agreeing to the report, but he had the direction 
 of a majority of the committee to present it to the 
 Convention. The necessity of revising and re-or- 
 ganizing oar judiciary system was one ot the prin- 
 cipal causes of calling the Convention. This ne- 
 cessity had existed tor several years; and the at- 
 tempts repeatedly made to amend the Constitution 
 in the mode pointed out in that instrument hav- 
 iag uniformly failed, it became indispensably nec- 
 essary to assemble the Convention. Dissatisfac- 
 tion had long existed with regard to the construc- 
 tion of the present conrt for the correction of er- 
 rors. It was believed by many to be too numerous 
 for securing the strict attention of all its members 
 to the elaborate arguments frequently made be- 
 fore it in complicated and difficult cases. It was 
 further alleged that Mhe responsibility of it 
 members was too little felt y because it was too 
 much divided among its great number of judges. 
 Its connection with the legislative branch of the 
 government was justly regarded by many as a 
 fault in its organization; and particularly so with 
 respect to the decision of all causes in which the 
 constitutionality of an act of the legislature was 
 drawn in question. In all such cases the point 
 in dispute must necessarily have been prejudged 
 in pas-ing the law. Complaints have also been 
 made of the delay and%xpense of litigation in 
 the Court of Chancery ; and yet the officers of 
 that court are not generally, if at all, justly 
 chargeable with censure. The delay had arisen 
 partly from the great quantity of business in that 
 court vastly greater than its small number of 
 officers can reasonably be expected to dispatch 
 and partly from the inconvenient and ill-de- 
 vised mode of taking testimony before an ex- 
 aminer, in writing, out of court. The frequent 
 appeals now allowed by law in that and (he oth- 
 er courts, are objected to with great reason as 
 unnecessary, burlhensome and vexatious. The 
 supreme court is insufficient in the number of 
 its judges to dispose of the great mass of busi, 
 ness to be done in it. A single central bench 
 of judges is not adapted to the convenience of 
 so large a state as ours in territorial extent. It 
 can hold but four terms a year; its calendars are 
 so burlhened and surcharged with business that 
 suitors and counsel, after travelling great distan- 
 ces to arrive at the court, are frequently com- 
 pelled to wait in vain for the opportunity of be- 
 ing heard. The circuit system, adopted in 1822, 
 is disapproved ; and the opinion of the members 
 of the bar and of the public, seem to require the 
 restoration, in that respect, of the organization 
 which preceded that of 1822. It is believed to be 
 better that the judges who assembled tore-exam- 
 ine the decisions at the circuits, should them- 
 selves hold the circuit courts, and thus be brought 
 into direct contact with the people and their 
 business. In some counties, the county courts 
 are efficient and useful in the dispatch of business. 
 In others.it it is said they are not so. and are com- 
 plained oif as a burthen rather than a benefit to 
 the county. In the trial of civil causes before a 
 jury, experience has demonstrated that a single 
 judge is more efficient than a greater number, and 
 that those county courts in which the trial of 
 causes is committed to some one of the judges, 
 give greater satisfaction to suitors than when they 
 all take part in the trial. In speaking of the in- 
 
483 
 
 sufficiency of the present system of courts to do 
 the business of the state, it must not be forgotten 
 ;t was framed on the basis of the population 
 of the yrii r 1 vJi >. At that time the number of in- 
 habitants was 1,372,812. It has since doubled. 
 The last enumeration shows the population of 
 1845 to be 2,604,495. The wealth of the state 
 has increased probably in a greater ratio. It is 
 unreasonable to expect that the judicial officers 
 under the present constitution, although of emi- 
 nent talent and unwearied industry, should be 
 able to hear and determine all the disputes and 
 controversies which must unavoidably spring up 
 among an active, energetic and prosperous 
 population of nearly three millions. In fram- 
 ing the plan which I have here the honor 
 in behalf of a majority of the committee to report, 
 the committee have ende avored to remedy the 
 defects of the existing system. By altering the 
 organization of the Court for the Correction ot 
 Errors; by such a reduction of the number of its 
 judges that each may be more apt to give to every 
 case an attentive hearing and careful examination 
 without reliance on the judgment of his fellows, 
 and that each may feel more directly and sensibly 
 the weight, importance and responsibility of 
 his own share of the duty in rendering final 
 judgment between the parties ; by severing its 
 connexion witn the Legislature in order that its 
 attention may nut be diverted from its appropri- 
 ate duties in ihe adminisiration of justice, by mul- 
 tifarious subjects on which as senators, its judges 
 have been called to act, or by the more exciting 
 and distracting scenes of party politics in which 
 the mernbersof the legislature have been continu- 
 ally involved; instead of a court composed of the 
 chancellor, the j-.-.dges of the supreme court, the 
 lieutenant, governor, and thirty-two senators, the 
 committee recommend a court of appeals, to be 
 composed ot eight judges four of whom shall be 
 justices of the supreme court of original jurisdic- 
 tion and liable to do the duties of a justice of that 
 court in holding circuit courts and terms when 
 not engaged in the court of appeals. The com- 
 mittee propose that the remaining four judges of 
 the appellate court shall be elected by the people 
 on a general ballot. This preserves and continu- 
 es in the court of last resort, a popular and as your 
 committee believe, a valuable feature existing in 
 the present court. The presence of a portion o' 
 laymen in that court, if such should be elected, 
 ot men ot extensive general knowledge and sound 
 judgment not educated to the legal profession, 
 rnay in many cases be useful. It may serve to cor- 
 rect the tendency which is said to exist in the 
 minds of professional men, to be led away by habits 
 of thought, from the just conclusions of natural 
 reason into the track of technical rules, inapplic- 
 able to the circumstances of the case and at vari- 
 ance with the nature and principles ot our social 
 and political institutions. The committee enter- 
 tain no tears that a court so constituted will be 
 unstable in its decisions, or that it will fail in pay. 
 ing all proper respect to uniform rules and estab- 
 lished precedents. Whatever may be the objections 
 against the election by the people of local judg- 
 ment, and judges whose duties may require them, 
 alone and without associates, to decide contro- 
 versies at the circuits between their friends and 
 heir opponents, the objection applies with lit- 
 
 tie, it any force, to the election of part of the 
 judges of the court of appeals. The judges of that 
 court being eight in number, it will seldom hap- 
 pen that a majority of the court are acquainted 
 with the parties. The majority of the court will 
 always, from their position, number and connex- 
 ion with each other, be beyond the reach of those 
 influences, which ia the case of a single or local 
 judge maybe regarded as unfavorable to the exer- 
 cise of unbiassed and impartial judgment. For 
 the purpose of organizing a Supreme Court of ori- 
 ginal jurisdiction the plan reported by the com- 
 mittee proposes to divide the state into eight judi- 
 cial districts. The state has outgrown the system 
 established in 1822. There is a necessity of increas- 
 ing its working power, by enlarging the number 
 of that class of judicial officers which has hereto- 
 fore been most efficient. The jurisdictions of the 
 present Supreme Court and Court of Chancery 
 are united in one Supreme Court by the plan 
 proposed. In regard to this union of the two 
 courts there has been a difference of opinion 
 among the members of the committee. On the 
 one hand it has been urged with great force, that 
 the perfection of skill, in learning as in the arts, 
 is best attained by the division of labor ; and that 
 in the vast field of jurisprudence it would be bet- 
 ter to class the laborers into separate departments, 
 so that the skill and learning of each might be 
 limited and directed to that one particular branch 
 of duty for which he might be most eminently 
 qualified. On the other hand that system is sup- 
 posed by some to be attended with the inconveni- 
 ence of having too many tribunals. By others it 
 is believed that by uniting the two tribunals in 
 one, the modes of procedure at law and in equity, 
 which now differ widely, may immediately, by 
 legal enactment or more gradually by the action 
 and practice of the court be assimilated and final- 
 ly blended, thus obliterating and abolishing ^the 
 distinction between law and equity as heretofore 
 recognized. Without coming to this conclusion, 
 several of the committee who were inclined to 
 favor the continuance of separate courts, have re- 
 garded it as a question not of vital importance ; 
 and they have yielded their original preference 
 for separate courts in favor of what they deem the 
 greater advantages of the plan reported. The 
 union of the two jurisdictions in the same court 
 is not an untried experiment. It has the sanction 
 of a number of the states ; and is part of the ju- 
 dicial system of the United States. One of its ad- 
 vantages in connexion with the plan of the com- 
 mittee arises from the greater faciiiy and conve- 
 nience with which the equity causes involving 
 questions of fact, may be tried before a jury at the 
 circuit in the county where the parties reside, and 
 without the formality and expense of a separate 
 court. One of the changes recommended by the 
 committee and which they all regard as highly 
 important and useful, relates to the taking of tes- 
 timony in equity causes. Heretofore it has been 
 taken by deposition before an examiner in chan- 
 cery and not in open court. The examiner not 
 being authorized to reject any testimony which 
 either party proposes to take, the depositions 
 are usually encumbered with a vast mass of 
 matter immaterial to the questions in contro- 
 versy. A great proportion of the delay and 
 expense of litigation in chancery arises from 
 
484 
 
 this cause. The committee recommend a pro 
 vision directing the evidence to be taken be 
 fore the judge on the trial as in cases of com 
 mon law. Although this is a matter within the 
 power of the legislature it has long been the 
 subject of complaint and the evil has remained 
 without correction. The committee consider it 
 so essential in the way of reform, and so mate- 
 rial in relation to the operation of the system re- 
 ported, that they deem it worthy of constitutional 
 enactment. The justices of the Supreme Court,as 
 proposed by the committee, are to be charged with 
 the entire judicial business legal and equitable, 
 civil and criminal, which has heretofore been 
 done by the supreme court, the court of chancery, 
 and the county courts. The weight and burthen 
 of the business is considerably increased by the 
 duty charged upon the judges of taking the testi- 
 mony in equity cases in open court at the circuit. 
 For these varied and extensive duties the num- 
 ber of judges of the Supreme Court must be large. 
 The committee propose eight districts, and four 
 judges in each districts 32 in the whole; of which 
 number, however, four are to be judges of the 
 court of appeals, leaving 28 judges for the actual 
 business of the Supreme Court. These judges are 
 to hold as many general and special terms in each 
 district, and as many circuit courts and courts of 
 oyer and terminer in each county as may be ne- 
 cessary. By the system thus proposed, the com- 
 mittee have endeavored to provide a remedy for 
 the deficiencies of the present organization :* 
 
 1st. By adapting the number of active judicial 
 officers to the altered circumstances of the State 
 and to the quantity of work to be done. 
 
 2nd. By reducing the number of judges of the 
 appellate court tor its greater conveniency and 
 efficiency in, the despatch of business. 
 
 Third. By separating that court from its con- 
 nexion with the legislative branch of the govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Fourth. By the reduction of the number of ap- 
 peals in civil cases, consequent on the establish- 
 ment or a single court. 
 
 Fifth. By diminishing the delay and expense 
 of litigation in the court ot chancery in the mode 
 of taking evidence, and by providing a number of 
 judges sufficient to dispatch the business of that 
 court. 
 
 Sixth. By establishing a branch of the court 
 in each of the eight districts, so that the business 
 may be done where it arises, without journeying 
 to distant parts of the state for the hearing of 
 causes. 
 
 Seventh. By abolishing the system of circuit 
 judges; and requiring their duty to be done by the 
 judges of the supreme court. 
 
 Eighth. By an inflexible rule tnai 'all judicial 
 officers, above the grade of justices of the peace, 
 shall be compensated by fixed salaries, and shall 
 not receive fees or perquisites of office. 
 
 It has been the aim and object of the commit- 
 tee to give to the system proposed, all the requi- 
 site efficiency with the smallest number of judi- 
 cial officers adequate to that end; and with as lit- 
 tle increase ot expense to the treasury as may be 
 consistent with the prompt and faithful adminis. 
 tration of justice How far the cbinmittee have 
 succeeded in diminishing the number of officers, 
 will appear by a brief comparison of the present 
 
 system wuh that which is proposed in its place: 
 The Court of Errors consists of the Lieut. Governor and 
 
 Senators in number, 33 
 
 The Court of Chancery, of the Chancellor and three 
 
 Vice-Chancellors, ^ 
 
 The Supreme Court, of three Judges, 3 
 
 Circuit Judges,-. g 
 
 County Judges, five in each county, excepting New- 
 York, ....". 290 
 
 Making in the whole, 338 judges, besides the 
 judges of the local city courts, which may be re- 
 quired to remain as they are. In the place of 
 these 338 judges, and 168 examiners in chancery, 
 the committee propose that the business should 
 be done by the 36 judges mentioned in this re- 
 port. But the establishment proposed by the 
 committee, must unavoidably be a charge on the 
 treasury, somewhat heavier than the present, be- 
 cause the present is dependent to some extent on 
 fees received for specific services, which the com- 
 mittee recommend unanimously should be en- 
 tirely changed. The judges created under the 
 new constitution are to be compensated by fixed 
 salaries, and not be in any respect dependent on 
 suitors, attorneys, solicitors, or counsellors, for 
 their livelihood or emolument ; and because, al- 
 though the entire number of judges is greatly di- 
 minished, the number of efficient working officers 
 requires to be and is enlarged, for the purpose of 
 giving greater promptness and efficiency to this- 
 branch of the government. The expense of the 
 present system, and of that reported by the com- 
 mittee, will appear by the following statement : 
 
 The expenses of the Court for the Correction of 
 
 Errors in 1845, as stated by the Comptroller.... $26,193 
 
 hancelloi's salary 3,000 
 
 Vice Chancellor, 1st circuit. 2,000 
 
 Assistant Vice Chancellor 2,700 
 
 Vice Chancellor ot the 8th circuit 1,600 
 
 Three Justices of the Supreme Court 9.000 
 
 Eight Circuit Judges, $1,600 each 12,600 
 
 Paid i.n 47 counties for the attendance and services 
 
 of the Judges of the county courts 14,632 
 
 Estimated lor the remaining counties 3,424 
 
 $75,359 
 
 Amount drawn from the State and co. Treasuries- 
 
 Fees of the Vice Chancellor ol New York, the 
 
 Assistant Vice Chancellor and Judge of the 1st 
 
 circuit 
 
 Judge of 2d circuit, returned 
 
 3d circuit, returned 
 
 4ih circuit, returned 
 
 6th circuit estimated at 
 
 6th circuit, estimated at 
 
 7th circuit, returned 
 
 8th circuit, returned 
 
 Fees of 86 Examiners in Chancery 
 
 Estimated at same rate for remainder, not returned 
 Fees paid to first Judges ot counties 
 
 $44,095 
 
 Add to this the sum before stated as drawn from 
 the State and County Treasuries 75,359 
 
 Making a sum total of- 
 
 $119,454 
 
 which constitutes the compensation paid by the 
 state, by the counties, and by suitors in fees to the 
 three hundred and thirty-eight judges and to the 
 examiners in chancery, under the present organi- 
 zation. 
 
 An accurate comparison of the present estab- 
 ishment with that which the committee have pro- 
 posed, cannot be made, because the committee do 
 not propose that the salaries of the judges under 
 the new arrangement should be fixed by the con- 
 stitution. They deem it expedient that it should 
 )e left to the legislature. But ii the plan propos- 
 
485 
 
 ed by the committee should be adopted by the 
 Convention, and the legislature should fix the 
 compensation of the thirty-six judges at the same 
 sum which is now paid to the judges of the pres- 
 ent Supreme Court, the amount (which would be 
 01)0) is less than the sum now paid to the 
 judges and examiners, although it is more than is 
 drawn from the public treasuries. But when we 
 take into view the great increase of the population 
 and wealth of the state since the present system 
 was established, the actual expense upon the trea- 
 sury will be less in proportion to the means of 
 defraying it than thai of the present system was 
 when it was established. But if it should be deem- 
 ed just that the suitors should contribute towards 
 the expenses of the establishment and thus re- 
 lieve the treasury from a part ot the burthen, a 
 small sum paid in each case at some specified stage 
 of its progress, into the hands of the clerks tor the 
 benefit ot the treasury, will effect that object 
 without increasing the expense to the public be- 
 yond what is now paid in the shape of fees. 
 This however is not suggested by the committee 
 as expedient to be adopted either here or in the 
 legislature. The object of the chairman is only 
 to show that the establishment proposed by the 
 committee is neither beyond the wants nor be- 
 yond the means of the State on principles of strict 
 economy. Dividing the population of the State, 
 which is 2,604,495, by the number of judges pro- 
 posed by the committee, the result, if the re- 
 port should be adopted, will be that we shall 
 have one judge to every 72,347 inhabitants. On 
 a comparison of our own with other States, it is 
 found that the number of our judges will be 
 smaller in proportion to our population than in 
 any State in thr- Union, excepting two. Massa- 
 chusetts has one judge to 73,769 inhabitants, ac- 
 cording to the census of 1840, and North Caro- 
 lina to 75,341, according to the same enumera- 
 tion. In Massachusetts their judges are heavi- 
 ly burthened with duty. In North Carolina, 
 if the slave population is deducted, that State 
 has one judge to every 51,000 inhabitants. In 
 considering this plan of the committee, with re 
 spect to the number of judges, the more doubt 
 ful question is whether the number is not too 
 small. The system proposed is, however, capa- 
 ble of expansion, without further constitutional 
 provision. This may be done by adding to the 
 number of districts after the State census of 1855 ; 
 or by the establishment of inferior courts if the 
 Supreme Court should be found overcharged with 
 business. As to the mode by which the judges 
 should be selected, whether by appointment or 
 by popular election, the members of the commit- 
 tee entertain different opinions. They under 
 stand that the same differences of opinion exist 
 in the Convention. The plan submitted in the 
 report is adopted to either mode of selection, and 
 believing that on this point, which has been the 
 subject of much conversation and discussion, the 
 opinions of the committee may better be ascer- 
 tained on the floor than by the report, they have 
 reported, and respectfully submit a proposition in 
 the alternative. So that the convention may 
 adopt that which it may in its wisdom deem the 
 most advantageous to the public. The present, 
 for obvious reasons, is not a suitable occasion for 
 entering into a discussion of that topic. It will, 
 
 doubtless, receive, at the proper time, that atten- 
 :ion from the convention which its great impor- 
 tance deserves. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR presented a minority report 
 which the Secretary read as follows : 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 1. Tha judicial power of this state shall be vested in 
 :he Supreme Court, and the interior courts mentioned in 
 :his article ; subject to such appellate jurisdiction as 
 may be vested in the Court of Appeals. 
 
 2. The state shall be divided by law into a convenient 
 number of districts, not less than eight nor more than 
 twelve, subject to alteration from time to time as the pub- 
 lic good may require; in each ol which there shall be elec- 
 ted by the people one judge of the Court of Appeals; and 
 lor each of which there shall be appointed by the supervi- 
 sors of the towns and wards therein, at a joint meeting, 
 three district judges, or so many more as may be directed 
 by general laws. 
 
 3. The Court of Appeals shall consist of the Lieuten- 
 ant? Governor, the judges so elected, or the major part of 
 them, and any two judges of the Supreme Court. In the 
 absence of^he Lieutenant Governor the senior justice pre- 
 sent shall preside. The Judges ot the court below shall 
 assign the reasons for their decision, and the same shall 
 not be reversed or altered without the concurrence of six 
 members. 
 
 ($4. The Supreme Court shall consist of a chief justice 
 and twelve justices, any of whom may hold the court. 
 
 (j 5. Civil cases at issue in the Supreme Court, whether 
 triable by jury or not, may be tried before any of the jud- 
 ges before mentioned in this article. Anj^hree of saidP 
 judges, or any one of them, with one or more of the coun- 
 ty judges, may hold courts of oyerand terminer and gene- 
 ral jail delivery. 
 
 6. The county courts may be held by the district or 
 county ju tges or any of them. The general sessions of 
 the pe'ace may be held by any three of said judges, or by 
 any one of them with two justices of the peace. 
 
 ^7. There shall be in each county one or more county 
 juuges, and in each town one or more justices of the peace, 
 as may be directed by general Jaws. The number of jus- 
 tices of the peace in ciiies and wards thereof and in villa- 
 ges, shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 8. Courts of civil jurisdiction, having a clerk and seal, 
 to be held by three or more judges, may be established in 
 any city, and courts of summary process, having a clerk, 
 and to be held by one or more justices of the peace, may 
 be established in any city, ward or wards, town or village, 
 
 9. Appeals may be allowed by general laws from deci- 
 sions of a city or county court held before three or more 
 judges, directly to the Court of Appeals. 
 
 (j 10. The Justices of the Supreme Court shall be appoin- 
 ted by the Senate and Assembly in joint meeting, at which 
 the President of the Senate shall preside. And it such Pre- 
 sident be the Lt. Governor, he shall have a casting vote 
 only. Clerks of the Supreme court shall b3 elected by 
 the people of the state or district as may be directed by 
 law. County judges shall be appointed by the Boards of 
 Supervisors, and City Judges and their Clerks by the Com- 
 mon Councils of the cities. In towns, the Justices of the 
 Peace aud Clerks of the Justices' Courts shall be elected 
 by the people, and in cities, wards and villages, shall be 
 appointed by such local authorities, or elected by the peo- 
 ple as may be prescribed by general laws. 
 
 11. Clerks of courts, Justices ot the Peace, and County 
 Judges shall hold their offices for lour years; Judges of 
 the Court of Appeals, District and City Judges for ten 
 years, and Justices ol the Supreme Court during good be- 
 haviour, or until they attain the age ot seventy years. 
 
 12. Justices of the Peace may be vested with jurisdic- 
 tion, in civil cases for money demands not exceeding $100. 
 
 13. All Judges and Justices mentioned in this article 
 or any of them, may be vested with such jurisdiction as 
 conservators of the peace or otherwise, as may be pre- 
 scribed by law. 
 
 tj 14. County and City Judges, and Cleiks of the Supreme 
 and City Courts, may be removed by the Senate on the re- 
 commendation of the Governor and Justices of the Peace, 
 and Clerks of Justices' Courts may be removed by the 
 County Courts, for causes to be specified in the recommen- 
 datipn or order ol removal. '1 hn officer shall have notice 
 of the charge against him and the right of being heard 
 thereon before the Governor or County Court. 
 
 16. Vacancies in any of the offices mentioned in this ar- 
 ticle, happening by death or otherwise, may be filled by 
 temporary appointments as may be prescribed by law. 
 
486 
 
 6 16. No Judge shall hold any other office or public trust, 
 and all votes given for any of them during his continuance 
 in office shall be void 
 
 * VL No J ud & e - nor any justice of the peace, authorized 
 to hold any court mentioned in the 8th section of this arti- 
 cle, shall exorcise any power of appointment to office, or 
 receive any fees or reward for any services whatever ex- 
 cept a stated salary to be prescribed by law, and to be un- 
 alterable during his term oi office. Courts and judges may 
 be authorized to appoint trustees, receivers, auditors, re- 
 ferees, elisors,, experts, and other agents, to perform du- 
 ties m any pending suit or matter, and to license counsel- 
 lors ana attorneys. 
 
 & 18. A code of procedure in civil suits shall be enacted 
 within two years, subject to alteration by law. The Su- 
 preme Court, subject to control by law, shall establish 
 uniform rules of practice for all civil courts in this state, 
 except the Court of Appeals. 
 
 19. All causes and matters depending in the Court of 
 Chancery, shall be transferred to the Supreme Court The 
 transferor continuance, as may be required, of all other 
 causes and matters depending, shall be directed by law. 
 
 The following section should be inserted in the chap- 
 ter on the legislative department, immediately after the 
 section No. 12, in the Constitution of 1821: 
 A.- The Assembly, by the concurrence of a majority 
 i the number elected, may impeach any civil officer for 
 mal or corrupt conduct in office, or for high crimes and 
 misdemeanors. The Senate, with the judges of appeals, 
 or the major part of them, shall have sole power to try all 
 impeachments. Before sitting on such trial, each mem- 
 ber shall take and subscribe a solemn declaration, truly 
 and impartially, to try and determine the charge in ques- 
 tin When thg Governor is impeached, the Lieut. Gov- 
 ernor shall take no part in the trial. No conviction shall 
 take place without the concurrence of two-thirds of the 
 members present; nor shall judgment extend further than 
 to removal from office; but the party convicted shall be 
 liable to indictment and punishment according to law. 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 CHARLES O'CONOR. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said it was not necessary that 
 he should do more at this time than to state brief- 
 ly the points on which he differed from a major- 
 ity of the committee. That difference to be sure 
 would sufficiently appear from his written report, 
 yet according to usage he would shortly state it, 
 that it might come before the minds of the mem- 
 bers more clearly, by being unconnected with 
 the minor details which in a paper of this kind 
 are apt to divert attention from the principle in- 
 volved. He was of opinion that it was quite pro- 
 per to preserve that feature in our judicial sys- 
 tem,which authorizes the people to elect the great- 
 er part, or nearly all the judges of the court of ap- 
 peals in the last resort. He was of that opinion 
 because it was desirable as far as conveniently 
 practicable to vest the power of appointment to 
 Office in the people rather than in any select body; 
 4nd also because he conceived there'would be no 
 difficulty in the people acquiring such a degree 
 of knowledge concerning the character and capa- 
 city of every candidate, as might be necessary to 
 enable them to determine his fitness to hold a seat 
 in that high tribunal. But in reference to such de- 
 partments as the supreme court and the county 
 courts, if indeed those tribunals are to be pre- 
 served, his reflections had led him to a different 
 ! conclusion. In those courts not only are integ- 
 rity and soundness of judgment, and great general 
 capacity and good sense, required, but also an 
 extensive knowledge of what is commonly called 
 the technicalities, or the more artificial details of 
 the legal machinery and great experience in the 
 application of them. As to these courts, it struck 
 him with great force to be eminently proper that 
 the people should make choice of the judges thro' 
 the instrumentality of some select body or com- 
 mittee appointed to make the selection. Taking 
 
 for his guide in this matter, the practice which 
 has long obtained throughout the country, in the 
 organization of the school districts, vvhere the 
 people elect all their ordinary governing officers 
 but do not assume the appointment of the teach- 
 ers ; but refer their selection to a select body. In 
 that way only can we examine into the minute 
 details as to capacity and fitness in the candidate 
 which are requisite to be known, before a proper 
 choice can be made. From want of opportunities 
 of observation, and not from want of capacity to 
 judge, 'he conceived that the people could not, in 
 their own persons, make the best selections. The 
 principle of election by the people, he would re- 
 tain in the judicial department to the full extent 
 in which it had been sanctioned and applied in 
 former usage ; that is to say, in the construction 
 of the court of appeals in the last resort. He did 
 not agree with the committee, in the propriety of 
 extending it to the selection of the judges, in the first 
 instance. He also dissented from the majority in 
 their resolution to abolish (he county courts. It 
 now seemed, though he did not know it until this 
 morning, that he was in a minority on that point. 
 He had supposed a majority was in lavor of op- 
 holding these county courts. In this he dif- 
 fered radically with the committee, for he 
 held it to be exped.ient not to annihilate the 
 county courts because they were now inef- 
 ficient, as indeed all the courts were. On the 
 contrary he deemed it a sounder policy to pre- 
 serve, reorganize and strengthen, so as to qualify 
 them for the dispatch of business. 3y this 
 ;means the great portion of the business of the 
 sptate would be performed in these tribunals. In- 
 timately connected with this difference between 
 himself and the committee, was another in rela- 
 tion to the structure of the Supreme Court. De- 
 siring to preserve the county courts by means of 
 a district, jorganization which would raise those 
 courts to a very high grade in point of capacity, 
 he deemed it highly desirable to preserve the 
 singleness and unity of the Supreme Court. 
 It might meet in as many places, and hold as 
 many terms as the legislature might direct, but 
 he considered it essential to the preservation 
 of private right, and public liberty, and vitally 
 important in reference to the legal reputation of 
 the state, that we should retain one single, uni- 
 form supreme court, and not a court split up into 
 fragments like that reported by the committee. 
 Herein, again, he differed radically from the com- 
 inittee. He would state another and a leading rea- 
 3pn why he had presented a distinct and fully 
 written out system differentfrom that presented by 
 the committee. Whilst he was very much dis- 
 posed to preserve essentially the existing state of 
 things so far as the judges and the modes of or- 
 ganizing the courts were concerned and in 
 that respect might be considered as acting on a 
 strongly conservative principle, yet in respect 
 to the forms of practice and pleadings, these mi- 
 nor details administrative of civil justice, he went 
 far beyond the majority of the committee, in the 
 disposition to make what might be called radical 
 changes. The convention had been informed by 
 the Chairman that the committee had determined 
 by a considerable majority to bring together the 
 administration of what was called law and equity 
 and to direct justice in these two forms to be ad- 
 
487 
 
 ministered in the same courts, acting, as the 
 chairman informs us, in some measure under the 
 idea that at some period those two forms and me- 
 thods of administering civil justice might be per- 
 v blended, so that there should no longer be 
 / recognized or known such a distinction as law 
 and equity a distinction which it mustbe admit- 
 ted it would be highly desirable to abolish. He 
 deemed it an evil that we should have recognised 
 in the constitution, by an express provision, the 
 truth of that saying which the unlearned in the 
 metaphysics of law or legal practice are arpt to 
 indulge in when they find fault with a legal de- 
 cision to wit, that law is one thing and equity 
 or good conscience is another. He thought theiTi 
 no ground for the distinction, and that civil 
 justice in all its forms and phases might bej 
 and ought to be administered in the same tribu- 1 
 nals and in one uniform mode of procedure. 
 Although it had been his fortune to practice for a 
 good many years in the rigid and technical forms 
 of the common law and though he did not hesi- 
 tate to say, even here, that he was capable of fen- 
 cing with them as his neighbors and of taking 
 care that his clients should not suffer from their 
 misapplication, yet he had long thought that there 
 was no propriety in the existing distinctions in 
 the forms of practice and pleading, between these 
 two tribunals that of law and equity ; and there- 
 fore, with the same view as the committee, that 
 of ultimately blending them together, and forming 
 one consistent, uniform and harmonious method 
 of practice in the administration of justice, he 
 had brought forward, as well as the committee, 
 a system tending to that end. His method of ef- 
 fecting the result differed from that of the. com- 
 mittee in 'his one important jrespect in no part 
 of the article which he had presented had he in- 
 troduced the phrases courts of law, and courts 
 of equity jurisdiction in law, or jurisdiction in 
 equity. By thus denying to the distinction a con- 
 stitutional recognition, it was left fully and un- 
 questionably within the_p_o_vver of the legislature, 
 should they in their wisdom, on a full examina- 
 tion of the subject, find it proper to blend the 
 system, to do so. It left the law-making and law 
 reforming power unemharraa&d_by any language 
 in the constitution, which might be a barrier to 
 such blending. It also left to them the power 01 
 retracing their steps, if after making the experi- 
 ment, it should be found that the project of blend- 
 ing the two systems was impracticable was, as 
 .some suppose, a dream of visionary enthusiasts in 
 law-reform. If enlightened by the developments o 
 excellence, ttu-y suould find the distinction sain 
 laty, i hey wou^ld be Iiee to erect anew this barrie 
 between law and conscience, which nothing bu 
 the iron test of mischiefs actually experience 
 from its abolition, could convince me was neces 
 s-ary. It was, in a principal measure, with the 
 view of avoiding the permanent establishment ii 
 the constitution beyond the reach of legisLtiv 
 f power, ot these two modes of proceeding, that h< 
 h,ul felt himself constrained to write out anev 
 the whole article; otherwise he would probabl; 
 have confined hi.nselfto his right to propose, ii 
 committee of the. whde, amendments vt the arti 
 cle reported by the chairman. In other respects 
 he mainly concurred with the committee. VVhils 
 he concurred most fully in thr- remarks of Ih 
 
 onorable chairman, as to the expediency of'as- 
 imilating the modes of taking testimony in those 
 ifierent classes of cases, called cases at law and 
 ases in equity, and especially that I he trial by 
 nry should be extended as far as possible, slill he 
 !ad omitted that provision fiom his system, be. 
 ause he conceived that these minute details be- 
 onged to the field of ordinary legislation or to 
 hut of court rules, and not to the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said, in the reasons so well 
 tated by the honorable chairman of the Judicia- 
 y Committee for a radical and thorough reform 
 >f the Judiciary system, I fully agree. Eut in the 
 node of obtaining that result, and of re-organiz- 
 ng the Judicial tribunals I differ essentially from 
 he committee ; and I feel great regret in being\ 
 Constrained to dissent from their report. In pre- 
 lenting a separate report as one of a minority of 
 hat committee, I do so, sir, with unfeigned d'iffi- 
 dence, with a feeling of the most entire respect 
 r or every member of that committee and with a 
 ust sense of the responsibility that I assume. I 
 lave not the vanity to supppose that my report will 
 adopted by this Convention ; but if there 
 >e any proposition or sentiment contained in 
 "t that shall communicate a single new idea 
 :o any member of this honorable body, or 
 contribute in the slightest degree to the im- 
 jortant work of forming a suitable judiciary 
 system for this State, my object will have 
 )een accomplished, and I shall be entirely satis- 
 fied. This, sir, is not the time this is not the 
 jroper occasion to state the reasons in detail why 
 [ am opposed to the report of the majority of the 
 committee, nor of explaining why I am in favor 
 of the article which I shall take the liberty of 
 ^resenting. I will however say that the Supreme 
 Dourt as reported by the committee, whilst it 
 purports to be and nominally and theoretically 
 forms but one, yet it is in fact, and practically, a 
 court composed of fragmentary parts, liable to 
 conflict and contradiction ; and it is in point 
 of fact, nothing more in its practical results than 
 a number of independent courts. Now, sir, one 
 great difficulty in this plan I propose to remedy. 
 i propose to obviate the inconvenient and anama- 
 lous character of such an arrangement. I pro- 
 pose to do in form what that report does practi- 
 cally, not theoretically, to organize separate 
 courts of the same grade, of concurrent and inde- 
 pendent general jurisdiction. And, sir, I would 
 further state, that in my judgment there is a seri- 
 ous, if not a fatal objection to the system pro- 
 posed by the committee in its omission to provide 
 for county courts. It is my firm and deliberate 
 conviction that the immense business of this State 
 cannot be done without the aid of such a tribunal. 
 Bt-tore 1 an down, sir, I will make a few remarks as 
 to the mode bv which I propose to fill the offices I 
 have designate d in my article. 1 propose to ap. 
 point these officers differently from the committee 
 or from the pi.ui proposed in the report presented 
 by the majonty of (hut committee. In fifteen or 
 twenty of the States, these high judicial officers 
 are appointed by the Legislature; m joint ballot. 
 Now I ptopose to divide the power to place it 
 in different depositories to have a pa. t of them 
 felected directly by the people, a pan of them by 
 ihe Governor and Senate, and a part of them by 
 [he joint ballot of the Senate and Assembly. I 
 
 
488 
 
 will not now, sir, detain the Convention by giving 
 my reasons tor proposing this plan; I will do 
 so fully when this question comes to be discussed 
 hereafter. As to te mode of organizing the su- 
 perior courts, by my plan which proposes con- 
 current jurisdiction", I will merely observe, sir, 
 that this is no new course, no unknown path, 
 no untried experiment. I am here but following 
 in the steps of many of the States of the Union, 
 both young and old. I will conclude, sir, by say- 
 ing that these are some of the reasons why I differ 
 from the report of a majority of the committee, 
 and present to the Convention this article of my 
 own. The main object that I have had in view 
 in compiling it has been to lessen the expense oi 
 la'v suits to do away wi:h unnecessary and pro- 
 tracted litigation to render justice more certain, 
 and to procure that proper degree of expedition in 
 relation to the despatch of business in our courts, 
 which is so exceedingly desirable, both to suitors 
 and to the public. With respect to the report 
 itself, sir, I have no desire to see it adopted by 
 this Convention, unless it shall be found, on full, 
 iair, impartial, and careful enquiry, to be deserv- 
 ing of support. And now, sir, having made these 
 necessarily brief explanations, with regard to my 
 views upon this highly important subject, I have 
 only to repeat that I (lifter from the report of a 
 majority of the committee with regret, and to say 
 again that I present this report with all due re- 
 spect, and with a proper estimation of the respon- 
 sibility I incur in doing so. 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 Judicial Department. 
 
 & 1. The judicial power shall be vested in the courts es- 
 tablished or authorised by this article. 
 
 Court of Impeachments. 
 
 k 2 There shall be a Court for the trial of Impeach 
 merits. It shall be composed of the President of the Se- 
 iate, and the Senators, or the major part ol them. The 
 lombers ol the court shall, before trying any impeach- 
 nut take an oath and affirmation impartially to try and 
 oternvine the charge in question. No person shall be 
 Convicted without two-thirds of the members present 
 Judgment incase of impeachment shall extend only to re- 
 moval from office and disqualification to hold any office ol 
 trust, honor or profit under this State, but the person con 
 victed shall be liable to indictment or punishment accord- 
 ing to law. Any Judge impeached shall be suspended 
 from exercising liis office till his acquittal. The Assem- 
 bly shall have the power of impeaching all civil officers of 
 the State for corrupt practices in office and high crimes 
 and misdemeanors, but a majority of all the members 
 elected shall concur in an impeachment. 
 
 Supreme Court of Appeals. 
 
 fc 3. There shall be a Supreme Court of Appeals. It 
 shall be composed of seven (7) judges, three ^of whom 
 shall be elected by the qualified electors of the State, and 
 four of whom shall be appointed by the Governor, with 
 the consent of the Senate. It shall have appellate jurisdic- 
 tion only It shall hold at least four terms annually ; said 
 terms shall be held at difteient places. It shall appoint its 
 own Clerk who shall hold during the pleasure of the 
 court. A majority of said judges shall constitute a quo- 
 rum for holding a court. No judgment or decree shall be 
 reversed without the votes of a majority of all the judges 
 of said court. The senior in years of said judges shall 
 preside in said court. 
 
 Superior Courts. 
 
 & 4 The State shall be divided into six judicial districts, 
 to be denominated the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and 
 sixth judicial districts, of which the city of New York 
 shall form the first. There shall be a Superior Court in 
 each of the said districts, which shall have jurisdiction in 
 all matters of law and equity within the State, and such su- 
 pervisory and other power over inferior tribunals and of- 
 ficers within its district as now exists m the Supreme 
 Court, subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme 
 
 Court of Appeals. It shall in the first district be composed 
 of six judges, and in each of the other districts of four 
 judges. Two of the judges in each of said districts shall 
 be elected by the qualified electors of such district, and 
 the remainder of said judges shall be appointed by the 
 joint ballot of the members of the Senate and Assembly. 
 The Governor shall designate one of the judges thus elec- 
 ted as Chief Justice ot the Court in the district for which 
 he was elected. Each of said judges shall, during his con. 
 tinuance in office reside in the district for which he was 
 elected or appointed. 
 
 5. The judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals, and of 
 the Supreme Court, may hold courts in any district, ui.der 
 such regulations as may be prescribed by law. Each of 
 said judges shall possess the power now possessed by any 
 judge of the Supreme Court or the Chancellor at Cham 
 bers, subject to regulation and modification by law. Cir- 
 cuit Courts may be held by any one of taid judges; and 
 general terms ol the Superior Court in any district by any 
 three, of them ; and special terms by any one of them for the 
 hearing and disposition of matters usually heard at special 
 terms. 
 
 Courts of Oyer and Terminer may be held by any one 
 of said judges with whom in said court shall be associated 
 the two county judges, except in the city and county of 
 New-York, where two Aldermen of said city shall be as- 
 sociated with such judge in said court ot oyer and terminer- 
 
 Provision shall be made by law lor the transler of causes 
 from one district to another, and for the change of venue 
 to a county in the same or another district, as the ends of 
 justice may require. 
 
 6. There shall be a clerk of said superior court in each 
 district. He shall be elected by the qualified electors of 
 such district, and shall hold his office for four years, sub. 
 ject to removal by said couit for misconduct or incompe- 
 tency. He shall give security, it required by law. Pro- 
 vi-ion shall be made by law lor supplying vacancies in 
 said office. 
 
 ^ 7. The judges of the Supreme Court of Appeals and of 
 the Superior Courts shall hold their offices for ten years. 
 Vacancies in the case of an elected judge shall be sup- 
 plied by election and in the case of an appointed judge, 
 by appointment as provided in this article. Any judge of 
 either ot said courts elected or appointed to fill a vacancy, 
 shall hold his office for i en years. 
 
 Provision shall be made by law for cases of an equality 
 of votes, in all cases of election authorized by this aiticle. 
 
 6 8. Cases, both m law and equity, shall be triad at said 
 Circuit courts, and without a jury .whenever thepaitiesin 
 interest in a suit, and the judge holding the circuit, assent 
 thereto. Provision shall also be mace by law for cases in 
 law or equity not propeily triable at a Circuit Court. 
 Provision shall also be made by law for the performance of 
 the duties heretofore performed by masters in chancery. 
 
 Circuit Court and Surrogate. 
 
 9. There stoll in earh county be a county court, 
 which shall have the jurisdiction now existing in the coun- 
 ty courts, subject to modification and alteration by law j 
 and also such equity and other jurisdiction as may be con- 
 ferred by law. 
 
 In the first judicial district, there shall be four district 
 judges of the county court ; each of them shall alone hold 
 county courts in said district, for the trial and disposition 
 of civil cases. In criminal cases, two of the Aldermen of 
 the city of New York shall be associated with any one of 
 said district judges. In each of the other judicial districts 
 there shall be a district judge of the county court; he 
 shall alone hold courts for the trial and disposition of cv 
 vil cases in each county in his district. In criminal cases 
 the two county judges shall be associated with him. The 
 term of office of said district judges shall be eight years. 
 They shall be appointed by the joint ballot of the Senate 
 and Assembly. Any district judge appointed to fill a va- 
 cancy, shall hold his office for eight years. 
 
 The district judges of one district may hold courts in 
 anv other district, and shall do so when required by law; 
 and said district judges may be authorised by law to hold 
 circuit courts. 
 
 There shall in each county be a first judge and an asso- 
 ciate iudtce. They shall be elected by the qualified elec- 
 tors of such county, and shall hold their offices tor four 
 vears The firstjudge shall have and exercise'the powers 
 and duties of surrogate in his county. Each of said coun- 
 tv iudces shall also have and exercise such other powers 
 and jurisdiction as may be conferred by law. Provmon 
 shall be made bv law for cases of vacancy in the office o] 
 said first judge and associate judge, or either of them, and 
 
489 
 
 lor the rase of the absence or inability of them or either of 
 them, to perform any of their official duties. 
 
 k 10. Appeals from the judgments or decrees of a county 
 co irt shall t>e brought to the superior court of the district 
 in which said d unt> is s tuated. In case of aflirraance, no 
 further appeal shall be allowed. 
 
 Miscellaneous Provisions. 
 
 11. Laws may be passed to diminish the number of the 
 juntos dt" the supreme court, court of appeals, and of the 
 judges of the superior court, and of the district judges of 
 tin- c .nnty court in any district, if the number hereby 
 authorized shall be unnecessary. Laws may be passed to 
 incn a-e the number .-( the judges of the supreme court of 
 appeais. nn.l the judges of the superior court, and ihe said 
 diS'rict judg' s iii any district whenever and as ofienas the 
 pu ilic int. rests demand . Any such additional judge shall 
 be ele -ted or appointed as shall be pre*cribed by the law 
 authorizing such additional judge.. The districts in this 
 article mentioned may be altered by law whenever and as 
 of en as the public interests demand. No law authorizing 
 a diminution or increase in the number of judges or the 
 a>u-ra ion of any district sh^ll be passed without the votes 
 of two-thirds ot the mi-mbers elected to each branch of the 
 legislature, and no such, law shall aflect any judge then m 
 omce. 
 
 ^ 12. The Judges in this article mentioned, shall receive 
 stated annual salaries. The salary of no Judge shall be 
 diminished during his continuance in office. The said 
 Judges shall receive no fees or perquisites of office. No 
 one ot th,-m shall, during his continuance in office, hold 
 any other office under this state, and all votes for any of- 
 fice (except the office of Ju Ige) given by the legislature or 
 the peo,.le, or any Judge while in office, shall be void. 
 
 No provis on of this section shall apply to the said As- 
 sociate Judges. 
 
 & 13. The Governor shall remove any of the said Judges, 
 on the address ol two thirds of the members of each branch 
 of the legislature; Providi-d, however, that tne cause or 
 causes shlul be stated in full in such address, and entered 
 at large on the journals of each house; and the Judge in 
 tended to be removed shall have reasonable notice of the 
 same, and shall be admitted to a hearing in his defence, be- 
 fore such shall be adopted. In every case ot such address, 
 the vote shall bo taken by ayes and nays and be entered 
 on the journals ofeach House. 
 
 & 14. Laws may be passed lor the creation of local courts, 
 with jurisdiction inferior to that of the County Court, and 
 for the continuance of such courts now existing. 
 
 Justices of the Peace. 
 
 & 15. Justices of the peace shall continue to be elected as 
 they are now elected. Their number, powers and duties, 
 hall continue as they now are, subject to modifications 
 and alterations therein by law. Laws shall be passed to 
 abolish appeals as now authorised from courts of justices 
 of the peace, and for further trial and final decision in such 
 cases in the same town when the first trial was had, or in 
 
 any adjoining town. 
 
 Respectfully submitted, 
 
 C. P. KIRKLAND. 
 
 . 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND wished again to call the at- 
 tention of the Convention to one great, material 
 difference between the report of the committee 
 and his own. In the report of the committee, 
 there is no provision made for county courts ; 
 whilst in his, there was a provision for this im- 
 portant and indispensably necessary tribunal. 
 His firm conviction was that the immense busi- 
 ness of the State could not be transacted without 
 its aid. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that however much he re 
 gretted the necessity of increasing the number of 
 reports from the judiciary committee, he would 
 detain the Convention with no other apology 
 than to say that a sense of duty impelled him to 
 submit another minority report. He objected 
 particularly to that part of the report that sought 
 to perpetuate exclusive chancery jurisdiction du- 
 ring the continuance o the Constitution. Here- 
 tofore this jurisdiction had been created and con- 
 tinued by law, and could be by law limited or de- 
 stroyed. He objected, too, to the mode proposed 
 
 r the appointment of the judges. He objected 
 
 36 
 
 also that the proposition of the committee does 
 not distribute the sessions of the court sufficient- 
 .y throughout the State. It provides for a ses- 
 sion of the court in each of the eight districts. 
 He desired that bank sessions should be held in 
 all or nearly all the counties of the State. He 
 )bjected also to the power proposed to be given 
 to the legislature, not only to increase the judges 
 of the proposed courts, but to create and multiply 
 inferior courts without limitation. Entertaining 
 these objections, he had felt it his duty to pre- 
 pare an article, which he now respectfully asked 
 leave to submit : 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 1. A court for the trial of impeachments shall consist 
 of the I'resident of the Senate, the Senators or a major part 
 o( them, and the judges of the Supreme Court or a major 
 part of them, whose term of office shall be within two 
 years and not within one year of its expiration And the 
 Senators and judges taking their seats in the said courtfor 
 the trial of an impeachment, shall continue members 
 thereof until the same shall be terminated, notwithstand- 
 ing the expiration of their term. No officeragainst whom 
 an impeachment may have been presented shall, at any 
 time, be a member of the said court. The impeachment of 
 an officer shall suspend him from the discharge of his off. 
 cial functions. 
 
 2. The Assembly shall have power of impeaching all 
 civil officers ot this State for mal and corrupt conduct in 
 office and high crimes and misdemeaners, by a majority of 
 all the members elected concurring. 
 
 Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend fur 
 ther than the removal from offices and shall not be a bar 
 to an indictment. 
 
 (5 3. All other judicial power shall not be vested in justices' 
 courts, a Supreme court and in Surrogates. 
 
 4. Justices ot the peace shall be chosen by electors in 
 such districts, in such numbers and for such periods of 
 time, and their powers, jurisdiction and duties shall be 
 such as are, or may be, prescribed by law. 
 
 5- The supreme court shall have such powers and ju- 
 risdiction as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 There shall be thirty-two judges thereof, one of which 
 shall be elected by the electors of each of the Senate dis- 
 tricts, at a special election at which no other officer shall 
 be chosen. 
 
 The said judges shall hold their office for four years, ex- 
 cept a part of those first to be chosen. Vacancies shall be 
 filled at special elections to be ordered by the Governor, 
 and judges chosen to fill vacancies shall hold only for the 
 unexpired term. 
 
 6. Four of the Senate districts shall compose a judi- 
 cial district, and the judges first to be chosen in a judicial 
 district shall at a time and place to be designated by the 
 Governor, meet and draw for terms, of one, two, three and 
 four years. The term of the judges chosen in the judicial 
 districts, shall commence in different months of the year 
 
 (5? There. shall be a circuit session by one of the judg- 
 es of the supieme court in each of the counties of the ju. 
 'licial district, as often as the judges thereof shall deem 
 proper, for the trial by jury of ah ib.surs that may be join- 
 ed in civil and criminal causes, and for the rendering of 
 final judgments in criminl causes. .For the tiial and deci 
 sion of criminal causes there shall be associated with the 
 ju.lge, the surrogate and one justice oi the peace of the 
 county, or in the absence ot the surrogate two justi- 
 ces of the peace 
 
 8 There shall be bank sessions of riot le^s than three 
 nor more than four judges of the Supreme Court in the 
 several counties of the julicialdistricts, at such times and 
 pUc.es as to the judges thereof shall seem proper, to review 
 he decisions and proceedings of the circuit .sessions, and to 
 discharge such other duties in relation to the administra 
 lion o! justice and the establishment of rights as shall be 
 prescribed by law. 
 
 9. There shall be appeal sessions composed of the 
 judges whose term of office shall be within one year of its 
 termination, in the seveial judicial districts of the State at 
 *uch times and places as ohall be appointed by the said 
 j idge, unless said times and places shall be fixed by law, 
 jt which the decisions of the sessions in bank may be re- 
 viewed aud such other judicial powers exercised as shall 
 be prescribed by law. 
 
 ^ 10. Surrogates of counties shall be chosen by the elect- 
 ors thereof, and shall hold their offices for lour years. 
 
490 
 
 Their powers and jurisdiction over the estates of de 
 ceased persons and other matters, shall be such as are, or 
 maj be prescribed by law. 
 
 The Legislature may provide that issues joined in any 
 proceedings before Surrogates may be tried ot the Circuit 
 Sessions, and that any oi' the proceedings of Surrogates 
 may be reviewed by the Supreme Court. 
 
 11. The Clerks of the several counties of this state shall 
 be clerks of the Supreme Court with such powers and du 
 ties as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 () 12. A clerk of the Appeal sessions shall be appointed 
 by the judges thereof, who shall hold his office at the 
 pleasure of the said judges, and shall receive such com- 
 pensation as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 13. The judges of the Supreme Court shall receive 
 no tees or perquisites of office, other than a fixed salary; 
 and any alteiation thereof shall only effect those to be 
 thereafter chosen; but an allowance for travelling expen- 
 ses, in addition to a flxed salary, may be made to a judge 
 required to discharge judicial duties without his judicial 
 district. Respectfully submitted. 
 
 ANSEL BASCOM. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said he had no minority report 
 to make, but he wished to define his position. 
 Some three or four years ago, it was known to 
 the Convention, he was instrumental in attempt- 
 ing to procure the action of the legislature on 
 amendments to the constitution ,which were nearly 
 adopted. Those amendments were for the im- 
 provement of our judicial system, some of them 
 agreeing with and others differing from those now 
 proposed, and therefore the Convention would 
 excuse him for taking a few minutes to make an 
 explanation. He had assented to the majority re- 
 port being brought in for consideration, and if he 
 could not get any thing better he should go for it, 
 for he held it to be the duty of every patriotic man 
 not to oppose all that was offered because he did 
 not get as much as suited his inclinations. He 
 confessed here were some radical differences of 
 opinion, between the majority report and his own 
 views ; and although he must frankly confess that 
 the very beautiful exposition of it by the chair- 
 man (Mr. RUGGLES) had made it appear a little 
 better to him than it did last evening, yet there 
 were some things he could not approve, except 
 in the alternative that he could not get anything 
 better. He should go for it in preference to any 
 thing worse if he could make the distinction. 
 He would stale briefly surneot the things to which 
 he objected in thi.s report, and a tew of the par- 
 ticulars in which he differed from the committee. 
 .;; First, then, as to the in>>de of appointment of jud- 
 
 ges. 
 
 He could not think that the deliberate and 
 
 well considered and settled opinion of the people 
 of this state was in favor of the election of the 
 judges of the Supierne Court. And yet he confes- 
 sed lie was of opinion that the people were in fa 
 vor of some change by which they shall De 
 brought nearer to the people, and the state courts 
 more diffused and less centralized than the system 
 we now have. And perhaps some such method 
 might be hit upon as to that adopted in Vermont, 
 where the election was by the joint ballot of the 
 two houses of the legislature. But the present 
 mode would satisfy him better than a resort to 
 popular elections for judges of the Supreme Court, 
 if they were to hold office tor only the short term 
 of eight years. Then as to the tenure of office. 
 He could not think that, the best interest of the 
 state uas consistent with so short a term as eight 
 years, considering the little inducement it would 
 be for gentlemen who were competent to fill the 
 highest judicial offices of the state. He would not 
 
 now enter info the discussion of this question 
 he would merely suggest as an excuse for his 
 opinion, that the best men those very persons 
 who ought to fill such places, would be the least 
 likely to consent to take them for so very short a 
 term. He had no objection to an election by 
 the people, provided the tenure of office could be 
 made long enough, and the incumbents could be 
 made ineligible for another term, and could do 
 as well for themselves in that position as they 
 could in other employments. If this could be 
 secured, he thought an election by the people 
 would be the best mode of appointment. He 
 was for an election by the people if they could 
 get the term right, and that he believed was the 
 opinion of the best men in the state. He would 
 like the term till sixty-five years of age ; but 
 if that was too long, then for a term of years 
 long enough to induce the best talents to 
 accept the place. Without this security we 
 should effectually destroy the judiciary. And 
 next, as to the organization of these courts. In 
 regard to the number of judges, he did not mate- 
 rially differ from the committee. He had first 
 thought there should be thirty-two ; or some 
 number from thirty to forty, which could be best 
 arranged in judicial districts tor the purposes of 
 business. Then there were nisiprius duties and 
 bench duties. He thought there should no long- 
 er be a divorce between the subtleties and niceties 
 of book learning and practical knowledge derived 
 from practice and experience in the trial of causes 
 which draws more largely on common sense. 
 Those two streams of knowledge must have a 
 confluence in forming the mind of the judge. 
 The committee were all unanimous as to that. 
 And then there was the mode ot taking testimony 
 in equity cases. They were ail agreed also on 
 the necessity of a change there. But then came 
 a point on which he had lo differ from the com* 
 mittee, and he hoped the Convention would view 
 it in the s^me light with himself, when the sub- 
 ject came to be fully considered. He thought 
 that having this great expansion of judges of from 
 thirty-two to thirty- six, and arranged on a kind <i 
 spirit level system over the whole state, would break 
 down the moral power and influence of the court; 
 and that it was necessary to provide some head to 
 be looked up to, whose opinions should be consid- 
 ered as authentic and undisputed law, and whose 
 decisions should be received as legal oracles, 
 which should have a moral weight beyond its 
 mere power of legal coercion. He feared we 
 should, by such an expansion, have a a system 
 which would become shallow in proportion to its 
 breadth. He wished to see about one-half this 
 number of judges, say sixteen, formed into state 
 courts of general concurrent jurisdiction, and so 
 raised above the rest as to be considered the great 
 expositors of the law whose decisions should be 
 published, and referred to as precedents, and sus- 
 Lain the reputation of our reports. And then he 
 wished to have the other sixteen judges so ar- 
 ranged as to form a system of superior courts, 
 something like the superior court in the city of 
 New York ; but local, as contradistinguished from 
 the state courts, and supplying the places of the 
 county courts. With such a system, he thought 
 the people would be satisfied. It was evident that 
 n the improvement of our judicial system, two 
 
491 
 
 great points were necessary to be attained. One 
 was, the enlargement of the judicial force, so as 
 to make it adequate to the growing wants of the 
 state, whose population and business had now out- 
 grown its judicial institutions; and ihe other wa> 
 a more equal arrangement of these forces locally 
 over the state so that while enlarging, weshouki 
 avoid centralizing our courts too much. It was 
 desirable to avoid both extremes. One of the 
 great inconveniencies in this state, had been, that 
 the courts in bank had heeritoo much centralized; 
 and thus the suitors in the extremities of the state 
 had been obliged, in getting their law business 
 done, lo be subject to double expenditures. They 
 had to transport their causes, papers and counsel, 
 one or two hundred miles to the place where the 
 court eat. Now in improving this system, it 
 seemed to him that they could accomplish both 
 objects, of keeping up the state courts, as hereto- 
 fore, in the prominent, central points of the state, 
 and giving, at the same time, more expansion to 
 the judiciary, by creating, and distributing to 
 * other parts ot the state, an equal number of local 
 superior courts. By the erection of these of equal 
 grade, in effect, with the state couits, they would 
 have secured ail the substantial objects of equal 
 ization as well as enlargement of the courts so 
 far as necessary for practical purposes all the 
 advantages of teetd- courts distributed so as to 
 accommodate all without losing or lessening the 
 advantages of the state Courts as heretofore or- 
 ganized. We now have eleven supreme court 
 judges and four equity judges in the court of 
 chancery. Now with one additional supreme 
 court judge, this was judicial force enough for the 
 state courts. The twelve judges could be arranged 
 into sections or divisions of four each, for the busi- 
 ness of courts in bank, and all ride the circuits in 
 vacations to hold nisi prius courts; while the four 
 equity judges might 'constitute a slate court of 
 equity to sit at four different places in bank, and 
 each judge in vacation ride his equity circuit and 
 take plea testimony. Then let the additional six- 
 teen judges be distributed through the state under 
 a similar organization of three superior courts or 
 sections of a superior court of law, and the other 
 four should constitute the superior court of equity : 
 ii the terms in bank of these superior courts should 
 be located at different points from those of the su- 
 preme court, you would attain all the benefits of 
 equal distribution in bringing justice home to the 
 suitors, while you would save all the advantages 
 and reputation ot the state courts as to v\ eight of 
 character and moral influence, /Mr. S. thought it 
 would not do to break up our state judiciary into 
 mere provincial or district courts. But then he 
 must candidly admit that the point on which he 
 most essentially differed from the proposition bro't 
 before the Convention by the majority of the com- 
 mittee and by each of the minority reports was 
 one, that, unless he was very much mistaken, this 
 Conventon would ultimately adopt; and that is, the 
 separation of the law_and_eguiityjurisdiction into 
 different courts as heretofore, and not their' union 
 inthe same court. Mr. S. wished~lb' organize the 
 juoTclaryso -w-to have 1-4 part of the state courts 
 serve as equity courts, and the other 3-4 as law 
 courts. He could not for a moment conceive that 
 it was wise and proper in us to blend these juris- 
 dictions at the very time when other states as far 
 
 as he had been able to ascertain, were moving in 
 an opposite direction, and were more and more 
 separating the equity from the law courts with a 
 view to obtain all the advantages arising from a 
 sub- division of labor and improvements of the 
 science he could not think it would be wise in 
 us, in opposition to the declared opinions of every 
 judge he had read of, from Lord Bacon down to 
 Chancellor Kent and Judge Story to amalgamate 
 those two jurisdictions. He thought it highly dan- 
 gerous to convert this standing army of judges 
 into so many chancellors, with all the arbitrary 
 power ol that court. We had long ago attained to 
 the separation, and he thought we had better hold 
 to what we had got. We had got a certainty in 
 common law courts, and jury trials, and we ought 
 not t6 hazard this security by mixing them up 
 with equity powers in the same hands. There 
 were, however, a good many things in the majori- 
 ty report which he should sustain, and he should 
 seek to make it as much better as possible. He 
 did not think it advisable to bring in a minority 
 report. He knew the disadvantage in a delibera- 
 tive body of confusing the mind by double images 
 of varied projects; and being aware that several 
 reports were coming in, he felt that it would be 
 better to go in this qualified way with the majo- 
 rity, and rely on his good fortune to carry amend- 
 ments, adapted to his purpose, in the committee 
 of the whole or in the Convention. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that perhaps it would not be 
 improper if he should follow the example of his 
 asaociates on the committee, who had felt it to 
 be their duty to address the Convention and define 
 their positions in this matter. He desired to be 
 understood as concurring with cordiality in the 
 main principles and leading features of the report 
 of the committee presented by its chairman, 
 to the Convention this morning. In saying this, 
 however, he desirtd to be understood as not indi- 
 cating an opinion that the report of the majority 
 was perfect in its details, or that it contained all 
 that he should desire to see embodied in the Con- 
 stitution, nor yet that some matters of minor im- 
 port contained in it might not be changed with 
 advantage, and he should feel the same liberty 
 which had been expressed by his associates of 
 the committee, to ask a modification of any part 
 of it when it should corne under consideration. 
 There was, however, one further view of the 
 matter, and it was the principal inducement lor 
 him to address the Convention on this occasion 
 neither the report of the majority nor that of any 
 member as a minority, as far as he had heard 
 them, contained what seemed to him a very de. 
 sirable provision a plan for another court, a\ 
 humbler court a court of little pretension but of 
 great utility one much more needed in the trans- 
 action or ordinary, necessary business, than the 
 ligher tribunals. He desired lo see something 
 of this kind provided for in the Constitution, 
 and for that purpose, he should submit be- 
 bre he set dovvn, three sections taken from a 
 Judicial system, which he had drawn up in the 
 progress of the labors of the judiciary committee, 
 as others had. He should not submit an entire 
 plan, because he concurred in the report of the 
 committee in its general features, but only as to 
 his branch of it, relating to a locjil tribunal. He 
 would not deem this a proper occasion to propose 
 
492 
 
 any amendment to the report of the committee 
 bnt raiher to supplv what seemed to him would 
 be a valuable addition. He deemed it due 
 fo the Convention and to himself, that en- 
 tertaining the view he did, of the necessity of 
 a local tribunal for the transaction of business 
 in the country, near the homes of persons having 
 business to do, he should submit it in advance 
 that it might be examined before the subject came 
 up for consideration. He proposed to establish a 
 simple county tribunal, to be confined wholly 
 within the county to have jurisdiction of ap- 
 peals and certiorari from justices courts, and also 
 of a large class of neighborhood matters, such as 
 the partition of lands, sales of infant's estates, 
 equity powers over lunatics and drunkards estates, 
 removal of tenants holding over, and many other 
 cases. There was a large amount of this kind of 
 business necessarily arising in every county, which 
 ought to be transacted in the neighborhood where 
 it exists. He propos3d in the three sections; 
 which he should offer, to provide for the election 
 of officers to be called county justices, to have 
 jurisdiction of the matters to which he had allu- 
 ded. He would have two such county justices 
 in every county, and more than that in the larger 
 counties, to be determined by the legislature, as 
 the wants of the business might require, but not 
 to exceed one for every ten thousand inhabitants in 
 such county. He did not propose that these officers 
 should hold county courts lor the trial of causes, 
 as courts of common pleas are held, with all the 
 form and expense of the attendance of sheriff, 
 crier and county juries but to permit all trials of 
 issues of that kind to be had before the tribunal 
 reported by the committee, at their circuit courts. 
 But he designed this court to perform a kind of 
 county circuit to try appeals from justices courts, 
 in the town where they were first tried or to al- 
 low parties to appeal to this court before tried 
 so as to have it tried in the first instance before a 
 county justice, and save a second trial. They 
 Anight hold law terms together, if desired to settle 
 such questions as might arise before them not re- 
 quiring a jury ; but it seemed to him well to have 
 a set of county judges who would go to the place 
 where parties, jurors and witnesses live to try the 
 causes as they might arise, rather than incur the 
 expense, public and private, of a general attend- 
 ance of parties, witnesses and jurors at the county 
 seat, wailing, perhaps, day after day, and often a 
 week and more, for an opportunity to be heard in 
 these little matters. The sections he should pre- 
 sent were designed to effect these objects, but 
 to leave the particular manner to the Legislature 
 He felt constrained to remark that he differed 
 from two of his associates who had addressed the 
 Convention in presenting their several plans, as 
 to the construction which they had placed upon 
 one part of the report of the majority of the com- 
 mittee. He had understood two of those gentle- 
 men to attribute to that report that it perpetuated 
 the distinction between law and equity jurisdic- 
 tion. Such he was confident was not the inten 
 tion of the majority in making that report. On 
 the contrary, and he spoke from his knowledge 
 as a member of that committee and of that majo- 
 rity, it was not the intention of the report of the 
 majority to perpetuate that distinction. It refers 
 to the tribunals of law and of equity as matters 
 
 >ast. It provides for a common tribunal to have 
 general jurisdiction over the whole matter, unit- 
 ng them as to the court, but leaving the matter 
 )f blending the practice or not, to the future and 
 :o experience. It was the intention of the com- 
 mittee to leave it in this- form and to avoid any 
 >rovision by which the practice hitherto distinct, 
 should be necessarily kept separate or necessarily 
 combined. The system if adopted and left untram- 
 meled by any constitutional restrictions in that 
 respect would work out its own result. He propo- 
 sed that these county justices should hold their offi- 
 ces for four years, and that provision should be 
 made by law securing their rotation in office, so 
 hat all should not be elected at the same time after 
 he first electioftr-With this system of a local tribu- 
 na>fof the transaction of the business of the kind 
 *e had referred to, it seemed to him that the sys- 
 em proposed by the committee, of having but one 
 State court to try all causes usually tried at cir- 
 cuit and county courts, and combining law and 
 equity jurisdiction, possessed great advantages 
 over other plans proposed. It would prevent de- 
 ay, as all causes would be tried in the same 
 court, and all issues joined in the county might 
 be tried at the first circuit. It saves the necessity 
 f drawing distinction between the jurisdiction 
 of two or more courts, and for equalizing their 
 msiness. But he would not here undertake to 
 shew its advantages. In respect to courts of jus- 
 ices of the peace as now organized, he did not 
 propose to take away or change their jurisdiction 
 but he saw no objection to permitting litigated 
 causes in that court to be tried, if one of the par- 
 ties desired, in a higher court, in which one or 
 h of the parties might have more confidence. 
 Parties litigant often suspected the bias of a Jus- 
 tice of the Peace, before whom they are required 
 to have their rights adjudicated. This was all 
 the explanation he deemed it material to give : 
 and when the subject should come under con- 
 sideration, he intended to move then three sec- 
 tions, which he now submitted, with that excep- 
 tion or rather with that addition. He again re- 
 peated that he should cordially support all the 
 reading features, if not the entire report of the 
 majority of the committee. Mr. L. then submit- 
 ted the three following sections : 
 
 . There shall be established a County Court in each 
 county, to consist of two county justices and as many 
 more as the business of the county may require, but such 
 number shall not be increased so as to exceed one county 
 Justice for every 10,000 inhabitants. Such justices shall 
 hold their office for lour years. The legislature shall fix 
 the number for such county at the first session alter the 
 adoption of this constitution, and such number may be in- 
 creased or diminished within the above prescribed limits 
 at every fifth session of the legislature thereafter and at no 
 other time. 
 
 ^ The county courts shall have such original and ap- 
 pellate jurisdiction as may be prescribed by law, and the 
 trial of issues of fact and of appeals from justices' courta 
 may be had before any of such county justices in any 
 town where the parties reside or the cause of action arose, 
 01 in an adjoininggtown or elsewhere as maybe directed 
 by law. Two or mare law terms shall be held before such 
 justices in every county in each year. The legislature 
 may confer on one or more of the county justices, the ju. 
 dicial powers and duties of surrogate and such other pow- 
 ers and jurisdiction in law and law and equity, subordin- 
 ate to the supreme court, as it may deem expedient. 
 
 (. The county justicts shall be elected by the people 
 
 oi the several counties, at such tin es and in f uch manner, 
 to be prescribed by law, as shall ensure rotation in office ; 
 and for that purpose, part of the justices at first elected ia 
 
493 
 
 each county, shall hold for periods less than four years, to 
 be determine 1 between them by lot, under the supervision 
 of thfi board of supervisors. Vacancies occurring by 
 death or otherwise, shall ' rilled for the residue ol the 
 term unexpired, by the appointment by the board of su 
 pervisors 
 
 Mr. BROWN said he desired that the report of 
 the committee should go out to the country, ac- 
 companied by some views of his own, in regard to 
 the subjects it embraced, and with the indulgence 
 of the Convention, he would present them now. 
 With the proposition of the honorable member 
 from Herkimer, io reform the Justices' courts, he 
 could not concur. As now organized, these courts 
 had not been ihe subject of any just complaint. 
 They settled many corvroversies, ami disposed 
 of a large amount of litigation, with a very small 
 consumption of the time of suitors, jurors and 
 witnesses, and no expense whatever to the 
 public. He was not aware ot any useful reform 
 which could be applied to them, and he would, 
 therefore, suffer them to remain as they now are, 
 subject to such modifications as time and future 
 experience, may point out. In regard to the 
 eurr' gates's courts, he would have them substan- 
 tially as ;hey now are, with two exceptions. The 
 proot of a will before the surrogate, so far as real 
 property is concerned, was of no value whatever. 
 Months he might say, years were some times 
 consumed in the proof of wills at great expense 
 to the parlies in interest, and in respect to any 
 real estate claimed under or affected by the in- 
 strument, the question was as open to be contro- 
 verted after the decree as if was before. He 
 would, therefore, remove this defect, by trans- 
 ferring all issiu-;* upon the due execution of wills 
 or codicils as soon as they were formed, into the 
 supreme co.irt for trial and final adjudication. 
 The other exception which he took, was to the 
 manner of the surrogate's compensation. This 
 is derived from fees, taken from suitors and the 
 estates of deceased persons, taxed usually by 
 the surrogates themselves. Such a mode of 
 compensation leads to many abuses, and much 
 injustice visiied too often upon those who had 
 no means of redress The judiciary committee 
 proposed to make the surrogate a salary office, 
 and with those two reform?, lh<>se courts would 
 occupy a most useful pluce in the judicial ad- 
 ministration. The work entrusted by the Con- 
 vention to the judiciary committee, was one of 
 great magnitude and surrounded with many dif- 
 ficulties. To irame a judicial system for a gre;;t 
 and growing state, which should prove effectual 
 to the protection and preservation of the numer- 
 ous and complicated interests committed to its 
 charge, is a work upon which hon. gentlemen 
 might well entertain a conflict of opinion. And 
 if the report which they had submitted, through 
 their chairman, did not in all its details and 
 minor parts command the concurrence of all the 
 memb rs of the committee, he hoped it would 
 encounter no disfavor on that account. The re- 
 sult of the deliberations of a committee so nu- 
 merousand indeed the result of the delibera- 
 tions of th Convention itself must, to some ex- 
 tent, be brought about by compromise. Entire 
 unanimity was wholly out of the question. All 
 governments of opinion were governments found- 
 ed upon compromises. And unless the members 
 of the Convention were prepared to yield their 
 
 preferences for particular objects, to a limited 
 extent, as the members of the judiciary commit- 
 tee had done in framing their report, all hope of 
 the introduction of useful and wholesome re- 
 forms, into our system of government, must for 
 the present be abandoned. It afforded him great 
 satisfaction to know, that upon all the prominent 
 features of the report, there was no difference of 
 opinion. The necessity for a large increase of 1 
 the judicial force, and for the separation of that ' 
 force and its distribution over the territory of the ^ 
 state, was too apparent to admit of any doubt. 
 How that force should be created, what it should 
 be denominated what should be its powers and 
 duties when and where those powers should be 
 exerted, and how those duties should be perform- 
 ed, and for what periods of time they should be 
 exercised, were questions upon which the com- 
 mittee did entertain some differences of opinion. 
 But many of these differences were such as could 
 be reconciled without compromising established 
 principles. The first leading proposition of the 
 report is the creation of thirty-six judges, for the 
 supreme court and the court of appeals. His own 
 judgment was, that the number should be in- 
 creased to forty. Such was his judgment at the 
 commencement of the session, and all the pro- 
 tracted discussions in committee, and all the sta- 
 tistics furnished the Convention had served to 
 confirm that judgment. All the business now 
 done in the court of errors, in the supreme court, 
 the court of chancery, and the courts of common 
 pleas, are to be imposed upon these judges. 
 The Convention, he thought, would concur with 
 him, that the number was barely sufficient for 
 the duties to be performed. The second lead- 
 ing proposition of the report of the commit- 
 tee, was the separation of the State into eight 
 judicial districts with general and special 
 terms of the court to be held in each district. 
 This second proposition was a necessary conse- 
 quence of the first. For it was apparent, if the 
 unity of the court was to be maintained, and the 
 judges all to sit at one time and in one place as 
 they now do, an increase of the judicial force was 
 useless and unnecessary. No useful or beneficial 
 application of the additional force can be made 
 until it is severed and separated, and properly dis- 
 tributed. He was not insensible to the advan- 
 tage resulting from the unity of the court. Noth- 
 ing but the severest necessity could justify its 
 separation into distinct parts or benches acting 
 'ndependen ly of each other. Harmony of ac- 
 :ion, uniformity of decision, the dignity and the 
 nfluerice which belonged to a united and indivi- 
 sible tribunal are objects which cannot be too 
 hly valued. He would submit to many incon- 
 veniences and make many sacrifices in order to 
 attain them. But in a state like this, with its 
 vast population, its growing business, its wide 
 erritory, its foreign and domestic commerce, the 
 enterprise and diversified pursuits of its people, 
 the unity of the Supreme Court, is no longer 
 compatible, with the due administration of jus- 
 ice. We must therefore submit to see the court 
 separated in the manner proposed in the report, 
 and its terms held in the various judicial districts 
 of the state. In no other way can civil rights be 
 asserted and properly made secure by means of 
 our courts of justice. The third leading propo- 
 
494 
 
 sition of the report is to unite the common law 
 and equity jurisdictions in the same tribunal. 
 This feature of the report had its entire approba- 
 tion, and in this respect he was sorry to find him- 
 self at variance with his friend from Essex, (Mr. 
 SIMMONS.) He was aware of the force of that 
 gentleman's influence whenever he chose to ex- 
 ert it. But with the opinion of some of the 
 ablest English judges concurring with that of 
 the committee with the successful example of 
 some of the English courts the Supreme Court 
 of the United States, the courts of several of the 
 states of the Union, and the equity powers ex- 
 ercised by the circuit judges of our own state for 
 the last twenty years, he was encouraged 
 to look for the happiest results from this propo- 
 sition of the report. He would refer in this con- 
 nection to another recommendation of the re- 
 port, \yhich he was sure would command the ap- 
 probation of every member of the Convention 
 that was the duty imposed upon the judges to 
 take the testimony in equity causes the same as 
 in cases at common law. This.provision will re- 
 move one of the principal causes of the delays 
 which mark the progress of a chancery suit. 
 He had always regarded the practice of taking 
 testimony before an examiner as an enormous 
 abuse and a perversion of justice. It was op- 
 pressive upon the judge or officer whose duty 
 it was to try the cause ; it was oppressive upon, 
 and oftentimes ruinous to the suitor who paid 
 the expenses, and benefited no human being but 
 the examiner who wrote down the testimony 
 While his honorable friend (Mr RUGGLES) was 
 the Vice Chancellor of the second circuit he had 
 seen vast bundles of depositions brought before 
 him upon the hearing of a chancery cause, the 
 bare sight of which was sufficient to correct all 
 unhappy aspirations after the judicial office. 
 The expense of taking the evidence in this form 
 sometimes amounts to many hundred dollars ; 
 and if he was not mistaken the gentleman from 
 Oneida brought to the notice of tbe committee a 
 case where the expenses amounted to several 
 thousand dollars for examiners' fees alone. 
 When the judicial administration becomes pro- 
 ductive of such results, it fails to preserve the 
 interests committed to its charge. The duties 
 which the government owes to the citizen are to 
 protect him in the enjoyment of life, liberty and 
 property. But if property cannot be preserved, 
 if civil rights cannot be enforced or defended 
 without such enormous burthens and expenses, 
 he submitted whether the government had not 
 failed to fulfil one of the principal ends for which 
 it was instituted. The fourth leading proposition 
 of the report is the abrogation of the courts of 
 common pleas. With very few exceptions, these 
 courts have long since lost the public confidence. 
 Holding their terms three or four times a year, 
 they necessarily impose large expenses upon the 
 county treasuries, in addition to the loss of time 
 to parties, witnesses and jurors, without any cor- 
 responding benefits. Imperfect in their organi- 
 zation, feeble in their administration, few will 
 behold their abrogation with reluctance or regret. 
 The fifth proposition of the report is one upon 
 yrhich the committee had no divided opinion. It 
 is the provision for permanent salaries to judicial 
 officers, and the prohibition to take fees or per- 
 
 quisites. He had no desire, in the mode of ap- 
 pointing the judges, to put them beyond the reach 
 or influence of public opinion ; but in regard to 
 the duration of their official terms, the security 
 in which those terms should be enjoyed, and the 
 liberality of their compensation, he would have 
 them wholly independent. He would have them 
 untouched, untainted and uncontaminated by a 
 miserable traffic in the fees of office. Nothing in 
 his judgment, tended so much to lessen the dig- 
 nity and impair the influence of the judicial of- 
 fice, or to bring reproach upon judicial adminis- 
 tration, as this system of compensation by fees. 
 All the propositions to which he had referred had 
 the approbation of a large majority of the com- 
 mittee, and if they could be embodied into the 
 Constitution by a concurrence of a majority 
 of the Convention, he was sure they would be 
 attended with the happiest results. There were 
 some other provisions which he should have been 
 glad to have engrafted upon the report. It was 
 his wish that the terms of the Court of Appeals 
 and the terms of the Supreme Court should be 
 justly distributed amongst the proposed judicial 
 districts by constitutional provision. It was far 
 easier and more appropriate for the courts to fol- 
 low the people, than for the people to follow the 
 courts; and he hoped to see the time when the 
 necessity of sending causes from one extremity of 
 the State to another, for argument and decision 
 would no longer exist. Provision should also 
 have been made in the report for the election and 
 compensation of a clerk of the supreme court for 
 each of the eight judicial districts. In addition 
 to their duties upon the common law side of the 
 court, they will be required to perform all the 
 duties now performed by the registers and clerks 
 in chancery. The office will be one of great 
 responsibility, requiring more than common abi- 
 lity. He hoped the Convention would make 
 them elective, and remunerate them by salaries. 
 The fees of the clerks of the supreme court had 
 heretofore been the subject of some complaint 
 and of some legislation. The people of the State 
 had seen what he hoped they might never see 
 again judges come down from the bench, to 
 reap those rich rewards as mere clerks of their 
 own courts, which legislation denied to learning 
 and to intellectual labor of the highest order. 
 As a means or measure of compensation, fees were 
 justly obnoxious and objectionable. They are 
 the legitimate offspring of monarchical gov- 
 ernment, and are often the source of the most 
 flagrant abuses, They afford the only measure 
 of compensation by which the real amount re- 
 ceived is concealed from public observation and 
 large contributions levied upon the labor of the 
 people, without their consent. Under an admin- 
 istration of government designed to benefit all 
 alike, the standard of compensation for public 
 services should be known, and established by 
 law, and the temptation to multiply unne- 
 cessary services and to make unjust and il- 
 legal exactions should always be withheld. 
 The report of the committee omitted ano- 
 ther provision which he hoped might still 
 be inserted. He alluded to a commission to be 
 composed of competent men to dispose of the un- 
 finished business in the Supreme Court and Court 
 of Chancery. It has been said before the com- 
 
495 
 
 that I here were at this moment some 1500 
 red causes ready for heating, pen-! ing and undeter- 
 mined in those two courts. The number was 
 doubtless very large. This vast accumulation of 
 unfinished business will derive new accessions du- 
 ring the coining year and will become a subject 
 of serious public concern. Suitors whose pro- 
 perty is dependent upon or locked up in those 
 causes have a right to look, and do look, to this 
 Convention for relief. Shall this business be 
 thrown upon the tribunals we propose to estab- 
 lish, or shall provision be made without any de- 
 lay to dispose of it before the time appointed 
 for the new constitution to tai<e effect, which will 
 
 not be sooner than the first of January, 1848. 
 would greatly prefer the latter alternative. 
 
 He 
 To 
 
 vvith what truth he was unable to say | advantage to those to whom it belongs. He there- 
 fore hoped to see this embodied in the constitu- 
 tion about to be framed, and which should form 
 a part of this judicial report, a provision by 
 virtue of which the State shall take into its own 
 hands the fund to which he referred, and hold 
 the same upon such terms and at such rate as of 
 interest and under such regulations as the legis- 
 lature may prescribe. The security of the mo- 
 ney and the stability of the government would 
 then become identical ; they would stand or fall 
 together, the State would become, what every free 
 state should be the protector and the preserver 
 of the property and interests of those whose age 
 or infirmities, or whose peculiar condition in so- 
 ciety puts it out of their power to protect them- 
 selves. He would disturb no vested interests, 
 nor introduce any sudden or inconvenient 
 changes in regard to these funds, but he would 
 by prospective provisions take away the instabil- 
 ity and insecurity which under our present laws 
 too often await upon the fortunes and subsistence 
 of those who may find themselves suddenly 
 bereaved of their parents and protectors. 
 He understood that an Hon. friend of his (Mr. 
 WHITE) designed at the proper time to submit an 
 amendment of this kind. He hoped that gentle- 
 man would do so now, that it might be printed 
 and made public with the report of the commit- 
 tee. The very able and lucid exposition which 
 the chairman of the committee (Mr. RUGGLES) 
 had made to the Convention rendered it unneces- 
 sary that he should say more than to express his 
 sincere belief that, should the proposed judicial re- 
 port be adopted even in a modified form, it would 
 confer benefits upon the people of the state in the 
 prompt, economical and enlightened administra- 
 tion of the law, which would more than com- 
 pensate them for all the time lost and expense 
 incurred in calling this Convention. 
 
 Mr. WHITE offered the following additional 
 section, which he said he should at a proper time 
 move to add to this report : 
 
 {j . The legislature shall provide by law that all 
 moneys in the custody or under the control ol any of the 
 courts of law or equity, for the benefit of suitors and others, 
 at the time this Constitution shall take effect; and all mo- 
 neys which sha 1 thereafter be paid into any of the courts 
 of record of the state, for the benefit ol' suitors and others, 
 shall be paid into the tr.-asury of the state, at such times, 
 and under such regulations, and to b he-Id by the state for 
 the benefit of such suitors and others, at such rate of in- 
 terest as the legislature may prescribe. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved that all the reports 
 be printed, the usual number and 500 extra co- 
 pies, (1300.) 
 
 Mr. CROOKER suggested that 1600 would be 
 desirable. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE assented, and so amended 
 his motion. Agreed to. 
 
 The Comptroller transmitted an answer to the 
 resolution offered by Mr. F. F. BACKUS, as to 
 the value, &c., of the canals, &c. 
 STATE OFFICERS. 
 
 The committee of the whole, Mr. JONES in 
 the Chair, resumed the consideration of the re- 
 port of committee No. 6. 
 
 Mr. CHATEIELD doubted the propriety of 
 taking any vote with so thin a House 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to rise and 
 report progress. Carried. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 say nothing of the injustice which would be done 
 to the new system by thrusting upon it at the com- 
 mencement, of the accumulations of oast years, it 
 was due to the parties interested in those suits and 
 to the wholesome administration of justice itself 
 that they should be heard and determined at an ear- 
 lier dav. He, therefore hoped that authority would 
 be given to the Governor or to the Governor and 
 Senate, the moment the new constitution is ratified 
 and adopted by the people, to appoint a commis- 
 sioner to hear and determine causes depending in 
 the Supreme Court, and another commissioner to 
 hear and determine causes depending in the court 
 of Chancery the judgment or decrees of the 
 commissioners to have the same effect as if pro- 
 nounced by the judges or chancellor themselves. 
 And all the powers of the commissioners to cease 
 at the time appointed for the new constitution to 
 take effect. B\ this plan, a large portion of the 
 unfinished business would be disposed of, and the 
 new system go into operation unoppressed by the 
 accumulations of past years. There is a large 
 amount of money, the property of suitors, infants, 
 married women, widows, persons of unsound 
 mind, and unknown and absent owners of real 
 estate, in the custody or under the control of the 
 various courts of record in the State. In the 
 court of Chancery alone it amounts to near three 
 millions of dollars, but how much remains with 
 the other courts the documents before the Con- 
 vention do not disclose. This fund is invested in 
 the trust company, deposited in banks or loaned 
 out upon the security of bonds and mortgages. 
 The government by its agents and instruments 
 the courts of law and equity has undertaken the 
 management of this large property, and should in 
 his judgment be responsible for the faithful exe- 
 cution of the trust; yet while a large portion of this 
 money comes into the custody of the courts with- 
 out the agency or the assent of the owners, and 
 constitutes in many instances the sole support of 
 age and infancy, and those borne down and ren 
 dered helpless by physical and mental infirmity, 
 it cannot be controverted that should the fund be 
 lost or wasted by the failure of the trust compa- 
 ny, the banks, the insufficiency of the bonds and 
 mortgages or the mal-conduct of the officers of 
 the court, the importunate and helpless owners 
 would find themselves without the shadow of a 
 remedy. This State is constantly borrowing mo 
 ney at interest, and must continue to be a borrow- 
 er for many years to come. It could therefore use 
 this fund with profit to itself and with manifest 
 
496 
 
 MONDAY, (52d day,} August 3. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. iVlr. MEYERS. 
 
 Mr. MANN called for the consideration of the 
 resolution offered by him a few days since and 
 laid upon the table, requiring the chancellor to 
 report to this Convention the items, making the 
 amount of nearly $3,000,000, reported in nggre 
 gate amount of the funds in the Chancellor's hands 
 and under his control. No objection being made, 
 the resolution was considered. It was as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 Resolved. That the Chmcellor of this State be request- 
 ed to direct the Register, Assistant Register and < lerks, 
 to furnish to this Convention the separate and distinct 
 items, with the names ol all the estates, heirs, owners *nd 
 parties claiming and interested, for whose benefit and for 
 what purposes the funds are held, whether in trust or oth 
 erwise, with the dates of the receipt of all the funds, com- 
 prising and making the aggregate amount reported or 
 furnished to this Convention by the Chancellor, as subject 
 to the order and control of the court of chancery up to 
 January, 1816. 
 
 Mr. MANN said he did not call up this reso- 
 lution for the purpose of producing a discussion, 
 and was willing to submit its decision to the good 
 sense of the Convention without debate,and hoped 
 it would take this course. If gentlemen did not 
 approve of the call for information, or the items 
 making this vast amount in the hands of the 
 Chancellor, and the manner of its accumulation, 
 to whom it belonged, and for what purpose it was 
 held, then they would vote against the resolu- 
 tionbut if they deemed the call important and 
 of consequence to the convention or to the peo- 
 ple, they would vote for it. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS asked if it was a matter of re- 
 ference, or a direct call for the statement ? 
 * Mr. MANN replied that it was a direct call for 
 the items making up the aggregate amount of 
 funds reported to the convention by the Chancel- 
 lor as being in his hands and under his control. 
 
 Mv. SIMMONS said he did not think it would 
 be proper to expose all the facts which this reso- 
 lution would bring out. 
 
 Mr. MANN insisted that it would be proper. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND wanted it sent to some com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM had doubts about the propriety 
 ot adopting the resolution. AM answer would be 
 voluminous, and he doubted whether i( was ne- 
 cessarv tor the bnsis uf any ad ion by the Conven. 
 tion. There was one branch of the subject upon 
 which he would like more information than con- 
 tained in the Chancellor's report ; he would like 
 a more detailed statement in relation to what is 
 described as ' floating balances," or " floating." 
 This fund as would seem by ihe Chancellor's re- 
 port was now nearly $165,000 : 
 
 In the 1st circuit it was $86,534 18 
 
 id do 39,16737 
 
 3d do 2.938 17 
 
 4th do 1,87939 
 
 6h do 8.799 47 
 
 6th do 157 64 
 
 7th do 9,38808 
 
 8th do 1603709 
 
 This floating fund was made up of funds of 
 suiters deposited by order of ihe courts. It was 
 kept in banks at interest until it was more perma- 
 nently mves;ed or paid over to those entitled to it. 
 If he was not misinformed, the interest that ac. 
 cumulated upon these deposits in banker a part 
 
 of it at least had been used for the purchase of 
 books for the Chanceiloi's or Vice-Chancellor's 
 libraries, and f r other purposes in which suitors 
 lo whom the money belonged, had no particular 
 int-resis. It might be right to use the interest ac- 
 cumulating upon the funds of individual s-uitors 
 for such purposes, but we could not understand 
 why it was so. He had drawn an amendment 
 which he h;td thought of offering to the resolu- 
 tion of the gentleman from New York to call out 
 information in relation to this floating fund, but 
 as he had some doubts as to its necessity or pro- 
 priety, and as he did not wish to embarrass the 
 resolution, he would not now offer it. He would 
 like the information, but he did not see clearly 
 what action we could lake upon Ihe subject when 
 we should have obtained it 
 
 Mr. MANN then said that the call would not 
 incur the labor that many gentlemen had suppos- 
 ed. These items were all made up annually to 
 1st January in each district, and were returned to 
 the Chancellor, and all the labor required 
 would be to copy the return in each dis- 
 trict, which would give the desired information. 
 Mr. M. said if this inf rmation was not neces- 
 sary, why was the call made for the aggregate 
 amount at all necessary; and Mr. M. deemed the 
 items were much more important than the aggre- 
 gate. This having been reported, it had created 
 a desire on the part of many of the convention, 
 and of the people at large, to have these items 
 laid before us, and made public. Mr. M. believ- 
 ed that the people were anxious to see the items 
 called for by the resolution, comprising this large 
 amount in the hands of the Chancellor. This was 
 one of the reasons that induced him (Mr. M.) to 
 offer this resolution but he was willing to leave 
 it to the convention to dispose of as they thought 
 proper. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY was anxious to have some rea- 
 son for this call, more satisfactory than the one 
 which had been given. If this was anything 
 which was connected with the business of the 
 Convention, it would be proper to pass the reso- 
 lution ; but from the explanation of the gentle- 
 man from New- York, it appeared that the simple 
 object was to gratify what the gentleman called 
 the public curiosity. It might be that it was de- 
 sired to publish a statement of unclaimed funds, 
 that their existence might be made known to 
 those to whom they belonged, that they might 
 make application for them, as was the practice 
 in relation to unclaimed dividends in banks. 
 But he should object if the object was to spread 
 before the public the private interest of individu- 
 als in the court of chancery, to satisfy the curi- 
 osity of some men who had a design on those 
 funds. He thought this was not the legitimate 
 business of this Convention, and he, therefore, 
 moved the reference of this resolution to the ju- 
 diciary committee. 
 
 The motion to refer was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN presented a petition 
 from citizens of Madison county, in relation to 
 the revenues and canals of the State. Referred 
 to the committee of the whole having in charge 
 Mr. HOFFMAN'S report on that subject. 
 STATE OFFH ERS. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole, and again took up the report of the 
 
497 
 
 sixth standing committee, Mr. JONES in the 
 chair. 
 
 The question was on striking out in the first 
 section the provision for salaries. 
 
 Mr. STRONG believed that this question of 
 salaries would have to be decided here in Con- 
 vention, or otherwise it would become a fruitful 
 source of electioneering and a popular bone of 
 contention, and State officers would be elected 
 upon the principle of high and low salaries, and 
 before election the candidates would be interro- 
 gated as to whether they were in favor of high 
 salaries or low ones, and unless they could take 
 the course of gentlemen from New York, and un- 
 derstand their instructions both ways, and answer 
 both ways, it would lead to a reduction below a 
 fair rate. He was for giving fair salaries, and 
 having them fixed and permanent, and not fluc- 
 tuating by change of parties. This would be the 
 means of calling here an enormous lobby to in- 
 crease salaries every year. He believed the peo- 
 ple had more confidence in this Convention than 
 they would have in the next legislature, and it 
 was our duty to determine this question and re- 
 lieve the legislature from the duty of fixing the 
 salaries of some fifty officers, and from the crowd 
 of lobby agents who would besiege them for an 
 increase of the salaries of their friends. He be- 
 lieved all in the Convention to be as honest as 
 any out of it. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN offered the following amendment 
 as a substitute for the amendment pending : 
 
 " Each of the officers in this article named shall at sta- 
 ted times receive lor his services a compensation which 
 shall not be increased or diminished during the term for 
 which he shall have been elected ; nor shall he receive to 
 his use any ices or perquisites oi' office." 
 
 Mr. PERKINS believed this amendment would 
 substantially reach his object in the report which 
 he had submitted on Saturday. And after some 
 explanations he assented to it. His views in dif- 
 fering from the majority report were that in the 
 course of a long period of time, changes in the 
 value of money, and the expenses of living would 
 take place, rendering a change in the amount of 
 salaries necessary. Again, if these salaries were 
 fixed in the Constitution, it would lead to length- 
 ened discussion among the people in regard to 
 the justice of their salaries, and by this means 
 their attention would be withdrawn from the 
 more important principles of government. He 
 was willing for his own part, to trust this matter 
 to the Legislature. In his section of the State, 
 there had been no complaint at any time in re- 
 gard to the amount of the salaries of State offi- 
 cers, and he did not believe there was any such 
 feeling amongthe people generally. It had been 
 urged against giving this matter to the Legisla- 
 ture, that the efforts of partizans would be direct- 
 ed against these State officers, by attempts to re- 
 duce their salaries. But by taking it out of the 
 power of the Legislature to reduce or to enlarge 
 the salaries of officers during their term, this 
 objection would be removed. While, by this 
 privilege of fixing them in prospective, when 
 found too limited or too large, they might be cor- 
 rected as regarding those 'who were to receive 
 them in succeeding terms. The action of the 
 Legislature had heretofore been governed by 
 great propriety, and the salaries given were fair 
 
 37 
 
 and equal. He was still willing to give this 
 power into their hands, believing that they 
 would perform the duty with well-considered 
 and just attention to the merits of the matter. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said, as a member oi the com- 
 mittee No. 6, he had differed wiih the majority of 
 the committee on the subject of salaries, and re- 
 served his right to object to the salaries of the 
 State officers being fixed in the Constitution. He 
 believed this to be a legislative duty, and he wish- 
 ed to devolve it upon the Legislature, and as we 
 had commenced this system in regard to the sala- 
 ry of the Governor, he (Mr. N.) thought we had 
 better adopt the same rule in all cases. It has 
 been said that we have already deviated from this 
 rule in regard to the pay of the Legislature, which 
 we have specified in the Constitution, but they 
 are not anaiagous cases, for the reason, that the 
 Legislature would fix their own compensation, if 
 it is not limited in the Constitution, and there is 
 certainly a propriety in the compensation of 
 the chief agents, the representatives of the pec- 
 pie, being determined by the people them- 
 selves through the Constitution, leaving it to 
 their representatives to decide what shall be the 
 compensation of all other officers of the State. 
 The duties of these officers will necessarily va- 
 ry. There is now, and it is proposed to continue 
 a material disproportion in the compensation of 
 these departments, and perhaps as great in their 
 labor and responsibility. Now if the latter 
 should hereafter be changed if the labors and 
 responsibilities of one department are diminished 
 and those of another increased, their relative com- 
 pensation should undergo the same change. Your 
 Comptroller now receives $2.500, and the Trea- 
 surer $1, 500. Suppose the Legislature hereafter 
 finds it necessary to vary their present relative du- 
 ties to transfer a part of the labor of the former 
 to the latter department, it is evident that it may 
 be proper to increase the pay of the Treasurer, 
 even if thesalary of the Comptroller should be sta- 
 tionary. Now,insert the salaries in theConstitution 
 and you preclude the possibility of future necessa- 
 ry alterations in the duties of these departments. 
 Mr. N. need not allude to the fluctuation in the 
 value of labor, property, subsistence and money 
 itself, which render it difficult to decide now what 
 will be proper salaiies for the next quarter of a 
 century, and we all hope that our Constitution 
 will endure without chanee for that period. He 
 (Mr. N ) could not see the danger predicted by 
 gentlemen here, if this question of salaries is left 
 to the Legislature, that it will become an issue 
 which will influence your elections, that candi- 
 dates for the Legislature will be brought forward 
 with reference to low salaries; he (Mr. N.) feared 
 no such result. If the Constitution leaves the 
 question with the Legislature, there will be no 
 danger of salaries extravagantly high, and the per. 
 pie of this State would not approve of insufficient 
 compensations, they know very well that to se. 
 cure the services of competent men they must be 
 allowed a fair remuneration for their time and la- 
 bor an! official rpponsibili'ies. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN desired to obtain all the ad- 
 vantages presented in the report of the commit- 
 tee, and also the advantages contained in the 
 pending amendment. For five years to come, 
 and even for ten years, this Convention can well 
 
498 
 
 judge and determine what the duties of these offi- 
 cers are likely to be, and what compensation they 
 oue;ht to receive for those services, and he would 
 advise that the salaries should be fixed for that or 
 some other limited period. Whether the com- 
 pensation fixed by the report was too high or too 
 low, had nothing to do with the principle; we 
 could easily judge of what the duties of a Comp- 
 troller would be for the next ten years; and there 
 would be great gain in our fixing the salaries. 
 Gentlemen were mistaken in supposing that the 
 Legislature could fix these salaries without diffi- 
 culty. When these lobbies should be thronged 
 with the office-seeking and office-holding aristo- 
 cracy, this would be found to be a difficult if not 
 a dangerous task. He wouid advise that we 
 should fix the compensation for such a limited 
 period as you safely can ; fix it for such a limited 
 period u.s you can judge of what the duties of the 
 office will be, and then for the future beyond, al- 
 low the Legislature to determine; but require that 
 whenever they shall so act, the increase or dimi- 
 nution of salary shall not take effect until after 
 the expiration of the term of the incumbents then 
 holding. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER suggested that Mr. MARVIN 
 should except the Speaker of the Assembly from 
 the operation of his amendments, and Mr. M. as- 
 sented. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD at some length advocated 
 the proposition of the committee as it stood. 
 
 Mr. HART was in favor of fixing the salaries, 
 if there could be a principle of flexibility obtain- 
 ed in it; and to produce this, he had prepared the 
 following amendment, which he sent up : 
 
 The salaries prescribed in this article shall be subject 
 to alteration by law at every successive [leriod of ten years, 
 out such alteiation shall not aft'ect the salaries of the in- 
 cumbt-nts then in office, during their respective terms. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that he did not object 
 to this; but the proposition struck him quite fa- 
 vorably. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought these salaries should 
 not be fixed in the constitution for the reason that 
 they would be so inflexible. No change could be 
 made in them without an amendment to the con- 
 stitution. He was in hopes that the constitution 
 might be sent to the people without any provision 
 of this nature. No fears need be entertained 
 such as had been expressed that che Legislature 
 would be besieged or influenced by lobbies in re- 
 gard to this matter. He would give to the next 
 Legislature the power to fix these salaries. It 
 could not be expected that the duties of the State 
 officers would always remain as they now are. 
 He was in favor of taking some portion of the 
 power of the comptroller out of his hands, and 
 distribute them among other State officers to the 
 Treasurer or Engineer ad Surveyor. The Comp- 
 troller holds the canals in one hand and the 
 banks in the other. He had power to draw mo- 
 ney from the Treasury to any amount, and apply 
 it to private uses, instead of for public purposes. 
 To guard against this, he would have the Trea- 
 surer, or some other officer, examine every mat- 
 ter before it went into the comptroller's hands, and 
 find whether there was a real claim against the 
 State for the funds drawn, and then he should 
 himself examine to see if it was correct. This 
 was, as was said, a matter of legislation. And 
 
 while it was given to the legislature to prescribe 
 the duties of the State officers, he would also 
 give them the power of fixing salaries appropriate 
 to the extent of those duties. He had no com- 
 plaints to make in regard to the amount now paid 
 to the Comptroller; it was none too much for the 
 duty he performed ; but as heretofore had been 
 the case, the pay of officers had been graduated 
 according to the expenses of living, &,c. No fear 
 need be entertained that a crowd of officers would 
 beset the legislature when this subject came be- 
 fore them. Never, in his experience, had this 
 been the case, although salaries had been in- 
 creased and lessened. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG opposed the fixing of sala- 
 ries by the constitution. Experience had shown 
 that it often became necessary to change the 
 amount and nature of the duties of public offi- 
 cers ; and with such change it would be necessary 
 to make a corresponding change of compensation, 
 which could not be done if the legislature were 
 tied down by a constitutional provision. He had 
 no fear that the legislature would fix salaries too 
 high. Members would not thus hazard their pop- 
 ularity, knowing as they did, that their constitu- 
 ents were opposed to high salaries. An effort 
 was made at the last session to effect some reduc- 
 tion of salaries. A committee on retrenchment 
 had been appointed in the Assembly ; the com- 
 mittee reported some reduction, but upon exami- 
 nation it appeared to be the opinion of the house 
 that no further reduction could reasonably be 
 made; and the subject, after a little discussion, 
 was dropped by common consent. Besides, he 
 did not think the people designed thus to have 
 themselves tied down, and prevented from carry- 
 ing into effect their own wishes, when they de- 
 sired to instruct their representatives to raise or 
 reduce salaries when they might be found to be 
 either too high or too low. This was not a prop- 
 er subject lor the action of the convention. It 
 was a matter of too small importance, and ought 
 not to be placed in the way of those great meas- 
 ures of reform which had been demanded by the 
 people. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS wanted, before they went any 
 further, to have the principle so fixed, as to se- 
 cute the Legislature from the Deductions that 
 would otherwise eternally surround them. Fix 
 them lor some ^es'iocl; autr that revjs;- them; 
 then go on to another period, and so on liorn pe- 
 i iod to period. iJut never let them go into mime 
 diate effect. He had no plan p-epaied, but he 
 g.tve the practice in Vermont as an illustration, 
 where they called a Convention every seven \eais 
 for the purpose of revising vheir arran^enient of 
 irovernrnent. rlo |'ropo*t-d thai it hould he pro. 
 vuled that a similar Convention should be held in 
 this State every 20 or 525 years, for the purpose of 
 taking our bearings and seeing where we were. 
 There would then be DO chance for yetting up a 
 political excitement by one partv or another lor 
 the salve of popularity in relation to calling such a 
 Convention. 1' would come round periodically, 
 and as a matter of regulation. He would not pro- 
 pose that the salaries should be fixed lot the peri- 
 od inteivening between these Conventions, but 
 for five, seven or ten years ; and afier they were 
 settled he would not have them go into eflect tor 
 a short time. He was opposed almost entirely lo 
 
499 
 
 the system of salaries, and to the present organiza- 
 ' i he governmental departments of thiS!afe. 
 In France there was a greater appropriateness in 
 TS. There was the minister of 
 iterior, the minister of finance, the minister 
 and tin 1 secretary of state. He 
 .. :it this stale suffered tor \vaiif of a function- 
 ary to superintend the administration of justice. 
 : try of state was not engrossed with too 
 much labor.' His duties should come up to his 
 name, and he should not be merely a secretary of 
 the legislative department. He desired to see 
 that officer make an annual report on the busi- 
 judicial departments, with statistical 
 i>f crime and convictions, civil suits, 
 -i that the duties of secretary of state would 
 iose of the officer who in Europe was 
 i the " minister of justice." He went on 
 to say that in the duties of the Comptroller, per- 
 haps some subdivision could be made. He 
 thought some of his duties in connection with 
 the canals were incongruous. He ought not 
 to be both the receiving and the disbursing 
 agent. His duties should be divided whilst 
 those of the secretary of slate should be in- 
 creased. The Secretary of State should not on- 
 ly be Secretary of the Legislative Department, 
 but. he should be what his name implies, Secre- 
 tary of the whole State of the Judiciary, Legis- 
 lative, Educational, and every other Department; 
 so as to bring his duties and powers up to his 
 title. 
 
 Mr. CH ATFIELD said that the committee had 
 considered the arrangement of the districts in re- 
 lation to the duties and powers of the heads of de- 
 partments, a? a imtter of legislation. The legis- 
 lature had ample power to do this. Mr. C. went 
 on to argue further in favor of fixing the salaries in 
 the constitution, rather than to leave it to the vas- 
 <;ili .it ion of legislation. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said the invariable practice of 
 >vernment for a series of years, had been for 
 the legislature annually to elect a committee to 
 examine into the expenditures, and charged with 
 the duty of seeing whether the warrants were 
 drawn according to law, and if they were not, it 
 was perfectly in the power of the legislature to 
 punish the officer. Since no such thing had ever 
 occurred, he apprehended therefore that the war- 
 rants were drawn according to law, or under such 
 circumstances as constituted a law not to be re- 
 sisted. Every warrant issued by the Comptrol- 
 < mined, not only by the le- 
 : ive committee, but by the Treasurer him- 
 self, who by law was required to pay no warrants 
 unless it was drawn according to law. The 
 Comptroller was also obliged to say in the war- 
 rant by what law he was authorised to draw it. 
 And in the whole history of the government, 
 for the last quarter of a century, not a dol- 
 lar has been lost in the Comptroller's or the 
 
 Treasurer's Office by any misapplication. 
 
 The comptroller was the linancial officer of the 
 an officer must also have charge 
 of what is necessary in order to make that sys- 
 tem successful. Mr. H. urged that therefore 
 the convention would riot find it practicable to 
 divest the comptroller of his supervisory power 
 over the banking department. Some single offi- 
 cer, he contended, must be made responsible for 
 
 all these matters, and have charge of the whole 
 >f them. To divide the duties would be to dimin- 
 sh the responsibility. The complication of the ac- 
 counts in that office did not arise from the manner 
 n which they were kept,but from the complicated 
 nature of the subject, which would not be obvia- 
 ted until we got rid of the multifarious cha- 
 actet of the accounts, and the action of the go- 
 vernment was limited to subjects more direcily 
 .vithin its range and jurisdiction. The Cornp- 
 :roller not the Treasurer was the auditing officer 
 of the State, and this was right. The man who 
 received money should never be the officer to say 
 what money is received, nor he who pays the me to 
 say what amount v\as paid. If human experience 
 h-..'il not settled this, it had never settled any thing. 
 Mr H. did not believe that the great and respon. 
 sible duties of the Comptroller would in any con- 
 siderable degree be lessoned for some five or ten 
 years. The duty of overlooking and aggregating 
 he State revenue must still appertain to him. 
 This, Mr. H. urged was safer than putting it in 
 charge of a commission. This had been tried in 
 his state, in the Commissioners of the Canal 
 Fund, and he admitted that it had been as well 
 managed as any similar amount of funds had ever 
 :>een managed by any commission whatever. But 
 turn to the reports of that commission, and it 
 would be seen that more than half a million cf 
 the funds of the State in their hands, have be- 
 come if not utterly worthless, yet entirely nuavail- 
 able. And during the same period, he was not 
 aware that there had been a single dollar of the 
 funds under the care of the comptroller ever lost. 
 This was evidence of the danger of putting the 
 funds of the State in the charge of a commission 
 even the best that ever existed. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS had supposed that the whole prin- 
 ciple of fixing salaries in the Constitution was 
 settled in the action of the Convention on the 
 report in relation to the Executive department. 
 He thought that it was unwise to incorpnrale in 
 the Constitution, which w<ts intended to exist per- 
 haps tor all time to come, the exact compensation 
 to be paid to any particular officer. It would be 
 presupposing the continuance of the existence of 
 all ,hese offices. The contrary had already been 
 shown in the matter o( the Surveyor General. 
 The time may also come when some of these oth- 
 er officers will cease to have any duties to per- 
 f"rm, or be so \vry limited, as lo require '.m' 
 ited compensation. It had happened, and mi^ht 
 iijjain in this country, that a dulhir w.xsld be 
 worth as much as two or three now, an- ; 
 when a dollar compared with property v. , 
 be worth as much. It therefore 'semed to him 
 that the question should be left to Legislate 
 act in accordance with circumstances. H<? would 
 leave it to them, with the restricion that th; 
 ary of the incumbent should b;- 1 untouched during 
 his term of office, 
 
 Mr. PERKINS (bought the effect of nuttin? 
 these salaries in the Constitution, would be to draw- 
 out the instrument to an unreasonable lentl^ 
 He should object to it on that ground. And fur- 
 ther, there was no subject upon which there was 
 such a variety of opinion among the people, as to 
 what constituted a proper salary ; and he feared 
 therefore if inserted here, it would induce the dis- 
 cussion of matters not proper in the organization 
 
500 
 
 of the great principles ot' a government. Mr. P. 
 went on to allude to the present duties of the sl*te 
 officers, suggest in: that their duties could not 
 very well he lessened at this time. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN was in favor of 
 fixing those salaries in the Constitution, as tending 
 to settle a subject which had been one of constant 
 agitation in the Legislature, and not unfreqnently 
 of party legislation. He thought it to be perfectly 
 practicable for the Convention to fix the salary 
 for ten years, at ledst. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM, suggesting that there was not a 
 quorum present, moved to rise and report progress. 
 
 The question being put, there were ayes 20, 
 noes 25 not a quorum. 
 
 The CHAIR thought there was a quorum pre- 
 sent, and again put the question. There were 
 ayes 26, noes 34 not a quorum. 
 
 The Secretary then proceeded to count and re- 
 ported seventy members to be present. A quo- 
 rum. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON, in reply to Mr. HOFFMAN 
 and in proof of his remarks that large sums of 
 money had been drawn from the treasury without 
 authority of law, went on to quote from a report 
 made to the legislature of 1839 by Chester Loom- 
 is of the Senate, and Azariah Smith and Fortune 
 C. White of the Assembly. In that report it was 
 stated that during the past year different sums to 
 the amount of $1,290,000 had been drawn from 
 the treasury on the warrant of the Comptroller 
 without the authority of law. Mr. P. pointed out 
 these instances. By the Revised Statutes it was 
 required the accounts of the state printer to be au- 
 dited by the Comptroller. And yet the commit- 
 tee say, that his accounts to the amount of $28,- 
 000 had been paid by the Comptroller without 
 being audited. There was another item of $400 
 paid to the Clerk of the Assembly, before the law 
 authorized the same to be paid. Mr. P. read 
 from the law to show this. Now, as to the next 
 item of $1,260,696 43, the Comptroller took that 
 sum from the treasury and loaned it out to the 
 several counties on bond and mortgage. The 
 United States Deposite Fund was to be paid to 
 this state in four instalments. Three of them 
 were paid, but the fourth was withheld. The 
 Comptroller drew his warrant on the treasury for 
 the same amount of $1,260,696 43 and loaned it 
 on bond and mortgage. There was not the shad- 
 ow of the authority of law for this warrant, and 
 so this committee say. The law of 1837 autho- 
 rized the loan only of what was received from 
 the United States in the state treasury. There 
 was another item $2,561 paid to sheriffs and de- 
 puties for the transportation of convicts to the 
 Auburn prison. The law of 1835 required these 
 sums to be paid by the agents of the prison. 
 There was no authority for the Comptrolller to 
 advance this sum. As to the assertion that the 
 Treasurer was a check upon the Comptroller, Mr. 
 P. would ask where the Treasurer found the law 
 which authorized this warrant for $1,290,000? 
 And yet he paid it. He (Mr. P.) did not charge 
 this as wrong but it was evidence of the oversha- 
 dowing power of the Comptroller. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that in every Comptrol 
 ler's warrant he had seen, reference was made to 
 the law authorizing it, with a single exception ; 
 and in that case the officer was not able to find it 
 
 Mr. H. was rather of opinion that it existed, if 
 not in pne law, in a large number. The officer 
 jrobably was right by construction certainly by 
 lecessity. As to the sum paid to the State Prin- 
 :er, Mr. H. believed it was the settled construc- 
 tion of the then law, the State Printer being under 
 contract, that the Comptroller was to advance to 
 lim. As to the other instances named, the gen- 
 tleman would find that they were according to the 
 settled construction of law, known to the legisla- 
 ture, reported, through its committees, and adopt- 
 ed by them, except in relation to the one million 
 of the deposite fund. The authority for that was 
 considered unquestionable. Whetherthat construc- 
 tion was right or not, he would not argue. Whatev- 
 er was done, was done with the knowledge of the 
 egislature. And Mr. H. submitted that the legisla- 
 ture was quite competent to judge whether war- 
 rants had been drawn without their authority.-^- 
 He had no interest in defending the Comptroller. 
 His own feelings and prejudices were on the oth- 
 er side. The legislature had been remiss on this- 
 subject. It had abandoned its duty, and had giv- 
 en over to Executive officers a power they never 
 should have had. But the Comptroller made 
 the best disposition of that one million that was 
 possible, and saved it to the State. Had it been 
 left as other monies were to the banks, it would 
 have been lost with them in '41 and '42, And the 
 legislature had never attempted to recall that mo- 
 ney. 
 
 Mr. CHATFILLD referred to the statute defi- 
 ning the power of the Comptroller as showing 
 that if there was any blame to be attached to any 
 person in the matter alluded to, the Treasurer 
 and the officers of the deposite banks had their 
 share in it and to show that, there was now as- 
 complete a system of checks upon the disbursing 
 officers as could well be desired. 
 
 Mr.PATTERSON disclaimed any intention of 
 casting any imputation on the Comptroller, but 
 insisted'that the i'act he had stated-that the Comp- 
 troller had drawn monies without authority of 
 law was still uncontroverted. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to amend so as to fix the 
 salary of the Comptroller and Secretary of State 
 at $2,000, instead of $2,500. Lost. 
 
 The committee then refused to strike out that 
 part of the section fixing salaries, as moved by 
 Mr. KENNEDY, 30 to 38. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to strike put that part of 
 the section fixing salaries, and to insert: 
 
 " Each of the officers in this- article named, shall at sta- 
 ted times, receive lor his services a cumpt. nation which 
 shall not be inci eased or dimmis- bed during the term lor 
 which he shall have been elected; nor shall he receive to 
 his use any fees or perquisites of office " 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND, the house being thin, moved 
 that the committee rise, which was done. 
 
 A report was received from the Comptroller, 
 in answer to Mr. MURPHY'S enquiry into the 
 amount of stocks held by citizens of New-York 
 in the city banks and other monied corporations, 
 compared with the amount held by others. [The 
 report states the portion of the $54,000 held by 
 citizens of New-York, to be about $30,000.] 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The Convention immediately on assembling 
 had the roll called. 68 were present 
 
501 
 
 The committee then went into committee of 
 the whole on the Report of committee No. 6, on 
 public affairs, &c. 
 
 Mr. JONES of New- York , resumed the chair. 
 
 The proposition offered by Mr. MARVIN in 
 the morning was negatived, ayes 22, noes 35. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to reduce the salary -of the 
 Treasurer from $1500 to $1000. Lost, without 
 any division, only about 10 siding in favor of it. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY ottered a proposition to pre 
 vent any officer of government receiving any fees, 
 but on reflection withdrew it. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that he was opposed to hav- 
 ing the treasurer elected by the people; and he 
 would therefore move to have it struck out. of this 
 section. His object was lo provide fur the ap- 
 pointment of the Treasurer as he was now appoin- 
 ted, in a sepaiate seel ion. The reason lor his 
 wishing to elect the Treasurer by a different mode 
 fr-m other stale officers, was that the Legislature 
 appointed every year a committee to examine his 
 accounts at the close of the fiscal year in Septem- 
 ber arid report their condition to them at the next 
 session. And alter this is done, they pioceed to 
 fUct the Treasurer. It this officer should be 
 elected by the people, iie would be nominated and 
 elected before any report of this kind could be 
 received. It would be exceedingly unwise to 
 have this mode ; to have this officer's election bro't 
 before the people every two ye-irs; when they 
 Could not possibly tell how he had behaved whilst 
 lie had been in office, or what necessity there was 
 for any change at all. The mode of appointment 
 now in vogue, had worked well, and he did not 
 believe that tl^ere was that call Cor a change in 
 that mode, thai perhaps existed in regard to other 
 officers, w.iose patronage *vas largei. He should 
 also propose a change of the term of the other 
 stale officers, and a classification of them, so 
 that one of them should be elected every year. 
 This he regarded as important, so as not to have 
 the entire government, executive and adminis- 
 trative liable to be changed once in two years 
 or if these officer* should be elected in different 
 years from the executive, so as not to have the 
 execuiive and administrative officer in conflict 
 politically with each other. If elected one each 
 year, there would be more likely to be an infu- 
 sion of men of both parties in the boards, which 
 were composed of the State officers, who would 
 operate as a check upon each other. As to the 
 Attorney-General, who was in fact the legal advi- 
 ser of the executive, it was proper that he should 
 come in and go out with the executive; and he 
 should not propose to change his term. He 
 should prefer also to have the Attorney-General 
 appointed by the Governor and Senate but he 
 should not press this change. He urged further, 
 that to elect the Senate once in two years and all 
 the State offices, and at a different time from the 
 Governor, might bring all the branches of the 
 state government in conflict or if elected at the 
 same time, might produce a clean sweep in every 
 department, without that salutary check which 
 parties always had upon each other. And the 
 tendency would be, unless there was some alter- 
 native, to give the elections one year an exciting 
 character, to be followed by a general apathy in 
 regard to them the next. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS agreed with Mr. PERKINS, 
 
 that it would be highly dangerous, and almost un- 
 precedented, to have the Treasurer, the holder of 
 the purse of the State, elected by the people.- 
 There were some peculiarities in this office, 
 which made it proper that the person who held 
 it should be the creature of the representatives of 
 the people. It seemed to him that it would be 
 imposing too much trouble on the people to make 
 the Treasurer elective every year. He ought to 
 hold his office at the pleasure of the representa- 
 tives of the people, he ought not to have 24 
 hours that he might call his own. The people, 
 too, would be apt to make a mistake sometimes 
 in regard to the qualifications of a person to hold 
 this office. He remembered an instance when 
 the Treasurer of Massachusetts failed and ran 
 away, leaving the State minus for a considerable 
 amount. He would have the Treasurer elected 
 as he now is, making our representatives respon- 
 sible in that way for the safe-keeping of the pub- 
 lic money. He liked the report, generally ; there 
 were some new features in it with which he was 
 pleased that of making a State Engineer and 
 Surveyor among others but he would have the 
 Treasurer elected in the old way. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said he felt compelled to sup- 
 port the proposition of the gentleman from St. 
 Lawrence, to provide for the appointment of the 
 Treasurer by the Governor and Senate or by the 
 Legislature. It had been admitted in the discus- 
 sion to-day that the duties of this office had al 
 ways been well discharged ; that the public trea- 
 surer had been safe in the charge of officers ap- 
 pointed by the Legislature. The question in ef- 
 fect was whether this officer should be appointed 
 by the Governor and Senate or Legislature, or by 
 an irresponsible State caucus of the political par- 
 ty that chanced to be in the ascendency. It would 
 be seen that if the article reported by the com- 
 mittee should be adopted, that a State caucus or 
 convention for the nomination of one or more of 
 these officers would be necessary every year. 
 The Secretary of State, Comptroller, Treasurer 
 and Att'y General were to be commissioners of the 
 Canal Fund and were to be a part of the Canal 
 Board. Now he asked gentlemen to anticipate 
 what interests would be best represented in these 
 annual State conventions. While there were 
 strong interests to be represented in all the coun- 
 ties through which the canals passed, would such 
 counties as Suffolk, Queens, Rockland, Orange 
 and Dutchess feel sufficient interest in the nomi- 
 nation of a single State officer to secure a faithful 
 representation in these yearly conventions ? The 
 truth is that an army of candidates for Canal In- 
 spectors, collectorships and other canal officers 
 will, in the character of regular delegates or lob- 
 by attendants, control the action of these nomina- 
 ting Conventions, & when their nominations come 
 to be ratified by the people, will claim and obtain 
 the offices in the gift of the Canal Board as their 
 reward. He saw a danger in the propositions of the 
 committee, and his present inclnation was to wash 
 his hands of the whole scheme of submitting the 
 appointment of all these important State officers 
 to a self-constituted State caucus, who would 
 meet at their own expense without other reward 
 than the offices they could obtain by the aid of 
 the candidates they assist in nominating. He 
 had heard it said that the public voice demanded 
 
502 
 
 that the State officers should be elected by the 
 people. He had some opportunity of knowing 
 the wishes of the people as to the constitutional 
 reforms they desired, but he had not heard so 
 clear an expression of popular opinion upon this 
 question, as to compel him against his judgment, 
 to support the proposition of the committee to 
 make elective all the State officers. He had seen 
 the proposition advocated by an influential jour- 
 nal of this city, but not until after the State offi- 
 cers had become obnoxious to the editor of that 
 paper. He liked to stand well with the people ; 
 lie habitually had great respect for their well ma- 
 tured opinion: and he trusted he was ready 
 enough to suspect the sound ness of his own, when 
 in conflict, with a well considered public opinion. 
 He had another objection .to the report of the 
 committee. He was for electing the judiciary. 
 By the report of the majority of the judiciary com 
 mittee, and by some of the minority reports the 
 judges of the supreme court were to be elected. 
 He was for electing them, because they could be 
 
 elected in single districts, so that the" candidate 
 would be within the influence of his personal ac- 
 quaintance. When the people could decide be- 
 tween candidates, from such acquaintance they 
 would generally decide rightly, but when called 
 upon to decide between candidates in distant parts 
 of the State, they would have to act from inform- 
 ation furnished by partizans and would olten be 
 deceived. Now, there was some danger that we 
 were to increase the number of important elective 
 officers to that extent that the people might not 
 be able to bestow all the attention to the respec- 
 tive fitness of so many candidates that the public 
 interest would require. He feared that combina- 
 tions would be formed along the canal lines, by 
 candidates for canal offices, that would be too 
 
 powerful for the virtue of State caucuses, and 
 that the propositions of the committee to make 
 the entire Canal Board elective, would lead to 
 bad results if adopted. 
 
 Mi KiUHiVlOM) lullmvod. He did not like 
 ttie jjiovisionsot tne amendment. Gentlemen in 
 
 favor, argued thil this mutter ot salaries snould be 
 l-jft fo (he L.-gislaiure. He, Mr. R., begged to 
 say to gentlemen that the parry in power might 
 in-; disposed by their plan, to reward political la- 
 vontes by giving them hiph salaries, and they 
 i, it su disposed, punish political enemies by 
 u reduction ot oi hers. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS reunrked that the amendment 
 expressly prohibited a Legislature tiom acting on 
 the salaries of ofiicers in power. They cuuld 
 only act piospeciiveiy. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND resumed by saying that 
 he perh-.-e iy understood this whole matter. 
 Gnlleine:i told us they were in mvor of leav 
 ing i ins whole mailer to the Legislature, but 
 at ihe same time they look special care to pur in 
 a clause forbidding t lie Legislature 1'roiri either in- 
 creasing or decreasing a salary during the time 
 the incumbent w f *s in office. They aisoiell us why 
 distrust the Legislature ?Now, he (Mr. i-1.,) wish 
 eU to say that he had no distrust of !t,e Legisialure 
 nor of the people, if gentle men will L.O with him 
 and leave this whole mailer open to ihe people, 
 through their representatives. But when iheir pro- 
 position is {airly examined, we shall find that its 
 [radical results will be. to impose upon the 
 
 tax payers of this State, a Jarge batch ot sal- . 
 aried officers, receiving an amount of salaries near- 
 ly if not quite double the amount heretofore paid 
 in this State. What is this proposition? It 
 that the Legislature at its first meeting after 
 the adoption of this Constitution (it they shall so 
 adopt it) shall proceed to fix these salaries, and 
 that when so fixed they shall remain unalieied 
 during the term for which they are elected or ap- 
 pointed. We are, judging from the report 
 of the judiciary committee, to have some 
 forty or fir'ty salaried judges holding for some eight 
 years each, and their salaries are to be fixed per. 
 manently for that time. Judging fiom this prop- 
 osiiion, and when all this is to be done unaltera- 
 bly by on Legislature, who can calculate the 
 lobbying which will then be done about (his Cap- 
 itol to influence the Legislature to fix these sala- 
 ries hiuh, and if they should do so and fix the sal- 
 aries of the judges exorbitantly high, this system 
 will tie up the hands of the people's representa- 
 tives for at least eight years. Now he thought 
 this system will be distrusting both the Legisla- 
 ture and the people. In conclusion, he would 
 only say, that he would be willing to compromise 
 this matter in one of two ways, either to fix these 
 salaries in the Constitution, or to leave the 
 matter unrestricted to the Legislature, so that 
 if by any management they are made too 
 high the next Legislature may' reduce them. 
 
 Mr CAMPBELL 'briefly followed. 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought the committee were pro- 
 ceeding under a sort of impulse which did not 
 admit of due consideration. He confessed it was 
 with some surprise that he found so many here 
 that were willing to make the treasurer elective, 
 and for two years. Thefe seemed to be a wonder- 
 ful charm in adding names to the ticket. The 
 complaint in his county was that there were so 
 many elective officers because it imposed on the 
 people so much labor. He heard a gentleman 
 from Clinton county say and he lived among a 
 very intelligent population too that there were 
 so many names on the town ticket now, that he 
 could get his horse elected supervisor, and nobody 
 would know it. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : That probably was some dis- 
 appointed gentleman w r ho had lost his election. 
 
 Mr. STRONG did not see why the people could 
 not nominate and elect a Treasurer as well as a 
 Governor. Nor did he see why Treasurers elect- 
 ed by the people might not be made responsible 
 and removable, at the pleasure of the legislature, 
 as well as a Treasurer elected by the legislature. 
 Mr. SIMMONS farther explained his views. 
 He wanted some security. Bail was good for 
 nothing. We must have the security in the qual- 
 ifications of the man. 
 
 The motion of Mr. PERKINS was rejected. 
 Mr. PERKINS then moved to strike out the 
 words, " and shall hold their offices for two 
 years." He intended to follow this up with a 
 motion to classify these officers. 
 The motion was lost. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to amend so that no 
 one of the State officers should receive any fees, 
 or perquisites besides the annual salary. Agreed 
 to. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH moved to amend so as to 
 make, the Commissary General also elective by 
 
503 
 
 the people. He had never been ;ible In S66 why 
 
 m-tinn should be made between tb.- fYm- 
 
 State -.llieers. One of 
 
 the leading objects of tins Convention was, by 
 1,-iviii-- the election of these officers to the people, 
 to break up the central power here and the 
 principle of popular election, if applied to some 
 of them, should be applied to all. He was aware 
 that this office was not generally considered as 
 one of much importance but to him there had 
 always been a sort of necromancy about it, for it 
 was dagerly sought after. If it was an office of any 
 impori;i, ice, '-very section of the State ought to 
 have the privilege of having its candidate. As it 
 was, the selection would perhaps always be made 
 from the city and county of New-York. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD opposed the motion. The 
 committee had fully considered this matter, and 
 regarding this office as a purely military office, 
 not one of the Executive cabinet, they concluded 
 to leave the matter of his appointment to the mi- 
 litary committee, with the Adjutant General. 
 As to its being an office much sought after, it was 
 because to military men it was a post of distinc- 
 tion worth having without regard to emolument. 
 Mf. S i'E i >Oi\ could not see the reason tor the 
 di"tnii'tu)u btr ween the nmi who held the purse 
 and the man who had the custody of the military 
 property ot Ibe s:atc nor why the one should be 
 .iveand not the other. As to this article 
 g.-iMM-ally, Mr. S. said he should probably approve 
 of most of it, except that it) relation to the inspcc 
 tion of state prisons. And when we came to that 
 part of the article, he would endeavor ro picture 
 out the co>ir -. by '.vine!) irresponsible men would 
 creep fi inn ih ditch info positions where they 
 should not be. He was orif-y surprised indeed that 
 farther provision was not made in this article thai 
 -iio'iid elect those who were to be under the 
 care of the insper tms. P .;.>ular or unpopular, he 
 would endeavor to avoid the momentary impulse 
 that fed the minds of some for he had rathei 
 stand riijht with those who should come alter him 
 than feed the breath of a morbid public sensibility 
 in M'tn- directions. How, be asked, would in 
 sut'ci nrs be appointed ? 
 
 ' Mr. UHA'ITIELD tilled to order. The gen- 
 tlernan was MI discussing the question. 
 
 Mr. STETSON was willing it should be out o 
 order. He was only going to say now that the 
 people were fully competent with respect to al" 
 officers where they had the means and opportu- 
 But in putting off all these du- 
 >ple, we should see that we die 
 not overtask, not their ability or judgment, but 
 .ic.iiinery by which nominations were made 
 in convention and Mr. 8. went on to describe 
 the mode in which nominations were usually mad* 
 in conventions and to say, that after the fatigui 
 of disposing of some of the more important nom 
 i nations had been irouc through with, the mino 
 offices the little somethings were usually given 
 to appease disappointed persons and to make up 
 a stron ir ticket, so that while the first nominaliot 
 won: . those made at the end, would be 
 
 the worst that could be made. So it would be ii 
 nominating inspectors of state prisons. They 
 were officers that should possess peculiar quali 
 fications and in his judgment it w r as far less ob 
 jectionable to elect a judge than an officer of a 
 
 o\v grade of duty comparatively, in which the 
 ublic felt, no gencr;;! interest. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD rcpln-d, saying that he it- 
 gretted to see Ivre so t't. ijuent a disposition to dis- 
 :uS8 every thing but the question. The 
 ornmittee would hear wi 'ness that he had on 
 ivory occasion endeavored to confine himself 
 o the matter in hand, and if others would do the 
 same, we should et along with business in less 
 han naif the time. 
 
 Mr. STETSON rose here, but 
 
 All. CHATFIfiLD would not be interrupted. 
 
 Mr. STETSON would not permit the gentle- 
 man to re;vl him a lectute. 
 
 A debate of a personal character here occurred 
 between Messrs. CHATFIELD and STETSON, 
 when the matter dropped. 
 
 Mr SHEP.-RD continued the debate, urging 
 :hat this officer came properly under the cogni- 
 sance of the militaty committee. 
 
 Mr CROOKER sublimed the amendment. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH insisted that the Commissary 
 ?r! j ii"ra! was in no sense a military officer, but 
 stood.it the head of a department, or bureau and 
 as such had considerable patronage. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. D. was lost. 
 
 The committee then rose and reported progress, 
 and :he Convention 
 
 Adjourned to nine o'clock to. morrow morning. 
 
 TUESDAY, (53d day,) August 4. 
 
 Prayer. by Rev. Mr. MEYER. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that a speech in the Argus 
 attributed to him was made by some other gentle- 
 man. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said he would take it offthe 
 gentleman's hands. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE said that on Friday last he 
 had voted "aye" to limit the sessions of the le- 
 gislature to 90 days ; his name was not recorded 
 and he wished it to be. 
 
 The vote on Friday was a tie vote and the Con- 
 vention refused to let him have it recorded now 
 as it would change the result. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE offered this resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to report 
 to this Convention the amount paid to the < ornmissary 
 al as -siu-.h, for his services during the year J 1 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON an amendment 
 
 to include his travelling expenses. His salary 
 
 ;7pQ. 
 
 M i'. BRUCE amended the resolution accord- 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to add " and the amount 
 ofrnon- him." 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND 'thought that would not do. 
 Some men spent more than they received. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE suggested a change of 
 phraseology, so thatit should read, "the amount 
 of money disbursed by him." 
 
 Mr. P'KN KIN'S as>i iiied to the amendment. 
 The resolution., as amended, was adopted. 
 Leave of absence fo> a grunted to Mr. 
 
 SIMMONS, and for one week to Mr. VV. TAYLOR. 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG offered a resolution that 
 the report of committee No. G should be taken 
 out ol committee of the whole that djy at half- 
 past one. It had been discussed sufficiently ; we 
 were wasting a great amount of time in unneces- 
 sary speeches and we should never be able to get 
 
504 
 
 through with the proper business of the Conven- 
 tion unless some such plan was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to lay the resolution 
 on the table. This was an important report and 
 it could not be properly got along with without 
 further discussion. 
 
 Mr. SHEP ARD would suggest that another dis- 
 position be made of it inasmuch as the learned 
 and excellent gentleman from Wyoming had ef- 
 fected his object by making a speech, he (Mr. 
 S.) would move that he (Mr. Y.) have leave to 
 withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN hoped Mr. CHATFIELD would 
 withdraw his motion to lay on the table. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: What lor? 
 
 Mr. JORDAN: That I may show why this re- 
 solution ought to pass. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: Oh, no. 
 
 The motion to lay on the table was lost Ayes 
 20. Noes not counted. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN desired to see this resolution 
 pass; th^re had already been deliberation enough, 
 and also discussion on this report ; besides it was 
 hardly possible to keep a quorum together in com- 
 mittee of the whole But when they come to 
 act in the House, and have to take a vote by the 
 ayes arid noes, this seems to act like an alarm bell, 
 and then one half of the members come in to hear 
 and to think about the subject before them for the 
 fiist time. They had much belter get at it in the 
 house, where they can fix their attention upon it, 
 and dispose of it. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD hoped the resolution would 
 not pass. 
 
 It was adopted, ayes 49, noes 24. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM ottered this : 
 Resolved, That all resolutions having for their object 
 the saving of tie time of this Convention, be hereafter 
 parsed upon without debate. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY also hoped that all speeches 
 having the same object, be hereafter not deliver- 
 ed in the Convention, but be written out by gen- 
 tlemen and handed to the reporters. (Laughter,) 
 This kind of business seems now to have been 
 taken up by the gentleman from Wyoming, (Mr. 
 YOUNG.) And whereas, there was no man who 
 had unnecessarily wasted so much ot the time of 
 the Convention as he had in every possible way, 
 in his improper and unjust efforts to get an addi- 
 tional member for his county of Wyoming. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM : I am afraid my resolution to 
 save time will cause a great many speeches to 
 be made, Mr. Chairman, and I therefore with- 
 draw it. [Laughter.] 
 
 STATE OFFICERS. 
 
 The Convention went into committee of the 
 whole Mr. JONES resumed the Chair. 
 
 The consideration of the report of committee 
 No. 2, on the State officers, was renewed. 
 
 The first section, as amended, was then read. 
 
 Mr. HART said that the resolution which he 
 had heretofore ottered, he wished to have insert- 
 ed at the end of the report. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to reconsider that 
 part of the amendment which forbids the public 
 officers from receiving any fees. The effect of 
 this would be to prevent all of their officers from 
 receiving any fees for work done for the public 
 in their respective offices ; although the fees to 
 be received were to go into the public treasury 
 
 for the benefit of the whole community. Now, 
 he certainly could see no good reason why these 
 officers might not, under proper circumstances, 
 receive these fees, provided they were to go into 
 the public treasury, and not into their own 
 pockets. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD defended his report. He 
 objected to these officers receiving fees. The 
 system was liable to much abuse. The govern- 
 ment ought not, after selling a man a piece of 
 public land, and taking the money for the same, 
 then to charge him $1 for making out the deed 
 for the land. The people ought not to be charged 
 any fees or compensation for work of this charac- 
 ter done for them by their own hired servants 
 these public omcers. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON spoke of the immense amount 
 of labor this would entail on these officers. He 
 instanced the case of the Holland Land Company, 
 where it was necessary in order 10 secure a clear 
 title to a tract of land, to go back thiough the 
 grants and charters of the reigns of several mon- 
 archs, the letters patent of James to the Pb'niouth 
 Company, confirmed by King Charles, which cost 
 that Company trorn $300 to $500 to get a correct 
 map of this tract, and al?o a certified copy of it, 
 so as to make good their title.. Now it, was too 
 much to ask the Secretary of State to do all this 
 work for nothing There would be no end to the 
 demands made upon him. if this'was tolerated. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to amend the sec- 
 tion so as to make it read, that none of these pub- 
 lic officers shall receive any fees for their own use ; 
 to be put in the 8th line ; and he would have it 
 left to future legislation to say what fees shall be 
 charged for any public work which fees are to go 
 into the public Treasury. He contended that if 
 we did not hold these fees in terrorem over the 
 heads of applicants, there would be lawyers 
 enough found who would want the whole record 
 of the Secretary of State's office, and of the Comp- 
 troller's offices, copied for their especial benefit. 
 And they must quadruple all the clerks and other 
 officers there. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that many papers had 
 been copied unnecessarily and had given much 
 trouble ; when they were intended only for the 
 benefit of private individuals. He was in favor of 
 the motion to reconsider. 
 
 It was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART then withdrew the amend- 
 ment he ottered yesteiday, and substituted the 
 following, to be inserted in the Sth line, alter the 
 word "dollars:" "but neither ol the office is men. 
 tioned in this section shall receive anyoihcr or 
 further fres, perquisites or compensation lor any 
 sei vices perlormed by them, or either <1 them, in 
 their official capacity," which was adopted. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to strike out the word 
 and ' in the 5:h line agreed to. 
 
 The 1st section was then agreed to, as amended. 
 
 Mr. SMI I'H proposed as the second section of the 
 article, one providing jlhat a Stale Super intendent 
 of Common Schools shall be elected lor iwo years, 
 with an annual salary of two thousand dollars. 
 Mr. S. said, on the original organization of 
 our school system in 1814, a superintendent was 
 appointed at an annual salary of $700 ; and when 
 in 1821 this office was abolished by the legisla- 
 ture, and its duties devolved upon the Secretary 
 
505 
 
 of State, the number of school districts was onl) 
 about one half the present number, and the num 
 her of children under instruction in the common 
 schools considerably less than one half the num 
 her now instructed. The amount of public mon 
 ey annually received and disbursed in the severa 
 districts instead of '27f>,0()0, the amount now an 
 nuully appropriated, was less than $80,000. Th< 
 correspondence of the department was very light 
 and all the duties required of this officer were 
 nominal when compared with those now impose 
 by law. Since that period the whole system has 
 undergone a thorough revision. We have now 
 upwards of 11,000 school districts, comprising 
 nearly o'0,nO() officers, 900 town and 60 county 
 superintendents, and nearly 800,000 children un- 
 der instruction. The correspondence of the de- 
 partment alone requires the constant attention of 
 an active and experienced clerk, and the exami- 
 nation and decision of the numerous appeals 
 growing out of the administration of the system, 
 the preparation of the annual report, and of the 
 necessary forms and instructions for the guidance 
 of the several local officers, the apportionment of 
 the public money, and the supervision of its ex- 
 penditure within the time and for the purposes 
 provided by law, are of themselves sufficient to ab- 
 sorb the time and task the energies of any officer. 
 He would take away from the Comptroller much 
 of his over-shadowing power, carrying as he does 
 the banks in one awn and the canals in the oth^r. 
 There was no earthly reason why one or two State 
 officers should have this immensely overshadow- 
 ing power. We are about to commence a reform, 
 and he wished to see the different portions of the 
 State represented in this respect as they are by 
 their candidates in the Legislature ; so that the 
 east, west, r.orth and south parts of the State 
 might have a like influence on these various 
 boards ; and not as now, the whole power of over- 
 shadowing influence might rest in the hands of 
 one or two men. All this could be done without 
 much additional expense, by making heads of de- 
 partments out of head clerks, who worked for 
 $1200 to $1500 a year. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that the superintendence 
 of these common schools had always been very 
 well managed under the present system as far as 
 he had had any knowledge; and whilst this was 
 the case and he had heard no complaint to the 
 contrary why should they go to work and elect 
 another officer with a higher salary than is now 
 paid to do the work no better and perhaps not as 
 well. There seemed to be a little too much con- 
 solidation in the matter. He did not want to see 
 the Prussian system adopted in this country 
 where the minister of public instruction selected 
 all the books, &c., and had all to say as to how 
 the. school was to be managed. He would not 
 abolish the office because they might now and 
 then get a bad officer. 
 
 Mi . .S 1 KUi\G also opposed the amendment. It 
 wa> lost. 
 
 The second stctioo was then read as follows: 
 
 ^2. The State Engineer and S'trvpyor shall be chosen 
 at a gi-iu-ial ejection, and shall hold his offi -e iur two 
 >ut nu pe/ sou shall belected to s.aidotti;e who is 
 not a pi acticnl engineer, and h.is not pursued civil engi- 
 naming aa tiiisiur&s and profession .01- seven suc> > 
 years before his . l.-.tion. He Khali receive an annual salary 
 of two thousaud dollars and his necessary expenses while 
 
 38 
 
 tiaveJimgon official uubims*, ou iue hue oi L 
 and public works of this State. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved to insert " 4 years" as 
 the term of office, instead of " two years." No 
 officer that would have to be elected in this go- 
 vernment required such long experience to ena- 
 ble him to fulfil his duties a* the Slate Engineer. 
 He would require at least two years to become 
 acquainted with our canals, and alter having de- 
 voted that period for such a purpose, it would be 
 but fair to keep him in office tor at least two years 
 tnore. The State wanted all possible experience 
 and talent in this office; and also permanence 
 arid continuity. He above all things wanted this 
 office to be free from the various mutations of 
 party. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS hoped the amendment would 
 not be adopted. If a State engineer was a good 
 officer, he would be re-elected by the people be- 
 yond all di.ubt. And if he be not a valuable offi- 
 cer, of good scientific standing and of integrity, 
 he will be removed by the people at the end of 2 
 years, a he ought TO be. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that these Engineers are 
 sure after all to be chosen from political consid- 
 erations, and every new party that comes into 
 power will remove the head State officers, &c 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that all past experience, 
 in relation to this matter show r ed, that these 
 public officers generally learn by their ex- 
 perience only to entrap and deceive the people 
 3y their false estimates ; and this was generally 
 done, either for their own individual aggrandize- 
 me.nt, or to serve party purposes. They had a 
 sample of this on the canals; the old estimates 
 on the Erie and Champlain canal, did not vary 
 $1,000,000 from the result. But it had been very 
 different ever since. He believed with others 
 that if an officer of this kind performed his duty, 
 and was a valuable and skilful Engineer, that 
 ;he people would re-elect him, and this was the 
 *;rue system. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that if by adopting this 
 provision, they were to procure first rate engin- 
 eering talent, then the form of it might perhaps 
 be well enough But he was afraid that by adopt- 
 ng such a plan of eUcting this officer much mis. 
 hiet miiiht be rendered permanent. A trade 
 iught nev.-r to be converted into an office. Civil 
 engineering is a trade; it is an occupation; and 
 we should be very cautious how we turn a trade 
 nto an office. Anything which has heretofore 
 iistained itself a* a trade, should he allowed to 
 r?nrain so; and our business here is to reinstate 
 as trades those things which have been drawn, in- 
 o the vortex of party politics. This should al- 
 ways be done, wherever we can by possibility do 
 f . If they succeeded in electing an engineer-in- 
 hief, what then? He must have assistant en- 
 'ineers, and these must have studied in his schot.l 
 f politics whatever that may be. It the comniil- 
 ee intend that this business of engineering which 
 las heretofore remained a trade, shall hereafter 
 >e converted into an office, and thus necess >i ily 
 e drawn into the vortex of party politics, all the 
 ubordinates must by necessity be drawn in with 
 t. All that has hitherto stood the test as a trade 
 ie desired should remain so ; and all trades that 
 lave heretofore been drawn into the vortex of 
 jarty politics, he desired to see reinstated in their 
 egitimate positions. All the various inspectors 
 
506 
 
 guagers, markers, measurers, &c., present quite 
 an array, compared to almost any other class that 
 can be named. You will continually meet with 
 difficulties if you attempt to convert this trade of 
 engineering into political office. If he is elected 
 as an Engineer, he will be an Engineer, whether 
 he knows anything of engineering or not; and at 
 the same time he will be bound by the shackles 
 of his political party. He was opposed to th 
 whole scheme, and much preferred the old claus 
 should remain as it is with regard to the selec 
 tion of a Surveyor General, and leave to the le 
 gislature to put such a construction on wha 
 are the legitimate duties that he is to per 
 form, as they may deem right and proper. 
 That we need no Engineer-in-Chief lor the publi 
 service, he fully believed; that such a proposihor 
 ought not to be adopted, he was entirely satisfied 
 This business of Engineering for the State, is now 
 held in commission. That commission can review 
 the labois of the State Engineer; they can cal 
 others to assist them in reviewing those labors. 
 And with regard to the estimal.es, the gentleman 
 from Genesee (Mr. RICHMOND,) is mistaken; we 
 got the estimates lor the Erie and Chainplainca 
 i.al at last within $2S,000,UOO ; but it was atte 
 many previous estimates had been made and ten 
 dered. in the estimates of the Chernung an 
 Crooked Lake canals, the canal was made ba( 
 enough to enable the Engineer to keep within his 
 own estimates. But in 1840 the repairs, c., o 
 the locks alone cost as much as the whole work 
 And in all others the cost was about double the 
 estimate; arid so it must be, tor an engineer-in- 
 chiefwill noi like to do the work so badly as to 
 keep within his own estimate. But the fact is 
 that the business of engineering should be held in 
 commission. It you do not do this, your cana 
 commissioners should no longer be regarded as 
 canal commissioners. Y' u ought, to change the 
 entire character of that commission. And he 
 was satisfied that the Convention was not fully 
 aware ot the great extent of the change in prac- 
 tice which this proposition contemplated. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD was surprised to see the op- 
 position to this section in the quarter fiom which 
 it came. When his Iriend trorn Herkimer was 
 making rapid strides in the advocacy of measures 
 of reform, he w;is surprised inat he should oppose 
 this proposition, having for its object ihe secur 
 ing of such relorm. The committee were satis, 
 fied that much of the embarrassments which I he 
 State now experienced, was directly attributable 
 to bad engineering, from a want of knowledge in 
 those who planned the works. The State had 
 been deceived and deluded by false estimates to 
 undertake works which would otherwise have 
 been left alone. As to the objection that this was 
 making a trade an office, Mr. C. would ask the 
 gentleman if we had not already done the same 
 with two other offices? What was surveying but 
 a trade ? And yet we had made the office of Sur- 
 veyor General.' Is the office ot Attorney General 
 anything more than a trade? The Attorney Gen- 
 eral must be a practicing attorney and counsellor, 
 and yet we had made an office of the Attorney 
 Generalship. The same objection would reject 
 the appointment of those two officers as readily as 
 it would the en^ineer-iri-chief. One is no more 
 a trade than the other. Mr. C., in reply to an 
 
 allusion of Mr. H. to the debate on the qualifica- 
 tion for Governor, asked him if he had been con- 
 sistent ? Did he not vote then to restrict the peo- 
 ple in f heir choice? He vo'.ed for the 30 years 
 qualification and the five years residence ; and vet 
 he asks us with much gravity, why we want such 
 and such qualifications for this work or that office. 
 Why then should he object to this provision? 
 Mr. C. proceeded to advocate the section, and lo 
 urge the necessity ot its adoption. Heretofore 
 our Engineers had been interested in the under- 
 taking of public works, that thus they might oh- 
 tain employment. Hence the secret of false es- 
 timates. For this reason he would have a Chief 
 Engineer, whose salary should be fixed, and not at 
 all dependent upon the fact whether the State 
 was carrying on public improvements or not. 
 There was a vast difference between general quali- 
 fications for a general office, and particular quali- 
 tications for a particulai office. The gentleman 
 objects that the nominating convention would not 
 select the best men for thnt office, but one that 
 belonged to tl.eir political school. He did not be- 
 lieve this; he believed the people would select a 
 man with reference to his qualifications as an en- 
 gineer. The committee No. 6 reported this, be. 
 cause they believed that much of the engineering 
 done for the State has been heretofore done by 
 men who have been guilty of making low and 
 false estimates, with a view to. deceive the public 
 and the authorities of the State. The proposition 
 of the committee is to elect an officer whose salarv 
 shall not depend on whether or not the State shall 
 be engaged in public works; he will thus guard 
 us against all errors, and stand on his dignity as a 
 public officer to correct all false calculations. 
 The State has suffered always by the Canal Board 
 being utterly ignorant of practical engineering, 
 and thus being continually imposed upon by (Lose 
 who were interested to deceive them. If thev 
 had in that Board a Chief Engineer, who is a 
 practical man, and an officer of State, one who is 
 not at all interested in any of I he works himself, 
 or in any misrepresentation, he Would instantly 
 detect all errors as soon as they are made. As to 
 disqualifications, perhaps the insertion of those 
 were not necessary. The committee would allow 
 iim to have his travel f^es as an inducement for 
 his State Engineer to go round the State, and in- 
 ipect the public works. It has frequently hap- 
 >ened that the Canal Board has not been on the 
 me of the public works over once a year- They 
 have left the canals to take care of themselves; 
 >ecause they hnve a reduced fixed salary, and no 
 llowance for traveling. Theiefore the committee 
 wanted to hold out an inducement to this Engineer 
 o leave his office frequently during the year, and 
 nspect all those works 
 
 The CHAIRMAN said the merits of the whole 
 icction were not in order ; only the question of 
 ime ; four years instead of two years. 
 Mr. PERKINS was opposed to the amendment. 
 Mr. RHOADES' amendment was negatived. 
 Mr. NICHOLAS moved to strike out, " but no 
 >erson shall be elected to said office who is not a 
 >ractical engineer and has not pursued civil en- 
 ineering as a business and profession for seven 
 uccessive years next before his election," and 
 nsert, " He shall be a practical engineer." 
 Mr. RHOADES approved of so much of the 
 
507 
 
 amendment as proposed to strike out, but not o 
 the rest. Doubts and perplexities would arise 
 if these words were retained in any shape. 
 
 Aii-. NICHOLAS moved to strike out the word 
 44 but no person shall he eU.cted to said office wh 
 is not a practical engineer and has not pursuec 
 civil engineering as a business and profession fo 
 seven successive years next before his election 
 and insert, " He ^hall be a practical engineer." 
 
 Mr. RHOADES approved of so much of the a 
 mendment as proposed to stuke out, but not o 
 the rest. Doubts and perplexities would arise, i 
 these words were retained in any shape. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS would not insist upon the ad 
 dition of these words it it was thought inexpedi 
 ent. He tnought however it would be much easi 
 er to ascertain whether a man was a practical en 
 gineer, than if would whether he had been so en 
 gaged for <even years previous to his election. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought it was belter either t< 
 adhere to the qualifications as prescribed by lh< 
 committee, or to stnke them out altogether. The 
 words practical engineer would not be sufficient!) 
 efficient, for any one who had studied a week 
 might be a practical engineer within the meaning 
 of the Constitution. 
 
 Mi. BLJRU should vote for the amendment a 
 being; better than the original section. But he 
 would like s ill better to strike out all that refers 
 to qualification. Practical engineering was his 
 trade, and he knew that the number of years engagec 
 jo this business was no test of competency. He 
 had some doubts whether the section was at al 
 needed. But if there was a necessity lor a Sur- 
 veyor General, ti;is proposition was much prefer- 
 able to the former orovision. 
 
 Mr. WHlT/Sdid not dissent from the commit- 
 tee as to the extent of the qualifications required 
 but he objected to any whatever being imposed 
 in the Constitution. He thought the people were 
 quite capable to judge of the qualifications of 
 any officer thev had to elect. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was in favor of striking out, and 
 indeed would go further. The idea of having a 
 State Engineer provided for in the Constitution, 
 was not to his taste He did not like the idea of 
 having the people called upon to investigate the 
 scientific attainments of a few distinguished in- 
 dividuals in the State, alone, over all the other 
 citizens of the State. It seemed to him that the 
 committee had mistaken the duties required of 
 the officer at the head of that department. He 
 was not expected to go out into the fields himself 
 and discharge the duties of Engineer he should 
 be a man of good sound sense, and not tied down 
 to the technical rules of the profession. From 
 what we had experienced, he had no peculiar 
 attachment for the office of Engineer. Mistaken 
 estimates and the manner in which the public 
 works had been executed under those officers, 
 had cost the State hundreds of thousands and 
 millions of dollars. It was a good, sound, prac- 
 tical man that was required ; one who would be 
 able to give directions to the Engineers, and to 
 take charge of the records of the departments, 
 and also to do the business of the Surveyor Gen- 
 eral. The people along the line of the public 
 works would startle at the idea of an Engineer 
 being placed in charge. It was well understood 
 among the contractors now, that it was highly 
 
 important to secure the services of the Engineer, 
 and this system of favoritism would not be im- 
 proved by this proposition. He was therefore in 
 favor of striking out the whole of these qualifi- 
 cations, and then of striking out the whole sec- 
 tion, or of substituting another word for Engineer. 
 He concurred with the committee, that it was 
 necessary to substitute an office in place of the 
 Surveyor General, but of all others, he would not 
 select that of Engineer it was not the duties of 
 the place. He would move an amendment to the 
 effect that a Commissioner of the Public Works 
 should be elected for two years, to have charge of 
 the department heretofore belonging to the Sur- 
 veyor General with the addition of the canals. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said the committee suppos- 
 ed they could do nothing more properly, in 
 framing the article, than to decide the element- 
 ary principles which shall govern the depart- 
 ments, leaving to the Legislature to decide upon 
 their appropriate powers and duties. If there 
 were certain powers provided for, they might be 
 supposed to be restricted to those powers alone, 
 whereas there might be others com ing legitimate- 
 ly and properly within the scope of their depart- 
 ment. The committee, in examing the duties of 
 the Comptroller, found it necessary to divide 
 them, and place one branch under the charge of 
 another department, and they decided that it 
 should be in the department of the canals, as one 
 in which the greatest interests were involved. 
 If gentlemen did not like the term by which the 
 office was designated, they might substitute 
 something else. He believed that it was proper 
 to have a practical engineer, an expert, as this 
 officer. Gentlemen who wish to employ a car- 
 penter, would not lookout for a man of good 
 common sense instead of an expert to do his 
 work; and the same principle was here involved. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY suggested that the amend- 
 ment of Mr. NICHOLAS should be modified so as 
 mly to strike out after the words "practical en- 
 gineer," in the third line, to the end of the sen- 
 ence. This would accomplish the object of the 
 gentleman without further addition. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS assented. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said the proposition was to place 
 in engineer at the head of the Canal Commis- 
 lioners with other engineers below them. If 
 he Canal Commissioners had been imposed upon 
 >y the engineers heretofore while they had ex- 
 :lusive control over them, it was not going to rem- 
 idy the difficulty by placing a man selected from 
 he same class over the commissioners. Mr. L. 
 urther objected to the proposition. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY referred to his experience 
 n the Delaware and Hudson Canal, as showing 
 hat it was not always the length of service which 
 made a competent engineer. 
 
 Mr. E. HUNTINGTON had not intended to say 
 
 word on this section until a motion should be 
 made to strike it all out. He agreed that it was 
 mportant there should be a competent head to 
 his Department. He had not a doubt but mil- 
 ions of the public money had been lost for want 
 f such an officer. But he was opposed utterly 
 o entrust the selection of such an office to poli- 
 cians acting in a nominating Convention. They 
 vould know as much about the qualifica- 
 ions of such an officer as of the geology of the 
 
508 
 
 moon. With all respect for the people, Mr. H. 
 must say that this was a question upon which they 
 could not pass understandingly. This man 
 should be appointed by the Commissioners hav- 
 ing charge of the canals. It would then be made 
 their duty to investigate the qualifications of the 
 man that they should appoint. This whole sec- 
 tion seemed to him to be inexpedient. With a 
 salary of $2000 you could never command the ser- 
 vices of an Engineer who should be fully com- 
 petent for the place. Engineers of the first class 
 now get $4000 or $5000 per annum from private 
 corporations, who know that it is for their in- 
 terest to place their works in the charge of men 
 of the best talent. Mr. H. trusted that because a 
 bad measure had been christened with the name 
 of Reform, it would not therefore be adopted by 
 the Convention. Besides the objection urged on 
 the score of salary, he would say that two years 
 would not be sufficient for a man to become fully 
 acquainted with the canals of the State. This 
 officer should hold his place during the pleasure 
 of the appointing power. Mr. H. would admit 
 that there was much of truth in the charges made 
 that the public money had been squandered. The 
 case referred to by the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer (Mr. LOOMIS) might be unjustifiable. The 
 Engineers might not have acted there with due 
 judgment. But it was out of our power to de- 
 cide upon the case. We must know all the par- 
 ticulars. There might have been good reason for 
 this act it might have been injudicious. The 
 Department he again admitted, had suffered for 
 want of a head. We should have such a man and 
 pay him a sufficient salary. But he objected in 
 toto that he should be selected by a political cau- 
 cus and be elected by a political party. We 
 should run a great risk in the first place of not 
 getting a good man, and if we did he might be 
 turned out of office in two years. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES had a v%ord to say in answer to 
 gentlemen who were in favor of striking out the 
 whole section. From the arguments whicn had 
 been used by fhe gentlemen from Herkimer and 
 from Genesee, he w.is led to believe that there ex 
 isted an imperious necessity for the creation ot 
 such an office as was heie provided for. The 
 false estimates alluded to by the gentleman from 
 Genesee, (Mr. RICHMOND.) and the statements ol 
 the gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS,) 
 prove that it was necessary to have an offictr who 
 was responsible directly to the people for the pro. 
 per performance of his duties. This would also 
 prevent h s haying a personal interest in the work 
 on which he v\as engaged for the State. He should 
 be a practical engineer, to prevent hid being de- 
 ceived by the subordinate officers and agents 
 whom he might have under his direction. He 
 hoped the section would remain. 
 
 The motion ol Mr. NICHOLAS was then adopt- 
 ed. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY, moved to strike out the pro- 
 vision lor paying the travelling expenses ot th. 
 engineer. He was not satisfied that there should 
 be tins permission to charge an indefinite amount 
 
 for travelliriii expenses. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS opposed this amendment. 
 
 The 
 
 great complaint was not that these corrmissioners 
 were paid too much, but that they did not travel 
 as much as they ought along the line of the ca- 
 
 nal. These lees should be an inducement tor 
 them to travpl. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON and Mr. BRUCE followed 
 briefly in favoi ot striking out when the motion 
 was injected. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to strike out all of the 
 section which prescribes the salary of this officer. 
 Lost. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved to amend so that the 
 sum paid for travelling expenses should in no 
 year exceed $200. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY moved to fix the sum at 
 $500. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. W. was debated by 
 Messrs. RICHMOND and WATERBURY, and 
 rejected. 
 
 That of Mr. RICHMOND was agreed to 37 
 to 28. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS then offered the following sub- 
 stitute for the whole section : 
 
 ($2. A Commissioner of Public Works shall be elected 
 by the electors of the State, to hold his office for two- 
 years. He shall have charge of the department heretofore 
 belonging to the Surveyor General, and also of records, 
 documents, and business in the Comptroller's office, per- 
 taining to the canais and State prisons, public buildings 
 and lands, subject to regulation by law. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to amend by striking 
 out all after the words " Surveyor General," and 
 insert "and also of the Canal department as now 
 exercised by the Comptroller." Mr. P. wished 
 to divest the Comptroller of his present control 
 of the Canals. He would make this man the 
 head of that department. 
 
 This after some debate was rejected, as was the 
 substitute of Mr. LOOMIS. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to strike out the whole 
 section. Agreed to 42 to 32. 
 
 The 3rd section was then read as follows : 
 
 & 3. Three Canal Commissioners shall be chosen at the 
 general election which shall be held next after the adop- 
 tion of this Constitution, one of whom shall hold his office 
 tor one year, one shall hold his office for two years and 
 one shall hold his office for three years. The Commis- 
 sioners of the Canal Fund shall meet at the Capitol on the 
 first Monday of January next after such election, and de- 
 termine by ballot which of said commissioners shall hold 
 his office for one, year, which for two, and which for three 
 years ; and there shall be elected annually thereafter one 
 canal commissioner who shall hold his office lor three 
 rears. The annual salary of a canal commissioner shall 
 be sixteen hundred dollars, and his necessary expenses, 
 while travelling on the line of the canals of this State on 
 official business as such commissioner. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved to strike out all that gives 
 to these officers necessary travelling fees. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS then moved to strike out so 
 much as fixes the salary. Lost, 36 to 37. 
 
 The 4th section was then read, as follows : 
 
 k 4 Three Inspectors of State orisons, shall be elected at 
 the general election v hich shall be held next af;er the 
 adoption of this Constitution one of whom shall hold his 
 office for one year, one for two years, and one lor three 
 years. The Governor, Secretary of Stat*, ad Comptrol- 
 ler, shall meet at the Capitol on the first Monday of Janu- 
 ei y next succeeding such election, and determine by Jot 
 which ot said Inspectors shall hold his office lor one year, 
 which for two, and which lor three years; and there shall 
 be elected annually thereafter one Inspector ol Slate prisons 
 who shall hold hi office for three years. Said Inspectors 
 khallhave the charge and superintendence of the State 
 prisons, and shall appoint all the officer* therein, and shall 
 receive' four dollars each for every day actually occupied 
 in officialduty at the prisons or at the Capitol, and ten cent* 
 for every mile actually travelled on official business. All 
 
509 
 
 vacancies in the ortice ol such lii*peetor shall be tilled by 
 the Governor, till ihe next election. 
 
 Mr. PERKfNS moved 10 strikeout "ten cents' 
 and insert " five cents " Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN moved lo s'rike out "four dol- 
 lor-*'' and in>. rt ' three dollars." 
 
 Mr. PERKINS opposed the motion, but it was 
 agreed to, 41 to 29. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to strike out all that re 
 lates to comj.ensnlior.. Lost, 34 to 37. 
 
 Mr KENNEDY thought we might save anoth 
 er shilling, and he moved to strike out " $3" and 
 insert &2,&7." Lost. 
 
 The 5lh section was then read as follows: 
 
 (j 6. The lieutenant-governor, speaker of the Assembly, 
 secretary of state, comptroller, treasurer,attorney-genera!, 
 and state engineer and survey or, shall be the commission- 
 ers of the land office. 
 
 The lieutenant-governor, secretary of state, comptrol- 
 ler, treasurer, an*! a'torney general, shall be the commis- 
 sioners 01 the can^il fund. 
 
 The canal board shall consist of the commi-sioners of 
 the caml fund, the state engineer and surveyor, and the 
 canal commissioners. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE moved to strike out. the words 
 " State Engineer and Surveyor" wherever they 
 occurred. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to strike out the whole 
 section. It was time, he thought, to stop legislat- 
 ing and eo to work to make a Constitution. All 
 thi had heretofore bren regulated by law. 
 
 The hour of H o'clock having arrived, thecom- 
 mittee of the wliole rose and reported the article 
 to the Convention. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved that the House again 
 go into comnvttee of the whole on the report. 
 
 The PRESIDENT decided this motion not to 
 be in order. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY then moved to recommit the 
 report. 
 
 This was opposed by Messrs. STRONG and 
 JORDAN and rejected. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved that the Convention 
 take up the report where the committee of the 
 whole left off'. Agreed to. 
 
 The question then recurred on the motion of 
 Mr. MARVIN to strike out the fifth section. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD urged that these boards might 
 be found to be an unnecessary part of the ma- 
 chinery of government and it would be unwise 
 to fasten them on the State, and beyond the reach 
 of the legislature. 
 
 Mr. CHATF1ELD, after expressing his regret 
 at the vole abolishing in effect the office of Surveyor 
 General, went on to sustain the section as one i f the 
 most important points in it. It designated Ihe 
 officers or boards that were to have charge of the 
 three great interests of the state, the canals, the 
 canal fund, and the public lands, which belonged 
 to the school fund and th*se boards would be 
 necessary so long as yve had canals, a canal fund, 
 and public hnds. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD replied, and Mr. PERKINS 
 followed in opposition to the motion to strike out. 
 
 The motion to strike out was lost. 
 
 The sixth section was then read as follows : 
 
 ^6. No law shall be passed creating or continuing any 
 Office, forthe ins| ertion ol any aiticle of merchandize, 
 p-oduce or manufacture (except salt manufactured within 
 this state.) and all existing laws authorizing or providing 
 for such inspt-ction, and the offices created thereby, are 
 hereby abrogated 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved the following substitute 
 f jr the section : 
 
 " No law shall be parsed creating or continuing any of- 
 fice lor the \veighingor measuiing or inspection ol ai y ar- 
 ticle ol merchandise, produce or manufacture, or ('oh Ant- 
 ing any authority to create any such office; and ell i .\ist- 
 ing IHWS authorizing or piovhling lor sui h weighing or 
 meisuringor inspection, or delegating such autlniity, 
 and the officers created lor such purposes, are hereby ab- 
 rogated. Nor shall any laws be pas.-ed granting licenses 
 forcanyingon any trade, calling, business or profession 
 and all licens* s and laws authorizing the same are hereby 
 abrogated. But nothing in this section contained shall 
 prevent the Legislature from exercising such control over 
 the salt springs and salt manufactured from the spme, us 
 they may deem proper, or from enacting suchsanitory 
 laws as the public welfare may require." 
 
 Pending this mgtion, the committee took a re- 
 cess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 There was a call of the House. Only 61 mem- 
 bers answered . Before the Clerk had got through 
 calling the absentees, four more came in. 
 
 The PRESIDENT. The Clerk announces 65 
 members present. A quorum is present. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : I suppose, sir, that 65 
 members is virtually a quorum; but, sir, there 
 ought to be more than 65 members present in or- 
 der to make a Constitution for the great State of 
 New-York. And if we cannot induce members 
 to come as at present, we ought to adopt a new 
 system. Either let us meet at a different hour, 
 or have one longer session ; we must adopt some 
 way to get a full house. Some gentlemen have 
 never been here of an afternoon ; and what is 
 more they never will be here. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that in order to test the 
 sense of the House upon this point, he would 
 move to adjourn. 
 
 This he was induced to withdraw. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said he would send up his 
 amendment of the morning in a modified form. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS begged him to withdraw it 
 for a moment, whilst he (Mr. N.) sent up the fol- 
 lowing, as a new section to come in just before 
 the last. 
 
 ^5. The Treasurer may be suspended from office by the 
 Governor until thirty days trom the commencement ol the 
 next session of the Legislate, whenevei it shall appear 
 to him that such Treasurer has in any particular viol ted 
 his duty, upon report of the Comptroller. The Governor 
 shall appoint a competent person to discharge the duties of 
 the office during such suspension of the Treasurer. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES asked why they should wait 
 for a report from the Comptroller ? Why not 
 give the governor the power to remove him in- 
 stantly on proof of misconduct. There might be 
 a collusion between the comptroller and the trea- 
 surer. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS modified it so as to leave it 
 entirely to the governor. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON asked why he did not make 
 it more general, so as to extend to other officers. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said this provision was not 
 broad enough to meet the case ; it would be found 
 inadequate to secure the treasury if the Conven- 
 tion shall decide that the people may elect a trea- 
 surer, before his accounts are examined. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said it was thus intended to 
 enable the governor to suspend a treasurer when 
 suspected, and to turn him over to the legislature 
 afterwards, and enable them to investigate his ac- 
 
510 
 
 counts and impeach or restore this officer. The 
 remedy would be pretty effectual and speedy and 
 some such provision is necessary because we now 
 elect a treasurer for two years instead of one, and 
 he has control of all the funds of the state. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved to add after the word 
 "Gov." " during the recess of the legislature." 
 This section would address itself better to his ap- 
 preciation if the authority of the governor should 
 be limited to the time during the recess of the 
 legislature. By the present reading of it, the go- 
 vernor was allowed to remove this officer in Feb- 
 ruary, and appoint a successor, who would hold 
 his office until the next year at the same time. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought there was no danger 
 of the power being abused by the Governor. The 
 Governor would not dare remove an officer elect- 
 ed by the people, except upon the most stringent 
 proofs equivalent to cauoe of impeachment. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. BAKER to'add after the 
 word " Governor," the words "during the recess 
 of the Legislature," was agreed to. 
 
 The section was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that in order to try the sense 
 of the Convention, whether they would retain a 
 fixed salary for all these officers in the Constitution 
 he would move to strike out the salaries in the 1st, 
 2d, and 3d sections, and this would test the ques- 
 tion as to how these salaries are to be settled. 
 Mr. J. however withdrew this. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY then sent up his modified sub- 
 stitute for the last section, thus : 
 
 All offices for thj weighing, guaging, culling or inspec- 
 ting any merchandise, produce, manufacture or commodi- 
 ty whatever, are hereby abolished; and no such office 
 shall hereafter be created by law; but nothing hereby con- 
 tained shall prevent the legislature from exercising such 
 control over the salt manufactured from the springs be- 
 longing to the state as it may deem proper. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY now offered his substitute for 
 the last section, (as above) and went on to say, 
 that in proposing the amendment to the section 
 reported by the committee, he only sought to 
 carry out more fully the principle asserted in the 
 section. There were many officers besides those 
 of inspection, partaking of the same character, 
 and equally impolitic and unjust, which ought to 
 be abolished ; and he had framed his amendment 
 so as to embrace them. For one he returned 
 thanks to the committee for bringing the question 
 of our inspection laws so directly before the Con- 
 vention. They had performed a noble duty to the 
 country and to public opinion. If there was one 
 subject more than another of general legislation 
 settled in the public mind, it was the abolition 
 of those laws ; and we should illy perform our 
 duty here if we did not conform to its wish, evi- 
 dences of which crowded upon us on every side. 
 The legislature in 1813 acknowledged it when 
 they abolished compulsory inspection, weighing 
 and measuring, yielding to the demands of the 
 producer, trader and consumer. The public press 
 and political conventions in various portions of 
 the state have urged it upon us ; and none more 
 so than in his own county. He felt gratified that 
 he could stand here acting in consonance with 
 that public opinion and at the same time accord- 
 ing to i he dictates of his own judgment. He had 
 always considered those laws as improper inter- 
 ferences with the private dealings of individuals 
 on the part of the government, whose province 
 
 was to extend equal protection to the lives and 
 property of its citizens, but not to regulate their 
 business transactions with each other. When 
 government has provided such protection it has 
 discharged its principal duty. It might, for the 
 purposes of such protection, tax its citizens and 
 adopt regulations for the collection of public re- 
 venue ; but it should not legislate between indi- 
 viduals. Men were sharp-sighted to see their 
 own interests. Left to themselves they would 
 not be subject to frauds in any such degree 
 as they now are by these attempts to affix a 
 value to the articles- of trade. The assumption 
 of this office on the part of the State begets laxity 
 and induces a reliance upon an official brand to 
 which it is not entitled. The officer generally is 
 a mere partizan, not selected with exclusive re- 
 ference to his qualifications, but for his political 
 services. Carelessness, ignorance, avarice, fre- 
 quently lead to bad inspection, for which there is 
 no remedy. He was, therefore, opposed to the 
 whole system from principle. He knew, howev- 
 er, that it was due to the subject, especially when 
 it is proposed to adopt a constitutional provision 
 in regard to it, to look at the origin and effects of 
 the system as it has existed, and this he would 
 do very briefly. Laws for the purposes of inspec- 
 tion were passed as early as 1784. In one, enac- 
 ted in 1790, the object is in a preamble declared 
 to be " to render the commodities more valuable 
 in foreign markets." Under such a pretext has 
 grown up the gigantic system which has estab- 
 lished several hundred of the officers in question, 
 whose support as he would show, was a tax 
 upon the industrial classes of the state, without 
 effecting the object originally designed. If the 
 object of those laws had not been accomplish- 
 ed, all candid men would agree that they 
 should be abolished. He would state a fact 
 which had been communicated to him by a 
 respectable constituent of his own, showing that 
 the price was not raised in the foreign mar- 
 ket by our inspection. The standard of pot- 
 ash inspected in New York was ten per cent 
 inferior to that of Montreal. Why this was so 
 was perhaps immaterial to inquire. All we wan- 
 ted for the purpose of this enquiry was to know 
 if the fact were so. That it was so, he repeated 
 he had good authority for saying; and with 
 that one fact the whole reason for the laws as sta- 
 ted in the act of 1790 failed, He found another 
 stated in a memorial to the legislature by the 
 New York Chamber of Commerce in 1841, equal- 
 ly conclusive, arid that was, that in many cases 
 the New York flour brand is of positive injury to 
 the article in Brazil, because the James river flour 
 was more highly esteemed in that market. Now 
 if our inspection served to mark the inferiority of 
 our commodities, to those of other states, it was 
 not likely that their value would be enhanced by 
 it. To his mind, the system had utterly failed to 
 accomplish its object. Its practical operation, 
 therefore, was merely to tax the industry of the 
 state, build up valuable offices and to restrict com- 
 merce, as he would proceed to show. In general, 
 taxes were said to fall upon the consumer; but in 
 this case, the expense of inspection, operating as 
 a tax, fell upon the producer. The article is taken 
 to a foreign market to compete with the same 
 kind of commodity from other parts of the world, 
 
511 
 
 or perhaps with the home production which is 
 not inspected. The New York producer, there- 
 fore, must enter into competition with the other 
 producers, and every charge at home operates to 
 reduce his profits abroad. The inspection in New 
 York, as well as the transportation, is a charge to 
 get his produce to the foreign market, while he 
 obtains no higher price in consequence of it, 
 but oftentimes his produce is even depreciated 
 by the brand. The amount of this inspection 
 tax was enormous. He would take the case 
 of pot and pearl ashes to which he had already 
 alluded. He found in the Legislative docu- 
 ments of the last year that the amount of fees 
 and other expenses attending inspection on 77,- 
 107 barrels of ashes inspected in New York was 
 048,955 equal to sixty-three cents on each bar- 
 rel, and to two and one-half per cent on the whole 
 value of the article. Such a tax as this was enor- 
 mous, and it came out of our own citizens produ- 
 cing the article. It was the enormity of these 
 fees which called for our interposition. The le- 
 gislature had in vain attempted to correct the sys- 
 tem. The year after compulsory inspection, 
 weighing and measuring, was abolished, a law 
 was passed requiring all those who did have their 
 commodities weighed, inspected, or measured, to 
 employ official weighers, measurers and inspec- 
 tors. The consequence was that the evils of the 
 system remained in as full force as before. The 
 impracticability of accomplishing the reform in 
 the legislature, presented the necessity for our 
 action. Weighing, measuring and inspecting 
 could be done better by private persons than by 
 public officers. Industry, character and ability 
 would soon render private inspection more desi- 
 rable. Monopoly and extortion would be pre- 
 vented. Men free to go where they would be 
 best and cheapest served, would obtain all the 
 advantages of superior inspection at a less price ; 
 and the honest man would not be compelled to 
 see his labor depreciated by official ignorance or 
 carelessness. The effects of our inspection laws 
 have been equally injurious to our commerce. 
 They have prevented New-York shippers from 
 being the carriers of much western and southern 
 produce. No commodity could be sent to New- 
 York for exportation without being subjected to 
 the expenses of inspection. The consequence 
 has been, especially under the discriminating du- 
 ties in favor of American productions from the 
 British colonies, that large portions at one time 
 went to the Canadas in order that the expense 
 might be avoided ; and in the ose of Richmond 
 flour, before alluded to, much exportation from 
 the city of New- York has been prevented in conse- 
 quence of the inferiority* of our brand. Thus our 
 commerce has been shackled, and the just advan- 
 tages of our great seaport lost. He would detain 
 the committee no longer on this question ; but 
 would observe in conclusion that the adoption of 
 the provision under consideration in the Consti- 
 tution, would abolish a great number of officers 
 not only useless, but positively injurious to the 
 community. We would get rid of a vast amount of 
 troublesome executive patronage. We would do 
 a lasting service to the people in leaving them to 
 the management of their business transaction un- 
 burthened by official interference, alike offensive, 
 unnecessary and unjust. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS hoped that the amendment of Mr. 
 MURPHY would prevail. He did not want all 
 these weighers, gaugers, measurers, &c. &c. re- 
 tained ; they were excessively troublesome to the 
 Executive, and he believed all who ever filled that 
 office would be glad to get rid of them. They 
 formed sources of political combinations in New 
 York and made a great deal of difficulty there ; 
 especially in electing members to the Assembly, 
 &c.; all this had operated very injuriously to the 
 interests of the city and county of New-York, and 
 resulted in a heavy tax upon the people and busi- 
 ness of the State. The committee would have 
 reported to do away with them; but the extent of 
 them had not before been brought properly to the 
 notice of the committee. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that he should go for 
 the substitute because it went much farther than 
 the original section ; it included weighers and 
 measurers with inspectors. Now he (Mr. P.) 
 knew this whole system of weighing, measuring, 
 and inspecting to be a gross fraud upon the peo- 
 ple. It filled the pockets of a few but produced 
 no real benefit to any trade. The fees of the flour 
 inspector in New York were over $15,000 a year ; 
 the fees were reduced from Ik to 1 cent per bar- 
 rel, but the increase of trade had still increased 
 the fees. Now in purchasing flour it is not done 
 in relation to the inspector's brand, but on ac- 
 count of the character of the merchant. They 
 asked for Beach's flour, or for KempshelPs flour, 
 or any of the other brands that are considered 
 good in the market. He hoped the amendment 
 would be adopted. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON said that in many instances 
 the system of inspection had operated very bene- 
 ficially to purchasers. They had often been pro- 
 tected from fraud by these inspectors ; frauds in 
 the purchase of flour, of lumber and of various 
 other articles, fish in particular ; in this it was ne- 
 cessary to trust to the inspector's brand, and he 
 fully believed that if the system of inspection was 
 to be as rigidly enforced as it used to be in former 
 times that our exports would stand much higher 
 than they now do in the foreign market. The 
 evil was not in the system itself but in the extra- 
 vagant fees given to the inspectors ; this might be 
 remedied but he hoped the system would not now 
 be entirely swept away. He should oppose the 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES suggested that the amendment 
 would exclude a certain class of officers appoint- 
 ed by the Canal Board, such as weighers, inspec- 
 tors of boats, &,c. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that he had added to the 
 last part of the section, a provision limiting in the 
 legislature control over the salt, manufactured by 
 the State. He did it because he observed in the 
 original section an exception in favor of salt, al- 
 though he did not wish to see any exception. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said he quoted these returns to 
 ahow what the tax on the producer was. To him 
 it was of no consequence whether these exactions 
 went into the pockets of the inspectors only, or 
 whether they were divided with thecartman, the 
 cooper, &c. &c. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY supposed it would be useless 
 to detain the Convention upon this subject, as 
 they now seemed to have decided upon adopting 
 this section. Indeed, from all he had seen in the 
 
512 
 
 action of this Convention, he was led to the con- 
 clusion that it was called for the purpose of, in 
 every possible way, preventing the city of New- 
 York from enjoying any benefit from legislation, 
 and of crippling its prosperity; and he might as 
 well sit still and allow this section to pass with- 
 out saying a word. But he felt called upon to 
 oppose its adoption. He was opposed to compul- 
 sory inspection laws. Those features had been 
 allowed to go out of use, and no person was now 
 obliged to have an article inspected unless he de- 
 sired it. The inspection was no injury to the 
 manufacturer, if he was honest, and if he was not 
 it would not injure the buyer to know it. Mr. K. 
 then referred to the condition of potash as he saw 
 it in the warehouse of the inspector in New- York. 
 Barrels which had been broken open were found 
 to contain masses of stone, which had been con- 
 cealed in the ashes when in a molten state. If 
 this article was sent to a foreign market in such a 
 condition, the impurity reflects not upon the cha- 
 racter of the manufacturer, but upon the market 
 from which it was shipped. It was therefore pro- 
 per to protect the character of our markets by an 
 inspection of articles exported. The purchaser was 
 interested in this, because he would be likely to 
 get a better and purer article. He could not in- 
 spect it himself, because it was not a thing to be 
 handled, even if he was acquainted with its qua- 
 lities and if we were to have inspections at all, 
 the expense of storage, cooperage, &c., must ne- 
 cesarily be considerable and of this amount but 
 a small portion went to the inspector. Mr. K 
 also stated as a fact that such was now the char- 
 acter of the New- York brand, that flour had been 
 brought there from other markets, to be reinspec- 
 ted, and because the New York inspection gave 
 to it a higher character and a better price. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL inquired of his colleagues if the 
 article of largest export from New-York (cotton) 
 was not free from inspection ? 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY replied that cotton was an ar- 
 ticle that all who dealt in it were well acquainted 
 with. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said it would be so with flour and 
 other articles. The great question was whether 
 we could not reduce the patronage of the govern- 
 ment. Here were over 500 officers thus holding 
 power, and he believed we could safely get rid of 
 them. He should vote for the amendment. 
 
 Mr. MANN said he did not know that any re- 
 marks which he might make on this question 
 would have any weight or influence with the 
 members of the house. He was opposed to the 
 amendment offered by the gentleman from Kings, 
 (Mr. MURPHY) which at one full sweep destroy- 
 ed all inspections weighers, guagers, &c. Mr. 
 M. would say a few words. His friend and col- 
 league from New York, on his left, (Mr. SHEP- 
 ARD) had spoken his (Mr. M.'s) sentiments on 
 this subject, and he fully coincided with that gen- 
 tleman in every word he had uttered, and he 
 would not repeat his remarks. But he could 
 not agree or coincide with the remarks made 
 by his colleague in front, of him, (Mr. KEN- 
 NEDY.) He alluded to the first part of them, 
 when he spoke of the action of members of 
 this Convention towards the city of New 
 York. He imputed no such motives as were 
 attributed to the members of this house by that 
 
 gentleman, but on the contrary he believed that 
 every member of this convention had acted from 
 the best motives, and their action, so far as related 
 to New York, had been from honest convictions ; 
 that they were acting for the best interests of the 
 State at large, as well as for the city of New York. 
 He did suppose that it would be useless for him 
 to talk, or of any use for any other member to 
 talk on this side of the question, or in opposition 
 to the amendment, as the gentleman from Kings 
 had stated that the question was always settled by 
 Convention. It probably was ; and anything that 
 might be said by him or other members, would be 
 of no avail. But he (Mr. M.) could not agree 
 with the gentleman from Kings in his proposi- 
 tion. As he (Mr. M.) understood the amend- 
 ment, it swept every thing before it in the shape 
 of inspection, weighers, guagers, measurers, &c.; 
 even inspectors of weights and measures. What 
 would be the result of this proposition ? Why, 
 that we should probably have all kinds and sorts 
 of weights and measures, as there could be no 
 provision to regulate them. We should have 
 nine ounces for the pound, three pecks for the 
 bushel, three quarts for a gallon, and so on. 
 And if this amendment was adopted, we should 
 have a singular state of things to regulate trade 
 and commerce in the large cities. He was in fa- 
 vor of some kind of inspections and regulations for 
 weighing, guaging and marking of merchandise 
 and produce, but he was decidedly in favor of 
 abolishing all of the compulsory features for such 
 inspections, weighing, guaging and measuring, 
 and leave it entirely with the buyer and seller to 
 settle as they found it for their interest, whether 
 they would employ such officers or not. Trade 
 and commerce could not well be carried on in 
 large cities without some regulations in these 
 matters, and inspectors, weighers, guagers and 
 measurers would be created and employed in one 
 way or another. He would ask gentlemen if they 
 supposed there would be any less number of these 
 in-pectorsor officials by adopting this proposition? 
 He thought not; for they would be created and 
 employed ; and how would it be done ? Why, by 
 all the large dealers in pot and pearl ashes, beef, 
 pork, and all kinds of merchandize and produce. 
 Every heavy dealer would appoint his own man 
 as inspector, weigher, guager or measurer, as the 
 case might be, and they must be paid for their 
 services. Such services would be found requi- 
 site and proper in the transaction of mercantile 
 business, and were indispensable. He (Mr. M.) 
 would not detain the Convention longer with his 
 remarks, but should vote against the proposition 
 to amend. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD would not leave this matter 
 of abolishing the inspection laws to the Legisla- 
 ture. Here was the place to do it in this Con- 
 stitution. These inspection laws operated as a 
 tax upon the people of the country it was upon 
 their products that it was levied. Mr. C. referred 
 to the reports as showing that $'125,000 was paid 
 in New- York, in one year, for inspections, and 
 this large sum, he argued, was paid by the pro- 
 ducers of the country. The adoption of this sec- 
 tion would relieve them from it. Another, and 
 au important object he said was to diminish the 
 Executive patronage, to relieve the Executive 
 from the hordes of office-seekers and office abet- 
 
513 
 
 tors, who hang around the Capitol every year. 
 He would place a, merchant upon his business 
 integrity and responsibility for the sale of an ar- 
 ticle, and it was no man's interest to get a bad 
 reputation. It was said that this whole matter 
 should be left with the Legislature. He had seen 
 enough since he had been here to despair of any 
 reform being effected there. Since this report 
 had come in, inspectors from New- York had been 
 here besieging him, and he doubted not that other 
 delegates had been in like manner besieged. 
 When a Legislature should reform this inspection, 
 then should we find white crows and the sky 
 would rain larks. He would abolish all this in- 
 spection and put every man in the community 
 upon his own honesty. 
 
 Mr. WHITE : As one of the delegates from 
 the city and county of New- York, I desire to ten- 
 der my thanks to my honorable friend from Otse- 
 go (Mr. CHATFIELD) the Chairman of the com- 
 mittee who reported this secton for the abolition 
 of all Inspection Laws, and for the important ser- 
 vices rendered to my constituents by this measure 
 of sound policy and practical wisdom ; I desire 
 also to make my acknowledgements to my honor 
 able friend from Kings, (Mr. MURPHY) for the 
 very able support which he has given to the re 
 port of the committee upon this important sub 
 ject I profess myself wto be a decided advocate 
 of the doctrine which gives to industry, the ut- 
 most freedom of action and which leaves unre- 
 strained, individual enterprise and individual sa- 
 gacity. I hold to the opinion that every 
 regulation of trade is a restrictien, and that 
 all laws affecting such pursuits are not only un- 
 wise, but in violation of private rights and sub- 
 versive of the principles of Iree trade. It was 
 well and wisely remarked this morning by the 
 Hon. member from Herkimer, that it is neither 
 right or expedient " to convert a trade into an 
 office" an opinion which I would not repeat in 
 terms less forcible than his own, and in which I 
 entirely concur. The acuteness of the great bo- 
 dy of the people render them perfectly capable 
 of taking care of themselves in all the transac- 
 tions of life ; and we have laws to enforce the ful- 
 filment of contracts according to their plain, ob- 
 vious and honest import. That is all the inter- 
 ference of government that is desired or wanted. 
 "We want no guardians legislative or political 
 and all such evidences of antiquated ignorance 
 should be erased from the statute book. We 
 have inspectors of flour, tobacco, ashes, lumber, 
 hides, leather, &c., amounting in number, with 
 he weighers, guagers, measurers, &c., to 380. 
 What has been our experience as to the benefit 
 derived from this costly system ? I hold in my 
 hand a document addressed to the Senate by the 
 Chamber cf Commerce of New- York, against 
 these inspection laws, which demonstrates 
 from actual knowledge of the fact, that 
 commerce has been shackled and fettered; 
 and that no advantage but positive injury has 
 been the consequence of their enactment. 
 The inspection of flour is peculiar to this coun- 
 try, and it is entirely unknown in France and 
 England.. But it must be conceded that in effect 
 it has ceased to give a character to the article in 
 their market. The brand of New York adds 
 nothing to its value, nor any facility to its sale. 
 
 39 
 
 Every person conversant with this branch of 
 trade, must know that flour is regarded for foreign 
 markets, not according 4 the brand of the 
 inspector, but according to the name and reputa- 
 tion of the miller or manufacturer of the article. 
 That name is the best warrantee that it contains 
 a certain weight of flour of a good quality. This 
 is found in practice, to be effectual. It is his 
 interest therefore, to be honest. Frauds were 
 formerly practiced on the great staple article of 
 our country, cotton; but since the planter has put 
 his name on the bale, they are of very rare occur- 
 rence. It cannot be disguised that'persons are 
 frequently appointed to such office from conside- 
 rations solely of a political character, and not from 
 any aptitude to judge and determine the quality of 
 the commodity they were selected to inspect. 
 These several inspection laws have, in my hum- 
 ble judgment, failed to accomplish the purposes 
 they were intended to effect. And they are a 
 heavy and onerous tax either on the producer or 
 consumer. In opposing the appointment of this 
 class of State officers, I desire however to be un- 
 derstood as solicitous that everyone of our fellow 
 citizens may be, if he so elects, an Inspector, 
 Guager, Weigher, Measurer, &c., and that they 
 may follow any and every employment which the 
 usage of trade and of commercial men may de- 
 mand. This is their natural and unalienable 
 right. And I shall ever maintain the right of the 
 people to follow whatever professional employ- 
 ment or calling they may please, unrestricted by 
 the power of the State. And all that is required 
 of the State authorities, is to protect them by law 
 from imposition ; and to punish those who prac- 
 tice it. I shall therefore feel it to be my duty to 
 vote for the amendment of the honorable gentle- 
 man from Kings. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD offered the following amend- 
 ment : 
 
 " No laws shall be passed compelling the inspection, 
 weighing, or measuring of any article of merchandise, pro- 
 duce or manufacture, (except salt manufactured within 
 this state) or prohibiting any person from acting as in- 
 spector,) weigher, or measurer of any such article." 
 
 Mr. RHOADES knew something about the 
 abolition of this compulsory feature of the in- 
 spection laws. The same arguments now urged 
 were those put forth against that alteration. He 
 believed the present law was in effect but little 
 better than compulsory, for every man from the 
 country going to that city, was compelled to submit 
 to this inspection. The year after compulsory in- 
 spection was abolished, the Inspectors of beef and 
 pork in New York did but little business. Appli- 
 cation was made next winter to appoint an Inspec- 
 tor General and a law was passed ior that purpose. 
 It was generally supposed then that the only ob- 
 ject for obtaining this office, was that he might 
 ^ive employment to some dozen or more of In- 
 spectors, who could not get a living in any other 
 way and the result was that inspection was now 
 compulsory. Mr. R. knew something about the in- 
 spection of salt. It had never been of the least 
 use. More than twenty years ago the inspectors 
 were indicted for passing bad salt as good. The 
 only guard the public had was in the character 
 and standing of the manufacturer. Mr. R. said 
 he had been told by the late Attorney General a 
 fact which went far to elucidate the operation of 
 
514 
 
 the inspection laws in New York. It appeared 
 in a suit that by an arrangement between an in- 
 spector of lumber andfthe purchaser, that lum- 
 ber at first marked " second rate," was afterwards 
 reinspected as " first rate," thus making a change 
 in one operation of some $8,000. He had not sup- 
 posed that a single member ol this Convention 
 would have voted to retain these useless provis- 
 ions. He should vote for the entire abolition of 
 all inspection laws. 
 
 Mr. O CONOR wished his colleague (Mr. SHEP- 
 ARD) would withdraw his amendment, as it seem- 
 ed to him that the sense of (he Convention had 
 befter be taken on the amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Kings. There was very little objec- 
 tion, in his view of the matter, to the amendment 
 proposed by his colleague. The object of it, as 
 he supposed, was to divest the inspection laws ot 
 their compulsory character, so that a man shall be 
 perfectly free to have his merchandize inspected 
 or not, as he should see fit. It would undoubtedly 
 accomplish that object, and would render the in- 
 spection laws a perfect nullity. Therefore, altho' 
 he preferred the amendment of his friend from 
 Kin^s, he should feel constrained to vote also for 
 the amendment of his colleague, if it \vas per- 
 sisted in. He was sure that if the merchants ol 
 New York were released from the tetters of the 
 law to the extent which this amendment proposed, 
 that they would immediately proceed in some 
 departments of inspection, at all events to em- 
 ploy the old inspectors persons not now in office 
 
 because ihe change ot political parties had 
 
 lead to their removal, but who had by reason of 
 their integrity and otherwise, acquired for their 
 names and brands, while in office, a high repu- 
 tation in certain quarters. The inspection laws 
 now were compulsory to a certain extent. The 
 laws of trade have established the necessity for 
 some inspections, and the laws of the land forbid 
 those goods to be inspected by any other person 
 than a legally appointed inspector. If this was 
 to be abolished, very well, and it would be best to 
 do it under the amendment of the gentleman from 
 Kings. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD had three objects in view 
 First, to divest the Inspection laws of any com- 
 pulsory features, and in the second place, if it 
 should be found that inspection laws were calcu- 
 lated to promote trade, that the legislature might 
 pass such laws without the compulsory features; 
 and in the third place, he was averse to fixin? in 
 the Constitution any rule forbidding the passage 
 of laws on the subject at all. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE conceived that this subject 
 had no business here, and he should vote against 
 all the propositions which might be made in re- 
 lation to the paltry inspection laws. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN should vote for the amendment, 
 for the reason assigned by his colleague. (Mr. 
 O'CoNOR) as to its nature. By the act of 1843, 
 the compulsory character of the system was abol- 
 ished ; but, in 1844, an act was passed explana- 
 tory or amendatory of the former one by which 
 no person except an officer appointed by the Go- 
 vernor and Senate, was allowed to follow the bu- 
 siness of inspection, &c. so that in practice the pre- 
 sent system had not been voluntary. If this amend- 
 ment were adopted, and a provision" were added 
 abolishing the laws which he should move to 
 
 do it would accomplish every thing valuable 
 and desirable in the proposition of the gentleman 
 from Kings, while it would avoid the objection to 
 the loose and dangerous phraseology of that pro- 
 position avowed by many of its friends, and in- 
 tended to be corrected hereafter. It would effectu- 
 ally restrain the legislature from any violation of 
 freedom of trade hereafter, while it left that pow- 
 er of general legislation and of the conduct of 
 strictly state business, which the other proposi- 
 tion intended to leave. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND expressed himself to the 
 same effect. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. SHEPARD was reject- 
 ed, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bouck, Cornell, Jones, Kennedy, Mann, 
 SheparJ, Smith, Stephens. J.J. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, 
 Wood-12. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 H, Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bowdish, Bray ton,Bruce. Burr, 
 Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, R. Campbell jr., Chattield, 
 Clark, Cook. Cuddeback, Dana, Danforth, Dodd, Dorlon, 
 Flanders, Forsyth, Gebhard, Harris, Harrison, Hotchkiss, 
 Hunter, A. Huntington, E. Huntington, Hyde, Jordan, 
 Kemble, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirkland, McNeil, McNitt, 
 Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Morris, Murphy, Nellis, Nicho- 
 las, Nicoll, Parish. Patterson, Perkins Potter, President, 
 Rhoades, Richmond, Riker, St. John, Salisbury, Sears, 
 Shaver, Shaw, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, Strong, 1 aft. Tag- 
 gart, Tallmadge. Tutbill, Vache, Waterbury, White, Wil- 
 lard, Witbeck, Worden, Young, Youngs 76. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved to add to the amend- 
 ment of Mr. MURPHY the words "and over the 
 canals and other public works of the State," to 
 come in after the word "salt." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to strike out all 
 that related to the inspection of salt. 
 
 The debate was briefly continued by Messrs. 
 PATTERSON and RHOADES, when the amend- 
 ment of the latter was rejected. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved to modify the amend- 
 ment of Mr. MURPHY, so that it should provide 
 that the legislature should have control over the 
 manufacture and inspection of salt. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY assented. 
 
 The motion of Mr. PATTERSON to strike 
 out was negatived. 
 
 Mr. STOW dared not vote for this amendment 
 because he feared the effect of the phraseology. 
 We had the office of weigher of boats on the canal, 
 which might be abolished by this section. The 
 same might be said of the office of inspector of 
 boats. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN moved the previous question, 
 but it was not seconded. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY modified his amendment so as 
 to add the words, " or shall interfere with the 
 collection of the canal tolls of the State." 
 
 His substitute for the whole section was then 
 adopted, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer. Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bowdish, Bray ton, Bruce, 
 Burr, Cambreleng, D. D- Campbell, Chatfield, Clark.Cone- 
 ly, Cuddeback, Dana, Danforth, Dodd, Dorlon, Flanders, 
 Forsyth, Gebhard, Harris, Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Hunting, 
 ton, E. Huntington, Hyde, Jordan, Kingsley, Kirkland, 
 Loomis, McNeil, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Morris, 
 Murphy, Nelhs, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Por- 
 ter, President, Rhoades, Richmond, Riker, St. John, Salis- 
 bury Sears, Shaver, Shaw, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, Strong, 
 Taf't, Taggart, J. J. Taylor, Townsend, Tutbill, Vache, 
 Waterbury, White, Witbeck, Worden, Young.Youngs 73. 
 NOES Messrs. Bouck, Cornell, Harrison, Jones. Mann, 
 Shepard, Smith, Tallmadge, Tilden, Willard, Wood 11. 
 
 The section thus agreed to is as follows : 
 
515 
 
 All officers for the weighing, guaging, measuring, cull- 
 ing, or inspecting any merchandize, produce, manufacture, 
 or commodity whatever, are hereby abolished; and no 
 such office shall hereby be created by law: but nothing 
 heroin contained shall prevent the legislature from exer- 
 such control over the inspection or mamifactuie of 
 the salt made from the springs belonging to the State, as it 
 may deem proper; or shall interfere with the collection of 
 the tolls and revenues of the State. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved a reconsideration. Lost. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved that during the rest of this 
 month, the Convention hold but one session a day, 
 from eight until two. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved to lay the resolution on 
 the table. Agreed to. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned to nine o'clock 
 to-morrow morning. 
 
 WEDNESDAY (54th day,) August 5. 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. MEYER. 
 Mr. BOUCK presented the petition of certain 
 persons in Oneida county, in relation to the elec- 
 tive franchise; and also in relation to the con- 
 struction (if the two Houses ol the Legislature. It 
 was referred to the committee of the whole hav- 
 ing chc'.tge of the report of committee No. 4, of 
 which Mr. BOUCK. is chairman. 
 
 Mr. C. P. WHITE then said he would call up 
 his resolution, which was l.ml on the table yes- 
 terday; providing that (he Convention should 
 hereafter meet at 8 in the morning and adjourn at 
 2 P. M , and have no afternoon or evening session 
 during this exceedingly hot and oppressive wea- 
 ther. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS hoped the resolution would 
 not pass. He thought that we generally did 
 more business iii the afternoon two hours than we 
 did in the morning sessions. The speeches were 
 much shorter, a-id more voting was done. Now, 
 if this was produced hy the heat of the weather, 
 he sincerely hoped that it might be hotter still. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that he thought 9 
 o'clock was early enough; but if gentlemen de- 
 sired to avoid having these sessions in the heat 
 and burthen of the day, he would have no objec- 
 tion to move to amend so as to have a recess in 
 the afternoon until 7 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE's motion to meet at 7 at 
 night was lost. 
 
 Mr. WHITE'S motion to meet at 8 in the 
 tnoruing was lost. Ayes 37, noes 50. 
 
 STATE OFFICERS. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole on the report of committee No. 6. 
 Mr. JORDAN resumed the Chair. 
 Mr MURPHY, by consent, sent up a substi- 
 tute for the one offered by him yesterday, and 
 which was at that tune adopted. It was thus: 
 All officers for the weighing, guaging, measuring, cull- 
 ing or inspecting any merchandise, produce, manufacture 
 or comtnO'lity whatever, are hereby abolished, and no such 
 office shall hereafter be created by law; but nothing in this 
 section contained shall abrogate any office created for the 
 purpose of protecting th? interests of the State in its pro 
 l>erty, revenue, tolls or purchases, or of supplying the 
 people with correct standards ot weights and measures 
 or ihall prevent the creation of any office for such pur 
 poses hereafter. 
 
 There being no opposition, the substitute was 
 entertained instead of the section adopted yestei 
 day 
 
 The question was then upon adopting the sec 
 tion as amended. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE again repeated that he 
 
 hould vote against this proposition in any and 
 
 every form. As to putting down excitement and 
 
 ntrigues at elections, by abolishing inspectors, it 
 
 vas all idle. Do what you would, the Lazzaroni 
 
 f New York will always turn up the other end 
 
 first, and kick up some confusion. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said, that as a general thing 
 ic was opposed to putting any thing into the, 
 Constitution that was more properly matter of 
 egislation. But he had seen enough of legisla- 
 ion on this subject. In 1843 a law was passed 
 abolishing compulsory inspections. And yet a 
 lorde of these officers came here besieging the 
 legislature in '44 until they got a law passed for- 
 bidding any man to discharge the duties of in- 
 spector except one who had been regularly ap- 
 pointed. Since this Convention met, some of these 
 fficers had been here opposing the adoption of 
 his section. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said if the lobby had be- 
 come so powerful that they controlled all three 
 branches of the legislature, it would be idle for 
 us to attempt to nail down what all three of these 
 could not keep still. His word for it, there would 
 >e a re-action on this subject, and the Lazzaroni 
 n New- York would come up at the other end of 
 he heap. 
 
 Mr. MANN inquired of Mr. PATTERSON, if 
 any of these officers had besieged him ? If so, he 
 lad been more unfortunate than the New York 
 Delegation. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON replied that he had not 
 >een spoken to by any of them, nor had he ever 
 >een approached when he was a member of the 
 egislature. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said he was acquainted with 
 most of the inspectors from New- York, and he 
 lad not seen one of them in this capitol. He 
 said the mind of that man was not rightly con- 
 stituted who could not tolerate honest differences 
 of opinion ; and the man who saw a rogue in ev- 
 ery one, who was not of his party, was likely to 
 >e a good deal of a rogue himself. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR was sorry to hear these imputa- 
 tions upon his city and the delegation. They 
 were all unfounded. He had seen no inspectors 
 icre. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said if he had been under- 
 stood as making any charge against the inhabit- 
 ants of the city of New-York, as such, or its rep- 
 resentatives, in reference to their action upon this 
 question, he had been misunderstood. He did 
 not wish to impute any thing improper against 
 those who voted upon this question contrary to 
 himself. Nor should the gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. SHEPARD) who had read him a lecture 
 here this morning, impugn his (Mr. P.'s) motives 
 with impunity. He did not wish to apply any 
 rule to the city of New-York which he was not 
 willing to have applied to the country he had 
 no ill-will toward that city he admired both it 
 and its representatives. But these inspectorships 
 which existed as well in the country as in the 
 city, were not needed in either the inspectors of 
 lumber, leather, &c., were entirely unnecessary, 
 and he should vote for the proposition to do away 
 with them. In regard to the other matter, he 
 had heard an honorable member state that there 
 were eight inspectors in this chamber yesterday. 
 
516 
 
 He was not certain that he said they were from 
 the city of N, York, and in this he might have been 
 in error. But that there were inspectors here he 
 believed could not be contradicted. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD, after the explanation of the 
 gentleman, withdrew all imputations on his part. 
 But he would take this occasion to say that while 
 he should never seek collision by unjust impu- 
 tation on any one, gentlemen might rest as- 
 sured that when it did come, he should never 
 shun it. He was the last to assign motives to 
 any gentleman he was the first to repel any as- 
 persions cast on his delegation or his city the 
 last to shun responsibility of any honorable kind 
 the first to assume it in a just cause. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that in former times it 
 
 was necessary to have these 
 order to prevent frauds. 
 
 inspection laws in 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said it was not his purpose 
 to say anything wrong ; yet in allusion to the 
 feeling that had been exhibited here in the Con- 
 vention this morning, in relation to the inspec- 
 tors of New York, and their alleged interference 
 in election matters or coming up to the Legisla- 
 ture to interfere, or to this Convention, he would 
 remind the gentlemen of the Convention, and 
 particularly of the farmers present, to the well 
 known fact that a certain bird by fluttering as 
 though its wing was broken, and by cries of dis- 
 tress, allured men from its riest. It might be so 
 here. He begged, however, not to be involved 
 in this argument, either right or wrong. But it 
 is not a little curious that this Convention cannot 
 let well enough stay well let alone. He begged 
 to record himself always in the negative, on all 
 these matters. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that the gentleman from 
 Dutchess seemed to object to all this because it 
 was not to be found in the old Constitution. 
 Some gentlemen seemed particularly to love ev- 
 ery thing that was old. He was not wedded to 
 every thing that was old, but to every thing that 
 was right and just, whether it was old or whe- 
 ther it was new. He remembered some of the 
 scenes that were connected with many of the al- 
 lusions that had been made to these inspection 
 laws, and to their abolition, and to the difficul- 
 ties between the various candidates for inspect- 
 ors, and to the divisions of the various offices, and 
 to the influences which each could bring to bear 
 on the elections at home, and on the legislatures 
 here ; and the result was that at last we had a 
 fist fight upon this very floor, in 1843, between 
 two of the members from New- York. [Laugh- 
 ter.] 
 
 Mr. RHOADES hoped that much of what had 
 been proposed here would not prevail in relation 
 to restrictions, &c. upon all the pursuits of life. 
 Why if the amendments proposed for instance by 
 the gentleman from Dutchess (Mr. TALLMADGE) 
 should prevail, the boys at school could not even 
 play at pin lotteries, without being liable to be 
 
 fined. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE 
 
 said that lotteries were 
 
 questions connected with moral rectitude, and 
 not of commercial regulations, 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that although he should vote 
 against this motion, yet he did not wish them to 
 consider this as indicating his opinions upon this 
 subject at all ; for he was opposed to putting any 
 
 of these matters into the Constitution. As a leg- 
 islator he would vote for the section, but he re- 
 fused to make it a Constitutional provision. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM did not want to lumber up the 
 Constitution with any unnecessary provisions, 
 which of right did not belong to it ; but still he 
 wanted gentleman to come out and look at this 
 point ; we have here to say what officers shall, 
 or shall not be created or suffered to stand ; and 
 how each office is to be filled; 
 
 Mr. JONES said the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer (Mr, LOOMIS) had anticipated him in almost 
 all he had intended to say. Inspection laws had 
 been in existence in this State for more than 60 
 years, and a diversity of opinion existed among 
 dealers in articles subject to inspection, whether 
 these laws could with propriety be abrogated. 
 His own opinions, founded however upon little or 
 no practical knowledge upon the subject, were 
 not very favorable to the continuance of inspec- 
 tion laws ; and were he a member of the legisla- 
 ture, and were this question pending there, he 
 would cheerfully vote for a proposition similar to 
 this, inasmuch as he should be perfectly willing 
 to have the experiment tested, whether we could 
 well and safely get on without any of these laws r 
 and tested too in a way that would put it in the 
 power of a subsequent legislature to rectify the 
 error, if the experiment should prove to be im- 
 practicable, or in any important respect, detri- 
 mental to the interests of trade. He was not, 
 however, so perfectly confident of the soundness 
 of his views upon this question, as to justify him 
 in voting to engraft the principle into our organic 
 law. It was not easy to change our constitution, 
 and a subject like this, relating to the trade and 
 business of the community, involving questions 
 of disputed propriety and practicability, should 
 not be placed beyond the reach of a reasonably 
 prompt and proper corrective. For these reasons 
 therefore, and disclaiming with the gentleman 
 from Herkimer, to have his vote at all involve 
 the policy of inspection laws, Mr. JONES conclu- 
 ded by saying that he should vote against the pro- 
 position now pending. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG regretted to hear the ex- 
 pression of opinion against inspection laws ; and 
 yet gentlemen avowed that they should vote 
 against the provision, on the ground that it was 
 the subjct of legislation. What were they here 
 for, but to reform the constitution ? What was 
 it but to dispense with every useless office ? And 
 what were they here told respecting these of- 
 ficers ? Why that they were not only useless, but 
 mischievous and oppressive. What were the 
 questions here involved ? It was whether the go- 
 vernment is better able to ascertain the quality of 
 an article, or the trade. Whether the government 
 is better qualified to judge of hops and potash, 
 than those whose business it is. He hoped all 
 this Executive patronage would be abolished. 
 Take the article of cotton, and how was that dis- 
 posed of? By Brokers. Their lives were devoted 
 to that branch of business, and their experience 
 was worth more than aH these inspection laws. 
 Who were these tobacco inspectors? Were they 
 tobacconists ? No no more than he was who 
 never used the article. They were politicians 
 who were put into the office, and he wished to see 
 such offices abolished and that patronage taken 
 
517 
 
 from the Executive. Gentlemen then who de- 
 sired an abolition of the inspection laws should 
 take this opportunity to accomplish that reform. 
 The vote was then taken, and the section was 
 agreed to, ayes 92, noes 10, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bergen, Bowdish, Brayton 
 Bruce. Brundage, Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, R. 
 Campbell, jr , Caudle, Chamberlain, Chatfield, Clark, 
 Clyde, Conely, Cook, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, Dan- 
 forth, Dodd, Dorlon, Gebhard, Harris, Hawley, llotchkiss, 
 Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, E. Huntingtrn, Hyde, Jor- 
 dan, Kemble, Kernan. Kingsley,Kirkland, McNeil. McNitt, 
 Marvin, \iaxwell, Miller, Morris, Murphy, Nellis, Nicho- 
 las, O'Cdnor, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, 
 Powers, President, Rhoades, Richmond, Riker, St. John, 
 Salisbury, Sanford, Sears. Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon, E. Spen- 
 cer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Taft, Tag- 
 gart, J.J. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, Tuthill.Van Schoon- 
 hoven, Waterbury, White, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, A. 
 Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 92. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Bouck, Cornell, Harrison, Hart, Jones, 
 Loomis, Mann, Shepard, Smith, Tallmadge 10. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved that the Convention re 
 turn to the 1st section as amended, which was 
 agreed to. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to strike out the word 
 " Treasurer," with the view of moving so to 
 amend that he be appointed by the legislature, 
 and hold his office for one year. He gave a few 
 reasons why that should be done. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said it had been remarked that 
 in correcting past evils, human nature was prone 
 to run into the other extreme. He had so view- 
 ed the report of the committee on this pending 
 question. He approved of the amendment of the 
 gentleman from St. Lawrence. In relation to the 
 others mentioned in this section, he expressed 
 the fear that in endeavoring to take away Execu- 
 tive patronace, they might endanger that balance 
 which should be preserved between the depart- 
 ments of the Government. The idea of taking the 
 nomination of the cabinet of the Governor from 
 the legislature was one which did not originate 
 with those who started the subj ect of calling a 
 Convention. It was a whig project, and there 
 was no evidence that it was called for by popular 
 sentiment. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS called for the yeas and nays, 
 and they were ordered, and being taken, result- 
 ed thus yeas 10, nays 89 : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bascom, Bergen, Brayton, Cornell, 
 Hunt, Kemble, Loomis, Mann, Perkins, Stetson 10. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bouck, Bowdish, Bruce, Brundage, 
 Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, Candee, Chamberlain, 
 Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cook, Crocker, Cudde- 
 back, Dana, Danforth, Dodd, Dorlon, Flanders, Gebhard, 
 Harris, Harrison, Hart, Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Huntington, 
 E. Huntington, Hyde, Jones, Jordan, Kernan, Kingsley, 
 Kirkland, McNeil, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Mor 
 ris, Nellis, Porter, Powers, President. Rhoades, Richmond, 
 Riker, St. John, Salisbury , Saniord, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Shtpard, Smith, E. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stow, 
 Strong, Taft, Tallmadge, Tilden, Townsend, Tuthill, 
 Vche, Van Schoonhoven, Waterbury, White, Willard, 
 Witbeck, Wood, A. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 89. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to strike out all that part 
 of the section which fixes the salaries of the of- 
 ficers, and insert " Each of (he officers in this 
 article numed, except the speaker shall at stated 
 times during his continuance in office, receive for 
 his services a compensation which shall not be in- 
 creased or diminished dining the time for which 
 he shall have been elected; nor shall he receive 
 any fees or perquisites of office." Mr. M. briefly 
 
 explained his amendment. He opposed the fix- 
 intj of the salaries of the public officers in the 
 Constitution. The people should not part with 
 the power of regulating the compensation of their 
 servants from time to limeasciicumstancesmight 
 require. Fix the salary in the constitution, and 'he 
 people could not, by their representations reach 
 it, and it must remain as fixed in the constitution, 
 whatever change should take place. The time 
 might come when many of these officers would 
 have little to do, indeed perhaps some of them 
 might be dispensed with, and yet the power to 
 modify their salaries will have been patted with; 
 and the people could not release themselves from 
 the payment of the salary to an officer because 
 useless, without an amendment of the Constitution. 
 He had the other day in committee of the whole 
 insisted that the fixing of salaries in the Constitu- 
 tion was against all 'he principles of republican 
 government The people should never part with 
 the power of declaring by their representatives 
 the amount which they feel willing and able to 
 pay. At the same time, the Legislature ought 
 not to have the power of changing the compen- 
 sation of a public servant during the time for 
 which he was elected. The period for which 
 these officers were elected was brief. The legis- 
 lature should have the power of providing at any 
 time the compensation to be paid to every officer 
 elected, before his election. The public servant 
 would then always know how much he was to 
 receive. It tested upon the principles of a con. 
 tract by which the people agreed to pay a certain 
 amount for the service tendered during a certain 
 short fixed period But it would be unwise on the 
 part of the people to agree now in a constitution 
 that they would at all times pay a sum now fixed, 
 notwithstanding any changes which might here- 
 after occur. He had a great repugnance to this 
 anti-republican principle of fixed salaries in the 
 Constitution. He had looked hastily through all 
 Constitutions of the United States, and in no in- 
 stance in the free States were any salaries fixed, 
 and in only two of the slave-holding States, in 
 one of which, Louisiana, the salaries of the 
 Judges only were fixed ; and in the other, Flori- 
 da, the salaries of the Governor and Judges were 
 fixed. There may have been reasons in those 
 States for fixing these salaries. But what did 
 this almost entire absence of fixed salaries in the 
 American Republican Constitutions prove ? Pie 
 submitted that it proved the unwillingness of the 
 people to part with the power of regulating the 
 payment of their servants. He hoped his amend- 
 ment would prevail. Mr. M. said that before he 
 took his seat he would detain the Convention a 
 moment with a matter in which he was personal- 
 ly interested. It would be recollected that in 
 the debate some days since upon the legislative , 
 department, he took some part. The gentleman 
 from Kings (Mr. MURPHY) proposed to restore 
 the article of the present Constitution in relation 
 to the compensation of members of the legisla-. 
 :ure. He (Mr. M.) was in favor of the amend- 
 ment. But another member from Kings (Mr. 
 SWACKHAMER) immediately proposed an amend- 
 ment limiting the sessions of the legislature to 
 ninety days. To this amendment he (Mr. M.) 
 was decidedly opposed, and he submitted some 
 remarks, occupying some ten or more minutes. 
 
518 
 
 He (Mr. M.) was followed in the debate by the 
 gentleman from Kings, (Mr. S.) and he now 
 found in the Atlas of last evening a report of the 
 debate, in which his (Mr. M.) remarks were corn- 
 pressed into a few lines. Of this he did not com- 
 plain. He knew it was impossible to report and 
 publish all that was said here; but he found 
 in the reported remarks of the gentleman 
 from Kings, (Mr. S.) language attributed to 
 him (Mr. M.) which he never used, and 
 which advanced principles the very ' reverse 
 of those which he (Mr. M.) advocated. Mr. M. 
 read from the reported speech, " He (Mr. MAR- 
 VIN) had taken the same track as his colleague, 
 but he had gone one step farther, he could not 
 stop short of dear old England, as though she had 
 any thing to do with making a republican consti- 
 tution." Again, " he also spoke of the British 
 parliament as the great foundation of liberty and 
 school of instruction for the people." Again, 
 " But the gentleman has other reasons. Ameri- 
 can reasons for opposing the amendment. He 
 considered the legislature a first rate school for 
 our people, and therefore the members must be 
 allowed to sit here five or six months for our 
 benefit, and to enlighten the large children of 
 this State." He (Mr. M.) would not refer to any 
 other portion of the reported speech. He would 
 say that he had uttered no such language or any 
 thing of the kind or character ; on the contrary 
 the entire scope, tenor and effect of his remarks 
 were the most of those used for him by the gen 
 tleman (Mr. S.) He (Mr. M.) on that occasion 
 took the ground that limitations upon the repre- 
 sentatives of the people were in effect limitations 
 upon the action of the people, and a restraint up- 
 on liberty, that the only mode which the people 
 fead of acting, of transacting the State affairs was 
 by their immediate representatives. He did say 
 that the legislature was the people's parliament 
 whom they by their representatives met and con- 
 sulted, and deliberated, and transacted the great 
 affairs of State. He said nothing about the British 
 parliament, He did say that the legislative hall 
 of a few people was the great battle ground o: 
 freedom, and that any wound inflicted upon the 
 freedom of its action was a wound inflicted upon 
 free institutions, tending to the concentration o 
 power in the hands of the few. He did not saj 
 one word about the legislature being a gooc 
 school for the people. On the contrary his whole 
 argument was in defence of what he esteemed the 
 rights of the people, and the course of popula 
 liberty. How these errors had occurred he couli 
 not say. He had only heard a small portion o 
 the remarks of the gentleman, (Mr. S.) 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND opposed lumbering the con 
 stitution up with provisions of this description 
 *Why should we in this fundamental law esta 
 blish this iron rule in relation to compensation o 
 officers. The consideration of the changing va 
 lue of money in this changing country, shoul< 
 alone deter "us from doing this. The fact als 
 that by the same change the duties of the officer 
 might so vary as to require also a variation ii 
 their pay, was another reason. He supposed tha 
 in settling the question of the compensation o 
 Governor or Lieut. Governor, the principle was 
 settled that this matter should be left to legisla 
 
 on, where it had always heretofore been vested, 
 nder former censtitutions. 
 Mr. RICHMOND regretted to see the current 
 etting to the reversal of the vote of the -commit- 
 ee on this point. The argument was that this 
 alary should not, under the changes which mo- 
 ey, &c., were undergoing, be forced permanent- 
 y on the constitution, but should be left to the 
 eople, through the legislature, to make such 
 hanges when required. Arid yet what sort of 
 iberality do they propose to allow to the legisla- 
 jre ? Why, that the salary should not be changed 
 uring the term for which the individual ' should 
 old. Mr. R. referred to the fact that it was pro- 
 osed to provide that an immense number of offi- 
 ers should be salaried officers, whether for long 
 r short terms. How then would the people re- 
 ulate the salary of a man who held for ten years, 
 t would be as permanently fixed as in the con- 
 titution. And if salaries were to be thus fixed, 
 ie would prefer to do it here. But he desired to 
 eave the whole matter to the legislature. He 
 vould ask the gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. 
 MARVIN) if he would go with him on this point? 
 Mr. MARVIN would like to understand the 
 >osition of the gentleman himself. He (Mr. R.) 
 las voted against striking out, even when the 
 question was the naked one of striking out, thus 
 Doting to fix it for all time to come, so that the 
 egislature should have no control over the mat- 
 er at all. Mr. M. said that the whole effect of 
 lis amendment was that the legislature shall esta- 
 lish the compensation, and when they have done 
 30, that they shall not have power either to raise 
 ar reduce it, during the time for which the officer 
 shall have been appointed or elected. And the 
 section provides that most of the officers shall 
 hold for two years, and the longest term is but 
 three years. It proceeds on the just and equita- 
 ble principle of a contract between the people on 
 ;he one side and their servants on the other so 
 ;hat the servant knows what his pay is to be when 
 tie sery.es the people. But the legislature may at 
 any session pass laws raising or reducing the 
 compensation but not to operate on the then in- 
 cumbent. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND continued to argue in favor 
 of leaving the question to the legislature without 
 any restrictions. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART had introduced a proposition 
 to strike out the salary of Governor, and Lieut. 
 Governor which was adopted by a very strong 
 vote. He supposed that that, therefore, was a 
 sett led and fixed question. He had endeavored 
 to convince himself that in reference to these of- 
 ficers, it was a matter of indifference, whether 
 their pay was fixed in the Constitution or left to 
 the Legislature, but the more he reflected upon 
 the matter, the more he was convinced that the 
 principle of fixing it in the Constitution was 
 wrong and would lead to disastrous results. Mr. 
 T. referred to the present duties of some of the 
 officers, to the great power of the Comptroller, of 
 which there was a general complaint arid urged 
 that should the Legislature reduce them, if Ihis 
 was fixed in the. Constitution they would have no 
 power to make a commensurate reduction of sa- 
 laries. As regarded the question raised by his 
 colleague (Mr. RICHMOND) it would only be fixed 
 by the Legislature for ten years. The object was 
 
519 
 
 to prevent any collision in high party times, on 
 the subject of compensation between theLtgisla- 
 ture and the State officers, tor the time being 
 They could always change it with reference to fu- 
 ture incumbents. He feared that the effect of fix- 
 ing the salaries in the Constitution would excite 
 bickerings among the people through the move- 
 ments of men who made political capitals out of 
 these questions, and to the detriment of the other 
 great principles involved in the Constitution when 
 that instrument came to be submitted to the peo- 
 ple. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM was in favor of the amendment. 
 It was said that the officers were the servants of 
 the people, but if the other principle was adopted 
 the position would be changed, and the pay of 
 these officers would be beyond the reach of the 
 people for a quarter of a century. Again was it 
 right that the legislature should be allowed to in- 
 crease the duties of an officer, or to reduce them 
 without being at liberty to vary their salaries ac- 
 cordingly. To illustrate : If the public works 
 are to remain in their present condition, as the 
 movements of the folly of those who projected 
 them, then $1600 was too much for a canal com- 
 missioner, but if on the other hand a contrary 
 principle should be adopted, the compensation 
 would be too little. He trusted therefore, 
 that this important matter should be disposed of 
 and subjects of more importance be considered. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN did not distrust 
 the legislature any more than the Convention 
 the point involved, to him appeared to be whe- 
 ther we should cast the immense labor of fixing 
 the salary of all die officers of government upon 
 the legislature, or do a part of it here. He de- 
 sired also to remove from the legislature this mat- 
 ter, being as it was yearly made a topic of mere 
 political agitation. In relation to the governor 
 from his high station it was most likely that he 
 would never descend to operate or participate in 
 this agitation, but with other officers of a lower 
 grade it was a different matter. There was a strong 
 difference in the two cases, and he mentioned it 
 to show that there would be no inconsistency in- 
 volved in thus adopting a different course as to 
 the different officers. As regards the changing 
 value of money, he would ask how much gentle- 
 men thought the change was within the last ten 
 years. The discount on a dollar was about one or 
 two per cent., never exceeding four per cent, even 
 in high speculating times. But in times of pres- 
 sure the dollars increased in value in the hands 
 of the capitalist, and it was the laboring, working 
 classes who were injured. The public officers 
 rather profited than suffered by the change. This 
 was the curse of the whole thing these changes 
 did tend to make the rich richer and the poor poor- 
 er, so that u wuul'.i never iesiili tolhe injury of the 
 public officer. Bui the public officer should be on 
 tin-; saline level with others of the public, and there 
 was no reason why them should be a legislative 
 interposition in behalf of ihe executive officers, 
 in tmes ol disaster and pressure. But the period 
 had never arrived when the salary proposed here 
 would not have been suUieifiit to pay public offi 
 cer*. Hrf wi.s led to gu.ird the public from those 
 influences which the public officers have it fully 
 iu their power to exert. He had no doubt that 
 this influence had been brought to bear when sala- 
 
 ries had been raised by the legislature heretofore. 
 Hut this was an evil that could not always be avoi- 
 ded the public officers had always this power. 
 He deemed that it was desirable to fix these salaries 
 for a quarter of a centur, the members of the 
 committee had expressly stated that thwy preferred 
 to limit the period to about ten years, an i leave it 
 to the legislature to vary them aiterwards. But 
 he did not desire to see it left to annual agitation 
 Mr. V. S. expressed his preference tor the section 
 of the committee amended by the adoption of the 
 proposition of the gentleman from Oswego, (Mr. 
 HART.) Mr V. S continued his argument at 
 some length in favor of his position. He had seen 
 so much of the evil consequences of the agitation 
 in the legislature on this subject, that he desired 
 to see some plan fixed. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN confessed that he was at a loss to 
 understand which side of the question the gentle- 
 man was arguing. If the salary was to be fixed 
 in the constitution he could understand that in 
 time of monetary pressure, the office would be 
 elevated above the disaster and evil that bore 
 down the rest of the people. It seemed to him 
 that the gentleman's arguments were all on his 
 (Mr. M.'s) side. The argument of the gentleman 
 was that this question could be settled better here 
 in Convention than hereafter by the legislature 
 that he would not leave it to agitation there. 
 Has it come to this that we desire to place these 
 matters above all agitation? Governments can be 
 so arranged as to be above all agitation so that 
 the calm sea of despotism would never be ruf- 
 fled by the slightest wave of popular feeling. 
 This was the very principle adopted by govern- 
 ments of a despotic character. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN rose to reply to 
 Mr. MARVIN. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS rose at the same time, and 
 the President said he was entitled to the floor, 
 not having spoken. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said he knew 
 what the gentleman meant to say, and he could 
 say it after he (Mr. V. S.) was through. 
 
 Mr. BACKUS said he did not take up much 
 time in talking, and did not know how the gen- 
 tleman could know what he intended to say. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said he could read 
 it in his countenance. 
 
 Mr. BACKUS replied that perhaps he was mis 
 taken. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN claimed the right 
 to the floor, as he had already begun to address 
 the Chair. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the gentleman from 
 Monroe was entitled to the floor. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS had but a word or two to 
 say on the disposition manifested to continue this 
 debate. We had been told 1SOO years ago, that 
 everything under heaven and in the sea might be 
 tamed except the tongue. He thought he could 
 appeal to this convention for the proof that this 
 rule yet held good The tongue is absolutely un- 
 tameable. He did not rise to cast any blame any- 
 where, for he considered this to be a disease, 
 which unless soon remedied, would prevent us 
 doing what we were sent here to do to make a 
 constitution. The only remedy that he could 
 think of, would be to avoid the committee of the 
 whole hereafter. To-day, we had had the same 
 
 
520 
 
 gentlemen speaking who spoke in committee o 
 the whole, and precisely the same speeches, even 
 to the crossing of t's and dotting of i's. These 
 gentlemen must suppose that we who listen eithei 
 have very bad memories or were very dull o 
 comprehension, or else they were advocates o 
 the old theology, which gave line upon line anc 
 precept upon precept. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN and Mr. BAKER 
 rose, and the floor was given to the latter. 
 
 Mr. BAKER'S view in rising, was to put a 
 termination to this debate, believing that every 
 member had fully made up his mind as to how 
 he would vote. But if there was one member 
 who would manifest his relation to Walter the 
 Doubter, so far as to say that his mind was not 
 yet made up, or any gentleman who would say 
 that he expected to change the opinion of 
 single member here by further remarks, he 
 jvould withhold the motion he was about to make. 
 None answering, Mr. B. moved the previous 
 question. And there was a second ayes 29, 
 nays not counted; and the main question was or- 
 dered. 
 
 The question being taken on Mr. MARVIN'S 
 amendment, it was adopted, ayes 73, noes 33, as 
 follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F.F Backus, H. 
 Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish, Bray- 
 ton, Bruce, Burr, Cambreleng, D. D Campbell, Candee, 
 Chamberlain, Gonely, Cornell, Crooker, Dodd, Flanders, 
 Gebhard, Harris, Harrison, Hawley, Hunt, Hunter, E. 
 Huntington, Jordan, Kemble, Kirkiand, Loomis, Marvin, 
 Murphy, Nelli*, Nelson Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Pat- 
 ters n, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, Powers,* President, 
 Khoades, Riker, Rug.-les, St. John, Salisbury, Sanford, 
 Shaw, Shepard, Smith, E. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, 
 Stetson, Stow, Taft't, Taggart, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, 
 Tilden, Tuthill, Vache, Waterbury, White.Willard, Wor- 
 den, A. Wright, Young 73. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Brundage, R. Campbell, Jr. Chatfield, 
 Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cud'teback, Dana, Danforth, Dorlon 
 Hail, Hotchkiss, A. Huntington, Hyde, Jones, Kernan 
 Kinsley, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Maxwell, Miller, Mor 
 ris, Richmond, Sears, Shaver, Sheldon, Strong, Townsend 
 Van Schoonhoven, Wood, Yawger, Youngs 33. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved now to pass over the first 
 section, without final action upon it. If the of- 
 fice of Surveyor General was retained, as it now 
 existed, it would be necessary to provide for the 
 election of that officer in this section. 
 
 This motion was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to restore the sec. 
 tion providing for the election of a state engineer 
 &c. as amended in committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD explained the object of the 
 committee in reporting this section. First as the 
 office of Surveyor General had become very much 
 reduced, its duties and others could be discharged 
 by a single individual that a State officer, fully 
 qualified, should have the power of supervising 
 the reports, &c. of engineers, from which hereto- 
 fore much bad legislation had resulted and that 
 one member at least of the Canal Board should 
 possess these requisite qualifications and expe- 
 rience for that purpose. The Canal Board had 
 charge of thegreatest and most important monetary 
 interests of the State, and the committee did not 
 desire to reduce its number. He preferred rather 
 to increase its number and thereby to divide and 
 increase the responsibility. It was with these 
 views that the section was reported, and he be-. 
 
 lieved its adoption would result in benefit, and 
 would be sustained by the people. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES agreed entirely with (he chair, 
 man of the committee (Mr. CHATFIELD,) in his 
 view of this matter. He believed had this office 
 existed before, millions of dollars would have been 
 saved to the people of this State, that had been 
 lost through false estimates. There had been a 
 great want of tesponsibility, he uraed, in this de- 
 partment. Mr. R. concluded by proposing the 
 following amendment : 
 
 2. A State Engineer and Surveyor shall be chosen at 
 a general election, who shall hold his office for two years 
 and whose powers and duties in relation to the canals and 
 other interests of the State shall be prescribed by the Le- 
 gislature. 
 
 Mr. STETSON referred to the action by which 
 this section was stricken out by a large vote, and 
 said that nothing had been yet said to induce him 
 :o change his position in voting to strike out. 
 This question should be viewed alone as a propo- 
 sition to create a new < ffice. The Surveyor Gene- 
 ral could well be dispensed with, but this was a 
 matter that could easily be settled hereafter. He 
 loped the section would not be restored. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN continued the de- 
 rate on the question of fixing the salary in reply 
 ,o Mr. MARVIN. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH believed that the people 
 re willing to pay public officers a full compen- 
 ation for all services rendered by them, and that 
 hey would never call on the legislature to reduce 
 . salary, because a public officer happened to re- 
 eive a dollar more than their actual expendi- 
 ures, in consequence of an increase in the value 
 f money. The idea that public officers were to 
 e pensioners, and that they ought to receive a 
 are support, and that this matter was to be left 
 o the legislature, in order to keep salaries al- 
 ways within that precise limit, was an idea which 
 the people never would sanction. The position, 
 therefore, that the matter of salaries must be left 
 out of the constitution, that the people might 
 raise or cut them down according to the value of 
 money, was a fallacy. He had no objection to 
 having it there, if the Convention saw fit, but not 
 on any such grounds. 
 
 Mr.CHATFIELD would disembarrass the ques- 
 tion of the one of salary by leaving that portion 
 out of his motion. Mr. C said if the office of 
 Surveyor General was abolished, the duties of 
 the office would still have to be performed by 
 some one. Now there was not a chief clerk in any 
 department who did not receive quite as much 
 compensation as the Surveyor General. So that 
 therefore by abolishing the office there would be 
 no saving to the people effected, while the effect 
 would be to deprive the Canal Board of one of its 
 members. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said it was not without some 
 hesitation that he moved to strike out this sec - 
 And he confessed that he had since some- 
 what changed his view of the question, under 
 what had been since said of the importance of 
 divesting the Comptroller of some of his immen 
 iower and patronage which it had been a sub- 
 ect of frequent remark, exceeded those of all 
 )ther executive officers put together. If there- 
 ore the section could be amended as he had in- 
 
521 
 
 dicated, he should be glad to see it restored, and 
 should vote to restore it with that view, 
 
 Mr. JORDAN rose to enquire whether it would 
 be in order to move an amendment to the motion 
 of the chairman of the committee. He had voted 
 to strike out the section in committee of the 
 whole, because he was opposed to creating a new 
 officer upon a salary of $"2000, not knowing at the 
 time what were to be the precise duties of that 
 officer. He was not advised whether if the State 
 should undertake new public works or proceed 
 to finish those already begun, this officer's duty 
 would be to take charge of those works profes- 
 sionally, or whether a chief engineer would be 
 professionally employd,and the duty of this office 
 be merely to supervise his proceedings, for the 
 purpose of detecting errors and false estimates, 
 and to have a general superintendence of the ca- 
 nals. He (Mr. J.) had supposed of the former, 
 that no competent, scientific and practical engi- 
 neer could be obtained for the salary proposed. 
 If the latter, then the sum fixed might be dispro- 
 portioned to the services he would be called on 
 to render. He agreed with the Hon. chairman of 
 the committee, that it might be, and in his judg- 
 ment, was of great importance to the interests of 
 the State to have in commission an officer of scien- 
 tific attainments and practical experience, capa- 
 ble of understanding and correcting the errors and 
 false estimates alluded to. And inasmuch as the 
 amendment to the first section moved by the gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque, (Mr. MORRISON,) had 
 been adopted by the Convention, which in its 
 terms applied to all the officers mentioned in the 
 article, he should vote to retain the section, 
 with a view to an ulterior motion to amend it by 
 striking out all after the third line, so as to bring 
 the office within the operation of the amendment 
 to the first section. He was willing to entrust it 
 to the legislature to fix the salary, believing that 
 they would apportion the salary according Fo the 
 services required The immense magnitude of 
 the public works already constructed and begun, 
 their importance to the revenues of the State, and 
 the manifest propriety, and he might say, the co- 
 gent necessity, of having them well cared for by 
 a responsible official, would induce him to restore 
 the section under consideration. 
 
 Mr. S i'ETSON said he would ask the indulgence 
 of i lie Convention a moment, to reply to an allusion 
 whicn he had heen informed the gentleman Irom 
 Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD) had made lo him whils 
 he was absent Mom the hall namely: That his 
 posn ion to-da\, in opposing the motion to r^-tor 
 the section ci eating the new office of State Engi 
 neer, was inconsistent with that which he occu. 
 pied heretofore, when he expressed his approba 
 tion of the report of the committee, with the ex 
 cepiion of the section relating to Inspectors of 
 State Prisons. Mr. S said it was true that he did 
 say then that he was disposed to support the pro- 
 visions if the report, generally; but that remark 
 had relation lo the great point then under discus 
 ion the election of the State officers, and espe- 
 cially I he Comptroller, Secretary of State, and 
 Attorney General. He did venture to go beyond 
 the qiitsiion and express his disapprobation of the 
 section which provided for the election of Inspec- 
 tors of State Prisons ; but m that he was thought 
 lo be out ot order, by the gentleman from Otsego ; 
 
 40 
 
 and now he should not be taken to have given hi* 
 unqualified assent to other provisions, not ihen 
 under consideration, and lo which he could not 
 have referred, without being also deemed out of 
 order. He (Mr. S.) said he would again repeat, 
 that he was unable ro see any good reason lor the 
 creation of this new office. He was not in the 
 habit of referring to the action of political con- 
 ventions, caucuses, and newspapers, ior the pur- 
 pose of fortifying himself in an argument on this 
 floor; but such had been the course of others. 
 When it was proposed to increase the Senate to 
 forty, and again, only to thirty-six, the cry had 
 been raised from all quarters, thaf there had been 
 no popular demand for the increase, neither by 
 the people in caucus or convention, or by the press. 
 He did not himself rely much on that, but it had a 
 powerful influence with others; and he thought 
 the same argument was good here against those 
 who used it then. He would therefore, in imita- 
 tion of those, demand to know where and evhen 
 popular resolutions had been passed, cr a conven- 
 tion, or a caucus held, requiring the creation of 
 this new office. So far as there had been popular 
 action on the subject of reform, as to officers, it 
 had been more for the reduction of their number 
 to dispense with those that were useless than to 
 create new ones. And yet the proposition here 
 was one that would fasten a whole horde of them 
 upon the people, or rattier upon the tax-payers 
 for when you shall have placed a professional 
 Engineer in the Canal Board, and entrusted 
 him with the general supervision of canals and 
 internal improvements, he will take good care 
 that full and abundant employment be given 
 to his professional brethren. The election of 
 of this state engineer was equal to the election of 
 The whole corps. He was opposed to this office 
 of state engineer, for he felt certain that if we 
 were to have him we would have quite too much 
 engineering. It would be remembered at least: 
 the tax-payers and their children off the line of 
 the canals, would long remember that there had 
 been quite too much engineering. If the time 
 was when such an officer was required, it had 
 gone by ; and its creation now implied that new 
 schemes of improvement were to be opened, 
 which would require the constant superintend- 
 ence of a state engineer. He could not see where 
 this was to be ; certainly not at the north where 
 they had to build their own railroads and pay 
 their own engineer with their own means, or at 
 the south where they also were to proceed unaid- 
 ed by the state. Nor did the centre seem to re- 
 quire it, for now they had a canal equal to their 
 present wants and the enlargement could be com- 
 pleted gradually as we got in funds, without fas- 
 tening upon the State an officer who would 
 only invite the people to new projects and 
 make estimates to be met by future tax-payers. 
 But even if we were to have new works which 
 would require an engineer, he would leave him to 
 be employed by the Canal Commissioners, on 
 whom we placed the responsibility of conduct- 
 ing the work. It was a department of business 
 where there could be no unity without a head to 
 it on which the whole responsibility would rest. 
 By providing an engineer for the Commissioners, 
 we relieved them from responsibility and ena- 
 bled them to say, "it is the fault of the engineer," 
 
522 
 
 and enabled the engineer to throw it back upon 
 the Commissioners. Mr. S. said he was opposed 
 to electing this officer, if we were to have him. 
 The duties to be performed by him were of a 
 scientific kind, so much so that few of our citi- 
 zens, except perhaps those residing along the 
 line of the Canal, could have an accurate opinion 
 of the comparative merit and skill of candidates. 
 We always have a very good Governor and 
 a very good Lieut. Governor we always had 
 elected very good ones, because every citizen of 
 the state felt a deep interest in the duties 
 of those officers. A stranger was not put 
 up as a candidate for these places; he had 
 been and would be a man of whose capa- 
 bilities and fitness, the people can judge, 
 both because they heard of him before, and be- 
 cause the duties of the place concerned the per- 
 sonal welfare of them all, and come under the 
 constant observation of the whole country. It 
 would be so when you elected your Comptroller, 
 your Secretary of State, and your Attorney Gener- 
 al. The whole people had much to do with these 
 officers, and could easily judge of their fitness, 
 because they had by means of this intercourse and 
 the character of the duties an opportunity to judge 
 and appreciate. But here we had a State Normal 
 School, an interesting establishment, and to where 
 pupils were sent from all the counties. The head 
 of it was an officer employed by the State, and 
 was as much a State officer as an Engineer upon 
 the Canals. Now would any one seriously pro- 
 pose to make that an elective office, and that the 
 State Conventions at Syracuse and Utica should 
 should hereafter make the nomination ! Had the 
 time come when school district trustees were to 
 be denied the power of employing a teacher, so 
 that the school master might be voted for at town 
 meeting ? Would any one propose to elect the 
 managers of the Lunatic Asylum at Utica, the 
 commissioners of health in N. York, or the officer 
 having charge ofscientic instruction at WestPoint, 
 if that were a State institution ? He believed not ; 
 and he (Mr. S.) regarded the duties of an engi- 
 neer as analagous in their character to those he 
 had named. They required qualifications of judg- 
 ment combined with scientific skill, and for one, 
 if he should happen to be sent as a delegate to a 
 State Convention at Syracuse, he should not feel 
 competent to make a judicious selection. The 
 duties of an engineer were without the range of 
 his daily observation and intercourse. His con- 
 stituents, and he believed the constituents of oth- 
 er gentlemen would feel embarrassed in passing 
 upon the comparative merits and skill of civil en- 
 gineers, and it would be quite as awkard in vo- 
 ting for them. Why did the committee desire 
 to make this an elective officer ? Why it had 
 been said, so as to make him directly account- 
 able to the people, and thus prevent false and 
 erroneous estimates. Sir, said (Mr. S.) I admit we 
 have had delusive estimates, and that if we are 
 to have new works, there is much need that es- 
 timates should be more accurate. But his opin- 
 ion was that we would not correct the evil by 
 changing the mode of his appointment: for there 
 already had been popular accountability in his 
 selection. The canal commissioners were elective 
 officers and they felt their responsibility to the 
 people in selecting an engineer competent to 
 
 make true estimates, as much as they did in 
 performing any other of their duties. If 
 they J)ad failed to select judicious, competent 
 and faithful engineers, i! only proved ihat other 
 men of no higher intelligence than the connnis. 
 sioners, and of means not so good for judging who 
 would be sent to our State nominating conven- 
 tions, would be likely to fail too. The canal com- 
 missioners had months in which to enquire, corn- 
 pare, and finally select, whilst a delegate to a 
 State Convention, after being exhausted possibly 
 in a two days' service, in helping to make the no- 
 minations of the numerous other officers we were 
 properly making elective, would have only a few 
 moments in which to act. If next week, he found 
 he had made a mistake, it would be too late to 
 correct it, for the ticket would be made out. All 
 the voter could do would be to decide whether he 
 would vote this ticket or another made in the 
 same way, or throw away his power by voting for 
 a third candidate, for whom there would be no 
 chance. r l his would be the practical operation- 
 arid in hn opinion it would pioduce the very mis- 
 chiefs the committee said they designed to correct. 
 They had provided travelling fees lor this officer, 
 and he (Mr. S.) would sav in conclusion that he 
 was opposed also to creating a political agent to 
 travel through the Stale. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said the gentleman's objections 
 applied as well to others officers as to the Sur- 
 veyor and Engineer. Mr. P. believed the people 
 were as competent to judge of the qualifications 
 of one class of officers as the other. 
 
 Mr. STETSON interposed. The Governor's 
 duties and the Comptroller's were of a general 
 political character, such as were known to the 
 public. Scientific attainments were not general- 
 ly known. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS replied that the Comptroller's 
 duties required financial talent, those of the At- 
 torney General, legal talent and acquirement 
 and both were as much matters of sience as en- 
 gineering. Mr. P. went on to urge the import- 
 ance of having not only a practical and profession- 
 al engineer to revise and review the acts of sub- 
 ordinates, but to have him a sworn officer of the 
 government, and responsible in the way of en- 
 gineering. Hitherto this officer had been a mere 
 hired servant, under no oath of office, and utterly 
 irresponsible, and the state, under the erroneous 
 estimates of such men, had been led into enor- 
 mous expenditures. As to the salary of this of- 
 ficer, he, Mr. P., said if he could save any con- 
 siderable portion of the half million now annually 
 expended in canal repairs, he did not care a pin 
 whether we paid the officer $1,000 or $5000. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 As soon as the roll was called, and a quorum 
 found to be present 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN said that the statement 
 made by the gentleman from Genesee (Mr. RICH- 
 MOND) relative to the expense of the Genesee 
 Valley Canal, was quite inconect. That gentle- 
 man had placed the fiist estimate too low, and the 
 total erst much too high. Most certainly the ca- 
 nal had cost more than the estimate; but there 
 were very good and satisfactory reasons fur this in- 
 crease, which could be shown to the entire satis- 
 
523 
 
 faction of every one that wa entirely unprejudiced. 
 And he would further state that much ignorance 
 ftvvailed with regard to the cost of completing 
 this canal f 1,300,000 would he all-sufficient, in 
 the estimation of competent and candid met). 
 
 Mr. MANN enquired what was the pending 
 question before the house. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said it was upon restoring 
 the 2d section of the committee No 6, which had 
 been stricken out in committee relative to the 
 State Engineer, &c, 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD That was my motion. 
 The PRESIDENT The gentleman from Chau- 
 tauque moved to amend that motion he propos- 
 ed a substitute for the section. The question is 
 on this substitute. 
 
 J\lr. CROOKER was opposed to destroying the 
 section It had been stricken out after a full and 
 fair discussion, and it was rather too much like 
 child's play to be undoing one day what was done 
 the day before. The design of "the gentleman 
 from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD) would be accom- 
 plished by inserting either of the words, "En- 
 gineer" or " Surveyor" before the words ** At- 
 torney General" in the first section. He 
 was favorably disposed towards this plan ; 
 He would consent to vote for such an officer, but 
 he did not want the whole of a ticket taken up in 
 reciting his titles. Again he decidedly objected 
 to the limitation in the original section ; he was 
 opposed to the doctrine of saying that no man 
 should be eligible tathat office unless he had been 
 for seven years engaged in the occupation of a 
 practical Engineer. You might with the very 
 same propriety say that no man should be eligi- 
 ble to the office of Attorney General of the State, 
 unless he h;-d been for seven years a practical 
 lawyer. There was no fear but that the people 
 would select highly competent men to fill all the 
 offices in their gift. 
 
 Mr. STRONG : Well, what objection is there 
 to a man being required to be a lawyer in full 
 practice for seven years, before you will allow 
 him to manage the duties of Attorney General of 
 the State. I look upon it as all very proper, that 
 we should have this qualification required ; if 
 we always did, we should have better lawyers by 
 a good deal. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. CROOKER : To a certain extent, the qual- 
 ification may be a proper one ; but why not be 
 consistent in this business; require the qualifica- 
 tions from all ; make this apply equally and all 
 round the list. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that the proposition seemed 
 now to come before the Convention in a new 
 form ; he did not like the aspe'ct which it at pre- 
 sent seemed to assume. On yesterday it was sta- 
 ted that by this section, it was intended to retain 
 the office of Surveyor General ; and with the view 
 to carry out that idea he had at that time offered 
 a substitute for thesection,which he felt satisfied 
 would accomplish that object. Now, to-day, he 
 understood from the gentleman from Otsego and 
 other friends of this section, that this officer was 
 not to be a substitute ; but that he would be re- 
 quired to have been seven years a practical engi- 
 neer, and would be elected and retained to do the 
 engineering on the public works. What does all 
 this mean ? What do gentleman intend by the re- 
 insertion and passage of this section ? What need 
 
 have we for any such officer ? Are we about to 
 start, or do we propose shortly to start on a new 
 system of internal improvements ? Is this but the 
 beginning of a " new impulse," as it has been 
 called ? And are we about to commence an en- 
 tirely new system of public works ? For this 
 seemed really what some gentlemen designed, 
 He was satisfied that the almost universal res- 
 ponse would be in the negative. Again, what 
 duties would you assign to this officer ? Do you 
 propose that he should superintend all repairs on 
 your canals, enlargement of your locks, or what- 
 ever is to be done on them ? Is that the object ? 
 If it is, then I ask you what do you propose to do 
 with you present canal commissioners ? But if 
 he is to be but a substitute for your present Chief 
 Engineer, then it is only a question as to the way 
 in which he shall be appointed; by the people 
 direct, or by them through the Canal Commis- 
 sioners ? But there is no necessity for any such 
 appointment. The present Canal Board 
 its officers are fully and entirely compe- 
 tent to discharge any and every duty that 
 may properly devolve upon them as connected 
 with your canals; or that might fall within the 
 service ol such an officer as you propose to appoint. 
 But if you were to decide on having such an officer 
 as has been here spoken of, that is not ihe proper 
 way to choose him. It was idle t<> say or to sup- 
 pose that a political caucus could by possibility 
 know what scientific men there were in this state 
 best calculated to fill such an office. He did not 
 believe that in this very Convention, v\ith all its 
 knowledge, its 128 members, and their political 
 knowledge and experience in public matter? 
 and public men, there were over twenty or 
 twenty-five who knew the name of the present 
 Chief Engineer. And if any of these were re- 
 quired to select a man for Chief Engineer, they 
 would not rely upon their own knowledge in lela- 
 tion to these matters, bui they would refer to those 
 who were competent to judge , to such men as 
 the distinguished gentleman from Schoharie, who 
 from long experience and connection with the ca- 
 nals, would l>e better qualified to judge of the 
 merits of a man competent to fill such an office. 
 And in the absence of all other information upon 
 this subject, you would be not merely influenced, 
 but absolutely governed, in relation to this mat- 
 ter. For this purpose he should vote to have the 
 section stricken out. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD repeated that it was not 
 it had not been his intention, or the intention of 
 this section to abolish the office of Surveyor 
 General; he desired to retain it; and to superadd 
 to it the duties of engineer. Neither was he at 
 all disposed to stand in the attitude in which the 
 gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS) had at- 
 tempted to place him, of having in view the com- 
 mencement of what had been termed a "new im- 
 pulse" the beginning of a new system of public 
 works. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS did not desire to place the gen- 
 tleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD) in that 
 position; but he merely intended by what he said 
 that such seemed to be the tendency of the gen- 
 tleman's proposition. He would be happy to 
 find that such was not the case. 
 
 Mr. CHATFlELD'said that the gentleman from 
 Herkimer (Mr. LOOMI&) had very gravely en* 
 
524 
 
 quired if this step was to be the commencement 
 of a new impulse ? and that question, and in fact 
 the general scope of his remarks did amount to a 
 direct charge that such was the intent of the sec- 
 tion which he desired to have restored. Now 
 he would repel any and every such imputation ; 
 he was not one of those who came here with but 
 a solitary idea in their heads, and then make 
 every act of theirs in this Convention square with 
 the same. Nor was he prepared to suppose that 
 there was nothing of any importance to the state 
 which was not embraced in what are called the 
 " People's Resolutions." He was here for other 
 and higher purposes than merely to secure the 
 results thus contemplated. And he would not 
 for a single moment tolerate the idea that seemed 
 to be entertained by some here that we were to 
 frave no more public improvements in this state, 
 or that we were to favor such a declaration. Do 
 gentlemen suppose that there is hereafter never 
 a single step of progress to be made in regard to 
 the improvement of our present public works, 
 and no new ones to be constructed ? So far from 
 this being the case, he was confidently looking 
 forward to the period (and that not far distant) 
 when this state might with safety a time beyond 
 doubt or peril when the state should resume 
 that policy which had been her crowning glory ; 
 when we might without danger go forward in 
 the great work of internal improvement. He 
 would go as far as the gentleman from Herkimer 
 (Mr. LOOMIS) or his colleague (Mr. HOFFMAN) 
 to place the finances of the state on a safe and se- 
 cure basis and also to make ample provision for 
 the public debt. But having done this he was 
 not bound to stop there, to stand still and fold- 
 ing his arms, say that his work was done. So 
 had he not learned his duty to the people. It 
 seemed to be the opposite idea, that influenced 
 the gentleman from Herkimer, who asks, with 
 peculiar emphasis, if this is the beginning of a 
 " new impulse ?" and says that now was the time 
 when an officer of this kind may be dispensed 
 with that there was no longer a necessity for 
 such an one. He a.sked if the canal commission- 
 ers had not retained in their employment such 
 an officer ? The fact that they had done so, was 
 proof, that they believed there was a necessity 
 for such an agent. The commissioners were not 
 practically acquainted with the scientific knowl- 
 edge necessary for a proper discharge of the du- 
 ties of such an officer, and for this reason they 
 had retained the services of a scientific man. He 
 thought there was as much safety in electing this 
 officer at a popular election, as in electing a 
 Governor in the same way. The' principle of 
 popular election had been applied to the State of- 
 ficers heretofore appointed by the legislature and 
 the Governor ; and the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer would not dare to oppose that. Why should 
 they not be consistent, and apply this principle 
 to all ? There was no good reason why they 
 should not. 
 
 Mr. E. HUNTING 1'ON said that it did seem to 
 him that gentlemen were fighting not a little at 
 cross purposes in this matter. Now if the com- 
 mittee desuecl 10 break up the gieat cen'ral pc.w- 
 er at present in the hands of the Comptroller if 
 it was intended he shall no longer, as the geriili- 
 man from Chau'auque (Mr. PATTERSON,) and the 
 
 gentleman from Chenango (Mr. SMITH,) said ihe 
 ether day, hold the Canals in one arm, and the 
 Banks in the other, and the public Treasury in 
 his pocket; if they intended to erect a department 
 of public works at the head of whfch should he 
 an officer upon whom should devolve the duty of 
 the Surveyor General, he would not interpose; the 
 least objection to \h\sprojet; hut if gentlemen in- 
 tended that this Chief Engineer shall have the 
 actual charge and custody of all the public works 
 of this State, that he shall exercise his skill in 
 designing, in deciding upon what are necessary, 
 and directing the works at present in progress, or 
 the necessary repairs to the State works alrea- 
 dy completed -if the services of this ofnciT 
 were actually and bona fide to be I hose of a 
 Chief Engineer, then he for one must enter his 
 protest against it, for the reasons which he stated, 
 and therefore he would not take up the time of 
 the committee (as many had done) by repeating 
 them. As far as he was able to judge, notwith- 
 standing what the gentleman from Otsego had 
 said, (Mr. CHATFIELD,) it was idle to imagine 
 that by the mode proposed in this section, that 
 you could obtain a competent Engineer, who 
 could upon such services be called into requisi- 
 tion, perform the duties of a scientific and skil- 
 ful man. For these reasons, he did not want to 
 see the section restored; but if the convention 
 desired to organize a new department of govern- 
 ment, (such as he had alluded to) they should 
 draft a proper section to effect that object, and in 
 connection with this, call thar officer by his pro- 
 per name ; he always liked to see things called 
 by their right names ; and that of Chief Engineer 
 was not at all suited to the duties required of this 
 officer to perform, if he was chosen. He sincere- 
 ly hoped therefore that those who were in favor 
 of the proposition first indicated, would not vote 
 to restore ; then those who thought with him (Mr. 
 H.) in the main, might by and by move another 
 section, having proper provisions and also a pro- 
 per name for the officer and the office. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN desired to know what were to 
 be the powers and duties of the office proposed to 
 be created. If the object were to retain the sur- 
 veyor general, under an altered name, and with 
 such additional and not incompatible duties as 
 the Legislature may assign, he had no objection. 
 That office might be abolished, and its functions- 
 performed by a bureau in one of the departments ; 
 and he did not think they would be performed 
 much more economicaly, and he conceded that 
 there was force in the considerations presented 
 by his friend from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD) in 
 in favor of retaining the Surveyor General as a 
 member of the Canal Board. But he had not 
 been able to gather from the debate such 
 a definite idea of the purpose of this officer as to 
 induce him to vote for its restoration. Was this 
 officer to be superior to the Canal Board and the 
 Canal Commissioners ? He argued that it would 
 be an unnecessary measure, and unsafe concen- 
 tration of power. Was lie to perform the ordina- 
 ry duties of the chief engineer? He (Mr. T.) 
 doubted whether those duties would be compat- 
 ible with the others which as Surveyor General 
 and a member of the Canal Board he would have 
 to discharge; and he pointed out other objections 
 to the proposed change, as respects the business 
 
525 
 
 of the chief engineer. Was this officer to super- 
 cede the present head of the Canal Department ? 
 He did not understand his friend from Otsego or 
 the committee to design any such thing. He did 
 not suppose the Convention inclined to adopt any 
 such proposition. What were the functionaries of 
 the chief clerk of the Canal Department? To ad- 
 minister ihe fiscal a flairs of canals tosuperintend 
 their collections and disbursements keep their ac- 
 counts and records ; in a word, to perfoim the du- 
 ties of the comptroller as respects the canals. 
 Certainly you do not want an engineer to transact 
 such business; and, if this office were intended 
 for such a purpose, the requirement that he shall 
 be a " practical engineer," would be absurd. 
 Mr. T. alluded to a remark of the gentleman from 
 Oneida, that the Comptroller held the canals in 
 one hand and the banks in the other ; and read 
 from the laws to show that by an act drawn by 
 Mr. J. C. Spencer, in 1840, the Canal Depart- 
 ment had been separated from the Comptroller's 
 office, and that the Chief Clerk was appointed by, 
 and responsible to, the Canal Board. He con- 
 cluded by repeating that he had no objection to 
 restoring the office of Surveyor General : and gen- 
 tlemen seemed to disavow the various other ob- 
 jects which have been suggested as reasons for 
 adopting the amendment ; but he was not inclined 
 to vote for the proposition until it assumed a more 
 tangible shape. 
 
 Mr. STKUJNG was struck with surprise by the 
 course of the gentleman (roin Herkirner (Mr. 
 LOOMIS.) Yesterday he had proposed an amend 
 merit changing the name of the officer named in 
 this seciion {<> a Commissioner of the Public 
 Works, and saui if the gentleman from Otsego 
 (Mi. CHATFIEL.D) would consent to adopt it, iu- 
 would vote for the section. To day, however, a 
 great change had came over his rmnd. He had 
 discovered a great secret lurking under this sec- 
 tion, and the word engineer sounds strangely and 
 harshly in his ear. He sees in this the cotnmenc- 
 nient of a new era in relation to our public works, 
 and this engineer is to be the great entering 
 wedge. This fact he has just discovered. He 
 says that such a project as the resumption of the 
 public works would meet with an. univeisal res- 
 ponse in this Convenlion against it. 
 
 AJr. LOOMIS had only alluded to new projects 
 of public improvements. 
 
 Mr. STRONG had taken down his words as 
 they fell from his lips, and could not be contradict- 
 ed. The gentleman asked, " are we to commence 
 a new system of public works? I trust that there 
 will be but one universal response against it in 
 thin Convention." Gentlemen did riot always 
 know what they did say. In regard to that ques- 
 tion, he could inform the gentleman that there 
 was a county or two beyond old Herkiiner, who 
 had not received the benefit of the enlaigement 
 of the Erie Canal, as that county had, and who 
 would not be satisfied that it should go no further 
 But this was not the first attempt of the gentle 
 man to wed this Convention to the repoit which 
 had just been received from his colleague (Mrt 
 HOFFMAN ) He would not pretend to predic. 
 that I ht Convention would not ado} t that report 
 just as it was reported ; but be could inform tren- 
 tlemen that there would be far lioai '^universal 
 response in its favor. It wa tot in order lo allude 
 
 to this subject at tins time, but he knew tliat the 
 western counties never would submit that they 
 should be deprived of the benefits of the enlarge- 
 ment, alter it had been made through t.'ie gentle- 
 man's county they would claim to have a voice 
 in this matter; and that voice would be against 
 their selfish policy. Gentlemen hud objected to 
 adopting this section from one reason and anoth- 
 er ; some, because he was to be a practical engi- 
 neer. Would not gentlemen have the Attorney. 
 General a practical lawyer ? or would they be sat is- 
 fied that the thiity-six judges to be elected under 
 the new Consti'ution should be laymen? He 
 oould not suppose that it would be a good objec- 
 tion to the new system that they were to be select^ 
 ed Irom among the w : iscst and soundest lawyers in 
 the State. These objections raised here seemed 
 to him to be entirely frivolous, ana designed to 
 furnish an excuse for voting against the section. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE thought! here was a good deal of 
 misapprehension on this .subject, and as one of the 
 members ol the committee he felt it to be his duty 
 to explain the circumstanced under which the sec- 
 tion was reported The committee, in the perior- 
 mance of their duty and in examining the differ- 
 ent offices which came within their scope ot ac- 
 tion, found two offices that of Engineer in chief 
 employed bv the Canal Commissioners, v\ith a 
 salary of $2000, and that of Surveyor General, 
 which had once been an office, ot great consequence, 
 but which had been icduced in importance and in 
 salary until it now stood at about $ 1 000 m a king 
 JJj<3i/00 for the two offices. The committee, look- 
 ing at the importance of throwing the two offices 
 together, thought it necessary to destroy that of 
 Surveyor General, but considered it of great 
 importance that the office of Engineer should 
 be elevated in character and be brought neater 
 to the people. This officer was very ne- 
 cessary to the Canal Commissioners, because 
 they were constantly obliged to apply to him 
 in relation to their votes in the Canal Board, 
 and in their reports to the legislature, he furnish- 
 ed all the estimates. It was therefore thought 
 best to elevate him to a seat in the Canal Board, 
 so that he should be personally responsible for 
 his acts, and in making reports, he would make 
 them upon his own responsibility. The canal 
 commissioners, not being engineers, would not 
 assume responsibility for the estimates presented 
 in their reports, but fell back upon their subordi- 
 nate officer, the Engineer-in-Chief. The people 
 of the State had been losers to the amount of mil- 
 lions of money on this account, because there 
 was no one to take the responsibility of their re- 
 ports. If the committee had erred in regard to 
 this matter, they had erred unanimously ; for this 
 was the only point in which they did all concur. 
 
 Mr.TILDEN enquired if the gentleman thought 
 the duties of Surveyor General, and of an engi- 
 neer compatible. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE: Certainly compatible. Not 
 only that, but the person competent to perform 
 the duties of engineer-in-chief, is fully compe- 
 tent to perform the duties of Surveyor Geiieral.fij 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS inquired if it was intended to 
 have the Canal Department under the charge of 
 this officer ? 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE : Not by any means. We pro- 
 pose to elevate him from a mere subordinate to a 
 
526 
 
 seat in the Canal Board and on an equality with 
 the other members of it, so as to make him per- 
 sonally responsible and nothing more. We 
 merely place him in the Canal Board, leaving it 
 to the Legislature to direct hereafter what shall 
 be his specific duties. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that if he understood the 
 gentleman from Putnam, he has said substantially 
 that it was the intention of the committee that 
 this new officer should enable the Canal Commis- 
 sioners to make better estimates. Would it give 
 to them a greater degree of intelligence or enable 
 them to do it better than heretofore ? 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE said that the intention was to 
 create an officer responsible for the information. 
 
 Mr. STETSON made the enquiry because he 
 understood that this officer was not to perform 
 
 Eractical field service. Without this, he Mr. S. 
 ad been informed by a distinguished gentleman 
 formerly of the Canal commission, the officer 
 could not give to the Commissioners reliable ad- 
 vice or information. It would be far better to 
 require one of the anal Commissioners who 
 travelled along the line to be a practical engin- 
 eer. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE said this engineer was to have 
 the superintendence over all estimates coming 
 into the Board of Canal Commissioners. And 
 also to allow his travelling expenses to be paid, 
 with a view to permit no estimate to come before 
 the legislature, without his having himself been 
 upon the ground and examined for himself, and 
 assumed the whole responsibility of that esti- 
 mate. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : To perform practical duty on 
 the ground himself? 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE : To go upon the ground him- 
 self. His duties in Albany would be in the win- 
 ter, and in the summer, when estimates are al- 
 ways made, he would have it in his power to su- 
 perintend the operations of his subordinates. We 
 should thus have a man of high character to be 
 responsible for these estimates, and had we had 
 such a man twenty years ago, twenty millions of 
 dollars would have been saved to the State. 
 
 Mr. T1LDEN : Who shall decide when doc- 
 tors disagree ? His friend from Putnam, (Mr. 
 KEMBLE,) for whom he had great respect, had 
 said that the functions of these two offipers could 
 be united in one person. His friend from Onei- 
 da, (Mr. HUNTING-TON,) who had had some ex- 
 perience in this matter of engineering, thoughl 
 differently. Mr. T. said that he was not one of 
 those who supposed that if we had had one or 
 more practical engineers in the canal depart- 
 ment, that we should have saved much of the 
 public money. The Chief Engineer would be li- 
 able also to make erroneous estimates in relation 
 to the public works, and the Canal Board woulc 
 not therefore acquire any more certain knowledge 
 on the subject. 
 
 The question being taken, the motion to re- 
 store the section providing for a State Engineei 
 was agreed to ayes 73, noes 26, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. y\ngel, Archer, Ayrault. F. F. Backus 
 H. backus, Bowdish, Bi uce, Brundage, Cambreleng.Cham 
 berlain, Chatfield, Clyde, Cook, Cornell, Dana, Uanfbrth 
 Dodd, Dorlon, Uebhard, Graham, Harris, Harrison, Hart 
 Hawley, Hunter, A. Hutington, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble 
 Kernan, Kingsley, Kirkland, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Mar 
 vm, Maxwell, Miller, Morris, Nellrs, Nelson, Nicholas 
 
 'arish, Patterson, Porter, President, Rhoades, Riker, Rug- 
 ;les, St. John, Salisbury, Santbni, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 ihrpard, Smith, E. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stow, 
 Strong, Taft, Tallmadge, White, Willard, Witbeck, Wor- 
 len, A. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 73. 
 
 "NOES Messrs Bascom, Bergen, Bouck. Brayton, Burr, 
 D.D.Campbell, R. Campbell, jr., Candee, Clark. Conely, 
 looker, Cuddeback, Flanders, Hotchkiss, E. Huntington, 
 ^oomis, O'Conor, Powers, Richmond, Stetson, Tilden, 
 Townsend, Tuthill, Vache, Waterbury, Wood 26. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved to amend the second sec- 
 ion by striking out the provision fixing the com- 
 >ensation of the officers. He saw no reason why 
 he salary of this officer should be more than 
 >thers. 
 
 This was carried. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved to strike out the provision 
 equiring a practical engineer. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS hoped the motion would not 
 prevail. The words could do no harm, and the 
 >bject of the insertion was to indicate the inten- 
 ion of the convention that a scientific Engineer 
 alone should be selected for this orffice. Mr. N., 
 at some length, then went on to Oppose the mo- 
 ion to strike out. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER desired to leave the people free 
 and unshackled in their choice, and also objected 
 to the provision because it meant nothing. There 
 was not a town surveyor but could come forward 
 and claim to be a practical engineer. All he de- 
 sired was to see the office of Surveyor General 
 retained. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said there had been several 
 speeches on the one side, and it was high time to 
 lave another on the other side. 
 
 SEVERAL: You have had] four speeches 
 yourself already. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND went on to make a speech 
 on the other side. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES briefly replied. 
 
 The question being taken on Mr. TILDEN'S mo- 
 tion it was rejected ayes 30, nays 65. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND proposed to amend so that 
 the section would read,the Surveyor General shall 
 also be state engineer. This would retain the 
 name of the old officer and merely add to his du- 
 ties. 
 
 The amendment was lost ayes 40, nays 40. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, (55th day,) August 6. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. MILES. 
 
 Mr. BRAYTON presented the remonstrance of 
 the trustees of the Jefferson county Institute a- 
 gainst the proposed diversion of the Literature 
 Fund. 
 
 Mr. HOTCHKISS presented the petition of 
 citizens of Warren county for the establishment of 
 free schools. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN presented the remonstrance of 
 the annual conference of the Methodist Episco- 
 pal church at Oneida against the proposed diver- 
 sion of the Literature fund. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN desired to have this printed. 
 
 Mr. WILLARD hoped not. He was opposed 
 to any of this Sectarianism.. 
 
 Mr. MANN also opposed the printing unless 
 every other one was printed. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND also opposed this. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN withdrew the motion to print. 
 
 Mr. H. BACKUSjpresented a remonstrance 
 from the Trustees oWie Brockport Literary In- 
 
527 
 
 stitute, Monroe county, on the same subject, 
 which was referred to the same committee. 
 
 STATE OFFICERS. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND, at the request of many mem- 
 bers, moved a reconsideration of the vote taken 
 yesterday rejecting his amendment to section 
 number two of the report of committee number 
 six, in relation to the state engineer, as follows : 
 ' The surveyor general shall be state engineer and sur- 
 veyor." 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved to lay this motion on the 
 table. Agreed to, Ayes 46, noes 26. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS moved, by consent, the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 Resolved, That hereafter the reports of the several com- 
 mittees he considered in the Convention and not in com- 
 mittee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN hoped that this resolution 
 would be referred to the committee on rules. 
 
 Mr. BACKUS hoped this would not be so re- 
 ferred. We all understand this matter now. We 
 can get no information from the committee on 
 rules. 
 
 Mr. BURR hoped the resolution would be 
 adopted. In committee of the whole they barely 
 had a quorum. They sat there day after day hear- 
 ing the same arguments ; and they frequently re- 
 versed the votes given in committee one day, 
 when they got into the House the next. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that we thus had a double 
 consideration of every subject. 
 
 Mr. COOK said that we were continually hav- 
 ing a continuation and repetition of the speeches 
 of members. We had got through three reports 
 and we had 61 working days left to dispose of the 
 other fifteen, yver. if we sat till the 15th of Octo- 
 ber, or four days for each report. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said the gentleman (Mr. 
 COOK) was celebrated for moving the previous 
 question after all the talk had been on one side. 
 Mr. COOK said he had never done so. 
 Mr. RICHMOND: Oh, no, it is the gentle- 
 man from Washington. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN wanted the benefit of having 
 members in committee of the whole; he regretted 
 that to think without thinking and conclude with- 
 out reasoning, was to be pushed further. He re- 
 inded the Convention of what had been done at 
 e commencement of the session, when instead of 
 ing into committee of the whole on the Consti- 
 tion, the various subjects were referred to eight- 
 n standing committees. He thought the Con- 
 ention had made a mistake at the outset, and he 
 ,w not how anything was to be gained by the 
 course suggested, as motions to recommit with in 
 ^ructions, and debate thereon would be inevita- 
 e. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS thought all this delay was 
 le and worse than idle. We have the same 
 iresome and ledious speeches over and over again, 
 without any new ideas; it is a horrible waste of 
 time; there is seldom a quorum in committee; it 
 is a great waste; men's minds are made up ; and 
 the whole matter UPS in a nu'shell. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY was of the same opinion. 
 Mr. MANN hoped no more lime would be lost 
 on this. 
 
 The resolution was referred to the committee 
 on rules 53 to 22. 
 
 KMr. St. JOHN offered the following- 
 
 Resolved, That no member shall he permitted to speak 
 more th-.in ten minutes in Convention, on any question 
 which may have been previously discussed in committee - s 
 of the whole. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER suggested that in addition no 
 gentleman should be permitted to speak more than 
 once as yesterday they had four speeches each 
 from two gentleman, who had each spoken in 
 committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. WHITE called for the yeas and nays, and 
 the resolution was lost yeas 41, nays 64. 
 THE ORDER OF BUSINESS. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that he had voted in op- 
 position to the resolution, not because he was not 
 anxious to expedite the business of the Conven- 
 tion, but because it was in substance one which 
 the Convention had heretofore adopted and after- 
 wards rescinded ; but it had now become evident 
 hat something must be done to facilitate busi- 
 less. It was evident that much business which 
 lad been contemplated must be left untouched, 
 icnce the importance of taking up those promi- 
 nent subjects which must be considered. It is 
 impossible that all the business can be done in 
 he time left to the Convention. With these 
 views he called for the consideration of Mr. 
 LOOMIS' report on the order of business. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES then moved to n,ake No. 6 (t,ie 
 Judiciary) stand No. 3; oi the next m order. 
 
 Mr. MILLER asked why the repoit was not on 
 he table. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said it was owing to the great 
 and repeated delays of the printer. He had been 
 requested by many members 10 move to take np 
 ,he judiciary Report at an early d;iy. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said they had goi through with 
 3 reports, the executive, legislative and the go- 
 vernment officers. The mxt in older was the ju. 
 diciaiy. It was evident that all the 18 reports 
 rum standing committees could riot be considered 
 n the time allowed to them. Gentlemen were 
 disposed to consider every question gravely, bo'h 
 in committee arid in Convention, and he should 
 like to know -\here the) were .to land on the 1st 
 N'.vembt.-r next. He had not heaul this even from 
 the gentleman iroin Herkimer. It was important 
 ,hat i. hey should first dispo e of those piominent 
 questions which had ui ought I hem together, and 
 it they had then any tune to spare to liaiue. the 
 fancy pan of the Constitution, they rniijhi do so 
 alter disusing ol the substantial. He hof ed also 
 that when they took up i his judicial department 
 gentlemen would be lound in their seais. He 
 hoped the gentleman from H rkiriier (M'. HOFF- 
 MAN) would neglect his business at New Yoik lor 
 a nine, and give them his attention in the Conven- 
 tion on :his important question. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he, in some respects, 
 agreed with Mr. JORDAN, but disagreed with the 
 premises which he had assumed. He differed 
 with him in the opinion that the chief question 
 which led to the calling of the Convention, was 
 the reorganization of the judiciary. It was the 
 subject of relieving the Legislature of the State 
 fiom the mass of local matters which weighed 
 them down. The reorganization of the judiciary 
 was a new question a question of yesterday 
 The mass of business which encumbered the courts 
 of the State was accumulated because we had no 
 Legislature to make laws, but was taken up with 
 mere administrative matters. The gentleman from 
 
528 
 
 Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) had said that the great 
 question of the finances of the State must be de 
 layed until the judicial department is settled, be 
 cause if once we get into that entangling subject 
 we shall never get away from it. He (Mr. H ) 
 said this question of the debt and finances of the 
 State was one of the principal questions which we 
 were to settle. Were it not for the fact that we 
 had a debt hanging over us, and which threatened 
 to accumulate, this Convention would never have 
 been called together. And would gentlemen say 
 that we s-hould delay the subj -ct which we were 
 called particularly to consider, until there was no 
 time left to consider it properly? He (Mr. H.) 
 hoped that the subject of banks and incorporations 
 would be first taken up, as one of the matters which 
 must be swept away from the legislation of the 
 State. Next, he hoped, would be the great sub- 
 ject ot the debt and finances, which must here 
 settle forevei the great quarrel which exists in re- 
 gard to it. He was not behind the gentleman from 
 Columbia in desiring n good judicial system, and 
 he hoped that next in order would be the distrac. 
 ted reports from the judiciary committee; and he 
 believed we should be able to settle the differences 
 which prevailed in (hat committee. He intended 
 to be present when that report was taken up, as 
 the gentleman from Columbia had had the kind- 
 nes* to hope. It may be necessary for him some- 
 times to be absent from this body, both by reason 
 of other duties, and becau-e ot sickness in his 
 family a circumstance which had prevented his 
 attendance for a few days past. 
 
 Mr. TALLM ADGE said they were spending a 
 whole day again in discussing questions of order. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND wanted the Judiciary report 
 taken up first. 
 
 Mr. STETSON wanted the finances considered 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said the whole day was thus 
 lost, and he moved to lay the whole matter on the 
 table. Lost ayes 18, noes 79. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS considered the motion made 
 by the gentleman from Dutchess as one of the 
 most important which had come up. Not his 
 motion of amendment particularly, but the ques- 
 tion of settling the order of business. He did not 
 believe with gentlemen that we had ample time 
 to settle every question which had been present- 
 ed for our consideration. He had no experience 
 in parliamentary 'business, but he could judge 
 something of this matter from the view he was 
 able to take of it, and was satisfied that unless 
 some system was agreed upon, we must break up 
 without effecting the business for the settlement 
 of which we were sent here ; and we should go 
 home to our constituents with discredit. He 
 agreed with the gentleman from Herkimer that 
 there were three or four subjects which should be 
 decided, and he hoped an arrangement would be 
 made to take them in proper order. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said they must do away with 
 long speeches. He moved to postpone the matter 
 till this day week. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENGsaid they must have some 
 settled order of business. But he did not think 
 the judiciary report ought to be taken up first. 
 
 Mr. K1RKLAND denied that there was so great 
 a disunion among the members of the judiciary 
 committee as indicated by Mr. WORDEN. Almost 
 
 i\,. t-amp- 
 ;1, Cudde. 
 an, Hunt, 
 lis, Mann, 
 
 with entire unanimity had the committee agreed 
 upon some most important features. They had 
 almost unanimously concurred in the union of 
 .aw and chancery jurisdiction. And also, to 
 provide that cause* shall be tried in the both ca- 
 ses under the same forms. This alone would 
 save an immense expense to the State. Mr. K. 
 urged that this judicary question was one which 
 excited more general public attention than any 
 other question here. It might be too soon to 
 :ake up the report of the judicary to take it up 
 'mmediately, but he suggested that one weeks' 
 :ime would be fully sufficient delay. He moved 
 therefore to make this report the order for Thurs- 
 day next. The Convention would then at last 
 ^et to work at some of its important objects. 
 
 Mr. MANN was opposed to the judiciary re- 
 port taking precedence of the financial report. 
 He should, therefore vote against the proposition. 
 
 Mr. STETSON called for the ayes and nays, 
 as he considered this a most important question, 
 and the motion prevailed, ayes 58, nays 46, as fol- 
 .ows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F .Backus, H Backus, 
 Baker, fiasco n, Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish, Brown, Bruce, 
 Burr, D. L). Campbell, Candee,Chamberlain, Cook, Crook- 
 er, Dana, Dodd Dorlon, Graham, Harris, Hawley, Hotrh. 
 iiss, K. Huntington, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble, Kirkland, 
 McNitt, Marvin, \1axwell,Miller,Morris, Nicholas, O'Con. 
 nor, Parish, Patterson, Rhoades, Ruggle?, S ars, Smith 
 K. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stow, Strong, Tallmadge, 
 J. J Taylor, Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Wi>terbury, W it- 
 beck, Wood, A. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 53.' 
 
 NOE^ Messrs. Angel, Bray ton, Cauibreleng, R.Camp- 
 bell, jr. Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Conely, < ornell, Cudde. 
 back, Danfonh, Flanders, Harrison, Hart, Hoffman, "" 
 Hunter, A Huntington, Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, 
 McNeil, Nillis.Pt-nniTnan Perkins, Por'er, Powers. Presi. 
 dene. Richmond, Riker, S'. John, Salisbury, Sanford, Shaw, 
 Sheldon, Shepard, Stetson, Swackhamer, Taggart.Tilden, 
 Townsend, Tuthill, White, Willaid, Worden 46. 
 
 PLAN OF A JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN remarked that he had drawn 
 up a plan for a Judiciary which he desired to 
 present to the Convention. He would not ask 
 for its reading now but would merely state its 
 outlines. In the first place it proposes to abol- 
 ish the court of errors, and to substitute in its 
 place a court to consist of a chief justice and 
 nine associate justices. In the next place, to 
 abolish the court of Chancery, and to substitute 
 in place of it a court with equity powers, under 
 the control of the Legislature, to consist of not 
 less than five judges. In regard to the supreme 
 court, he proposed to make it consist of thirteen 
 judges, a chief justice and twelve associates to be 
 divided into classes the associate justices of 
 twelve to be divided into classes of three each. 
 The first class with the chief justice, making 
 four, to hold terms in bank for two years. The 
 other nine justices to hold circuit and special 
 terms for the hearing of non-enumerated motions. 
 Giving to the legislature the power to require 
 any other class of judges to hold terms in bank, 
 whenever the business of the state should require 
 it. To divide the State into five judicial dis- 
 trictsthe city of New York to be one and to 
 provide for the holding of courts in each district. 
 Circuit courts for the trial of issues joined in the 
 supreme court and sent to the circuit to be tried , 
 to be held by one of the justices of the supreme 
 court. Courts of oyer and terminer to be held as 
 they now are. Out of New York the district* 
 
529 
 
 to be subdivided into four judicial districts so as 
 to make eight in all; and in each of these dis- 
 tricts to appoint a president judge of the court of 
 common pleas, to try all the causes in the courts 
 ol common pleas within his district. To locate 
 not more than two judges in each county of the 
 
 , who with tin- president judge shall con- 
 stitute the court of common pleas and the crim- 
 inal court of the county. He proposed so to 
 form the judiciary that the whole system of equi- 
 ty jurisprudence, shall be remodeled, leaving to 
 the Legislature and experience to point out what 
 reforms in the practice of the courts are expedi- 
 ent. He proposed to abolish masters and exam- 
 iners in chancery and to provide that all testimo- 
 ny in chancery cases shall be taken before one of 
 the judges of the court of equity, or the Pres- 
 ident, judges of the common pleas, so that the 
 vast expenses attendant on taking testimony 
 shall be done away with, and leaving it to the 
 legislature to provide by law for the decision of 
 cases in Chancery before a president judge of 
 common pleas, or any of the judges of that court. 
 He would leave the courts of the city of New- 
 York, precisely as they now are, giving to the le- 
 gislature the power, as they now possess, over 
 these courts. For the purpose of disposing of the 
 Equity business in New York, in that respect he 
 would leave it as it now is, with two officers to 
 have in that county, the powers given to the pre- 
 sident judges of the common pleas, in the several 
 districts of the state they to have the dower of 
 trying these Chancery causes. This, Mr. W. said, 
 was briefly the plan he submitted. In regard to 
 the election of judges, he had not submitted any 
 proposition, and (here were two already before 
 the Convention, and in relation to this he begged 
 leave to present to the Convention a view of the 
 case not yet taken. The judiciary power of the 
 state, is in its nature and character, totally differ- 
 ent from the legislature or Executive. It varies 
 essentially from both these departments, and he 
 believed to the extent of any gentleman there, 
 that the legislative and Executive departments 
 should respond as freely as possible to the ac- 
 tion of the popular will. But the judiciary 
 is another branch of the government in which 
 individual rights are to be determined and 
 settled upon great and fundamental princi- 
 ples, that cannot or should not change or alter, 
 and whether one man stands in opposition to the 
 whole people, or the whole people to one man, 
 the great question of individual rights should be 
 determined upon the intrinsic merits of the case. 
 In that consists the dignity, the efficiency, and the 
 purity of the judicial system. Again, that the 
 judicary system may be a protection to individual 
 rights and individual liberty, and that it may con- 
 fine and keep within its proper limits all the 
 powers, duties and departments of government, 
 .it must be independent, and not made to depend 
 on the caprice or fluctuation of public or private 
 opinion. In all these respects a judiciary system 
 should be guarded, trenched about and kept void 
 of influences that are not properly and altogether 
 legitimate. He believed it possible to frame a 
 
 in of elective judiciary upon a safer plan 
 than that submitted by the majority of the com- 
 mittee, and he had not agreed to that plan pre- 
 cisely, if the Convention should adopt the princi- 
 
 
 pie of electing judges. He wished to say one 
 word in regard to that matter. The very pole 
 star tc guard us in the formation of a judiciary, 
 is to have it independent and away as far as pos- 
 sible from any exciting questions that operate 
 upon legislation, the executive, or the popular 
 body at large, so that individual and public rights 
 may be settled upon great and fundamental prin- 
 ciples, administered in the courts, not for po- 
 litical benefit or in reference to public sentiment, 
 but by the eternal and abiding principles of jus- 
 tice. Mr. WORDEN'9 plan is as follows : 
 
 ^ 1. The judicial power shall be vested in a court for 
 the trial of impeachments', a court for the correction of er- 
 rors a court of equity, a supreme court, county courts and 
 courts of oyer and terminer, and such inferior courts as 
 may be created by law, pursuant to this Article. 
 
 (j 2. The court lor the trial of impeachments shall consist 
 of the PresUent of the Senate, the senators or a major part 
 of them, the justices of the court for the correction of er- 
 rors or a major part of them. 
 
 3. The Assembly shall have the power of impeaching 
 all civil officers of this state, for mal and corrupt conduct 
 in office, and high crimes and misdemeanors; but a major- 
 ity of all the members shall concur in an impeachment. 
 Before the trial of an impeachment the members of the 
 court shall take an oath or affirmation truly to try and de- 
 termine the charge in question, according to evidence, and 
 no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of 
 two-thirds of the members present. "When the Governor 
 shall be impeached, the Lieutenant Governor shall take no 
 part on the trial or decision of such impeachment. A per- 
 son impeached shall be suspended from exercising his of- 
 fice until acquitted. Judgment, in case of impeachment, 
 shall not extend further than removal from office, and dis- 
 qualifica'ion to hold any office or place of trust under this 
 state; but the party convicted shall be liable to indictment 
 and punishment according to law. 
 
 4 The court for the correction of errors shall consist 
 of a chief justice, and not less than nine associate justices. 
 The supreme court shall consist of a chief justice, and not 
 less than twelve associate justices. The court of equity 
 shall consist of a chief justice, and not Jess than lour asso- 
 ciate justices, any four of whom may hold the court; and 
 special terms, for hearing and deciding such questions and 
 matters as may be prescribed by law, may be held by any 
 one of the justices of the court of equity. 
 
 5. The state shall be divided into not less than five ju- 
 dicial districts, of which the city and county of New York 
 shall be one; but no connty shall be divided in the forma- 
 tion of a district. Terms of the supreme court, and of the 
 court of equity, shall be held in each judicial district, at 
 such times and places as shall be prescribed by law. The 
 terms of the court for the correction of errors shall be 
 held at the times and places fixed by law. 
 
 6. The stated terms of the Supreme Court shall, when- 
 ever practicable, be held by four justices thereof; butmay 
 be held by three or any two of them, in case of absence of 
 the other justices And the justices ot said court shall by 
 lot or otherwise divide the associate justices thereof into 
 four classes, each to consist of three such justices. The 
 justices of each class in rotation, or their successors in of- 
 fice, shall, with the chief justice, hold the stated terms of 
 the said court for two years. 1 he legislature may by Jaw 
 direct that any other of the said classes may hold stated 
 terms whenever it shall be found necessary to dispose of 
 business pending in said court. Special terms of the su- 
 preme court may be held by any one justice thereof, for 
 the hearing and'decision of such questions and matters as 
 may be prescribed by law, with the right of appeal to the 
 justices of the said court at a stated term, in such cases 
 and on such terms as the legislature may direct, or as may 
 be directed by general rules of said court when authorized 
 by law. Such special terms shall be held in each judicial 
 district at the places prescribed for holding stated terms 
 of the said court. And they may also be held by any of 
 the justices, who are not at the time dcsignuted to hold 
 stated terms, in the several counties at the same times and 
 places at which circuit cuurts nrc appointed to be held, or 
 at other times at d plncos as shaJl be directed bv law. 
 
 ^7 Circuit courts lor the trial of issues joined in the su- 
 preme court, or sent to that court to be tried, shall be held 
 at least twice in each year in every county of this State, 
 and oftener in any county when required by law. They 
 shall be held by such of the associate justices of the su- 
 
 41 
 
530 
 
 preme court as are not at the time designated to hold the 
 stated terms of the said court, in such rotation and order as 
 shall be arranged among themselves; or, incase of their 
 disagreement, as shall be directed by the supreme court at 
 a staled term thereof. But no such justices shall hold a 
 circuit court in the same county more than once in the 
 same year. The mode of supplying any omission of a jus- 
 tice of the supreme court to attend any stated term or to 
 hold any circuit court, shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 & 8. courts oloyer and terminer for the trial of such crl 
 minal causes as shall be directed by law, shall be held at 
 the same times and places for which circuit courts are ap- 
 pointed They shall be held by a justice of the supreme 
 court and a judge or judges of the county courts, or justi- 
 ces of the peace of the county, as the legislature may di- 
 
 9. Each of the judicial districts of the state, except that 
 consisting ot the city and county of New York, shall be 
 subdivided into two districts} and ior each of the said last 
 mentioned districts, there shall be a presiding judge ol 
 county courts, and ia each of the counties composing such 
 districts, there shall be elected, not more than two county 
 judges, who shall hold their office for five years. And the 
 countv courts of >he several counties in said last mentioned 
 districts, snail be held by the presiding judge thereof and 
 by the county judge or judges. And the presiding judge 
 mav, alone, try all civil issue brought to trial, o ordered to 
 be tried in said courts. The powers and juri>diction of the 
 county courts, as now existing, shall remain, until altered 
 by the legislature, which may confer such other additional 
 powers on the said courts as may be deemed expe-iient. 
 
 & 10. In suits and proceedings m equity, the testimony 
 snail be taken before one of the justices of the court ot 
 equity, or one ol the Vice-Chanceliors, or a presiding judge 
 ot the county courts; and issues of fact joined or lormtd 
 in such suits shall be tried before a justice of the court of 
 equity, or one of the Vice-Chancellors, or at a circuit court, 
 or by a presiding judge of county courts, as the legislature 
 may direct; and the mode of deciding questions and causes 
 on pleadings, or upon pleadings and proofs, or of determin- 
 ing questions of lact and the mode ot appealing from such 
 decisions t the court of equity at a stated term, shall be 
 provided by law. And it shall be in the power ol the legis- 
 lature to conler such equity ] owers and duties on the pre- 
 siding judges of county courts, and the \ice-Chancellors, 
 from time to time, as sliall be deemed expedient. 
 
 11. There shall be in the city and county of New York 
 not less than two Vice Chancellors, who shall possess and 
 exercise within the said city and county, subject to the ap- 
 pellate jurisdiction of the court of equity, such equity 
 powers and duties as may be prescribed by law. 
 
 & 12. The courts of common law and criminal jurisdic- 
 tion in the city and county ol New York, as they may be 
 organised and exist when this constitution takes effect, 
 shull continue and remain, subject to be altered, modified 
 or entirely abolished. 
 
 & 13 Inferior courts of equity and common law jurisdic- 
 tion may be established by the legislature. And appeals 
 and writs of error therefrom may be brought to the su- 
 preme court, court of equity or court for the correction of 
 errors, as may be prescribed by law. 
 
 ^ 14. The court lor ihe correction of errors shall be ap- 
 pellate, and shall possess tue powers now vested in that 
 court but the concurrence of six of the members of that 
 court' shall be necessary to reverse or modify any judg- 
 ment or decree. The court of equity shall possess and ex- 
 ercise equitv powers. The supreme court shall pos- 
 sess the powers now vested in that court, and equity pow- 
 ers may be conferred thereon. The number ol justices of 
 the court for the correction of errors, of the supreme court 
 and the court of equity, and the vice chancellors of the 
 city and county of New York, maj from time to time be 
 increased- but not more than one justice or chancellor 
 shall be added to the said courts in any one year. Nor 
 shall the number of vice chancellors be increased more 
 than one in the same year; nor shall any such increase b 
 made unless by the assent ol two-thirds ol all the mem- 
 bers elected to both branches of the Legislature. 
 
 k 15 The justices of the court lor the correction of er 
 rors 'and of the supreme court, the court of equity and 
 Vice-chancellors, and president judges of county courts, 
 shall severally, at stated times, receive ior their services 
 a compensation, to be established by law, which shall not 
 b> diminished during their continuance in office. They 
 shall not receive any lees or perquisites Icy judicial ser- 
 vices They shall n6t hold aay other office or public trust, 
 and all vote* lor either of them by the legislature or the 
 neoule during their continuance in office (except for a ju- 
 dicial office), shall be void. They shall not have, and are 
 
 declare incapable of receiving, any appointing power (ex- 
 cept the power to license practitioners in their courts, and 
 to appoint referees and other proper persons to aid in judi- 
 cial proceedings). 
 
 16. All judicial officers except justices of the peace, 
 may be removed from office by joint resolution of both 
 houses oi the legislature, if two thirds of all the members 
 elected to both branches concur therein; but no such re- 
 moval shall be made unless the party complained of, shall 
 have been served with a copy of the complaint against 
 him, and have had an opportunity of being heard in his de- 
 fence. The cause of such removal shall first be agreed on 
 by two-thirds of all the members elected to both branches 
 and entered on the journals of both houses, and on the 
 question of agreement or removal the ayes and noes shall 
 also be entered on the journals of both houses. 
 
 17. Surrogates shall hold their offices for four years, 
 and shall be elected by the qualified electors of the several 
 counties. 
 
 18. The justices of the peace in office when this con- 
 stitution takes effect, shall remain and continue in office 
 for the residue of the terms for which they were respec- 
 tively elected, and they shall continue to be elected in the 
 manner and hold their offices for the term prescribed in 
 the present constitution. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved that the plan be 
 printed and referred to the same committee of the 
 whole as the other reports This was agreed to. 
 ORDER OF BUSINESS. 
 
 The report on this subject was iigain taken up. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to amend the report so as to 
 make the. report on the finances the next business 
 in order, alter the judiciary revolt was disposed of. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to make the report of. 
 the committee on ihe judici-.ry a speci;il order for 
 Monday week. Mr.C did not deMre to be obliged 
 to consider a report before it was printed and before 
 him, to examine and understand it. None of these 
 reports had as yet been punted. He was not able 
 to loreshadow the result of the vote just taken, or 
 to see what influences had brought it about. It , 
 might be the result of a connection ot the legal 
 gentlemen here, of high character, with those 
 who are adverse to all leform in the finances, lo 
 occupy so much of the time with ihis, that the 
 otlier subject would receive the go-by. 
 
 Mr BROWN felt called upon now after what 
 had just fallen trom.the gentleman lo say a word, 
 and before he pioceedt-d, he wished to say that he 
 should not regard this day as altogether lost, if 
 spent in the discussion i.f this question, because 
 the time had ai rived when it became the members 
 of this Convention to stop and make an observa- 
 tion as to their present latitude and longitude. 
 It wiis in vain tor gentleman to say that there was 
 abundant time and opportunity for us to accom- 
 plish all of our business. To be sure there was 
 much business done at the close of the session, 
 but it was always badly done. He was satisfied 
 that all atiempt* to curtail debate would be whol- 
 ly useless, and this had been fully demonstrated 
 here In regard to the appieht nsions of a union 
 to stifle the consideration of the great report on 
 the finances, God forbid that there should be any- 
 thing of the kind. He desired above hll,that ihia 
 financial question should be here settled forever. 
 The judiciary system might be settled by legisla- 
 tive action, but this was a question that could never 
 be settled by any such action. He would say to the 
 gentleman from Otsego, that he (Mr. B.) too, had 
 apprehensions on the subject, and when he saw men 
 of experience introducing here, not for action, but 
 for discussion, a variety of questions purely legis- 
 lative in their character, he feaied that this great 
 
531 
 
 qutsitioii would have been crowded i-ff and fall 
 down altogether. And if we should go home with 
 the mortification of having had the great 
 {or whirl) we were assembled, full down before us, 
 it would he fiorn this very cause. In relation to 
 the vote he had just given, he confessed it was 
 with reluctance, and upon reflection he was not 
 cenairi that he was right in doing so, and there- 
 fore if the pending motion was withdrawn, he 
 would move a recon.-ideration of the vote just 
 taken. Mr. H re lei red to the attempt that had 
 b<-en made to disparage the judiciary committee, 
 as an injustice to them. Most faithfully- and in- 
 dusiriouMv had they labored, and they had agreed 
 upon all the great and material features of a sys- 
 tem, the detail* only being a mat.er of disagree^ 
 ment This he ventured to say would be fully 
 shown when the report came to be considered, 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that personally he felt more 
 interest in the judiciary question than wny other, 
 but he owed a higher duty to his constituents, 
 tnan to be governed by such considerations in 
 adopting an order of business. And he was free 
 to say that he regarded the vote just taken as a 
 portentous one. It was a vote giving precedence 
 t> the rep.;rt of the judiciary over nearly all the 
 other questions which have called this Conven- 
 tion into existence. That report was not first in 
 order of time and important as it is, it was not 
 the question that originated the great popular de- 
 'tnaud for a Convention. Nor was the report 
 printed >er, nor had it been fully examined. Mr. 
 T. referred to the vote just taken, as showing a 
 combination of influences somewhat ominous 
 The rnaj-itity wa^ composed of those, who, it was 
 understood, were mainly opposed to this great 
 measure of fin; nciai reform. Take away from that 
 majoi i! v the gentlemen who com posed I he judiciary 
 committee, and it would be seen that this was so. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON wished to call attention to 
 the business before us. We had voted to-day to 
 make this judiciary report number 3, in the order 
 of business. It was now alleged that this would 
 be taken up to-day. This would depend very 
 much upon the length of speeches made on the 
 order of business. Mr. P. suggested that if this 
 should be made a special order for Monday next, 
 it would then be behind all unfinished business, 
 and might nt be considered for three weeks from 
 that time The Convention should understand 
 this matter before reversing the vote just taken. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that he had made the mo- 
 tion to take up the judiciary report, under the 
 belief that there was a pressing necessity of set- 
 tling upon some order for the sake of expediting 
 business, and for the purpose of bringing that 
 question before the Convention. It was for that 
 purpose, not that he had any preference for the ju- 
 diciary report in the first instance, and because 
 he desired to see the question disposed of at an 
 early day, and before the Convention became ex- 
 cited by the discussion of more exciting topics. 
 He was even now willing that some other report 
 should be brought forward and discussed, but not 
 that of the finances. He had an objection to tak 
 ing up that question first, because it was one of 
 great magnitude, would occupy a long time in 
 discussion, and one that would create some ex- 
 * citement on the minds of members, and during 
 
 he discussion of which very little attention 
 
 would be paid to the report of the judiciary. 
 And all would concur in the necessity of giving to 
 the judiciary report a full and calm discussion 
 free from any such exciting influences. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN opposed the postponement of the 
 judiciary reports to so late a day as Monday week, 
 and went on to urge that some other reason must 
 exist for desiring this postponement, than that 
 members had not read them. All of us had been 
 supplied with newspapers, by the vote of the 
 Convention, and if all had not read them there, he 
 ventured to say that two-thirds of the electors had. 
 He could account for the gentleman from Otsego 
 not having read them, from the great burthen 
 which fell upon him of sustaining his own report 
 on the state departments. He urged that these re- 
 ports should be taken up as soon as the one now . 
 pending was disposed of, and then, if gentlemen 
 desired further time, they could be made unfinish- 
 ed business, and kept within the control of the 
 body. Mr. J. disclaimed having entered into a 
 combination or intrigue to give a precedence to 
 these judiciary reports over that on the finances. 
 He knew of no such combination or conspiracy ; 
 and any such imputation upon him, came from 
 those who did not know him. And for one, he 
 could say that on the great subject of the finan- 
 ces, he came here with as hearty a willingness 
 and desire to have it brought forward and consi- 
 dered as the subject of the judiciary. And when 
 the former came up, he intended to bestow the 
 ame honest attention and thought upon it, that 
 le had sought to give to the judiciary question, 
 ^ot that he intended to speak upon it for he was 
 not familiar with the subject, and he did not be- 
 .ieve the public interest would suffer from his 
 gnorance, for there was a corps of gentlemen, 
 ,vho appeared to consider themselves specially 
 charged with every measure. They had attended 
 to their supposed duties with gre t fidelity, and 
 rather than subjects should not be well consider- 
 ed and well understood, they had fallen into the 
 labit of repeating over and over again not only 
 what others had said, but what themselves had 
 said. Much of the time of the Convention, he 
 regretted to say, had been taken up in this way, 
 as it had a tendency to keep back ideas which oth 
 ers might have broached perhaps to advantage, had 
 not the patience of the body become exhausted 
 "rom the eternal debate about every thing and no- 
 thing. Mr. J. was ready to go on with this great 
 subject of finance. He had looked over the re- 
 port and had already considered the subject. 
 There were many things in the report which he 
 admired, and the necessity of which he was im- 
 pressed with. And he would almost give up the 
 judiciary, the great anchor of the state, if he 
 thought its consideration first would give the 
 financial question the go-by. But he trusted the 
 order assigned to these reports would be adhered 
 to and that the judiciary report would not 
 be postponed to that of finance, in which there 
 probably was combustible material enough to 
 rouse a feeling here incompatible with a calm 
 and proper discussion of the question of the judi- 
 ciary. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that although it was mani- 
 fest to those who had observed the vote just taken, 
 that party lines were nearer drawn than upon any 
 vote that had been yet taken, still he could very 
 
532 
 
 easily account for it without presuming any such 
 connection of action. It resulted simply from the 
 preferences of individuals and the importance 
 which gentlemen of different modes of thinking 
 gave to one subject or the other. He considered 
 the subject of finances the most important, and 
 in drawing up the order of business which had 
 been recommended by the committee, he had 
 sought to divest himself of all individual prefer- 
 ences. And he would say that as a reformer, he 
 had devoted three hours to judicial reform where 
 he ever had one to the subject of finances. His 
 aim was to facilitate business and he supposed 
 that whilst the subject of the judiciary would 
 probably draw out the most debate, there were 
 other matters of engrossing interest on which the 
 public mind was better settled, and which would 
 require less time to adjust here and that these 
 should be disposed of first. At the same time, 
 h,e preferred to make no special orders, but to ad- 
 here to the order laid down heretofore. Mr. L. 
 concluded by moving to postpone this subject un 
 til to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. CHA TFiELD, in order to meet objections, 
 sent up a proposition making the judiciary reports 
 the special order for Monday the 17th inst., 10 
 o'clock, then to take precedence ot all other or- 
 ders or business. Mr. C.went on to explain a re- 
 mark which seemed to have given ofience in cer- 
 tain quarters. He did not intend to charge that 
 there was a combination between the judiciary 
 committee and any party here. He intended lo 
 say that the judiciary committee desired to secure 
 for their report an early consideration, that that 
 would naturally draw to the support of a motion 
 to give it preference, all the members of that com- 
 mittee that there were those who sought that 
 opportunity to accomplish a certain object, that 
 almost all the whig members voted on that side 
 and that all this loreshadowed a disposition to 
 get rid or a certain subject. But he meant to 
 charge no combination upon the judiciary com- 
 mittee. This was not the first time Mr. C. had 
 been lectuied by the gentleman from Columbia 
 who, to carry a certain point had often availed 
 himself ot the feeling here against debate. But 
 Mr. C. was not to be deterred by these castiga- 
 tions from expressing his views here on any sub. 
 ject 111 which he felt an interest and he suffered 
 no man, without replying, to stand up here and 
 attempt to lecture him lor wasting the time of the 
 House,^ especially when reproof came from one 
 who had occupied more time in debate than he 
 had. In the eaily part of the session, that gen- 
 tleman had made as long speeches as any one, 
 and made them more frequently than he (Mr C ) 
 and since then he has taken it upon himself, al- 
 most every day to get up and spend half an hour 
 in lecturing this body. He (Mr. C ) denied him 
 that right. All aie equal here, and he had no 
 more right to arraign him at the bar of the house 
 in accordance with his notions of justice, than had 
 he (Mr. C ) to arraign him. If he (Mr. C ) spent 
 the time ol the House, he was responsible. As to 
 the financial report embarrassing fhe consideration 
 of the judiciary report, even though the former 
 might contain combustible materials, he could 
 not see how that could be the result of its prior 
 consideration. But he had framed his resolution 
 BO that by no possibility could the fhancial report 
 
 override that from the judiciary and with this 
 he hoped gentlemen would be content. 
 
 Mr.. STEPHENS, though he voted to give a 
 preference to the judiciary reports, yet as anoiher 
 had first come from one of the judiciary commit* 
 tees, he was not disposed to precipitate a discus- 
 sion of it, before any of these reports were printed 
 and unless this motion prevailed, we might be 
 called on to.moirow to go into it. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that the gentlemen from 
 Columbia and Dutchess had now been pleased te- 
 state why they desired the judiciary report to 
 have precedence over that on finances. If they 
 had not avowed the reason, he would never have 
 suspected it. The objection was that the subject 
 of finance, as presented in the report, was one that 
 would carry the Convention with inflammatory 
 zeal into the residue of their labors. With all 
 deference to the gentlemen, he could not accord 
 in any such libel on the Convention. This Con- 
 vention to be moved by a debate upon the dull 
 subject of finance, so as not to be able to act with 
 deliberative wisdom on a judicial system f If this 
 report, was combustible, it was not so bad as that 
 argument supposes this Convention to be. Gen- 
 tlemen, in his opinion, were entirely mistaken. 
 He entertained no such suspicions of this body, 
 and it had never entered his head for one moment 
 to suppose that to be the reason why it was de- 
 sired that the judiciary should have precedence, 
 over the finance report. But he differed as much 
 from them in relation to the character of the sub- 
 ject, as he did in relation to the liberality and ca- 
 pacity of the Convention. A subject of finance, 
 an exciting question ! On what subject could a 
 man sleep, if not on the dull subject of finance ? 
 Talk about exciting the Convention by a debate on 
 finances! When or where did that ever happ< n ? 
 $25,000,000 of debt, never to be redeemed and 
 paid, without paying about 40,000,000 of dollars, 
 interest and principal, was that a question to 
 make men mad, to deprive them of judgment, 
 and to incapacitate them from considering se- 
 riously and calmly a judicial system ? If there 
 be any subject calculated to humble us, to bow us 
 down to the earth, and to prostrate us into the 
 ashes and dust of the past, it was the considera- 
 tion of this subject of finance. Heartfelt sorrow, 
 deep, abiding regret for the past, and firm 
 and abiding resolution to do right for the future 
 these were the only feelings that grew out of such 
 a subject. Gentlemen were mistaken in suppos- 
 ing that upon a subject of this dull, death-like 
 and practical nature, they can hurry this Con- 
 vention in the violence of passion. It was not 
 one of those subjects on which the imagination 
 would delight to revel, or the passions exert 
 themselves. So of that other branch of the finan- 
 cial report requiring specific appropriations, and 
 allowing the future, when debts were to be con- 
 tracted, to pass upon the question whether they 
 should be settled on them what was there exci- 
 ting in that ? But it was not the report of the com- 
 mittee or the subject of finance, he apprehended, 
 that excited the fears of gentlemen. He appre- 
 hended that they supposed that he should feel it 
 to be his duty or right to look back into the sour- 
 ces of debts, to condemn the course, and arraign 
 the motives of men, and thus excite the angry- 
 passions of the Convention, If that be the 
 
533 
 
 
 foundation of the fears of gentlemen, then 
 he would say to them that they had never 
 been more mistaken. In a practical matter 
 in rel.tlu'M lo things that have passed, gone 
 by and cannot be iec,-illed, does any man suppose 
 that he was weak enough to seek after motives, 
 where a small .*hare of hypocilsy would non-suit 
 him. Wiih millions ol debt to pay, did the gen- 
 tlemen suppose that he was so weak and feeble, 
 as to endeavor to airaign the past. God forbid 
 that any such error should be committed by any 
 member of the Convention. No, it was Ihe ways 
 and means to pay, the iron screw of taxation, di- 
 rect and indirect, these were the things to be con. 
 sid-T^d. It was wholly immaterial who created 
 the debt, or what were iheir motives. And having 
 disavowed any design as an incendiary, with a 
 financial torch to blow up this splendid edifice ol 
 a judiciaiy system sky-high and having endea- 
 vored to satisfy uentlemen that the subject wasone 
 which could n.ot lead to extreme agitation, he did 
 hope that the judiciary report would not be placed 
 ahead of the finances on the ground of any dread- 
 ed explosion. It was but the weak dream and de. 
 lusion ol the hour, and had no foundation in truth 
 Mr. WORDEN thought really we could get at 
 some order of business. He thought he could see 
 what difficulty lay at the bottom of all this busi- 
 ness. He did not doubt but what the gentleman 
 from Herkirner would meet this question of finance 
 with cool and able argument. So momentous a 
 subject should not be considered under excitement. 
 Mr. W. did not believe party considerations 
 would mingle *iih this question of internal im 
 provements. It was far above all others and 
 small indeed roust that mind be, that would seek 
 thus to narrow it down. He trusted there was no 
 disposition to force upon the Convention unpre- 
 pared, either of the great questions of finance or 
 the judiciary. He for one desired more time to 
 examine the question of finance, and he knew 
 there were others similarly situated. The same 
 remark would apply, in regard to others, to the 
 subject of judicial reform, Propriety, courtesy 
 parliamentary usage then required that we should 
 not be thus precipitated into the discussion of 
 either of these great questions. Could not both 
 parties be accommodated? He trusted that the 
 gentleman from Otsego would add to his resolu. 
 ticn, that immediately after the Judiciary report 
 should be disposed of, the report on Finance 
 should be then considered and acted upon. He 
 made a motion to that effect 
 
 Mr. TILDEN wanted to reverse this and take 
 up the finance report first. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that the 13 members of the 
 judiciary committee had been constantly engaged 
 for 46 days on the subject before them, and had 
 no time to examine this question of finance. 
 Was it more than fair to them to give a little lon- 
 ger time to consider that subject ? 
 
 Mr. TILDEN thought the same objections 
 would apply to the other report. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN remarked that a majo- 
 rity of the Convention could decide what subjects 
 they would take up at any time. Any order, 
 then, we might make would be useless. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought we had better adhere 
 to the decision already made. 
 The debate waa farther continued by Messrs. 
 
 LOOMIS, MANN and TILDEN, when the amend- 
 ment of Mr. WORDEN was agreed to; ayes 56, 
 noes 41. 
 
 AYES-- Messrs. Angel, Archer. Ayrault, F.F. Backus, 
 II. Backus. Baker. Bascom, Bonck, Bowdish Brayton, 
 Brundagc, Bnrr D. D. . amphe 1, Can. it e, Chamberiain, 
 Cook, Crocker, Dana, Dodd Doilon Graham, Hauls, liar- 
 risen, Hawlev, Hotchk^ss, E. Huiitington, Hydr, Jordan, 
 Ramble. Kiikln.rH, Marvin, Maxwell. Miller. Morris, Nich 
 olas, Parish, Patterson, Periniirian, Porter, Rugeles, Sails 
 bury, Sears, Shaver, E Spencer, Stan on, Stow, Strong, 
 Taggart, Van Schoonhoven, Waterbury, \Vorden, A. 
 Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 56. 
 
 NOES Messrs Brown, Cambnleng, R. Campbell, Jr, 
 Chatfield, Clark, Conely, Cornell, Cuddeback, Danlorth, 
 Flanders, Hart, Hoffman, Hunt, Hunter, A Huntinuton, 
 Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Nellis, 
 O'Conor. Perkins, Powers, President, Riker, St. John, San- 
 ford, Shaw, She'don, She ; i8rd, Smith Stephens. Stetson, 
 swackhamer, Tilden, Towusend, White, Willard, Wood 
 - 41. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved further to amend so as to 
 make the judiciary report the special order for 
 Monday next. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved further to amend so as 
 to provide that the consideration of the judiciary 
 report be continued from day to day until dispos- 
 ed of. Agreed to, and 
 
 The resolution of Mr. CHATFIELD, as amen 
 ded was adopted. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved to lay upon the table the 
 report of Mr. LOOMIS' special committee, upon 
 the order of business, which was under consider- 
 ation at the hour of adjournment this morning. 
 Two of the subjects there named had been taken 
 away from it, to be considered next in order suc- 
 cessively, (the judiciary and the canal reports,) 
 and three reports had already been disposed of, 
 (the Executive, Legislature, and State officers). 
 As much had been done as was likely to be pro- 
 fitable in that way. 
 
 The motion was agreed to. 
 
 STATE OFFICERS. 
 
 The report of standing committee No. 6 was 
 taken ui> lor completion. 
 
 Mr. KINGSLEY moved to strike out the first 
 and second sections of the article and insert as 
 follows : 
 
 1. A Secretary of State, Comptroller, Treasurer, At- 
 torney General and State Engineer and Surveyor, shall be 
 chosen at a general election, and shall hold their offices 
 tor two years; but no person shall be elected State Engi- 
 neer and Surveyor who is not a practical Engineer. 
 
 Lst, without a division. 
 
 The second section, as restored and amended, 
 was agretd to 
 
 The question then recurred upon the adoption 
 of the first section. 
 
 Mr. TrtLLMADGE moved to amend by adding 
 the woid " compensation" after " perquisites." 
 His object was to prevent the Legislature Irom 
 putting, in extra compensation in ihe annual sup- 
 ply bill, as ihev had b-en in the habit of doing. 
 
 Mr. HAVVLEY,to.show that such had been the 
 practice of the Legislature heretofore, read Imm 
 the Assembly journal of J843. This subject could 
 not be too well guarded, and he hoped the amend, 
 ment would be made. 
 
 The motion was agreed to. 
 
534 
 
 Mr. CH ATFIELD moved to strike oifl the word 
 "general" before "election" in the third line. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Several verbal alterations were made, and the 
 section was adopted. 
 
 The thini section was then read. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to strike out the salary of 
 the canal commissioners. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM proposed the following a a sub. 
 Stitute for the whole section :. 
 
 ^ 3. Two Canal Commissioners shall be chosen or ap 
 pointed, who shall hold their offices for four years, except 
 one of those first to he chosen or appointed, who shall hold 
 for two years. The two first chosen or appointed shall by 
 lot determine which shall hold for two years and which 
 for four years. 
 
 Mr. CH ATFIELD defended the report as it 
 originally stood, upon the same grounds that he 
 did when in commit'ee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that in his judgment, 
 if anything of the' kind was to be adopted, the sec- 
 tion as originally reported by the committee was 
 the best thing of the kind that could be adopted. 
 But still he thought that the whole matter ought 
 to be stricken out, and left entirely to the legis- 
 lature to appoint, or not, as heretofore, as they 
 thought proper. These officers had never been 
 recognized as State officers by the Constitution ; 
 and he thought it quite unnecessary that they 
 should be so now. Possibly, a greater or less 
 number than three might be required hereafter 
 to perform these duties; and therefore the legis- 
 lature should have the power to increase or di- 
 minish the number hereafter as might be deemed 
 necessary. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM desired to have the section 
 stricken out; and then the entire subject would 
 be left to the legislature. At the same time, he 
 wished so to arrange the term of their duties, 
 provided they should be made State officers by 
 the Constitution, that considerable expense might 
 be saved to the. State by the motion. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD defended the report. He 
 had supposed that it was the duty of the commit- 
 tee having this matter in charge, to provide for 
 the appointment of all the officers of the state go- 
 vernment. They had believed that such was the 
 strong desire of the people of the state and there- 
 fore they had inserted this section. It was true 
 that in the old Constitution there was no pro- 
 vision made for these officers, but there was a 
 good reason for that. The canal policy was not 
 settled at that time ; the canals were finished sub- 
 sequent to the completion of the Constitution. 
 Now it was an endeavor on the part of the com- 
 mittee to get rid of the non-acting canal commis- 
 sioners so that the state should pay for no more 
 persons than were necessary to perform the du- 
 ties which legitimately devolved on their canal 
 officers. Gentlemen had spoken as it at some pe- 
 riod these officers could be dispensed with. That 
 time he believed would never arrrive ; we should 
 always have from 600 to 700 miles of canals in 
 the state to be taken care of. The election of 
 these officers by joint ballot of the legislature the 
 committee had desired to prevent. And he was 
 convinced that if the Convention should adopt 
 this section none of the evils heretofore complain- 
 ed of or now alluded to would occur, and he hoped 
 that they would retain the section as reported. 
 Mr. PERKINS said that the small amount of a 
 
 salary of $1600 for a canal commissioner was a 
 trifling affair to discuss so long about, when $600,- 
 000 were annually expended on the canals. And 
 an individual owning property equal in value to 
 the New York state canals, which extended over 
 800 miles, and requiring such constant super- 
 vision, and which cost as he had said $600,000 for 
 repairs why a man who owned this would be 
 set down as a crazy man who did not have at least 
 one general superintending officer or agent to 
 every 250 miles of its distance, and especially aa 
 he was to spend $200,000 a year on its repairs. 
 He hoped the motion would not prevail. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM'S motion was lost. 
 
 A verbal amendment was made to strike out 
 " shall hold his office" in fourth line. Adopted. 
 
 The section was then agreed to. 
 
 The 4th section was read. 
 
 Mr. TAGG ART moved to strike out in the 12th 
 line all relating to the pay of the state prison in- 
 spectors. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that he would move 
 to strike out the whole section. All they had 
 done in the whole of this bill was a nullity. He 
 understood that there were now five inspectors to 
 each prison, and if these three were appointed, 
 the legislature would appoint as many more ; at 
 least there would be nothing to prevent them. 
 And we might as well allow the whole question 
 to remain with the governor and legislature, who 
 would manage the whole matter connected with 
 the prisons wisely, he did not doubt, and to them 
 it belonged to do it. He did not like the idea of 
 electing officers of this description. It would, in 
 the end lead to very great abuses ; and ought to 
 be inserted in the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS considered these prison inspec- 
 tors to be a department not administrative, but 
 governmental in its character, and as such he ap- 
 prehended, they should derive their authority di- 
 rectly from the people. Hitherto there had been 
 great complaint in relation to these officers, as to 
 the manner of the appointment, and the manage, 
 ment of the prison. He thought there should be 
 some change made from the present system. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said the science of prison dis- 
 cipline was but in an imperil ct state, and there 
 was as much room for improvement there, as in 
 any other science. To continue this Inspec- 
 lion system, and to make fixed and per- 
 manent in the Constitution, would be to prevent 
 any change which might perhaps become neces- 
 sary. There were no inspectors in the Clinton 
 Prison, and he had never heard any complaint of 
 the management there. There, the system work- 
 ed admirably. As to how the system operated at 
 Sing Sing and Auburn, where there were inspec- 
 tors, all were aware of the complaints that exist- 
 ed. He would therefore prefer to leave this mat- 
 ter to the legislature, subject to variation by the 
 advancement of the science of prison discipline, 
 rather than to make it permanent in the Consti- 
 tution. Mr. S. went on to urge that the same 
 reason which would apply to making the Prison 
 Inspectors elective, would apply also to the 
 managers of the Lunatic Asylum. He feared also 
 than the chances would be against a nominating 
 Convention, called mainly for a different and 
 more prominent object, acting with that accurate 
 
535 
 
 knowledge necessary for the selection of a man of 
 science to manage these prisons. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that he should prefer 
 to have three inspectors, one for each prison. As 
 to the question of his appointment, whether elect- 
 ive or by the Governor a:id Senate, he should 
 not argue that question now, for he presumed thai 
 the mind of every man was made up as to how- 
 he should vote. Mr. P. thought in relation to the 
 Auburn orison, there was too much power vested 
 in the agent too much for one man. He pre. 
 1'erred rather to have three inspectors and those 
 to be elected by the people. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS believed that our present state 
 prison system was wholly inadequate, and that 
 there was much room for improvement. He was 
 therefore opposed to fixing a permanent system 
 in the Constitution. From his own observation, 
 Mr. M. said he was convinced that the results of 
 our present system, was but to increase crime 
 and to educate criminals. The prisoners now to 
 besuie, were not allowed to talk to each other, 
 but they knew each other, and remembered each 
 other after they 1< ft the prison. During the time 
 he was recorder of New York, there was scarce a 
 prisoner convicted of a higher grade of crime, 
 who had not previously been in the state prison. 
 And where a new one was caught, the commis. 
 sion of the crime was traced directly to his asso 
 ciation with a previous convict. The present 
 state prison was nothing but a school to educate 
 villains. A convict who should leave there de- 
 termined to reform, would be traced out by some 
 brother convict and be preyed upon and again led 
 into the commission of the crime. He trusted the 
 time was not far distant when there would be a 
 thorough reform, and when the person convicted 
 a second time should be banished. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE again explained that his 
 object in making the motion was, that he did not 
 desire to see this loathsome subject of State Pri- 
 sons talked of, and mixed up with other questions 
 at our elections. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD felt none of that morbid 
 sensitiveness in talking about our state prisons, 
 which gentlemen seemed to feel. He was sorry 
 human nature was so bad as it is, but it was so, 
 and there must be places of confinement of crimi- 
 nals in order to protect society. Mr. C. alluded 
 to the almost unlimited power these inspectors 
 possessed over the convicts, their influence as 
 the disbursers of large amounts of patronage and 
 of money, and urged that therefore they should 
 be made directly responsible to the people. 
 These criminals deprived as they miaht be, were 
 still men, and should be treated as such, and the 
 direct responsibility of the inspectors to the peo- 
 ple would induce them to see that they were thus 
 treated. As to the prison system, if it was bad, 
 there was the more propriety in adopting some- 
 thing better. This system of election would not 
 prevent the adoption of any improvement or ame- 
 lioration of prison discipline, but would rather 
 aid such an advance. 
 
 Mr. St. JOHN moved that the Convention ad- 
 journ. Agreed to. 
 
 And the Convention adjourned to 9 o'clock to- 
 morrow morning. 
 
 FRIDAY, (56th day,) August 7. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. MILES. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said he. rose to a question of 
 privilege. He had not troubled the convention 
 with any of the mistakes that had occurred in re- 
 porting his remarks, because in the main he was 
 not dissatisfied. But the report in question was 
 calculated to place him in a false light in refer- 
 ence to a matter where he was desirous that his 
 opinions should not be misapprehended. The 
 letter writer of the New York Tribune had stated 
 that he (Mr. S.) was opposed to the abolition of 
 the Inspection Laws, and a little farther down in 
 his communication he had stated that he (Mr. S.) 
 introduced an amendment providing for their fur- 
 ther continuance. This exposition of his views, 
 and of his amendment, were erroneous, and 
 he believed -was mistakabiy so. His view 
 was that it was not judicious -to keep a con- 
 stitutional provision to the effect thai no in- 
 spection laws should be established hereafier. 
 What mignt be the necessities of trade, they could 
 not foresee. These were ever varying in their de- 
 tails, though resulting from the operation of the 
 same great principles, and he would leave a flexi- 
 ble rule that would bend to the wants of our com- 
 merce, as those wanis might arise. But for tne 
 sake of liberty ot trade, he would secure, by Con- 
 stitutional provision, the citizen against all com- 
 pulsory inspections of his property, and he would 
 restrain any infringement of iiis light to procure 
 an inspection of his properly by whomsoever he 
 might see fit. So he had expressed himself, and 
 so he desired to be understood. 
 
 Mr DANA presented a memorial from Madison 
 county, on the canal policy, piaying for the com- 
 pletion of the works. Referred to the committee 
 of the whole having that subject in charge. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN offered the following resolution, 
 which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to furnish 
 to this Convention a statement of the amount oi'salt duiies 
 received in each year by the State prior to the year 1S17, 
 and the amount of specific appropriations out of such du- 
 ties, and the objects of such appropriations, and of the 
 years in which they were made. Also a statement of the 
 nett amount of salt duties received into the State Treasury 
 since the year 1836. Also, a statement of the amount of 
 auction duties received in each year by the State, prior to 
 the year 1817. and the amount of specific appropiiations 
 out oi such duties, and the objects of such appropriati ^ns 
 and of the years in which they were made. Also a state- 
 ment of the nett amount of auction duties received in each 
 year by the State since the year 1836. 
 
 In reply to a question of Mr TOWNSEND, 
 Mr. W. remarked that the Comptroller had already 
 reported the amount received between the years 
 1 SI 7 and 1836. 
 
 STATE OFFICERS. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to the conside- 
 ration of the report of committee No 6. 
 
 The question was upon striking out the section 
 which authorises the election by the people ol 
 three inspectors of the State prisons. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS wished to know how could these 
 three inspectors better remedy the evils com- 
 plained of than the present officers of the State 
 prison ? Is it contemplated that these men should 
 reside at the prison, and one to be at each prison? 
 If so, you will only supply the place of the pre- 
 sent keeper. Are they to be travelling 400 miles 
 from one prison to another, on a continual cir- 
 
 
536 
 
 cult ? If they do, they will not be equal to every 
 contingency. If they are to make laws to regu- 
 late the prison, they must meet and confer. Per- 
 sons could be 'found residing near these prisons, 
 who would cheerfully devote their attention to 
 these prisons for a small compensation. The 
 great trouble is, these inspectors have mainly the 
 appointment of all the prison officers. That cre- 
 ates the main difficulties. Take these executive 
 powers away from them and let there be local 
 inspectors to provide rules and regulations only 
 for the government of the prison and the improve- 
 ment of the prisoners. But he wanted no such 
 provision inserted in the Constitution ; for this 
 was a matter of mere legislation, and public 
 opinion was yet by no means matured on this sub- 
 ject of prison discipline. The present inspectors 
 are paid less than the three new ones proposed. 
 He saw nothing but evil in this proposition ; and 
 he was opposed to incorporating any provision 
 connected with the prison system, in the Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said the cure of lunatics was 
 much in advance of the cure of the moral disea- 
 ses of thieves ; but this has been done by private 
 competition, among the proprietors of Lunatic 
 Asylums. If we could get a remarkable expert 
 to cure thieves as cleverly as they did madness, 
 why he hoped that this expert would be obtained 
 and sent to the State prisons to cure thieves. He 
 did not know but that the old nurses the old 
 women in the Asylums cured the crazy men 
 first rate ; whether these old women were good 
 old nursing politicians or no, he could not tell. 
 But he knew that most of the inspectors of the 
 State prisons, at present were old nursing politi- 
 cians. He did not know whether the people had 
 not been humbugged by the keeper of the Clinton 
 State prison or not about the quantity of ore to 
 be found there or not. But the sums expended 
 for building all these prisons had been so large 
 that it was necessary to have three disinterested 
 inspectors like those in the report to look after 
 those matters. Great reformation was wanted in 
 this matter. Will you do it ? He could not see 
 that the election of these inspectors would at all 
 interfere with the adoption of any new or impro- 
 ved system. The present system with local boards 
 surrounded by various influences and having much 
 patronage was decidedly objectionable. 
 
 The motion to strike out was lost ayes 30, 
 nays 61. 
 
 Mr. STETSON then moved that the three man- 
 a-ers of the Lunatic Asylum at Utica shall be 
 efected by the people, so as to harmonize with all 
 the other parts ; in like manner and with like 
 powers, and also the Health Commissioners in 
 New-York. He did this to destroy the great cen- 
 tral power here. 
 
 Mr. UHATblELD Inked what the gentleman 
 wanted to do by electing these officers ? Did he 
 want to take the Lvmalic Asylum in charge. 
 
 Mr. 8TKTSON: This w.,s built with the pub 
 lie money; it is a State institution; there was a 
 great de'al of patronage connected with it; and 
 this iremend. us central j owrr at Albany should 
 be roofed out. And he hoped ihis would be done. 
 The people were as capable of judging who was 
 fit for this office as for any other, 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to add after the word 
 
 'therein" the following: "Subject to such re- 
 gulations as maybe provided bv law." Agreed to. 
 
 The 5th section was then read. 
 
 Mr. CHATF1KLD moved to amend so as to re- 
 store the words " State Engineer and Surveyor" 
 in the 5th and 7fh section. It was agreed to. 
 
 Mr- WORDEN moved to amend the 5th section; 
 but withdrew it for the present. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to strike out the whole 
 section. (It related to the Canal Board, &c.) 
 He wished all this matter left to the Legislature; 
 leave it where it always has been, and nofiomake 
 it a Constitutional provision. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD wanted these high officers to 
 be elected by the people to be subservient only 
 to the control of the Legislature. He would 
 not have the control of these funds at all within 
 the power of the legislature. If they should find 
 a Board that was impracticable they might abol- 
 ish it. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN had no objection to the present 
 organization. But it might be advisable to change 
 it hereafter, and it had better be left where it was 
 a statutory provision. 
 
 The motion of Mr. MARVIN was negatived. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN offered the following as 6 : 
 
 ^6. The powers and duties of the Commissioners of the 
 Land Office of the Canal Fund, the Canal Commissioners, 
 and the Canal Board, shall be prescribed and regulated by 
 law. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN explained his design in offering 
 this section. These Commissioners had the con- 
 trol of large sums of money. In past years, it 
 amounted to between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000, 
 and sometimes has run up to $3,500,000. It may be 
 proper at some time hereafter, to require security 
 of the officers. It had not been thought neces- 
 sary heretofore. He only desired to confer upon 
 the legislature power to regulate this whole mat- 
 ter as they might find it to be necessary. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said he did not attain his 
 objectto put it in the power of legislature to obtain 
 security from each of these persons individually ; 
 it would only prescribe what these persons should 
 do in their collective capacity ; and the legisla- 
 ture have now the power to prescribe their du- 
 ties and require them to take security. And if 
 this is required it is quite as proper to have it in- 
 serted that the legislature shall have power over 
 each one of these individually. This amendment 
 would not allow the legislature to require secu- 
 rity from those officers. He supposed that the 
 legislature had now all the power which would 
 be conferred by this proposed section, and it 
 would be entirely a work of supererogation to 
 adopt it. The legislature, if they were allowed to 
 prescribe the powers and duties of these boards 
 collectively, would also have control over them 
 individually ; and might, if they chose, require 
 them to give security. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN wanted it inserted in the Con- 
 stitution that these individuals shall be controlled 
 by the L^gislaiuie in every respect. Arid if his 
 friend troin Oneida (Mr. KIRKLAND) was right, 
 then this section could do no harm. These bodies, 
 deriving their powers' from the Constitution, might 
 claim that ihe Legislatuie had no control whatever 
 over them. This was a disputed question, and he 
 wanted it asseited positively in the Constitution, 
 that the Legislature had this power, or should have 
 
537 
 
 it. This was much better in order to prevent dis- 
 putes of any kind from arising hereafter. It could 
 do no harm and might do much good 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said these Canal Commis- 
 sioners are now required to give bail in $'20,000. 
 And yet as may be seen by the law, they are pro- 
 hibited from holding over $10,000 at any one 
 time. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN had not denied that. He re- 
 ferred to the Commissioners of the Canal Fund. 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL jr. further objected that this 
 would require the legislature to re-enact all the 
 laws now in existence on these subjects. 
 
 Mr. BAKER, to obviate this objection, moved 
 to amend by inserting before "prescribed by law" 
 in Mr. WORDEN'S amendment, the words " as 
 they now are or hereafter may be." 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that the le- 
 gislature having full control whenever the Con- 
 stitution did not expressly forbid them to act, that 
 therefore this provision was wholly unnecessary. 
 
 After some further debate, by Messrs. WOR- 
 DEN, LOOMIS, SALISBURY and VAN 
 SCHOONHOVEN, 
 
 Mr. BAKER, to obviate still another objection 
 which he had urged, moved the following substi- 
 tute for the section of Mr. WORDEN. 
 
 The powers and duties of the respective boards, and of 
 the several officers in this article mentioned, shall be 
 such as now are or hereafter may be prescribed by law. 
 
 This was accepted by Mr. W., and adopted, 
 ayes 36, nays 30. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote on the second section, for the purpose of mo- 
 ving a substitute. He thought there should be 
 some general provision for the removal of officers 
 elected by the people. So far as his observation 
 extended, financial officers of the various states, 
 and of the United States, were appointed either 
 by the Governor and Senate or by the legislature, 
 and were thus amenable to some power. 
 
 The CHAIR informed the gentleman that he 
 was not in order, a re-consideration requiring a 
 day's previous notice. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS would vary his motion so as to 
 be in order. He would move his amendment, as 
 follows, as an additional section to the article : 
 
 The Governor, Lieut. Governor and Chief Justice of the 
 Court of Appeals, shall constitute a commission ior hearing 
 and investigating all suspicions and charges of embezzle 
 ment, fraud, oppression, gross neglect, or other malversa- 
 tion in office, oi all officers (except judicial) whose pow- 
 ers and duties are not local, and who shall be elected at 
 general elections. They shall have power at all times to 
 compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of 
 papers; to examine books, accounts, acts and omissions of 
 such oiiicers. They may, under such regulations as shall 
 be prescribed by law, remove such officers and appoint 
 others in their places, but beiore any such officer shall be 
 removed, he shall be furnished with a copy of the charges 
 made against him, and be heard in his defence. Upon the 
 removal of any such officer, a copy of the charges and 
 the evidence taken in support of the same, shall be tiled in 
 the office of the Secretary of State. Officers appointed by 
 any body or board ol public officers may be removed under 
 such regulations as may be prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. P. supported his amendment. Some pro- 
 vision more stringent than impeachment was ne- 
 cessary to secure the proper operation of the Con- 
 stitution in this respect. There had been no case 
 of impeachment ever attempted in this state with- 
 in his recollection, although members of the le- 
 gislature have been expelled for malversation, and 
 
 42 
 
 this because of the expense of the impeachment 
 and its delays. Mr. P. at some length pointed 
 out the advantages that would result from the 
 adoption of the principle involved in his amend- 
 ment, as contrasted with the inadequateness of 
 the section as it now stood. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON suggested that this amend- 
 ment would conflict with the section allowing 
 the governor alone to suspend the state*treasurer, 
 until the meeting of the legislature. In order to 
 afford time for examination, he would suggest that 
 the report and amendment should be laid on the 
 table and printed. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS was willing to accede to any 
 course that the Convention might determine in 
 regard to it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON urged that from the num- 
 ber and complicated character of the amendments 
 that had already been adopted, that the report 
 should be printed before action was had upon the 
 amendment of Mr. P. He made that motion. 
 
 The motion was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN laid on the table 
 a reconsideration of the section proposed. 
 
 RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF THE CITIZEN. 
 
 The Convention then went into committtee of 
 the whole, Mr. MARVIN in the chair, on the un- 
 finished business, being the report of committee 
 No. 11. 
 
 The first section, as follows, Being under con- 
 sideration : 
 
 ^ 1. Men are by nature free and independent, and in their 
 social relations entitled to equal rights. 
 
 The question pending was on the motion of Mr. 
 BASCOM to insert the words *' and political" af- 
 ter the word 4< social" in the second line of the 
 first section, 
 
 Mr TALLMADGE, as the chairman of the com- 
 mittee number eleven, made a general explana- 
 tion of the provisions of this article. He said it 
 was discussed in committee with great freedom, 
 and the majority agreed to every section j and the 
 out-voted minority yielded with good temper. He 
 commended the spirit in which the committee had 
 conducted its deliberations. He said at the open- 
 ing of the business of the committee there was 
 presented to it the. bill of rights, consisting of 
 nearly three pages of the Revised Laws; but the 
 committee thought that matter had better be left 
 untouched by this Convention. The majority had 
 inserted the two first sections, which were mere 
 abstractions, which might be rejected without in- 
 jury to the aiticle. At the proper time, he should 
 move to strike out those sections. The third sec- 
 tion had been altered simply by striking out the 
 words " or the judgment of his peers." He poin- 
 ted out those sections which were incorporated 
 into the constitution of 1777, and afterwards into 
 that of 1821 from Magna Charta, which, for the 
 benefit of the lay member*, he explained to betha 
 charter of British liberties which was wresttd 
 from the despotism of the Sovereign, by the Bar- 
 ons, in 1215, the great epoch of British freedom, 
 and the commencement of the freedom now en 
 joyed in the civilized world. He mentioned the 
 fact that this historical event was commemorated 
 by a monument on the road leading from London to 
 Windsor Castle, a simple inscription of the rnemor. 
 able period being preserved on a boulder stone. Af 
 
538 
 
 tera period ot nearly 6l)0 years had elapsed, cam 
 the declaration of independence ot this country as 
 result of the first declaration ot independence 
 Magna Charta and hence he justified the inco 
 poration of this section in our constitution. H 
 said it might he pie sing to see the progress o 
 time in liberal principles; by turning to sectio 
 three, which was as follows: 
 
 ' No melfiber of this State shall be disfranchised, or de 
 prived of the rights and privileges secured to any citize 
 thereof, unless by the law of the land." 
 
 And then to section 13, of the constitution o 
 1777, the difference would be seen. In the lat 
 ter the citizens were spoken of as the " subjects 
 of this State, showing at that time they had no 
 got the phrases of liberty. The words which th 
 committee had striken out " or the judgment c 
 his peers," the committee thought an unmeaninj 
 phrase, which if reported now would bespeak 
 distinction which we do not recognise. Heshoulc 
 however hereafter move an amendment of the 
 section by striking out the words " unless by the 
 law of the land," and insert a substitute which he 
 had prepared, to restrain the legislature in its ac 
 tions on individual rights. He next passed to tht 
 4th section, which guaranties the trial by jury. 
 The old section the committee had altered by in 
 troducing the words " right of" before the word: 
 " trial by jury ;" the object being to enlarge th< 
 expression, but from the views of the committee, 
 he expressed his dissent. He also expressed his 
 belief that the system might be rendered less op- 
 pressive on jurors; by diminishing the number 
 required in the trial for certain cases. Passing 
 on to the 9th section, he pointed out an addition 
 which the committee had made to secure to a par- 
 ty on trial the right " to appear in person and 
 with counsel." This was found necessary in 
 consequence of certain ancient judges hav- 
 ing prohibited an accused party appearing 
 in person when he appeared by council. 
 The rotmnittwe thought a person on trial should 
 be allowed to take part in his defence even when 
 aided by counsel. The addition in the 12th, 13th 
 and 14th lines he explained to be necessary, illus- 
 trating it by an example from proceedings in a 
 case of usury. The words introduced were '* nor 
 in any case to subject himself to a penally or for- 
 feiture, or any lss or deprivation in the nature ot 
 a penalty or forfeiture," v\hich were inserted after 
 the words. " no person shall he subject to be com- 
 pelled to be a witness against himself in any 
 ciiminal case.'' He said no man should be com- 
 pelled to be put in peiil even in the capacity o! a 
 witness. The tenth section relates to the trial by 
 jury. He recounted the struggles recorded in his. 
 lory to obtain the treedom ot the press, from a pe- 
 riod anterior to the publication of Junius' letters 
 and the mobs ol London, coming down to the ef- 
 forts of Fox, the British statesman, and to the ar- 
 guments of Hamilton and Spencer in this capitol 
 on the trial tor libel of Mr. Croswell. father of 
 one of the reporters of this Convention, when the 
 great Hamilton put forth all his mighty energies 
 to des'roy the old and now exploded maxim, " the 
 greater the truth, the greater the libel. 8 ' In the 
 Convention of 1881, the article in relation to li 
 bel was incorporated into our Constitution, 
 which allowed the truth to be given in evi 
 dence to the jury, they to judge of the law and 
 
 the fact. He considered that section as the 
 proudest monument of liberty we possessed. 
 But in the recent cases ot libel in which Mr. 
 Cooper had been engaged, circumstances had oc- 
 curred, which showed a necessity for the amelioi a- 
 tionottheiaw of libel. The" committee were 
 unanimous in favor of such amelioration, but a 
 majority out- voting him had inserted the woids 
 "and in civil actions." Mr. T. had differed trom 
 them, not because he was opposed to amelioration 
 but because he feared this would abridge the priv- 
 ileges of the defendant. He gave his view sot the 
 operation of this amendment, remarking that he 
 believed the section was broad enough in the 
 present Constitution. But any member who 
 could suggest an amendment that would secure 
 all the privileges of the citizen in this particular, 
 should have his support. The llth section which 
 relates to the taking of private property for pub- 
 lic use, had been amended by a provision that 
 the legislature shall provide for determinir.g the 
 damage where the property is taken for the use of 
 the state. Also, that the legislature may pro- 
 vide for the opening of private roads in case a 
 iury of freeholders shall deteinaine the road nec- 
 essary. The committee had also provided, to ob- 
 viate the complaints now made of inability to 
 obtain compensation after it has been assessed 
 and execution issued, that the compensation 
 shall be ''first made therefor," so that lime 
 vould not be lost and expense incurred in use- 
 ess litigation. The provision in relation to pri- 
 vate roads was made to guard, by the Consti- 
 tution, against what was deemed an erroneous 
 principle which had been established by a re- 
 cent decision of the Supreme Court, as found in 
 Hill's reports. Mr. T. next came to the 12th 
 section, which prohibits the imprisonment of 
 witnesses in criminal cases. The committee 
 vere unanimous in this". He pointed out the 
 gross wrongs now perpetrated. In point of truth, 
 witnesses entering complaints were imprisoned 
 more days than the persons accused by them of 
 crime. If the witness was transient, or unable 
 o give bail, the magistrate imprisoned him. 
 n hen came the long delays of the law, the poor 
 witnesses in the meantime suffering in jail, with- 
 out a friend to help or pity. Mr. T. referred 
 o the laws authorizing such commitments. He 
 vould not impugn the motives of the magistrates 
 rvho had acted under this law. Now for the 
 >ractice. These gentlemen rogues were an or- 
 anized corps, and came to the rescue of each 
 ther. They knew the laws much better than 
 ounsel, and honest men who paid their debts 
 nd staid at home. Residents of New York 
 nd the other large cities would go unharmed 
 lut the traveller from a distance, when crossing 
 he ferry to New- York, was almost sure to lose 
 is pocket-book, unless he kept his hand on it 
 ontinually. Now for the result. The pick- 
 ocket hands the pocket-book to a confederate, 
 /ho is ready to go his bail. But the poor non- 
 esident, who has been robbed, has no friends, 
 nd he must go to jail, while the robber is at large, 
 eing bailed by his accomplice, who holds the 
 ocket-book in pledge. That was one beautiful 
 jeration of our present criminal jurisprudence, 
 "r. T. would cite one or two of the many in- 
 ances of gross outrages which had been com- 
 
539 
 
 tnitted under this clause authorizing the impris- 
 onment of witnesses. Three villians committed 
 a rape upon a woman, just north of the city of 
 Albany, in what are called the Patroon's woods. 
 She was a cook upon one of the canal boats, 
 and was therefore considered by the magistrate 
 a transient person; and upon her entering com- 
 plaint against the villians, she was committed to 
 the jail in this city, while the rascals were ena- 
 bled to obtain bail, and had never been brought 
 to trial. That poor woman lay in jail fifteen 
 months, and, until through the intervention of 
 himself, as chairman of this committed, she was 
 at length set at liberty. Not only was our state 
 disgraced with such a law, but he would refer 
 to similar scenes in other states. In Baltimore, 
 a rape was committed by eight desperate vil- 
 lains upon a poor German girl, who had been 
 but a short time in that city. She was in com- 
 pany with her cousin, who strove all in his pow- 
 er to protect her from outrage, and was himself 
 badly beaten. Behold the result The poor girl 
 and her protector were imprisoned, while the 
 eight villains obtained bail, and were at large. 
 Eighteen months passed by before one of them 
 was brought to trial ; and during all this time the 
 poor witnesses were compelled to associate in jail 
 with rofies and felons. The one tried was con- 
 victed, but after three or four day's imprison- 
 ment he was pardoned. The witnesses were 
 still left in jail, until rescued by the German So- 
 ciety, when the city of Baltimore paid the young 
 man $100 and the girl $50, for the detention of 
 eighteen months. The 13th section relates to im- 
 prisonment for debt, &c., the committee deeming 
 it proper to maltf; it a constitutional provision. 
 But if it werr deemed proper, to leave it to the 
 legislature, this section could be stricken out. 
 The 14th section relates to the rights of married 
 .women, which he explained at some length; al- 
 so the nature of the marriage contract, as viewed 
 at different periods and in different countries. 
 The latter sections of this article, he said it was 
 not necessary to explain, inasmuch as they were 
 taken from the old constitution. 
 
 The question recurred on the amendment pro- 
 posed by Mr. BASCOM, to insert the word " po- 
 litical and" before " social" so that it should 
 read, 
 
 " Men arc by nature free and independent, and in their 
 political and social relations entitled to equal rights." 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said he hoped that after the elo- 
 qn^nt exposition of the venerable chairman of the 
 committee, it would not be necessary to say a 
 word in favor of so simple and self-evident pro- 
 position as that men were entitled to equal po- 
 litical rights. We derived our right to sit here, 
 we derived all our political rights from their fear- 
 less publication by the Declaration of Indepen- 
 dence. If the time had come when such a body 
 of men as this feared to say that the political 
 rights of men were equal, for one he desired to 
 know it. To ascertain whether this was so, was 
 one of his purposes in offering the amendment 
 that had produced so much sensation. He should 
 embrace the opportunity that this section afforded 
 to express his opinion by his vote unless by the 
 arbitrary application of rules of order he should 
 be prevented, and he intended gentlemen who 
 dared to vote that men were not entitled td equal 
 
 political rights should have the opportunity. 
 
 The motion of Mr. BASCOM was negatived 
 ayes 33, noes 42. 
 
 Mr. BURR moved as a substitute for the first 
 section the following : 
 
 Men are created equal and are endowed by their Cre- 
 ator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, 
 liberty and the pursuit of happiness." 
 
 The CHAIR said this was not then in order. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved to strikeout the word "so. 
 cial" and insert " political" Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER moved as a substitute for the 
 first section the whole of the first clause of the 
 Declaration of Independence. 
 
 A VOICE: Why not move to insert the whole 
 Declaration of Independence? 
 
 Mr LOOMIS here raised a point of order which 
 he wished to have decided for the government of 
 the Convention hereafter. He insisted that a mo- 
 tion to strike out had precedence. 
 
 The CHAIR decided to the contrary. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS appealed from this decision. 
 After some conversation on the point of order, the 
 decision ot the Chair was sus'ained. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN, did not believe that what 
 could justly be called abstractions, should be plac- 
 ed in the Constitution. Some matter that could 
 be applied to practice would be better. He had 
 supposed that this section was not an abstraction, 
 but meant something. In every government there 
 was danger that the class which may with pro- 
 priety be called the non-governing class., may 
 have a class of laws applied to them, which the 
 governing class would not enact for themselves. 
 In other countries this had been so common that 
 it would be extraordinary to find in any instance 
 that the governing class have laid down the same 
 rule for themselves, as for the others. In this 
 county the practice had in general been the oth- 
 er way. In some of the States of this Union how- 
 ever, the rule has not been so closely observed, 
 and there has been a time in the history of this 
 State when the rule had no application, and the 
 voting classes had sometimes applied to those who 
 were not voters, a rule which they would not 
 have applied to themselves. In another part of 
 the report, attention is called to a single class of 
 cases of the kind. By the common law, a woman 
 was a human being entitled to dower, if she could 
 stand out and resist its conveying away under 
 such chastisement with a rod of moderate size, as 
 the husband might choose to inflict upon her. By 
 the introduction of the Roman civil law, the court 
 of chancery, after about three hundred years of 
 labor, contrived to a considerable extent to re- 
 store a married woman or those who might 
 thereafter be married, to the condition of a human 
 being, giving her some rights of property, real 
 and personal, and some powers of government 
 and administration over it, under the regulation 
 of trustees. In 1830, in the revision of the laws 
 of the State, the legislature whether by design or 
 accident is not now material to enquire, substan- 
 tially brought back a woman to her condition un- 
 der the common law that of a human being en- 
 titled to dower if she could resist such a flagella- 
 tion with a rod ot moderate size as her lawful 
 husband should apply to her. At the ensuing 
 session, the legislature, to some limited extent, 
 consented to the exercise of trustees for the benefit 
 
 
540 
 
 of married women. But it was to a very limi- 
 ted extent indeed, and entirely unequal to the 
 wants of a highly civilized society. When he 
 read this clause, he supposed it was inserted 
 here to assert in strong and plain terms the 
 principle that the non-voting classes in this 
 State should hold their rights under the same 
 laws as those who are are voters, and he would 
 submit that if the sentence could be made expres- 
 sive of such opinion, it would be of great practi- 
 cal use. He had alluded to one of the instances 
 where the rights of non-voters have been invaded, 
 but there were others to which he begged leave 
 lo call attention, equally requiring the establish- 
 ment of this rule. We are a highly commercial 
 people, and we design to be the broker, the me- 
 chanic, the carrier, so lar as we can, for every 
 part of this great union. Often, very often, to 
 immense amounts, the rights of property of those 
 who are not voters must be committed to our 
 charge, and under the jurisdiction of our laws. 
 Was it not best for us then, if we could do so, in- 
 stead of making an abstraction of this clause to 
 make it a practical rule. So that all property in 
 this situation confided to us, while it is here, 
 should be held and protected precisely as it 
 would be if it was the property ot resident citi- 
 zens and voters. Would we not in this matter 
 correct all temptations at times to force unnecessa- 
 ry taxation upon it, to the injury of oui commerce 
 and trade? Was it not worth while then, instead of 
 regarding the section as an abstraction, to be 
 amended by some other abstraction, to adopt some 
 practical rule, asser'ing the principle he had re- 
 ierred to? He had supposed that such was the in- 
 tention of introducing the clause. 
 
 Mr BRUCE hoped this section would not be 
 stricken cut. It had been called an abstraction. 
 Was it an abstraction to say that we, in this free 
 government, were entitled to the enjoyment of 
 our rights? After the toil and struggle of our 
 Forefathers in the Revolution, had it corne to pass 
 in this late day that the principles which they 
 put forth were nothing but abstractions? He 
 trusted not, but that the amendment now pending 
 would be adopted. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that the section as it 
 stood, and the amendment to it, were not quite 
 perfect; he would like to see a small amendment. 
 True, it might be a matter of taste (laughter) but 
 he wished it to express what was intended. He 
 would have added after the word " rights" the 
 words " without regard to color." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR: Will the gentleman accept 
 an amendment to that or an addition, viz : the 
 words " age or sex .'" [Laughter.] 
 Mr. CHATFIELD Oh, certainly. 
 Mr. WORDEN said that this amounted to the 
 recognition of a principle that no man dare to de- 
 ny, but it was of no practical use. It protected 
 no one, and there was nothing practical or opera- 
 tive in it. And he submitted whether it was not 
 best to strike out both sections instead of engraft- 
 ing abstractions upon the Constitution. When 
 they came to practical questions, he would, to the 
 best of his ability, aid in giving effect to this great 
 principle. 
 
 Mr. CROOKERsaid, that in offering the amend- 
 ment now under consideration, he had not design- 
 ed to say a single word in support of it. He de- 
 
 sired to offer it, in order that he might in Conven- 
 don have an opportunity to bring it to a direct and 
 formal vote. He should not now have arisen, but 
 for the course of remarks pursued by several mem- 
 bers of the Convention. They had denou need this- 
 amendment as an abstraction. And had it come 
 to this ? Was this amendment indeed a " mere 
 abstraction ?" Sir, (said Mr. C.) the author of the 
 language of that amendment received the highest 
 regard and respect of the age gone by. Very many 
 at this day, who, in by-gone times, entertained 
 but little regard for him when in life, are now 
 foremost in shouting applause to his memory. 
 Much has been said in praise of the act of the 
 Barons of England, atRunnymede, when they ex- 
 torted from the British monarch the Magna Charta 
 of British liberty. Sir, the time and place, and 
 occasion that gave birth to the language of my 
 amendment, was as holy as that at Runnymede. 
 The body of men who put it forth, were as much 
 devoted to human liberty. The publication of 
 these sentiments was the first act in the grand 
 drama that led to the freedom of our country. 
 From the sentiments contained in this " mere ab- 
 straction," flowed the free institutions of this 
 land. Were the venerable men whose names ap 
 pear in this instrument, (holding up the Decla- 
 ration of Independence,) only publishing a 
 mere abstraction" to the world ? We pride 
 ourselves upon the fact that our country is 
 the only asylum of oppressed humanity. We 
 have thrown open our arms to embrace every 
 foreigner of Europe. We have spent four weeks- 
 of the time of this Convention in striking out 
 the word native, in order to open the doors of 
 the Executive mansion to the foreign emigrant. 
 Sir, all this is well. I can go, and desire 
 to adopt the amendment of the gentleman from 
 Otsego, " without regard to color." I am 
 opposed to distinctions that rest upon no .better 
 foundation. But with all our boasted equality, 
 we deny to a portion of our citizens any partici- 
 pation in some of our dearest political rights. 
 They are, it is true, in numbers, a small and fee- 
 ble race. They are not foreigners who come to 
 us asking a boon. They were born and bred up- 
 on our soil. And here in the house of their birth 
 we dare to deny them the sacred right of suffrage 
 on account of the shade or color of the skin. 
 Whence, sir, do we derive the power to deny to 
 that oppressed race the enjoyment of that sacred 
 right ? Have not they just as much right to deny 
 it us ? It is might and power alone that gives 
 right. It is the robber's right. But I confess I 
 was not prepared to hear it declared in this hall, 
 that the principles of the declaration of indepen- 
 dence are mere abstractions. If we have indeed 
 come to this if we have as a people, adopted 
 this sentiment, we have very far departed from 
 the " faith once delivered to the saints." We 
 have lost sight of the principle of equal rights, 
 and our government is indeed a despotism. 
 
 The committee here rose and reported pro- 
 gress, and the Convention took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. CHATFIELD, offered in 
 the morning, to Mr. CROCKER'S amendment, was 
 agreed to. It was to insert the words " without 
 regard to color," in the place he had designated 
 
541 
 
 Mr. CROCKER'S amendment as thus amended 
 was then agreed to. 
 
 Mr. BURR'S amendment was lost. (It was 
 published in the morning's proceedings.) 
 
 Mr. MANN then moved to strike out thewhol 
 section, as thus amended. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said as it had been amended by 
 the gentleman from Otsego, or on his motion, in 
 such a capital manner, he hoped it would not be 
 stricken out. 
 
 It was stricken out ayes 42, noes 19. 
 
 The second section was then read. 
 
 ^ 2. All political power is inherent in the people. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER moved to strike it out. 
 
 Mr, RICHMOND wanted to hear some good 
 reasons advanced why a section so important in 
 principle as this was and in so few words, should 
 be stricken out. He had often heard it asserted 
 in this body, and elsewhere, and on this floor, that 
 the legislature was omnipotent and not the peo- 
 ple. He would like to have it settled where the 
 power does actually rest. He believed it rested 
 in the people. There had been an opinion pre 
 vailing, that the legislature had the right to 
 take lands from the citizens, which the State had 
 given to the citizens with good warranty deeds, 
 and give them to whoever theyj pleased yes, 
 they have given this very doubtful power to take 
 lands to certain overgrown incorporations. This 
 was all wrong decidedly wrong. And, in these 
 matters, the appeals to higher courts had failed ; 
 and in some instances the Court of Errors had 
 confirmed this very power. There was a lurking 
 fear amongst those who lived upon those legis- 
 lative grants, that there was not so much 
 Constitutional right in these things after all as 
 to sanction such proceeding. He was sorry to 
 see an attempt made here to give more power to 
 the Legislature to favor these chartered compan- 
 ies. And when the question came up properly 
 he would be found recording his vote against it. 
 And if it should be submitted to the people who 
 live along the line of travel through the centre of 
 this State, nine-tenths of them would be found 
 voting with him (Mr. R.). He felt it was his 
 right and his duty to stand up in behalf of that 
 people, and against allowing these chartered com- 
 panies to trample upon the rights of the yeoman- 
 ry of the land. They had thought it necessary to 
 put in a clause to carry on wiorks of internal im- 
 provements, whilst the people cried out against 
 the increase of these chartered rights. Gentle- 
 men have taken this ground. They say that the 
 public good requires it to take land of the citi- 
 zens for railroads. Why, they have got all the 
 power they need under the present Constitution. 
 What do they want with more ? He would go as 
 far as any man to allow the State to take private 
 property for public purposes, but no farther. 
 Some gentlemen here think me tenacious, be- 
 cause I am so strenuous about this. But go from 
 Albany to Buffalo, &c. with me and submit the 
 question go with me and talk to the people on 
 this subject. They know they have been cheat- 
 ed and defrauded in these matters, and they 
 will stand it no longer. The internal improve- 
 ment system I glory in, and will do all that 
 is right to promote it. But I will not trample 
 down the yeomanry into the dust. They could 
 
 not come to your capilol to complain ot their 
 wrongs. Their opponents come here and ask and 
 beg of the Legislature and get privileges granted, 
 which injure the yeotnanry. I have a right to 
 stand up here for the rights of this large class of 
 my fellow citizens. Now editors in their edito- 
 rials, spoke against this; all your public speakers, 
 all your political men, abolitionists, old hunkers, 
 barnburners, whigs, and all classes ot them they 
 all declared they would go against this increase 
 of the powers of corporations, and the people 
 now have fears that this body will not go quite 
 right, on this subject. If this has been done un- 
 der your past Constitution what may not be done 
 under some words of present articles in some of 
 the reports. He was saying that it the taking is 
 for the public use, he would go for it, but not oth- 
 erwise. And he was sorry to find that there had 
 been a clause put in to this effect, to give more 
 power to corporations. He would appoint two 
 disinterested men, to judge on and decide all such 
 matters In 99 cages out ot 100 the couits have 
 declared wrongfully in these suits; and they have 
 taken the land from the farmers to give to these 
 overgrown monopolies, to the destruction of some 
 farms; and in their own way, just balanced the 
 account. He (Mr. R.) had seen robbery enough 
 of this kind, and he wanted to see no more of it. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he fully agreed with 
 Mr. RICHMOND, and he would go with him shoul- 
 der to shoulder, to defend private rights against 
 the encroachments of chartered monopolies, and 
 he hoped Mr RICHMOND would go with him in 
 another proposition, it was this : However true 
 that gentleman's views may be, it may not be best 
 to incorporate all that is true in the Constitution. 
 I move to insert so as to read thus " all power is 
 not inherent in the legislature." 
 
 Mr. STRONG Mr. Chairman 
 
 Mr.RICHMOND I wish to move an amend- 
 ment to the amendment. 
 
 Mr. STRONG. I have the floor. The gentle- 
 man from Genessee has a good deal of trouble 
 this afternoon. What he alluded to was when a 
 member came in and wished to record his vote. 
 
 Mr.RICHMOND: Will the gentleman allow 
 me to explain. 
 
 Mr. STRONG : No, sir, the gentleman wishes 
 to get up again to explain and make another 
 speech. Now if if we retain this seel ion, we 
 will never have another railroad ; he ought to be 
 excused, because the Tonawanda railroad runs 
 through his wood-land, he thinks if he can retain 
 his section, that he can stop the railroad, and the 
 ocomotive, when they get to his land. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER was proceeding to ex- 
 plain, as a member of the committee that report- 
 ed the section. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN rose to a question of order; you 
 cannot oiler an amendment that is inconsistent 
 with the original section. He hoped they would 
 Ret to work like men of sense, and he hoped the 
 ridiculous amendment about all power not being 
 'nherent in the Legislature, would be withdrawn ; 
 -vho ever heard of such a preposterous thing. 
 He begged Mr. LOOMIS to withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS did withdraw it. 
 
 iVJr. HUNT said, if it was designed to insert in 
 he Constitution a collection of political axioms, 
 le would propose the following: 
 
542 
 
 "The rights of men are the gifts of God, and are sacredt 
 The first duty of government i<, to protect them; the se 
 cond. 10 let them alone." [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. WARD begged him to withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. HUNT would do so if it would give rise to 
 debate. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER : Anything, no matter where it 
 came from, would be debated here. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : If I am to be charged, &c. 
 then, when any of these questions of incorpora- 
 tions comes up, I have got personal matters en- 
 ough in my head to throw back ; and I will throw 
 them back the : ext time I am assailed. 
 
 The section was struck out. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON offered the following amend- 
 ment, which was negatived : 
 
 2. The political power of a state is inherent in the peo- 
 ple thereof, and the institutions of government are derived 
 from their authority and must be created for their benciit 
 and protection. 
 
 The third section was read, as follows : 
 $3 No member of 'this state shall be disfranchised, or 
 deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any 
 citizen, unless by the law of the land. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN wished to amend the last words 
 thus : " Except by due operation of law." He 
 referred to the changes of the law, by which a 
 party might be unjustly dealt with. He said that 
 you cannot by an arbitrary act deprive a man of 
 his liberty, but a law may be passed by which, if 
 he violates it, he may be deprived of his liberty. 
 All a man's rights, life, liberty and property, may 
 all be taken away by reason of his violation of the 
 laws of the State. He wished this matter, there- 
 fore, properly worded. 
 
 Mr. TALDMADGE said he had adopted the 
 words in accordance with the terms of the Con- 
 stitution, that no ex post facto law should be 
 passed. You committed an act yesterday that 
 was innocent ; to-morrow the legislature may pass 
 a law making that act criminal. That used to be 
 the old mode of legislation. He wished to pre 
 vent all that. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN read 'the amendment as he 
 wished it modified : 
 
 ^ 3. No citizen or member of this state shall be disfran- 
 chised or deprived of any rights, privileges or franchises 
 by any thing contained in this constitution, no- shall any 
 vested rights or remedies b divested, destroyed, or taken 
 away in any manner whatsoever, except upon the ver> 
 diet of a jury, rendered according to due course oflaw in 
 a civjl action or in a public prosecution and in pursuance 
 of some general law of the land promulgated prior to the 
 act or matter alleged as the case of such action or prose 
 cution. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN explained the effect and inten! 
 of the amendment, to be to prohibit the passage 
 of laws acting retrospectively upon remedies as 
 well as right, and to effect also the object which 
 the gentleman from Genesee was aiming a'. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS preferred the original languag 
 of the section as reported, to either of the amend 
 menls, as being more simple and comprehensive 
 except that the amendment provided against the 
 passage of any ex post facto laws. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said the Constitution of the U 
 S. provided that no ex-post facto law should b 
 passed by any State. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS asked the mover of this proposi 
 lion if an office was a franchise ? 
 
 Mr. WORDEN replied in the negative. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS : Blackstone thinks it is. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : It may contain a franchise 
 
 Mr. LOO MIS continued: ^ corporation might 
 e regarded as a member of the State. If you 
 fould not disfranchise, you could not perhaps 
 Jin a person out of office, until his term expired} 
 or allow the law in relation to existing corpora- 
 ions. He thought it expedient to adopt this pro- 
 osiiion certainly not without due consideration. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN would prefer to have it lay over 
 or a day. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said this principle was not 
 pplicable to a government like this, and he wa 
 ot disposed to re- affirm inx>ur constitution a prin- 
 iple wrested from a despotic monarch in the 
 magna charta, for the protection of the barons and 
 lobility of that day. To assert that a citizen 
 ould under our government be deprived his pro- 
 perty, liberty, &c., without due process of law, 
 vas to assert a monstrosity. He had no sort of 
 bjection to the section as it originally stood, he 
 nought it could do neither harm or good. Ha 
 ooked upon the amendment ot Mr WORDEN as 
 :unningly drawn and tending lo perpetuate corpo- 
 ations, &c under the guise of vested rights. He 
 ould never consent to the adoption of such a 
 
 principle. There was one kind of vested rights 
 
 which he would sustain ; another that he never 
 
 would. Mr. C. alluded not only to corporations, 
 
 ut to certain estates which he thought as much 
 
 t war with the spirit of our institutions as the 
 
 government against which our fathers rebelled. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM agreed with the gentleman from 
 Otsego, as lo the specious character of the propo- 
 ition ef Mr. WORDEN, although he did not as to 
 he original section. It was under that section, 
 he apprehended, that the Legislature had the pow- 
 er to deprive an individual of his right of suffrage 
 and of being a witness, in cases of crime. When 
 n order, he should offer the following amendment, 
 which he believed would be cairying out the in- 
 ention of the committee. To strike out from the 
 word " unless,'' and insert after it, " upon convic- 
 lion of an offence against the law of the lurid." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS should have no objection to leave 
 the article as reported by the committee, because 
 ts meaning was well understood, and no mis- 
 chievous results had arisen from it. He concur- 
 red with the remarks of the genileman from Otse- 
 go, as to the character of the provision of Mr. W. 
 and he protested against the insertion of any 
 such one in the Constitution, Tnlk about "vest- 
 ed remedy" where will the gentleman find any 
 such language in any Constitution any where ? 
 Mr. H. apprehended that it would lead to very 
 grievous results through the construction that 
 might be given to it. 
 
 Mr. K1RKLAND concurred in the views of 
 the gentleman from Albany, in his understand- 
 ing of this amendment. He believed it would 
 assert the reverse of what the gentleman intend, 
 ed. If the language carried out the sentiment his 
 friend from Ontario proposed, he should like to 
 vote for it. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN would like to ask his friends 
 from Olsego and Albany whether they proposed 
 to take away any vested right or franchise now 
 enjoyed by corporations? 
 
 Mr. HARRIS would answer the gentleman on 
 the report of committee No. 18. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN denied it to be the power of the 
 Legislature or of the Convention to take away any 
 
543 
 
 of these rights. A great deal of sensitiveness had 
 been manifested recently as to the taking of pri- 
 vate property by corporations. This thing hap- 
 pened every day, and without it our government 
 could not go on. In the case of a man's dying and 
 leaving an estate in dower, or to be partitioned, 
 
 necessary that the legislature should retain some 
 control over personal rights to be exercised in the 
 cases of punishment of crime, &c. As the section 
 stood however, he feared it might if the legisla- 
 ture should dare to do so, empower them to de- 
 
 
 it is divided at the instance of one of the heirs, 
 and the rights of all the others disturbed. The 
 laws of partition, of dower, &c., are nothing more 
 than laws which divest one man of his property, 
 and vest it in another, contrary to .the will per- 
 haps of all who are thus divested. Vested rights 
 are such as are secured to individuals, and which 
 cannot be taken away without just and full com- 
 pensation in courts of law. That is what he de- 
 signed to do to secure vested rights and reme- 
 dies against the action of the Legislature in any 
 particular. It has been solemnly argued and in- 
 sisted upon that the Bankrupt law of the Federal 
 Government, violated those rights. He desired 
 to see this State Constitution guarded against any 
 sucli thing. He would object to the taking away 
 of vested rights and remedies in courts of law, 
 and this is what he designed to guard against and 
 nothing more. He had no such objects as the 
 gentleman from Otsego supposed. He would go 
 as far as any gentleman to prevent that accumula- 
 tion of property which tended to create almost 
 the relation of lord and serf. He was ready to go 
 to the very verge of the Constitution to prevent 
 that. And he desired also, that these vested re- 
 medies should be placed on the same footing with 
 vested rights, and not interfered with without ad- 
 equate compensation. 
 
 Mr. CAMPBELL preferred that we should not 
 insert any new section in our bill of rights. He 
 thought the object of the gentleman from Ontario 
 would meet with little favor here. The gentle- 
 man states that he desires to prevent any inter- 
 ference with the remedy. In the case of a judg- 
 ment, there fare, he would take away from the le- 
 gislature the right to pass a law preventing im- 
 prisonment on the execution of that judgment. 
 Mr. C. thought it was best to have the inheren 
 rights of the people as they are. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD, in reply to Mr. WORDEN 
 denied that he had any idea of interfering with 
 vested rights. He would as soon think of lock 
 ing up that celebrated temple in the great deser 
 of Sahara, to keep out thieves, as to do it. Ther 
 was also no power in the State to do it. H 
 might be mista'ken in the amendment, but h 
 thought that it was liable to the construction o 
 perpetuating certain things he had before allude( 
 to. There was a great question as to what con 
 stituted vested rights. The courts had decide 
 many things to be vested rights which he (Mr. C. 
 could never acknowledge as such. This doctrin 
 had been held as to grants of franchise to corpo 
 rations, &c. As to vested remedies, it would b 
 to make vested remedies of all that are now pro 
 vided for in our laws, if we adopted this propos 
 tion. It would be to make our laws perpetua 
 and unchangeable, and would preclude any at 
 vance that might be demanded by the progress 
 civilization and humanity. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM considered the amendment on 
 of some importance. He apprehended the ob 
 ject was to secure personal rights and privileg 
 and not corporate rights and property. It wa. 
 
 prive persons of the right of giving evidence on 
 
 count of their religious belief. The amend- 
 ent he proposed, was to confine the exercise of 
 is power by the legislature to cases of crime. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said if the committee would 
 ot consent to let this matter lie over, until to- 
 orrow, he would withdraw his amendment, to 
 fer when he might deem proper. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE then renewed his amend 
 ent. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS was a little uncertain as to the 
 anguage of this section. It spoke of the inter - 
 entionofa jury. There was a proceeding in 
 lis State by which the Court of Chancery had 
 urisdiction without requiring a jury. Perhaps 
 
 would be well to provide for this, but this was 
 ot the place to do it. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS was a good deal of a reformer 
 ut in regard to this matter he must say, that he 
 fas an ultra conservative. He would not alter 
 lis provision in the constitution, which was now 
 o well understood, and from which no evil had 
 esulted. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR objected to any change in the 
 ection. As it Hood, it was with a slight altera- 
 ion the language of Magna Charta. Its con- 
 truction had been long and well established by 
 udicial decisions. It was a most excellent sec- 
 ion, an ancient section, and he desired to see no 
 inkering with it. 
 
 Mr TALLMADGE'S amendment was then 
 
 oteddown. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE moved to strike out the word 
 1 member" and to insert " citizen," so as to read 
 1 no citizen of the State, &c. This was rejected. 
 The third section was then agreed to. 
 The fourth section was then read as follows : 
 
 $4. The right of trial by jury in all cases in which it 
 las been heretofore used, shall remain inviolate. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved the following amendment : 
 Add 10 the section 
 
 " The judge may repeat to the jury, and call their attenj 
 ion to all the te-timony, but na judge shall argue, advise, 
 nsuuct, or express an opin ; ou upon any matter oi lact, on 
 the trial of any issue in any civil cause." 
 
 Mr. J.'s object was to preserve the legitimate 
 objects of a Uial by jury, and to prevent judges 
 Iroin interfering where they had no right ic. It 
 hud been the practice of some judges not only to 
 repeat the evidence and to call the attention of the 
 jury to it, but to argue a matter of fact and to ex- 
 press a decided opinion thereon, arid to advise 
 them as to a matter of fact; and often, unless the 
 jury happened to be a very independent and think- 
 ing one, almost instruct them as to how the facts are 
 to be settled accordingto ihe judge's notion o! them. 
 And at the same time he would tell the jury that 
 they, after all, were to be ihe judges ot the law 
 and of the facts- He admitted that nine-tenths 
 of the judges were free from this charge ; but he 
 was aware of ir.stanct-s where both himself and 
 his client had suffered from such conduct on the 
 part of a judge. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
544 
 
 Mr. CONELY moved to amend the section s< 
 that it should read, "the right of trial by jury, in 
 all cases, shall be inviolate." 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE explained that the commit 
 tee bad adopted the language of the former Con 
 stitution, the construction of which was well es 
 tablished and well understood. 
 
 Mr SWACKHAMER briefly advocated thi 
 amendment, and Mr. TILDEN opposed it. 
 
 It was rejected. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR proposed the following substi 
 t ute for the section. 
 
 ^ 4. The trial by jury in all cases in which it has been 
 heretofore used, shall remain inviolate forever, and shal 
 be allowed in like cases arising in any new court or pro 
 ceeding hereafter instituted or authoiiaed. 
 
 Mr. O'C. explained and advocated his amend- 
 ment. It only reasserted in spirit, though not in 
 precise words, the provision in the Constitution 
 of 1821. 
 
 Mr. STOW advocated the amendment. 
 
 The committee then rose and reported and the 
 Convention adjourned. 
 
 SATURDAY, (51th day,) August 8. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. MILES. 
 
 Mr. ARCHER offered a resolution that the re 
 port of committee No. 11 be taken out of com 
 miliee of the whole at halt' past 10 to-day. 
 
 The roll was called 72 members present. 
 
 The motion was lost. 
 
 The Report of committee No. 11 was then up 
 in committee of the whole. Mr. MARVIN in 
 the chair. 
 
 The question was on section 4. 
 
 The substitute of tne gentleman from N. Y. 
 (Mr. O'CONOR) was carried. As follows: 
 
 (5 4. The trial by jury in all cases in which it has been 
 heretofore used, shall remain inviolate lorever, and shall 
 be allowed in like cases arising in any new court or pro- 
 ceeding hereafter instituted or authorized. 
 
 Mr. liA.SCOM wished the Legislature to pre. 
 scribe the number ofjuroisj and he would amend 
 this section by adding at the close of it, "but the 
 number ot Jurors to form a jury may be prescribed 
 to l.,w." 
 
 Mr. BROWN opposed the amendment. He 
 would not leave it in the power of a jury to say 
 that there shall be but three or four persons to 
 try a case. This would give the Legislature ab- 
 solute and uncontrolled power over trial by jury. 
 He was not disposed to experiment on that right. 
 We know what the trial by jury is. It has come 
 down consecrated by a long course ot usage, and 
 we ought not to make any innovations, unless it 
 were such as there were no doubts about such 
 as were cleat ly pointed out by wisdom and expe- 
 rience. To allow the legislature to prescribe the 
 number would be to say that the legislature 
 should be entitled to say that a jury should con- 
 sist ot one, two, or three, or any other number. 
 Now in all his experience at the bar for twenty- 
 five years, he had tound that the present number 
 of jurors was the best in all trials. In England, 
 experience had taught the same tact; and unless 
 some better reason was given, than any he had yet 
 heard, he should preler to adhere to the old rule, 
 than to try innovations which would put such 
 power into the hands of a small number ot the 
 legislature. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said the rigJit of trial by jury was 
 a grant from the sovereign power to the people, 
 to protect their personal rights from the tyranny 
 of the king ; we have no necessity for this grant 
 to the people of our country; the legislature was 
 our sovereign and he had no fear that the legisla- 
 ture would ever abolish this trial by jury ; the ju- 
 diciary committee propose to grant trial by jury 
 to issues of fact between parties in chancery suits ; 
 we have seen recently great abuses of this jury 
 system ; haye seen large sums of money and a 
 month of time consumed in getting a jury ; the 
 more atrocious the crime the better known the 
 facts the more difficult it is to get a jury. And 
 if by this provision in the Constitution the legis- 
 lature hereafter would, be prevented from reme- 
 dying these abuses then he wished to have it 
 stricken out. He was willing to trust the legis- 
 lature with full power in this subject. He went 
 further than Mr. BASCOM. He wished a section 
 to be put into the Constitution better adapted to 
 the present state of things, if we were to have 
 anything said about the matter in the Constitution 
 at all. He had a substitute which he would offer at 
 the proper time, having reference to our courts 
 as they now exist. He read it. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said it gentlemen supposed this 
 section meant that the legislature could not reduce 
 the number of jurors, he would ask, how it is that 
 a large class ot cases are now tried by less than 12 j 
 by 6; and the amount of property disposed ot in 
 these courts, is perhaps larger than that disposed 
 of in the other courts; and actions of seduction 
 and crim con, come under their cognizance, and 
 are disposed of by them. He proposed no action, 
 but wished to call attention to this point. 
 
 Mr. WORDAN said that 12 men were as few 
 as the rights of citizens ought to be entrusted to. 
 Jurors were liable to prejudice ; but one man could 
 always be tound in every twelve, that would not 
 De swayed by improper feelings. He meant not 
 o asperse the action of jurors, because generally 
 their conduct was entitled to all praise. 
 
 Mr. STETSON asked if the section required 
 that twelve should always be present ? 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that jurors were often com- 
 pelled to try causes which their own good sense 
 :old them never ought to be brought into a court 
 of justice. But still there must be evils growing 
 out of all these things. He would not now say 
 that the Legislature could not reduce the number 
 of jurors from 12 ; but the justice's court rested 
 on their own peculiar organization, and ought 
 not to be cited here. The present system of 12 
 lad been well tried, and worked well; and it 
 ought to be left as we found it. Cases of accounts 
 are frequently tried by referees ; and a law is on 
 ,he books now where a judge can try a cause 
 without a jury if the parties agree. Judicious 
 counsel always advise this course; and he wish- 
 ed all to leave this precisely as it now stands. 
 le agreed with the gentleman from Orange (Mr. 
 BROWN) that this right of trial by jury was of too 
 great importance to be assailed in any way with- 
 >ut great consideration. It had been said to be 
 he palladium of individual rights, and doubtless 
 t was so. The trial of questions of fact by twelve 
 men, and requiring them to concur in the facts 
 which are to deprive a man of his liberty and pro- 
 perty, is the great safeguard of individual rights ; 
 
545 
 
 and he agreed with the gentleman from Orange 
 that twelve men were as few as the rights and 
 
 eroperty of citizens ought to be entrusted with, 
 is experience had shown him that there are 
 times when even jurors are influenced hy consi- 
 derations that swerve them for the time from a 
 right determination. In such cases, when they 
 had the number of twelve, they were very sure to 
 find one of that number who would take a right 
 and proper view of the subject. He did not in- 
 tend to impeach the integrity of the jurors far 
 from it. His experience had shown him that the 
 actions of jurors entitled them to commendation, 
 and he only wished now to say that he desired 
 that the system should be left>,as it now is. He 
 knew it was an onerous duty ror jurors. He re- 
 capitulated the cases in which jurors were called 
 upon to try, and showed that they were often call- 
 ed from their homes to attend the trial of causes 
 which their own good sense told them should ne- 
 ver be brought into court. But it should be re- 
 membered that imperfections are attendant upon 
 the administrations of all human institutions. 
 When great rights and personal privileges were 
 at stake, then It was that they were protected by 
 jury trials. He would not say but what the le- 
 gislature had the power to decrease the number 
 of jurors. He did not think such a decrease 
 would be advisable. But he would leave this 
 whole question to the sound discretion of the le- 
 gislature. He would not put this clause in the 
 constitution, for it would invite such changes. 
 Parties, in certain cases, could now dispense with 
 jury trials, and submit their causes to the deci- 
 sions of the court. Why not leave this in the 
 constitution as it had stood all along : It had 
 worked generally well, and with as few evils as 
 cduld be anticipated from any mere human sys- 
 tem. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said the whole subject was free 
 from d : ilicu^.Ly, and they could agree here to pre- 
 serve the right of trial by jury substantially the 
 same as it was written in the Constitution of 1777 
 and of 1821. There are many cases in which 
 trial by jury cannot be introduced; and we can 
 only provide that the right as heretofore main- 
 tained and practiced shall remain inviolate. The 
 right of trial by jury means really and practical- 
 ly the right of trial by twelve ; that is the old 
 Saxon institution. We only know things by the 
 names given to them. This is the ancient and 
 sacred number, and that it is which we ought to 
 preserve. We ought not to put it in the power 
 of the legislature to change this ; nor ought we to 
 change it ourselves. If trial by jury was not trial 
 by twelve men, then we may call these references 
 of one to three men a trial by jury. From the 
 earliest history there were petty courts for the 
 trial of small causes ; and this system was intro- 
 duced here. An act was passed in this colony in 
 1704, where justices of the peace could try small 
 causes under 40 shillings without a jury ; and we 
 perhaps had extended up to 5, up to the adop- 
 tion of the Constitution ; and when in that instru- 
 ment we retained the right of trial by jury, as 
 heretofore practiced, this class of causes in the 
 Justices' Courts remained there as the exception ; 
 and the introduction of six men amounted to no- 
 thing, as there was no necessity for them, ac- 
 cording to the statute, and they formed no part of 
 
 the old institution of trial by jury. They were 
 an illegitimate jury. And he hoped that the old 
 safeguards of trial by jury would forever be re- 
 tained inviolate. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM was pleased to hear gentlemen 
 advocate the extension ot this right of trial by 
 jury ; but was astonished that they had so strong-- 
 ly supported that Court which scouted the idea of 
 trial by jury. He was glad to see the anxiety ma- 
 nifested to retain the light of trial by jury, and if 
 gentlemen desired to extend that right, they would 
 find him going with them. It was a sacred right, 
 and it was rather unfortunate that the people had 
 not been more watchful of interference with this 
 right. He would call attention to the fact that 
 a vast amount of property was disposed of, with- 
 out the intervention of a jury. Look over the 
 overshadowing influence of that court which re- 
 pudiates jury trials. He regretted that the amend- 
 ments offered yesterday by Messrs. CONELY and 
 JORDAN had not been adopted. He believed the 
 legislature had exercised this right of reducing 
 the number of jurors. He would not say but 
 what that was an infraction of the constitution. 
 But after the vote of yesterday, placing all our 
 rights within the control of the legislature, and 
 allowing them to say that we shall not in certain 
 cases bo witnesses, it was too late to talk about 
 the legislature restricting the rights of citizens by 
 abridging the number of jurors. He was not cer- 
 tain that his own amendment was perfect. It 
 might be well to confine its operation to trials in 
 civil cases. In criminal cases it might be neces- 
 sary to retain the number of twelve. But in 
 such cases of mere inquest and such like matters 
 of form, he thought it could be done as well with 
 a less number. There was a great expense in- 
 volved in these trials by jury. In the county of 
 Ontario during the past year, the amount paid out 
 of the treasury for jury fees was greater than the 
 entire amount of verdicts rendered by them in ci. 
 vil cases. Mr. B. trusted this important subject 
 would be fully considered, and that the correct 
 result might be reached. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN thought that gentlemen were 
 mistaken about the expenses of jury trials ; the 
 greatest expense was that connected with crimi- 
 nal trials, the enquiries returned being calculated 
 to mislead in this matter. The enquiries had 
 been to find out those expenses compared with 
 the amount of judgments rendered, which had 
 shown a great disparity. But it was overlooked 
 that a great share of them was for trials of crimiS 
 nals. 
 
 Mr. PORTER: The gentleman from Herkimer 
 (Mr. LOOMIS) misunderstood the subject, in 
 saying that the only object of jury trial in this 
 country was to protect the individual against the 
 legislature. The institution here is intended to 
 protect the people from the encroachments of the 
 judiciary ; and he also understood it had always 
 been so in England ; it was to protect the people 
 from the encroachments of the judiciary. For in 
 England it is equal to the monarchical power, and 
 it has no check placed on its action whatever; and 
 it is very much the case also in this country. Now 
 he should strengthen rather than relax every ef- 
 fort to protect the rights of the people from the 
 overshadowing encroachments and the tremen- 
 dous power of the judiciarv. This is done by in- 
 
 43 
 
546 
 
 terposing the jury trial system. It is too sacred 
 aright to be interfered with; and he entirely 
 concurred in the views taken by Messrs. JORDAN 
 and O'CONOR on this very important subject. 
 
 Mr. STETSON would only ask the gentleman 
 , from New-York (Mr. O'CoisroR,) if a case was 
 withdrawn from a court where 12 jurors sat, and 
 was given to a court where only six jurors sat, or 
 were required, would that be a violation of this 
 section ? 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR : It would if they have ever done 
 so. But they have not, as he believed. 
 
 Mr. STETSON replied he thought they had 
 done so ; for if you bring your action in a court 
 below for $50 or more and less than $100, say for 
 a horse you only get a jury of six if you sue for 
 the same cause in a court of record, you have a 
 jury of twelve. Now^this change had occurred 
 since the adoption of the present Constitution. 
 The Legislature have kept varying the jurisdic- 
 tion from $10 to $100 They may still goto 
 $500, $5000 or any higher sum, thus transferring 
 causes of" action before tried by twelve to juries of 
 six only. He did not complain of this, he only 
 stated "it to show that possibly legislative bodies 
 had taken a distinction between trial by jury, 
 and the number that should compose the jury. 
 He would say too, that if these six men juries in 
 justices courts were not to be called juries in a 
 constitutional sense, then all trials in the enlarg- 
 ed jurisdiction of those courts had been without 
 any legal jury at all. It was worth notice also 
 that the words " heretofore used" at this date 
 would mean something else and more than they 
 did in 1821. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR : Formerly the cause was tried 
 by a justice only ; now six men are added and 
 nothing taken away, but something is given. 
 Formerly the trial was before a justice alone. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : If the whole jurisdiction 
 from above be brought down to the justice's courts 
 then the trials have been without a jury. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said he had not recently exa- 
 mined the law applying to county courts. He 
 thought the old act provided that wherever this 
 class of jury cases was brought down to the jus- 
 tice's courts that a common law jury of twelve 
 men shall be brought down with them. And if 
 by this recent county act the same rights are not 
 secured,then the Constitution.has been most gross- 
 ly violated. The only practical question before 
 them was the amendment of Mr. BASCOAI which 
 he hoped would be voted down. 
 
 Mr* LOOMIS was opposed to the amendment. 
 He admitted that it was doubtful, perhaps, whe- 
 ther the legislature might not alter the number 
 unless this section was retained. The adoption 
 of additional words were sometimes of doubtful 
 intent. He wished that point decided. He wish- 
 ed the section improved ; the original proposition 
 was better than the amendment of the gentleman 
 from New York ; we had there the words the 
 " ri-ht" of trial by jury. We did not compel a 
 man to pay all the expenses of a trial by twelve 
 men, wlien in point of fact, in four cases out of 
 five in the country courts the jury have not a word 
 to say about the cause ; the judge decides it ; it is 
 therefore a nullity ; that is the practice and the 
 operation of the system as it now stands. He 
 therefore preferred to leave it as the committee, 
 
 reported it ; which designs to limit the number by w 
 giving the legislature power over the matter. 
 
 Mr. KHOADES said that this subject had inter- 
 ests far beyond the meresuhject of expense <<f the 
 jury system. It was to interpose a check be- 
 tween the people and the aibitrary power of the 
 Judiciary. And the system of trial by jury en- 
 ables men to study law who otherwise have no 
 time to study it, by being brought into court, by 
 force of law as jurois. And it is desirable that 
 all men should know something about our laws 
 generally about our Constitution for the benefit 
 of themselves and for all their fellow citizei 9 
 The debate has been thus far confined to legal 
 gentlemen. The proposition ot the gentleman 
 from Seneca (Mr. BASCOM) has been sustained 
 mainly upon the ground that the number of ju- 
 rors should be reduced tor the purpose of saving 
 expense. Aside from all consideration of the 
 question of having the rights of every individual 
 preserved, by causing his interests to be submit- 
 ted to the judgment of his peers, and of securing 
 the rights ot the people at large against the ten- 
 dency to arbitrary power and the eriCioachmen's 
 of the judiciary, which far outweigh any argument 
 in favor of diminishing expense preserves and 
 keeps up an important union between the people 
 and their courts of justice. The jury are their 
 representatives in the administration of their ju- 
 dicial affairs. It allays all jealousy and distrust 
 of judicial power. It brings a large portion of 
 our fellow citizens, the mechanics and tarmeis of 
 the country, in immediate contact with our courts 
 of justice. It enables them to acquire a knowl. 
 edge of the geneial principles ol law and makes 
 them acquainted with the principle of all good 
 government and the mariner in which their own 
 laws should be administered. But few have the 
 time or ability to study the laws ot their country. 
 they have not the books necessary ior such in- 
 formation. But few rnen, except those who be- 
 long to the legal profession, have the taste or dis- 
 position, of their own accord, to have any lurther 
 knowledge of law, than what is necessary to ena- 
 ble them to avoid its penalties. They will not 
 study its principles, and yet a large amount of 
 legal knowledge was acquired from their connex- 
 ion with courts of justice in the capacity of ju- 
 rors. The number who are now enjoying these 
 advantages ought not to be diminished it is of 
 great importance to the preservation and security 
 of public interests, as this form of trial is now ad- 
 mitted to be secured by the old constitution, in 
 respect to its numbers as well as its privileges. 
 He'hoped it would not be changed. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON proposed an amendment. 
 
 The CHAIR said it was not in order. 
 
 Mr. HART proposed to add after the word 
 " Judges" the words " for the trial of civil 
 causes." 
 
 Mr. BASCOM adopted the amendment. 
 
 Mr. STOW regarded this a highly important 
 question much more so than most who preceded 
 :iim. He would sooner leave to the Legislature 
 the power to fix the number of legislators, than 
 the number of jurors. The people had better 
 surrender their legislative halls, than their repre- 
 sentation in juries. No country can be free where 
 ;he people are not represented in the legislature 
 Yhere no power can pass away without their con- 
 
547 
 
 sent; or where they are not represented in courts 
 of justice where no punishment can be in- 
 inflicted on them, nor any properly taken away 
 from them without their consent. He would 
 sooner let the Legislature change the courts than 
 change the jury. And as there was some doubts 
 about what powers the Legislature has over this 
 matter, I would make this question made definite 
 in the Constitution, and say to the legislature you 
 shall have no right to lessen the people in their 
 representation in the courts of justice. I would 
 not have this sacred this most important subject 
 of trial by jury interfered with by the legislature. 
 I would secure this by Constitutional enactment 
 ami not If t it bslet't to law. And the Legislature by 
 reducing in any case to six, clearly violated the 
 Constitution. The Legislature originally did not 
 pretend (hey had this power ; but afterwards it 
 was said that as ihe Legislature had heretofore 
 exercised this power in a qualified form, then 
 ii was attempted to be insisted, upon that the Le- 
 gislature had the po^ er to take away the original 
 right of the people to demand a trial by jury 
 that is, by twelve men. We may leave the quali- 
 fications of jurors to the Legislature, because ai 
 present, by recent decisions, none but knaves or 
 fools can sit as juries knaves, who deny they 
 have an opinion on the case; or fools, so pro- 
 foundly ignorant they can form no opinion about 
 a rase. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that the number of twelve 
 jurors should be retained in the higher courts; he 
 also believed that the Legislature should have 
 i>me control over this subject. If there be any 
 doubt, doubt the constitutionality of the Legisla- 
 ture directing trials, as at present, before justices 
 of the peace, with only six men that point ought 
 to be settled. And he believed that the Legisla 
 ture should have the power to interfere in this, 
 (if they now have it not) to protect the commu- 
 nity, an'i to say that in all these small civil cases 
 the trial may be by a le^s number than twelve. 
 He had prepared an amendment. TheLegislature 
 had the power to reorganize and reconstt^ct the 
 Justices' Court ; and it was perfectly safe to leave 
 all the matters connected with these cases to the 
 legislature, where the amount in controversy is 
 but small. If the legislature should by possibili- 
 ty fall into error upon the subject, it could be 
 corrected. He was of opinion that the principle 
 of that law should be retained. Cases had .occur- 
 red where twelve men had been called from their 
 work to sit upon a cause where the amount in 
 controversy was not twelve pence. This was an 
 abuse which the legislature should correct. 
 This was necessary, not so much to protect the 
 parties as the public. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. B ASCOM was negatived. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES then sent up the following 
 amendment to be added to the section : 
 
 " Excepting, however, that in all cases in which the 
 value in controversy shall not exceed $3, the trial may 
 be by a jury of less than twelve in number, or without a 
 jury, as may be directed by law." 
 
 Mr BROWN moved to strike out the words 
 ' or without a jury, as may be directed by law." 
 If we change the fundamental law in relation to 
 the trial by jury, it should on the most careful in- 
 vestigation. It was dangerous ground. The 
 greatest principle may be involved in a question 
 
 involving only one shilling of damages. The 
 whole Revolution in England turned upon the 
 sum of 20 shillings, the ship-money assessed on 
 John Hampden. The whole franchise of a Bridge 
 company turned upon an action to recover a 12i 
 cents toll. It was not, therefore, the amount of 
 money involved in the controversy that consti- 
 tuted 'the magnitude of a case, but the principle 
 involved. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND explained that he knew a case 
 where the amount was only for a small toll which 
 involved the entire franchise of a penknife com- 
 pany; the right for ever of the company to receive 
 12 cents or six cents toll for pleasure wagons. 
 A company whose charter would never end but 
 with the close of Government. The amount at 
 issue directly was only 12k cents ; but this was to 
 decide for ever the right of that company to exact 
 that toll. It is impossible to define often wheth- 
 er the amount in issue is over or under $20; and 
 important principles were involved in it. This 
 is to affect all the courts in the state ; actions for 
 slander, &c., &c. The indefmiteness and uncer- 
 tainty of this amendment is another reason for 
 the committee to reject this. There are a great 
 many cases where the amount in the controversy 
 is small, and yet most important principles are 
 involved; and the right of trial by jury should 
 be preserved inviolate. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES explained. His object was to 
 protect the community from being called in cases 
 of unnecessary, useless and vexatious litigation, 
 where the matter at issue was of no personal con- 
 cern to any but the two litigants ; of no earthly 
 consequence how it terminated, and where the 
 issue did not amount to 121-2 cents. He had 
 known instances where many farmers had been 
 brought from their business in the middle 
 of harvest, and kept all day and all night, up- 
 on worthless cases like this. He did not propose 
 to do away with the right of the trial by jury in 
 any case. There was no fear any such attempt 
 would ever be made .especially in the State of New 
 York where the value of the trial by jury is so 
 highly appreciated; and by none was its impor- 
 tance more deeply felt than by himself. He. 
 would secure the public from being thus oppres- 
 ed by those who were disposed to engage in vexa- 
 tious litigation. He had no wish to abolish trial 
 by jury in every case, but to submit it to the leg- 
 islature to say. if in cases involving small amounts 
 the jury may not be less than twelve or no jury at 
 all. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON thought they were wandering 
 from the true object. The section first secures 
 the right of trial by jury. The next object should 
 be to secure, in all criminal cases the full number 
 of twelve. The next question would be to de- 
 termine if it was proper in all other cases to call 
 together the same number of jurors. He thought 
 a few words would determine all these points. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that the words " as may be 
 directed by law," must remain ; the words " or 
 without a jury" must be stricken out. 
 
 Mr. BROWN accepted this alteration. 
 
 The motion of Mr. BROWN was then agreed 
 to. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that if any other construc- 
 tion be put upon " trial by jury" than that it 
 means twelve men, then any number of men may 
 
548 
 
 constitute a jury six men three men two men 
 one man may be a jury ; a judge may be both 
 court and jury in his own person. He was willing 
 to insert as a constitutional provision on this point, 
 that in civil cases in justice courts where the 
 amount at issue shall not exceed $100 the cause 
 shall be tried before a jury of six. But he would 
 not go for any alteration of the number of jurors 
 now in courts of record ; when this was done it 
 would involve the improvement of the whole of the 
 jury system and should not be done without great 
 deliberation, when it is proposed to make juries 
 consist of superior classes of men, that is if there 
 are any superior class of men in this democratic 
 republican country. He might be willing to put 
 the number at six. They ought to fill the 
 blank in the amendment before they could tell 
 whether it would be proper to adopt it or not. 
 He would move to fill it with $100. The legisla- 
 ture had evidently infringed on the Constitution by 
 reducing the number of jurors from twelve, un- 
 less they had left the jurisdiction of justices at 
 twenty-five dollars, where it wasjat the adoption 
 of the Constitution of 1777.. Because trial by jury 
 was a definite thing ; and meant nothing more nor 
 less than twelve men. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to fill the blank with $50. 
 Mr. WORDEN said there would be an insuper- 
 able difficulty in this amendment. In giving ap- 
 plication to this rule, a man might be tried for 
 cutting down a tree ; the tree would be valued at 
 $5. The man might plead that he cut it on his 
 own land. This would involve the question of 
 title. And he knew a case where a large estate 
 was at issue in this very manner, and endless and 
 important controversies have similarly arisen. 
 You must limit this to justices' courts, or to a per- 
 sonal cause. Did the gentleman who made the 
 proposition mean to apply it to all the courts in 
 the state. It would be difficult in many cases to 
 decide the amount in controversy. In looking over 
 the books he had found that there were numerous 
 cases where actions in trover turned upon the right 
 of property, and were decided by jury. This 
 amendment did not appear altogether lawyer-like. 
 There was no application of it to any particular 
 court ; and if intended to apply to courts of record 
 he believed it would be entirely without effect, 
 because of the difficulty to decide the amount in 
 controversy. He certainly thought the amend 
 raent should apply only to justices' courts, or 
 Otherwise it would lead to breaking down one ol 
 our most valuable rights. 
 
 Mr. STETSON replied that the legislatures 
 have been going on for years and reducing the 
 number. And whether they have this right or 
 not, the question should now be settled. He 
 would therefore support the pending amendment. 
 If you could draw all causes of action down to a 
 jury of six men, then you can take a jury of six 
 up to any court of record whatever ; engraft a ju- 
 ry of six on the highest court in the State. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN An action is brought for tres- 
 pass. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : If you bring in an action for 
 less than $50 in a justices court, and the question 
 -. of title is raised, the cause then goes up into a 
 higher court, and the lower court loses its juris- 
 diction. Wherever there is a practical doubt as 
 to the constitutionality of an act, it was our duty 
 
 here to settle it. Now, what was the practical 
 doubt in this case? "The trial by jury, in all 
 cases in which it has been heretofore used, shall 
 remain inviolate," was the language of the pro- 
 position. Now, was it a question involving a 
 certain number of jurors ? Gentlemen had con- 
 tended that a jury was twelve men, and that it 
 was unconstitutional for the legislature to reduce 
 the number; but the legislature had nevertheless 
 done so in certain cases, and the terms of the 
 substitute having reference to the jurors " here- 
 tofore used", would make it uncertain and ob- 
 scure. The object of the gentleman from Dutch- 
 ess was to remove all doubt. 
 
 Mr. A YRAULT, of Livingston, said this was 
 a very important question, and the legal gentle- 
 men here differed so much about it, that he moved 
 it be passed over ; but he waved this motion to 
 allow 
 
 Mr JORDAN to rise to offer as an amendment that 
 it might go over with the whole subject ; which 
 being assented to, he moved to add to Mr. RUG- 
 GLES' amendment, " and the jury trial may be 
 waived by the parties in all civil cases in the 
 manner to be prescribed by law." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR hoped they would vote on this 
 question now. He had never heard so many le- 
 gal gentlemen speak so much alike on any ques- 
 tion heretofore. And he believed gentlemen 
 were generally ready to vote, and he hoped the 
 section might be now finished, so that so much of 
 of our labor would be got along with so far as the 
 committee of the whole were concerned; and if 
 any radical slip was made, it might be corrected 
 in convention, after a long pause, as must neces- 
 sarily be a pause, for the reports of the judiciary 
 committee must take precedence on or after Mon- 
 day. 
 
 The motion to pass over the section was nega- 
 tived. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to amend so as to except 
 courts of record from the application of Mr. RUG- 
 GLES' amendment. 
 
 The^CHAIR said the motion was not now in 
 order. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS saw no reason for the adoption of 
 the amendment, as it would be but sanctioning 
 what had already been adopted in practice for 
 years. It had long been the practice in justice's 
 courts to have a jury trial by six men and no 
 court in this state would ever declare it to be un- 
 constitutional. There was therefore no need of 
 sanctioning what had already been adopted, and 
 what the people would never consent to change. 
 He preferred the original section, giving to every 
 party the right to claim a trial by jury, and the 
 same liberty to waive it if they desired. 
 
 Mr. CONELY moved to insert " or where the 
 imprisonment is for not more than thirty days." 
 
 The CHAIR ruled the amendment to be out of 
 order. 
 
 The motion to fill the blank with one hundred 
 dollars was then rejected, as was the motion to 
 fill it with fifty. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON called on the laymen to come 
 to the aid of their professional brethren here. 
 The old Constitution he thought contained all 
 that was necessary on this subject. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN denied that the 
 tern} jury expressed also the number. There was 
 
549 
 
 nothing in the present Constitution, and it would 
 be difficult to find in any elementary work, any- 
 thin? that authorized the conclusion that a jury 
 necessarily meant twelve men. All that was un. 
 derstood by that term, was a simple body of men 
 assembled to try a case or controversy. But if in 
 the constitution, it was important to fix the num- 
 ber beyond dispute, it seemed to him to be very 
 easy to say that every petit jury should consist of 
 12 men in courts of record, leaving it to the legis- 
 lature to regulate the number in all inferior courts. 
 The only objection he had heard to it was possibly 
 that the jurisdiction of justices courts might be 
 extended beyond $100. If that was ever done 
 or seemed safe, it will be equally safe to leave to 
 the legislature to say whether such extended ju- 
 risdiction required a jury of nine or twelve men. 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER hoped that the amend- 
 ment of the gentlemen from Columbia would be 
 adopted, and also that of the gentlemen from 
 Dutchess, and as many others as might be propos- 
 ed, and then that the whole of them would be 
 rejected, and a plain common sense proposition 
 adopted in the Constitution. The proposition of 
 the committee that the right of trial by jury 
 should remain inviolate, he thoughtto be abundant- 
 ly sufficient. Mr. S. urged that no proposition 
 should be adopted in the Constitution but that could 
 be apprehended and understood by every man. 
 But such was not the course pursued. We had 
 propositions submitted here, full of technicalities 
 and obscurities, and numerous enough arid long 
 enough to fill a book. Why all this mystery and 
 humbug. If it was proposed to make a distinc- 
 tion in suits where would gentlemen begin, and 
 where would they stop. The man who had $150 
 at stake, had as much right to a jury trial as he 
 who had $500,000. He was not sure but he 
 would abolish all laws for the collection of debts, 
 and leave tho matter to the honesty and integrity 
 of men. Much however could be said on both 
 sides of that subject. -Why this clinging to the 
 common law, this eternal dragging of it in here ? 
 Why not make a Constitution and laws that every 
 man can read and understand ? Mr. S. earnestly 
 opposed the incorporation of any ambiguity in 
 the fundamental law. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN asked if it was in order to with- 
 draw his amendment. He did not want his pet 
 lamb brought into the flock of amendments, so 
 kindly by the gentleman from Kings, [Mr. 
 SWACKHAMER,] that its throat might be cut with 
 the rest. [Laughter.] He withdrew his proposi- 
 tion for the present. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN had not yet to learn with his 
 friend from Kings, the great use in civilized so- 
 ciety of laws for the collection of debts. And if 
 he had, a very cursory glance over the earth, at a 
 hundred nations where no such system of laws 
 existed, would satisfy him where we should come 
 to, if we were mad enough to abandon a 
 sound system of laws /or the collection ol debts 
 All Asia, and nearly half of Europe could tell him 
 what would be the consequence of abandoning 
 such a system one man a prince or master, the 
 mdss, slaves. That was the history of mankind 
 wherever there were no good system of laws for 
 the collection of debts, and he hoped his friend 
 from Kings, before he finished his education on 
 the subject would take the pains to look after the 
 
 consequences, tor he, Mr. H., knew him well, 
 and in his heart there was nothing on Cud's earth 
 that he would abhor more than the consequences 
 that would inevitably grow out of his own propo- 
 sition. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER; I was not decided in 
 my views, I merely threw it out. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN believed the gentleman had 
 not decided and did only throw it out. The labors 
 
 f thisConventiori,whethersuccessfulor not,on this 
 subject are well worthy of it. He held in common 
 with those who had spoken most warmly in favor 
 of the trial by jury, that not only was it the palla- 
 dium of liberty, in the strong sense of the En- 
 glish law, as constituting the shield, the safe-guard 
 of the subject, against the fixed magistrate of the 
 Crewn, but further, that it was the great school of 
 civil wisdom in any free or constitutional country 
 which more than all others put together, taught 
 the practical lessons of libexty and freedom. 
 And therefore he desired as strongly as any mem- 
 ber here, lhat this part of the Constitution should 
 be fixed and definite. But he differed from the 
 Constitutional lawyers who had expressed an opin- 
 ion on the subject, and although it was many 
 years since he had occasion by the necessities of 
 his profession, to look over the question, still he 
 would venture to express an opinion different from 
 the one which seemed to prevail. It seerns to be 
 supposed that the word jury implied twelve men, 
 and he believed this to be an entire mistake. The 
 highest jury known to the common law, the jury 
 not of twelve men but of sixteen sixteen Iree- 
 holders to use the language of this day sixteen 
 knights, to use the language of the military age 
 in which it had its origin. The men who fought 
 were the owners of the land, and very few were 
 owners of the land who did not fight. Ordinarily 
 in the king's court of records, a jury did mean 
 twelve men. He was not able, on the instant, to 
 recollect whether in any of the numerous subor- 
 dinate tribunals of Great Britain, a jury of less 
 than twelve men were employed, although he 
 should think it very extraordinary if there had 
 not been cases of the kind. But in most of the 
 minor courts there were no juries called, the subor- 
 dinate magistrates usually deciding the cases them- 
 selves. How was it when the constitution of '77 was 
 adopted ? Had there been no instance prior to 
 that time, in which in a subordinate court, not of 
 record, there had been a jury of less than twelve 
 men ? When that instrument was framed, did not 
 its framers know what had been the fixed, prac- 
 tical construction of the word jury, and when 
 subsequent legislation gave it the construction it 
 received, and when the courts followed it, did 
 they not know that they were unquestionably 
 right ? He believed that history would show that 
 the legislature had in no instance construed it 
 contrary to that, and the courts in supporting that 
 construction have done no violence to the instru- 
 ment. If he was right in this conclusion, then 
 the report of the committee on the subject is as 
 definite and as certain as it could be made, and the 
 only open question was the one sought to be set- 
 tled by the gentleman from Columbia. The right 
 
 of tria'l by jury was not only the right of the per- 
 sons tried, but it was the right of the citizen to 
 be a juror. It is his right to sit in judgment upon 
 the controversies of his fellows. It was a right 
 
550 
 
 more important in his opinion than the right of 
 suffrage itself, and he would as soon expect to 
 hear a rational man complain that he was obliged 
 to breathe in order to live, and to act with cir 
 cumspection in order to be free that he was not 
 divested of the duties which freedom under God, 
 imposed upon every thing human as to hear 
 him complain of the burthen of being a juror. It 
 was under God the highest power a man could 
 exert. He is to sit in judgment on the contro- 
 versies of his fellows, and he should never yield 
 it One step further and it would be taken from 
 him. Such had been the history in all ages. Let 
 no man then in free America yield without a strug- 
 gle his right to be a juror. It was not merely a 
 question as to the person to be tried, although it 
 is important to him and was designed and intend- 
 ed as a shield of right against the partiality and 
 the oppressions of the fixed magistrates of the go- 
 vernment. If we adopt the amendment as report- 
 ed by the committee, there may be a question 
 whether the parties themselves in any case in 
 which no issue of fact should be joined, would 
 have the right to abandon that mode of trial. 
 And if the Convention should be of the opinion 
 that this exercise of discretion ought to be allow- 
 ed, the amendment of the gentleman from Colum- 
 bia ought to be adopted. He was aware that in 
 adopting it, it would be invading the general 
 rights of the citizen to act as a juror. He saw 
 the danger of that invasion, but the inconvenience 
 on the other hand of not allowing this, was very 
 great. In the choice of difficulties therefore he 
 should vote with the gentleman from Columbia. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER would like to inquire 01 
 his liiend in what civilized govtmnient at the pre 
 sent day there did not a system of laws for the 
 collection of debts, exist ? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : The gentleman qualifies his 
 inquiry so f that I might, within the sense of the 
 word, and with propriety, answer him that there 
 was none. Ttie very want ot such a system was 
 an act of barbaiianism. But if the gentleman 
 would look into any of the countries ot Europe, 
 he would see the laboring man the man of small 
 claims borne down and oppressed lor the want 
 of laws to enfoice the payment of those claims. 
 
 Mr JORDAN withdrew his amendment for the 
 time being. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES accepted the amendment of Mr. 
 MANN, but his entire proposition was rejected. 
 
 Mr. KINGSLKY moved to amend, so that the 
 legislature might prescribe that injustices' courts 
 a jury might consist of six persons. Lost. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN offered his amendment that trial 
 by jury might be waived on the consent of parties. 
 
 The amendment was further debated by Messrs. 
 KIRKLAND, HARRIS, JORDAN, TAGGART, 
 PERKINS, J. J. TAYLOR, O'CONOR, when 
 the question being taken, it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE had supposed that when the 
 constitution secured to every man the right of tri- 
 al by jury, that that was the amount of the provi- 
 sion, and that the particular manner of conduct- 
 ing these trials was left to the legislature for their 
 regulation. But suggestions had been thrown out 
 that the trial by jury, according to common law 
 construction, implied twelve men. Still, he un- 
 derstood the rule to be that the statute law, when 
 in conflict with the common law, was paramount, 
 
 and that of course this matter of the number of 
 jurors, whatever might be the common law rule, 
 was under the control of the legislature. Again, 
 the rule of law by which jurors in justices' courts 
 are limited to six, had been so long in practice, 
 and so long acquiesced in, that it in itselfbecame 
 a part of the common law. That they were evils 
 growing out of the abuse of trial by jury, there 
 was no doubt, and there was as little doubt in his 
 judgment, that they were certainly within the 
 reach of legislation, by regulations, as the causes 
 and number of challenges. He alluded to cases 
 before the higher courts. He was aware of evils 
 existing injury trials before magistrates but he 
 had never been able to devise a remedy for them. 
 Mr. B. concluded by moving to add a provision 
 giving to the legislature power to prescribe the 
 qualifications, compensation and number of ju- 
 rors, and the causes and number of challenges. 
 
 The amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. BROWN offered the following as a 5th sec- 
 tion : 
 
 (j 5. The Legislature shall have no power to pass any 
 law to defeat or in any wise affect the recovery of the 
 money mentioned in negociable paper upon the ground of 
 usury, where such paper is held by a person who has re- 
 ceived the same in good faith, for a valuable consideration, 
 and without actual notice of such usury. 
 
 After a few remarks from Mr. RICHMOND in 
 
 opposition, this section was rejected. 
 
 The 5th section was then agreed to as follows : 
 5. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive 
 
 fines imposed; nor cruel nor unusual punishments iuflic- 
 
 ted. 
 
 The 6th section was read, as follows : 
 6. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious pro- 
 fession and worship, without discrimination or preference, 
 shall forever be allowed in this State to ail mankind; but 
 the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so 
 construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify 
 practices inconsistent with the peace or salety ot this State. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to add after the word 
 " mankind," the following : 
 
 " And the Legislature shall provide by law for the effec 
 tual protection of the rights ot conscience, so th-it, in the 
 exercise thereof, no person shall suiter in person or es- 
 tate." 
 
 Mr. H. said he offered this, having reference to 
 a class of Christians in our State, who were very 
 respectable in number and among the be-*t class of 
 our citizens. He referred to the Seventh Day 
 Baptists, so called. They had been subjected to 
 embarrassing hannbsmems by ill-dispostd persons, 
 who, by selecting Saturday, then Sabbath, as the 
 day to bring suits against them, in that way very 
 often inflicted seiious injury upon them unless 
 they would forego their rights of conscience. 
 The Legislature had heretofore refused to take ac- 
 tion lor their protection, and this was only inten- 
 ded to require them to legislate. 
 
 The amendment was adapted. 
 
 Mr. CORNELL moved to strike out the sixth 
 section, arid insert in lieu thereof, the following: 
 " The mind being by nature free, all men have an inhe- 
 rent, unalicnableand indctc-asible right to the full and free 
 exercise of the faculties thereof; and to form, hold and 
 utter opinions upon all subjects. The free exercise and 
 enjoyment ol religious p 1 oiessiou and worsnip, wi hout dis- 
 crimination or piefpn nee, shall not be infringed; but no 
 man shall be comj elled to attend or support any religious 
 worship, place or ministry, of any name, nature or de- 
 scription whatever; except to iulfil a contract to give pe- 
 cuniary support, voluntarily and freely made; nor enforc- 
 ed, restrained, molested or burthened in mind, body or 
 
551 
 
 Roods- nor otherwise surfer on account or in consequence 
 of any cieed, opinion or bi-li-f, touching matt- rs ol reli- 
 gion philosophy or other subjects, nor shall the same in 
 any wist: diminish, enlarge or afiect his political or civil 
 capacity, co^poU-ncy er duty. But the liberty of con- 
 science hereby secured to all mankind within tins state, 
 shall not be so construed a-i to 'X use acts of licentious- 
 ne-s or justify practices inconsistent wiih the peace and 
 safety of this sta.e." 
 
 This was negatived. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to insert after the word 
 ** mankind" 
 
 " And no person shall be deprived of any right or pro- 
 vision, or rendered incompetent as a witness, on account 
 of his religious belief or unbelief." 
 
 Mr. T. briefly advocated his amendment, and 
 it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH here sent up the following- 
 being a transcript, he remarked, of a section in 
 the old Constitution: 
 
 " "Whereas the ministers of the gospel are, by their pro 
 fession, dedicated to the service of God, and the cure oi 
 souls, and ought not to nc diverted from the great duty ol 
 their Junctions; therefore no minister of the gospel or 
 priest of any denomination whatever, shall at any time 
 hereafter under any pretence, or description whatever, be 
 eligible to or capable of holding any civil or military of- 
 fice or place within this state." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON had supposed the time had 
 gone by when any class of citizens was to be pro- 
 scribed. He thought we should extend equa 1 
 rights to all. Why should these persons be ex 
 eluded ? Would our liberties be endangered by 
 placing Clergymen on a par with other profes 
 sional men ? He would give them equal rights 
 and subject them to the same burthens as othe] 
 citizens. He would allow them to hold office, i 
 the people willed, and would repeal the law ex 
 empting them from taxation. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY followed on the same side 
 As to the exemption from taxation, Mr. S. point 
 ed out the practical operation of the law. Man; 
 Mormons hia.l availed themselves of this exemp 
 tion by ordination of their own sort. He woul< 
 repeal that law, and also wipe out from the Con 
 stitution the odious distinction which had hither 
 to been held up in that instrument. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART also warmly opposed the pro 
 posed section, pointing out its injustice. 
 
 Mr. CUOOKrJK saiu thai he ditiered altogethe 
 from the geniiemen who had preceded himiu thi 
 debate. He was in favor of the section propose 
 by the gentleman fiom Jefferson. He believe 
 t'uat there was no section ol our present constiiu 
 lion which had been more carefully considered 
 more deliberately adopted, than the one^tthich i 
 was now proposed to reinstate. It was inserte 
 for wise and patriotic purposes by the ernineri 
 statesmen who composed the Convention of 1S21 
 The wisdom ot Ihe prohibition it contained ha 
 iiever been called in question. Botti the peopl 
 arid the priesthood have been content with its pro 
 visions. Its effect was consei vative, and most ar 
 dently did he hope that in this particular we sha 
 leave the constitution as we found it. No rna 
 had a greater respect for the proletsion in genera 
 than himself. But it must be remembered tha 
 priests were but men. That they possessed th 
 ambition and pride incident to humanity. Tha 
 like other men, they were divided imo two clas.* 
 e? the pure and the impure. He believed lha 
 as many knaves weie to be found in clerical robes 
 in propwtion to their numbers, as in any othe 
 
 ass of citizens, lie would frankly confess that 
 e, tor one, v\a jealous of die power and influence 
 
 the priesthood. It w.is perhaps true, that as 
 
 ng as so rn-iny and vaiious denominations exist- 
 1, and while the thousand sectarians continutd 
 
 battle the fragments ot each other's faith, that 
 ogieal danger of any attempt to unite church 
 ud stale could be apprehended. Their divisions 
 ow constituted our security against such an altei- 
 ative. But times and circumstances may mate- 
 ially change. The love ot office and the lust of 
 ower may serve as a chain to draw and bind them 
 ogether. From his own observation, he did not 
 elieve them, as a class, to be safe depositories ot 
 ower, Their peculiar calling, if it waslollowed 
 sit should be, most eminently unfitted them for the 
 uties ot legislation and administering ihe laws in 
 ecular offices with impartiality. It was well known 
 hat now, restricted as they are, they wielded in our 
 ocul elections a tremendous power. And it 
 vas equally certain that their influence was not 
 Iwavs well and wisely directed. He desired to 
 lonfine them to the proper and legitimate duties 
 >f the holy calling they have chosen. He believed 
 t was wisdom to keep them tree and unspotted 
 rom the defilements of political ambition. He did 
 not believe that a single pious and high-minded 
 )nest in the state desired the abrogation of this 
 >rovision. Ministers of this character were will- 
 ntj to be set apart for the service of God and the 
 offices of religion. It tended to keep their eyes 
 fixed on the glories of another world. Upon them 
 t operated not as a leatriction but as a shield 
 against the lorce and power of temptation. The 
 
 rovision of the constitution \\as necessary for the 
 protection ol the clerical profession. He did not 
 wish to do anything that might tend to lessen or 
 destroy the sacredness ot the priestly office. If 
 you destroy this reduction you confer no benefit 
 >r boon upon the valuable portion of the clerav. 
 They will be content with their dedication to God 
 and ihe cure ot souls. They will never consent 
 to become candidates for office while they are true 
 ministers of a pure gospel. The corrupt arid the 
 vicious of the clergy alone would seek to reach 
 official stations. Have we not enough ot corrup. 
 tion now in our political scrambles for offices, 
 without throwing the priesthood into the arena ? 
 The love of office and power had many and strong 
 temptations for the human mind, and the purest 
 priest had the passions and ambitions of men like 
 ourselves. Was it wise to invite a holy and hit>h- 
 minded ministry to mingle in the corrupting 
 conflicts of our political ' elections ? Would it 
 not hazard Ihe sac-redness of their piety arid soil 
 i heir robes of office? He implored gentlemen 
 to pause and reflect. Will not the destruction 
 of this protective provision not only endan- 
 ger the freedom of elections but also t-nd to 
 degrade the priestly office and character ? 
 It is said that this restriction puts the priest upon 
 a level with the convict. This cannot be true. 
 The priest is allowed the privilege of the ballot 
 of which the convict is deprived. The prohibi- 
 tion of the right of suffrage to the convict is the 
 result of his crime. It is forced upon him, and 
 there is no way of escape by his own act fi orn the 
 privation. Not so with the clergy. By them, 
 the prohibition is assumed by their own volunta- 
 ry act. They choose their profession with a full 
 
552 
 
 knowledge of its terms and disabilities. There 
 is no force in the case. Neither is there any 
 thing of imputation in the restriction. We assign 
 them a higher and holier function. We but say 
 to them that so long as they remain dedicated to 
 their holy calling, we intend to keep them free 
 and aloof from the corrupting influence and mis- 
 erable scrambles for office and power. Have we 
 not always restrained our high judicial officers, 
 and others in the same way, in order to keep the 
 channels of justice pure and above suspicion. 
 And is it not proper as rigidly to guard those who 
 are set apart for the cure of souls, as the judges 
 who watch over the right of property. The cer- 
 tain tendency of the restriction was to keep them 
 pure and unspotted from the world. It kept 
 their profession safe above the storms of political 
 turmoil, and saved them from the strong and al- 
 luring temptations to which they would otherwise 
 be exposed. It kept the vile from assuming the 
 robe It was the safeguard of religion itself 
 against the tide of corruption, that, during polit- 
 ical struggles, overspread the land. If he should 
 find a clergyman who desired to enter the field of 
 political warfare, he should consider it strong 
 eveidence that he was unfit for the station he 
 held. If any such priest desired to get relieved 
 from the restrictions, it was always in his power 
 to do so. They have nothing to do but cast aside the 
 priestly robe. They could thus by their own act 
 render themselves eligible to all the offices and 
 honors of the state. It was safe to continue the 
 conservative principle of the section ; and if he 
 stood alone, his vote would be recorded in favor 
 of continuing the restriction. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH did not design to kindle un 
 tins tire, when he transcribed this section Irom 
 the present constitution. But the debate having 
 taken the turn it had, he felt called upon to make 
 a tew remarks, and especially to repel the intiriiH- 
 tion that he undervalued the ministers of the gos- 
 pel He had no idea of classing them with fel- 
 ons', outlaws and outcasts, as the gentleman from 
 Gene&ee seemed to imagine. This was not the 
 estimation in which he held this distinguished 
 and venerated class of men. There was no class 
 whom he regarded with more respect and defer- 
 ence. The reasons why he would not have them 
 eligible to civil office, was expressed in the sec- 
 tion he had sent to the chair. They were by pro- 
 fession devoted to the service ot God and the 
 cure of souls. That was reason sufficient why 
 they should be excluded from a participation in 
 our political st rites. But there were higher con- 
 siderations. To them were committed the cul- 
 ture of the mass of mind that was soon to occupy 
 our places in society and in official station. There 
 was a supreme ruler of the universe. These men 
 professed to be his ministers special teachers of 
 Truth which he had given us to enlighten our 
 path through this wilderness world. We invited 
 them to come here each day at the opening of our 
 sessions, and invoke the blessing of God on us- 
 that was a virtual recognition of their high and 
 honorable station. He trusted no man would im- 
 Bute to him a disposition to lower and and degrade 
 it As tar as h is knowledge extended of this class 
 of men, he never had known one of them express 
 a desire to be recognised as politicians, or a wil- 
 lin<*ness to come into our political suites. That 
 
 they did sometimes exeteise the elective fran- 
 chise, was true; and it was their undoubted 
 right and duty to aid in elevating to high places 
 those who they regarded as best calculated to ad- 
 minister the government. , But all who valued 
 rightly the importance of'their ministration, and 
 the salutary influence which their example, not 
 less than their services, were calculated to ex- 
 ert would not desire to see them in the political 
 arena, mingling in the active duties of a political 
 campaign, and themselves the candidates of dif- 
 ferent parties, for party favor. Much less ought 
 we to incite by such a course, the slightest ap- 
 proach to that union of church and state, which 
 had been found to be so fruitful of evil in other 
 counties, to both. If he was rightly informed, 
 this very article was drawn by the hands of the 
 distinguished President Nott, of Union College. 
 He considered it essential to the influence of the 
 ministry. This was the testimony of one of this 
 profession, to the importance of this exclusion. 
 So far as he knew, it was desired by the clergy 
 themselves. There might, however, be among 
 them, those who were ambitious of political as 
 well as ecclesiastical honors ; and he trusted this 
 Convention would retain a provision, under which 
 we had lived for a quarter of a century. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG was truly rejoiced to find 
 that the committee who reported this article had 
 a sufficient regard for intelligence and equal 
 rights as to leave out this section, which it now 
 proposed to reinstate. For this they were enti- 
 tled to his thanks. We had been told that this 
 class did not ask for the repeal of this prohibition. 
 Who, he would ask, were to judge of that? If 
 they were as good men as had been alleged, then 
 certainly there was no necessity to exclude them 
 by a constitutional provision. It was also said 
 their calling was such that they could not inform 
 themselves on political subjects. Mr. Y. knew 
 of many from whom he might well learn lessons 
 of statesmanship. It was the duty of all to in- 
 form themselves of the policy of government, so 
 that they could vote understandingly. Mr. Y. 
 objected to this for a further reason. It would be 
 holding out a bribe for bad conduct. For, put 
 this in the Constitution, and it would be saying 
 only in fact, that if a clergyman would only be- 
 come so bad that he was unfit to act as clergyman, 
 he might then hold office. He did not say that a 
 clergyman could discharge the duties of his of- 
 fice and at the same time hold a seat in the Le- 
 gislature. But there were many offices, like that 
 of inspector of schools, the duties of which they 
 could well discharge. As to the exploded doc- 
 trine that this would be a union between church 
 and State, that was too stale to rest a word of ar- 
 gument upon. Neither could he see much sound- 
 ness in the objection that they were too holy to 
 mingle in political scenes. 
 
 Mr. BURR moved to amend by inserting "prac- 
 tising physicians." It was very inconvenient 
 to him to have his family doctqr taken away by 
 his duties in the legislature. He should like to 
 make a speech on this, but he was too hungry. 
 
 Some conversation ensued, when Mr. SHE- 
 PARD moved to rise and report. 
 
 Two votes were taken on this, but no quorum 
 voted either time. 
 
553 
 
 Mr. CHAIR then rose and reported that fact to 
 the Convention. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to adjourn. Agreed to, 
 ayes 41, noes -2 I. 
 
 Adjourned to 9 o'clock on Monday morning. 
 
 MONDAY (58th day,) Aug. 10. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. MORROW. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK presented a memorial relative to 
 the unfinished public works, canals, and canal 
 tolls, and the canal debt and revenue, from vari- 
 ous citi/ens of Madison county. Referred to the 
 committee of the whole having charge of the re- 
 port ot Mr. HOFFMAN, &c. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR presented a remonstrance 
 from the academy at Owego, Tioga, co., against 
 depriving the colleges and academies of this State 
 of a portion of the literature fund. 
 
 Referred to the committee of the whole having 
 charge of the report of Mr. NICOLL. 
 
 Mr. CLARK presented a similar remonstrance 
 from the Mexico Academy. 
 
 Referred to the same committee. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a report from .the 
 Comptroller in reply to a resolution calling for 
 the sums paid to the Commissary General. Also 
 a report from the Comptroller in relation to the 
 loans made to pay the Canal debt and the appro- 
 priations for the same. / 
 
 Both were referred to the committee of the 
 whole having charge of Mr. HOFFMAN'S report. 
 MONIES IN THE HANDS OF THE CHANCELLOR. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES from the judiciary committee 
 said that on Monday last a resolution was referred 
 to the judiciary committee requiring certain in- 
 formation from the Chancellor relative to monies 
 in his possession, the property of suitors, &c. 
 The committee thought it proper that this infor 
 mation shou.ld be obtained and laid before the 
 Convention, and therefore recommended the 
 adoption of the resolution. 
 
 Resolved, That the Chancellor of this State be request- 
 ed to direct the Register, Assistant Register and Clerks, 
 to furnish to this Convention the separate and distinct 
 items, \viththe names oi all the estates, heirs, owners and 
 parties claiming and interested, for whose benefit, and for 
 what purposes the funds are held, whether in trust or oth- 
 wise, with the dates of the receipt of all the funds, compri- 
 sing and making the aggregate amount reported or fur- 
 nished in this Convention by the Chancellor, as subject to 
 the order and control of the Court of Chancery, up to 
 January, 1846. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES, however, said he would move 
 to strike out the word " estates." 
 ^Mr. MANN said he would not object to that 
 
 The word " estates" was then stricken out. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said the Convention was some- 
 what thinly attended [there were not 70 present] 
 and as this was a delicate matter, he would move 
 that the report and resolution be laid on the table 
 
 The question on this was put and the motion 
 was lost. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that he was in favor of the 
 resolution ; still if gentlemen desired it he was 
 willing that it should lay over for a day or two 
 
 Mr. MANX said it was pretty generally conce 
 ded by the members of the Convention that the 
 Court of (*ii;nieery was to be abolished by t!u> 
 ^itution to be presented to the people 
 for their ratiiication,audthis large fund now under 
 its control, was now placed in the hands of Re- 
 
 44 
 
 Bisters and Clerks, and by them in Banks arid 
 Trust Companies, and otherwise disposed of. 
 le thought that this Convention and the people 
 ,hould know where it was, and to whom it be- 
 onged. Large amounts of this fund had been ac- 
 cumulating for 10, 20, 30 and even 40 years, and 
 Belonged to deceased persons and litigants, who 
 ;vere dead and gone. And their heirs and the 
 egitimate owners knew nothing of the existence 
 jf such funds or of their right to claim them and 
 get their own. He conceived it to be the duty of 
 his Convention, as it was about to abolish this 
 court, to have the information asked for by the 
 esolution, which would expose the condition of 
 :hese funds, and by giving publicity to the items, 
 enable the legal owners to claim and obtain their 
 rights. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that as the resolution seem' 
 ed likely to pass, he telt himself compelled to 
 say a word or two in opposition. Nothing that 
 fiad yet been said upon that iloor had convinced 
 him of the propriety of passing this resolution ; 
 in addition to tliis he thought he could clear- 
 ly see that much inconvenience, if not positivly 
 mischief would arise from the adoption of this re- 
 solution, to say nothing of the great labor and 
 trouble which it would cause th.e Registers in 
 Chancery. The various and complicated subject 
 in dispute in the Court of Chancery were altoy-ft Pi- 
 er private matters, and he did not think that it 
 was a legitimate duty of the Convention to en 
 quire how much money in that Court belonged to 
 A. B, and how much of it belonged to C. D. 
 Now if the information was really necessary, and 
 the Legislature should neglect to obtain it, or 
 rather were likely to do so, then they might en- 
 join on that Court or the Registers, to make a 
 publication every year, containing a list of all 
 these monies, &c. For his own part, he was no 
 champion of the court of chancery, nor did he 
 wish to be understood as desiring to keep any of 
 the matters connected with that Court in a state 
 of secresy. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that it was now pretty general- 
 ly understood that the Court of Chancery was to be 
 abolished. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that in his judgment it 
 would be much better to make some other dispo- 
 sition of the funds at present in the court of 
 chancery than to leave the same in the hands of 
 irresponsible clerks. Now the legislature it was 
 well known had chartered the New York Life 
 and Trust Company, and in that charter had ac- 
 tually authorized the Chancellor to place the 
 funds he had in the keeping of that company and 
 which funds were to be managed by that Compa- 
 ny ; for his own part he sincerely hoped that the 
 legislature would adopt something like the rule 
 established in England, when they came to revise 
 the courts. He would like them to adopt some 
 such plan as the English one ; in that country an 
 officer called an accountant general (who is un- 
 der the control of law) has charge of all this class 
 of funds, and from him the parties interested in 
 those funds can at any and all times obtain all the 
 information they may desire in relation to them. 
 But now unless the information sought to be ob- 
 tained by this resolution would lend reflecting 
 men to see the importance of establishing a dis- 
 tinct court of equity to take charge of these fund* 
 
554 
 
 he really did not see what good object the publi- 
 cation of these private matters would possibly 
 bring about. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that in reality this 
 fund was one in regard to which no part of it, 
 belonged to the State of New York. And it would 
 be quite as well before they proceeded farther, to 
 ascertain to whom it really did belong. Now, it 
 was the property of individuals ; and it was held 
 in trust until it could be ascertained to which of 
 the parties, that were in litigation, it belonged ; 
 and this would only be done at the close of a suit. 
 The Legislature, it was known, had some time 
 back passed a law ordering that its income should 
 be appropriated for the purchase of a library ; and 
 a large and valuable library had consequently 
 beenpurchased from the income of this large 
 fund, which had remained uncalled for from year 
 to year, and for many years. He never could un- 
 derstand why the legislature should or had as- 
 sumed thus to use these funds, or to direct their 
 use ; to take this income, arising from the inte- 
 rest'of the funds of private parties, and buy a li- 
 brary with it ; that had always astonished him. 
 This fund has certainly been rapidly accumula- 
 ting for a great number of years ; and undoubted- 
 ly if the publication of the items such as is 
 now called for by this resolution, had been 
 made years back, a very large portion of 
 of these funds would have found claimants and 
 owners rightful owners a very long time ag 
 He knew of a case (by way of illustrating this; 
 in reference to the publication of monies deposi- 
 ted in banks. During the last war, a gentleman 
 had deposited a large sum of money in a certain 
 bank he was killed in one of the battles on the 
 lines ; no memorandum was left by him to tell 
 where the money was, or that he had ever deposi- 
 ted it at all. And his heirs consequently knew 
 nothing at all about it, until several years after- 
 wards when the Legislature ordered the publica- 
 tion of all the items of monies deposited in Banks 
 that were unclaimed; and this was doubtless but 
 one case out of hundreds of a similar character. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that a similar state of 
 things existed in other courts the Common 
 Pleas, Supreme Court, &c., a large amount of 
 surplus funds upon various executions, and un- 
 claimed monies, that had accumulated in various 
 wavs and from various sources, being in their 
 possession. There should be an annual publica- 
 tion of all these matters. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said he agreed to this; but 
 the question was, shall the Convention call for it, 
 or shall it be be left to the Legislature? 
 
 Mr BROWN said that he was in favor of the 
 resolution ; but he rose to correct an error. It 
 had been stated here that the funds thus accumu- 
 iatino- in the Court of Chancery was the property 
 in litigation. Now, to a certain extent, this is 
 true. It is also true that property is often de- 
 posited in the Court of Chancery to abide the 
 event of suits ; but a great part of the fund spoken 
 of here was the proceeds of the sales of infants' 
 estates, of those of absent owners, and of the es- 
 tates out of which dower and the rights of wi- 
 dows were secured. Now, the legislature had 
 heretofore received all the information relative 
 to this particular fund ; the amount of money, the 
 length of time it had laid there, and to whom it 
 
 belonged. Such a report Vas made to them in 
 1830,- and it was very proper that another should 
 be made now. If the Court of Chancery was to 
 be abolished, it was necessary that the Conven- 
 tion should have this information. In fact, the 
 legislature should have ordered the publication 
 of this every year ; but we had no proof that they 
 would do it, for they have not done it. Still, he 
 did not believe there had been any improper use 
 made of this money, but the whereabouts, &c. of 
 so large a fund ought to be known. The Court 
 of Chancery was not a secret institution, but an 
 agent of the people of the State, and its deeds 
 should not be covered up. The clerks and re- 
 gisters give a bond in the penal sum of $20,000 or 
 $10,000, and the clerk in his (Mr. BROWN'S) dis- 
 trict, who gave a bond for only $10,000, had un- 
 der his control nearly, or over, $300,000. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that he recollected 
 very well that when a few years ago, a gentleman 
 offered a resolution of this kind in the legislature, 
 it created a tempest and commotion in this cham- 
 ber quite as great as that produced the other day 
 by the thunder storm, which tore down the cur- 
 tains and scattered the members. Now, he would 
 ask why should there be so great an opposition 
 to this resolution of enquiry ? If every thing was 
 all fair and square, why have any fear from pub- 
 lication of the information ? He wanted to get at 
 it; and he wished the resolution to be adopted at 
 once. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that he considered the on- 
 ly question before the Convention at this time, to 
 be not whether we are or are not to have this in- 
 formation, but whether the legislature or the 
 Convention is to call for it, or to receive it. The 
 information would be very voluminous it would 
 require a long statement, and the Convention 
 ought not to call for it, unless there was a very 
 good and sufficient reason for it. 
 
 It was now 10 o'clock and as the judiciary re- 
 port had been made the special order of the day, 
 for this hour, all further action on the resolution 
 was suspended. 
 
 THE JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 The PRESIDENT announced the arrival of the 
 hour when the Convention had fixed to take up 
 the reports from the judiciary committee as the 
 special order. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR desired to offer a resolution. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the special order would 
 now alone be acted upon. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said his resolution had reference 
 to that order of business. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES moved that the Convention 
 o into comrnitee on thejudicial reports. 
 
 Mr. BROWN asked unanimous consent to lay 
 on the table an amendment that it might be 
 Drinted and referred to the committee of the 
 whole. 
 
 Consent was given, and the amendment was 
 lad as follows, and referred : 
 
 ( AS soon as this constitution shall tie approved and 
 
 adopted by the people, it shall be tho duty of the Gover. 
 ior to appoint couunissioneis who shall severally have 
 ind possess the same power and authority they had and 
 )ossessed by the chancellor and justices of the supreme 
 ;ourt. Any one of the said commissioners may hold a 
 ourt for the hearing' and determination of suits which 
 hall be pending in the court, of chancery ; and any tuo 
 or more of the said commissioners may hoid ;i court for 
 he hearing and determination of suits which skail bepcnd- 
 
555 
 
 nt? m the supreme court ready for argument and hearing 
 at the time or their appointment, at such times and places 
 es the Governor may, by his proclamation, appoint. Such 
 suits to be brought to a hearing at the courts to be held by 
 the commissioners, upon such notices as is required by 
 rules and practice of the courts where such suits maybe 
 pending. And judgments and decrees may be registered 
 with the registers and clerks of such courts on the written 
 order or opinion ot the commissioner or commissioners 
 hearing such suits, with the like effect as if the same had 
 been heard and decided at one of the regular terms of the 
 court where the same may be ending. The legislature 
 shall provide by law for the compensation of the said com- 
 missioners And their powers and functions shall cease 
 t the time hereby appointed for this constitution to take 
 effect. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR then asked unanimous consent 
 to offer the resolution he had spoken of. It was 
 merely one of instruction to the committee of the 
 whole for them to report a judicial system com- 
 bining in one system, courts both of 'law and of 
 equity. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said it could only be re- 
 ceived by unanimous consent. 
 
 Mr. HART objected. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that, as advised by his 
 friends, he appealed from the decision of the Chair. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON asked that the special or- 
 der made last Friday should be read. 
 
 The President then read it. It made the vari- 
 ous reports of the committee on the judiciary the 
 special order every morning from this day at 10 
 in the morning. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON insisted that they were com- 
 plying with the order. That they were taking up 
 those reports as the order directed ; but the res- 
 olution did not say that they should go into 
 committee of the whole on them. Having there- 
 fore taken them up, they would of course instruct 
 the committee of the whole. He did not think 
 this would be denied. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER hoped the objection would be 
 withdrawn, as it would thus enable the Conven- 
 tion to decide whether they would have a Court 
 of Chancery or not. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that there could be no ques- 
 tion but that it was the duty of the Convention to 
 observe the order it had made; this was as much 
 Iheir duty as it was to render obedience to a res- 
 olution which required that all debate should 
 atop at a certain hour; and under a resolution of 
 the latter character, the moment the hour ar- 
 rived at which it was prescribed, that debate 
 should cease then all debate must cease ; and 
 and with these views he felt satisfied that the 
 decision of the Chair was correct. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said he entirely differed from 
 this view. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then said he would read an 
 extract from Jefferson's Manual, which had a 
 bearing on this question. It was as follows : 
 
 " The only cuse where a member has a right to insist on 
 any thing, is where he calls lor the execution of a subsist- 
 ing order oi the House. Here, there having been already 
 a resolution, uny person has a right to insist that the: speak- 
 er, or any other whose duty it is, shall carry it into execu- 
 tion, and no debate or delay can be had on it." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said that so far as Jefferson's 
 Manual was concerned this was all very well in 
 relation to a special order. But the order in 
 question did not say whether the reports should 
 be taken up in Convention or in committee of the 
 whole. 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that heretofore all the reports 
 had been committed to the committee of the 
 whole, and subsequently they had passed an or- 
 der stating that when a certain hour arrived, those 
 reports should become the special order of the 
 day. It was very clear therefore that the Con- 
 vention must go into the committee of the whole 
 where those very reports were, before they could 
 get at them to act upon them. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER still contended that the Con- 
 vention had, notwithstanding all this, the right 
 to instruct the committee. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that this matter wa 
 perfectly clear. And the gentleman from Wash- 
 ington (Mr- BAKER) was clearly correct in his 
 view of the case. The reports that we desired to 
 consider were not in Convention at all. 
 
 The PRESIDENT repeated ibe decision he had 
 just previously made. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that to prevent delay he 
 would withdraw his appeal. 
 
 The Convention then went into the committee 
 of the whole, on the 
 
 REPORTS ON THE JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 Mr. "C'AIVJBRETET^G was calleffToTnTCnair. 
 
 The Secretary read the first section, as follows: 
 
 ^ 1. The Assembly shall have the power of impeach- 
 ment, by a vote of a majority of all the members elected. 
 The court fur the trialof impeachments, shall be composed 
 of the President of the Senate, the Senators, and the judges 
 of the court of appeals, the major part of whom may hold 
 the court. On the trial of an impeachment against the Go 
 vernor, the Lieut. Governor shall not set as a member of 
 the court. No judicial officer shall exercise his office;after 
 he shall have been impeached, until his acquittal. Before 
 the trial of an impeachment, the members of the court 
 shall take an oath or affirmation, truly and impartially to 
 try the impeachment, according to evidence; and no person 
 shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds 
 of the members present. Judgment in cases of impeach- 
 ment shall not extend further than to removal from office; 
 but the party convicted shall be liable to indictment, and 
 punishment according to law. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that having on the intro- 
 duction of this report on the 1st of August made 
 some general remarks respecting the plan report- 
 ed by the committee, or a majority of that com- 
 mittee, it did now appear to be necessary that he 
 should do more than to make such very brief re- 
 marks as were necessary to elucidate this section. 
 It was mainly drawn from the section in the pre- 
 sent Constitution ; the change in it was in rela- 
 tion merely to the persons who were to compose 
 the court. By the old Constitution the persons 
 named to constitute the court were the chancellor, 
 judges of the supreme court, and the state senate. 
 Thus making it in fact to be composed of the same 
 persons as the present Court of Errors. The com- 
 mittee in the present report had thought it best 
 that the court of impeachments should consist of 
 the Lieut. Governor, the state senators and the 
 judges of the court of appeals. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to amend this section thus : 
 
 " The Assembly shall have the power of impeaching all 
 civil ofiiccrs of this State for mal-practices and corrupt 
 practices in ofiice, and for high crimes and misdemean- 
 ors." 
 
 Mr. DANA explained that his object in this 
 amendment was to designate the officers who 
 should be liable to impeachment. He had done 
 nothing more than to use the precise language of 
 the present Constitution. 
 
 Mr. DANA'S amendment was rejected. 
 
556 
 
 Mr. CONELY offered this amendment: 
 
 " Resolved, Thatthe court forthe trial of impeachments 
 consist only of the Senate." 
 
 He would strike out the words " the Senators 
 and the judges of the court of appeals" and insert 
 the words "the Senate." 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that he was opposed to 
 the adoption of this amendment ; and he would 
 ask the members of the Convention, if any of them 
 should be so unfortunate as to be impeached by 
 the court of impeachments, whether he or they 
 would like to have the case tried before the very 
 court by whom the impeachment was made. 
 
 Mr. CONELY said that his object was to avoid 
 the great influence of that fraternal feeling which 
 it has invariably been seen existed in all bo- 
 dies, disposing the members thereof to lean too 
 much towards the individual who was im- 
 peached, instead of rigidly but fairly and honora- 
 bly insisting on enforcing the laws and obtaining 
 the ends of justice. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that there was no proprie- 
 ty in making this section in relation to impeach- 
 ments as stringent as they had made it ; and he 
 wished the members to look at the llth section, 
 where another mode was provided for the re- 
 moval of the Judges. 
 
 This is it: 
 
 |g*5 11. Justices of the Supreme Court and judges of the 
 court of appeals, may be removed by joint resolution of 
 both houses of the Legislature, if two-thirds of all the mem- 
 bers elected to the Assembly and a majority of all the mem- 
 bers elected to the Senate concur therein. Surrogates and 
 all judicial officers, except those mentioned in this section, 
 and except justices of the peace, may be removed by the 
 Senate, on the recommendation of the Governor; but no 
 removal shall be made unless the cause thereof be eiiteied 
 on the journals, nor unless the party complained of, shall 
 have been served with a copy of the complaint against 
 him, and shall have had an opportunity of being heard in 
 his defence. On the question of removal, the ayes and 
 noes shall be entered on the journals. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that he greatly preferred 
 this last section, which thus allowed two-thirds 
 of the Assembly, of all elected, together with a 
 majority of all those elected to the Senate, ,to re- 
 move from office. 
 
 Mr. CONELY'S amendment was thenf put and 
 negatived. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that he desired to extend 
 the disqualification in case of conviction to the 
 holdingof any office under the state government 
 of an^vfrind whatever. In short he wished to re- 
 store/the article in this particular to the provi- 
 sions of the present constitution. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said there had been doubts about 
 this in the committee. But his own opinion was 
 that this amendment should be adopted. 
 
 Mr BASCOM said he certainly hoped that the 
 amendment would not be adopted. For he very 
 much doubted the propriety of clothing the court 
 of impeachment with any such powers as ihose 
 contemplated by this amendment. He preferred, 
 by far, that the section should remain as it is. For 
 it might very well happen that a young man 
 might be impeached; and if so, would they de- 
 bar him on that account from ever after holding 
 any office whatever? Should not a long life of peni- 
 tence and good conduct, be taken into the account? 
 He certainly was willing to trust the people with 
 the power of forgiveness, in the matter, and allow 
 them to confer an office on such an one if they 
 thought proper to do so. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said he hoped the amendment 
 of the gentleman from Clinton (Mr. STETSON) 
 would be adopted. The mode of removal from 
 office by the legislature as recommended ly the 
 committee in section No. 11 of this report is 
 wisely arranged, and provides for all cases of phy- 
 sical and mental disability, not involving moral 
 delinquency. A conviction under an impeach- 
 ment will only occur in cases of corrupt official 
 misconduct, and in all such cases the judgment 
 shall extend as it now does, not only to removal 
 from office, but also to future disqualification to 
 hold any office in the State. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that this amendment pro- 
 posed was exactly the language of the section in 
 the present constitution ; and as he believed in 
 almost every constitution of the Union. 
 
 Mr. STETSON'S amendment was adopted, 
 
 Mv. WORDEN said that the section as it stood 
 by the reading of the 4th line, would authorise 
 the holding of this court without the credit of any 
 one of the court of appeals. It says, " the court 
 for the trial of impeachments shall be composed 
 of the President of the Senate, the Senators, and 
 of the court of appeals ; the major part of whom 
 may hold the court." Now, he wished to amend 
 the section, so as to require that a major part of 
 both bodies shall be holding the court in cases of 
 impeachment. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that possibly the section 
 might be considered liable to that construction 
 to the objection suggested by the gentleman from 
 Ontario (Mr. WORDEN.) He was willing to ac- 
 cept the amendment. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN'S amendment was adopted. 
 
 Mr.TAGGART moved to strike out the words, 
 " judge of the court of appeals," and insert "jus- 
 tices of the Supreme Courts." 
 
 This was negatived. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART further moved to amend the 
 42th line by striking out the words, " two-thirds 
 of the members present," and to insert " a majo- 
 jority of all the members present." He said this 
 was a question of very great importance ; he cer- 
 tainly did not know any reason why a different 
 rule should prevail in courts of impeachment 
 than in other courts, and he was not aware of any 
 other court in which a two-third vote was re- 
 quired. 
 
 ,v> Mr. HOFFMAN thought that the gentleman 
 was certainly mistaken in his rule. In a case of 
 impeachment, the Senators acted in the capacity 
 of petit jurors, and in every other case we re- 
 quired entire unanimity to commit. He was in 
 attendance at the trial of Judge Peck, and his im- 
 pression and firm convictions at that time was 
 that a vote of two-thirds was entirely proper. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS said that gentlemen should 
 remember that in addition to all other matters, 
 there was the consideration of the security of the 
 penalty, in case of conviction. This, therefore, 
 should not be dependent on a single vote, which 
 it would be if a majority had to decide. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART'S amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR then moved to amend the section 
 so that it would read thus : 
 
 " The Senate, with the Judges of Appeals, shall possess 
 exclusive power to try impeachments." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said the amendment might seem 
 to be slight, as to be merely verbal; it was, how- 
 
557 
 
 ever, important. He wt-nt on to .show tlmt a si- 
 milar provision was found in the constitution of 
 the United States, and he defended it on the 
 ground of tlic necessity for a separate and inde- 
 pendent judicial department, which had received 
 the sanction of many constitutional sages in other 
 States. This State, unlike many others, never 
 had a constitutional provision creating a distinct 
 judicial department, and therefore, although we 
 have a Supreme Court, the legislature might 
 erect another Supreme Court, and though they 
 could not abolish the existing Supreme Court, 
 tlu'y miV'it }>;>-> laws which would divest it of all 
 its business. We have also a court of Oyer and 
 Terminer, and provision is made showing who 
 are the judges of it; yet there wus nothing to pre- 
 vent the appointment of special commissioners to 
 try criminals, taking the business from the stand- 
 ing tribunals. Now all this should have been 
 avoided by the erection of an independent depart- 
 ment of the government a political power and 
 a section should be introduced into the constitu- 
 tion to effect that object. He spoke of courts 
 martial and courts for the trial of impeachments, 
 as partaking of the same character, but not as be- 
 ing part of a judicial department, or having any- 
 thing to do with the regular administration of jus- 
 tice. They were only means used for the puri- 
 fication of the civil and military department, 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that he really could not 
 see how the amendment of the gentleman from 
 New-York (Mr. O'CONOR) at all varied the ef- 
 fect of the original provision of the section. It 
 merely avoids distinguishing as a Court this 
 body who are to try impeachments. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR in reply, said that his desire 
 was to adopt the language of the Constitution of 
 the U. States; and that instrument makes this 
 board a tribunal, but not a Court; thus it is dis- 
 connected from the judicial department. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN hardly knew how to feel any 
 considerable interest in a question so purely tech- 
 nical as this, and yet he apprehended in its ul- 
 timate consequences it may deserve n serious con- 
 sideration. This mode of proceeding by impeach- 
 ments was instituted in the controversies be- 
 tween the barons and the Kings, in order that the 
 great officials might be brought to justice. It 
 deserved in his opinion the very front place in 
 any judicial system. Mr. H. urged the pro- 
 priety of infusing a large share of the popular 
 feeling in this court, and expressed the hope that 
 the court would be composed of the Senators, and 
 a single judge to preside when the governor was 
 impeached. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND offered as a substitute, the 
 following section from his minority report : 
 
 ^ji. There shall be a court for the trial oi'impeachments 
 It shall be composed ot the President of the Senate, and 
 the senators, or a major part of them. The members of 
 the court shall, belore trying an impeachment, take an 
 oath or affirmation, impartially to try and determine the 
 charge in question No j eis 11 shall be convicted without 
 the concurrence of two thirds of the members present. 
 Judgment in cases ot impeachment shall extend only to 
 removal from office, ana disqualification to hold any office 
 of trust, honor or profit, under this state ; but the person 
 convicted, shall be liable to indiotin-.-nt and punishment, 
 according to law. Any ju>lgf impeached shall be suspen- 
 ded from cxeicising his office till his acquittal. Tin; as- 
 sembly shall have the power ot impeaching all civil olti. 
 cersol this stale lor corrupt practices in office, and high 
 crimes and misdemeanor ; but a nuijority ot all the mem- 
 bers elected, shall concur in an impeachment 
 
 This Mr. K. said would meet the objections so 
 ,vell stated by the gentlemen from Herkimer. It 
 leaves out of the tribunal the judges and confines 
 the court entirely to the Senate, as^s done in the 
 United States Constitution. It also provides for 
 what officers shall be impeached. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN could not agree that, judges 
 should not form a part of the court of impeach- 
 ments. When a judicial officer was impeached 
 there should be at least 'a sufficient infusion of 
 the judicial power, to preserve legal questions 
 and the rules of evidence inviolate. The Senate 
 was composed of men, to be sure, of intelligence 
 and ability, but they were selected with a view 
 rather to their legislative than to their judicial 
 capacity. He, therefore, preferred the original 
 section. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS desired to amend the amendment 
 with reference to the extent of punishment. It 
 was to strike out the words " and disqualification 
 to hold any office of trust, honor or profit under 
 the State." It seemed to him that this was too 
 strong a punishment to impose on any individu- 
 als by a Senate, without a jury, and without a 
 trial under the forms of the common law, ex- 
 empted as it was, too, from any intervention of 
 the pardoning power. He was aware that the 
 provision was contained in the present Constitu- 
 tion, and that no complaint had arisen under it, 
 but he apprehended that in excited party times 
 this power might be used in an oppressive man- 
 ner. He preferred to leave these cases to the or 
 dinavy judicial tribunals. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLUS thought that the Convention had 
 already decided upon this question. He should 
 also object to the section, because it proposed to 
 make the Senate the sole tribunal to try impeach- 
 ments. The members of that body, like those of 
 all legislative bodies, were more or less imbued 
 with partisan feelings, and it might be that an im- 
 peachment in an excited state of political feeling 
 might grow out ot those very feelings. Mr. R. 
 urged the propriety of infixing into the court a 
 share of the judicial force, to restrain that (eel- 
 ing. For these reasons he preferred the original 
 
 The question then being taken, Mr. LOOMI5' 
 amendment was rejected, as was tne substitute ot 
 Mr. KIRKLAND, also. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS offered the following substi- 
 tute lor the first section: 
 
 & 1 The legislature shall define offences in office, and 
 provide for the trial and punishment of persons guilty ol 
 such offences in the ordinary courts o! the state. I he jn- 
 dictmem of any officer lor any act declared by law to be 
 an official oftence, shall operate as a suspension ol ,11 
 powers of such officer, until he shall be convicted on sue! 
 indictment; such conviction shall operate as a removal 
 from office. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS said his object was to intro- 
 duce something into our Constitution that would 
 be of some effect. He proposed to place persons 
 liable to impeachment on a par wi'h all other 
 offenders, giving them the same riuht of defence 
 anil prescribing the result of a conviction. 
 
 Mr. VVORDEN said that such a provision al- 
 ready existed in the law and there never had been 
 any difficulty in applying it. He urged that it would 
 be nnsafp to attempt to df-fine in a law what of- 
 fences should he punishable. Such a thing was 
 beyond the power of human imagination. 
 
558 
 
 The question being taken, Mr. FLANDERS' 
 amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to strike out the words 
 *' but the party convicted shall be 1-iable 1o in- 
 dictment and punishment according to law," and 
 insert, " arid shall not be a bar to an indictment." 
 Lent, 22 to 42. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to strike out the word 
 ''convicted," in the last line, and insert the word 
 
 "impeached," and the word 
 after the word "shall." 
 
 notwithstanding" 
 
 This was adopted, alter a brief debate by Messrs. 
 A. W. rOUNG,WORDEN, and TAGGART. 
 
 Mr. BASCOiM moved as a substitute the follow, 
 ing sections, from Ins minority report : 
 
 $ 1. A court for the trial of impeachments shall consist 
 of the President of the Senate, the Senators or a major 
 part of them, and the Judges of the Supreme Couit, or a 
 major part of them, whose term of office shall be within 
 two years and not within one year of its expiration; and 
 the Senators and Judges taking their seats in the said court, 
 for the trial of any impeachment, shall continue members 
 thereof until the same shall be determined, notwithstand- 
 ing the expiration of their term. But no officer against 
 whom an impeachment may have been presented, shall at 
 any time be a member of the said court. The impeach- 
 ment ot an officer shaJl suspend him from the dischaige of 
 his official functions. 
 
 -2. The Assembly shall have power of impeaching all 
 civil officers of this state, for mal and corrupt conduct in 
 office, and high crimes and misdemeanors, by a majority of 
 all the members elected concurring. Judgment, in cases 
 of impeachment, shall not extend further than the remo- 
 val from office, and shall not be a bar to an indictment. 
 
 This amendment was rejected. 
 Mr. O'CONOR offered the following, on the 2d 
 section : 
 
 <J -2. The residue of the judicial power of this state shall 
 be vested in the Supreme Court, and the inferior courts 
 mentioned in this article; subject to *>uch appellate juris- 
 diction as may be vested in the Court of Appeals. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER mov*d to amend by strik- 
 ing out all after the word " article." Lost. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said that on account of some 
 differences of opinion among the merimbers of the 
 committee, as to the form and propriety of this 
 section, it was rejected. And he thought if it 
 was adopted at all, it should be alter the report 
 had been gone through with, and it had been de- 
 termined what courts should be cons'ituted, and 
 what should be left to legislation in the matter. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER supported the section. 
 There were now too many courts, the people com- 
 plained, and he would settle the question here. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM thought too, that the question 
 should be decided here. He looked upon it as 
 giving too much to the Legislature to require them 
 to decide what courts were necessary for the pre- 
 servation of justice. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR contended that this was the only 
 way in which ajudicial department could be ere. 
 ated, without leaving the whole matter to thi 
 Legislature. 
 
 Air. KIRKLAND although he concurred in the 
 propriety of the section, thought this to be not 
 the proper rlace tor it to be inserted. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN regarded this matter as fully 
 provided tor in the section, in a manner for pre- 
 ferable to the amendment of Mr. O'CONOR, anc 
 should vote against it. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMEfl moved a reconsideration 
 to lie upon the table. 
 
 The 2d section was then read as follows: 
 
 -2. There shall be a court 6\ appeals, composed of eight 
 judges, of whom four shall be elected by the electors of 
 the State ibr eight years, and four si^kcted from the class 
 of Justices of the Supreme Court having the shortest time 
 to serve. Provisions shall be made, by law, for designat- 
 ing one of the number elected, as chief judge, and lor se- 
 lecting such Justices of the Supreme Court, from time to 
 time, and for so classifying those elected, that one shall 
 be elected every second year. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said there was one provision 
 in this section which was a matter of some dis- 
 cussion in the committee, although it was not now 
 as originally drawn. That proposed the election 
 of all the eight Judges of appeals. He prefeired 
 this and moved to amend so that all the Judges 
 hould be selected from the justices of the 
 Supreme Court. It was supposed necessary to 
 hrow some of the popular feeling into this court. 
 When we came to I he 12th section, Mr. P. ap. 
 prehended we should adopt the provision for elec- 
 ion of these judges. That would be a sufficient 
 nfusion of the popular element. He bad anoth- 
 er objection. If it should be found necessary to 
 lave judges to hold special terms, they could be 
 aken from this court of appeals. But if this was 
 adopted, these four judges elected only as judges 
 of the court of appeals, could not discharge that 
 duty. He had another objection. This placed 
 ;he judges at too great a distance from the elect- 
 ors. It hai been suggested that these four judges 
 would be laymen, as his friend from Monroe call- 
 ed them. Mr P. apprehended no laymen would 
 ever be elected to this high judicial tribunal, but 
 all be taken from the most eminent members of 
 the legal profession. But he would not extend 
 his remarks, but submit his amendment to the 
 committee. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND rose to propose a serious ques- 
 tion to the committee in regard to the most useful 
 course to be pursued in acting upon this question 
 of establishing a judiciary system. He believed 
 no discussion could be had upon these reports, 
 taken up separately, which would result in any- 
 thing satisfactory. The several reports were but 
 parts of one whole, links in one chain, and they 
 should be brought up so that members of the com- 
 mittee could give their views in regard to the en- 
 tire subject. The discussions here were not for 
 the benefit of the members of the Convention 
 alone. The Judiciary Committee were unable to 
 present any reasons in support of the great changes 
 which they proposed to be made, and he had 
 heard objections made to some of them, as the 
 most mischievous which could be made. It was 
 desirable, therefore, that this subject might aiise 
 in such a way as to allow gentlemen to go over 
 the entire ground, and give such discussions upon 
 it as were looked for by the members of the bar, 
 and the people throughout the State. So, he be- 
 lieved tnat taking up this report by sections, as 
 was very well done in other articles, was not the 
 proper mode, or one which would be the most ad- 
 
 1 The CHAIR said that the whole subject of the 
 Judiciary system was open in the discussion of 
 the section now under consideration. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND was then satisfied that his 
 
 objections might be waived. 
 
 Mr RUGGLES desired to bring two points, 
 which would require the consideration of the com- 
 mittee,- up in distinct order. One point was whe- 
 ther the powers of tne courts of law and equity 
 
559 
 
 should be kept separate or united in one. This 
 was involved in the 3d section. The other was 
 as to the mode in which these judges of the Su- 
 preme Court should be selected. He suggested 
 to expedite business and to confine speakers more 
 to the point, whether it would not be best to pass 
 over the 'Jd section and go to the 3d and from that 
 to the 12th, which provided for the appointment 
 of judges. He moved to pass over the 2d and take 
 up the 3d section, which related to the organiza- 
 tion of the courts of law and equity. 
 
 Mr. BROWN doubted the propriety of this, be- 
 cause no vote we should take in committee of the 
 whole would be conclusive. The ayes and noes 
 were not taken and it was with the utmost diffi- 
 culty that we could procure a quorum to vote. 
 He suggested that in the Convention we should 
 come to a determinate and positive conclusion on 
 the two points referred to by Mr. RUGGLES. He 
 proposed that the committee should rise and re- 
 port, and then he would submit resolutions of in- 
 struction on the various points involved. He read 
 a series of resolutions which he should then offer 
 
 Hus proposition was discussed by Mes-rs. FOR- 
 SYTH, WARD, A. W. YOUNG, WORDEN 
 S TK I'SON, STRONG, MARVIN, BROWN, TIL- 
 DEN ard others. 
 
 Mi. PERKINS moved that the committee rise 
 and report progress. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved to lay that question on the 
 table. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH moved a recess, which was 
 agreed to. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 As soon as the Convention organized, the ques 
 tion arose on granting leave to the committee o 
 the whole having charge of the Judiciary repor 
 to sit agaiu. Leave was granted. 
 
 JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 Mr. C AMBRELENG resumed the Chair. Thi 
 committee then took up the Judiciary reports. 
 The second section was passed over. 
 Ttie third section was then read as follows: 
 ^ 3. There shall be a Supreme Court having the sam 
 jiiriiilicciun in law and equity, which the Supreme Cour 
 and Court of Chancery now hav, subjtct to legulatioi 
 bylaw. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to strike out the sec 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES hoped we should have som 
 reason for this before the question was taken. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said his design was to draw 
 out some reasons for having the section there. 
 The article under consideration provided for 
 court of appeals, and then for some other court o 
 courts. The committee had called a multitud 
 of courts the supreme court. They had created 
 court with thirty-two justices, divided into eigh 
 sections, and located them in different parts of th 
 state, and called it the supreme court. Ther 
 no unity in it. He was utterly opposed t 
 such a system. If we were to have a suprem 
 court let it be a court entitled to that name. J 
 we must have eight district courts, let them b 
 called district courts. A supreme court, intenc 
 ed as a unit, and yet divided into eight parts 
 would be as diiricult to be understood as som 
 systems of theology. Where and how are we t 
 proceed in it ? How and where are we to brin 
 
 ur causes to hearing or argumont? He was in 
 avor of district courts, located in different parts 
 f the state, and vested with law and equity ju- 
 'sdiction, transacting business as was clone by the 
 irmer supreme court before the adoption oi' the 
 onstitution of 1821 . That court held its term in 
 ank, and also held circuit courts and court of 
 yer and terminer throughout the whole state. 
 "hat court, with five judges, disposed of all the 
 usiness of the state without delay or inconveni- 
 nce. Such a court would probably be inadequate 
 low to perform all the business of this great state, 
 o great has been the increase of population and 
 >usiness since that time. But we might establish 
 listrict courts, with the right of appeal to the 
 :ourt of last resort, and save all the benefits of 
 hat system. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said there would be no more dif- 
 iculty in understanding the kind of Court, or the 
 >ractice of the Court, proposed to be established 
 >y this article a court holding courts in banque, 
 n eight different places, by three judges, than in 
 understanding the present system of three judges 
 
 and one of them holding a court in banque. 
 
 This system this article contemplates a unity 
 in that court one court for the whole State; 
 either of the three judges may hold a court in 
 banque, and any ot them trying issues of fact. 
 One court doing business in banque is not sum"- . 
 cient lor the wants of the community; for a great 
 city like New- York for instance. But the system 
 proposed by this article is the same as if they 
 were constituted as they now are, and yet that 
 two or more courts in banque might be held at the 
 same time and in different parts of the State. It 
 preserves the unity of this court inasmuch as it 
 has the same judges, each being authorized to 
 hold a court of appeals ; and yet it contemplates 
 district courts, distinctly from this, and simply 
 by themselves, as if they were eight separate 
 and distinct courts of jurisdiction. This will re- 
 medy the evil of having the business of the profes- 
 sion done by counsel who reside here in this 
 part of the state. They often go into these causes 
 without a knowledge of the real argument of the 
 case, and therefore this plan will be greatly for 
 the benefit of suitors. And so far as locality was 
 concerned, this adapted itself to the convenience 
 of the public as much as if the three judges hold- 
 ing a circuit were circuit judges confined to one 
 circuit. These judges will interchange and tra- 
 verse the whole state. 
 
 Mr. CROOKKR here asked him the plan by 
 which he proposed to bring causes to trial on thesis 
 circuits? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS: They shall take their place in 
 these courts in the order that shall be prescribed 
 by law, and shall continually interchange iheir 
 circuits. 
 
 Mr. HUN F said that he had an amendment to 
 otier, not quite so sweeping as that of the gi'ntle. 
 man troin G. j nesee lie would not give this court 
 nil the powers ih.it ;>re now exercised by the 
 Chancellor. He moved to amend so that the sec- 
 lion should read thus : 
 
 ' There shall be a Supreme Court, having jurisdiction 
 in law and equity." 
 
 He would strike out the words "the same," in 
 the first line, and all after the word " equity," in 
 the second line. 
 
560 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that by this motion he sup. 
 posed the gentleman meant to take from the Le- 
 gislature the power to regulate the practice of the 
 Supreme court. Thisameiidment would certainly 
 stnke out the clause giving the Legislature power 
 to regulate that jurisdiction, and would conse- 
 quently throw that duty upon us. Now, for his 
 own part, he believed that it would be an endless 
 and a thankless talk for this Convention to attempt 
 to perform this duty of deciding where the courts 
 should, and where they should not, have jurisdic- 
 tion. It would be the work of a considerably 
 protracted judicial act ; such a one as he hoped to 
 see adopted in the next session of the Legislature. 
 He objected to leaving this task to the Convention. 
 He hoped, for the puipose.of preserving the vm 
 metry of the report, that this section would be al. 
 lowed to srand, unless it was very objectionable 
 to give to the Legislature this power of defining 
 the practice of the courts. The judiciaiy com- 
 mittee intended to have one great fountain of law 
 and equity, subject to curtailment ef jurisdiction 
 and power by the Legislature. This was one 
 gieat and desirable object to be attained. And 
 this was a highly important matter, and one which 
 we could not go into without great detail. He 
 hoped, therefore, as he before observed, that un- 
 less there were some proper objections to giving 
 Ihis power to the Legislature, that the section 
 would be allowed to stand as it was. 
 
 Mr. HUNT said that the extent or definition of 
 the jurisdiction in law and equity, as it now ex- 
 ists, was very vague ; and he doubted whether 
 any three, or even two men could be found in the 
 State who could tell, or agree as to what power 
 the Court of Chancery^now really had. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that the gentleman from 
 New York (Mr. HUNT) was perfectly right in 
 this matter. He was decidedly opposed to the 
 court of chancery. And indeed it was a general 
 remark now that the chancellor had more power 
 than the Autocrat of Russia had. Now he hoped 
 we were not going to confirm any of these out- 
 rageous powers. He did not want the legislature 
 to have the privilege of conferring on this court 
 any of these extensive and injurious powers. If 
 the legislature had always had the privilege to 
 regulate this tremendous power as some of the 
 gentlemen here on this floor said they had, and if 
 the legislature, having this t power, had permitted 
 this monstrous and overgrown court to make these 
 and most infamous encroachments on the rights 
 of individuals which that court had made, the 
 o-reatest possible censure ought to fall on the le- 
 gislature. He would give to no body the power 
 to erect such courts as could usurp such powers, 
 and encroach on the rights of the people so infa- 
 mously as this court had done. And he therefore 
 agreed fully with the gentleman from New York 
 that when we say that this supreme court shall 
 have jurisdiction in law and equity we have said 
 quite enough. 
 
 ""Mr. RUGGLES said that as he understood the 
 object of the amendment, it was to make that 
 plainer which was now said to be obscure. And 
 he only now rose to ask the gentleman from Ge- 
 nesee, (Mr. RICHMOND) if he would instruct him 
 how the obscurity of the section might be obvia- 
 ted ; and if he did so, he would vote tor an amend- 
 ment to that eil'ect. He wished to ask that gen- 
 
 tleman what would be the extent of that jurisdic- 
 tion of the Supreme Court if these words were 
 stricken out. But otherwise, he thought the sec- 
 tion had much better remain as it stood. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD had thought that the object 
 of the mover was to prevent the Legislature from 
 organising any other district court of equity. If 
 this was so, the amendment would defeat its own 
 object; for if this was stricken out, the legisla- 
 ture would be left entirely unrestrained ; and 
 they would then have the power to organize as 
 many courts of equity as they thought proper. 
 He could not, and would not assent to allowing 
 them this power, and therefere he should vote to 
 retain the section. He (Mr. C.,) desired to get 
 rid of this court of equity, and to give to the Su- 
 preme Court, law and equity powers. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR regretted that the gentleman 
 from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD) was not in his 
 seat this morning, when he had the honor to pro- 
 pose a new second section, which would have 
 obviated the present difficulty and the honor to 
 fail in it. It was said on all hands to be a very 
 good proposition, but it was said not to be the 
 right time for introducing it, and so it was post- 
 poned by a vote of rejection. Mr. O'C. thought 
 it was now apparent that that proposition was 
 made precisely in the right time. He (Mr. O'C.) 
 wished to accomplish the very same thing which 
 the gentleman from Otsego did. He believed 
 that the majority of this Convention desired it. 
 But he was quite sure they would not accomplish 
 it if they adopted this section, even if it were 
 amended, as proposed by his colleague (Mr. 
 HUNT.) He (Mr. O'C.) wished to strike out a 
 little more. He would strike out all of the sec- 
 tion except the provision that there shall be a su- 
 preme court. Even that was not very necessary. 
 There were some here the gentleman from Otse- 
 go, himself (Mr. O'C.) and some others ready 
 strenuously to advocate a system which would 
 bring the administration of civil justice, in all 
 its departments, into one uniform method of pro-' 
 ceedure. And he was anxious to have an oppor- 
 tunity this morning to present a resolution in- 
 structing this committee of the whole to report a 
 judicial system by which equitable relief might be 
 administered in the same courts in which legal re- 
 lief was dispensed, without a separate court of 
 chancery. But time did not admit and we were pre- 
 cipitated upon the consideration of this third sec- 
 tion. He was against the section because he 
 conceived that its language would perpetuate the 
 distinct forms of pleading, called common law 
 and equity jurisdiction, and thus prevent a reform 
 of the civil administration by blending them to- 
 ether. He apprehended that we should never 
 attain this reform as long as we spoke of law and 
 equity as distinct things in our Constitution so 
 long as we treated them in the fundamental law 
 as things of a distinct and different nature, the 
 legislature would not feel at liberty to unite and 
 blend them into one. This section as reported, 
 would, it is true, bring them into one court, 
 but it would still recognize them as two sepa- 
 rate and distinct forms of practice. It would 
 perpetuate those separate forms of practice, in 
 despite of anything the legislature might hereaf- 
 ter feel inclined to do towards assimilating them. 
 He desired to adopt this phraseology "the judi- 
 
561 
 
 cial power of this state shall be vested in the su- 
 preme court, and in the inferior courts mention- 
 ed in this article" this would include all courts 
 which the constitution may authorize the legis- 
 lature to crt'iitc, ;is well as those expressly nam- 
 ed in the constitution. If we erect one supreme 
 court, and declare that in it shall be vested the 
 whole judicial power except such as may be par- 
 celled out to courts inferior to it, we shall have 
 law and equity in one court without saying one 
 word about them as separate departments in the 
 administration of justice. The advantage of omit- 
 tingt o name them as distinct departments, is 
 that we shall leave the legislature free to put an 
 end to those distinctions in point of practice. 
 But if we carry them into the supreme court by 
 Their distinct titles of law and equity jurisdiction, 
 it will, at least, piesent a serious question wheth- 
 er the legislature could annihilate the distinction 
 by blending the two forms of pleading or other- 
 wise. It had been said that the words " subject 
 to regulation by law" in the reported section, 
 would allow the legislature to blend law and equi- 
 ty into one form of pleading. Mr. O'C. had no 
 hesitation in saying that he did not believe they 
 would be so construed by the courts or the legis- 
 lature. The terms subject to regulation by law 
 implied, in their connection, merely a regulation 
 of each of them as a distinct and independent 
 head of jurisdiction. Mr. O'C. was satisfied that 
 it was practicable to blend them, and he stood 
 there to defend the opinion that law and equity 
 ought not to be known or recognized in our sys- 
 tem of jurisprudence as distinct and separate 
 methods of administering civil justice. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked if he understood the gen- 
 tleman ? Whether he did virtually propose to an- 
 hiliate the procedure we now called equity pro- 
 cedure ? 
 
 Mr. O'C :>NOR : No sir. 
 
 Mr. WOrlDEN: Does the gentlemen mean 
 that pro -codings in Chancery shall be conducted 
 in the manner in which they are now conducted? 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR thought the system susceptible 
 of very great improvement. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : That is not an answer to the 
 question. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR should not answer every ques- 
 tion which the gentleman might frame to interrupt 
 his argument That gentleman and himself en- 
 tertained directly opposite opinions upon this sub- 
 ject. That gentleman was for perpetuating the 
 distinct forms ot law and equity pleading, and 
 would not go even so tar as the committee had 
 gone. He would have different judges and courts 
 to administer them -as well BLS the distinct modes 
 of pleading in law and equi'y. That gentleman 
 was for perpetuating tne present system, and if 
 that system was not strong enough to wait the ter- 
 mination of an argument against it, before present- 
 ing its defence by way ot interruption, it must be 
 a w<';tk one. The section reported proposed to 
 bri:ig them both into the same court. That was 
 halt the work. He was bound to vindicate the 
 propriety of doing so much, and would do so it H 
 wen 1 Ufccsv.iry. Rut his immediate object was to 
 vindic;i'e ih>- propriety of bringing them together 
 in such a manner that they might be blended in 
 one uniform and harmonious system ot" pleading 
 and practice so fcthat^there might be k no longer 
 
 known in the administration of civil justice, any 
 such distinction as law and equity. [Mr. WORDEN 
 in his seat : That introduces the civil law.] 
 Mr. U'CoivoR proceeded : It might be deemed 
 proof of the soundness and safety of the gentle- 
 man's (Mr. WORDEN'S) position, that he could not 
 restrain himself until it was his time to answer. 
 Those who are impatient of argument do not 
 usually leel the safety of their position most 
 strongly. To understand this question, it was 
 necessary to look at what these things called law 
 and equity, are, as contradistinguished from each 
 other. In strictness, there could not be said to be 
 any such distinct systems ot jurisdiction, as law 
 and equity. They were more properly called two 
 distinct systems of practice the one called the 
 practice at law, and the other the practice in equu 
 ty. By the practice at law a man was only ena- 
 bled to recover a simple money demand with the 
 two exceptions of ejectment and replevin. In 
 ejectment the plaintiff may recover land the 
 thing itself in replevin,he may recover a chattel, 
 the thing itself; but in all other respects a party 
 can recover in the law practice nothing but a sum 
 o'f money. And to recover that he must adopt 
 one or other of five or six particular forms of action 
 very technical and special in form, and in which 
 the pleadings are almost invariably fict itious filled 
 with false allegations from beginning to end. 
 They bore, to be sure, a certain conventional re- 
 lation to a truth which they were supposed to re- 
 present, and which conventional relation was 
 perfectly well understood by learned lawyers, 
 tolerably well understood by the profession gene- 
 rally, but which no layman would understand. 
 For instance, if one were to rob him of his watch, 
 the forms of pleading at common law would al- 
 low him to waive the force, and to bring an action 
 for the value of the watch as upon a purchase. 
 He could charge that on a certain day he sold and 
 delivered to the defendant a certain watch, in 
 consideration whereof the thief promised to pay, 
 when he should be thereto requested, as much as 
 such watch was reasonably worth, and that it was 
 reasonably worth $250. The defendant would 
 answer, non-assumpsit that he did not so pro- 
 mise. Every word in the declaration would be 
 false, and the plea would be manifestly true. 
 And yet there was no judge in the land that 
 would not. instruct the jury that though this was 
 a very outrageous act, the party whose watch it 
 was had a right to waive the wrong, and to have 
 twelve men say on their oaths that the defendant 
 did promise to pay what the watch was reasona- 
 bly worth in manner and form as he had alleged, 
 and their verdict must be for the plaintiff. This 
 was a very fair specimen of the fictions which ex- 
 isted in the common law modes of pleading. He 
 could consume hours in giving similar instances, 
 but one was sufficient, indeed almost through- 
 out the allegations in the declaration are false to 
 every common and ordinary intent. But they 
 were said to be technically true, because by con- 
 struction of law, the relation between the fiction 
 in the pleadings and the truth it represented was 
 well understood by lawyers and judges; and be- 
 tween them they could instruct the ju/y to bring 
 in such a verdict as worked out the ends of jus- 
 tice. It might be asked why such forms were 
 ever adopted ? Their origin is of remote an- 
 
 45 
 
562 
 
 tiquity, but there was no doubt of the true reason. 
 Jurors, in early times, were very ignorant, and 
 it was necessary by special and strict proceed- 
 ings to bring down questions in issue to a very 
 nice and simple point. And these pleadings 
 were modified from time to time until ttiey had 
 received the character that we now find impress- 
 ed on them. They received their form at that 
 period when a scholastic pedantry had overrun 
 and perplexed with its arbitrary rules every 
 branch of science. And hence, of course, every 
 special system of pleading came to be adopted. 
 It was, however, wholly inadequate to the ends of 
 justice ; and because it was so, the system of equity 
 jurisprudence was adopted to supply its detects. 
 That was equity practice. Under legal practice a 
 man could not get a discovery from his adversary, 
 could not reach documents, nor get specific relief, 
 except HI a tew cases. To obviate these detects 
 in the law, the clerical chancellors introduced the 
 civil law practice a practice which however dis. 
 figured in &orne places by unnecessary forms, how- 
 ever disfigured at this d-iy by extreme prolixity, 
 was nevertheless in its own nature flexible, high- 
 ly convenient, and capable of being made to an- 
 swer all the ends ot justice There was literally 
 no foim about it. Toe party stated his case, and 
 asked the relief he desired, and the court, if he 
 proved his case, gave him that relief. Under this 
 practice, any suit for any kind of remedy may be 
 brought. It was always quite easy by bill in 
 chancery to sue on a promissory note, yet as the 
 English courts of common law had jurisdiction of 
 the action, and chancery had no jurisdiction where 
 relief could be had at law, chancery was never 
 permitted to take cognizance of such cases. Thus, 
 from the inadequacy ot the forms of the common 
 law to answer the ends of justice, this equity prac- 
 tice was introduced, but it was not permitted to 
 act except in cases of necessity. Thus the two 
 systems grew up together. And at the Revolution 
 they had courts ot common law and courts of 
 chancery in England as we have them now, each 
 exercising au extensive jurisdiction, or as a legal 
 writer of eminence by a typographical blunder 
 was made to say in regard to the court of chan- 
 cery, an expensive jurisdiction. We adopted the 
 old English forms; and hence we have at this 
 day, these two distinct forms of practice He 
 supposed they could be abolished, and one form 
 made to answer every puipose. He thought the 
 keeprng up of these separate forms was mischiev- 
 ous. In no country of Europe, except Britain, 
 did these two separate foirus exist. The chan- 
 cery or civil law forms obtained throughout the 
 continent of Europe indeed throughout the whole 
 civilized world wherever jusiice was administer- 
 ed in a regular form. 1 hey obtained, in Scotland, 
 for all the purposes of remedial justice. They 
 were used lor all these purposes in (he state ot 
 Louisiana. In some countries of Europe, where 
 the civil law forms of practiceobtained, and in 
 .Louisiana, they had the trial by jury in as lull 
 vii^or as under the common law forms. That 
 mode of trial was just as applicable, in civil con- 
 troversies, in one form as 111 the other. The in- 
 convenience of having these two forms of practice 
 had been long felt here. In every state in the 
 Union, except Mew York, New Jersey, Maryland 
 and South Carolina, law and equity was now ad- 
 
 ministered in the same courts, though under dn- 
 ferent forms of proceeding. And even in the four 
 states mentioned, and aL-o in England, law and 
 equity, in the last resort, were administered in 
 the same court. In Great Bri'.ain, the court of 
 exchequer long had a law side and an equity side 
 the same judges administering both kinds of 
 practice. Still, generally, they had been kept 
 apart, as to the modes of practice. Efforts had 
 been made in several states to bring them together. 
 An effort had been made in Pennsylvania; but 
 there they took a course precisely opposite to that 
 which good sense would have recommended. 
 They attempted to make the fictions of common 
 law subserve all the ends of civil justice; and as 
 those are utterly incompetent for this purpose, 
 that state presented a very unfavorable specimen 
 of the effects of endeavoring to administer civil 
 justice in one form. His view was that the forms 
 of pleading used in chancery, reduced arlfi cut 
 down to the extent they might be, were the true 
 forms by which civil justice might be administer- 
 ed in all cases, in one court, and by a uniform 
 mode of practice. It was so administered, not on- 
 ly in all the countries of Europe, in Scotland and 
 in Louisiana, but in all cases of admirality juiis- 
 diction throughout the U. S. Directly under oor 
 eyes, in the U. S. district court sitting here at 
 Albany, this mode of pleading and practice, sim- 
 ple, uniform, free from technicalities, which was 
 adequate to the administration of justice in all 
 civil cases, was in full operation. And Mr. O'C. 
 invited the Convention to approach the framing 
 ot these provisions, with the view of carefully 
 avoiding the perpetuation of these distinctions, 
 and enabling the legislature to simplify and bring 
 the two forms into one, if practicable. This he 
 had shown to be practicable ; and he would now at- 
 tempt to show that the working of these two 
 separate modes of administering justice was mis- 
 chievous. He held that the practice which exist- 
 ed in courts ot common law, of dividing their 
 forms of action into five or six different forms, 
 was ensnaring and utterly useless. It was wholly 
 unnecessary that when a man brought a suit at 
 law, he should be obliged to give it a name on 
 pain of being non-suited if he gave it a wrong one. 
 If- a man brought a suit to recover money on a 
 sealed instrument, he must call it debt or cove- 
 nant. If he sued on a simple contract he must 
 call his action debt or assumpsit and if he made 
 a mistake, it was fatal to his action. fie had 
 heard learned lawyers say that if a man was so 
 ignorant as not to know how to christen his bant- 
 ling, he ought to lose his suit and be turned out 
 of court. He could cite instances showing that 
 the most learned did not know half the time, 
 which of these names to give their actions; and 
 our books were full of non-suits, after long liti- 
 gation, merely because the lawyers, the parties 
 and the judges did not know what was the true 
 form of action. Mr. O'C. cited an instance where 
 an action of debt was Drought to recover about 
 $1000. The defendant insisted that the form of 
 action should have been covenant. A learned 
 judge at circuit decided that the defendant was 
 mistaken and that the action was in right form. 
 The supreme court, three years afterwards, in a 
 learned opinion citing almost all the books of 
 the common law, held the same opinion. And 
 
563 
 
 yet that judgment, two or three years afterwards, 
 was reversed by the unanimous opinion of the 
 court of errors; and the plaintiff in the original 
 suit was left to discontinue and pay costs to a 
 r amount than the sum in controversy. 
 Mr. O'C. maintained that this cutting up and 
 subdivision of lawsuits, giving them each a par- 
 ticular name, forbidding a man to prosecute except 
 in the precise form to which according to tech- 
 nical rules, his cause of action belonged, and 
 punishing him if he had made a mistake when 
 the line between them was so difficult to discover 
 that the most learned judges differed was idle, 
 useless, and most pernicious. But the subdivis- 
 ion between law and equity was still worse. 
 The jurisdiction of the court of chancery, orig- 
 inally narrow and limited, had become by degrees 
 so extended that it was difficult to say of what 
 case it had not jurisdiction. And the courts of 
 law had liberalized their remedies, and, in imi- 
 tation of the court of chancery had extended 
 their territory into the region formerly occupied 
 by the latter ; until, instead of being divided 
 by distinct and broad lines, these two jurisdic- 
 tions were actually interlocked in such away t.hat 
 it was difficult for the most learned to ascertain 
 where law practice ended, and where the chan- 
 cery practice begun. And yet the consequence 
 of bringing a suit at law, when it should have 
 been in equity, or vice versa, was a non suit ; 
 and the question to which forum the suit belong- 
 ed, cost not unfrequently years of litigation. He 
 cited the cas of Elmendorf against Harris in fifth 
 Wendell's Reports, which turned upon the ques- 
 tion whether the defendant's remedy was in law 
 or in chancery. The common pleas judge de- 
 cided that relief cowld not be had at law. The 
 Supreme court, some years afterwards, affirmed 
 the judgment. Seventeen volumes of Wendell's 
 reports elapse between this decision and the judg- 
 ment of the court of errors, by which it was re- 
 versed. It reversed the decision of the Supreme 
 Court; and thus, after a protracted litigation, 
 which must have cost the defeated party a very 
 large sum, a decision was had upon its merits. 
 The whole difficulty was in ascertaining the 
 boundary between the jurisdiction of these courts. 
 He stated another case in illustration of the per- 
 plexity and delays growing out of these two se- 
 parate jurisdictions. Mr. O'C. went on to urge 
 that one form of practice was adequate to all the 
 ends of justice, and that the two forms should not 
 be perpetuated. Where was the difficulty in pre- 
 scribing that a suit may be brought on a promis- 
 sory note in the same form in which parties 
 brought suits in chancery ? He admitted that the 
 practices of the two courts were very different, 
 !>ui lie denied that there was any necessity that 
 they should be so. He admitted that we must 
 have a court of Chancery, but under its form of 
 practice, he insisted we could obtain all the 
 remedies we now had under these antiqua- 
 ted forms of the English common law. 
 The difference beUyeen law and equity, and the 
 only difference, was in the form of pleading and 
 the remedies. The principles of law, applicable 
 to both, were the sume. The rules and princi- 
 ples of justice delivered from the bench by the 
 chancellor were identically the same as those de- 
 ivered in the Supreme Court. There was no 
 
 difference except in the form of getting into court 
 and getting out of it. True, in the origin of chan- 
 cery jurisdiction, chancellors maintained the doc- 
 trine that the rights remedied in a court of chan- 
 cery were those which the law did not exactly de- 
 fine but which it belonged to the arbitrament or 
 will of a good and conscientious man to define 
 and enforce. But that doctrine was obsolete. 
 There was not at present any such thing recog- 
 nized in jurisprudence, as the will or arbitra- 
 ment,of a good and conscientious man finding some 
 measure of justice between neighbors, which 
 :he law did not define and declare. It was the 
 Law of the land, and not the conscience of the 
 chancellor, by which the right of the citi- 
 zen must be determined. The court of chan- 
 cery was as much bound by the rules of law, 
 ay precedent and former adjudication, as courts of 
 Law, and the principles of justice were the same 
 in both courts. The notion that our rights were 
 to be measured by the length of the chancel- 
 lor's foot was exploded long ago. The only dif- 
 ference between the two courts consisted in this: 
 In chancery the testimony is ordinarily taken by 
 deposition, and the Chancellor proceeded with- 
 out the aid of a jury. The chancellor could also 
 grant what was called specific relief. True it 
 was that the common law courts could not grant 
 all the relief that the court of chancery could, 
 but it was not true that the court of chancery 
 could not grant all the relief attainable in courts 
 of law. The common law forms were constantly 
 being departed from by legislation ; but it was in 
 such an inch-by -Inch, irregular and disorderly 
 manner, that whilst it confounded the distinction 
 between the two courts, and made it every day 
 more and more difficult to determine where a 
 man's remedy was to be sought, it did not tend to 
 that complete consolidation and union of the 
 practice of the two courts that was desirable. 
 By statute, the courts of law now granted equita- 
 ble relief in a great variety of cases showing 
 that there was no difficulty in bringing these two 
 forms into the same court. But as the hour of 
 adjournment was near, he would not pursue this 
 subject further at present. He maintained, on 
 the grounds stated, that it was expedient to avoid 
 the use of the terms law and equity in this 
 section and that in its place we should use some 
 term descriptive of the judicial power generally, 
 to the end that this supreme fountain of jurispru- 
 dence may have power to administer justice in all 
 its various forms leaving it in the power of leg- 
 islation to unite and bring together in one sim- 
 ple, uniform and harmonious mode of practice the 
 prosecution of all civil suits. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN did not intend to follow the gen- 
 tleman from New York (Mr. O'CoNon) at this is- 
 sue through the whole of his argument. That 
 gentleman h.id misunderstood him (Mr. W.) in re- 
 spect to his views on the subject of administering 
 law and equity. At the outset of the gentleman's 
 argument, Mr. W. said he had taken the liberty to 
 ask him to be a little more specific in regard to 
 (he nature and extent of the changes he proposed 
 in our system of jurisprudence, that he (Mr. W.) 
 mi^ht see better the loice and application of his 
 argument, and the point he was aiming at, and 
 not be left, with what poor intellect he had^to 
 gather the object of the gentleman from the whole 
 
564 
 
 scope of his remarks. It was certainly hut a fair 
 mode of argument for gentlemen to put forward 
 distinctly and plainly, the positions and measures 
 they intended to support, and then sustain them 
 by argument; and this was all he had desired the 
 gentleman to do, and he could not see that it in 
 volved any distrust of the safety or soundness ot 
 his own position, although he admitted that the 
 gentleman from New York was right in saying he 
 (Mr. WORDEIST) distrusted his own ability in be. 
 ing able to meet and refute hie arguments. 
 He did not complain that the gentleman had as- 
 sumed or said as much as that. As Mr. W. un- 
 derstood the gentleman from New York, he was 
 not for 'abolishing the complex and tedious pro- 
 ceedings in chancery practice, but the simple, 
 concise and well understood common law forms 
 of procedure. He would annihilate the common 
 law and its practice, and substitute the civil law 
 and its practice. Every suit was to be special, 
 and to be presented with all its circumstances and 
 details in the special pleadings, to take the place 
 of the common law forms. We were no longer 
 to have those concise modes of declaring in ac- 
 tions at law in which the conclusion of the facts 
 on which the party relied is mainly to be stated, 
 6ut each party is to state all his facts in detail, 
 and leave the law to draw its conclusions from 
 them ; an'd this was to be done because it was so dif- 
 ficult to comprehend the nature of remedies which 
 parties were entitled to on a given state of facts, 
 and therefore, as the gentleman would have it, 
 lawyers were often mistaken, and parties turned 
 out of court with heavy costs. The gentleman 
 had cited a case, and the only one to illustrate 
 and enforce his argument ; that was an action 
 against the assignee of a lease to recover the 
 amount of rent reserved, in which great difficulty 
 had arisen in the city of New York, in ascertain- 
 ing the appropriate! form of action. Mr. W. 
 would not say but that this difficulty might 
 have arisen in New- York. It was very possible 
 that there was a doubt as to the appropriate 
 remedy in the case referred to; and it was 
 possible that the question was one of difficul- 
 ty. Mr. W. had however supposed that the 
 assignee of a lease became in legal contemplation 
 a party to and bound by all the covenants contain- 
 ed in the lease itself, and that an action of coven- 
 ant was the appropriate remedy. Another case 
 has been referred to by the gentleman : He ?aid 
 if a man knocks him down and robbed him of his 
 watch, he might sue the person in an action of 
 assumpsit, and declare that on such a day he sold 
 the defendant a watch, and that a jury on oath 
 would say it was true. Now, it was possible in 
 the case last stated, an action of assumpsit should 
 be maintained, but several legal gentlemen 
 have asserted to the contrary. It it could be, it 
 was on a principle of the plainest justice and right 
 and there was nothing absurd or nonsensical in 
 the rule. It was on the ground that a party might 
 always waive his remedy fora personal injury, 
 and seek redress for a portion of his grievance on- 
 ly ; therefore if any one should get the gentle- 
 man's watch by violence or fraud, and convert it 
 to his own use, the law said the party thus pos- 
 sessing himself of another's property, might 
 at the ejection of the real owner be regard- 
 ed as a purchaser, and proceeded against as 
 
 such; therefore every person who wrongfully 
 possessed himself of another's goods, and con- 
 verted them to his own use, understood full well 
 that it was the right of the owner to consider him 
 as a purchaser, and as such to compel him, in a 
 court of law, to pay for them. There was no- 
 thing, therefore, fictitious or artificial in the form 
 of the action in the case cited by the gentleman ; 
 the wrong-doer was bound to know when he took 
 property violently, that the owner might consider 
 him as a purchaser, and if he did, a contract was 
 complete. But it is true, said Mr. W., parties 
 are sometimes turned out of court because they 
 have not pursued the appropriate remedy ; but 
 would the gentleman's plan obviate this ? In 
 looking over the Louisiana reports, where the 
 practice existed of formal special pleadings, 
 in every case, Mr. W. said, he found the cases in 
 which a party lost his remedy for mistating his 
 action, far more numerous than in this State. In 
 the form of pleadings and practice advocated by 
 the gentleman, a party must be technically accu- 
 rate, not only to a common intent, but to every 
 intent. It was so in chancery pleadings. It is 
 so in the civil law. The proceedings are such as 
 only the most specious and artful pleader alone 
 can draw up, while the forms of the common law 
 are simple, and very general, stating the cause of 
 action generally, and in most cases, where the 
 opposite party is not fully apprised of the 
 items and particulars of the demand, a specifica- 
 tion or bill of particulars may be obtained. But 
 yet we are to abolish these common law forms 
 and substitute this special system of chancery 
 and civil law pleading ! The gentleman says he 
 is sure ot some support if he is unable to carry 
 his plan. He knows the gentleman from Gen- 
 esee (Mr. RICHMOND) and the gentleman from 
 Monroe (Mr. STRONG) will be with him.. The 
 gentleman from Genesee had promised to give 
 a lift to the gentleman from N. Y., and it might 
 be that their combined efforts would be able to 
 rupture that system of jurisprudence which our 
 fathers established, and which had been perfect- 
 ed and impioved by the ablest and most enlight- 
 ened minds vhe world has produced. Although 
 great reforms in the proceedings in chancery 
 may be adopted, and thereby the causes of com- 
 plaint against local courts as administering a dis- 
 tinct system of equity, jurisprudence, removed, 
 yet Mr. W. said he doubted whether it would be 
 wise to abolish the court altogether or to attempt 
 te assimilate the practice of our law courts to 
 that of the court of chancery. It was true, 
 that law, as a rule was the same in both courts. 
 In equity, special and peculiar circumstances ex- 
 isted which required some modification of legal 
 rules as applied to transactions between par- 
 ties ; the rights of two persons as between 
 themselves might be very clear, but the 
 rights of these parties might intervene, which 
 would require protection and vary somewhat the 
 remedies to be applied between the principal lit- 
 igants as in the case of agreement, which may be 
 specifically performed. If A contracts to sell B a 
 piece of land and then refuses to comply, as be- 
 :ween these persons the contract should be car- 
 ried into effect in equity ; but the rights of others 
 may be effected thereby : creditors, purchasers 
 &c., may alter the contract or even before have 
 
565 
 
 acquired interest in the land of A, or such lien 
 upon it as would render it inequitable as against 
 them, that the contract should be specifically per- 
 formed ; and in all the complicated and various 
 transactions between individuals, cases of this 
 kind frequently arise, which were appropriate for 
 a court of equity, ' proceeding on the grounds of 
 practice peculiar to itself and calculated not only 
 to discover but to protect and enforce the rights of 
 all parties. But, Mr. W. said, he did not propose to 
 take up time in arguing upon the propriety of 
 sustaining a separate organization of the court of 
 Chancery. That court was probably doomed. 
 His principal object was to draw attention to the 
 fact that his learned friend from New- York in- 
 stead of abolishing the Court of Chancery, would 
 abolish the common law form of procedure and 
 make every case the case for a bill in Chancery. 
 
 Mr. STETSON offered an additional section. 
 He said if we were not to have two district courts 
 of law and equity, he wished to have this in- 
 serted : 
 
 " And to the end that ultimately the jurisdictions of law 
 and equity may not be separately administered, and that 
 the two may be blended into one harmonious sytem. the 
 legislature shall provide by law, as far as may be, common 
 form of procedure for remedies arising under both juris- 
 dictions." 
 
 The committee then rose, reported progress and 
 obtained leave to sit again ; and 
 
 The Convention adjourned to 9 o'clock, A. M. 
 to-morrow. 
 
 TUESDAY, (59th day,) August 11. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. MORROW. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY presented a petition from lead- 
 ing men of both political parties in Kings county, 
 adverse to the election of judges by the people. 
 It -was reie-red to the committee of the whole 
 having charge of the reports of the judiciary com- 
 mittee. 
 
 1*, was read and referred. The Convention re- 
 fused to print it. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to reconsider this 
 reference. Objected to. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER desired to explain. Ob- 
 jected to. 
 
 The memorial of Mr. R. Townsend, jr., on ju- 
 dicial reform was referred. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered the following . 
 
 Resolved, That the committee of the whole having in 
 charge the several ivports irorn the committee on the ju 
 dioiaiy, be instructed to report the following section to 
 the Constitution. That the judicial power of tnis State 
 shall be vested in our Supreme Court, and in such inferior 
 co-irts as may be authorized by this Constitution. 
 
 Mr. S. said that he offered this resolution in 
 order to settle an important principle before they 
 proceeded farther in discussing the reports of the 
 judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved to refer it to the com- 
 mittee of the whole having charge of the judiciary 
 rep'. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN thought there was much pro- 
 priety in the suggestions of this resolution. It 
 contains a principle that ought to be settled at 
 the outset. Whether we will have a separate 
 court of equity, or whether we will blend the 
 powers of law and equity in one court. There 
 was much good sense in the suggestion of the re- 
 solution. At any rate, this principle ought to be 
 
 settled at once. He believed that the minds of 
 the Convention were made up on this point; but 
 at the proper time he had an amendment to offer, 
 having this object in view. 
 
 The resolution was referred. 
 
 Mr. SMITH had leave of absence for two weeks. 
 
 Mr. WHITE offered the following resolutions: 
 
 Resolved, That a judicial system should be provided 
 embracing the following principles : 
 
 1. That equitable relief be administered in the same 
 courts in which legal remedies are enforced, without a se- 
 parate court of chancery. 
 
 2. That provision be made for the enactment within a 
 specified time, of a code of procedure by which the dis- 
 tinction between common law and equity jurisdiction shall 
 be abolished, and justice administered in all civil cases in 
 an uniform mode of pleading and practice. 
 
 3. That the judges of the supreme or superior court of 
 original jurisdiction, be elected by the people in districts 
 lor a term of years. 
 
 4. That the county courts, or courts of common pleas 
 be retained and re-organized in such manner as to give 
 them more efficiency and usefulness. 
 
 5 That the surrogate's jurisdiction be retained and uni- 
 ted to the county courts. 
 
 Mr. W. moved to refer these to the committee 
 of the whole having charge of the judiciary re- 
 ports. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved the transmission to the 
 Assistant Register and to the clerks of the 2d, 3d, 
 and 5th circuits, of the resolution calling for a 
 statement of sales of real estate belonging to in- 
 fants, with a request that they furnish answers to 
 the same. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS called for the consideration of 
 the report made by Mr. RTJGGLES yesterday, rela- 
 tive to the resolution offered some days since by 
 Mr. MARVIN, calling for the names of the own- 
 ers or claimants of monies in the hands of the 
 Chancellor. 
 
 The CLERK read the report. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to amend Mr. MANN'S 
 resolution by inserting after the word " interest- 
 ed" the following words " And in case the name 
 cannot be ascertained, then the title of the suit 
 from whence the fund originated." Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS proposed to add at the end of the 
 resolution after the word " funds" the words 
 And showing how such funds are invested, at 
 what rates of interest, and how the income is ap- 
 propriated op-invested." Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to strike out the word 
 " this Constitution," and to insert " the next leg- 
 islature within 10 days after the commencement 
 of its session." He said that we could not get 
 the information here in time to be of any service. 
 
 Mi. LuOiVilS tUoiigiit we could easily gel the 
 inform 1 1 nm hcrr in a week. lib-re is a lar^e fund 
 of over $3,000,000, and the Lcgishiiure has ap- 
 propriated year at:er year private properly to pub. 
 lie use, without any remuneration taking thr in- 
 terest of this money to buy a lar^e and valuable 
 library for the Chancellor." This was contraiy to 
 the Constitution, and as we are now re-organizing 
 the Constitution, we ought to gu:ud ;iLj;./n*t ibis 
 nbuse. The whole history of this tnnd ouyht. to 
 be made known to the whole community, it was 
 very proper fhat. this information should be laid 
 before this body in detail ; the Convention had 
 power to call tor all this. The history ol Tie 
 Court ot Chancery was not, or ought not to be ;* 
 secret one; all who went there, went, there opnily. 
 
 Mr. RUGULKS thought it would take many 
 
566 
 
 weeks to compile and gather from the records the 
 information heredeaired. He considered that the 
 printed documents of 1838 the report made to 
 the Legislature by the Court of Chancery con- 
 tained all the information in regard to this fund, 
 thai was desirable for the guidance of the Con- 
 vention. The information called for, was very 
 proper, and it might be desirable to obtain a full 
 statement in relation to the monies under the con- 
 trol of the Court of Chancery. If the amendment 
 to have this information sent to (he next Legisla- 
 ture was adopted, he would vote for the resolution 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS was opposed to the resolu- 
 tion. He said he would call on the chancellor 
 for the items which form the large fund now in 
 the custody of the court for the information of 
 the Convention, but he should vote against the 
 amendment requiring the details to be reported to 
 the Legislature at its next session. Should this 
 requirement be made, we should transcend our 
 duty and power. We may call for any information 
 necessary for our own guidance, but it is not in- 
 cumbent upon the convention to instruct or en- 
 lighten the legislature in its action on any speci- 
 fied question. The legislature is fully "compe- 
 tent to obtain for itself all necessary information 
 on every subject. The report already received 
 on this subject contains all the information we 
 need in regard to the powers and duties of the 
 Chancellor. We learn from this report that the 
 court has in charge three millions of dollars be- 
 longing to various citizens and institutions of the 
 country. This fact alone, as set forth by this re- 
 part, will of itself convince every person, 
 that our chancery system, as heretofore organi- 
 zed, imposes on the chancellor greater responsi- 
 bilities and invests him with more power than 
 should ever belong to any one man under a go- 
 vernment like ours. We do not therefore need 
 more specific information in regard to the gene- 
 ral question of remodeling our chancery system. 
 But the details called for by this resolution may 
 induce the convention to adopt a provision re- 
 quiring the legislature to make it the duty of all 
 officers both civil and judicial, to make periodi- 
 cally a public report of all funds or balances 
 which they by virtue of their office have held be- 
 yond a specified period of time. Such a report 
 was required by law from the banks five years 
 since, and has, as we stated yesterday, been very 
 beneficial to surviving relatives, who never be- 
 fore knew that their deceased parent, or friend, 
 or guardian, had made a deposit for their benefit. 
 Hoping that a full detailed report from the Chan- 
 cellor may lead hereafter to a similar periodical 
 expose from every officer of the State to whom is 
 confided moneys belonging to his fellow citizens, 
 he (Mr. N.) should vote against the amendment, 
 but in favor of the resolution. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved that the proposed a- 
 mendment be laid on the table, so as to carry the 
 resolution along with it. 
 
 Cries of oh ! no ! no ! 
 
 Mr. MANN : That has been tried too often, 
 already. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS called for the ayes and noes on 
 Mr. MURPHY'S motion. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY withdrew it to allow 
 
 Mr. NICOLL to remark that he wished the 
 resolution to be so modified as to leave out the 
 
 names of the orphans an* estates that own this 
 fund. He moved to refer this to a select com- 
 mittee to re-modify it. Mr. NICOLL went on to 
 say that if it was important to the Convention to 
 obtain the information asked for, he for one 
 would not oppose the inquiry provided it could 
 be made without publishing to the world the 
 names of the individuals interested, or the funds 
 now deposited in the court of chancery. He was 
 sure there was no disposition here to indulge in 
 a prying useless curiosity in the affairs of that 
 large class of persons whose property had been 
 placed under the care of the chancellor. There 
 is an instinctive unwillingness in mankind to 
 have their private affairs exposed to the public 
 gaze. It is a subject with which the public 
 have nothing to do. Here no fraud or abuse is 
 charged, and Mr. N. said he sincerely hoped that 
 at least the names of the individuals would not 
 be asked for. It was easy to perceive how un- 
 pleasant and painful it would be to publish to 
 the world such details. All the good effects 
 sought to be acquired by the resolution under 
 consideration, he believed could be obtained 
 without any violation of private matters. Its 
 phraseology could, in this respect be easily al- 
 tered with this view, and for such purpose he 
 moved a reference of the resolution to a select 
 committee. 
 
 Mr. MANN said it appeared to him very strange 
 that this resolution should be so strenuously op- 
 posed by professional gentlemen; he had supposed 
 there was nothing wrong in relation to this fund, 
 but from the violent opposition it had received 
 from certain professional gentlemen he had began 
 to believe there was iniquity under a cloak some- 
 where: a portion of the profession had acted man- 
 fully in this matter and desired the informa- 
 tion called for, while others had endeavored in 
 every possible way by motions to refer, lay on the 
 table and every other possible way to choke it 
 down he gave credit to those professional gen- 
 tlemen who had sustained the resolution. He 
 hoped the resolution would come to a direct vote 
 and if the Convention did not think it advisable 
 to adopt it, let them vote it down; he wanted the 
 question to come to a direct vote and hoped it 
 would take this course. 
 
 Mr. BROWN asked the gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. MANN) if lawyers were more given to 
 choking than any body else ? 
 
 Mr. MANN said perhaps not. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY had helped to pay money 
 into that court. Wanted to have all the informa- 
 tion possible to know what was done with the or- 
 phan's money. The orphan wanted to know 
 what became of the money ; and those who help- 
 ed the orphan wanted to know. Let us have all 
 the truth, and let us know all about it. Better 
 throw off all sensitiveness on this subject, and let 
 us have a little truth and righteousness and light 
 and hope thrown on this subject. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS agreed to refer this to a select 
 committee that they might enquire what informa- 
 tion was contained in the report of 1838. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS could see no earthly use in 
 this resolution, or the information sought for by 
 it, although all sorts of motions had been made in 
 relation to it. Now he wished for the 
 
 Mr. BAKER : Special order, Mr. President. 
 
567 
 
 The PRESIDENT: The hour (10 o'clock) 
 has arrived that is set apart for the renewal of the 
 consideration of the 
 
 REPORT ON THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG resumed the chair. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER called for the considera- 
 tion of his resolution. It was read, as above. 
 
 Mr. STETSON called for his amendment. It 
 was read as follows : 
 
 Add after "law," in the third line of section 3, as follows: 
 " And to the end that ultimately the jurisdiction of law 
 and equity may not be separately administered, and that 
 the two may be blended into one harmonious system, the 
 Legislature shall provide by law, as far as may be, com- 
 mon forms of procedure for remedies arising under both ju- 
 risdictions." 
 
 Mr. STETSON said it would perhaps be ex- 
 pected that he would explain the object of his 
 amendment. The section to which it applied 
 vested the jurisdiction of law and equity in a su- 
 preme court, subject to regulations by laws. 
 His amendment required the legislature to pro- 
 vide a common form of proceeding for remedies 
 under both jurisdictions, so that law and equity 
 should not be separately administered. It might be 
 said that the words " subject to regulation by law" 
 reported by the committee gave the legislature 
 the same power; if so, no objection could be 
 taken by them to his amendment except to its 
 phraseology, which was framed so as to avow a 
 distinct object, and under the expectation that af- 
 ter the principle was sanctioned the language 
 would be changed. But it was because the words 
 " subject to regulations by laws" might not be 
 construed to mean the same with his amendment 
 that he was induced to offer it. The jurisdic- 
 tion of law and equity had been administered ^>y 
 courts of distinct organization, and now these ju- 
 risdictions v ere conferred jointly upon the su- 
 preme courts and power given to the legislature 
 to regulate. He foresaw that two parties would 
 arise in the legislature, the one insisting that 
 these jurisdictions were to be separately adminis- 
 tered as heretotore, and the other that they should 
 be blended. It would be a perpetual struggle 
 and we would not have either the one system 
 or the other. It would be a middle ground posi- 
 tion, and a judge of the supreme court whilst hold- 
 ing a law term, feeling conscious of his equity pow- 
 er would begin to administer it without regard to 
 forms,,c. So of the law when holding an equi- 
 ty term. It would cease to be a regulated sys- 
 tem of law or equity under a separate administra- 
 tion that would be only partially observed. Now 
 he was opposed to this middle ground position ; 
 and he desired to remain at the extreme we had 
 occupied. Separate courts of law and equity, or 
 go to the other, that of having but one set of forms 
 lor both jurisdictions. He would confess that he 
 had not been accustomed to regard a fusion of the 
 two courts as desirable, and he would still prefer 
 separate courts and separate jurisdictions ; but 
 that had been surrendered by the committee, and 
 the Convention generally regarded it with disfa- 
 vor. Under these circumstances, unless we could 
 have the influence of the committee in leading 
 the way to a distinct separate organization, he 
 hoped we would proceed at once to the other ex- 
 treme oi blending the exercise of the two juris- 
 dictions. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said there appeared to be a great 
 reluctance or hesitation lodiscussthe general me- 
 rits of the judiciary system reported by the com- 
 mittee. It was to him most embarrassing to en- 
 ter upon, and (.'specially to take the lead in this 
 matter. Having lor more than twenty years been 
 
 it were fastened to his table as a sort ot fixiure, 
 with no expei ience in debate, rarely having en- 
 gaged even in the trial of causes or the argument 
 of them in court, he felt great diffidence in at- 
 tempting to point out any errors or defects in a 
 plan repoitfd and sustained by gentlemen of the 
 high character and talents of the hon. geotlenu'n 
 of fhe judiciary committee, who advocate the 
 adoption of this system. But having for a long 
 time been impressed with the importance of are- 
 form in the judiciary system ol the state as a 
 oundation for a reform in our legal proceedings, 
 and believing that the plan reported by the com- 
 mittee is defective in its organization, and will 
 not answer the purpose for which it was designed, 
 h*e could not sit still and see the question taken bv 
 default. He therefore begtred the indulgence of 
 the committee while he attempted to say a lew 
 words in relation to some of the defects in the 
 system proposed by this report, and he would 
 then refer to a plan for a judiciary proposed by hi in- 
 self. But first he would here express his heartfelt 
 thaiiks to the honorahle gentleman from New York, 
 (Mr. O'CoNon) who has so ably, eloquently, and 
 triumphantly vindicated the principle of the union 
 not only of the equity and law jurisdiction in one, 
 but of the uniformity of practice and proceedings 
 upon the two lemedies. There should be a simi- 
 larity of proceedings in all cases, and whether pro- 
 ceedings should assume the torrn of equity pro- 
 ceedings, or the simple and well known proceed- 
 ings of an action on the case, was of comparatively 
 little importance. His impression had been that 
 the better method would be to assimilate all ac- 
 tions and proceedings to the simple form of an ac- 
 tion on the case as now used. That the multi- 
 tude of civil actions now in use, should be abolish- 
 ed, and one plain, simple remedy provided in all 
 cases. On this subject he did not know but he 
 stood alone in the profession, and it was highly 
 gratifying to him to rind in the honorable gentle- 
 man from New York so able a champion of that 
 principle. The gentleman and myself desire to 
 arrive at the same result, and it matters but little 
 by which course of proceeding we shall so arrive 
 at it, whether by the simple action on the case, or 
 by a plain, concise, and simple bill in equity. 
 
 But to return to the subject before the commit- 
 tee, and on which he proposed to comment. 
 
 The judiciary plan now under consideration 
 proposes to divide the State into eight districts, 
 and to hold terms of the supreme court in bank in 
 each district. These terms may be held at the 
 same time in different and distant districts, each 
 one to be held by less than one-tenth part of the 
 court. So far as he could discover, causes might 
 be noticed for argument at either of these terms, 
 or in any part of the State. He might have three 
 causes ready for argument at a term. One of 
 these causes might be noticed for argument by 
 the opposite attorney at a term held to-day in 
 Chautauque ; another for a term to be held to- 
 morrow in Suffolk ; and a third at a term held 
 next day in Clinton county Instead of remedy j 
 
568 
 
 ing the inconvenience of the present practice in 
 compelling us to go from home or intrust our pa- 
 pers to counsel who are unacquainted with the 
 subject, you make it eight fold worse, inasmuch 
 as you have eight times as many terms in eight 
 times as many places. The honorable gentleman 
 from Herkimer expects the legislature to remedy 
 this evil, by providing that all causes shall be 
 noticed for argument in the district where the 
 venue is laid ; but will the legislature do this ? 
 Why has it not remedied a like inconvenience 
 under the present system ? He (Mr. T.) was op- 
 posed to leaving this ma'ter to the legislature ; he 
 wanted it provided for in the Constitution. He 
 would not leave so important a regulation to be 
 provided for by legislation. He would remark 
 farther, there will be no uniformity in the deci- 
 sions of these eight courts. They are bound by- 
 no common union or order. They are severally 
 simple district courts. In name you call them 
 ' ' supreme court, but in substance they are nothing 
 ;'* like a supreme court. 
 
 Mr. T. would not pursue this subject farther .-r- 
 He rose to point out a few objections to the pro- 
 posed plan, and hoped he should be followed by 
 many of the able gentlemen in this house, who 
 will examine that plan in its details and point 
 out its defects with much more clearness and 
 ability than he was capable of. 
 
 He would, however, before he sat down, bring 
 to the notice of the committee the outlines of a 
 plan for a judiciary prepared by him, and which 
 he thought obviated many defects in the system 
 reported by the judiciary committee. 
 ^ By this plan he proposed first, that the judic- 
 ial power of the State should be vested in a su- 
 preme court, district courts, circuit courts, sur- 
 rogate's courts, justices' courts, and such other 
 courts as are authorized in the article. 
 
 Second, a supreme court (which should be a 
 court of appellate jurisdiction only) to consist of 
 eight justices, one of which should be denominat- 
 ed chief justice. 
 
 He would give this court the name and title of 
 supreme court. He would not give any court that 
 name and title over which he gave another court 
 supervisory or appellate jurisdiction. 
 
 He proposed then to divide the state into four 
 judicial districts, in each of which there should 
 be elected seven district judges, who should hold 
 district courts in their respective districts. Such 
 courts to have original, general, civil jurisdiction 
 co-extensive with the limits of the district, and 
 to be appellate courts in all criminal matters aris- 
 in- in such district, and for reviewing decisions 
 of Surrogates and justices. To have the same ju- 
 risdiction within the limits of the district that the 
 supreme court now has in the state ; and such 
 equity powers as may be conferred by law. 
 
 Four justices of the supreme court to be elected 
 in the state, and the senior judges of the four dis- 
 trict courts to be ex-officio justices of the supreme 
 court. 
 
 One term of the supreme court to be held in 
 each district every year, and as many more as 
 shall be provided by law, and no judgment, de- 
 cree, order or decision of any district court to be 
 reversed without the concurrence of at least four 
 justices of the supreme court. 
 To be not ss than four general terms of the 
 
 district court in each disjf ict every year, to be 
 held in four different counties. Such terms to be 
 held by not more than four nor less than three 
 judges, and special terms forbearing motions and 
 other interlocutory or special proceedings, and 
 hearing or trying causes other than those to be 
 tried by jury, may be held by any one judge. 
 Both general and special terms of such courts 
 shall be holden at the times and in the manner 
 and at the places prescribed by law. 
 
 Circuit Courts shall be held in each county of 
 the State at the times and in the manner prescrib- 
 ed by law, and may be holden by any district judge 
 of any district, or by any justice of the Supreme 
 Court. 
 
 The circuit courts to possess original jurisdic- 
 tion in all criminal matters, (except such as shall 
 be cognizable xn justices' courts) and shall try is- 
 sues of fact joined in the district court tor trial in 
 such county. 
 
 It would, therefore, be seen that he had endea- 
 vored to restore the judicial system which existed 
 prior to 1S21 as tar as practicable. All the judg- 
 es and justices would be judges in bank, and all of 
 them might hold circuits in every part of the 
 State. He had divided the court of highest origi- 
 nal jurisdiction into districts, because no single 
 court would be competent to transact the business 
 of the entire -State; but the four courts possessing 
 the same power arid jurisdiction within their dis- 
 tricts that the former supreme court possessed in 
 the whole State, would, as he thought, be capable 
 )f transacting all the business without injurious 
 delay. 
 
 For the trial and decision in criminal cases, he 
 proposed having the surrogate and a justice of the 
 peace of the county associated with the judge or 
 justice who holds the court, as proposed by the 
 gentleman from Seneca. 
 
 Mr. T. also in his plan provided for the estab- 
 lishment of inferior courts in those counties which 
 should have a population exceeding 60.000 inhab- 
 itants, with the view of providing J'or the admin- 
 istration of justice in the large cities ond villages, 
 in cage the district courts with the Circuits shall 
 prove inadequate to transact all of the business in 
 those counties 
 
 He had also provided that the Legislature should 
 by law so regulate the practice and proceeding in 
 all of the courts, lhat every party might have any 
 remedy or relief to which he mi^ht be entitled in 
 ne and the same action, suit or proceeding, with- 
 out resorting to another action. The plan of the 
 committee proposes to leave this matter optional 
 with the Legislature. He was unwilling so to 
 leave it. He desired to insert a provision making 
 it imperative upon the Legislature to act. 
 
 He had also provided in his plan that there 
 should be no appeal from justices' courts; but 
 
 es might be removed from those courts to the 
 district courts by writ of certiorari after judgment 
 which courts should review the decision of the 
 justice and render such judgment as ought to have 
 been rendered before the justice. But if, by rea- 
 son of the exclusion of evidence, or the inability 
 o procure evidence before the justice, a new trial 
 >ught to be granted. Such court shall order a 
 lew trial before the justice who tried the cause.or 
 some other justice of |the same or au adjoining 
 town. 
 
569 
 
 He said that by the old twenty-five dollar act the 
 supreme court, In deciding cases brought up from 
 jutices' courts by certiorari, were bound to gives 
 judgment as the very right or the case should be, 
 without regard to technicalities. Under that law 
 the court had only reversed or affirmed the judg- 
 ment. The court ought, in his opinion, to have 
 gone farther, and if they could see from there- 
 turn that either party was entitled to a judgment, 
 but different from tin: one rendered, they should 
 have rendered such judgment and not sent the 
 parties bark remediless. It they could see that 
 injustice had been done, and in what it consisted, 
 wny not apply the equitable principle and correct 
 the error and end the litigation.' 
 
 Hi* pian also provided that no cause should be 
 removed from any district court to the supreme 
 court in actions arising upon contractor judgment, 
 unless the amount in controversy exceed the sum 
 ot &5UI). It had also provided for the election of a 
 cleik of the supreme court, and made county clerks 
 ex officio clerks of district courts. All of which 
 clerk? to be paid by salaries, and to account for 
 
 The term of office of the first class shall exphe at the end 
 of two years, ot the second at the end ot lour years, of the 
 the third at the eud of six years, and ot the fourth at the 
 end of eight years. And, alter said first election onu jus- 
 tice shall be elected every second year, and they shall se- 
 verally hold their offices for the term of eight years. And 
 provision shall be made by law designating one of the 
 justices ol the supreme court, chief justice, aud lor classi- 
 fying such justices, and the judges ot the district courts. 
 
 6. One term of the supreme court shall be held in each 
 district erery year, and as many terms in addition thereto 
 as shall be prescribed by law. And nu judgment, decree, 
 order or decision of any district court, shall be reversed 
 without the concurrence of at least tour justices of the su- 
 preme court. 
 
 7. General terms of the district courts may be holden 
 by not less than three and not more than lour judges, and 
 special terms for heanng motions and other imerlocntery 
 or special proceedings, and hearing or trying causes, other 
 than those to be tried by a jury, may be held by anv one 
 judge; and not less than four general terms of said court 
 shall be h^ld m each district every year, and shall be hr>i'i 
 in four different counties. Both general end special terms 
 ot such courts shall be held at the times and in the manner 
 and at the places prescribed by law. 
 
 8. Circuit courts shall be held in each county of th* 
 state at the times and in the manner prescribed f>y law, 
 and may be ho'den by any district judge of the district in 
 which such county is situated, or of any other district 
 judgr, or by any justice of the supreme court. The circuit 
 courts shall possess original jurisdiction in all criminal 
 matters (except such matters bs shall bt cognizable in ius- 
 ,.__* *<--*- district 
 
 their fees to state or county, as shall be provided 
 by law. Courts might leier causes except inac- 
 tions for wrongs. And to insure uniformity of jtices courts,) and try issues of fact, joined In th 
 pra'-nee and ptoeeedings, he had provided that | courts for trial in sut:h county. 
 
 the supreme court should prescribe rules regulating , ? The Al ic ' e ??L^ s "? mQ court und - district J" d ? eK 
 the practice and proceedings in that and the district 
 courts. 
 
 Mr- T. concluded by so modifying his motion to 
 strike out the thud section, that it should be a re- 
 solution to strike out such section and insert the 
 following, viz: 
 
 $3. The supreme court (which shall be a court of ap- 
 pellate jurisdiction only) shall consist of eight justices, 
 one of whom shall be denominated chief justice. 
 
 The following is the plan for a Judiciary Sys- 
 tem subnutfed by Mr. TAGGART : 
 
 shall, severally at stated times, receive tor their services <* 
 compensation, to be established by law. The legislature 
 which shall first assemble, after the adoption of this con- 
 stitution, snail fix such compensation, and the same may 
 be altered at every fifth annual session of the legislature 
 thereafter, and at no other time; and no law altering the 
 comp nsation of such justices and judges, shall take effect 
 until the first day of January, next after the passage there- 
 of. And said justices and judges shall receive no lees or 
 perquisites of office, or other compensation than such as 
 shall be so provided by law. 
 
 10. Such justices and judges shall hold no other office 
 or public trust; and all votes given lor either ol them, lor 
 any other office by the legislature or the people, shall be 
 void. 
 
 11. For the trial or decision in criminal cases, there 
 1. The judicial power of the State shall be vested in a I shall be associated with the judge or justice who holds 
 supreme court,districtcourts,circuit courts, justices courts ! the court, the surrogate and one of the justices of the 
 and in such other courts as are authorized in this article. | peace of the county in which the court shall be held; or 
 
 The supreme court (which shall be a court of ap- 
 pellate jurisdiction only,) shall consist, of eight justices, 
 one of whom shall be denominated chief justice. 
 
 3. The State to be divided into a judicial dis- 
 trict, in ench of which there shall be a court to be deno- 
 minated the district court of such district. Such (Jistrict 
 court to be courts of original, general, civil jurisdiction, 
 co-extensive with the limits ot the district, and appellate 
 
 in case of the absence of the surrogate, two justices ol the 
 peace. And in the city of New York, two judges of such 
 inferior court as the legislature may by law direct. 
 
 ^ 1-2. Inferior courts of civil and criminal jurisdiction, 
 may be established by the legislature, in any count} 
 which shall have more than sixty thousand inhabitants. 
 From which courts, appeals or writs of error, or both.Jzas 
 shall be provided by law, may be brought to the district 
 
 couits, in all criminal matters a i is ing in such, districts, j court of ine district in which such county may be situ 
 and for reviewing decision of surrogates and justices, and ted; but no judge of any such court shall hold any other 
 of all inferior courts in such district, and possess ail such j office. And every judge of the courts so to be established, 
 powers within the district as are now possessed by the j shall receive for his services a compensation, which shai* 
 supreme court in the state,' and all such equity powers as j not lie increased or diminished during his continuance in 
 may be conferred by law, and any process of such court i office; and he shall receive no fees or perquisites of uiiice, 
 to be issued after any suit or proceeding shall be commen- ! and shall hold his office for the term ol live years. 
 ced, may be issued to any part of ,hc state. ! {j 13. The legislature, shall by law, so reg'uiate the prac- 
 
 4. There shall be si-.ven judges elected in each district j tice aud pioceedings in such courts, that ever} party may 
 at the first annual election after the adoption of this Con- j have any remedy or relief to which he in;:y be entitled in 
 stitution, \v h'j shall be. divided into classes to ue numbered j one and same action, suit or proceeding, without resorting 
 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 7. The term ot office of the first class j to any other action; and the testimony in all cases to be 
 shall expire at the end of two years, ol the second class, j taken at the trial, or hearing before the court, referee or 
 at the end of four years, ol the thir>l class at the end of j referees, except such as may be taken out of court upon 
 six ye'^rs, of the fourth class at the end of eight years, of i commission, or taken conditionally, or to perpetuate tesu- 
 the fifth class at the end often years, of the sixth class at j mony, in cases piovii'ed bylaw 
 
 the end of twelve years, and of the seventh class at the j 14. Surrogates shall be elected at the annual election, 
 end of fourteen years. And after said first election, one j in each county, arid shall hold their offices for four years, 
 judge in each district shall be elected every second year, > and shall receive lor their services a compensation, to be 
 
 and they shall severally hold their offices for the term of 
 fourteen years. 
 
 5. The judges of th district courts shall, during the 
 last two yenrs ul their official terms, respectively, be ex- 
 officio justices of the supreme court. The other lour jug. 
 tices of the supreme court, shall be elected at the first an- 
 nual election aftr-r the adaption of this constitution, and 
 shall be divided into classes to be numbered 1, 2, 3 and 4. 
 
 46 
 
 established t>y law, and shall receive no fees, perquisites 
 or other compensation 
 
 ^ Id. The electors of each town shall, at their annual 
 town meetings, and in sucii manneras the legislature shall 
 direct, elect the justices of the peace. The term of office 
 of justices shall be lour years. Tlje number to be elected 
 and their classification shall be regulated by law. But the 
 justices who shall be in office when this Coiislittition takts 
 
570 
 
 effect, shall remain and continue in office for the residue 
 of the term for which, they shall respectively have been 
 elected 
 
 16. There shall he no appeal from justices" courts; but 
 causes may be removed from such courts, alter judgment 
 therein, to the district court of the district in which the 
 
 on which the Convenflbn could agree. 
 There had been much difference of opinion 
 among them, but they had yielded individual pre- 
 ferences and made concessions in order to harmo- 
 
 to the district court ol the district in wiucn the , n j /e A m .,ioritv of *hp rnrnmitfpo h-irl vrr^H 
 justice resides, by writ of certiorari. The district court | , *?' 1 ie committee had c^ieed, 
 
 shall review the proceedings, and decision of the justice, j P ut there vvere otner members who could not ieel 
 and render such judgment as ought to have been rendered | it their duty to give Up their first impression 
 before the justice. But if, by reason of the exclusion of j I n this state of things, it was quite apparent 
 evidence, or inability to procure evidence before the jus- i f i,,, 4. ^,,,j i 
 
 evidence, or inability to procure evidence beiore the jus 
 tice, a new trial ought to be granted, such court shall or- 
 der a new trial before tha justice who uied the cause, or 
 before some other justice of the same or an adjoining 
 town. 
 
 ^ 17. No cause shall be removed from any district court 
 to the supreme couri in actions arising upon contract or 
 judgment unless the amount in controversy shall exceed 
 the sum of live hundred dollars. 
 
 !) 18 Justices of the Supreme Court, district judges, sur- 
 rogates and judges of any inferior court auinorized to be 
 tux-ated by this article may be remove.! by joint resolution 
 of the Legislature, if two-thirds of all the meml.ers of the 
 Assembly and a majority of all the members elected to the 
 Senate, concur therein. But no removal shall be made 
 unless the cause thereof be entered on the journal-, nor , 
 until the party complained of shall have been served with any amendment could be ottered tiiat would im- 
 a. copy of the complaint against him. and shall have had an prove it, or if any entire plan could be produced 
 opportunity of being heard in his defence. On the question | preferable to that of the majority of the commit- 
 
 srsaa w^^^'srsssavs \ ^ ^ y. st ""W ad t ' i v But ex - 
 
 district court of the district in which he resides." And i penence had led him to believe that if any nurn- 
 rio jus-ice of the peace shall be removed until he j ber of projects should start up, and he thought 
 shalUiave been served with a copy of the complaint against j there were likely to be many, no two of them 
 him and shailhaye ia<_ an oppoitumty p n j ^, nnlrl >, *}\} f0 There were five of the commit- 
 
 that 
 
 the report must be wrecked, unless it 
 ceive the candid and liberal consideration of the 
 Convention, and the community would be left to 
 groan under their past intolerable grievances. 
 He was not wedded to any plan, nor had he the 
 vanity to believe for a moment that his own opi- 
 nions were preferable to those of others. But he 
 had made it the rule of his conduct to state frank- 
 ly his own views, and to hear those of other gen- 
 tlemen, and when disagreements existed to re- 
 concile them if he could. He was now about to 
 say that if many new projects should arise, if 
 
 a justice shall be had in the county where he resides, and j tee who differed with the majority, and their 
 Jim- be had before any district judge: but such judge ! conscientious determination to discharge their 
 shall report the proofs and allegations to the district court, j duty witn uny ielding firmness, was evinced 
 and no removal shall be made except at a general term. , , f , ., / ' r 4-1 i j u 
 
 (, ID. A clerk of the Supreme Court shall be elected at a ! ty the fact that no two of them had been able to 
 general election, and shall hold his oltice four years, and J agree with each other ; and so earnest was one of 
 shall receive lor his services a compensation to be estab- j that number to complete a system of his own, 
 ^/^LL^f^!?/*- J^lK"r^Jt?J r ! perfect in his judgment in all its parts, that he 
 
 -iished by law, 
 
 fees, perquisites or other compensation. Clerks of coun- | - 
 
 ties shall be ex-officio clerks of the district courts and i had appeared to be unable to ^agree with himself, 
 county courts:, and shall receive for their .services, as such 
 clerks, a compensation to be established by law, and shall 
 not receive for their own use any fees, perquisites, or oth- 
 er compensation for such services. And all of such clerks 
 shall account for all !ee* received by them, respectively, 
 for services, as clerks of such courts to the State or coun- i ; 
 ty , as shall be provided by law. 
 
 -20, Any such courts may order causes pending therein, 
 to be referred to one or mure referees for hearing and de- 
 
 [Much laughter.] Mr. J. judged so from the fact 
 that the gentleman referred to had on this floor 
 asked time to draw his report, or at least to com- 
 plete it, several days after the chairman had pre- 
 ented the majority report. [Cries of " name 
 him."] No, he would not name the gentleman 
 
 without his consent, but this he could and would 
 
 cision therein, in cases prescribed by law;' but no civil ac- i say, that he was one for whose talents and integri- 
 tion, founded in tort, shall be referred, without the consent ! ty he entertained the highest possible respect, 
 of all the parties to such action. 
 ^i!l- Tht- supreme court shnll prescribe rules, regulating 
 
 the practice and proceedings in the supreme court and dis- 
 trict courts, subject to alteration by law. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN had listened with interest to the 
 explanations of the chairman and other gentlemen 
 of the committee on presenting the report, some 
 days since. He had also given his attention to 
 the several minority reports, and the remarks of 
 the gentlemen who had brought them forward. 
 They had now been favored with another distinct 
 plan of organization by the gentleman from Ge- 
 nesee (Mr. TAGGART) ; and from present appear- 
 ances, he should judge there were others yet be- 
 hind. He must take occasion to say, that in the 
 multitude of propositions, they were likely to get 
 into inextricable uitficulties, if every member of 
 the Convention should determine to resist all plans 
 which did not precisely and in all particulars ac- 
 cord with his views. Should such unfortunately 
 be the case, they could arrive at no results. He 
 had great doubts and fears, unless gentlemen could 
 yield minor points for the general good. The 
 committee of thirteen of which he had had the 
 honor to be a member, had proceeded to their du- 
 ties with an earnest desire to devise a system 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that if he was alluded to.. 
 
 his report word for word was presented in com- 
 mittee before it was presented here. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said he would then correct his 
 error. He had not before seen or heard the re- 
 port, but if the honorable delegate from Ontario 
 affirmed it to be so, he must believe it as much as 
 if he had himself seen it. It is much easier i said 
 Mr. J.) to find fault with a plan and pull it to pieces 
 than to originate a better. He did not intend to 
 apply this remark to the minority nor did he apply 
 it to 'the gentleman from Gen esee (Mr. TAGGART) 
 who h..d lead an ailicle which he pK.po-eu as a 
 suh^tituie. He (Mr. J.) hoped it would oe print- 
 ed, and all other- of ihe ki:id it tlieie were lotiy 
 of i hem, that we might see what they were. He 
 pusumed thai no two would he alike; and it 
 would serve to convince the delegates oi the ne- 
 ces-iity ot cultivating thai spirit of concession to 
 vvhich he had relriieii a spirit to which ue were 
 indebted for the !< deral constitution, and which 
 he deeded it a public du:y to chensh. It v\ as 
 impossible, at a casual re.iding by Ihe gentleman 
 (Mr. T.) in his place to grasp the oUlJiue of lus 
 plan, much less the details. He could retain in 
 
571 
 
 IMS mmd only ihe prominent lectures, ami with 
 the unJeistanding he had ol it, would endeavor to 
 
 to the honorable gentleman himself that the 
 report ol the committee attained the same objects 
 and at a belter way The gentleman Imrn ' 
 
 .:.tkes his district judges local, while the su- 
 preme judges of the committee dojngsimilar duties, 
 are ambulatory; the former are to hold courts nt 
 nisiprius and sit inb.ink only in their own dis- 
 tricts the Litter throughovjt the State. By his 
 |il,m the judges of the several district courts 
 would be strangers to e,.ch other; their juiisdic- 
 tion was confined to their own districts; '.hey had 
 no more power in, or connection with the olhei 
 puts of the State than with Massachusetts or 
 NeA' Jersey. A suitor in one district prosecuting 
 a resident of another would he obliged to go into 
 the latter to commence his suit, the same as into 
 a foreign State. By the plan ot the committee. 
 the judges would (eel and know ItiaLJJb&y were 
 judges for the wh ;-:r prongs would 
 
 run int>"TvTn7~et5uriry. A judge in Suffolk could 
 hold a circuit or sit in hank in Erie; or a judge 
 i.i Clinton could do the same in Richmond. Each 
 would go ovrry wheie, exchange duties with eve- 
 tyjuuiy. They would commix and commingle, 
 and be kept bright and but niched, so to sneak, by 
 rubbing themselves against earn other. In this 
 court, separate, bur not divided ; local, yel every 
 where ; one in eight, and eight in one, he (Mr J.) 
 Conceived there would be great advantage over 
 that of the antagonist plan. He would undoubt- 
 edly prefer if it were possible, to have hut 
 one bench; but that was deemed, and by the 
 gentleman from Genesee conceded to be im 
 possible. No number of judges sitting togeth- 
 er c.mld do tiie business of the State. There 
 must he multiplication of working tribunals. 
 His (Mr. T/s) pTairpToTrosed a Supreme Court of 
 eight judge? with appellate jurisdiction only, this 
 the coinMin , had provided for in a Court of Ap- 
 peals, of the same number of judges. His plan 
 proposed to draw all the judges of the court of 
 last resort from his four local supreme courts, or 
 LS- lie has denominated them district courts. 
 These judges having local, and restricted territo- 
 rial jurisdiction as already stated. The commit- 
 tee propose to draw eight judges froin"T?l 
 prerne Court, one from each of' their eight dis- 
 tricts, all having equal poweis jurisdiction and 
 authority throughout 'OTe - ""State as also stated. 
 Four of whom should sitTfouTtime to time and in j 
 rotation in the Court ot' Appeals, and to elect four j 
 more by general ticket. The superiority of the | 
 latter over the former he conceived to be, first, j 
 that the four justices ofThe-Supronfre-Court would | 
 in every instance have held courts and become j 
 
 i.r jtvith the course oTTJusmess throughout , 
 the >&ie. They would have thus become famil- 
 i irized with the intricacies of commercial law in 
 the metropolis, as well as with the less diversi- 
 fied and intricate portions of the law applicable 
 to the agricultural and manufacturing districts. 
 They would have mingled more and have been 
 
 hi in more direct contact and collision with 
 those great minds which he trusted to see adorn the 
 Bench. They would be less provincial in their 
 notions, less circumscribed in the sphere of their 
 usefulness and means of knowledge, and more fit- 
 ted to the discharge of their high duties Sec- 
 
 ond, that the four Judges elected would come 
 rnoie directly from the people, a:-d fe<-[ more di- 
 rectly their responsibility to them. They would 
 imbibe and retain more of the great general prin- 
 ciples ot moral justice; of what might be called 
 the impulses of natural equity ; ?uch as it. had of. 
 ren been remarked would "knock off the rough 
 coiners of the common law and loosen the fetters 
 of artificial and technical equity." Inflexible 
 rules would be brought by a species of m. definable 
 neces>ity,fo blend and harmonize with the discre- 
 tion of enlightened conscience. It would in that 
 partake somewhat of the character of the former 
 court, which, though considered an anomaly by all, 
 had, home how or other, most generally contrived 
 to do justice without violating law, and had, until 
 mischiefs had latterly ciept in, given general satis, 
 faction to the community. By the plan of the 
 gentleman from Genesee, (Mr. TAGGAKT) there, 
 would be but four districts, instead of eia,ht. It 
 there was any thing in bringing the courts nearer 
 to the people, in that respect it was less desirable. 
 The convenience of suitors arid the bar would be 
 less promoted; and although the profession of the 
 law had become apparently odious to a certain 
 class, and even to some who were nominally mem- 
 bers of the bar, (lawyers upon parchment, bur 
 demagogues among the people) he would say that 
 their convenience must be consulted despite the 
 groveling prejudices alluded fo or the community 
 must suffer. It could not be expected that coun- 
 sel would travel one hundred and fifty miles to 
 argue a client's cause, without drawing from that 
 client's pocket the additional expense. By the 
 report of the committee, if adopted, the legisla- 
 ture shall provide that so many courts in Bank 
 shall be established in each district, as will be 
 sufficient to do all the business with promptitude. 
 This cures the great mischief of the present or- 
 ganization; it saves as well the delays as the vex- 
 atious and ruinous expense of traveling from Suf- 
 folk, and all the distant counties to Rochester, 
 Utica and other places three or four times a year. 
 and after waiting for weeks to watch the tardy ad- 
 vance upon a calendar loaded down with 700 to 
 1000 causes, traveling back again, with no senti- 
 ment of respect for the judiciary establishment. 
 No results except those of a bootless expense of 
 time and money. In this regard, he (Mr. J.) 
 would submit the fact that superior advantages 
 were not to be found on the side of the honora- 
 ble gentleman's proposition. That gentleman by 
 way of illustrating the inconvenience of the 
 majority report, had supposed himself in the 
 course of his extensive and useful practice to have 
 in his hands three causes all ready for argu- 
 ment, and noticed for the samo time one 
 in his own district, one in Albany, and one in 
 New- York. How could he attend to all ? This 
 certainly would present a case of difficulty to 
 himself and^disadvantage to his client. But he (Mr. 
 J.) would suppose the same gentleman had one 
 cause at a circuit in Buffalo, one in Batavia and 
 one in Rochester, all ready for trial, and no- 
 ticed for the same day (a case equally sup- 
 posable upon his own plan and in Ins own 
 district,) what should he do? Why, but one 
 remedy could be applied, and that would extend 
 to both hypotheses. He must put two of his 
 briefs into other h-md?. It ww, eaid Mr. J., im- 
 
572 
 
 possible to adopt any system that would be at 
 all times entirely convenient to all persons, and 
 any one who was so sanguine as to expect it, was 
 doomed to disappointment. Could all the courts 
 of law and equity, for the trial ot issues and trials 
 in Bane, be consolidated into one, so that one 
 cause, and only one, in the whole State could be 
 on trial at once, then and only then could the 
 gentleman secure himself against conflicting en- 
 gagements. That is impossible ! [Mr. BROWN 
 here reminded Mr. JORDAN that he proposed in 
 committee, and that it was practicable for the le- 
 gislature so to arrange it, as that no two Courts in 
 the State should be sitting in Bane at the same 
 time.] True, said Mr. J., if there were four 
 terms in Bane in each district in a year, there 
 would be but thirty two in the whole, and a week 
 lor each, or 32 weeks, would probably upon an 
 average dispose of all the business. Now, 
 to conclude upon this topic he would again 
 bespeak for the judiciary committee the favorable 
 consideration of the delegates. He would (if he 
 could do it, without speaking of himself) say, of 
 his colleagues they had the confidence of the peo- 
 ple, they had been selected by the officer who so 
 ably presides over our deliberations for their ex- 
 perience and candor. Without individual ends 
 to promote, or selfish feelings to gratify, they 
 had devoted themselves to the subject, arid the 
 report before you is the best they could produce. 
 It is true four of the number could not yield their 
 preferences for other plans, but with the ample 
 discussion it had received in the committee and 
 from the concurrence of a majority there could 
 not be imminent danger of committing any fatal 
 or serious error by adopting it. It certainly had 
 a decided advantage over those plans and sugges- 
 
 A" ^1. ' _ 1 J l_ * _ x i jt> ) 
 
 be so constructed as, with\ little aid from the le- 
 gislature and aboard of codification, (a project 
 now on foot,) to necessarily lead to it. The rea- 
 sons assigned were the great delay and expense, 
 and the follies and fictions of the proceedings in 
 the courts of common law. ' Nothing was said 
 against the proceedings in the Court of Chancery; 
 on the contrary, it was inferable from his remarks 
 that he considered that court as one which had 
 given entire satisfaction ; as a very harmless, 
 cheap, efficacious and simple machine ; and it 
 certainly fell from his lips that the course of pro- 
 ceedings of that court was that most agreeable to 
 his mind, and one which he would incline to 
 adopt for the new-born court which his imagina- 
 tion had conceived. Was there, he would ask, 
 any other gentleman, who had witnessed the ope- 
 ration of our chancery system, prepared to say 
 that he would prefer the mode of procedure to 
 the plain, settled, direct (though sometimes fic- 
 titious, and often unnecessarily cumbrous) reme- 
 dies of the common law, in ordinary cases ? 
 With that individual he should entirely disagree. 
 Although the senior of the honorable gentle- 
 man from New-York (Mr. O'COIVOR) in years, 
 
 would not pretend 
 practical experience 
 
 to the same amount 
 and accuracy of ob- 
 servation ; yet he had seen enough to con- 
 vince him that if the one or the other must 
 fall, he would cling to the common law ; it was 
 a science of great exactness, its remedies were 
 bounded by right lines, it did not and could not 
 follow the zig zag, crooked and searching tracks 
 of the Court of Chancery, but so far as its rem- 
 edies extended they were direct and perfect. He 
 who sued for justice there could march straight 
 forward to her altar and receive from the hands 
 
 tions which sprung up around him, the crude oil- | of her priest that measure to which he was en- 
 spring of individual minds, who could not (howev- j titled. The systems of equity were adopted from 
 erable) have had much opportunity for reflection, ipecessity; and nothing but necessity would drive 
 
 jany sensible man into that forum a suit at law 
 Sv-cis no mystery every body could understand it 
 r'sufficiently, and calculate with proximate cer- 
 
 Yhe gentleman Iroui JNc-vv Yotk (ivji. O'L'ONOR) 
 
 had started doctrines which he teceived with 
 
 apprehension and alarm. He (Mr. Q'C.) had, if he 
 
 was rightly understood, advocat 
 
 oi what uiut 1)0 considered not only a great fun- j lieus of the court o cancery 
 
 <lamenial innovation, (under the name ut reform) ! darkness and mystery, and his clients generally 
 
 but which siopned ai nothing short of the entire j when informed that no adequate remedy existed 
 
 overthrow of toe common law a system -A inch, \ elsewhere, would shrug their shoulders and 
 
 ed fhe introduction tainty its expenses audits delays, but the pur- 
 t only a reat fun- j lieus of the court of chancery were shrouded in 
 
 since our fir,-,!, existence as a people, hud rous'i 
 luted the law ot the iand a system derived from 
 our mother country, venerable for its an'iquity, 
 aiid admirable tor its wisdom, and its adaptation 
 to the condition of a free people not without it* 
 faults, (particularly in its s-\<i<:Uis ot pleading and 
 
 shrink back as from the horrors of annihilation. 
 Much of this it was true, arose from the manner 
 in which justice had been administered in that 
 forum ; much simplification, much reform, in 
 that department might doubtlesss be attained, and 
 he trusted would be, in whatever court its pow- 
 
 praciice, :nd A'hieh Mr. J. would cordially unite j ers might be vested, though in its best estate if 
 in reforming 1 but u.ore i*ul;less, he would ven- the one system or the other must ^ ^ r o by the board 
 ture to say, than any other single system on the he would take leave of it forever and take 
 globe. He would like to know whether ha the hazard of moulding the remedies of the 
 had understood the' gentleman (ruin New-York courts of law so as to attain the ends of justice. 
 r<ghi; he would not descvrid to quibble or de-i"Ne had hoped however to see both systems pre- 
 signtdly uridei.-laiid any thing from language Uerved, for with the reforms they were suscepti- 
 utteied in dr-hue, which it was not intended to Ible 61, he believed together, side by side, they 
 convt-y? >;d he intend lo be undei stood ! (ii-sir- formed 'the most perfect shield against fraud, 
 
 It) blend and amalgamate our entire systems oi 
 law and equity, so that no distinct tiace ut either 
 should be left"? Did he intend, us he (Mr. J.) had 
 understood him to intimate that lie desired to see 
 the principles and mode of procedure of the civil 
 law adopted among us that if the Constitution 
 tVr-3 net 50 framod in it terms, it should ar leas!: 
 
 oppression and 
 ty could devise 
 
 injustice that human ingenui- 
 Iri this, he was sorry to differ 
 
 so radically with his friend from New York, and 
 he could account, for it upon no other principle 
 but his yearning after the beauties and simplicity 
 of the civil law. The honorable delegate from 
 Kincs, (Mr. SWACKHAMER) had talked much 
 
573 
 
 I 
 
 ot codification and of writing out the whole body 
 of the law, in so plain, brief and simple a man- 
 ner, that every man could turn to it and know 
 precisely what were his rights and duties in any 
 case that might arise. He, Mr. J., would cer- 
 tainly be very much gratified to see' this work 
 performed, and he, for the sake of the experiment 
 would respectfully suggest to some future legis- 
 lature to appoint 'that gentleman a sole board of 
 revision ; he was sure it could not be entrusted to 
 abler hands to any who would with more merited 
 contempt cast asid'e the jargon and technicalities 
 of all existing systems ; and by the lights of his 
 own vigorous intellect, compile the "whole du- 
 ties of man" in one intelligible little book, which 
 he supposed the gentleman might think of accom- 
 plishing in a volume the size of the American Al- 
 manac. He was sure that any gentleman who 
 should contrive so labor saving a machine, would 
 exhibit greater ingenuity than the yankee who 
 invented " wooden nutmegs" or any other article 
 of modern commerce for which a certain class of 
 the enterprising population of New England are 
 so celebrated at home and abroad ; he would de- 
 serve much of his country. But to be serious, he 
 (Mr. J.) would desire to suggest to gentlemen 
 who thought it so easy a matter to simplify the 
 laws of a tree and commercial people, that they 
 would find it a much more difficult task than they 
 anticipated. The civil law had been referred to 
 as a model ; the civil law which sprung up on 
 the banks of the Tiber, had more than two thou- 
 sand years ago become an unwieldly fabric ; at- 
 ter struggling through the vicissitudes of ages, it 
 was finally in the beginning of the 6th centu- 
 ry, under the order of the Emperor Justinian 
 embodied by Tribonian into code ; not with 
 the ease and facility however, and in the 
 compact and portable form which seem to 
 invite an experiment here. We are informed 
 by historians that the civil law was at that 
 time found in two thousand books and three 
 millions of verses ; and the digest when com- 
 pleted occupied forty volumes, [Mr. SIMMONS : 
 fifty ! !] My iriend, (said Mr. J.) who is a much 
 better antiquarian than myself informs me it was 
 fifty volumes. Yes, sir, and 170 years labor were 
 allowed for the accomplishment ; ten years each 
 to the principal compiler and his sixteen col- 
 leagues. It was accomplished in less time it is 
 true, but it was done in so careless a manner, that 
 although the Emperor had by an imperial edict 
 forbidden any commentary upon it, it was but 
 comparatively a few years before something like 
 a body of statute laws called novels was enacted to 
 remedy its defects,and commentary upon commen- 
 tary was writen lor its interpretation, until books 
 enough were produced to load several camels. 
 The civil law was carried with theRoman arms into 
 Britain about the commencement of the Christian 
 era ; on the continent it was afterwards trodden 
 down by the barbarians of theNorth when theWes- 
 tern Empire fell, and was heard of no more until in 
 the receding darkness of the middle ages, it was 
 recovered from its oblivion and adopted by the 
 Nations of modern Europe which rose on the ru- 
 ins of the Empire. I profess but a very limited 
 knowledge of the civil law, but it is easy to im- 
 agine that an imperial code (somewhat developed 
 it is true in the more free ages of Rome) but 
 
 moulded at last by an imperial hand, should be 
 better adapted to despotic countries, than to the 
 bold spirit of independence, the rough and hardy 
 freedom of our Anglo-Saxon ancestors. When 
 they invaded and subjugated Britain they brought 
 with them their own institutions the germs of the 
 common law as more congenial with liberty. The 
 two systems maintained an arduous struggle for 
 the ascendancy in the hands of the common law- 
 yers on the one side and the civilians on the other. 
 Many principles of the civil law were ultimately 
 incorporated with and now form a part of the body 
 of the common law ; it is from that c de we have 
 borrowed our systems of equity and admiralty ju- 
 risdiction. The trial by jury is unknown to the 
 civil law, and are we prepared to give up that 
 boasted and truly valuable institution the bul- 
 wark of civil liberty. We are informed by 
 the gentleman from New York (Mr. O'Coiv- 
 OR) that in Scotland and Louisiana where the 
 civil law prevails, the trial by jury exists in all 
 its vigor. Be that so, it is an improvement of the 
 system, but no part of the system itself. I hope, 
 said (Mr. J.) we are not prepared to lay violent 
 hands upon the common law or hold out an invi- 
 tation to the legislature to do so we have had de- 
 tailed to us by way of anecdote, or illustration so 
 called, glowing instances of its oppression and 
 ruinous operation. But the frauds of knaves, and 
 the ignorance of fools, which generally lie at the 
 bottom of such cases, are not chargeable to the 
 common law. He protested against it as an un- 
 merited abuse, an unfounded aspersion upon the 
 wisdom of our chivalrous and (in later times) 
 enlightened progenitors. The wisest systems on 
 earth are liable to abuse, and are constantly abu- 
 sed. He would say to his brethren of the legal 
 profession, let us unite in an honest effort, to re- 
 move all excresences, and reform all abuses. 
 To the laymen (adopting a figure borrowed 
 from the church) he would say, it was not 
 now a time to have their prejudices imflamed 
 by the exaggerated history of extreme cases ; 
 and he hoptu no lurther efturt would be made m 
 that direction or if made that it would prove 
 abortive. The pleading both in suits at Law and 
 equity might be divested of much of their redun- 
 dant verbiage. We had fallen into that error by 
 adopting English forms, originally the oiispung of 
 mure barbarous ages. Their ancient statutes and 
 systems of conveyancing, as well as the forms of 
 i heir pleadings, had run into absurd extravagancies 
 by piling together in contused masses all the near- 
 ly synonymous words and phrases will) which our 
 language abounds, serving only to confound the 
 most simple idea, which could often have been 
 expressed in a monosyllable. Neither the En- 
 glish nor the American lawyer had endeavored to 
 correct the error, nor would they be likely lo, so 
 long as writing by the month, and receiving pay by 
 the folio, were countenanced by the courts, and 
 permitted by the Legislature. A common declara- 
 tion at law or bill in chancery could be penned in 
 half the words commonly used, and he hoped soon 
 to see a board of able men sit down to the task of 
 reducing them to the standard of plain English and 
 common sense. Under such a process, he would 
 venture to say that our whole system of law and 
 equity pleading, and procedure would come out as 
 perlect a system as man could invent. 
 
574 
 
 Mr. KTRKLAND : The subject now under 
 consideration, Mr. CHAIRMAN, is, in my judg- 
 ment, that which more than any other led to the 
 assembling of this Convention and winch cannot 
 rank in importance below any, on which we^have 
 been, or shall be called to deliberate. It has for 
 many weeks received the patient and careful and 
 anxious attention of the committee to which it 
 was entrusted, and as one of that committee I 
 have devoted to it whatever of energy and indus- 
 try I possessed, sensibly feeling as I did and now 
 do that the great and diversified interests involv- 
 ed, demanded for it the fullest investigation and 
 the most mature and serious deliberation. The 
 result of these labors and reflections is that great 
 and essential changes in the judiciary system of 
 this State are imperiously required by the public 
 good. Such changes have therefore been propo- 
 sed both in the majority and minority reports pre- 
 sented to the Convention. In the necessity and! 
 propriety of most of these reforms, the different 
 members of the committee have unanimously con- 
 curred, and as to the remainder their views were 
 nearly unanimous. 
 
 Itcannot be amis, sir, to take a cursory view oi 
 some of the evils of the existing organization.- 
 Such a view may lead to a proper conclusion as 
 to the remedy to be applied. 
 
 In the first place, it is a notorious fact that the' 
 delays of business in the court of chancery and the 
 supreme court are now so great as to amount to a 
 denial of justice, and to lead to all the ruinous 
 consequences, which such a state of things is al- 
 ways sure to bring in its train ; excessive and 
 burdensome expenses; the total loss of just claims; 
 and the actual ruin and insolvency of suitors in 
 moderate circumstances, whose whole estates are 
 not unfrequently dependent on the result of a lit- 
 igation now thus protracted and in one of those 
 courts at least, almost interminable. 
 
 For some years past the number of causes on the 
 calendar of the supreme court at each term has 
 varied from seven hundred to nine hundred; and 
 generally not over eighty or ninety have been 
 regularly reached and argued. In the court of 
 chancery the condition of business is vastly 
 worse; I have attended the terms of that court 
 for years in succession for the purpose of arguing 
 causes, the issues in which were joined six and 
 eight years previously; and up to the very last 
 term of that court, I have thus attended in vain. 
 Indeed, I heard the chancellor, within a year past, 
 state to counsel, who desired to place a cause 
 on the chancery calendar, that the success of his 
 application would be of no avail to him, for were 
 it granted, he would not reach his cause in ten 
 years. He might well -have added that in the 
 present state of business in that tribunal, it never 
 would be reached. In thus alluding to the ru- 
 inous delays in these courts, I make not the 
 slightest imputation on the learned and able 
 men, who now occupy the benches of those 
 courts: on the contrary I can bear personal tes- 
 timony to the immense amount of labor perform- 
 ed by each of them; the fault is not in them, but 
 in the system. 
 
 Again, sir, great and just complaints have been 
 made and great evils and hardships endured from 
 the centralization of the business of those courts. 
 It is known that the general terms of the court 
 
 of chancery are held at ^nly two places in the 
 State and those of the supreme court at four, 
 while the special terms of both courts are held 
 exclusively (with the exception of the Chancel- 
 lors summer terms) at the Capitol. The most 
 trilling motion in either of these courts in a cause, 
 the parties and counsel in which reside in the 
 remotest parts of the State, in Chautauque, St. 
 Lawrence or Suffolk, must be made in the city 
 of Albany; the inevitable effect .of these arrange- 
 ments is to cause great and needless expense to 
 suitors, gross injustice to counsel and attorneys, 
 not residing at the favored places where the terms 
 are held and to create monopolies of business 
 detrimental alike to the people and to the pe- 
 cuniary interest arid the professional character of 
 the great mass of the members of the bar through- 
 out the State. In truth, sir, these courts have 
 thus become almost sealed tribunals to all who 
 are so unfortunate as to reside at any considerable 
 distance from the Capitol and the other two or 
 three places where the terms are held. 
 
 Asain, sn, experience has luily ueinonstrated 
 the impolicy and injury ot separating the duty of 
 hearing and deciding from that of 1 ry ing causes ; in 
 other words, of devolving the term duties on one 
 and the circuit duties on another class of judges. 
 The effect ot such a system is to diminish respect 
 for and confidence in the decisions of the jud^e 
 presiding at inals and to increase greatly the num- 
 ber of appeals from those decisions to separate 
 the term judges from the people and to prevent 
 Ihemtroin having the full knowledge of causes, 
 which is derived chiefly in many instances lioin 
 seeing and scrutinizing the witnesses on the stand; 
 and the tendency of a long continuance in a judi- 
 cial office, the duties ot which are performed 
 merely in the study or on the bench at term, is to 
 deprive the judicial judgment of that sound, prac- 
 tical common sense, obtained from mingling with 
 men and the knowledge of human natuie thus 
 acquired, which is so useful an ingredient to in- 
 termingle with the technical learning _ derived 
 from books. The abandonment ot the nisi prius 
 system existing prior to 1823 has often been la- 
 mented, and that substituted in its place has re- 
 ceived almost universal condemnation. 
 
 Another evil of great magnitude is the present 
 mode of ascertaining tacts in the court of chancery 
 by means of taking testimony before examiners. 
 A more ruinously expensive, a more dilatory and 
 a more inefficient and impeitect mode of taking 
 testimony could scarcely be devised. I will noi 
 dwell on'the evils of this system. It is sufficient 
 now to state, by way of illustration, three cases 
 within my own knowledge as counsel. I have at 
 this time in my charge a cause, the testimony in 
 which extends over nearly seven thousand folio- 
 sixty or eighty days were consumed in the exami- 
 nation of -A single witness, and the examiner's 
 fees as is known to an honorable gentleman now 
 before me, (Mr. CAMPBELL, of Steuben) who 
 performed in part the dunes of examiner in 1 
 cause, vvereliule less than three thousand dollars. 
 In another cause, the folio were three thousand, 
 and the examiner's fees upwards of twelve hund- 
 red dollars; and within the last eighteen months 
 in a cause where 1 filed a bill in behalf of a poor 
 and unfortunate wile against her husband for a 
 divorce for ill treatment, the defence was so con- 
 
575 
 
 ducted by means of the existing s\s!em, as to 
 (he examiner's fees to the amount o! ' tirclrr 
 hundred dollars and the; testimony to three thou- 
 sand folio! I hazard nothing in saying that either 
 of tin'.- ab >ve causes rmild haw been Iried ;ii)d dis- 
 : of by an intelligent jndire and jury in Iroin 
 two to five da\s and at a trifling expense. I am 
 aware that al tempts have been made to remedy 
 this evil by legislation, but they have proved 
 abortive. Any system, under the shelter and cover 
 of which such' enormities -can be perpetrated, 
 ought to be abolished by the Constitution. 
 
 The attention of the committee, Mr. Chairman, 
 s has also been bestowed on some other evils. The 
 mode of remunerating judicial officers by fees and 
 perquisites of office is fraught with mischief its 
 tendency is corrupting, demoralizing and degra- 
 ding it has always the appearance and some- 
 times it is feared the effect of converting the ju- 
 dicial functionary into a vender of justice; it has 
 caused very numerous and very just complaints. 
 Again, sir, judicial patronage, the power of ap- 
 pointment to office by the incumbents of high ju- 
 dicial stations is, it is believed, universally repro- 
 bated. It presents temptations to those officers, 
 to which they should not be subjected it expo- 
 ses them to imputations and suspicions, from 
 which they should be wholly free it tends to de- 
 rogate from the high, unspotted character they 
 should always bear. The temple of justice is the 
 last place from which should be distributed the 
 spoils of office. It is the unanimous opinion of 
 the committee, as I trust it will be of the Con- 
 vention, that all judicial officers of the higher 
 grades should be prohibited from the power of 
 appointment to office, and from receiving any fees 
 and perquisites of office. 
 
 One other subject, sir. All I trust concur in 
 the propriety and the necessity of the independ- 
 .ciary but between judicial inde- 
 pendence and judicial irresponsibility, there is a 
 wide and palpable difference. While I am a 
 strenuous advocate for the former, I am convinced 
 lhatthe term of office of no judge in this State 
 should be such as to relieve him from that sense 
 of responsibility to the " sovereign power," which 
 every incumbent of office should feel. I do not 
 regard a term, which is practically a term for 
 life, as essential to judicial independence, where- 
 as I do regard a limited term of suitable duration, 
 as highly conducive to a due respect for just and 
 legitimate public sentiment, and as well calcula- 
 ted occasionally to remind a judge that his power 
 is not absolute, and that elevated as his position 
 is, there is in this land a still higher pow*r. 
 Judges it is to be remembered are after all but 
 men and subject to the like passions and infirmi- 
 ties with others. The term ior life of judges ir 
 England was introduced to protect the subjcc\ 
 against the crown and not for the sake of tfn 
 judge. The committee almost unanimously ar 
 rived at the conclusion that the present term o 
 judicial office should be changed. 1 will hereaf 
 | ter speak of what in my opinion should be the 
 duration of this term. 
 
 The foregoing among other considerations have 
 induced me to unite with the committee in recom 
 mending the following material and important re 
 forms and changes : 
 
 1. The union of the duties of term and circuit judges 
 
 n the same individuals. 
 
 2. The trial of ca<es in law and equity substantially in 
 lie same manner; and the consequent abolition ol the of. 
 ces of ma^vi r iiihl r\ -minrr. 
 
 3. The bringing of the courts comparatively within the 
 icinity of the suitors, tin ir attoi ni'-\ s nnd counsel. 
 
 4. The changing of the term of oliice from a ttrm prao 
 ii'iilly for life to a term for years 
 
 ;"> The abolition of judicial patronage and of judicial 
 cs :.nd perquisites of office 
 
 6. The union of the couit of chancery and the supreme 
 ourt in one tribunal. 
 
 These changes are all material and some of 
 hem doubtless of a very grave and vital charac- 
 er. Among the latter is that of the union of the 
 wo courts. This union, it is to be observed, nei- 
 her implies nor involves any abolition of juris- 
 diction nor any destruction of equity powers and 
 emcdies while it will be attended, lam per- 
 uaded, with many conveniences and advantages. 
 One tribunal can be organized with more ease, 
 simplicity and economy than two. It will be the 
 means of dispensing with a number of clerks arid 
 other officers, who will by this arrangement be- 
 come unnecessary ; it will not require as manv 
 udges, in consequence of the less number of 
 courts which the judges will be obliged to travel 
 to and to hold. If the tribunals are separately 
 organized, it will follow as a matter of course 
 :hat double sets of courts, (both bane and circuit) 
 must be held ; one for the trial and hearing of 
 ;ases in equity, and another for the trial and hear- 
 ng of cases at law ; these must necessarily be 
 ield at different times, and thus the number of 
 ourts to be held in the several counties and dis- 
 tricts will be much increased ; the jury burdens 
 greatly aggravated ; and county as well as State 
 expenses materially augmented. Again, the pro- 
 posed union would promote facility, convenience 
 and economy in the dispatch of the business of 
 ^uitors; their attorneys and counsel having cases 
 in law and equity could attend to both at the 
 same court and at the same time, instead of be- 
 ing compelled to attend a different court at a dif- 
 ferent time ; very often the convenience of wit- 
 nesses would be greatly promoted ; and frequent- 
 ly the same party would have a case in law 
 and in equity to be tried or heard at the same 
 court and thus great additional expense be avoided. 
 Again, sir, if in the march of improvement, the 
 time should ever arrive, when the pleadings and 
 practice the modes of procedure in law and irX 
 equity should be assimilated or made uniform, the 
 existence of but one tribunal would greatly fa 
 ciliate that operation ; at least it would furnish a 
 fair opportunity and means for the trial of the ex- 
 periment. Such a result, if attainable at all, must 
 I apprehend be the work of time, and be effected 
 by slow and gradual steps. It cannot, surely it 
 ought not to be attempted suddenly and at " one 
 leap" for the present modes are incorporated 
 and interwoven with all our habits of business, 
 and I may say, almost with all our legal notions 
 arid ideas ; but 1 am far from supposing such a 
 change either impossible or, as some have seen 
 fit to characterize it, Utopian and absurd. I am 
 not at present the advocate of such a measure, 
 e.t, sir, it would not to my mind be eviden 
 tial of fanaticism or insanity, or of tne influence 
 of the " pestilential breath of the demagogue," 
 (as a worthy friend says in a letter to me,) if any 
 gentleman should advocate its slow and gradual 
 
576 
 
 and ultimate introduction. I would refer all, 
 who entertain the sentiments of the friend to 
 whom I allude, to a most able paper in the 17th 
 volume of the American Jurist (p. 253) ; and af- 
 ter a candid and careful perusal of that argument, 
 they will be loth, I apprehend,to bring the charges 
 of fanaticism and of folly against those who differ 
 from them in opinion. The legislature now has 
 and will, without doubt, hereafter retain the pow- 
 er over these " modes of procedure ;" and to their 
 wisdom it must be left to adopt such measures in 
 relation to them as the public interests demand. 
 
 It has been argued against the plan of the union 
 of these courts, that there is a natural, radical, un- 
 alterable difference.and distinction between law 
 and equity, an irreconcilable contrariety and in- 
 consistency. To such a doctrine I can by no 
 means assent. It has no foundation in truth, and 
 is the erroneous conclusion of minds warped and 
 contracted by long continued habits and prejudic- 
 es, and by the "set forms of speech" to which 
 they have invariably been accustomed. It is said 
 in Twiss' life of Lord Eldon, that that most distin- 
 guished of English chancellors, repudiated in em- 
 phatic terms such a sentiment. I venture to as- 
 sert, sir, that there is not as great or radical or es- 
 sential a difference between any given title or 
 " equity'' law and ot " legal" law as exists be- 
 tween many of the different titles or branches of 
 the law itself as, for instance, between commer- 
 cial law and the law of contingent remainders 
 and between the law of libel and the law of de- 
 scents and devises. The difference between 
 law" and " equity" is a difference in the reme- 
 dies, and substantially in nothing more. The 
 judge who administers '"equity 4 ' is bound by au- 
 thority alike with him who administers " law:" 
 the one can no more exercise his own unregulated 
 * discretion" than the other. Chancellor Kent 
 (honored alike in Europe and America) declared 
 in one of the learned judgments pronounced by 
 him as chancellor, that he had no right or power 
 to devise or to make or unmake the law ; that his 
 more humble duty was to seek out and to find and 
 when found, to follow in the path of his prede- 
 cessors. 
 
 It is alleged that the same judge cannot be 
 qualified to administer both law and equity. This, 
 sir, 1 consider a libel on the human intellect, and 
 I know that it is contradicted by every day's ob 
 servation and experience. The numerous able 
 and prominent lawyers of the State practice con- 
 stantly in both courts and with capacity and suc- 
 cess in each ; and any judge, who is competent to 
 his post, should be and can and will be qualified 
 to administer the law in the one branch of this 
 tribunal as well as in the other. Is any evidence 
 wanted on this subject ? I reter to the Court of 
 Errors to furnish it. What more learned, able 
 and satisfactory judgments in "equity" cases have 
 ever been pronounced than by the judges of the 
 supreme court, when sitting as judges in that 
 court (of Errors) : and on the other hand, where 
 can we find more lucid, conclusive or learned 
 opinions in " law" cases than have been delivered 
 in that tribunal by our chancellors? And again, 
 sir, the fact is notorious that members of that 
 court, who were neither judges nor chancellors, 
 have on one day delivered opinions of unquestion 
 ed ability in cases arising at " law," and on the 
 
 next, opinions of equal ability in cases coming 
 "rom " equity." 
 
 We have great and numerous examples in favor 
 of the proposed union. We find it in the United 
 
 fates system, and in the systems of more than 
 
 venty of the individual States, it has never, 
 ;jj my knowledge, been a cause of complaint in 
 
 iy of the States, that law and equity were ad- 
 ministered by the same tribunal; but the com. 
 plaint has been that that tribunal had not suffi- 
 cient equity powers. In proof of this assertion, 
 I refer to the 8th volume of the Law Reporter, 
 ]p. 556] where will be found a statement or ihe 
 struggle recently made in 'he Legislature of Mas. 
 sachusetts to obtain additional chancery powers 
 for the supreme court of that State. But, sir, 
 we have our own example for the last quarter of a 
 century, in the union of law and equity powers in 
 the circuit judges it is in those courts that a vast 
 proportion of all the original chancery business 
 has been done during that period, and I never yet 
 heard that any great danger or difficulty or absur- 
 dity had been produced by the union. On the 
 contrary I can, from my own experience, testify 
 as to several of those " union" courts, that the 
 judges have discharged with signal and with equal 
 ability, and with entire satisfaction to the public, 
 their duties both as common law and as chancery 
 judges. 
 
 On this subject, Mr. Chairman, I could easily 
 enlarge, but I trust that the views I have already 
 presented will furnish at least an " apology" for 
 the recommendation of the union of these tribu- 
 nals. And on this point, I will only add, that it is 
 a quite prevalent opinion among many persons, 
 that the court of chancery has become so formal 
 and technical, so embarrassed with the details of 
 practice, and so encumbered with numberless rules 
 and the constructions thereof, that it is quite de. 
 sirable that it should be united to a court of law in 
 order to liberalize anduntrammel, and disenthral 
 it from its load of forms, and thus enable iito ad- 
 minister equitable relief with less regard to "strict 
 rules'* and modes of mere practice and procedure. 
 The above changes being resolved on and recom- 
 mended, the next question is as to the proper or- 
 ganization of the tribunal, which is to represent 
 and take the place of the present supreme court 
 and court of chancery, with the immensely in- 
 creased amount of business devolved upon it by 
 means of the alteration in the mode of trial in 
 equity cases. The first object, beyond all doubt, 
 to be considered and attained is, such a system 
 and mode of organization as will enable the legal 
 business of the state to be done without delay, 
 while it shall be done with economy and with 
 judicial ability. To this main and great object 
 every other must yield ; and if consistently with 
 this, it is not possible to adopt such an organization 
 as will preserve the high and distinguished po- 
 sition heretofore occupied by the supreme court 
 and court of chancery as expounders of the law 
 and as repositories and promulgators of legal 
 learning, this glory and renown must be sacrificed 
 to the necessity of the case ; and a substitute for 
 those courts, in the respect to which I have just 
 alluded, must be provided in the court of ap- 
 peals. I have regarded it too as exceedingly de- 
 sirable that the representative of and substitute 
 for those courts should, if possible, be a single 
 
577 
 
 court, so that there should be uniformity of de- 
 cision, greater dignity in the court, a higher re- 
 ibr the. tribunal, and more confidence in its 
 judgments. "Hut on the most mature deliberation, 
 I am fully satisfied that a single court, with such 
 advant;iL'i'S, or with any of the advantages of a 
 single court, cannot be established. It is to be 
 remembered that this single court is to do all the 
 business now done by the supreme court, the 
 court of chancery, and the circuit judges, and 
 much of that performed by masters and examiners. 
 I have come to this conclusion with pain and re- 
 gret, for accustomed as I have been for years to a 
 constant attendance on those two courts, highly 
 esteeming as I do the individual members com- 
 posing them, and remembering the legal lustre 
 and glory., which have been shed on this land, for 
 nearly half a century, by the ability and learning 
 of both the tribunals, I bid farewell to them with 
 feelings of the deepest regret. I am equally 
 pained by the reflection that no single tribunal of 
 the same grade can be introduced 1.0 take theif 
 united place. But there is a consolation in know- 
 ing that a court of appeals can be so organized as 
 to take their place as a repository of legal learning, 
 from which may issue as learned, able, satisfac- 
 tory judgments and opinions as those, which have 
 heretofore proceeded from the two courts in ques- 
 tion. I come now to a consideration of the plan 
 reported by a majority of the committee, as con- 
 tained substantially in the three following sec- 
 tions of the article presented by them : 
 
 ^3. There shall be a Supreme Court having the same 
 jurisdiction in law and equity, which the Supreme Court 
 and the Court of Chancery now have, subject to regulation 
 bylaw. 
 
 ^ 4. The Stateshallbe divided into eight judicial districts, 
 of which the city of New York shall be one. The others 
 to be bo untied by county lines; and to be compact and 
 equal in population as nearly as may be. There shall be 
 four justices of the supreme court for each district, and as 
 many more in the distiict composed of the city of New 
 York as may from time to time be authorized by law, but 
 not to exceed the number of justices in the other districts in 
 proportion to their population. They shall be classified so 
 that one of the justices ot ench district shall go out of of- 
 fice at the end of (-very two years. After the expiration 
 of their terms under such classification, the term of their 
 office shall be eight years. 
 
 6 Any three of them may hold general terms of said 
 court in any district, and one of them may hold special 
 terms and circuit courts, and preside at the courts of oyer 
 and termiuer in 4 any county. 
 
 This plan, it will be seen, provides for a single 
 court of thirty-two judges, which is to take the 
 place not only of the supreme court and court of 
 chancery but also of the county court. 
 
 This proposed court of thirty-two judges pre- 
 sents in not the smallest degree the advantages of 
 a single court. 
 
 1. Its very numbers destroy it; composed of 
 thirty-two persons, it could never have the re- 
 spect, dignity, or confidence, which are among 
 the advantages of a single tribunal. 
 
 2. It is impossible, and it is not contemplated, 
 that all or any considerable share of its members 
 should ever assemble together as a court. An 
 anomaly like this I apprehend is without a pre- 
 cedent. 
 
 3. A great, perhaps almost the only peculiar 
 benefit of a single court is uniformity of deci- 
 sion. But this is totally unattainable here, for the 
 terms of the court are to be held by any three. of 
 the judges ; they may and will be held Vy differ 
 
 ent persons at different places at the same 
 indeed, many terms may be held at the same time 
 in places remote from each other. It is thus im- 
 possible that there can be uniformity of decision 
 or anypratical unity in the court. There would 
 be just as many appeals from a court thus organ- 
 ized as from eight distinct and separately organ- 
 ized courts. 
 
 What advantages then does such a plan pre- 
 sent ? Not a solitary one that I can discover. 
 
 But there are many positive disadvantages, dif- 
 ficulties and absurdities in sue!) an organization. 
 
 1. If would be an arduous task to keep theww.v- 
 ter-roll of such a company and to designate who 
 should be on duty here and who there, at given 
 periods The distribuiion of the terms, cm: mis', 
 and special tcirns among this multitude would be 
 /bund, if practicable at all, very difficult. 
 
 2. At the close of a term in bane, (he three 
 judges who held it would by the very const ruc- 
 tion of the system, immediately separate ami de- 
 part severally to other and different places to hold 
 couits. It would thus be very difficult if not 
 impossible for them again to assemble arid have a 
 consultation as to the causes argued before them, 
 and without such consultation, no cause could be 
 properly or satisfactorily decided. 
 
 3. After the trial of a cause before one ot these 
 ambulatory and ever moving judges, where would 
 he be found (o settle a case, bill of exceptions, 
 &.C., in the causes just tried ? 
 
 4. Practically, trascouit professing to be one 
 would be several; it would be composed of 
 many fragments united by no common tie, but 
 jostling, contradictory and conflicting. 
 
 These seem to rne just and unanswerable ob- 
 jections to the plan of the majority and I stale 
 them in no spirit ot criticism or c-f fault -finding, 
 but solely from an imperative sense of duly. I 
 am fully convinced that these considerations pre- 
 sent serious and latal difficulties in the piactical 
 operation ot that plan; and if I am correct, it 
 would be calamitous to adopt ir. 
 
 Having thus as I think, shown the impossibili- 
 ty of forming a single court without any reason- 
 able hope or promise of success I am led lo the 
 conclusion that the rnosi sate, simple and certain 
 mode is to establish indepf ndeni courts oi general 
 jurisdiction in prescribed territorial districts. 
 The following section of (he article I had ttie 
 honor to report, presents the outline of such a 
 plan : 
 
 Superior Courts. 
 
 % 4. The State shall be divided into six judicial districts, 
 to be denominated the first, second, third, fourth, lilth and 
 sixth judicial districts, of which the city of New York 
 shall form the first. There shbll be a Superior Court iu 
 each of the said districts, which shall have jurisdiction in 
 all matters of law and%quity within the Sfate, and such su- 
 pervisory and other power over inferior tribunals arid of- 
 ficers within its district as now exists in the huprenuj 
 Court, subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme 
 Court of Appeals. It shall in the first district bo composed 
 ot six judges, and in each of the other districts of four 
 judges. Two of the judges in each of said districts shall 
 lie elected by the qualified electors of such district, and 
 the remainder of said judges shall bo appointed by tin; 
 joint ballot ol the members of the Senate and Assembly.-* 
 The Governor shall designate OOP of the judges thus elec- 
 ted as Chief Justice of the Court in the district for which 
 he was elected. Each ol said judges shall, during his cou. 
 tinuauce in office reside in the district for which he was 
 elected or appointed. 
 
 47 
 
578 
 
 The courts under this plan can be arranged wit 
 enlire simplicity, harmony and symmetry; th 
 system admits of reduction or extension of th 
 judicial force with perfect facility and it thm 
 can be adapted to the wants of any particular dis 
 trict without in any way intertering with the har 
 monyof.any part of the plan. The number o 
 districts and ot judges which I have proposed 
 may be too great or too small, but this of cours 
 can easily be increased or diminished. I have de 
 nominated these courts ' Superior Courts" as be 
 ing in harmony with the name of "Supremi 
 Court of Appeals," given to the court of the high 
 est grade. They should be of general jurisdic 
 tion, for many reasons not deemed necessary t< 
 be now elated ; but if the Convention should be o 
 opinion that their jurisdiction should be local, thi 
 alteration could be made without in any degrei 
 affecting the remainder of the plan. To preven 
 any possible injustice or inconvenience thatmijrh 
 arise from these courts having general jurisdir. 
 lion, adequate provision is made in the fifth sec 
 lion of the article, for transfers of causes from one 
 district to another, and for changes o( venue, as 
 the rights of suitors may require. Thus, all caus- 
 es will be tried, argued, decided, in such districts 
 as the ends of justice may demand, irrespective o 
 the district in which the suit may have been ori- 
 ginally commenced. 
 
 In the fifth section provision is also made for 
 the judges of the superior courts (and also of the 
 court of appeals) holding terms, circuits, &c. in 
 any district. The effect of this will be to equal- 
 ize the labors of the judges and to keep them all 
 constantly employed ; and likewise to furnish aid 
 to a district which may be overburdened with bu- 
 siness, by means of the judicial force of another 
 district, in which there might happen at the time 
 to be a paucity of judicial work. This will also 
 lead to the farther beneficial results of the occa- 
 sional intermingling together of the judges of the 
 different districts, "and of the judges appearing in 
 different and various parts of the State. 
 
 In the eleventh section of the article, provision 
 is made for the increase of the judicial force ac- 
 cording to the exigencies of business; and it is 
 believed that the authority thus given to the leg- 
 islature is sufficiently guarded and restricted by 
 requiring the vote of two-thirds of the members 
 elected. This is a provision, the want of which 
 in the Constitution of 1821 has caused great in- 
 convenience and injury. 
 
 It is to be observed that in the plan I propose 
 there is no more liability to appeals than in that 
 presented by the committee. 
 
 It may be objected to the courts thus organized 
 in districts, that they are provincial . To a cer- 
 tain extent this is true, but so far as it is an evil, 
 I deem it an unavoidable one > and in reference 
 to which it may well be said that the lesser evil 
 must be endured for the greater good. 
 
 The inconveniences ot any pus-mole conflict ol 
 decisions in these " superior courts'' will be ob- 
 viated by the court of appeals, which under any 
 system tnat can possibly be devised, must have a 
 similar duty to perform. And here I beg leave 
 to say a word as to the organization I propose ot 
 the latter tribunal. This organization will be 
 found in the third section. It is manifest that 
 Ihis must be a court of the greatest interest and 
 
 importance, and I have endeavored to secure lo it 
 that degree of permanence and independence, 
 which the vast interests commuted to its decision 
 would justly seem to icquire. 
 
 I will add another word, Sir, in reply to the 
 question which may perhaps be asked, " who will 
 have the supervisory power over these six courts'"? 
 Such a question I should answer by asking, who 
 now has that power over the supierne com t and 
 the court of chancery? It tests nowhere except 
 in the integrity and amenability to public opinion 
 of the Judges ot those courts; and as to the Judges 
 of the proposed " superior courts," the same pow- 
 er \\iilex\st. They are liable also to removal 
 and impeachment. 
 
 I present my plan, Mr. Chairman, for the or- 
 ganization of these ' superior coui ts " (in connec- 
 tion with my proposed court of appeals) with the 
 more confidence because I find it on examination 
 to be substantially the system of a large number 
 of our sister states, Louisiana, Missouri, Iowa, 
 (proposed constitution) Delaware, Mississippi, 
 Virginia, Florida, Connecticut, Texas, Alabama, 
 as I read their constitution, have judicial oigam- 
 zations similar in all essential particulars to that 
 which I propose: I may add that the judiciary 
 jystern of the Union is not materially different. 
 
 It is to be observed that the selection of the 
 
 udges of the " superior courts" is not limited to 
 
 he district, in which their duties are to be per- 
 
 brmed ; though while they hold their offices they 
 
 are required lo reside in that distiict. 
 
 The provision made in the7ih section for the 
 enn of office of a judge, elected or appointed to 
 fill a vacancy, will practically answer (he purpos- 
 es of classification, while it avoids its inconveni- 
 ences and also obviates the probable difficulty of 
 finding qualified persons willing to take the ollice 
 or the short remainders of terms. 
 
 Having thus glanced at tne objections to the su- 
 ireme court as proposed by the Committee, and 
 laving briefly stated some of my reasons in suj>- 
 ort of the courts I propose in its stead, I will 
 ow, Mr. Chairman, consider for a moment the 
 bjections to another part of the report of the 
 !ominittee or rather to the omissions in that re- 
 ort. It omits entirely the county courts in any 
 3*'rn ; or practically it proposes to have no such 
 ourts. This I retrard, sir, as a most ohjectiona- 
 le feature in the report, for 1 am persuaded that 
 he immense and diversified legal business of the 
 :ate cannot be done without the aid of that tribu. 
 al. I do not mean that tribunal as it now exists ; 
 >r I believe there is greal ii not enure unanimity 
 n the opinion that those courts as now organized 
 hould be abolished j but, sir, that a couiuy court 
 roperly organized should be created I entertain 
 o doubt whatever. An immense amount of bu- 
 iness civil and criminal is now done in those 
 ourts, they are integral parts ot the county or- 
 anizations and are in a manner identified with 
 le county as a municipal body. They are as it 
 /ere the domestic courts of the people and by 
 cans of these courts, imperfectly as they may 
 ow be arranged and conducted, much knowledge 
 ('.matters ot business, of law and of general af- 
 tiis has been diffused through the community. 
 do not believe that the people desire or are pre- 
 ared to wit.iess their total annihilation; nor do I 
 eem such a measure in anywise expedient. In 
 
579 
 
 ,,iMiiioii, sn,tt> all the business done in those 
 courts, strictly pertaining to the trial and disposi- 
 tion of civil and criminal causes, there is a vast 
 .< in <unt ot special power and duty performed by 
 those courts and their Judges. I have been at 
 the pains to ascertain the extent of this miscella- 
 neous business and! read the following statement 
 as the result ot my investigation : 
 
 Miscellaneous duties now performed by county courts 
 and the Jud^e- thereof or some of them in addition to the 
 trial of causes and other business ordinarily done at court: 
 
 1. As to Committees of Lunntics. 
 
 2. As to disorderly persons. 
 
 3. As to relatives of paupers. 
 
 4. As to ot.itt's ol persons absconding an leaving their 
 
 families chargeable, &c. 
 o. As to cases of bastardy. 
 
 6. As to apprentices and servants. 
 
 7. As to admeasurement of dower. 
 8 AS to restitution of lands. 
 
 9. As to licensing of ferries. 
 
 10. As to regulation of fisheries. 
 
 11. As to removal ot justices of the peace. 
 
 J-2. As to trial of physicians for mal-practice, &c. 
 
 13. As to appeals from Commissioners of highways. 
 
 14. As to removing occupants of St-ite lands. 
 lf>. As to absconding and non-resi ient debtors. 
 
 16. As to insolvent and imprisoned debtors. 
 
 17. As to forcible entries and detainers. 
 
 18. As to under Landlord and Tenant's act. 
 
 19. As to keeping the peace; requiring sureties to keep 
 
 the peace, arresting offenders and fugitives and 
 
 taking examination of pnsoners, taking bail in 
 
 criminal ca^-es. 
 20. As to compelling delivery of books, &c. by an officer 
 
 to his successor. 
 SI. As to designdtiiig Coroner to act as Sheriff in certain 
 
 cases. 
 
 2-2. As to Wrecks. ( 
 
 23. As to habitual Drunkards. 
 21. As to slaying waste, &c. 
 2.3. As to inspecting CountyjPrisons &c. 
 *nd this by no means embraces the whole. 
 
 Now, sir, when all this local and miscellane- 
 ous business <s taken into the account and when 
 you add to it tl-.e great mass of civil and criminal 
 business d >ne at the terms of the county courts 
 even as at present organized, and when besides 
 ;ili this you consider what an amount of addition- 
 al business is to be devolved on the circuit courts 
 by the trials of Chancery causes, it is, it seems to 
 me, an unquesticnable proposition that county 
 courts on ;iu efficient and improved plan must be 
 established. They are indispensable as auxiliary 
 to tne higher court thev are indispensible to the 
 :(?tion of the vast variety of business now 
 d'lin 1 bv them as above stated. I will not now speak 
 a' length of the plan I propose lor the organiza- 
 tion of the county court; it is I hi lieve as good an 
 one as can probably be suggested; and it has been 
 used successfully in other Stales. There are in 
 my view very good reasons lor uniting the offices 
 <>l First Judge and Surrogate as I propose; it will 
 ,-<ave expense to the counties and to individuals; 
 it will tend to elevate the character of both offi- 
 ces by making the position one of more impor- 
 tance and responsibility, aud will lead to the selec- 
 tion of more competent persons to fill the station. 
 
 lr will be perceived, sir, that rny judicial arti- 
 cle provides for the payment ot salaries to trie 
 judicial ofiic'-rs, except to the associate Judge of 
 the county court. 
 
 It is riot just that the whole expense of any ju- 
 dicial system should fall on the state or county 
 'ries: it should in part be defrayed by those 
 who use the tribunals for the purposes of ttieil 
 own busings. This matter can easily be arranged 
 
 by law; andjproper provision be made, b> which 
 suitors and those doing business at the surrogates 
 office will pay (tor the use of the Stale or county 
 ty Treasuries as the case may be) such sums as 
 may be reasonable. 
 
 I will say a word as to the terms of office of these 
 judges. 1 propose ten years for the judges of the 
 two higher courts and eight years for the district 
 judges of the county courts. These terms I can- 
 not deem too long they should be of sufficient 
 length to induce men of capacity to take the of- 
 fice and to secure a reasonable independence in it, 
 and also to prevent frequent changes of the 
 judges. Judicial experience is as valuable any as 
 any other. 
 
 In looking into the constitutions of the several 
 states, I find that in twelve states (as well as in 
 the United States) the tetm is equivalent to a 
 term for life, in one state it is for fifteen years; 
 in two for twelve years and in two for eight 
 years, thus in the large majority of the states 
 the term being for life or for a period of not less 
 than eight years. I trust the Convention will 
 adopt terms at least as long as those I have had 
 the honor to propose. 
 
 I come next to the question of the mode of se- 
 lecting these officers -that is whether they} shall 
 be elected or appointed. On this subject, though 
 of great importance, I do not at. present intend to 
 dwell at length, and will suggest only a few con- 
 siderations pertaining to it. 
 
 I implicitly believe in and ardently admire the 
 great principle on which our glorious institutions 
 are founded, ''that the people are the only legiti- 
 mate source of power" it is a sacred principle 
 never to be violated or disregarded. But in rny 
 judgment it argues no disregard of or departure 
 from this principle, for 'he people to commit to 
 intermediate hands the appointment of such and 
 so many of their agents or officers as they may 
 deem can be more fitly thus appointed or who if 
 thus appointed would be more likely to discharge 
 well and faithfully the duties ot" their station.- 
 The office of judge is of a peculiar character ; its 
 duties are highly delicate and important this of- 
 ficer is often called on to decide between the peo- 
 ple themselves on one side and the individual citi- 
 zen on the other; he is to defend the weak against 
 the strong and may at times be required to inter- 
 pose himself between an excited and pervading 
 popular sentiment and an individual who may 
 happen to be its subject. 
 
 Ii has been argued and with justice that a judge 
 elected bypopular vote would be exceedinglyliable 
 to entertain prejudices and hostility toward those, 
 who may warmly have opposed his election and 
 also that tempted by a desire for re-election, he 
 might be induced to court the powerful and in- 
 fluential and to yield to the popular caprices or 
 prejudices or passions of a particular period. It 
 is said too, and it is not to be denied that nomina- 
 tions as now conducted do not leave to the peo- 
 ple that free and unbiased choice they should 
 have, and it is notorious that party conventions 
 and the nominations there made are not unfre- 
 quently the fruits of intrigue and selfish manoeu- 
 vre. But there are loud complaints against the 
 central power at the capital, and strong desire? 
 to diminish it; and though I am not aware of any 
 general call made by the people for the election of 
 
$80 
 
 the judges, still I am entirely willing to have this 
 mode tested to a reasonable extent, so that, if it 
 prove successful, and judicial incumbents thus 
 selected are not found obnoxious to the charges 
 which it is supposed under such circumstances 
 might exist against them, it may be introduced 
 more fully into use. My deliberate reflections 
 have led me to the result of proposing to distrib- 
 ute this power into three parts and to recommend 
 that the judges be in part elected by the people, 
 in part appointed by the Governor and Senate, 
 and in part by the joint ballot of the Senate and 
 Assembly. This division would be calculated to 
 produce a salutary rivalry between the several 
 powers to select the worthiest incumbents and 
 between the incumbents themselves"" a similar, 
 just and honorable rivalry would also be produc- 
 ed. I may here remark, that the mode of ap- 
 pointment by the joint ballot of Senate and As- 
 sembly prevails in two thirds of the states, a. fact 
 calculated to show that this mode is a generally 
 approved one. 
 
 L ought further to add, that?'n no one State of 
 the Union are the judges of the higher tribunals 
 elected by the people, except in Mississippi, and 
 the example of that State, in other respects at 
 least, would hardly be proposed for imitation in 
 this. I may at a future time go more at large in- 
 to this subject, and will content myself now with 
 reminding the convention that the other changes 
 proposed to be made as to the judiciary establish- 
 ment are great, thorough, and in some degree ex- 
 perimental. The voice of wisdom, of duty, and 
 of patriotism, calls on us to pause, and calmly de- 
 liberate before we at one and the same time in- 
 troduce into full and exclusive use another change 
 still greater and more important, hitherto untried 
 among us, and among all our sister States, with 
 the solitary exception just mentioned. At the 
 hazard of being branded on the one side with the 
 epithet of " radical" and " demagogue," and on 
 the other of " aristocrat," and " an enemy of po- 
 pular rights," I have put forth the above senti- 
 ments deliberately, and by them I am willing to J 
 abide. It remains for me now, Mr. Chairman, j 
 only to present very briefly some of the benefits, | 
 in addition to those already mentioned, of the 
 new organization proposed. 1. While it will be j 
 little, if any more burthensome to the State or 
 County treasuries than the present entirely inef- ' 
 ticient system, it will be a vast saving of expense 
 to the people. By the official documents pre- 
 sented to the Convention, it appears that the ex- 
 penses of the present system are as follows: 
 Salaries and expenses paid out of the State Trea- 
 sury, (I year) 104,660 
 
 Do. out 'oi' County Treasuries, (including New 
 York,! yjear) 4-2,564 
 
 Perquisites and fees (1 yeai). 
 
 Vice Chancellors 
 
 Circuit Judges 
 
 First Judges 
 
 Masters 
 
 Examiners 
 
 $147,2:14 
 
 $5,076 
 
 3/JS9 
 
 22,30f> 
 
 59,942 
 
 122.264 
 
 if the district judges of the^Cuunty Courts should 
 receive $2,000 per year, and the' clerks be com- 
 pensated in the most liberal manner by receiving 
 on an average as much as is now paid to the chan- 
 cery clerks and registers, even on 'his liberal es- 
 timate of 'compensation, the amount of annual sa- 
 laries and charges would be about Jjjl35,u00, thus 
 falling considerably short of the spurns now paid 
 out of the State and County Treasuries, to say 
 nothing of the enormous savings in fees and per- 
 quisites. 
 
 2. An immense number of officers are dispens. 
 ed with, as will be seen by the following state- 
 ments. Without intending in any manner to dis- 
 parage any person in office, the evils of numerous 
 officers is acknowledged by all, and, at all events, 
 it must be conceded that the large ;i mount ot fee 
 and perquisites received by them comes directly 
 from the pockets of the people: 
 
 Judges Proposed. 
 
 Court of Appeals 7 
 
 Superior Courts-" 25 
 
 District Judges 9 
 
 County Judges-. us 
 
 160 
 Judges dispensed with. 
 
 Chancellor 1 
 
 Vice Chancellors 2 
 
 Assistant Vice Chancellors 1 
 
 Judges of Supreme Court 3 
 
 Circuit Judges 8 
 
 Judges County Courts, (58 counties, 5 each). -290 
 
 Common Pleas, N. V. . 3 
 
 Superior Court, N Y 3 
 
 Recorders, 8 cities S 
 
 Surrogates 59 
 
 Judges Court Errors, Lt. Gov. & 32 Senators-. 33 
 
 411 
 Other officers proposed. 
 
 Clerks Superior Courts 6 
 
 Clerk Court of Appeals 1 
 
 7 
 Other Officers dispensed with. 
 
 Clerk of Court of Errors 1 
 
 Chancellor's Clerk 1 
 
 Clerks Supreme Court 4 
 
 Register and Assistant Register 2 
 
 Clerks in Chancery 6 
 
 Reporters in Chancery and Supreme Court- -- "2 
 
 Masters in Chancery 
 
 Examiners in Chancery., 16 
 
 37-2 
 
 And also the Clerks of the Superior Court in New 
 York and the Recorder's Courts. 
 RECAPITULATION. 
 Officers proposed. 
 
 Judges 160 
 
 Clerks 7 
 
 Officers dispensed with 
 
 Judges (including Surrogates) 
 
 Other officers 
 
 -411 
 
 .27:3 
 
 Total annual expense $269,488 
 
 Now, sir, the expenses ol the proposed .\vsieru, 
 if the judges of the Court of Appeals a;>d ot the 
 Superior Courts should receive the same salaries! 
 now paid to the judges of the Supreme Court, ar.d i 
 
 783 
 
 Making a diminution of 616 officers. 
 3. If I mistake not greatly, the plan I have pro- 
 posed will produce a uniformity m the Courts- 
 throughout the State; it can be made to operate 
 as well in New York as elsewhere ; and by this 
 means we should have all our courts, (except 
 those of the very lower grades) under the name 
 system, organized in the same manner, governed 
 by the same rules. This result, if attainable, 
 would be of great public benefit and convenience; 
 it would relieve the community from the numer- 
 
581 
 
 ous anomalous Courts which are a sort of patch- 
 work tacked on to the judicial system to meet 
 particular exegiencies. 
 
 I will now, Mr. Chairman, close my remarks 
 by saying that I have no pride of opinion as to 
 the plan I Wave presented. After mature reflec- 
 tion, I believe it one in whose pratical workings 
 entire confidence may be placed. Whether re- 
 jected or^dopted by the Convention, my duty is 
 done when I have presented it. 
 
 I beg to express my thanks to the committee 
 for the patience with which they have listened to 
 the remarks I have addressed to them. I find 
 my apology for the length of time I have occupied 
 in' the vast importance of the subject under dis- 
 cussion. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said he regarded it as a misfortune 
 that whilst the delegates were so unanimous in 
 opinion that judicial reform was necessary, they 
 so widely differed as to the mode of the reform 
 required. Nearly every gentleman had his own 
 peculiar plan, to which he seemed to cling with 
 uncommon tenacity. In order to enter under- 
 standingly into the business of reformation it is 
 proper, said Mr. A., to treat the question as the 
 legislature would the amendment or repeal of an 
 existing statute ; we should consider the old law, 
 the mischief it tolerates and the remedy it de- 
 mands. I will take a short review of the history 
 of our judiciary. Prior to 1821 we had a supreme 
 court, consisting of five judges, organized upon 
 the nisi prius system, and a court of chancery, 
 consisting of a single equity judge. The judges 
 of the supreme court alternately held circuits in 
 every county ; they traveled over the state and 
 became acquainted with the people ; they learned 
 their habits, their modes of thinking, their wants 
 and necessities, and by such means they became 
 qualified to administer the law in a manner ac- 
 ceptable t'j them. That court was the brightest 
 judicial ornament to be found in the world. Its 
 decisions commanded the highest respect, n6t 
 only in America but in England. The reports of 
 that court were good authority in all courts where 
 the common law prevailed. As population and 
 business increased, the labors of the court in- 
 creased, until it was found to be physically im- 
 possible for it to perform the business required. 
 The Convention of 1821 was called to provide a 
 constitutional remedy for the evil. Complaints 
 against the judiciary existed then, as now ; some 
 imputed the then existing evils to the judges, and 
 others to the judicial system. The question em- 
 barrassed the Convention of 1821 as much per- 
 haps as it now embarrasses us. That Convention 
 abolished the court as then organized, and estab- 
 lished our present judiciary system. At the time 
 it was adopted the people were pleased with it ; a 
 large majority esteemed it as a most salutary re- 
 form. We had our home judges, and justice seem- 
 ed to be brought to every door through the law 
 and equity judges dispersed throughout the state. 
 The system went into operation ; for a season it 
 appeared to work well, but after a lapse of twen- 
 ty-five years we find ourselves here in Conven- 
 tion listening to longer and louder denunciations 
 against it than were uttered against the system 
 preceding it. It is our business now to look into 
 the causes of these complaints, and to devise a 
 system that will remove the evils complained of 
 
 and prevent their recurrence. I desire that we 
 should organize a supreme court as nearly as pos- 
 sible upon the plan of the old supreme court. I 
 desire that the judges who decide the causes at 
 jar should try them at the circuits ; I desire that 
 they should travel over the state and mingle with 
 :he people, and learn some common sense, and 
 incorporate it into their decisions. The time was 
 when counsel could advise their clients with tol- 
 erable certainty when it was safe advising men 
 that so and so their rights would be decided, but 
 that time has passed away. It seems that we have 
 seen running into judicial darkness, and have 
 made such progress in the race as to throw the 
 law into utter obscurity. No honest counsel will 
 at this day advise his clients with any degree of 
 assurance, that their interests will be promoted by 
 prosecuting or defending any matter in which there 
 is the least chance for getting up a litigation. 
 The most he can do is to advise them of his opin- 
 ion of the law, and apprise them of the dangerous 
 uncertainty that attends its administration, and 
 tell them if they prosecute or defend it must be 
 upon their own responsibility. Different causes 
 have led to this result. I believe that a princi- 
 pal one arises from the fact that the judges who 
 decide in bank, are not allowed to try the causes 
 at the circuits ; none of them have ever seen 
 the parties or heard the witnesses, and all they 
 know of the matter comes to them upon paper. 
 The increasing population and business of the 
 State has greatly increased the demand for ju^i- 
 cial labor. The legislation of the State has ad- 
 ded to that increase. Some of our very mea- 
 sures of reform have tended, in my opinion, to 
 cast burthens upon the judiciary. The abolish- 
 ing imprisonment for debt, and the extension of 
 the former exemption laws, have given rise to 
 much litigation. Litigation has increased and 
 accumulated until our courts find themselves 
 with a burthen upon their shoulders which they 
 have no longer the strength to carry. They are 
 literally borne down with a mass of business that 
 they have not the capacity, mental or physical, to 
 dispose of. We must devise and adopt measures 
 that will enable our judiciary promptly to meet 
 this increased and increasing business, or what 
 will operate as a check upon litigation. I think 
 that I can mention one thing that would ultimate- 
 ly go far to check it, but the legislature is the 
 proper organ to apply that check. I refer to the 
 fees allowed by law to counsellors and attorneys. 
 Should they be entirely abolished, I believe that 
 more than one half of the litigation in the State 
 would fall off. It would reduce the number of 
 lawyers, and with the reduction of their number, 
 you would reduce the chances of litigation. 
 Should the fees be abolished, it would improve 
 Ihose who remained ' in the profession. They 
 would become better and more reliable lawyers, 
 and it is due to the profession that the odious po- 
 sition that they now occupy should not be forced 
 and continued upon them. The fee bills should 
 be abolished, and lawyers restored to their natu- 
 flal rights. Lawyers are the only class whose bu- 
 liness is bound down by statutory restriction. 
 The clergyman is allowed to agree upon the price 
 of his services with the flock he teaches. The 
 physician is permitted to bargain with his patient, 
 the merchant to fix the price of his merchandise , 
 
582 
 
 i 
 
 the farmer of his produce, and the laborer the 
 amount of his wages. Every class of citizens in 
 the State except lawyers, have the right to make 
 the best bargain for themselves. Complaints 
 against the profession are very common. They 
 are accused of extortion, and of being allowed ex- 
 orbitant fees. These fees are established by law, 
 and if an attorney should exact and receive more 
 than the prescribed amount, he would be liable 
 to punishment by indictment and fine. I repeat, 
 it is due to the profession that this odious and 
 partial distinction be done away, and that law- 
 yers, in regard to their business, be placed on the 
 same footing with the other classes of the com- 
 munity. As it regards the question before the 
 committee, that of blending the law and chance- 
 ry jurisdiction, I deem the thing impracticable, 
 "'hose jurisdictions should be kept separate. I 
 \ would not vest them in the same tribunal, but 
 inasmuch as the demolition of the court of chan- 
 cery has become so great a favorite with this Con- 
 vention, and inasmuch as they assert that they 
 are only reflecting the will of the people in this 
 respect, I would consent to vote for the adoption 
 of a Constitution that provided for vesting the 
 law and equity powers in the same court. I re- 
 gard it as highly dangerous that the distinction 
 between proceedings at law and in equity be a- 
 bolished. It would be a greater innovation than 
 had ever been introduced into our system.' It 
 would lead to more and more confusion than we 
 have ever witnessed. I think it would peril the 
 safety and freedom of the people, and put to haz- 
 ard the existence of our free institutions. It was 
 with surprise that I heard the gentleman from 
 New York, (Mr. O'CONDR) put forth the propo- 
 sition yesterday. I had not supposed that any 
 man, the least acquainted with the history of civ- 
 il jurisprudence, could by possibility entertain 
 such a heresy. I am not tenacious as to the form 
 in which our judiciary be established, so that we 
 come the nearest possible to our old nisi prius 
 system. Perhaps the report of the majority of 
 the judiciary committee approximates as nearly 
 to it as the condition of the State will admit; and 
 I think if we incorporate the report into the 
 Constitution, and the legislature will do its duty 
 in passing laws of reform, we shall be relieved 
 from the j udicial evils that now afflict us. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM then took the floor and moved 
 to rise and report progress. Agreed to. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr- CAMBRELENG made a motion to print 
 the proposition ot Mr. TAGGART for a judiciary 
 system. 
 
 Messrs. F. F. BACKUS and J. J. TAYLOR op- 
 posed the motion to print- 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to amend so as to include 
 all the plans that had been referred for a judiciary 
 system. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said they were very volumin- 
 ous ; they had all been duly considered, and the 
 committee considered themselves entirely dis- 
 charged trom their further consideration. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY then said that he withdrew his 
 motion. 
 
 The motion was put ; a count was called, arid 
 resulted ayes 35, noes 15 50. 
 
 The PRESIDENT: No quorum voting; the 
 Clerk will call the roll, to see if a quorum is 
 present. 
 
 Cries of " Oh no ; no." 
 
 The Clerk counted, and said that there were 70 
 members present. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : A quorum is present. 
 
 The question was then put again, and resulted 
 ayes 44, noes 9 53. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: As 44 is a majority of a 
 quorum, that is sufficient, since a quorum is pre- 
 sent. 
 
 Mr. PRESIDENT: The Chair will put the 
 question again, if gentlemen will please to vote. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH: I call the ayes and noes on 
 the question, sir. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER: I would rather vote to 
 expel the member who would not vote on that 
 question. 
 
 The ayes and noes were ordered and resulted : 
 Ayes 65, Noes 1580. 
 
 When the first call was made, there were only 
 75 members answered. Five came in afterwards. 
 
 The motion to print 300 copies, was therefore 
 carried. 
 
 On motion of Mr. RUGGLES, the Convention 
 then went into committee of the whole on the 
 JUDICIARY REPORT. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG resumed the Chair. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said if he could without the 
 charge of egotism, say how long he had indulged 
 the hope of seeing the people of the State in their 
 majesty, come up to the work of a thorough re- 
 formation of their laws, and the tribunals for their 
 administration, it would hardly be necessary for 
 him to assure the committee, that he rose under a 
 deep sense of the importance of the subject we 
 had at length come to consider, and of the high 
 responsibility resting upon those who had so im- 
 portant a duty to discharge in reference to it, as 
 the members of this body ; and he might be per- 
 mitted to say that he had reflected long enough 
 upon the questions we are now considering, and 
 had traced back to such causes, the evils we 
 should attempt to cure, as not to be angry or im 
 patient with those with whom he differed, and to 
 extend that charity to what he regarded as the er- 
 rors of others that he claimed for his own ; and if 
 he indulged in what should be thought severity, 
 he intended its application to systems and their 
 results, rather than to men that had administered 
 them, or had become their victims. He had in- 
 tended this morning to have confined some re- 
 marks to the third section of what was called a 
 report of the majority of the committee, that 
 was the subject of yesterday's debate ; but not ha- 
 ving obtained the floor, the debate of this morn- 
 ing had changed his purpose and furnished his 
 apology for a wider range. He thanked the gen- 
 tleman from Allegany (Mr. ANGEL,) for a sug- 
 gestion that we should first consider and under- 
 stand the nature and cause of the evils that 
 we are to remove, before we come to decide 
 upon the remedies to be applied. It was a sug- 
 gestion worthy the experience and judgment 
 of his friend, for that governmental reformer 
 who should undertake to change or alter the 
 institutions of his country, without first under- 
 standing whether evils existed, or from what 
 source they had sprung, was as much a fool as 
 
583 
 
 the physician who should drug his patient with- 
 out first ascertaining not only that he was dis- 
 eased, but the nature of his malady. That our 
 present judicial system was radically, fundament- 
 ally wrong and defective, that the body politic 
 was diseased by its unsuccessful workings, was 
 so generally, so universally understood and ad- 
 mitted, as not to justify argument upon this first 
 important point ; and he should pass at once to 
 a consideration of what he regarded its particu- 
 lar defects, for from these had come the evils 
 it was our business to correct. In 1821, when a 
 Convention like this assembled to reform the 
 foundation structure of government, it found a 
 judiciary system, with a single chancellor and a 
 clear docket, a Supreme Court of five judges who 
 had held the circuits throughout the State, re- 
 viewed their own decisions, and corrected their 
 own errors besides performing important duties 
 as revisers of the Legislation of the state, with- 
 out such load of deferred business upon their hands 
 as to cause general complaint of the delays of 
 justice. The Convention of 1821 changed the 
 whole structure of the judicial system, wheth- 
 er wisely he left the results to tell. It cre- 
 ated nine chancellors, made one the chief, and 
 the eight, subordinates. It created eleven 
 judges of the supreme court, made three of them 
 chiefs, and eight of them subordinate, introducing 
 into your judiciary a system of rank, and grade 
 more properly belonging to your army. From 
 this system of grade and division of labor, a great 
 proportion of the evils had originated that demand 
 a remedy at our hands. Your three judges of the 
 supreme court were immured at the capitol and 
 their energies taxed and expended in studying 
 the opinions of men living,and men'dead across the 
 water, and denied such opportunity as they ought 
 to have had, of becoming familiar with the men, 
 and all the varied interests of their own country, 
 while yovr circuit judges, the real working men 
 of the syatem, were sent abroad to hold your cir- 
 cuits, branded by a limitation of their powers, 
 and a comparatively small salary as inferiors. 
 Now, here was one of the great faults of the sys- 
 tem; if different grades of talent was to be em- 
 ployed, if the labor of trying and setling contro- 
 versies was to be divided and parcelled out to 
 men of different grades of talent and ability, he 
 insisted that the best should be sent down to the 
 circuit, that by far the most important part of the 
 work might be done by the best ability that could 
 be employed, and the inferior talents should be 
 employed in reviewing the comparatively few 
 cases that were carried beyond the circuit. The 
 circuit court passed upon all the issues that were 
 joined; the supreme judges passed upon only the 
 few that were carried before them, and if there 
 must be an inferior grade of judges in the same 
 court, they should be placed so as to do mischief 
 in the smallest number of causes. The circuit 
 branch of the system has been the only one that 
 has been tolerable. Notwithstanding all the diffi- 
 culties under which the circuit judges have la- 
 bored, some experience warranted him in saying 
 their duties had in the general been discharged 
 with great industry and fidelity, but with what- 
 ever ability they might try, and decide, the idea 
 of their inferiority constantly tempted the defeat- 
 ed suitor to try his chance with judges who, by 
 
 the judicial organization, were Superior to the 
 one whose opinion was against him. The inte- 
 rests, as well as the prejudices of his profession- 
 al adviser favored this experiment, and appeals 
 to the superior branch were the consequences, 
 until this best branch of the system had become 
 a kind of horse-rake, to gather litigation into 
 winnows, that it might be pitched into and stored 
 away into your superior courts. For one, he 
 would not admit the propriety or necessity of 
 reorganizing or continuing the idea of superiority 
 or inferiority in the judges that were to be em- 
 ployed in trying, reviewing and deciding causes. 
 But if the idea was not to be abandoned, then he 
 insisted upon sending down to the circuit the very 
 
 best judicial talent in the service of the State. 
 
 Let the circuit work be done well ; let it be done 
 by judges who have the advantage of every cir- 
 cumstance that will command the confidence of 
 suitors, and the profession, and much will be done 
 to prevent the improper and unnecessary carry- 
 ing up of causes. Let your causes be well tried 
 at the commencement, and few of them will em- 
 barrass your tribunals by attempts to obtain new 
 trials. The abler the judges you place at the circuit 
 the fewer circuit blunders will there be to correct; 
 defeated suitors must not be expected to be satis- 
 fied until the best judicial talent in the service 
 
 shall have considered and decided their causes. 
 
 The common pleas was liable to the same objec- 
 tion here, but such talent was brought into requi- 
 sition as the locality furnished and a stinted com- 
 pensation could command, and they too furnished 
 a reasonable share of the question for review 
 that had blocked up the superior courts, and the 
 result had shown that the Convention of 1821 
 had made the same mistake, that a mill-wright 
 would be likely to, who would be ignorant of the 
 required relative capacity of his grinding and his 
 bolting power. He came now to speak of the 
 report of the majority of the committee, as it was 
 called of it he intended to speak plainly; the 
 objections he had to it, that in his judgment 
 justified him in presenting a minority report, but 
 he intended to state, he would bear in mind the 
 appeal of one of its god-fathers, the gentleman 
 from Columbia, that it should be treated kindly. 
 The appeal was hardly necessary for him, and if 
 there was any apparent unkindness in the objec- 
 tions he should make, he hoped it would be un- 
 derstood to go to the report itself, rather than to 
 the members of the committee who stood its spon- 
 sors. He had had as full opportunity as any 
 other man, for he had attended every one of the 
 40 or 50 sessions of the committee, to judge of the 
 fidelity with which that committee had aimed to 
 discharge its trust, and while rumors out of doors 
 were rife as to disagreements, and even of person- 
 al altercations, the members were using every 
 exertion to make, or permit to be made a real ma- 
 jority report. The labor of week after week 
 was devoted to preparing and agreeing to sections 
 which after being voted in by a majority, made 
 in the aggregate an article without paternity or 
 advocates. The committee were unable to agree, 
 and the great reason was that it was composed of 
 honest men, who had opinions of their own, (pre- 
 conceived perhaps) as to what the public interest 
 demanded, and each was reluctant to surrender 
 principles that he deemed sound and salutary ; 
 
584 
 
 and it was not for him to complain of the mem- 
 bers of the committee who were more yielding 
 than himself, and had enabled any report to be 
 presented that could be called a majority report; 
 he had every reason to treat the thing kindly 
 for he knew of the short period of its gestation, 
 and its consequent immaturity. But more than 
 all, he liked it for some of its most important 
 provisions, and he feared he would be charged 
 with ingratitude for not lending the whole of it 
 his support ; but he represented the opinions of 
 others besides his own here, and although the 
 majority had gone a great way in meeting the wants 
 of the people, yet when acting in their behalf, 
 he might be pardoned if he was greedy enough to 
 ask for still more relief. The second section pro- 
 vided for the election by the people in the state 
 at large of four of the judges of the court of last 
 resort for a term twice as long as that of the mem- 
 bers of the present court of errors. Now though 
 he should advocate the election by the people of 
 their judges in single election districts, the elec- 
 tion by the state at large was an entirely differ- 
 ent matter. The Convention had decided upon 
 electing the state officers, canal commissioners 
 and all the officers that compose the canal board, 
 and also the state prison inspectors, by which an 
 unhealthy activity will be stimulated along the 
 canal lines and around your state prisons among 
 the ever ready army of candidates for canal and 
 prison officers. This array he feared would con- 
 trol your state nominating conventions, and when 
 it had secured to itself such candidates as would 
 parcel out the officers as it desired it would not 
 be strange if the chances of popular success should 
 be increased by nominating for judges of the high- 
 est court,candidates who sympathized with some 
 local- popular excitement. He feared the time 
 might come when candidates for this high judi- 
 cial station or their friends might bargain for a 
 nomination in these (not always to be trusted) 
 state conventions. He had once known a candi- 
 dateijfor a seat in the present court of errors, indi- 
 cate to a portion of the electors what his opinion 
 was upon a matter to be decided in that court, in 
 which a large number felt an interest, and he 
 would not close his eyes to the fact that local in- 
 terests or subjects of temporary excitement some- 
 times had a controlling influence in popular elec- 
 tions. And he might be permitted to repeat what 
 he had said the other day that the people would 
 generally decide rightly when a personal ac- 
 quaintance with candidates would aid them 
 yet it did not follow that any intuitive wisdom 
 would secure them from an unfortunate choice 
 when candidates should be necessarily located in 
 distant parts of the State. The third section is 
 sui generis like itself, and unlike any section 
 that could be found in any constitution. It does 
 not vest the judicial power of the State in the 
 court it establishes, and there is no section of the 
 article that performs that office., aad yet it vests a 
 jurisdiction that should be conferred, if conferred 
 at all, by the Legislature. It declares that " there 
 shall be a Supreme Court having the same juris, 
 diction in law and equity, which the Supreme 
 Couri, and the Court ot Chancery now have, sub- 
 ject to regulation by law." By the present Con- 
 stitution, the jurisdiction of the courts it creates, 
 is not described, it simply vests the judicial power 
 
 in the tribunals provided, and leaves the Legisla- 
 ture fo mark the boundaries of the jurisdictions. 
 But his chief objection was that it recognized a 
 distinction between law and equity, conferred all 
 the power and jurisdiction thai the Court of 
 Chancery had obtained either here or in England 
 by constitutions, by law, or usurpation, and sub- 
 ject not to abolishment but to mere regulation. 
 It was held with reference to another subject that 
 ihe power " to regulate" was not a power to abo- 
 lish or destroy, and he apprehended that such in- 
 terpretation would be given to this section. If 
 gentlemen would turn to the 2d volume of the 
 new edition of the Revised Statutes, at page 234, 
 they would see a part of the power that they 
 would confer upon this court without the power to 
 take it away again. The powers and jurisdiction 
 of the court of chancery are co-extensive with 
 the powers and jurisdiction of the court of chan- 
 cery in England, with the exceptions, additions, 
 and limitations created and imposed by the laws 
 of this state. The gentleman from Columbia (Mr. 
 JORDAN) had nominated his friend from Kings 
 (Mr. SWACKHAMER) for commissioner upon codi- 
 fication, and suggested that he make a little book, 
 in which all the laws necessary to be had should 
 be written. Now it his friend should deem it 
 necessary, as a preparation to the discharge of his 
 duties, to make himself acquainted with the pow- 
 ers and jurisdiction of the court of chancery, in 
 England ; and with the exceptions, additions," and 
 limitations created and imposed by our own sta- 
 tutes, he would have no time in the course of an or- 
 dinary life, to write even a little book. These co- 
 extensive powers with England's court of chancery 
 have heretofore existed by law, and could by law 
 be taken away. It is now proposed to make "them 
 irrevocable by the constitution. Is it not time 
 that we should have done with the musty volumes 
 of antiquity, or the archives of foreign countries, 
 to learn what are the powers and jurisdiction of 
 our own courts ? Is it not time that their powers 
 should be so enumerated in the constitution, or 
 the laws, as that they can be understood without 
 so much ancient and foreign research ? Besides 
 these general powers, there has been given to the 
 court of chancery a great deal of power over parti- 
 cular subjects. The power to compel discovery 
 and assignments by judgment debtors, power to 
 foreclose mortgages, partition lands, to aid rail 
 road corporations in obtaining rights of way a 
 power over banks and incorporations with a great 
 many other powers have been from time to tune 
 conferred hy the legislature, on that court. 
 The present law too declared that the supreme 
 court should possess the powers and exercise the 
 jurisdiction which belonged to the supreme court 
 of the colony of New York. This description of 
 jurisdiction was to be perpetuated by the section ; 
 it might be well enough ; but it was growing every 
 year more and more difficult to know exactly what 
 the powers and jurisdiction of the old colonial 
 court really was and he believed it was time to 
 enumerate the powers conferred upon the courts. 
 We could not well do it here, but the legislature 
 could, and he hoped it would do so. He had lis- 
 tened with great pleasure to the argument of his 
 friend from New York (Mr. O'CONOR) yesterday, 
 in favor of the proposition to assimilate the pro- 
 ceedings and practice in the classes of causes 
 
585 
 
 heretofore distinguished as suits in law and suits 
 in equity; he thanked that gentlemen for the 
 clear and satisfactory argument he had made to 
 
 the feasibility of so important a reform 
 And although he understood the gentleman differ- 
 ently in one respect from others who had replied 
 to him, that gentleman required no aid from him 
 to be set right before the committee. And al- 
 though he had for some time supposed that there 
 
 ip intrinsic difficulty in accomplishing the 
 assimilation of the practice and mode of procedure 
 on the two classes of causes, and though he had 
 long thought it extremely desirable,he should not 
 weaken the force of that gentleman's remarks by 
 unv attempt to fortify them, other than to answer 
 if he could the objections of the gentleman from 
 Ontario. He was glad to see his friend from On- 
 tario meet the proposition, for if there was any 
 man upon this floor who was capable of meeting* 
 and overthrowing a false position upon a subject 
 like this, it was that gentleman. He had noted 
 his argument and his illustration, and if he could 
 show by the very illustration the gentleman had 
 used that his position was unsound, he would be 
 content to pass the subject. The illustration was 
 this, A. contracts to purchase land of B. and 
 pays $500, agreeing to pay more hereafter, but 
 fails to put his contract of purchase upon record. 
 B. afterwards sells and conveys the land to C. 
 By the present system, if A wants his money 
 he may bring an action at law against B. ; but if 
 he prefers to have the land, he must file his bill 
 in Equity against C. and the question will then 
 be whether C. is a purchaser in good faith with- 
 out notice of the interest or rights of A. ; if so he 
 will be entitled to hold the land, and A must pay 
 a good bill of costs for attempting to get it from 
 him. But A. may then bring his action against 
 B and get his money if B.'s responsibility has 
 lasted as long as a chancery suit. Now in both 
 these actions the whole facts of the case will 
 have to be elicited. Is it not possible to avoid 
 one of them ? Suppose the form of proceeding 
 should permit A to make his complaint against 
 both B. and C., recover his land of C. if C. 
 was in the wrong, or if C. was entitled to keep 
 the land, recover back his money from B. 
 It has long been the practice to bring an action 
 against several defendants for a trespass, and 
 take a judgment against a part only who were 
 proved to be guilty, and if it be objected that the 
 rights of A. grow out of a contract, and that the 
 general rule was that you should bring actions 
 upon contracts only against joint contracting par- 
 ties, I answer that we have already departed from 
 that rule and permitted parties to be made joint 
 defendants where they were not joint contractors; 
 we now bring an action against maker, endorser, 
 and acceptor of a bill of exchange, or note, al- 
 though the promise of one is absolute, and the 
 other conditional. The same principle applied to 
 the case the gentleman from Ontario has used for 
 an illustration, would permit both parties to be 
 
 the 
 best 
 
 complained of in one action or proceeding, 
 one in the wrong to be compelled to do the 
 equity in his power and the other to be discharg- 
 ed. If it should turn out that both C. and D. had 
 been guilty of bad faith, let the judgment or de- 
 cree pass against both, and if C. had not acted in 
 bad faith, let the judgment be that B. shall pay 
 
 back the money with interest. There was no dif- 
 ficulty in the application of the principle to such 
 a case, and he did not believe that any other could 
 be stated where there would be more difficuly. 
 He came now to the alternative section, and his 
 opportunities as a member of the committee had 
 not enabled him to know why this section pro- 
 viding that judges be appointed in a particular 
 manner or elected by the people in lar^e 
 districts was introduced, unless for the pur- 
 pose of bringing to the support of the report 
 opposing and conflicting opinions, upon this most 
 important part of the subject. The committee 
 discussed, considered and decided the question re- 
 ferred to in regard to the mode of designating 
 judicial officers, by a larger majority than almost 
 any other proposition was settled, and yet what is 
 is taken up here as the majority report recom- 
 mends one or another of two objectionable modes. 
 With all respect he felt bound to insist that the 
 well considered decision of the committee should 
 have been reported to the Convention instead of 
 an alternative proposition, intended as he thought 
 to give appearance of agreement where there 
 was none. But he objected to both the proposi- 
 tions. The present mode of appointment by the 
 Governor and Senate had received too general 
 popular condemnation, and had in his judgment 
 been attended with such results as not to justify 
 its continuance. The judgment and feeling not 
 only in the Convention but throughout the 
 State was against it. The idea is fast being 
 abandoned that any portion of the public ser- 
 vants should enjoy independence of the people 
 whose interests they have in charge, whose 
 business they transact, whose rights they protect 
 or disregard. The idea of the necessity of judicial 
 independence in England ws entirely different 
 from that conveyed by the use of the term here. 
 In England, the term meant an independence of 
 the crown, and to preserve it the life tenure of 
 the judges was adopted, while bete the advocates 
 ot judicial independence were the opponents of 
 judicial responsibility to the people. But we re- 
 quired no such independence here, but rather 
 that mode of selection that shall secure the ho- 
 nest discharge of official duty, by the most direct 
 responsibility. We have had appointed judges 
 under the present constitution. How has the sys- 
 tem worked? How in your counties, has it been 
 successful in securing !he best integrity and abili- 
 ty? Has it even worked well in regard to the 
 judges of your higher tribunals? When was 
 youi Siate more deeply humbled and disgraced, 
 than when the judges of one ol your highest 
 courts chaffered on the bench for places of profit 
 within their own power of appointment, when 
 the junior became the chief, when the glitter of 
 small chantre had greater ch aims in thee\es of 
 the seniors than the purity of judicial ermine, and 
 they weni down to clerk's stools to put lawyer's 
 papers into pigeon holes and keep the dust off of 
 them for six cents a pitce ? The-e were your ap- 
 pointed judges. Now if the principle be a sound one 
 thai has been adopted here with so much unanimi- 
 ty in relation to the mode of electing the member* 
 of both branches of the Legislature, the subject was 
 relieved of all difficulty if anything like the num- 
 ber of judges be adopted that is recommended by 
 any of these reports. In the report he had felt it 
 
 48 
 
586 
 
 his duty to submit, he had proposed the number ( 
 of thirty-two judges. He would have preferred a 
 somewhat larger number ; though with such re- 
 formation as he hoped to see, he apprehended 
 the number would be found sufficient. He had 
 proposed this number on account of the facility 
 that existed by our having made thirty- two Se- 
 nate districts of electing these important officers 
 in what he regarded as the only safe and proper 
 manner. By providing for the selection of a sin- 
 gle judge of the Supreme Court in each of the 
 Senate districts, at a special election, we should 
 enable the people to act wisely, and the result 
 need not be feared. But he had an objection to 
 long terms. He believed as firmly as any one, 
 that in the general, that this mode of selection 
 would be successful, but it would not always be 
 so. The public ear might be sometimes abused, 
 and incompetent or improper men placed upon 
 the bench, and he would afford a reasonably fre- 
 quent opportunity of correcting such mistakes as 
 should be made. Eight or ten years term was 
 proposed by some, but he could not see the pro- 
 priety of making the judicial term four or five 
 times as long as the gubernatorial or senatorial 
 term. It would not give the opportunity that 
 ought to be afforded for correcting the mistakes 
 that might to be made. In Vermont, the judges 
 of the Supreme Court were elected annually by the 
 legislature. Every year each judge lays his com- 
 mission at the feet of the power that conferred it, 
 and what was the result ? If an injudicious ap- 
 pointment be made, but a year's inconvenience 
 resulted from it ; but mistakes had been seldom 
 made, and year after year the judges had been re- 
 appointed, and political parties dare not refuse to 
 re-appoint a good judge, even where differences 
 of political opinion existed. It was not unwise 
 to permit the experience of that State to light 
 our path a little. In the judiciary committee he 
 had asked the opinion of two gentlemen, one 
 qualified to judge from his acquaintance in that 
 State, and both well qualified by a familiar ac- 
 quaintance with the decisions of that court, as to 
 the Vermont judiciary, and both agreed in accor- 
 ding to it the highest character. And this one 
 year term, and direct and constant responsibility I 
 to the appointing power, was one of the causes of 
 the success of the Vermont system. There was 
 still another objection to the report under consi- 
 deration, and here he would repeat that the re- 
 port was a great and important improvement up- 
 on the present system. A loudly proclaimed evil 
 had been the centralization of political power 
 and judicial business at the Capital. So far as 
 the judiciary system could do it, this would be 
 pretty effectually broken up if the report should 
 be adopted, or at least as far as Albany was con- 
 cerned ; and an important part of the judicial bu- 
 siness would be transacted at eight different cen- 
 tral localities. The report went a good way to ac- 
 commodate the profession, and would save suitors 
 considerable of the expense to which they had 
 been heretofore subjected. Now why not go far- 
 ther and carry the sessions of the three judges 
 into all the important counties of the state ; there 
 might be some small counties that would afford 
 little or no business for such a session, but as the 
 county courts are to be abandoned there was no 
 good reason why the sessions of the supreme court 
 
 should not be distributed throughout the state, as 
 in Vermont and some of the other states. If your 
 bench sessions are held only at a central point of 
 the large districts, you will perpetuate in a degree, 
 the inconveniences that have resulted from the 
 centralization at Albany. It would be more eco- 
 nomical for three judge's to travel from county to 
 county than for parties and counsel to meet thorn 
 at the centre of the district. He had another 
 reason, higher than any founded upon a calcula- 
 tion of economy of time or money. He would 
 have the courts missionaries of legal morality, 
 instructors of the people of their legal rights, du- 
 ties and obligations, and for this purpose he would 
 distribute their sessions as much as possible 
 among the people. Let causes be argued and the 
 decisions promulgated among those who from 
 their locality and acquaintance with the subject 
 matter feel an interest in the question, and the in- 
 fluence will be to enlighten the people and in- 
 duce respect for sound principles of law. But 
 what possible good in this respect results from 
 the argument or decision of questions origi- 
 nating in distant parts of the state, in one of 
 the rooms of the capitol where none but pro- 
 fessional men (and but few of them) ever en- 
 ter. The report under consideration takes one 
 good step; let it be so amended as to take another 
 and it will receive great favour. He appealed to 
 every member of this convention, he appealed 
 particularly to every member of the legal profes- 
 sion, for without the aid of such, this work could 
 not be done, to engage in this work of judicial re- 
 formation, forgetting every personal or profession- 
 al interest, and enquiring carefully and deciding 
 honestly, as to what was best for the great whole, 
 the great people whose rights are to be secured, 
 whose interests advanced by an enlightened and 
 efficient judiciary. The legal profession borne 
 down as it had been by the operation of vicious 
 systems and influences, for the existence of which 
 they were only in part responsible, had now an 
 opportunity of taking the position in the public 
 estimation to which the learning,intelligence and 
 high moral worth of the gieat body of its mem- 
 bers entitled it, but to do so the members of that 
 profession must be faithful here. Complaints had 
 been made by the gentleman from Allegany and 
 from Columbia, of the estimation in which that 
 profession was held, but they should remember 
 that it was natural and unavoidable, while ac- 
 cumulations of industry for years, were being 
 swept from their possessors, by the operation of a 
 system that had only worked well for an 
 unprincipled portion of a privileged order 
 ot men, that complaints, loud, guntral, uni- 
 versal, arid indiscrJmmatnig, should be heard. 
 He owed it to himself here lo say that his own 
 opinions ot the profession lo which he belonged, 
 had been the subject of misunderstanding and 
 misrepresentation, and instead of indulging in such 
 as had been loo often attributed to him, he had 
 wondered at, and admired the worth its ranks em- 
 braced, notwithstanding all the temptations to its 
 enure corruption that had existed. Was it won. 
 dertul that when judges from your highest bench 
 yielded lo mercenary motive s and drscended to 
 the clerk'sdesk and there sanctioned the exactions 
 of costs never earned or justified oy the spirit even 
 of the bad laws upon the subject that the w hole 
 
587 
 
 of -o large a profession *>hould be uninfluenced b> 
 8'ich example, and corrupted by such temptation ? 
 Was it wonderful that the young and inexperi- 
 enced should desert the path lo professional fame 
 which an honorable discharge ol duty would ever 
 secure, for the one to which avarice beckoned, and 
 which such high influences had sanctioned/ The 
 opinion he had of the legal profession the estu 
 mation iu which he held its members upon this 
 floor was the foundation of his hope that we 
 should perfect a judicial system here, promoting 
 and requiring such leforms by legislation, as that 
 the law of this great people, instead of being some- 
 times the mere engine of craft and oppression, 
 \vould he the shield under which innocence might 
 ev.M- find shelter the staff upon which honesty 
 might lean in security a system suited to the en- 
 lightened intelligence ot a great people adapted 
 to fh> varifd wants, interests, and future greatness 
 of the treat S'a'e of the Union. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES had but a very few words to 
 sny. He asked the attention of the committee to 
 the phraseology of the 3rd section, and submitted 
 to the committee the question whether the legis- 
 ture have not now as entire and perfect control 
 over the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as 
 was conferred by this section. Because if this 
 so, then no amendment was necessary, But 
 if there was any doubt as to the power of the leg- 
 ire to take away a portion of the jurisdiction 
 of the Supreme court, (in regard to which he 
 thought there could be none) there could be none 
 as to the power to regulate the practice of the 
 court, both in regard to the equity side and the 
 law side, and in such a way as they pleased. The 
 powers of the Court of Chancery are. transferred 
 by this section to the Supreme Court. Thepow- 
 ers of that court, are within the control oifihe 
 legislature at pr^esent. TheT~are "conferred upon 
 the Chancel! or by the legislature, and his autho- 
 rity for the exercise of his powers depends now, 
 as it has <"or a long time, upon the law as provided 
 by the legislature. These powers are transferred 
 to the Supreme Court by this section and the leg- 
 islature will retain the same control over the 
 Chancery powers in the Supreme Court, as it 
 has now over them while it is in the hands 
 of the Chancellor. The proposition of the gen- 
 tleman from New-York (Mr, O'CoisroR,) is that 
 a code of procedure ought to be enacted, by 
 which the forms in which causes heretofore have 
 been carried on in the Court of Chancery, and 
 courts of law, shall be assimilated, and brought 
 together, so that as far as practicable both shall 
 proceed in the same courts, and by the same 
 forms, and under the same regulations. Could 
 there be any doubt as to the power of the legisla- 
 ture under the section to do this ? Mr. R. could 
 not see the least possible ground for such a doubt. 
 He did not propose to say any thing further, all 
 he desired was to call attention to the construc- 
 tion of this section, and for an expression of opin- 
 ion as to whether it did not confer upon the le- 
 gislature perfect authority to make any and every 
 reform in the mode of proceeding, either in equi- 
 ty or law. Therefore the amendment of the gen- 
 tleman from Clinton, (Mr. STETSON) was entirely 
 unnecessary, and upon that ground he should 
 vc-fe against it. In regard to the forms of proce- 
 dure in both these courts, there was no one who 
 
 had a greater desire to see a change in some res- 
 pects, than himself. With respect to the prac- 
 ticability of the particular change proposed, there 
 was certainly some doubt, but he had not the 
 slightest objection to see this proposition to bring 
 the two courts together, tested. This section laid 
 a foundation for it. It ivas the intention of the 
 committee in reporting the article, to put the 
 whole matter in the power of the legislature, 
 or rather to suffer it to remain there where it al- 
 ways had been. It was necessary that it should 
 be so, that the power should rest where it could 
 occasionally be regulated or altered according 
 to the wants and necessities of the State, and for 
 that reason this section was incorporated into the 
 article. 
 
 Mr. STETSON so varied his amendment that 
 it should read as follows : 
 
 The Legislature shall provide by law for a uniform sys. 
 tern of proceedure in the administration of justice in civil 
 cases, without regard to the distinctions heretofore had 
 between different forms of action and different jurisdiction 
 in law and equity. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said it would, perhaps, be ex- 
 pected that he would explain the object of his 
 amendment. The section to which it applied 
 vested the jurisdiction of law and equity in a 
 Supreme Court, "subject to regulation by Jaw" 
 His amendment required the Legislature to pro- 
 vide a common form of proceeding for remedies 
 under both jurisdictions, so that law and equity 
 should not be separately administered. It might 
 be said that the words "subject to regulation by 
 law," reported by the committee, gave the Legis- 
 lature the same power; if so, no objection could 
 be taken by them to his amendment, except to 
 its phraseology, which was framed so as to avow 
 a distinct object; and under the expectation that, 
 if adopted, it would afterwards be changed. But 
 it was because the words, "subject to regulation 
 by law," might not be construed to mean the 
 same with his amendment, that he was induced 
 to offer it. The jurisdiction of law and equity 
 had been administered by courts of distinct or- 
 ganization, and now these jurisdictions were con- 
 ferred jointly upon the Supreme Court, and pow- 
 er given to the Legislature to regulate. He fore- 
 saw that two parties would arise in the Legisla- 
 ture, the one insisting that these jurisdictions 
 were to be separately administered as heretofore, 
 and the other that they should be blended. It 
 would be a perpetual struggle, and we would 
 not have either the one system or the other. It 
 would be a middle ground position, and a Judge 
 of the Supreme Court, whilst holding a law term, 
 feeling conscious of his equity powers, would be- 
 gin to administer it without regard to forms ; 
 and so of the law, when holding equity terms. 
 It would cease to be a regulated system of law 
 and equity practice, under a separate administra- 
 tion, tnat would only be partially observed. Now 
 he was opposed to this middle ground position, 
 and* he desired to remain at the extreme we had 
 occupied, separate courts of law and equity, or go 
 the other, thit ot having but one set of forms for 
 both jurisdictions. He would confess that he had 
 not tieen accustomed to regard a fusion of the two 
 courts as desirable and he would still prefer sepa- 
 rate courts and separate jurisdiction ; but that had 
 been surrendered by the committee, and the Con- 
 
588 
 
 vennon generally regarded it with disfavor. Un- 
 der these circumstances, unless we could have the 
 influence of the committee in leading the way to 
 a distinct, separate organization, he hoped we 
 would proceed at once to the other extreme, of 
 blending the exercise of the two jurisdictions. 
 
 And then, on motion of Mr. LOOMIS, the 
 committee rose and reported progress, and the 
 Convention adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (60th day,} August 12. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. MORROW. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND made an explanation in regard 
 to a statement of Mr. BASCOM, yesterday, relating 
 to action by the judiciary commiltte, with refer- 
 ence to procuring a statement of the proceedings 
 of Bounty courts. 
 
 Mr. KiKER presented the remonstrance of the 
 trustees of Union Academy, Queens county, L. I., 
 relative to the proposed distribution of the litera- 
 ture fond. Referred to the committee of the 
 whole, having in charge the report of Mr. NICOLL, 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a return from the 
 Comptroller, in answer to a resolution of Mr. 
 WORDEN, relative to the salt and the auction du- 
 ties. Referred to the committee of the whole 
 Laving charge of the report on that subject, and 
 rdered to be printed. 
 
 CODIFICATION OF THE LAWS. 
 
 Mr. C. P. WHITE, from the select committee 
 on the codification of the laws, made the follow- 
 ing report : 
 
 ARTICLE 
 
 I. The Governor of the State, at the first session of the 
 legislature alter the adoption uf the Constitution, shall by 
 and with the advice wd consent of the Senate, appoint live 
 Commissioners, whose duty it shall be to reduce into a 
 written systematic code, the civic and criminal procedure, 
 and the whole body of the law of the State, or so much 
 and such parts thereof as to the said Commissioners sh-.ill 
 seem practicable and expedient. And the said Commas, 
 sioners shall specify such alterations and amendments 
 therein as thev shall deem proper, and they shall at all 
 times make reports of their proceedings to the legislature, 
 when called upon to do so. 
 
 (5 -2. The legislature, at its first session after the adoption 
 of this Constitution, arid irom time to time thereafter, as 
 may be m cessary, shall pass laws regulating the tenure of 
 ottice, the filling of vacancies therein, and the com;>< nsa- 
 tion of the said commissioners. The legislature shall also 
 provide for the publication of the said code, prior to its be- 
 ing presented to th^ legislature for adoption. 
 By order of the committee. 
 
 CAMPBELL P. WHITE, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. W. said that a majority of the commiitee 
 had agreed to this report; yet each had reserved 
 to himself the right to tak" such action upon it, 
 in the Convention, as he might deem fit. 
 COURTS OF CONCILIATION. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND sent up the following article 
 to be added to the article on the Judiciary : 
 
 (; . Tribunals of conciliation shall be established by 
 law; such law shall be general, and shall be of uniform 
 operation throughout the State. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that he would move to 
 have this section referred to the committee of the 
 whole having charge of the Judiciary reports. 
 But in so doing be begged leave to add one word 
 of explanation. The object of the tribunal men- 
 tioned in this section was to prevent litigation ; 
 and that was an object which he was sure every 
 member of the Convention had sincerely at heart: 
 nd would unite in the means to attain. These tri- 
 
 bunals of conciliation haooeeh known in Europe* 
 for a long time past. Several years ago they were 
 established in Denmark, in Prussia, in France, 
 and in Spain, and in all the countries where 
 they had been in operation, they had uniformly 
 been pronounced to be sources of the greatest bles- 
 sings td the people. In .Denmark, they were es- 
 tablished as far back as 1795 ; and for the three 
 years previous to that time, there had been over 
 25,000 law suits in that country ; three years sub- 
 sequently to the establishment of these courts the 
 la%v suits had dwindled down to less tnan 10,000? 
 being a diminution of move than 15,000 in three 
 years. Now, ifsuch tribunals could be establish- 
 ed in the state of New- York, (if they were, there 
 is but little doubt that they would operate most 
 beneficially) every good man, every lover of good 
 morals, and of good order, must and would re- 
 joice at it. He offered this section at this time, 
 to call the attention of every member of the Con- 
 vention, and also of the public generally to this 
 subject; in order that they might be furnished in 
 a short time with all the authentic information 
 that could be obtained in relation to the organiza- 
 tion and mode of procedure in these courts, and 
 the results of their action. And thus, if that in- 
 formation should be satisfactory the Convention 
 could by a section in the proposed Constitution , 
 establish a tribunal designed lor the great and be- 
 nevolent object of preventing litigation. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD wished to enquire of the gen- 
 tleman from Oneida (Mr. KIRK.L.AND) what was 
 the object he had in view, and how he proposed 
 to adapt these courts to the circumstances of our 
 state ? He had examined the French courts, and 
 he considered the machinery oi' them altogether 
 too cumbersome to be adopted in this country. 
 He hoped that the gentleman (Mr. KIRKLAND) 
 would favor the Convention with an outline of 
 his proposed plan. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that he would cheer- 
 fully furnish the Convention with all the infor- 
 mation that he possessed on the subject, which, 
 by the by, was not a great deal. He had re- 
 marked when he presented the proposition just 
 now that he did so in order to call the attention 
 of the public, and of the Convention to it, in 
 order to elicit information on the subject. He 
 would read to the Convention an extract from a 
 report made some two years since to the New 
 Jersey Convention : 
 
 " In each town or precinct, two persons are chosen by 
 the people, who sit one day in each \v eek, for the receiving 
 of complaint^, issuing summonses lor the appearance or' 
 parties at the next regular day of meeting, and for hearing 
 the parties already "Vummcned. The Courts sit witft 
 closed doors, and none but the parties themselves, or 
 their special attorneys, are permitted iu be present. The 
 duty of the Court is to hear tiie complaints and reply to 
 the parties, and to endeavor to induce them to adjust their 
 difficulties amicably. At an absolute rule, nothing that 
 passes in the Court is divulged by the members of it, and 
 is forbidden as evidence in the Courts of law. Should the 
 attempt for reconciliation fail, the Court grants to each of 
 the parties a certih'ca e stating that they had appeared, 
 but did not reconcile their clifteicnccs. 'ihote certificates 
 are required by the Courts of law, in order to oblige par- 
 ties to seek reconciliation. 
 
 The (ee of this proceeding is very trifling, and is paid 
 by one or both of the partie.-, as may be uecided by the re- 
 conciling judges. 
 
 Your commit-. ee suppose that it is unnecessary for them 
 to say any thing in recommi nd.ition of <\ tribunal so s,m- 
 ple in its lormation and <o evidently usetul but they can- 
 not refrain from calling the attention ol the Convention 
 
589 
 
 to the fact of the numberless cases which are subjects of 
 lengthy, expensive and vexatious lawsuits, which have 
 their origin in trifling differences between neighbors and 
 friends, and which tlie amicable agency of a third party 
 could reconcile and put forever at rest." 
 
 A MEMBER asked what book he read from ? 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND replied that it was one but 
 little known and difficult to obtain. He added 
 that this was all the information that he now pos- 
 sessed, but in a few days he hoped to be able to 
 give them more. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said if they would look at a recent 
 number of the Edinburgh Review, they would 
 learn all about these courts, their practice, and 
 the results. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said the subject of conciliation 
 courts was worthy of more consideration than 
 some gentlemen seemed willing to bestow upon 
 them. They had received recently great conside- 
 ration in England, and were in force in some of 
 the countries of Europe. Mr. W. said he had re- 
 cently met a gentleman of great intelligence, and 
 extensively engaged in mercantile affairs, residing 
 in a country where these courts were in existence, 
 and who had given him a very minute and accu- 
 rate statement, he had no doubt, of the operations 
 and organization of these courts, from which it 
 appears they go very far to repress litigation, and 
 speedily to arrange those controversies that some- 
 times spring up between very honest and well 
 meaning men, without the costs and delays atten- 
 ding upon a litigation in our courts. Mr. W. said 
 he only doubted whether such could be made ap- 
 plicable to the state of things existing in our 
 State, and the nature of all the various dealings 
 between individuals, or to all questions that arise 
 out of our extensive mercantile transactions ; 
 but there were a class of cases which he said he 
 believed could with great propriety and advan- 
 tage be refer i-ed to these courts. And with leave 
 of the Convention, Mr. W. said he would state the 
 mode of procedure in Courts of Conciliation, and 
 the cases that, in his opinion, might be brought 
 to an end and wisely disposed of in these courts. 
 A court of conciliation where they are in exist- 
 ence, is organized in this way there are two in- 
 telligent and honest men appointed to hear the 
 complaints and allegations of the parties, who ap- 
 pear before the court without the aid of lawyers, 
 and each states his case and the points and ques- 
 tions of controversy existing between them, and 
 the facts on which they base their claims. The 
 judges of the court hear their statements, and take 
 into consideration the rights of the parties, and 
 advise them in regard thereto and make efforts to 
 bring them to a conciliation. No witnesses ap- 
 pear in court, nor are counsel or attorneys em- 
 ployed ; and nothing that takes place is ever ad- 
 mitted in evidence between the parties elsewhere. 
 If the parties agree, a statement of the agreement 
 is reduced to writing, signed by the parties and 
 the court, and time fixed for the payment of the 
 amount agreed on, for which, if not paid as agreed, 
 the court issues execution very similar to that 
 from our justice's court. Mr. W. said he thought 
 courts of this description could be organized in 
 the towns, wherein parties residing in such towns 
 should be compelled, before goinglo law, to make 
 efforts to settle their difficulties; and, as in the 
 countries where those courts exist, the parties 
 should not be permitted to recover costs unless 
 
 they had made an effort to conciliate their differ- 
 ences in the court of conciliation of the town. It 
 is true these courts do not act compulsory, but by 
 prohibiting the parties from recovering costs un- 
 less he makes an effort to conciliate his differ- 
 ences, it operates to enforce the parties into that 
 court ; and it is found that the moral sense of the 
 community in favor of a peaceful adjustment of 
 difficulties, induces parties to seek that mode of 
 doing so. In this way neighborhood difficulties 
 personal controversies that now disturb com- 
 munities, and call in aid courts and juries, are set- 
 tled and put an end to. If this system could be 
 adopted and applied to towns, two of the eldest 
 justices might constitute the court, or two distinct 
 men might be elected for that purpose. The same 
 system might be applied to counties, but he saw 
 greater difficulties in making it applicable to the 
 entire state, and to controversies arising between 
 citizens residing in different portions of it. At 
 all events it might be made to operate on those 
 controversies arising in towns and counties, and 
 he would not say it could not be made applicable 
 to the state at large. The subject was worthy of 
 consideration, and if it could be so arranged as to 
 reach to the suppression of litigation and to the 
 adjustment of controversies, it would do much to- 
 wards repressing the spirit of litigation, and the 
 costs and vexation attendant upon long and pro- 
 tracted legal controversies, which often had no 
 other result than the ruin of those engaged in 
 them. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM was rejoiced to see this new 
 light breaking in on the judiciary committee ; 
 he had expected something of this kind in the on- 
 set, and he had suggested some such proposition ; 
 but it had had the go-by most singularly ; and yet 
 now this new light was breaking in upon them ; 
 he was glad to see it, and he moved a reference 
 of this proposition to that judiciary committee, 
 in the hope and expectation that they would re- 
 port a provision for such a Court as was contem- 
 plated by the section. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that as a member of that 
 committee, he prayed to be delivered from such 
 a reference ; to be excused from the charge of 
 this bantling. Under the report of the majority 
 of the committee, the Legislature had full power 
 to institute as many of these courts as they pleased. 
 They could provide that old women might talk 
 over these matters at a tea table, or that some ve- 
 ry wise heads, some few extraordinary old gen- 
 tlemen, might advise their neighbors not to be 
 cross or litigious. This proposition was unwor- 
 thy of the consideration of this convention, it was 
 beneath the dignity of the committee, and he 
 hoped it would be laid on the table or thrown un- 
 der the table. Such courts belonged only to a 
 despotic government, where the people were ig- 
 norant, and had a superior class over them, and 
 not for our free Yankee population; who consi- 
 der they are competent to judge for themselves 
 in such matters. We have got luggage enough 
 of this kind in committee of the whole. We have 
 too many encumbrances, and want no more of 
 them. 
 
 Mr. BROWN desired to say one word. This 
 plan was brought before the judiciary committee 
 and met with no favor except from the two gen- 
 tleman who had spoken this morning, and the 
 
590 
 
 gentleman from New York (Mr. STEVENS.) If 
 he mistook not, the gentleman from Ontario (Mr. 
 WORDEN) did not favor it, and yet he appeared 
 here this morning as the especial champion of 
 such courts. It could clearly be demonstrated 
 that such courts had no affinity with our institu- 
 tions. 
 
 The hour of 10 here arrived, and the debate 
 was arrested by the special order. 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole on the report of the judiciary commit- 
 tee, Mr. CAMBRELENG in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS, in remarking upon the proposi- 
 tions before the committee of the whole, and the 
 action of the judiciary committee upon the same 
 propositions, said that it was the intention of the 
 latter committee, in reporting the third section 
 of the majority report, to provide that the legis- 
 lature might bring into one tribunal the jurisdic- 
 tions of law and equity; and he did not hesitate 
 to say that he believed this would produce a per- 
 fect blending of the two in the course of practice. 
 But there existed different opinions in regard to 
 ithe effect of the language of the section, and he 
 ;was willing to obviate the objections which were 
 founded upon its ambiguity, as gentlemen regard- 
 ed it, by adopting a phraseology which could not 
 be mistaken. He went on to allude to the opin- 
 ions entertained by gentlemen in regard to the 
 union of practice, and the origin of the chancery 
 practice. The union -e_jthe two jurisdictions in 
 the same judges was- tho immediate trcrestion 
 which it was desirable to settle now, as upon 
 that must depend the entire system. It was de- 
 sirable for many reasons to do this, whether the 
 practice should be blended or not. All practi- 
 tioners were educated in both forms. They were 
 equally acquainted with the forms of common 
 law and chancery, They brought their cases in 
 either court, as became necessary. From this 
 class of practitioners the judges of our courts were 
 selected, and he did not perceive the necessity 
 for two courts. No judge could be a good chan- 
 cellor without, a good knowledge of common law. 
 Those who differed in regard to forms of proce- 
 dure differed more in the terms they used than in 
 their opinions. He concurred with the gentle- 
 man from Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) in his descrip- 
 tion of the reforms necessary in the system of 
 pleading. They should be as simple and direct 
 as possible, and yet sufficient to inform the other 
 party of the grounds of the action or defence, and 
 prevent surprise on the trial. In adopting this 
 he believed we should dispense with the distinc- 
 tion between law and equity, and should 
 also do away- with the distinction now ex- 
 isiii.g in foims of action at law Gentlemen 
 had said that by having the two forms in the 
 same court, the judges wuuld first have a circuit 
 for trials at law, arid afterwards another in the 
 same county for equity causes. He did not re 
 gard I his as necessary. The causes rniyht all go 
 on the same calendar and be tried in the same 
 court, both law and equity cases, which would 
 finally produce a blending of the two. Our couit.s 
 of law already exercise jurisdiction in equity, in 
 many cases, which showd that there is no real ne- 
 cessity for a separation of them. Many actions 
 in law are analogous to the chapcery practice, 
 
 s'ich as actions of repli-vii^ which returns to the 
 pirty, not damages merely ns in other actions but 
 (he specific property claimed, which is precisely 
 the province of an equity court. So suits of par- 
 tition have the same analogy to equity proceed- 
 ings, and are brought either in a court ot law or 
 in chancery at the option of the party, and 
 they give title and possession in both courts. 
 The supreme court had exercised equity jurisdic- 
 tion at every special term. These special terms, 
 8 of them in a year, are held expressly to decide 
 matters in equity, and in many cases they make 
 a decree like a court of equity at some length re- 
 quiring specific acts to ba done by the parlies mu- 
 tually. That ihedistinctions in the foirnsof action 
 in suits at law were not necessaiy was very clear to 
 his mind, and he had an incident in mind which 
 .vouldshow it. He alluded to a statute passed b\ the 
 legislature, doing away the distinctions between 
 actions of trespass, or actions for wrong commit- 
 ted which resulted in damages, and actions on the 
 case, by which statute the couits were relieved 
 from much of the business which lumbered up 
 their calendars. His desire was first, to have the 
 question whether the jurisdiction in law and equi- 
 ty should be brought into the same court de. 
 cided, so that the system of appointing judges 
 might be framed in accoidance with it. The sub- 
 ject of blending the two piactices might after, 
 wards be settled. He therefore suggested that 
 the getitleman from Clinton (Mr. STETSON) 
 should withdraw his proposition, when he would 
 submit another to effect what he desired. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said he did not favor the a- 
 mendment which he had proposed, and did not 
 believe that the reform which it seemed to 
 promise could be realized in the extent antici- 
 pated by it. The forms of practice, he believed 
 were not the result of arbitrary rules, but existed 
 in reasons behind the causes themselves. An uni- 
 formity of practice might be effected, but he did 
 not believe that the distinction in the various ac- 
 tions at law and equity could be abolished. He 
 was quite willing to withdraw his proposition. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said he \vas confirmed in the be- 
 lief before expressed, that the difference was more 
 in words than in reality. He did not contemplate 
 that the form should be the same in all cases, but 
 he wished to abolish the fictitious forms under 
 which actions were brough*", which allowed of a 
 certain printed form for all actions. There might 
 as well be any hieroglyphical symbol by which 
 to proceed as to have forms printed in advance, 
 adapted to any state of facts in that particular ac- 
 tion, and which only required the names of par- 
 ties to be written in them. He expressed his ob- 
 ligations tp Mr. STETSON for withdrawing his 
 proposition, and submitted the following in its 
 place : 
 
 3. The judicial power of this state shall he-vested in 
 one Supreme Court subject to the appellate jurisdiction of 
 the Court of Appeals, and in such subordinate courts as 
 shall be authorised by this Constitution. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that his amendment 
 would of course have the preference ; but he 
 would now withdraw it and accept the proposi- 
 tion of Mr. LOOMIS, as a modification of his own. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said he rose to take some part in 
 the debate, deeply impressed with the magnitude 
 of the questions involved in it, and conscious of 
 
591 
 
 his inability to do justice to the subject. Save 
 those things which affected man's eternal 
 welfare, the human mind could never be employ- 
 ed in a more exalted pursuit than in the adminis- 
 tration of justice among men, in the establish- 
 ment of those great principles of law and the 
 pearis of so applying them, as to detect and pun- 
 ish falsehood, fraud and crime, and to secure to 
 every member of society equal and exact, justice. 
 
 if gave him great pleasure to witness the calm 
 and temperate manner in which this subject was 
 discussed. He had not however anticipated that 
 it would become necessary at this day to enter 
 into a defence of the very foundations of our sys- 
 tem of jurisprudence, a system that had command- 
 ed the respect and the admiration of the most em- 
 inent, pure and enlightened minds that the world 
 had ever produced ; a system doubtless suscepti- 
 ble of great improvements and upon which from 
 time to time, since the days of the great Alfred, 
 improvements have been made, as the rights and 
 interests of society, in a higher state of civiliza- 
 tion, have required. A system undoubtedly im- 
 perfect and failing to accomplish at all times the 
 great object of its institution among men, to wit 
 the discovery of truth and the establishment of 
 justice. And what system human was perfect ? 
 Perfection was not an attribute of any thing that 
 emanated from man. 
 
 It had been said by men of great eminence that 
 the common law was the perfection of human 
 reason, and though he believed that this eulogy 
 was quite too extravagant, yet in his opinion 
 when it was contrasted with the laws of other na- 
 tions, when its history was well known, when 
 the influence which it had exerted upon society 
 in diffusing intelligence, in laying deep the foun- 
 dations of liberty in an age almost barbarous, and 
 finally, by th? silent operation of its principles, 
 working out and surely establishing the freedom 
 of so man; millions of the human race, it was 
 deserving of very grave consideration how far it 
 became them to go, in the introduction of new 
 and untried principles and practices calculated to 
 embarrass and cripple the free action of the prin- 
 ciples of the common law. 
 
 What was the common law ? How did it origi- 
 nate ? It originated in customs, rules and regu- 
 lations established by society and acquiesced in 
 from their convenience. It had been defined to 
 be that branch or department of the municipal 
 law of any state, which is opposed to the edictal, 
 legislative or other written constitutions. It con- 
 sists of those maxims, customs and established 
 usages, which originating in the peculiar genius, 
 local situation, military institutions, or other cir- 
 cumstances of a people, take root and gradually 
 spring up in every country. Hence the different 
 parts of it are not of equal antiquity, but have 
 been successively recognized, as the maxim, cus- 
 tom or usage was found to be consonant to the 
 public sentiment and had received a general adop- 
 tion. Every country had its common law. But 
 the trial by jury was peculiar to the English com- 
 mon law and of great antiquity. The common 
 law of this country was originally from England, 
 but it was undergoing changes to accommodate it- 
 self to our peculiar circumstances. 
 
 His honorable ti tend from .New York (Mr. 0'- 
 CONOR) had objected to the remedial forms of 
 
 procedure which hud gro\ui up vuih the common 
 i tvv, and Imd been quiie successful in casin.g ridi- 
 cule upon them, tor being, as he alledgts, ofien 
 mere fictions, und /or containing much (hat was 
 mere form, and which had now become surplus- 
 age. He (Mr M.) thought that the forms now i n 
 use in pleading weie not obnoxious to the sweep- 
 ing objection of his Iriend, especially when he 
 took into consideration the rerneuv, or substitute, 
 proposed by the gentleman. It was true thai some 
 of these forms contained matter now no longer 
 necessary, and which a gocd practitioner now in 
 drafting his pleadings often oinits. Originally this 
 very matter was necessary, arid was a part of the 
 history of the case. Take the action of trover, to 
 which (he gentleman had referred. Originally 
 this action was only resorted to in a case where the 
 plaintiff had actually lost his property and it had 
 come to the possession of the defendant, by find- 
 ing, and he had con vet ted K ; and the ioiu'j u (ne 
 pleading is the shortest, most simple, and at the 
 same time comprehensive, that could be invented 
 And he (Mr. M.) would have selected ihe declara- 
 tion in an action of (rover, as a beautiful illustra- 
 tion of the simplicity of the common law forms 
 and the happy facility of the common law m prol 
 vidirig short forms for the redress of grievances 
 And as the action of trover did not now depend 
 upon the questions, of Ihe loss of the chattel by 
 the plamtirf, and the FINDING of it by the defend- 
 ant; but was, as a remedy, extended to all cases 
 where the defendant had wrongfully taken or con- 
 verted the property of the plaintiff; all the gen- 
 tleman had to do, was to omit five or six lines in 
 the form, and his declaration would dt-sciibe the 
 case truly, and with a brevity unknown to any 
 system, other than the common Jaw. But what 
 reform did the gentleman propose ? Why, simply 
 this that the party should tell his stoiy just as jV 
 was. This certainly appeared lo be a veiy simple 
 and easy rule; but how had it proved in practice, 
 and how would it prove ? It had been tested It 
 was the rule of the civil law, and this rn.de of 
 procedure was now in full operation in France, 
 and on the Continent of Europe, where they foil 
 lowed the civil law forms, ms ead of the common 
 law forms. And what was the result? Why, that 
 the civil law forms were incomparably more' pro- 
 
 lix, more complicate d, more difficult to prepare 
 
 so much so, that none but those learned in the 
 law, were ever ent. usted with their p.eparaiion 
 The whole glory must he told. Thtie would be 
 vastly many more m.s akes under such a sysietn. 
 ihan under the common laws\siem. it v\ ul<f be 
 almost impossible to classify the remedies, us e.idi 
 case would rest upon us own pait,eul,,i cncum- 
 stances and require its own |,,rm. \Y he.ea* a had 
 been supposed that (he common law had accom- 
 plished a great triumph, when it had reduced the 
 remedie* to so few aciion*, and had classified and 
 defined them with bo much accuracy that mistakes 
 could seldom happen. The difference between 
 the common law forms of procedure and the civi! 
 was si:nply i his by the former, the conclusion 
 or result only of a great vaiiety ( 1 tacts and cir- 
 cumstances was staied or averred and the le- r al 
 cons'-quence following t her efrott was alUd--td 
 leaving the R reat variety ol facts and circumsian- 
 ces to the proof upon the trial. Whereas, by the 
 latter all the facts and circumstances were stated 
 
592 
 
 with a prolixity entirely unnecessary in a system 
 which employed a jury to find 'the facts, and en- 
 tirely unendurable in a country like this. The 
 pleadings in chancery were taken from the civil 
 law forms of procedure. He (Mr. M ) had no de. 
 sire to introduce that mode of procedure into our 
 courts of law; he preferred the brevity and sim- 
 plicity ot the common law forms purified, shorn 
 of their redundancies, and made what they were 
 originally intended to be a simple statement of 
 the legal claim of the party. 
 
 Mr. M. said that they heard a great deal, 
 at the present day, about reforms, and almost eve- 
 ry one had become a zealous reformer. The whole 
 machinery of governments, in the estimation of 
 some was entirely worthless, and should be des-. 
 troyed, and its plan should be supplied by the 
 productions of modern genius. Our fathers had 
 done nothing right. For one he was not opposed 
 to reform, he claimed to be an ardent and zealous 
 reformer. But in what did reform consist? What 
 Was reform ? Did it consist in eternal changes, 
 in constant revolutions? Was every change a 
 reform? No, sir, there was a wide difference be- 
 tween the two. True reform consisted in correct- 
 ing the errors of the past, when clearly ascertain- 
 ed by experience, holding fast to all, that experi- 
 ence had proved to be good and useful, and en- 
 grafting upon our present institutions those prin- 
 ciples which the experience of other States have 
 shown to be sound, practicable and useful, or in 
 the absence of such experience, those principles 
 which enlightened reason assured them, when 
 put in practice, would accomplish the object de- 
 signed He believed he possessed as much moral 
 courage as most men, but he confessed he had 
 not courage or temerity enough to lay a ruthless 
 hand upon any of the great institutions of their 
 fathers, until his judgment was entirely satisfied 
 that the sacrifice was necessary, and that they pos- 
 sessed wisdom enough to erect other edifices more 
 beautiful, more useful and more enduring, than 
 those they were called upon to destroy. Were it 
 not for the great confidence he reposed in the in- 
 telligence and integrity of the people of the State, 
 he should have been alarmed at some of the start- 
 ling measures of reform, so called, which he had 
 seen suggested. It was but a tew days s'nce that 
 he had read in one of the most extensively circu. 
 lated newspapers in the State, a communication 
 suggesting the abolition of all courts of justice, 
 above those of a justice of the peace, and alleging 
 that these courts were all that the people wanted 
 or required. Let the Justice hear the cause and 
 decide it, though it involved thousands, and with 
 his decision let the parties be content! All these 
 appeals and reviews were only for the benefit of 
 the lawyers ; the people did not desire them! 
 What think you, Mr. Chairman, of such reform 
 as this ? Why, sir, (said Mr. M.) it has ever 
 been held that judicial discretion was judicial 
 despotism, and under the system suggested what 
 should they have but the unlimited discretion of 
 a single magistrate, who knew his judgment could 
 not be reviewed. How long would it be before 
 justice would be bought and sold, as it had been 
 in other countries, where, like other things, it 
 was a commodity in the market ? Where would 
 be the security of the poor man in a struggle with 
 the rich ? Doubtless for a long time, from the na- 
 
 tural integrity of the peopte, a great majority of 
 their magistrates would remain uncorrupted, but 
 the removal of all accountability and restraint, in- 
 vited corruption. What was it that rendered the 
 whole administration of justice in this State so 
 pure ? In what did the safety of the citizen con- 
 sist ? How did it happen that so much confi- 
 dence was reposed in the legal tribunals ? Will 
 it be said that it is owing to the integrity of the 
 magistracy ? But to what is this integrity owing ? 
 Is not human nature the same as it ever was ? 
 and under a different system of jurisprudence 
 might it not in time become corrupted? They 
 must, in his opinion, look deeper for the solution 
 of the interesting questions propounded, and they 
 would, he thought, find that the principle which 
 had always prevailed, that all the decisions and 
 acts and doings of these legal tribunals, were at 
 the will of any party affected, subject to be re- 
 viewed by a court of higher jurisdiction, having 
 the authority to revise the decisions of the lower 
 tribunals, until by successive gradations, the 
 court of last resort, in which the majesty and jus- 
 tice of the whole State was represented, had been 
 reached. He confessed that he should not feel 
 safe, under any system of jurisprudence which de- 
 prived the humblest citizen in the land of the 
 right to have the judgment of a court repiesent- 
 irig the entire majesty and the entire justice of 
 the whole State. Not that he encouraged ap- 
 peals; far from it, but judicial discretion and irre- 
 sponsibility conferred upon courts of inferior ju- 
 risdiction would be a despotism which in time 
 would become unendurable. He should advert 
 to this topic again in connection with the judi- 
 ciary system reported by the committee now un- 
 der consideration, as he apprehended thai it was, 
 among other things, obnoxious to some of the ob- 
 jections he had suggested in relation to judicial 
 irresponsibility. 
 
 In approaching the consideration of judicial re- 
 form, it was important to ascertain what were the 
 evils under which they were now suffering, and 
 then endeavor wisely to apply the proper remedy. 
 He believed that there were some radical defects 
 in the system itself, but the great difficulties and 
 embarrassments under which they were now suf- 
 fering, arose mainly from an entire inability on 
 the part of the higher courts, to transact the bu- 
 siness thrown upon them. Hence t.he whole sys- 
 tem had become paralyzed, and the delays arising 
 from such a state of things, went far towards a 
 denial of justice. No people could long endure 
 such a state of things. The evils were not con- 
 fined to the suitors alone, but they extended into 
 every ramification of society, paralyzing enter- 
 prise and carrying disease into the vitals of the 
 whole body politic. What did they desire ? 
 What was the object of a judiciary system to a 
 people governed by laws ? There should be a 
 sufficient force at all time to hear all complaints 
 and to carry into effect the injunctions of the 
 law. Some had supposed that the laws might be 
 so simplified that all could understand them alike, 
 and that they would require no explanation or 
 construction from any court. Arid they were dis- 
 posed to attach blame to the legislature for not 
 having so framed the statutes that no doubt or dif- 
 ficulty should ever arise in their construction or 
 application. He had often been interested in lis- 
 
593 
 
 tening to these complaints, and had endeavored 
 to satisfy his friends that their complaints against 
 the legislature, were generally unfounded. That 
 the legislature endeavored to make the laws as 
 clear and perspicuous as possible, and that the 
 difficulty lay in the imperfection of language, 
 the impossibility of forseeing all the circumstan- 
 ces that should arise, and he had referred them to 
 the fact that the scriptures written by inspiration, 
 were the subject of many conflicting commenta- 
 ries and constructions, giving rise to numerous 
 sects. This was owing to the imperfection of 
 language. So it was with the laws. Two men 
 put different constructions upon the law. Their 
 rights were to be affected by it. They could not 
 agree. What was to be done ? There must be 
 authority somewhere to construe the law, and 
 decide between them. Hence the necessity of 
 courts, even if all mankind were disposed to 
 fulfil their obligations in pursuance of the re- 
 quirements of law. But all men were not always 
 willing to fulfil their obligations and obey the 
 injunctions of the law, and their obedience must 
 therefore be compelled. Hence the absolute ne- 
 cessity of an efficient judiciary system for the 
 prompt enforcement of rights and the redress of 
 wrongs, without which society would soon be re- 
 solved into its original elements, and civilization 
 would take its departure from among men. 
 Complaints were often made of the amount of lit- 
 igation in this country. He admitted that it was 
 an evil All litigation was undoubtedly an evil. 
 That state of society in which every member of 
 it performed, without compulsion, all his duties 
 and obligations, and abstained from all encroach- 
 ments upon the rights of others, would indeed be 
 a most happy state. But he never expected to 
 witness a state of things like that. On the con- 
 trary, in a free country like this, there would al- 
 ways .be litigation. A country where every man 
 was the equJ of his fellow-man, where every 
 citizen hid a right to prefer his complaints and 
 demand a patient hearing, where every one enjoy- 
 ed the right of launching upon the great ocean of 
 enterprise his little ship whose flag was entitled 
 to respect, where the relation of lord and vassel 
 did not exist ; where freedom was the birth-right 
 of all, in such a country and among such a people, 
 there would be litigation. Men would defend 
 their rights from all encroachments. There 
 might be and doubtless often was an excess of lit- 
 igation, it was one of the penalties paid, as a part 
 of the price of liberty itself. 
 
 Our judiciary system was, in tne main, a good 
 one, but like every thing else it was liable to a- 
 buses and to derangement. And it was the duty 
 of all to unite their efforts in removing these 
 evils. 
 
 What did the people desire ? What did they 
 need ? First it was desirable in every judiciary 
 system, that the administration of justice should 
 be brought home, not literilly to every man's 
 door, but into his neighborhood, within a reasona- 
 ble and convenient distance. Secondly, justice 
 should be promptly administered, without un- 
 reasonable delay, that every individual should be 
 as nearly as possible, in the constant enjoyment 
 of all his rights. Thirdly, these rights should be 
 secured at a moderate and reasonable expense. 
 Litigation in our courts of record in this State, 
 
 49 
 
 had become too expensive, and a reform should be 
 effected. But did not this system contemplate 
 the accomplishment of all the objects he had in- 
 dicated ? True it had failed in some respects, 
 as he should endeavor to show, and should sug- 
 gest what be believed to be the proper remedies, 
 still with all its faults, when compared with the 
 system of other countries, he believed it would be 
 found to have accomplished in a higher degree, 
 
 the objects of its institution, than any other. 
 
 The great Alfred of England, in order to bring 
 justice home to every man's door, established as 
 many courts of judicature as there were manors 
 or townships in the kingdom ; wherein justice was 
 redressed in an easy and expeditious manner, by 
 the suffrage of neighbors and friends. 
 
 This was a happy thought. It familiarized 
 the people with the administration of justice. It 
 taught them to protect and preserve their individ 
 ual rights, and invited them to a knowledge of the 
 laws. The introduction of a valuable principle 
 into society, often produced results of the gre'at- 
 est consequence, whose influence was felt for 
 ages in forming the character and habits of a 
 people. And who, at -this day, would under- 
 take to say how much the people of England and 
 this country were indebted to the wise systeiri of 
 jurisprudence, introduced by Alfred?' Who 
 would undertake to say that it had not exerted a 
 great influence, in diffusing information among 
 
 the people and accomplishing their freedom : 
 
 He would bring justice home to the people. HH 
 did not propose, at this time, to remark upon the 
 justices' courts, further than to say that in his 
 opinion they had in the main faithfully perform- 
 ed their duties, and answered the purposes de- 
 signed by their establishment. He would pro- 
 ceed to speak of the other courts, and consider 
 the judiciary system reported by the committee. 
 He should speak with all freedom, but at the same 
 time with great respect for each and every mem- 
 ber of that committee who had assented to the 
 report. He should not criticise it in detail, but 
 should confine his remarks to the system itself, 
 and the mode of employing the judicial force 
 which it provided. He was aware of the great 
 difficulties involved in the subject, and he had 
 resolved for himself to examine most favorably 
 the plan of the committee and to give it his sup'- 
 port, if in his judgment it obviated the difficul- 
 ties under which they were now laboring, and 
 would accomplish, in a tolerable degree, what all 
 so ardently desired. He had been unable to sat- 
 isfy himself that the system recomeaded would 
 and could operate satisfactorily. He hoped, if 
 it was to be adopted, that time would show 
 that he was mistaken. 
 
 The plan of the committee united in the same 
 fcourt the practice of law and equity; in other 
 [words, it abolished the court of chancery and con- 
 ferred upon the courts of law the powers and du- 
 jties now exercised and performed by the court of 
 .Chancery, lie thought they were about to cqm- 
 Vnit a great error in thus uniting in the .same 
 court, those powers and duties which had always 
 in this State been kept and preserved in separate' 
 jurisdictions. No one proposed to abolish equity' 
 law. It seemed to be conceded by all that those '" 
 great principles of equity justice, which formed 
 so essential a part of their system of jurispru- 
 
594 
 
 dence, must be preserved and must be adminis- 
 tered in some form. How could this last be done? 
 
 A certain amount of judicial force was necessary, 
 
 to transact the business promptly, wisely and ef- 
 ficiently. Certain portions of that business were 
 
 transacted in accordance with the common law 
 
 mode of procedure, which employed a jury for 
 
 the ascertainment of disputed facts. This was 
 
 by far the largest portion. Another portion had 
 
 been performed, and must, as he believed, be 
 
 performed, without the aid of a jury. Here was 
 
 a natural line of separation, and in his opinion 
 
 the whole judicial business of the State could be 
 
 done with a less amount of judicial force and at 
 
 less expense, and far better, by preserving sepa- 
 rate courts, than by uniting them. If this was, 
 
 as a matter of fact, true, then he submitted that 
 
 gentlemen who desired wise reform, instead of 
 
 mere change, should go with him for a separate 
 organization. He was willing to put the whole 
 
 question upon this ground. He was not one of 
 those who believed that equity and law were so 
 different that the same mind could not compre- 
 hend and administer both. On the contrary, he 
 
 believed that to be a good lawyer, a man must be 
 well informed in the principles of the law, as 
 administered in both the equity and common law 
 courts. Still, any man would acquire a greater 
 facility in the despatch of any business to which 
 his whole attention was confined, than he would 
 if compelled to devote himself to a great variety 
 of pursuits. 
 
 The mode of proceeding in Ihe two courts was 
 essentially different, and it must continue to be 
 so. And in all tnose couris, where law and equi- 
 ty were united in Ihe same tribunal, theie was an 
 equity side of the court, and a law side, so called. 
 Mr. Blackstone, in speaking of courts ol law and 
 equity, enquires " Wherein does their essential 
 difference consist? It principally consists (says 
 he) in the different modes of administering jus- 
 tice in each, in ihe mode of proof, ihe mode ol 
 trial and the mode of relief." He (Mr. M.) could 
 proceed at length and point out the difference in 
 
 the practice of ihe two courts, but he must con- cause before an examiner, was liable to great ob- 
 tent himself with a mere reference to the subject, j Jections and led to great abuses. The offices of 
 In a cou.t of law, the lacts and damages having I Master, Exception Master, and Examiner, 
 been ascertained by the verdict of the jury, the (should be abolished, and the evidence should be 
 
 or interest in lands, should be void, unless ihe 
 contract or some note or memorandum thereof ex- 
 pressing the consideration be in writing, and be 
 subscribed by the party by whom the sale was to 
 be made. This was a positive statute, and no man 
 could be defrauded out of his land by the perju- 
 ries ot any one, or by a contract unless it was 
 written, arid signed by him. This was an impor- 
 tant law for the safety of all. And yet every one 
 could see, that cases might arise when the great- 
 est fraud and injustice might be done, by car- 
 rying it literally into effect. A man enters into 
 a parol contract for the purchase of land, enters 
 into the possession and makes valuable improve- 
 ments, and pays a part of the purchase money, 
 and then the owner refuses to convey. Every 
 one would see that it would be a fraud on the 
 part of the vendor to refuse. In such a case a 
 Court of Equity, acting upon the equity of the 
 statute, would give relief and decree a specific 
 performance of the contract, if the vendor had it 
 in his power to make title, and would compel 
 him to convey the land. He was satisfied a Court 
 of Equity was indispensible in a country like 
 this, and without it justice could not be success- 
 illy administered. He desired that very great 
 reform should be effected in the court. A large 
 Dortion of the business now done in that court 
 could and ought be done in the courts of law. He 
 ,vould transfer to the courts of law all the busi- 
 ness that could be done there. The court had 
 alien into disrepute, partly by its own fault, but 
 mainly in consequence of the large amount of bu- 
 siness which had been thrown into it. A thor- 
 ough reform should be effected in its forms. 
 They should be simplified and abbreviated, and 
 the expense of obtaining justice in that court 
 should be greatly reduced. In his judgment an 
 ordinary Chancery suit ought not to cost the par- 
 ties any more than a simple suit at law. And 
 equity justice should be administered in every 
 county in the state, with the same ease and sim- 
 plicity that a cause was tried in a court of law. 
 he system of taking the evidence in a chancery 
 
 judgment of the law immediately followed. No 
 further directions were necessary Irom ihe judge 
 or the court, but the law had defined and directed 
 what was to be done, and had placed the remedies 
 io the hands of Ihe party in whose favor the jury 
 had pronounced. JNot so in a court of equity: 
 there special directions were often necessary, and 
 the party against whom the decree was made, was 
 directed to do some act inderd boih parties arid 
 all parties to the suit were often required to do 
 some specific act or act*,. A court ot law pro. 
 c^eded upon general rules, often arbitrary and in- 
 flexible, and which generally operaied justly, but 
 a strict adhecence to which, would sometimes 
 produce the greatest injustice, and a court ot equi- 
 ty then, pioceeding upon well established princi- 
 ples, and examining all the peculiar circumstan- 
 ces, would afford iclief. To illustrate the differ 
 ence. In order to render more secu.-e a man's 
 right to real estate, and to avoid the danger of 
 perjuries, it had been deemed wise to declare b) 
 law that every contract for the sale of any lands 
 
 taken before the Equity judge, who was to make 
 the decree and give the relief. He should before he 
 sat down, submit a plan for the re-organization 
 of the Courts, which he believed would relieve 
 them from all the difficulties under which they 
 were laboring, would enable the legislature to ac- 
 complish all the reforms which he had indicated, 
 and which all so much desired. He would pro- 
 ceed to a further consideration of the plan of the 
 committee. It contemplated the destruction of 
 the County Courts the Courts of Common 
 Pleas. He confessed he was greatly surprised at 
 this, and somewhat alarmed. He did not believe 
 the people were prepared for the overthrow of the 
 County Courts and tha establishment of one great 
 Court of thirty-two judges, cut up and divided 
 into fragments. 
 
 He was aware that the county courts in many 
 parts of the State, had failed to secure the confi- 
 dence of the people. But was there not a good 
 cause for it ? It had fallen under the baneful in- 
 fluence of the party county caucus system. And 
 
595 
 
 the Governor was no longer left free to act in th 
 selection of the best men. Its organization w 
 . :md it was surprising to him th 
 it had boon uble to accomplish as much as it ha 
 ; cad of being destroyed, however, he would r 
 organise it, in a manner and with a view of mat 
 it the very best court of original jurisdictio 
 in the State, for the transaction ot the business i 
 the county. The people had a right to deman 
 thi^, in order that they might do their business 5 
 home, in a court of original jurisdiction, in whic 
 an able and competent judge should preside. B 
 he would recur to this subject again. He woul 
 now endeavor to ascertain what the system re 
 commended by a majority of the committee weu 
 It contemplated the election or appointment < 
 *hirty-two judges, all members of the samecour 
 and which was denominated the Supreme Cour 
 It proposed to divide the State into eight districts 
 in each of which there should be four judges o 
 this Supreme Court. Four of the thirty-tw 
 judges, whose term of office was first to expire 
 were to go into the court of appeals, the court c 
 last resort, to which court were to be added fou 
 others, who were to be members of the court o 
 appeals only, thus making thirty-six in alj^a 
 Thirty-two of whom' uuiistituUrd th"e~TS r uprem 
 Court, which was to transact all the busi 
 ness in law and equity,and to take the place of th 
 present courts of the chancellor and vice chan 
 cellors, the supreme court, the circuit courts, an 
 lifty-nine courts of common pleas, and three hun 
 dred and fifty six masters and examiners in chance 
 ry. fThese thirty-two judges, or if lour of then 
 should be, (as they would be,) constantly employ 
 ed in the court of appeals, twenty-eight judges 
 were to hold circuits in ali the counties, for th 
 trial of all cases pending in the court and all cau 
 ses brought into the court by appeal from justi 
 ces' co.urts, and for the hearing before the judgi 
 of all equiiy causes, the evidence to be taken be 
 fore the judge, and also the trial of all crimina 
 cases These judges were to be confined to n< 
 particular part of the State, but were respectivel; 
 to hold circuits in all parts of the State. An) 
 three of these judges wei e to constitute the, or a 
 supreme court in bane, to hear and determine 
 questions of laws, so that there might be eight o 
 nine of these supreme courts so called in session 
 at the same time, the terms being held at dif- 
 ferent times and in different places, the judges 
 holding sessions in bane ; might be constantly 
 changing by a change of the judges. This was a 
 brief outline of the system. It was an entire depar- 
 ture from our present system and unlike anything 
 he would venture to say, that had ever been in- 
 vented. He did not like it. It made an unfavora 
 ble impression upon his mind. He could no 
 get rid of the conviction that it would prove .a. 
 failure. If it was to be considered as the su- 
 preme court broken into fragments, or as a sys- 
 tem of district courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction. 
 whose judges interchanged, formed and reformed 
 their courts, and mixed all up together, and haV 
 ing as a whole the entire, exclusive jurisdiction 
 of all matters affecting the people in law or equi- 
 ty, he objected to it as a dangerous system. He 
 submitted whether such a court composed ol 
 such a number of judges, uninfluenced by other 
 courts, might not become intolerant, overbear- 
 
 ing, dictatorial, and in time dangerous ? He 
 would not pursue the idea, But in his judgment 
 the court, or the judges could not transact the 
 business, and he believed it would break down 
 from its own weight, and from the manner in 
 which the force was organized and was to be em- 
 ployed. He had always supposed that there was 
 an important principle involved in the gradation 
 of courts and in the division of labor. This plan 
 puts all upon a common level, and mixes all 
 things together, and sets all the force employed 
 at work upon all the kinds of business to be done, 
 and no decision made by any of them or any of 
 the courts, would be binding upon any of 
 the rest of them, or any court in bane composed 
 of other men, though they all belonged to the 
 same supreme court. What would be the effect 
 of this? Why, conflicting divisions constantly as 
 the courts in bane should be held by different 
 men, and this to be followed by constant appeals 
 to the court of last resort. No one would rest 
 satisfied with the decision of the one-eighth or 
 one-ninth part of the court; representing only 
 one-eighth part of the State. The system itself 
 would invite appeals, and the court of appeals 
 in his opinion, would be overwhelmed in two 
 years. The court of appeals would occupy the 
 place that the supreme court now did. It could 
 not stand the avalanch that would be poured in 
 upon it. 
 
 But let us (said Mr. M.) return to the circuits, 
 of which there must be probably three or four in 
 each county at least. And what should they find 
 there ? A calendar composed of all those causes 
 now found upon the circuit and common pleas 
 calendars, and also all the criminal business now 
 disposed of by the courts of oyer and terminer, 
 and the general sessions of the peace. Now how 
 ^ong would the suitor be obliged to attend court 
 with his witnesses before he could obtain a hear- 
 ng ? But the civil and criminal business was 
 disposed of the jury was dismissed, and what fol- 
 owed ? Unless the j udge is compelled to depart to 
 the next county to hold his court there, he will 
 open his court of equity and enter upon the hear- 
 ng of witnesses and taking notes of the evidence, 
 sitting now as an equity judge. If he has suffi- 
 cient time to hear all the evidence in his equity 
 cause or causes, if the witnesses are all in attend- 
 nce, if when the evidence is closed, the counsel 
 are ready to argue their cause, and if the judge is 
 eady on the spot, without time to examine au- 
 horities, to make his decree, then it will all 
 work very well; but suppose some of the evidence 
 s absent, or the counsel desire some further time 
 o prepare for the argument of the cause, or the 
 udge wants time to examine further. What then ? 
 The whole system of trying equity causes has fail- 
 id, for when the judge leaves the county you may 
 lot see him again in three years, as these judges 
 re to be flying all over the state like a flock of 
 igeons. 
 
 The truth is, you must have a localized judge ; 
 ne who is confined to a district of reasonable ex- 
 ent, before whom to transact this equity busi- 
 less, if the office of Examiner is to be abolished, 
 nd all agree that it ought to be, and that the 
 vidence should be taken before the Vice Chan- 
 ellor or judge who is to make the decree. 
 But suppose the judge has had time to try the 
 
596 
 
 equity cause, and has made the decree, and one 
 of the parties is not satisfied what then ? An 
 appeal lies, I suppose, to one of these Supreme 
 Courts in bane. This appeal must go up on a 
 case containing the facts, to be agreed on by the 
 parties, or, which will generally be the case, to 
 be settled by the judge who tried the cause. 
 Now, where am I to find the judge to settle the 
 case ? Perhaps, sir, in Clinton county, holding 
 a circuit, or sitting in bane, as a member of one 
 of these branches of the Supreme Court. But, 
 air, with a great deal of trouble the case is settled 
 and appealed to one of the Supreme Courts, com- 
 posed of any three of these thirty-two judges, and 
 then the cause is to be argued, and then either 
 party may appeal to the court of appeals. This 
 
 conclusion of his remarks submit a plan which he 
 had drawn up. He agreed with his friend from 
 Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) that it was but fair that 
 
 he who found fault 
 
 with the plan 
 
 by 
 
 the committee ought to present 'something which 
 he believed to be better. He had started with the 
 idea that it was better to reform than to destroy, 
 In the language of Mr. Van'Buien in the Conven- 
 tion of 1821, he believed that "if there were de- 
 fects in the system as now exist i Jig, let them be 
 corrected let us amend, not destroy ."' He (Mr. 
 M,) saw established in every county of the Slate 
 a county court, of original jurisdiction, confined 
 to the county, and which, though defectively 01- 
 gariized, had transacted a v?st amount of business 
 in the trial of causes reviewing the decision of 
 
 carinot work well. How are all these motions in ! the justices, and hearing and deciding a laige 
 equity causes to be heard, and how are all those ! amount of miscellaneous business consigned to it, 
 interlocutory decrees to be made, which often de- j and which his friend from Oueida (Mr. KIRK- 
 cide the whole cause ? I suppose, sir, they are LAND) had referred to. This court had a clerk 
 to be heard by one of these courts in bane, or at a and a clerk's office in the county where the papers 
 special term, perhaps, whose judges are constant- of the suitors were kept, where the judgments 
 ly shifting and changing, and thus we are to lose j were docketed, and every citizen in the county 
 
 the benefit of the knowledge previously acquired 
 by a judge who may have made some previous 
 order or decree in the cause. It is impossible, 
 sir, for me to see how this equity business can be 
 done with any simplicity or certainty. The 
 whole system of equity jurisprudence invited 
 
 might go and obiain information without employ- 
 ing a. lawyer. 
 
 On examining the organization of the court, he 
 found that it was composed of five judges, all re. 
 sidenisof the county, and having no ]urisdictior> 
 out of the county, and employed in court only 
 
 constant appeals to the court of last resort, as | during the sittings of the court in one county -- 
 there could be no uniformity of decisions by so The compensation of these jodtn-s was small. 
 many judges and so many courts, and the court of NOW, any one could see what the result would be 
 appeals would take the place of the present court j ij] ce ly fo 'be, and what rn fact it had been, but this 
 of chancery, to which the appeals from the Vice | was no argument against a court of common pleas 
 Chancellor were now made, and which had been H e proposed a reorganization of the court, and 
 
 overwhelmed and borne down ; and the court of 
 appeals could not dispatch with greater facility 
 than the present Chancellor. 
 
 The court of appeals upon the plan of the com- 
 mittee did not meet his views of what, a court of 
 lijsl report :n the great State of New York should 
 be. It had been resolved nearly, if not quite, 
 
 with a view of giving to the people in every coun- 
 ty a court of originf.1 jurisdiction with a judge to 
 preside in it of high legal attainments and as com- 
 petent as the judges in any court in the State. 
 Establish such a court, and four-fifths if not nine- 
 tenths of all the business of the county, where the 
 parties resided in il, would be done in that court, 
 to the great relief of the supreme court. In order 
 
 to effect this, a judge must be employed who shall 
 
 tion of it was a branch of the legislatuie, and also! devote his time constantly to his judicial duties; 
 
 unanimously, to nb iii>h 
 now constituted, upon 
 
 the Court of Errors 
 
 I hat. it was too Inrge u body lor a court. It 
 wa.-, however, only an net of justice to sav, that 
 that court had commanded the resi>ect and confi. 
 of the people of this State and of the other 
 
 arid economy would be consulted by paying him 
 liberal salary so as to command the best talents. 
 His. plan proposed that the court of common pleas 
 for each county (other than New York) should 
 
 Stales in the Union. And its expositions of the j consist of a president judtje and two associate 
 great arid enlightened principles of the law, re- [judges. That the president judge should always 
 lieved from a too narrow and technical interpieta- j be a member of the court, and might bold the 
 tion, have shed lustre upon the court, and have | court alone. He prooosed to divide the State into 
 
 enured to the lasting benefit of the people, and 
 our system of jurisprudence. He desired to see a 
 . strong and able_.c<mrt .substituted in ifs place a 
 court whicTi "shall embody a liberal portion of the 
 popular features of the old court. And he desired 
 A judicial system so organized that but few causes 
 
 a convenient number of common ple.is judicial 
 districts subject to alteration by law, that a presi- 
 dent judge should be chosen in each district, who 
 should be the president judge of the court of com- 
 mon pleas in each county, and of the court of gene- 
 ral sessions of the peace [The chairman of the 
 
 in practice should ever be carried to rhis court of judiciary committee (Mr. RUGGLES) here enquir. 
 
 las' resort. Important questions would arise, in a 
 proper decision of which the whole people were 
 interested, and which should be settled upon great 
 deliberation, and by a court representing the whole 
 Stale, and in a manner calculated to secure the 
 confidence of the whole country. 
 
 Having already detained the committee he fear- 
 ed too long, he would proceed to explain briefly 
 
 ed of Mr. M. how many of these president judg. 
 PS he proposed to have?] Mr. M. said he had not 
 limited the number as it would be entirely 
 safe to leave that to the legislature, but he sup- 
 posed that some twelve or fifteen would be enough 
 for the state out of the city of New- York. 
 He proposed to have no more than was absolutely 
 necessary to transact the business. Thev were 
 
 toe result of his best reflections upon a proper re- ' to be working men, and it would presently be 
 organization of the judiciary, and would at the i seen what other labors besides attending to their 
 
597 
 
 duties in the law courts, he proposed to impose 
 upon them in the way of doing up the equity bu- 
 > in the districts. The two associate judges 
 were to be chosen in the county. They were not 
 important to his plan in the administration of ci- 
 vil business, though they might be useful in cer- 
 tain parts of it, but he wanted them to constitute 
 with the president judge, the court of general ses- 
 sions of the peace. He was unwilling to trust to 
 any single man the administration of criminal 
 law the infliction of the penalties for crimes. 
 He desired that the president judge should have 
 upon the bench with him two citizens of the coun- 
 ty m en of good strong common sense with 
 whom he could consultwhen he came to inflict 
 penalties for crimes. He did not propose to pay 
 the associate judges any more than the county 
 judges were now paid. They would only be on 
 duty when the court sat in their county. It would 
 be safe to confer upon such a court, with a presi- 
 dent judge, as competent as their circuit judges 
 now were, and constantly employed as a judge, 
 jurisdiction of all crimes committed in the coun- 
 ty, and of all indictments sent into the court from 
 any other court or county, for trial. A court thus 
 organised, with a President judge, for some four 
 or five counties, would command the confidence 
 of suitors and the people, and he would be able 
 to dispatch business with as much facility as the 
 circuit judge now does, and no further complaints 
 would be heard among the profession, of the slow 
 and tardy progress of the court of common pleas. 
 The business of the county would be done in such 
 a court. It would 'be more convenient, less ex- 
 pensive, and being a court of original jurisdic- 
 tion, it could hear all law arguments, correct er- 
 rors, grant new trials, all at home in the county, 
 without the trouble, and delay, and expense, of 
 making up bills of exception and cases, and send- 
 ing them off io a distant city, and there employ- 
 ing counsel to procure a correction of the errors 
 of the circuit judge, who was a mere commission- 
 er from another (the Supreme) court, sent down 
 to try the issues joined in the supreme court, and 
 who had no original jurisdiction to grant relief. 
 The president judge could hold special law 
 terms other than the regular terms, if necessary, 
 . to hear law arguments alone, without a jury. A 
 writ of error would issue from the supreme court 
 to his court, to review his decisions. He would 
 be prompted by every consideration, stimulated by 
 ambition to qualify himself in such a manner that 
 few of his decisions would be reversed. And 
 with such 'a court, writs of error and appeals 
 would be less frequent. It was in this way, by 
 beginning at the root of the evil by giving to 
 the people in their own county a competent 
 court to transact their business in the first instance, 
 that he proposed to remove the evil and relieve 
 to a great ex ent the embarrassment of our high- 
 . er courts. But he proposed to confer upon these 
 president judges other important duties. He 
 would make each of them a vice chancellor, and 
 then sir, you can transact your equity business at 
 home. He had long desired to see the offices of 
 examiner, ex< eption master, and masters in chan 
 eery, abolished, and to see competent men ap- 
 pointed before whom the equity suit could be 
 commenced, and who should hear all the witness- 
 es, hear the arguments, make the orders and de- 
 
 crees, and all in a way and manner as simple as in 
 a suit at law, and more so as no jury is required, 
 and at an expense generally not exceeding a sim- 
 le ordinary suit at law. But to accomplish this 
 :he judge must be a. local judge, so that he can be 
 found so that he can conveniently attend to the 
 Business. This was no new idea with him, and 
 it was the only mode that occurred of doing that 
 equity business conveniently, if they were to 
 dispense with the master and examiner. 
 An appeal would of course lie to the Chancellor 
 or Chancellors sitting in bane, and representing 
 the whole state. He proposed to create a Court 
 of Chancery consisting of three Chancellors, any 
 if whom might hold the Court, with appellate ju- 
 risdiction only, and such original jurisdiction as 
 the legislature might confer upon it. He propo- 
 sed three, with a view of guarding against the 
 danger of the court being overcome with business, 
 allowing each Chancellor to sit alone if necessary. 
 He believed it would never be necessary, under 
 his system, that they should sit separate after 
 those reforms were effected which they all desir- 
 ed. But he had another object in proposing three 
 Chancellors; it was in reference to the court 
 of last resort of which he proposed they should 
 form a part, and thus they would secure for that 
 ourt, the constant attendance of three of the 
 most eminent and accomplished jurists in the 
 state. Thus his whole system of the court of 
 Chancery, was seen. He provided a sufficient 
 force, brought the vice Chancellor almost literal- 
 ly to the door of the suitor, and kept the court of 
 Chancery intact secured a uniform practice 
 throughout the state, avoided the danger of con- 
 fusion, and transacted the business with a less 
 force, and at a less expense,he submitted,than were 
 possible under the system of uniting law and 
 equity in the same court the system of the com- 
 mittee. 
 
 For the city and county of New York he pro- 
 posed a president judge of the court of common 
 pleas and as many associate judges as might be 
 necessary, " any of whom may hold the said court 
 for the trial of all issues of fact joined therein 
 or sent into the said court for trial, and any three 
 of whom may constitute the said court in bane." 
 This would enable the city of New York to estab- 
 lish one of the most splendid courts on earth, and 
 without any danger of its ever being overwhelm- 
 ed with business. There will be but one clerk's 
 office. All records and judgments and papers of 
 the court will be kept there. And suppose that 
 six courts with a jury each, are required in that 
 city. Appoint five associate judges and they and 
 the president judge may each on the same day, at 
 the same hour, be employed in the trial of causes 
 before juries, in six different rooms. Three of 
 these judges come together and constitute the 
 court in bane, to hear and decide all law ques- 
 tions which arise in this court. It occurred to 
 him that in New York he could further apply 
 beneficially the principle of a division of labor. 
 He did not therefore conier upon any of the judges 
 of this law court, equity jurisdiction, but he pro- 
 posed to create a vice chancellor and assistant 
 vice chancellors enough to do the business of the 
 city, they performing the business now done by 
 the examiners and masters and making their de- 
 crees subject to appeal to the chancellors. 
 
598 
 
 Having thus organized the courts of common 
 pleas, he had no difficulty in creating a su- 
 preme court whose numbers should be confined 
 within some of those limits to which he had al- 
 ways supposed it was desirable to confine it. It 
 was important in the establishment of this court 
 to unite all its Judges when sitting in bane and 
 thus obtain at once the opinion of a court repre- 
 senting the whole state. This he had v not been 
 able to accomplish. The difficulty now was that 
 the court could not hear, examine and decide all 
 the causes brought before it, and by adding to its 
 numbers you do not increase the force in the 
 same ratio. He could think of no other way but 
 that the court, for the present must be divided. 
 This was an evil and would undoubtedly tend to 
 increase the appeals to the court of last resort. 
 But in his plan he divided the court into only two 
 branches, instead of eight as proposed by the 
 committee, and this he submitted, greatly lessen- 
 ed the evil. He proposed that the supreme court 
 should consist of a chief justice and eight 
 justices. That the State should be divided 
 into two districts the eastern and western and 
 that each district should be divided into four 
 circuits, in each of which a justice of the 
 Supreme Court should be chosen to hold his of- 
 fice twelve years in all cases after the first elec- 
 tion. So arranged that the term of office of one 
 of the four in each district should expire every 
 three years. These justices to hold the circuits 
 twice a year in each county, and any justice may 
 hold any circuit. As they are not to be troubled 
 with equity business, but simply with the trial of 
 the issues joined in the court and the trial of 
 criminal causes in the court of oyer and termi- 
 ner, there will be no difficulty in their changing 
 from one circuit to another. The court in bane 
 for the eastern district is to be composed of the 
 chief justice and the four justices chosen in that 
 district or any three of them. The court in bane 
 for the western district is to be composed of the 
 chief justice and the four justices chosen in that 
 district or any three of them. Each court will 
 hold as many terms in its district and at as many 
 places as shall be necessary, probably four terms 
 a year besides the special terms. The chief jus- 
 tice has no circuit, and probably in practice would 
 not attend to circuit duties, but he will attend all 
 the bane terms in each district, and this will tend 
 greatly to promote uniformity of decisions. It 
 may be that after a few years the whole court may 
 be brought together in its sittings in bane. This 
 certainly is very desirable. 
 
 He proposed that the court of last resort, the 
 court for the correction of errors and of appeals, 
 should consist of the chancellor, the chief justi- 
 ces and the two senior justices from the eastern 
 and western districts, and eight judges to be cho- 
 sen expressly for that purpose, one from each of 
 the circuits, to hold their offices four years, and 
 to be so classified after the first election, that the 
 terms of one-fourth of them shall expire an- 
 nually. This would preserve the popular features 
 of our present court. The whole number of the 
 court would be sixteen. He did not think it too 
 large for a court of last resort for this great State, 
 to which but few causes, under a good and efficient 
 judicial system, would ever be carried. It would 
 be in session but a small part of the year. The 
 
 pay of all the members, except the eight elected 
 for that purpose alone, is provided for in their sa- 
 laries as judges and chancellors. If gentlemen 
 thought the court too numerous, one of the justi- 
 ces from each district and one or two of the chan- 
 cellors might be dropped, and thus reduce the 
 court to thirteen or fourteen. He, however, pre- 
 ferred the whole number. His plan, he thought, 
 would involve less expense than the plan of the 
 committee. He did not employ, in fact, as much 
 working force as they contemplated, but his ar- 
 rangement was different, and he submitted, better 
 calculated for the efficient employmentof the force, 
 and the accomplishment of the.business. He had 
 thus explained his views as to the proper mode 
 of reorganising the judiciary of the State. He 
 had barely alluded to some of the reforms which 
 he desired to see effected in legal proceedings, 
 He might hereafter, in imitation of other gentle- 
 men, take some occasion to suggest other reforms 
 in judicial proceedings, but this body could pot 
 effect them. It was a work for the legislature. 
 
 Our position (said Mr. M.) is one of great re- 
 sponsibility. Vast interests are confided to the 
 Convention. Three millions of people, to be af- 
 fected for good or evil, are looking calmly on, 
 and waiting the result of our deliberations. It is 
 often easy to destroy institutions which it has re- 
 quired the wisdom of ages to erect and perfect. 
 I'o a free people, nothing can be more important 
 than a pure and wise administration of justice. 
 Thus far in our career as a nation, we have the 
 proud satisfaction of knowing that the laws have 
 been faithfully administered by our couits, that 
 the judiciary has proved itself true to the high 
 trust reposed in it. 
 
 The judiciary system of the State may be des- 
 troyed. Your judges may descend from the high 
 seats of justice, and a new older of things may be 
 established. Let us hope that the judicial eimine 
 will ever remain pure and unspotted. It is of the 
 deepest importance that the high confidence hith- 
 erto reposed in your judges and your courts be 
 preserved. A faithful and competent judiciary is 
 the sheet anchor of safety in a free country. One 
 of the most sublime spectacles on earth may be 
 constantly witnessed in your courts of justice. 
 While in other lands, the toiling millions were 
 borne down and oppressed, to maintain standing 
 armies to secure obedience to the laws; while the 
 judge was escorted to the bench, surrounded by all 
 the trappings of office; here, in a republican land, 
 you behold an aged man enter your court room, 
 undistinguished from the crowd ; he slowly ap- 
 proaches the seat of justice and enters quietly up- 
 on the discharge of his high duties. Presently 
 men's minds become excited in the angry con- 
 flicts of contending parties, and a storm of pas- 
 sion agitates the living mass. To a stranger un- 
 acquainted with our institutions, all appears upon 
 the eve of civil convulsion, and he looks around 
 in vain for the power that is to command and 
 preserve order. But the judge upon the bench 
 has spoken the storm has ceased order reigns 
 and yet every man in that vast crowd stands 
 proudly erect, unawed by fear. What miracle 
 has wrought this change ? Is it solely the pow- 
 er of that feeble old man ? No, sir ; it is the 
 power of the law, the sovereign will, the fiat of 
 three millions of freemen, more powerful than 
 
599 
 
 standing armies. The judge is but the appoint- 
 ed minister of the law, the organ of the people's 
 will, as proclaimed in the laws, established by 
 themselves, and to which they yield a willing 
 obedience. May these sublime spectacles be ev- 
 er exhibited in this free country. 
 
 The following is the plan submitted by Mr. 
 MARVIN : 
 
 1. The judicial power of this State shall be vested in a 
 court for the trial of impeachments, a Court for the Cor- 
 rection of Errors, and Appeals; a Court of Chancery, a 
 Supreme Court, a Court of Common Pleas, Surrogates, 
 Justices of the Peace, Courts of Oyer and Terminer and 
 general jail delivery, Courts of General Sessions, of the 
 peace, and such courts of jurisdiction interior to the courts 
 of common pleas, and courts of General Sessions of the 
 Peace, as shall be by law, from time to time established. 
 
 fc 2. The court of common pleas for each county, other 
 than the city and county of New-York, shall consist of a 
 president judge, and two associate judges. The president 
 judge shall always be a member of the court, and may 
 holl the said court alone. 
 
 3. The state shall be divided by law, into a convenient 
 number of common pleas judicial districts, subject to alte- 
 ration by law, from time to time, as the public good may 
 require. No county shall be divided in the formation of 
 the said districts. 
 
 ^ 4. The city and county of New-York shall be one dis- 
 
 & d'. There shall be chosen in each of the said districts, 
 otht r than the city and county of New York, by the quali- 
 fied electors thereof, a judge, who shall be the president 
 judge oi the courts of common pleas, and general sessions 
 of tiie peace in each county of the said district. He shall 
 hold his office eight y ears, unless sooner removed. There 
 shall be chosen in each county by the qualified electors 
 thereof, two judges of the courts of common pleas of such 
 county, who shall be styled associate judges, each of whom 
 hall liold his office five years, unless sooner removed. 
 
 6. There shall be chosen a president judge ol the courts 
 of common pleas, in and for the city and county of New 
 York, and such number of associate judges as shall, from 
 time to time be provided by law, any ol whom may hold 
 the said court for the trial ot all issues of fact joined there- 
 in, or sent into the said court for trial, and any three of 
 whom may constitute the said court in bane. 
 
 ^7. The cour> -f general sessions of the peace in and 
 for the city and co.-nty ol New-York, shall consist of the 
 president jud^e of the courts of common pleas ol said city 
 and county, and any two of the associate judges, and in all 
 cases, below the degree of felony, the said court may be 
 held by any three of the said judges. The said court 
 shall have jurisdiction olail crimes committed in the city 
 and county of New-York, and of all indictments that may- 
 be sent into the said court for trial, from any other court 
 or couuty. 
 
 (j 8. The court of general sessions of the peace for each 
 of the counties o; the State, other than the city and coun- 
 ty of New- York, shall consist of the president judge of 
 the courts of common pleas and the associate judges of 
 the common pleas of the county, or the said president 
 judge, an associate judge, and a justice of the peace of the 
 county; or the said president judge and any two justices 
 of the peace of the cou:.ty ; and in all cases below the de- 
 gree ot felony, the said court may be heid by the said as- 
 sociate judges and a justice of the peace of the county, or 
 by an associate judge and two justices of the peace of the 
 county. The said court shall have jurisdiction of all crimes 
 committed in the county, and of all indictments that may 
 be sent into the said court for trial from any other court or 
 county. 
 
 Supreme Court. 
 
 9. The Supreme Court shall consist of a chief justice 
 and eight justices. 
 
 <) 10. The State shall be divided into two districts, the 
 eastern and western; each of which will be divided into 
 four convenient circuits. And a justice of the Supreme 
 Court shall be chosen in each circuit, by the qualified 
 electors thereof, on a day specially appointed for that pur- 
 pose. The lour justices'so chosen in each district, shall be 
 dividtd in o four classes; the term of otiice of the first class 
 shall expire at the end of three years, of the second class 
 at the eni oi six. ye 'is. of the third class at the end of nine 
 years, and ol the fourth class at the end of twelve years, 
 to the eiid that the term of office of one-fourth of the said 
 justices shall expire every three years. Elections shall 
 
 be held in the proper circuits to fill any vacancy about to 
 happen, by the expiration of the term of ortice, and the 
 justice so elected shall hold his office twelve yeais, unless 
 sooner removed. In case a vacancy in the office of any of 
 the said justices shall happen, otherwise than by the ex- 
 piration of the term of office so become vacant, it shall be 
 the duty of the Governor to order a new election, to be 
 heli within six mouths after the happ niiigof such vacancy, 
 to fill the said office for the unexpired term; and in case the 
 said vacancy shall happen within two yeais of the time 
 for the expiration of such term of office the Governor 
 shall, within three months after the happening of said va- 
 cancy, appoint a justice of the said court to fill such vacan- 
 cy for the unexpired term. 
 
 (j 11. The Chief Justice shall be chosen by the Senate 
 and Assembly in joint meeting, by ballot, and shall hold 
 his office for years, unless sooner removed. 
 
 12. The Supreme Court in bane, for the eastern district, 
 shall consist of the Chief Justice and the four justices cho- 
 sen in the said district, or any three of them. And the 
 Supreme Court in bane, for the western district, shall con- 
 sist ot the Chiuf Justice and the four justices chosen in 
 the said western district or any three of tht-m. The said 
 courts respectively, shall be htld at such times and pla- 
 ces in their re.-pective districts as shall be provided by 
 law, or directed by said courts respectively, and the said 
 Chief Justice,the justices of the said districts, respectively, 
 oneormoieof them, shall hold at such times or places, 
 as shall be provided by law or ordered by the said courts 
 respectively, special terms of the said court for the hearing 
 of such motions and the transactions of such business as 
 shall be provided by the rules of court, subject to regula- 
 tion by law. 
 
 Circuits. 
 
 13. The Chief Justice or any one of the said justices 
 may hold circuits in any county ol the state for the trial 
 of all issues of fact, joined in the said Supreme Couit, or 
 which may have been sent into the said court lor trial, and 
 may preside in the court ot oyer and ternoiner and general 
 jail delivery. 
 
 ^14. The court of oyer and terminer and general jail 
 delivery in the respective counties o! the state, other than 
 city and county of New-York, shall consist of one of the 
 said justices of the supreme court and the associate judges 
 of the court of common pleas of the county, or a justice of 
 th supreme court and any two ot the justices of the peace 
 of the said county. In the city and county of New-York, 
 the said court shall consist of a justice of the supreme 
 court, and any two of the judges of the courts of common 
 pleas, in and lor said city and county. The justices of the 
 supreme court shall, respectively, be conservators of the 
 peace throughout the state. 
 
 Chancery* 
 
 15. The Court of Chancery shall consist of three Chan, 
 cellors, any of whom may hold the court. It shall have 
 appellate jurisdiction, and such original jurisdiction as 
 shall be provided b> law 
 
 1 6 The chancellors shall be chosen by the Senate and 
 Assembly in j->int meeting, by ballot, and shall hold their 
 offices respectively for years, unless sooner removed. 
 
 ^17. There shall be chosen a vice.chancellor, in and 
 for the city andcoun'y of New-York, and such numbers fo 
 assistant vice-chancellors as shall be provided for by law, 
 
 not exceeding in number, until alter the year 1855, 
 
 when the number may be increased to not exceeding , 
 
 any of whom may hold the court. 
 
 ^ IS. The president judge of the courts of common pleas, 
 except in the city and county of New York, shall be a 
 vice-chancellor; and such equity powers may be vested in 
 him as the Legislature may, by law, direct, subject to the 
 appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery. He shall 
 hold stated terms in each county in his district, for the 
 hearing of cases in equity, and the witnesses produced and 
 the documentary and other evidence shall be heard by 
 him in open court. 
 
 19. The vice-chancellor shall also hold stated terms, 
 a sucntimes and places in hi" district, as he shall, from 
 tjme to time, appoint, or as shdll be directed by law, for 
 the hearing of arguments and motions. 
 
 20. The Legislature may provide by law for the exam- 
 ination of foreign and distant witnesses, and the taking of 
 evidence conditionally, an I for the reference of any ques- 
 tion or cause, to an auditor or auditors, referee orreleie-s, 
 or master upon special application to the courts: such iu- 
 ditor, referee or masters to be named by the cou.t.or the 
 parties to the suit, subject to the approval of the court. 
 
 ^ 21. The offices of master, exception master, and exam- 
 iner in chancery ate abolished. 
 
600 
 
 Court of ^Appeals, $-c. 
 
 22. The court for the correction of errors and of ap- 
 peals, shall consist of the chief justice and the two senior 
 justices of the Supreme Court from the eastern and west- 
 ern districts of the State, respectively, of the Chancellor 
 and of eight judges to be elected. The qualified electors 
 of each circuit shall elect one of the eight judges. They 
 shall, after the first election, be divided into four classes in 
 each district. The term of office of the first class shall be 
 one year, of the second class two years, of the third class 
 three years, of the fourth class four years, to the end that 
 one-fourth of the said judges shall be annually elected, 
 and hold their offices, respectively, four years. In case of 
 a vacancy happening, a new election in the proper circuit 
 shall be held to fill such vacancy, for the unexpired term, 
 at such time, and in such manner, as shall be directed by 
 law. 
 
 23. The Legislature may provide, by law, for transfer- 
 ing to the courts of law, such powers and duties of the 
 court of chancery as may be conveniently executed and 
 performed by such courts. 
 
 b 24. There shall be elected in each county, by the quali- 
 fied electors thereof, a surrogate who shall hold his office 
 for lour years, and until his successor shall be duly quali- 
 fied. 
 
 ^ 25. The justices of the peace in office when this Consti- 
 tution takes effect, shall remain and continue in office for 
 the residue of the terms for which they were respectively 
 elected; and they shall continue to be elected in the man- 
 ner, and hold their offices for the term prescribed in the 
 present Constitution. 
 
 ^ 26. The Legislature may, after 1855, increase the num- 
 ber of the justices of the Supreme Court to any number 
 not exceeding twelve, and may divide the State into three 
 Supreme Court judicial districts, each of which districts 
 shall be divided into not less than three, and not more than 
 four circuits. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said he felt some hesitation in 
 rising to address the committee, after the elabo- 
 rate and eloquent arguments which they had just 
 heard from the gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. 
 MARVIN,) still as the subject under considera- 
 tion was of vast importance, he would venture to 
 ask permission to give as briefly as possible his 
 riews to the committee. The debate had already 
 taken a wide range, and several gentlemen had 
 felt it to be their duty to discuss the entire report 
 of the judiciary committee, although the subject 
 directly under consideration was the third sec- 
 tion, of that report. To that section Mr: N. said 
 he sh'ould confine his remarks. The proposition 
 now before the committee was to abolish the pre- 
 sent court of chancery, and to transfer its large 
 and important jurisdiction to the Supreme Court, 
 with the view that provision may ultimately be 
 made for but one form of procedure in all civil 
 causes, as well at law as in equity. This was in- 
 deed a great change ; one that should not be made 
 rashly nor without a full appreciation of its im- 
 portance and of the consequences which would 
 flow from it. Mr. N. said there was a natural 
 feeling among reflecting men that no great 
 change should ever be made except upon mature 
 deliberation. Perhaps he might venture to say 
 that there was often an unwillingness, even 
 in cases of acknowledged evils to change what 
 was known and had been long acted upon and 
 practiced, for a system wholly untried. He had 
 no disposition to quarrel with this feeling. No 
 man would more strongly deprecate than himself 
 rash and uncalled for changes. He was not one 
 of those who would tear down and break up old 
 institutions merely because they were ancient. 
 At the same time, when he thought he could see 
 clearly and distinctly in a proposed change a re- 
 moval or alleviation of present admitted evil, he 
 would not suffer himself to be embarrassed or hin- 
 dered in the work of reform by any attachment 
 
 for antiquity. Mr. N. observed that it could not 
 be denied that the present system of administer- 
 ing the jurisdiction of law and equity, in separate 
 tribunals, was productive of much uncertainty 
 and difficulty. He asked what was the great ob- 
 ject proposed in all litigation ? Was it not to 
 redress a wrong or enforce a right ? This was the 
 only and paramount object. Every thing else in 
 the progress of a cause was subordinate to and in- 
 tended to effect this great end. It was of the 
 highest importance that the course of procedure 
 should be such as would most surelyand in the sim- 
 plest manner effect this object. The administration 
 of justice cannot be made too plain. Mr. N. ap- 
 pealed to his professional brethren whether in 
 this State it was not widely different. Was it not 
 very often in many cases, a matter of real diffi- 
 culty to determine how the redress sought for 
 was to be obtained ' Has not the lawyer again 
 and again felt it to be almost impossible' to de- 
 termine with anything like certainty the proper 
 form of action and the appropriate forum to en- 
 tertain his complaint? He believed such em- 
 barrassments were of daily occurrence in the pro- 
 fession. They had to be encountered at the thresh- 
 hold of litigation and the risk had to be met at 
 the peril of a loss 'of substantial rights. Again 
 and again has the reality been sacrificed for the 
 sake of form technical, artificial, and too often 
 unmeaning form. Mr. N. said he would endeav- 
 or to show as briefly as possible in what these 
 defects in the system of procedure consisted, and 
 would in so doing, state the reasons which in- 
 duced him to advocate the union of the two 
 courts in a single tribunal. In the first place he 
 would yield to no man in respect and admiration 
 for the common law but the common law far 
 which he entertained this veneration, was 
 that law which prevailed among our Saxon an- 
 cestors, a free and simple people, before their lib- 
 erties had been destroyed by the rapacious and 
 unprincipled Norman. In the early days of the 
 common law the administration of justice was 
 eminently simple and expeditious. Almost every 
 hamlet had iis courr, and parties were enabled to 
 state their complaint and defence without regard 
 to technical jargon. A jury of their neighbors 
 chosen because they were likely to be acquainted 
 with the litigants and the merits of the contro- 
 versy were enabled to come to a decision with- 
 out the aid of the arguments of contending 
 advocates, and the whole procedure was ia 
 entire consonance with the habits and char- 
 acter of the people. But with the conquer- 
 or came the feudal system which brought 
 serfdom and despotism into all these countries 
 where it was introduced It is a well known his- 
 torical fact, however, that its lull establishment 
 was never entirely perfected in England. A peo. 
 pie who had once enjoyed the blessing of freedom 
 could not be compelled to give up all their rights, 
 and hence it is that so much of the common law 
 .vas preserved. Still the changes were great and 
 impoitant. The courts became a part of the roy. 
 .il prerogative and justice was administered though 
 the king's servile retainers. In pn gress of time 
 sprung up our forms of action, the germs of which 
 ut-re transplanted from the civil law. When 
 e established they were declared unalterable. 
 Mr. N. here adverted at some length to the histo- 
 
601 
 
 ry of several of the*e forms of action and the ne- 
 necessity which had from time to time caused 
 their invention He observed that while it 
 was the great boast, of the common law that it 
 processed a flexibility which admitted of its exten- 
 sion part passu with the increasing wants arid 
 refinement ot society its forms of procedure were 
 in a great degree fixed and unalterable. To this was 
 to be attributed in a great degree the numerous fic- 
 tions which disfigured its remedial process, aud that 
 after ail it must be admitted that its procedure 
 was in manv instances wholly incapable of render- 
 inn substantial jiwlico. It had been observed by 
 the elegant writer ot the commentaries that great 
 apologist and vindicator of the common law, as he 
 has been not inaptly termed that had the judges 
 been disposed to extend rather than narrow the 
 remedial effect of their writs, all the effectual 
 purposes of a court of equity, except a discovery, 
 might have been obtained. To their unwilling- 
 ness in this respecr to the palpable inability of 
 the common law processes to render redress in all 
 c.ises we owe the origin of our chancery juris- 
 diction. In its first creation it was not only in 
 name, but in fact, a court of equity a court not 
 acting upon pi ecedent or by "positive rules, but 
 according to its own illy-defined notions of good 
 conscience. It was the mere creature of royal 
 prerogative. It took its hue from the palace, and 
 fostered and encouraged, it soon became no mean 
 part of the judicature of England. Twin-sister 
 to the star chamber, and too often acting not in 
 furtherance of the common law, but in strict op 
 position to its rules, and in the exercise of an ar- 
 bitrary discretion, it shared in many respects with 
 that tyrannic tribunal in the odium of tne people. 
 The early chancellors were in most instances either 
 soldiers or churchmen, and the system in vogue in 
 the court, so fdr as it may be said to have been a sys- 
 tem, was founded on the unpopular models of th 
 civil and tae canon laws. There is great uncer- 
 tainty as to the period when the court of chancery 
 was fully recognized as a distinct and separate 
 tribunal for the administration of justice. It hac 
 however fully become so at the time when Lore 
 Bacon was elevated to the Chancellorship. From 
 that day its jurisdiction had been constantly on 
 the increase. The illustrious men who had then 
 presided had done much to form a complete sys 
 tern, corresponding with the increasing wants o 
 a nation advancing in civilization. Its form of pro 
 cedure was comparatively simple, and capable o 
 being applied to any imaginable case. But th 
 court had long since ceased to be a tribunal c 
 mere discretion. It administered justice ir 
 obedience to positive rules and in strict confor 
 mity with its own established precedents. Mr 
 N. said he had spoken of the technical actions o 
 the common law. He was sure he would be par 
 doned if he adverted also to the strangely incon 
 sistent system of pleading under that law, a sys 
 tem which had been justly characterized as hav 
 ing been framed upon the narrow rules and fan 
 ciful niceties of metaphysical and Norman juris 
 prudence and the logic of the schoolman. In a 
 common law pleadings the case must be state 
 either with a perilous precision and minutenes 
 or with a generality which literally gave the ac 
 versary no idea of the claim brought against him 
 There was no well founded reason for the di 
 
 nction. In the one case the pleader cannot be 
 o explicit he walks surrounded with traps and 
 it falls; and if he falls the mistake is too often 
 icurable. While on the other a party is fre- 
 uently at the trial, made the victim of a fatal 
 nd unavoidable surprize. Mr. N proceeded to 
 low that the boundary lines separating the ju- 
 sdiction of the courts of law arid chancery, 
 ad become in the progress of time greatly 
 onfused. He said there was now a vast 
 oncurrent jurisdiction, and it was in many 
 ases no easy matter to determine where, in a 
 iven case, the jurisdiction properly belonged. 
 'he courts of law had for years been assuming 
 ne' branch after another of equity law. He 
 ight instance among others that occurred to him 
 t the moment, contribution, relief of a surety, 
 nd the broad and generic action of money had 
 nd received, which was maintainable in every 
 ase where a party was in possession of money or 
 ts equivalent which ex cequo et bono belonged to 
 nother an, action which it had been avowed 
 gain and again by courts of law was a substitute 
 or a bill in equity, and should be encouraged. 
 Ir. N. also alluded to the jurisdiction in the 
 ase of sealed instruments ; the consideration of 
 vhich could never be impeached in a court of 
 aw, until in the revision of our laws in 1830 a 
 >rovision was wisely inserted enabling this to be 
 .one. This was in effect transferring at once to 
 court of law a large and important branch of 
 quity jurisdiction, and was undoubtedly a most 
 jeneficial reform. He thought it might be safely 
 aid that the present tendency of our courts of 
 aw was to administer equitable relief as far as 
 hey could without violating their settled and fix- 
 ed forms of procedure. It appeared to him plain 
 ;hat if these unyielding forms could be material - 
 y altered, so as to admit of their application to 
 all cases as well at law as in equity, the organi- 
 zation of the two systems would be a work easily 
 accomplished. He admitted it should not be done 
 rashly, but with a circumspect regard to the 
 ?vhole body of the law, and in such a manner as 
 would cause the least possible inconvenience 
 n putting into operation the new procedure. 
 But until this should be done for the reasons 
 which had just been stated, the boundary line 
 which separated the two tribunals must of neces- 
 sity grow more and more confused. Mr. N. said 
 a case had recently been stated to him by a highly 
 respectable professionalgentlernan,which illustra- 
 ed in a remarkable manner the diiliculty of deter- 
 mining whether the remedy was at law or in equi- 
 ty. It was a case where this difficulty had actually 
 amounted to a denial of justice. He would brief- 
 ly state the case to the committee. It was this 
 Two individuals having a matter in dispute agreed 
 to leave it to the decision of arbitrators. Through 
 inadvertence the submission had not been made 
 in the presence of a subscribing witness. In 
 making their award the arbitrators committed an 
 admitted clerical mistake by which the par- 
 ty in whose favor the award was made had 
 adjudged to him a much larger sum of mo- 
 ney than he was entitled to. The submission 
 had provided for the entry of a judgment in the 
 supreme court upon the award. The defendant 
 applied to that tribunal for a correction of the 
 award in respect to this admitted mistake. He 
 50 
 
602 
 
 was answered by the court that the jurisdiction 
 was in equity not at law, and the judgment was 
 accordingly entered up for the full amount. Act- 
 ing upon this decision the defendant at once filed 
 his bill in the court of chancery to correct the 
 award. When the case came before the chancel- 
 lor he decided that a court of equity had no juris- 
 diction in the matter, a court of law being in his 
 opinion fully competent to afford the required re- 
 lief. So this unfortunate individual, seeking to 
 correct a mistake about which there was not a par- 
 ticle of doubt, was turned out of both courts. 
 The committee would easily see that these pro- 
 ceedings were attended with no small expense. 
 Mr. N. said the case just alluded to ought to be 
 sufficient to produce the conviction that the in- 
 creasing confusion of the jurisdiction of the courts 
 called v loutly for reform. This was not by any 
 means *a solitary case. He believed that almost 
 every professional gentleman on the floor could 
 recall to his recollection cases in his own prac- 
 tice where similar difficulties had occurred. The 
 question now before the committee was whether 
 they would take the initiative step in the great le- 
 gal reform which was every where so loudly call- 
 ed for a reform which he admitted should be 
 made with the greatest deliberation and caution. 
 If judiciously done he felt assured that in a few 
 years the legal profession would look back upon 
 the cumbrous, artificial and expensive procedure 
 of the present day with feelings very much akin 
 to those which our travellers on railroads and 
 those who use the" lightning to communicate 
 Uieir thoughts regard the old fjsnioned stage coach- 
 es, and mail wagons of other days. For himself, 
 Mr. N. said he should rejoice to be instrumental 
 111 preparing the ground lor these great changes, 
 and he was convinced that a more noble task, or 
 one in which the interests of the community were 
 more directly involved, could not engage the at- 
 tention of the Convention. He hoped that be- 
 fore they separated, ample provision would be 
 made for the prosecution of this great work. Mr. 
 N. said that many professional genileman enter- 
 tained the idea that there was something inherent 
 in oui common law courts which rendered them 
 incapable of administering equitable relief. He 
 had endeavored to show that this difficulty, if it 
 existed, grew solely out of the limited and re- 
 stricted forms ot procedure in these tribunals, and 
 that notwithstanding this obstacle a large branch 
 of equity jurisprudence was actually admin- 
 istered in our courts of law. Mr. N. then 
 proceeded to show that the common law courts 
 had in many respects been clothed by the Statute 
 with a procedure in some respects very analagous to 
 the forms of our courts ot equity. He instanced the 
 proceedings in partition where the Legislature had 
 given their tribunals a procedure at once simple 
 arid efficacious, and which po.-sessed the p-cuhar 
 merits of the chaneery procedure. He was not 
 aware that any difficulty had been experienced in 
 proceeding under these provisions. Mr. N. also 
 referred to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court 
 in granting writs of mandamus and prohibition 
 and the practice in cases of waste and nuisance. 
 If such powers could be exercised by a common 
 law court, he saw no difficulty in their adminis- 
 tering the preventive as well as the other process 
 of the court of chancery. The gentleman from 
 
 Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN) had said that the 
 distinguishing feature of the common law courts 
 was that they enabled parties to come directly to 
 a point to single and distinct issues, and that 
 
 all that the jury had to do was to settle a fact 
 
 either to find for the plaintiff or defendant. Mr. 
 N. admitted this to be so in point of form but in 
 that respect only. True it was that single issues 
 were made up and passed upon by the jury. 
 But he would ask his honorable friend whether 
 an issue did not in every instance consist of a 
 number of varied and dependent facts all of which 
 were material to its formation. When the Jury 
 passed upon the issue, they must of necessity, 
 have passed upon the truth of all the alleged 
 facts which formed the issue. For in- 
 stance, in an action against a party as the 
 endorser of a promissory note the verdict 
 of the Jury, if for the plaintiff, is to a 
 single point that the defendant promised as 
 alleged in the declaration but in giving this 
 verdict the jury n.ive in effect found three tac'S 
 all of which were prerequisite to the defendant's 
 liability, to wit, the endorsement demand of tlie 
 maker and a proper notice of non-payment to the 
 defendant. This is stating the case in the simplest 
 manner, because every profe.ssional gentleman will 
 at once see that the determination of these facts 
 may in many instances involve an enquiry into a 
 multitude of other facts. Now how are the jury 
 instructed in regard to the facts to be passed upon 
 by them ? This office is performed by the judge, 
 who, in his charge to the jury, invariably setles 
 and determines the actual and particular issues 
 upon which the jury are to deliberate, and upon 
 all of which they must pass before thev can find 
 the formal and simple issue made by the plead- 
 ings. If the jury system should be iniroduced in 
 equity proceedings, it might be necessary to settle 
 the issues in advance, before enteiiug upon the 
 testimony, which Mr. N. thought could be easily 
 done. He would beg leave further to say to the 
 genileman trorn Chautauque county (Mr. MARVIN) 
 that no one dreamed 01 administering equity ju- 
 risprudence through a jury alone. All that was 
 intended was to submit to their determination 
 the facts of the case in the same manner as in 
 trials at common law He had also alluded 10 
 the difficulties attendant upon the administra- 
 tion ot equity jurisprudence in the common law 
 courts of Pennsylvania, and had particularly in- 
 stanced the case of specific performance, where 
 the jury were obliged to find heavy damages, to 
 be "stricken off" upon performance of the agree- 
 ment. His friend (Mr. MARVIN) had justly cha- 
 racterised this procedure as cumbrous, and the 
 relief as imperfect and unsatisfactory ; but Mr. N. 
 thought that the whole difficulty consisted in the 
 forms of procedure. Had the Legislature of Penn- 
 sylvania given the court power, upon certain facts 
 being found by the jury, to adjudge a specific per- 
 formance, he apprehended all cause of complaint 
 would be removed. Mr. N. felt he had already 
 taken up too much of the time of the committee, 
 but before concluding he desired to say a few 
 words in reply to his friend from Chautauque up- 
 on the subject of a codification of the whole body 
 of our laws. The select committee intrusted 
 with the consideration of this important subject, 
 had this morning reported a project which he 
 
603 
 
 hoped would be adopted by the convention. 
 When it should come up for consideration, Mr. 
 N. said he should advocate it with all the energy 
 and ability he possessed. At present he would 
 content himself with the single remark that the 
 friends of codification do not suppose that all ne- 
 ;ty for construction, or that all doubts and 
 ambiguities will be removed, when the law shall 
 be reduced into a simple and harmonious system. 
 While the combinations of thought ad action are 
 infinite, language is finite and imperfect. Rela- 
 - must be formed and cases must arise in which 
 ;>ecific provision will be found for in thelaws 
 but in those cases, Mr. N. said, we should not 
 be worse off' than at present. He thought if the 
 code should be prepared with that careful study 
 and deliberation which the vast importance of 
 the subject demanded, the instances for interpre- 
 tation would be infinitely less than under our 
 [invent system of unwritten and too often uncer- 
 tain rules. The law would then cease to be a 
 mystery, and would be ranked among the scien- 
 ces, where its place should be the highest, be- 
 cause its sphere was infinite in its extent, and 
 because its application affected the liberty, hap- 
 piness and welfare of society, in all its complica- 
 ted relations. 
 
 And then on motion of Mr. STRONG, the com- 
 mit.iee rose and reported progress. 
 
 And the Convention adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The Committee of the Whole, Mr. CAMBRE- 
 LKNii in the Chair, again took up the several 
 reports on 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. STRONG rose and said : as it seemed there 
 w;ix to be an occasion for every member to express 
 their opimoi. upon the judiciary reports, he should 
 occupy a few moments in giving his views upon 
 the repor r . of the majority. There was another 
 reason lor his desirintc to do so The gentleman 
 (rota G-nesee, the other day, had remarked that 
 it w.n time that something should be said by the 
 lay m j mbers. Perhaps, after hearing so many 
 spe'-cliHs from gentlemen ot the legal profession 
 and which he had listened to with a great deal of 
 interest, and with regret that so many gentlemen 
 of shining talent should disagree upon the adop. 
 tion of a plan lor a judiciaiy he might not have 
 so good an excuse for troubling the Convention, 
 but lie desired to have an opportunity of stating 
 some objections which he had to the report of I he 
 rnajdiity. He would have liked that report much 
 better h-id^tretaiiied (he county courts in gome 
 f < > wju H e had NndersTW.Cl ftom*SoT!re~g7ntTe m e n 
 of the judiciary committee, that a plan had been 
 proposed bur which could not obtain the assent of 
 that committee, lie could not agree with gentle- 
 men who said that the people had no confidence 
 in the county courts It might be becr.use he had 
 the fortune to live in a county where there was a 
 good court; where they have judges who are ca- 
 pable oi understanding their duty, and perform it 
 to the satisfaction of the people. In order to pro- 
 cure such a court and such officers, the county of 
 Monroe paid the first judge a salary of $1000, and 
 th District Attorney $1,500. And they saved 
 mon.>y in this way, as well as securing a good 
 court. The salaries of these officers are fixed by 
 
 the Board of Supervisors. It did seem to him that 
 there might have been some form devised, (and 
 such an one as would raise their standard,) by 
 which these county courts might be established. 
 But if the Convention had determined to adopt 
 the report of the majority of the judiciary com- 
 mittee, he Was willing to attempt to amend it in 
 the best manner that it might be, to make it as ac- 
 ceptable as possible to the people. There would 
 be great difficulty in getting through any other re- 
 port, he was aware, because there was so great a 
 difference among all the reports which had come 
 from the minority of the committee; and although 
 there were many things in the latter reports which 
 would be preferred to the provisions in thelorrner, 
 there would be difficulty in transferring them. 
 Had the minority, or those who disagreed with the 
 majority, got together and agreed upon some plan, 
 to which they could all give their assent, some 
 chance would be given to carry it through. But 
 he wished to comment upon some portion of the 
 report; and first he would like some amendment 
 in the seventh section, but he would not take time 
 to comment upon that, as it was not of the greatest 
 importance. He would ask, however, why it was 
 that the last clause of this section, which was not 
 found in the present Constitution, was inserted 
 here ? He found it in the Constitution of 1777, 
 and he believed that it was brought from across 
 the water ; but in 1821, when we "had made sorre 
 progress to enlightened knowledge, in liberty, and 
 in tree institutions, it was stricken out. Why it 
 was put in here, he could not account for. He 
 had no objections that the courts should have their 
 own rules and regulations so far as regards the 
 privilege of saying who shall practice in them, 
 but he had objeciioiis to making this a part of the 
 Constitution, so that it could not hereafter be at 
 tered, if the people required it to be done. He 
 would not have the people bound down in regard 
 to this matter by the iron arm of the Constitution. 
 What would it be thought of the farmers and me- 
 chanics, who should corne here and demand that 
 a law should be passed requiring that a profession- 
 al man should undergo a certain examination and 
 receive a license from an agricultural or olher 
 board, or a committee of farmers, before he was 
 allowed to engage in the business of farming or a 
 mechanical occupation ? He landed that they 
 would be laughed at. He was opposed to any rule 
 for the establishment of a superior and privileged 
 order of human beings. Such a rule was nor a 
 proper one in the laws of a free people. It was 
 engrafting that on ihe Constitution which ought 
 wot to be engrafted on the Constitution of a free 
 people. This, too, was a matter of legislation. If 
 there was to be such a rule, it should not be 
 placed in the Constitution, to remain unchanged 
 until another Convention should be called. 
 
 He would pass, however, to the 10th section. 
 This section provides that surrogates shall be 
 elected for four years, receive a fixed salary, and 
 shall not receive other fees or compensation. 
 Whichever principle should be settled in Con- 
 vention whether this officer was to be paid a 
 salary by the people, and restricted from receiv- 
 ing fees, or was to receive his pay by fees was of 
 too little consequence for an argument. But he 
 was opposed to one of the provisions of the sec- 
 tion. If the surrogates were to be salaried of- 
 
604 
 
 ,ficers, (and he thought they should be) their sa- 
 ylaries ought to be under the control of the Board 
 ; of Supervisors, and not left to be fixed by the Le- 
 I gislature. He had prepared an amendment or 
 s substitute for the section, which he would prefer, 
 as follows : 
 
 ' Surrogates shall be elected for four years. They 
 shall be compensated by salaries to be fixed by the Board 
 of Supervisors of their respective counties, and paid out of 
 the county treasury, and all fees of office received by them 
 ghall be paid into the county treasury." 
 
 He had his reasons for preferring a section like 
 that, which he would give. How, he asked, 
 could the Legislature determine this question of 
 salary wisely, if a stated salary was to be fixed, 
 when, as was well known, the counties varied 
 rery greatly in the extent and in the amount of 
 business which w r ould fall upon the Surrogate ? 
 Double the business would be found in one county, 
 that would exist in another, and consequently the 
 salary given in one would not be sufficient to com- 
 pensate the officer in another. He remembered 
 that it was once attempted by the Legislature to 
 fix the salary of the county clerks, and they met 
 with precisely this difficulty, and were obliged to 
 give up the scheme. The boards of supervisors, 
 however, would know how to fix this little mat- 
 terthey were as safe a body as any to which this 
 power may be given and would always award a 
 liberal compensation to their own county officer. 
 He went from this section to section 12. This, 
 he remarked, was the only section in the report 
 which was a twin. The first section 12 provides 
 that the justices of the Supreme Court shall be 
 nominated by the Governor and appointed by the 
 consent of the Senate ; and then came another sec- 
 tion 12, (with the little word " or" between the 
 two,) which provides for the election of these jus- 
 tices. He would like to inquire the reason of 
 there being two sections reported upon the same 
 subject of an entirely opposite character? Why 
 t.iey had these two sections thus reported, he 
 could not account for. There were, he did not 
 doubt, good reasons for it, and he would like to 
 know them. It might be, that the committee 
 were at a loss to know which would be most con- 
 sonant with the views of a majority of the Con 
 vention, or perhaps they desired to suit both sides 
 those who favored their appointment, and they 
 who upheld the elective system. They were pro- 
 bably not far out of the way if they supposed there 
 was a decided division in the sentiment of the 
 Convention on this question. In his own opin- 
 ion, the first of these twin sections should be 
 stricken out. It had nothing to do there. The 
 People of this state had not demanded such a pro- 
 vision at our hands. The people of this state So 
 not expect this Constitution is to have that pro- 
 vision inserted in it. They had no desire for the 
 adoption of such a principle, when they called 
 this Convention together. On the contrary, if 
 any question was distinctly understood and settled 
 by the people of all parties, it was that the elec- 
 tive princigle^sliould be made t6~apply"ro~all the 
 State officers. All ^p^ti^inJii?. county expected 
 that the people were to elect all the Judges. The 
 people have called 1'or it-; and their mandate has 
 gone forth to this Convention that they will have 
 that principle engrafted in the Constitution. He 
 had no hesitation in pronouncing it a libel upon 
 the people, to say that they were not fully com- 
 
 petent to elect every one qf their judges, and the 
 people had asked for the privilege of doing so, 
 and had demanded it too. with a loud voice. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : How long would you elect them 
 for ? 
 
 Mr. STRONG : That is not so much matter. 
 But he was opposed m any way, shape, sense, 
 or manner, except by the people. The next sec- 
 lion he would allude to, and for the reason that he 
 was content to take this report with such neces- 
 sary amendments as he could reasonably hope to 
 have engrafted upon it, and leave the people to 
 obtain the remainder when they could have an 
 opportunity of affecting it. It he could obtain 
 such modifications in it as would meet the most 
 earnest wishes of the people, and at the same time 
 get gentlemen here to accept of teriiis which 
 would place them in a middle ground, he would be 
 satisfied with that. To effect this he was willing 
 to give up some things which he deemed desirable, 
 He would pass over them to the 15th section. So 
 far as this section had gone it was very well. It 
 provides that the people shall continue to elect 
 their justices of the peace, their term of office to 
 be four years, and their number and classification 
 to be regulated by law. He had a few words to 
 say in regard to the number of these justices. 
 Those two words "the number" gave great im- 
 portance, in his mind, to the section. Without 
 those j^wo words, he should object to the section. 
 The time might come, he supposed, when in many 
 of the towns it would be quite unnecessary to 
 have four justices of the peace. In some towns, 
 one justice was all that was required to do the 
 business, and in most of them, two were all that 
 the people needed. He had often heard it said, 
 and it was a good argument, that if the business 
 of a town was divided among four justices it 
 would be good for nothing to either. And in 
 consequence of this, it was found impossible to 
 procure as good talent in these local offices as they 
 were worthy of. If you divide the duty up so 
 much in these towns, you never can get proper 
 men to fill these offices. Reduce the number, and 
 you may get proper men ; and justice may be pro- 
 perly administered. These officers were often 
 found going begging in Western New- York. If 
 the number were lessened, and better men retain- 
 ed, by reason of better inducements, the charac- 
 ter of the office would -be- improved, its dignity 
 would be increased, and ther,.would be a better 
 administration of j ustice. He was in favor, tfeere- 
 fore of giving the Legislature power to so regu- 
 late this matter that the people might determine 
 in the several towns at their town meetings, how 
 many justices they would elect. Every four years 
 they could fix the number according to their 
 wants and to the amount of business in the town. 
 So far as the section went, then, as he had before 
 said, he was willing to agree to it, but the diffi- 
 culty was that it did not go far enough. He had 
 therefore prepared an amendment to carry out his 
 views, which was to add to the section as it stood 
 the following provision : 
 
 Justices of the Peace shall have original jurisdiction to 
 the amount of two hundred and fifty dollars, and exclusive 
 jurisdiction for one hundred dollars. Laws shall be pass- 
 ed to abolish appeals and certioraris, as now authorized, 
 from courts of Justices of the Peace, and lor further trial 
 and tinal decision in such ca-es in the same town where 
 the first trial was had, or in an adjoining town. 
 
605 
 
 With this addition it would be a very nice sort 
 of a section. The jurisdiction of these courts 
 now reached to ']00, but it was conclusive only 
 "iO. He might be mistaken in this, as it wa> 
 some time since he had practised even in just ices 
 courts. He was no lawyer ; and so if he did not 
 say it right, why professional gentlemen who 
 heard him could correct him. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : About as near right as could be 
 expected. 
 
 Mr. STRONG: The gentleman from Orange, 
 (Mr. BROWN) says about as near right as can be 
 expected from a farmer. 
 
 Mr. BROWN: No, no; I did not say from a 
 farmer; you put that in. 
 
 Mr. STRONG : But he would ask why there 
 should not be allowed to these courts exclusive 
 jurisdiction in suits to the amount of $100. If 
 gentlemen would show any reason why this 
 should not be allowed, he would not make objec 
 tion. Application had been made to the legisla- 
 ture, in previous years, to extenHThe jurisdiction 
 so far as $100; and in 184U, R'ad it not been for 
 the strong and bitter opposition of gentlemen of 
 the legal profession against it, such'a bill would 
 have prevailed. But the friends of that bill, fear- 
 ing to jeopard its passage by asking so much, 
 compromised at $50. Had they known their 
 strength, they might have extended it to $500. 
 It was his belief, at that time, and he was still 
 firm in that belief, that when the people demand- 
 ed a reform they will eventually accomplish it. 
 He would then take all he could get, and trust 
 the people to secure the rest afterwards. So far 
 as his knowledge went and he did not have a 
 very great acquaintance with law yet heliad a 
 faint knowledge oTth'e practice in justices' courts 
 a great share of business in the country goes in- 
 to the justices' courts. The plaintiff now can sue 
 in a justices' court over $50; but yet in practice 
 it is not so. This shows that the people approve 
 of them, and they also will sanction, and do 
 demand, that their jurisdiction shall be extended. 
 The question arises why these courts should not 
 have origin- 1 jurisdiction in $250? He had yet 
 to learn why a note of $250 could not as well "be 
 collected in a justice's court, as in a county court? 
 and if gentlemen could give any good reason 
 against it, he would listen to them with a good 
 deal of pleasure. Why should not a note be col- 
 lected in a justices' court, where all the costs of 
 the suit would be five dollars, unless they have 
 foreign witnesses, rather than carry it to a county 
 court, where a bill of costs will swell up large 
 enough to swallow up the judgment? It might 
 be answered that these courts were not compe- 
 tent that they had not good juries. Then why 
 may not the Legislature pass an act providing for 
 as good persons in justices' courts, as well as 
 courts of Record ? When the farmer had a cause 
 to be tried, he would always prefer to select a ju- 
 ry from amoug_those of his own, class, as they 
 could best appreciate the case. Your men in the 
 country do not want professional men as jurors to 
 settle a dispute. And even when a man is to be 
 tried for his life, or for a criminal offence, he 
 looks upon the men who are presented for the 
 jury box, and when his eye rests upon a man in 
 the farmer's garb, he says " let him pass." They 
 are always willing to trust their case with such 
 
 men. People of all classes prefer to have their 
 matters in dispute settled by men who labor for 
 a living mechanics as well as farmers and me- 
 chanics have interests inseparably connected with 
 the agriculturists, for farmers and mechanics 
 make the very best of jurors. There is not a 
 town in the State where there would not at all 
 times be found plenty of good men to form a jury. 
 He had often seen far better jurors in justices' j 
 courts than he had ever seen in courts of Record. . 
 And to secure this, let there be a list filed with 
 the town clerk of such persons as were liable and 
 competent to perform the duty, and who could be 
 at hand at all times. Thus, the objections to this 
 proposition were all answered; and he was 
 obliged to anticipate gentlemen in what their ob- 
 jections probably would be. It might be said 
 that a suit brought by a man living at a distance, 
 in a justice's court, the witnesses would have to 
 be transported from a great distance. It was true 
 that in a suit for $100, it would be necessary to 
 do so, and it would be right that it should be done. 
 But the suitor would still have a right to com- 
 mence his cause in a court of record, if he pre- 
 ferred to do so; he was not deprived of the privi- 
 lege of so doing. If a party from New York 
 brings a suit in the country, there arises what 
 is called the race for witnesses, as it is called, 
 the strife to see who can bring the greatest num- 
 ber of witnesses for his own side, Thus the same 
 evil complained of is not remedied by having a 
 suit in the county courts. Parties are not cut off 
 from choosing between the (wo, when the demand 
 is over the amount of $100. He knew there were 
 many members of this Convention who were anx. 
 ions to have conclusive jurisdiction up to $250 
 given to justices' courts; but they prefer not to 
 present a plan, seeing as they already do the dif. 
 ficulty which there exists in gentlemen, who oc- 
 cupy so different opinions upon other questions, 
 finding a medium where they could come togeth- 
 er upon a middle ground; but if they will meet us 
 laymen on a proper middle ground, they will lind 
 no difficulty in our coming over to meet them 
 For his own part, he was desirous to abolish the 
 present system of appeals. If gentlemen asked 
 whv, he answered, that it was a system under 
 which the people had groaned for years and years. 
 The Legislature had been applied to for relief, 
 but in vain. And every thing having failed elee- 
 where, the people demand of this Convention to 
 remedy UnltrraMer. The system of appeals is 
 that which the people have again and again so 
 loudly complained of, and all their denw;<is and 
 resolutions speak in volumes to us and in language 
 not to be mistaken. Here is the place that, the 
 people have called on and to, in tones of thunder; 
 and for one, he was not disposed to disivtiard their 
 voice. They ask us to make for them a system 
 by which they shall not be cheated out of or 
 lawed out of, if he might say so, of the hard 
 earnings of years of toil, by carrying up a pei- 
 y suit from county court to circuit court, then 
 o the supreme court, and then to the Chan- 
 cellor's court, and then to the court whero 
 hey commit all kinds of errors; and when 
 le gets through these, he is a beggar a pau->^ 
 >er. First, then, let this odn.ns system of ap. 
 leals be swept from the statute books ; then place 
 D the Constitution a provision which shall com- 
 
606 
 
 pel the Legislature to make the justices' courts 
 iwhat they should he. He would make this duty 
 imperative upon the Legislature, and therefore he 
 had used in his amendment the word shall, so 
 that they could have no opportunity to dodge 
 round the plain provisions of the Constitution. 
 The Legislature should fix the place of the defi- 
 nite or conclusive trial in or near the place where 
 the party lives. When this command should be 
 given and obeyed, there would be done what the 
 people had asked for years to have accomplished. 
 In further anticipating the objections of gentle- 
 men, he supposed it might be asked what he pro- 
 posed to establish in lieu of the present system of 
 appeals ? He answered by referring to his amend- 
 ment, wherein he provided that the legislature 
 jjshall pass laws to abolish the present system, and 
 fprovide for the final trial and final decision of suits 
 for $250 in the same town where brought, or in 
 'an adjoining town, where there was no just cause 
 for carrying the cause up. He was well aware 
 that this system would meet the decided disap- 
 probation of a large class of the members of the 
 Convention, and there need be no doubt as to who 
 composed that class. But he could say that by 
 following out his suggestions, an important prin- 
 ciple would be established, and that one for 
 which the people had loudly called. The old 
 system, against which he had spoken, had never 
 had any other effect than to take money from the 
 pockets of laboring men. A party wishing to 
 appeal a case, has merely to make his affidavit 
 and present it to the judge for his sanction. 
 And he had asked, the other day, in the presence 
 of several legal gentlemen, if they had ever 
 known a case where a judge had refused to grant 
 an appeal. But one gentleman answered, and he 
 had known of but a single instance. He had ne- 
 ver known an instance where the judge refused 
 to grant an appeal, for it was a very simple and 
 very quick way of doing business. The party 
 takes the papers upon which he founds his ap- 
 plication to the judge, who sometimes looks at 
 the inside of them, and sometimes not, just as he 
 chooses, and writes something on the back of it 
 in this way, " This appeal allowed ;" and while 
 with one hand he reaches back the papers, he 
 reaches out the other to receive the dollar. If 
 that was not a shaving machine, he did not know, 
 what might be called one. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : Only 50 cents. 
 
 Mr. STRONG : If this was so, then he was 
 sure the judge never took the trouble to examine 
 the case or read the documents. The party goes 
 back to the justice before whom the case was 
 tried, to whom must be paid two dollars. A gen- 
 tleman corrects me again and says only 75 cents. 
 Well, it made no difference as to the amount of 
 the fee ; he desired to explain the process. The 
 justice for this fee makes out a statement of the 
 testimony, with a history of the trial before him, 
 which is sent up with the suit to the county 
 court, and the whole neighborhood is summon- 
 ed, and sometimes kept there the whole term 
 of the court. Here the case is argued by 
 legal gentlemen, and a decision is rendered by 
 the judge, either confirming or reversing the de- 
 cision given by the justice. And this makes new 
 costs. In some instances, the amount iii contro- 
 versy is not more than six cents, and he knew of 
 
 a case in which it was but one cent. After this 
 decision is obtained, one party or the other believes 
 that injustice has not been done them, and they 
 appeal again from one court to another up to the 
 court of last resort. It is that there may be some 
 remedy for this crying evil, which is eating up 
 their substance, that the people now demand an 
 extension ot the jurisdiction of their own jus- 
 tices' courts. There are few demands for more 
 than $250 and such matters ought to be decided 
 in the same town where they arise, or at least 
 not be carried farther than to an adjoining town. 
 To effect this he would have provisions so sim- 
 ple and plain that it would not be necessary to 
 employ counsel. In Ohio, where he resided, 
 some time since, they had a very simple method 
 of making appeals. All that was necessary was 
 to take your papers to the justice, and get some 
 responsible person as your bail, and apply for an 
 appeal of the case. The justice examines the 
 papers, and ascertains that the bail is good, and 
 then writes on his docket, " This case, appealed 
 to the court of common pleas," entering the name 
 of the bail, and all the fee charged is one shil- 
 ling. He had appealed 5 cases in this way, in 
 all on them he had only paid a shilling for each 
 case. Gentleman will perhaps complain that this 
 furnishes no sufficient security for cost. If a law 
 was passed making the security satisfactory, and its 
 requisitions were complied with, this objection 
 would not certainly be valid. "When the requisi- 
 tion is complied with, was not that as strong as a 
 bond. The only difference would then be in the 
 amount of the fees paid. He would have the j us- 
 tice make out a statement of the case,and the testi- 
 mony which should be carried to the county judge, 
 who should examine the case, and if the judgment, 
 was right, in his opinion, he should confirm it ; 
 and if an error had been made, he should point 
 out wherein the error consisted, and send back 
 the cause to be re-tried, either in the same town 
 or in one adjoining. He would say the adjoin- 
 ing town because there may be an undue excite- 
 ment in one town arising from different causes. 
 If a party should be sued by an individual from 
 another town, there was sometimes a desire on 
 the part of the people in the latter to shield their 
 own townsman in the suit, even against the 
 equity of the case ; and by having the right to 
 carry his suit to another town, an impartial trial 
 ^might be obtained. 
 
 The legislature should provide for making these 
 justices' courts better tribunals than they now 
 are. In the second trial of a case let there be 
 *three justices associated, or an arrangement by 
 which a county judge can go into the towns at 
 stated times, and, associated with three of the jus- 
 tices, hold courts for trying up all these minor 
 causes which exist. Would not this be a tribunal 
 as capable of settling all cases to the amount of 
 $250 as well as a county court could do it ? And 
 then the everlasting and terrible system of ap- 
 peals would be got rid of which are so ruinous 
 and which do no nobody any good, except those 
 who fob the fees. It was a court near their own 
 homes, which they could attend with little ex- 
 pense and loss of time, and where witnesses and 
 jurors could be got near their own doors, that the 
 people asked for, and were anxious to obtain, and 
 where they can all go home at night. And here 
 
607 
 
 you have the relief that the people who have been 
 suffering for years, have so loudly called for, who 
 can oppose this ? He sincerely believed this Con- 
 vention were prepared to grant this request. He 
 could see no reasonable objection to such a 
 scheme, and he was prepared to believe thac the 
 gentlemen of the le^al profession in this body had 
 too much honor to be influenced by personal con- 
 siderations in this matter: they would not oppose 
 this valuable reform for the sake of keeping up 
 their fees. He could not say this of all the pro- 
 fession, however. With a few amendments, such 
 as he had indicated, he was prepared to subscribe 
 to the report of the majority of the committee. 
 And why cannot the laymen ? Why cannot the 
 appeals of the bleeding country induce the law- 
 yers to meet them on this matter. There was one 
 more consideration which he desired to urge, and 
 that was,thatby esMjlisMog- these j ustices' courts 
 with an enlarged jurisdictipn^.a.^r.eaLamouat of 
 : the business of eoujrts of record would be taken 
 down in them, and thus relieve them of a portion 
 of that which blocked up those courts. It would 
 provide a cheap remedy for the farmer or me- 
 chanic, to settle their difficulties near home, by 
 which an untold expense would be saved, which 
 the people have been paying for years and years. 
 Men of fortune, merchants, jobbers, speculators 
 and brokers might have their gigantic and ex- 
 pensive courts, to try their large causes, in which 
 their thousands are at stake, but the laboring peo- 
 ple did not need them. They ask this favor of 
 the convention, that their rights may be looked 
 after as well as others. This voice came from the 
 bone and sinew of the country. The men who 
 raise your bread who till the ground, who ho- 
 nestly labor for a livelihood ! And the latter class 
 of men were those to whom all shoved defer. 
 Without them our country could rtbt exist. 
 Without their labor on their farms and in their 
 workshops, fine gentlemen might starve and die 
 with their silken purses full of shining gold, and 
 their pockets crammed with bank notes. And 
 these are the men who in time of war defend the 
 soil. They and their sons in time of war front 
 their breasts to the pointed steel, and bleed and 
 die for the liberties and honor of the country. 
 He could say to this convention, that by conced- 
 ing to them their demand in this respect, by es- 
 tablishing even but one court upon the plan he 
 (Mr. S.) had here proposed, they would save to 
 those men, in a few years, more than all the cost 
 of this convention. It would be an act of justice 
 which would render the memory of this conven- 
 tion, and those who established for the working- 
 men this great remedy, sacred and honorable 
 they will have done a deed that shall be an eter- 
 nal fountain of honor and glory to us and to the 
 State long after the present generation have 
 ceased to exist, and when all the actors in this 
 body are laid down in their silent narrow homes. 
 Mr. SWACKHAlVJER was anxious thdt some 
 member, other thanot the legal profession, would 
 liave pit-ceded him in (he discussion ot (he nio- 
 m.-iuoui question under consideration, but as this 
 was the 4th day ot the debate and no laymen, as 
 they were temied here, had ventured to break 
 ground on thi.s my^tetious subject, it was left 
 lor him, without the aid of the ministers or high 
 priests of the law, to look beyond the veil which 
 
 at the earliest period of our history sct-rns to have 
 been placed between the people and the adminis- 
 tration of their laws. It was true that the 
 gentleman troni Monroe (Mr. STRONG) had 
 addressed the committee but even he was 
 quasi lawyer. He was aware that the fee- 
 hie attempt he was about making to investi- 
 gate this matter would be criticised by the legal 
 profession, and every word that fell ir>m him 
 would be placed in the most unfavorable light by 
 the advocates of the old decaying judiciary sys- 
 tem. He also felt his inability to contend with 
 able gentlemen, educated in the science of the 
 law. He wished it distinctly understood, in ad- 
 vance, that whatever allusion he might make to 
 members of the bar, would riot be in feelings of 
 unkindness towarus any gentleman, or with the 
 view of drawing a distinction between persons of 
 different occupations in that Convention. He 
 was proud to admit that many of the greatest 
 siatesrnen and purest patriots of the pasi and pres- 
 ent age had arisen from amongst them. Besides, 
 it was but fair to suppose that thev were ac- 
 tuated by the highest motives, for thcy'in common 
 with other members of this Convention, would 
 henceforth become a part of their country's history. 
 That every act, every speech and every vote given 
 here would receive the severest scrutiny, not 
 only of the present but of future generations. 
 He felt thankful to the judiciary committee, for 
 the reports they had laid before the Convention. 
 Much had been said against them, yet it was his 
 opinion that either of them, if adopted, would 
 prevefar superior to the existing system. While 
 he conceded this, he was compelled to dissent 
 from some of the conclusions to which the com- 
 mittee had arrived. He regretted this the more 
 from the fact that he considered the gentleman 
 who presided over that (Mr. RUGGLES) commit- 
 tee, one of the purest men and most able jurist 
 in this country his associates were also men of 
 great ability. It was under such feelings that he 
 was half inclined to doubt the correctness of his 
 own views, and yield to the conclusions of those 
 of more experience. As it was decided that the 
 merits of the whole question was under consid- 
 eration, he had no apology for not confining his 
 remarks, entirely to his amendment ; nor for fol- 
 lowing other gentlemen in the path they had 
 marked out. The advocate from Ontario" (Mr. 
 WORDEN) opened the discussion in favor of re- 
 taining something in the new Constitution to per- 
 petuate the memory of the deceased court of 
 chancery, and when the gentleman from Genesee 
 (Mr. RICHMOND) merely intimated his objections, 
 on the ground he (Mr. S.) presumed that its 
 character for equity did not stand sufficiently 
 high, while living, to entitle it to so favorable 
 remembrance, now that it was departing this life, 
 he was sneeringiy asked " what could he know 
 about it ? he had never studied law." Next we 
 find the able advocate on the same side, from 
 Columbia (Mr. JORDAN,) contending for at least 
 a small remnant of this glorious institution. 
 This gentleman alluded to some remarks submit- 
 ted by him (Mr. S.) the other day, on another 
 part of the constitution, when he (Mr. S.) ex- 
 pressed a desire to see it made as concise and in- 
 telligible as possible. He (Mr. J.) said that he 
 (Mr. S.) presumed to think that our laws could 
 
608 
 
 be contained in a little book not larger than an 
 Almanac. " He thinks he (Mr. S.) could not 
 have considered the subject it must be an able 
 yankee who could read and understand the science 
 of law in one day. He further said that he would 
 appoint him (Mr. S.) to codify the laws." He 
 did not remember making the remark attributed 
 to him, but he would now say that he knew 
 of no better comparison in one respect 
 for lie would feel about as secure in tiu*ting his 
 property to the fulfilment of a prognostication in 
 an American Almanac, as he would in the result 
 of a suit in the court of chancery, no matter how 
 just his claim, or how plain his case. There 
 would be this advantage in the first game of ha- 
 zard, you would be certain to know the result 
 within a year, which in the other case it would 
 be necessary to have your life insured if you ex- 
 pected to live long enough to get a decision. 
 With reference to his " nomination as a cornrnis 
 sioner to codify the laws," he begged to decline 
 the honor, lor he had no idea that the appoint- 
 ment would be confirmed, especially if it had to 
 be 'acted upon by the legal profession, for it was 
 evident that the gentleman was of the opinion 
 that all knowledge and learning was confined with- 
 in its limits. Then again, it was questionable 
 whether the appointment would stand law, under 
 his (Mr. JORDAN'S) judiciary system, as some 
 learned lawyer might raise the question, whether 
 it was made under the rules ot law or equity, it hav- 
 ing been repeatedly admitted here that cases have 
 been carried up through four or five courts, at an ex- 
 pense of thousands of dollars, in order that the con- 
 centrated wisdom of the judicial force of this State 
 might determine where law ends and equity be- 
 gins. He found another able advocate for this con- 
 demned remnant of kingly power and of the civil 
 law, n the gentleman from Allegany,(Mr.ANGEL,.) 
 He admits tnat we have been " progressing in ju- 
 dicial darkness ever since the adoption of the pre- 
 sent Constitution ;" yet he sighs" for fear this 
 precious " institution" will be /abolished, an<i is 
 "alarmed" at the thought of blending both sys- 
 tem? into one; and as though his apprehensions 
 were founded in the expectation that the " inno- 
 vation" would lead to barbarism, he informs us 
 that " under the civil law it was once the practice 
 tor creditors to dissect up debtors and distribute 
 their bones amongst them." Seneca tells us of a 
 powerful prince, who lived about the same period 
 of the world, that was in the habit of ordering his 
 most prominent subjects to place their sons in such 
 an attitude as that their hearts might be used as 
 targets. And in one instance, while the boy was 
 weltering in his own blood, he required his father 
 to cut out his heart, that he might see how near 
 he had hit the mark. The same prince used to 
 amuse himself by inviting his neighbors tor feasts, 
 at which he would furnish them with a variety ot 
 dishes, and alter they had eaten, would intorm 
 them that they had been dining on their own 
 children. The same monster kept a large num- 
 ber ot fish ponds, for the pleasure of feeding them 
 with live subjects. Perhaps the gentleman would 
 contend that the institution of a code here would 
 bring about similar resul.s. It would be about as 
 logical a mode of treating the subject. But the 
 analogy was not fair, nor the. reasoning jusr. He 
 also thinks the non-imprisonment law and the ex- 
 
 emption act have occasioned litigation. Here Mr. 
 S. entirely differed with hisfriend. That humane 
 laws founded on just principles could increase 
 evils existing in society, could not be demonstra- 
 ted by fads. He fui ther says he can propose a 
 plan fqr legislation by which many of the evils of 
 our judiciary system might be remedied. Procras- 
 tination had always been the enemy of reform, and 
 this was the way its opponents had always talked. 
 But gentlemen might as well make up their minds 
 to meet the question now, for no chance would 
 be left by which they could evade it. Next in 
 order was the gentleman from Chautauque, (Mr. 
 MARVIN,) and he hoped the gentleman was 
 in his seat. It would be recollected that he (Mr. 
 S.) made some remarks in answer to a speech 
 of his on a former occasion, and that no notice 
 was taken of them by him (Mr. M.) until several 
 days after, and that, too, during his (Mr. S.) ab- 
 sence, although he (Mr. M.) was in this room at 
 the time they were made. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN : Does the gentleman pretend 
 to say that I heard his remarks as published, on 
 the occasion alluded to ? 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER : I do say the gentle- 
 man admits in his explanation that he heard a 
 part of them, and if he did not hear them all, it 
 was his own fault, as the gentleman was in the 
 house the whole time, his (Mr. S.) remarks oc- 
 cupying only about ten minutes. But it was his 
 wish to do every gentleman justice, and if he had 
 misconceived the gentleman, he was glad to be 
 corrected. He would, however, prefer that 
 it should have been done while he was present. 
 The gentleman thought that some plans he had 
 seen would do very well where justice was bought 
 and sold. Does he allude to the amendment now 
 before the Convention ? 
 
 Mr. MARVIN : I do not ; I referred to plans 
 I have seen in the newspapers. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER apprehended that no 
 such system could obtain here, and for that rea* 
 son he could not see the force or application of 
 the gentleman's remarks to any plan submitted to 
 the Convention. He (Mr. M.) was pleased with 
 the remark of Mr. Van Buren, who said while a 
 member of the Convention of 1S21, that they 
 ought not to destroy, but to amend and improve. 
 This was very well, but with the highest possible 
 respect for the great man referred to, and his patri- 
 otic associates in that venerated body, he must be 
 permitted to say that our judiciary system had been 
 amended, or rather mended, in the manner con- 
 demned by the purest law giver known in history. 
 Which wa^ that " no man putteth a piece of new 
 cloth into an old garment : for that which is put in 
 to fill it up, taketh from the garment, and the 
 rent is made worse." So it was with the present 
 judiciary system, it was " patched" by that Cifti- 
 vention in the manner mentioned, and the truth 
 was that it had been continually growing worse. 
 The same gentleman informs us " that in coun- 
 tries where the civil law prevails that it requires 
 several years to get a decision." Under our system 
 it takes a quarter of a century, and requires the 
 expenditure of a fortune to arrive at a result in 
 our courts of law and equity. He illustrates his 
 opinion that our laws are necessarily ambiguous 
 and difficult to be understood ; by a conversation 
 u hich he had had with a Baptist friend, on the 
 
609 
 
 great variety of opinions amongst the various re- 
 is denominations. He did not consider the 
 illustration a very fortunate one, for while Chris- 
 tians differed in regard to questions of minor im- 
 portance, all acknowledged the moral obligations 
 resting upon every member of society, and knew 
 that any violation of the divine law would receive 
 merited punishment, while under our human law 
 the guilty go free, and tl 
 for that redress which 
 
 ressed seek in vain 
 well organized society 
 
 owes to its most humble members. There was an- 
 other branch of the gentleman's argument that he 
 would notice previous to concluding his remarks. 
 Before proceeding to pull down, to use the ap- 
 pellation now applied to judicial reform, he 
 would say that he entertained as high respect 
 and as much veneration for time honored institu- 
 tions as any gentleman. But false systems, and 
 aristocratic establishments could find no favor 
 with him, even though they were covered over 
 with the dust of antiquity, and were coeval with 
 the history of man. He considered thejsourt of 
 chancery an institutiga_a this characterTancT for 
 this reason it ought to be abolished. It was a 
 compound of aristocracy and despotism. It had 
 its origin from "be1rnrd~tfre~ " "thrune of kings it 
 had been insiduously grasping power and usurp- 
 ing authority unknown to any other legal tribu- 
 nal, until millions of property and the rights and 
 happiness of thousands of our citizens depended 
 on the dicta of this one man power. It had 
 been his fortune to call public attention to this 
 dangerous, and he had almost said lawless insti- 
 tution, years ago. But then it was in the height 
 of its power and zenith of its glory. During the 
 legislative session of 1842, he took the responsibi- 
 lity of submitting a resolution requesting the ju- 
 diciary committee to enquire into the expediency 
 of so amending the constitution as to dispense 
 with this court. But his proposition was rejected 
 by the Assembly without ceremony, and sneer- 
 ingly hooted out of the house by members of the 
 legal profession. There was an appeal taken 
 only one appeal and that was from the legisla- 
 ture and lawyers to the people. The result was 
 known to every member of this State the peo- 
 ple, in his judgment, had decided against that and 
 other similar abuses; and in conformity with that 
 will, from which there was no appeal, he found 
 the majority of the judiciary committee reporting 
 in favor of its condemnation, and many of the most 
 able members of the legal profession sustaining 
 
 man gave him a cause in Chancery. This simple 
 hearted young man went honestly to work and 
 settled the matter in a few weeks, and called on 
 the experienced father for more business. " Fath- 
 er, said he, can you give me another suit to try ?" 
 The old gentleman, with great surprise, answer- 
 ed, " I do not know, my son, what have you done 
 with the other ?" His reply was, " I settled that 
 some time ago." Oh, my son, said the astonished 
 Lawyer, my grandfather made a fortune out of that 
 cause, my father increased it I have added still 
 more to it, and I intended to leave it as a le- 
 acy for you. You have not finished your legal 
 education, you are not a proficient lawyer, and I 
 cannot give you any more Chancery business." 
 He knew that this might be considered by some 
 as extravagant, but it was a difficult matter to give 
 an adequate idea of the folly and iniquity of this 
 system. Why, it was but yesterday that the gen- 
 tleman from Oneida, (Mr. KIB.KLAND) informed 
 us of a cause of which he had charge that required 
 7000 folios to contain the evidence,and the charges 
 of the examination amounted to $3000. Three 
 thousand dollars, and all the poor woman finally 
 recovered was $1000. Other cases without num- 
 ber could be cited, but it was not necessary. He 
 had listened attentively to the speeches of the 
 friends and opponents of this Court, and he had 
 not heard a single argument, or even sentiment, 
 to recommend it to his favor. It had not been 
 shown that it possessed one redeeming quality, 
 
 and the only defence now left was 
 should be respected for its age. 
 
 that it 
 It was 
 
 the same side of this question, 
 how human ingenuity could 
 pun lo defeat justice than 
 
 He di 1 not know 
 devise a. better 
 our present ju- 
 
 diciarv system. It was generally admitted that 
 if you get a suit in chancery rT7s~a~ciiance wheih. 
 er it will ever he got out "There were other ob- 
 jections to Uus courr. It was enormously expen- 
 aivb Jhejymense attending suns in chancery were 
 beyond estimation. He could not better illustrate 
 the expensiveness and delay than by^an anec- 
 dote oi a triend, told to him onboard a terry-boat. 
 It seems that a certaia able lawyer had united 
 his daughter in matrimony to a young gentleman 
 who w,.-. .'.Rented in the law and qualified for his 
 profession, except in one essential point which 
 the sequel would show. Havin<r comnleted his 
 
 Having completed his 
 
 studies and entered upon the duties of a husband, 
 he asked his father for a job. The old gentle- 
 
 scarcely necessary for him to remind the Con- 
 vention of the vast amount of private proper- 
 ty or money now under the control of the chan- 
 cellor and his subordinates. Three millions had 
 been acknowledged by that officer besides other 
 large amounts in a trust company for safekeep- 
 ing not directly under his control. One of the 
 friends of this court had admitted to him that he 
 had no doubt but that there was at least Jive (5) 
 | millions of property distributed about in the same 
 manner. This secret fund had become so abun- 
 dant that a large sum was appropriated to embel- 
 lish the chancellor's library. Several efforts had 
 been made by the legislature to procure light on 
 this unseen part of this establishment, but they 
 were always defeated by the emissaries of this 
 dangerous court. The rattling amongst the dry 
 bones the other day occasioned by offering a sim- 
 ple resolution of enquiry would long be remem- 
 bered by those then present. Why so much ef- 
 fort to keep the affairs of this court veiled in 
 darkness if all was right ? Why fear the light 
 unless something is wrong ? The people had be- 
 come justly alarmed, and nothing short of a tho- 
 rough exposition of all its transactions would sa- 
 tisfy public expectation. Much had~bjfl said 
 against "the practicability of uniting law and 
 equity jurisdiction in the. .saiofiLCQurt. The util- 
 ity of this plan had been demonstrated by gentle- 
 men far more capable to investigate this branch 
 of the subject than he could claim to be. No 
 good could result from keeping up these two dis- 
 tinct fnrTrre-*-<ui f HP ^pntrnry., in\mh-TTTJnry and in- 
 convenience had been occasioned by this -prac- 
 tice. The proposition to blead the two systems 
 into one was not an untried experiment. He 
 knew of no civilized country where, these sep- 
 
 51 
 
610 
 
 arate forms of practice prevailed, except in 
 Great Britain and in a portion of our American 
 States, in which it had been transplanted from 
 England. And it would seem (hat it was not 
 congenial either to our climate or soil, as the fruit 
 produced here was even worse than th*at which 
 grew there. Besides liberty and despotism never 
 could flourish together, and he was glad to say 
 that the latter was yielding to the genial fays ot 
 the former. He could not refrain in this connec- 
 tion to Pedeem his promise to his friend from 
 Chautauque (iVJr. MARVIN) by showing the incon- 
 sistency of his position. He had proved himself 
 to be one of the most able and decided friends of 
 the distinct organization of this court and of sepa- 
 rate forms of proceeding : yet the gentleman was 
 compelled to make admissions which were any 
 thing but favorable to this side of the question. 
 He (Mr. M.) had admitted that it was a tedious 
 and expensive court, and that some time since he 
 drew up a form which he believed to be correct- 
 that it was very long and a friend of his not having 
 any, had rode 20 miles to procure a copy. Finding 
 that it was inaccurate, he travelled all the way lo 
 Albany to obtain a new printed form being very- 
 much liighieued,as he knew the consequence of his 
 blunder. He proceeded home with his new print- 
 ed forms, but to his astonishment, when he was 
 about to commence his pleadings before the imma- 
 culate Chancellor, his highness informed him that 
 there was a slight mistake in his form, and that 
 he must dismiss his case, first taking care to have 
 him foot op a heavy bill of costs. He (Mr S.) 
 had no comment to make on the gentleman's sin 
 gnlar position, except to enquire whether it was 
 any wonder that he was driven to the alterna- 
 tive of calling on ihe honored name of Judge 
 Story to eulogize an institution condemned by 
 the experience of every inhabitant of this State 
 There was another point to which he would call 
 the attention of the committee before leaving this 
 branch of the subject, which he trusted would be 
 a satisfactory answer to all that had or could be 
 said against the impracticability of blending the 
 two forms and systems into one. It was that the 
 court of last resort in this state, although not the 
 most conveniently organized, exercised jurisdic- 
 tion both in law and equity. He begged not to 
 be understood as casting any reflection on gentle- 
 men connected with the judiciary it was a false 
 system against which he was contending, and not 
 the men who administered it. He would also abol- 
 ish the Supreme Court as at present organized. 
 He would not enter at large into the objections 
 that could be urged against it. The mode of ap- 
 pointing the judges, the life tenure, or virtually 
 so, of their office, and the delay of justice were 
 sufficient reasons against its continuation. There 
 are now on the calendar between ten and fifteen 
 hundred causes, and the judge had been heard to 
 say that no new case could be reached in less than 
 ten or twelve years, so it is evident that this court 
 does not afford such facilities for the attainment 
 of justice as the people have a right to demand; 
 The court for the correction of errors too, must 
 be dispensed with. True, it was not obnox- 
 ious to the same objections as the others, but 
 it was too large arid unwieldy for a court of 
 appeals, i.nd it was too expensive, the average 
 costs of causes being over five hundred dollars. 
 
 Indeed our whole system of jurisprudence was 
 more costly than that of Great Brit iin. Another 
 reason why this court should not be continued, 
 was that it exercised two of the highest preroga- 
 tives known in civilized government that of 
 making and administering the laws. These func- 
 tions were incompatible with eaeh other, and too 
 important in themselves to be blended together,. 
 which could not be done on any sound principles 
 of government. Having accomplished this, the 
 smaller courts would go by the board as a matter 
 of course. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD : The gentleman from Kings 
 has shown his hand at pulling down, will he be 
 good enough to inform us how he would build up ? 
 
 Mr SWACKHAMERwasonce cross-examinee! 
 by a lawyer, but he could not extort anything 
 from him but the truth. He would, however ex- 
 cuse the gentleman for interrupting, and give him 
 his plan in due time. But to proceed. He would 
 complete the demolition of this antiquated but 
 dilapidating structure, by driving out the last peg 
 that held it together. The offices of surrogate, su- 
 preme court commissioner, masters and examiners 
 in chancery should he known no more forever. The 
 first of these was unnecessary except to the occu- 
 pants, whose fees amounted in one case at least, 
 during the last year, to between 8 and $'9000. The 
 worst feature of which was, that this enormous 
 sum was principly abstracted from the remaining 
 support of widows and orphans. The second 
 class done very well for taxing lawyers' costs, as 
 those who taxed the highest were sure of getting- 
 the most business. The third was useless altho' 
 it was lucrative, and the fourth paid well, for it 
 had been proven that in a single case the exami- 
 nation of witnesses cost $3000, the expense of 
 this part of the work being two-thirds more than 
 the amount finally recovered, which was only 
 $1000. Indeed all these officers were well cal- 
 culated for the promotion of political objects, and 
 afforded good berths for partizan leaders, if the 
 courts and offices he had named be abolished, 
 the remaining little establishments would soon 
 give way to a better system, especially the court 
 of common pleas, which like the Dutchman's 
 horse had " cost more than it come to," as far as 
 we could learn from the returns received. Hav- 
 ing finished this branch of the subject he 
 would proceed to answer the enquiry of the gen- 
 tleman from New York (Mr. SHEPARD.) He 
 would premise by saying that it was asking a 
 great deal of one charged with being ignorant 
 of the principles of law, as he was not familiarly 
 acquainted with writings of Black stone and other 
 similar authors, to lay down a judicial system 
 which had baffled the efforts of the learned and 
 experienced judiciary committee, eleven of whom 
 were eminent members of the legal profession. 
 In framing a judiciary system, he would not adopt 
 the iron code of Lycurgus, nor the elastic system 
 of common law, which was like the wind, " that 
 bloweth where it listeth, and ye hear the sound 
 thereof, but know not from w r hence it cometh nor 
 whither it goeth." It was the unwritten law, 
 consisting principally in the decisions of all the 
 courts that have gone before us, from Alfred down 
 to the present time. It in effect assumes for ju- 
 dicial tribunals the prerogative of making, ad- 
 ministering and enforcing law ; and in that view 
 
611 
 
 was inconsistent with republican institutions, 
 which were or ought to be based on written con- 
 stitutions. The civil law had its origin in the 
 -litest era of Roman liberty, anterior to the 
 Theodosian code of A. D. l-'is, or that of the 
 
 .TH Emperors, as compiled by Trebonia. 
 But they were now about making a written re- 
 publican constitution, and laws would be enacted 
 in conformity therewith. It was therefore their 
 duty to reject all that experience had proven to 
 he injurious to society and wrong in principle, and 
 
 t that which was just in principle and would 
 prove conducive to the best interests of the human 
 I'.unily. He considered that his amendment invol- 
 
 i'he first great principle of a correct judicia- 
 
 -!<>m. It provides, 1st. *' that the judicial 
 
 power of the state shall be vested in one su- 
 
 'ite court and suck subordinate courts as are 
 
 authorized by thi-s Constitution." If this should 
 
 iopted, or the 3d section of the report of the 
 judiciary committee, proposed to be stricken out, 
 
 ided so as to conform to it, then he would fol- 
 low it up with an additional section which would 
 accomplish the object he had in view. There was 
 this distinctive difference between his section and 
 th-.it of the committee's. They leave it optional 
 with the legislature to create as many little mush- 
 room courts as it may deem expedient, with a va- 
 riety of names, diversity of jurisdiction and di- 
 verse forms of proceeding. It was not necessary 
 for him to point out the evils of such a system, 
 its baneful influence had long been deplored 
 throughout the state. His plan provided for one 
 harmonious system, known by the same name, 
 with one plain, intelligible form of proceeding 
 and of practice, whose jurisdiction could be 
 understood by all it was emphatically an Ame- 
 rican system. 
 
 . 2d. Substitute salaries in lieu of fees for ju- 
 djfcial officer* if charges or fees are necessary, 
 send them to the public treasury, and appropri- 
 ate them toward defraying the expenses of your 
 judiciary. Do this and you take from judicial of- 
 s all inducements to encourage litigation. The 
 fee or perquisite system was demoralising and cor- 
 rupting in all its bearings it had brought re- 
 proach on the judiciary, and dishonor on its offi- 
 cers. * Under this system justice.might be bought 
 and sold. Judges are but men, and if a lawful 
 fee was offered to allow an exception, or order an 
 appeal, it would very likely be received. The 
 ermine should be untainted by any such mean or 
 grovelling considerations ; its functions were ele- 
 
 { and noble, and should be kept as spotless 
 as the sun. 
 
 -'I. Limit the time within which decisions 
 shall be had. Delay was one of the most cer- 
 tain means for defeating the ends of justice. It 
 
 the common receptacle of the poor man's 
 last farthing, who was compelled to resort to the 
 law for the purpose of establishing his rights. 
 
 4th. Restrict suiters to one appeal. He ap- 
 prehended it would be difficult to prove how 
 some half dozen appeals had any other effect than 
 to enrich the lawyers and impoverish the liti- 
 gants to confuse, embarrass, and finally defeat, 
 the object desirable to be attained. 
 
 5th. Place the legal professionon the same 
 
 platform with other occupations. Every consi- 
 deration ot equality and enlightened government 
 
 demanded this reform. It was a remnant of the 
 protective system that ought to find no favor here. 
 People at this day were as capable ot judging of 
 the qualifications of their lawyers as of any other 
 business man. The committee, in his opinion, 
 had made a great mistake in supposing that this 
 Convention would constitutionally prohibit men 
 from presenting their own case betore a court of 
 justice, merely for the purpose of building up the 
 interest of lawyers. The men who bore the 
 parchment were not always the most capable to 
 present the plain truth to an upright court. The 
 seventh section of the report ot the judiciary com- 
 mittee must be stricken out. 
 jSth, Reorganize what are now known as jus- 
 tices' courts: elevate their character: extend their 
 jurisdiction, and construct them in such a man- 
 ner that may constitute courts of conciliation, 
 He would engraft on the organic laws ot this siate, 
 the principle of conciliation and reconciliation. 
 He was not tenacious about whether it should be 
 done in the way he had suggested, or in any oth- 
 er manner that should be deemed most advisable. 
 It might not be out of place for him here to re- 
 mark, that he never had a law suit. He had 
 once a misunderstanding about a business matter, 
 and it was mutually referred to the arbitration of 
 two gentlemen, who satisfactorily arranged the 
 difficulty without the aid of lawyers or the law. 
 He was aware that this proposition had been cha- 
 racterized by two able legal gentlemen (Messrs. 
 JORDAN and BROWN) as foolish, impracticable, 
 and out of the question ; and that it would do very 
 well in ignorant and barbarous nations, but it was 
 unfit for this enlightened community. He could 
 not answer such forcible and logical arguments, 
 but he had always thought that peace making 
 was of divine origin, and was an evidence of the 
 highest state of civilization, while mischief- 
 making was peculiarly characteristic of the pro- 
 fession of the law. As this proposition had ori- 
 ginated with him, he would attempt to show the 
 propriety of its adoption. And he wished to 
 thank the gentleman from Seneca (Mr. BASCOM) 
 and the gentleman from New-York, (Mr. STE- 
 PHENS,) also the gentlemen from Oneida and On- 
 tario (Messrs. KIRKLAND and WORDEN.) for the 
 favorable consideration which they had given it 
 They had the liberality to look beyond their pro- 
 fession and sustain truth, though it originated in 
 humble obscurity. It appeared from the Edin- 
 burgh Review that an institution of this kind was 
 established in Denmark in all other respects an 
 arbitrary government in the year 1795. There 
 was an effort made to organize a similar court in 
 the same country some forty years previous, but it 
 did not succeed for reasons not now necessary to 
 mention. Time would not now permit him to 
 enter into a detailed statement of the organiza- 
 tion and arrangement of the Conciliation Court 
 of 1795, he would merely give the results. "Du- 
 ring the three years proceeding this institution 
 there came before the courts of law 25,521 causes; 
 and for the three years following 9,653, making 
 the astonishing difference of 16,863 law suits." It 
 seems the idea of this court was originally taken 
 from the Dutch,among whom it produced the most 
 happy effects. It also existed in other European 
 countries, where it worked well. He begged to 
 call the attention of the committee to the testi- 
 
612 
 
 mony of Mr. Weed of the Albany Evening Jour- 
 nal, respecting this admirable institution. He 
 concludes an article on this subject in the follow- 
 ing beautiful manner : " In the five months we 
 passed in the dominions of the King of Denmark, 
 we had opportunities of observing the practical 
 workings of * CONCILIATION COURTS.' Influen- 
 ces more benign can scarcely be imagined. We 
 have felt, ever since the subject of Constitutional 
 Reform was broached, a strong desire to urge the 
 consideration of ConciliationCourts upon the Con- 
 vention. It is a sublime feature in human Govern- 
 ment. It divests litigation of its worst charac- 
 teristics. It calms and tranquilizes the passions 
 of men. It prevents most of the description of 
 law suits in which neither party is benefitted. 
 And it arrests controversies which arise out of 
 misapprehensions. Indeed communities protec- 
 ted by such enlightened Tribunals are exempted 
 from most of the evils of excessive, rapacious and 
 destructive litigation.'* A committee in the Con- 
 vention of New Jersey had made a report in lan- 
 guage equally commendatory of the principle, 
 and in favor of engrafting it in the constitution of 
 that State. He had heard it said that parties 
 could resort to arbitration without this constitu- 
 tional provision. He did not deny this, but he still 
 wished the principle recognized in the Constitu. 
 tion of this State. It was desirable that an insti- 
 tution of this kind should be established, and its 
 doors open to the whole people it should be 
 known and admired by all. It was not only the 
 doty of government to interdict and punish wrong, 
 but to encourage right. The supreme law giver 
 had not thought it unworthy his high office to 
 hold out inducements to invite men to upright 
 and neighborly conduct towards each other. The 
 highest honor is tendered to those who soothe the 
 passions of men " Blessed are the peace-makers, 
 for they shall be called the children of God." 
 The principle was founded in the Christian spirit 
 of kindness and peace. Friendly advice and kind 
 words would very often accomplish what the law 
 could not obtain it would not only secure justice, 
 but calm the anger of man. It was like the morning 
 dew, the summer shower, it cooled and tranquiliz- 
 ed the burning passion, leaving freshness and beau- 
 iy in place of darkness and waste. He now came to 
 the seventh and last proposition which was 
 
 To Elect Judges by the People and deprive 
 them of patronage. He fell that it was due to 
 the Convention, tne people and to himself, to say 
 that he had not assumed this very responsible po- 
 sition without much reflection and calm delibera 
 tion. There was good reasons for a difference of 
 opinion amongst the most enlightened minds, on 
 this subject. It was comparatively an experi- 
 ment. Many of the most liberal and able states 
 men doubted the policy of the change. It was 
 his duty, in view of these considerations, to place 
 the question on high ground. He presumed the 
 assertion that the governing power resided in the 
 people would not be disputed here. That the 
 government should be vested in three distinct 
 branches was also generally conceded. These 
 three parts constituted the whole government, and 
 could with much propriety, in one point of view 
 be considered three in one they are usually term 
 ed, Legislative, Executive and Judicial. The 
 Legislative was the. first and highest function o" 
 
 remaining department of g( 
 plete the symmetrical and h 
 
 overn- 
 armo- 
 
 civilized government. The* Executive was the sec- 
 ond, arid the Judicial the third. He who at this day 
 would deny the right of the people tn elect the two^ 
 first branches of their government would be uni- 
 versally denounced as an enemy to the Republic 
 and to free institutions; and they who doubt 
 their capability to elect the third could scarcely 
 be considered as the friends of either. He had 
 been told that there was no precedent for this pro- 
 position, and no examples in favor of it. If there 
 was none in favor, there was certainly not any 
 against. But he contended that the precedent was 
 established in the election of other high officers of 
 state, and in the election of the members of the 
 court of last resort ; and that the adoption of this 
 principle in the 
 ment would complete the 
 
 nions system to which he had first alluded. 
 Indeed the question involved the first princi- 
 ples of self-government. To dispute the right, 
 the safety or the policy of the measure, was 
 a rejection of the corner stone of popular 
 liberty the basis of universal freedom. It 
 was an insult to the intelligence of the peo- 
 IP and a libel on their republican institutions 
 When it was originally proposed to elect justices 
 of the peace many men of experience looked up- 
 on it with alarm, yet no mischief had resulted 
 from it to the body politic. True this court was- 
 not in every respect what it ought to be, but this 
 was owing to the organization and the fee sys- 
 tem, and not to the mode of selecting the justices. 
 Whatever may be the opinion of gentleman res- 
 pecting the present organization of these courts, 
 he apprehended that no one would venture to 
 take the privilege of the election of justices from 
 the people. He was not pledged to the election 
 of judges, but he believed it to be the desire of 
 the county he had the honor in part to represent. 
 And here he must be permitted to say, that noth- 
 ing but a high consideration of duty could induce 
 him to place himself in an antagonistic position, 
 to his distinguished colleague (Mr. MURPHY), for 
 he regretted to say that his friend differed with 
 him on this important subject. The election of 
 judges had been endorsed at an early stage of the 
 discussion for a State Convention, by the people 
 of his adopted village. If he was not mistaken 
 this fundamental principle was first publicly 
 proclaimed there. It was not the first time that 
 the fire of truth had been enkindled in an obscure 
 quarter, and spread until its purifying flames had 
 consumed error, and left society in the full 
 possession of liberal principles. The coun- 
 ty, following in the footsteps of Williams- 
 burgh, did, through the nominating convention 
 pass the following among other resolutions: 
 "Resolved, That we are in favor of electing all 
 judicial and executive officers by the people ; be- 
 lieving that if we can be trusted to elect our Pre- 
 sident, no x>od reason can exist for restraining us 
 from electing all inferior officers." The resolu- 
 tions adopted by the convention were directed to 
 be communicated to the nominees by the Secre- 
 taries, and an answer required. In his reply, he 
 did not accept the nomination, nor did he decline 
 it, for his purpose was not to be a candidate, un- 
 less his nomination should be unanimously con- 
 firmed by the county meeting, called to consider 
 the report of the nominating convention. Neither 
 
613 
 
 did he pledge himself to any other course than 
 such as should be dictated by an % enlightened 
 view and public policy. The tenor of his reply 
 was however in conformity with the sentiments 
 sustained by the convention, as they met his un- 
 qualified approbation. But it would be said that 
 the convention might have been "packed," and 
 that its conclusions were not the views of the 
 county. His answer to this objection was that at 
 the county meeting referred to, the people assem- 
 bled to the number of several thousand, and 
 unanimously confirmed the nomination of the 
 convention and ratified all their resolutions. The 
 next ordeal through which they passed was the 
 election, when the whole people had an opportu- 
 nity of freely expressing their unbiassed will. 
 Then again the nomination of his associates and 
 himself was confirmed by an aggregate majority 
 of about eight hundred, that too when Brooklyn 
 alone had given nearly 1200 majority on the other 
 side but a week previous. He believed that the 
 judgment of his village and county was in con- 
 formity with that of the State. He submitted 
 whether,after having been elected under such cir- 
 cumstances, he was not in honor bound to sustain 
 the view he did or else resign. But he felt no 
 embarrassment in his position, it was as clear as 
 the light of truth. It had been objected that the 
 election of judicial officers would be the means of 
 selecting political judges. He had no such fears, 
 for he had but little doubt that if they were left 
 without patronage, they would be elected for their 
 capability and honesty, and not for their political 
 notions. The people were not in the habit of 
 trifling with their best interests. But admitting, 
 for the purposes of argument, that this would 
 prove true, are you any better off with the cen- 
 tral appointing power ? Were not the governor 
 and senators partizans ? And have you had 
 any other than political appointments to judicial 
 office during the last 25 years. The ermine had 
 been tarnished, and our judiciary system brought 
 in reproach within eight or ten years past, by the 
 appointment of a number of stupid and incapable 
 men as judges, who were common political braw. 
 lers. Indeed, a rejection by the popular will of 
 failing politicians, had almost become a pass- 
 port to the appointment to office by the central 
 power. He was proud to know that they had as 
 able judges in this State as there was in the U. S. 
 But no one could deny that a large number were 
 unworthy the dignified post they occupied, and 
 could never have reached it through the people. 
 He supposed it was generally known how appoint- 
 ments were made now-a-days ; if not, he would 
 give an example or two. It was customary fur a 
 political committee to meet together in some se- 
 cluded place, when there was an appointment to 
 
 be made, and quietly resolve that Mr. S was 
 
 just the man tor the office. The matter was per- 
 fectly understood by the " knowing few." It a 
 ' green 'un" of the committee happens to make an 
 
 enquiry respecting Mr. S , Mr. S at once 
 
 becomes "a most excellent man first raft just 
 the man for the place," but then it is doubtful 
 whether he will survive. The next step was to 
 appoint a committee to wait on him and insist on 
 his acceptance of the office. He finally yields to 
 the solicitations of his fellow citizens at a heavy 
 personal sacrifice. The resolution is signed by 
 
 the officers of the committee, transmitted to Al- 
 bany, and as it is against the rule for the Gover- 
 nor to look beyond the official proceedings of the 
 committee the appointment is made, and the 
 plain Mr. S. who no one knew, or if known, it 
 was only as a small politician, at once becomes 
 the learned Judge Squash. You may subse- 
 quently hear of the judge in this way. "The 
 cause of Ignorance vs. Knowledge, came up for 
 a hearing to-day, in the court of Wisdom. The 
 learned judge Squash delivered an able opinion! 
 Verdict for the plaintiff." Perhaps the decision 
 was in violation of both the constitution and laws, 
 but no matter, it becomes a precedent, and was 
 legally reported it now becomes a part of the 
 common law. There were other modes of pro- 
 curing appointments, one of which was to secure 
 the nomination of Senators and Assemblymen, 
 who woulfl " do the right thing" when they 
 got to Albany. It was some times convenient 
 to go to State Conventions to nominate a Gov 
 ernor, provided an appointment was desira- 
 ble. He knew an instance where a person suc- 
 ceeded in procuring an office worth nearly jpQOOO 
 per year by getting on a nominating committee 
 but once. Abolish the appointing power, and you 
 will have no more scrambling to get on nominat- 
 ing committees. You will elect good men to of- 
 fice, and politicians by tra ie will not exhaust 
 their patriotism in servingon com.mttees without 
 pay. There were- other objections to the present 
 mode of appointment to which it was painful to 
 allude. He would not now ask why the council 
 of appointment was abolished in solemn silence. 
 Neither was it necessary to inform the committee 
 that men had been appointed to high judicial offi- 
 ces while they were responsible on the paper of 
 the appointing power to the amount of thousands 
 of dollars, and which the endorser had finally to 
 pay. He would not show how easy it was for an 
 ambitious executive to perpetuate his power, and 
 promote his designs through his thousand offices, 
 scattered throughout the State. Judges were 
 not only appointed on party grounds, but they 
 were- also removed to subserve party purposes. 
 Able and pure judicial officers had been re- 
 moved by an ambitious executive to promote 
 unprincipled political designs. This system 
 of appointment was impolitic and dangerous. 
 It was a canker-worm, eating out the vitals of our 
 institutions. It must be abolished. He was sen- 
 sible that what he had said would displease some, 
 and could not find a response from all. He had 
 spoken frankly his own opinion of what he be- 
 lieved to be the defects in our present system of 
 jurisprudence, and had fearlessly proposed reme- 
 dies which he sincerely hoped would prove ef- 
 fectual. He was glad to see that the very able 
 committee on the judiciary had submitted the 
 most important part of the plan he had suggested 
 by resolution, shortly after their organization, 
 and he was happy in believing that the Conven- 
 tion would go still farther than the committee, 
 and engraft on the Constitution other proposi- 
 tions which he had submitted. He considered 
 the question then under discussion one of the 
 most momentous that would come before the 
 Convention. He had not rushed into it from 
 the impulse of passion. What he had said was 
 based on calm reflection, and though imperfect, 
 
614 
 
 was the result of careful investigation, and he 
 sincerely hoped would conduce to the es- 
 tablishment of correct principles. What ever was 
 then done of good or of evil would not be 
 confined within the borders of this State. The 
 happiness of unborn millions might, and perhaps 
 did depend upon the result of their deliberations. 
 Great was the responsibility to all, and fearful 
 the future to them, if any, who failed to discharge 
 their whole duty at the present golden moment. 
 It was in view of these solemn considerations that 
 he had taken the position he now occupied ii he 
 was sustained by the enlightened opinion of a free 
 people he would feel gratetul, if otherwise, he 
 should not complain, leaving as he would, this 
 capitol, conscious of having acted according to 
 the dictates of his best judgment, and with the 
 single purpose of humbly contributing to the pros- 
 perity of all. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that his colleague, who 
 had first addressed the committee, had made some 
 allusions of a local character, to which he (Mr. 
 M.) did not intend to reply at this time, although 
 he might do so on some other occasion. Yet he 
 wished to ask his colleague, to whose remarks he 
 had listened to with pleasure, whether in his 
 plan to elect judges by the people, he proposed to 
 elect them for a long or short term ; and if for a 
 short term, what period ? 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that he had not fix- 
 ed in his mind any definite term, although he was 
 disposed to give them a reasonably long term. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY Perhaps then there will not 
 be so many points of difference between us. 
 
 And then, on motion of Mr. BASCOM, the 
 committee rose and reported progress. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, (61** day,) Aug. 13. 
 PLAN FOR A JUDIClARif. 
 
 Mr. St. JOHN presented a plan for a judiciary 
 system. He moved that it be printed. Agreed to. 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 ^ 1. All judicial power shall be vested in a Supreme 
 Court, and in such subordinate courts as are hereinafter 
 established. 
 
 2. The Supreme Court shall consist in a Chief Justice 
 and sixteen associate Justices to be denominated Justices 
 of the Supreme Court. 
 
 3. The Chief Justice shall preside over the judiciary 
 department, and it sfliall be his duty to prescribe forms and 
 rules of practice in the Supreme Court, and in all subordi- 
 nate courts. 
 
 5} 4. Such forms and rules shall be simple and plain, with 
 apt words to express the subject matter, and nothing more. 
 
 5. The Chief Justice shall be elected by the people of 
 this State, and he shall hold his office for eight years. 
 
 6. The State shall be divided into eight judicial districts 
 to be numbered from one to eight inclusive; they shall be 
 composed ot contiguous territory, and shall contain as 
 nearly as may be, without dividing a county, an equal 
 number of inhabitants. There shall be elected in e^ch of 
 the said districts, two Justices of the Supreme Court, who 
 shall be divided by the board ot State canvassers, into 
 eight classes, of two in each class; arid each of the said 
 justices shall hold his office for a term of years, corres- 
 ponding with the number of the class to which he belongs; 
 and tnere shall be elected annually, alter the first election 
 of such justices, two Justices of the Supreme Court, who 
 shall hold their office for eight years. The board of State 
 canvassers shall so classify the said justices, that the first 
 district shall contain one of the first class and one of the 
 fifth; the L-econd district shall Contain one of the second 
 class and one of the sixth; the third district shall contain 
 one of the third class and one of the seventh; the fourth 
 district shall contain one oi the fourth class and one of the 
 eighth; the fifth district shall contain one of the first class 
 
 and one of the fifth; the sixfb district shall contain one of 
 the second class and one oi the sixth; the seventh district 
 shall contain one of the third class and one of the seventh; 
 and the eighth district shall contain one of the fourth class 
 and one oi the eighth. 
 
 7. The Court for the Correction of Errors shall be com- 
 posed of ihe Chief Justice and of the associate Justices of 
 the Supreme Court, comprising the second, third and fourth 
 classes, and the concurrence of at least four of their num- 
 ber shall be necessary to a decision; which court shall, in, 
 every year, hold at least one of its terms in each of the ju- 
 dicial districts in this State. The Legislature shall provide 
 for filling all vacancies which may occur in the office of 
 Chief Justice, or in either of the Justices of the Supreme 
 Court, until the next annual election for such Justices; but 
 every person elected to fill any such vacancy, shall serve 
 for the unexpired term of his immediate predecessor, and 
 no longer. No member of the Court for the Correction of 
 Errors shall have a voi e in the affirmance or reversal of a 
 cause brought from any court wherein he shall have presi- 
 ded at the trial thereof. 
 
 ^ 8. There shall be elected in each of the counties of this 
 State, one county iudge and one assistan* judge, who shall 
 hold their offices for five years. 
 
 9. The county courts shall consist of one county judge 
 and one assistant judge, together with one of the justices of 
 the Supreme Court, any one of whom may hold the court; 
 but the legislature shall prescribe the cases in which the 
 presence of a Justice of the Supreme Court shall or may be 
 required. 
 
 10. The county court shall have original and exclu- 
 sive jurisdiction 'within their respective counties, in all 
 cases, civil and criminal, in law and in equity (including 
 the powers and duties of surrogates) ; except where the 
 actual balance between the parties shall not exceed the 
 sum of two hundred and fifty dollars. 
 
 11. There shall be elected in each of the towns in this 
 State, and in each of the districts or wards in the several 
 cities, not less than two nor more than four justices of the 
 peace, who shall hold their offices for four years. The 
 number of justices of the peace to be elected in each town, 
 district or ward shall be determined by the electors there- 
 of, at their first annual town, district or ward meeting, af- 
 ter the adoption of this Constitution; but such number 
 may be altered at the expiration of each period of four 
 years thereafter, and at no other time. 
 
 12. Courts ot justices of the peace shall have original 
 jurisdiction in allcases where the actual balance between 
 the parties shall not exceed the sum of two hundred and 
 fifty dollars; and whenever a suit shall be commenced and 
 tried in a county court or before a justice of the Supreme 
 Court, and the plaintiff shall fail to recover the sum or val- 
 ue of two hundred and fifty dollars, exclusive of costs, the 
 court shall award to the defendant a sum sufficient to co- 
 ver all extra trouble and expenses, over and above what 
 they would have been, had the suit been tried before a jus- 
 tice of the peace. 
 
 13. Judgments obtained before a justice of the peace, 
 may be removed by a writ of certiorari to the county court, 
 but the court shall have no other or further jurisdiction 
 in the matter than to affirm or reverse the same, or to grant 
 a new trial to be had in the same town, or in the town ad- 
 joining the one in which the first trial was had. In all ca- 
 ses where a new trial is or shall be granted, the court shall 
 designate one of its number or a justice of the peace of the 
 same county, to preside thereat, and such second trial 
 shall in all cases be final and conclusive, and no appeal 
 shall be had therefrom. 
 
 & 14. Judgments rendered in a county court, or in a 
 court held by a county judge or by a justice oi the Su- 
 preme Court, maybe removed by a writ of error to the 
 court for the correction of errors; but that court shall have 
 no other or further jurisdiction in the matterthan to affirm 
 or reverse the same, or to grant a new trial, to be had in 
 the same county where the suit was originally tried; and 
 in all cases where a new trial is or shall be granted, the 
 court shall designate a justice of the Supreme Court to 
 preside thereat; and such second trial shall in all cases be 
 final and conclusive, and no other or further appeal shall 
 be had therefrom. 
 
 ^ 15. One Clerk of the court for the correction c 
 shall be appointed thereof, who shall hold his office during 
 the pleasure of the court. 
 
 & 16. The county clerk in each of the counties of the 
 State, shall be the clerk of the county courts, and of all 
 courts held by a county judge, or by a justice of the Su- 
 preme Court in their respective counties 
 
 ?! 17. No court provided for by this constitution nor either 
 of the members thereof, nor any other tribunal shall have 
 
615 
 
 power to license or appoint any person to practice as at- 
 torney or counsellor at law. in any of the courts of this 
 State, and all such licenses heretoiore granted are hereby 
 abroir. 
 
 MS. In all judgments rendered by a justice of the peace 
 ana in all judgments docketed by the clerk oi' any other 
 court, every item of all the costs adjudged shall be insert, 
 ed and become a part of the record; but 110 retaining trial 
 or counsel fee shall bo allowed us a part of such costs; 
 nor shall any such fee be collected of the party against 
 whom such judgment shall have been rendered. 
 
 19. No more than one adjournment shall be allowed in 
 any cause, unless the party applying therefor shall pay 
 all the costs which may have then accrued. 
 
 ^20. The legislature may direct the election of one or 
 more additional justices of the supreme court, in any of the 
 judicial districts of the State, in case it shall become actu- 
 ally necessary for the transaction of the judicial business 
 in such districts. Such additional justice or justices shall 
 hold their offices for a term to be fixed by the Legislature, 
 not exceeding eight years, and they shall have concurrent 
 jurisdiction in all cases witli those whose election is pro- 
 vided for by the srxth section of this article; but the elec- 
 tion of such additional justice or justices, shall in no 
 wise interfere with the classification of those whose 
 election is provided for by the said sixth section. 
 
 ^ 21. The Chief Justice, and each of the Justices of the 
 Supreme Court, and the clerk of the Court for the Cor- 
 rection of Errors, shall receive for their services, an an- 
 nual salary, which shall be fixed by the Legislature, and 
 paid from" the Treasury of the State; and neither ol the 
 said justices, nor the clerk of the said court shall receive, 
 for their own use, any fees or perquisites of office or any 
 other or further compensation for such service. 
 
 2-2. County judges and the clerks of county courts 
 shall receive for their services an annual salary, to be fixed 
 by the boards of supervisors of their respective counties, 
 and paid in the same manner as other contingent expen- 
 ses of the county; but neither the county judge nor the 
 clerks of county courts shall receive, for their own use, 
 any fees or perquisites of office, or any other or further 
 compensation for such service. 
 
 23. The Legislature shall prescribe the fees to be 
 charged by the Court for the Correction of Errors, and by 
 the clerk thereof, which fees, when received, shall be paid 
 into the State Treasury, and become a part of the general 
 fund of the State; and the Legislature shall also prescribe 
 the fees to be charged by the Judges composing the coun- 
 ty courts, and by the clerks of the said courts, which fees 
 when received r-li.--.ll be paid into the county treasury, and 
 become a part of the contingent fund of the county. 
 
 24. No oth-.-r cou.-ts than these provided for inthis article, 
 shall be established by law; and all testimony, in every 
 cause or trial, in law or in equity, shall be taken in the 
 manner now practiced in courts of law; and no officer, or 
 other person shall be authorized to perform any portion 
 oi the duties of justices ot the Supreme Court, or of the 
 judges of the county courts. 
 
 DAVID B. St. JOHN. 
 
 FUNDS IN CHANCERY. 
 
 The resolution of Mr. MANN relating to the 
 monies in the Court of Chancery, was then called 
 up by Mr. MANN. It had been left undisposed 
 of for several days past, (since Monday last) on 
 account of the arrival of the hour for the taking 
 up of the special order of business, viz. the re- 
 port of the judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. WHITE said that this was a very import- 
 ant resolution. It had already occupied a great 
 deal of time ; and although he felt desirous to ex- 
 press his views on the subject, yet under all the 
 circumstances he felt compelled to move the pre- 
 vious question. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART withdrew his amendment to 
 have the returns furnished to the next legisla- 
 ture ; and he begged the gentleman to withdraw 
 his call for the previous question for a few min- 
 utes that he (Mr. T.) might make a statement. 
 
 Mr. WHITE assented. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART then exhibited a voluminous 
 return from one circuit only, occupying one hun- 
 dred and thirty pages, and containg amounts ex 
 
 ceding 5jj>3U,OUU. He went on to say that the re- 
 ams from all the circuits would occupy from nine 
 lundred to one thousand pages, and could be of 
 o use to the Convention. They had already got 
 all they wanted lor their own action. He then 
 withdrew his amendment, and siid he should con- 
 tent himself with voting iigainst the resolution. 
 
 Mr. WHITE renewed his demand fur the pre- 
 vious question. 
 
 Mr- MURPHY wished to know who it was that 
 was desirous of stifling debate; he therefore de- 
 manded the ayes and noes on this morion. 
 
 The previous question was seconded ayes 62, 
 noes 22". 
 
 The main question was ordered, and then the 
 resolution was can led, ayes 63, noes 22. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND then moved that his proposi- 
 tion to establish courts of conciliation be referred 
 to the committee of the whole, having charge of 
 the Judiciary reports. Agreed to. 
 
 JUDICIARY REPORTS. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 of the whole on the reports of the Judiciary com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG resumed the the Chair. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that at the rising of the com- 
 mittee yesterday, he made an observation which 
 on reflection he felt was liable to exception, in 
 relation to the speech of the gentleman from 
 Kings (Mr. SWACKHAMER.) It was made in a 
 playful way ; but it was not intended to wound 
 his feelings, nor to detract from that respect which 
 is due to that gentleman, and to every member 
 of this convention. *He certainly was the last 
 person in the world to do anything that would 
 tend to produce any such result ; and he should 
 endeavor not to fall into the same error again. 
 
 [Mr. B. then proceeded with his remarks on the 
 judiciary system.] 
 
 Mr. BROWN said it was worthy of notice, and 
 afforded him a legitimate argument to be .used in 
 the progress of this debate that those who oppos- 
 ed the union of the equity and common law juris- 
 dictions in the same tribunal, had failed to pro- 
 pose any scheme which preserved the distinction. 
 In this particular they are not consistent with 
 themselves. While they assert that the .rules 
 which prevail at law and in equity are ..essen- 
 tially different, demanding in those -^entrusted 
 with their administration, a different kind of ed- 
 ucation, a different kind of knowledge, a differ- 
 ent order of intellect, and qualifications different 
 in all respects, they offer no possible plan 
 wherein this vital and essential distinction shall 
 be maintained in the j udicial organization. They 
 will have a separate court of chancery, it is true 
 with exclusive chancery jurisdiction, and 
 chancellors and vice chancellors, who shall ex- 
 ercise no common law powers, but they all unite 
 in the propriety nay the absolute and inevita- 
 ble necessity, of creating a class of common law 
 courts and common law judges who shall exert 
 equity powers and adjudicate in equity cases. 
 In all the plans offered to the Convention, an 
 equity cause either in its origin or in the course 
 of its progress to its final termination, must pass 
 under the observation of a court, possessing com- 
 mon law and chancery jurisdiction. Does 
 not this admission concede the whole ques- 
 tion ? And does it not virtually yield up all 
 
616 
 
 that the judiciary committee claim, that there 
 is nothing inconsistent, nothing unseemingly 
 or unsuitable in the union of the two juris- 
 dictions, but that after all it is a mere ques- 
 Uion of expediency, of economy and conven- 
 ence? The proposition of the committee is to 
 abolish the Court of Chancery, as a separate and 
 distinct tribunal, not to impair, to take away, or 
 to limit in any degree the power and authority 
 which now belongs to it. The design is to pre- 
 serve in its entire strength and symmetry, that 
 beautiful and benign system of jurisprudence the 
 noble offspring of many noble minds, and the col- 
 lected wisdom of many generations known in 
 this country and in England, under the name of 
 equity and jurisprudence, and transfer its exer- 
 cise to the courts of common law. This explan- 
 ation is due to those unthinking men, who rejoice 
 in the prospect of the speedy downfall of the one 
 man power, and the immediate and utter destruc- 
 tion of that o<jious authority, which is supposed 
 to know no limit, and to acknowledge no law, 
 but the arbitrary and uncontrolled will of the 
 Chancellor. It is also due to those who like him- 
 self behold in the establishment and existence of 
 this very equity jurisdiction, one of the wisest 
 and noblest institutions of modern civilization, 
 without which the rights of property would find 
 no adequate protection. " Equity must have a 
 name in every rational system of jurisprudence; 
 if not in name, at least in substance." Its pecu- 
 liar and appropriate province is amongst other 
 things to secure the execution of trusts and the 
 just distribution of trust property. To protect 
 the property of femes covert, infants and idiots, 
 and to compel the specific performance of con- 
 tracts. To relieve against " losses and injuries 
 by accident and fraud against penalties and for- 
 feitures many cases of irreparable injuries or 
 meditated mischiefs cases of oppressive pro- 
 ceedings undue advantages impositions, be- 
 trayals of confidence, and unconscionable bar- 
 gains." Courts of common law can only entertain 
 a suit in a prescribed form, and render a judgment 
 for the one party or the other. And in all those 
 cases where a simple judgment without qualifica- 
 tions or conditions, or some peculiar arrangements, 
 would not do entire justice between the parties, 
 they become the proper subjects of equity juris- 
 diction. The idea that equity is to be administer- 
 ed at the will or the arbitrary discretion of the 
 judge or chancellor, is not to be entertained. Mr. 
 Justice Blackstone declares that " the system of 
 our courts of equity, is a labored, connected sys- 
 tem, governed by established rules, and bound 
 down by precedents, from which they do not de- 
 part. The system of jurisprudence in our courts, 
 both of law and equity, are now equally artificial 
 systems, founded on the same principles of justice 
 and positive law, but varied by different usages in 
 the forms and modes of their proceeding." 
 " There are," says LordRedesdale, " certain prin- 
 ciples on which courts of equity act, which are 
 very well settled. The cases which occur are va- 
 rious, but are decided on fixed principles. Courts 
 of equity have in this respect no more discretion- 
 ary power than courts of law. They decide new 
 \ cases as they arise by the principles on which for- 
 \ mer cases have been decided, and inay thus illus- 
 trate or enlarge the operation of those principles. 
 
 But the principles are affixed and certain as the 
 principles on which the courts of common law 
 proceed." These authorities and observations 
 will serve to show what the judiciary committed 
 design to preserve in all its purity and power, under 
 the name of equity jurisdiction, but under a new or-J 
 ganization. Upon a proposition to unite the power**' 
 and authority which has heretofore belonged to the 
 two separate classes of courts, the question occurs, 
 are the elementary principles of law and equity 
 essentially and radically different? Have they 
 their origin in sources far apart, and foreign from 
 each other? Or have they nut a common root, a 
 common foundation in the great immutable and 
 eternal principles ofjustice and truth ? Do they con- 
 flict in their operation, or in their application to the 
 rights of property and the rights of persons? Or 
 do they not harmonize and blend themselves to- 
 gether in the common purpose of maintaining and 
 preserving those rights ? There is but one an- 
 swer to be given to these interrogations. Both 
 systems, both jurisdictions, have their foundations 
 deeply laid in the divine attributes of justice and 
 truth, and both are equally worthy oi the rever- 
 ence and regard of an enlightened people. Why 
 then may they not both be deposited with the 
 same judicial tribunal, and their administration 
 entrusted to the same judicial officers? Equity 
 jurisprudence is of but recent growth upon this 
 side of the Atlantic. During the period of Co- 
 lonial subjection to the parent country, it had no 
 existence in the New England States, and even at 
 this day it finds no place in the judicial codes of 
 several of the States of the Union. It made its 
 appearance in the colony of New York in the 
 year 1701, but made lirtle progress, and command- 
 ed but little share ot public confidence. The rea- 
 son is obvious. Its vigorous maturity belongs to 
 a more advanced stage of human civilization. 
 Among a rural population, with simple habits, 
 with little property and exclusively employed in 
 the peaceful pursuits of agriculture, there is little 
 room for its existence, and no rights or obliga- 
 tions or duties upon which it is required to exert its 
 influence. It belongs more properly to the civ- 
 ilization and refinement of our own day genera- 
 tion, when the vast and varied operations of com- 
 merce, of manufactures and the mechanic arts, 
 and the accumulations of wealth and property de- 
 mand the introduction of new legal elements and 
 the application of new and more subtile legal 
 principles. To Chancellor Kent, more than to 
 any other man, do we owe the strength and ma- 
 turity of equity jurisprudence in this State. From 
 the year 1814, when he took his seat in the Court 
 of Chancery, under the impulse given to its ad- 
 ministration by his well cultivated and elegant 
 mind, it has constantly extended itself until it has 
 embraced within its power and influence, and ta- 
 ken under its care and protection many of the 
 best and most valued interests of society. To ab- 
 rogate, or to limit, or to restrain to any material 
 extent, the exercise of its authority would weak- 
 en the safe-guards which surround the enjoyment 
 of property. 
 
 Among the reasons in favor of uniting the ju- 
 risdictions in one and the same tribunals, is the 
 fact alluded to in the able and logical argument 
 of the gentleman from New York, (Mr. NICOLL,) 
 that the courts of equity and of common law now 
 
617 
 
 have concum -tit jurisdiction upon many subjects. 
 In the history \vliicli the honorable member 
 
 in and progress of the courts, he show- 
 ed u.s addiction of both had gradually 
 ,i>laion and judicial deci- 
 sion, until they had embraced many subjects in 
 common, and it had been difficult to define with 
 of accuracy the boundaries of their au- 
 thority. They had concurrent jurisdiction of 
 which no one' proposed to deprive them of the 
 partition uf lands of questions arising upon the 
 execution and the consideration of sealed instru- 
 ct off', questions arising out 
 of the relations of principals and sureties; ques- 
 of fraud, of accident, of mistake, and of a 
 great variety of kindred subjects, which he would 
 op to enumerate. The subjects over 
 which they thus exerted concurrent jurisdiction 
 yearly increasing, their territorial bounda- 
 ,!hd the monuments which mark those boun- 
 daries, we: 'e gradually- decaying and being oblite- 
 rated, thus proving that their natural tendency 
 to unite, and their adaptation for such union. 
 He would now assert, what no gentleman here 
 could successfully controvert, that a thorough 
 knowledge of the rules of the common laws was 
 indispensable to enable an equity judge to exe- 
 cute his trust. And so, too, an intimate sense of 
 the principles which govern in equity cases 
 was equally necessary to the judge, whose 
 province it was to sit in the courts of law. 
 He had already attempted to show, and he 
 he hoped he had shown, that the doctrines which 
 obtain, in both class of courts, were founded in 
 justice and in truth ; that they were in fact sub- 
 stantially the same, and differed only in the modes 
 and forms by which they were applied to the 
 rights of pen-sons. He had shown that it was the 
 peculiar province of the courts of equity to afford 
 relief in those cases where from the multitude of 
 parti. - uplex character of their several 
 claims, and the peculiar and special duties and 
 obligations to be imposed upon some of those par- 
 ties, and riot upon others, a court of law, by 
 reason of the form of its proceedings, could afford 
 no adequate or effectual relief. How could the 
 equity judge make an intelligent application oi 
 Hie pi :,i..:i|>ies of universal justice, unless he- 
 knew where the powers at the command of the 
 courts of common UA' were inadequate to its per- 
 foi mince ? At}d how was the common law judge 
 to k i lae jurisdiction of his Court termi- 
 wa.* also informed where that of 
 the c-mtu of equity commenced? The truth is, 
 that these two jurisdictions are as much part and 
 pared of i he same wise system ot justice and tight, 
 as the rules which govern the descent of real es- 
 tate, lh<: distribution ot personal pioperly, or the 
 forms which regulate the action of' ejectment, the 
 action ot ivplevin., .,f trover or assumpsit. And 
 the rules which distinguish the remedies in equi 
 ty from those at common law, are not more dis- 
 sim.lar t'l.m those which distinguish any other of 
 the various branches of l-gal science. 'The veiy 
 i'e argument of the learned 
 and ar.'i'inp.!- >,M from Oneida (Ah. 
 
 KlRKI.AX!') I end -red much that he h-ul to Say 
 
 uunr<\ > - ny. l 1 ' or the multitude and force oi 
 n> facts, tor the clear and perspicious ar- 
 rangement iu which they were presented, for 
 
 the reasons and deductions drawn from those 
 acts for the simplicity the power and the ele- 
 _: HUT of its language, that argument was a model 
 >f parliamentary eloquence, and he should ap- 
 i it, in all time hereafter as a vindication of 
 nis vote upon the proposition to unite the two ju- 
 risdictions. He would, however, before he sat 
 down, refer to the judgment of eminent men, and 
 to some events in the history of the courts, in 
 this country and in England, in corroboration of 
 :he recommendation of the judiciary committee. 
 Sir Robert Parnyage, who became Chancellor of 
 England in the reign of Edward III, was the first 
 egularly educated common lawyer who attained 
 that dignity, his predecessors with one or two ex- 
 ceptions having been ecclesiastics. Speaking of 
 this distinguished person, Lord Campbell, in his 
 lives of the Chancellors, says : " The equitable 
 jurisdiction of Chancery had generally extended 
 itself, and to the duties of his own court the new 
 Chancellor sedulously devoted himself. But he 
 thought, as did.Lord Eldon, and the mostcelebra- 
 ted of his successors, that the best qualifications 
 for an Equity Judge, is not the mere drudgery of 
 drawing bills and answers, buta scientific knowl- 
 edge of the common law ; and he further thought 
 it essential that his knowledge ot the common 
 law should be steadily kept up by him when 
 Chancellor." " This man" says Lord Coke, 
 knowing that he who knew not die common 
 law, could never well judge. in equity, (which ia 
 a just correction of law in some cases,) did 
 usually sit in the court of common Pleas 
 which court is the lock and key of the 
 common law and heard matters in law, 
 there debated, and rnanv times would argue 
 himself as in the Report of the 17th Edward III. 
 it appears.'' l:i'a letter written b> Lord Eldon to 
 James William F.urier, Esq upon the study and 
 practice of the law, and daied in 1807, this person 
 .iraong^i the mosf accomplished and regularly 
 educated of all the English Chancellors hoUN 
 the following language: "1 approve altogether 
 the idea that such of ycu as ii.oK to the courr of 
 equity should go, and for a good many years to the 
 northern circuit, as well as he who makes the 
 protession of the common law his peculiar study. 
 I know from Utttg pefootvaJ cb-v: v.ttion, that the 
 iieneral defect o! the chiMjftry l>ar, is its igno- 
 rance of common law and common law p'-achce: 
 and stiang:- as it should iset-rn, yet almost without 
 exception it is, that gentlemen go to a bar where 
 they are to modify, quality and soften th li^or of 
 ihe common law, with very linU- notion of its 
 doctrines 'and practice." L<>id Brougham, in his 
 ske ches of the lives of eminent statesmen, makes 
 this remark ot Lord Chancellor Loughbtuxxigh. 
 "lie practiced in the Court of Chancery, but in 
 those days, the line had not Iveii drawn, which 
 now so hurl fully fur the equ.lv pi MCiitiontr sepa- 
 rates the two sides of Westminster Hall, and 
 Chancery leaders frequented ti;c different courts 
 almost equally with trie practitioners in ihecuuns 
 of common law." These opinions of distinguish* 
 ed lawyers, well calculated irom their position 
 and piv.f..'ss:o.!-il eypT!ei:tv i<> ,-n m a correct 
 judgment uuon questions of this nature, would 
 not, he iioped, be without ih.'ir itdluence with 
 the Convention. He would not advert to the 
 courts of the United Stales wheie the jutisdic- 
 
 52 
 
618 
 
 tions had been united with manifest advantage for 
 more than half a century, nor to the union of 
 the common law and equity powers, in the 
 persons of our own circuit judges, with equal ad- 
 vantages for the last three and twenty years. He 
 would proceed however to show that both in 
 England and our own state the equity judges 
 were selected indiscriminately, from the mem- 
 bers of the bar, without reference to the courts in 
 which they practiced. Indeed we have not, and 
 cannot have, any such thing as an exclusive 
 equity or common law bar in this state. Profes- 
 sional men who hope to attain any thing like dis- 
 tinction in their line, must qualify themselves by 
 severe labor and study, for every species of pro- 
 fessional business. Among the great men whose 
 administration adorned the English court of chan- 
 cery was Lord Eldon. He was a barrister of dis- 
 tinction, practicing for many years at the cir- 
 cuits in the trial of common law causes. He was 
 the attorney general, the chief justice of the com- 
 mon pleas, and the chancellor under the adminis- 
 tration of Mr. Addington. So it was with Lord 
 Thurlow and with Mr. Wedderburne, afterwards 
 Lord Loughborough. Thurlow was the attorney 
 general and then the chancellor, and Loughbor- 
 ough was attorney general, chief justice of the 
 common pleas, and then became the chancellor. 
 And both of them commenced their carreer as 
 barristers, practicing like the members of the bar 
 in our own State, in the courts of law and equity. 
 He might also name Lord Redesdale, LordErsk- 
 ine, and in our own times Lord Brougham, all of 
 them chancellors and all eminent for their com- 
 mon law knowledge. The progress of profes- 
 sional advancement amongst the great Eng- 
 lish lawyers, is almost as regular as it is 
 in the army or the navy. First it is to the 
 office of solicitor general, then to that of at- 
 torney general, then perhaps to be the master 
 of the Rolls, and the Chief Justice of ihe King's 
 Bench or the Common Pleas; and last, and loftiest 
 of all, to take the great seat and becotue the Lord 
 Chancellor. To show the close and inseparable 
 connection between the English courts of common 
 law and equity, he would quote another sentence 
 Irom Lord Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors 
 "The practice was likewise established, which 
 continued down to the time of Lord Thurlow, of 
 the Chancellor deputm.' a puisne judge to sit foi 
 him, in cases of sickness or political avocation. 
 Common law judges were likewise called in as as- 
 sessors, in cases of difficulty." Loid Thurlow 
 ceased to be Chancellor and surrendered up the 
 seals of office in the year 1792, and up to that 
 time, according to this author, the common law 
 judges were in the constant habit of assisting the 
 Chancellor in the performance of his judicial 
 functions. If we turn to the judicial history ot 
 our own State, we shall find a state of facts equal- 
 ly conclusive. In 1814, Chancellor Kent, like 
 Lord Eldon and Lord Loughborough, was trans- 
 lated from the office of Chief Justice of one of the 
 common law courts, to the court of chancery. 
 How well he performed the duties of that high 
 office how well he adorned that exalted station, 
 while equity jurisprudence with us was hi its in- 
 fancy what lame, what undying renown already 
 gathers round his name it were idle to say. It 
 has been said, however, that even he had to qualify 
 
 himself tor his new duTies as Chancellor, by a 
 long and laborious course of study and pre- 
 paration. This fact none will doubt. "Labor pa- 
 tient, unwearied, unremitfed labor could alone 
 produce the rich fruits of his judicial administra- 
 tiation, and the honors he has so justly won. In 
 this respect his life and character form a model 
 worthy of all imitation. It must be remembered 
 however, that in 1814, Chancery practice and 
 Chancery jurisprudence was to some extent un- 
 known to the bar of the state. It was a branch of 
 legal science, with which very many of the best 
 lawyers, were by no means familiar. And the 
 preparatory studies of the Chancellor were in 
 some degree attributable probably to this circum- 
 stance and the absence of equity practice, w r hile 
 he himself was a member of the bar. Chancellors 
 Sanford and Jones, like their great predecessor, 
 were not selected on account of their exclusive 
 knowledge of equity law. Nor was such the quali- 
 fication which recommended their successor to 
 his present position. A most respectable judge 
 of one of the Circuits he was if we believe his 
 written address to the members of the bar at the 
 time of his appointment, by no means perfect or 
 accomplished in the knowledge of equity jurispru- 
 dence. Yet he has iahis judicial career been most 
 useful most valuable most honorable to him- 
 self and the great state whose chief judicial officer 
 he now is. This array of facts and these argu- 
 ments have led the judiciary committee to the 
 conclusion that there was no inherent, intrinsic 
 objection to the union of the equity and the com- 
 mon law jurisdictions. To regard it as a question 
 of expediency, convenience and economy, there 
 will be but one court, one class of judges, and 
 one class of practitioners. It will be the first 
 step towards an amalgamation of the practice 
 and proceedings, and the hope may then 
 be indulged that under a wise and enlight- 
 ened judicial administration, common law 
 and equity will cease to be regarded as rival and 
 separate systems. Good men look to the institu- 
 tions of the past and the present times with pride 
 and veneration. Even at this day, in this great 
 and free State, we regard the courts and the legal 
 tribunals of the parent country, the depositories 
 of the rights and liberties of men in past ages, 
 with reverence and profound respect, as models 
 worthy of constant imitation. We must remem- 
 ber, however, that property there is gathered to- 
 gether in great masses and in few hands, while 
 here with us it is dispersed and distributed like 
 the early dew and the summer rain. Our institu- 
 tions must conform to the condition of our peo- 
 ple. We could not endure that our law suits 
 should be so costly and prolonged through so ma- 
 ny years of " hope deferred" as they are in En- 
 gland. Our courts of justice must be constructed 
 with reference to the speedy, prompt, the effec- 
 ual, the economical, as well as the intelligent 
 dispatch of the public business. Tribunals cre- 
 ated upon any other principle, were unsuited to 
 the condition of our people. Such he hoped was 
 the character of the courts which the judiciary 
 committee proposed to create, and as such he con- 
 mended them to the favor of the convention. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that he wished to make a 
 few remarks upon the practical operation of the 
 systems reported by the committee. He was of 
 
619 
 
 ;>inion that the force which they suggested 
 would be insufficient, as they had proposed toor- 
 >e it. Again, equity jurisdiction could be 
 i- administered by a separate organization, 
 blending of the two as proposed by 
 Mr. O'CoNOR. Under the plan proposed by him- 
 Mr. M.) the mode of transacting equity bu- 
 precisely ;is the gentleman from Or- 
 i M r. BROWN) had indicated. But still there 
 l>e some review of the proceedings. The 
 gentleman from Orange (Mr. BROWN,) says that 
 the judge would send up the evidence to the 
 court in banque. He would appeal to the com- 
 mon sense of the committee to say if .the judge 
 having the evidence in a case all before him, was 
 not the proper man to make the decree ? But un- 
 der the report presented by the committee, this 
 cannot be done, unless the judge decides instant- 
 tr. 
 
 Mr. KiRKLAND begged to correct the gentle- 
 man (run Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN.) The 
 committee proposed o dispose of these equity 
 cases precisely as of cases in courts of law. Mr. 
 K. proceeded 'o detail the process. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN asked him who they proposed 
 should make the decree? 
 
 AJr. KiRKLAND said that instead of being 
 made by one Judge, as now, it would be made by 
 the court in banque, when the party had the opin- 
 ion* of three j idges instead of one. And from 
 th it court there lay but one appeal to the courts 
 of appeals. This proved the symmetry ot the 
 whole system. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN also explained what he under- 
 stood would be the practical operation under the 
 plan which the standing committee had proposed. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN went on to point out what he 
 d.-emed the defects in the plan. He contended 
 that it was of the first importance that the judge 
 hearing i he c?use should make the decree. All 
 seemed to agree that we must dispense with the 
 presen! sys em of taking testimony by examiners. 
 And he (Mr. M.) was quite confident that under 
 the system proposed by him all this would work 
 effectually and beneficially and harmoniously. 
 
 A i explanation ensued between Messrs. JOR- 
 DAN and PERKINS on the subject of appeals. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES desired to submit a few obser- 
 vations, in answer to the gentleman from Chautau. 
 que (Mr. MARVIN); and his answer to that 
 gentleman would also bean answer to the gentle- 
 man from St. Lawrence, (Mr. PERKINS.) The 
 gentleman from Chautauque thinks that the plan 
 proposed by the committee is not defective in 
 force, or upon the ground that it did not provide 
 a sufficient number of judges, and the gentleman 
 could not well suppose it to be deficient in that 
 respect, inasmuch as the number he himself pro- 
 poses, was less than that of the committee. If, 
 therefore, there be any ground upon which the 
 gentleman assumed that the plan of thecommitfee 
 WHS insufficient, it must be from the organization, 
 and not the number ol the judges. Now, he (Mr. 
 R.) thought that a few minutes would enable him 
 to show that the plan proposed by the committee, 
 was the one which was the most efficient of all 
 others, and that the plan proposed by the gentle- 
 man from Chautauque, was in many respects far 
 less efficient. In speaking of the mode of doing 
 equity business, the gentleman thinks there is an 
 
 advantage in the plan he proposes, because the 
 president judge could act upon the law, and make 
 a decree in equity cases. He (Mr. R.) was at a 
 loss to understand how the gentleman supposed 
 that the judge of the supreme court could not act 
 in the same way. The judge holds the circuit 
 he has the testimony in equity cases, and he re- 
 duces it to writing. He (Mr. R.) begged leave to 
 say that from the experience he had himself in 
 that kind of business, he was satisfied that three 
 out- of four of all the causes could be decided on 
 the spot, without any difficulty at all ; because 
 three out of four of the causes brought into the 
 court of chancery, involve the questions of lact, 
 and not of law. There was another advantage in 
 the plan of the committee, (and it may be also in 
 the plan of the gentleman from Chautauque) and 
 it was this : That in all cases in which an issue 
 could be made, the question may be tried by a 
 jury, and not by the civil officers before whom the 
 evidence is> heard. His president judges had sev- 
 eral counties in his district, and would not be at 
 hand at all times where a cause was tried. Mr. 
 R then went into a calculation of the time which 
 would be occupied by the several judges in at- 
 tending their several courts. By the present sys- 
 tem, the several courts occupied in their sessions 
 1800 days in each year. He supposed there could 
 be no doubt that the force provided in the report 
 of the committee, could perform all the duties 
 which were performed by the supreme court, cir- 
 cuit courts, the common pleas and general sessions 
 in the same time which these courts now occu- 
 pied he was willing to be liberal in his state- 
 ments, but he did not doubt in the least that they 
 would require not more than half the time and 
 he made a calculation of the time which would 
 be occupied by each of the judges of the several 
 courts, in which he supposed that 144 weeks 
 would be the whole time, which divided among 
 28 judges, gave [five weeks to each judge who 
 practiced in law and equity. He supposed that it 
 would take one-third the same length of time in 
 chancery practice. In all the courts, he had given 
 27 weeks to each judge, which allowed him the 
 remainder of the year for deliberation. One dif- 
 ference between the system of the gentleman from 
 Chautauque and the committee, was that in the 
 latter the judges of one court might be called to 
 assist in anomer, when there was a pressure of 
 business. In that of the gentleman from Oneida 
 he could see no substantial difference. 
 
 Mr. MANN had but a word or two to say. He 
 considered the report of the majority of the com- 
 mittee as worthy of much consideration. It pro- 
 posed a material change in our judiciary system 
 and for the better. And he could say the same of 
 the minority reports. For one he felt much in- 
 debted to all these gentlemen for their labors and 
 the result arrived at by them. He was for abol- 
 ishing the courts of errors and of chancery. But 
 we must have equity powers somewhere, and he 
 would confer them upon courts of record. We 
 must have a supreme court, and he would give it 
 equity powers. If it was thought proper to retain 
 the Common pleas court, he thought the plan sug- 
 gested by Mr. MARVIN the best ' that had been 
 proposed. But he rose to suggest that the same 
 privileges should be extended to the city of New 
 York that were enjoyed in the country. He 
 
620 
 
 would have justices of the peace elected in every 
 ward, to hold courts therein. He would extend 
 
 mitigate, and some of thm entirely to avoid. If 
 we fail our failure is not onlv disgraceful to our- 
 
 their jurisdiction to the amount of $'150 exclu- 1 selves but it is a great calarn ity to'the whole peo- 
 sively, and concurrent jurisdiction somewhat far- ! pi e . But, sir, whatever we do we must act de- 
 is 
 
 ther. He believed such courts would be of great 
 advantage in the disposal of minor causes in the 
 city. He would not allow of more than one ap- 
 peal from these justices courts. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said: Mr. Chairman, I am op- 
 posed to the report of the majority of the commit- 
 tee. In my judgment it is wholly inadequate to 
 remedy the evils of the present judicial system. 
 Its defects are plain vital and far beyond the 
 healing skill of the legislature or the judges. 
 The judiciary, sir, must be by far the most im- 
 portant -of all human institutions. Indeed it is 
 one of the necessary conditions of civilized gov- 
 ernment to depend in a very large degree upon 
 the administration of justice, for no evil is so 
 quickly felt or so severely resented as any in- 
 fringement of those rights of property or of per- 
 son which have been consecrated to the use of 
 men. And of no government can this be more 
 truly spoken than our own, where the people 
 themselves make the law and change it 
 as the public welfare and the public happiness 
 demand. The great variety of sentiment, and the 
 warmth of feeling that have distinguished this 
 wide and amplified discussion are, therefore, not to 
 be regretted. This subject, like almost every oth- 
 er that deeply affects the interests of mankind, is 
 full of practical difficulties which strike the minds 
 of different men with different degrees of force. 
 Even the lawyers, who are most intimate with 
 
 our present judicature 
 mon sufferers from its 
 
 -who have long been corn- 
 evils, and whose minds 
 
 would consequently seem to be impelled toward 
 similar conclusions disagre'e in the material re- 
 medies to be applied. This, however, is not un- 
 natural, for they never did yet agree upon any 
 considerable point that had not the authority ol 
 a legal judgment to support it. Sir, speaking 
 comparatively, our judiciary system does not oc- 
 cupy any very large space in the business of the 
 state the. mighty aggregate of our other transac- 
 tions is immeasureably beyond the labors of dis- 
 pensing justice from the constituted tribunals. II 
 does not, therefore, derive its dignity so much 
 from the vastness of its duties as from their sacrec 
 and indispensable character. But such as it is 
 we may regard it with complacency nay, witl 
 pride. Its voice heard in the recorded decisions 
 has been echoed with respect on every court of 
 this vast nation, and even where its expositions 
 of the great principles of law have been doubted 
 or denied, dissent has been as hesitating and re- 
 luctant as former approval was hearty and sincere 
 Such as it is it has, except in one single unhap 
 py instance that I remember, shielded the Con 
 stitution against the graspings of Executive am 
 legislative power. Such as it is it has done jus 
 tice between legal persons and individuals. ', 
 know it has been slow in its great office. I know it: 
 machinery has become cumbered by ill-de 
 vised forms, and that it has not in any great de 
 gree been liberalized as our necessities required 
 I know that the judicial power blended with tin 
 legislative in the highest court, has continual!; 
 threatened danger to our most sacred institutions 
 All these evils I trust we shall be able largely tc 
 
 berately. Caution is an e -t of true 
 
 visdom. The administration of the law in this 
 tate is a great system. Indeed the largeness of 
 abor alone, induces us to regard it with a kind of 
 we. 1 am sure the amount of such business done 
 mongst us greatly surpasses the proportion of the' 
 ther States. This is an unavoidable consequence of 
 he superiority of our commercial transactions, for 
 itigation follows property wherever ir goes. But 
 ts complexity tar exceeds its threat ne-s, and as a 
 practical difficulty is much more considerable. 
 n no respect is the progress of society more surely 
 narked than by the c replication of rights. Deli- 
 cate and intangible rights are regaided by refined 
 ocieties, and become the creatures of governmen- 
 al protection mankind is taught to respect ab- 
 itractions as the roots ot practical things. But 
 his complication is chiefly owing to the necessary 
 changes of property lo the groat vaiiety of estates 
 Yom !he slightest lien to absolute ownership, that 
 can be created out of if by the wants of business 
 >r the caprices of individuals. And permit me to 
 add that the infirmity of human judgment iyet 
 urther entangles a subject which is already the 
 most difficult thst employs the ingenuity of man. 
 All these causes therefore the largeness of fhe 
 abor the complication of rights ,md the intrin- 
 sic unsoundne.^s of human judgment, contribute to 
 render our judicial system one, difficult to be un- 
 derstood difficult to be administered and only to 
 be approached in its reform with the greatest care 
 and with the most profound wisdom. In the most 
 common aflairs of life, a subtle and discriminating 
 nlellect finds ample opportunity for its exercise 
 how much greater the occasion in touching a 
 system by which the soundest judgments that man: 
 can exercise is t<> be applied to all that makes life 
 
 dear : to the rights of property, 
 I at ion nay, to life itself. 
 
 liberty, family re 
 we find a judicial 
 
 system in full operation; we are not disposed to 
 question the great principles of law it promul- 
 gates. Those principles are p-tr'r of our tree heii- 
 tage ; they have been recognized by the people 
 since the establishment of our government. They 
 change, it is true; but slowly, and oftenest with- 
 iheever changing condition ot society. We hope 
 to give them to our children, in no respect injured 
 but rather improved by our fostering hands. Our 
 duty is to leave them, untouched by any arbitrary 
 rule that we might lay down, to be varied by the 
 people as their varying w.tnts may require. We 
 find that system working in many respects well, 
 and in many respects ill. Where it has worked 
 well, I am willing to keep it : where it has worked 
 ill where it has not done lull justice, in a man- 
 ner as rapid and complete as any other system we 
 can devise let us amend it. Where, however, 
 we doubt; where we are not sure that we can be 
 benefitted by any change, let us rely upon the wis- 
 dom of our fathers, and stand still. I do not love 
 change, lor the sake of change, more than I love 
 lo stand still, for tlie sake of standing still. But 
 whatever we do, we cannot do all that some gen- 
 tlemen desire: our power is limited to make the 
 frame the skeleton ol the judiciary: the people, 
 through their representatives in the Legislature, 
 
621 
 
 must clothe it with the veins, the arteries, the 
 muscles; arid all beside tbat goes to make it ft living 
 furore.. Jini'' will not permit us to wiihdraw 
 our consideration from the gr^at outlines of the 
 
 :n to the minure details by which it is to 
 
 be rendered more or less etlective. For this rea- 
 
 I shall not di- two of my col- 
 
 ies, (Mr. O'CoNOR and Mr. NICOLL) have 
 (1> nc the mere forms of procedure in courts. I 
 with their opinions, but we cannot apply 
 the remedy, upon this floor. No sir ! a discus- 
 sion about pleadings would be interminable. 
 We can only make the system of courts by which 
 our Judicature is to be administered and provide 
 an adequate judicial force for that purpose the 
 
 -:.ituiv must apply that force as the public 
 business requires. I shall now proceed to state 
 these leading defects which characterize the re- 
 port of the majority. The first, and in my judg- 
 ment a serious one, is that there is nojarovision 
 for a separate administration of "equity Jurispru- 
 dence, either by-a-d-rflfereTlt "court, or by differ- 
 ent, particularly designated, judges of the same 
 court. I h-epa-t-s-hall not be misunderstood. I 
 do not stand upon this floor the advocate of the 
 present court of chancery. I have a hearty de- 
 testation of the one man power. In a republican 
 government, no man, however high his character 
 or commanding his intellect, should be permit- 
 ted to wield the patronage the coercive power 
 the mighty and controlling influences of such a 
 tribunal. It is incompatible with the security of 
 the government and with the safety of the people. 
 I do not think there can be any disagreement on 
 this point. Popular liberty must be secured by 
 the diffusion of power. If the liberties of the 
 people, should ultimately in the course of ages 
 be stricken down, they themselves will have 
 concentrated the power to do it, in the hands of 
 their destroy-'rs. This court is not a necessary- 
 instrument of our government and it is far too 
 dangerous to be employed. But sir, whatever 
 may become of the court of chancery, I'assume 
 that equity powers are still to be exercised. The 
 unbending rigor of the law itself does, sometimes, 
 that very injustice it was established to prevent. 
 This is a necessary consequence of the weakness 
 of human foresight, and no system of laws can be 
 altogether safe or beneficent in its effects which 
 does not somewhere secure a relief against the dis- 
 covered fallability of mankind. Beside, sir, there 
 is a marked and decided difference between the 
 great substantial parts of law and equity jurisdic- 
 tion a difference resting not solely in the will 
 of the Legislature nor in any great degree de- 
 pendent on or controlled by it, but existing in 
 the unalterable nature of things themselves. 
 The jurisdiction of law is confined to matters 
 comparatively simple in their character where 
 one, or at most a lew, issues can be presented, tried 
 and adjudged. But sir, equity does not proceed 
 upon the harsh and unyielding rules of law. It 
 is true, as has been said, that the adjudicati 
 equity tribunals have become a system as well 
 settled and defined as the body of the common 
 law itself, but, does this render it less effectual 
 for the purp..si.-.s it was designed? i\o sir ! Hu- 
 man right ought to stand upon as sure a founda- 
 tion as human weakness will permit. Every 
 man should be able to ascertain from the ex- 
 
 pressed will of the people, as spoken by the lips 
 of the Equity Judge or by the corrective and 
 overruling voice of the Legislature what is that 
 equity to which he is entitled. To 
 this dependent upon his own will would 
 be too absurd- to be spoken of tor a moment but 
 to make it dependent upon the will of a chancel- 
 lor, who is bound by no known authority whose 
 j ud j;ment receives the sanction of no precedent 
 rule but who sits supreme within the .circle of 
 his own discretion and draws from his own mind, 
 rather than from the fountain of an enlarged and 
 salutary jurisprudence, the principles of equity, 
 distorted by prejudice, or it may be blackened 
 by corruption would be not only absurd, but 
 wicked and perilous in the extreme. The form- 
 er case would cause wrong and individual suffer- 
 ing, but the latter would shake the strongly based 
 columns of society, and involve the whole com- 
 monwealth in the same mighty calamity. All 
 that has been said against the principles of equi- 
 ty in this discussion, simply because those prin- 
 ciples happen to be long settled and well settled, 
 and because the laborious wisdom of former years 
 was devoted to expound them, I shall wholly dis- 
 regard it is not particularly worthy of no- 
 tice. Our forefathers lived and care^ and 
 thought a little for us as well as for themselves. 
 The exceeding complication of many subjects of 
 equity jurisdiction, though it may be regretted, is 
 one of the necessary incidents to high civilization 
 to extended commerce, and to the vast and in- 
 volved circle of the transactions of men. I have 
 touched this consideration before, and I shall not 
 amplify it here. Uses Trusts expressed and im- 
 plied ; Accidents, the remedies for which no fore- 
 cast can provide ; Frauds, the result of every 
 complication of business, and every device of sub- 
 tle and ingeniftus minds ; Partitions, Accounts, 
 Specific performances these are, and must be, 
 the subjects of an equity jurisdiction. I know 
 that gentlemen have spoken warmly in favor of 
 employing a jury in every suit, and I do not for- 
 get that there is something exceedingly plausible 
 in this notion to an inexperienced mind. Sir, I 
 wish we were able to do so. No man can go be- 
 yond me in his admiration of the jury. It per- 
 forms a great function in our government and one 
 which is not often mentioned. I mean the tem- 
 pering of the law to the circumstances and the 
 infusion into it of the feelings of the people. The 
 character of men is elevated by their being made 
 the ministers of justice at the altar where her sa- 
 cred duties are performed ; by association with 
 the judges, they obtain a practical knowledge of 
 the principles of law and their application, while 
 the judges by the same means, learn many of the 
 evils oi'an existing judicature, (for evils it must 
 have,) and the most ready and acceptable mode 
 for their correction. I am, for these reasons, in 
 favor of employing the jury in every practicable 
 case the public welfare, the right administra- 
 tion of your judicial system, demand no less. 
 But it may be accounted among our misfortunes 
 that these are causes to which it cannot be ap- 
 plied. I will not attempt to enumerate them. I 
 suppose all who have weighed this matter will 
 readily assent to the proposition. I put only a 
 single case to those gentlemen whose thoughts 
 have not been turned in this direction a trust 
 
622 
 
 estate, where the parties are numerous say 
 twenty, thirty, forty or fifty and where the rela- 
 tion of every party to every other party in the 
 suit is somewhat different. If the jury were em- 
 ployed, then the issues presented must be very 
 numerous, and the labor of trial must be burthen- 
 some beyond the patience of man to bear. And, 
 again, these issues can in no way be arrived at by 
 the parties themselves, under any system of plead- 
 ing applicable to such a case. They must there- 
 fore be made up by the court or by some of its of- 
 ficers, especially deputed for that purpose. The 
 power to make the issue involves the power to 
 give a coloring to the case by the mode in which 
 the question is presented to be tried, or to pre- 
 sent unnecessary and immaterial issues. These 
 two consequences then irresistibly follow : the 
 extent of jury duty will be greatly increased, and 
 the equity judge will have the same power that he 
 now possesses and in my judgment always will 
 possess, so long as he can determine what the issue 
 is the power of presenting erroneously the true 
 question in dispute. The latter evil is in the na- 
 ture of things inseparable from every system 
 where decisions are required to be made upon 
 involved and complicated statements. I do not 
 know^that it is any worse than the power exer- 
 cised by a common law judge, by the expression 
 of an opinion unwarranted by the facts of the case, 
 to sway the judgment of the jury ; but such as it 
 is, we must guard against it by the selection of 
 those men for judges, who by the clearness of 
 their intellects and the purity of their characters, 
 give us the best assurance against a natural defect 
 in every system of jurisprudence, and one that 
 we cannot wholly hope to avoid. Sir, the equit) 
 business of this State has increased very greatly 
 since the year 1821, with the natural increase of 
 our population, of our commerce, both internal 
 and external, and from many other causes that I 
 will not undertake to enumerate. Our courts of 
 equity are now fully occupied, and the extent of 
 their employment must increase with the pro- 
 gress of time. This, in my way of thinking, con- 
 stitutes a strong argument in favor of the separa 
 tion of law and equity jurisdiction. I am quite 
 clear that such a separation would be unwise. I 
 am sure it would be at variance with a principle 
 that has done more for the development of hu 
 man industry, both physical and mental, than 
 any other. 1 allude to the division of labor. 
 This has been the great cause of perfection in 
 every art. Every man recognizes, every man ap- 
 plies it, so far as possible, in the details of his 
 occupation ; and do vou believe, sir, that it will 
 lose its force when applied to your judiciary. 
 Sir, I think not. In the first place, the judges 
 who sit in equity alone will have superior skil] 
 in that department ; that skill will be of great 
 service in the administration of justice; it 
 will fix more definitely those rules of equi- 
 ty, which are evolved from the considera- 
 tion of a great variety ot cases, and it wil 
 secure the most rapid dispaich of business 
 according to the established modes. I say the es 
 tablished modes if you would have these chang 
 ed, and I am sure they should be in many respects 
 it must be done by the Legislature. Judges, like 
 other men are too apt to employ forms that have 
 become familiar, and to do business according tc 
 
 heir previous habit. B*it, sir, the gentleman 
 rom Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) has rejected the 
 pplication of this principle to the separation of 
 aw and equity tribunals. The substantial argu- 
 ment that he has addressed to the Committee is 
 hat there is no great difference between law and 
 quity, inasmuch as both are lor f .he redress of 
 wrongs. This he has presented in a great variety 
 f forms, but they all rest on the basis I have sta- 
 ed. Sjj-ip it of all its illustrations not tending 
 o illustrate resolve it into its own substan- 
 elements, and the answer is obvious. V\ hile 
 t is true that both are tor the redress of wrongs, 
 t is equally true that wrongs aie infinitely diversi- 
 ied in their natures and infinitely diversified in 
 heir remedies. If we are assailed upon this floor, 
 we retort as the rules of parliamentary bodies 
 )ermit ; if we are attacked in the streets, we re- 
 iiot with a violent hand; it our property is wrong, 
 ully taken away, we reclaim it by seizure, if we 
 can ; or if not, then we seek the established tribu- 
 nals for relief; if we have interests in a large es- 
 ate, in common with many other persons inter- 
 ests which are nice, complex and embarrassing ; 
 we seek a court of equity, not for litigation but 
 ^ disentanglement, and a jus;, permanent and ir- . 
 revocable settlement- But I will not trouble the 
 Committee with illustrations of this description 
 'or a slight effort of the imagination will produce 
 a vast number. When all the wrongs for which 
 elief is sought in Ihe courts, shall be reduced to 
 ,he same class, and becomprehensible in the same 
 general remedies, I shall be exceedingly happy to 
 agree with my estimable friend Irom Heikimer,but 
 hat time is far far away beyond the reach of any 
 Constitution or any law that we shall ever frame. 
 One of my colleagues, who sits just at my left 
 [Mr. NICOLL) has adduced an argument from the 
 practical difficulty of observing the boundary be- 
 ween law and equity, and he magnified that dif- 
 ficulty until it appeared to be subversive of all 
 justice.. Nothing, he seemed to think, could be 
 nore vague, more shadowy and more perplexing, 
 :han this utterly uncertain region. It reminded 
 me of nothing so much as that chaos, where the 
 Prince of Darkness, could neither wholly walk, 
 nor swim, nor fly. Sir, I am free to admit that 
 difficulties may arise from the confusion of boun. 
 darary. Boundary is and always has been a vex- 
 ed question. The division of the world into na- 
 tions and of our country into tracts of land and 
 farms, has given rise to many difficulties, but 
 these do not, on the whole, materially diminish 
 its advantages. Every earthly good is alloyed by 
 some portion of evil which constitutes its draw- 
 bac^k and it is the chief office of philosophy to in- 
 struct us what good will compensate the evil we 
 must bear with it. I think my friend has declaim- 
 ed against the evil without allowing himself to 
 look at the good beside which, it is inconsiderable 
 indeed. Some divisions of your judicial business 
 it is conceded must be made. Rest assured none 
 will ever be too broad for ignorance to confound, 
 and weakness to misinterpret, nor any too sharp 
 and fine for the ingenious and discriminating fully 
 to understand and observe. But, sir, if we could 
 commit so great an error as to reason solely from 
 the evils ot a division between law and equity, it 
 would prove nothing for the purpose the honorable 
 gentleman has used it. It is as good an argument 
 
623 
 
 to justify the merging of the law into the equity 
 courts as the converse. I only mention this t 
 aiiovv how slippery a tooting it rests on. The 
 strong answer to ii is to be found in tne nature ol 
 the boundary of which the honorable gentleman 
 .token. It is not as he supposes, an arbitrary 
 division it is not dependent upon the will of the 
 judges it is not to be built up and pulled down at 
 the pleasure of the legislature it lies deep in the 
 nature of wrongs and of remedies. You may, if 
 lease, give up the advantages which result 
 frmn a division of business you may impair botn 
 systems by an inharmonious union, but neverthe- 
 less you cannot wholly escape the consequences 
 of the natural division to which I have alluded. 
 J[t cannot be doubted no man is so visionary as 
 to question that different forms will be requisite 
 to attain the different objects of law and equity 
 pursuit. Even the present forms of pleading are 
 not wholly without meaning, as gentlemen have 
 seemed to suppose. It is true, they do not often 
 express their true signification in language intel- 
 ligible to the inexperienced, but they are in their 
 actual sense applicable to the case, and calculat- 
 ed to work out the remedy. The use of peculiar 
 forms and the necessities of particular cases will 
 unavoidably originate a difference of practice. 
 Here then arises the division of which I speak. 
 I am satisfied that form and practice will not be 
 adhered to with less tenacity than heretofore, and 
 here the division is widened and perpetuated. 
 If law remedies are applied to equity cases or the 
 converse, embarrassment must be felt and tha 
 we cannot possibly guard against. I will allude 
 now, to the only case my honorable colleague put 
 as an illustration, of the enquiry which this con- 
 fusion of boundary may occasion. I would not 
 do this, but I thought the case made a visible im- 
 pression upon the members of this body, as in- 
 dividual cases of hardship always do. A debtor 
 had signed a submission to arbitrators, and an 
 award had been made against him for $300, more 
 than the amout due. Upon this erroneous award 
 a judgment was entered, which the credi- 
 tor refused to cancel except on payment of the 
 whole amount. The debtor, says my learned 
 friend, made an application to the Supreme Court 
 to set aside the judgment, but that tribunal did 
 not conceive it had authority to do so, because 
 there was no subscribing witness to the submis- 
 sion or to the award. The debtor flew to the 
 Court of Chancery, but he procured no relief. 
 That court also doubted its jurisdiction, but decid- 
 ed that there was a complete remedy upon applica- 
 tion to the Supreme Court. The consequences 
 stated were lamentable the unfortunate debtor 
 was forced to pay $600 as the costs of his appli- 
 cations beside the whole amount of the award. 
 Sir, this case appeals strongly to our sense of jus- 
 tice, but I am obliged to touch it with an answer 
 that utterly destroys its illusion. It never could, 
 have happened. By the statute the award musthave 
 an attesting witness, and upon the submission be- 
 ing proved by the affidavit of the subscribing wit- 
 ness thereto, aud upon the award made in pursu- 
 ance thereof, being proved in like manner, or by 
 the aliidavit of the arbitrators, the Court shall 
 confirm sucli award. JN'ow sir, if there was not 
 the attesting witness or the evidence of the sub- 
 mission required by the Statute it would never 
 
 have been confirmed and no application could 
 ever have been necessary to set aside a confir- 
 mation that did not exist. But on the other hand 
 if the attesting witness signed and the submission 
 and award were regularly made, then the appli- 
 cation might have been entertained by the Su- 
 preme Court. I leave my friend to reconcile 
 this difficulty, or rather, I give him a free election 
 to impale himself upon either horn of, this for- 
 midable dilemma. If however, the court of equi- 
 ty to which the unfortunate debtor applied, had 
 been merged into a court of law, would he have 
 been any better off? Certainly not, for as the a- 
 ward did not conform to the Statute, the court 
 would not have had jurisdiction and the party 
 would have been equally remediless. I may go 
 therefore, the length of admitting an impossi- 
 ble case, and yet nothing is proved in favor of a 
 union of these two great judicial departments. 
 Of all sciences that of law ought to act by plain, 
 simple, and well established rules, becaus^ it in- 
 volves all the rights that are recognized in civilized 
 society the rights pertaining to property, to per- 
 sonal security, to character, to the domestic re- 
 lations, and to life. Such rules, as I have before 
 suggested, by their generality must frequently 
 Work injustice, and this it is the high function 
 of a court of equity to alleviate by known and fix- 
 ed maxims, with exact reference to the peculiar 
 circumstances of each case. This tribunal 
 wears rather the aspect of an enlarged arbi- 
 tration. It is capable easily to hear a great 
 number of parties, in the same suit, and it can en- 
 force its decrees by a vast number of means un- 
 known to the common law. It binds none but 
 parties,and these it binds by a judicial settlement 
 of every separate, individual interest, by the pe-\ 
 culiar circumstances applicable to that interest.! 
 It is true these suits are often longer than neces-i 
 sity demands; but when they are determined, they' 
 determine in the same litigation a great variety of 
 nice and refined questions which could not have 
 been settled so easily in any other way. Look, 
 sir, at the statute of Uses, how delicate and ab- 
 struse the questions that may arise how numer- 
 ous the parties and how important in a pecuni- 
 ary view, the result. Look at the cases of trusts, 
 involving the interests of two clases of the com- 
 munity, whom it is our duty as well as our dear- 
 est wish to protect. I mean infents_.an.d..married 
 women. The cases are too numerous to be brief- 
 ly stated in which peculiar remedies must be 
 sought by peculiar means entirely at variance 
 with any forms of practice or procedure that can 
 be advantageously resorted to at the common law. 
 Sir, two instances have been mentioned to show 
 with what facility the courts of law can adminis- 
 ter the principles of equity partition and ac- 
 count. It was a favorite object of the revisers of 
 our Statutes to simplify these two actions and ren- 
 der them easy law remedies ; but, sir, I think they 
 failed in both these objects. I appeal to the gen- 
 tlemen who have used that argument (Mr. NICOLL, 
 and Mr. BROWN) to answer whether partition is 
 not in nine cases out of ten brought in a court of 
 equity. In my experience the proportion is much 
 greater than this. I know a partition suit in a 
 court of law in New-York to be a very rare pro- 
 ceeding, arid I suppose it to be equally so in the 
 other parts of the State. Of the action of account 
 
624 
 
 there have not been twelve cases in a court 
 law in the state since the Revised Statutes. Th 
 proceeding has been altogether too embarrassin 
 and in its results altogether too disastrous. I ne 
 ver heard of more than one such case in this stat 
 that was brought to a conclusion, and that wa 
 expedited by the ignorance rather than by the in 
 genuity of counsel the plaintiff failed by demur 
 rer and made wise by defeat, never trusted s 
 treacherous a remedy again. Within a few year 
 the present Chief Justice, upon deciding one o 
 these cases, told the plaintiff, who failed in the 
 technical part of his remedy, that he should hav 
 gone to a court of equity, the machinery of whic] 
 was so much better calculated to explore the la 
 barynths of an intricate transaction-. Sir, even 
 in Pennsylvania, where this action has been fos 
 tered, because its equity was desired, it has been 
 found ponderous and unmanageable and such i; 
 the testimony of the bench and the bar of tha 
 State. * Glance at Massachusetts. The want of a 
 complete equity judicature has been lamented b) 
 her judges. But the gentleman from Chautau 
 que (Mr. MARVIN,) has alluded to this. Glance 
 at Pennsylvania. In no place has the privation 
 of any equity system been more sensibly felt or 
 more deeply regretted. All sorts of shifts, arti- 
 fices, and deVices which lawyers and judges coulc 
 devise, were resorted to, to patch and frame up 
 some substitute for an equity System. The hon- 
 orable gentleman from Chautauque, (Mr. MAR- 
 VIN,) told us that in an action for specific per- 
 formance of a contract for the sale of lands, inas- 
 much as the courts had no power to decree such 
 a performance, they were compelled to direct the 
 jury to find two or three times the value of the 
 land in order to drive the defendant to convey il 
 rather than pay the amount of so onerous a judg- 
 ment. I thought the Convention was forcibly 
 impressed with the absurdity of this proceeding, 
 and my respected colleague (Mr. NICOLL,) felt it 
 weigh so heavily upon his argument that he was 
 forced to suggest a remedy that might be applied 
 consistentlywith the extinction of a separate equi- 
 ty jurisdiction. The Legislature, said he, should 
 have passed a law granting authority to the courts 
 to decree specific performance. Sir, the answer 
 is apparent supposing they had done so a sin- 
 gle instance would have been corrected and no 
 more. And when the Legislature with long la- 
 bor and continued attention shall have remedied 
 all the instances by statute, then this consequence 
 utterly repugnant to the gentleman's views, will 
 have happened. They will have established a 
 complete equity system. But, sir, what has been 
 the conduct of that state ? The people pressed 
 down beneath the unavoidable inflexibility of 
 their law system, have, like wise men, imitated 
 the enlarged principles of that jurisprudence, 
 which has been an honor to our State, which has 
 made her respected far and near, which has 
 given her recorded decisions the authority of 
 law. They have established an equity system 
 not so comprehensive as desirable, but still 
 obviating many existing evils. Much has been 
 said in this discussion against the forms of pro- 
 ceeding in equity, and gentlemen have assumed 
 the abolition of the court, to be the easiest 
 way to get rid of the forms. Certainly that 
 would achieve the object and in a summary way. 
 
 You can abolish your ponderous law forms by the 
 same process. So you can cure the headache by 
 taking off the head. Does it follow however that 
 this is the best mode ? In my judgment no part 
 of your judicature requires closer attention of the 
 legislature than the forms of proceeding, but in 
 the main I am inclined to think they will bend to 
 the remedy sought or rather such forms only will 
 be used as may be appropriate to the remedy. 
 It may be readily answered that they have be- 
 come cumbersome and expensive. This is unfor- 
 tunately too true but in a few excepted instances, 
 this is not the consequence of the rules of plead- 
 ing. No, it is the result of some other element 
 that you have let into the system A bill in 
 equity has been called a thrice-told tale. Can it 
 be otherwise, so long as the folio system exists, 
 unchecked by the careful supervision of the tax- 
 ing officer. No, sir, your taxing officers must be 
 rigid what is superfluous must be struck out 
 and then you may be confident that a bill in equity 
 will become what it was designed to be, " a plain 
 unvarnished tale." Examinations in equity suits 
 are wonderfully tedious and expensive. Abolish 
 the office of examiner and substitute oral exami- 
 nations to be heard before the equity judge as in 
 a trial of law. If you would take a step in law 
 3leading that shall leave a favorable impress 
 jpon the whole system, abolish the general issue, 
 that common refuge of indolent and ignorant 
 men. England has taken a step in this respect 
 n every way worthy our imitation. My col- 
 eague to whom I have before alluded (Mr. Ni- 
 COLL) regrets that so much of the subtle dialec- 
 ics of the schoolmen have been infused into our 
 system of pleading. Sir, I differ with him there 
 as upon almost every other point. The great evil 
 of that system is that we have departed from spe- 
 cial pleading. I know gentlemen regard special 
 )leading with a vague and undefined horror as 
 lie awful instrument that has severed the thread 
 >f so many just suits. I hope to live to see form 
 n pleading disregarded by the courts. I hope to 
 ive to see every plaintiff state in plain and dis- 
 inct terms the substance of his action and the de- 
 endants reply the very subject matter of his de- 
 ence. I would like to see the truth told on 
 aper in our law suits, and then we should 
 enow .what we are about. There would be 
 10 new trials upon the ground of surprise. 
 "his is what I have been taught to consider the 
 ommon law system of special pleading, and this 
 hope to see restored to the frank and manly sim- 
 ilicity that pervaded it, before it was so wofully 
 eclouded. But we cannot cure that evil here 
 ur time is too short, and we have other weighty 
 natters on our hands. Indeed, it would not be a 
 afe experiment for us to attempt. Our forms 
 must bend to our wants. This I deeply regret, 
 ut it is unavoidable. No, sir, it is reserved for 
 ome favored band in the legislature to work out 
 lis herculean task, and thus to do more for the 
 welfare of unfortunate litigants than has been 
 one before in the history of our State. Rest as- 
 ured it will be done. The attention of the peo- 
 le is turned in that direction; they will never 
 e satisfied till it is achieved. An argument has 
 een made in favor of blending the jurisdiction 
 :' these courts from the transfer of equity juns- 
 iction to courts of law. One of my colleagues 
 
625 
 
 (Mr. NICOLL,) says " they have already become 
 ee, commingled." Then, I ask, d( 
 to do what has already heen done ? 
 Bur that is not true in point of fact. Thougl 
 courts of law now issue commissions and take tes- 
 Dioiiy in rei memoriam perpetuam; though 
 can enforce a discovery of books anc 
 papers; though in many cases of fraud they 
 jurisdiction the great, leading pecu- 
 f'.'utures of equity justice will remain 
 :olure. 1 am willing to agree with gen- 
 tlemen up to a certain point, and then we must 
 separate. Wherever equity jurisdiction is auxil- 
 iary to that of law, then I would clothe the law 
 h every necessary equity power. Foi 
 instance, I would give him authority to compel 
 a discovery in aid of a suit at law, or upon a cre- 
 ditors hill; but that great, peculia/, substantial 
 equity jurisdiction, which never can involve any 
 matter of purely legal litigation, I would keep as 
 -entirely separate and distinct, as our forefathers 
 have made it. Sir, I come now to a second lead- 
 ing objection to the majority report. There are 
 not judges enough to do the labor cast upon them. 
 Four out of the 32 judges must sit in the court of 
 appeals. They will be fully occupied with that 
 business, for it will be most laborious in all its 
 .branches. It is not the sessions of the court alone 
 that will consume their time, but the examina- 
 tion of great bodies of authority upon the ques- 
 tions that must come before them. You have 
 fthen eight and twenty left to do the duties of your 
 ' present chancery circuit and common pleas courts 
 to hear certioraris to justices and to all other 
 oiliccrs ; to hear all special proceedings, such as 
 prohibition, procendo, mandamus and infor- 
 mations, and to encounter that resistless tide of 
 business arguments in error and in bane, in 
 law and equity. Sir, is it for a moment believed 
 that they will be capable to perform this great 
 task ? Ana if they can with vast industry accom- 
 plish it ? Is this a system to expand with your 
 wants and meet your growing necessities ? Are 
 thirty^^wojasn to do tne duties of over three hun- 
 dred, wEo" are employed under your present sys- 
 tem : I will not lor a moment argue this to those 
 who known anything of the magnitude of the 
 work to be done. But, I may be answered, that 
 the legislature can increase this number of judges 
 or create other courts. Sir, to this I should say, 
 I want a judicial system that will stand of itself, 
 that is adequate to do the duties required of it, at 
 least at the moment it is put in operation. I do not 
 desire that we shall commence such a system, and 
 leave the legislature to complete it. There 
 would be less danger, and greater prospect of har- 
 mony, in leaving it to them altogether. No, sir, 
 Let us construct a system lhat shall answer our 
 present wants, and give~-to the Legislature ihe 
 nexessary power ip expand it, as those wants in- 
 crten*;. My next leading objectron to tfTe'plan of 
 the coin mitiee, is, that one-tenth part of the judges 
 are authorized to hold general tenns, and from the 
 structure ot the court a larger number cannot of- 
 ten sit for this purpose. We cannot then have 
 the judgment of the whole court upon any matter. 
 j You have a seiies <,t hide courts, vvondei lully like 
 a number uf large justices' courts, who determine, 
 arid whose judgment in the nature of things must 
 often be conflicting. Your court of appeals becomes 
 
 an arena for the settlement of these differences, 
 and the lour judges you send iriio it from the su- 
 preme court, are already, by the ties of friendship 
 or by pride of exprt s>ed opinion, turned into par~ 
 tizans in the most sacred leces-ts ot the judicial 
 sanctuary. Sir, we ought to elevate the character 
 ot our courts. The judicial Tinine is never tco 
 pure nor too much respected. This is the way 
 fatally to depress it. Weare tau^hi wisdom from 
 tlie decisions of the higher tribunals The judges 
 ought to be wise and pure men, and their opinions 
 ought to be entitled to profound respect. We look 
 to the supreme court for a lart.',e bodv ol decis-ions 
 that are worthy to be followed. The court of ap- 
 peals will riot decide upon all classes of questions 
 until many years shall have run away. And as 
 years run away decisions he-come inapplicable 
 1 he great leading principles of the common law 
 have been settled, not in cases involving large 
 amounts, but in those which arose upon ordinary 
 occasions. That is the cl:iss ol cases to which 
 your law is peculiarly applicable, and to do justice 
 in which it is peculiarly descried. The decisions 
 of the Supreme court will riot he worth a rush, 
 if the report of the majority of the committee is 
 adopted. The last objection that 1 shall urge to 
 (his report, is one peculiar to the city 1 partly re- 
 present. Our judicial business is large, much lai- 
 ger in proportion than that <>f any other p,irt of 
 the Stare. We employ one Vice Chancellor ;.m! 
 one Assistant Vice Chancellor, whose duties are 
 f the most laborious description; one Circuit 
 Judge, one Recorder, three Judges of I he Superior 
 Court, and three Judges of the Common Fleas, 
 who, without any figure of speech, i/iny be said to -it 
 perpetually. Indeed they are already loaded wiili 
 susiness to the full limit of human health to bear. 
 Yet this force was found unable to do the business, 
 and we were compelled to apply to the legisla- 
 te to give the Superior Court and Common 
 Pleas, the right to hold double sessions to try 
 two causes in different chambers at the same time 
 and even this temporary alleviation is rapidly 
 jecoming inadequate to our necessities. The 
 committee have substituted for this large judicial 
 ibrce, four judges yes, four judges ! 1 need say 
 no more. The fact is its own most severe and 
 unanswerable commentary. But I hear gentlemen 
 say the legislature can create additional judges 
 Yes, they can complete what we have left incom- 
 jlete they can finish the system. But, sir, I 
 lave answered this suggestion before. And I will 
 say more in behalf of the great interests for which 
 speak upon this floor I will say, sir, that no 
 Dlan is worthy of our support which does riot ex- 
 end to those judges whose servicej^&^liaJJl re- 
 
 quire spjongas wejEejaaJEg. any thing, a oj^sttu- 
 1 office. I will not. put them aV Ihe 
 mercy ojveak or venal legislature. I will not 
 rust them in the hands of that body, any more 
 han the necessity of the case compels me they 
 ihall not be liable to be turned adrift at any mo- 
 ment or upon any impulse they shall no*t feel 
 hat they are insecure in their seals. JN T o sir, they 
 hall possess the independence, and strength of 
 )osition that will enable them to resist thelegis- 
 ature when it encroaches upon the rights of the 
 )eople. Without this we are not safe. Sir, I 
 will now briefly state my own plan for a judiciary. 
 T shall urge no reasons for its adoption ner do I 
 
 53 
 
626 
 
 know that I shall formally bring it before this bo- 
 dy. That plan I would present as a combination 
 of the views of members, and worthy to be called 
 a compromise. I would have the highest tribu- 
 nal a Court of Appeals, organized separately from 
 | every other tribunal. I would be satisfied if it 
 ' were arranged in other respects upon the general 
 features of almost any plan that has been sub- 
 mitted. I would next in gradation establish a 
 Supreme Court to consist of as many judges as 
 7 might be required and who should hold Circuits, 
 / and sit in bane and upon appeal from the Com 
 ''I mon Pleas. I would have a separate Equi 
 ty tribunal, or if gentlemen like it better, 
 I would have the Supreme Court divided, 
 so that some of the judges should hear Equity 
 causes and no other. Next in gradation, I would 
 place the courts of common pleas organized in 
 districts say sixteen for this State, to be formed 
 by the Legislature. One judge should be ap- 
 pointed for each district, and in the more popu- 
 lous, such additional judges as might be necessa- 
 ry. These Judges should hold circuits in each 
 county as often as business might require. In those 
 parts of the State where the business would ad- 
 mit of it law and equity powers might be blend- 
 ed. I would give them the power of holding 
 general sessions and of trying all criminal cases 
 subject to the right of appeal. Below these I 
 would place as many justices' courts as necessary, 
 giving the appeal from those courts to the com- 
 " nnon pleas disminishing the number of justices 
 and enlarging their jurisdiction. I would re- 
 tain the Surrogates' and such local courts of 
 law and equity, as the necessities of the 
 city and county of New York might require. 
 1 would give bin one appeal in any case an ap. 
 peal t'rurn the justices to the common pleas from 
 the common pleas to the Supieme Court and 
 Irom I he Supreme Court to the Court of Appeals. 
 The judgment on appeal should be final except 
 perhaps where the appellate cou'rt disagreed with 
 the judgment of the inferior tribunal. I would 
 prive the Supreme Court of original jurisdic- 
 n in actions on contract where the amount should 
 below a certain specified sum, and I would es- 
 tablish the same rule with reference to the com- 
 mon pleas. Sir, this_iyould elevate the character 
 of the judiciary. The dignity ~oT~every court 
 would oe heightened, and judges of ability com- 
 mensurate to these-sfcH-ionv.wjQuld De chosen. 
 The common pleas would take by far the greater 
 proportion of the business and the pressure in the 
 higher courts would be relieved and avoided. 
 This machinery is simple it is not liable to de- 
 rangement, and it admits of an extension of your 
 courts upon a regular system with your business 
 Sir, in conclusion, let me hope that we shall com- 
 plete the great work before us in a spirit of har- 
 mony arid compiomise, that will unite the sup. 
 port of every candid and considerate mind. The 
 people have the deepest interest in this part of 
 our deliberations, and God forbid that we should 
 present to their view a hesitating and divided 
 house. I am free from pride of opinion on this 
 subject but I most fervently desire a great result 
 a system not liable to be shaken by the will of 
 the Legislature, but one that will remain a broad 
 platform on which those rights of the people that 
 are enforced in the public tribunals, may stand 
 
 unshaken tor generation* and generations after we 
 shall have ceased to enjoy the blessings or parti- 
 cipate HI the glories of fret 1 er< vernu ent. 
 
 Mr. J.J.TAYLOR, said he did not rise to discuss 
 fully the great and important subject that was 
 then before the committee. After the very able 
 and elaborate manner in which it had been treat- 
 ed by several of the eminent legal gentlemen up- 
 on this floor, it would ill become him to do so. 
 But the subject is one of vital interest to the peo- 
 ple of this great state, one to which we should 
 each and all of us, with honest hearts, bring our 
 best efforts. He purposed therefore, in offering 
 a slight amendment to the section of the majority 
 report, more immediately under consideration, 
 to make a few general remarks. 
 
 It has been well remarked (continued Mr. TAY- 
 LOR) in the course of this debate, that if we would 
 cure existing" evils, we must first enquire what 
 those evils are, and whence they originate. The 
 present judiciary system was admitted on all 
 hands, to be extremely defective. In its prac- 
 tical workings, it does not answer the purpose 
 for which it was designed. We must then en- 
 quire what its defects are, if we would remedy 
 them. jOne great evil to be remedied is the ac- 
 'cumuTation of business in the higher courts, and 
 cases consequent upon this the delay and expense at- 
 tending the decision of causes. The supreme 
 court and the court of chancery, have had thrown 
 upon them a mass of business for many years past, 
 which no learning, no capacity, no industry on 
 the part of the judges of those courts, could dis- 
 pose of. This evil'has at length become so great 
 that the delays of justice in these courts, amount 
 not only to a denial of it, but in many instances 
 to something worse. The plain, obvious remedy 
 for this delay, is to increase the judicial force, 
 and to make it enough to discharge all this im- 
 mense mass of business. This most obvious 
 remedy, the committee have attempted to apply 
 and as it seems to me, successfully. But an- 
 other remedy is, to improve and elevate the char- 
 acter of the inferior tribunals, and this remedy, 
 in my poor judgment, has not been sufficiently 
 adverted to, either in the discussions which have 
 been carried on in the community generally, or 
 which have been had on this floor. Having been 
 more familiar with these tribunals, the courts 
 within the counties, and with their practical 
 workings, than most gentlemen who have addess- 
 ed the committee, and whose business has been 
 more in the higher courts, I may be permitted to 
 point out some of their defects, which have fal- 
 len under my observation, and to suggest such 
 remedies as may occur to me. Our justices' courts 
 are far from being what courts of justice, or even 
 the lowest grade, should be. In saying this, sir, 
 I must not be understood as complaining of the 
 magistrates who hold these courts. They are all 
 that we can expect them to bef under the system. 
 With four justices toj>e elected in each town, 
 however small, and with the little inducement 
 which exists for men to take the office, or v 
 they have it, to qualify themselves for the dis- 
 charge of its duties, what more can we expect of 
 them? With a view to remedy this evil as far as we 
 may, I incline strongly to the adoption of the s 
 
 estion of the gentleman from Monroe, (Mr. 
 
 TRONG) to reduce somewhat the number of jus- 
 
627 
 
 bees. One should probably be elected in each 
 Q, whatever may be its size. All beyond 
 
 iniiiht be made to depend upon the popula- 
 tion of the town, fixing such a ratio as considera- 
 i- 1 reduce the present number, and limiting 
 the number in the other direction, so that no 
 should have more than a given number 
 
 our. This would make the office more de- 
 sirable, /both upon pecuniary considerations, 
 .n\ji8 / a post of honor and distinction and 
 [would probably, therefore, draw to it better 
 'May we not hope it would tend 
 
 : . lesson tlu- large amount of petty litigation 
 with which our state is afflicted? That litigation, 
 permit: me to say, Mr. Chairman, is no trifling 
 v-vil ; and Jet me say, too, that the expenses of li- 
 
 ion in justices' courts are by no means small, 
 especially in comparison to the amounts in con- 
 troversy. Why, sir, since the practice has been 
 introduced here, I may be allowed to mention an 
 
 nee which occurred in my own county, 
 with ii) the last two years. 1 do so not because I 
 think it establishes any general rule or principle, 
 but it amounts to as much as the cases which 
 have been cited as occurring in higher ; it is this: 
 Two neighbors differed, honestly, I believe, about 
 the ownership of a pair of yearling calves, w r orth 
 
 iier, perhaps, ten dollars. They went to 
 Juw about it, before a justice of the peace and 
 juries disagreeing, they kept at law about it, all 
 the time before a justice of the peace, till they 
 had expended in the litigation about three hun- 
 dred dollars each, and then, not having been able 
 to get a verdict, they settled the matter amicably 
 between themselves, and that too, without the 
 aid of a " court of conciliation." This statement 
 I have from a magistrate before whom the cause 
 was tried. 
 
 But there is another evil existing in the justi- 
 ces' courts, greater, perhaps, than all the rest, and 
 for which I ..m n-jt prepared to suggest a remedy. 
 I mention it mainly in the hope that ssme gentle- 
 man of more ingenuity than myself, may suggest 
 one. It is the bias that is likely to affect the 
 mind of the justice from the fact, that while he 
 is the judge, he is also to some extent the minis- 
 terial officer of the court, issuing its process and 
 receiving fees and perquisites for his services. 
 This Convention will, with entire unanimity, I 
 do not doubt, take from all higher judicial officers 
 the right to receive any fees or perquisites of of- 
 fice, and have them paid entirely by fixed salaries, 
 -hail no longer suffer the judicial ermine to 
 be soiled and tarnished by these unseemingly 
 pickings. I most heartily approve of this reform. 
 It will do much good. Had it been introduced 
 only so far as to require taxing officers to tax costs 
 without fee or reward, as was proposed by an 
 honorable senator in another hall of this building 
 
 ti-s ago, it would have prevented to a very 
 
 i.-xtent, cases of over taxation, and would 
 have saved us, particularly, of the legal profes- 
 tion, much of the reproach we have had to en- 
 counter. But the time has come to go farther, 
 and extend this principle to all fees and perqui- 
 sites. Would that it could be extended to justi- 
 ces of the peace. I have no distrust of justices 
 over other men and other officers. I know of no 
 reason for speaking disparagingly of them. But 
 they are men, subject to be influenced like other 
 
 men. Let us look a moment at the influences 
 which are brought to bear upon them. The 
 plaintiff goes to the justice with his complaint 
 against his neighbor. If the justice will listen 
 to him, he will surely tell him his side of the 
 proposed litigation. Add to that, that he is 
 bringing to the justice a job for which he is to re- 
 ceive fees, out of which he is to make money, 
 Perhaps he is in the habit of bringing him busi- 
 ness to I he amount of hundreds ot dollars in a 
 year- He is to that extent, his patron. Is the 
 justice fit, under such circumstances, to sit in judg- 
 ment between such a man and his opponent, in 
 the enjoyment of no such advantages? I speak in 
 disparagement of no justice, when I say that il is 
 not in human nature that he should be and I 
 hope, as I said, that some remedy may be suggest- 
 ed for these evils. I may be thought to be spend- 
 ing too much time upon these, in some sense, in- 
 ferior tribunals. I say, "in some sense," for in 
 one important sense, they can by no means be 
 considered inferior. To the great mass of the 
 people, they are tribunals of at least equal conse-. 
 quences to any other. Small as is their jurisdic- 
 tion, collectively, they adjudicate upon a greater 
 amount, perhaps, in a year, than any other grade 
 of courts in the state. 
 
 Before leaving the subject I have one word to 
 say to the proposition of the gentleman from Mon- 
 roe, (Mr. STRONG) to enlarge the jurisdiction of 
 these courts. He would extend it to two hundred 
 and fifty dollars. Now I am not prepared to do 
 this, at least not here. The extension, if it is to 
 be made, can as well be done by the legislature, 
 and better, for to do it. sately will require enact, 
 ments in detail, which no one would think of 
 putting into a constitution. But I have another 
 reason. The poor man who is compelled to liti- 
 gate about a hundred dollars, is entitled to jusl as 
 good a court to litigate in, as the rich man who 
 goes to law about his tensof thousands. Justices' 
 courts, from their very organization, from their 
 inevitable delects, to some of which I have allud. 
 ed, are not, and I fear cannot be, as good courts, 
 and as safe courts, especially to the poor man who 
 has no patronage (o bestow, as the higher courts 
 ought to be, arid I hope hereafter will be. Then 
 it seems to me these higher courts, and their prac. 
 tice and proceedings, can be so reformed and 
 cheapened that litigations and collections in them, 
 tor small amounts, will cost little if anymore! than 
 injustices' courts. If this can be done, will it 
 not be better than to enlarge still farther the ju- 
 risdiction of justice? If it cannot then let the 
 legislature extend their jurisdiction. 
 
 lindeed, constituted as our courts of common 
 pleas h<*ve been and are, it is not at all wonderful 
 that the jurisdiction of justices has been sought to 
 bf extended. Nobody can give any good reason 
 why the jurisdiction of the common pleas, as at 
 present constituted, should be greater than that of 
 justices of the peace. The courts of common 
 pleas, generally, I believe, are no way superior to 
 justices' cours. except that the law gives them a 
 superior jurisdiction. In p:>int ol capacity, of 
 anility to perform well judicial labors, in general 
 they are not superior. Perhaps we have no other 
 judicial tribunals so utterly incompetent to dis- 
 charge the duties thrown upon, as most of our 
 cuuris of common pleas. From this, result many 
 
628 
 
 evils. One is, that it encourages the carrying up 
 of causes from courts of justices of the peace, 
 when they ought not to be carried up. I have al- 
 ways found it more difficult to sustain a judgment 
 of a justice, which ought to be sustained, than to 
 reverse one which ought to be reversed. Judges 
 not properly qualified for their stations, Irom a 
 natural love of exercise of power, or from some 
 other cause, are always prone to reverse justices' 
 judgments, and thereby to encourage this oppres 
 ive species of litigation. Another evil is, that 
 nobody is satisfied with the decision of a court ot 
 common pleas. It may be right, but it is jus' 
 about as likely to be wrong; and the advice of the 
 counsel, if he thinks it wrong, is, of course, to 
 carry it up. If the purse of the client holds out, 
 a burthen is, thus thrown upon our overburthened 
 supreme court. 
 
 If these courts of common pleas are to be contin- 
 ued, they must be reformed. Many gentlemen 
 think they cannot be dispensed with, and perhaps 
 with reason. There seems to be -a necessity tor 
 something like, the common pleas court, as a court; 
 bat I would abolish altogether the county judge- 
 ships. Let the supreme court judges, provided by 
 the majority report, hold the courts of common 
 pleas, and preside in the oyer and terminer and 
 general sessions of the peace. In the criminal 
 business, let them call to their aid two justices of 
 the peace, or other county officers. This would 
 make a saving of expense over keeping county 
 judges in attendance through the whole court, ai.d 
 would answer every purpose. But it it should be 
 found that the judges of the supreme court can- 
 not hold these courts, and discharge properly 
 their other duties, let there be power given to the 
 legislature, in that case, to provide for the elec- 
 tion of president judges, in districts, composed of 
 several counties, to hold the couits of common 
 pleas, and preside in the general sessions. Of the 
 two methods, however, the former is unquestiona- 
 bly best; and in my judgment it would be better 
 to enlarge the number of supreme court judges, 
 than to provide a different and inferior grade ol 
 judges. Unquestionably it is best, so iar as it is 
 possible, to have but one grade of judges. The 
 best, are none too good for the poorest ana hum- 
 blest, as vvfll as for the richest and most elevated 
 citizen. Different grades of judges encourage 
 that great evil, under our present system, succes- 
 sive appeals. Of course, there is less confidence 
 in the lower than the higher tribunals ; and ot 
 course there is a temptation to appeal fiorn one 
 to the other: hence delays and costs. By hav- 
 ing as few grades of courts and judges, as we con- 
 sistently can, appeals and liiigation are discour- 
 aged in the only way consistent with the righisot 
 individuals. 'If possible, then, let the Supreme 
 Court judges hold and preside in the county 
 courts. But as some gentlemen suppose this can- 
 not be done, I have prepared an amendment to 
 the fifth section of the report of the majority of 
 the judiciary committee, authorizing the legisla 
 ture to provide for the election of district judges. 
 One of the unfortunate changes in the judiciary 
 made by the Convention of 1821, all agiee, was 
 the adoption of the circuit judge systtrn. Th 
 judge at the circuit should unquestionably be a 
 judge also upon the bench and the judge on the 
 bench should as surely be judge at the circuit. 
 
 Slse the judge on the be%ch becomes a closet law- 
 r er, to some extent ignorant of the common af- 
 airs of life and business transactions, and the 
 udge at the circuit, a bad lawyer, n<>t sufficiently 
 earned in the rules of law Again, there is much 
 undoubtedly in the idea of the gentleman from 
 Seneca, (Mr. BASCOM) that the judge who tries 
 he cause should be at least as good a judge 
 as the judge who is upon the bench. His" rea- 
 on for this opinion, that, the judge at the circuit 
 ries more causes than the judge on the bench, is 
 a good one. But there are other reasons. The 
 ndge who tries the capses has much the harder 
 tusk to periorrn. In the first place, he has cer- 
 ainly all the questions of law to decide that the 
 udge in bench has, and probably many more. He 
 :an know nothing ot these questions beforehand, 
 ind he has to decide them off haivl, without any 
 opportunity for examination, or consultation of 
 books, and that generally upon very imperfect ar- 
 ;ument by counsel. Besides all this, he has the 
 acts of the cause to take care of as rt goes along. 
 tie has too, his minutes of evidence to keep, of 
 tselr' almost work enough for one man. So great 
 ? this last labor, that Lord Brougham, (then Mr. 
 Brougham,) nearly twenty years ago, in the British: 
 House of Commons, in his great speech upon le- 
 gal reform, proposed that clerks should be provid- 
 ed to keep minutes in short hand for the judges. 
 
 But how is it with the judges upon the bench ? 
 The points raised before them are all on paper. 
 They have BO facts of the cause to watch as they 
 come out, no minutes of evidence to take ; the 
 points of law are fully and elaborately discussed 
 before them, and they have ample time to consult 
 their libraries, and weigh and deliberate upon 
 their decisions. Tell me whether, if there is to 
 be any difference, the judge at the circuit ought 
 not to be the greater man, than the judge on the 
 bench ? But all we can do is to make him the 
 same man, and this the report of the majority of 
 the committee does do, and in that it has my 
 hearty concurrence. 
 
 I wish, Mr. Chairman, this principle of having 
 the judge on the bench at the same time a judge 
 at Nisi Prius, might be extended to the court of 
 appeals, provided 'in the majority report espe- 
 cially to those of the judges of it, who are to be 
 elected in the State at large. Perhaps it may be, 
 but 1 fear that it would, in practice, be found im- 
 po^sible. For this reason, it would perhaps be 
 better to take the whole number of the judges of 
 the court of appeals from the districts, one from 
 each district. They would then have had pre- 
 vious experience at the circuit, as well as on the 
 bench of the supreme court. And there is an- 
 other reason in favor of this. We are about to 
 introduce the system of electing judges, and I am 
 glad that we are. ~~THe change is not only de- 
 manded by public sentiment, but it is right in it- 
 self, and it is the only system consonant with our 
 theory of government. Upon this system there 
 is something in the idea of equal representation 
 upon the bench, as well as in the halls of legisla- 
 tion and if we elect four judges from the State 
 at large, and take four from four districts, and 
 none from the other four, the representation is 
 not equal. Nor would alternation among the 
 districts altogether remedy the evil, for all should 
 be represented alike, at all times. Again, the 
 
629 
 
 election of judges, in the State at large, is not, 
 in my judgment, the best mode. The candidate 
 will not in that way be sufficiently known to most 
 of the electors. This is an important considera- 
 tion ; and yet, in securing this object, we must 
 take care that we do not run into other difficul- 
 ties. If we make our districts too small we shall 
 be liable to have judges elected upon local ex- 
 citement. If for instance, we should adopt the 
 single senate districts, as judicial districts, as re- 
 commended by the gentleman from Seneca, (Mr. 
 BASCOM,) would there not be this danger? 
 Rensselaer is a single district, Albany is another. 
 Have there not been times, within the last few 
 years, when it would not have been safe to elect 
 judges in them ? It cannot be said that it is 
 equally safe as it is to elect Senators. The judge 
 is, in some sense, a one man power he holds 
 his courts, in part, at least, alone, with nobody to 
 restrain him, or temper his action. The Senator 
 is but a constituent member of a body, and of 
 himself can effect nothing. In my judgment, the 
 majority report is about right in this particular, 
 so far as it respects the election of the judges of 
 the supreme court. The districts are not so small 
 as to create danger from local excitement, and 
 not yet so large that the candidate may not be suf- 
 ficiently known to the voter. 
 <As lo the proposition to unite the lawand equity 
 jurisdictions in our tribunal, he had not much to 
 say. No reasons have yet been assigned for doing 
 so, satisfactory to his mind he couid see nothing 
 to be gained bv it. He feared it might introduce 
 confusion and difficulty, that might be the means 
 of causing an utter failure of the system. Yet, if 
 the majority of this Convention shall ihink other- 
 wise, I shall cherfully acquiesce in this determi- 
 nation, and use my feeble powers to aid in per- 
 fecting the system, and giving it a lair trial. But 
 that the praciice of the two courts can be so blend- 
 ed as to m?.ke one praciice that they can, to use 
 thi> language of the gentleman from New York, 
 (Mr. O'CoNOR,) be blended in one uniform, har- 
 monious practice," I have no belief. The ends to 
 be attained by the two modes of proceeding are 
 different, and what objection can there be lo making 
 use of different and appropriate means to attain 
 the*' 1 ends ? Why compel a man to take one road 
 to all places ? It has been often asserted, on this 
 floor, that the only distinction between law and 
 equity, was in the mode of proceedings This is 
 not strictly true. The rules of law by which the 
 two courts are governed, are different, to some 
 extent. In the main, they are the same, but not 
 altogether. Take for example the common case 
 of land held under contract to purchase, as it is 
 termed. The vendor in possession, though he 
 may have paid part or all the consideration money 
 is, bj tbe doctrines of the court of law, but a ten- 
 ant at will, liable to be turned out at any moment, 
 and lose all his improvements, and is subject at 
 all times t o have his land sold to pav the debts ol 
 his vendor. He has no interest whatever in the 
 soil. But in chancery his righ's are p rfect. If 
 he has paid all, or any part of the consideration 
 money, he is, to that extent, the owner of the 
 soil. And it is only in a court of chancery, that tin- 
 rights of a very numerous class of comparatively 
 poor men in I he siate, holding these land contracts 
 have any protection. [Mr. TAYLOR fuuherillua 
 
 frated this subject by further examples and said.] 
 Lotus not then abolish this jurisdiction, whah-\<T 
 court we may give it to, while our rules of law 
 temain as they are. We cannot change them, 
 here, in this Convention. If it can be done at all, 
 it must be done by legislation. And. if it can be 
 done consistently with the public good, let it be 
 done. But let us preserve an equity jurisdiction, 
 until it is done. 
 
 Here Mr T. (the hour of two having arrived) 
 gave way to a motion to rise and report progress. 
 
 The Committee rose, and the Convention took 
 a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR resumed his remarks. He 
 said he was satisfied with the 3rd section of the 
 majority report, with the slight amendment which 
 he should propose, if the jurisdictions Qfjaw and 
 equity were to be united in one court. But he 
 musT'not be understood as advocating a chancery 
 court or jurisdiction, such as that which we now 
 have. That jurisdiction had doubtless been too 
 much extended. He would bring it back to 
 something like what it was in the days of Lord 
 Hardwick. At the same time he must not be un- 
 derstood as censuring the present chancellor. If 
 he had assumed any jurisdiction, by construction 
 or otherwise, the legislature had thrown upon 
 him much more. That court had been found a 
 convenient receptacle for everything that had no 
 appropriate place anywhere else. It was capa- 
 ble of being adapted to almost any business and 
 he submitted whether this very capacity of adap- 
 tation was not an argument in favor of rather than 
 against the jurisdiction, and whether a great, grow- 
 ing state like ours did not need some such juris- 
 diction. The proceedings in chancery, too, might 
 be much simplified, shortened and improved. He 
 desired it might be done, and that in every possi- 
 ble way the expense of litigation and business in 
 that court, and in all others, might be lessened. 
 He would abolish examiners in chancery and per- 
 haps masters too. But it was an error to suppose 
 there was any great technicality in these proceed- 
 ings anything that could not be easily compre- 
 hended by a little study. They were, in fact, 
 much less technical than proceedings in courts of 
 law. He would not, however, on that account 
 abolish the latter, and make everything a chance- 
 ry procedure, as had been substantially proposed 
 by the gentleman from New York (Mr. O'CoNOR.) 
 If the desired end could be obtained by the di- 
 rect, simple process of the common law, by all 
 means let it be done. Let us, in every case, make 
 use of those means which are best adapted to the 
 end to be accomplished. This is done in every 
 other business why not in proceedings at law ? 
 He was satisfied that the two jurisdictions could 
 not be blended so as to form one single mode of 
 proceeding and he feared very much that the at- 
 tempt to unite them in one court would not only 
 prove a failure, but bring into disrepute a judi- 
 ciary system otherwise well constructed. Chan- 
 cellor Kent, universally acknowledged to be one 
 of our most eminent jurists, had confessed that 
 when he was appointed chancellor he was obliged 
 again to become a student to qualify himself for the 
 discharge of his new duties, though he had been 
 chief justice of the state. Is it safe then to give 
 
630 
 
 both jurisdictions to one set of judges ? Mr. T. 
 found himself fortified in his views onfthis sub- 
 ject by those of many of the great men who framed 
 our present constitution, and he read from the de- 
 bates of the Convention of 1821 the remarks of 
 Mr. Van Buren, in which he pronounced the court 
 of chancery the chief corner stone of our judicia- 
 ry ; and also the remarks of Mr. Van Vechten. 
 He called the attention of members to these de- 
 bates. 
 
 The United States courts had been cited as an 
 example of the union of the two jurisdictions, but 
 it was admitted, he believed, by the ablest judges 
 of those courts, that had they the general law and 
 equity powers which exist in the states, they 
 could not well get along. From the very nature 
 of the United States government, their powers 
 were limited. 
 
 But after all, if it was the will of the majority 
 to unite the two jurisdictions in one court, let 
 the experiment be tried. Nobody would be more 
 ready to hail its success, than he would. It had 
 been objected to the preserving the two jurisdic- 
 tions, even in the same tribunal, that they ran 
 into each other, and it was difficult, sometimes, 
 to define accurately the line between them. This 
 difficulty had been greatly overrated, though he 
 admitted there was something in it. Is there 
 anything in this world without its imperfections? 
 The same objection might be made to the colors 
 of the rainbow. Who can define the line which 
 separates them ? But is that any objection to the 
 colors themselves ? 
 
 Mr. T. had a few remarks to make on the re- 
 port of the majority of the committee, and he 
 should be done. He had said he would abolish 
 county judges certainly he would not have more 
 than one, and make him elective by the people. 
 But he preferred to have none. Some of their 
 local duties might be discharged by the surro- 
 gate, who should also be made elective, as the 
 report provides. Others might go to other offi- 
 cers. 
 
 One reason for abolishing county judges was, 
 that their judgeships will not support them, and, 
 if lawyers, they must be allowed to practice law. 
 He was not willing to have any judge at the same 
 time that he was judge, a practicing lawyer in 
 any court. No man can be trusted with suitors 
 before him, as judge, who are his clients in other 
 causes. No man should trust himself in such a 
 position. Human nature was too weak fbr it 
 and if it were not, the judge should be, like Ce- 
 sar's wife, not only pure, but above suspicion. 
 He would prohibit all judges from practising as 
 lawyers or counsel in any court. Justices of the 
 peace should at least be prohibited from practicing 
 as counsel in justices' courts. 
 
 He would go with the gentleman from Monroe, 
 (Mr. STRONG,) to strike out of the report the 
 clause authorizing the judges to license practi- 
 tioners in their courts. He had for a long time 
 believed these licenses useless, if not worse. 
 They may serve to deceive the public, and give 
 credit and employment to men who do not de- 
 serve it. He would let anybody practice law as 
 he would let him pursue any other calling. If 
 he is worthy of employment he will get it, if not, 
 he must content himself without it. He would 
 not have the lawyers "a privileged class," as they 
 
 had been called, even though the privilege were 
 
 only to work hard all their days, and die poor 
 
 He concluded by urging mutual yielding of pre- 
 conceived opinions and views, in order to the 
 perfecting of some one of the plans submitted, or 
 a combination of them. He regarded either of 
 them as a great improvement upon the present 
 system, and he felt that we were greatly indebted 
 and the people of this great state would consider 
 themselves indebted, to the judiciary committee 
 for the great labor they had bestowed so success- 
 fully upon this important subject. He preferred 
 the plan of the majority of the committee, with 
 some slight alterations, not at all interfering with 
 the general plan. But he was willing to yield his 
 individual views, so far as he consistently could, 
 for the sake of harmonizing on some plan which 
 should suit a majority. He rejoiced to see this 
 spirit of reconciliation pervading this debate and 
 the Convention generally. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS said he would make no apo- 
 logy for rising to address the committee on this 
 occasion. He held it to be his right more, he 
 regarded it as his duty, to give his views on the 
 subject under consideration. On the score of 
 courtesy, too, he thought he might justly claim 
 the attention of the committee for a few moments; 
 for this was the first instance in which he had 
 risen to make any lengthened remarks in this 
 body. But while he considered it his right and 
 duty to speak, he owed it to the committee and 
 to himself to say, that he approached the discus- 
 sion with extreme diffidence. He was aware of 
 the magnitude and vast importance of the ques- 
 tion he thought he justly appreciated the extent 
 of the interests to be affected for good or evil by 
 our action and he believed that he was duly sen- 
 sible of the great ability, profound learning, and 
 lofty eloquence, which gentlemen who preceded 
 him had brought to this discussion, But in his 
 judgment, every constituency represented on this 
 floor was entitled to be heard through its repre- 
 sentatives, and gentlemen should make known the 
 views and wishes of every portion of the State 
 that in our deliberations and action, such a judi- 
 ciary system as would give general satisfaction 
 might be adopted. And he would here take oc- 
 casion to express his great gratification at the 
 spirit which had been manifested by gentlemen 
 who had taken part in the debate. He discover- 
 ed a general disposition to devise and unite upon 
 the best plan which was attainable, for the admi- 
 nistration of justice in the great State whose so- 
 vereign authority we represent. This he regard- 
 ed as eminently auspicious. For, with the talent 
 which was congregated upon this floor, and the 
 liberal and honest intentions which had been ex- 
 hibited, he could not doubt that we should arrive 
 at good and satisfactory results. What do we 
 propose to do ? He understood our object to be, 
 to furnish the people with a wise, efficient, speedy 
 and economical administration of justice, which 
 should be easily accessible to the whole commu- 
 nity. He need not say that such a system does 
 not now exist in this State. Our present judicial 
 organization is universally condemned its de- 
 fects are everywhere acknowledged. No voice 
 is raised to defend it no hand is put forth to save 
 it from its merited doom. The evils which at- 
 tend its action have already been exposed by gen- 
 
631 
 
 tlemen who are familiar with its practical work- 
 ings in all its branches and departments. Its de- 
 lav -s, uncertainty, inefficiency, and enormous ex- 
 pense, were well understood, and needed no far- 
 ther exposition than had already been made. In- 
 deed, judgment had been pronounced upon it by 
 the people, and we had come here with their high 
 behest to remove it, and substitute h\ its stead, a 
 wiser and a better system. It is to that work we 
 have to address ourselves, that the interests and 
 wishes of our common constituency may be sub- 
 served. In looking around us for a plan which 
 would answer the great ends which we have in 
 view, he thought that what we sought was to be 
 found, in all its substantial features, in the report 
 of the majority of the Judiciary committee. In 
 his judgment, that report would furnish a system 
 which would meet the wants, provide for the in- 
 terests, and promote the happiness of this great 
 people. The plan proposes a uniflmgf law and 
 equity jurisdiction in the same tribun"juT"'To this 
 he was decidedly favorable. He could see no 
 sound oo"j?etrw-to it. He spoke according to his 
 best judgment and although he felt his slight 
 experience and limited knowledge, and holding 
 himself the humblest member upon that floor he 
 must still be permitted to say, that in his opinion 
 no good reason could be urged against it. He 
 thought it perfectly practicable, and tiiat it could 
 be carried into effect without difficulty. The fact 
 that this union had existed for a long time in cer 
 tain departments of the Judiciary system of our 
 own State that it had always prevailed in the 
 courts of the United States government and that 
 in a large number of the States of this Union no 
 distinct and separate jurisdiction had ever been 
 known, furnished to his mind satisfactory evi- 
 dence that the proposed change was safe and wise. 
 If this union of law and equity had not worked 
 well in the c?.ses alluded to, he thought that a di- 
 vorce wov.ld 1 i.ig since have been demanded, and 
 that it would have been carried. But he could 
 see nothing inconsistent in the two jurisdictions. 
 They were both but parts of one great whole. 
 The object of our law courts was to enforce rights 
 and redress wrongs. That also, was the object of 
 our courts of equity. Both were intended to ad- 
 minister certain established principles of our law. 
 As an orignal question, would it seem to any 
 mind that this administration could not be carried 
 on by one and the same tribunal ? He ventured 
 to say that it would not. The whole difficulty 
 arose from this circumstance. We had been accus- 
 tomed to a different order of things, and men never 
 were unwilling to proceed in any other manner 
 than that to which they had been used. There 
 was a conservative principle or element in every 
 human mind, and especially was this the case 
 with the members of the legal profession. Of all 
 men he thought they were the most conservative. 
 And it was natural that they should be so. Their 
 labors related to things as they were, and their 
 researches were into musty tomes of the past. 
 They sought not to know" what is right what 
 ought to be but endeavored only to ascertain 
 what has been established by precedent. They 
 were not moved by a spirit of progress and ame- 
 lioration, but were disposed to cling to things as 
 they were. He thought this the secret of the op- 
 position which was made to the proposed meas- 
 
 ure. But he was surprised that his friend from 
 New-York (Mr. SHEPARD,) who spoke this morn- 
 ing, manifested so much conservatism upon this 
 question. He (Mr. F.) had not supposed that that 
 gentleman had been so long engaged in legal 
 practice as to have become so strongly wedded to 
 ancient institutions as appeared to be the case 
 with him. But he was sure that his friend was 
 sincere in the opinions which he expressed, and 
 consulted what he deemed to be the public good, 
 but he must say that he thought him in error. 
 Suppose, sir, we were now engaged in devising 
 a judicial system originally, without having 
 known any former system, or being influenced 
 by any preconceived opinions upon the sub- 
 ject. Do you think that any one would suppose 
 that different kinds of courts, separate junsdic. 
 lions, would be necessary for ihe due admimstra. 
 lion of the laws. He had no idea that any one would. 
 And this distinction would never have existed 
 among us, had we not derived it from the mother 
 country. The system was furnished, ready-made, 
 to our hands, from across the water, and to this 
 circumstance we may attribute its existence here. 
 And in regard to the terms of proceeding, he did 
 not think there was any good reason why they 
 should not be assimilated. He believed that they 
 might and should be. Why not come to a single 
 and direct mode of staging what we mean and 
 what we want in our legal proceedings ? He 
 thought this could be easily dor,e v not only as be- 
 tween law and equity cases, but also as relates to 
 different forms of action at law. Let the com- 
 plainant or plaintiff, state, in a plain, substantial, 
 and direct manner, what he complains of, and 
 what he seeks by his action ; and let the defend- 
 ant, in the same way, state his defence, without 
 any particular kind or form of action being named 
 throughout the proceeding. And according to the 
 character of the case finally moved as established 
 in the course of the litigation, let judgment be 
 rendered, or relief decreed, '"fri the trial of cases 
 involving questions of fact, he thought that issues 
 growing out of transactions of equity jurisdiction 
 might as well be tried by a jury, as i.i matters of 
 legal cognizance. Cases at law in many instances 
 present a great variety and long train of complica- 
 ted tacts and circumstances, -and \et they are al- 
 ways passed upon and decided by a jurv. If this 
 is the pr per mode of trial in matters of this char- 
 acier and no one questions thai it is there does 
 not seem much ground for opposing the extension 
 of the trial by jury to equity cases. But this 
 brunch of the subject, was so well arid happily 
 argued and illustrated by the gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. NICOI.L.) that he would not longer 
 dwell upon it. In regard to this whole matter he 
 (Mr. F.) thought that the resistance which was 
 made to this reform, arose from the conservative- 
 spirit to which he had before alluded. But he 
 confessed he could not see the difficulties which 
 were imagined to stand in the' way of the measure. 
 To his mind, the practicability of it had been 
 demonstrated by two gentlemen from New- 
 York (Messrs. O'CoNoR and NICOLL) the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer (Mr. LOOM is) and the 
 gentleman fiom Orange (Mr. BROWN.) They 
 lad gone over the whole ground, and it would 
 not become him to enter a field which had been 
 so fully occupied. And he would here remark, 
 
632 
 
 that he thought all fear of this being a dangerous 
 innovation, must be removed from everv mind 
 when lawyers so able, experienced, ai;d distin- 
 guished, as those whom he had just named, were 
 found advocating it. He hoped that some provi- 
 sion would be introduced into the new Constitu- 
 tion, indicating the wish that the reform suggest- 
 ed should be carried out by the legislature and the 
 courts. He wanted the expression of this enlight- 
 ened body in its favor. Passing on to the partic- 
 ular organization of the courts proposed by the 
 ^committee, he suggested that he should have lik- 
 / ed it better if it had provided that the court of ap- 
 I peals should be constituted entirelyof judges of the 
 / Supreme Court. It was agreed onfall hands, that 
 I it was best that judges of a court of review should 
 be accustomed to the trial of causes at nisi pnus 
 that they should be compelled to mingle with 
 the people, and thereby become acquainted with 
 their interests, and the practical business and re- 
 lations of life. Hence, he preferred that all the 
 judges of ihe court of appeals should be tak^n 
 from Ihe bench of the Supreme Court, instead of 
 out-half their number being elected as judgesof the 
 couri of appeals exclusively, and never having an 
 opportunity to try a cause, as proposed by the coin- 
 mil lee. He approved the proposition of having 
 ' but one court of general original jurisdiction in 
 1 the State. This was favorable to simplicity and 
 uniformity in the system. For this reason he 
 could not concur in the plan of the gentleman 
 from Chautauque, (Mr MARVIN) or any other 
 which proposed a subdivision of the same gene- 
 ral jurisdiction among several courts. He was la- 
 vorable to the election of ihe judges by districts, 
 and he thought ihey should be elected by 
 single districts, as proposed by the gentleman 
 horn Seneca, (Mr. BASCOM) rather than forming 
 the State into eight large districts, with lour 
 judges 10 a district, as the committee would leave 
 it. In another particular he thought t! e plan oi 
 the gentleman from Seneca, (Mr. BASCOM,) the 
 best. It v\as in providing lhat tbeie should be 
 bane sessions of the Supreme Court in eve- 
 ry county of the several judicial districts as of 
 len as should be needful for the proper dis- 
 position of business. This would be a great and 
 benefical reform, and one which was urgently de- 
 manded by the people. They required that they 
 should no longer be put to the inconvenience and 
 expense of having their causes reviewed and de- 
 termined in distant parts of the State. What 
 they w r anted was, that suits should not only be 
 tried originally at home, but that in their several 
 stages of review, up to their final determination, 
 they should be brought as near as possible to the 
 several localities where the controversies origi- 
 nated. It might be said that under the plan of 
 the committee the legislature might provide for 
 this. That was true, but the report of the gen- 
 tleman from Seneca- (Mr. BASCOM) directed what 
 should be done in this respect, and he (Mr. F.) 
 , . preferred a certainty to an uncertainty. He 
 tli ought that our inferior courts had not received 
 that attention, in this body, to which they were 
 entitled. He supposed it was to be attributed to 
 the fact that the gentlemen who had given their 
 views upon the subject of judiciary reform had 
 practised exclusively in the higher courts, and 
 were not therefore familiar with the practical op- 
 
 erations of the courts of justices of the peace. He 
 did not know but these humble tribunals were to be 
 passed over as unworthy of consideration. In his 
 judgment they were the most important branch 
 of our judiciary system. He might give them 
 undue prominence from the fact that he came 
 from a district of country where the most of the 
 litigation was had in those courts. But he thought 
 that take the State at large, the controversies car- 
 ried on by them were far greater in amount than 
 those entertained by all other courts, and that the 
 action of these tribunals more immediately and 
 deeply affected the interests of the people than 
 the combined operation of all the rest of the sys- 
 tem. And he was happy that the gentleman 
 from Tioga (Mr. J. J. TAYLOR) had so far de- 
 parted from the line of discussion pursued by 
 other gentlemen, as to bring this subject promi- 
 nently before the convention. He (Mr. F.) was 
 delighted with the remarks of that gentleman. 
 He had made a thorough and able exposition of 
 the evils and defects of qur justices' courts, as at 
 present constituted, and showed an absolute ne- 
 cessity for amendment and reform in them. He 
 (Mr. F.) thought that this subject should not be 
 overlooked in our efforts to improve the higher 
 departments of our judiciary. But a compara- 
 tively small portion of the people were immedi- 
 ately interested in the upper courts, or would be 
 directly affected by their action, while the great 
 mass of the community were dependent, for the 
 protection of their rights and interests, upon these 
 inferior courts. He therefore thought it the duty 
 of this body, while it was providing an improved 
 organization of courts for the few, who would 
 have controversies of such a nature that they 
 would have to be litigated in the higher courts, 
 either originally or by appeal also to do some- 
 thing to raise the character of those courts to 
 which the people had to resort for the determi- 
 nation of their controversies. He wished gentle- 
 men would for a moment consider what justices' 
 courts are, and how proceedings are conducted 
 in them. Each town in the State has four justi- 
 ces of the peace. They may reside and hold their 
 courts in any part of the town even in its most 
 remote and inconvenient corner. The justice is- 
 sues the process of his own court. A party wish- 
 ing to bring a suit, may select his justice from 
 any of those in the town in which he may reside, 
 or in either of its adjoining towns. He can go to 
 the justice whom he thinks the best suited to his 
 purposes, tell him his story, get his advice 
 as to the form of action, in which he should 
 prosecute, the kind of process to sue out, 
 what witnesses he will want, and all other par- 
 ticulars necessary to insure success. The result 
 is, that in many instances, the cause is prejudged 
 at this early stage of it. The trial comes on. It 
 may be had at any time of day, and at any place, 
 perhaps in a bed-room, a kitchen, a barn, a bar- 
 room, or a grog-shop. The defendant may think 
 that the plaintiff has got the start of him in the 
 selection of the justice, and he calls for a jury. 
 A venire is issued. It is handed to a constable, 
 who picks a jury of such materials as he pleases, 
 and often acting under the influence of one or the 
 other of the parties. The cause is tried, and the 
 parties take such justice as they can get under 
 such a system. A worse state of things than this 
 
633 
 
 could hardly be imagined, and some remedy, 
 whereby these evils may be removed, ought to be 
 ,'his is a work iu which this Conven- 
 tion should earnestly engage, that a wholesome 
 and impartial administration of justice may be 
 provided for the whole people. These inferior 
 courts must be elevated and improved, to meet 
 the public wants and interests. He believed that 
 this might easily be done. He had reflected some 
 upon the subject, and a plan had occurred to him, 
 which he had reduced to writing, and would read 
 as a part of his: 
 
 " Town courts shtfll be organized -with civil jurisdiction 
 in such ca<es as shall be designated by law to the amount 
 of two hundred and fifty dollars, and with such criminal 
 jurisdiction, and other powers and duties, as shall be pre- 
 scribed by law. Laws shall be passed providing for the 
 holding of i'miuent and stated terms of the said courts, at 
 n'xrd and convenient places, in the several towns of this 
 State, and for the lair and impartial drawing and summon- 
 ing of jurors in said courts. Each of said courts shall 
 have a clerk for the Usuing of process, entering of defaults, 
 taking of confessions of judgment, and the performance ot 
 such other duties as shall be devolved upon him by law. 
 
 " Whenever a new trial shall be deemed necessary, by 
 a court of review for the attainment of the ends of justice, 
 in any case originating in a town court, such new trial 
 shall be had in the town where such cause was first tried, 
 or in an adjoining town. 
 
 " Such town courts shall be held by judges to be elect 
 ed by counties or districts, for such terms, and with such 
 compensation, as shall be prescribed by law." 
 
 Some such measure as this would effect the 
 
 desired reform. We owe it to the people to mak 
 
 a sincere and united effort to afford them reliel 
 
 from the defective and mischievous arrangement 
 
 and operation of justices' courts. We are taking 
 
 great pains to reorganize and improve our highei 
 
 courts. In these courts we are careful to guard 
 
 the purity and impartiality of the trial by jury 
 
 and removing temptation as far as possible from 
 
 the judges of those courts, and relieving suitors 
 
 from vexatious and burdensome impositions, by 
 
 taking away all fees from those officers, and re 
 
 quiring them to De paid by fixed salaries. But 
 
 yet, we are leaving that class of courts which is 
 
 far more important to the mass of the people, ex 
 
 posed to the corrupt and dangerous influences to 
 
 which he had referred, and allowing the 
 
 officers holding those courts to be wholly depend 
 
 ent upon fees. He would provide for all alike 
 
 By the plan suggested by him we should establish 
 
 courts in which the people would have confidence 
 
 In them the law would be so well administere< 
 
 that a large share ot business which is now con 
 
 ducted in the higher courts, would be done ii 
 
 these town courts; the effect of which would bi 
 
 that the number of judges of the Supreme Cour 
 
 might be much reduced, and the expense of th 
 
 superior departments of Judiciary essentially les 
 
 sened. A large share of criminal business, too 
 
 might be done in these courts, which would stiJ 
 
 farther relieve the higher courts. Great expense 
 
 loss of time, and inconvenience, would also b 
 
 avoided, bv leaving all appeal causes tried in th 
 
 town where they should originate, or in adjoinin 
 
 town. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN: How does the gentleman pro 
 pose to have the causes tried in these town cour 
 reviewed ? 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS: By having them carried t 
 the court of review upon points of law, the sam 
 as causes are now catried from Circuit Courts an 
 Courts of Common Pleas to the Supreme Cour 
 
 If any error in law was committed on the trial, any 
 
 evidence improperly admitted or rejected, and in 
 ases when the attendance of witnesses could not 
 e procured, or of newly discovered evidence, let 
 new trial be ordered. " This pl.m mny lie ddeci- 
 e. It was no favorite or hobby of his. He 
 lought that something ought to be done, and this 
 as what had occurred to his mind. He hoped 
 entleman would direct their attention to this 
 ulvject. However great might be. the improve 
 lents which we should make in our higher 
 nurts, the mass of the people would se and feel 
 ttle practical benefit from such improvement, 
 iut elevate the character of your town courts 
 ive them respectability, capacity, and^wnpartnl- 
 y and you will introduce a reform which will 
 ome directly home to the interests and bosoms 
 f the people, and confer upon the community 
 lessings which will be understood, abroad, and 
 ppieciated by all He had now very irnperfect- 
 y and unsatisfactorily gone over the ground which 
 e had intended to occupy. He xvas happy to 
 erceive that he had not detained the committee 
 ong, and in conclusion, tendered his thanks for 
 he attention with which ho had been favored 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR suggested that the Convention 
 hoiild take up the resolutions referred to the 
 ommittee of the whole, either those of Mr. 
 WHITE or those of Mr. BROWN, and thus be able 
 o discuss and settle some distinct principles of a 
 udiciary. The matters of detail could be easily 
 
 adjusted afterwards. 
 
 After some cony 
 COM and KIRKLAN 
 
 ation between Messrs. BAS- 
 r. O'C. waived his motion. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY bne.flv followed. 
 The committee rose and reported progress, and 
 he Convention 
 Adjourned to 9 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 FRIDAY, (Q2d day,} Aug. 14. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr PREBLE! 
 
 MONIES IN CHANCERY. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a letter from the 
 Chancellor enclosing certain papers from regis- 
 ters and clerks relative to the monies in Chan- 
 cery, in answer to the resolution of Mr. MANN, 
 adopted yesterday. It was as follows : 
 
 SARATOGA SPRINGS, August 12, 1848. 
 Dear Sir:! see by the debates in the Convention, of 
 Monday and Tuesday, that a resolution is under discus- 
 sion in relation to calling upon the Register and Clerks in 
 Chancery, for a statement of the items composing the fun-l 
 under the control of the Court of Chancery, as contained 
 in my stntement of July last. It would n quire many 
 month's labor, and the examination ot the proceedings of 
 the court for many years back, to get a much more per- 
 feet statement of the nature of the funds, and the owners 
 and claimants thereof, than is contained in the annual 
 statements which thu Registers are required to furnish to 
 the Chancellor, and the Clerks to the Vice Chancellors, 
 under the 127th rule of the court I have procured most of 
 those annual statements, and herewith transmit them to 
 you for the use of the Convention. 1 also send you a 
 statement of about half a million, which is deposited in the 
 Trust Company by Receivers and others, under the or- 
 ders of the court, upon trust, to accumulate, for the benefit 
 of the creditors of broken banks or others, who may event- 
 ually be found entitled to the same, but which does not 
 stand in the name of the Registers or Cleiks, and will 
 not therefore be found in these accounts. Thee ac- 
 counts will, I think, be found sufficient to iurnish the 
 Convention with th information desired, so far as it could 
 be obtained from the records of the court, in time to be of 
 any use in the deliberations. Most of the funds, except in 
 suits which are yet pending and undetermined, is vested 
 upon trust, to pay annual allowances out of tho income, 
 
 54 
 
634 
 
 and to pay over the principal, after the termination of par 
 ticular estates thereon, or to accumulate tor the benefit o 
 infants until they become of age, or for unknown owners 
 in particular suits, or for creditors who are entitled to 
 come in and establish their claims, &c. It will also 
 be seen by the accounts of the Assistant Register and Clerk 
 ot the first circuit, that there is about twelve thousand 
 dollars, which he denominates the dead fund, belonging 
 probably to various indiriduals and suitors, who are un- 
 known to him, and for which no claims have been made 
 for the last six years. The management of the suitors' 
 fund, whicli must always be large in this state, and partic- 
 ularly in New York, requires great care to preserve it 
 from loss. But I believe no losses of any amount have 
 been sustained in the Court of Chancery, though many 
 millions have, from time to time, passed through the hands 
 of the Registers and Clerks. It may, however, be a pro- 
 per subject for the consideration of the Convention, whe- 
 ther it may not be expedient, considering the importance 
 of the subject, to have an officer somewhat analogous to 
 the Accountant General in England, to take charge of alJ 
 the funds brough< into court and required to be invested for 
 the benefit of suitors in all of the courts of the State. 
 Many persons who would make very competent registers 
 and clerks of court, would not have the financial talent and 
 the requisite responsibility to manage these large funds, 
 and to keep them properly invested for the benefit of sui- 
 tors and the unprotected classes to whom a great portion 
 of such funds generally belong. And it is impossible for 
 the courts themselves to watch over and superintend such 
 investments. 
 
 I am, with respect, yours, &c. 
 
 R. HYDE WALWOKTH, Chancellor. 
 Hon. JOHN TRACY, 
 
 President of the Constitutional Convention. 
 
 It was referred to a select committee of three ; 
 Mr. MANN, Mr. TAGGART. and Mr. . 
 
 Mr. HART presented a remonstrance from the 
 trustees of Fulton Academy, Oswego county, 
 against the withdrawal of ttie' literature fund from 
 academies and colleges. Referred to the commit- 
 tee of the whole having in charge the report of 
 the committee on education. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR presented a like remon- 
 strance from the trustees of Manlius Academy ; 
 which received a like reference. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES called attention to the fact that 
 a report had been received from the Chancellor 
 in obedience to a resolution of the Convention 
 adopted on the 26th of June, in relation to the 
 awregates of monies in Chancery, and which had 
 not been printed. He moved to refer that report 
 together with the communication received this 
 morning. Agreed to. 
 
 ACCOUNTANT GENERAL. 
 
 Mr. WORD EN moved that the select commit- 
 tee, to wtiota was reteired the letter and papers 
 from the Chancellor relative to the monies now 
 in his hands, or those of some of his officers of 
 the court of chancery, be instructed to take into 
 consideration, and to report upon the propriety of 
 the appointment of an accountant general. He 
 (Mr. VV.) had thrown out a suggestion some days 
 since, that a public officer was necessary to take 
 charge of the funds paid into the court ot chancery 
 as well as other courts ; and he had then adverted 
 to tne fact that in England, such an officer was 
 appointed by the government to take charge of all 
 the monies paid into the various courts, which 
 monies were to abide the result of litigation. 
 By means ot such an office the difficulties 
 with which they have met in this country 
 would be obviated; for then there would be a 
 public record kept of all these monies, and the 
 names of the owners, &c., so that every person 
 could see what was the amount and to whom it 
 belonged. He thought that there was much in 
 
 the suggestion of the Chancellor that registers 
 and clerks are not the proper officers to have 
 charge of or to manage these funds. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said there was a resolution 
 offered some time since which suggested the pro- 
 priety of having all these moneys paid into the 
 treasury of the State. This was a good project, 
 and if adopted, there would be no necessity for 
 this new officer. And for his own part, he" was 
 not in iavor of appointing officers, unless there 
 was a real necessity for them. Again there is 
 another matter which requires some remedy ; and 
 that is the cost and trouble of getting money out 
 of these courts when it is once paid into them. 
 If it was paid into the public treasury, a simple 
 order of the court would be all that was necessa- 
 ray to draw the money out of it at any time. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that there could exist no 
 necessity for the appointment of an accountant 
 general here. The funds in England, in Chance- 
 ry, are very large. Much more so than any that 
 we have here. If this fund is to be borrowed by 
 the State (and this state is to be a borrower for 
 twenty years to come) why then, when this 
 money is paid into court, in the first place all 
 that is necessary to be done is to transfer it to 
 the Comptroller or the proper officer. You will 
 thus create a bureau and it will have to have one 
 clerk. If you have an accountant general he 
 must have his clerk, and an office and room; and 
 this fund will be taxed to pay all this expense. 
 When a decision takes place then the Chancellor 
 issues an order ; that order is presented to the 
 proper officer and the money is paid. This is 
 pretty fair for all parties, to the government and 
 to all; and it would relieve the clerks and regis- 
 ters from a vast deal of trouble. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN did not differ with the gentle- 
 men from Otsego or Orange. All agree we 
 must have these funds in the hands of some one 
 else besides these clerks and registers. Here are 
 $3,000,000 in their hands; and there is nearly as 
 large an amount under the control of a receiver; 
 and he is a mere dead weight to prevent its dis- 
 tribution; and there is almost as large a sum also 
 under the charge of special officers such as re- 
 ceivers of broken banks, &c. Now he wanted all 
 this money under the supervision of law and not 
 in the hands of individuals who use it merely to 
 subserve individual interests. Now the Chan- 
 cellor throws all possible obstacles in the way of 
 getting at this information. But we must have it; 
 and make a different disposition of the funds. 
 The Legislature has been applied to, to get a set- 
 tlement of these funds, but without effect. He 
 wanted all this money to be under control of law 
 and not left under control of clerks and irrespon- 
 sible individuals. The gentleman from Chau- 
 auque (Mr. PATTERSON) has $600,000 in his 
 hands subject to the decision of litigation. It 
 ought not to be there. He wanted to call the 
 attention of the Convention to this subject. It 
 might be questionable, however, whether it 
 would be wise to have these monies mixed up 
 and used as the funds of the State. But still a 
 remedy should be provided for the existing evil. 
 T^ie resolution was then adopted. 
 
 SERGEANT-AT-ARMS. 
 Mr. MANN offered the following :- 
 
635 
 
 ivu.l, That HIKA.M ALLEN be appointed Secretary 
 of this Convention, to take effect on the first of June last. 
 The duties of Sergeant-at-Arms, and keeping and distribut- 
 ing the public documents shall be assigned to this Secre- 
 tnry Mis compensation as Secretary shall be in full pay- 
 ment for his services as Sergeant-at-Arms and Secretary of 
 this Convention. 
 
 Mr. M. said that the Comptroller refused to pay 
 Mr. Allen as Sergeant-at- Arms ; he had some 
 cniiscientious scruples about it and it would be 
 necessary to make him a secretary before he could 
 get his pay from the Comptroller. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON was not sure but that the 
 Comptroller was right, although he came in direct 
 conflict with the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN) and his opinion, who solemnly de- 
 \-l.iml at the commencement of the session that 
 the Convention could appoint such an officer, or 
 that he was necessary. Now the Comptroller 
 differs with this gentleman and says he is notne- 
 y ; and it may be that he very properly dif- 
 fers. But as the man had faithfully done the 
 work and ought tc have his pay at once ; and as 
 the Comptroller has taken the responsibility of 
 refusing to pay him, why perhaps it may be pro- 
 per to call him a Secretary, and that will satisfy 
 the scruples of the Comptroller perhaps. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY : You may well say per- 
 haps. 
 
 Mr. JONES : Perhaps it may become necessa- 
 ry to call the clergyman " Secretaries" before 
 they can get their $3 a day. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : Three dollars for one small 
 prayer? 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Yes, perhaps it may. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS could not vote for this resolu- 
 tion. He could not possibly believe that we had 
 a Comptroller so weak ihat he would be satisfied 
 with this mere change of the name of an officer, 
 in order to give him his pay. Now if the Comp- 
 trolU-r will n >* pay this man, why the next Legis- 
 lature certainly will. 
 
 Mr. MANN : The gentleman from Essex (Mr. 
 SJMMOIVS) forgets that we have already passed a 
 similar resolution calling our Librarian a Secretary 
 and we did so to effect the same object that we 
 propose to Ho here to have the officer paid lor his 
 services. He (Mr. M.) had no feeling about the 
 matter ; he merely wished to do what was right. 
 The man had done his work well and ought to 
 have his pay. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS replied that there might be some 
 liitle propriety in calling a Librarian a Secretary, 
 
 E'M'liaps ; for their duties are somewhat similar 
 ut when you come to call (his officer a soldier 
 a Secretary, and a gun a goose quill, why it is a 
 little too small business. [Laughter.] 
 
 The resolution was adopted almost unanimously. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to have printed the re- 
 monstrance of the Trustees of Union Hall Acade- 
 my in relation to the distribution of the literary 
 fund. The arguments in that remonstance were 
 well stated ; and contained pretty much all that 
 could be said. The printing of it would very 
 much expedite the labors of the committee. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought that they had better 
 not commence printing these remonstrances ; 
 else they would have to go on and print them all. 
 If this remonstrance was to be read here instead 
 of u speech on the subject, it would answer every 
 
 Surpose, and be much better than most speeches 
 elivered here. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that he wanted this remon- 
 stance printed because it was much fuller than 
 the others. It was not a long document, howev- 
 er, and the printing of it would not be expensive^ 
 
 The motion to print was lost. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole on the 
 
 REPORTS OF THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said he did not rise to discuss 
 the question whether the powers of a common 
 law court and of the court of chancery can be 
 advantageously blended in one tribunal. There 
 can be no doubt chancery and common law pow- 
 ers must be vested in one or more tribunals and 
 f think it certain the essential modes of proceed- 
 ings in both courts must be preserved. The 
 mode of proceedings in the courts of common 
 law is exactly adapted to trials of questions of 
 fact by a jury. The pleadings at law, if well 
 drawn, are a brief philosophic statement of legal, 
 ly deduced facts from the circumstances attend- 
 ant upon the matter complained of, and which if 
 denied by the opposite party, forms an issue to be 
 tried by a jury at circuit,all the circumstances are 
 thus put in issue, and the cause goes down to trial 
 before a jury; the evidence which tends either 
 fo support or deny the legal fact stated in the 
 pleadings are given, and a jury decides the fact 
 stated in the pleadings and assesses damages. In 
 chancery the complainant states all the circum- 
 stances historically upon which he relies, and the 
 defendant makes also another historical state- 
 ment of the circumstances detailed by the com- 
 plainant, introducing with it such denials, facts 
 and circumstances as he relies on in defence 
 These statements are drawn up with great skill 
 and are very like the pleas of eminent counsel in 
 summing up a cause to a jury after the evidence 
 is given. It makes an issue utterly incapable of 
 trial by jury and a general verdict. Yet chan- 
 cery proceedings cannot in all cases be dispensed 
 with. In cases which a general verdict would 
 not determine the rights of parties,it is convenient 
 if not necessary to have chancery forms and 
 proceedings. They are better adapted to the 
 ends of justice in such cases. We must have 
 decrees for specific performance, and to enjoin 
 duties and correct mistakes, and decide causes 
 too complicated and rights too complex for the 
 decisions of a jury. Jury trials have been the 
 cornerstone of English and American law and 
 liberty. It is then on the trial of those rights 
 brought before them,discussed,proved and adjudg- 
 ed that they have learned and come to understand 
 the theory of human rights and the defence of 
 them. This mode of trial was introduced at an 
 early day by our English ancestors; the pleadings 
 have been (though incumbered with useless 
 words,) adopted by such minds as those of a 
 Barren, a Coke and a Mansfield to a trial by jury. 
 Not so with the forms and proceedings of the 
 civil law. They are prepared for judges 
 and constitute an essential part of the trial. We 
 need only turn to an ecclesiastical tribunal or 
 court marshal, which are proceedings much after 
 the forms of the civil law, with their charges and 
 specifications, each of which are to be historically 
 traced ; and no facts or circumstances can be proved 
 
636 
 
 to substantiate the principal charge, that is not 
 accurately detailed in the specification. We in- 
 variably see learned doctors in the ecclesiastical 
 courts, and experienced and learned men in courts 
 martial, spending days and weeks in solving a 
 question ofguilt or innocence, which under the 
 substantial rules and forms of the common law, 
 a justice of the peace and a jury of farmers would 
 more satisfactorily solve in two hours. It will be 
 an evil hour for this country, when we abandon 
 the issues of the common law and a jury, for the 
 codes and forms of the civil law. But whether, 
 when necessary, as it sometimes is, to have re- 
 course to the forms and proceedings of chancery 
 or the civil law, we cannot do both kinds of bu- 
 siness in the same court with advantage, is 
 another question, and one upon which I cannot 
 fully satisfy my own mind and assuredly shall 
 not attempt to satisfy the minds of others. I rose 
 at this time because no other member of the com- 
 mittee seemed willing now to address it. I have 
 a proposition which I wish to offer as a substi- 
 tute for the second section of the report of the 
 chairman of the committee on the judiciary. Mr, 
 P. here read the "substitute which is as follows: 
 
 ^ I . There shall be a Court of Appeals .composed of nine 
 judge*, to be elected by plurality of votes, at a general 
 State election. 
 
 (j 2. The judges of the Court of Appeals, shall respect- 
 ively hold circuit courts, and courts of oyer and termmer, 
 no that a circuit court, and court of oyer and terminer shall 
 be held by some one of them in each of the counties of the 
 State, at least once in two years. 
 
 ^ 3. When holding circuit courts, and courts of oyer and 
 terminer, the judges shall have all the powers and perform 
 the duties enjoined by law on the justices of the Supreme 
 Court; but they shall not be judges of district courts, in 
 bane, or judges of the Supreme Cour' in term. 
 
 ^ 4. Any MX of said judges may hold a Court of Appeals; 
 but no judgment of the Supreme Court shall be reversed 
 without the concurrence of two more judges in favor 1 re- 
 versal, than ot' affirmance. 
 
 ^ 5. At the first geni al election under this Constitution, 
 each elector shall' be entitled to vote lor six oi soid judges, 
 and every fourth year thereafter, for two such judges; and 
 at such first election, no ballot for such judges shull be 
 counted, upon which more than six names shall be con- 
 tained, or at subsequent elections, more than two. 
 
 ^6. The judges shall be so classified that three shall be 
 elected every fourth year. Vacancies, otherwise than by 
 expiration of the term, by the nomination of the Governor 
 and approval by the Sen'au-; so thatthiee of such judge 
 shall always be elected evrry fourth year. 
 
 {3 7. If by reason ot an equality in the number of voter 
 cast, there should fail to be a choice by plurality of votes 
 ot any one ormore of the judges, at any election, the GOT- 
 ernor shall appoint such judge or judges from among those 
 having an equal and the greatest mimbsi of votes. 
 
 It will be perceived I propose the election of 
 nine judges of the court of appeals by general 
 ticket and a plurality of votes, and that no elec- 
 tor shall vote for more than six of those judges 
 so that the minority will always elect one-third 
 of those judges. This will divest the election of 
 judges of the virulence of party, and secure (I 
 trust) an impartial administration of justice. The 
 court will have the whole people for its constit- 
 uency. They are to hold circuits so that they 
 will be known and judged by the whole people. 
 They will not be mere legal monks, always pour- 
 ing over cases and antique tomes of learning. 
 They will be practically associated wilb and un- 
 derstand trials at citfujts and the wants <>! the 
 people and the spint of the age. The talents ot 
 both ol the great political parlies will be centred 
 in this court, and it we are not too penurious in 
 
 he salaries we give them, the highest talents of 
 he State will be secured in the performance of 
 some of the usual duties. They are not by my 
 proposition permitted to set at the proposed terms 
 f the supreme or district courts, in b'ank, and will 
 be in a condition impartially to hear the appeals 
 which will be brought before them, and know how 
 :o respect proceedings at circuit courts, as well as 
 of the court in bank, and the duties to be perform- 
 ed at circuit will enable us to dispense with eight 
 if the judges proposed by the majority of the com. 
 mittee. I think three judges for each of the eight 
 districts will be qmte sufficient tor the courts in 
 bank, and to peitorm the residue of circuit du- 
 ies, especially if proper courts and officers are 
 provided for the city of New York, and if we 
 have a local court for minor local matters, and in 
 some cases taking testimony in chancery causes, 
 which I apprehend may be found necessary. 
 These are the advantages I anticipate from the 
 proposition I make for constituting the court of 
 appeals. I will now state my objections to the 
 organization of that court as proposed by the ma- 
 jority of the committee. The four judges pro- 
 posed to be elected will not be authorized to per- 
 form any judicial duties except in the court of ap- 
 peals, while if I understand the report it is con- 
 templated the judges to be elected from the Dis- 
 trict justices of the supreme court will still remain 
 judges of the latter court and perform so many of 
 its duties as their time will permit. If this is not 
 so then we must have eight judges on large sala- 
 ries doing only appellate business and unless ap- 
 pellate business shall greatly increase under the 
 new organization they will not be employed one- 
 half their time, for under the organization of our 
 courts under the present Constitution the court 
 for the correction of enors does not sit more than 
 eight weeks in the year, and the chancellor and 
 judges of the supreme court in addition to the 
 great duties they perform in their respective 
 courts, give the leading opinions in cases brought 
 to the court for the correction of errors. It 
 was intimated by the chairman on presenting 
 the repoit of the com mittee, that it was probable 
 the four judges elected by the State would be lay- 
 men. If the design is that these laymen should 
 be a kind of law jury to decide difierences be- 
 tween learned judges in the courts of law and 
 equity, then I submit they are not sufficiently nu- 
 merous for the purpose designed. If it be de- 
 _igned they shall be eminent counsellors and ex- 
 pert in the law and equity business ot the State, 
 I confidently believe they cannot be induced to 
 accept office and retire from their practice for any 
 salary we can give there, and for so short a period 
 as it is proposed to have their term of office. For 
 I assume that under the project of the committee, 
 no man can be elected except ne belongs to the 
 political majority which may be ascendant at the 
 time of the election. In this State there can be 
 no such confidence in the political ascendancy of 
 any party as to induce a man to retire from a lu- 
 crative business and profession in the expectation 
 of a re-election. The whole arrangement for the 
 felection or appointment, of Judges in all the courts 
 will inevitably result in party selections in the state 
 or appellate judges, arid in the districts in which 
 
 the judges of the Supreme 
 
 rourt are to be elected. 
 
 project submitted by me would abate party 
 
637 
 
 rancor, and it it were t xtended to the choice ol 
 all the judges of the Supreme court ol' each po- 
 litical party, would have some of its favorite and 
 eminent men on the bench in every section of the 
 State. The most eminent men of both parties 
 would be brought into action in our judiciary sys- 
 tem. Confidence and respect would be shown to 
 their decisions everywhere, and bills of exceptions 
 and appeals would be comparatively few. 
 Without such confidence no end can be put 
 to a law suit until by certiorari, bills of excep- 
 tion and appeal, the cause has reached the last 
 destiny provided for it in the constitution 
 The plan of the majority of the committee may be 
 easily changed to meet these views. If the elec- 
 tion or appointment of our judges is not intended 
 to be a rancorous and partizan matter, it must be 
 changed. It' we intend to have an able and im- 
 partial administration of justice, in which the 
 confidence of the whole people will repose, it must 
 be changed In some sense we are all political 
 partizans; but I trust there are none of us who do 
 not desire an impartial and enlightened adminis- 
 tration of justice. Without it neither liberty can 
 be maintained or property secured. As a people 
 we are working out a great problem in human ex- 
 istence. If we can preserve a pure and enlight- 
 ened judiciary and our laws from aKrarianism on 
 the one hand and monopoly on the other, we shall 
 succeed. Failing in this, military despotism and 
 a night of darkness broods over our country and 
 our posterity. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS desired to answer the gentlemen 
 from Erie, (Mr. STOW) and Chautauque, (Mr. 
 MARVIN.) The gentleman from Chautauque, ob- 
 jects to the system proposed by the committee, 
 not because the officers were not numerous 
 enough, inasmuch as he proposes a less number, 
 but because ot fhe organization of the courts, as not 
 being calculated to make the whole system effec- 
 tive, and atle to do the greatest amount of busi- 
 ness. In this respect he, (Mr. L.) differed en 
 tirely from the gentleman. He did not believe it 
 possible or within the scope ot human ingenuity 
 to devise a system, by which a given number 
 of judges, divided into sepaiate court*, would 
 do the same amount of business that they would, 
 if united in one court. The judges being all uni 
 ted in a single court, might direct their energies to 
 those places in the State where business accumu 
 lates, and may withdraw from other sections the 
 lorce not there occupied. If they are divided in 
 to distinct courts, with different jurisdiction, it 
 would require legislation to equalize business be- 
 tween the several tribunals. When this subjec 
 was under discussion before the committee, it was 
 deemed expedient by the members, when it was 
 proposed to have two courts for the trial of issues 
 tf fact, to authorize the Legislature to make such 
 provision by way of costs and otherwise as might 
 secure an equal amount of business in these 
 courts. And in his judgment it was a necessary 
 provision too. The gmtlernan from Chautauque 
 proposes in his plan to have nine Supreme Court 
 judges, and to divide the State into two parts ha- 
 ving two separate Supreme courts ; the judges in 
 each half of the State to belong to that half, and tc 
 have no jurisdiction in the other half. He propos- 
 es, however, to have a common chief justice, to 
 preside in both courts. If we look at the statistics 
 
 )resented to this convention by the Chairman of 
 he judiciary committee, (Mr. RUGGLES) and also 
 )y the gentleman from Tioga, (Mr. TAYLOR,) it 
 vould be found that the accumulation of business 
 n the courts, to be decided upon in bane, was 
 enough, and more than enough, to occupy two 
 such courts all the time. There were nine hun- 
 dred cases on the calendar, now, and he supposed 
 ;hat did not include a number perhaps equally 
 arge but not placed the calendar, Could two tri- 
 bunals keep up to that ? The gentleman propos- 
 es in addition to the four judges of each court, to 
 lave a chief justice in each district. And for 
 what purpose to preside in one court, while the 
 judges are writing out their opinions in the other, 
 and vice versa. What is the use of this chief jus- 
 tice, what are his functions, and what benefit was 
 be except to give off-hand opinions. He may in 
 that respect have a salutary influence as a presi- 
 ding officer, he can help in making off-hand de- 
 cisions. But he was not the officer to per- 
 form the laborious duties of the office to 
 nvestigate those deep fundamental principles, 
 and legal authorities in his chambers, or bribery 
 if the number of causes carried to that court 
 ere any thing like equal to those under the pre- 
 sent system, both these courts would be fully 
 and constantly employed. But this was not all 
 he requires the chief Justice of the court 
 and some of the judges of it, and also of the court 
 of Chancery to sit in the court of errors. If they 
 are to be so occupied in the Supreme courts what 
 time will they have to sit in the court of appeals? 
 Gentlemen can not make out that the business of 
 the Supreme Court is to be so diminished by any 
 system of jurisprudence as not to occupy the 
 judges of that tribunal all the time. The gen- 
 tleman says that the court of errors proposed 
 by the committee, was immediately to be broken 
 down and swamped with business. The court 
 of errors as heretofore organized had been com- 
 posed of a body of men certainly much less effi- 
 cient for the rapid transaction of business than 
 the one proposed by the committee, for they 
 woul ! be eminent lawyers capable of appreciat- 
 ing a principle of law at once, without having 
 every point distinctly argued as was now the 
 practice. It has required a longer time to dis- 
 pose of a cause in that court than it would if the 
 court had been constituted as now proposed. And 
 yet they had performed legislation for four months 
 in the year, and having three months leisure, 
 have accomplished all their business before 
 them. Will not a court devoted exclusively 
 to that business, composed of men learned in 
 the law, educated to that profession, be able to do 
 the business before them. He had not the slight- 
 est doubt about it. But this was not all the gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque proposed that these 
 supreme court judges through the State, shall 
 not only constitute the supreme court of the 
 State, and the court for the Correction of Er- 
 rors, but shall hold the circuits throughout the 
 State, and in every county. He Mr. L. hoped 
 that we would have circuit courts rather oftener 
 than once ayear,but even this would be utterly im- 
 possible under the gentleman's system. They 
 could never hold the circuits, or if ever but few 
 and far between, and practically therefore with 
 Ihu other courts with which tlie gentleman pro- 
 
638 
 
 poses to relieve it, it would be the present supreme 
 court, to hold law terms and do the appellate 
 business and never holding a circuit but leaving 
 that business to the district judges. The gentle- 
 man from Erie (Mr. STOW) whcfhad addressed the 
 Convention this morning, proposes somewhat to 
 enlarge the number of judges, and to have instead 
 of nine, fourteen, though still dividing the State 
 into two judicial districts, two supreme courts, 
 and still constituting the same judges members 
 of the Court of Errors, and to hold circuits and as 
 presiding officers at the courts of Over and Termi- 
 ner. The same objections that he applied to the 
 system of the gentleman from Chautauque, appli- 
 ed with less force to be sure, owing to increase of 
 judges to that of the gentleman from Erie. The 
 gentleman from Chautauque proposed to have two 
 or three chancellors, which he thought would 
 
 be amply sufficient to do the business. 
 
 He would ask how many Chancellors we 
 had now. We have it is said but one, yet 
 we have two vice Chancellors and the as- 
 sistant Vice Chancellor of New York, whose 
 business is confined almost exclusively to 
 the hearing of- causes, in lieu of the Chan- 
 cellor, and yet every body considered that court 
 to be utterly overwhelmed with business. Tfcere 
 were now, therefore, in fact four Chancellors 
 whose business was confined exclusively to that 
 jurisdiction, besides the circuit, judges who also 
 have equity jurisdiction, and have full employ- 
 ment. In his opinion the business of the Court 
 of Chancery was destined to accumulate as much 
 within the next ten years as in the last ten years, 
 if it was continued as a separate system. 
 There was in the nature of its jurisdiction, and 
 in the character of its mode of proceeding, when 
 we abolished its absurd system of taking evidence, 
 and shortened and simplified other forms that 
 would command public attention and draw within 
 its vortex the business of the country. And he 
 
 j concurred entirely with the gentleman from New 
 York, (Mr. O'CoNOR,) that in case the practice 
 in law and equity were to be united and blended 
 into one system, we should rather approximate to 
 
 ? the system of the Court of Chancery than to that 
 of the common law that it was the rational, 
 
 , the equitable system, and the one which provided 
 a remedy according to the exigencies of the 
 case, and one which is most wanted. The gen- 
 tleman's two or three chancellors would be en- 
 tirely inadequate to the performance of the duties 
 of that branch of business. How was it with the 
 report of committee ? That proposed to give these 
 same powers and duties to the thirty-two circuit 
 judges,giving it room to expand ad libitum^s oc- 
 casion might require. If the equity practice was 
 to be kept distinct,and should it predominate there 
 would be a court for it, and so also with the law 
 system. The judges could place themselves on 
 trie one side or the other, as business should re- 
 quire and thus be perfectly adequate to the wants 
 of the community. The beauty of the plan 
 proposed by I he Judiciary committee would 
 be its expansibility in any direction in which 
 the public business rnay require. Again, both 
 of these gentlemen and others have advocated 
 a system of district judges to hold courts, at least 
 that was his, Mr. L.'s, construction of it. They 
 called it a county court, he called it a district 
 
 court. Mr. L. characterised it as a double system 
 of circuits one class held by a presiding judge 
 elected in a particular district, and the other held 
 by the supreme court judges a system entail- 
 ing upon counties a double expense and upon par- 
 ties and witness the inconvedience of assem- 
 bling a second time to attend trials. He could 
 see no good reason for calling one of them a cir- 
 cuit court and the other county courts nor any 
 reason why all causes ready for trial should not 
 be tried whenever a court was held in the 
 county. Mr. L. further contrasted the plan 
 of the judiciary committee with that of Mr. 
 MARVIN, objecting particularly to that section 
 of the latter which contemplated making the 
 surrogate and a supreme court commissioner a 
 part of their county court their offices to be 
 supported by fees, or to peddle out justice. Mr. 
 L. had hoped that such a proposition would not 
 have found an advocate here. Mr. L. insisted 
 that the causes of the inefficiency of the county 
 court lay in the system itself and not in the want 
 of material /or judges. It was neither an office 
 of honor or merit, and would not command the 
 requisite talent. He next proceeded to notice the 
 position of the gentleman from Erie, in favor of se- 
 parate jurisdiction of law and equity, who assum- 
 ed that the decisions of a court of chancery were a 
 matter of discretion that the chancellor under- 
 took to do right without reference to law not 
 that he decided against law ; but that the system 
 allowed him to do as he pleased in certain cases. 
 But, if Mr L. kne v anything of the principles 
 of equity, they were as well settled as those of the 
 common law. Nor could he constiue away a stat- 
 ute law as the gentleman supposed. He was bound 
 just as much by rigid rules of law as the common 
 Jaw judge. And whatever might be said of the 
 stretching of the power of our court of chancery, 
 the supreme couit had kept pace with it step by 
 step. Both gentlemen went as tar as he did 
 in desiring simplicity and directness in the forms 
 of proceeding. The difference between them and 
 him 'was, that they desired separate and distinct 
 forms for eacn of these two jurisdictions and yet 
 he ventured to say that if either of them could 
 divest themselves of the influences of education, 
 and their predilections for separate and distinct 
 forms of practice, and would sit down and maik 
 out a mode of procedure, they would find that 
 there was no greater necessity for a separate 
 system by the distinction between cases in 
 law and cases in equity, than between cases of 
 tort and cases of assumpsit. But no one proposed 
 to make a set of forms fur all cases. The forms 
 would vary with the peculiarities of the case. 
 He believed we wanted one court of last resort to 
 settle great principle's of law not mere techni- 
 cal questions as to foiins of piocedure. Then we 
 wanted another court which should diffuse itself 
 over this broad state to try issues of fact, and have 
 original jurisdictions. These were the main tea. 
 tures of the plan of the judiciary committee, and 
 he doubted not it would piove, with some modifi- 
 cation in detail, a convenient and efficient plan. 
 The objection ot the gentleman from St. Lawrence 
 that under this, and most of the other schemes, a 
 judge might sit in review of his own decision, it 
 would be easy to obviate by an express prohibi- 
 tion. 
 
639 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that his objection was that 
 the judge who decided the cause in bane might 
 sit in the court of review. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that made no difference. 
 Nothing was easier than to provide that the judge 
 in such a case should not have a voice in the fi- 
 nal decision in the court of appeals though he 
 was not sure that it ought to disqualify a judge 
 because he happened to have heard the case, and 
 had bestowed some thought upon it. He was not 
 aware of a court of appeals anywhere none of 
 whom were judges of other courts. Mr. L. 
 said, in conclusion, that he did not expect this 
 article would be adopted without amendment ; 
 but he had thought it proper that objections to it, 
 which he thought untenable, should be answered 
 as they were made, that the Convention might see 
 both sides. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN wished to remove the objections 
 the gentleman from Herkimer had made to the 
 Supreme Court which he proposed, upon the 
 ground of its not containing sufficient force. Gen- 
 tlemen familiar with judicial proceedings had 
 been of opinion, that simply dividing the court 
 into two parts would cure this evil, of the courts 
 being blocked up, and that in a few years you 
 might consolidate them into one, and let them 
 discharge circuit duty. But Mr. M. said he pro- 
 posed to occupy fifteen minutes, on another occa- 
 sion, in indicating what the reform would be or 
 might be made under his plan. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS then obtained the floor, and moved 
 that the committee rise, which was done. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved the printing of the sub- 
 stitute for section three of the committee's re 
 port. Agreed to. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 TERNOON SESSION. 
 Mr. HARRIS said it had been his lot, occasion- 
 ly, to take part in the discussion of important 
 questions, but never before had he been called to 
 act upon a subject whose transcendant importance 
 impressed itself so deeply upon his own mind. 
 We had, at length, reached the culminating point 
 of our labors the great work for which the Con- 
 vention had been called and which we had been 
 commissioned to execute. Other reforms had 
 been deemed necessary other questions of great 
 importance may yet claim our attention but this 
 was one great work a work which deeply con- 
 cerned all classes of community. The farmer 
 the merchant, the mechanic, the artist, the la- 
 borer and his employer the wise and the igno 
 rant the great and the small the rich and the 
 poor all alike were vitally interested in the 
 great work of reform in which we were now en 
 gaged. It was only by an enlightened and faith 
 t'ul administration of the law that society can be 
 bound together, its diversified interests protectec 
 and peace and harmony preserved. 
 
 Nor are our labors to affect merely the millions 
 who constitute the present population of thi 
 State. Other States yet to be formed from ou 
 great public domain, and peopled with the son 
 and daughters of freedom, will look to us for a 
 mode upon which to organize their new govern 
 ments. Posterity, too, had a deep interest in the 
 result of our labors. The system which should 
 be adopted by this Convention would exert an 
 
 mportant influence, not only on the millions of 
 ur constituents, but upon the generations who 
 vere to succeed us. 
 
 Upon this subject, too, the public attention is 
 nxiously fixed upon us. Their hopes and fears 
 re centred upon our action in this branch of our 
 abors. He would approach the discussion of. 
 hese important questions, discarding all selfish 
 mrposes, and in a deep sense of the magnitude of 
 he trust devolved upon us. 
 
 That some reform in our present judiciary sys- 
 em is necessary all agree all admit that some 
 change is now inevitable. No man is to be found, 
 either in or out of this Convention, who will 
 itand up the unflinching advocate of the present 
 ystem. Upon other questions men differ, but 
 lere, the demand for reform comes up to us with 
 united voice from every quarter. Even those who, 
 bnd of ease and quiet, would pursue the tranquil 
 :enor of their lives in the same steps with their 
 athers, and because their fathers walked in them, 
 even they admit that here some change is neces- 
 sary. Those who are educated with the most 
 profound reverence for established things, here 
 oin in the cry for improvement. Their love of 
 epose their abhorrence of change, is overcome 
 jy the emergency of the case. There was not 
 ic trusted, a member of this Convention who did 
 lot cherish an ardent desire to engage in this 
 great work, with elevated views and in a manner 
 lonorable to himself and useful to his age and his 
 country. 
 
 The wisest institutions are no longer useful 
 than they retain the public confidence. It had 
 seen well observed by a celebrated writer that 
 'next to doing right the great object in the 
 administration of justice, should be to give pub- 
 lic satisfaction" The present judiciary system 
 had not secured the public confidence. So far 
 from giving public satisfaction, it had been con- 
 demned with entire unanimity, and the great 
 object of our assembling was to wipe it out ot 
 our Constitution and substitute in its place some- 
 thing which shall be better adapted to the wants 
 and circumstances of the people of this State. 
 It would be unnecessary, therefore, to occupy 
 the time of the committee with an examination 
 of the present system, or an attempt to point out 
 its defects. Whatever its defects, or however 
 perfect it may be, the public voice demands a 
 change, and we should only discharge our duty 
 to our constituents, by devising a new system 
 which shall in its practical operation effectually 
 maintain the supremacy of law, and secure to 
 every citizen, however humble, the enjoyment of 
 all his natural and social rights. 
 
 Mr. H. said that for eighteen years he had 
 been an humble member of the legal profession, 
 and in his practice had had some opportunity to 
 see and to feel the evils of the present system. 
 From the time it was known to him that he was 
 to be honored with a seat in this body, he had 
 anxiously turned his attention to this great ques- 
 tion. He had, however, drawn out no plan. 
 He came here wedded to no particular scheme. 
 Had it been his lot to have been placed upon the 
 committee to whom that duty was assign- 
 ed, he might have felt it incumbent on him to 
 devise, as well as he might a system for the con- 
 sideration of the committee; but others, more 
 
640 
 
 competent having been selected for that purpose 
 he had preferred to hold himself uncommittet 
 until the report of the committee should be pre- 
 sented, and then bring the best faculties of his 
 mind to the examination of such propositions as 
 should be brought before the Convention for its 
 consideration. Still, in his reflections on this 
 important subject, he had fixed upon some grea 
 measures of reform which any system must pos- 
 sess, in order to have the approval of his judgment. 
 Among the changes he deemed to be of the 
 greatest importance, and without which no plan 
 would meet with his approbation, were the fol- 
 lowing-^-first, the election of judges by the people 
 for a definite term, which should not be very short, 
 nor yet so long as to place an incumbent who 
 should fail to discharge the duties of the office to 
 the public satisfaction, beyond the reach of the 
 appointing power. Secondly, a union of law and 
 equity jurisdiction in the same tribunal. Third- 
 
 (ly, uniformity in the administration of justice, 
 securing so far as practicable, the same decision 
 of the same questions throughout the State. In 
 this respect, Mr. H. was happy to state, in ad- 
 vance, that the general plan of the majority of 
 the committee on the judiciary, corresponded very 
 nearly with the results of his own previous re- 
 flections. ,s And fourthly, a simplification of the 
 ,^?actrce"~bf our courts of law and equity, so as ma- 
 jterially to reduce' the expense of legal proceed- 
 ings. He regretted that so cardinal a measure in 
 the work of reform in which we were engaged 
 had been omitted in the report of the committee 
 for without it, however wise or well conceived 
 any plan, may be, in other respects, he should 
 regard it as radically defective. No matter how 
 well adapted any system might be to attain its 
 object, he maintained, that without essential 
 changes in the present* forms of practice, it would 
 prove a failure it could not accomplish the end 
 for which it was designed. The cumbrous and 
 unwieldy machinery of our present forms of 
 practice, would crush any system. Construct 
 your judiciary system as you may arrange and 
 multiply the judges as you may, if they are sent 
 forth to these labors burdened and crippled with 
 the unmanageable armor in which the present 
 forms of practice would encase them, your great- 
 est jurists, the strongest men, would soon find 
 themselves felled to the ground by its weight. 
 Our legal proceedings must be simplified the 
 administration of justice must be cheapened or all 
 our efforts would prove abortive. It was here 
 that our present judiciary had made shipwreck. 
 Upon this rock they had split. Ill adapted as he 
 conceived our present courts to be, to the great 
 ends for which they were intended, the time was, 
 when even those courts, with all the defects of 
 their system, might, by thorough and persevering 
 reforms in their rules of practice curtailing and 
 simplifying the machinery by which legal pro- 
 ceedings were to be conducted, and thus expedi- 
 ting business and reducing the expenses, have 
 preserved themselves from that condemnation 
 which the public voice with such unexampled 
 unanimity has passed upon them, and from whose 
 judgment there can be no appeal. ' 
 
 No man entertained a higner respect for our ju- 
 diciary than himself ; no man more highly appre- 
 ciated tue purity, the elevated dignity, the exalted 
 
 worth of the present ben^Uof our couris, than he 
 did. Tnere were among them men whose trea- 
 sures of legal learning would adorn any court in 
 his or any other munt.v. And yH lie t\>\\ him- 
 self constrained to say, (hat these courts were, to 
 a great extent, chargeable with the overthrow of 
 our present judiciary system. Had they adopted 
 such reforms in the administration of justice as 
 the spirit of the age demanded, they might have 
 saved the system. 
 
 Previous to the revision of our statutes, in 1S30, 
 the revisors, in their report, distinctly called the 
 attention of the Legislature to the subject, ex- 
 pressing a decided opinion that great improve- 
 ments might and ought to be made in the practice 
 of the court of chancery and the supreme court, 
 and recommending that the Legislature should 
 impose by law upon the chancellors and judges, 
 the duty of a periodical revision of the rules and 
 practice of their courts, with a view to such im- 
 provements. The Legislature expressed their de- 
 sire for such improvements by requiring those 
 courts, within two years, and at the expiration of 
 every seven years thereafter, to revise their rules, 
 with a view, so rar as practicable, to improve their 
 practice, by abolishing fictitious and unnecessaiy 
 process and proceedings, expediting the decision 
 of causes, diminishing costs, and remedying such 
 abuses and imperfections as might be found to ex- 
 ist in the practice, in any class of suits cognizable 
 in those courts. Mr. H- did not hesitate to say, 
 that, odious as was the court of chancery now, had 
 the chancellor, in the spirit of the enactments of 
 the Legislature, pursued, earnestly and diligently, 
 the work of reform in the practice of his court, 
 we should have been here to-day if this Conven- 
 tion had ever assembled (and he greatly doubted 
 whether it would have been) acknowledging the 
 obligations of the people to an efficient court of 
 chancery, and to continue it as an indispensable 
 branch of our state judiciary. But our judiciary 
 have been so much engrossed with their arduous 
 labors, and have been so wedded to their old sys- 
 tems, that they have not discovered or appreciated 
 he imperious demand for reform. They have been 
 content,year after year,to struggle on with the accu. 
 rculated and ever accumulating mass of unfinished 
 ausiness upon their hands, apparently unconscious 
 of the increasing public discontent, and with no 
 effort to avert that doom which public sentiment, 
 with a distinctness not to be mistaken, has already 
 pronounced. The manner in which the Chancel- 
 or had complied with the desire of the Legisla- 
 ure might be well illustrated by the anecdote, 
 well known to the profession, of an eminent law. 
 /er who, when informed by the Chancellor that 
 le was about to publish a new edition of his rules, 
 drily and significantly enquired of his honor whe- 
 her it would appear in one volume or two. 
 The same thing is true, though to a less extent, 
 with respect to the Supreme court. Much might 
 lave been done, in his judgment, to render the 
 practice of that court less difficult and complica. 
 ed. And now what was to be done, was a grave 
 aid difficult question. The project of the gentle- 
 man from New York, (Mr. O'CONOB) who propos- 
 ed to blend the common law and equity practice, 
 le deemed impracticable at least for the present, 
 and he had been unable to devise anything better 
 han an amendment which at a proper time he 
 
041 
 
 
 intended to otter providing for the election of a i 
 Chief Justice, who should preside over the judi- 
 ciary department, and whose tiuty it should be 
 from ti'ne to tune to prescribe .such forms of prac- 
 tice for the Supreme and subordinate courts, as 
 should effectually simplify proceedings, and es- 
 sentially reduce the expenses of litigation. This, 
 alone, would be a reform of incalculable impor- 
 tance. He who should effect it, would entitle 
 himself to the gratitude and honor of a public 
 benefactor. The change could only be effected 
 gradually. Much skill and experience and great 
 deliberation would be required in the execution of 
 snrh a woik. He would elect an officer who 
 should be held responsible to the people for a 
 faithful and energetic petlormance of this diffi. 
 cult task; and the more certainly to secure this 
 object, he would require this officer to report an- 
 nually to the Legislature, recommending such 
 measures tor the action of the Legislature as should 
 aid in the accomplishment of this greaf work. 
 
 Mr. H. now passed to the consideration of the 
 subject ol uniformity of decisions in all of our 
 courts. All would admit its importance, and he 
 thought the plan submitted by the majority of 
 the judiciary committee, was best adapted to se- 
 cure this end. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN here interposed saying that 
 there was no such thing before the Convention as 
 a plan recommended, by a majority of the judicia- 
 ry committee. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS would be glad to have the gen- 
 tleman explain. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : I will at the proper time. 
 Mr. HARRIS : It is a very extraordinary state- 
 ment. 
 
 A Voice : " Jordan, what will you say to that?" 
 Mr. HARRIS: I do not understand the gen- 
 tleman from Ontario (Mr. WORDEN). Does he 
 mean to say anv thing affecting my argument ? 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : Yes, sir. That report never 
 did receive the assent of a majority of the judi- 
 ciary committee. The gentleman has undertaken 
 to say what the fact was, and in stating what 
 he did, I suppose he was led into the error by 
 hearing this repeatedly alluded to as the report of 
 the majority. It did not get a majority of votes. 
 I believe it got three votes in committee. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN : I beg leave to say that the gen- 
 tleman from Ontario is entirely mistaken. Our 
 chairman never presented a report as a majority 
 report, that was not so in point of fact. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN did not hear the gentleman from 
 Columbia. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN repeated his previous statement 
 and appealed to Mr. RUGGLES. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES (in his seat) said he had been 
 looking for a paper which he thought he had in 
 his drawer, but it was at his room. He would 
 get it and confront the gentleman from Ontario 
 (Mr. WORDEN). 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that the gentleman from 
 Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) from first to last voted 
 against every proposition in the report, and in 
 favor of every one contained in his (Mr. W.'s) 
 plan. He appealed to the gentleman from Essex 
 (Mr. SIMMONS) to say whether he was wrong or 
 right. Three gentlemen did agree that the re- 
 port might be brought in, but not as one to which 
 they assented. He had the report which was 
 
 agreed on, (holding up a roll of paper, )*which 
 contained some 49 sections, and was twice as long 
 as the present constitution of this State. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN regretted that any gentleman 
 should take it on himself to go as far as the gen- 
 tleman from Ontario had done. He considered it 
 in the first place as a direct imputation on the 
 conduct of the chairman of the committee. In 
 the next place, as regarded himself, it was un- 
 true in point of fact. {Laughter.] Mr. J. did 
 not know what the gentleman meant by assenting 
 to the report. If he meant that each, perhaps all 
 of us, originally had entertained different views, 
 and that we advocated those views in committee, 
 then the gentleman was right. But the 
 gentleman was mistaken entirely in saying that 
 the gentleman from Columbia (if he meant Mr. 
 J.) voted against all the propositions in this re- 
 port. He voted against one or two, perhaps 
 more of them. But he did not consider himself 
 as so much wiser than everybody else, that they 
 could not propose anything worthy ot adoption 
 and he did yield his individual opinions in two 
 or three particulars, to harmonize the views of 
 the committee that we might bring in a report. 
 Not to have done that would have been disgrace- 
 ful to the committee. They owed it to them- 
 selves, to the Convention, and to the public, to 
 agree on something that the Convention might 
 act upon. In the end,* a majority did agree to 
 the report, and no doubt the chairman could show 
 that fact from the journal of the committee. 
 
 Mr. BROWN had a word to say and he hop- 
 ed the gentleman from Ontario would not leave 
 his seat (Mr, WORDEN had in the interim left lii>- 
 seat and was conversing with a member in 
 one of the aisles. Having returned) Mr. K. went 
 on to say that this report was submitted fourteen 
 days ago. It had been treated throughout as the 
 report of the majority of the committee, and by 
 all up to this time. The allegation now put forth 
 by the gentleman from Ontaria, imputed a direct 
 falsehood to those who were instrumental in bring- 
 ing it forward. He could not regard it in any 
 other light. If the gentleman did not mean it to 
 be so, he had no more to say. He would state 
 again, that the gentleman might understand him 
 because this concerned the respect due to him- 
 self and others of the committee it concerned 
 the credit due to his honorable friend the chair- 
 man of the judiciary committee and all the rest 
 of us that he understood it as a direct imputa- 
 tion of falsehood on our part. Am I mistaken ? 
 asked Mr. B. (turning to Mr. WORDEN.) 
 
 Mr. WORDEN regretted this sensitiveness on 
 the part of certain members of the committee. 
 He had brought forward nothing that amounted 
 to a charge of falsehood, or any thing else deroga- 
 tory to the character of any gentleman of the com- 
 mittee. This report had been spoken of here, 
 time and time again, as one to the provisions of 
 which the majority had assented ; and it seemed 
 to have stood before this body, us a report which 
 iu all its features had met the concurrence of a 
 majority of the committee. Now he asked the 
 gentleman from Orange (Mr. UROWN) if that was 
 so ? If the majority were understood to be pledg- 
 ed conscientiously and fairly to the support of this 
 plan ? He asked the chairman of the committee if 
 that was so ? 
 
 55 
 
642 
 
 Mr. BROWN I will answer the gentleman. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN In all its features and parti- 
 culars ? 
 
 Mr. BROWN Not in every particular, or in 
 every slight shade or section. But in regard to 
 all its main features, they were as much pledged 
 as any ten gentlemen could be. It was not possi- 
 ble to form a plan of this kind, that would com- 
 mand the assent of every body, in all its details ; 
 but in all its leading features it was agreed to by 
 a majority, and was to all intents and purposes a 
 majority report; as much so as any report that 
 had been presented here. As Mr. B. stated when 
 the report was submitted, in all its essential fea- 
 tures, it commanded the assent of a large majority 
 of the committee. He so stated, over and over 
 again ; and now stated it. On the evening when 
 the report was adopted, all were present except 
 Mr. STEPHENS, (vvho left his assent to it with 
 Mr. JORDAN;) the gentleman from Essex, (Mr. 
 SIMMONS) and the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 (Mr. LOOM is) did not assent to some portions of 
 it, and it was modified, and as modified, did com- 
 mand the assent of a majority. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN Did not the gentleman him- 
 self dissent, and did he not consent to the plans 
 being submitted, only on condition that he should 
 have leave to dissent in convention ? 
 
 Mr. BROWN did dissent from such portions 
 of it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON here rose, holding a M.S. 
 book. 
 
 Mr BROWN (who had just received a paper 
 from Mr. RUGGLES) asked the gentleman to give 
 way whilst he read what took place. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON If the gentleman from 
 Orange, (Mr. BROWN) will give way, I will read 
 from the record. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said he had the files also. The 
 committee, he said, after great labor a labor 
 which he believed was as honest and faithful as 
 ever thirteen gentlemen bestowed on any subject, 
 went through with the various propositions before 
 them, and agreed to a plan in detail, by votes pro 
 and con. That plan he had in his hand, with 
 the exception of eight or ten sections and it was 
 longer than the present constitution of New York, 
 containing nearly fifty sections. When the final 
 question came as to reporting this plan he did not 
 know how many votes it got. Weary with this 
 plan and wearied with labor, the committee fi- 
 nally agreed that the chairman should draw a 
 plan a plan to which the chairman himself dis- 
 sented in some prominent features, and that that 
 plan should be treated as coming from the com- 
 mittee. At the same time every gentleman was 
 at liberty to dissent from it. After that agree- 
 ment had been made, a plan was handed about 
 the house, and gentlemen signed it, he presumed 
 with the understanding, that it should be pre- 
 sented as he had stated. He (Mr. W.) had sign- 
 ed it himself, without a qualification. He be- 
 lieved the report had been brought forward in 
 that spirit, honestly and fairly, by those who had 
 brought it forward. But it should admonish 
 these gentlemen, and should have admonished 
 the gentleman from Columbia, [Mr. JORDAN] the 
 other day, that it was not prudent to be making 
 insinuations against other gentlemen on the com- 
 mittee, when he stated among other things that 
 
 there was one gentleman* who could not agree 
 with himself. As to the plan which Mr. W. had 
 the honor to present, that gentleman had voted 
 with him throughout on every essential feature 
 of it- 
 Mr. KIRKLAND asked if this course of refer- 
 ring to what was done in committee was not un- 
 parliamentary. 
 
 The CHAIR interposed. It was entirely un- 
 parliamentary to refer to proceedings in commit- 
 tee. It had never been done or heard, of here- 
 tofore, any where. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN continued. The chairman of 
 the committee had made no statement not com- 
 porting with his high character. Mr. W. had 
 no intention to impeach him or any other jnem- 
 ber of the committee. But he supposed it was 
 not a report which a majority of the committee 
 assented to which had been presented here, and 
 it was in this feeling that he had spoken. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON here said as recollections 
 might vary, he would read an extract from the 
 journal of the committee kept by a secretary from 
 the beginning to the close of their labors. The 
 last evening the committee met, it appeared a re- 
 solution was adopted agreeing to the report as 
 amended ayes 9, noes 3 Messrs. WORDEN, 
 KIRKL.AND and BASCOM, voting in the negative. 
 And then on motion of Mr. .BROWN it was resol- 
 ved that the chairman present the report to the 
 Convention to-morrow morning. Mr. O'CONOR 
 was not present at that meeting. The proceed- 
 ings were signed by Mr. KIRKLAND as secretary. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said it was because the action 
 of the committee was departed from. A paper 
 was handed to him with seven names on it, and 
 knowing that it had received the sanction of a 
 majority of the committee in private, there was 
 of course no use in attending to see that carried 
 through ; and that was his reason for not attend- 
 ing to sanction or dissent from this thing, which 
 had already been pre-determined upon. It was 
 the only meeting that he had been absent from.' 
 
 Mr. BASCOM enquired whether the report did 
 not override two or more distinct resolutions of 
 the committee one of them relating to the num- 
 ber of courts, and the other in relation to election 
 of judges? 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said it was true that at some 
 former meeting the committee agreed to have two 
 courts. But two of those stated that they voted 
 under some misapprehension. As to the report 
 containing 42 sections, it was true that there was 
 such a report drawn up ; but that was twice lost 
 by a tie vote. After that, the Chairman went to 
 work and drew up a report, leaving out the ob- 
 jectionable sections of that report, arid for this he 
 had Mr. P.'s hearty thanks. One proposition in 
 it varied from the original but the majority vo- 
 ted for it. Mr. P. voted against it, but agreed to 
 the report as a whole the understanding being 
 that we could vote as we pleased in Convention. 
 But the whole was agreed to by ayes and noes as 
 it stood on record. 
 
 Mr. BROv\N had a word of explanation in re- 
 gard to tlie paper circulated in the House bolure 
 the last meeting oi the com mi I It e. There \\o 
 great apprehension that we should bf able in agiee 
 on nothing. The g->ntkunan iroin New York (Mr. 
 O'CONOR) could not very wull recodj. Under 
 
643 
 
 i iriMnnsunres, it. \YJS agreed that an etiori 
 (| I).' iii;n.itf lo t'raute a report which should 
 <-inui. iiul the assent of the majority, and the gen- 
 Mi Iroin Columbia and Dntchets met at his 
 room, drew up this report, and it was circulated 
 . -even ct the commit tee signing it. At the 
 meeting that evening, it was remodeled to suit 
 inc. taste of the gentleman 1'rotn Herkimer and 
 v, and adopted distinctly, by a vote of nine to 
 three, it WHS as legitimate and fair a report as 
 fvei c-ame hefoiv surh u body. 
 
 Mr. SIM MUJVS said this was the first he had 
 ver heard of a paper being citculated for sigria- 
 Mifs--but he would add that, whilst every 
 in the report uas adopted by a majority, 
 is not by a majority constituted of the 
 j^irne persons that when a motion was made 
 that the chairman present the report, Mr. 
 WORDEN objected that the question should 
 be on agreeing lo it that but two or three would 
 tiree to it though the committee were willing to 
 n.tve it reported, lor the purpose of having some 
 thing before the body to act upon. From that 
 time there was a good deal of difficulty. The 
 r.iuirman had a great responsibility thrown upon 
 /urn; and he (Mr. S.) must give him the credit of 
 uting in as high a degree the virtues ol 
 Christian patience and foititude, as heever knew. 
 At'er a while, an abridgement of the work at 
 large was presented; and he understood then, as 
 (io\v, that a majority of the committee weie in fa- 
 vor of the substantial things in the report; but 
 < hat it was not expected of us, any more than of oth 
 <;r committees, that every gentleman who assent- 
 ed to it would not be at liberty to improve or dis- 
 ^int from it in Convention. He defined his posi- 
 tion when it came in. Some approved it more 
 4ully than others, in one sense, the report never 
 was aureed i-> by a majority but essentially it 
 was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. WOUDEN hoped the gentlemen trom 
 Du i chess and Orange (Messrs RUGGI.ES and 
 IJROWIV-) understood him precisely as the gentle- 
 man from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) said that each 
 one in committee, reserved to himself the right to 
 oppose such parts of it as he saw lit and almost 
 every gentleman expressed a dissent to some part 
 of it 
 
 All. RUGGLES: (In his seat.) That will riot 
 do iMr. WORDEJV 
 
 Mr. VVOKDEiN: Is the gentleman from Essex 
 right? 
 
 Air. RUGGLES: He is substantially right as 
 irtMids himself 
 
 Mr- WORDEN intended to convey the same 
 idea that the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIM- 
 MONS) did am! he begged here to say that this 
 plan if adopted in toto, as it now stood would not 
 be a bad one, but an improvement on the old one. 
 
 The CHAIR interposed, and the conversation 
 dropped. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS resumed, saying that after what 
 had passed, he should by way of designation, in 
 what further he had to say, refer to the report 
 submitted by the chairman of the committee as 
 the report of the majority. He entirely approved 
 of the plan of the committee, by which one court 
 was tobe organized with sufficient force to trans- 
 act all the judicial business of the State. It was, 
 in his judgment, much preferable to a series of 
 
 courts of different grades. A supreme court with 
 a number of judges of equal grade, with the State 
 divided into convenient judicial districts, was he 
 thought, the best possible system to secure uni- 
 formity of decisions and a prompt administration 
 of justice. He would have every portion of the 
 State visited by judges of the highest grade. In 
 this respect, the plan of the committee met with 
 his decided approbation. There would be in 
 each of the eight judicial districts, into which it 
 was proposed to divide the State, four judges 
 whose duty it would be as often as necessary, to 
 go through the counties in their districts, holding 
 the circuits. The fact that the trial of causes 
 would be had in the first instance before a judge 
 of the highest court, and one who would sit in 
 the court of review, would have a strong tenden- 
 cy to prevent appeals, and thus diminish litiga- 
 tion. Suitors would be more likely to be satisfi- 
 ed with the result of the first trial, if they had 
 the decision of such a judge, than if it were tried 
 before a court of inferior rank. The fact that a 
 court of superior grade exists, is a temptation to 
 parties to protract litigation. It had been doubt- 
 ed whether, if law and equity jurisdiction should 
 be united in the same court, these judges would 
 be able to discharge all the duties devolving upon 
 them. He had taken some pains to satisfy his 
 own mind upon this point, by consulting those 
 whose experience best fitted them to judge, and 
 he had uniformly found their opinions as to the 
 practical operation of the system, corresponding 
 with his own. Among others, he had enquired 
 of the present judge of the third circuit, (Judge 
 Parker) who had long been engaged in successful 
 practice and for several years had discharged his 
 official duties in this circuit with eminent ability 
 and great satisfaction to the public. That judge 
 had informed him that he had no doubt that he 
 could perform one half the duties of that court in 
 this district, if the offices of master and examiner 
 in chancery were not abolished, and with the ad- 
 dition of the duties of those officers he believed 
 three judges could do the business of the third 
 circuit, under the system proposed, with ease. 
 With a proper reform in the practice, Mr. H. 
 believed the system would prove one of the bos'; 
 that this state or any other ever saw. It had 
 been generally admitted that the separation of the 
 duties of the circuit of the supreme court in bane, 
 is a radical defect in the present organization of 
 our judiciary. That the system which existed 
 prior to the adoption of our present Constitution 
 was in this respect at least preferable. The plan 
 recommended by the committee, restores this fea- 
 ture of the old Constitution. The judges are all 
 to go through the counties of the state holding- 
 circuits, and thus acquiring that practical expe- 
 rience which forms so essential a qualification of 
 a good judge, after which they are to meet in their 
 respective districts, to determine the questions 
 which have arisen at the circuits, and from their 
 decisions appeals are to be taken to a court of last 
 resort, composed of judges who have had at least 
 six years experience upon the circuit. And if at 
 the expiration of his judicial term, the judge 
 should have discharged his duties to the public 
 satisfaction, he would in most instances be re- 
 elected and return to the circuit with the weight 
 of character and moral influence which his expe- 
 
644 
 
 rience and a re-endorsement by the people,woulc 
 give him. Mr. H. desired to have the provisions 
 of the report of the committee for the construction 
 ^f the coart of appeals so modified, as to have tha 
 court composed of the senior class of the judges 
 of the supreme court exclusively. This wouk 
 in his opinion, more effectually secure uniformity 
 of decrees, and at the same time a court which 
 would be sure to command the public confidence 
 and res-pect. 
 
 Mr. H. said he was also in favor of uniting the 
 jurisdiction of Jaw and equity in the same tribu- 
 nal. He had been unable to discover any sounc 
 reason why this should not be done. Under the 
 present system the Circuit Judges were vested 
 with equity as well as common law jurisdiction, 
 and the justices of the supreme court sit as a 
 court of review upon the decisions of the Chan- 
 cellor. He could see no practical difficulty in 
 the way of uniting in the same court the powers 
 of the Chancellor and the supreme court also. 
 The jurisdiction of these courts was already to a 
 considerable extent concurrent. This had, doubt- 
 less, arisen from the disposition of the courts, 
 commendable in itself, to give relief to do jus- 
 tice between parties when before the court, in- 
 stead of turning them over to another tribunal for 
 the relief to which they were obviously entitled. 
 And although he did not believe it possible to 
 blend equity and common law proceedings, yet 
 he did believe, that if the same tribunals were to 
 exercise both jurisdictions, they would gradually 
 approximate and become assimilated to each oth- 
 er and that each would exert a happy influence 
 in simplifying and improving the practice of the 
 other. And it might be, in process of time, that 
 the anticipations of the gentleman from New- 
 York (Mr. O'CONOK) might be realized,, and the 
 distinction between law and equity be no longer 
 known. So far as this was practicable it certain- 
 ly was desirable, and he would go as far as any 
 one to effect this object,without embarrassing the 
 administration of justice. 
 
 As they now exist, it would not be an easy 
 matter for any lawyer to point oat any distinct 
 and complete boundaries of the Court of Chancery 
 and Common Pleas. A cloudy dubiousness 
 hangs over the confines of these two jurisdictions. 
 And he who would find the great outlines of a 
 complete distribution of the powers of these courts, 
 will find himself lost in a wilderness of particu- 
 lars. This should not be so. In a country like 
 ours, and in this age, the path that leads to the 
 temple of justice should be so plain as not to in- 
 volve those who seek her shrine in the mazes of 
 error. 
 
 With respect to the election of a judiciary by 
 the people, Mr. H. said a diversity of opinion ex- 
 isted. It was he admitted, an experiment. But 
 he believed it an experiment which now, and in 
 this State, might safely be tried. For himself, he 
 had no fears as to" the result. The argu- 
 ments which had been urged against this change 
 were the same which in the Convention of 1821 
 were passed against the election of justices of the 
 peace by the people. And yet who will not ad- 
 mit that since those officers have been elected by 
 the people, a better class of men have been se- 
 lected than those who had before been appointed ? 
 What individual could be found, in this Conven- 
 
 tion or out of it, who wonlol be in favor of with- 
 drawing from the people the election of justices ? 
 The experiment has been tried, and it has proved 
 that all the arguments, which were in 1821 urged- 
 with so much effect as to defeat the amendment 
 proposed, were entirely groundless. To show 
 that the grounds upon which this change was op- 
 posed then, are the same urged by gentlemen a- 
 gainst this measure now r "Mr. H. would read 
 from the debates of that Convention some ex- 
 tracts from the speeches of eminent citizens of 
 the democratic faith, who were members of that 
 distinguished body. Mr Van Buren upon this 
 question holds the following language : 
 
 'The amount of business before the justices of 
 the peace in this State, was four times as great, 
 as all the business before the other courts. They 
 were equally important as it respected criminal 
 justice as to the probable effect upon their in- 
 dependence, there is no room for a comparison. 
 The Judges of the supreme court are elected for 
 a long term of time should the people become 
 dissatisfied, even whole counties, these officers 
 might not feel the effects of their displeas-ure till 
 after a long time had elapsed but apply this 
 to justices of the peace who administer justice ia 
 the immediate presence of their constituents, and 
 are exposed to the daily scrutiny of those upon 
 whom they are dependent who are cognizant of 
 all they do y and have the power of pass-ing judg- 
 ment on them if they are not satisfied with 
 them they must forfeit their offices. He did not 
 relieve it would be benefiting the people to ex- 
 tinguish one great fire and kindle fifty-two small- 
 er ones. The further this power could be re- 
 moved from the people the better. It must be 
 perfectly obvious, that every consideration that 
 could be urged in favor of electing justices of the 
 peace, would apply in favor of having the Judg- 
 es of the higher tribunals elective also and that 
 even fewer objections exist to having those courts 
 selected in this way." 
 
 Mr. Ross, anether member of that convention, 
 s-ays: 
 
 ** That effects the most pernicious and detri- 
 mental to the public welfare would flow from 
 making any judicial officer elective, particularly 
 magistrates T I think must be manifest to all. 
 Independently of the agitations, management and 
 strife incident to such elections, and which will 
 5e sufficient to deter sober, discreet men from en- 
 tering into competition to obtain the office, it 
 will destroy all confidence in the independence 
 and impartiality of our magistrates. Wherever 
 these elections a're contested, as they will be, the 
 candidates cannot help but kn^w who have op- 
 posed, as well as those who have advocated, their 
 election. In this respect, they are altogether 
 more unpleasantly situated than judicial officer* 
 >f a higher degree," 
 
 Other members of that convention were found 
 urging the same reasons why the people should 
 not be entrusted with the election of these'magis- 
 rates, but Mr. H. would only detain the commit- 
 ee by reading one other paragraph from the re- 
 marks of Gen. ROOT upon the same question. 
 
 " It has been claimed," said he, " that to elect 
 
 ustices of the peace, is a democratic meafsure. 
 
 Sir, I oppose such election, not merely on the 
 
 ground that it would produce turmoil and confu- 
 
645 
 
 sion, but principally on the ground that it would 
 be the height of aristocracy. The plan of elect- 
 ing magistrates in town meetings, is as destitute 
 of democracy as the canton of Berne in Switzer- 
 land, where three or four hundred burghers save 
 the mass of the people from that trouble. The 
 jurisdiction of a justice of the peace is co-exten- 
 sive with the county in which he resides. And 
 you elect by one town a magistrate who can play 
 the tyrant over all the other towns in the county, 
 without any responsibility to those towns. There 
 is no relation between the elector and the elect- 
 ed, and the few are thus enabled to govern the 
 many, which I take to be the very essence of ar- 
 istocracy. He was in favor of placing all judi- 
 cial officers upon the same footing, so far as it 
 respected their creation. He thought there was 
 more safety in electing theChancellor and Judges 
 of the Supreme Court by the people, than the 
 Justices of the peace. They were altogether less 
 liable to improper influence from the power that 
 created them." 
 
 These extracts sufficiently show what were the 
 views, entertained in 1821 on the subject of a 
 elective judiciary. There is not one of those who 
 then opposed the election of justices, who would 
 not now frankly admit that his apprehensions 
 were groundless. So it has ever been with the 
 progress of democratic principles. Let the pro- 
 position to elect our judges be adopted, and those 
 who now oppose the measure, as destructive of the 
 independence of the judiciary, would ten years 
 hence be constrained to admit, like those who op- 
 posed the election of justices, that their fears were 
 altogether imaginary. 
 
 The gentleman from Tioga (Mr. J. J. TAYLOR) 
 had referred to the local excitement which had 
 extensively prevailed in several of the counties 
 of this state, to shew the danger of adopting the 
 plan of electing judges. Mr. H. would refer to 
 the same state oi things to shew the perfect safety 
 of conferring upon the people the choice of their 
 judicial officers. He was happy in the conscious- 
 ness that to a very considerable extent he posses- 
 sed the confidence of those who were then sub- 
 ject of the excitement which had been referred to. 
 Judge Parker, in the discharge of his duties as 
 circuit judge, had presided at many trials grow- 
 ing out of that excitement he had sentenced 
 more than a score of those unfortunate men to the 
 state prison, and yet he, Mr. H. would scaicely 
 venture to accept a nomination for judge in oppo- 
 tion to that distinguished judge so ably and so 
 faithfully had he discharged his delicate and re- 
 sponsible duties as to secure the approbation of 
 the great body of the people and he ventured to 
 say that no man could be found in the district 
 who could successfully stand a canvass with him 
 for a judicial office. But, suppose he had yielded 
 to the influences with which he was surrounded, 
 instead of holding the scales of justice with an 
 unswerving hand, and administering the law with 
 fidelity, he could not for a moment, have stood 
 the ordeal of a popular election. The great mass 
 of the people are intelligent and virtuous. They 
 appreciate, as fully as this committee does', 
 the vital importance of an intelligent, faith- 
 ful administration of the law. The honest, 
 conscientious and upright judge will always 
 command their approbation and support, and no 
 
 other recommendations will atone fora deficiency 
 in these qualifications. We hear much of judicial 
 independence and an independent judiciary. No 
 man was more deeply impressed with the great 
 importance of an enlightened and efficient judi- 
 ciary than he was. No man would go farther 
 than he would to attain that object. Such a judi- 
 ciary is the very soul of a free Constitution 
 without it, the best system of government in the 
 world is but a dead letter. It is the indispensa- 
 ble safeguard of all constitutional liberty the 
 great animating principle of society securing to 
 all the high and the low the rich and the poor 
 protection of all their dearest interests protec- 
 tion of life and those domestic relations deurer 
 than life protection in the acquisition and en- 
 joyment and transmission of property guarantee- 
 ing equal rights to all and, like the life-blood, 
 circulating from the heart to the remotest extre- 
 mities of society. Nothing short of such a judi- 
 ciary can effect the great object of a free govern- 
 ment. You may have the best possible code of 
 l aws you may have the most efficient executive 
 department all will be in vain, liberty will be but 
 another name for licentiousness and anarchy, un- 
 less-the supremacy of the laws is fearlessly main- 
 tained b_y A taiUilui aiid independent judiciary. 
 The beautiful sentiment of Si. Paul, thai prodigy 
 of intellectual splendor, is as true in government 
 as it is in religion " We are all servants of tlie 
 law, that we may be free," an inconupubie, in- 
 dependent and enligliU;ned administration ot jus. 
 tice is indispensable in a free government with- 
 out it *' we cannot be liee." l he judiciary is ttie 
 only beneficent power to which the weak and Uo- 
 fencejess can look for protection. Iis influence, 
 not confined to the mere administration of justice, 
 is felt in ail the conceins ot lite and government. 
 Holding the shield of the law, it is the avenger of 
 wrong the only protector ot innocence. He 
 would yield to no man in his devotion to this 
 branch ol our government in his efforts to render 
 it useful and efficient But gentlemen mistake 
 when they suppose lhat judicial independence can 
 only be secured by placing the judge beyond the 
 reach of all responsibility to hun-ian power. He 
 would secure the people against an arbitrary, 
 tyrannical, and despotic exercise ot the judicial 
 office, by making the judge feel more his responsi- 
 bility. He was far from believing that irrespon- 
 sibility was necessary to secure judicial independ- 
 ence. Judicial independence, what is it but 
 simple honesty? The judge is the represen- 
 tation of the law. If you give him lo understand 
 that he will be held lesponsible for his steward- 
 ship, do you thereby unnerve him? Far from it. 
 On tne other hand a new incentive is placed befoie 
 him to increased fidelity. So long as the peo- 
 ple are found true to virtue and good govern- 
 ment, so long those, who would minister at the 
 altars of justice, must present themselves 
 with clean hands and a pure life. These qualifi- 
 cations alone could fit the candid .te for that holy 
 office, to stand the ordeal through which he must 
 p ass these alone can secure public confidence. 
 
 Mr. H. said he should do injustice to his own 
 feelings, if he were to take his seat, without ex- 
 pressing to this committee his heartfelt thanks 
 for the patient attention with which they had lis- 
 tened to him, notwithstanding the extreme in- 
 
646 
 
 clemency of the weather. His own mind was 
 deeply affected with the magnitude of the inter- 
 ests involved in the subject under consideration. 
 This must furnish his apology for the unusual 
 length of time he had allowed himself to occupy. 
 If the Convention should succeed in devising a 
 plan for an efficient, thorough administration of 
 justice, whatever else we may fail to do, our labor 
 would not be in vain. We should be entitled to 
 the credit of success. And whatever else we do, 
 if we fail here, our whole labor must prove a 
 failure. 
 
 1 he committee rose and reported progress, and 
 the house adjourned. 
 
 SATURDAY, ((j'3d day,) August 15. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. KAWSOJV. 
 
 Mr. GREENE presented the memorial of six 
 ladies in Jeriersou county, asking for the extension 
 of the elective tranchise to women. It was read 
 and rel'eired to standing committee No. 4. 
 
 The ioliowmg is the petition: 
 
 To the Constitutional Convention of the State of New- 
 York : 
 
 Your Memorialists inhabitants of Jefferson county, be- 
 lieving thai civil government has its foundation in the 
 laws oi our existence, as moral and social beings, that the 
 specific object and end of civil government is to protect all 
 in the exerci&e ol all their natural riguts, by combining 
 the strength ot society lor the defence of the individual- 
 believing that the province of civil tjovemment is not to 
 create new riguts, out to declare ana enforce those which 
 originally existed. Believing likewise that all govern- 
 ments must derive their just powers from the consent of 
 the governed " Irom the great body 01 society, and not 
 irom a favored class, although that favoied class inay be 
 even a majoiit} of the inhabitants," therefore respectfully 
 represent: That he present government of this state has 
 widely departed fiom the true democratic principles upon 
 which all just governments must be ba>ed by denying to 
 the female portion of cominumity the right ol snli'rage and 
 any participation in forming the government and laws un- 
 der which they live, and to u hich they are amenable, and 
 by imposing upon them burdens of taxation, both directly 
 and indirectly, without admitting them the right ol repre- 
 sentation, thereby striking down the only baleguards of 
 their individual and personal liberties. Your, Memorialists 
 therefore ask your honorable body, to remove this just 
 cause ol complaint, by modifying the present. Constitution 
 oi this State, so as to extend to women equal, and civil 
 and political lights with men. In proposing this change, 
 your putitionei s ask you to confer upon them no new right 
 but only to declare and enforce those which they origin- 
 all) inherited, but which have ungenerously been with- 
 held from them, riguts, which they as citizens of the state 
 of .New iork may reasonably and rightfully claim. We, 
 might a iduce arguments both numerous and decisive in 
 support ot i ur po.-ition, but beiiev.ug that a self evident 
 truth is sufficiently plain without argument, and in view 
 ol our necessarily limited space, we forbear offering any 
 and respectfully submit it lor consideration. 
 
 LEAN OK VINCENT, MJSAN ORMSBY, 
 LYDIA A. WJLL1AMS, AMY ORMSBY, 
 LYDI1 OSBORN, ANNA BISHOP. 
 
 Aug. 8th, 1846. 
 
 A report was received from the chancery clerk 
 of the 2d circuit, giving the amount of applica- 
 tions to the court for the sale of infants' estates, 
 together >^ith the names of the applicants. Re- 
 ferred to the select committee to make an abstract 
 lor printing. 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of the 
 whole on the reports of I he judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG resumed the chair. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS: In the observations 1 shall make, 
 the course pursued by gentlemen who have pre- 
 ceded me, will be adopted, and I will not confine 
 
 myself to the consideration or the section under 
 discussion. [The Chairman stated, as the motion 
 was to strike out the third section, the whole sub- 
 ject was under consideration.] Mr.M. proceeded. 
 I am happy that it is so, as it enables me to pro- 
 ceed in order. 
 
 In the observations I shall make, I intend to 
 present such a general judicial system as I prefer, 
 with this assurance, that I will vote for that sys. 
 tern which shall the nearest approximate to my 
 views. 
 
 Believing that in organizing the judiciary, as in 
 establishing the whole organic law, we should 
 commence at the source the people and run up 
 to the highest organizations, [ will first, call the 
 attention of the committee to the town corrta to 
 the organization of the towns and proceed from 
 them through the courts of the county, and the 
 supreme court, to the court of ultimate appeals. 
 
 In my judgment, the agricultural towns of the 
 state, each, have too many justices of the peace; 
 a less number would efficiently perform all the re- 
 quired duties, without that temptation to justices 
 to encourage litigation, growing out of their desire 
 to be occupied and increase their compensation 
 
 I beg leave to make a suggestion to my country 
 friends, growing out of the practical experience 
 of the city of New York. IH the city of New 
 York, we have some four or five justices' courts. 
 They are called Assistant Justices' Courts, though 
 they are of the same jurisdiction of the Justices' 
 Courts in the country. They are thus organised. 
 The justice receives a salary. There is a clerk 
 to the justice ; he also receives a salary. The 
 clerk gives a bond to the corporation. The clerk 
 issues all the precepts and receives all the fees, 
 which fees he pays into the treasury of the city. 
 
 The justice comes into court in the morning; 
 the precepts are returned by the marshal, and the 
 first the justice learns of the subject matter of 
 the controversy, is when the issue is joined, 
 without having before heard of the matter in con- 
 troversy, he hears the testimony of witnesses, and 
 disposes of the cause. One of these courts has 
 jurisdiction over about 80,000 inhabitants. The 
 causes he tries are immense in number, and 
 truly immense in the aggregate of recovery. The 
 justice I particularly speak of, has been in office 
 three or four years, and has not had more than 
 four or five causes removed by certiorafi, and the 
 most of these have been affirmed. It makes no 
 difference to him pecuniarily whether he tries 
 one cause or one thousand causes. Though the 
 fewer he tries the less labor he has to perform, 
 which tends so far as he is interested, to discou- 
 rage rather than to encourage litigation. 
 
 By this method the litigants' fees, pay the 
 greater proportion of the expense that supports 
 the court ; though the taxable inhabitants con- 
 tribute towards the support of the court, as they 
 should, as a just and prompt administration of 
 the laws by its example and effect, relieves many 
 of them from law suits. 
 
 We also have upon the island of New York jus- 
 tices upon the same principles as the justices' 
 courts in the country, where there is no clerk, 
 where the justice issues his own precepts and re- 
 ceives to his own use all the fees of his office. 
 These courts are in what we, who are surround- 
 ed by brick and mortar and walk on cobble stones, 
 
647 
 
 
 call rural districts, although my country friends 
 I presume would hardly consider them enritled 
 to such appellation. The difference in the prac- 
 
 tperation of these courts, thus differently or- 
 ganized, is great. Certioraris to the rural courts 
 are very numerous, and it is as strange that their 
 judgments should be affirmed, as that the judg- 
 ments of the other justice should be reversed. 
 Whether this great disparity in correct judgments 
 is owing to the one justice living upon his fees, 
 or that he has the story of the parties before trial, 
 I know not ; but such is the working of the two 
 systems, and that too when the rural courts do 
 not try more than a tenth in number and amount 
 of causes that are disposed of by the justices un- 
 der the other system. 
 
 I make this plain statement of facts, Mr. Chair- 
 man, not for the purpose of expressing a deter- 
 mination that I will insist upon a similar organi- 
 zation for the country, but to throw the sugges- 
 tion out for the consideration of the gentlemen 
 from the country, and to assure them, if they ap- 
 prove of such principle and will introduce a sec- 
 tion embracing it, they shall have my vote. 
 
 The business transacted in justices courts, is 
 the most important to the general public. It is 
 emphatically the business of the masses. If we 
 succeed in establishing justices' courts which will 
 command and retain public confidence, the great 
 mass of the business of the people will be 
 accomplished in them, and at home ; and as 
 regards the general public the upper courts 
 will be of minor consequence. Have your towns 
 properly organized, and your justices' courts held 
 by honest and capable men, and your upper tri- 
 bunals, as regards the great mass of the popula- 
 tion, will be tribunals only in name, for by them 
 they will be resorted to but seldom. 
 
 Though born in the city and now residing there, 
 still I practically know much of the country 
 from the p issage of town laws, at town meetings 
 to the settlement of town accounts, and to the ac- 
 tion and duties of Boards of Supervisors. Most oi 
 the towns of the state have no permanent place 
 for the records of the town. In such towns, if it 
 is necessary- to have recourse to town records, or 
 to the records of a justice who has died or has 
 not been re-elected, you are obliged to look for 
 them at private houses, and you will be fortunate 
 if you find them. 
 
 I would suggest that each town should have a 
 town house at this house should be the town 
 clerk's oih'ce in which should be kept all the rec 
 ords ot the town all the town' proceedings. Th< 
 clerk of the- town should be the clerk of the jus- 
 tices of the peace ; he should issue all the pre 
 
 - of justices ot the peace, (except such ur 
 gent precepts as require adjudication before the} 
 are issued) which should be made returnable 
 at the town house. The justices of the town 
 should alternate in trying the causes thus com 
 menced by the precept issued by the clerk. Th 
 justices would then never have heard the story o 
 the parties until the witnesses disclosed them- 
 the parties would not know what Justice was t 
 try their cause and jurors could sit comfortably 
 in a room prepared fur them and would not b 
 compelled to meet at taverns. 
 
 There should be a county court of review, t 
 which causes may be carried by certiorari from 
 
 ustices' judgments. The practiced!' removing 
 isticee' judgment by appeal should be abolished; 
 vitnesses should not be taken to the county seat 
 o repeat their testimony. The practice of appeals 
 las been fraudulently used to injure the parties 
 ml harrass the public; parties have notexarnin- 
 d their witnesses before justices, expressly for . 
 he purpose of increasing the expenses against 
 he opposing party. The injury to the public by 
 n immense loss of time and expense, is far 
 Teater than any benefit parties can obtain from 
 .ppeals. 
 
 This county court in my judgment, should be 
 resided over by a judge who should be elected 
 y the electors of the county this judge should 
 Iso be Surrogate of the county. The court should 
 consist of this judge and any two of the justices 
 )f the peace of the county. The justices of the 
 
 "teace should alternate in sitting in this court. 
 
 ?his court should not only revise the judgmentsjof 
 ustices of the peace, to affirm or reverse, or to 
 3 end the case back to be tried by the same or an- 
 )ther justice in the same or an adjoining town to 
 hat in which the cause was first tried ; but should 
 'orm the court of general sessions of the peace of 
 :he county and perform all those duties now 
 performed by the county court, and by its judges 
 within the county. Your justices of the peace, 
 *hus acting as members of the county court, re- 
 vising each others judgments, and assisting in the 
 performance of other duties, would be much im- 
 Di-oved and elevated in their judicial character. 
 The public would become satisfied with their de- 
 cisions and litigation would decrease. 
 
 In my judgment, it is not necessary to have a 
 court intermediate the Justices' Court and the 
 Supreme Court. There is no reason, in my judg- 
 ment, why the circuit judge of the Supreme 
 ^ourt should not try all issues of fact. 
 
 I am, sir, fixed in the principle, that, there 
 should be a union of law and equity ; not, sir, a 
 mere union of judges, but a union of the prac- 
 tice. I can see no reason, sir, why A shall come 
 in front of the judges and prosecute B in law, 
 prove his case and obtain judgment, and that B 
 should go behind the judge, file his bill in chan- 
 cery, and ask and obtain a perpetual injunction 
 upon the judgment obtained against him by A. 
 Why not, sir, let B state in his plea to A's suit, 
 the facts which entitled him to perpetual injunc- 
 tion to the recovery of A, and have the matter 
 settled in the one suit ? Let B have judgment, 
 if the facts are such as to entitle him to a per- 
 petual injunction had judgment been rendered 
 for A. 
 
 Let us get rid of these fictitious cases where 
 John Doe and Richard Roe make a bet to enable 
 a judge to do justice to individuals. Why not let 
 the real parlies interested, tell their own" stories, 
 instead oi having an imaginary suit. I have lis- 
 tened attentively during this discussion, to the 
 gentlemen who are opposed to the union of the 
 practice in law and equity, and h;ive also taxed 
 my recollection to discover a case where the pro- 
 ceedings of necessity required to be different, and 
 I have not been able to see any reason why ihe 
 practice should not be the same. When the facts 
 are truly staled, and proved, equity and law can 
 both be obtained. " Law" means right and jus- 
 tice, as much so, as " equity" does. I am opposed, 
 
648 
 
 sir, to giving to the Legislature the power 10 cre- 
 ate tribunals of inferior jurisdiction. Insert a 
 clause in the constitution, that the legislature have 
 power to add strength to the same court, to in- 
 crease the number of judges so that the number 
 of trial courts may be increased. If four judges 
 are not sufficient to transact the business of a dis- 
 trict, let their number be increased. Have them 
 of the same court; controlled by the same rule of 
 practice, and governed by the same legal princi- 
 ples. All your causes being commenced in the 
 same tribunal, under the same practice, the rough 
 corners of the common law will be smoothed 
 by the principles of equity, and the law will be 
 applicable to human nature as it is. While up, 
 sir, I will make a clean breast of it and state, 
 that, I am in favor of electing the judges by the 
 people. I am in favor of electing the judges of 
 the Supreme Court by general ticket; to take, 
 however, the justices from each district, though 
 voted for by the whole state: to be the judge 
 of the whole state, not the mere judge of the dis- 
 trict. These are my notions upon these subjects 
 at this time, and I shall adhere to them, unless I 
 should be convinced that the benefits to result 
 from a general ticket should be more than coun- 
 terbalanced by a purely sectional organization of 
 the Supreme court. 
 
 Mr. W. B. WRIGHT said it had been truly re- 
 marked, in the progress of thisdebate, thatamongst 
 the leading causes that originated this Conven- 
 tion, was the imperious necessity of judicial re- 
 form. He would go farther, and assert that a re- 
 form in the judiciary was, immeasurably, the 
 most prominent of the expected benefits to be se- 
 cured. Whatever portion of time, therefore, (said 
 Mr. W.) we shall bestow upon the discussion of 
 this grave and important subject (ever keeping 
 in mind that our session must necessarily termi- 
 nate by the first of October next,) will not be 
 wasted ; nor will it be so regarded by those whom 
 we represent. The people expect that upon this 
 subject, more than upon all others, there shall be 
 a full, frank and liberal exchange of sentiment, 
 and that we shall approach it, not in the spirit of 
 professional selfishness, nor with contracted views 
 of hostility towards an enlightened class of our 
 fellow citizens, but with minds enlarged and lib- 
 eralized, and elevated above the influences of the 
 meaner passions that cling to man in his best es- 
 tate. In a matter that so deeply and vitally con- 
 cerns not only the rights of property, but the lib- 
 erty, aye, the life of the citizen, there should be 
 no sordid interests or narrow sectional prejudices 
 to subserve. If he knew his own heart, although 
 an humble member of the legal profession, he 
 could not be controlled in the discussion and set- 
 tlement of this important subject by any motives 
 of self-interest, or by any other motives save those 
 which regard the promotion of the public good ; 
 and whilst he might be permitted perhaps egotis- 
 tically, to say this of himself, he cheerfully em- 
 braced the occasion to declare the solemn convic- 
 tion of his mind, that there was not in this cham- 
 ber or out of it, an enlightened and high-minded 
 member of that profession to which he esteemed 
 it an an honor to be attached, who could be prompt- 
 ed by avarice or cupidity or selfishness, to desire 
 that the action of the Convention, on this momen- 
 tous subject, should be of such a character as that 
 
 the public interests woulft not be fully subserved. 
 Believing this, he deeply regretted that, here and 
 elsewhere, a few individuals should be found to 
 lend themselves to the illiberal task of exciting 
 public prejudice and hostility against a numer- 
 ous and respected class of citizens of arraying, 
 what they denominate laymen, against those pur- 
 suing an honorable and dignified profession; but 
 whilst he regretted this, he rejoiced in the con- 
 viction that the illiberality was confined within 
 extremely narrow limits, and that there was too 
 much of magnanimity and intelligence pervading 
 the masses of this great state, to denounce an en- 
 tire profession, because forsooth a few unwor- 
 thy members not lawyers, in the just sense of 
 the term, for that man whose mind is deeply 
 imbued with the cardinal rules of law, that are 
 but the immutable principles of ethics and truth, 
 can scarcely be otherwise than upright and hon- 
 orable in his relations with men because these 
 pettifoggers, as they may be properly called, 
 taking advantage of the eminence of their posi- 
 tion, have at times abused the public confidence. 
 But there was another circumstance that had 
 transpired in this debate, that he still more deep- 
 ly regretted. It was that gentleman attached to 
 the legal profession holding somewhat of an 
 elevated rank in it should possibly, to subserve 
 ulterior ends, descend to the task of giving some- 
 thing of form and shape to the misty, undefined, 
 unshapen prejudices that it may be supposed pos- 
 sess the minds of a small part of the co'mmunity, 
 arising as he insisted wholly from the unworthy 
 practices of the professional charlatans to whom 
 he had alluded. Are not these gentlemen aware, 
 said Mr. W., that it is a characteristic of preju- 
 dice to grow and expand, and to seize upon soph- 
 istry with a zest outsripping that with which it 
 seizes upon truth ? Sir, our constituents expect 
 that we shall approach and discuss this deeply 
 interesting subject, divested of all prejudice 
 against caste or profession divested of all pro- 
 fessional selfishness, with no narrow views of 
 hostility to this or that class of citizens with no 
 hidden purpose of elevating or prostrating, by 
 our action, any profession ; but with the single 
 object of constructing a judicial system by and 
 through which the law may be administered, and 
 justice dispensed, efficiently, speedily and econo- 
 mically. Nor is it expected that we shall take 
 upon ourselves the grave duty of codifying the 
 laws, or of abrogating, so far as applies to our own 
 State, either the common or the civil law ; or of 
 maturing any system of jurisprudence that shall 
 amalgamate or blend them together. This codi- 
 fication would be the labor of months, nay of 
 years, rather than of days allotted to our session ; 
 if indeed it could ever be successfully accomplish- 
 ed. But he begged leave here to remark, that 
 the intimation thrown out, that in this State, now 
 or hereafter, the common law may be in jeopar- 
 dy that it may be supplanted by an imperial 
 code, originating in the despotic ages of the Ro- 
 man empire, and that now measurably sup- 
 poses " a discretion in the judge, which in the 
 law of tyrants" had filled his mind with 
 alarm ; and he was sure that the carrying out of 
 such a project, should the thought emanate here, 
 would induce the people to lament, for all future 
 time, the call and assembling of this Convention. 
 
649 
 
 
 ^ the occasion to say that he was o 
 
 toVny" judicial system which contemplated, even 
 remotoly, the abrogation of the common law. 
 What is the common law ? A system of princi- 
 ples and precepts, founded in reason and truth, 
 reduced to order by the wisdom of ages, *hat jus- 
 tice may be administered, by unchanging rules, 
 not to the distinguished and great alone, but to^all 
 mankind. It had contributed more to the promotion 
 of human liberty-more to the elevation of the mas- 
 ses in the scale'of political and social existence 
 than probably all other influences combined. Why 
 is it that in the old world rational liberty exists on- 
 ly with the masses of England that property and 
 life secure ? Because ot the benign \id blessed 
 influences of the common law. Why is it that 
 dignity and public confidence have been largely 
 imparted to the higher courts of this State ? Be- 
 cause justice has been diligently and faithfully 
 meted out through the prescribed forms and upon 
 the pri nciples of the common law. True, that in 
 those forms there are detects palpable, glaring 
 defects. These may and should be remedied. 
 There are, what appears to us now, absurdities, 
 that may be removed But, in the language of an ' 
 eminent British civilian, (which he begged leave 
 to quote,) " Notwithstanding the rudeness and 
 defects of the common law, we should ever re- 
 member its favor to personal liberty, and its ad- 
 mirable machinery for separating law and fact, 
 and assigning each to a distinct tribunal; where- 
 in it excels all other systems of jurisprudence 
 that have appeared." It should be the task of 
 the present day to render that machinery less 
 complicated; not to utterly demolish it. But 
 enough on this point. He could not suffer the oc- 
 casion to pass without entering his solemn and 
 deliberate protest, at the threshhold, against any 
 attempt to overshadow the common law by any 
 other system ;'' jurisprudence. It has been (said 
 Mr. W.) well remarked, that in organizing a 
 judicial system or rather in constructing the 
 frame work, as little else can be done by constitu- 
 tional provision, we should first ascertain the de- 
 fects of the existing one ; for after all, our duty is 
 not to construct a system, fanciful and untried in 
 all its parts, but to remedy defects which experi- 
 ence has shewn in that which exists. Many of 
 these defects are apparent they are as familial- to 
 lay <is proiessional men and any plan, therelore, 
 which 'it is thought will most effectually icinedy 
 them, should addiess itself to oui favorable con 
 sideiation. He proposed briefly to glance at some 
 of these defects, with the view of ascertaining 
 whether, by the plan proposed by the majority o 
 the judiciary committee, they would probably be 
 obviated. In the first place, (said Mr. W ) a rad 
 cal defect in the present system is, that, by its or- 
 ganization, neither puimro or the public have that 
 confidence in the HU&rio.r.. .courts of record which 
 is absolutely necessary for the effective, expedi 
 tious an'd**eTOnomical working of the system. 
 Hence expense and delav have, in some degree 
 their origin in this source Were this confidence 
 fully extended to one court of oiiginal jurisdiction 
 it requires little sagacity to foresee that much o 
 delay and expense, at present incident to a suit a 
 law, would be avoided. Could the suitor enter 
 tuin entire confidence in the capacity and integri 
 ty of the judge (hat first tries his cause oould h 
 
 eel that his case had, at the outset, been conectly 
 and fairly adjudicated there would be an absence 
 motive and desire to encourage appellate juris- 
 dichnn. By our present system, riot only suitnis 
 but the public have lost all confidence in these 
 iferior courts. With a very few honorable ex- 
 c.-ptions, alluded to yesterday by tlie gentleman 
 from Erie, (Mr. STOW) our courts of common 
 leas have become a by- word of reproach ihroughi 
 out the state. No person has any confidence in 
 them, and least of all the legal profession. As 
 has been truly said, the piofession will not, nor 
 cannot promise success to a client, however sirorg 
 his case may be, who seeks his remedy, or looks 
 for justice through the medium of a court of com- 
 mon pleas. Hence ii is that much ot the business 
 that now crowds our appellate courts, has iis on- 
 gin in, or has necessarily passed thiongh, the 
 common pleas. The cause* of this want of confi- 
 dence are apparent. The judges know H'tle el 
 the elements, much less of the pratice of the law: 
 they are unfitted by their ordinary avocations to 
 correctly discharge the ptave 1nty thrown upon 
 them (their slender and insufficient compensa- 
 on not justifying the devotion of any portion ot' 
 heir time, off the bench, to legal studies) atxt 
 o tar as experience had enabled Itim to form a 
 nnclusion, theirdecisions are note frequently lr>e 
 flspring of impulse and prejudice than of delibt- 
 ation and enlightened reason- Besides, they are, 
 oa great extent, partisan judges, o\\ing norespor - 
 ihility to the people they are sometimes appoint- 
 ed more tosubserve partisan than judicial purpose*-, 
 and there have been cases where from the fact 
 hat thev owed their selection, not t'> their own 
 merit, but to the influence of one member of the 
 >ar, they have become his willing creatures. 
 N'ow, can it be wondered at that there should 
 >e so little of public confidence reposed in these 
 ribunalsf Should it be a surprising matter 
 hat the calendars of your supreme court are 
 umbered up with cases that have 
 n or passed through the common pleas ? But 
 here are other circumstance* connected with 
 hia common pleas tribunal that tend to bring 
 the entire administration of law into disrepute, 
 and loan the people with unnecessary and 
 oppressive burdens. When we speak of de- 
 lay and expense to suitors, who are compel- 
 led in many cases, by statute, to pass through 
 this court, it is only of those who have the pecu- 
 niary ability to resort to appellate jurisdictions. 
 But to those with limited means, not only is there 
 no redress, but the law erroneously administer- 
 ed, addresses itself neither to the reason or the 
 
 respect of the citizen. Again, this court, so in- 
 efficient and unpopular, so destructive, at times, 
 of the ends of justice and of law, costs more to 
 the people of this State than all your other courts 
 of record of every grade. Yet there are gentle- 
 men upon this floor disposed to continue, in some 
 way, this onerous and odious system. The gen- 
 tleman from Oneida, (Mr. KIRKLAND,) not now 
 in his seat, stated the other day, in a very able 
 exposition of his views upon judicial reform, that 
 he did not believe that the people were prepared 
 to give up their county courts their domestic 
 tribunals that a vast amount of business was 
 done in them and he proposed in his plan to 
 confer additional powers, that of Surrogate, upon 
 
 56 
 
650 
 
 their chief officer. Now, said Mr. W., let me 
 say to any gentleman who coincides in opinion 
 with the gentleman from Oneida, that he widely 
 mistakes the public sentiment on this subject. 
 Eight-tenths of the people of this great State, 
 could they vote on that distinct question, would 
 wait eagerly and impatiently for the opportunity 
 to forever blot out these " domestic tribunals" 
 from our system of jurisprudence. Is it any rea- 
 son because the legislature has imposed upon 
 these courts multifarious duties, rarely perform- 
 ed, but if performed, in many cases, erroneously 
 or imperfectly, that they should be continued ? 
 Cannot these duties be transferred to other offi- 
 cers, or other tribunals, where they may be more 
 effectively exercised ? Certainly, gentlemen can- 
 not fail to see how easily this may be accomplish- 
 ed. Of these duties the attention of the commit- 
 tee has been particularly drawn to the powers 
 now exercised by the common pleas judges 
 on appeals from the orders of commissioners 
 of highways, and it has been rather sig- 
 nificantly asked, where this power would be lodg- 
 ed ? The case (said Mr. W.) cannot be regarded 
 as a fortunate one, as in his judgment, should the 
 court be continued it should be forthwith disburth- 
 ened of this duty. Were it intended to bring a 
 court into public disrespect, probably no more 
 successful mode could be devised than to charge 
 its judges with the power of itinerating from town 
 to town of a county to settle disputed questions 
 in relation to the location of a district road ! Some 
 gentlemen have said that they would continue the 
 county courts for the purpose of hearing certioraris 
 and appeals, and doing the minor business. The 
 bulk of the business they now do is of this char- 
 acter ; and to continue these powers in their 
 hands would be, in effect, a continuance of the 
 old system. Now, sir, the majority report of the 
 judiciary committee proposes to abolish these in- 
 ferior and inefficient courts of record and to bring 
 near to the people in the shape of a court of orig- 
 linal jurisdiction one that shall be uniform, effi- 
 cient, enlightened, and which will commend it- 
 lielf to public confidence it proposes that the 
 law shall be administered, at the threshhold, in 
 such a way as shall command popular respect, 
 and subserve public justice the end of all judic- 
 ial administration. In this respect it command- 
 ed his cordial approbation, and the great princi- 
 ple which it established should receive his hearty 
 support. It would go far to restore public con- 
 fidence in our courts for the trial of issues of fact 
 and in proportion as that confidence should be 
 entertained, would expensive, protracted litiga- 
 tion cease. Another of the defects of the pres- 
 ent system (said Mr. W.) is the expense and ne- 
 cessary delay incurred by suitors and the public. 
 The principal causes of these evils, in the high- 
 er courts, may be found in the inadequacy of the 
 judicial force, and the multiplication of appel- 
 late courts. It is not in the possibility of things 
 that three men nay, that ten men should dis- 
 charge the vast legal duty thrown upon them by 
 the present system, or that one man, with orig- 
 inal and appellate jurisdiction, should'accomplish 
 the equity labor of this wealthy and populous 
 state. Hence causes have accumulated by hun- 
 dreds upon the calendars of your courts, only to 
 be finally disposed of after years of delay anc 
 
 a large expenditure of m^ans, by the public and 
 itigant parties. It is not the delay and expense 
 >f bringing a cause to issue and trying it in a 
 ;ourt of original jurisdiction, that have called 
 brth the loudest complaint it is because when 
 a man gets into court there is no certainty that 
 le wilf get out of it in an ordinary life time, and 
 should he succeed, there is something of a cer- 
 "ainty that the expenses of protracted litigation 
 vill have materially impaired his fortune. Now 
 t would seem a simple matter to remedy these 
 defects. Yet, under the present system they 
 could not be wholly remedied by an increase of 
 "udicial force in the higher courts, even though 
 hat force were distributed into sections through- 
 out the state. Something more must be done, 
 and that the majority report proposes to do, 
 viz : to diminish the number of the appellate 
 courts, and if he might be permitted to use a 
 vulgar phrase in illustration, to place the courts 
 "the right end foremost." In his judgment the 
 present system invited litigation, and encourag- 
 sd delay and expense in the administration of the 
 Law, without benefiting the public, the suitor, 
 the lawyer, or any one else but him who subsists 
 upon the "spoils of office." There is a class of 
 men in all communities, who, if you had a dozen 
 appellate courts, would not be content until they 
 had each been resorted to. Again, we commence 
 a suit now in a court having the least of legal ca- 
 pacity or public confidence the next step brings 
 us nearer to that which is desirable in a court 
 and after one or two further steps we reach that 
 judicial tribunal, where from its exalted charac- 
 ter and the capacity of its members, public confi- 
 dence centres. Now so long as there is a want 
 of confidence, even slightly, in these intermedi- 
 ate courts, there is a tendency in the human mind 
 to reach forward to that tribunal, where full con- 
 fidence is reposed. But should we by any sys- 
 tem reverse this order of things send into our 
 counties to exercise sole and original jurisdiction, 
 judges, who from their exalted character and 
 acknowledged ability, and dispossessed as they 
 necessarily must be of local feeling or prejudice 
 shall command public respect and confidence 
 at the outset multiply their numbers so that the 
 business may not only be correctly but expedi- 
 tiously performed let the nisi prius and bane 
 courts be held by the same individuals organize 
 but one appellate court for the correction of er- 
 rors and he believed that neither the public, 
 nor the professional man, nor the suitor, would 
 have reasonable cause to complain of delay or ex- 
 pense in the administration of law or equity. 
 The majority report contemplates the carrying 
 out of these leading principles. The only doubt 
 on his mind had been, whether the force propos- 
 ed would be adequate to the expeditious dis- 
 charge of the vast and constantly accumulating 
 judicial business of the State. The interesting and 
 admirable statement of the hoaorable chairman 
 of the judiciary committee had satisfied him up- 
 on this point. But if the force was deemed in- 
 adequate he would increase it now; for he was 
 wholly opposed to conferring authority upon the 
 legislature to establish inferior courts of civil 
 jurisdiction. If this power should be conferred, 
 he had a dread that hereafter, in some unlucky 
 hour, something like our present common pleas 
 
651 
 
 MI might be fastened for evil, on the state. 
 
 :i(!i- defect in our judicial sytem seemed to 
 him in having, in the same court, one class of 
 
 > silling in bane and another at nisi prius. 
 
 admirable working of our judicial system, 
 prior to IS21, when the judges of the Supreme 
 court sat in bane and at nisi prius, appeals with 
 peculiar force alter an experience of twenty-five 
 under the present system. It is certainly 
 important to the suitor that he should have a judge 
 to try his cause who may afterwards sit in bane 
 with others to review the case ; and it is impor- 
 tant to the judge that he should mingle with the 
 people, acquire their confidence, consider him- 
 self as one of the millions embarked in the great 
 
 I of State, instead of shutting himself out 
 from intercourse and fellowship with the masses. 
 This detect the majority report proposes to cor- 
 rect. Another defect is, that the mode of the ap- 
 pointment of the Judges, and the tenure of the 
 judicial office, render them not only independent 
 of, but wholly irresponsible to the people. With 
 the exception of justices of the peace, our judi- 
 ciary force is created by a central power, and the 
 tenure of office of the judges of the supreme court 
 Circuit Judges and chancellor, is in effect for life. 
 The result, is that there has grown up in this State 
 what may be denominated a judicial aristocracy, 
 feeling no responsibility to the primary source of 
 all power. The evils growing out of such a sys- 
 tem have struck each member of the judiciary 
 committee with more or less force. All agree 
 upon remedying the evils in part all recommend 
 a diminution of the term all are not disposed, 
 however, to go the length of directly entrusting 
 the people with the election of the judiciary. 
 What are the objections to entrusting them with 
 the power? In his opinion they were exceed- 
 ingly specious, and not sustained by experience ! 
 The gentleman from Albany (Mr. HARRIS) yes- 
 terday ably demonstrated this truth. It is said 
 that the judiciary should not be subjected to po- 
 pular excitement or partizan influence. Under 
 the plan proposed by a majority of the judiciary 
 committee, can any reasonable dread be appre- 
 hended that in the election of these officers unu- 
 sual popular excitement will exist, and are they 
 not, by the present rno4e ot appointment, sub- 
 jected to partizan influence ? Who selects most 
 of your judges now ? The politicians of a party 
 caucus. He meant no disrespect to the present 
 judges of the Supreme court, indeed he enter- 
 tained the highest confidence in their capacity 
 and moral worth, but he would ask has a judge 
 been appointed in this State for the last twenty- 
 five years who was not a partizan ? Nay, has not 
 the oifice, in numberless instances, been bestow- 
 ed as a reward for partizan services, and will it 
 not be again should the system ot appointment be 
 continued ? Again, experience had shown that 
 the people are not apt to err in the discharge of a 
 duty of this grave character. More than three 
 lli.i'j.-,.im! jtHu-ial i ilicers, in this slate, are at this 
 niumuiit, elective by (he people, and who will de- 
 cl;u>: lh.it the present incumbents ot the oilice ol 
 justice ot the peace may not creditably compare 
 wiih those once selected by a central power? So, 
 also, the highest couit of the State has ever been 
 elective , bui lie had never heard it alleged that 
 the abrogation of the court for the correction of 
 
 errors was desirable on account of legal incapaci- 
 ty or inefficiency, although so far as it is concern- 
 ed, that care has not been taken by the people in 
 the selection of its members (they being regarded 
 rather as legislators than judges,) that might have 
 been expected had it exercised judicial power 
 alone. / Now, it seemed to him if the principle 
 was correct to subject to the popular ordeal the 
 highest and lowest of the judicial officers, it was 
 equally correct to apply it to those intermediate. 
 For his own part, he had no fears in submitting 
 these selections to the popular judgment. He 
 had had occasion often to mark the caution and 
 circumspection with which the most violent par- 
 tizans approach the choice of their inferior magis- 
 trates, and he believed that a far t;reater degree of 
 circumspection would be exercised in the selec- 
 tion of those of a more elevated grade. In the 
 choice of judicial officers partizan influences never 
 could wholly prevail, nor popular opinion be 
 moulded and controlled by demagogues. Another 
 defect, said Mr. W., is, (and it goes far to lessen 
 the dignity of the judge, which some gentlemen 
 have so deeply at. heart) that judicial officers may 
 descend to receive fees or perquisites, or that they 
 may dispense, in any way, official patronage. He 
 did not know how others might feel, but to him it 
 was a mortifying he might say, a disgusting spec- 
 tacle to witness a high judicial functionary descen- 
 ding from his eminent position to receive a paltry 
 fee for granting an order or taxing an attorney's 
 bill of costs; and it became still more so, when he 
 saw him engage in a petty partizan struggle 'to 
 appoint some favorite either to the office of dis- 
 trict attorney, clerk, register or injunction master 
 of his court. The report of the majority proposes 
 to elevate these judges above all malign influen- 
 ces arising from these sources. It proposes to 
 give them an ample, fixed compensation to pro- 
 hibit the taking of fees in any case it gives them 
 no power of appointment and therein it reaches 
 public desire and expectation. Another defect 
 to which hew r ould allude, was the multiplication 
 of inferior officers or attaches to the courts. 
 When the suitor is now presented with a large 
 bill of costs, the fault of its extent lies not with 
 the attorney or solicitor. That bill is swelled to 
 its enormity by the fees of these officials. The 
 gentleman from Oneida gave the other day apt 
 illustrations of this truth, in the cases of examin- 
 ers and masters in chancery. The majority re- 
 port he might say all the reports contemplate 
 the abolition of many of these offices, and for this 
 the profession would thank them, for this every 
 layman, whether he shall hereafter employ the 
 courts or not, should thank the distinguished gen- 
 tlemen composing the judiciary committee. It is 
 a ready and united response to universal public 
 sentiment. Now, if the adoption of the majority 
 report would cure these leading, prominent de- 
 fects, (and he believed that in a great measure it 
 would,) should not that report be received with 
 consideration arid favor; especially as the Con- 
 vention were likely, by the multiplicity of 
 plans, to fall into extricable confusion. It 
 cannot be expected that all shall be suited 
 all our peculiar notions of judicial reform can- 
 not be embraced in one system perhaps no 
 system that can be framed will be perfect, 
 either in its theory or detail. He did not say 
 
652 
 
 that the system proposed by the majority of 
 the judiciary committee had perfection stamped 
 upon it nay, he observed in that system an 
 ovil, (not from the necessity of things to be avoid- 
 ed) which measurably impaired that most desira- 
 ble object, the unity of the Supreme Court but 
 because that it will radically reform present 
 abuses, and remove present prominent and glar- 
 ing defects, it should, in its leading features, re- 
 ceive his vote. He would have preferred he 
 still preferred that constitutional provision 
 should be made, somewhat conformable to the 
 suggestions of the gentleman from Albany, (Mr. 
 HARRIS,) for the prescribing of such rules and 
 forms of practice in the supreme court, from 
 time to time, as should tend effectually to sim- 
 plify the practice and reduce the expenses of 
 that court; but if it cannot be done now, all 
 know that the power is in the legislature to be 
 exerted at any future time. One word further 
 in conclusion. He regretted to differ with his 
 esteemed friend from Monroe, (Mr. STRONG',) 
 but he was opposed to changing the present cha- 
 racter and condition of justices' courts, and, by 
 constitutional provision, extending their juris- 
 diction. With their present jurisdiction, an im- 
 mense sum of litigation finds its way into them, 
 to be decided far from satisfactorily to the public 
 in numberless instances. He was unable to sat- 
 isfy his mind that the people desired any further 
 extension of jurisdiction to these inferior tribu- 
 nals, but on the other hand, he believed that they 
 were content that they should be let alone. He 
 had satisfied himself that in the proportion that 
 power may be extended to these courts, should 
 petty, sectional and neighborhood strifes and con- 
 troversies be increased : for the court of a justice 
 of the peace wherein neighborhoods assemble 
 and enlist in behalf of one or the other of the liti- 
 gants is peculiarly the arena for engendering 
 animosity and strife, that years, may not, in some 
 cases allay. Thus these tribunals, designed for 
 public benefit are often times, incidentally, pro- 
 ductive of serious mischief. He doubted the poli- 
 cy of extending the sphere of this indirect and 
 perhaps unavoidable evil. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS suggested that the question had 
 better be taken now. The principal part of the 
 discussion had been on this section. The great 
 question involved in it was whether we would or 
 would not have a court with equity and law pow- 
 ers, or a separate court for each. This disposed 
 of, the Convention would be better prepared to 
 discuss the other matters. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR urged that the better plan would 
 be to take the question on one of the resolutions 
 heretofore submitted, as that would distinctly set- 
 tle a principle without reference to details. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR thought it was necessary to 
 know what was to be done with the inferior courts 
 before any other question was decided, as upon 
 that, in his opinion, hung all the rest 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was opposed to going back. In 
 his opinion the debate could as well proceed on 
 these sections as upon the resolutions involving 
 the same principles. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON also urged that the question 
 should be taken on the section, as that involved 
 the single question whether law and equity pow- 
 ers should be united in the same tribunal, and 
 
 thus a direct and distinct vote could be had on 
 the principle. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN examined into and stated the ef- 
 fect of the section as it stood, and as proposed to 
 be amended by the gentlemen from Kings and 
 Herkimer preferring the original section. But 
 he thought there was good sense and propriety in 
 the suggestion of the gentleman from Otsego/an<$ 
 the substitution of the word "general" before the 
 word "jurisdiction," instead of the words "the 
 same," would be an improvement of the section. 
 As to the 13th section, which gave the legislature 
 power to establish inferior courts it was a very 
 broad section, and it might well be a question 
 whether it ought not to be amended materially. 
 As to the principle of bringing these two juris- 
 dictions of law and equity together in the same 
 hands, he believed it would work,, and with a tol- 
 erable degree of success,. And regarding it as a 
 settled point that these two jurisdictions would be- 
 put into the hands of the supreme court, then the 
 amendment of the gentleman from Otsego would 
 be all that was necessary. But in relation to the 
 proposition of the gentleman from New- York, to 
 amalgamate or fuse these courts into one putting 
 them as it were into a crucible and melting therm 
 down, so that you could not tell which was law and 
 which equity some gentlemen entertained great 
 doubts about it. But he did not see, though he 
 had been in practice many years, and devoted hi 
 attention to it more than to. law or constitution- 
 making he did not see how he could with any 
 degree of facility, get up a system of practice, un- 
 der existing laws, that would operate. But he 
 was with them in this sentiment, that if it could 
 be made to operate he was willing to see it so 
 that is, to expedite and cheapen justice. But if 
 we placed these two jurisdictions in the supreme 
 court, subject to regulation by law and if the le- 
 gislature thought there was a probability of bring- 
 ing them together, this section would leave tha 
 matter open for this purpose to the plastic hand 
 of the legislature gradually to bring about the 
 consummation desired, and which he should like 
 to see, if practicable. All agreed substantially 
 in the ultimate end to be attained, if practicable, 
 though we differed materially as to the mode of 
 arriving at it. Mr. J. said he had heretofore, on 
 the spur of the occasion, submitted some general 
 remarks on this whole system. He should take 
 some suitable opportunity hereafter to show how 
 the committee contemplated carrying out this 
 machinery from beginning to end its motive 
 power and how every part and portion of it 
 might be filled out by the legislature how jud- 
 ges are to be selected and classified how clerks 
 were to be appointed, &c. &c. As yet we had 
 discussed general principles and having formed 
 the skeleton, it was incumbent on the committee 
 to show it was to be clothed with flesh and blood, 
 and set in motion. That he should undertake to 
 do, and to contrast the plan with that of the gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN.) 
 
 Mr RICHMOND v\as prepared to vv/teupon the 
 question of the union u! the courts oi law and 
 equity, and had been from I he day this leporc 
 reuott came in. But he WdS not prepared to vote 
 for this third section as reported by ihe commir- 
 lee, unless ii was more satisfactorily explained 
 than it had yet been. He" believed that the latter 
 
653 
 
 part of the section (which says the Supreii 
 Court shall have this law and equity jurisdiction 
 subject to regulation by law) would give the Le 
 gislature power, were they so disposed, to appoii 
 direct the appointment of officers occupyi 
 5 same position, and doing, perhaps the vtr 
 ne husmess now dune by ;he' masters and ex 
 liners in Chancery, which would in his opini 
 only cha.'iging the name, but retaining the sut 
 stance of a system which had become justly ob 
 noxious to a very large portion of the people 
 this state. He might be mistaken about this, bu 
 he thought he had just grounds of fear: at a 
 events he was of the opinion where language wa 
 doubtful, it was best to amend so as to make 
 plain and distinct so that all could understan 
 if, and it had long been a standing rule with him 
 Mr. R , to call things by their right names. Th 
 gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN) th 
 other day put certain questions to the corn 
 mittee who reported this article * as to wh 
 were to discharge the duties of some three hundre 
 subordinate officers in these courts, as now organ 
 ized, earning the impression as he, Mr. R , un 
 derstood him, that the system as reported b 
 the committee would be likely to be overloade 
 with business, if the judges had to take all Ih 
 testimony in chancery, and do all other dutie 
 which there was a probability this system woul 
 put upon them. A member of the committee re 
 plied that it might benecessary for the Legisla 
 ture to appoint certain officers to do a portion o 
 this work. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS : To whom does the gentleman 
 allude ? 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : 
 Herkimer. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said the gentleman had totallj 
 misapprehended him. He had been most decid 
 ed for a long tin;? against the continuance of mas 
 ters and exe miners. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND still feared, notwithstanding 
 this explanation, that if- we adopted this section 
 something would grow up, he cared not what i 
 was called, of precisely the character of masters 
 and examiners. He desired to call attention to 
 this, that it might be fully garded against. He 
 wanted things called by their right names. He 
 would not leave a door open for the Lagislature 
 to create another batch of these officers. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN called the attention of the gen- 
 tleman to the 9th section : 
 
 J) 9. The testimony in equity cases shall be taken before 
 
 the judge who shall hear and decide the casein the same 
 
 meras testimony is taken upon the trial oi'anissue at 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was perfectly aware that 
 section was in this report. 
 
 Mr. LUUlvl is hoped the gentleman would not 
 impute to i he committee what they were decidedly 
 and unanimously opposed to. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND had no desire to cast imputa- 
 tions upon the committee. He meant only to be 
 understood as saying that authority was given in 
 this repon to create such officers, although he be- 
 lieved (Irom the explanations ot gentlemen) thai 
 the committee did not intend io have any such 
 officers. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Where will you find the 
 authority ? 
 
 To the gentleman from 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND: In i his third S.TI ion 
 ant authority is given for the Legislature to pro- 
 vide as they please, for taking testimony; foi the 
 latter clause of the section says in such manner 
 as shall be provided by law. And all know that 
 the Legislature is the law making power. Mr. 
 R. would give an instance which he thought might 
 illustrate somewhat the course of proceeding in 
 
 the court of chancery. This happened wuhin a 
 few miles ot him, in an adjoining town to the one 
 in which he resided, in Monroe county, which is 
 in part represented by ;he gentleman over the way 
 (Mr. STRONG ) A man sold a$n;all farm to anoth- 
 er, in winter, when the snow was on the ground, 
 representing that thesoil wasgood for the growing 
 of winter wheat. He was to leceive a good price 
 for it, and about $1100 was paid down. When 
 i he snow melted oti', and the buver could see the 
 soil, he found that he had been grossly cheated. 
 He went to the man selling him the farm, and told 
 him he must make him recompense for the decep- 
 tion he had practiced on him. The seller would 
 do nothing about it ; would listen to no teims, and 
 
 he buyer was obliged to go into chancery for ie- 
 dress. The suit was not yet decided. The costs 
 had already run up to $4,000, or double the amount 
 of the value of the (arm. The fees of one exam- 
 iner for taking testimony were over $SOU j and 
 Mr. R. ventured to say that any justice ot the 
 peace in that town could have taken the same tes- 
 timony, in a better form, for 12 or 14 shillings. 
 We laymen know ; very well how this is done. 
 Testimony is taken to the chancellor by the basket 
 full, and he never reads it. nor can he. These 
 examiners are paid by the folio, or number of 
 words, for taking testimony; and in many instan- 
 ces they take down all the rigmarole and irrele- 
 vant matter that can well be obtained from a w it 
 less, as by doing so they are enabled to realize 
 enormous bills of costs. Now, Mr. Chairman, I 
 am opposed to these officers perambulating the 
 county, taking testimony by means of which they 
 'ill their own pockets, at the expense of the par- 
 ies in the suit. He was in favor of taking testi- 
 nony in open court, before the judge in all cases 
 where it could be done, and he wanted a union of 
 aw and equity powers, that they might go hand 
 n hand together. In conclusion, he would say 
 hat he would give no vote that could by possibility 
 >erpetuate the present odious system, or that would 
 How the Legislature to create as bad a one in its 
 lead. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said he was unavoidably absent 
 rom his seat during the two first days of the dis- 
 ussion of the report of the committee on the ju- 
 iciary. With the spirit and ability with which 
 ae general subject had been discussed for the 
 ast four days, he had been highly delighted as 
 
 eil as instructed. To this 3d section, and to the 
 ubstitute offered by the gentleman from Kings, 
 e had paid little or no attention until it was 
 ust now alluded to by his colleague from Onon- 
 aga (Mr. TAYLOR); the merits of either that see- 
 on or the substitute had hardly been mentioned 
 n debate he had yet the impression from what 
 ad been stated by the Chair, that the substitute 
 r ent to change the entire character of the court 
 om that which was prepared by the committee, 
 nd that hence the whole merits'of the report was 
 
 order for discussion, in what had been stated 
 
654 
 
 by the chair, as he understood it, the committee 
 had seemed to acquiesce. But in looking at the 
 3d section, and comparing it with the substitute, 
 he was at loss to perceive any difference in them, 
 so far as to change the character of the Supreme 
 Court. The third section reads as follows : 
 " There shall be a Supreme Court having 
 the same jurisdiction in law and equity as 
 the supreme court and the court of chancery 
 now have subject to regulation by law." The 
 substitute reads thus" The judicial power of 
 the state shall be be vested in one supreme court, 
 subject to the app^late jurisdiction of the court 
 of appeals, and in such subordinate courts as shall 
 be authorized by this Constitution." Now if he 
 had understood the argument of gentlemen who 
 had spoken of these two propositions they regard- 
 ed them so distinct and different as to change the 
 character and powers of the court. To him there 
 appeared no such difference. The committee 
 propose a supreme court having all the jurisdic- 
 tion which is vested in the present supreme court 
 and the court of chancery. Those two courts as 
 they now exist, he had supposed embraced sub- 
 stantially, all the judicial power of the state sub- 
 ject to an appeal to the court for the correction 
 of errors. The committee propose to vest all the 
 powers of the two courts in one, subject to ap- 
 peal as provided for in another section. The 
 substitute proposes to grant " the judicial pow r er 
 of the stale" to the supreme court subject to the 
 court of appeals, " and in such subordinate 
 courts," &c. He had never supposed the court 
 of court of chancery to be a court subordinate to 
 the supreme court. Now if a vote as between 
 these two propositions was to affect the character 
 of the court we were about to establish or to de- 
 termine the question whether we would have law 
 and equity administered by the same court. He 
 did not so comprehend the subject as to vote un- 
 derstandingly in the matter. It may appear to 
 many gentlemen a senseless inquiry, but he hoped 
 to hear some explanation of the substitute and the 
 reasons for adopting it before a vote was taken. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he had offered the sub- 
 stitute for the section in order to have the ques- 
 tion which the gentleman from New- York (Mr. 
 O'CONOR) desired to raise under his resolution, 
 raised directly on the section itself. That gen- 
 tleman did not like the phraseology of the origi- 
 nal section, under the belief that it might convey 
 to the legislature an intimation that the intention 
 was that these jurisdictions, though proposed to 
 be united in one court, were to be kept distinct 
 in practice. Mr. L. did not suppose the original 
 section liable to this construction ; and he only 
 intended to frame the section so as to meet the 
 views of the gentleman from New- York. If that 
 gentleman did not see fit to sustain it, Mr. L. 
 should not, as, as he regarded it as immaterial. 
 In order to prevent misconstruction, he had pro- 
 posed to adopt the language of the resolution in- 
 stead of the section. But he did not consider 
 that the section conveys any instruction to the le- 
 gislature that these two systems were to be kept 
 separate in practice 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that when gentlemen at- 
 tempt to take up others for wandering from the 
 subject, they ought to be careful and not do so 
 
 themselves. He wished to enquire of the Chair 
 as to the question before them. 
 
 The CHAIR said that it had decided that the 
 whole merits of the question were under conside- 
 ration. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER begged to correct the 
 gentleman. He did not understand with the Chair 
 that the merits of the whole question was under 
 consideration on the amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIEL.D) but on the 
 proposition to strike out the third section of the 
 report of the committee, and on his substitute for 
 the section. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES replied that he had looked at 
 the general acquiescence conceded by the House, 
 as a proof that the whole subject was under con- 
 sideration. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER went into some explana- 
 tions. He originally proposed a substitute for 
 this third section; to the effect that the judicial 
 power of the State should be vested m one su- 
 preme court and in such subordinate courts as 
 should be established by this constitution. At 
 the request of the gentleman from Herkimer, he 
 accepted that gentleman's version, though he 
 confessed he did not understand it to change the 
 principle involved in his section. It merely pro- 
 vided for a contingency anticipating the adop- 
 tion of the second section of the committee's re- 
 port, which provides for a court of appeals. Cer- 
 tainly, nothing was farther from his intentions 
 than to sanction the organization of the law and 
 equity jurisdictions in separate courts. The gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque, (Mr. PATTERSON,) was 
 entirely mistaken in asserting that those who vote 
 to strike out the third section and insert his sub- 
 stitute, voted to continue separate jurisdiction in 
 the courts. The second section united the sys- 
 tems, but left all the power and jurisdictions 
 usurped and assumed by the judiciary during the 
 last thousand years. It also left it optional with 
 the legislature to institute courts without num- 
 ber. His proposition placed no dominion in the 
 legislature, except to carry out the constitutional 
 plan, and in connection with another section, 
 which he would subsequently offer, if the first 
 was adopted, would limit the jurisdiction of courts 
 to powers conferred by the constitution. The le- 
 gal profession properly understood the difference, 
 and he hoped it would be appreciated by others. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said he rose rather to express 
 the hope that we should not be committed by any 
 vote upon this question to-day, than to make an 
 argument upon the section itself, but he would 
 say a word to relieve the difficulty of the gentle- 
 man of Onondaga, (Mr. RHOADES) and others, 
 who may labor under the same difficulty, who 
 seem to be unable to see the difference between 
 the amendment and the section itself. The 
 amendment proposed to vest the judicial powers 
 in certain tribunals to be provided by the Con- 
 stitution. The judicial power was one thing, the 
 jurisdiction of courts another. If the Constitu- 
 tion merely vests the judicial power in the va- 
 rious courts created, or to be created, the Legis- 
 lature may distribute the jurisdiction among the 
 various tribunals at its discretion, or abolish it ; 
 but if certain jurisdictions are given to certain 
 courts by the Constitution itself, it may well be 
 doubted whether the Legislature will have pow- 
 
655 
 
 er to take it away and distribute it among the in- 
 ferior tribunals, "that another section of the re- 
 port provides for the creation of. To illustrate, 
 the court of chancery has jurisdiction on subjects 
 of dower, the partition of lands, has jurisdiction 
 to assist rail roads to obtain rights of way, over 
 banks and other corporations, &c. Now it was 
 pretty clear that the Legislature would not have 
 the power to take away these and such like ju- 
 risdictions, and confer them upon some other tri- 
 bunals or other branches of the government at 
 any rate so as to deprive the courts of an appel- 
 late power. The section is like itself, it is 
 unlike any that his research had enabled him 
 to find in other Constitutions. It has not here- 
 tofore been deemed proper in this State to con- 
 firm the jurisdictions of the courts by the Con- 
 stitution; the Constitution has established the 
 courts and the Legislature have been left to 
 define and distribute their several jurisdictions. 
 And if no certain and obvious necessity could 
 be shown for this novel section, he trusted it 
 would not be adopted. He hoped the question 
 would not now be taken ; the gentleman from N. 
 York (Mr. O'CoNOR) owed it to the committee 
 and himself to defend his proposition made the 
 other day, and when he should have the opportu- 
 nity, he had the ability to do it. He (Mr. B.) 
 had understood him somewhat differently from 
 what gentlemen who had replied to him, and had 
 somewhat ingeniously placed him in a position 
 he had not chosen for himself. He hoped that 
 gentleman would be heard before any question 
 would be takSn. He had the satisfaction to say 
 to the committee that two members of the judi- 
 ciary comrr.ittee had agreed, unanimously agreed 
 both in the principle and the detail of an import- 
 ant new section, which it was their purpose to 
 submit to the Convention, that it might be print- 
 ed if it should be thought worth it. Upon being 
 further interrogated as to the nature of the sec- 
 tion, Mr. B. said it provided for courts of concili- 
 ation, and he read the section as follows : 
 
 There may be established in the city of New-York one 
 or more tribunals ol arbitration or conciliation, each tc 
 be composed of three arbitrators or conciliators, one o 
 whom shall be clerk thereof. They shall be paid a rea 
 sonahle compensation to be nxed by law, and all lees re 
 crived by them shall be paid into the public treasury. Th 
 legislature may provide for similar tribunals in othe 
 localities of the State if it shall be deemed expedit nt, am 
 may attbrd parties inducements to submit their difference 
 to the arbitrament or conciliation of such tribunals by re 
 gulation of costs in other courts. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELDdid not propose to enter int 
 the discussion of this whole subject matter, bu 
 he felt very much disinclined to allow the ques 
 tion to be taken on the section without calling at 
 tention to the phraseology employed by the com 
 mittee, and by the gentleman from Kings in hi 
 substitute. In the formation of a Constitution 
 too much caution could not be exercised in th 
 selection of the proper words to express the view 
 and object of its provisions in the clearest and mos 
 explicit manner. He should differ from the com 
 mittee as to the propriety of the language em 
 ployed in section third, with great deference how 
 ever, as he was aware that the committee was 
 composed of gentlemen of the highest legal at 
 tainments. He agreed with them in the grea 
 purpose the union of the two courts to be es 
 tablished, yet he was in doubt whether the Ian 
 
 uage they had employed would attain that end. 
 [e would not give to the court about to be created 
 nly the same identical jurisdiction now possessed 
 y the Supreme Court and the Court of Chancery. 
 le would not make an inflexible rule that new 
 ubject requiring the investigation of the courts 
 hould not be allowed to be considered in this 
 ew court. It seemed to him that the language 
 vould have the effect of making such a restriction, 
 le suggested that the section should be amended 
 o as to read " There shall be a Supreme Court 
 laving general jurisdiction in law and equity." 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE was i* doubt as to the 
 iracticability of this system, because there had 
 ieen no explanation as to the carrying into op- 
 iration of the subject matter of the report. If 
 his could be given he was certain the house 
 would soon be ready to vote. He should like al- 
 o, to have some information as to the expense of 
 he system. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said he should confine himself 
 o the two higher courts, and show how the sys- 
 em could be carried out. As to the 13th section, 
 providing for the creation of the subordinate 
 courts, he had already said that that required a- 
 mendment and so far as the general operation 
 of the system was concerned that might be laid 
 out of view. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said his suggestion was an- 
 swered in part but before assenting to this be- 
 rining of 36 judges with salaries in the aggre- 
 gate amounting to $100,000, he was anxious to 
 enow additions there were to be in the shape of 
 subordinate courts, especially of criminal juris- 
 diction in order that he might contrast it with 
 ;he plan of Mr. MARVIN which provided special- 
 ly for subordinate courts and for lessening their 
 number. But on the other hand, Mr. T. express- 
 ed himself in favor of a court of appeals formin- 
 no part of a supreme court. He again, however, 
 expressed the hope that we might have the infor- 
 mation called for in the beginning of the next 
 week. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD had two or three times heard 
 an intimation thrown out which might improp- 
 erly govern members, and which he-felt very de- 
 sirous should be contradicted on the spot. It was 
 that the judges provided for in the higher courts, 
 were expected to receive $3000 each as a salary. 
 He knew not how that idea had got into any mind 
 because he did not believe that if the subject was 
 left to the legislature, as it must be by the lan- 
 guage of the report, it would be fixed at much 
 more than half that amount. If it was left to this 
 Convention to be settled, he was satisfied that no 
 one here would purpose a salary exceeding $2000, 
 and he believed that $1500 would get more votes 
 than $201)0. Tile chairman had only assumed that 
 sum as a basis for his calculation to show that even 
 with that high rate, the system would be cheaper 
 than the one we now have,atid hedesired gentlemen 
 would dismiss such considerations from their 
 minds, as that the salaries ot these officers would 
 be fixed at any (hint; like $3000. There had never 
 yet in this State a judge received anything like 
 that amount, except the Chancellor. When Uj> 
 before, he did nut know that he had rn;ide a dis- 
 tinct proposition to amend, but he would make it 
 now. The gentleman fiom Columbia (Mi. JOR- 
 DAN) in considering the amendment of the gen. 
 
656 
 
 tleman from : Kings, he thought had overlooked 
 one point of it which was entitled to considera- 
 tion. He, Mr. J., supposed that the amendment 
 accomplished precisely ihe same thing that the 
 seciion accomplished. But it not only does that 
 but a great deal more. It viitually destroys sec- 
 tion 13, and provides tor the lodging of the judi- 
 cial power in our Supreme Couri, and in such 
 subordinate courts as ihi* Constitution .may pro- 
 vide, thus depriving the Legislature of any power 
 to establish subordinate courts. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMERsaid that the blow was 
 aimed at Section 1%, which he looked upon as the 
 most dangerous feature in the report. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said there could be no doubt 
 that the blow was aimed at that section. Mr. C. 
 wished to leave this section in relation to the Su- 
 preme Court entuely disembarrassed from any 
 such question. It had no connection with the 
 other tribunals. The tim* to consider the subordi. 
 nate courts was when the 13h section was reached, 
 and when. that, section was taken up, he should 
 have something to say, and should propose to 
 amend it or strike it out altogether. He wished 
 now to get rid of the language in the third sec- 
 tion vesting in the new court "the same jurisdic- 
 tion in law and equity as trie Supreme Court and 
 the Court ot Chancery now have," because he 
 de>ired not only the union of the two courts, but 
 another great principle of reform, which he 
 should discuss on a proner occasion. As the sec- 
 tion was Iramed, it retains not only the jurisdic- 
 tion which the^e courts have, but might lead to 
 the adoption of the practice as it now stands in 
 both courts. His amendment avoided that diffi- 
 culty, as it effectually united the two jurisdictions 
 leaving the piactice open to reform hereafter eith- 
 er bv the Legislature or the courts themselves. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER concurred with the gen- 
 tleman from Otsego in respect to one judiciary 
 system, -and he was happy to see his friend from 
 Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) coming round to their 
 views and the views of the Convention. He was 
 not tenacious of his amendment, but the great ob- 
 ject he had in view was to reach the principle in- 
 volved in the 13th section, which gave to the le- 
 gislature the power to establish as many inferior 
 courts as they thought proper. His substitute 
 provided that the jud'ical power should be vested 
 in one supreme court and such inferior courts as 
 might be organized or sanctioned by the Consti- 
 tution. Leaving it to the legislature would be 
 leaving the whole matter at loose ends. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN desired to enquire of the gen- 
 tleman from Kings how he supposed the 13th sec- 
 tion varied the Constitution from what it stood for 
 the last twenty-five years. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER: How it varies? Why 
 sir, it is a matter of entire indifference to me whe- 
 ther it does or not. I conceive that the principle 
 is false in itself, whether sanctioned by usage or 
 not. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : The same provision has been 
 in the Constitution for the last twenty-five years. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR : These same words were never 
 in the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : The same power. 
 
 Mr! CHATFIELD: The power as found in 
 the present Constitution only applied to courts of 
 equity. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER : I know that the pre- 
 sent Constitution contained part of the power 
 proposed to be given to the legislature by this 
 13th section, and for these reasons I am op- 
 posed to it, as a most miserable judiciary system 
 had grown up under it. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that on reflection he prefer- 
 red the substitute of the gentleman from Kings as 
 amended by the gentleman from Herkimer, to the 
 section as reported by the committee, or even as 
 worded by the gentleman from Otsego. He 
 believed that all concurred that in effecting 
 this great reform, in amalgamating these two 
 great divisions of jurisprudence, there ought to 
 be no reasonable doubt as to the construction of 
 the constitution. If there was, it might also lead 
 to doubt whether it did not involve the necessity 
 of proceeding hereafter by the same forms which 
 now distinguished the two tribunals. This was 
 a matter which should not be left in doubt, and 
 he thought it all might be avoided by adopting 
 this amendment. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said, as the gentleman from 
 Kings had now defined the object of his amend- 
 ment, he desired to see it voted down, and that 
 then the amendment of the gentleman from Otse- 
 go would be adopted. This would bring a direct 
 vote upon the single naked question, as to whe- 
 ther we should vest in one court the jurisdiction 
 of law and equity. Upon that question he was 
 desirous to give his vote. Having been interro- 
 gated upon this subject of judicial retbrm, when 
 a candidate for a seat here, he had avowed him- 
 self generally in favor of such a reform as should 
 cheapen, simplify and expedite the administra- 
 tion of justice and particularly in favor of dis- 
 pensing with the court of errors, and of combin- 
 ing law and equity in one court. He believed 
 that the general belief and desire was that this 
 last measure might be adopted, and the practice 
 of the courts very much simplified. But from his 
 inexperience, he had found himself embarrassed, 
 but he had now to acknowledge his obligations 
 to gentlemen of the legal profession, for the 
 light they had thrown upon this subject for 
 they had enabled him to come to a conclusion 
 satisfactory to his own mind on this important 
 question. He aiiudtd to the prejudices mat ex- 
 ited in the public mind against placing men of 
 ihe legal profession in the Legislature and in this 
 Convention : lest pt-radventure the> might beiound 
 ariaved against the reforms which the people de- 
 manded. But whatever teeling might exist out of 
 doors, in that respect, he was satisfied that no such 
 teeling existed here and for one, he thought it 
 due to them to say lhat in this matter ot judicial 
 leform, they had taken a noble and proud stand, 
 and with great ability andzeal h<id come up to the 
 work of establishing our judicial system on the 
 best possible foundation. He. added that it had 
 been owing to the able and liberal views ot this 
 subject taken by gentlemen of the profession, lhat 
 he had come to Ihe fixed and deep conviction that 
 we might combine the jui isdici ions of law and 
 equity in the same court and thus save an im- 
 mense amount of tedious and expensive litigation. 
 Such it seerued was the opinion of the majority 
 ot the judiciary committee after a long and pa- 
 tient examination and review of -the whole sub- 
 ject. And the fad that some of ihe committee 
 
657 
 
 differed Irom the report of the majority, and ha 
 presented antagonist plans in several instances, 
 gave strength i->, rather than detracted from th 
 weight due to the majority report in itself" inas 
 much as it was relieved from all suspicion of hav 
 ins: been concocted by the profession, to suit per 
 sonat or interested views. And taking it for gran 
 ted that the majority of the committee agreed i 
 opinion that as there wss nodiffcrence in the prin 
 ciples of law and equity, and that the two juris 
 diction* might be amalgamated into one court, h 
 for one, was ready to vote as ihis was a result t 
 which his own previous reflections had led him 
 and which he was happy to find was the result o 
 the arduous deliberations and labors of the judi 
 ciary committee. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN wished to say that he under 
 stood the 13th section as intending to confer upon 
 the legislature the same and no other power than 
 it now possesses, except In this that it gave them 
 the power of providing for the carrying of appeal: 
 or writs of certiorari directly to the courts of ap 
 peals without going through the Supreme Cour 
 and blocking up that court if it was found expe 
 dient. These four others were in the presen 
 constitution, and he had heard no complaint o 
 them. It allowed, he urged, the legislature to 
 adapt the system to the exigencies of Jhe times 
 and this power he desired to see retained. It hac 
 been exercised by the legislature and beneficially 
 as for instance in the establishment of the Supe 
 rior Court of the city of New-York. Mr. W. re- 
 ferred to the various sections of the present Con- 
 stitution, merely implying to the legislature to 
 what is provided, in this 13th section. Was i 
 wise or prudent, he asked, to put the whole great 
 interests of tne state in regard to the judiciary 
 under one inflexible rule to be established here 
 Who could tell what changes may take place in 
 the State within the nrat twenty-five years. And 
 unless we could arrive at that degree of moral 
 certainty in viewing the future, which was never 
 yet vouchsafed to human intellect, we may well 
 pause and consider whether it was not not safe 
 to have somewhere a principle of flexibility and 
 a power to which we might resort for the purpose 
 of creating those tribunals which experience 
 shall show are absolutely necessary to preserve 
 our rights to property and the lives of our citi- 
 zens. Was the Convention ready to assume that 
 this thirty-three judge court without any other 
 tribunal in the State, and without any provision 
 for the creation of any other would answer the 
 public exigencies for the next quarter of a centu- 
 ry? But admitting that it would, he urged that 
 it would be wiser to leave those who came after 
 us the power to modify and adapt the system so 
 as to conform to their wants. Mr. W. urged in 
 conclusion that the amendments should not be 
 adopted without great consideration. 
 
 Mr. STETSON expressed the opinion that 
 the amendment of the gentleman from Kings was 
 not at all inconsistent with the 13th section. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD considered the argument of 
 Mr. WORDEJV as an extremely specious one, and 
 repelled the idea that the third section prevent- 
 ed the creation of any other court, and conferred 
 on the supreme court all jurisdiction. The sec- 
 tion provided for one tribunal section two for 
 another, and other sections for other tribunals, 
 
 and section thirteen gave a general power for the 
 creation of others. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN denied that there was any 
 thing specious in his argument, and again insist- 
 ed that the amendment pending virtually over- 
 rode the 13th section, and he asked, if you vest- 
 ed in a supreme court general jurisdiction in law 
 and equity, which embraced all controveries be- 
 tween man andinan, where was the jurisdiction 
 to be vested in any inferior tribunal ? 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD remarked that our supreme 
 court was a court of general jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN replied that that was so but 
 there was no provision in the Constitution giving 
 it that jurisdiction ; it was established by law. 
 He repeated his question, if you created a court 
 and conferred on it all the jurisdiction known in 
 any civilized country, where was the jurisdiction 
 to be conferred on any other court ? 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD replied, insisting that his 
 amendment proposing to confer on the supreme 
 court general jurisdiction in law and equity, did 
 not necessarily imply that the supreme "court 
 alone should have general jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN here moved that the committee 
 r i se _lost, 30 to 37. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that there were many gen- 
 tlemen who were desirous of speaking on the 
 subject, and the Convention was desirous to hear 
 what they had to say. And now in order to save 
 time and to give gentlemen an opportunity to re- 
 flect on the able arguments, which had been de- 
 livered here, between this day and Monday morn- 
 ing, he moved that the committee rise. 
 
 This was lost 30 to 37. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he did not wish to be 
 misunderstood in this matter, as he evidently had 
 been yesterday. Whatever might be the opinions 
 of other gentlemen he was satisfied that he was 
 right. He considered that this question -was one 
 of the most important that had ever engaged the 
 attention of intelligent men. He would not mis- 
 represent any gentleman, nor did he wish to be 
 misrepresented himself. He would pursue the 
 course he had already pointed out, although he 
 tood alone. Now he would ask, " what is a ju- 
 diciary ?" For what purpose is it created ? What 
 s it to do when created ? Have gentlemen con- 
 sidered that this judiciary system is the all-con- 
 rolling, conservative and life-preserving power 
 
 under 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS said that as the gentleman 
 tfas evidently indisposed, and as it was desirable 
 hat he should address the Convention at length, 
 le would move that the committee do now rise, 
 caving the gentleman in the possession of the 
 loor for Monday. 
 
 This was agreed to, and the committee rose. 
 Mr. BASCOM then rose and said that quite 
 arly in the session the gentleman from Kings 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER) introduced a resolution in- 
 tructing an inquiry into the expediency of pro- 
 iding for the establishment of conciliation courts. 
 U a subsequent period he (Mr. B.) introduced a 
 imilar resolution as to the propriety and expedi- 
 ncy of converting justices' courts into courts of 
 onciliation. After this his friend from New- 
 fork (Mr. STEPHENS) introduced his resolution 
 or a court of arbitration for that city. All these 
 esolutions were referred to the judiciary com- 
 
 57 
 
658 
 
 mittee, where they found but little favor excep 
 from the gentleman from New- York and himself 
 Quite recently, however, the gentleman from 
 Oneida had introduced a mandatory propositior 
 for their establishment throughout the State, am 
 much to his gratification had he learned that no 
 only he, but also his friend from Ontario (Mr 
 WORDEN) were advocates of the propriety of pro- 
 viding for some kind of conciliatory forum. He 
 had too much doubt of the expediency or success 
 of any attempt to introduce the system through- 
 out the State, until it should have been provec 
 practicable in some of the localities where it 
 would seem to be most required, to urge his ori- 
 ginal proposition, and the idea of his friend from 
 New-York, which had at first struck him as pe- 
 culiarly happy, was the foundation of the propo- 
 sition which his friend (Mr. STEPHENS) and him- 
 self now asked leave to submit in the form of a 
 separate section. All civilized governments, in- 
 cluding our own, provide at great expense of time 
 and money, tribunals for establishing and protect- 
 ing the rights, and passing judgment upon the 
 controversies of the individual members of the 
 community, by which the litigious propensities 
 of mankind are necessarily stimulated and in- 
 dulged. And some governments had recently 
 provided institutions to curb and hold in check 
 the passion for litigation, that the existence of 
 judicial tribunals could not but excite, and we 
 were bound, he thought, to profit by their expe- 
 rience. In a state of natural society individual 
 controversies were adjusted, and individual 
 wrongs redressed, by the application of physical 
 power, and the first step in the progress of civili- 
 zation or of government, was to provide some 
 juster or milder mode of accomplishing these 
 ends. 
 
 He had read long ago a story in the Sanscrit lan- 
 guage, he begged pardon, he did not read the San. 
 serif, but he read the iranslation from that lan- 
 guage of a story that he had net forgotten. "A 
 traveller across the burning sands of India, dis- 
 covered two men in a most violent trial of physi- 
 cal strength, he enquired the cause of such strife, 
 and was pointed to a golden goblet and a pair of 
 slippers th^t lay upon the sand, the one possess- 
 ing the power of turning any liquid into the most 
 delicious nectar, and the other enabling the wear- 
 er to walk the air at his pleasure, and for this 
 rich prize they were contending. The travellei 
 informed them that in his country (probably some 
 civilized one) that they had a belter and milder 
 mode of settling such disputes, and entreated 
 them to adopt, it and save each oi her further harm. 
 He proposed that they should run a race, and that 
 the one who first arrived at yonder palm be en- 
 titled to the prize. The proposal was accepted 
 and the race was run, but when the victor turned 
 to gloat his eyes upon ihe rich trophy of his vic- 
 tory, behold, 'Mr. Traveller had the golden goblel 
 under his arm and by the aid of the enchanted 
 slippers was pei forming his gyrations in the air 
 over their heads and beyond their reach." 
 
 Mr. li. said he had forgotten much of the read- 
 ing of his youth, but he had seen too many legal 
 race*, and" too many trophies ot victory borne oil 
 by the mere advisers of the contest, to be ever 
 able to forget the story from the Sanscrit. 
 
 In 1755, conciliation courts were established in f 
 
 the Danish West India Islands, but the first at- 
 tempt to make them useful wns a failure, but 
 King Christian the 7th, by an ordinance promul- 
 gated in 1798, re-established them upon "princi- 
 ples that had succeeded in the home portion of 
 the kingdom, since which time they had exerted 
 a most salutary influence. The principles upon 
 which they were established were in consonance 
 with the great doctrine of Christianity, Ihat be- 
 fore we should turn over our offending brother to 
 the judge, we should exhaust every reasonable ef- 
 fort for reconciliation. 
 
 By the Danish system local commissioners are 
 appointed, who, without reward other than a title 
 of rank after eight years of service, are to cause 
 contending parties in certain classes of causes to 
 come before them, in private and without counsel 
 or a lawyer, and submit to the influence of the 
 conciliators. If their efforts are unsuccessful 
 they merely give a certificate that they have ex- 
 hausted their influence and the parties are at 
 liberty to litigate in the King's courts, and the 
 party defeated is adjudged to pay the costs. The 
 only compulsory feature of the system is, that a 
 party shall not bring an action in the King's court, 
 without having first tried the effect of the recon- 
 ciling commission ; and a suitor who declines 
 to appear before the concilators may be sued in 
 the courts and compelled to pay costs if the action 
 is sustained. He was indebted to a valued friend 
 who had spent considerable time in the Danish 
 Islands for considerable information as to the op- 
 eration of the system there, and also for a trans- 
 "ation of the Royal ordinance establishing these 
 courts, which w r as at the service of any gentle- 
 man who desired more information as to the de- 
 tails of the system. 
 
 The high opinion this friend had formed of 
 ;hese courts, had induced him to urge the trial 
 icre, and he (Mr. B.) v\as^juite willing to repre- 
 sent his wishes in this body. He had the opin- 
 on also of several other gentlemen who had resi- 
 ded in these Islands, all concurring that these 
 courts were eminently useful there. 
 
 He felt no certain confidence that any general 
 
 system like the one he had described would at 
 
 'irst work well here ; to work well and justify 
 
 he expense there must be business for it to do. 
 
 n some parts of the State there might be little 
 
 necessity for it, and its novel features would be 
 
 met with the prejudices that all new things have 
 
 o meet. But the suggestion of his friend from 
 
 N T ew- York for the establishment of an arbitration 
 
 ourt in that city had in his mind, cleared the 
 
 ubject of all difficulty. He had turned it over in 
 
 lis mind since the resolution of that gentleman 
 
 was introduced, and he could see clearly that it 
 
 might be made to work great good, and he felt 
 
 under great obligation to the originator of the 
 
 dea. He liked it every way, and for the attach- 
 
 nent he sincerely entertained to it he felt that he 
 
 vas entitled to as much merit at least, as if it had 
 
 ieen,his own. It is easy to love our own plans 
 
 nd projects, but not always so easy to appreciate 
 
 nd admire those of others. 
 
 In the ureut exilian rc'ui emporium of the State 
 nd the Union, with its thousands of questions of 
 ifference constantly arising, not only among its 
 wn citizens but among those who congregate for 
 usiness purposes at that great mart of commerce, 
 
659 
 
 i necessity I'or a tribunal where diller- 
 a could be more promptly and equitably adju- 
 dicated upon, than was possible by the existing 
 courts. The questions for litigation arising in that 
 city had been the great cause of our courts being 
 blocked up to the hindrance and delay of justice 
 in all parts or the Slate. This justified him in 
 part for the anxiety he felt for the trial of the ex- 
 {"miK'nt, and if successful there, its blessings 
 would soon be extended all over the State, Some 
 s had now their tribunals foi settling disputes. 
 The brokers had their tribunal of arbitraments, so 
 had the merchants, and the Superior Court of that 
 city had yielded to the necessity of a sort of stand- 
 ing board of referees, to which the causes proper 
 for reference from that court were referred. But 
 still there was an immense number of questions 
 ansinir between employers and contractors, arti- 
 zans and merchants, owners and builders, for 
 which no provision was made j questions arising 
 loo between city and country dealers of every de- 
 scription, could not be settled by the slow pro- 
 ceedings of the courts but at great inconvenience 
 U< one ot both parties. He was not in the habit 
 of proposing or advocating important changes un- 
 til he had well considered them, but long reflec- 
 tion upon the general subject of conciliation, and 
 some two months of consideration of the particu- 
 lar suggestion of his friend from New York, had 
 enlisted his leelings, and made him regard this as 
 a proposition from which more good might flow, 
 than from any other yet entertained in this body. 
 
 He thanked the Convention tor the unanimous 
 consent that had been given to present this subject 
 out of its proper order, and to the attention that 
 had been given to the explanation which, owing 
 to the manner in which this subject had before 
 been treated in certain quarters, he had deemed it 
 necessary to make, and he gave notice to gentle- 
 men who had met sujph like questions with ridi- 
 cule, that the authors of this section were in ear- 
 liest in its presentation and intended to secure its 
 adaption. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM then presented the following 
 resolution: 
 
 There may be established in the city of New York one 
 or more tribunals of arbitration or conciliation, each to be 
 composed ot three arbitrators or conciliators, one of whom 
 *hall be elected clerk thereof. They shall be paid a rea- 
 sonable compensation to be fixed by law, and all fees re- 
 ceived r>y them shall be paid into the public treasury. 
 The legislature may provide lor similar tribunals in other 
 localities of the state if it shall be deemed expedient, and 
 may afford parties inducements to submit their differences 
 to the arbitrament or conciliation of such tribunals, by 
 regulation of costs in other courts. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to refer this resolu- 
 tion to the committee on the judiciary. It might 
 be a question with some whether two individuals 
 a constitutional right thus to submit their 
 difficulties to arbitration in the way proposed. 
 And if they had, there is such a resource in exis- 
 tence now. In fact, the community has now the 
 power the full constitutional pow^r to do so 
 now. These courts were now at every, man's 
 door, and w r ere daily resorted to. But he hac 
 yet to learn that any live Yankee could be driven 
 by any law to go to these courts to settle their 
 difficulties, when he considered that he was fully 
 competent to judge of his own case, and his own 
 rights. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS said the spirit of the remarks 
 
 of the gentleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD,) 
 appeared to be in the spirit of some of the reso- 
 utions introduced at an early period of the sit- 
 ings of the Convention. The gentleman from 
 Seneca (Mr. BASCOM) and himself had some time 
 since agreed upon a resolution similar to that 
 vhich had been introduced to-day, but the pro- 
 ect at the time they proposed it had met with no 
 'avor either in the judiciary committee or else- 
 where ; and they therefore came to the conclu- 
 sion that it was hardly worth while to introduce 
 he subject in the Convention. But a few days 
 since, to their surprise, they saw a proposition in- 
 ;roduced here making it mandatory that the very 
 thing originally contemplated by them, should be 
 done by the Convention should be embodied in 
 the Constitution. And this proposition had been 
 advocated with much learning and much zeal ; 
 ind the mover of it went much farther than either 
 aimself or Mr. BASCOM. We do not compel suit- 
 ors to go before any Courts whatever. And if he 
 (Mr. S.) had the enacting of a clause in relation 
 to this matter, he xvould not make it obligatory to 
 establish these courts ; nor would he make it ob- 
 igatory on suitors to go in that court ; but he 
 would allow the legislature, in its discretion, to 
 establish such courts, with such powers as to 
 hem might seem proper. He would have them 
 establish one of these courts in the city of New- 
 York, by way of an experiment to test the work- 
 ings of such a system. He would have the views 
 of various gentleman who approved of this plan 
 collected and compared, and all the facts, details, 
 and information connected with the working ot 
 this system of Courts of Conciliation in other 
 countries brought together, and to be used to the 
 aest advantage in establishing and trying such a 
 system in this state He could let the legislature 
 have the power to do this, if in their wisdom the}- 
 thought proper to do so, and to establish such a 
 Court of Conciliation. At any rate it was a harm- 
 less experiment; and after the very appropriate, 
 feeling and beautiful remarks of various gentle- 
 men on this subject, he felt it would be superflu- 
 ous for him to add any more. But in ^conclusion 
 he would simply observe, that if he, or his friend 
 (Mr. BASCOM) could have supposed that this plan 
 would have met with so much favor, as it now 
 was receiving at the hands of the Convention, 
 they would not have been so late in bringing it 
 forward, and at present all that they asked, was 
 that the report might be printed. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES hoped the proposition would 
 be printed and adopted. It w r as in accordance 
 with man's natural rights ; and was perfectly 
 Constitutional. He would have it so that before 
 the suitor who gained a cause should be allowed 
 costs, he should have submitted his case to arbi- 
 tration. He hoped it would not be referred to 
 the Judiciary committee. 
 
 The proposition was ordered to be printed, 
 and was then referred to the committee of the 
 whole, having charge of the reports on the Judi- 
 ciary. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that as there were but 
 few members present (only 44 were there) he 
 moved to adjourn. Carried. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned until Mon- 
 day. 
 
C60 
 
 MONDAY, (Q4th day,) August 17. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. RAWSOIV. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN presented a remon- 
 strance from Livingston county against transfer- 
 ring the literature fund to the common school 
 fund. Referred to the committee of which Mr. 
 NICOLL is chairman. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK submitted the following as a sub- 
 stitute for sections 1, 2, 3, 4 and & of the first ar- 
 ticle, and sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the second ar- 
 ticle of the report of the committee No, 3, of 
 which Mr. HOFFMAN is chairman : 
 
 1. The aggregate indebtedness of the stats at the time ol 
 the adoption of this constitution, shall not be increased, 
 unless to repel invasion or suppress insurrection. 
 
 2. The auction and salt duties, and all the receipts into 
 the treasury, not appropriated to other funds or specific 
 objects, shall be set apart for the use ol the general fund. 
 
 3. The tolls collected on the canals and railroads, the 
 rent oi surplus wafers, Sic. the proceeds of property be- 
 longing to the canals, shall constitute the canal fund, and 
 are appropriated to the maintenance of the canals and the 
 ya\ ment ot the canal debt and interest, except as herein 
 otherwise provided. 
 
 4. After paying the expenses of collecting the tolls, the 
 superintendence and repairs on the canals, and other ex- 
 penses (if any) properly chargeable to the canal fund, 
 $420,001) shall in each fiscal year, be set apart from 
 the canal revenues as a sinking fund, to pay principal 
 and interest of the general fund and railroad debts as set 
 forth in the annual re-port of the Comptroller, oi the 12th 
 ot January, 1816, on page seven ; and also $1,275000 in 
 each fiscal year shall be set apart from the canal revenues 
 to pay the principal and interest of the canal debt. The 
 balance of the canal revenue shall, at the discretion of the 
 legislature, be applied to pay any deficit which may occur 
 in the revenue of the general fund, to meet the expenses 
 of the government, or to the payment of the public debt, 
 or to the completion of the enlaigement ol the Erie canal, 
 or to the completion of the Genesee Valley and Slack Bi- 
 Ter canals. 
 
 5. The legislature may, to meet casual deficits orfailure 
 in the revenue, or lor expenses rot providedfor, make tern. 
 porary loans, wnich singly or in the aggregate shall not 
 exceed on-e million of dollars. Besides such temporary 
 loans the legislature shall not in any way or manner cre- 
 ate a deb which shall in the aggregate exceed five mil 
 lions of dollars, except to repel invasion or suppress insur 
 ruction: and every law authorising a loan of money, ex- 
 cept for temporary purposes, shall provide for a sinking 
 t.md frora available sources for the payment of the interest 
 on the moneys loaned, and the extinguishment of the prin- 
 cipal in twenty years, or a less time, from the time of con- 
 tracting such loan or debt; and the moneys arising irom 
 any loan shall be applied to the purposes mentioned in the 
 ac's authorising the same, and in the final pass-age ot such 
 aclg, in either house of the legislature, the question s-hail 
 betaken by ay ts and nays duly enteied on the journals, 
 and the assent of two-thirds of the members piesent in 
 eich house, shall be necessary for the passage oi any such 
 law; and such law shall cot be repealed or modified to af- 
 fect injuriously or adversely, the securities and intei est ol 
 the holders of the stock issued upon the faith and credit 
 thereof. 
 
 6. The rates ol toll upon the canals shall be so regulated 
 and adjusted, as that the aggregate amount of revenue re- 
 ceive I therefrom shall not be diminished, until the existing 
 canal debt is paid. After that period, the tolls may be re- 
 duced thirty per cent; and after paying all the expense; 
 properly chargeable to the Canal Fund, $800,000 in each 
 fiscal year shall be set apart lor the use of the General 
 Fund; $8CO,000 in each fiscal year shall be paid over to the 
 School Fund and the balance shall be appropriated to a 
 find for the purpose of internal improvements. 
 
 7. No direct tax shall hereafter be levie.i on the real and 
 personal property of the people of this state, for internal 
 mprovements. 
 
 B. If any S:ate stocks outstanding shall fall due, and the 
 funds herein provided shall not be' sufficient to pay the 
 same, the legislature shall provide for such payment by 
 the issue of new stock, payable at the shortest period with' 
 in the ability of the canal revenues to meet the same. 
 
 9. The Legislature shall not pass any law to loan the 
 credit of the State to any corporation, institution, invidu- 
 al or individuals, or in any manner or way guarantee the 
 
 ayment ol any stock, bond, or other instrument, made,, 
 executed, and issued, by any corporation or institution 
 whatever, or by any individual or individuals whomsoever. 
 
 Explanatory of the foregoing Propositions. 
 
 The sinking fund of $420 000, in each fiscal year, to pay 
 the General fund debt and interest, is based on a debt of 
 $5,835,549, the amount stated in the last annual report ol 
 the Comptroller. 
 
 The Sinking Fund of $1.275,000, in each fiscal year, to* 
 pay the canal debt and interest, is based on a debt of $16,- 
 944,815. 
 
 A calculation will show that, at the rate of 5* per cent 
 interest, the Sinking Fund will pay the General Fund 
 debt in 26* years, and the cafcal debt in 24 years. 
 
 After taking from the canal revenues $500,000 for col- 
 lection and repairs, and the sums mentioned for a. sinking 
 fund, making in all, $2.135,000, there would, from the ca- 
 nal revenue of the fiscal year 1845, be a balance of $222,000 j. 
 and probably from 1846, of $422,000. 
 
 Referred to the committee of the whole when 
 in charge of report No. Three, and ordered to be 
 printed. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole on the 
 
 REPORTS ON THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG resumed the chair. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS I am opposed to the proposi- 
 tion to annex chancery powers to the common 
 law courts y and in favor of vesting these two ju- 
 risdictions in separate courts. In other respects, 
 I would have the equity courts, or courts consti- 
 tuted like those of common law, consisting of se- 
 veral persons and not one man, and riding equity 
 circuits, to take the testimony and pronounce de- 
 crees in the first instance, in analogy to the prac- 
 tice of nisiprius judges in courts of law. The 
 report of the judiciary committee was set down 
 for consideration at an earlier day than was ex- 
 pected by me, but on receiving notice of it, I lost 
 no tims in returning from my residence y so as not 
 to forego the opportunity of discharging my duty 
 to the public upon this important question. I 
 was determined the convention should not com- 
 mence the work of mixing these jurisdictions, so 
 far as I might properly prevent it, without bear- 
 ing the responsibility of doing it with their eyes 
 open. 
 
 Gentlemen, who advocate the union of law and 
 equity powers in the same court, do not agree 
 among themselves as to the reasons why this is 
 to be done. The gentleman from New York, (Mr. 
 O'CoNOK) and the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 (Mr. LOOMIS) take the ground that such a con- 
 nection is not desirable on its own account as a 
 permanent arrangement, but only as a temporary 
 expedient, to secure by subsequent legislation an 
 amalgamation of all equity and common law re- 
 medies, and a uniformity of proceedings in all 
 cases to attain such remedies. They desire, not 
 merely to unite the jurisdictions, but to abolish 
 the distinction between them, and to assimilate 
 the proceedings of both courts to those of Louis- 
 iana or other States, having only the civil law 
 forms of proceeding, somewhat similar to those of 
 the admiralty courts. Sir, it is only through 
 courts of justice that we can see and know, what 
 the law truly is. These two courts of law and 
 equitv, are the two eyes of the law. But what 
 should we say of a surgeon, who, being called on 
 to remove a splinter from one of a person's eyes, 
 should begin with questioning the necessity of 
 his having two eyes at all ; as it is evident, that 
 
661 
 
 one alone will answer well, and all the better for 
 the other's being put out or never opened ; and so 
 proceed to extinguish the diseased one as unne- 
 cessary ? You have heard, Mr. Chairman, of 
 persons slightly deformed by nature, having one 
 leg a little shorter than the other, so that their 
 steps are not uniform ; now, suppose a surgeon 
 sent for to cure a sprained ancle, or set a broken 
 leg, for such a person ; must he begin away back, 
 beyond the case of complaint, because it recurs to 
 him the man was not made right, and take his 
 frame all to pieces, in order to equalize his limbs, 
 before proceeding to apply the remedy ? This is 
 what these gentlemen propose to do with the ju- 
 diciary. They say the judiciary, because it con- 
 sists of two courts, one of law another of equity, 
 was not made right ; that there is no substantial 
 difference between law and equity as to the reme- 
 dies, but only a formal distinction in their modes 
 of proceedings, and that they can and ought to be 
 assimilated into ^.uniformity of judicial proceed- 
 ing. 
 
 Other gentlemen are only for uniting the two 
 jurisdictions in the same courts, not of blending 
 their proceedings; conceiving this change will 
 improve, not impair, the useful working of the 
 judiciary ; admitting, however, a substantial and 
 permanent difference between legal and equitable 
 remedies. 
 
 Now, this division of judicial workmanship is 
 certainly one of long standing, and like every 
 other division of labor, has brought along with it 
 expertness in the workmen and excellence in the 
 work ; the progress of judicial reform seems ev- 
 erywhere else to favor the separation, and against 
 the connection ; and the reasons, I think, must be, 
 
 First, because the distinction between legal 
 and equitable remedies is not merely a difference 
 in the forms of proceeding in the two courts, but 
 in the things themselves. The authorities are all 
 this way. This is the doctrine of the most distin- 
 guished judges and most eminent writers, ancient 
 and modern. I shall cite some of these opinions, 
 not as binding precedents, but as useful advisers 
 for this Convention, Afterwards I shall examine 
 the reasons for such opinions, and attempt to 
 show them to be well founded in principle ; and 
 upon a sifting analysis of the remedies them- 
 selves, as distinguished from the proceedings 
 employed to attain them, and from the machinery 
 of the courts called to administer them. 
 
 Mr. Charles .Butler, the distinguished Annota- 
 toi upon Coke, in the first volume of Ins Remini- 
 scences, says "Equity, as distinguished from law, 
 arises from the inability of human foresight to es- 
 tablish any rule, which, however salutary in gene- 
 ral, is not in some particular cases evidently un- 
 just and oppressive, and operates beyond or in 
 opposition to its intent. The grand reason for the 
 interference of a court of equity is, that the im 
 perfection of legal remedy, in COILS, qu. nee of the 
 universality of legislative provisions, may be re- 
 dressed " 
 
 Lord Bacon ?everal times declared his opinion 
 to the same effect. " All nations," say he in his 
 speech on the jurisdiction of the Marches, " have 
 equity. But some have law and equity mixed in 
 the same court, which is worse ; and some have 
 it distinguished in several courts, which is bet 
 ter." And his forty-fifth Aphorism reads thus : ~ 
 
 'Some think it expedient, that the jurisdiction 
 which decides according to equity and good con- 
 science, and that other which proceeds according 
 I" strict law, should be entrusted to the same 
 courts; others think, to different courts. By all 
 means, there should be, in my opinion, a separa- 
 tion of the courts. For the distinction of the ca- 
 ses cannot be presumed, if the jurisdictions are 
 allowed to be blended ; but discretion will at 
 length draw to itself the law." 
 
 Judge Story says, " Lord Hardwick held the 
 same opinion ; and that it is certainly a common 
 opinion in countries governed by the common 
 law." And again: " That equity jurisdiction is 
 founded in the very nature of remedial justice." 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I will now read from Pro- 
 fessor Wheewelfs elements of Morality and 
 Polity, where the learned author remarks thus: 
 " Justice and equity, originally conceived as 
 identical, in the course of time were separated; 
 for justice in its administration was necessarily 
 fixed and limited by laws and rules; while equity 
 was conceived as not so limited. And as laws 
 and rules, however much meant^ to be just, and 
 however, carefully constructed, 'will yet press 
 upon individual cases in a way which seems 
 hard; equity was conceived as that kind of jus- 
 tice which was not thus bound by laws and rules, 
 and which was disposed to relieve such hard- 
 ships. The virtue which exists in such a dispo- 
 sition is termed by Aristotle, equity, and he de- 
 fines it to be the correction of the law, where it 
 is defective by reason of its universality. Here 
 is a defect, not in the law, but in the nature of 
 things, and the equitable is opposed to ihe. rig- 
 idly just" 
 
 Now, although Aristotle is here speaking of 
 moral, not of civil equity, yet as the learned pro- 
 fessor remarks, further on, " In a certain sense, 
 and to a certain extent, equity does supply de- 
 fects in the law. The rules of equity jurispru- 
 dence came into being, at first, as remedies to the 
 defects of law; and though by being reduced to a 
 fixed form, and settled maxims, they can no lon- 
 ger be appealed to as remedies for all hardships 
 and defects of law, they have still a remedial and 
 supplementary character." These opinions, Mr. 
 Chairman, come from one of the most eminent 
 living writers of the present age, the author 
 of the History and the Philosophy of the In- 
 ductive Sciences, .and now filling the chair of 
 moral philosophy at Cambridge, in England. 
 The view to be taken is, that the same distinc- 
 tion between justice and equity in moral juris- 
 prudence or natural law, is transferred to the prac- 
 tical administration of positive law, where equity 
 is made to supply, not to subvert the law ; that is 
 to say, the law of remedies, though it is adminis- 
 tered, not according to the judges natural dis- 
 cretion, but according to his legal discretion. 
 It is this very discretion that furnishes the rules 
 of decision to the equity judge, and forms the 
 " better half" of our common law, but cannot be 
 divorced without danger to the other half. I shall 
 have occasion further on, to show, that equity 
 follows the law, and never decides differently 
 from a court of law, except in cases which in- 
 volve circumstances to which a court of law can- 
 not advert. 
 
 But this jurisprudential equity, as distinguished 
 
662 
 
 from moral, and as distinguished from legal in the 
 administration of "justice, was actually adopted 
 and reduced to practice by the free states of anti- 
 quity, or at all events by the Greeks and Romans. 
 " In Rome," says judge Story, " with whom ju- 
 ridical institutions are best acquainted, not only 
 were jurisdictions intrusted to different magis- 
 trates; but the very distinction between law and 
 equity was clearly recognized. A broad distinc- 
 tion was taken between action at law and action 
 in equity, the former having the name of actiones 
 civile*, and the latter of actiones Prastorice." 
 
 It is well known that the Roman Proctor exer- 
 cised equity jurisdiction, and that equity constitu- 
 ted a large" portion of the body of the Roman ju- 
 risprudence, which it is well known drew largely 
 and constantly from the laws and philosophy of 
 the Greeks. Indeed, Wheewell considers the 
 same distinction was recognized by the Christian 
 dipensation. [2 Wheewell, 99.] Thus it appears 
 that equity had 'its birth in free states, and en- 
 lightened 'ages not in monarchies or barba- 
 rism. It originated in Greece, and was transplant- 
 ed to Rome th<e two states of antiquity distin- 
 guished for liberty and civilisation. This looks 
 certainly like the workings of nature. From them 
 it has comedown to the modern nations, enriched 
 with the experience of subsequent improvements, 
 and wherever it has been adopted, has contributed 
 to make them virtuous and enlightened, and there- 
 fore free. The jurisprudence of the modern states 
 of Europe is progressively developing equity, as a 
 distinctive branch of remedial justice, just in pro- 
 portion to their progress in liberty and civilization. 
 At present those states are unequal ; but their ap- 
 proach to equality hereafter, is as sure to follow in 
 this as in other things; for equity jurisprudence, 
 as a separate branch, has ever been co-extensive 
 with the intellectual and moral progress of states 
 the states of antiquity and modern Europe. 
 The difference in this respect between England 
 and the Continental States is owing to the circum- 
 stance that her institutions are more free and en- 
 lightened, and her people further advanced in 
 practical liberty and useful science ; which again 
 is the necessary consequence of having enjoyed 
 better channels of communication than they, with 
 the stories of the old jurisprudence and polity. 
 If the superiority of all modern institutions to 
 those of the ancients is due to its complex charac- 
 ter in comparison with the simple elements em- 
 bodied in those of former times, this is emphati- 
 cally the case with the judicial institutions of Eng- 
 land and America. Courts of law and equity are 
 the organs of jurisprudence, by which it acts in 
 society and impresses its image on the morals and 
 character of the people. The jurisprudence of 
 Rome has come down to most of the nations ot 
 E'.irope mutilated of one ot its organs, and the 
 other is of course morbidly enlarged. England 
 alone has adopie-1 both of these courts of law and 
 equity, the former from the feudal, the laiter from 
 the civil law, deriving throuah ihe first the princi- 
 ples of personal liberty, and of real property, and 
 from the second, those ot moral semiment and per- 
 sonal property. Her selections of both these courts 
 are certainly justified by their effects and workings, 
 for they have drawn with them from those two 
 systems of ancient laws, the best portions of both, 
 and infused them into the modern laws of Eng- 
 
 land and these United States. The union of 
 both in the common law, makes this a law of 
 liberty and morality. The feudal has liberal. 
 ized the civil, and the civil has moralized the 
 feudal, and Christianity has moreover divinely 
 tempered Jhem with the law of charity. And 
 yet, sir, at this late day, in the middle of the 
 nineteenth century, we are eravely invited to ex- 
 change the common for the civil courts and reme. 
 dies. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, what is the connection between 
 the jurisprudence of a people and the jurisdiction 
 of their courts ? Precisely that between the rules 
 of civil conduct in our social and business rela- 
 tions, and the power that enforces them. The 
 relation is that between rights and remedies. You 
 cannot destroy the judicial power, without just so 
 far nullifying the legislative power ; you cannot 
 take away remedies without destroying rights. 
 Besides, jurisdiction has always preceded legisla- 
 tion in the order of time as art goes before science, 
 and practice before theory, in human affairs. This 
 makes me fear to change the jurisdiction, lest I 
 destroy the jurisprudence of the courts. I am 
 afraid of losing so much of the law itself. Need 
 I say any thing here upon the value to us and the 
 world, of the common law ? What has it cost ? 
 Let me just glance at its rise and growth. 
 
 At the beginning of the Christian era, Europe 
 consisted of two unequal portions, the Southern 
 comprising Greece, Italy, Belgium, France, 
 Spain, Portugal and Britain, constituting togeth- 
 er the seat of the Roman empire ; the Northern, 
 comprising the vast central plains of Europe, ex- 
 tending far towards the pole, forming an almost 
 interminable wilderness, and occupied by various 
 nations, bearing the general name of Germans. 
 Their manners and institutions were widely dif- 
 ferent from those of the Romans. They had made 
 considerable advances in arts and government, be- 
 yond the condition of Aboriginals, but were then 
 far behind the Romans in laws and letters. But 
 their institutions were essentially democratical, 
 while those of the Romans were become Monar- 
 chical. Their institutions were on the advance, 
 while those of the Roman* were on the decline. 
 Among these Germans the people elected their 
 own chiefs, enacted their own laws, and admin- 
 istered their own justice personally, for they had 
 the trial by jury. Here we find the seeds of our 
 own free and popular institutions. The over- 
 throw of the Romans by these northern nations, 
 at the close of the fifth century, produced a mix- 
 ture, not a fusion of those two opposite systems 
 of laws and government. From this amalgama- 
 tion emerged at the close of the fifteenth century 
 the present political and civil institutions of Eu- 
 rope. In every European state the body of its 
 common law is a compound in different propor- 
 tions of these older systems of jurisprudence, the 
 German and the Roman, generally known as the 
 feudal and the civil law. The common law of 
 England was formed by the union of these two 
 sources, just as plainly to my mind, as that the 
 Lower Mississippi at New Orleans comes from 
 the mingled waters of the Missouri and Upper 
 Mississippi. In those states of Europe that now 
 hold the seat ol the ancient Germans, the largest 
 portion comes from the Feudal law; in those oc- 
 cupying the seat of the Romans, from the civil. 
 
663 
 
 But England situated on the confines 9!' both and in- 
 sulated, from the others, was enabled to avail her- 
 self of these resources, in better proportions. I Id- 
 policy was that ul't-Iccticixni, to seek all things ;m<l 
 holdfast thcuood. Hence her jurisprudence par- 
 niore of the civil, and less of the feudal law, 
 than the Northern States; and more of the feudal 
 and less of the civil than the Southern, as for in- 
 stance, France and Spain. The grand result of the 
 whole is, that complex body of principles pos- 
 sessed by England and the United States, call- 
 ed the common law. 
 
 To bring this law into action and to give it ap- 
 plication to individuals, so as to make it availa- 
 ble to society, courts of judicature were organi- 
 sed as a part of it. The common law here too 
 selected wisely from each of the primitive sys- 
 tems ; courts of law, with their living witnesses 
 and jury trials, from the German; and courts of 
 equity, with their written testimony and trials by 
 the judges, from the Roman law. England took 
 her ordinary tribunals from the free and popular 
 institutions of the North and her extraordinary 
 courts from the imperial institutions of the South. 
 France and some others, adopted the Roman law 
 mutilated of its equitable jurisdictions, but in 
 possession of the legal ; and instead of adopting 
 from the northern nations their living witnesses 
 and jury trials, are just beginning to borrow them 
 second-handed from England. She from the first 
 adopted only the worst and repudiated the best of 
 of the Roman tribunals, while England from the 
 first, rejected the worst only, and adopted the best 
 courts from both systems. But the subject of legal 
 reform is now progressing in Europe as well as 
 America; jury trials are beginning to be engraft- 
 ed on the civ;J law courts of France, Scotland, 
 and others, and we may anticipate a gradual se- 
 paration of their law and equity courts ; for, after 
 all, it is only a struggle of human reason for a more 
 perfect division of human labor, and a more per- 
 fect protection of human rights. 
 
 If, then, Mr. Chairman, the Greeks and the 
 Romans were right in dividing these labors, and 
 separating these remedies ; if Story is right in 
 founding this distinction in the very nature of re- 
 medial justice ; if all nations have, and must have 
 both law and equity, as Bacon thinks ; if it is bet- 
 ter to have them separate in different courts, and 
 worse to have them mixed in the same, as he con- 
 tends ; if this separation is one of the safeguards 
 of liberty, and an evidence of moral and political 
 progress ; if man improves in the moral as he 
 does in the physical arts, by a division of labor 
 then surely the tendency of society is to separate 
 the courts of law and equity, aiMl so to secure 
 more expert and competent judges, more prompt 
 and perfect remedies. 
 
 Until this Convention assembled, such has 
 been the case with America. Our progress here- 
 tofore has certainly been favorable to a gradual 
 separation of law and equity jurisdictions. In ail 
 our states, except Louisiana, which has the civil 
 law ,equity jurisdiction is txtrciacd apart from that 
 exercised by courts ot law, though vested oiten in 
 the law courts ; but in none out of Louisiana are 
 the proceedings confounded. In Pennsylvania 
 the legislature in 1&>4U conlerred general equity- 
 powers on the supreme court within the great bu- 
 siness metropolis, the city and 'county of Phila- 
 
 delphia. Large equity powers have been recent- 
 ly conferred on other courts in that state ; and in 
 Virginia separate equity powers have been con- 
 ferred within the city of Richmond and its county. 
 In Kentucky, for thj city of Louisville. Several 
 have separate equity courts, but in none af- 
 ter these jurisdictions have become separated 
 have they been again united, much less con- 
 founded. 
 
 If equity jurisdiction is not yet fully developed 
 in any one of our states, it is because this branch 
 of our law is of later growth, and only comes up 
 with the growing maturity of a people. It 
 scarcely had an existence as a distinct branch of 
 jurisprudence during the colonial state of any 
 
 ;eople, and such was the case with New England, 
 ut then it as surely developes itself with the so- 
 cial progress of every prosperous people. Indeed 
 equity jurisdiction in some form, will keep pace 
 with equity jurisprudence, because the practical 
 applications of justice are thereby brought into 
 closer accordance with our theoretical concep- 
 tions of it. All states have equity as well as law, 
 more or less blended or separated. Even Louis- 
 iana with her uniform code of procedure, is com- 
 pelled to have equity. Her session laws for the 
 last ten or dozen years shows an equitable inter- 
 position of the legislature, and several times in a 
 session to correct and amend the harshness and 
 imperfection of her uniform code to prevent a re- 
 currence of similar cases. In the New England 
 states before equity jurisdictions were establish- 
 ed, there was a perpetual resort to the legisla- 
 tures for relief in particular cases, where the com- 
 mon law courts were deficient, a practice which 
 tended to a dangerous and arbitrary confusion of 
 legislative and judicial powers. Even in crimi- 
 nal jurisprudence, there must be a power lodged 
 somewhere, to interpose against hard cases of re- 
 gular convictions, which is reserved in a frag- 
 mentary form only, under the name of the par- 
 doning power, in the hands of the executive ; but 
 is subjected to no regular operation of rules, such 
 as was recommended by Bacon's aphorisms relat- 
 ing to criminal courts of equity. Cut oft' this par- 
 doning power, and your courts and juries will ex- 
 ercise it irregularly and at random ; so abolish 
 equity jurisdiction in civil cases, and it will be 
 exercised by courts and juries without law or rule, 
 under the seductive influences of particular hard 
 cases. 
 
 This seems to be the doctrine of Scotland, 
 too, where they have the civil law. " At 
 present," says a writer in the Edinburgh 
 Review of April, 184(3, in an article on Lord 
 Campbell's Lives on the Chancellors of England, 
 " now and then a few hasty reformers of the 
 Cromwellian school, may be heard talking about 
 the abolition of the Court of Chancery ; yet all 
 who know what they are talking about, would as 
 soon speculate on the restoration of a Court of 
 Criminal Equity in the detested Star Chamber." 
 Mr. Chairman, I confess 1 am afraid of the con- 
 sequences of even uniting these jurisdictions 
 much more of blending their proceedings. 1 am 
 aware that some persons in the outset of their 
 professional studies, disrelish this distinction be- 
 tween law and equity between courts proceed- 
 ing according to strict law, and those deciding ac- 
 cording to discretion arid good conscience, just as 
 
664 
 
 if the rules of equity jurisprudence were the dic- 
 tates of the personal conscience and personal dis- 
 cretion of the judge, instead of being the con- 
 science and discretion of the law. Such persons 
 always make fun of Lord Coke for saying : 
 "That the common law itself is nothing but 
 reason, which is to be understood of an artifi- 
 cial perfection of reason, gotten by long study, 
 observation, and experience, and not of every 
 man's natural reason. And therefore if all the 
 reason that is dispersed in so many several heads, 
 were united into one, yet could not he make 
 such a law as the law of England is; because by 
 many successions of ages, it hath been fined and 
 refined by an infinite number of grave and le. rn- 
 ed men, and by long experience grown to such 
 a perfection." I can only commend my young 
 friends to Wheewell to learn, not merely that 
 there is a national conscience, common to all of 
 one nation and expressed by its laws ; but a uni- 
 versal conscience, common to all nations and ex- 
 pressed by the Law of nations. 
 
 Thus lai, Me. Chairman, 1 have only attempted 
 to show up the origin and progress of law and 
 equity jurisdictions, and their tendency, always 
 and everywhere, not to union, but to a .separa- 
 tion,' and it is only within the last two days that 
 1 have met with one solitary opinion, coming from 
 one of the puisne judges of the supreme court of 
 India, and in opposition to that ot the chief jus- 
 tice and his other associates, that equiUble reme- 
 dies may be administered, in India, confounded 
 with legal ones, and by the same cuuit, under simi- 
 lar forms ot proceeding, saving to this court, 
 however, all the working machinery appertain- 
 ing to both systems. This opinion, it nut meant 
 to he coutiaeu io the peculiar laws of India, which 
 may have many peculiarities, rrom its Asiatic ori- 
 gin and character, is <it least balanced by its saving 
 clause; and therefore torms no exception to the 
 uniform current of opinion from Aristotle and 
 Ciceio to Bacon, Hall, Butler, Kent, and Story, 
 the other way whose opinions are confirmed by 
 their own great personal expeiienceas judges, and 
 by ihe general sentiment and practice of the most 
 enlightened states in the old world and new in- 
 cluding our own. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I am aware that gentlemen do 
 not intend, by exchanging common law tor civil 
 law proceedings, to exchange common law for 
 civil law remedies, much less common law for 
 civil law rights. And yet the very forms of pro- 
 ceedings stick so close to the substance the 
 practice of courts is so adhesive to their doctrines 
 that I am afraid. Are we prepared to let go our 
 hold of the common law ? I say no ! no ! 
 
 What should we gain by it ? I know, sir, that 
 this is not the time or place to speak of the com- 
 parative merits of the two systems of law, or of 
 their respective influences in the great work of 
 modern civilization. But just trace your finger 
 over the map of Europe distinguish the civil 
 law countries from that governed by the common 
 law, and then say, which has done most to eman- 
 cipate the souls and bodies of men ? Which to 
 unfold the inventive powers, to discover the sci- 
 ences and invent the arts, to create and give skill 
 to industry in all her exertions in agriculture, 
 manufactures, and commerce, to raise a high stan- 
 dard of civilization at home, and to carry it to all 
 
 the destitute parts of the earth ? Which, to ex- 
 tend the area of liberty and popular institutions? 
 Which is the most inclined to a government by 
 laws, and which to a government by arms 1 
 
 Mr. Chairman, up to this stage I have been en- 
 deavoring to show, that there is a substantial dif- 
 ference between legal and equitable jurisdictions, 
 or rather between the remedies, by the opinions' 
 of eminent authors and the practice of eminent 
 states and nations ; but 1 promised not to leave 
 you here, but go further and prove this distinc- 
 tion upon reason and principle, by an examina- 
 tion of the things themselves. I contend that the 
 division of remedies into legal and equitable, is 
 founded on a natural distinction, and that it is 
 impracticable to blend them under a common 
 code of procedure, or to administer them by the 
 machinery of courts similarly organized. 
 
 But, first, it is proper io examine the modes of 
 proceeding, by which the remedies are obtained 
 respectively in the two courts. It will thus be 
 seen that the remedies themselves aie independent 
 of the fotms of proceeding. In short, the reme- 
 dy is the relief or redress obtained by the proceed- 
 ing: it is just that indemnity which the party in 
 fault ought to render to the other party volunta- 
 rily and without any proceeding in Court. It dif- 
 fers from the judicial proceeding, just as the cure 
 of a broken bone differs from the surgeon's opera, 
 tion. The proceedings may be various to obtain 
 the same or similar remedies, and may be the same 
 or similar to obtain different remedies, because 
 thev are not the remedies but only the means of 
 obtaining them. The different forms of proceed- 
 ing in courts of law and equity in England and 
 this country was, indeed, the result of accident. 
 Those of the equity, probate and admiralty courts, 
 were borrowed from the Roman Law, those ot the 
 common law courts mainly from the German cus- 
 toms. 
 
 It has been urged, that the difference between 
 law and equity jurisdiction is oiJy that between 
 the two systems of pleading, and not the reme- 
 dies. But this cannot be so. The pleadings may 
 be transformed and leave the remedies the same. 
 The office of pleading is the same in both courts, 
 namely, to apprise the parties beforehand of the 
 nature of one another's claims, arid the court of 
 the questions to be disputed. The common law 
 affects this by requiring the parties themselves to 
 so plead and CQU&ierplead as at last toseparate the 
 disputed from the undispuied matter, and thus 
 extricate the point in dispute for the court ; the 
 civil, by allowing each party, once for all, to set 
 forth the whole of his case at large, and leave it as 
 a task for thecolrt to make the reparation, which 
 s done by the solicitors abstract fur the court. 
 [t clear that all the difference between the two 
 systems of pleading is matter of form, and may 
 be varied without varying the decree of the re- 
 medy adjudged to the Daily, instead of the plead- 
 ngs being the remeuy, that is contained in ihe 
 decree ot ihe court. 
 
 Whether it would be expedient to so reform 
 the pleadings as to assimilate them in both courts, 
 is another question. I think not, because tho* 
 for the purpose of pleading, the distinction is on- 
 ly formal, yet on account of the distinct organiza- 
 tion of the two courts, and the peculiar kind of 
 cases to be tried in each, it becomes important to 
 
665 
 
 retain the distinctive tbrrns of pleading. I con- 
 tend, then, Mr. Chairman, that there is a 
 substantial difference between legal and equita- 
 ble remedies ; a difference so marked and wide 
 us to call forth a corresponding difference in the 
 constitution and organization of the courts. To 
 this point I ask the. particular attention of the 
 committee. 
 
 Professional gentlemen speak of legal rights 
 and legal remedies as distinguished t''O equita. 
 ble riiihts and equitable remedies, yet both are 
 comprised under the description of civil rights 
 and ctvii remedies; that is lossy, rights and rerne 
 dies acknowledged and protected by the law, as 
 opposed to such as are merely honorary, moral, or 
 religious. Now, it H evident, civil remedies in 
 borne court or other must be co-extensive with civil 
 rights, and if one class of courts cannot grant a 
 remedy in all cases whatever for lh protection of 
 rights recognised by the law, then another must, 
 or else the rights themseUes are gone. It is the 
 duly and object of government to furnish a remedy 
 for every right by courts of judicature ; but to 
 guard against indefinite and arbitrary power, it is 
 necessary to constitute those courts, so as to act 
 as checks upon each other. Solo guard against 
 unchecked power in a legislaitve body, composed 
 of a single branch, you constitute two branches so 
 that one may work a limitation or restriction on 
 the powers of the other. The judicial power in 
 free states under the dominion of the laws, is in 
 like manner constituted of twocourts or systems 
 of courts those of law and ot equity, to operate 
 as limitations and restrictions upon the powers of 
 each other Both are to be considered, if we 
 would have precise ideas of equity jurisdiction. 
 For the :nost precise descriptions} a court of equi- 
 ty is, that it has jurisdiction in all cases of rights 
 acknowledged by the law, but without remedies 
 plain, adequate and complete in courts of law. 
 Observe, that it is of rights acknowledged and pro- 
 tected by law, not mere honorary or moral ones; 
 for equity must follow the law as steadily as law 
 courts themselves do. 
 
 The cases where you have not a competent re 
 medy in a court of law are of three descriptions, 
 namely ; where the matters calling for relief are 
 of such a character as are not cognizable in courts 
 of law, and they give you no remedy at all ; 2d 
 where the cases are cognizable there, but equity 
 gives a better remedy ; 3d, where the action of 
 both courts must concur to furnish a remedy, one 
 acting in aid of the other ; so that equity jurisdic- 
 tion is sometimes exclusive, sometimes concur- 
 rent, and sometimes auxiliary. Now, what is 
 the difference between these cases and those cog- 
 nizable and remediable in courts of law, and 
 what is the reason of the distinction ? I answer 
 cases cognizable in the law courts are limited anc 
 prescribed by law ; that is to say, injuries to be 
 redressed there, are by law defined and enume- 
 rated, in order to prevent the capricious and arbi- 
 trary action of the court, and to make those reme- 
 dies easy, clear, and free from uncertainty. In- 
 juries to be redressed in equity courts are unde- 
 fined, uuclassed, non-enumerated. 
 
 To these enumerated cases the powers of the 
 courts of law are restricted. But various unfore- 
 seen and anomalous cases of injury not falling 
 under any one of these classes, and not capable o" 
 
 nomaous an non-enumerae cases. ese are 
 ourts of equity. Suppose a man that has a large 
 state makes his will, and gives particular por- 
 ions, specifically described, to his sons A, B, C 
 
 edress by means of any one of these prescribed 
 emedies, are constantly occurring. The most 
 perfect classification that human ingenuity has 
 >een able to devise, fails to include all the cases, 
 hat in fact occur, because man's ability to ar- 
 ange and classify injuries, is never so compre- 
 icnsive as power to commit new ones. This 
 classification of injuries and limitation of judicial 
 Dower to prescribed remedies, is no peculiarity 
 of the common law. The security of the people 
 against unrestricted power, and the need of cer- 
 tain and settled rules in their application to com- 
 mon cases, have induced in every age and every 
 country, similar restrictions of judicial power 
 and limitations of the remedy, under the name of 
 action*, 
 
 Besides courts of prescribed jurisdiction, we 
 need others to take care of anomalous cases, cases 
 not falling under any of the prescribed actions, 
 and yet amounting to civil injuries, recognized 
 ay law and equally demanding redress ; other- 
 wise the laws fail to protect their own acknow- 
 ledged rights, and are so far void and nugatory. 
 Some courts there must be, then, that are not 
 bound down to these enumerated injuries and 
 prescribed remedies, to take cognizance of the 
 anomalous and non-enumerated cases. These are 
 courts 
 estate 
 tions, 
 
 and D, and then all the residue of his estate, 
 without specifying the articles, to his son E. 
 Here the first named children are specific lega- 
 tees, and E is the residuary legatee. This is the 
 relation between courts of law and those of equity. 
 The powers of the former extend only to cases of 
 injury and remedy specified and prescribed by 
 law; the latter to those not particularly speci- 
 fied, but only generally and en masse acknow- 
 ledged such by the law. Such cases are intend- 
 ed to be but few compared to the whole, and in 
 the nature of exceptions to classes ; and yet there 
 is always a considerable number in a highly civil- 
 ized community. But to understand this ground 
 of distinction between courts of law and of equity, 
 and the necessity of upholding both as checks 
 upon each other, we must look at them as consti- 
 tuting, both together, the depositories of all the 
 judicial powers of the government, and see how 
 they stand related to the legislative powers. 
 
 No man who hears me need be reminded that 
 the legislative, the judicial and the executive 
 powers, must be coextensive with each other; 
 that, for instance, the judicial power of the gov- 
 ernment, in the language of Mr. Justice McLean 
 of the Supreme Court of the Union, must be co' 
 extensive with the legislative; in other "words' 
 remedies must be co-extensive with rights, an 
 every right must have its remedy, or it ceases td 
 be a right, in a legal sense, and is so far nullifieo 
 and extinguished. Ofcour.se, this is not rneand 
 of man's moral, religious or honorary rights, but 
 of legal rights, rights recognised by law. Thest 
 rights, as to their legal character, and so far ae 
 they are legal rights, are the creatures of the laws 
 making power, and must have their remedie- 
 supplied by the courts, the law-applying powers 
 hence the powers of the judiciary, which give 
 the remedy, must be precisely co-extensive with 
 the powers of the legislature, which give the 
 
 ' 58 
 
666 
 
 right, or the right ceases to exist ; and not only 
 the judicial department is mutilated, but the le- 
 gislative also and executive to the same extent, 
 and the law itself vox prae terea nihil. It is a 
 first axiom in the law, that all rights have their 
 remedies, and that those things only are remedies 
 which restore the rights protected, or repair the 
 injuries forbidden by the laws of civil society; 
 just, as nothing is a remedy for a disease, but 
 what restores the health or repairs a disorder for- 
 bidden by the laws of the animal economy. It is 
 the province of courts to ascertain the rights and 
 apply the remedies. The judges must understand 
 both, as much as the physician who understands 
 by his science of pathology to distinguish dis- 
 eases, and to remove them by his skill in Thera- 
 peutics. Now, if it were possible to make a per- 
 lect classification of all civil injuries forbidden 
 by law, and to prescribe before hand all the ap- 
 propriate remedies, so that none should be omit- 
 ted from the list, we might assign the whole to 
 one and the same court, and yet impose limitations 
 and prescribe such hums 01 proceed. ng in us ac- 
 tion, as to secure ourselves against vague and un- 
 defined power on the one hand, and a failure of 
 remedies, and consequently a loss of rights, on 
 the other. But human wisdom is not sufficient 
 for this; we can only divide the great mass of 
 such cases into classes of actions, to be followed 
 by the ordinary courts, and then constitute an ex- 
 tiaordinary tribunal to take charge of the residue, 
 anl nothing bu': the residue, that its action may 
 be at least so far limited by reason of us jurisdic- 
 tion being so tar confined And as the powers 
 and proceedings of courts of law cover the whole 
 field ot civil injuries and remedies, whether con- 
 tracts or torts, so the powers and proceedings ol 
 courts ot equity cover the same grounds; and the 
 difference is, that the proceedings in the courts ol 
 law are actions of account, assumpsit, debt, and 
 covenant, in matters ot contract; and of trespass, 
 case, trover, replevin and ejectment, &c. in 
 .cases of tort; and the proceedings in courts ot 
 equity are not actions, but proceedings in the na- 
 ture of the same actions of account, assump- 
 sit, debt, covenant, trespass, case, trover, reple- 
 vin, ejectment, &-c., in cases where such actions 
 at law are obstructed or insufficient by reason of 
 accident, fraud, trust, or where the remedies must 
 be preventive, or specific, or conditional v &c., in 
 order to be effectual. 
 
 Thus each court presupposes the orher, and just 
 balances th^ power of the other ; both being nec- 
 essary to prevent a failure of rights and remedies 
 because the whole of the judicial power is noi 
 committed to either alone, but to both together, 
 * placed in the relation ot specific and residuary 
 partakers of all the judicial au;hority. And Ji 
 is the relation between them, that secures us a- 
 gainst discretionary power in the coui is of justice. 
 But, sir, there is another peculiarity in equity 
 Hirisdiction, that furnishes another reason equally 
 strong against blending them with ci-urts of law 
 This is the complexity ot the questions, enter- 
 tained by courts of equity, computed to the sim- 
 plicity of those entertained by courts of law. A 
 court 'of law is only adapted to cases between two 
 parties or sets of parties ; a court of equity to 
 cases in which a greater number of parties is con- 
 ceraed. All who have any interest whatever, in 
 
 I he decree to be made may, and ail who aie so 
 connected in interest thai no decree can be made 
 between some of them without afierlinir the in- 
 terest of all, must be made parties. Now, the 
 business transactions of men are not merely the 
 simple relations between two parties only, or se;a 
 of parties, as that of debtor and ci editor, seller 
 and buyer, borrower and lender, &c. which raise 
 only simple questions triable by a jury 
 but usually moie complicated, involving the 
 interests of dozens and hundreds, and all 
 in competition with each other; so that 
 no final adjudication can be made between any 
 two sets of them, without settling at the same 
 time, the rights of all, and who must therefore 
 be made parties to the suit. Courts of law are 
 organized with reference to the trial of simple 
 questions between two parties only by a I'iry, and 
 therefore are not adapted to the examination of 
 very complicated transactions between numerous 
 parties. On the other hand courts of equity ate 
 organized with reference to this class of question.?; 
 and the machinery of these courts, consisting of 
 clerks, examiners and masters, is well adapted 10 
 such examinations. I now hold in my hand the 
 lUth vol. of Paige's chancery reports, in which on 
 running over the casesm their order, I find as many 
 as nine out of ten-are just such complicated ques- 
 tions between numerous parties, involving vari- 
 ous interests in conflict with each othe,r. and ail 
 of them necessary to be heard and determined to- 
 gether, before justice can be rendered to any one. 
 I find mortgage cases, involving the rights of both 
 mortgagor and mortgagee, and at the same time 
 those of their respective assignees, grantees and 
 judgment lien holders; partnership questions, in- 
 volving the rights of many co-partners, and of 
 each of their assignees and creditors ; questions of 
 trust to be executed by the administrators of the 
 estates of testators and intestates, and by the as- 
 signees of insolvent debtors and even under fraud- 
 ulent assignments and concealments of property, 
 of which questions not any part of any one of them 
 can be disposed of without giving all parties con- 
 cerned an opportunity to be heard; questions of 
 legacy and disbribution among the next of kin 
 equally complex; questions of marshalling se- 
 curities, that is, of settling the order of their pri- 
 orities among various persons having dissimilar 
 interests ; and many others of equal complexity; 
 all involving numerous parties and as numerous 
 conflicting interests. In fact, the main bulk of 
 equity causes are precisely such as these in which 
 all the parties must be heard together, or none of 
 them. These questions could not be determined 
 by a jury ; and if they could, would require a vast 
 multitude of suits at law, sometimes running up 
 to hundreds ; for instance, a single suit in equity 
 against the stockholders of an insolvent corpora- 
 tion, liable for its debts, brought to compel a con- 
 tribution for the payment of those debts, saves nu- 
 merous separate actions at law by creditors against 
 a stockholder for their debts, and several others 
 by stockholders against co-stockholders for their 
 shares, &c. Can such complicated rights and li- 
 abilities be disposed of in one action at law, by a 
 jury ? Bills in equity, involving the interests of 
 numerous parties, do in fact prevent as many suits 
 at law as can be resolved into double sets of par- 
 ties, even were it possible to take them in detail ; 
 
667 
 
 but it is not, at least without discarding the trial 
 by jury and the machinery of courts oflaw, and 
 thereby transforming such courts in fact, into 
 courts of equity. 
 
 U'i.hout regard, then, to the other reisons, be- 
 fore sh.fd, namely I hat couits of law must be 
 restricted in their powers to cases specifically enu- 
 merated by law, and equity courts to the non-enu- 
 merated ones this second ground of distinction is 
 a practical arid palpable one is experienced by 
 every professional man and, if the proposed con- 
 fusion/ of remedies shall -take place, will be felt 
 by other men, too, as embarrassing in business and 
 destructive ot many rights and remedies. Can 
 any gentleman of the Convention fail to perceive 
 the difference between questions in dispute be- 
 tween only two parties, or sets of parties, and 
 questions among parties more numerous, and 
 therefore involving; interests more complicated ? 
 
 But Mr. Chairman, this is not all; there are 
 other reasons still for keeping separate our law and 
 equity jurisdictions, depending on the different na. 
 turps ot the remedies afforded to the parties. 
 
 Courts of law have been wisely confined in 
 their powers to the great mass of business actual- 
 ly involving, or that may involve, a jury trial, 
 and a judgment for the absolute recovery of 
 money or property. This power of a court is 
 well known, easily applied, and usually sufficient. 
 Hence for cheapness and dispatch, it is better to 
 confine these courts to these cases. But a retri- 
 butive or compensatory remedy is not always suf- 
 ficient; a party has a right to a full and ample 
 remedy ; sometimes, then, it must be preventive 
 by injunction against fraud, trespass or waste, or 
 specific, giving the party the thing itself, and not 
 compelling h,m to forego it for an equivalent in 
 damages, taken at the appraisal of a jury. 
 
 There are thousands of cases, too, where both 
 parties are in fault.; where the plaintiff himself 
 has not fully performed on his part, and the judg- 
 ment must therefore be conditional, as a decree 
 allowing a party to redeem after forfeiture of his 
 contract, or compelling a vender to accept the 
 balance of his purchase money, and convey, not- 
 withstanding a default in the purchaser. All 
 these, too, seem to be of too distinct a nature, and 
 as partaking too much of the nature ot exceptions, 
 to allow them to be blended and tried by juries 
 under the general rules of law relating to con- 
 tracts, as understood and applied by courts of 
 law and their juries. These require plaintiffs 
 bringing suits upon contracts, to have performed 
 all things on their parts to be done, before com- 
 mencing suits against the other parties to the 
 contracts. 
 
 These cases, I grant you, are only between two 
 parties or sets of parties, and might possibly, for 
 this reason, be done in courts oflaw, as in Penn- 
 sylvania, Canada, Louisiana, &c. ; but not with- 
 out the hazard of confusing established ruins of 
 practice in all courts, even of justices of the 
 peace, and so far of turning every magistrate into 
 a chancellor. Are we prepared for such a revo- 
 lution in men's views and habits, as to the con- 
 struction of contracts? If all cases arising be- 
 tween only two parties, now cognizable in equi- 
 ty only, can be transferred to courts of law and 
 despatched there by a jury, still the transfer 
 should not be made at once, but by little and lit- 
 
 tle, so that parties and judges not familiar with 
 equity jurisprudence, may become prepared for 
 the change, and may come to distinguish these 
 equity doctrines from the other principles so 
 long acted on in courts of common law. But 
 there is another point of comparison between 
 courts of law and equity, much more important 
 than those mentioned; I mean the division of la- 
 bor, by which alone expertness in the workmen, 
 and excellence in the work are to be secured in 
 your judicial establishment. This has been the 
 parent of all improvement in the physical arts of 
 human society, and no less so in the mental ones. 
 The divisions of intellectual labor in the different 
 professional pursuits, are as prominently marked, 
 and as evidently productive of improvement, in 
 their mental operations, as in those of the hand. 
 It is the subdivision of mental labor in the medi- 
 cal art, that has produced in one case perfection 
 in surgical operations, and in another the cure of 
 diseases. It is the same subdivision that has pro- 
 duced the distinction between an eminent chan- 
 cery judge, and another equally eminent, for a 
 court of law. 
 
 This principle of dividing judicial labor is at; 
 old as the law itself, and has been the chief canso 
 of its increasing certainty fiom age to age. The 
 talents of an admiralty judge are secured by limit- 
 ing his duties to that branch, which gives you a 
 Sir VVrn. Scott; a similar arrangement for a Pro- 
 bate Judge gives you a Dr. Lushington ; just as 
 ihe peculiar business of , the Supreme Court of the 
 United States, gives you a great Constitutional 
 Judge in John Marshall. By blending these two 
 jurisdictions, then, we shall throw the law back- 
 wards as a science, and lose the advantages here- 
 afrer to be gamed by the division of labor. No 
 jsidtre nor bar c-m be equally well acquainted with 
 Doth branches of the law, because these two paris 
 of jurisprudence, though bur parts of one whole, 
 are distinct, parts, and have been advancing and 
 mowing through many ages, only by a division of 
 labor. Indeed, sir, we throw it back as a moral 
 science, and retard the progress of moral civiliza. 
 tion. Jurisprudence is just so much of morality as 
 is established by the State. In some countries a 
 religion is established by the State, and no other- 
 is toleiated. In other?, besides the State estab- 
 lishment, there are others free and voluntary; and 
 in other countries, ail ate voluntary and in- 
 d^pendent of the State. Not so with morali- 
 ty. In all countries, it is partly voluntary, 
 and parHy established b.f the State. Thin 
 part is the law. It is not made, but dis- 
 covered, and it is reared to perihelion only by 
 much observation and reflection. It has its ori- 
 gin in the primitive moral relations, its growth in 
 their cuittiie, and its maturity in their gene- 
 ral development, as embodied in the practice 
 "fall the cMl and social relations of lit'c.- 
 Other reasons against committing two jurisdic- 
 tions to the same court are, that it will render the 
 rules of law uncertain, and the courts arbitrary ; 
 or, as Bacon says, the ' equity branch will draw 
 to itself the legal, and discretion will master the 
 law." Such is the connection between jurisdic- 
 tion and jurisprudence, between the powers to 
 apply the law, as a system of pre-existing rules 
 of decision, and the rules of decision themselves, 
 upon which every one's rights depends that I am 
 
668 
 
 afraid of transferring such a large portion of them 
 from separate to the same courts f I think it will 
 necessarily abolish many of the remedies them- 
 selves. When you take away the remedy, you 
 destroy the right; when you take from a man the 
 remedy to collect a debt, or to enforce a claim, 
 you destroy the right or the claim. This is worse 
 than repudiation it is agrarianism itself in high 
 places. There are some reasons against this 
 change peculiar to America. 
 
 We already have the common law we have 
 always in this State been accustomed to separate 
 courts of law and equity. We have no known 
 legal remedies for injuries here exclusively cog- 
 nizable in equity, as some of our sister States 
 have, who have gradually extended their reme- 
 dies at law to supply in some degree their want 
 of equity courts. Now, we propose to change 
 this course of practice. Is it safe ? I think, on 
 the contrary, it is highly dangerous. It is ex- 
 pected by some that this union of law and equity 
 jurisdiction, will result in a complete amalgama- 
 tion of law and equity proceedings; and its ablest 
 advocates on this floor "justify the union solely on 
 the ground of its being but a" temporary evil, and 
 soon to result in a great ultimate good, a common 
 code of procedure. 
 
 .but lei us see. A written code is well charac- 
 terized as a coat of mail. It is stiff and inflexible, 
 and never in accordance wiih all the circumstan- 
 ces of a case. The common law rules are 
 flexible, and accommodating to circumstances. 
 Here is the great difference between common and 
 statute law. ' The former is a body of principles 
 which are only exemplified, by particular cases 
 and expressed terms; me lattep is in fixed and 
 inherent in the precise terms and forms express 
 ed. Now we are a young and growing people, 
 and shall need this flexibility of puneiples- to 
 accommodate our rules of social life to our growth 
 and experience. Shall we throw it away I Shall 
 we in the very act of reforming, put an end to 
 further reform ? 
 
 How does this mixture of law and equity work 
 in other States ? In Massachusetts they are, dis- 
 satisfied and advancing fast towards a separation ; 
 because in the lani^uage of one of their judges, 
 they can never see the end of a chancery suit. In 
 the western States, I am told, it is difficult to Ml 
 when the court is sitting inequity oral law in the 
 same cause. The proposed change, in my opin- 
 ion, is sure to cost us all the benefits o! a settled 
 course 0f practice, to increase litigation and law. 
 yers, to lower the character of our judges and re- 
 ports and to render the rules of property less cer- 
 tain and stable Why then n sort to it ? 
 
 The administration of justice will be attended 
 with greater delays and expense for want of the 
 savings and advantages arising from the division 
 of labor, such as greater skill in the bar and the 
 court. It will require not less, but more judges 
 to do the same work. Your judges will have to 
 hold separate terms for the trial of equity causes, 
 as much as if they were judges of separate equity 
 courts. But for the very purposes designed by 
 its leading advocates, namely, the assimilation 
 into one code of all proceedings in both courts, 
 this mixture will obstruct, not aid them in the 
 work. You may easily mix what you cannot 
 identify, and confuse what you cannot distin- 
 
 guish ; but if you wish to draw clearly the line 
 between those matters now carried into chancery/ 
 but which might as well be done in courts of law, 
 and thc.se others which must necessarily, or can 
 much better be done in courts of equity, you 
 should keep them distinct lor the sake (.f clearer 
 comparison, and go to work gradually in re- 
 moving from equity to law courts all mailers pure- 
 ly legal and which can as well be transacted there. 
 I mean sir, that if law and equity jurisdictions, 
 and proceedings are ever to be assimilated, this 
 should be done by degrees- and without hazarding 
 the loss of remedies- and rights by a general and 
 rad.cat innovation. No doubt oral distovery upon 
 oath, equitable, defences- to legal claims, creditor's 
 bills to reach chosesin action, foreclosures of mort- 
 gages perhaps, some cases of accounts, partitions of 
 real estate, protection of guardians, infants, luna- 
 tics, &c., car> be done in law 01 probate courts, 
 some of them better and some of them not so well, 
 as they now are in equity courts. But our object 
 should be not to mix and confuse, but to separate 
 and simplify. Simplify the proceedings in all- 
 courts so tar as to divest them of unnecessary verb- 
 i \ge and forms, and then by degrees only, trans- 
 fer from equity to law courts all business that 
 can as well be done there. Give to your courts 
 ol law the power of granting a* plain, adequate 
 and complete a remedy for every case of com- 
 plaint known to the law, as is consistent with 
 well defined powers, and established rules of pro. 
 ceedings; and reserve to the equity courts only 
 such cases as shall befonndnet to have such plain 
 and easy measures of remedy at law by pre. 
 scribed rules and modes of proceeding, and in 
 ihe exercise of lestricted and well' guarded pow- 
 ers jn those courts-. 
 
 But,. Mr. Chairman, I suppose I must take for 
 granted that there is to be a union of equity and 
 law jurisdictions in the same courts. Then how 
 shall they be constructed ? I have already indi- 
 cated an opinion, and some years ago, as a mem- 
 ber of the legislature, was concerned in attempt- 
 ing to carry into the Constitution- a re-organiza- 
 tion of our equity courts, so as to have a Supreme 
 Court of equity, consisting of an equal number of 
 judges with a court of law. But assuming there 
 is now to be a union of the courts, we have to 
 provide for two things for a proper unity of the 
 judicial department as a single, general, State 
 power y and for the proper distribution of that 
 power in its action among all parts of the State. 
 All are agreed to unite bench with nisi prius 
 duties,. This alone will effect much. 
 
 Nearly ail a^ree as lo ihe necessity of avoiding, 
 a one-man court, so as to discourage the multitude 
 of appeals. All seem to be agreed in the neces- 
 sity of constituting both general and local juris- 
 dictions that is, stale and county courts f but 
 gentlemen differ as to the proportions,^ propor- 
 tional forces, to be emu)oyed in these two systems 
 the majority of the committee recommend a 
 Trge I think, an excessively large number of 
 judges for courts of general jurisdiction, and 
 proposejui- re skeletons, or courts of straw, for the 
 counties. 1 think this is wrong. Courts of gen- 
 eral jurisdiction must be considerably centralized, 
 so as not to brinp justice from one man's door, in 
 oider to carry it to anothei's ; and the state is too 
 large for the judges of your state courts to hold 
 
669 
 
 terms in bane in every county, unless you dispense 
 entirely with county courts, and increase thejudges 
 of 'he state courts in proportion. 
 
 The number of working j,udges including four 
 sitting in the court ot appeals, are to be thirty - 
 
 ' two. Now, I agree that this number may be suf- 
 ficient to do the business, if discreetly organized I 
 and arranged. But the committee propose to con- 
 stitute but one court,or system of courts, combin- 
 ing the extremes of centralization and localiza- 
 tion ; and yet in attempting to obtain both these 
 objects, they fail to secure either, and really lose 
 both. They shrink from carrying out their own 
 plan into a court in bane for every county, as a 
 substitute for our county courts, and yet they cut 
 up and divide the supreme court into eight local 
 district courts, without saving us any central one 
 of general jurisdiction, where terms can be held 
 and justice administered half way between the 
 extreme parts of the State. Besides losing both 
 objects proposed, this system will bring to the 
 ground the law as a science, for decisions ema- 
 nating from such a spirit-level system of judges, 
 will be too numerous for credit or high authority 
 of the law, and we shall be confined to the court 
 of appeals for all this. I think these thirty-two 
 judges ought to be divided into two sections of 
 sixteen each, and that half of them should be or- 
 ganised into a state court or courts, say four of ge- 
 neral jurisdiction over the whole State; to hold 
 terms in bane, say four annually in each quarter of 
 the state ; and to hold circuits at law and in equi- 
 ty, once yearly in all the counties; and then the 
 other sixteen judges might constitute a superior 
 court or courts of local jurisdiction for the coun- 
 ties, situated within their several districts; to 
 hold terms in Dane and circuits, as the judges of 
 the Supreme court, but more frequently, because 
 not expected to prepare opinions for the press. 
 The terms of the Superior or District Courts 
 could be arranged to be held at different times 
 and places from those of the Supreme or State 
 Courts, aud thereby both together would come 
 very near to serving every county with a term in 
 bane, as well as a circuit. 
 
 For these reasons, Mr. Chairman, I shall vote 
 against uniting the jurisdictions of law and equi- 
 ty. It is even admitted and felt, that chance- 
 
 (ry law is less generally known, certain, and set- 
 tled for practical purposes, than the common 
 rules of law; even one Court of Chancery is not 
 a popular institution. Shall we, then, create 
 thirty-two of these Chancellors, less experienced 
 and discreet, and thereby increase this uncertain 
 and unpopular system of courts ? I, for one, can- 
 not consent to it. 
 
 TUESDAY, (65th day,) August 18. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. RAWSON. 
 FUNDS IN CHANCERY. 
 
 The PRESIDENT laid belore the Convention a 
 communication trorn the Chancellor acknowledg- 
 ing the receipt ol JVlr. MANN'S resolution, accom 
 pained by a circular addressed by him to iheregis 
 lets, clerks. &c., requiring a compliance v\nh ihe 
 resolution, and the employment of such addition- 
 al assistance as may be necessary to secure a 
 prompt compliance with the wishes of the Con- 
 vention. 
 
 JVlr. MANN and otheis s-aid there was no secu- 
 
 rity lor any action on this cointnun:caiion, and it 
 was unanimously laid on th* table. 
 
 Mr. MANN presented the following report of 
 the special committee, to whom wys referred the 
 communications from the Chancellor, with the 
 papeis accompanying it: 
 
 That they havu examined and considered the communica! 
 tion and accompanj nig papers separately and collectively, 
 and irom the documents before the comti ittee they discov- 
 er that the papers submittea puipoit to contain the annual 
 returns Irom the several chancery circuits, made I y the 
 register, assistant registers and clerks by order of the 
 court, and under the l-27th article 01 said couit. 
 
 It ap) ears to the committee that the aggregate amount of 
 funds iu the hands and under the control of the chancellor 
 reported to the Convention in answer to a resolution adop. 
 ted by the Convention requesting ihe Chancellor ton port 
 the aggregate amount ol lunds und< r his contiol, was 
 made up from the papers and returns submitted to the 
 Convention, and referred to this committee. 
 
 By a close examination of the returns and papers sub- 
 mitted, the coinmi tee discove; many essential enorsin 
 the aggregate amounts, and the r turns ('run which the 
 aggregate n port was evident y made) lobe defective in 
 very many paiticulars, some o; which give only abstracts 
 omitting many of the most essential details necessary to 
 make any correct statemtnt from them, which would be 
 useful to the Convention, or to the j.eople at large. 
 
 Your committee also obst-rve, that these annual returns 
 make no statement of inures and ticcurculdtion, 01 inter- 
 est accounts, an i leave this portion of these funds entuely 
 to conjecture orpresump:jon. 
 
 There appears to be one small statement of interest of 
 cash funds in the si coiui-citou t, accruing ii|Oi. $37 .424 63; 
 hut no statement ol intert&t for the $vH 6,563 returned as in- 
 vested in bonds and mitgages; wJh this exception, no 
 statements of itit rest or accumulations are prest n>etl.- - 
 This fact alone is considered by your committee si Hi i< nt 
 to render the statements and returns imptrltct, and lall lar 
 short of the actual amount of these lunds. 
 
 The interest and accumulation of the funds, of property 
 invested in bonds and mortgages, New Yoik state and city 
 stocks, and other dividend paying stocks, with other sub- 
 stantial securities, would, when added to the principal, 
 enlarge the aggregate amount to a very great extent, which 
 interest and accumulations are as much a part of the funds 
 as the principal it elf. 
 
 Therefore your committee feel it to be theirduty to state, 
 that the communicationfrom h s honor, the chancellor, and 
 the accompanying papers, do not contain the detailed and 
 essential particulars, nan es of interested parties, suitors, 
 owners, heirs, claimants and others, who have a right to 
 know the precise amount and condition ol these Jaige lunds 
 including the exact amount of principal, interest and accu- 
 mulations, that no good or definite result can he arrived at 
 from the documents submitted to your committee. 
 
 It further appears to yotir committee, that large'amounts 
 of these funds a;e in the hands of registers an<; clerks, and 
 more directly under their control and direction and man- 
 agement, than they are under the immediate control and 
 direction of the Chancellor himself; arid the funds are so 
 placed generally, without any adequate security from 
 those who have the more immediate direction and control 
 of them. This arises no doubt, from the great mass of 
 complicated duties and business forced upon the Chancel- 
 lor, which renders it impossible lor him to have the imme- 
 di-ite supervision and management of these multifarious 
 lunds. 
 
 With a view to the better security, safety, and perma- 
 nent investment and accumulation of these funds, for the 
 use and benefit of infanfs, orphans, widows, heirs, and all 
 parties inteiested theiein, and upon the presumption that 
 the court of chancery, as at present organized, will be abo- 
 lished by the convention, should the people ratify their 
 action: 
 
 Your committee recommend the adoption of a provision 
 in the constitution, requiring the legislature to provide by 
 law, for the placing and depositing the funds and securi- 
 ties now held or that may herealter be held by, and under 
 the control ol the Court of < hancery, in the State Treasu- 
 ry for tale-keeping, investment, and disbursement ; and 
 that the Chancellor he requested to furnish to this Con- 
 vention the items constituting these funds, in accordance 
 with the resolution adopted and transmitted to him on the 
 13th instant, at his earliest convenience. 
 
 Your committee further report, that they have examin- 
 ed the aggregate report of the Chancellor rderred to them, 
 
670 
 
 showing $2,921,900 38 as the amount of funds in his hands 
 and under his control ; and on comparing the aggregates 
 and recapitulation of that report, with the returns and pa- 
 pers (from which it appears to be made.) find that it is de- 
 fective, as no interest or accumulations are included in 
 the amount, and that it is even less than the returns and 
 papers before us show the aggregate to be : this, it ap- 
 pears to the committee, occurs from clerical errors inad- 
 vertantly made. 
 
 Owing to the apparent inadequacy and defects in the re- 
 turns and papers referred to the committee, they cannot 
 recommend the printing of any of them by the Convention; 
 as a whole, no correct information would be derived from 
 them. 
 
 All of which is respectfully submitted, 
 
 GEO. S. MANN, Chairman. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that the committee were 
 unanimous in the report, with a single exception 
 upon the recommendation of the committee made 
 in the report. The security alluded to, was in 
 reference to transferring the funds held by this 
 court. For depositing them in the State Treasu- 
 ry, instead of leaving them as they now are, the 
 gentleman from Genesee preferred that these 
 funds should be deposited in the county treasu- 
 ries, instead of being deposited in the State Trea- 
 sury as recommended by the report of the com- 
 mittee; this trifling variance as to what should be 
 done with these funds, was the only difference in 
 the committee. With the exception stated, the re- 
 port was unanimous. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART agreed with the report ex- 
 cept as to the disposition to be made of these 
 funds hereafter. He did not wish it to be impera- 
 tive^ in the legislature to invest these funds in the 
 State Treasury. He thought they ought to be in- 
 vested with a view to local objects ; as these 
 funds came from certain localities, so they ought 
 to be invested there, with the county treasurer, 
 instead of the State Treasurer. The parties in- 
 terested in these funds would be much better 
 served by having them deposited in their own lo- 
 cality. Reason and justice to these localities re- 
 quired this. By and by he would submit a sepa- 
 rate proposition on that subject, proposed in com- 
 mittee, to leave the power to the legislature to 
 deposite it in counties, but was overruled. 
 
 Mr. MANN said, that in the examination of 
 the papers referred to the committee, they had 
 found many errors ; the report perhaps, stated 
 generally all that might be required at this time, 
 but he would remark that he had taken up these 
 returns from the several circuits separately and 
 discovered very many errors, which errors, have 
 been incorporated into the chancellor's aggregate 
 report, inadvertently, no doubt, but it goes to 
 show the Convention that there are various and 
 numerous important defects in the papers re- 
 ferred to this committee for their consideration. 
 Mr. MANN would cite one instance of error, 
 (which error was incorporated into the chancel- 
 lor's aggregate report) and other similar ones 
 were apparent. In the examination and com- 
 paring of items he found in one instance, in the 
 chancellor's aggregate report a discrepancy of 
 $3U,OUO, making this report less to this amount, 
 and this was not the only one, though of less 
 magnitude, and on the other side, which con- 
 vinced him that the errors were not intentional, 
 but clerical only. Mr. MANN had taken ab- 
 stract minutes from the returns before the com- 
 mittee and on examination lound them generally 
 defective ; he could go on at length, with these 
 
 details which would occupy much time, but he 
 would not do so at present, as he considered the 
 report which he had presented explicit enough, 
 and contained perhaps all that it was necessary 
 to say at present upon this subject. He did not 
 desire to detain the Convention with these 
 lengthy details, and would not at this time occu- 
 py the Convention with any further explanations. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved lo print it. Carried. 
 REPORT ON THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. SHAW offered two resolutions, 1st, that de- 
 bate in committee of the whole on tne Judiciary 
 report should terminate on Thuisday at 2 P. M. 
 2d, that when it carne into the Convention, speech- 
 es should be limiled to 15 minutes each. 
 
 Mr. MANN doubled the propriety of any such 
 resolution, and hoped it would be withdrawn. 
 The labor-saving resolutions always consumed 
 much time. He was sick of them. 
 
 Mr. BURR should vote against the resolution. 
 At an *arly period of the session he had united 
 with others in an attempt to curtail debate. He 
 was impatient at the time then wasted. He wan 
 then of opinion, and was so still, that the weeks 
 spent in debate on the age of the candidate for 
 Governor, were wasted. But on this important 
 subject, he wanted lull and free discussion. He 
 hoped the legal gentlemen would bring all their 
 talent to bear upon this question. He was trreaUy 
 trrarified to he^r the able speeches delivered on 
 this subject, and hoped to hear more. He only 
 asked that debute might be confined to the com- 
 mittee of the whole, and that when we came into 
 Convention, we mi^ht be suffered to vote thereon 
 without a repetition of the speeches. 
 
 Mr. DUDD moved to lay the resolutions on the 
 table. Agreed to. 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 The unfinished business was ajjain taken up. 
 
 The Convention asain went into committee of 
 the whole, Mr. CAMBRELENG in the chair, on 
 the judiciary reports. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : The debate on this subject 
 has taken a very wide range ; and I have been 
 present at as much of it as my health permits. 
 If I should now consult my own personal conve- 
 nience, I would inflict on this committee no ob- -jit 
 servations of mine ; but differing as I do, to a very * 
 considerable extent, not only with the reports 
 presented by the members of the judiciary com- 
 mittee, but with many of the arguments by which, 
 so far as I am able to learn, they are supported, I 
 feel myself compelled to say something on this 
 subject. Its features are so diversified and the 
 debate has taken so wide a range, that the diffi- 
 culty is not in finding subjects on which to speak, 
 but in selecting sucli ones as have some practical 
 application to the subject itself. I cannot, in my 
 present state of health, and at this late day in 
 Convention, feel at liberty to discuss in any con- 
 siderable decree the theories on which a judicial 
 system should be established, and I am forced by 
 the state of my health and the period of the ses- 
 sion, to endeavor to get over it, at those matters 
 that have some practical application to the sub- 
 ject. 
 
 I differ from gentlemen in considering the ju- 
 dicial department to be more important in civi- 
 lized society than the legislature. In the early 
 
671 
 
 stage ( of civilisation, in which the judges made 
 all the law, such a rule would be true. In tin- 
 progress of civilisation in which the judges are 
 , ivd to sneak the law as it has been made, in 
 my poor opinion, the organization p/ the legisla- 
 tive department is the most important, because if 
 the rule has not been rightly laid down, its exe- 
 cution by the judges may, and frequently must, 
 tend to do the very mischief, it would reme- 
 dy if the rule was right. The committee are 
 not unaware that I am not without apprehen- 
 sion that in reorganizing the legislative depart- 
 ment we have made it less powerful for gene- 
 ral legislation than it should be. If this should 
 prove true, in the end, then, a large share of ju- 
 dicial legislation will be inevitable, and we must 
 endeavor to supply it, in the judicial system it- 
 self, to remedy the defects which we leave in the 
 legislature. I know it is reversing the order of 
 things in a highly civilized society, but it is one 
 of inevitable necessity, if the judges should not 
 find the rule fixed by society itself, that he must 
 make the law. He may and probably will en- 
 deavor to do it by finding out what the natural 
 right would be in the case. He has done it in 
 ages past, and he must continue to do so in the fu- 
 ture. For if you and I are called upon and must 
 decide, and can find no rule established, where 
 shall we look 3 We must come to a conclusion, 
 and must decide by the rules of natural right as 
 we can best ascertain them. This is the inevita- 
 ble necessity, and I feel, sir, from the feeble or- 
 ganization we have given to the Senate of the 
 State, we will impose upon the judicial system a 
 large share of judicial legislation. I do not, 
 therefore, fael that we should be the less anxious 
 to make n judicial system strong and permanent, 
 but I beLeve these apprehensions to be reasons 
 why we should strengthen its hands. I cannot 
 now undertake, and will not, in the progress 
 of the observations I shall submit to the 
 Convention, to answer the varied suggestions 
 of gentlemen involving the theory of justice. I 
 agree in the opinion expressed by the orator near- 
 ly twenty-four hundred years ago, and read by 
 the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS.) I 
 know from him what the law is, and his opinion 
 stands recorded in the history of nations. Where 
 it is, there is perpetuity and progress. Where it 
 is not, there is despotism and ruin. I am not 
 behind the gentleman from Essex, or any other 
 gentleman in the Convention, for a reverence for 
 law, but it must be that law which Is from Heav- 
 en. It is not your declaration on these seats it 
 is not the declaration of those who will come 
 here after you, that can make the law. r lhey 
 may find it, they may declare it, but God himself 
 has made it and him only. Sir, if the judge is 
 not embued with this sentiment, he is not tit to 
 sit in judgment ; he is an outlaw and oppressor, 
 a ruifiun and not a judge. So too those who come 
 after us, if they cannot come up to this opinion 
 they are not statesmen, they are not legislators, 
 they are ruffians and oppressors. Whether in the 
 legislature or on the bench, the law must be the 
 truth. It must be right, it must conform to the 
 nature of things, and it is not the will of any man 
 or set of men. I deny that entirely. 1 repudi- 
 ate as detestable, that the majority, the will of 
 men in any form can constitute the law. The 
 
 majority searching the wisdom ot men, can only 
 find what it is and declare it. And if he find ft 
 falsely, like arsenic administered through mis- 
 take it will not produce benefits but certain death. 
 In any observation therefore, I have to make up- 
 on this subject, I desire that they may be received 
 and modified by this fixed declaration of opinion. 
 Sir, we have at this time no courts at law or in 
 equity they are overwhelmed and buried. They 
 will not deny you justice, but they are not able 
 to administer it. I had almost said, sir, that you 
 have no law, but that is not true. Law is in- 
 tended to enlighten the footsteps of men, to di- 
 rect them whither they may go and what they 
 may do, and if this be law, you have none every 
 citizen must act at his peril. Your laws are enu- 
 merated in ten thousand volumes. No diligence 
 on the part of the citizen, his counselor the judge 
 will enable him to find it on the day when he 
 must act. He must act on his peril, and day af- 
 ter day, week after week, month after month, un- 
 der the present system, the counsel must sit look- 
 ing for the law and seeking to find it. And un- 
 fortunately, in the present state of our judicial 
 system, many seek and cannot find it at all, and 
 their cases remain unheard and undecided. This 
 is a state of things which in my opinion cannot 
 last or endure. It has been foreseen; efforts have 
 been made to avert these difficulties, and these 
 etibrts have failed. What are they ? Sir, in 1S41, 
 the gentleman from Essex and others here, occu- 
 pying places as members of the legislature, sought 
 to avert these difficulties by introducing this sys- 
 tem. They proposed to leave the senate as part 
 of the court for the correction of errors. Perhaps 
 they did not entirely approve of it, but they sup- 
 posed in all probability that there would be less 
 hostility to less change, and therefore they sub- 
 mitted to it. They proposed to take some of the 
 circuit judges and put them in the court of 
 chancery, as chancellors. They proposed to re- 
 tain the present supreme court judges and to 
 make others of the circuit judges, and put them 
 in supreme courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction, so 
 as in effect out of the material which then existed 
 in the judicial system, to give you four courts of 
 co-ordinate jurisdiction, three of law and one of 
 equity, with four- judges in each. It found favor 
 here under the apprehensions that the existing 
 sy&tem would fail. It found favor in this 
 branch again, but it died in the senate. 
 So tai nau we got along in 1841-2. Tho scheme 
 wns r<> tnke ca.e ot th- existing i-fficials and per- 
 sonel of tiie couris, on ihe^round thai less change 
 wuu.d possibly be aitended with les* opposition. 
 It introduced no new rule as to the manner of 
 appointment, precisely on the same principle. Ii 
 saved the Senate as pail ol tde Court for the 
 Correction of Errors, undoubtedly on the same 
 principle. Sn, I yielded my reluctant assent to 
 it, as I presume others did, because no tn,ui could 
 look forward to ihis death which \ve have reach- 
 ed without dread. No man ot sagacity could 
 blind hunsc'lf, which would overtake us in the 
 end, and it was very natural in this mariner to en- 
 deavor to get lioin ;t. Sir, whether this scheme 
 received -diiy cold opposition from the judicial 
 personages in the State, or their proteges or clerks, 
 I do not know; but. it failed in the Senate, not 1 
 think lor want of lime, to which a great variety of 
 
672 
 
 failures in human history has been attributed, but 
 it tailed. What next? In 1844 this subject came 
 up again. Said a friend to me, if you go to the 
 Supreme Court, you are told that all the -difficul- 
 ties exist in the Court of Chancery there is 
 wanted a great additional force; but if you go 
 over to the Chancellor, you will be informed in 
 equity and conscience, that the great difficulty is 
 in the Supreme Court, and that they want a great 
 additional force there. From the character ot 
 Ihe gentleman, I had no doubt that what he said 
 to me was true, and after much consultation and 
 varied action, and getting the subject i'lto a com- 
 mittee of conference between the two houses, its 
 design was utterly changed. The proposition as 
 resulting from the conflicting opinions was to add, 
 I believe, three chancellors and two judges to the 
 Supreme Court, and thus to give us five judges, on 
 the principle that fLvfl men could hear a cause 
 swifter, and the increased burthen and weight 
 was intended, as upon an inclined plain to aid ve- 
 locity for the purpose of overcoming the draft. 
 The draft power was in another direction, and the 
 judiciary system must ascend. It would have 
 gone down more swiftly by adding to its weight, 
 but it never would have ascended by merely 
 adding two more judges to the bench. However, 
 it was understood here, right or wrong, that this 
 was the result of the deliberate wisdom of the 
 two Houses, taking advice also, from judicial 
 experience. Sir, I then believed, and it seemed 
 to me that I knew, because some times coming 
 events cast their shadows before, and so plainly 
 too, that no man can fail to read and under- 
 stand them, that such a mode of improving our 
 judicial system, would prove a total failure. 
 Borne down with a sense of the danger that 
 hung over the community, over the Judicial sys- 
 tem itself, and over the very Constitution of so- 
 ciety and its progess, 1 endeavored then to find 
 a remedy for the mischief, at least for a period, 
 and proposed to leave the Senate for the trial of 
 impeachments, and to separate it from all other 
 judicial duties, that we might have the benefit 
 of it as a legislative body. I do not know that 
 this was received with a special honor any where. 
 I think I may say it was not. I further pro- 
 posed that the state should make sixteen high 
 judicial officers that the sixteen sitting together 
 should constitute a court for the correction of er- 
 rors in law and equity, and that they should be 
 divided into four courts of four judges each. 
 And with a view to make the least change, and 
 thus justify the least objection, yielding some 
 of my strong convictions to prevailing opinions, 
 believing* that the truth would in the end tri- 
 umph, 1 proposed that one of these courts in 
 bane should have exclusively law jurisdiction, 
 with power to issue writs of mandamus and quo 
 warranto, and a supervision over the inferior 
 tribunals and that another of these four courts 
 should have exclusively equity jurisdiction that 
 the legislature should have power to confer upon 
 the judges of that court any equity power whatev- 
 er, and prescribe by law what questions heard be- 
 fore the judge, should be reheard before the court 
 ILselt. Thai m regard lo Ihe two oihei courts, 
 they should have such juiisdictiun at 'law and in 
 equity as the Legislature should confer upon them. 
 1 do not know that these propositions were regard- 
 
 ed with extra hostility any where, but they fell 
 dead. Perhaps even now lew of the members of 
 this Convention have had the misfortune before to 
 have them inflicted upon them I was driven to 
 present them then a& an amendment. The Chair 
 decided them to be out of order. I appealed from 
 his decision a decision which, in my judgment, 
 would do more mischief, if it could be followed 
 as a precedent, to the freedom of Legislation than 
 any other ever made in these halls. It was sus- 
 tained, two judges and three chancellors were 
 already on their way they saw their end, and so 
 did I. But by this motion, I got tiiy pioposition 
 entered upon the journals. It contained in it, I 
 admit, one great heresy it proposed that the 
 judges should be elected by the people. It might 
 have found in that house some thirty supporters; 
 but the invariable conviction eeeuied to be that 
 the election of judges would lead to certain ruin. 
 Sir, if the election of judges had stood upon the 
 ground that I have heard alledged for it here, I 
 never would have thought of moving it. God for- 
 bid that I should. I would never suggest a change., 
 if some strong and irrepressible evil did not re- 
 quire it. I saw then I think I see now that 
 there can be no Constitution in this country, un- 
 less the judges, or part of them, can be made to 
 depend for their offices upon the people of the 
 state. I looked in vain in any stale, in our own 
 state, or in the federal power, tor a judiciary that 
 had' been, able to stand by a Constitution, and to 
 defend it against usurpation ; for I could find only 
 judges of talent and integrity of the highest 
 order in the discharge of their ordinary duties. 
 I could find them appointed by power every 
 where. Power appointed such judges, and has 
 done so, for a hundred years, in Great Britain. 
 Power has appointed such judges in this State 
 from its foundation, and no man has whispered 
 that they have been deficient in integrity or pow- 
 er ot intellect. If you want judges only to this 
 extent, you have them without difficulty; you 
 need change nothing, you may adopt every rule 
 in your present constitution, and you may rest as- 
 sured that your judges will be men of high cha- 
 racter, high order of intellect, and brilliant at- 
 tainments on the subject of jurisprudence, and 
 great integrity in private life. But if you want a 
 judge that can stand by the constitution against 
 legislative usurpation, you look in vain for such 
 a man appointed by power. And, sir, you have 
 no constitution here, if you cannot maintain your 
 written constitution, you can have none: You 
 have no order in society to make a constitution 
 for you ; you must have a constitution in writing,, 
 or you can have none ; and unless your judges are 
 elected by the sovereign body, by the constitu- 
 ent, you will look in vain for judges than can 
 stand by the constitution of the State against the 
 encroachments of power. The federal court can 
 declare any act passed in these halls, or in any 
 State legislature, void and unconstitutional. 
 They have done it, and I honor them for it. Sir, 
 the state courts, I have no doubt, could very read- 
 ily determine that a law passed at town meetings 
 was unconstitutional and void ; and 1 believe they 
 have done it. One of your judges has manifested 
 a strong disposition, though appointed by power, 
 to hold the same rule in relation to the legisla- 
 ture of the State, But have the Courts been able 
 
673 
 
 i.o stand up in vindication of the constitution, 
 :>t the encroachments of power ? Such in- 
 stances may exist, and may have escaped me ; but 
 .iied down by a sense of the necessity of hav- 
 i court so constituted, that it could perform 
 iuty, and repress the encroachments of pow- 
 >o destructive of all private rights, I feel 
 myself compelled to insist upon the insertion in 
 any projet, of a proposition to procure their elec- 
 tion by the constituent body of the State. I 
 know that it is even doubtful whether you will 
 get men of as great ability as if appointed by pow- 
 er; and that under certain circumstances, the 
 judge may be driven from office bacause he has 
 done his duty. I differ from the gentleman from 
 Albany, (Mr. HARRIS) who delivered an opinion 
 the other day, that notwithstanding -the excite- 
 ment in these river districts, the judge who had 
 presided at trials arising out of it, could be re- 
 elected to-morrow. The gentleman undoubtedly 
 believes it, but I believe just as strongly to the 
 contrary. The men with whose views the judge 
 has come in conflict by his duties, are as earnest, 
 as honest, as zealous, and as fixed in their con- 
 victions, as the judge. One or the other must be 
 wrong. If the question be put to the people, there 
 will be no doubt of the answer. But from the 
 locality where this conviction exists, I do not 
 believe, I cannot persuade myself, that the judge 
 would be supported. It would be asking too 
 much of men on a technical point of this kind, to 
 forego their strong and deep convictions and the 
 men who have been engaged in these disturban- 
 ces in this excitement are probably too strongl) 
 embued with the conviction of the correction ol 
 their own ccnvse, to yield it readily at any early 
 election. God knows that if their own rule o 
 property was to be applied for a series of years 
 by the judges, it would not be long before there 
 would be nothing left for them to contend for. 
 Then I heartily believe no set of men would be 
 more strongly disposed to change the rule, anc 
 bring it back where the judge has decided it to 
 be. It would probably in a short time result in 
 but one judgment that if I take property from 
 you, and agree to pay you for it, I cannot dispute 
 your right to pay, while I hold the property from 
 you. But to ask these men who have formed ; 
 contrary opinion, to reverse that opinion, in 
 moment, is more than I am able to do, with an; 
 confidence or hope of success. But if you as! 
 the people of the State, and call on them to speal 
 through the ballot-box from one end of the Stat 
 to the other, I feel as strong a conviction as th 
 gentleman from Albany does in his peculiar opin 
 ion, that the voters of this State would speak right 
 I have no doubt of it. The only fears of danger 
 in my opinion would be in cases where there wa 
 little or no contest, where there was nothin 
 to excite the attention or to call upon the voter 
 to consider the matter. But although I hav 
 heard in conversation much |more than ha 
 been said here, when that proposition to elec 
 judges was brought into the legislature in 1844 
 I heard more perhaps than any other membe 
 heard of the dangers, the impropriety of such 
 course, and it was very natural that men shoul 
 speak to ine on the subject, and that they shoul 
 write to me. Sir, after having heard them al 
 after having considered the subject, I am still ( 
 
 e opinion that although by appointment wa 
 lould get ability, learning, and high integrity,} 
 nd be safe in it, yet you cannot get judges t</ 
 naintain the constitution against power, without' 1 
 icir election. Appointment in England has for 
 lore than one hundred years filled her four highest 
 ourts with men of great ability. So the Presi- 
 ent has filled the federal courts with men of de- 
 ided ability, learning, and integrity. In this 
 tate too, the appointing power has in all the 
 igher courts secured us able judges. This is 
 rue in other states but can judges so appointed 
 esist the encroachments of power and maintain 
 le Constitution ? I think they cannot unless 
 apported by election from the constituent body, 
 firmly believe that all the judges, and am en- 
 irely certain that half of the judges, should be 
 lected, and that they will be men of eminent 
 haracter, legal intelligence, moral weight, and 
 ble to discharge their duties ; but my proposition 
 hough it contemplates the least changes, only 
 asting off the former motion of providing for the 
 ixisting personel of the courts, fell perfectly dead- 
 And here in 1846, we meet the very difficulty 
 accumulated by time, and the question is, how 
 hall it be disposed of Sir, we may have theories 
 n the subject, we may be right or wrong in them, 
 ut we must have courts that can hear causes, 
 and will give judgment, and the machinery of so- 
 ciety must and will go on. It has become a prac- 
 ical question we may not be able to attain what 
 we desire, but we should make the effort to at- 
 ,ain it. I shall therefore proceed to examine, as 
 veil as I can, some parts of the report of the ma- 
 ority in which I concur, and from which in part 
 ! dissent. I have no right sir, under the circum- 
 stances, neither have I the inclination to state at 
 any length, the kind of judicial system I desire, 
 my opinions upon the subject have been written 
 arid published, and to repeat and inflict them 
 nere would be an unnecessary act of injustice ; for 
 any one who has desired to know them has had 
 ample opportunity to find them. I wish only to 
 say in relation to them, that I have neither seen 
 or heard here or elsewhere, any sufficient reason 
 to change them. I do not adhere so pertinacious- 
 ly to them as to insist precisely upon the number 
 of judges expressed, but I do beg leave to insist 
 in the strongest and most distinct manner, upon 
 all the requisites founded upon all the reasons al- 
 leged for them, as expressed in the commence- 
 ment, in order to make the system safe and suc- 
 cessful. Assuming them to be sufficiently known. 
 I shall allude to them, and apply them to the re- 
 port before us. The first section that meets us 
 in this report, having disposed of that which re- 
 lates to the trial of impeachments, states the con- 
 stitution of the Court for the correction of errors, 
 at law and in equity. Four of the eight judges 
 to constitute this court are to be elected by the 
 State, and so far as the name of election goes, is 
 entirely suited to my own convictions. But, sir, 
 they are to lay idle around thecapitol of the state 
 for three-quarters of the whole year, if you find 
 no business to employ them except their func- 
 tions as a court of errors. And I do not suppose 
 that it is intended that this court shall be a mill, 
 and sit permanently and grind out law every 
 day and hour. I suppose that if it sits a few 
 months or few weeks in the year, that would 
 
 59 
 
674 
 
 . be all that any sound judicial system woul 
 require of them. These four judges the 
 must stand idle three quarters of the time 
 and what will you pay them ? Will it be such a 
 to command the highest order of intellect and th 
 most extended knowledge of the law in all its va 
 ried departments ? No, sir, you will, I fear, of 
 fer them some paltry compensation ; you canno 
 pay any other for such a limited service. It ma) 
 be said that these four judges may be sent to hoi 
 circuits. I know that upon paper they can be 
 but I know that in practice they cannot. 
 would the matter stand ? The judge of the cour 
 of last resort goes down to the county, tries \ 
 cause at the circuit, and decides upon the law 
 The parties carry it to the court in bane, made 
 up of judges who do not sit in the court of las 
 resort, and if that court in bane should say theii 
 superior who held the court was right, the law> 
 yers and the world will say that they did not dare 
 to review or reverse his decision : and when th< 
 public declares that you dare not reverse the de 
 cision, you cannot affirm what you had not a righ 
 to reverse. Taking from you the moral liberty 
 on the one side, loses it to you on the other. If a 
 court in bane affirms what a superior said on the 
 circuit, it is evidence of sycophancy if they re- 
 verse it, then the expected chastisement from the 
 superior is the general supposition,and can scarce- 
 ly fail to embarrass as well the courts in bane as in 
 appeal. It looks to me, that it would never answer 
 for these four men to hold the circuits, unless 
 they were made equal to the other judges by oblig- 
 ing them also to sit in bane. It would be impos- 
 sible in practice to employ them at the circuits 
 only. I would not advise it, nor could I in any 
 cheerful manner assent to it. And what are the 
 other four judges of the court of last resort they 
 are not state judges, but district judges, chosen 
 not by the state but by a district they are not 
 chosen or appointed by the power of the state. 
 The court is one-half state without employment, 
 except during its particular terms; and one half 
 district, not state, with employment through the 
 year. In my opinion, sir, such a court for the 
 correction of errors cannot get along, will not 
 prove a working machine, cannot eventually suc- 
 ceed and believing this whether right or wrong, 
 as the conviction upon my own mind is strong 
 and deep, I am not able to forego my opposition 
 to it. 
 
 Another subject in which I unfortunately dif- 
 fer from the report of the majority of the com- 
 mittee, is that while members who support it seem 
 to suppose that it has appointed supreme courts, 
 in my opinion it has appointed nothing but dis- 
 trict courts to sit in bane. In some of the schemes 
 I believe this is a little different, but also essen- 
 tially district courts are distinctly proposed. In 
 my opinion, in the majority report it is distinctly 
 realized, practically realized. Take the county 
 courts as an example, suppose you give them ju- 
 risdiction over causes of action arising elsewhere, 
 are they not still county courts ? You allow the 
 process to run into other counties, but they are 
 still local courts. So here if the eight districts 
 as such elect the man, although the state may pay 
 them, is he not a district judge? I repeat, sir, 
 that these judges may be required to go out of 
 their districts and hold a court in another part of 
 
 the state. This, in the opinion of some, appears 
 to be a ground of preference and support, but to 
 my mind it is a ground of objection. It may be 
 said that the justices of the peace though chosen 
 by the towns, are yet justices of the peace for the 
 county. If I can draw any conclusion from what 
 I have learned from general remarks through the 
 state, a strong argument may be drawn from 
 it. How often has every member of the Con- 
 vention here heard men say, living in one town, 
 and sued by a person in another, I know that 
 they will give judgment against me, but I will 
 appeal it and beat them. And how often have 
 gentlemen seen the action suited to the word 
 the local court giving judgment against the stran- 
 ger, and the county court relieving him from its 
 grasp. There is nothing in this error of ours in 
 relation to the election of county justices,and rath- 
 er than extend the error to any other tribunal, 
 we should seek to correct it where it exists, and 
 make the justice of the county dependent upon 
 the county, for his existence and election. In- 
 deed, sir, I hardly know how the gentleman in 
 New-York would feel pleased to see the four 
 ludges of the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th districts coining 
 into that city to try causes, but I can say how the 
 inhabitants of those districts would feel to see the 
 ludges elected in the city of of New-York, come 
 ,nto their districts. They would feel as if,it was 
 ike any 01 her disti ict court that it was not a Stale 
 Court, a Supreme court, give it what name you 
 may. And yet I see that we are inevitably thrown 
 upon the question, and must decide it, whether 
 you will make co-ordinate State courts throughout 
 he State, of any number that may be necessary, 
 :>r whether you will divide the State into districts, 
 and make local courts. I do not blame the com. 
 niltee I have no right to reproach them Ihey 
 lave weighed and balanced the matter, and come 
 o the conclusion that the district system would 
 >e better than any other they could adopt. And 
 inler from the arguments, that they suppose that 
 [though the judge is elected in a district, he will 
 not be a district judge, but a State judge. Sir, 
 uppose he holds that something desired by the 
 ocality in which he was elected, and enacted by 
 he Legislature, is null and void, will he have his 
 e-election bv the State, which may approve the 
 'ecision of the judge, or will he have' it by the 
 .istnct that may disapprove it. It ought to satis- 
 y us, whatever we hope for that he would be not 
 State but a district judge. Were the choice 
 etween the two systems, I must express with 
 erfect frankness my decided pieference for any 
 umber of co ordinate courts for the State, to any 
 istrict system at this time, and in our present 
 ondition. When our population and progress in 
 ivilization shall have spread over every quarter, 
 ities and villages, and hamle s; engaged in eve- 
 y variety of interest, arts and letters, strongly 
 manufacturing, strongly mercantile and strongly 
 gricltural, so that cutting the State into varied 
 istricts, which may notwithstanding, in all its 
 moral and social elements, be very similar to any 
 ther, then and not till then would I consent that 
 he State system should be yielded for the distuct 
 nd local system. Such in my judgment is not 
 ovv the case. If your judges are elected from 
 istricts, they will not be elected to be qualified 
 )r holding the courts any and every where in the 
 
675 
 
 State. In the minds of the persons who make the 
 nomination, in the minds of the voters, the mind o 
 the aspirating power to a judgeship,all his friends 
 and supporters will be able to say that he will bt 
 able satisfying themselves and* believing he is 
 equal to the moderate power necessary to adminis- 
 ter justice in the district- They will not believe 
 they will not think it necessary to believe that he 
 is equal to a perfect administration of justice, ir 
 any place and in any case. No, sir, your judge will 
 sink down to a district man sufficient and eq'ial to 
 do the little business his district may requite 
 hut he will not be any State judge, equal in pow- 
 er, intellect, knowledge and character to the per- 
 formance of the highest judicial functions through- 
 out the State. I prefer four or six co-ordinate 
 courts of lour judges each, cutting the State 
 into districts, as I think this report does, and cer- 
 tainly it allows the Legislature so to do it ; and I 
 am disposed to assent lo no other form. It is not 
 forme to deny that the report which I had the 
 misfortune to make, and which was lost in 1844; 
 and which expresses jn some tolerable degree the 
 opinion I still entertain hag in it errors and de- 
 fects, which a,ny one may discover and supply. 
 How then do I now think the courts should be 
 constituted? I believe that sixteen high judicial 
 officers are enough, although I will not insist on 
 that number, but will cheerfully go for twenty, or 
 even twenty. four. If you get the twenty, you will 
 probably be obliged to make the full term ten 
 years, and lhat is objectionable to me. If sixteen, 
 eight will be the proper term, and if twenty-four, 
 it would still make the term eight years. I do not 
 quarrel with tiie report on account of the number, 
 I only remark this, that in my judgment, the mo- 
 ment the ntunbe,' exceeds what can easily and pro- 
 perly constitute a court of errors that moment 
 you enfeeble the state system, instead of strength, 
 ening it for i contend that whoever is a state 
 judge, should sit in last resort, should sit in bane, 
 should sit at the circuit, and no man should be 
 allowed to sit in either of these places, unless 
 he does fairly and in a working manner, s-rt in 
 
 If he does this, his weight of charac- 
 and moral, his deserved weight of 
 
 them all. 
 ter, legal 
 
 character, when he comes to that court makes 
 his decision satisfactory to a vast extent, but if 
 you send to that court men who do not sit in 
 bane, and know the whole law by hearing it 
 there, who do not sit in last resort and hear it 
 argued there if you send men who do not sit 
 in these two places to hold circuit courts, neither 
 counsel or client will respect his adverse decis- 
 ion. You will say, and say rightly, he is a mere 
 district judge, he never sits in bane, he has no 
 better opportunity of knowing the law than I 
 have, arid he must learn the law by reading only 
 the same books that my counsel reads, and he 
 has vastly less time to do it than my counsel. 
 It is one of the misfortunes of the present system, 
 that it invites appeals and writs of error. If 
 your judge in bane is not known to be a judge of 
 the court of last resort, if all men do not see and 
 feel it, they will not respect the judgment of the 
 court in bane. They will go up to your court of 
 last resort, whatever it may be, and overwhelm 
 and burthen it with their discontents. To avoid 
 tins, your man who comes to hold the circuit 
 must be known and felt to be an able jud"-e in 
 
 bane, and in court of last resort. This ig 
 the only way in which you can make the ad- 
 ministration of justice satisfactory and respect- 
 able, in my opinion. I would yield to the twenty 
 judges, cheerfully to twenty-four, though I be- 
 lieve that sixteen would be enough. I will not 
 dwell on the arrangements which in rny opinion 
 are necessary,'! will merely say that the judge 
 should at least once in each year be compelled to 
 hold a share of the circuits sitting alone, without 
 an associate. I know how a stupid man, preserv- 
 ing a mysterious silence, supported by able asso- 
 ciates, can look wise upon t/ie bench. I desire 
 to see him put upon trial let him sit once a year 
 in the circuit alone, with the whole public to be 
 his judge let them see and know who and what 
 he is and if the judge will not do this, let him 
 be removed. Then, whenever he is nominated, 
 and becomes a candidate for one of these places, 
 he will know and feel his friends will know and 
 feel the voters will know and feel that sitting 
 upon the bench unsupported by an associate, 
 through every year, in all places of the State, in 
 the fields, in the hamlets, m the villages, and in 
 the cities, he must meet the uncounted thousands 
 of men must speak justice and the truth must 
 act where he can have no help he must be a liv- 
 ing man. If there be any thing in human affairs 
 that will secure you a good nomination, and a 
 good judge, it will be by putting him in this se- 
 vere position of trial; and I never will consent 
 I may be forced to submit to it that any man 
 shall sit in bane or last resort, unless he 
 has passed safely and successfully through 
 this ordeal. I know that members of the 
 bar cannot, ought not, to speak too freely 
 of the judge. My counsel may be willing 
 to hazard his own bread, but he has no right 
 :o hazard my case, and if he speaks too freely of 
 :he character of the judge, he does put my rights 
 "n jeopardy. But when thousands are gathered 
 at the court house, there will be men fearing God 
 and God only, who will speak of the judge free- 
 y, of his capacity, of his ability, and of his deci- 
 sions. They will speak and will be heard. Let 
 the judge therefore hold his share of the circuits, 
 make it incumbent on him, and when he fails to 
 do it, let him give place to a better man. 
 Sir, I find this exercise of speaking rather severe, 
 md therefore almost repent that I have engaged 
 n it, and must contrive some method of abridge- 
 nent by which I shall bring myself to a close. 
 Perhaps I have said enough upon this subject to 
 ndicate my own conviction, and that is all I can 
 desire. I feel that every man here must have as 
 trong a solicitude for a good judicial system as I 
 can have, although he may not have been so unfor- 
 tunate as to have been an actor in the past. Hav- 
 ing seen what the past has been, it seems to me 
 that we ought either to have co-ordinate courts to 
 do the business or district courts. I have delivered 
 my mind sufficiently on the subject, and given 
 my decided preference for the first. I know from 
 the past, from all that exists, that if there was re- 
 quired only one or two co-ordinate courts it would 
 be agreed to without difficulty ; but gentlemen 
 seem to fear when we come to make four or five. 
 I can yield on this subject a great deal, I can 
 yield as I did in 1844 to make one of these co- 
 ordinate courts exclusively a court of law, and one 
 
676 
 
 exclusively a court of equity, but in yielding this, 
 I cannot yield the convictio'n strong and abiding, 
 that whether chancellor or law judge, the ordeal 
 of which I have spoken at the circuit, is one 
 through which he should pass. 
 
 We come then, sir, to another question 
 presented in this report, on which we have 
 had a debate, extremely difficult and technical, 
 and that is shall we join in the same tribunal 
 the power to administer the remedies at law and 
 in equity. Gentlemen objected that this would 
 make the forms at law and in equity an amalga- 
 mated mass. Sir, the very use of such a figure 
 of speech, shows that no such process is in the 
 mind. Men do not use a figure of speech in a 
 matter of this sort, where the mind sees with any 
 clearness what it would do. It is a figure of 
 speech to alarm, to excite fear, and grows out of 
 fear and a troubled mind. It is not the result of 
 a clear distinct view, or strong and well directed 
 judgment on the subject. I therefore go back to 
 the question made by the report, and avow that in 
 my own conviction, the report upon the subject is 
 ^entirely right, that the same judicial tribunal shall 
 be vested with the power to administer the reme- 
 dies known to us as common law remedies,where 
 proper; and equity remedies where they are de- 
 sirable. I may not follow gentlemen in their 
 history upon this subject, although I differ with 
 them to a very considerable degree. Why may 
 not the judge have the power to administer to 
 the party, what in his case the law determines to 
 be a proper and necessary remedy ? Why should 
 he be obliged, if he wants one remedy, to go to 
 one court,^and if he wants another to go into an- 
 other? The subject matter is the same. Well sir, 
 the best argument I have heard, and I was glad to 
 hear it, was from the gentleman from Essex as to 
 the saving of labor, facility and despatch in bus- 
 iness. If I supposed it could have that effect, I 
 should extremely regret it, and would go with 
 him to keep them separate, but then we should 
 meet a double barrier in the way, because in 
 many instances we should find that these two 
 classes of courts have concurrent jurisdiction, 
 and we should frequently be embarrassed to know 
 in which to proceed. When we go into one 
 court, we should be told gentlemen you are un- 
 der a mistake, you should have gone the other 
 road, and when we travelled a little on the other 
 road; we are liable again to be advised that we 
 were in error. I have listened to the gentleman's 
 argument and his idea of the great benefit that 
 would be attained in the saving of labor, but I 
 can see nothing in it, nothing so great as to 
 counterbalance the evil that would grow out of 
 it. In the matter of reforming the practice and 
 the pleadings of the courts and the body of the 
 law itself, I do not believe that in my own mind. I 
 go farther than other gentlemen who while they 
 express their wishes seem determined not to move. 
 If the gentleman from Essex, with a commission 
 to aid him, should reform the pleadings and prac- 
 tice in equity and if some gentleman equally ob- 
 stinate to keep the jurisdictions of the two courts 
 separate, should be called upon with an able com- 
 mission to aid him, to reform the pleadings and 
 practice at law, when they came to be compared 
 it could not fail but that they would have fused 
 and assimilated all the cases in which these two 
 
 courts have concurrent jurisdiction. For each of 
 them would inevitably seek the best cours. 
 proceeding and pleading, and each adopting the ' 
 best course, their two courses, so far as the courts 
 have concurrent juris'diction,would almost inevit- 
 ably be precisely similar, and thus would sweep 
 away a very large mass of the jurisdiction claim- 
 ed either for one or the other. So too they would 
 fuse and-let in any defence which is now allowed 
 in one court and denied in the other. I desire 
 nothing impossible in this matter, I ask that 
 the pleadings at law may be so reformed as 
 to be intelligible, I do not go farther than the 
 gentleman from Columbia. I ask that they may 
 give the information they deem proper to give. 
 Do this and I am satisfied. In relation to plead- 
 ings in equity, I a?k that they may be reformed on 
 precisely the same principle that the party may 
 state his case that the defendant may answer 
 and state his own case. I desire that in either of 
 these classes of pleadings, where a fact is alleged, 
 a party may have the opportunity of saying that 
 he cannot answer as to that,because he is not in- 
 formed. '"I desire nothing impossible throughout 
 the whole of it, and when the gentleman from 
 Essex comes to a case in equity, the argument 
 may be made to conform to the ordinary proceed- 
 ings of law, or any course of proceeding that will 
 enable him the best to secure his ends. For 
 whatever the form of action may be, whatever the 
 tribunal in which it is pursued, or whatever the 
 course of pleading or practice adopted, I only 
 desire that it may be the best that human inge- 
 nuity'can devise, to effect the best remedy that 
 human wisdom can suggest. I care not whether 
 it is borrowed from the Roman or the civil law on 
 the one side, or from the German nation or the 
 common law on the other. And I believe that 
 from the expression of gentlemen here^this is the 
 sum and substance of their own desires of reform. 
 Has there ever been a day or a time when it was. 
 proposed to make a change that somebody was 
 not alarmed? and I do not say that it is not right 
 that they should be. When a late act of parlia- 
 ment in Great Britain swept away fifty-four writs 
 at one breath, do you believe that there were not 
 alarm and terror through the whole profession in 
 that kingdom but it seems to be admitted that 
 the British Constitution had gone along very well 
 without those fifty-four writs. And these changes- 
 in law and equity have been going on. Why no- 
 thing was more alarming than the rule set up in 
 equity ,that where a man agreed that if he did not 
 pay a thousand dollars on a certain day, that he 
 would pay two on his penal bond, the chancellor 
 would relieve against this agreed penalty. The 
 judges of the courts of law resisted it, as a very 
 great and high-handed act of injustice. Why the 
 man agreed that if he did not pay the thousand 
 dollars on a certain day he would pay two; and he 
 should be held to his bond, and he issued execu. 
 tion accordingly. The court of chancery thought 
 not, and said, sir, you shall not have your execu- 
 tion for any more than the money actually due 
 and interest. Parliament came to the aid of the 
 suitor and ordered that the real debt and interest 
 or ascertained damage only should be levied and 
 the opposite opinions were fused into a uniform 
 rule ; and I have not heard that anybody was 
 alarmed because the two jurisdictions were fused 
 
677 
 
 in that instance. Take the case mentioned by 
 the gentleman 1'rom Essex. His contractor, who, 
 notwithstanding he received a notice not to go 
 on, notwithstanding he was offered all that 
 was due to him and all that he could have 
 made if he finished his labor, went on and 
 brought a suit at law and recovered, and then, 
 UK- Chancellor and the court of last resort with 
 him, agreed that it was highly unjust after he had 
 this notice, after these, oilers had been made to 
 him, for him to go on and undertake in this way 
 to get money out of the defendant; and relief was 
 decreed on a bill in equity. Now I ask the gen- 
 tleman whether it would have shaken the con- 
 stitution of civilized society, if the law had 
 wisely said, the defendant may make the de- 
 fence in a court of law, he may allege and 
 prove that he offered pay, not only for all 
 that was due, but all that could have been 
 made by the process. I say if legislation had 
 thought proper to say that this matter might be 
 set up as a defence, would it have ruined the world, 
 would such a fusion of jurisdiction have brought 
 on any possible mischief. It would have at least 
 saved a long vexatious suit in equity, to get rid 
 of an unjust judgment at law. It is now an ad- 
 mitted rule in equity that in a mere civil suit the 
 party may be examined as a witness against him- 
 self, but in a peculiar manner by bill, and if the 
 defendant wishes the complainant's answer as 
 evidence, he must file a cross bill to get it. 
 Now I ask if the legislature should bring this 
 rule into the courts of law and equity, and say 
 that either party may call upon the other, up- 
 on the same principle, to give evidence on an 
 issue or tn-il at law or inequity. 1 ask wheth- 
 er this fusion would alarm or endanger the 
 rights o pioperty? It would render useless 
 a great many torms now necessary in equity, and 
 a great many suits ; and would enable the courts 
 to do strict justice in many cases in which they 
 now cannot. I arn not so easily to be alarmed. 
 Gentlemen seem to suppose that because these ju- 
 risdictions have got separate, they must remain 
 so. Sir, I believe the history of the subject would 
 show the very contrary. This equity law is en- 
 tirely the Roman civil law, i til used into the com- 
 mon law of Greai Britain ;aiid what was that law ? 
 It was not, as has been supposed, the law of a 
 despot. Nosir, it was the judge made law of tree 
 Rome, matured and improved by the judges arid 
 priest^, for long centuries, and copied again and 
 again into the proctor's book, and digits and codes 
 of the lawyers, and then collected by the impe- 
 rial commission into a code. It was not made, 
 but gathered together by a despot, if you choose to 
 call him so, thirteen hundred years after. It had 
 been brought to maturity in a civilized country. 
 It was not a savage code. No, sir j it was a high- 
 ly civilized body of law, acknowledging the rights 
 of property with a distinctness, closeness and ac- 
 curacy that has never been excelled, if it has been 
 equalled. And what was the boasted common 
 Ja.\ ? If any part of the judicial proceedings of 
 Rome went into Great Britain, it died with the R - 
 man there. But when ihe Anglo, the Dane, arid 
 Norinan had pressed his hostile foot upon the soil 
 of Britain, estabhsning a military rule, and the 
 feudal system in the end, and when sucieiy had 
 giown somewhat out of de&potisui, it availed ltddf 
 
 of the common law. And what is it? Born in 
 battle, civil broil and conflict, it was like itself. 
 It had continued in an emergency to stand linn 
 by personal rights, and had called the trial by jury 
 into existence. By this means the law became 
 separated, from the fact; the former to be declared 
 by the permanent judges, and the latter to be found 
 by the jurors. A few days since I expressed the 
 opinion that these trials by jury were the' great 
 school of civil wisdom for our people. It is more. 
 The judge is obliged to explain the law to twelve 
 sensible men. He is therefore obliged to state 
 the law in a manner so plain that it may be un- 
 derstood by the body of the citizens. The courts 
 have been thus obliged, as far as practica- 
 ble, to make the law plain and intelligible. 
 I desire to retain the jury and every just remedy 
 of the common law. When the remedy is just, 
 necessary and proper, retain it. I desire to retain 
 the just enlightened liberalty of the equity law and 
 all its valuable remedies, and as far as practica- 
 ble apply them by means of the common law ma- 
 chinery and where, from the nature of the sub- 
 jeect, this can not be done, we must employ these 
 remedies by the means familiar in the civil law. 
 With this view r of the subject, no man will ac- 
 cuse me of desiring to get rid of the many excel- 
 lent remedies this highly civilized law offered. 
 No civilized society can exist without these reme- 
 dies, and if you repeal them to-day, and declare 
 that they shall not exist, they will grow up in 
 despite of your declaration. Men must have 
 remedies to suit their condition if those that you 
 give them do not, they never will and never can 
 remain quiet. Year after year of turmoil and 
 trouble must succeed the agitation may shake 
 the government to its foundation, but right,under 
 God, must at last be brought in and offered to 
 men. The reason is obvious; without it there 
 can be no justice, and man must struggle for a 
 miserable existence. Without justice there can 
 be only fraud and violence. There can be neith- 
 er peace or progress and it will never answer 
 for government to say take these poor inefficient 
 unsatisfactory remedies, this distress, insult and 
 abuse, under the false pretence of securing men 
 in their rights. In God's name,then, why should 
 we cling to the bad, and refuse to adopt the good 
 If the common law in certain cases offers a better 
 remedy than any w r e can form or devise, why un- 
 der heaven should we cast it off. There is no 
 man here who desires, no man elsewhere who 
 can desire it. Whatever he may say the high- 
 wayman himself, if not before, yet after he has 
 gathered his spoils, is obliged to call on the arm 
 of justice to defend him in his possession. So 
 civilized man in every relation in which he is 
 placed, is obliged to desire and ask for justice at 
 the hands of the government will have it, and 
 will in the end command it. Men must live in 
 safety and peace. They must have remedies, they 
 will have them and they will have the best that 
 their wisdom can devise, and if they find them 
 in the Roman law, in the German law, or in any 
 other, they will have them, they must have them. 
 I do not desire to destroy, I ask to see improve- 
 ment. I might make the same remarks of the 
 body of the law itself, but I will not. There is 
 nothing in it that is right and good, that 1 desire 
 to see annihiliated, nothing in it that is bad or 
 
678 
 
 evil, that any one here can desire to see contin- 
 ued. And why should we not be filled with 
 alarm and terror, because an effort is made to get 
 rid of what cannot well be endured. Sir, we hold 
 back too long. -.Is it not certain, that these very 
 difficulties which agitate us here now, if the 
 remedy offered in 1841 and 1844, had been adopt- 
 ed, would have been removed in part at least, 
 and we largely relieved from our present evils ? 
 Sir, we submit to a long holding to errors after 
 they are admitted, and asking society to bear with 
 them too long. But men will not be quiet while 
 they are oppressed it matters not whether from 
 design or error. Arsenic taken, will produce cer- 
 tain death, though administered by a friend. In 
 looking over this question and hearing the argu- 
 ments, I have seen nothing to alarm me. Some 
 individuals wish to go farfher than others, and it 
 seemed to me after all.that my friend from Essex 
 is just as liable to be hung for his seditious opin- 
 ions, as I am. My friend from Columbia wants 
 some reform also. It goes well enough until you 
 touch me; avoid that and you may reform any body 
 else, but touch me and then war to the knife, ft 
 seems to me that this matter of reform in relation 
 to the judicial system, lies within a very narrow 
 compass. The common law and its form of pro- 
 ceedings, and 1 put no more trust in its forms 
 than I do in any other mere form are admirably 
 suited to administer justice, where a cer- 
 tain sum of money, or piece of property, or 
 both united, does really constitute a just reme- 
 dy but go beyond that one step and the ac- 
 tion at the common law will not go with you. 
 If any thing is involved but a certain sum of 
 money ,or a certain piece of property,it would say 
 to you, we cannot understand you. It has been 
 taught many things by the courts of equity, and 
 it has been taught many by legislation, and it 
 has learned and I think will yet learn in various 
 ways, to give a man some sort of justice that does 
 not consist merely in a horse or in dollars and 
 cents. I think it can. I do not believe old and 
 unfair as it looks,it has so lost its vigor and force, 
 as not to be able to grapple with these reforms. It 
 has sloughed off fifty of its heads, I might say hun- 
 dreds, and was it Jess strong for the change. I 
 like its mode of trial, its jury, and any improve- 
 ment of it, that is practicable. In speaking a few 
 days since, I regarded the jury as the highest 
 school ot civil wisdom arnon- us. I go one step 
 further When the judge is obliged to make his 
 law so that it will be understood by twelve men, 
 there is some hope at least, that he would make 
 it plain enough to be understood by those who are 
 affected by it. But if the judge is left at liberty 
 to make the law plainly to himself, in his cham- 
 ber, his metaphysical distinctions, to his hair- 
 splitting process, this would uever be secur- 
 ed. But if he was obliged to submit the law 
 in these elaborate classes of chancery suits, 
 in a mode of trial known to the common law 
 to make his law understood by twelve men, 
 and possibly by others my word for it, if you 
 will compel the judge to go and hold his share of 
 the circuits, notwithstanding the number of par- 
 ties sometimes concerned in a chancery suit, not- 
 withstanding the complicated equity, if you will 
 compel the Chancellors to go and hold the courts, 
 thoy will soon devise modes of pleading and 
 
 practice, by which the disputed facts in a chance- 
 ry suit can be submitted to a jury. You have 
 tried by law to make them do it, but you have 
 not succeeded. But send him to the circuits, and 
 compel him there to try causes in the courts of 
 law by a jury, and he will soon find some mode 
 regulating the rules of pleadings in equity by 
 which nine-tenths of the chancery causes will be 
 tried by juries as common law issues are; and as 
 to the other tenth, I do not see the reason why 
 they should be any more complicated or dif- 
 ficult than many of the actions of assumpsit. 
 The difficulty is that the Chancellor can set at 
 chambers he is not obliged to go to the circuit 
 he can leave the issue to be joined by the present 
 general replication, and can send the matter to an 
 Examiner. Then he can get the bundle of pa- 
 pers, and he can read them over until his room is 
 rilled and his court becomes a mummery, buried 
 in unfinished business. But send him to the circuit, 
 tell him to hold his share of the courts, and I 
 venture nothing in the declaration that he will 
 invent modes by which nine-tenlhs of the chan- 
 cery causes will be decided in a few hours, as to 
 the disputed facts, by a jury I have another rea- 
 son why these two jurisdictions in our state, must 
 and should be blended in the same courts. If you 
 will keep them separate then I submit that you 
 must have two courts for the correction of errors 
 a double spotted, double headed judiciary. 
 That I know you cannot agree to. How then will 
 it stand? If you do not allow the law judges to have 
 some matters of practice in what you call the 
 equity cases, how can your law judges act effi- 
 ciently and safely as a court to correct the errors 
 of the equity tribunals. And are equity judges 
 alone to be substituted to correct errors in courts 
 of law, where they do not practice in the law 
 courts ? I desire to avoid such an absurdity. It 
 seems to me that the two remedies may well be 
 administered in the same tribunals, and that the 
 judges will thus be qualified to sit in the court of 
 errors. I do not see because the remedies are 
 difierent, the necessity of having a different tribu- 
 nal for each. It appears to me~a much more na- 
 tural rule to divide not by law and equity, but by 
 actions for injuries on the one side, and on con- 
 tracts on the other. That would look like a natural 
 division. But our own experience shows that it is 
 not necessary, and the experience in the federal 
 courts shows that these two jurisdictions can be 
 safely blended in the same magistrate, in the same 
 tribunal. If that be so, then surely it would be a 
 great improvement in the court of errors, to have 
 judges able to deal with both these branches of 
 law. As to the division of labor that is urged in fa- 
 vor of the separation, I hope by uniting and 
 strengthening the two courts, we shall be able to 
 get along with all the business that has hitherto 
 overwhelmed the courts. 
 
 It seems in the course of the debate here, to 
 have been supposed that courts of equity have 
 some power to dispense with the law. In an 
 early and valorous age such a power may properly 
 be exercised by the court, as we know it was by 
 the sovereign. It was one of the prerogatives of 
 the crown to dispense with an act of parliam<'nr, 
 and perhaps it was the prerogative of the Chancel- 
 lor to dispense with the law. In^the days of Lord 
 Bacon some doubt may have hung over the ques- 
 
679 
 
 whether i he Chancellor could dispense | inevitable necessity ; and you never have, you will 
 witl'i the laws. It is pretty certain that in the not, and I say you dare not confer this power 
 
 u;mn a justice of the peace, to set aside a default* 
 In Every court that will do justice to man, deserving 
 
 pretty 
 
 ling reiu;n, tint of Henry the VIII. 
 somewhat celebrated for his dispensations. 
 
 -Lc of Coke and Bacon there may have been 
 doubts on the subject; but the authorities were 
 
 _ that the Chancellor had no such power, 
 
 and in the succeeding reign no such power w;is 
 
 i i _j A * i-u;^. *;,,,. i- 
 
 of the name of justice, must have the power in 
 proper cases, to permit an amendment of the 
 pleadings, to permit new pleadings of the new 
 matter that may have occurred since the last pro- 
 
 or has ever since beeq claimed. At this time in | ceedings. You never have, you never will grant 
 this state or the United States and in Great to justices of the peace the power in any case 
 Britain for more 
 
 court of equity Iras claimed or exercised the 
 : to modify or soften the rigor of the law or 
 grant relief on mere grounds of moral right, 
 or conscience, that was not given it by fixed rules 
 of law. Even in the extracts read by the gentle- 
 man from Essex, it was the better opinion of Ba- 
 con, that a court of equity was as much bound .by 
 bw as a court of law, and it has been so in every 
 tribunal for 150 years. This notion that a court 
 of equity will of necessity do right, is entirely fal- 
 lacious, unless it be that the law in equity and 
 the mode of proceeding, is better to reach what 
 would be morally right. It is in no degree the 
 superior of the courts of common law. It has not 
 forced itselt upon men men have been obliged to 
 resort to it as a means to supply defects of the 
 common law, and in every instance it has pro- 
 ! the very remedies which were deficient and 
 wanting at common law. Now it appears to me 
 that there is no danger in the matter, no difficulty 
 in it, and yet I know how fearful other men are 
 on the subject. I could therefore yield, and say 
 make four co-ordinate courts, one a court exclu- 
 sively of law, another entirely a court of equity, 
 and leaving to the other two to be both law and 
 equity, and ler. it be tried and settled by the force 
 of huma.i experience. Then I insist, whether 
 we join or keep them separate, that the chancel- 
 lor like all other judges shall go down and hold 
 his share of the circuit, and if he would not, he 
 should be swept from the woolsack. This part 
 of the report relating to the blending of the juris- 
 dictions, I agree to ; and think that the committee 
 . are entitled to the thanks of the country for bring- 
 ing the question before the Convention, and whe 
 ther their proposition is the best or not, I approve 
 entirely of their expressing it in the form they 
 have adopted. As it is, the union of the two juris 
 dictions is most plainly expressed. 
 
 I must hasten over other matters, and some I 
 must entirely omit. And the next is. what shall 
 be done with the local county courts. Sir, the 
 report by reserving and preserving the justices oi 
 the peace, does admit that local courts are indis- 
 
 than an hundred years no however strong the necessity, to allow of this 
 amendment of the pleadings before them. 
 
 Mr. STRONG: Does the gentleman say that 
 hey do not have that power now by law ? 
 rMr. HOFFMAN : Yes, sir. I understand what 
 I am saying. Such a power must be exercised by 
 motion, on fixed rules of piactice and regular no- 
 ice to the other side, and must submit to the 
 onns necessary. You have not and will not grant 
 them thi power. Every tribunal that would do 
 justice deserving of the name, must have the' 
 power under certain circumstances to grant a new> 
 
 trial, and on the justices' courts you never have 
 
 you do not now permit a new trial to be granted 
 by the court itself. Hitherto you have not, here- 
 after you may grant the justice - a jury box, in his 
 town or adjoining one, to draw his jury. When 
 tried, it will probably be found to be a total fail- 
 ure, as gentlemen know, who know how the 
 drawing of a jury for a court of record is made to 
 succeed It is by drawing a great number, and 
 the list of twelve or twenty-four is attained by a 
 list of thirty-six, or more. But in attempting 
 to get a jury box for the justices, you proba- 
 bly will create so much distress in summoning 
 so many, that instead of lessening, you will 
 increase the mischief. There are other re- 
 medies essential to enable a court to do jus- 
 respect, esteem and 
 Yet there are many 
 
 local demands, small in amount to be sure, yet 
 great in the aggregate dear to the men who own 
 them, that deserve the kindest care, and the 
 safest operation of justice in a free country. And 
 I say to you that it appears to me that the local 
 tribunal that you can arm with the powers of 
 justice, in which you can make the proceeding 
 at the same time safe, and yet the cheapest, is the 
 tribunal of the county court. There you can 
 move to set aside the proceeding and you can do 
 it with safety. There you can vest the power of 
 appointing referees to take an account, and it 
 is as much 'needed in small accounts to the 
 amount of twenty or thirty dollars as any other, 
 and you cannot and will not vest this power in a 
 justice of the peace. There you can vest the 
 power to grant a new trial, and you have done it, 
 and it has been exercised and practiced for more 
 than half a century. There all these powers 
 are known to be safe and there they can 
 be exercised cheaply it depends only upon 
 legislation whether they shall be exercised 
 dear or cheap. There you can make jus- 
 tice what it ought to be, safe to the rights of the 
 citizen, cheap as is in your power to make it any 
 where, and L ask if you will destroy a tribunal 
 you can improve so much, and trust thai to the 
 justices' court which you dare not approve? Are 
 not men who are now obliged to sue in justices' 
 courts, as wtll entitled to the same justice as any 
 
 tice, and entitle it to the 
 confidence of the people. 
 
 pensable iit does assume the position that the 
 county courts are not. Now, sir, I am constrain- 
 ed to differ from the report on this part of the 
 subject, and for reasons entirely unacceptable to 
 some members of the Convention. The report 
 proposes to retain the justices of the peace as civil 
 courts I speak of it only on that point, and 
 gentlemen here have followed up the suggestion 
 that these civil courts should have given to them 
 a larger jurisdiction than they now possess. Ue- 
 fore gentlemen commit themselves upon the mat- 
 ter, I invite their attention to the necessity of the 
 case. Every court that will do justice, for it can- 
 not do justice without it, must have a power to 
 set aside a default, where the default arises from 
 
680 
 
 otner in the State ? Certainly they are. But it 
 has been supposed that the proceedings in justi- 
 ces' courts could be made so much cheaper, and 
 therefore men desire to be fed with cheap justice, 
 which when it comes to them, will be actual in. 
 justice and oppression. But the justice there will 
 not be so much cheaper as in the first instance we 
 would be led to suppose. If I employ counsel to 
 join my issue as against you, if you are an unpro- 
 fessional man, must you not also employ counsel ? 
 So, too, on the trial;' if these two pettifogging or 
 counsel fees are united to those of the court wit- 
 nesses and constable, it will be found, putting 
 them all together, that you do not there succeed 
 in getting even cheap justice, however bad its 
 quality may be. God forbid that I should condemn 
 the justice or 'any body about him. because for this 
 office you neve? have, you never will, give him the 
 powers necessary to do justice. When you consider 
 the circumstances under which he acts a body ot 
 law of 10,000 volumes, and be obliged to look 
 it up the jury summoned from the neighborhood 
 the justice who may have previously heard the 
 cause because he must have issued the process 
 when you view the circumstances under which 
 he comes to the discharge of his duties not al- 
 lowed to set aside a default not allowed any rea- 
 sonable amendment of the pleadings, for he has 
 no form of practice not allowed to grant a new 
 trial not allowed to do anything that you deem 
 indispensable to a court of justice. If these things 
 are not necessary, why give them to the Supreme 
 Court, and the county court. If they are not ne- 
 cessary, if they are not essential to justice, why 
 have they for the last two hundred years been en- 
 grafted on the practice of all the courts, where 
 you could hope for justice. They are essential, 
 and we know' that no court can do this duty with- 
 out them ; and we ought not to drive the mass of 
 the people into courts of justice, where you do 
 not send the power to administer justice. Nor is 
 there any necessity for doing it. Heretofore to 
 the small amount of twenty-five dollars, you have 
 allowed justices to try causes, and not above it. 
 If there were errors, there was the certiorari, and 
 the parties were sure of a remedy ; and up to that 
 amount I admit that the justices have exercised 
 their jurisdiction without any very considerable 
 complaint. Men have gone upon the principle 
 that it was better to lose a small sum than to sue. 
 But when you come to sums above twenty-five 
 dollars, you say in effect that the justice shall not 
 trj the cause, because you authorize an appeal 
 to the county courts. Well sir, what has been the 
 consequence of this attempt to remedy the evils 
 in the justices' jurisdiction ? How much better 
 would it be to say to the parties, before the tri- 
 al in the justices' courts, it your elect,you may now 
 remove your causes into the county courts. It 
 would be better a thousand fold. The cause is 
 not now tried in the justices' court. Each tries 
 to conceal his own case and evidence, and fishes, 
 as the lawyers say, to find out what the other will 
 prove. The appeal is then entered, and then the 
 manufacture of testimony, the improvement of 
 witnesses, goes on from that day until the trial in 
 the common pleas. And who that has attended 
 them has not seen, known and felt this to be the 
 case ; the worst curse to the parties the cause 
 of crime and corruption on the new trial, and 
 
 the reason why days are taken to try an appeal 
 in the common pleas, that would have been tri- 
 ed in as many hours, if the cause had been brought 
 there in the first instance. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that in his remarks in 
 the morning,he had been trying to show why the 
 justices' courts would not answer the purposes of 
 safe, proper and judicial action. Some had sup- 
 posed that the difficulty could be overcome by 
 making a law for this especial purpose. But 
 when this has to be done, the ways and means 
 have to be found to effect the same. The prin- 
 ciple he had spoken of must be fixed, established 
 and realized. By giving to the justices' courts 
 the powers which had been proposed, you injure 
 them, unless you also give them the means and 
 the rules necessary for the proper exercise of 
 those powers. He believed that they could not 
 with propriety, and that they dare not give them 
 all the power necessary to make them safe courts. 
 If you reduce the number of justices say to 40 
 justices in the small counties, and 60 in the large 
 counties, converting them into a sort of common 
 pleas, with the powers of those courts perhaps 
 you might render them safe tribunals. But will 
 you do it ? Are there ten men in the Convention 
 that dare venture on it. Whilst the laws remain 
 so voluminous as they now are, you will not do 
 it ; you will not empower the panel of juries 
 to draw for three or four times the number re- 
 quired, as you now do in the court of record. -. 
 You draw 24, and you do not get 16 ; you draw 
 18, and you do not get 12. Will this make justice 
 safe ? God of Heaven ! Is anything that is in- 
 secure safe. Or is it justice ? No, indeed! You 
 must find few courts where you may trust this 
 power. 
 
 He went on to say that the evils he complained 
 of were the fault of" the present system; and that 
 the reforms contemplated, never could be effected 
 under the present system. The trial might be 
 made, but it would prove a failure. Again, there 
 was no necessity for any such trial. He asked 
 if it was not possible in any county to procure 
 two good, competent judges of high standing and 
 character, to preside in a court something like the 
 present county courts, which shall exercise local 
 powers of indispensable necessity. You can ele- 
 vate their position and the character of these 
 courts by an adequate and proper compensation; 
 for justice is at least not so poor, that it cannot 
 afford to be paid lor. Can you not also always get 
 one goo : d man to act as Surrogate, if you pay him 
 for it? Most certainly you can; another could be 
 made a Supreme Court commissioner, with pow- 
 ers to act in cases of absconding debtors, &c., and 
 various cases which he (Mr. H.) would not then 
 enumerate. In large counties you may carry the 
 number of these to three, and where necessary 
 even to four. He would have all these justly 
 and adequately compensated ; for, he conten- 
 ded, that if you pay for justice, you buy noth- 
 ing so cheap on earth. You can get two, three, 
 or lour good, competent, able, honest.f coun- 
 ty judges, if by the constitution you fix the rule 
 that they shall be paid tor it; and in this particu- 
 lar make the proper apportionment throughout the 
 state, according to the population. They could also 
 reform and simplify the proceedings in all the 
 courts ; and make them simpler, and cheaper; 
 
681 
 
 'ould give the jurisdiction inequity, in mat- 
 
 re entirely local, to these judges. A 
 
 man may say, "Sir, I will not b tried in this 
 
 town I will not b:: tried in this county; he may 
 
 also say I will not be tried in your local courts 
 
 but I insist upon being tried in your state couits. 
 
 " You must provide for' this. You may go on and 
 
 a certiorari, where the ablest men in your 
 land are provided and prepared to administer jus- 
 Issues of law joined in your county courts 
 would require no jury. The clerk may assess the 
 damages, or the jury of inquiry may assess the 
 damages. You may divide your larger counties 
 into judicial districts. In the trial of a cause on 
 
 al from a justice, the judge may go down 
 into the district where the parties live, call for a 
 jury, and try it there ; and thus bring justice 
 close home to the doors of every one. And you 
 can have causes tried, justice administered, and 
 the dignity and the integrity of the laws preserv- 
 ed as cheap in this manner, as it can be made in 
 any human form, and make it safe ! Why then 
 should you destroy these county courts ? Why 
 when you need them ? why, when you can 
 make them useful ! when you can make them 
 respectable and valuable to the community in ev- 
 ery particular ? why, when you cannot do with- 
 out them ? Why, if when they ask for bread, you 
 do riot mean to give them a stone ? or if they ask 
 for a fish you do not mean to give them a serpent? 
 Having said thus much in relation to these courts, 
 he was entirely confident that the pla*n he had 
 proposed could be successfully put in practice and 
 that was all that he had to say on this part of the 
 subject. Mr. H. continued to say, that it seem- 
 ed to be supposed by some that the one-man term 
 the one-rnan power, might be continued as to 
 matters o ' practice. At least an argument or 
 statement to that effect had been advanced in the 
 Convention. But why would they, when a limb 
 has been torn away from the body, cut off the 
 other limb to make the man go even. The fatal 
 error of the Supreme Court, was by adopting the 
 one-man court, as to matters of practice. This 
 made it similar to a dark and dangerous cavern. 
 Few men went near it. It was without a bar 
 without the confidence of the people. And the 
 present suggestion he had alluded to, was nothing 
 but the old story revamped and renewed. If the 
 Convention intended to create courts that were to 
 live, let them have the means of life ; but Jet there 
 be no one-rnan term no one-man power. On a 
 writ of error, on a bill of exceptions, a one-man 
 term may be a possibility; if au error is commit- 
 ted you may carry it up you may thus get that 
 error corrected. But the other cases he had spo- 
 ken of, were too often matters of discretion. And 
 he would ask, is that the place where you would 
 put discretion ? The judgment may be set aside, 
 and the injury may be fastened on you forever. 
 Who ever heard ot' an appeal to a superior tribu- 
 nal for the purpose of setting aside a default ? 
 The lust thing which they should put into the 
 Constitution, was such a discretionary power as 
 this. It was a judicial impossibility. Some had 
 gone so far as to suppose that the evils he had 
 pointed out and denounced were to be continued. 
 He hoped to God they would not ! He hoped 
 that they would cease ! lie hoped that they 
 would never adopt such a system again ! The 
 
 
 continuation of it would not save the Supreme 
 Court ; it only tended to its final ruin. 
 
 There was one other point he would allude to. 
 If they were to have one keeper of the records, 
 the clerk of the city or county where the court in 
 bank is held, might safely act as clerk ; and in his 
 absence, the court might with safety appoint a 
 clerk pro tern. You could have him clerk of 
 the court or a temporary clerk ; and in each 
 case to receive no compensation, except such as 
 shall be fixed by law prior to the service. And 
 this system of clerkship may be adapted to any 
 of these courts; but unless it be made indispen- 
 sable to have this done, in the Constitution itself, 
 it will not be adopted. If this matter be left to 
 the Legislature, it never will be realized. 
 
 Mr. H. went on to complain of the great ex- 
 pense of these clerics; at present they cost the 
 state over $40,000 a year, and they cost the pro- 
 fession more than double that sum. He insisted 
 that this mass of judicial patronage would al- 
 ways be a prolific source of contention. All sorts 
 of arguments will be pressed forward in favor of 
 continuing this expensive and corrupt system ; 
 all sorts of inducements will be held out for their 
 continuance; and if this subject be left to the 
 legislature, the reform so universally called for 
 will never be realized. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that the state of his health 
 warned him that he must conclude. (He was 
 evidently suffering intense pain.) He knew how 
 painful it must be to others to listen to those who 
 spoke with pain. He knew that the members of 
 the Convention in their hearts desired to do the 
 very best they could, in reforming the judiciary 
 system. This was the day and hour that would 
 try them ; for here they were to make a system 
 that was to stand to all eternity recorded that it 
 was the best they could make, arid that they could 
 do no better. And this record would never lie. 
 It would tell to future generations that after 128 
 picked men from all parts of the state, had been 
 sent here to reform the judiciary system and af- 
 ter they had given their earnest attention for a 
 long period, that they had put forth this, as a wit- 
 ness that they could do no better. And when the 
 grave should close over them when their dust 
 should mingle with the common dust of the earth, 
 how strongly they must desire that no voice of 
 condemnation should corne down upon them, 
 when they stand forth in the hour of irial. They 
 might make the effort to prevent this, but still 
 the voice must be heard for praise or blame ; and 
 if they made a bad system, the voice of condem- 
 nation would be heard. If they made that which 
 should stand the test, it would be well for all ; if 
 not, it would be ill. But the voice must be heard ; 
 let it be that they have done nothing but their 
 duty, for no man can for a moment desire aught 
 but praises upon such a subject. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that it' in order he wished 
 to propose the following amendment : 
 
 Resolved, That the report of the Judiciary committee be 
 so arranged that sixteen of the Judges be so arrange.! into 
 four courts of general jurisdiction, one of which shall be a 
 .ourt of equity; eacli court to hold terms in .Bane at least 
 twico yearly in each of the four districts, and the other 
 sixteen judges to compose four courts of local jurisdiction 
 \vit:un a judicial distiict, one of which shall be a court of 
 equity, which shall hold respectively at court two terms in 
 Bane yearly in each of said disticts, and at different times 
 and places irom the other courU: The former courts to be 
 
 60 
 
682 
 
 entitled supreme courts, the latter superior courts; the 
 judges of the former to be selected for sixteen years; of 
 the latter for eight years. The Legislature shall have 
 power to constitute such county, city and town courts as 
 maybe deemed necessary; and to transfer such jurisdic- 
 tion and powers from the equity to the common law courts, 
 and from these to the former, and to prescribe such similar 
 and common forms of proceeding and of remedies, as may 
 be deemed practicable and expedient. 
 
 Mr. S. said that he proposed this amendment 
 in order to put himself right on paper. This a- 
 mendment while it would leave the legislature 
 free to assimilate the practice of the courts as the 
 exigencies of the times might demand, at the 
 same time prevented any confounding of courts 
 of general with courts of local jurisdiction. 
 At the same time it would give to the friends of 
 local jurisdiction, the same benefits precisely 
 that they could have from the report of the com- 
 mittee, and sustain the character of the courts of 
 general j urisdiction. He desired to have it print- 
 ed. 
 
 The CHAIR said a motion to print would on- 
 ly be in order when the committee had risen. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS further urged that the amend- 
 ment contained a principle which would recon- 
 cile the conflicting sentiments in the convention, 
 and secure a perfect unanimity of action. He 
 thought it afforded a perfect opportunity for a 
 compromise. 
 
 The CHAIR decided the proposition to be not 
 now in order. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS suggested that the gentleman 
 could secure his purpose by giving notice of his 
 resolution of instruction or amendment. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS adopted the suggestion. 
 
 The committee then rose and reported pro- 
 gress, and 
 
 Then the convention took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 FUNDS IN CHANCERY. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART, by the consent of the House, 
 presented a minority repoit from the select com- 
 iniUee, t> which was referred the letter, &c., of 
 the Chancellor, relative to the monies now under 
 the control of the Couit of Chancery. It is as 
 follows : 
 
 That having duly considered the subject of such com. 
 munication, he has arrived at the conclusion that it is inex- 
 pedient to provide lor the creation of any officer to take 
 charge ol such lunds; but that provision should be made 
 for the safe keeping, investment and disbursing of such 
 funds by such county and State officers as shall seem most 
 conducive to the benefit and convenience of the parties in- 
 terested therein; and tor that purpose recommends the fol- 
 lowing to be incorporated in the Constitution, either as a 
 separate article or as separate sections in some appropriate 
 article: 
 
 <b 1. The Legislature shall provide by law for transfer- 
 ring and depositing all funds and securities now held, or 
 which may hereatter be held by or under the control of 
 the Court ol Chancery, or ol any other court or courts, or 
 of any Register, Assistant Register, Clerk or Receiver of 
 any court, lor safe keeping, investment or disbursement, 
 in the State Treasury, or with a County Treasurer, as fol 
 lows: 
 
 1. All funds secured by real estate in any county with 
 all securities relating to the same with the County Treas- 
 urer of the county in which the real estate is situated. 
 
 2 All funds belonging to infants, widows or lunatics, not 
 secured by real estate, with the County Treasurer of the 
 county in which the infant, \vidow or lunatic entitled to 
 the same resides, if a resident of this State. 
 
 3. All funds arising from the sale of real estate hereafter 
 to ne made, directed to be invested by order of any court, 
 and all securities taken upon the sale ot real estate hereaf- 
 ter made by order or direction of any court, with the coun 
 
 ty treasurer of the county in which such real estate shall 
 be situated. 
 
 4. All other funds and securities mentioned in this sec- 
 tion, in the State Treasury or with the county treasury, as 
 shall be provided by law. 
 
 2. The Legislature shall provide by law that every 
 county treasurer having in his custody or under his con- 
 trol any of such funds or securities, shall account with the 
 board of supervisors of his county as often as shall be re- 
 quired lor the faithful execution of the trust reposed in 
 him as depository of such funds and securities, and shall 
 annually transmit a statement of such funds and securities 
 to the State Treasurer. 
 
 The report was ordered to be printed and to be 
 referred to the committee of the whole having 
 charge of the majority report. 
 
 The Convention then resolved itself into com- 
 mittee of the whole on 
 
 THE JUDICIARY- 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG in the Chair. 
 
 The question was then put on Mr. CHATFIELD'S 
 proposed amendment to the third section, so that 
 it should read: 
 
 " There shall be a supreme court having general juris- 
 diction in law and equity." 
 
 This amendment was adopted without a count. 
 
 The question then recurred on Mr. SWACKHA- 
 MER'S motion to F trike out the entire section, and 
 insert : 
 
 *' The judicial power shall be vested in one supreme 
 court, subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the court of 
 appeals : and in such subordinate courts as shall be pro- 
 vided by this constitution." 
 
 Ayes 22-, noes 34. No quorum. 
 
 A second time, there were ayes 24, noes 44. 
 Lost. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON now moved, as the commit- 
 tee seemed disposed to settle principles before 
 settling details,that the 12th section be now taken 
 up. That section was as follows : 
 
 " 5) 12. The justice of the supreme court shall be elected 
 by the electors oi the respective districts at^ such time as 
 may be provided by law but not within ninety days be. 
 fore or alter the general annual election " 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that this would occasion a 
 difficulty. How could they proceed lo poini out 
 the mode ot choosing the supreme court judi-s 
 before they knew the numbei they would have 
 They must decide on the number before they de- 
 cided whether they should be appointed or elected. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought that it was entirely 
 immaterial whether the number was more or less 
 in coming to a decision on their mode of appoint- 
 ment; they could easily say whether they should 
 be elected or appointed before they came to a de- 
 cision on the numbers. 
 
 JVir. BAKER withdrew his objection. 
 
 Mr. O'CUNOR suggested that a motion to amend 
 would bring up the whole question He thought 
 it desirable belore proceeding to lake up the 12th 
 section as proposed, that they should determine 
 whether they intend, d to, have county courts or 
 not. ^The 16th section proposed to abolish the 
 county courts. Now, a proposition to amend that 
 would bring up the whole question. The 12th 
 section contemplated district supreme courts 
 Now it must depend on the decision of this ques- 
 tion about county courts whether they would de- 
 cide on having the.e district supremecourts or not. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that he 'was by no means 
 satisfied with the vote on the 3d section ; and he 
 was not certain that he understood the effect of 
 that vote. Did it decide distinctly whether the 
 
683 
 
 Supreme Court was to have jurisdiction in law 
 and equity. He thought not. He wanted a vote 
 in some direct way as to whether the law and 
 i- 1] utty powers were to be vested in the same 
 <Miirt. And in order to get a direct vote on that 
 point, he would move to strike out of the section, 
 as amended, the words " and equity," so that it 
 should read, " There shall be a Supreme Court 
 having general jurisdiction in law." 
 
 Mr. BASCOM remarked that this presented a 
 very important question. He very much doubted 
 the propriety of increasing the number ot judges 
 who were to exercise chancery poweis from 
 eleven, the present number, to thirty-two. If, as 
 some supposed, it was impracticable to so assimi- 
 late the modes of proceeding in law and equity, 
 he would prefer to rest equity powers in four 
 chancellors, and the power of administering law 
 in a reasonable number of judges. But he believ- 
 ed it was practicable, and hence he had presented 
 a minority report, with a view to permit this as- 
 similation to take place, if the legislature choose 
 to do it. He suggested that this proposition left 
 room for the legislature lo make that distribution 
 of the legal ani equity poweTs~among the j4iei- 
 arVj_as the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) 
 desired. As it was, we had decided that we 
 would form a portion of a system, and leave the 
 legislature to form the rest. It this was to be the 
 result of this elaborate reform, and if that was the 
 settled determination of this body, then he had 
 only two lines to offer as a substitute for the whole 
 article to this effect, that the judicial power 
 shall be vested in such court or courts as shall be 
 established by law. He wanted the Convention 
 lo take the responsibility of establishing a judici- 
 ary system or of throwing it on the legislature. 
 For he was prepared, if any part of this responsi- 
 bility was thrown upon the legislature, to throw 
 the whole of it there. He only retained his 
 amendment to give the gentleman from Chautau- 
 que (Mr. MARVIN,) time to present distinctly the 
 question he desired to raise. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that it was the farthest from 
 his intention to declare, by any vote of his that 
 the courts of law and equity should be united and 
 merged in one. But he supposed that, he had vo- 
 ted under a misapprehension of what the ques- 
 tion was in reality when the amendment hereto- 
 fore passed had been voted upon. He had there- 
 lore at this time introduced this amendment so as 
 to raise the distinct question, as to whether they 
 would or would not abolish the court of chancery; 
 a vete on his proposition would decide it. For 
 his own part, he wished to see in the new Con- 
 stitution what there is in the present Constitu- 
 tion a provision to authorize the legislature to 
 confer on any courts of law such equity powers, 
 as they from time to time should see fit, and or- 
 ganize such subordinate courts as they might 
 deem necessary. And above all his desire was 
 to keep up the two courts with a separate and 
 distinct organization. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that under his present 
 understanding of the proposition of the gentle- 
 man from Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN) he should 
 vote against it. He (Mr. K.) did not consider 
 the proposition contained in this section as 
 necessarily involving the question whether they 
 were or were not to have but one single court 
 
 and that court to represent both the existing Su- 
 >reme court and the court of chancery. The pro- 
 >osition then before them and the amendment to 
 t, did not involve the question whether there 
 was to be one or more courts of chancery, but 
 whether equity and common law proceedings were 
 ;o be merged in one court ; whether they were 
 n favor of having the courts united in the same 
 ribunal. He certainly supposed that if the ju- 
 risdiction of these tyo were to be merged, there 
 would be a necessity for the erection of more than 
 ne court to dispatch all the business which must 
 necessarily be thrown upon such a tribunal. It 
 would at all events be necessary to have more 
 han one such court. All the business that is now 
 done by the circuit judges, the examiners, and 
 he greater part of that which is now done by the 
 masters, would have to be transacted by that 
 court. Now he (Mr. K.) should vote for the pro- 
 position, but in voting for it as it stood, he did so 
 lot suppose that he was voting for anything 
 more than this, viz : that we unite in one and the 
 ame ^ribunal or tribunals, the powers and duties 
 of these two courts, the existing tribunals of law 
 and equity or in other words, that these two 
 courts and their powers and duties, (in law and 
 equity) shall hereafter be vested in and exercised 
 y but one form of tribunal. And with these 
 lews., he should vote against Mr. MARVIN'S 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. HATFIELD asked Mr. K. how this sec- 
 tion differed in principle from' the gentleman'vS 
 wn report. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND stated in answer that the ju- 
 risdiction was the same in both. His (Mr. K.'s) 
 4th section, however, established more than one 
 ribunal. 
 
 Some further conversation passed between 
 Vfessrs. MARVIN and STETSON, in regard to the 
 effect which this amendment would have. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER hoped the amendment 
 would be voted down. This would go far to- 
 wards the settlement of the question whether that 
 old dragon, the court of chancery, was to be an- 
 nihilated. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM should vote for the amendment 
 for this reason. It might be that he misunder- 
 stood the effect of the proposition of the gentle- 
 man from Otsego. The section reported by the 
 committee provided that the Supreme Court 
 should have the same jurisdiction in law and 
 equity as the courts now have, subject to regula- 
 tion by law. Mr. B. objected to this, as not be- 
 ing definite enough, and would not authorize the 
 legislature to abolish the separate chancery ju- 
 risdiction. He wanted some provision in the 
 Constitution so defining the judicial power, that 
 we might know where to find it. But how stood 
 the section now ? There shall be a superior 
 court having general jurisdiction in law and 
 equity. Mr. B. objected to this word general, 
 because if it meant any thing it meant the juris- 
 diction now existing, and thus we should sanc- 
 tion all the equity powers of the court of chance- 
 ry as now existing. And to make the matter 
 worse, the words " subject to regulation by law," 
 were left out. Now, Mr. B. would vote to get 
 this word ** equity" out of this section, and when 
 it should be moved to insert it elsewhere, he 
 would probably be found voting against that. 
 
684 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD could scarcely find out what 
 the gentleman wanted. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM I want to leave the constitu- 
 tion in that particular as it is, and let the legisla- 
 ture regulate this subject of jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD Then the gentleman wants 
 more than when he brought in his report. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM Not at all. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD referred to the report, con- 
 tending that in effect it contained precisely what 
 this 3d section provided for. He could not as- 
 sent to the criticism on the word general. It 
 had a meaning well understood, and there was no 
 covert meaning hid under it. This section had 
 no connection with the 13th. When that came 
 up he should give his views in relation to it. It 
 did not meet his favor as it stood, and he should 
 vote to amend it. He might vote to strike it out. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER Are we to understand 
 that the gentleman will vote with us to strike 
 out the 13th section? 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD" Sufficient to the day is 
 the evil thereof." > 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said the amendment before the 
 committee brought up the direct question whe- 
 ther there should be a separate Court of Chance- 
 ry or not. He desired gentlemen so to under- 
 stand it. This would be the first vote directly on 
 that point that would be taken. He believed a 
 large majority would vote to unite these courts. 
 Mr. L. said the language of this section had un- 
 dergone a great deal of examination elsewhere, as 
 well as here. He believed it about right as it 
 stood. 
 
 The motion of Mr. MARVIN was rejected 
 ayes 7, noes 01. 
 
 Mr BASCOM moved to strike out the words 
 " law and equity," so that it should read "There 
 shall be a Supreme Court having general juris- 
 diction." 
 
 Mr. JORDAN Does the gentleman mean ge- 
 neral jurisdiction in ecclesiastical and legislative 
 matters? If so, I object decidedly. We have a 
 set of professional gentlemen set apart to take 
 care of one of these, and I believe we shall elect 
 128 men to look after the other 
 
 Mr. BASCOM only wanted to have this juris- 
 diction regulated by law. He varied his amend- 
 ment so that it would read " There should be a 
 Supreme Court havfng such jurisdiction as shall 
 be prescribed by law/' 
 
 The amendment was lost. 
 
 iVir. O'CON'OK moved io acJrl to the end of the 
 section the words, "and in each countv, a county 
 court having original jurisdiction in civil casts." 
 
 Mr. PEKKIN^ :' Does the m--n!lernan mean to 
 exclude criminal jurisdiction from these courts? 
 
 Mr. O'CONUK: Not at all. I only want to 
 raise the disimct question whether we shall have 
 a count v court or riot 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND: Does the gentleman mean 
 that these courts shall have jurisdiction in law 
 and equitv both ? 
 
 Air. O'CONOR : That is another question, to be 
 settled subsequently. I want to disembarrass this 
 question ot all collateral issues. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER suggested that the gentleman 
 should leave out the last few words of his amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR assented. 
 
 Mr. STETSON suggested that Mr. O'C. should 
 reserve his motion until the 13lh section was 
 reached which authorizes the Legislature to estab- 
 lish inferior courts, 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR was of the opinion that this was- 
 the proper place to move his amendment. Be- 
 fore approaching the question how many judges 
 should constitute the supreme court, &c., it vva^ 
 proper to ascertain whether we intended to abo- 
 lish this ancient institution the county court, or 
 whether we should try to elevate its character. 
 And besides he thought the 13th section would be 
 necessary whether we retained the county courts 
 or not. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS thought this not the proper time 
 to raistt the question. He was in favor of a coun- 
 ty court as had been shown by hisamendmenls of- 
 fered. We should embarrass the question of or- 
 ganizing the supreme court if we settled upon 
 this naked question at this time. It would lead to 
 contusion. He would adhere to the plan suggest" 
 ed by the chairman of the committee. S-,'tile the 
 question of election next, then of the supreme 
 court, and then it would be to say whether vso 
 should have a county court or not. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said he differed in opinion 
 wish the gentleman from Herkimei , (Mr. LOOMIS) 
 who thought we should first oiganize the supreme 
 court, and afterwards decide whetiier we are or 
 not to have a county couir. He (Mr. N.) thought 
 the ques'ion should now be settled whether we 
 are to have county courts. The adjustment of 
 this question, at this time, is important, to ena- 
 ble us judiciously to organize the supreme court. 
 Should the county courts be re-organized, and 
 rendered more efficient, a smaller number of judg- 
 es will do the business of the supjrerne court ; hut 
 if the county courls are to be abolished, jhe su- 
 preme court will require the number of judges re- 
 commended by the committee. He therefore 
 thought this question as to the county courts 
 should be decided at this time. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said the reasons suggested by the 
 entleman from Ontario would be those which 
 would bring him (Mr. J.) to an opposite conclu- 
 sion. If the retention of the county courts was 
 to have any effect upon the organization of the 
 Supreme Court, it was all important that we 
 should know what sort of county courts we were 
 to have. Some were for retaining these courts 
 as they now were others considered them as a 
 nuisance. Some proposed to organize them upon 
 one plan and some upon another. To settle 
 therefore upon the naked question that we should 
 have a county court, would be to leave us in the 
 
 k.^JHe was in favor of some, sort of a county 
 court, but nothing of the kind that we had now. 
 He would confine them to criminal and such mis- 
 cellaneous business as were now committed to 
 county courts the licensing of ferries, &c. &c. 
 Hie would make a first Judge and let him be the 
 Surrogate, and associate with him the justices of 
 the peace, to do the business he had suggested. 
 Such a court would not at all interfere with the 
 upper courts. If it was thought proper, he was 
 willing to go into the consideration of the ques- 
 ;ion what sort of county courts would be the best. 
 3ut to vote on the naked question would only 
 lamper our action and lead to embarrassment. 
 
685 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND could not concur with th 
 gentleman. He thought the only proper couvs 
 to Infill with the lowest courts and then g 
 up. l-'irst determine what sort of justices court 
 you would have then what kind of count 
 courts, and then see what your supreme cour 
 shall be. That is the only proper way to d 
 this understand! ngly. There was more than on 
 man in this Convention, who was in favor of in 
 creasing the jurisdiction of justices courts, an< 
 cutting off a certain amount of appeals therefrom 
 In relation to common pleas courts, Mr. R. woul 
 here say that if any plan could be devised tha 
 would elevate the character and influence o 
 these courts, he would vote for it. He would g< 
 with the gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. MAR 
 VIN) but he would say farther, that if that plan 
 should be adopted, he should not vote for near as 
 many supreme court judges as he should if w 
 were to have no common pleas courts. Anc 
 again, he believed that if we extended justice 
 jurisdiction and cut off' a certain portion of ap 
 peals, we should cut off at least one third of th< 
 business now thrown upon the upper courts. 
 This was another argument why we should be 
 gin with the inferior courts and settle them befor* 
 passing upon the question of the kind of supreme 
 court we should have. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN followed, expressing similar 
 views, and urging that it was all important we 
 should first settle the question of the retention 01 
 abolition of county courts. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON, before voting on the ques- 
 tion whether we should have a county court 
 hoped some gentleman, by to-morrow morning 
 would prepare and present to us a plan lor such 
 a court. Unless we had sujch a plan we might 
 find ourselves in the situation of a certain com- 
 mittee not long since. On the naked question of 
 a county court, there was a majority, but three 
 members voting with that majority, had each a 
 plan of his own, and the result was that no ma- 
 jority was found in favor of any project. Let us 
 have the plan before voting that we may know 
 what we are voting for. 
 
 The committee then rose and reported, and the 
 Convention adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (66th day,} August 19. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. SELKIRK. 
 
 The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention 
 a set of resolutions and a memorial adopted at a 
 meeting of the citizens of Jefferson, Lewis, and 
 Oneida counties, in favor of resuming the public 
 works and completing the unfinished canals. 
 They were read. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved that they be printed, 
 and referred to the committee of the whole hav- 
 ing charge of Mr. HOFFMAN'S report. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD called for a division of the 
 question. Ordered; and the memorial was so 
 referred. 
 
 On the question of printing, 
 
 Mr. KlKIvLANDsaid,that apart from the much 
 valuable statistical information, which the docu- 
 ment contained, it should be remembered that 
 there was a proper degree of respect due to the citi- 
 zens of those counties who hud assembled in the 
 meeting where these resolutions were adopted. 
 They were the deliberate convictions and senti- 
 
 ments of a large body of our fellow citizens in 
 Oneida, Lewis, and Jefferson counties ; they were 
 entitled to great respect; and the information 
 they had forwarded to us, ought to be printed 
 put into such a shape, as that the members could 
 readily read, examine closely, and reflect upon it. 
 This favor has already been granted to other me- 
 morials coming from other quarters of the State, 
 not even as important in their character as this. 
 The proceedings of a meeting at Niagara, and al- 
 so those of one at Rochester, were ordered to be 
 printed. There were a great number of facts 
 contained in this which would justify the print- 
 ing. It was on a very important subject, and was 
 from a very numerous and highly respectable 
 meeting ; and ought to be treated with the same 
 respect and courtesy which had been shown to 
 other memorials on the same subject. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD could not see the propriety 
 of printing this memorial. Indeed he had serious 
 objections to it. He had yet to learn why the 
 citizens of these canal counties had any more 
 right lo come here and spread their views on our 
 journals, and have them printed at the public ex- 
 uen.se than the citizens of his own county, or of 
 any other part of the State. Vaiious memorials 
 had coine in here from several other parts ol the 
 Siale, and they had not been printed, and this cer- 
 tainly ought not to be printed. Indeed this over- 
 shadowing canal interest has controlled the State 
 long enough. It has tor years and years thrust its 
 long arms, and broad, grasping hands down to the 
 bottom of the pockets of the people, and taken 
 out their money by thousands and hundreds of 
 thousands of dolla'rs. It has ruled the Legislature 
 
 ng enough, and he did not want it to rule the 
 
 onvention. At the same time, he (Mr. C.) was 
 not opposed to all rational internal improvements. 
 But he had already given his views at length on 
 his point, and might shortly have occasion to do 
 o again. Now, if they should vote to print that 
 neraorial, he should move to have meetings got 
 up all over the Siate, on the other side of the 
 question, and then let the Convention print all 
 hat is .sent to them. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said he had no objection to (ol- 
 ow the usual course in this matter, in regard to 
 he question of printing. He had no sort of bos- 
 ility to this subject that would lead him to oppose 
 granting the printing in this case, more than any 
 >ther. There should certainly be no partiality in 
 his matter. But he could not "admit that the prin- 
 :iple contended ior by Mr. KIRKLAJVD had been 
 ustained throughout. The gentleman Irorn Orange 
 Mr. TUTHILL) came here with a numerously 
 igned memorial, on a very important subject, and 
 us colleague (Mr. BROWN) had requested its print- 
 ng. It was against further luxation tor internal 
 approvements. The request was refused, although 
 everal documents from the other side had previ- 
 usly been printed. Now he was not opposed to 
 rinting both sides; but since the Convention had 
 enied it to one party, he should oppose it on the 
 (her. He therefore moved to lay the motion on 
 he table. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL called for the ayes and noes 
 iey were ordered and resulted thus : 
 
 AYES Messrs. AllenjBascom.Bergen.Bowdish.Brown, 
 urr, Cambreleng, Ghatlield, Cfark, Cook, Cornell, Dodd, 
 ubois, Flanders, Graham, Greene, Hart, Hunt, Hunter, A. 
 untington, Hyde, Kemble, Kennedy, Kernan, Kingsley, 
 
686 
 
 Loomis, Mann, Morris, Nellis, Nicoll, Perkins, President, 
 Bichmond. Riker, St. John, Sanford, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, W. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, 
 Tuthill, Waterbury.Willard, Witbeck, Wood, Youngs 51. 
 NOES- Messrs. Angel, Archer, F. F. Backus, Baker, 
 Bruce, Bull, D. D. Campbell, Chamberlain, Conely.Crook- 
 er, Dana, Danforth, Hotchkiss, E. Huntington, Jordan, 
 Kirkland, McNitt, Marvin, Miller. Nicholas, O'Conor, Par- 
 ish, Patterson, Penniman, Rhoades, Salisbury, Shaver, She- 
 pard, E. Spencer. W. H. Spencer, Stow, Strong, Swackha- 
 mer, Taggart, Tallmadge, Warren, White, A. Wright, W, 
 B. Wright, Young-40. 
 
 Mr. STETSON'S motion was therefore carried. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER offered the following, and it 
 was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That committee No. 18, be requested to in- 
 quire into the propriety of reporting a provision for dis- 
 couraging the holding of land by corporations, except 
 when used for their necessary business purposes. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole on 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG resumed the Chair. 
 
 The question was on 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR'S amendment to retain the 
 county courts. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON had but a few remarks to 
 submit upon this question. The amendment pro- 
 posed that we should have a county court with 
 original jurisdiction, without defining what sort 
 of a court we should have. He stated yesterday, 
 that unless we define the court first, that if the 
 question be taken on the abstract question of a 
 county court, without defining what kind of court 
 it is to be, we should find ourselves in the pre- 
 dicament of the judiciary committee, where, al- 
 though a majority voted in favor of a county 
 court, yet those constituting that majority could 
 not agree to any particular plan for the organiza- 
 tion of a court. He wanted a plan presented 
 here in advance and voted upon. Let the gen- 
 tleman from N. Y. (Mr. O'CONOR) present a 
 plan; if we do not agree on that let us have an- 
 other plan. Then we could vote understanding- 
 ly. But if we voted nakedly upon the question 
 of a county court, we should find ourselves in an 
 embarrassed condition. Let us say at once if 
 we are to have a county court of original juris- 
 diction or not. Now let us see what kind of 
 county courts we have had before. 
 
 He did not believe there was a gentleman on 
 or off this floor, who would consent to the estab- 
 lishment of just such county courts as we have 
 had in the several counties of this state hereto- 
 fore. Perhaps the gentleman from New York 
 (Mr. O'CONOR) would be willing to have such 
 courts established in the country, but he believed 
 no person out of that city would consent to it. 
 The returns which had been received here in re- 
 lation to the expenses of these courts, show that 
 the whole amount of judgments have not amount- 
 ed to so much as the expenses of jurors. It would 
 have been more to the pecuniary advantage of the 
 people if they had paid out of their own pockets 
 the verdicts rendered, rather than to have sub- 
 mitted to the expense of these formal trials. Then 
 why continue such courts as these ? 
 
 It had been said that it was necessary to have 
 local judges, in order to have an authority to issue 
 writs to apply in local cases ; but why should not 
 this power be given to the surrogates of the coun- 
 ties? If there were to be five judges hi each 
 county who received a fixed salary, what was to 
 
 be the amount of their salary? It could not be 
 said that a fixed salary could be made which 
 would apply to all the judges in the different 
 counties, both where the business was large and 
 where it was less extensive the same in Rock- 
 land as in Oneida. Why not confer on the Sur- 
 rogate the duties done by the county court judges 
 now in chambers ? His own plan would be, in 
 providing for local courts, to elect two judges in 
 each county, who, with a judge of the supreme 
 court, should hold sessions of oyer and terminer. 
 And this, he believed, would be as good a court 
 of local jurisdiction as could be had. Some gen- 
 tlemen, like the gentleman from Ontario [Mr. 
 WORDEN] had referred to one or two counties 
 where the county courts were good enough. 
 That gentleman had the good fortune to live in a 
 county where there was an effective court. Such 
 however, was not true of the State generally. 
 Mr. P. believed his own plan would be better 
 than any county court which could be established 
 upon the present plan. 
 
 The committee had provided that the judge of 
 the Supreme Court, when he went into the coun- 
 try to hold his Circuit might have two justices of 
 the peace associated with him. But the judiciary 
 committee did not propose to give the judge of 
 the county court original jurisdiction. They 
 wished all legal proceedings to be so regulated 
 that the practice should be the same in Chau- 
 tauque that it was in Suffolk. And above all they 
 wished to have as few appeals as possible. These 
 multiplied appeals have become a perfect nuis- 
 ance. If they were to have a county court at all, 
 why does not some gentleman propose a feasible 
 plan for the same. Let us elect in each county a 
 judge who shall discharge the duties of a Surro- 
 gate,hold a court of common pleas and hold the gen 
 eral sessions with two justices of the peace. That 
 would be as good a county court as you could have. 
 Mr. P. again asked gentlemen to submit their plans 
 for a county court. One had suggested the election 
 of a first judge who shall be a surrogate, and with 
 two justices of the peace, hold general sessions. 
 This struck him as the least objectionable and as 
 creating the least additional expense. It is pro- 
 posed by some to give the surrogate a salary, tube 
 fixed by the supervisors. He knew no objection 
 to that. But the gentleman from Herkimer objects 
 to this as a one man court. We have such courts 
 now. The justices courts are one man courts. 
 There are the circuit courts, which are one man 
 tribunals. Let any man go into a circuif court 
 and then into our county courts, where five men 
 are perched up for ornament, (and very pretiy or- 
 naments they are, some of them,) and he will be 
 satisfied that the circuit judge will do more in one 
 week than the others can in four. No one would 
 propose to pay all five judges large salaries, and 
 unless you did, you could not get competent men. 
 Mr. P. then examined the plan submitted by his 
 colleague {Mr. MARVIN). This he thought the 
 best plan for a county court, if we were to have 
 one. You could afford to give the presidentjudge 
 a good salary, and would thus get a good man. 
 His colleague (Mr. MARVIN) had proposed to have 
 a president judge to hold the common pleas in five 
 or six counties. The gentleman from Herkimer 
 (Mr. LOOMIS) had opposed this. But by this plan 
 you could get able men to hold these circuit courts, 
 
687 
 
 (in this district, at^least) and pay him a fit salary; 
 and, with two justices of the peace, he would 
 transact the other business. But if you come to 
 have one of the four judges of the supreme court 
 I'd lowing the other judge round in the circuit 
 courts, you will have trouble ; and thus have suits 
 commenced in two courts at once. It is better to 
 make him a jud^e of supreme court at once, and 
 not a mere district judge of the common pleas. 
 There will be another saving of time and expense 
 in this way. All the cases of assault and battery 
 can be sent down to the place where they origi- 
 nated ; and not have the people concerned in it 
 brought all the way across the country, which has 
 also been a very great nuisance. 
 
 But when the judiciary committee had got their 
 report drawn out for a district court of common 
 pleas, with a President judge to be elected in 
 each of the eight judicial districts, they saw at 
 once that this president judge might as well be 
 called a judge of the Supreme Court, because in 
 each of these districts four judges of the Supreme 
 Court are to be elected, and if more judical force 
 is necessary, then add it to the Supreme Court. 
 Why call one of the judges, elected in a district, 
 a president judge of common pleas and send him 
 to the different counties of the district to hold the 
 courts of common pleas, and the next week allow 
 one of the supreme court judges, elected in the 
 same district, to follow him and hold the circuit 
 court in the same counties. The committee in 
 looking over the whole matter, concluded that it 
 would be better to have but one set of judges, and 
 call them judges of the Supreme Court; have all 
 civil suits commenced in that court, where the 
 cost is no mor:! than in a county court, and where 
 the rules ^nd forms ot proceedings will be the 
 same throughout the State. In this way one ap- 
 peal, at least, can be saved, and in addition to 
 that, the number of appeals in his judgment, will 
 be less from the decision of a judge of the su- 
 preme court, holding a circuit, than from that of 
 a judge of the common pleas. 
 
 Mr. P. examined the objections to the plan re- 
 ported by the committee, arguing that they were 
 invalid. Country judges were now paid large 
 sums of money, for fees, when the services might 
 as well have been rendered by the justices of the 
 peace. The amounts paid to these county judges 
 for holding courts are not by any means the total 
 expense. He read the items of a single case, that 
 had been handed to him within a few days, where 
 a county judge bound over some parties in a riot 
 case. He thus made out the following bill for 
 services : 
 
 Attendance 25 cents; 4 oaths, 50; orders for 24 warrants 
 and warrants for 24, $12, $12 75 
 
 Subpoenas for 20 writs $5; attendance on return 25; 
 subpoenas for 20 writs $5; 10 25 
 
 Swearing 42 witnesses $5 25; drawing and engross- 
 ing 2(1 lolios of depositions $7 50 12 75 
 
 Attendance and orders that 17 defendants give secu- 
 
 my S,50; 22 recognizances 5,50 14 00 
 
 ;ice and orders that 10 witnesses give securi- 
 ty $5; ID recognizances 2,50 7 50 
 
 Attendance and orders to discharge 7 defendants, 
 without hail 3 gy 
 
 Attendance and orders to discharge 17 defendants 
 pn giving bail 8,60; do. !() witnesses 5 13 50 
 
 One da} : s attendance on examination 2 00 
 
 $76 25 
 
 This bill was audited by th<^ supervisors at 
 $31 25 ; and he hud another bill for 8 day's ser. 
 vices, of $141 00, which was audited at $75. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR: Was that for a single day's 
 services ? 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON knew nothing about it, ex. 
 cept what appeared on the face of the bill. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART wanted to know if that judge 
 had ever been indicted? 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON could not tell. 
 
 Mr. BROWN: What in God's name was the 
 man about when he made those charges ? 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : It appears by the bill that 
 he was examining and binding over some indivi- 
 duals charged with a riot. He could not see 
 what use there was in having 5 judges to run up 
 bills like the one he had read. Mr. P. spoke of 
 other duties now thrown upon county judges, 
 whic^he thought had better be dispensed with. 
 Such were appeals from the acts of road commis- 
 sioners, &c. Why should a judge go down from 
 his bench, and go out into the wonds, and say 
 which side of a hill a road is to go. If two judg- 
 es are to be elected in each county to sit with^the 
 judge of the supreme court, to hold courts of oyer 
 and terminer, they, with the surrogate, might 
 hear certioraris from Justices courts, and transact 
 such local business as is now done by the county 
 judges. But he would not like to see a county 
 court having original civil jurisdiction in any 
 county in the State. He was oppqsed to a county 
 court of original jurisdiction in any and every 
 form and shape, and he hoped that such courts 
 would never spring up in any part of the State, 
 except the delegation from New-York desired 
 such an one, and then he should not object to al- 
 lowing them to have it in their own county. The 
 gentleman from Genesee (Mr. RICHMOND,) had 
 discovered in the 3d section a provision which 
 would allow the legislature to appoint 168 exam- 
 iners in chancery. He (Mr. P.) did not believe 
 the same discovery could have been made by any 
 other gentleman in the Convention. The article 
 provided distinctly that the judges who decide a 
 cause shall hear the testimony, and the power 
 given io the legislature had no reference to the 
 appointment ol such officers as examiners in chan- 
 cery. There was no such provision in the report. 
 He hoped no other bugbear like this would be 
 found in the report of the judiciary commitlee. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said we could not discuss this 
 proposition, to create a local county court, with- 
 out also discussing the plan for organising the 
 higher courts, reported by the committee. He 
 regretted that we were compelled to go into this 
 question now, and he wished the honorable mover 
 (Mr. O'CoisroR.) could have yielded to the general 
 wish of the convention, to have this proposition 
 deferred until .we should have considered and 
 settled the organization of the higher courts. 
 
 [Mr. O'CONOR said he must interrupt the gen- 
 tleman, for he did not wish to occupy the posi- 
 tion of having refused to accede to the general 
 wish of the Convention that he thought this was 
 the right time to submit the amendment, tor the 
 purposes he had in view.] 
 
 Mr. STETSON said he meant no assault or re- 
 flections upon the gentleman, (Mr. O'CONOR,) 
 perhaps he had better said that in his opinion it 
 was unfortunate for the question itself, that we 
 
688 
 
 were compelled to act on it at this time ; for a 
 ^t now stood many would oppose it, and yet h 
 believed that all parties, before we got througl 
 would be constrained to organise local cour 
 with some sort of jurisdiction. It was unfortu 
 nate that we were thus precipitated into the dis 
 cussion, as the majority of the committee regarc 
 ed the proposition as hostile to their plan, in res 
 pect to the higher courts. For himself, he wish 
 ed to have a local caurt, between justices of th 
 peace and the Supreme Court, but not one hos 
 tile to the plan of the committee, or which woul 
 in any respect disturb the objects which the com 
 mittee desired to accomplish. The local court 
 , he spoke of, should have jurisdictionbnly of mat 
 3 to which the jurisdiction of the suprem 
 yourt could not be brought; and which could no 
 safely be entrusted with justices of the peace. 
 He agreed with the committee fully, that,^o fa 
 as we could, we should have but one court ; tha 
 every cause of sufficient magnitude to be tried i 
 a court of record, had better be tried, ^f possible 
 by a judge of the Supreme Court, than by one o 
 a lower grade ; for the better the judge the fewe 
 the errors to be corrected, and it was more eco 
 nomical too, in time and money. He would saj 
 that he believed the Supreme Court Judges ough 
 to try all the causes originally commenced in th( 
 common pleas. It was due to the mass of peo 
 pie, who were occasionally forced to litigat< 
 in the higher courts for the smaller sums tha: 
 they should be provided with judges able as 
 those who administered justice for wealthy suit- 
 ors. But he believed there would be a vas 
 amount of business, such as now proceeded fron 
 courts of justice of the peace, to which the Su- 
 preme Court could not be brought, without over- 
 whelming that court. 
 
 The report of the committee provided for 
 State Court of Appeals, a Supreme Court and 
 courts of justices of the peace. It seemed to be 
 contemplated that all trials would be in one ol 
 the last two. The gentleman from New- York, 
 (Mr. O'CONOR) proposed a local county court. 
 He (Mr. S.) knew the object of that gentleman 
 was, to provide it, if it was adopted, with a pre- 
 siding judge, who should have a circuit of seve- 
 ral counties, and in that aspect it was hostile to 
 the system of the committee, by which the jud- 
 ges who sat on the bench of the Supreme Court 
 were enlarged so that they should try all the cau- 
 ses; but he (Mr. S.) should not favor this local 
 court from any such hostile motive. Now, when 
 the question was put, shall we organize a local 
 court,with some sort of jurisdiction? bethought 
 no one could wisely answer no, unless he was 
 certain that he could demonstrate that the courts 
 provided in the report could certainly do all the 
 business, including that he had described as pro- 
 ceeding from justices courts. For himself he 
 would say, that he sadly feared that the gentle- 
 men who are opposed to the local courts, have 
 overrated the capabilities of the organization of 
 the higher courts, or underrated the amount of bu- 
 siness they will have to perform. What, then, is 
 the amount of business now required to be done in 
 the courts ? or rather, in the first place, how does 
 the judicial force you proposed, compare with 
 that we now have? You propose to create a court 
 of appeals of eight judges; a supreme court of 
 
 thirty-two judges, (but four of these help make 
 the eight which form the appeals,) leaving for the 
 purpose of his argument only 28 in all 36. 
 
 The only others are justices of the peace, as 
 heretofore. 
 
 We have now in (he court of errors, not form- 
 ing part of other courts, thirt}. two judges, the 
 Senators; three judges of the supreme court j one 
 chancellor; three assistant chancellors ; eight cir- 
 cuit and equity judges; and two hundred and 
 ninety-five county judges besides the recorders 
 of cities making in all three hundred and forty- 
 two judges. He would say here, in advance, to 
 revent rising impressions, that he had no inten- 
 tion of guaging the capacity for despatch of the 
 two systems, by a mere comparison of numbers 
 he wa. aware that the better disposition of the 
 force, as proposed by the committee, would make 
 such a comparison all but ridiculous. He would 
 proceed to show another result. 
 
 He would say, that, in his opinion, from the 
 manner we wer organizing the supreme court, 
 gentlemen would be disappointed if they expected 
 to detail any portion of the court of appeals, to 
 aid the supreme court, in their duties at the dis- 
 trict terms or in the trial ot causes. He believed 
 that court would have to do all it could perform, 
 and far more than was required of the present 
 court for the correction of errors. In his opinion 
 eight of the thirty. six judges, would be engaged 
 all the while in the couit of appeals. Now the 
 supreme court was to be divided into eight parts, 
 iij eight several districts, with three judges in 
 each district, to form a bench at the terms in their 
 listrictsj and the question arose how much of 
 heir time will it requite to do the business at 
 hese terms, in law and equity? for it is settled 
 hat they are to exerci&e the joint jurisdiction. 
 
 He was afraid that this subject had not receiv- 
 d quite sufficient attention, for since the report 
 had been made, a distinguished and able member 
 if {hat committee had inquiied ot him, if he (Mr. 
 ) did not think tour terms, of a week each, in 
 'ach district, would be sufficient to do up all the 
 >usiness. He then thought it was quite too short; 
 ml since he had given some attention to the sta- 
 istics of business, he had come to a conclusion, 
 equiring vastly so much more time for those 
 erm duties, that he feared this point had not 
 een sufficiently considered. The ancients and 
 he moderns had been discussed at great length 
 earned ly discussed and possibly in that we had 
 verlooked, slightly, the practical instruction to 
 e derived from dull and uninteresting statistics. 
 If the reports irorn the clerks of the supreme 
 ourt, of the amount of business placed upon the 
 alendars of that court, as consolidated by the se- 
 ed committee in document No. 45, is to be relied 
 n, then the judicial force proposed, will be not 
 merely questionable, but. sadly deficient- But 
 liere was an exaggeration, unintentional in that re- 
 ort, (yet still believed to be a truth by the pub- 
 c,) that reflected unmerited reproach upon the 
 haracter of the state, for unexampled litigation. 
 nterrogatofieshad been addressed to those cleiks, 
 nd they had returned answers giving in separate 
 ems the number of causes that had been placed 
 ;i the calender of that court, for each term dur- 
 ig two and :i half years, ending with May term 
 ast. The Report seemed to show that in that 
 
680 
 
 time 0~>73 c.iuses had been brought before that 
 court lor argum-Mit. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN 7 asked if they had not made a 
 mistake by adding all together 1 ? 
 
 Mr. STETSON said ho was about to explain 
 it, in the manner implied by the question. The 
 causes, werc.the aggregate of all the causes 
 il on ithe calendar during ten consecutive 
 terms, and there were four terms in each year. 
 They were mostly the same causes, which not 
 being argued for a number of terms, were count- 
 ed, once, twice, three, and up to eight times, 
 over, lie said a very aged and distinguished 
 member of this body had asked him, referring to 
 this aggregate which had gone forth to the public, 
 if he was s.\varo that there was more litigation in 
 the state of New York alone, than in the United 
 Kingdoms of Great Britain, Scotland and Ireland. 
 .Mr. S. said he was happy to say, that 1718, was 
 much nearer the number actually placed on the 
 calendar in that two and a half years, than the 
 frightful number in possession of the public. He 
 got at it in this way ; it appeared that 1053 causes 
 were actually argued and decided in that time, 
 and 065 were left unargued at the close of May 
 term last, making in all 1718 in two and an half 
 years. Taking those for the last two years only, 
 it appeared that 721 was the number annually 
 placed on the calendar, and 389 the average 
 number which was actually argued each year. 
 Now, no one complained of a want of industry and 
 patient hard labor in the judges of that bench, 
 and it appeared that 400 causes a year, with a 
 proportional quantity of special term or non enu- 
 merated business, was all that could be reasona- 
 bly asked o' three able and industrious judges. 
 
 H-ie, thesi, we had a standard by which to mea- 
 sure the fdpability of a bench of three judges, lor 
 a single district. It is important now to know 
 what will be the whole number of such causes in 
 tiie Shite They were now annually over 700, 
 and he hud not the slightest doubt that at the end 
 oi five y^ais, they would rise to lull 1000 peryear; 
 giving io each district annually 125 causes, on the% 
 Jaw side alone, and a proportional quantity of non. 
 enumerated and chamber duties. How much 
 tiuu! would thisiequue? It appeared that one 
 cause and one-third of a cause, with a due pro- 
 portion of incidental business, was all that ;i bench 
 of three judges could patiently hear argued, and 
 decided with carefully written opinions, in one 
 day. That is the raiio of despatch, for the law 
 side; for there were not over 300 working days 
 in tiie year, vtnd tiie average number of causes ac- 
 tually ,trg ied arid disposed ot, did not exceed 400, 
 
 '-'he present system had failed, more on account 
 of the system, which had remained stationary 
 since 1S21 5 whilst, population, commerce and 
 litigation had out-grown it, than on account of 
 th>; men. And \<,u will fail in getting better 
 judges for your thiity-two, than you have now. 
 If ho stood, solitary and alone, he would neverthe- 
 less express the belief, that before ten years had 
 gone by, the popular cry would HO up " Oh, that 
 we had such judges as filled the courts before 
 IS-lOj'' as we now hear the cry, " Oh, that we had 
 sueii judges as sat upon the bench belure 1821." 
 Sir, (_s,iid Mr. S.) there are various causes which 
 combine, just at this moment, to render the judg- 
 es ot our higher courts slightly unpopular; arid 
 
 
 the chief one was, that they were compelled to 
 bear (o some extent, the defects of the present 
 system; but no human power could aveit the 
 delays ofjustice, without an addition to the pres- 
 ent force. There were other causes, but they 
 were all evanescent, and short lived, whilst the 
 good thev had done would not soon be forgotten. 
 " The good that men do, lives after them:" and 
 it will not be long after we shall have parted com- 
 pany wiih I he present judges in law and equity, 
 before we shall look buck upon their learned 
 opinions, and indefatigable industry, with pride, 
 mixed with regret, thaf we are getting a quality 
 not quite so good. There would then be no in. 
 crease of despatch, or diminution of business, by 
 means of the new organization, only as more force 
 wo'ild accelerate despatch. 
 
 Next, what is the amount of business on the 
 chancery side. Here we had no statistics such 
 as had been drawn from the law side, but we 
 knew there was more force now employed in the 
 bench duties of chancery, than on the law side. 
 There was the chancellor and his three assistants ^ 
 and the circuit judges in vacation, performed more 
 bench duties on the chancery side than they did 
 of the law, and we knew that department was 
 further behind than the supreme court. To sav 
 nothing of the new duties which we proposed to 
 throw upon the judges, in taking the evidence in 
 chancery, heretofore taken by examiners, we 
 could believe, with great certainty, that the 
 amount of business for the bench at term, from 
 the equity sides, would in point of time be fully 
 equal to that of the law. 
 
 We would then within five years have one hun- 
 dred and twenty-five causes on the law side, and 
 one hundred and twenty-five causes on the equity 
 side ; making in all two" hundred and fifty causes, 
 with their proportion of non-enumerated and 
 chamber business, for the calendar of each district 
 term every year. This at the former ratio of one 
 and one-third cause per day, would require one 
 hundred and eighty-seven and a-half working 
 days, and travel would increase it to two hundred 
 days, equal to eight months in the year. Now 
 twenty-four judges were required to hold these 
 terms in the eight districts, and eight months of 
 the year was equal to sixteen of these twenty* 
 four. Thus eight of the thirty-six were required 
 constantly in the court of appeals, and time equal 
 to sixteen at the terms in the districts, and we 
 might presume that at least two of the whol 
 number would be unable, from sickness or domes- 
 tic reasons, from doing duty at all. This made 
 twenty-six, and there were only ten left or at most 
 (if all were able to work) twelve, to conduct the 
 trials which now required eight circuit judges, 
 two hundred and ninety-five county judges, and 
 also to take the evidence in chancery which now 
 required a force of examiners for which over 
 $16,000 was annually paid ; and which item alone, 
 estimating the labor by the compensation, and 
 putting a judge in that respect on a level with an 
 examiner, would require two-thirds of this re- 
 maining force. We had only these twelve to do 
 all this, and to which the gentleman from Oneida 
 (Mr. KIRKLAND) superadds a large amount of the 
 business now done by the masters in chancery. 
 
 He did not believe twelve judges could do any 
 such labor, and even if he had over-estimated the 
 
 61 
 
690 
 
 duties at the district terms equal to four of the 
 judges, he would say he still doubted whether 
 those added to the twelve, so as to make sixteen, 
 could perform all this accumulated labor, of cir- 
 cuit trials, oyer and terminer trials, common pleas 
 trials, general session trials, and trials of chance- 
 ry causes, with examiners' labors added. 
 
 What was the comparative amount of business 
 done at the circuits and in the common pleas ? 
 
 He said that there were, estimating those coun- 
 ties which had not made returns by those which 
 had, twenty-two hundred, causes of all sorts, ori- 
 ginal issues, appeals and certioraris, actually tried 
 and argued in the common pleas of the State, for 
 the year 1845 ; and which occupied 782 days. 
 Upon a like estimate, there were 1250 causes ac- 
 tually tried at the circuits in the same year, re- 
 quiring in the comparative ratio of time, 653 days. 
 The time given was that stated for the actual re- 
 turns of 950 causes tried at the circuits in on- 
 ly a portion of the counties, and 1031 in the com- 
 mon pleas. He had estimated the number of 
 causes which should come from the whole state, 
 but had not enlarged the time, for the ratio would 
 be the same. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM inquired if he included the 420 
 original cases in the common pleas of New York ? 
 
 Mr. STETSON said he included the general 
 aggregate, both of common pleas trials and cir- 
 cuit trials in New-York ; the rule of proportion 
 would be about the same. Now, the length o(\ 
 trial did not always depend upon the amount in 
 controversy it depended more upon the nature 
 and character of the cause, than the amount. 
 The judge cannot always cut short the trial, 
 though he may see clearly how the cause may 
 terminate. Although the amount in dispute may 
 be small, yet if the case involves a question of 
 fraud, and counsel continues to introduce new 
 evidence to change the colorable appearance of 
 the other evidence, the judge will not stop him 
 and summarily send the cause to the jury, so as 
 to nave a short trial, but will patiently hear him 
 out. It was so in cases of slander, whether ag- 
 gravated or light ; of colorable and doubtful cases 
 of seduction, and breaches of promise to marry, 
 as much, and more, than when they were hein- 
 ous and demanded heavy damages ; it was so of 
 all cases where the facts were intricate and dis- 
 puted, without regard to the amount ; and appeal 
 cases in their very nature were always long causes, 
 and always would require much time, whether 
 tried in the Pleas or at the circuit. This busi- 
 ness, then, from the Common Pleas and General 
 Sessions, though it would be done with greater 
 dispatch by tne abler judges of the Supreme 
 Court, would require time in amount equal to 
 the business which is now done at the circuits ; 
 and when we come to superadd the Chancery 
 trials, 'and the labors of the Examiners, he could 
 not but believe this new system was like to be 
 overwhelmed, unless we provided some relief in 
 advance. 
 
 He would say that this business of taking the 
 evidence in chancery would alone require a vast 
 foice. He liked the change ; the proie^-ion had 
 paid dearly for taking it over $16,UOO a year, 
 .but now the popular cry had gone forth from 
 Chautauque to Clinton Irom Moritauk Point to 
 St. Lawrence that this evidence shorld no lon- 
 
 ger be thus taken, but should be heard and taken 
 down by the judge at the trial, and that the bill 
 should be paid out of the treasury, and not by t!,e 
 party. He acquiesced, indeed he liked (he change, 
 but we ought not to underrate the rnatrniiude of 
 the labor, and shut our eyes to the I act lhat it 
 would require much patient tune of the judge. 
 It was true we could get rid of half the use less 
 and irrelative testimony now written down by ex- 
 aminers, but alter all it would take rnurh time. 
 Will the gentlemen of the judiciary committee 
 stand up in their places and say, that, in then- 
 opinion, this duly alone would not require tinu- 
 equal to eight of these judges, all the year round ? 
 That was only one judge in place of all the ex- 
 aminers in each senate iiis'r:ct ; and it did seem 
 to him that was not a hi^h estimate. 1C he was 
 right, then in the most favorable point of view we 
 would have but eight judges left to perform all 
 the duties of the present circuit judges at trials, 
 as now conducted by them, with the immense su- 
 per addition of common pleas and general sessions. 
 
 His conclusion was, that whilst he would do 
 all in his power to recommend and support the 
 general plan of organization proposed by the com- 
 mittee, yet he must express the conviction he felt 
 that here was a scant pattern of cloth for the coat 
 to be made out of it. But he would be met here, 
 as he had been met out of :1oors,with the suggestion 
 that this report provided for an expansion of judges 
 every ten years. It is now divided into eight 
 parts into so many parts that many gentlemen 
 have already expressed the firm conviction that 
 you will have no Supreme Court; that was the 
 opinion of the learned member from New-York 
 (Mr. O'CONOR), of the gentlemen from Chautau- 
 que (Mr. MARVIIV), of the gentleman from Gene- 
 see (Mr. TAGGART,) and he knew that numer- 
 ous members had fears on this point which had 
 not been expressed on the floor of this house. 
 For himself, he thought he could go with the 
 committee as far as they had now gone in divi- 
 ding this court into parts the plans of these 
 other gentlemen contemplated a division of their 
 courts into parts and thus aiding him in sup- 
 porting these; and, indeed, a division of the 
 bench into parts, seemed to be inseparable from a 
 requisite which all insisted on, that the judge 
 who sat upon the bench at term should also try the 
 cause with the jury. This being so, we could 
 not have an old fashioned supreme court, such as 
 we now have; but he thought we had carried 
 expansion and divisibility to the utmost tension 
 of the unity of the court, when we had divided 
 it into eight parts if we went further, our su- 
 preme court would become but a deputation, a 
 delegation, of county courts, making up a su- 
 preme bench, by a delegation of one from each 
 county court! Even now he would say the pre- 
 sent plan, carried no further, would not be much 
 better than a supreme court made up of any of 
 these circuit judges, in any of the districts. Be- 
 ware, then, of further expansion, or you will, if 
 you have not already, overwhelm your court of 
 appeals ! 
 
 Tuw great couf*t, then, is not likely to be able 
 to do all the business, and if it do not, where do 
 you propose to leave the bone and muscle ot the 
 country ? If the covering proves too short for the 
 body, you will pull it up and leave the feet cold ; 
 
691 
 
 and he would say that the bone and muscle of 
 which he spoke, were the feet of the country in no 
 degraded sense; for they are made to carry above 
 
 the whole superstructure that rests on labor. 
 If \our system fails to take care of all. it will drop 
 the litigants, tor the smaller sums at the present 
 circuits and in the common pleas, to whom you 
 now promise the protection of your supreme court 
 judges, into the vortex of the justices courts. 
 iie knew the committee did not mean this; but 
 he had endeavored to show a necessity in the vast 
 amount of business to be done and the inadequa- 
 cy of tht; force provided for a county court, which 
 should at least administer the laws in small crim- 
 inal cases, and to that class of cases which pro- 
 ceeded from justices courts. He did not desire to 
 preserve the present organization of the comnion 
 pleas he would adapt if to the duties he had just 
 suggested, and have it, not as now, an unsuccess- 
 ful lival of the supreme court, but a court to re- 
 lieve it of duties which cannot be wisely, because 
 not economically, brought within the jurisdiction 
 of the supreme court for jury ti ial. He believed 
 the plan of a county court recommended by the 
 gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS) in his 
 minority report, the best adapted to do this duty. 
 That contemplated the election of a number of 
 county justices, who instead of holding a cen- 
 tral court, tor the trial of appeals and certio. 
 rans, when so many witnesses and parties were 
 detained as mere spectators of other trials at great 
 expense, should act severally and allow one of 
 them to go into the part of the county where the 
 cause arose, and hear and decide the cause there, 
 before a local jury, drawn from a box, and not 
 picked up by the constable, under any bias to a 
 party. Appeals and certioraris, as now conduct- 
 ed, were not a remedy for the injustice which 
 was done in justices' courts, and which always 
 would be done under the limited and peculiar or- 
 ganization of those courts. He knew very well 
 what aott of men were justices of tne peace; and 
 he would say that in his own county, and 
 some 01 her counties within his knowledge, 
 a great many of them were honest, intelligent men, 
 folly capable of administering the laws upon the 
 Common pleas bench, and if trials could always be 
 had before such, and they had larger powers, such 
 asbeli>ii!< to higher courts, justice could be safely 
 and efficiently administered there a but to give 
 them these larger powers, would be constituting 
 numerous county courts ; and with the system as 
 it is, the difficult and hard cases are not brought 
 lit-fure the capable and fair justice he had describ- 
 ed ; but when ihe caoe required nursing, the per- 
 son having charge of it, too often sought out a jus 
 tice who from ignorance was incapable of admin- 
 istering the law, or \N as led by the plaintiff or his 
 attorney, so that all doubtl'ul questions would be 
 decided in his favour. It was from this source that 
 most of the appeals and certioraris proceeded. 
 He thought when a defendant was sued before a 
 juitice of that sort, for an amount exceeding $30 
 
 i, he ou^rit to have the right lo say, " I will 
 not be tried in this court, but elect to be tried be- 
 fore the county judge, who is to come into this 
 town to he.ir such trials, and also new trials when 
 they have been ordered/ He knew many thought 
 the true remedy was to increase the jurisdiction of 
 justices to $250 ; but that was worse than the dis- 
 
 ease. Without a local county court to correct its 
 errors, or try the causes originally, when the de- 
 fendant should elect so to be tried ; for without 
 that, certioraris and appeals, the present mischief 
 would be indefinitely increased, and block up 
 even the supreme court ; or if refused altogether 
 leave parties to be devoured by remediless injus. 
 tice in justices courts. Some gentleman seemed 
 to think it was an easy duty to administer laws in 
 all cases of only a hundred or two dollars, and that 
 every one, if honest, could without experience and 
 great attention, perform the duties of that court. 
 But he would ask the many honest and intelligent 
 gentlemen who belonged to this convention, who 
 never before sat in a deliberative body and stud- 
 ied parliamentary laws, how they would succeed 
 in performing the duties of the chair, in deciding 
 the questions of order which arose here ? The 
 rules for decision are all contained in this book, 
 (holding np Jefferson's Manual) it is only a lit- 
 tle thin book, and its decisions have principally 
 been known lor centuries. Yet he would venture 
 to say, that most of us would feel embarrassed and 
 uncertain of the rule, if suddenly called on |o per- 
 form the duty. And yet the law of the justices 
 courts was far more difficult and intricate; and 
 was spread through large and numerous volumes, 
 and any mistake of a thought, or of a just construc- 
 tion was liable to produce error, and a resort to 
 a higher court for review. It was a delusion to 
 suppose that justice could be administered without 
 a wise and capable judge, who knew what the 
 law was. ^But we must have justices courts from 
 the necessily of the case ; and it was our duty to 
 provide a means for correcting the errors which 
 arose there, cheaper and more economical than 
 the present remedies. He thought a full and fair 
 first trial in the original case, when it could be 
 iransferred to a county judge, and new trials in the 
 neighborhood before the same judge, would efiect 
 a great reform. 
 
 Mr O'CONOR said, as he had proposed this 
 amendment, and was frequently referred to, it 
 would seem to be proper that he should state his 
 object in presenting it, and the views he enter- 
 tained on the general question. He had not here, 
 lofore made any remarks on the general scope and 
 structure of the system, presented by the commit 
 tee on the judiciary; he should therefoie avail 
 himself of this occasion to speak somewhat at large 
 on that syslern; arid before he sat down, would 
 urge upon the committee the retention of county 
 courts in their piesent legal character, having ori- 
 ginal jurisdiction in suits between party and party, 
 and to be so newly organized and officered as to 
 give them the vigor requisite to enable them to 
 perform that large portion of the judicial business 
 of the State, originating between residents of the 
 same county. It might he, as the gentleman fiom 
 Clinton (Mr. STETSON) had said, that the report 
 of the majority would certainly command the as- 
 sent of the Convention; and that it was but a 
 waste of time for him to present his views in op- 
 position to the system reported But conceiving, 
 as he did, that this report destroys nearly all the 
 good features in our existing and past judicial sys- 
 tems, and furnished nothing that can be deemed 
 an equivalent, he should consider himself want- 
 mg in duty to his constituent, if he did not at 
 least enter his objections to it, and show, fo 
 
6<J2 
 
 the best of his ability, his objections to it. 
 They were told at an early stage of the proceed- 
 ings of this Convention, that it would be a sad 
 business it, instead of going into committee of the 
 whole, and there setilmg preliminarily certain 
 important principles, we should refer particular 
 matters to select committees. It was urged that 
 if we did so, we should virtually make those com- 
 mittees the Convention; that when a strong 
 committee of respectable gentlemen, was sent 
 out charged with any particular subject, they 
 were sure to letnrn with an esprit du corps, 
 
 banded together to carry it, 
 force altogether irresistible. 
 
 and 
 For 
 
 presenting a 
 his part, he 
 
 gave but little weight to that argument, and voted 
 
 against those who urged 
 
 perhaps because 
 
 he was unskilled in legislation. He suppos- 
 ed a report would come in merely as a basis 
 of action for the Convention, and that even the 
 members of the committee would themselves 
 treat it. merely as a basis of action. But per- 
 haps he was in error. Perhaps it was true that 
 when a report was made and thus returned to the 
 Convention, gentlemen could not be induced to alter 
 A word, a line, or a letter, because it was the report 
 ot their committee. He certainly should great- 
 ly regret the vote he had thus given at the outset 
 of our proceedings, if such should prove to be the 
 case. He begged to say, however, whilst heshonld 
 call the report the report of a majority of the ju 
 diciary committee while he would not dispute 
 the right of any to apply that title to it he felt 
 bound to refer to the proceedings of the committee 
 so far as was necessary to deprive, the report of 
 some claims to consideration which its advocates 
 have put forward for it. It was but a day or two 
 since a gentleman, a member of the judiciary com- 
 mittee, commented at lar-jre on the vast amount of 
 lab>T which that committee, for two months, have 
 devoted to this report, leading us to conclude that 
 it was the result of those labors, and had ultimate- 
 ly received the deliberate sanction of nine mem- 
 bers of that committee. This the gentleman gave 
 the Convention to understand, or his remarks lead 
 to such an understanding. The* gentleman might 
 not have intended to produce the impression that 
 this report, in its length and breadth, was the re- 
 sult ot such h-bor. or that it had received the 
 conc"rrence ot nine members <f that committee 
 Now, he would take occasion to say that the com- 
 mittee held forty-two mee'ings. On reaching the 
 forty. first, theie was a report piepared which ne- 
 ver yet hiis seen the light, each branch of which 
 received the sanction of a majority, and the whole 
 of which had that of six member-, while six oth- 
 ers dissented and prevented i,s approval. Then 
 c.i me the report in question, w bich is no more- 
 like the report referred to, than the famous report 
 o ; committee number five, on which the Conven- 
 tion commenced iis labors. That report had been 
 prepared, an had been observed by the gentleman 
 from Orange, (JVlr. BROWN) by two members of 
 ihe eou-.mniee, and, on piivale application, it re- 
 ceived privately the signatures of seven members 
 of the committee. It wan also true that at a sub 
 sequent meeting this report leceived a mere lor- 
 
 mal sanction. 
 It was useless 
 
 He did not attend that meeting.- 
 for him to do so, the seven signa- 
 
 That paper had in this way received a formal 
 sanction from nine or ten members ; and perhaps 
 '.t would have received his own signature, if he 
 fiad been there. But it was merely in order that 
 .t might reported as a basis of action for this Con- 
 vention. It was not a report regularly eked out 
 rom the labors of thirteen, at forty odd meetings* 
 and finally agreed to by nine. It was got up by 
 a few, and others were induced, one by one, pri- 
 vately to approve of it, that some basis of action 
 might be presented after the committee had been 
 wearied out by the difficult labor of trying to agree 
 on some system. He did not complain of this ; 
 3ut he took leave to say that the report was enti- 
 tled to no particular weight as having the sanc- 
 tion of the committee, or being the result of the 
 deliberations of the committee. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN enquired if the gentleman from 
 New-York intended to say that the report, as 
 draw 7 n up and presented to the Convention, was 
 not presented to the committee when every one 
 was present but the gentleman from New-York 
 himself, read over section by section, amended, 
 and finally received the sanction of the majority 
 of the committee who signed it? 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR remarked that he had already 
 admitted all that. After it received seven signa- 
 tures in private, it was agreed to by others, one 
 gentleman approving the slight alterations by 
 proxy ; for he was on the North River at the time. 
 But what he objected to was that this should be 
 received as the result of the labors and delibera- 
 tions of the committee. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS asked the gentleman from New- 
 York to point out any one principle that w r as riot 
 contained in it, but which was in the general re- 
 port previously made by the committee, except as 
 to the organization of the court. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR: In that respect there was a 
 most material deviation ; the very court of appeals 
 now in the report, was deliberately rejected in full 
 committee, and no attempt ever made to stir that 
 decision. The original report contained forty- 
 seven sections, and was he believed, longer than 
 the whole of the present constitution. It con- 
 tained a court of common pleas in each county, 
 with president judges for districts embracing many 
 counties. He, however, freely admitted that not- 
 withstanding the circumstances he had referred 
 to, this report was entitled to be discussed on its 
 merits and treated as a majority report. So he 
 had intended to treat it. He had always called 
 it the report of a majority of the committee, and 
 acquiesced in its being so called, but he did not 
 wish to have it passed before the Convention 
 as the result oi the labors of thirteen gentle- 
 men ; nor to have minority reports dispraised 
 by contrast on the ground that no one agreed with 
 the other. What time had they to make an agree- 
 ment ? The new majority report was signed one 
 afternoon and presented the next morning ? He 
 had made these explanations to correct the re- 
 marks of the gentleman from Columbia (Mr. JOR- 
 DAN), and also that the report might stand on its 
 own merits, without the aid of the praise that was 
 given to it on account of the great amount of pre- 
 
 tuies formed \\ majority, and the general scope 
 of it, at least, was prejudged, signed and settled. 
 
 vious deliberation bestowed upon it, when it was 
 not the result ot those deliberations. It might 
 however be unfortunate that we should have had 
 any discussions about what took place in com- 
 
693 
 
 mittee. He should not have spoken of it, but for 
 what had fallen from the gentleman from Colum- 
 bia on the same subject, giving the report inure 
 credit than ir was entitled to receive, and throw- 
 ing some odium on those who did not agree to it. 
 
 ich then for the origin of this report, and 
 now he had no more to say on that subject. He 
 was sure that every gentleman who had anything 
 to do with bringing it here was animated by hon- 
 orable motives, and the report was to be regarded 
 as the honest result of the fair and impartial judg- 
 ment of the two or three gentlemen who prepared 
 it, than any one of whom no gentleman could be 
 found on this floor entitled to more respect. He 
 had however many and serious objections to their 
 system. He thought it would be impossible to 
 do the business of the state under such a system/ 
 and that what was done would be badly done. It 
 
 i n substance and effect a system of district 
 courts, without any supreme court, having origi- 
 nal jurisdiction. Again, it dispenses with the 
 court of errors, and substitutes for it and for the 
 supreme court, a newly devised court of appeals 
 as a court of last resort a court wholly unlike 
 either of those courts a kind of mongrel court 
 between the two we have had, without the merits 
 of either. If he understood it aright, the courts 
 we had prior to 1821 were perfectly unexception- 
 able. All agreed in commending that judicial 
 system. It fell however on account of the 
 prejudices which had been excited against 
 the judges, for their real or supposed political 
 sins, as members of the council of revision. 
 Then we had justices courts as we have now, ex- 
 cept that the jurisdiction was not so high. We 
 had common {.leas or county courts as now, with 
 the exception ihat the senior judge held for life. 
 We had al^o a supreme court of original jurisdic- 
 tion and also of appellate jurisdiction represent- 
 ing the English king's bench the supreme foun- 
 tain of justice, and possessing jurisdiction over 
 all officers who are subject to mandamus or any 
 of the prerogative writs: that jurisdiction by 
 which ail officers are kept within their appropri- 
 ate spheres of action, and compelled to execute 
 their duties therein. We had an ultimate court 
 of appeals, consisting of the senate, aided -by the 
 chancellor or the judges of the supreme court. 
 That court was admirably framed for the devel- 
 opement of the principles of liberty established 
 by our revolution, and to be enjoyed under new 
 methods of government ; and for tiie modification 
 of our borrowed jurisprudence, by adapting it to 
 this new state of things. It was emphatically the 
 court of the people, composed of individuals se- 
 lected trorn the various sections of the country; 
 coming together and making a fair representation 
 of the general mind of the whole people, it was 
 the common remark of the most eminent techni- 
 cal J.t best court in the state 
 that it was hourly infusing new blood into tiie 
 law, and invigorating and sustaining our juris- 
 prudence, which without its aid might perhaps 
 luve become too contracted by the influence oi 
 precedents made under a monarchy. With these 
 tribunals erected by the constitution of 1777, no 
 fault had ever been found, except one. And 
 what wad that fault ? Vv l,y that the members, be- 
 ing a portion of the legislative department, were 
 not the proper persons to judge of the. constitu- 
 
 tionality of a law in whose passage they had taken 
 part. From our legal history it was shown that 
 the court of errors had never pronounced any 
 law unconstitutional. In this objection there 
 was theoretical soundness, and experience has ve- 
 rified the theory. But that was ttye only objec- 
 tion to that court. From its large numbers, it: 
 waa favorable to the development of free princi- 
 ples, and from the manner of the election of its 
 members, it was sure to present a high grade of 
 intelligence In 1S21 it was thought necessary 
 to strike at the supreme court, and therefore the 
 number of its judges was reduced, and the 
 circuit system introduced. The system thus 
 introduced justified the observation made on 
 this floor that the court was composed of two 
 distinct parts, one portion of which had no liv- 
 ing, practical, active knowledge of the peo- 
 ple or the existing relations of society, while 
 the other had greatly diminished opportunities 
 of knowing the law. This was the main, if not 
 the only error committed in 1821. With these 
 lights of experience before us, what, in the re- 
 arrangement of our judicial system ought now to 
 be our ruling principle of action? Ought it not 
 to be to hold on to that which is good and, which 
 has been proved by time and experience to be 
 good in our existing institutions, and to part with 
 or modify that only which the same tests have 
 proved to be bad that only which has failed in 
 the working of our system ? Surely every sensi- 
 ble man would agree that this was our true 
 course. It was not right to depart entirely from 
 the lights of experience the lessons of wisdom 
 and to devise an entirely new machine of untried 
 powers and qualities, and set it to work on 
 speculation. At least we ought not to do so 
 without being very sure that it was competent to 
 perform the duties of the old one. In this view 
 of the course to be pursued, he deemed it all-im- 
 portant that we should still have a supreme court 
 having some character ot unity, so that it should 
 be really, as well as in name, the supreme court 
 of the State of New York, and that it should rep- 
 resent in the reports which are to be issued of 
 its decisions, the weight and power and majesty 
 of this whole people. Hitherto we have always 
 had such a court, but shall we have such a court 
 under this proposed judicial system? Most cer- 
 tainly not. The proposition is to have judges 
 el-'- cted in eight districts or sections of the state, 
 each set of them to hold a court within the dis- 
 trict. By this we shall have eight local district 
 courts. Nothing more in fact, than enlarged 
 courts of common pleas. And how are we to 
 ascertain the decisions of those courts ? Were 
 they all to issue reports ? Certainly riot, for that 
 would overwhelm us at once. VVe shall then 
 know nothing of these decisions, and hence the 
 law of one district will not be the law of another, 
 and in no respect can they be placed in point of 
 dignity and respectability on the footing of a su- 
 preme court which is a unit which represents 
 tiie whole state and sits for the whole state. 
 He hardly knew how these local district courts 
 were going to discharge the business of a su- 
 preme court of the State of New York. They 
 would answer very well as courts of common 
 picas, in which a man might commence a suit 
 ior debt and follow it up to judgment, but when 
 
694 
 
 a question arose that was not of a local character, 
 he did not see how they could be made to an- 
 swer. Suppose occasion to occur for a manda- 
 mus to the directors of the Hudson and Erie 
 Railroad Company, which has its location in no 
 single district, to which of these district supreme 
 courts was application to be made for the writ ? 
 He knew that it might be said that a provision 
 might be introduced to meet such a case. But 
 nevertheless other cases of like difficulty would 
 arise, which cannot be anticipated. Suppose one 
 had to apply for a mandamus to the comptroller 
 of the State to which of these courts would he 
 apply ? He supposed to that district court in 
 which the Comptroller lived. [A VOICE to any 
 of them!] That would hardly do. He might 
 call upon the Comptroller to grant him a certain 
 right, and the gentleman from Erie might apply 
 for the same right, and the gentleman from Onei- 
 da might also apply for the same. He could 
 grant it to one only. Each of the disappointed 
 might wish to apply for a mandamus, and if he 
 could apply in his own district, the comptroller 
 might have a mandamus commanding him to grant 
 the same thing to each of several parties, from 
 different Supreme courts sitting in different dis- 
 tricts of the State. Nothing like this could arise 
 if they had one supreme court as heretofore. If 
 the power was confined to the district court of the 
 district in which the officer to be coerced resided, 
 it might answer where there was only one ; but 
 how would it be managed where, as in railroad 
 companies and boards of officers, the parties to 
 be coerced resided in different districts ? Again, 
 how would these district courts operate even in 
 common suits ? The plaintiff commencing a suit 
 in the Supreme Court,would lay his venue in ne 
 of the counties of a particular district, and would 
 lay it where he pleased. If a defendant had 
 ground to change the venue and carry the cause 
 within a different district, where must he apply ? 
 Gentlemen would tell him that application must 
 be made to the district where the venue was laid. 
 Well, suppose the judges were elected in and be- 
 longed to and locally confined within respective 
 districts, was it altogether fair for him to lay his 
 venue in the city of "New York when suing a gen- 
 tleman in Chautauque, and compel the defendant 
 to make his application to the judges of the New 
 York district, for a change of venue. The gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque might think if his mo- 
 tion for a change of venue was denied, that, great 
 injustice had been done. This very evil was well 
 guarded against when the superior court of the 
 city of New York was created. They were not 
 allowed to send their original process out of the 
 county of New York and arrest a man; but when 
 gentlemen came to the city of New York, process 
 could be served on them there, and they could 
 thus be made liable to have the action tried there, 
 though the cause of action arose, and the witness- 
 es for the defence all resided in another county. 
 The legislature, however, gave to the supreme 
 court the power to change the venue. They did 
 not entrust that power to the local judges. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : Does the gentleman suppose 
 that the judges are to be local ? 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR proceeded. I speak on the sup- 
 position that they are to be local. I purpose to 
 show presently that the evils to result from their 
 
 nterchanging, for the purposes designed by the 
 committee, Would be still greater. To attempt 
 the attainment of those ends, a totally unendura- 
 D!C degree of rambling and perambulation must 
 e imposed upon the judges, literally excluding 
 hem from all the ordinary enjoyments of life 
 converting them, as it were, into wanderers and 
 vagabonds; and yet the objects aimed at would 
 in no appreciable measure attained. He con- 
 ceived, upon the whole, it would be far better to 
 ibrego an attempt to produce unity of decision 
 ay an interchange and circulation of the judges 
 jetween the different eight benches. He illus- 
 trated his position by examples given from cases 
 :hat he could imagine would occur. He said, 
 with one Supreme Court for the whole State, he 
 could attend to all the cases he might commence, 
 without going out of his county, except on the 
 day of trial, or ever being called by a bar-motion 
 to more than one place at the same time. Under 
 this new system, how would it be ? All bar-mo- 
 tions, every material step in the case, requiring 
 the action of the court in bane, must be taken in 
 the district embracing the county in which the 
 venue is laid. An attorney in full practice would 
 have such cases in several, perhaps in every dis- 
 trict. How would he attend the eight different 
 sets of terms, held at the same time and in differ- 
 ent places ? It would be impossible, just as im- 
 possible as to practice at one time in several 
 States of the Union. Both the prosecution and 
 defence of every case in the Supreme Court must 
 therefore be conducted in future by attorneys re- 
 siding within the same district. It would be im- 
 possible for counsel to practice as at present, in 
 business arising in different portions of the state ; 
 and equally impossible that a citizen of the state 
 should have himself defended from any assailant, 
 wherever residing in the state, as now, by his fa- 
 vorite counsel, who best understood him and his 
 business, and upon whose knowledge and earnest 
 fidelity he could rely with safety and confidence. 
 To exemplify this, he would ask the gentleman 
 from Orange, who was acquainted with the prac- 
 tice, where was the attorney who defended his 
 clients in eight different courts of common pleas ? 
 Now and then he believed gentlemen were ad- 
 mitted in a couple of county courts, where 
 the counties adjoined. [A gentleman here re- 
 marked that he practiced in three such courts.] 
 Well, then, the gentleman is a rarity. [Mr. 
 CROCKER here remarked thai lie was admitted to 
 four] 1 can only sav that the gentleman is a 
 greater rariiy. Mr. O'C. was admitted in two, 
 but he had never tried more than a single case in 
 one of them. A gentleman to practice in eight 
 districts must have eight offices. He continued 
 for some time to il lustra! e the difficulties attend- 
 ing such a 'practice and then proceeded to notice 
 ! he suggestion that the judges of these districts 
 could be made by the legislature to interchange, 
 and thus many of the evils of this district court 
 system would' be remedied. How otien under 
 such a system, would any two of them meet du- 
 ring their judicial term of eight years? The 
 same two would never meet a second time.- 
 But, would a ii.ru meeting or iwo of this 
 kind produce tlmt comparison and inter- 
 change of opinion, concurrence of judgment and 
 that uniformity of decision, which was attainable 
 
695 
 
 in a court having a moderate- number oi'j>. 
 when the latter have oppurtuuitftesol coming 1:011- 
 tituiitlly in contact with earn o .her? ii Uuy did 
 interchange wh;ii operation was i: to have on ilie 
 judtres ihemselvt s ? We h.ue fj'J counties, and 
 judges were to go around ai.d interchange in 
 Uiing of circuits in all those counties. T,;t 
 only fair way of making this interchange was for 
 ibe judges each io hold a circuit through the state 
 before they came bacx io hold a second circuit in 
 th<irown, and thus each would hold f)b circuits 
 before h-- held a second in his own vicinage. Then 
 as to the b.uic com s ; each judge w(juld be u, 
 his own distnct one eighth pait of the lime devo- 
 ted to bench duties ; the other seven eighths he 
 must be absent in other districts. In tins way 
 alone can be produced a proper circulation ol tins 
 new circulating medium in legal admim^lra 
 tii.n. No man who had the proper affec- 
 tions of our naiure would take such an oi- 
 rice, ii would require of hiu. so much ab- 
 as to deprive him of all the erjoyments ol 
 home. There was nothing in it either to gratify 
 pride or ambition According io one gentleman's 
 views, (Mr. CHATFIKLD'S) they were only to be 
 l).iidsl,000, or at the most ftl,500 a year, and they 
 were all to be on a dead level in office. He asked 
 what sort of judges were they to get by such a sys- 
 tem ? Why they could have none but the most 
 inferior grade of judges. All the judges were to 
 be elected in districts, and yet they were to inter- 
 change so that the electors would only have their 
 fuvn judges one-eighth of theyear. What induce 
 ment had theelectots to trouble themselves much 
 about the selection ? What, would they gain by 
 i: ? Why the gentleman they would elect lor 
 eitriit years th< " would have but for one; the 
 rest of the term he would be wandering about 
 th>> state; and to get one portion ot it, v\e 
 ')een told, it was necessaiy to go inti 
 Canada, and to return bv the same way, si 
 that justice could not visit it during a wai 
 with our strong neighbor Britain. The rii 
 si priiis or circuit s\s ; em was desirable a 
 an auxiliary to the studies ol the bench. 
 But if was riot necessary or expedient to carry it 
 to tliis impracticable and oppressive extent. Car- 
 ried t'i a moderate extent it is a benefit. But io 
 keep i he judge continu liy upon the ramble, is in 
 espedientt particularly when the main object, m 
 terchariije of opinion and uniformity of decision 
 .either attainable, nor even in any detrrei 
 helped by it. Carried to an excess, the rambling 
 i) is unmitigated injury. The jud.ue elected 
 in Delaware or Orleans is not th" mo.-t competed 
 to try marine cases in N-w York, with which he 
 is not conversant. The New York jud^e endea 
 vonng in '" Old Moriah" to try a cause between a 
 miner and a wood-chopper, however ably arid inv 
 partially he might preside, would from his igno 
 ranee of the veiy terms in use, excite the saint 
 unfavorable observations upon his want of farnili 
 aiiy v\irh the matter, that the Delaware judg 
 would from the dandy juror in Now Yoik, by hi 
 want (!' familiarity with maritime transactions.-*- 
 Thi'se evils musl be encoUnU-ied to secure profi 
 ciency in the judges; and where the number i 
 few, and the appointment from the win <!< State 
 tn-'v shrink into insignificance, But with an arm) 
 of jMdges, elected in districts, f^r short terms 
 
 vith salaries of I, i mi i or <l,r,()(j a year; each: 
 ne kept almost .., nsi, mi ly on the ramble, and 
 mployed in that which he least understands, we 
 re likely to have an administration ot justice the 
 ikeot which was never before heard of in any 
 ivilr/.ed coumry. This bringing of jusiice home 
 o .-very mati's door, of which wo had heard so 
 nucli, was not practicable. FQT ail combatants 
 n the 1-iW, were; noi. next door neighbors. We 
 oiild approximate to such a result, but nothing 
 uore. Our svsiem was admirably constructed 
 iow for that, through our justices courts, our 
 :ounty couns, and supreme court. Whether the 
 :utlmg up of the supierne court would or would 
 lot tend to the convenience of counsel whether 
 . would tend to distribute more the business 
 vhich now fell inlo the hands of a few lawyers 
 iving here in Albany was not a matter pfoper for 
 he consideration of ihis" body. The question was 
 me in reference to the interest of suitors and 
 viewing the matter in all its relations, he con- 
 ceived i hat gieat disadvantages would result 
 o suitois from thus cutting up the court, and 
 lothing would be gained but a very slight con 
 venience to some particular counsel. To show 
 iow vain the dturt to bring justice home 
 
 every man's door, as the phrase was Mr. 
 O'C. supposed the case of the stale being cut up* 
 into eight judicial districts, with Newburgh as the 
 seat of justice for one ot them that might accorn 
 modate his friend from Orange, (Mr. BROWJV) who 
 was very uel! accommodated already, being within 
 six houis sieaming of Albany 01 New Yoi k where 
 the supreme court sat most of the rime. But 
 would his inend from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS) be 
 accommodated ? Where would the centre of his 
 district he under this new sys.ern, ^nd how Jar 
 would he have to travel to get to it? [Mr. SIM-) 
 MOAS: "About as fur as logo to Albany. ']_* 
 Hie imth was all those south of Albany down to 
 New York, and for one hundred miles in every 
 other direction, were actually nearer to ihe centre 
 ot justice, as the supieme court was now organ- 
 ized, than most of the inhabitants of other set* 
 iiuns would be to the centre ol any one of the 
 proposed clismcis. True, there would be eight 
 principal places, Troy, Syracuse, Poughkeepskl 
 &c., would be particularly blessed by having the 
 supieme court located right there, and the people 
 of ihe vicinage would have all the advantages of 
 (his beautiful svstem. Bur {hose living "sixty 
 BBiles otf, who had to travel sixty miles, and nof 
 pu-baps by steam on rail roads oroii'llu- Hudson, 
 would be about as far from justice as ever, with 
 iln- additional disadvantage to counsel of beint; 
 noiihed peihups to attend on the same day teirns 
 ot the supieme court held in the most "distant 
 places. He wen! on to urge that a supreme couit 
 
 01 twelve jud-cs, four of them sitting j n b; !n c, 
 and the iest on the circuit, would be adequate Io 
 do all the business of a supieme court under a 
 well orgamz-d system with the advantage of 
 nev.T holding a term at more than one place at a 
 time, and their small number bi inking them to- 
 Aether often enough lo produce that unity ol opin 
 ion and d< cision \\hich was not only necessary to 
 the safety ot the suitor, but iffcdiopensably neces- 
 s;iry r<> preserve thr judicial chaiacter of the state. 
 The lirst. unitormity court in this new s}stem was 
 _tlie court lit' appeals answering to the supreme 
 
 
696 
 
 court in the present system. The effect of having 
 this court of appeals the only uniformity court, 
 would be that all causes actively litigated would 
 go there. The undying spirit of litigation, so 
 characteristic of a people, free, independent and 
 prosperous, such as ours, would not abide by riie 
 decisions of tMi-se rambling district judges. They 
 would say in Essex, for instance, when one of our 
 judges from the city came up there to try causes, 
 that he might know all about ships and maritim 
 matters, but nothing of their affairs. And was 
 there a lawyer there who believed that this court 
 of appeals would suivive for eighteen months the 
 duty thus thrown upon it? Could these eight 
 judges, hear any more causes than three? Could 
 eight run a race quicker than otie? Or could 
 eight hear nrni talk faster than one? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS : They can hear as many as thir- 
 ty-five judges in the present court of Errors. 
 ^ Mr. O'CONOR replied that this was not so 
 and the sad mistake was in abolishing this court 
 and substituting nothing like it in abolishing 
 that court, the supreme court and the chancellor's 
 court, and substituting for the whole three this 
 single eight-judge court, all of whom must sit to- 
 gether ; too much was crowded into one spot. 
 The court of errors, by its numerous members re- 
 lieving each other, is enabled to do vastly more 
 business even of the small portion that fell to it 
 than this court of appeals could,and at the same 
 time preserve a fair degree of uniformity. But most 
 of these eight judges must always be present 
 and for the reason that they were to perform all 
 the judicial duty of producing uniformity, now 
 devolving upon the supreme court and chancel- 
 lor; with no ulterior appeal. Being the first 
 court of uniformity almost every thing will go 
 there which now goes to those two courts ; and 
 as it is to be the court of last resort, before it will 
 be made the final, full, elaborate, protracted ar 
 guments on which the ultimate destiny of a cause 
 was to be determined ; now only heard in the 
 court of errors, and often occupying many days. 
 He did not see how any practised lawyer could 
 hope that that court would last ? You might sus- 
 tain it by cutting off appeals in small cases, and 
 making it the rich man's court; but to this the 
 people would not submit, and if this was not 
 done, he humbly insisted that the court could not 
 stand. His view was that we should have a sys- 
 tem substantially preserving the great features of 
 the present preserve the justices court also 
 the county courts, giving them a good organization, 
 and as heretofore original jurisdiction of suits be- 
 tween party and party. [Mr. O'C. here gave way 
 lor a motion to rise and report progress and the 
 committee rose.] 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR' re-asserted the position with 
 which he closed the morning's debate, that in the 
 constitution of 1821, and its predecessor, was em- 
 bodied the best model for a judicial system, and 
 that in its general features that system should be 
 preserved. The workings of that system had de- 
 veloped its good qualities, and revealed its im- 
 perfections. With the lights of ample experi- 
 ence, we could now re-construct it in such a man- 
 ner as to avail ourselves of the former and to era- 
 dicate the latter. We could avoid the inter- 
 mingling of legislative and judicial duties, which 
 was the sole error of 1777. We could avoid the 
 
 entire separation of bench and circuit duties, 
 
 which was the capital error of 1821. We could 
 avoid another error, of which the foundations 
 were laid in the constitution of 182 1. Improvi- 
 dent legislation had degraded our county courts. 
 They had become reduced to such a feeble con- 
 dition, that they no longer commanded public 
 confidence, and consequently all the common law 
 business of the country, above the jurisdiction of a 
 justice of the peace, flowed into the Supreme court 
 completely checking the flow of justice in that 
 tribunal. These were the only defects which the 
 working of our system had developed these he 
 would eradicate. But he would preserve the sys- 
 tem itself. He deprecated the idea of attempting 
 this untried expedient, so novel in all its parts, 
 framed with a single view to the localising of ih* 
 judiciary power. An expedient which, whilst it 
 split up our supreme court, and deranged the 
 harmony of our system, diti not in fact increase 
 the convenience of courts or bring justice nearer 
 home to the citizen. The defects of the county 
 courts constituted the real impediment to the 
 workings of the Supreme Court; He was assured 
 by high authority that that court was occupied 
 about half the time in hearing and deciding cases 
 originally commenced there, in which the claim 
 did not exceed one hundred dollars. Under .an 
 efficient county court system, these cases would 
 have been tried in the common pleas, and few, 
 very few of them would ever have gone up by 
 writ of error. In view of these evils, he would 
 not destroy the court whose feebleness had brought 
 this oppressive burthen upon the higher court; 
 he would on the contrary reinvigorate it. It was 
 this excess of business in the higher courts, not 
 any intrinsic defect in our judicial structure, nor 
 any fault in our judges, that had produced all the 
 evils under which we are suffering. No fault 
 had been found on any side with our judges , 
 they had long performed immense labor; 
 with conceded learning and ability. The 
 Court of Chancery, or a separate Tribu- 
 nal had been unceremoniously brushed away, 
 and apparently with much personal satisfaction 
 to members here ; but all would admit the emi- 
 nent ability and distinguished worth of the Chan- 
 cellor. His ten volumes of equity decisions form 
 a monument of his great learning and strong 
 sense of justice which will remain as long as ju- 
 risprudence shall find admirers among men. At 
 this day his judgments command the esteem of 
 the learned throughout the union ; and long after 
 his court, himself, and the dissatisfaction of the 
 foiled seeker after wrong, shall have passed away, 
 the memory of his unparalleled industry, and his 
 singular acuteness of perception, will remain and 
 command the applause of well-thinking men. 
 He insisted that we were called upon by a con- 
 siderate regard for the legal reputation of the 
 state, for the preservation of uniformity in the 
 law and for the safety of the citizen, not to adopt 
 the plan of cutting up our supreme court into 
 fragments. Such a course would leave us with- 
 out any regular system of jurisprudence. He 
 conceived that we ought to preserve our higher 
 courts ; and to d6 this, it was necessary to aid 
 them by the construction of competent inferior 
 courts. The .county courts should be retained 
 w|ta their present jurisdiction, and should be 
 
697 
 
 furnished with such judges as would render them 
 useful. He would retain their jurisdiction in all its 
 legitimate strength and integrity, and elevate the 
 character of their judges. This might be done 
 in many ways, the surrogate might be made a 
 judge of the court, it might be declared that there 
 should be in each county one, two or more coun- 
 ty judges, referring to a graduated scale according 
 to the population of the county. They might be 
 organized in this way only, or in conjunction 
 wfth a president or district judge system, provi- 
 ding one or more judges for a district composed 
 of several counties. These judges might try the 
 issues ami held a bane court or argument term as 
 often as requisite in each county. They could at 
 t he same time try issues from the supreme court 
 and thus reduce the circuit duties of the supreme 
 judges and relieve small counties from the cost of 
 holding courts and calling together juries more 
 frequently than was necessary. This course 
 would give a strong county court, one comman- 
 ding as much respect, as the mis-named Supreme 
 Court or courts of the judicial committee. This 
 would be bringing justice home to every man's 
 door as far as practicable; it would give a purely 
 local court for those disputants who were near 
 neighbors, leaving to those farther apart the 
 cerxtral or supreme court -By an arrangement 
 thus reducing the business of the supreme 
 court, Mr. O'C. believed that from ten to thir- 
 teen judges could perform all the duties now 
 devolving upon the supreme court and the 
 chancellor. Four might form a quorum, and 
 by a proper division of labor in bane and cir- 
 cuit duties, and in the examination of cases, they 
 could easily despatch the business of the court. 
 If found necessa-y there might be in session dur- 
 ing the whcle year a court in bane. There ought 
 to be an ulterior court ot appeals beyond the su- 
 preme court, essentially similar to our present 
 court of errors. We had always had such a court 
 and in a great state like ours it is indispensable. 
 That court is required for these peculiar cases of 
 great difficulty, presenting great and novel ques- 
 tions which will occasionally arise under any ju- 
 dicial system, where the ordinary courts after the 
 fullest argument and scrutiny fail to satisfy the 
 public or the parties in interest. It ought to be 
 
 pulsion of his tenant. We need a court of this 
 kind, but it is not afforded to us under the pro- 
 posed system. Reverting to the precise point 
 before the committee, Mr. O'C. remarked that his 
 object in the amendment proposed by him was to 
 have the original county court of our country. 
 This would enable our system to work, a large 
 portion of the business would be done in the coun- 
 ty court nearly all the rest would be done in the 
 supreme court, and the residue, the great cases, 
 involving vast amounts, vast principles and caus- 
 ing a great consumption of time by protracted 
 and laborious argument, would fall to the share 
 of the court of last resort. The advocates of 
 the new system, who are of course enemies to 
 the county courts, perceiving that an attachment 
 to the latter exists in this convention, have sought 
 to satisfy that sentiment in form, whilst they de- 
 feated it in substance. They offer a new device, 
 called a county court, shorn of all its ancient 
 powers and honors as a court of original jurisdic- 
 tion between party and party. All that business 
 is needed for the newly devised octagonal Su- 
 preme Court. What is this newly devised coun- 
 ty court ? It is a petty local court, intended to 
 try appeals from justices, apprentice cases, &c. ; 
 to perambulate through the towns ; to go wherev- 
 er it can find a j ustice of the peace to devour. It 
 is a petty cormorant, going about the county to de- 
 vour the little business properly belonging to the 
 justices. It is to have no jurisdiction of civil 
 suits, except of the cases belonging to the justices' 
 courts, which have undergone some preliminary 
 It seems designed 
 If it is to be de- 
 jurisdiction of suits 
 between party and party, what kind of judges 
 will be placed in it ? Surely, we shall not have 
 a higher grade of judges when we lower the rank, 
 power and dignity of the court. The present 
 county court has fallen into discredit because the 
 employment of an inferior grade of judges 
 has reduced its civil business, and the re- 
 duction of business reacting, has prevented 
 the employment of able judges. Are we to 
 make a respectable court by diminishing and 
 degrading its power and jurisdiction ? Sure- 
 ly not. The judges of the newly contrived coun 
 
 investigation in that tribunal, 
 merely to destroy that court, 
 dared unfit to have 
 
 _____ _____ J ,_ o _____________ rf 
 
 composed in part of judges from the supreme I ty courts will be the same grade of men who have 
 court and a considerable number of -'lected judges, destroyed the county courts and furnished to gen- 
 
 say one or two from each of the eight judicial dis- 
 tricts. Mr. O'C. would prefer two, for the reason 
 already stated by the gentleman from Erie (Mr. 
 STOW). The decision in the great habeas corpus 
 case stated by that gentleman, shows the necessity 
 
 tlemen here the best arguments for their destruc- 
 tion. This new court to be a court of last resort? 
 If not, its feebleness will make it a mere machine 
 tor the fabrication of further appeals, and thus 
 vex the citizen and add vastly to the labor of the 
 
 of such a court. The case of Pendleton vs. Dyett courts above. Its very jurisdiction will involve 
 is another striking proof of it. A landlord who I a thousand doubts and questions ; being a new- 
 introduced into the same building with his device, it will riot rest upon the ancient well 
 
 had 
 
 tenant a number of profligate persons thereby 
 compelling the tenant to abandon the premises, 
 was held entitled co recover his rent, because no- 
 
 known foundations of the ancient county court. 
 If there is to be no appeal from its judgments, it 
 will be still more mischievous. Considering the 
 
 thing short of physical force, could in judgment class of men who will preside in it, is it a fit 
 of law, work an ouster or eviction. But when this j court to determine finally and without appeal 
 case reached the high court of the people, where j questions involving, if not great sums of money, 
 sound practical common sense sat robed in th<fj that which is much dearer, the reputation of 
 ermine of supreme judicial power, enlightened the citizen ? One gentleman (Mr. CROCKER) 
 
 by the principles of jurisprudence but not fettered 
 by its arbitrary technicalities, it was declared that 
 the landlord could not recover that he had raised 
 a moral pestilence and had wrought a moral ex- 
 
 proposes to give it extensive criminal jurisdic 
 tion. This petty tribunal, condemned in the 
 very law of its creation as unworthy of trying a 
 suit between man and man, is to have power to 
 
 62 
 
698 
 
 condemn the citizen to imprisonment and to infa- 
 my. It is to have power to do this without appeal, 
 though it should decide against all law and pre- 
 cedent; or with appeal under circumstances 
 which will ensure an appeal in every case. 
 This newly contrived court is a mere device to 
 ensure the destruction of our ancient county court, 
 it was 10 be a mongrel court, nenher the old 
 common pleas nor the general sessions, but a mix- 
 ture of both, with some additions. It presented 
 the same novelty of character as the new supreme 
 court and new court of appeals. Gentlemen were 
 quite right in making ettorts, under present cir 
 cumstances to increase the jurisdiction of justices' 
 court*. If every thing was to be new and chang- 
 ed, why not these justices' courts? Perhaps it 
 mi'-ht bfi well to have an appeal downwards and 
 have the justices' courts the courts of last resort. 
 Mr O'C. predicted that such a court as the new 
 countj court would prove a mischievous machine 
 for breeding the appeals now so much complained 
 of, and would overwhelm the supreme court. He 
 Msted 'hat such a mere experimental county 
 court, shorn of its ancient powers and honors, 
 would not receive the name of a county court and 
 at all events that it would not stand in the way ot 
 a county court with original jurisdiction ot civil 
 8U ji 3 _between party and party. He trusted that 
 in any ulan that niig'ht be adopted, we should pre- 
 serve the county court as a legal institution just as 
 U stood, strengthening it by proper judges, and 
 giving it lull original jurisdiction. And the ques- 
 tion i?i his judgment, involved the whole question 
 of a supreme court split into fragments. For th Q 
 friends of that kind of court must admit that such 
 a subdivision of the supreme court would be .idle 
 if good and efficient county courts were in opera- 
 Mr. CROCKER submitted the following addi- 
 tional' sections io the report of the judiciary com. 
 mittee, which wore ordered to be printed, and 
 were referred to the committee of the whole: 
 
 K 13 There shall be elected in each of the counties o 
 this State, except the city and county of New York, one 
 county incite who shall hold his office for four years, and 
 who shall hold the county court, and perform the duties o 
 the office of surrogate. 
 
 5j 14. The county court shall have appellate jurisdiction 
 of all causes tried in justices' courts; but shall have no 
 original civil jurisdiction. The county court may, in the 
 discretion of the county judge, be held at any place in the 
 county tor the convenience of suitors; but its regula 
 terms shall be held at the places where the courts of com 
 mon pleas are now held. 
 
 \ 15 The county judge, with two justices of the peace 
 to be arnualy designated ry the board of supervisors o 
 the several counties, shall hold courts of geneial session- 
 tor the trial of all offences punishable by impiisonment i 
 a state prison, lor a term not exceeding ten years; an 
 shall perform all the special dutie- now required by law t 
 be performed fry ihe countv courts. 
 
 k 16 I" cae. of the non-attendance, at the time and plac 
 nf holding the court of general sessions, of the justices s 
 rtpsiiroated or either of them, their pl.ices may be supplie 
 v others to be summoned by the sheiifT of the county. 
 
 \ 17 The countv judge shall receive an annual salary 
 
 f n V.P fixpd bv law.' The accounts of justices lor seiTice 
 
 cour* o -general sessions, shall be audited by the board 
 
 of supervisors, and paid out ot the connty treasury. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 The committee of the whole, Mr. CAMBRE 
 LENG in the Chair, again took up the report - 
 the judiciary committee. 
 Mr. JORDAN said, in addressing this body h 
 
 lould endeavor to recollect that he was discus- 
 ng a very grave subject, and addressing men of 
 ommon sense and sober judgment men who at 
 ast know a surrogate from a " bull-frog," and a 
 ounty court from a " cormorant." He did not 
 xpect by any witticism of that kind or by any 
 dicule he might throw on the advocates of a 
 Ian he might not fancy, to convince sober-mind- 
 d men either that he was right, or they wrong. 
 e promised the other day, in as brief a manner 
 s practicable, to explain what kind of acourt this 
 ould be, when the plan was carried out accord- 
 ig to these great outlines. But before doing- 
 lis, he must say that before the gentleman from 
 Vew-York, (Mr. O'CoNon) last addressed the 
 ommittee, Mr. J. supposed they had heard quite 
 s much about the proceedings of the judiciary 
 ommittee as they desired to hear; and he had 
 oped that gentleman, who had said all manner 
 f clever things about the committee, would have 
 een content, in the absence of the chairman 
 Mr. RTJGGLES), in consequence of sickness, to 
 ave let the matter pass over without further as- 
 ersions. He had been accused of ridiculing the 
 minority of the committee; and this accusation 
 ame from gentlemen, one of whom asserted in 
 iis place, a few days since, that no three of the 
 :ommittee agreed to this report, and now, after 
 hat bold assertion had been amply refuted, re- 
 eated the charge that this report was not the 
 act of a majority of the committee. Again, the 
 majority were accused of an intolerant, domi- 
 neering spirit, because they repelled this assault. 
 Ie disclaimed any intention to asperse the mo- 
 ives of the minority. He stated a simple fact, 
 and solely with the intention to vindicate the 
 course of the majority of the committee, especi- 
 illy that of the honorable chairman ; to show the 
 ntrinsic difficulties of the subject and to incul- 
 cate here, as he had done there, a spirit of har- 
 mony and conciliation. It had been his ardent 
 desire to prevent unpleasant and exciting colli- 
 sions to avoid any thing in itself calculated to 
 give just cause of offence to any, or to disturb 
 :hat calm deliberation to which this great subject 
 was pre-eminently entitled. And he did not in- 
 tend hereafter, whatever gentlemen might say, 
 DV way of covert insinuation or otherwise,against 
 the majority of the committee or its chairman, to 
 depart from that course. And he hoped yet to 
 convince the gentleman from New- York (Mr. 
 O'C.) more than two-thirds of whose remarks 
 were calculated to bring the judiciary committee, 
 and the plan they had proposed, into contempt 
 and ridicule, rather than to show a better plan 
 that this great machine, which the gentleman 
 predicted would break down in eighteen months 
 would operate efficiently, promptly and cheap- 
 ly, and (if we got good judges) to the satisfaction 
 of the whole community. One word more in re- 
 gard to what the gentleman from New-York had 
 said of the forty -seven section report. The gen- 
 tleman vas asked by the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer (Mr. LOOMIS), whether that report varied 
 from any principle finally settled by the commit- 
 tee, except in regard to the construction of the 
 court of appeals. The gentleman was bound to 
 confess that he did not know that it did, unless that 
 this report did not contain the provision in regard 
 
699 
 
 to the ineligibility of judges for two years after 
 their terms had expired. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR: The court of common pleas 
 was in, and a different court of errors. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said it was true the court of er- 
 rors was a little ditferently organized, and Mr. J. 
 regretted that the committee had not the benefit 
 of the light of the gentleman's great mind on this 
 subject. It was the misfortune of the committee 
 that the gentleman's business called him away, 
 and that they had not his assistance in re-model- 
 ling the court of errors when the report was fi- 
 nally agreed to. But in the other particular he 
 begged leave to say that the gentleman was 
 wrong. There was no such clause in the 47th 
 section report (as it was called) as that in regard 
 to the ineligibility of the judges, although that 
 matter had been discussed at large in the com- 
 mittee. It did, he believed, contain a county 
 court, but a very different one from that propos- 
 ed by the gentleman from New York it had 
 been placed there he believed to satisfy gentle- 
 men who finally voted down the report as a 
 whole, and was then omitted in the report pre- 
 sented, because a majority deemed it most desira- 
 ble to do so. But he had this general remark to 
 make, and he hoped for the last time, that this 
 report was fairly brought in by a majority of the 
 committee. And whilst saying this he saw here 
 in their places the gentlemen from Chautauque 
 (Mr. PATTERSON,) from Oswego (Mr. HART,) 
 from New York (Mr. STEPHENS,) from Tomp- 
 kins (Mr. SEARS,) from Orange (Mr. BROWN,) 
 and from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS,) all members 
 of the committee. Here were six, and if there 
 were a mau of them that did not agree to 
 this repon he begged he would rise and say 
 so, and Mr. J. would set down convicted of 
 falsehood. Gentlemen had not gone so far as 
 to charge that the chairman (Mr. RUGGI.ES) 
 or he (Mr. JORDAN) did not agree to it, and 
 if eight make a majority of thirteen, he did 
 not ask the aid of the gentleman from Essex 
 (Mr. SIMMONS,) who agreed with a mental reser- 
 vation, to make out a majority, though they would 
 have been glad indeed to have had his entire con- 
 currence. But to come to the details of this plan, 
 and redeem his promise by explaining how it 
 could be carried out by the legislature, so as to 
 work well (for the legislature would have cer- 
 tain duties to perform as well as this Convention.) 
 We were to fix the inflexible, unalterable parts 
 the legislature would have to give it its flexible 
 and moveable parts, those which could from time 
 to time be altered, and modified as the develop- 
 ment of circumstances should require. He re 
 marked the other day that the committee could 
 not claim for this plan the support of the Con 
 vention, unless they could show that the courts, 
 03 thus organized, would be efficient to do the 
 business, and do it well, and to the satisfaction 
 of the public. 
 
 He had been told that a majority of the commit- 
 tee had come in here in a body determined to 
 push this report through, every line and letter ot 
 it. That was the gentleman's (Mr. O'CONOR'S) 
 language and that he was now convinced of the 
 overpowering and pernicious importance attached 
 to a majority report. For he was now satisfiec 
 it was already to be considered as embodied in the 
 
 Constitution and that there was no more to be 
 aid about it. The committee, (said Mr. J.) were 
 elected to do a duty. They performed that du- 
 ty, and it would have been unparliamentary, if 
 not trifling with this body, if after doing that du- 
 y eight of the committee concurring in a report, 
 hey had fallen to work and pulled it to pieces. 
 The committee were not so regardless of what 
 :hey owed to themselves and their constituents as 
 ;o be betrayed into any such a course, it would 
 lave been the work of madmen; nor could they 
 consider an abandonment of it, without explain- 
 ng its principles, showing how it would operate, 
 ind endeavoring to obtain a majority to sustain it 
 lere, would be walking in the line of duty; un- 
 .ess indeed some gentleman could produce a bet- 
 :er plan, and convince them of its superiority. 
 tfe was inclined to do what he considered in- 
 cumbent on those who agreed to the report to 
 explain and defend it. And notwithstanding all 
 the accusations against the committee, and the 
 ridicule attempted to be thrown upon the report 
 ay comparing the judges to a flock of flying pig- 
 eons characterizing them as an itinerant band 
 of vagabond judges roaming about the state te 
 peddle out justice and he knew not what terms 
 of reproach and ridicule had not been employed 
 upon them he would not repeat the epithets 
 that had been so profusely showered upon them, 
 nor did he intend to retort upon the minority re- 
 port of his Hon. friend from New York, (Mr. 
 O'C.) He might with as much propriety com- 
 pare his stationary judges to a bed of oysters, 
 growing fast to any substance they might chance 
 to rest upon; there would be just as much of ar- 
 gument in it. But he would condescend to no 
 such course of remark he intended to do his 
 duty, and that done, the responsibility was off his 
 shoulders it would rest on the Convention, 
 where it would be clearly discharged a respon- 
 sibility, he confessed, he had felt oppressed with 
 ever since this matter was sent to the committee. 
 To begin with his explanation,he would call at- 
 tention to the court of appeals. There was one 
 spontaneous sentiment among the judiciary com- 
 mittee, and he believed every where, that the 
 court of errors, as now organized, should be abol- 
 ished. To supply its place the report provided 
 for the election of four members of the court of 
 appeal*, by general ticket throughout, the state 
 whose duty it should be to sit in this court, and 
 do nothing else. It puts four judges of the su- 
 preme court with them making a court of eight 
 any five of them, a majority, might hold the 
 court. This was done in view of the physical 
 constitution of man knowing that it was not in 
 the power of any man to sit week in and week out, 
 year in and year out, on the bench with his high- 
 est intellectual energies constantly employed. 
 This provision would allow one, two or three of 
 them to be absent, as they might arrange it, and 
 yet keep up a court. And it was pretty general- 
 ly agreed that five able and sound judges were as 
 safe to pass upon questions of law, as five hun- 
 dred. The election of half the court by the whole 
 people, was deemed to be important to preserve 
 a favorite feature of the present court of errors, 
 and to infuse into it the popular principle. The 
 committee proposed to divide the state into eight 
 districts four judges of the supreme court to be 
 
700 
 
 elected in each making thirty-two so classifiei 
 under provision of law that one should go out i: 
 each district every two years, and his place to b> 
 supplied by a new election. Of these thirty-twi 
 judges, it was proposed to select four of the senio 
 class of judges those who had their two las 
 years to serve, and who would of course be men 
 of experience and practical law learning to si 
 in the court of appeals the legislature to mak< 
 provision for the classification of the class of eigh 
 senior judges, so that they might alternate in the 
 court of appeals and in doing circuit duty anc 
 so that if it should be necessary for the court t< 
 sat the whole year round, the judges should noi 
 be physically broken down. As to the terms, he 
 supposed the legislature would fix on four terms 
 a year, all of them held at the seat of government 
 And this because it would best comport with the 
 dignity of the court, and because it was necessa- 
 ry that they should be in the neighborhood of a 
 law library and the state had one of the best law 
 libraries in the union 'that at Washington alone 
 excepted. This location the committee though 
 better than to have the court holding their terms 
 first in New- York, then at iSaratoga, then at Roch- 
 ester, then at Buffalo, and then perhaps at the 
 Pine Orchard, or on the top of Mount Holyoke or 
 the White Mountains, It was thought better to 
 have the court locat'ed, so that the profession 
 \vould know where to find it ; and where the mem- 
 bers of the profession called there by important 
 business might see each other occasionally. It 
 would have a tendency to improve and elevate the 
 character of the bar, but the legislature would 
 fix it where they pleased. These terms it was 
 supposed would commence on the first. Monday in 
 January. May and iSeptember and that they 
 would continue their sessions until all the busi- 
 ness on their calendar was done up, the court 
 hearing arguments and deciding cases as they 
 went along. And what time was there for a judge 
 to decide a cause so fit as immediately after hear- 
 ing the argument ? That was the way the su- 
 preme court at Washington did, and what court 
 did business more ably and promptly ? If this 
 court, sitting the whole year round, as by their 
 organization they might, could not do up the bu- 
 siness of a court of last resort then we should be 
 driven to the dire necessity which God in his 
 mercy avert ! of having a divided court of last re- 
 sort. Then might we look for conflicting deci- 
 sions, and then might be almost driven to divide 
 this great empire state into two. But he believed 
 they could do all. It was said our supreme court 
 sat all the while, and yet, running behind. 
 They had done all they could. One of them, 
 whose memory was revered and his loss la- 
 mented had already worked himself to death 
 he had doubtless fallen a victim to his lau- 
 dable ambition in the service of the state; and 
 another had been on the point of going the same 
 way. This report provided against that in the 
 way he had mentioned. 
 
 He iiad -nown how the four judges of the court 
 proper could alternate. Those diawn from the 
 .supreme court, eight in number, uiigh; alternate 
 jit the second four only ol the eigm being in re- 
 quisition at ihe same lime and ihus they could 
 sit nil tne year r .unci, il the business should re- 
 quire it, and h. had no npur?heiis;uu that it would 
 
 be overburthened with business. The mure exai 
 ted the court of original jurisdiction, the less likely 
 was it that its decisions would be appealed from. 
 Let the cases which ate locome up on appeals, 
 originate and be tried in a supreme court, before 
 a judge ot high character and order of talents, of 
 Kieat learning and experience, and be reviewed is 
 bane by three judges of the same grade, and his 
 word for it there would not be one case to ten ap. 
 pealed that formerly had been. But ibis court 
 was not yet organized. The legislature would 
 provide a clerk for it, and make provision for his 
 compensation. He would have" his office here 
 when the court set would receive all papers 
 coming up from the supreme couit would be 
 present when the court was in session to enter 
 their orders and decrees, to transmit papers for a 
 new trial, or for judgment in the court below. 
 The legislature would also provide an able repor- 
 ter for this court of appeals, give him a salary, and 
 give him nothingelse. There should be no "steal- 
 ings in" no " copy right." No partnerships with 
 booksellers nothing of the hind. The reporter 
 then, instead of wire-drawing, and making six 
 books where one was enough, would improve the 
 quality, whilst he lessened the quantity of his re- 
 ports. The legislature should also provide for 
 printing them at the public expense taking care 
 to cover the cost bv the price and he ventured to 
 sny that the profession and all others could then 
 purchase for $2, what they have been in the habit 
 of paying $6 a volume for. This would stop this 
 flood of books that were now rushing in on us like 
 an avalanche. We were already buried up in 
 them. There were from five to seven volumes 
 issued every year in this state, and many more in 
 all the other states and that every lawyer must, 
 if he womd measure swords with his advesary ir> 
 the multiplication of supposed aufhorities, have. 
 The first report, in this state, commenced about 
 lorty-five years ago. We had already here and in 
 [he U. S. courts about 150 volumes and it had be- 
 come an intolerable burthen to the profession, of 
 whom generally, it has been truly said, " They 
 vvurk hard, live well and die poor." This busi- 
 ness of book-making had had something to do 
 with it and he hoped never to see another law- 
 Dook piinieil in this state except such as came 
 rorn the hands of the repoiter of the supreme 
 court in law and equity. A young lawyer, just 
 enleririg upon his career, is borne down with the 
 ipparent weight ot expense he must plank $1000 
 or the reports of the si ate ot New-York and the 
 Jnited States alone, without these he could not 
 s;et along, and ever expect a client to daiken his 
 door, 'i btee fourths of the *tufl reported was un~ 
 jecessary and it tne reporter had a salary and no 
 copy right, instead ot five or ten volumes a year, 
 we should probably have one volume in t\\oor 
 hree yeats, properly condensed and caretuhy 
 nade up. They would then prub.ibly be issued 
 list in numbers, and the profession accommodated, 
 ind he would tell the gentleman from New-York, 
 Mr. O'CoNOR) that these vagabond judges, these 
 Uneraut law pedlars he had referred to, would be 
 nst as likely as not to come across them in their 
 vanderings, and he should not be at all surprised, 
 f they stiould withal now and then read a lew 
 ages, and become acquainted with their contents 
 should it so happen it might seem in part to ob- 
 
701 
 
 vi.ile one < f his difficulties, lhal of conflicting de- 
 cisions. But enough oft his and of his court of ap- 
 peals, which he did not hesiinte to .say, if we had 
 the right kind of judges would be amply sufficient 
 for all purposes. And he had no fears about elect- 
 ing judges; hut he had his dotints about shorten- 
 ing their terms. Electing judges would make 
 theni sensible of the source of their power. The 
 mis-fortune now was that a man who was made a 
 judge, was prone to forge' who made him, and he- 
 come indolent or insolent, if constitutionally dis- 
 po-sod th.it way. If he was a good, conscientious 
 and capable man, such as we had now, he would 
 he a valuable man and would not forget that a 
 judge ought to be a gentleman and that he some- 
 times had to deal with gentlemen in the members 
 of the bar. If there was any thing in the idea of 
 the independence of a judge as applicable to our 
 institutions it depended on the length of his term 
 and not ti e mode of his creation; on that head it 
 was nor his purpose now to remark. 
 
 Mr. J. said he would next explain the supreme 
 court, that great monster with eight heads, near- 
 ly as bad in the imagination of some gentlemen 
 as Anti-Christ, differing principally in having 
 more heads and fewer horns. The committee 
 proposed 32 judges elected by districts the state 
 to be divided into eight parts, as compact as might 
 be without dividing counties, for that purpose. 
 The city and county of New York was made in 
 some respects an exception an increase being 
 provided for there, as the exigencies of popula- 
 tion and business might require. Four of these 
 judges were to be residents of each district to be 
 classified as he had stated, any three of them to 
 hold a supreme court any where in the State. 
 Supposing these judges to be the right kind of 
 men, for he did argue on the supposition that 
 they were not to be " loafers from Delaware" or 
 any other benighted part of the state, as had been 
 supposed by the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
 O'C. 1 ) those who did not know a ship from a 
 coal barge a Baltimore clipper from an Albany 
 flat-bottom. He (Mr. J.) supposed they would 
 be intelligent, good men, then he insisted we had 
 those in each district, who might hold a supreme 
 court in any part of the State. But that this did 
 not exclude more ; and gentlemen were wrong in 
 supposing that there never could be more than 
 three. This article itself contained the elements 
 of a provision for the sitting in bane of as many of 
 these judges as were convenient or as chose ; and 
 Mr. J. could anticipate occasions when they would 
 nearly all sit together. There was nothing to 
 prevent it. But he went further. They would 
 be brought together once a year, not expressly 
 under this system, but it was a part of it which 
 the legislature would no doubt carry out. They 
 would meet to form their rules of practice and 
 proceeding, which must be uniform throughout 
 the state. If he had the framing of a judiciary act, 
 he should provide that they should meet once a 
 year, first for the purpose of establishing rules, 
 and afterwards to revise them, if by so doing they 
 would diminish costs or expedite proceedings by 
 it. There was nothing in this article necessa- 
 rily to keep them assunder at any other time. 
 They might all meet together, or any number of 
 them down to three, such was the structure of 
 the system. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR asked the gentleman to show 
 what part of the article provided for this. There 
 might be times when great constitutional ques- 
 tions questions affecting the interests of the en- 
 tire population of the State might arise. Should 
 such or any other case occur creating intense and 
 general excitement, perhaps convulsing the State 
 to her centre, and making the very battlements 
 of your judiciary rock, what court on earth 
 would be more likely to hush flic disturbing ele- 
 ments and command a reverence for your laws ? 
 Thirty-two men selected by the people, of known 
 integrity, profoundly versed in the principles of 
 your constitution and learned in the law, sitting 
 in judgment together, would present a moral spec- 
 tacle of itself calculated to rebuke the spirit of 
 discord. They might and doubtless would, should 
 occasion require it, convene and sit together from 
 the highest sense of official duty. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN replied that with a court of 
 thirty-two judges any three of them being allow- 
 ed to hold a court, the implication at least was 
 pretty strong that that was the least number, not 
 the greatest. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD referred the gentleman to 
 section four. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR was replying, when 
 .frMr. JORDAN interposed submitting whether 
 we had not had an abundance of this small stuff. 
 [Mr. O'CONOR : "small stuff?"] Yes, (said Mr. 
 J.,) " small stuff," if the gentleman chooses to 
 repeat my words. How easy was it, if there was 
 any doubt of this, for the gentleman, instead of 
 pulling the report to pieces, to amend by saying 
 " three or more." And who of the committee 
 had objected to any alteration of the language of 
 the report, if it could be improved? Which of 
 them had objected to the modification of this 
 section already made on the motion of the gen- 
 tleman from. Otsego ? Or who would object to 
 to any such alteration ? He liked the proposition 
 of the gentleman from Cattaraugus (Mr. CROOK- 
 ER) characterised as a bull-frog coUi-t by the gen- 
 tleman from New York. But more of this by and 
 by. He would suppose these judges elected and 
 sworn, and the districts arranged by the legisla- 
 ture. He thought he could show that this might 
 be carried out to the convenience of the whole 
 state. Recollecting that the legislature was to di- 
 rect how many terms in bane were to be held in 
 each district and where, he would suppose that 
 they would require four terms in bane in each 
 district let us see how this could be carried out. 
 Supposing the ratio for a district to be in round 
 numbers 300,000. First placing the city of New 
 York by itself, the second district might be com- 
 posed of Dutchess, Orange, Roc tdarid, Putnam, 
 Westchester, Richmond, Kings, Queens, and Suf- 
 folk. Here he would have lour places for hold- 
 ing bane terms Newburgh, Poughkeepsie, White 
 Plains and Brooklyn. The third district might 
 beRensselaer,Washington,Saratoga,Montgomt:ry, 
 Herkimer, Warren, Essex and Clinton and the 
 four places for holding bane terms Troy, White- 
 hall or Keesville, Saratoga Springs and irlerkaner 
 or Little Falls. The fourth, Oneida, Oswego, 
 Jefferson, Lewis, St. Lawrence, Franklin and 
 the places for holding the terms, Utica, Uswego, 
 Watertown, and Ogdensburgh. [A laugh from 
 M.. SIMMONS.] He had no~doubt the gentleman 
 
702 
 
 from Essex could arrange that district better, and 
 he should be happy to hear any suggestions from 
 that quarter. He did not profess a knowledge of 
 that portion of the state, as he had never been 
 there, and there were some parts of it, if he had 
 had a correct description of " Totten and Cross- 
 field," where he never desired to be. [Mr. SIM- 
 MONS : Perhaps the desire might be mutual.] 
 Not very likely (said Mr. J.) for it is the soil of 
 which I speak, and not the animals who grow 
 upon it. The fifth district he would compose 
 of Delaware, Schoharie, Schenectady, Otsego, 
 Greene, Columbia, Ulster, Sullivan, and Albany 
 the places of holding the courts Delhi, Coopers- 
 town, Kingston and Albany. The sixth, Tioga, 
 Tompkins, Cayuga,Onondaga,Chenango, Broome, 
 Madison and Cortland the places of holding 
 courts, Ithaca, Auburn, Syracuse, and Oxford. 
 The seventh, Monroe, Livingston, Wayne, On- 
 tario, Yates, Steuben, Seneca and Chemung 
 the places of holding courts, Rochester, Geneva or 
 Canandaigua, Bath and Waterloo or Penn Yan 
 The eighth, Chautauque, Cattaraugus, Erie, Ni- 
 agara, Orleans, Genesee, Wyoming and Allegany 
 the places of holding the courts, Mayville, Buf- 
 falo, Batavia and Angelica. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN resumed his speech, commenced 
 yesterday, and proceeded to show how the orga- 
 nization, which he had in part described, should 
 be completed. He said he supposed some point 
 would be designated by the legislature, where a 
 clerk's office, for each judicial "district, should be 
 established ; and that a clerk would be elected by 
 the people, to hold his office for such term as 
 might hereafter be thought proper, giving 
 bonds for the proper discharge of his duty, which 
 would be highly responsible, as all moneys paid 
 into the supreme conrt, on the law or equity side, 
 of which there would be immense sums, would 
 go into his hands to be distributed or invested 
 according to law. In establishing the clerks' of- 
 fices, of course, regard would be had to the geo- 
 graphical position of the district, and to the means 
 of communication by railroad, steamboats, mails, 
 &c., so as to locate in the best possible manner to 
 suit the convenience of the bar, and of suitors 
 whose business the bar had in charge. It would 
 be necessary that each of the clerks should have 
 a seal, both for law and equity. We have now 
 four seals of the supreme court and four of the 
 court of chancery, at the different clerks' offices 
 of the state, and the additional number he had 
 mentioned must be procured. Thus organized, 
 he saw nothing to prevent this court going into 
 active operation. As causes came from inferior 
 tribunals, they would be ready to hear arguments 
 and decide them. In case of reversal, they would 
 send them back for a new tiial : in case of affirm- 
 ance, they would authorize the party to enter up 
 judgment ; when if either party should be dissat- 
 isfied, the cause would be in a situation to be pass- 
 ed on to the court of appeals. By the article un- 
 der consideration they provided also that there 
 should be as many circuit courts held in every 
 county each year as the legislature should direct, 
 which would be regulated by the amount of busi- 
 ness to be done tliere might be two or three or 
 more if necessary, and the legislature would pre- 
 scribe the place and length of time of holding 
 them. The judge would go down to the circuit 
 
 and there remain until all the business was done. 
 The system contemplated, and the wants of the 
 community required, nothing less; and he desired 
 to say, once for all, that it lay at the foundation 
 of their plan to provide sufficiently that all the bu- 
 siness in all the courts, from the lowest tp the 
 highest, should be done up as they went along. 
 There was no time so favorable for deliberation 
 and decision as immediately after argument, and 
 thus only could we avoid the harassing expense 
 and vexatious delays to which we had been sub- 
 jected. The circuit judge would preside as the 
 judge both of law and equity. The clerk of the 
 county, who was to be the clerk of the circuit the 
 same as he hitherto had been, would have the 
 law and equity calendars separately made up on 
 notes of issue previously furnished by the attor- 
 neys and solicitors, and when the judge came, he 
 would call his jury, try his causes on the law 
 side, and the verdicts would be entered in the 
 rough minutes by the clerk of the circuit as here- 
 tofore had been done. Having got through his 
 law calendar, he would take up his calendar in 
 equity and such causes as were to be tried by jury, 
 he would try before the jurors were dismissed. 
 On this subject he might remark it would be 
 the duty of the supreme court at their annual 
 meeting, to which he referred yesterday, to pro- 
 vide by general rules how causes in equity should 
 be designated for trial by a jury, and how the is- 
 sues should be made up. And they would, if ei- 
 ther party desired a trial by jury, authorize him 
 to give his opponent notice ; if they could agree 
 on the issue to be tried, well; if not he must apply 
 to one of the judges, who would decide whether 
 the case was proper for a jury, and if so how the 
 issue should be prepared. The judge at the cir- 
 cuit having disposed of all his trials at law, could 
 next dispose of those in equity which have to be 
 tried by jury, and the verdicts would be entered 
 in the rough minutes of the clerk. He would 
 then proceed to the trial of those causes in equity 
 which are not to be tried by a jury. And when 
 he comes to the end of trials of that description, 
 he gives the heads of his decisions to the clerk 
 just as the verdict of a jury would be. He settles 
 the facts^ which become in fact a verdict. He 
 decides all the questions of evidence, and ques- 
 tions of law as he passes on through the trial ; the 
 same as in a trial at law. There is no difficulty 
 in this in suits at law, and he could not see why 
 there should be any in suits at equity. But he 
 would suppose that one or other of the parties in 
 these causes, whether in law or in equity, was 
 dissatisfied with the verdict or decree what way 
 to be done ? Why by the rules of practice as ma- 
 ny days as ten might be given to the parties to ap- 
 peal. If it were not done in that time the judg- 
 ment should be entered up on the verdict at law, 
 and a decree drawn out in form and entered in 
 cases in equity, in the office of the clerk of the 
 district. But if either party is dissatisfied he 
 gives notice; and prepares his bill of exceptions, 
 or makes out his case, to which his adversary may 
 agree or the judge settles it, and they are sent up 
 to the clerk of the supreme court to remain in that 
 office for the use of that court. Now in all this 
 he saw not the least difficulty. He might as well 
 now present his views of the objections of the 
 gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN), who 
 
703 
 
 presented his plan of a judiciary a few days ago. 
 
 Tne gentleman Iroin Ctidutduque hod objected 
 that it might not be convenient, to present all 
 the evidence in equity suits at the time, and there- 
 lore that there outfit to be power to adjourn. To 
 this he might reply that it was not always con- 
 venient to parties to give all then evidence in law 
 suns ai the same tune. Many parties would deem 
 it very convenient it they could postpone giving 
 their evidence lor a few days or weeks, or months; 
 but thai was an inconvenience which must be 
 submitted lo in courts of law, and he thought K 
 should be submitted to also in equity. It was no 
 more bunhensome in the one case than in the 
 other. Witnesses geneially were no more numer- 
 ous in equity than in law. But there was another 
 teas m why parlies ought to come prepared lo go 
 through ihe trial ot'their causes. Ti ue,it they could 
 not oe prepared, tney might put off a cause on the 
 usuil teims, as is done in courts of law; but when 
 they began a trial there wan an additional and co- 
 gent reason tor not suffering it to be postponed 
 from time to time, tor that pievents the despatch 
 of justice it creates those delajs which, more 
 (run anything else, have called tor a reform ot the 
 jadtciaf system B.it again, the gentleman asks, 
 it he wants to make a case when the judge from 
 a distinl county comes to hold the circuit, where 
 should he find the judge? For when he breaks 
 up he goes off and perambulates through the other 
 counties of the Stale. Well, it the gentleman had 
 a supreme court on nis own system would he not 
 be subjected to the same difficulties? It did not, 
 he admitted, appear that that gentleman's own 
 plan proposed to have judges of one side of the 
 state to sit on the other side; but why he could 
 not find a jud.a lo make out his case by the plat 
 of the maijnty of the committee as well as by hi* 
 own, he (Mr. J.) could not distinctly perceive. 
 By his own plan he would have to follow him 
 fr jm one end ot his half the state to the other. 
 There was about the same dilh'cul y in each; but 
 it was a very easy matter to transmit a letter and 
 papers, in thesi days of reduced postage, from one 
 part ot ihe stale to the other from New York lo 
 Chaulauque, or from Chautauque lo Oswego. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said he interred that the gentle- 
 man from Columbia had fallen into an error in re 
 lation to the system he (Mr. M.) had the honor to 
 present. In his plan he left the court ot commot 
 pleas on i;s present tooting, simply providing tha 
 there shall be a president judge tor seveial coun- 
 ties. Upon those president judges he conferrec 
 equity jurisdiction, and not on the judges of the 
 supreme comt. This common pleas judge tor 
 four or five counties would of course be local; am 
 it appeared to him that they must have local judg- 
 es to do this equiiy business, inasmuch as al 
 agreed to get rid ot masteis and examiners in chan- 
 cery. Hence it was that he h.id said they would 
 have their equity judges to transact the businesb 
 within a reasonable distance. He expected to 113 
 Causes before lhte>e judges as the gentleman fron 
 Columbia intended bfftffe circuit judges ; but he 
 being in ihe neighborhood, there would be no dit 
 fi..-ulty in applying to him in the ca-es referred to 
 Mr. JOKDAiN said he (Mr. M.) must bespeak 
 ing of a plan in his o.vn mind, but his (Mr. J.'s 
 remarks were applicible to both. The presiden 
 judge of his system would nor be stationary, and 
 
 ie understood tlmt his supreme judges were to 
 iold circuits, lie did no* there/ore get quite rid of 
 he difficulty either in law or in equiiy. The 
 equity judges would have a large number ol coun- 
 its the supreme jidges still larger. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN interposed and explained that he 
 imposed twelve or thirteen judges, and it might 
 )e necessary to increase them. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said the Legislature could in- 
 crease the twelve or thiiteen judges to eighteen, 
 t thirty, or e*en sixty, which would be an ex- 
 ceedingly objectionable feature. But he did not 
 nean to find fault with the gentleman's plan, or 
 the plan of any one, but he did desire to say that 
 t, according to the gentleman's plan, the state 
 was to be districted, and they must have traveling 
 resident judges, they must meet with more or 
 ess difficulty. The president judge could not 
 iv*e in the town of every lawyer, nor yet in every 
 coumy. For those who lived near him, or within 
 a convenient distance, he could do business ; bnt 
 or otheis, wh<> were distant ten, twemy, or forty 
 niles, the difficulty would remain. He did not 
 now see any great inconvenience of which the 
 gentleman complained, that was cured by his own 
 system. V\ hat matt red it to a lawyer, who wish- 
 ed to settle a case, if the juuge was forty or one 
 tiundred and forty miles ofi ? It was haidly lo be 
 supposed that the lawyer was to travel that dis- 
 tance merely tosettle a case, unless he could unite 
 some pleasure of his own with it. If a lawyer 
 was dissatisfied with a verdict, he would dtaw up 
 his case, and serve a copy on his adversary. If 
 his adversary was dissatisfied with the dralt, he 
 would propose an amendment in writing both, 
 wiih explanatory remarks, if necessary, would be 
 sent to the judge, who would settle the case, and 
 send it back. Postage is cheap, and cornrnun ca- 
 tion is safe and rapid, and but very little inconve- 
 nience would be felt. Now, me word as to the 
 plan of the gentleman from Cattarauiius, (Mr. 
 CROOKER ) It presented, in his judgment, a veiy 
 favorable amendment to this report He did not 
 say this with any intention of relieving himself 
 from any of the responsibility which the gentle- 
 man trom New York cast on the committee, ac- 
 coiding to his idea of what they intend to do with 
 the report, namely to carry it through line by 
 line and letter by letter. He was glad to see any 
 gentleman ptopose amendments that would im- 
 prove it. Indeed there were some things in the 
 report which he should himself, upon more mature 
 reflection, movefo amend at the proper time. 
 
 The gentleman from Cattaraugus had submit- 
 ted an amendment which struck him very favor- 
 ably ; he saw nothing in it to conflict with the 
 fundamental principles of the system they had 
 presented. In a wise economy, the gentleman 
 had avoided the multiplying of officers, and he 
 had proposed no new office to be created. There 
 was the surrogate for each county and there 
 must be one. He has duties to perform of a local 
 character ; but they were not sufficient to engross 
 all his time. He ought to be a man of learning 
 arid discretion, and it was to be presumed he 
 would be so. Now this plan proposes to make 
 that surrogate the first judge of the county. He 
 was to be elected, and would be chosen with 
 reference to the entire duties of his station. The 
 plan, as he understood it, proposed to have this 
 
704 
 
 county judge, with two justices of the peace, se- 
 lected by the board of supervisors, hold the courts 
 of general sess on, and try all offences, the pun- 
 ishment ot which does not exceed ten years im- 
 prisonment in a state prison. It was not intend- 
 ed to allow him to imprison for life, or to inflict 
 the punishment of death; and all that was very 
 well, for in those higher cases of offence it was 
 proper that the trial should be by judges, if not 
 of a higher grade of intellect yet of superior rank. 
 This plan, therefore, in this respect was a favor- 
 able amendment. The plan of the majority of the 
 committee had not provided any court of criminal 
 jurisdiction but the oyer and terminer. It had 
 not specially provide4 that all crimes should be 
 tried by the oyer and terminer, but it had left 
 that to be inferred, and such was his idea. Now 
 here were gentlemen who were declaring that the 
 committee's plan would break down, while oth- 
 ers on the contrary were complaining that it was 
 too large; for himself he would say that the com- 
 mittee had labored to produce something be- 
 tween the two extremes, making it neither too 
 small that it would be inefficient, nor too large 
 that it would provide sinecures and by its ex- 
 pensa be burdensome to the people. The report 
 as made was the conclusion to which the commit- 
 tee had come, and he still believed it would be 
 sufficient. 
 
 The plan of the gentleman from Cattaraugus 
 however they could adopt without any additional 
 expense or any new offices ; they could thus re- 
 lieve the supreme court of all general sessions 
 duties and have those duties as well performed; 
 it was calculated to allay the fears of those who 
 thought the system had not sufficient strength. 
 He knew that the ordinary run of justices of the 
 peace were not capable wisely to discharge the 
 duties of a criminal judge. Still there are re- 
 spectable men among them, many that were ca- 
 pable there must of course be preferences; 
 they could always find two in the county that 
 were competent to discharge such duties as well 
 as those who have heretofore done them, and 
 thus they would have a safe, convenient, and re- 
 spectable court of sessions, made, he might say, 
 out of nothing, by the inventive genius of his 
 friend from Cattaraugus, for he has suggested a 
 plan by which a county court can be created, and 
 a class of business taken from the supreme court 
 judges, and yet cost us comparatively nothing. 
 He was not aware how the gentleman intended 
 these judges should be paid, whether out of the 
 county or the state treasury, but he presumed the 
 Surrogate would receive a salary, and the justi- 
 ces of the peace a per diem allowance. There 
 was another thing about that amendment to be 
 approved. Some gentlemen have complained be- 
 cause there was no place into which all the ir- 
 re"-ular or miscellaneous business of the county 
 courts should be thrown and that was some ob- 
 jection. It was not necessary to go into that 
 question at this time. He hoped the gentleman's 
 amendment would pass if the 'plan of the com- 
 mittee did. It should pass if his vote could pa^s 
 it. He would give to it the miscellaneous power 
 which the couuty courts have been in the habit 
 of exercising, and that by a general law which 
 might be drawn in three lines. This certainly 
 would answer one class of objectors, who com- 
 
 plain that the courts of the majority report would 
 not be able to discharge all the duties that would 
 devolve upon them. Mr. J. thought those gen- 
 tlemen were mistaken. He thought their system 
 would provide for the despatch of all the business 
 without the aid of the amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Cattaraugus, but with it, he felt entire- 
 ly certain. He had now explained the working 
 of this system, and would barely take up and run 
 through consecutively and very briefly, the march 
 of a cause onward from the highest court, bv way 
 of recapitulation. He should say nothing "about 
 the justices of the peace, because they were to 
 be regulated by the legislature. The committee 
 intended to recognize them as existing, and that 
 was all that was necessary. He believed the 
 amendment of the gentleman from Cattaraugus 
 contemplated an appellate jurisdiction from those 
 courts to the county court, but it was not his de- 
 sign to say anything about that at present. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS enquired if the gentleman design- 
 ed to give to the surrogate an appellate jurisdic- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said he meant to give it to him 
 as a judge of the county court to a limited extent 
 so he understood the proposition. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said the surrogates were not to 
 be compared to the justices of the peace in point 
 of talent. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN remarked, that was a matter of 
 opinion. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS : Not at all, 
 Mr. JORDAN said the gentleman from Essex 
 seemed to have made up his mind pretty poitive- 
 ly, and he had no wish to disturb it if he could. 
 He knew there were some surrogates that would 
 not compare with some justices, but if the sur- 
 rogates were not what they should be, he hoped 
 .ve should make them what they ought to be. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said that was his object in of- 
 fering this amendment. He desired to make them 
 what they ought to be. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN repeated that he should vote for 
 that amendment. He thought such an organiza- 
 tion would be better for those who get their law 
 suits up in justices courts for small sums. It was 
 better if the decision was not so clearly and deci- 
 dedly according to law, to have an end put to 
 them, than to have them thrown by a succession 
 of appeals, and at a ruinous expense into the court 
 of last resort. He would give them exclusive 
 appellate jurisdiction in cases not exceeding $25; 
 but over that amount he would allow the parties 
 to go to the supreme court of the district, which 
 would become a domestic kind of court. But 
 when a party is dissatified with a decision of fact 
 in a justices' court, he would have him put his 
 case in writing and go to the court consisting of the 
 surrogate or justice alone, either of whom should 
 be capable of determining, and if it was found 
 that a mistake was made, or that injustice had 
 been done, the case might be sent back for trial 
 in the town from which it came, or to some other 
 adjacent town. He would always have the facts 
 settled in the town courts. He never would suf- 
 fer an appeal from any of these courts to take 
 twelve men of the county and occupy their time, 
 and that of a county court in the trial matters of 
 facts from justices courts; but if any questions of 
 law arose, then let the county court, if under 
 
705 
 
 $25, or the supreme court if over, put an end to 
 the matter. There were many cases in justice's 
 courts not over $10. 
 
 Mr. RICMOND interposed and inquired if the 
 gentleman from Columbia intended, when an ap- 
 peal goes up to the Surrogate to make that final. 
 Mr. JORDAN said -he was just endeavoring to 
 tell the gentleman. For sums amounting to not 
 more than $25 he would have the case kept there. 
 He would almost be willing to do as England 
 does have no justice under forty shillings, rath- 
 er than suffer parties from angry feelings to run 
 through all the courts with causes of mere tri- 
 fling amount. But when they come up to $100 
 or to a sum approaching the limits of the justices' 
 jurisdiction, he thought there should be a greater 
 latitude. Thus then they had their justices' 
 courts ; they had their appeals to the county, and 
 in cases of sufficient magnitude to the supreme 
 court. He had said much more on this subject 
 than he had at first intended and he begged gen- 
 tlemen would ask him no more questions lest he 
 might never stop. The business of justices court 
 making was out of the pale of constitution making. 
 He had designed in his recapitulation merely to 
 say that a suit could be commenced in the su- 
 preme court and put at issue as at present cir- 
 cuits would be held often and long enough to try 
 every cause when ready for trial a review might 
 be had in bane at the next term which would fol- 
 low close upon the circuit, a prompt decision 
 would be had there, and if unsatisfactory to eith- 
 er party, it was but a short step to the court of 
 appeals, where it could be disposed of with equal 
 promptitude with so simple a practice and so 
 great dispatch, justice could be done and cheaply 
 done, and hundreds of dollars saved, many times 
 in the prosecution of a single suit. He conceiv- 
 ed it to be one of the acceptable features ot this 
 organization, that while it gave the counsel for 
 the parties an opportunity for full discussion, it 
 lessened the number of appeals. They had been 
 too numerous, and produced too much delay and 
 expense. This allowed of but one, and that 
 from the supreme court to the court of ap- 
 peals. At the same time it gave an oppor- 
 tunity to the litigant to compel his adversary 
 to show his hand, before the final argument 
 of the court of appeals a circumstance whicl 
 would prevent surprise by any new points 
 springing up, for which he had not had time fully 
 to prepare. He would explain how this woulc 
 be effected. The judge who tries the cause at 
 nisi prius, does business rapidly, and is liable to 
 err. The cause is transferred to the bench by a 
 simple notice, for review ; it is then fully arguec 
 and this is done before judgment is entered. 
 Here counsel are obliged to apprise their adver 
 sary of all their points ; after that, if an appea 
 is brought to the court of appeals, each party be 
 ing apprised of his adversary's ground, having 
 had lull time to prepare, may put forth his whole 
 strength, and there is an end of the litigation. 
 Mr. J. considered it not improbable that unde 
 this system, causes might be presecuted througl 
 the supreme court, to final judgment in the cour 
 of appeals, in less than twelve months. The su 
 prerne court is the great fountain of original ju 
 risdiction in law and equity, and the court of ap 
 -peals is the end of the law in both branches. 
 
 
 Jnder such an organization, there would be few 
 ppeals : first, because lew suits of a frivilous or 
 roundless character would fee prosecuted, as 
 here would be but little chance of success in a 
 ourt of original jurisdiction of so high a charac- 
 er ; and second, because that court would make 
 >ut few mistakes. They would have ample time 
 Dr examination ; they would possess the confi- 
 lence of the community ; and he had no doubt 
 he thirty-two judges, with the four additional 
 udges of appeals, would be able to do all the bu- 
 iness. He was fully satisfied that, with the aid 
 iroposed by the amendment of the gentleman 
 rom Cattaraugus (Mr. CROOKER,) to relieve the 
 upreme court of sessions business, they would 
 je most amply able. If it proved to be otherwise 
 le should be greatly disappointed. 
 
 There had been, among others, a plan present- 
 d by the honorable delegate from Chautauque 
 Mr. MARVIN), which, for its matter, and the 
 pint with which it had been brought forward, 
 /vas entitled to great consideration. But he did 
 lot intend to go into an examination of that now, 
 >r any other of the numerous plans on hand, any 
 urther than he should find it necessary to do so 
 n vindicating thai of the committee. The latter 
 tfas now the basis of their action, and if it proved 
 acceptable to the convention, with such amend- 
 ments as it might receive from their hands, it 
 .vould be unnecessary to spend time on the oth- 
 ers. Should it prove otherwise, then it would be 
 )roper to take up some other distinct plan, and 
 nake that the basis of action, when he (Mr. J.) 
 would give it his most thoughtful attention. He 
 thought there might be faults pointed out in each 
 of them, though that was not now his purpose. 
 Of the whole number, however, he would now 
 say, that of the gentlemen from Chautauque (Mr. 
 MARVIN) came nearest to his views. Its most 
 objectionable feature was that of a court of com- 
 mon pleas, with co-ordinate civil jurisdiction. 
 Mr. J, could not conceive the necessity of having 
 our courts complicated, when they might be sim- 
 ple. Why have two tribunals working upon ex- 
 cetttric circles, when one upon a concentric cir- 
 cle, would perform all the duties required ? Why 
 have two organizations, two clerks, two clerks' 
 offices, two sets of rules and systems of practice, 
 two grand and petit juries, when one would an- 
 swer in every respect as well ? Why have a sub- 
 ordinate court, thereby adding one to the number 
 of appeals, before reaching the court of dernier 
 resort ? Why have one court of greater, and ano- 
 ther of lesser dignity, except to circumscribe the 
 confidence of the public in the latter ? The na- 
 tural result of which must be to promote a spirit 
 of litigation, and prolong it by multiplied appeals. 
 Whatever of superior dignity was conferred on 
 one, would proportionably be subtracted from 
 the other, and impair its usefulness. He could 
 not believe it wise to have two courts of exactly 
 the same original jurisdiction, and yet the one 
 subordinate and subject to review of the other, so 
 long as one could do all the business, and do it as 
 near to the residence and convenience of the 
 suitors as the other. 
 
 Thrfre seemed lo be with some, a peculiar charm 
 in the idea ot a couit of' common pleas. It wal 
 said (o be an old mend and companion of the peo- 
 ple with whouj they had become acquainted and 
 
 63 
 
706 
 
 familiarized, and would not therefore willingly re- 
 linquish it. He was not aware of any such feel- 
 ing. He believed, with the exception of a lew 
 counties, it was considered a nuisance, and that 
 we were called on to abate it. True itwas.th^ in 
 some ot the counties, able men had presided; but 
 they were rare exceptions to the general rule. 
 There were few such men to be found among us, 
 who would or could afford to forego fell pecunia- 
 ry considerations, and devote their time and ta- 
 Jents to the public service. Whenever such 
 could be found, the discernment of the people, he 
 trusted, would be sure to place them upon the 
 bench of the supreme court, under the new or- 
 ganization, proposed by the committee. The idea 
 of a court of common pleas was, in the early pe- 
 riod of our political existence diawn from the 
 British constitution. He did not propose to dis 
 course upon its origin; but every lawyer knew 
 how it had sprung up in that country. In the 
 council of wise men of her Saxon ancestors, and 
 afterwards in the regal hall of her kings, was con- 
 centered all judicial power, criminal, civil, and 
 ecclesiastical. In the growth of that people, it 
 became inconvenient to have all these powers 
 blended, and the civil jurisdiction of pleas was 
 allotted to a separate court, called the common 
 pleas, which took cognizance ot all matters aris- 
 ing from contracts. For the same reasons, at a 
 later period, jurisdiction of trespasses and crimes 
 was allotted to another separate court, called the 
 king's bench. These jurisdiction* for a long time 
 r emained separate ; bu f , as a natural consequence 
 f a mere arbitrary separation, without any natu- 
 al or convenient necessity, the king's bench ex- 
 'ended its jurisdiction over all matters arising on 
 ^contract. The common pleas retaining its original 
 jurisdiction, the two became co-ordinate; but 
 both courts have been kept up, because both have 
 been no more than was necessary to the discharge 
 of the judicial duties oi the realm. 
 
 In forming our constitution of 1777, when we 
 had not yet emerged from the Revolution, our 
 predecessors, who had been brought up under 
 royal institutions, naturally framed their own, 
 somewhat in analogy to those. They recognized 
 the. existence of the courts as they were ; they 
 had not. time nor was it then necessary to consid- 
 er how they could be improved ; they were well 
 enough. With the supreme court as it then was, 
 we required some other court to do a portion of 
 the business ; but with it as we propose it shall 
 be, there is no such necessity we are in an age 
 of improvement we are engaged in the business 
 of reform our judiciary must be re-organized; 
 let us, therefore, study its structure and make it 
 a simple, efficient, rational system. We are not 
 like England, wedded to her errors because they 
 are ancient; we are a people of a different genius 
 stamped upon us by different institutions; we 
 ; : re, thank God, a self-governing democratic peo- 
 ie, all occupying the same level, all having 
 jual wants, equal privileges, and equal rights, 
 o class whose distinct! vepriviieges begets a hor- 
 i or of reform, lest the lower orders should usurp. 
 In England, all is stable; here all is changing. 
 'i here a man reveres, as sacred the ancient stone 
 walls of the family mansion occupied by his an- 
 cestors a thousand years ago, however uncouth or 
 inconvenient ; here we would demolish them and 
 
 build better. But even in England, while their 
 courts remain the same, important steps in legal 
 reform have lately taken place. Let us then look 
 at the question before us with a single eye to the 
 utility of this double organization, embracing a 
 court of common pleas, and not content ourselves 
 with saying it must be so because it has been so. 
 I do insist, sir, with a supreme court that can do 
 all, we want no common pleas to do a part. ; with 
 large lights we have no need of small lights 
 with a court of high dignity we have no need of 
 one of low dignity. He had now done with the 
 particular features of that gentleman's (Mr.MAR- 
 vm's) plan, and all others but that of the com- 
 mittee. He had no design to notice them now, 
 except so far as necessary to vindicate the report 
 under consideration against the objection that it 
 had no common pleas or county courts. 
 
 He (VJr. J.) would now examine the objections 
 raised in other quarters. Ke judged troin the 
 standing of the honorable gentleman from Oneida, 
 (Mr. KIRKLAND,) and from New Yoik, (Mr. CT- 
 CONOR,) and from Ehautauque, (Mr. MARVIN,) 
 and from Ontario, (Mr. WORDEN,) that e'^ry ob- 
 jection had been raided ih<-.t could be. If such 
 minds could not rind others, he for one was quite 
 certain they did not exist in fact or in fancy. His 
 frieiid from Oneida had objected th.it the supreme 
 court was too large with thirty 1 wo judges, hold- 
 ing courts in bane in different places, it would not 
 be as dignified, would not have as much of the 
 confidence arid respect of the people as a single 
 tribunal of less numbers He had already intima- 
 ted that he thought there was not much in this 
 idea of dignity. He would add, that dignity in 
 this republican country consi.-ted in merit alone ; 
 all that was required here was, that a man should 
 be upright in his dealings, impartial in his judg- 
 ments, gentlemanly in his conduct, and *o tar se- 
 lect in his associations as not to herd with scoun- 
 drels or blackguards. He might and ought to m-at 
 every man as a gentleman who was correct in his 
 morals, respectable in his attainments, and decent 
 in his personal habits. Who would fall sboit ot 
 this would fall from the true dignity of our repub. 
 lican standard who would go beyond it would be 
 deemed an aristocrat, and he would advise him to 
 emigrate; not that he would be unsife, but thar 
 he would find himself uncomfortable ; in some 
 peculiar districts where semi-lynch law prevails, 
 he (Mr. J.) would not be answerable, but in this 
 sober state, contempt for his weakness would limit 
 his punishment. 
 
 Now, sir, (said Mr. J.) allow me to suggest that 
 my friend from Oneida hus not placed his notions 
 of dignity upon the right foundation. What could 
 present a more sublime spectacle before the world, 
 than thirty-two gentlemen of moral worth, hiyh 
 intellect, highly cultivated, deeply imbued with 
 the spirit of our republican government, adminis- 
 tering law and equity to three millions of people. 
 One of them comes down to the gentleman's conn- 
 ty (Oneida) to hold a circuit. Who that remem- 
 bered the workings of our judicial system under 
 the constitution of 1777, would not say that he 
 would command the respect and confidence of the 
 people? Three of them come into the same coun- 
 ty to sit in bane. What would detract from the:r 
 dignity? Certainly not the stnallness of their 
 number, for but three judges have constituted our 
 
707 
 
 supreme court in bane for the last twenty-fiv< 
 - certainly not (hat (here were twenty-seven 
 others of 'equal rank performing similar services in 
 other parts of 'he stale, and all having full em- 
 ployment, lie could not think his friend from 
 Cm-id.) had drawn his notions of dignity from a 
 u suited to our political condition ; neverthe- 
 w;is a matter of opinion between them, and 
 he hoped they might differ and yet not disagree! 
 Another objection to {he majority report, was 
 that the judges could not sit together, which was 
 an unheard of anomaly, that they professed to be 
 a unit, while they vere in fact several. It was 
 not the first time a Christian people had heard of 
 unities which this might humbly imitate. There 
 !;'>thing in the objection unless it was shown 
 iuence that the machine would work 
 discordantly. Their inability to sit together he 
 had already incidentally noticed. On great occa- 
 sions they might convene ; and they must meet 
 at least as often as once a year; they should be 
 required by law to do so, in order to establish and 
 from time to time review and improve their rules 
 of practice and procedure. At those meetings 
 ai would be drawn from multiplied experi- 
 ence. They would be made acquainted with the 
 il, practical operations of the system over 
 the whole state, and they would apply such rem- 
 edies as were left within their power. Three 
 \MTC- sufficient to hold a bane court that factwaa 
 established by long experience. Ten judges sit- 
 ting together could do no more in hearing argu- 
 ments and rendering judgments than three. It 
 nly by multiplying their powers of despatch 
 that the remedies called for could be applied. 
 Almost every gentleman who had found fault 
 with the FMJor ly report, had in one form or ano- 
 ther advocated a court with these multiplied 
 powers, or, as they had chosen to call it, a " Di- 
 vided Court" some in greater and some in 
 smaller numbers. The gentleman from Oneida 
 hod six in the form of six district superior courts. 
 The gentleman from New York had fifty-nine of 
 them in the form of courts of common pleas. The 
 gentleman from Chautauque had eight to twelve, 
 in the form of president courts, besides supreme 
 courts in bane. The gentleman from Seneca (Mr. 
 BASCOM) did not essentially disagree with the 
 majority report, if he principle was conceded 
 it must be conceded, or we had no relief; and he 
 could see no evil in it so long as we had our court 
 oMast resort to hold a steady helm. Nor could 
 aceive it to be of much importance by what 
 name they were called. In most matters there 
 was but little in a name in this, nothing. 
 
 But there was another objection, and it was 
 one at which he would not say he was astonish- 
 i- there was nothing at which he should be 
 astonished. The freedom of thought and debate 
 riii a body like this would justify it, and 
 he had reason to rejoice rather than regret that 
 it had been brought forward. " There will not," 
 say gentlemen, "be any uniformity of decisions 
 amongst } our eight supreme courts in bane." 
 He would in -I Miy this might not be possible, nor 
 could he say it was not possible the " sky might 
 fall" and wo " catch larks ;" but he considered 
 one about' as probable as the other. That these 
 thirty-two judges, all belonging to the same tri- 
 bunal, all learned in the law, all familiar with 
 
 the decisions of the appellate court, all desirous 
 of doing their duty, all intermingling their labors, 
 all in constant and familiar communication with 
 each other, should willfully attempt to establish 
 conflicting .rules of law, was utterly out of the 
 questio^ ; that they might fall into error was pos- 
 sible, but the evil would be temporary, so long 
 as the court of appeals regulated all, and if tem- 
 porary disagreements upon new and difficnlt 
 questions should arise, they would at once cor- 
 rect them. And how, he would ask, could the 
 objectors secure a uniformity of decision in their 
 fifty-nine courts of common pleas, or in their dis- 
 trict superior or president district courts, but by 
 the same means ? How had it been secured for 
 the last twenty-five years, with our eight circuit 
 judges and numerous county courts, but by the 
 supervisory power of the higher tribunals. 
 Among the weighty objections raised by the gen- 
 tleman from Oneida, another is that if would be 
 impracticable to keep a muster roll of this army 
 of judges. He (Mr. J.) had not been aware that 
 such a document would be required; if it were 
 however, he had no doubt a competent person 
 might be selected who would take upon himself 
 that duty for a trifling compensation. He thought 
 a serjeant of the Burgesses Corps might be found 
 whose education in that line of duty would be 
 useful, and that a salary of ten dollars a year 
 would secure his services to the extent required. 
 He thought great numbers of objections of equal 
 weight might be overcome without any ruinous 
 consequences ; as they did not go to the ground 
 work of the system, however, he considered it 
 unnecessary to spend much time upon them, and 
 it would not have occurred to him that they de- 
 served any notice had they not come from so re- 
 spectable a source. The arrangement of their 
 business among themselves had been considered 
 by gentlemen a matter of great difficulty. How 
 so vast a company should alternate in holding 
 their circuit and bane courts. In what orbits 
 they could be made to move without producing 
 confusion and running into chaos, seemed in their 
 judgment to defy the powers of orderly combina- 
 tion, and present insurmountable difficulties. 
 But he (Mr J.) was of opinion that a little atten- 
 tion to the subject would make it quite apparent 
 that it would be otherwise. The judges at their 
 annual meetings, knowing how many and what 
 courts Were to be held for the year, and the places 
 of holding them; could in the smoking of a cigar, 
 between dinner and sunset, arrange the whole 
 matter. They could construct for themselves a 
 sort of judiciary planetarium by which they might 
 operate with all the regularity of the solar sys- 
 tem. Sickness and casualty might sometimes 
 intervene, but the system embraced forces enough 
 to admit of calling in another judge, whenever 
 they should occur. He had no doubt the judges 
 would hold such annual meetings, for he consid- 
 ered it quite certain that the legislature would so 
 direct. It was not in the least probable that so 
 important a duty as that of forming rules of prac- 
 tice and procedure, and of revising them from 
 time to time would be neglected. 
 
 Again, it was urged by the gentleman from 
 Oneida (Mr. KIHKLAND) lhat afier the u.-rms in 
 bine, 1 he judges who might have come in from 
 other districts would separate; and it would be 
 
708 
 
 difficult for them to meet again in consultation 
 with this the convention had nothing to do it 
 would be their duty to examine and decide then- 
 cases (like the supreme court at Washington) as 
 they were argued; and if to the neglect of that 
 duty, they would separate, they must see to it that 
 they convened again as best they might. The 
 gentleman from New York, (Mr. O'ConoR,) had 
 appeared to be staggered by some other objections, 
 somewhat peculiar to himself. He had thrown 
 around them much of the ornament and draper} 
 of rhetoric, at the same time he had exhausted his 
 powers of ridicule upon the report ot the commit- 
 tee. In his judgment the court of appeals did not 
 sufficiently resemble the old court of errors. He 
 (Mr. J.) had heard that objection urged nowhere 
 else either in or out of the convention, and for 
 his own part, he thought the less resemblance it 
 could bear the more acceptable it could be to the 
 public. His (Mr. CXC's) only objection to the 
 present court was that it was substantially a branch 
 of the legislature and had never been known io 
 pronounce a statute of the State unconstitutional. 
 [Mr. SIMMONS That cannot be so!] With that 
 exception, he deemed it perfect. He (Mr. J.) 
 would agree that the objection relerred to waa ot 
 great weight, and he thought there were others ot 
 equal weight. He considered its whole organiza- 
 tion defective, it was too numerous and expen- 
 sive. It was composed principally of men uned- 
 ucaied in the law. Their usual mode of hearing 
 arguments was loose and inattentive. Memb 
 frequently voting on questions involving the high- 
 est interests who had heard but a small portion o 
 the arguments and sometimes when they hac 
 heard no parr ; ot late \ears ** log rolling and lob- 
 bying" had been more or less extensively prac. 
 ticed, the whole matter had been too much a game 
 of chance, in which the most adroit and many 
 times i he least scrupulous ulayer had all the ad' 
 vantage. He (Mr. J.) had always supposed tha 
 when counsel had argued their causes, and pu 
 forth their best efforts, their legitimate work wa! 
 done, that no honorable counsel would approach ; 
 judge, and no right minded judge would stifle 
 himself to be approached, after that. Private an< 
 personal solicitation after a cause had been sub 
 milted was a most da-igerous and corrupting pr.ic 
 tice, and he Mr. J. was as well convinced, as of hi 
 own existence that such practices had been resort 
 ed to and that his clients had been made the vie 
 tima. He desired no more of it 
 
 The gentleman (Mr. O'C.) had further objected 
 that such a supreme court as proposed by th 
 committee, could not wield the prerogative writs 
 such as Mandamus, Quo Warranto, Habea 
 Corpus, Sfc., a party would not know which c 
 the several courts in bane to apply to. This ob 
 jection was entirely unfounded. The writ 
 mandamus was a writ directed to some inferio 
 officer or tribunal commanding it to proceed i 
 the performance of some public duty. The wr 
 of Quo Warranto was directed to an individue 
 or body corporate who had usurped some office o 
 franchise &c , commanding it to desist or shei 
 cause. The writ of Habeas Corpus was also ad 
 dressed to individuals or bodies. Now the objec 
 tion he could answer in a word. Tell me (sai 
 Mr. J.) in which judicial district the person 
 body resides or is located in to whom you wish 
 
 Idress your writ, and I will shew you in the 
 me district, a supreme court held by three jud- 
 es, (the same number we now have) to whom 
 our application should be made. Again, he ob- 
 cted on account of the difficulty in changing ve- 
 ues in cases where it was necessary. To which 
 urt or board should he apply ? The answer is 
 > the court in the district where the venue is 
 id or, if the legislature should think fit, they 
 light direct it to be made in the district where 
 defendant lived, or any other. The honora- 
 le gentleman (Mr. O'CoNOR) seems to appre- 
 end that it would be very unsafe for a party re- 
 ding in New-York to be obliged to apply to 
 ountry judges sitting in a country district, and 
 ice versa. He seems to be horror stricken at 
 le idea of being obliged to go, for example, to a 
 udge in Delaware or Hamilton to argue a ques- 
 on of any kind; and, to avoid invidiousness, sup- 
 oses it would be equally unsafe for a country 
 avvyer to be obliged to go before a judge in the 
 ity of New-York for like purposes. He (Mr.J.) 
 ould entertain no &uch fears. He could not con- 
 ent to argue upon the supposition that a judge, 
 ither in city or country, was to be either igno- 
 ant or dishonest ; and that he could not but per- 
 eive, was the whole basis of the opposing argu- 
 ment. He would trust to the learning and integ- 
 ity of a Jones or an Oakly, come the party whence 
 le might, whether from the country or city, from 
 lis own state, or from any foreign state. He 
 vould repose the same confidence in the same 
 dnd of men, sitting any where, whether in the 
 ;ity or country. An upright and enlightened judge 
 would dispense even handed justice, be his loca- 
 ion where it might, in New- York or in Dela- 
 ware, in this State or in any other, in this coun- 
 ry or abroad, in the civilized countries of Chris- 
 er.dom or the PaganRealms of the Calmuc Tartar 
 an honest man is an honest judge an enlightened 
 awyer is an.able judge, be he where he may and 
 le (Mr. J.) was sincere in the belief, that the 
 most exquisitely perfumed dandy of the profes- 
 sion in the city of New-York , would be as safe 
 n the hands of a Delaware judge, as in the ' halls 
 of justice," or the north-east room of the city hall. 
 In the magnificent exclusivenes of city life and 
 city practice, he might probably feel inclined to 
 sneer at the " clod hoppers"- of these benighted 
 regions; but he would be agreeably disappointed, 
 when forced to go among them, at finding them a 
 hospitable people, and withal somewhat civilised. 
 The population of the city of New-York were 
 generally an enlightened and enterprising popu- 
 lation ; but there were among them those who 
 considered the city all the world who had hard- 
 ly dreamed of unexplored regions beyond the 
 highlands. To such gentlemen, he thought it 
 might be of benefit to extend their travels, and 
 he could inform them that some of the ablest law- 
 yers among them, were from this very county of 
 Delaware, which had been singled out as the ex- 
 tremest example, on which to enforce the argu- 
 ment on the other side. Many of the present jud- 
 ges of the city, were lawyers educated and train- 
 ed in the country, and although there were cer- 
 tain branches of commercial law with which city 
 lawyers were more familiarized than those from 
 the country ; yet the manner in which those jud- 
 ges had discharged their duty, served to show how 
 
709 
 
 readily an able and enlightened mind could acco- 
 modate itselt to any exigency There was yet 
 another and the last objection which he had not 
 answered. It had been originally stated by the 
 gentleman from Genesee, Mr. (TAGGART,) and 
 backed up by the gentleman from New- York, 
 (Mr. O'CowoR.) It was founded on the hypo- 
 thesis, that learned counsel might under the eight 
 district system have several causes standing rea- 
 dy for argument in the several district courts all 
 noticed for argument at the same time. What 
 should be done ? He, (Mr. J.) had on a former 
 occasion suggested the remedy which he could 
 here repeat; let the learned gentlemen select the 
 most important of his several cases, that which 
 most required and best deserved the energies of 
 his own mind, and hand over his other briefs to 
 other counsel. Although his clients might be 
 subjected to some inconvenience and peril, yet 
 those he submitted were such as could not under 
 any system be avoided. The same learned gen- 
 tleman was now and had always been liable to 
 the same embarrassment. We had now eight 
 circuit judges, all of whom might be engaged in 
 holding a circuit at the same time in each of 
 which the same counsel might have a client to 
 defend. [Mr. CTCoivoR explained that he alluded 
 to bar motions, and a variety of business of that 
 description, and not the trial of cases at nisi 
 prius.] 
 
 Mr. J. thought it made no difference. He had 
 only endeavored to show that there were incon- 
 veniences which could not be obviated under any 
 system. It was of quite as much importance, in 
 his judgment, to the suitor, to have his chosen 
 counsel to try uis cause at the circuit, as to argue 
 it at bar. Thtw, said Mr. J., I have endeavored, 
 in a plain way, to show what our judiciary will 
 be, if organized upon the plan contained in the 
 majority report. How it would be organized 
 how operate how answer public expectation ; 
 and, moreover, how their internal arrangements 
 could be made. How this " band of vagrants," 
 these " vagabondizing, itinerant pedlars of the 
 law," this " analogy to a circulating paper me- 
 dium," as the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
 O'C.) has, in the indulgence of his wit and mer- 
 riment, so facetiously called them, could perform 
 these duties. Acknowledging my profound grat- 
 itude for the patient attention with which the 
 delegates have heard me, I cordially unite in the 
 invocation of my respected friend from Erie 
 (Mr. STOW), that our work may be blest of Heav- 
 en ; and that this or any other plan which the 
 Convention in their wisdom shall adopt, may 
 prove satisfactory to our constituents, and remain 
 as a monument of their wisdom, while the earth 
 endures. 
 
 The committee then rose, and the Convention 
 adjourned to 9 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 THITRSDAY, (Glth day,} August 20. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. SELKIRK. 
 
 The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention 
 a communication from the clerk in Chancery foi 
 the 5th circuit in relation to infants' estates, in 
 compliance with a resolution of the Convention 
 Referred to the select committee of 5, to prepare 
 abstracts. 
 
 COMMON SCHOOLS. 
 
 Mr. TUTHILL from committee No. 12 on Ed- 
 ication and Common Schools, made a minority 
 eport as follows, which was referred to the corn- 
 uittee of the whole having Mr. NICOLL'S report 
 n charge : 
 
 1. The proceeds of lands belonging to this State, except 
 such parts thereof as may be reserved or appropriated to 
 mblic use, or ceded to the United States, which shall 
 leieatter b sold or disposed of, together with all the funds 
 ^nominated the Liteiatu e Fund and Common School 
 ^unil, and all moneys heretolore appropriated by law to 
 he use of the said fund, and which may be hereafter added 
 hereto, shall be and remain a perpetual fund, the interest 
 ol which shall be inviolably appropriated and applied t 
 .he support of common schools throughout this s ate. 
 
 2. The net annual income and proceeds of all the. mo- 
 n..-ys deposited with this state by the United States i.ursu-^ 
 am to the provisions ot the act of Congress of the United" 
 States, entitled " An Act to regulate ihe d. poshes ol the 
 :>ublic moneys," approved June 23, 18H6,except the sum of 
 650,000, shall hereafter be inviolably aunually appropria- 
 .ed and applied to the purposes of comiron school educa- 
 tion in this State, and the aiores-aid sum ol $50,OoO shall in. 
 iaeh year hereafter be set apart, transferred and added to 
 the capital of the common school iund ot the state. 
 
 3. It shall be the duty oithe legislature to piovideby law 
 or the investment and security of all moneys at eny time 
 aelonging to the capital of the common school Iund paid 
 'nto the treasury, and no part ol such fund shall at any 
 ime be appropriated or applied o defray the ordinary or ex- 
 .raordina} expt nsesof the government, nor shall the sam< be 
 .oaned to the State, except upon the same terms and condi- 
 tions, mid upon the like guaranties and securities, as other 
 moneys are loaned by ihe state, and not exceeding one-thiid 
 "n amount ot the capital of the said funds shall nt any one 
 ime be invested in securities issued or to be issued upon 
 :he faith and credit ot this state, nor shall such monev s be 
 Loaned to any literary institution, association or corpora- 
 tion, or to any town or village corporation. 
 
 Mr. WILLARD, from the same committee, 
 made the following minority report, which re- 
 ceived the same reference : 
 
 1. The proceeds of all lands belonging to this state, 
 except such parts thereof as may be reserved or appropri- 
 ated to public use, or ceded to the United States, which 
 shall hereafter be sold or disposed of, together with the 
 fund denominated the common school fund, and all moneys 
 heretofore appropriated by law to the use of said fund and 
 which may be hereafter added thereto, shall be and remain, 
 a perpetual fund, the interest of which shall be inviolably 
 appropriated and applied to the support of common schools 
 throughout this state. 
 
 2 It shall be the duty of the legislature to provide by 
 law lor the investment and securitv oi alt moneys at any 
 time belonging to the capital of the common school aiui lit- 
 erature funds paid into the treasury, and no part of such 
 funds shall at any time be appropriated or applied to de- 
 fray the ordinary or extraordinary expenses of the govern- 
 ment, nor shall the same be loaned to the state except up- 
 on the same terms and conditions and upon the like guar- 
 an ! ies and secur.tics, as other monies are loaned by the 
 state; and not exceeding one-third in amount oi the c^pitol 
 oithe said fund shall at any one time be invested in secu- 
 rities issued or to be issued. upon the faith and credit ol this 
 state, nor shall such money be loaned to any literal y in- 
 stitution, association or corporation, or to any town or vil- 
 lage corporation. 
 
 3. 1 he nett annual income and proceeds of all the mo- 
 neys deposited with this state by the United States, pursu- 
 ant to the provisions of the act of Congiess of the United 
 States, entitled An act to regulate the de| osites of the 
 public moneys. "approved June 23, 1836 except the sum 
 of $50,000, shall hereafter be inviolably annually appropri- 
 ated and applied to the purposes of common school educa 
 tion in this state, and the afurtsaid sum of $50 000* shall in 
 each year hereafter be set apart, transierred and added to 
 the capital of the common school fund of this state. 
 
 The Convention then, on motion of Mr. MANN, 
 resolved itself into a committee of the whole on 
 the reports on 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG resumed the chair. 
 
710 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE then addressed the com- 
 mittee at some length. In reference to the bill 
 S rod need a day or two since by the gentleman 
 om Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) showing how 
 a county judge had charged #78 for one day's ser- 
 vice, and upwards of $,'140 for two or three days 
 service, he said all this was legal. He had risen 
 to say this to the Convention, that he might show 
 the necessity for more discreet legislation. He 
 spoke of these charges as legal, and by that lie 
 meant that they were charges lawfully made ac- 
 cording to existing laws, and there were many 
 more that were worse cases than this which had 
 been presented by the gentleman from Chautau- 
 que. Why, so late as the year 1845, an act was 
 passed by the legislature of this state, entitled an 
 act to reduce the number of town officers and to 
 facilitate the auditing of their accounts, which 
 had a 21st section, that takes from the prosecut- 
 ing officer a discretion hitherto held, and makes 
 it mandatory that whenever criminal cases are 
 put off by either party, the public prosecutor shall 
 recognize all the witnesses to appear at the en- 
 suing court, by which there was at once a Pan- 
 dora's box opened for the commission of wrong, 
 amongst which might be the imprisonment of wit- 
 nesses that could not give security. He alluded 
 to this in charity to the legislature, which passed 
 such a law with such a title, but he thought it 
 afforded evidence that that legislature was busy 
 with something else than thinking. After some 
 other observations on rhis subject, he referred to 
 the discussion which had taken place on the judi- 
 ciary article now before the committee, and com- 
 mended it for the talent and spirit and assiduity by 
 which it had been characterized. He expressed 
 his regret that Mr. SHAW should .have felt it, ne- 
 cessary to offer his resolution to limit this debate, 
 and gave his views as to the number of committees 
 which should have been originally appointed, and 
 the course which the Convention should have a.- 
 dopted in the outset. His judgment was that there 
 should have been but three committees, the judi- 
 ciar> , the executive, and (he financial. The Con- 
 vention, in its wisdom, had spent six weeks in 
 the reception and discu&siofi of resolutions, not 
 one ot which would ever be brought to maturity ; 
 and this he disapproved, lie however expressed 
 his gratification wuh this debate, from which he 
 had derived much iiii<.nnation He tUen pro- 
 ceeded to an examination ot the justices courts 
 which he said he desired to maintain. They 
 were necessary fur the convenience of the towns 
 that were distant from the county seats. He de- 
 fended at some length the county courts in v\hich 
 in his younger days lie had practiced ; and he ex- 
 pressed his desire that they should not only be 
 preserved, bul improved and elevaied. He also 
 gave his views respecting the supreme court, the 
 court of errors, and the court ol chanctry. The 
 latter court he would root out entirely, as a firm- 
 er would a Canada thistle. In an allusion to the 
 f uu!s,'an amount of which had been called for by 
 Mr. MANX'S resolution,* he'said 'hat instead of 
 three millions, he believed the amount in chance- 
 ry was nearer nine -an- 1 even twelve millions. He 
 did not believe, however, tuat I hey should be able 
 to get the returns of n from the officers. If this 
 Convention did nothing else than abolish that 
 court, he thought they would deserve well of the 
 
 community. He examined the practice both in 
 hw and equity, and condemned the pleadings, as 
 unnecessarily complicated and expensive. The 
 court of appeals he desired lo have an indepen- 
 dent court. The judges of the court of appeals 
 he would have isolated from executive influence, 
 and he would make them ineligible to any office 
 thereatter. He went into an examination of the 
 causes of litigation, of which we have in this 
 state with a population of three millions so much 
 more than in England with a population of seven- 
 teen millions, and defended our people against the 
 imputation of being of a litigious spirit. It was an 
 incident of onr position. In England property 
 was classified, things were settled, commercial 
 dealings were running in established channels, and 
 there was very little leason to jostle with each 
 other; and he believed with us that litigation 
 would be progressively diminishing. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS gave his views in relation to the 
 county courts. Care should be taken in propos- 
 ing a plan for such court, that it should corres- 
 pond with the plan of the committee, for he pre- 
 sumed that report would be adopted, as he cer- 
 tainly desired it should be. He considered that 
 the judicial force provided for in the majority re- 
 port, and the organization ^proposed, would be 
 fully adequate to all the exigencies of the judicial 
 business of the State and to do all the duties im- 
 posed on them. But still he considered there 
 could be no question but that a county court was 
 necessary to do all the other business, especially 
 those local matters which were not and could not 
 be devolved on the Supreme Court. He disliked 
 this idea of dividing this court half of it to be 
 called by one name and half by another half of 
 it confined to one kind of cases and half to an- 
 other. The same kind of trial should be held by 
 the same kind ot judges. Every man who had a 
 cause to be tried had the right to have it tried in 
 the best manner that it was capable of being 
 tried. Nor could he conceive the necessity of 
 any county court for the trial of issues of fact. 
 But some local court, exercising judicial func- 
 tions, was necessary for other and local purposes. 
 He repelled the idea that this court would be a 
 small court a little nondescript thing. He ask- 
 ed if that could be called a petty system which 
 contemplated local courts for the correction of 
 the errors of four thousand justices of the peace, 
 and dispensing: with the enormous expenses of 
 the present wretched and vexatious system of ap- 
 peals and certioraris. He denied that, so far as 
 he was concerned, the county court systems pro- 
 posed here were extorted from those who were 
 supposed to be the enemies of county courts, 
 to save the plan of the judiciary committee from 
 apprehended defeat. His plan for a county court 
 was proposed simultaneously with the judiciary 
 re p 0r t and when no such motive could have ex- 
 isted. As to what should be the jurisdiction of 
 the county court as proposed by him, Mr. L. 
 enumerated some twenty-four subjects which 
 should be vested in local officers, and which 
 could not be vested in the Supreme Court ; and 
 beside/s these he specified the local powers 
 which he would vest in his county court In 
 conclusion, Mr. L. said that his plan only con- 
 templated carrying out in the counties what the 
 judiciary committee proposed to carry out in the 
 
711 
 
 State a local officer trying causes in every term, 
 ihe Supreme Court judges were 
 . erse the counties. 
 
 hunt concluding, Mr. L. yielded the floor, 
 and the committee rose .;';<[ iv|-.o.-t''d. 
 
 HARRIS asked consent to oiler the follow- 
 ing resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the clerk of the Court for the Correction 
 of Krrors be rrqui>-ted to furnish tl.is Convention with a 
 statement sliowin--- ^ oi' the recent session of 
 
 the court held at the city of LSun'alo, specifying therein the 
 amount paid to the members of said" court for travel and 
 per cliem allowance and also stating the number of causes 
 heard at said term. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS objected, and it could not be re- 
 ceived at this time. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 AFTEIINOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS having the floor, resumed. He 
 objected to Mr. CROOKER'S plan of a county 
 court because it contemplated but one judge in a 
 county. The number should be left to the leg- 
 islature. Or we might say one at least for every 
 county and additional ones for every member of 
 assembly. He concurred, however, in giving the 
 duties of surrogates to this court. And when 
 there was more than one of them in a county, 
 they might be authorized to hold a court to de- 
 cide the questions of law. Nor could he see any 
 objection to authorizing this officer to set aside 
 judgments taken by default in justices courts. 
 They could also do the duties of the supreme 
 court commissioner. The class of petty offences 
 with which we would charge this court was tnat 
 class now tried at special sessions. Perhaps 
 there might bt. added to these, cases now tried 
 before three justices of the peace. But all this 
 was matter of legislation, and there he proposed 
 to leave it. Mr. L. went on to explain his sys- 
 tem of county courts saying that all perhaps 
 agreed in having some local court, though they 
 might differ as to what kind of a court it should 
 be. The amendment, under these circumstances, 
 establishing a county court, would settle nothing. 
 
 Mr. RlCHMONDsaid that he had hoped, at the 
 commencement ol tiie discussion upon tins ques- 
 tion ot the judiciary, that the committee w<.uld 
 have commenced with the justice' eouris, and lirst 
 settled their poweis and duties; and next u.ecuurt 
 of common pleas, it we \\ere to have one and so 
 on, lo ,he .sup r<- me conn and court ot Appeals 
 But he had been overruled in this, and the dis- 
 cussion had la ken a wide r-mge, embracing all 
 matiers connected with our present judicial sys- 
 tem, and also the plan proposed by the majority of 
 the judiciary committee, and some six or eight 
 other plans, submitted and laid upon our tables, 
 together with the suggest ions of the several mem- 
 bers who had atidiessed the commi'tee, as ;o si^ne 
 amendments winch they thought should be adopt- 
 ed, provided any one of the plans which had been 
 presented should be adopted, in whole or in part. 
 Such being the present condrion ot this most irn- 
 portant and interesting dif-cussion, he hoped the 
 committee would pardon him if in the tew remarks 
 he WHS ;.b >ut io submit he should follow some ot 
 the many geutleinen who had spoken on the 
 lion, without any particular reference to the order 
 in which they spoke, or to the particular branches 
 of the several reports As he had but lew notes 
 
 of what had been said, he would lirst speak on 
 those branches now more immediately m his mind, 
 lest he might neglect to ivfer afterwards to some 
 of them which he deemed important. And firstly 
 he would say, that in likening to the able speech- 
 es of gentlemen on this subject, they had called 
 the attention of the committee mainly to the de- 
 lays andhindiances of our present system of ad- 
 ministering justice, u bile the giv.it and crying- 
 evil of the costs and expenses ot our courts, grow- 
 ing out of the tact that a large proportion of the 
 time of most of our courts is employed in revers- 
 ing, non-suiting, delaying, arid thwarting each 
 otbei's decisions. 
 
 He said it had been well remarked here, by more 
 than one gentleman, that one of the great objects 
 the people had in the calling and assembling of 
 this Convention, was the subject ol judicial re- 
 form. In this he said he fully concurred; but he 
 begged to say to those gentlemen, that the people 
 would not be satisfied with anv system, however 
 new it might be, the machinery of which was to 
 be carried on by means of all the technical, wordy, 
 nonsensical, unmeaning pleadings now in favor 
 in our courts, and so well adhered to by both courts 
 and lawyers. Neither would they, in his judg- 
 ment, longer submit to the interminable and ruin, 
 ous expenses forced upon them by the almost innu- 
 merable number of appeals, certioraris, demur- 
 rers, and other legal inventions, well calculated 
 to strip the laborious farmer or mechanic of the 
 hard earnings of his labor, to fill the pockets of 
 the lawyers, judges and clerks of the difierent 
 courts. Mr. R said that he had, some days 
 since, stated to the comrmtee his views with 
 reference to the Court of Chancery, and he 
 would not now repeat them, as he believed 
 from what had already taken place in this com- 
 mittee that that court which had so long afford- 
 ed such rich pickings for solicitors, masters, ex- 
 aminers, clerks,trustees&c. was destined to a 
 speedy and certain death, without any hope of a 
 resurection. Should this be the case, (which 
 God grant may be so) he would be disposed to 
 tread lightly upon its grave, and pass on to the 
 living. And now, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. R. lest 
 he might be misunderstood in what he had, or 
 might say, in regard to attorneys and bills of costs, 
 would take the present occasion to say, that he 
 had no personal hostility to the profession, many 
 of them were his most intimate friends but gen- 
 tlemen must remember that the interests of the 
 profession and those of the great laboring and 
 producing classes in this country are somewhat 
 different. He knew that the honorable and high- 
 minded of the profession, were above all censure 
 and among that number he was happy to class 
 the legal members of .this Convention. He be- 
 lieved they had come here with the determina- 
 tion to aid, by their powerful intellect, in fram- 
 ing a Constitution that shall confer blessings up- 
 on the anxious millions of this great State. He 
 said he knew those at home, who are possessed 
 of those same high qualities, and have a high re- 
 putation for honor and integrity. But when he 
 said this he felt bound lo say that there was 
 another class of the profession, of whom the peo- 
 ple had formed a very different . opinion. He 
 meant those who live by the imprudence and 
 misfortunes of their fellows. Those who are 
 
712 
 
 ever ready by their advice and management, to 
 embroil otherwise peaceable and quiet neighbors 
 in all the expenses, ill feelings, quarrels and con- 
 tentions growing out of the prolonged and ruinous 
 suits at law which they had by their management 
 succeeded in embroiling the parties in. The ob- 
 jects of these men do not seem to be to enable 
 their clients to get cheap and speedy justice, but 
 to so manage as to take advantage of all the tech- 
 nicalities and crooks of the law, so as to run up a 
 large bill of costs tp benefit their own pockets. 
 To this particular class, he said, was to be attri- 
 buted the greater portion of the opposition to a 
 radical reform in our judiciary system. Mr. R. 
 said he believed that two of the greatest evils of 
 our present system was the crooked and almost 
 useless forms of pleading now in full practice 
 in our courts, compelling the party to state 
 almost every thing known in our language 
 but the truth, and the facilities which were 
 afforded by our system for bringing appeals, 
 certioraris and motions, to be argued before 
 the higher courts, all of which give fine fees 
 to attorneys, and after involving the parties in 
 large bills of costs, generally result in being 
 sent back for new trial, for the purpose, as is al- 
 ledged, of remedying some great defect in the 
 former proceedings. He said he had looked over 
 the report of the majority on this subject, and he 
 had not been able to see anything there to pre- 
 vent as many appeals as in our present system. 
 Although he understood from some of the com- 
 mittee that the costs of these courts were to be 
 very much cheapened by the Legislature to come 
 after us, whose first business would be to simply- 
 fy the manner of pleadings in these courts. He 
 confessed gentlemen had more confidence in the 
 Legislature than he had. for he well recollected 
 the people had been asking the Legislature for 
 the last eight years to do this very thing, and be- 
 cause they had not done it, they -had called this 
 convention, expecting that something would be 
 done here in accordance with their demands. 
 Mr. R. hoped they would not be disappointed, 
 but that all their expectations for cheap and ex- 
 act justice would be realized. He believed the 
 jurisdiction in justices courts should be increased 
 to $250, that such courts should have equity and 
 law powers, that for all judgments rendered in 
 such courts of 100 dollars and under, the party 
 dissatisfied should appeal to the town court of the 
 same town or of some adjoining town. Town 
 courts to be composed of all the justices in town, 
 and to meet four times in each year. Either par- 
 ty to have the right to call a jury on the trial of 
 the appeal cause, but if neither party de- 
 sire a* jury, then the justices to decide the 
 cause; the decision of the town court to be final, 
 from which there shall be no appeal. The jury 
 for such courts to be drawn from the list of coun- 
 ty jurors from such town, which said list is now 
 by law filed in the Town Clerk's office. He said 
 there were now fewer appeals from the Justices 
 courts in proportion to the number of causes tried 
 by them, than there were from any other court, 
 not excepting even the circuit courts or the deci- 
 sions of the supreme . court. These town courts 
 making final decisions in all matters of $100 and 
 under, will very much relieve the higher courts 
 from a considerable amount of business that now 
 
 finds its way there, and the giving these courts of 
 Justices of the Peace jurisdiction in the sum of 
 $250, will also do very much to accomplish the 
 same object. The effect of these contemplated 
 changes will be to elevate the character and 
 standing of the justices courts. The people will 
 know when they elect their justices that they are 
 to make important decisions, and they w r ill be 
 likely to see to it and get good men It is a libel 
 upon the intelligence of the people in the seve- 
 ral towns in this State to suppose that 'they will 
 not elect men for justices when three of them as- 
 sociated together shall not be qualified to decide 
 finally a matter of $100 or under. He asked if 
 there was a man in this Convention that did not 
 believe these justices were more capable of deci- 
 ding matters of deal between farmers and mecha- 
 nics, than ai.y of your Supreme judges could be. 
 They were more conversant with such matters as 
 they were generally in their line of business. 
 They would see and hear the witnesses testify, 
 would know what kind of confidence to place in 
 them, whereas if the cause was allowed to go up 
 to the higher courts it would be decided on paper 
 siatements, and sometimes by men who were en- 
 tirely unacquainted with such matters of trade 
 and traffic as this kind of litigants dealt in. He said 
 this system would be cheap to parties and cheap 
 to the public, for he believed usually these courts 
 would not be in session more than one day at 
 a term, and it would not be necessary to pay them 
 more than $1,50 or $2 each, per day, for their 
 services. The expense of final decisions in this 
 way was not to be compared with the expense 
 under our present system. He cited one case of 
 appeal from the judgment of a justice (in an ad- 
 joining town to the one in which he Mr. R.resided) 
 which occupied the greater part of two terms of 
 the court of Common Pleas in Genesee county. In 
 both trials the jury could not agree and it was yet 
 undecided althougn the first judge of that coun- 
 ty said it had already cost the county and the 
 parties one thousand dollars, yet the matter in 
 dispute which was appealed from was only about 
 thirty dollars. 
 
 I tie gentle inan-froin Chuutauque (Mr. MARVIN) 
 had vindicated the character of these courts, when 
 he said ihere WHS m>i one cause in five hundred 
 decided in the justices couris of his county, that 
 were ever appealed from. Tne gentleman from 
 Herkimer (Mr LOOMIS) tells us that this Conven- 
 tion is not the place to cany out details by fixing 
 the matter of appeals, and s^ys we can here only 
 set up the skeleton or frame work and leave the 
 Legislature to carry nut the details. Mr R. said 
 should that gentleman's suggestions be carried out, 
 and this whole mauler turned over to the .Legis- 
 lature, he apprehended it would be alter this 
 lime when the People would realize the reforms 
 they have so long demanded, and he begged the Con- 
 vention to consider well, before the)- should adopt 
 so extiaordinaiy a course. The gentleman from 
 Fioga, (Mr. J. J. TAYLOR) who addiessea the 
 cornmutee a few days siuce, adverted to justices 
 couris, and stated a case in his county of two 
 neighbors lawihg in those courts about two calves 
 as to whom they belonged. Jury alter jury was 
 Called, but they continued to disagree. He said 
 he hud it from the magistraie that it cost them 
 nearly 300 dollars, and the neighbors finally had 
 
713 
 
 to set lie the matter themselves. Mr. R. said he 
 had no doubt such had oeen the fact as stated In 
 iiiieinip.. lint he would call the attention 
 il "en .'email lo a rase that happened scrne 
 since in the county of Steuhen, not far 
 from ih.it gentleman's own county. Two men gut 
 .JrU'> i iiMtier in dispute was only twelve 
 
 shillings a 't e < t:otng through -a justice's court, it 
 was earned through all the superior courts, and 
 c-on'e-ited in each brant h with all the skill and in. 
 genuitv that able counsel could bring to bear, and 
 was finally decided in the court of filial resort, at 
 an expense of more than $1400 cost, and justice 
 \vas so complete and satislactory in the matter, 
 
 to 
 
 .</,< t nd of this bill of cos', x to run a<vay, which 
 iid, the one to Ohio, and the other to Michi- 
 {Tin. Now, sir, allowing these to he extreme 
 
 I liar both parties found it necessary (in order 
 
 certainly be no reasonable objection, if we were 
 to have a county court at all, that we should have 
 a good one. And he believed, unless a better 
 plan was presented, that we should make the first 
 judge a salaried officer, have him do the duties of 
 Surrogate and pay all fees into the county trea- 
 sury. This he believed would enable him to de- 
 vote his time to the business, as h would he well 
 paid, and would have plenty of business to do> 
 He would have two side judges elected to sit du- 
 ring the trial of causes, to be paid by the day for 
 their services. With such a court as this, he 
 said we would he enabled to dispense with one 
 half of the army of supreme judges provided for 
 in the report of the committee. The 3G supreme 
 or district judges, provided for in that report, 
 
 with salaries (as was said by some) of $3000 
 each, would not, he believed, take well 
 with the people. They were not prepared for 
 such an avalanche of judicial wisdom. He 
 said he would now notice a remark that fell 
 the other day from the gentleman from Ontario 
 (Mr. WORDED,) a gentleman for whom he, Mr. 
 R., had the highest respect he had had the hon- 
 or of a seat on this floor with that gentleman in a 
 different body, and had always found him a faith- 
 ful and able representative. That gentleman 
 stated that the gentleman from Genesee, alluding 
 to him, Mr. R., has given us a tirade against 
 
 equity 
 doubte 
 
 proceedings 
 d whether h 
 
 and yet he (Mr. WOKDEN) 
 had ever read a sinle work 
 
 ca-es, still they are not uncommon. The genile- 
 
 siiin from Tioj:a will discover that the costs 
 
 <>t what may he justly called hard lawing, is at 
 
 all times as five to one in favor of the higher 
 
 courts. In the two cases cited, his among the jus- 
 
 tices and the one mentioned by him, Mr. K., there 
 
 is a difference of about ijj>'ilU(J in favor ot having 
 
 fhe matter kept in and decided in the justice's 
 
 court. And he believed this rule would he found 
 
 ?o hold yo d in most ca<es. The gentleman from 
 
 New Yurie, {Mr. O'CONOR ) some days since 
 
 darned a case that was tumbled about fiom one 
 
 rourt to another in the shape of exceptions, de- 
 
 murrers and a greaf many other legal quibbles, un- 
 
 til after sevetal yeais of delay, it was finally 
 
 sent back where it started from to be tried anew, 
 
 at an expense of some $1500. The gen- 
 
 tleman from Columbia, (Mr. JORDAN) said that 
 
 under such a system as the one now before the 
 
 committee the whole expense of such a case as 
 
 the one mentioned would not cost over one hun- 
 
 dred dollars. He (Mr. R.) could not see how this 
 
 was to be done, as he found as many places of ap- 
 
 peal in this plan as there were in our present 
 
 system. Perhaps the lawyers were to work 
 
 cheaper than they have heretofore done. This 
 
 he said he should believe, when he saw it put in 
 
 practice, and not till then. He had never known 
 
 them to work a great length of time for nothing 
 
 and find themselves. Like other men they will 
 
 demand pay for their services. He said that 
 
 should he ever become embroiled in a suit that 
 
 bid fair to go through all the courts, he should 
 
 certainly employ that gentleman, for he had all 
 
 the ability that could be required, and would 
 
 work at that rate for less than two dollars a day 
 
 and find his own roast beef. Mr. R. took up and 
 
 examined the plan of Mr. CROCKER, for a county I dirks, swords, pistols, cutlasses, bludgeons, blun- 
 
 court, as he said it seemed to find favor with j derbusses and boarding pikes, then and there held 
 
 many. His objections to it, were that it had all j in the hands, lists and clutches of him the said 
 
 rapharnalia of a court of judges, sheriffs, Thomas. Now, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. Rich- 
 
 iles, jurors, clerks, criers, &c , but had no ; mond, if that gentleman's equity reading teaches 
 
 jurisdiction in civil causes. It was designed only j nothing but such rigmarole as this, he, Mr. R., 
 
 .; matters coming up from justices courts and had reason to thank those who had the care of 
 to try all criminal causes arising in the county j his early education, tor having so carefully kept 
 
 on proceedings in law and equity. Now he, Mr. 
 R., would only say in reply to this that he had 
 always been taught to read such works as would 
 be beneficial to himself and to his fellow men, 
 and his reading had always taught him when he 
 made a statement to make it in a plain and unvar- 
 nished manner, whether written or oral. But he 
 feared this was not the case with the reading of 
 the writing of his friend from Ontario. That 
 gentleman in his business as a lawyer, if he were 
 going to tell you the story, Mr. Chairman, of 
 Tom's striking Dick over the shoulders with a 
 rattan as big as your little finger, would tell it 
 something in this '/vay : And ""that whereas the 
 said Thomas, at the said Providence, in the year 
 and day aforesaid, in and upon the body of the said 
 Richard, in the peace of God and the state then 
 and there being, did make a most violent assault 
 and inflicted a great many and divers blows, kicks, 
 cuffs, thumps, bumps, contusions, gashes, hurts, 
 wounds, damages and injuries, in aad upon the 
 neck, breast, stomach, hips, knees, slims and 
 heels of him the said Richard with divers sticks, 
 canes, poles, clubs, logs of wood, stones, daggers, 
 
 v\ here the penalty for the offence shall not ex- 
 ceed the term of ten years confinement in one of 
 the Stales Prisons. Now, he thought, that a court 
 which had sufiicient ability and discretion to 
 make decisions involving the liberty of citizens 
 ougiit to be competent to decide matters of dol- 
 ars and cents between individuals. There could 
 
 from his view all works so well calculated to mys- 
 tify and mislead the human mind. 
 
 The gentleman from Chautauque, (Mr. PAT- 
 TERSON,) the other day, while discussing this re- 
 port, took occasion to say, that he (Mr. R.) had 
 discovered in the third section a provision which 
 would allow the Legislature to appoint exami- 
 
 64 
 
714 
 
 ners in chancery. And said he did not believe 
 the same discovery could have been made by any 
 other gentleman in the convention. Mr. R. said 
 the discussion at the time referred to was on the 
 third section, and he would i ead it, and the con- 
 vention could see for themselves how the matter 
 stood between them. He read as follows : 
 
 3. There shall be a Supreme Court having the same 
 juris'Uction in law and equity, which the Supreme Court 
 an 1 tin; court of chancery now have, subject to regulation 
 by law. 
 
 Mr. R. said if there was a legal member in the 
 convention who would rise in his place and say 
 'there was anything in the section to prevent the 
 Legislature from appointing as many officers as 
 they saw fit,to do that kind of business, he would 
 sit down. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON here said that the 9th sec- 
 tion provided distinctly that the testimony in 
 equity cases should be taken before the judge. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND resumed by saying that as the 
 question at the time was on the third section, he 
 had no intention of having his mind drawn from 
 it by any promise of something that was to be 
 done bye and bye, in some other shape. He was 
 not in the practice of putting his foot into a trap 
 knowingly, at all events not without knowing 
 how he was to get out again without injury. He 
 said the gentleman (Mr. PATTERSON) had also 
 said in his published speech that he hoped no 
 other bugbear like this would be found in the re- 
 port of the judiciary committee. Mr. R. said he 
 thought the gentleman (Mr. P.) had the other day 
 found the greatest humbug of all, in the shape of a 
 miserly county judge, which was of so alarming 
 a character, as to bring some half a dozen of the 
 committee promptly to their feet. 
 
 Some further conversation here ensued between 
 Mr. RICHMOND and Mr. PATTERSON. 
 
 Mr. CirlAlFiELJU moved that the committee 
 rise and repoil Agreed. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, ($Qth day ,) August 21. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. ;SELK.IKK. 
 
 Mr. BAKER called for the consideration of his 
 resolution, directing the committee ot I he whole 
 on tne leports ot the judiciary system, to report 
 the article to the Convention next Monday, at G 
 o'clock, P. M. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to insert Wednesday, 
 ins'ead ol Monday. 
 
 Mr, BUKK thought they would be quite ready 
 by Monday next to go to work and vote on it. The 
 lunger they staid, the more speeches there would 
 be made. Many gentlemen hav^ made thiee or 
 lour long speeches on this subject already, and ap- 
 pear disposed to deliver many more on every su. - 
 ject or section ot it. The committee had had 
 these repoiis before them, and under considera 
 lion for over 13 ciavs, which gives one day to each 
 member of the committee, and tnere was more 
 than one member ol that committee who had oc- 
 cupied a day. He did not intend to debate this, 
 but wished ID be indulged in making a prediction 
 
 although he was nenher a prophet nor the son 
 
 of a prophet ho would venture to predict in re- 
 gard 10 some things which the plan to be made 
 would contain. It was quite apparent, that what- 
 ever plan might be adopted, it would be the result 
 
 of concession and compiomise ; no plan could te 
 formed which would suit every member in all it- 
 features. Not one gentleman out of the 128 would 
 get a plan to suit himself. 
 
 He believed then, to return to his prediction, 
 that oui plan would contain a provision aumoriz- 
 ing the Legislature to establish Couits of Concili- 
 ation not a mandatory provision, but one giving 
 the Legislature discretionary 'poweis, by which 
 they might abolish the Courts i! found not to work 
 well. Next, he thought the justices of the peace 
 would be retained. Although according to the 
 opinions of some gentlemen tvho have spoken, 
 they are rather a shabby set ot fellows, he did not 
 think the people could get along without them 
 He imagined that there would be authority .given 
 for the election of from one to four in each town ; 
 and he would like to have their capacities some, 
 what extended, so that they should have cogni. 
 zance in matters of money to tne sum of j-p^SQ, 
 with exclusive jurisdiction in $1UU, and original 
 and concurrent jurisdiction to $230. Then, he 
 predicted the establishment ot some kind ot Coun- 
 ty Courts. It might be the "cormorant" or "bull 
 Irog system," as proposed by the yenilenran lr< m 
 Nw York, (Mr. O'CoNoR ) He d.d not know 
 why this bull Irog system would not answer every 
 purpose, provided it w-as given vitality, so that it 
 could make it* jumps whenever it was necessary. 
 Al'er these courts would come the " thirty-two 
 vagabond internal law-pedlers," forming that 
 " hydra headed monstei" called the Supteme 
 Coui t. Then he fancied we should top off' with 
 an eight square Court of Appeals. Such a judi- 
 cial system, which he piedicted would be erected 
 here, he believed would miswer all the purposes 
 of justice inthe state. He had formed his opin- 
 ions, to be sure, fiom those ot gentlemen who 
 were wiser than himself, but with his conclu. 
 sions, drawn from such sources, he was satisfied. 
 He hoped then that by next Monday the C nven- 
 tion would be prepared to take up the labor of 
 settling and finishing this matter by direct votes 
 upon the vaiious propositions. 
 
 A count was called, and it resulted thus: Ayes 
 24, noes 39. No quorum votiiig. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY called for the ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. LOOM1S moved to insert " as soon as 
 Monday ;" so that in case they got through soon- 
 er, they might then rise, (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. NICOLL : No likelihood of that. 
 
 Mr. BROWN hoped this would be viewed as 
 an invitation to the committee to rise on Monday 
 rather than as a coercion. He was as desirous to 
 expedite the business as any one, and that this 
 article should be accepted as soon as possible ; 
 but he preferred that it should be left to the good 
 sense and discretion of the committee when they 
 would close debate upon it. He could not omit 
 to express his gratification at the good spirit 
 which had so far characterised the discussion up- 
 on this subject. It had been conducted with the 
 most perfect propriety, and he believed would be 
 of great benefit to the members of the Conven- 
 tion. No gentleman would go away, he thought, 
 without allowing that he was compensated for the 
 time which had been given to the discussion of 
 this subject. And if after Monday night any gen- 
 tleman desired to speak at large upon any ques- 
 
715 
 
 tion before the committee, he should be sorry if 
 vote of his (Mr, B's.) should deprive him of 
 an opportunity. He hoped, then, that the reso- 
 lution would not be passed as a mandate upon the 
 committee. 
 
 Mr. T. \LLMADGE said it was notorious that 
 the plain English of the resolution was this; and 
 it might bo'ivndered by saying that as Saturday 
 i very bad day upon which any vote could be 
 taken upon this question, and Monday not being 
 the best day for such a vote, because a great many 
 members were always away on that day, this re- 
 solution, if it was laid on the table, by giving no- 
 tice that the article was to be taken out of com- 
 mittee on Monday next, would be a .warn- 
 ing to absent members to be present, and we 
 should thus %et a full house when we came to 
 vote. As all these purposes might be obtained by 
 laying the resolution upon the table, he moved 
 that disposition of it. 
 
 Mr. WHITE called for the ayes and noes on 
 Laying this on the table. 
 
 They wore ordered. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY desired to say a word on this 
 subject, and Mr TAL.L.MADGE withdrew his mo- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said nothing was to be gained 
 by adopting this resolution, by taking this article 
 out of committee on Monday, unless there was a 
 further provision in the resolution directing that 
 when it was brought into Convention, we should 
 proceed to vote upon the several propositions and 
 amendments; otherwise we should only have a 
 continuation of the discussion in Convention, 
 which could ->niy be ended by a resort to the pre- 
 vious question. He appealed to gentlemen to 
 bear this ii. mind ; unless there be also an amend- 
 ment making it compulsory on the Convention to 
 go on and vote on the amendments pending when 
 the committee shall report. If this or such an 
 aim'ii'hiHT.t is not adopted, the debate will be 
 continued in Convention, and nothing whatever 
 will bo gained. 
 
 Mr. STRO.YG : The only way to get through 
 the business is to take this thing out of commit- 
 tee of the whole at once. The resolution ought 
 to be adopted. At any rate there would be no- 
 thing lost, at least, by taking the article out of 
 committee, inasmuch as the debate could con- 
 tinue, and amendments might be proposed, all 
 inc. We should probably have the discus- 
 sion already had, over again in convention, the 
 same speeches and the same old stories on all 
 sorts of subjects, and the sooner it was taken out 
 of committee, the sooner we should begin to go 
 mini already traversed, and the soon- 
 er we should get this repetition completed. We 
 had the power, however, of bringing gentlemen 
 to a vote, whenever the discusssion had gone far 
 enough. If it was to be laid on the table simply 
 as a " polite invitation" to this committee to rise 
 if they thought proper, why it would be sure to 
 be disregarded. He wanted to take this out of 
 comi; .'ondiiy, so that lie would bring the 
 
 previous question to bear on it, and so get a vote 
 on it at some time or other. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 he whole on the 
 
 JUDICIARY KEPORTS. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG resumed the chair. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said, when I took my seat in 
 this hall,commissioned by the freemen of the coun- 
 ty of Otsego, to consider, amend, and reform the 
 organic law of the state, I came with an earnest 
 desire to lop off the excresences of the past, and 
 to infuse into the new instrument, those princi- 
 ples of liberty, equality, and social well being, 
 which the experience of a quarter of a century 
 has more fully revealed, and which the great body 
 of the people hope to see incorporated into the 
 constitution which we shall frame. After a labo- 
 rious and industrious session 01 two months and a 
 half, although it may be thought by many of the 
 citizens of the state that our progress has been 
 slow, I cannot think that our labor has been en- 
 tirely fruitless, when I reflect that many of the 
 most valued and cherished principles of the peo- 
 ple have been already adopted by this body, giving 
 an earnest that we shall not halt in this great work 
 at the threshhold of that department in which 
 the errors of the past are most prominent, and 
 which has hitherto been the least invaded by the 
 hand and the spirit of the reformer. The execu- 
 tive and legislative departments of the govern- 
 ment, were early based on principles compara- 
 tively liberal, and were so organized as to secure 
 accountability to the source of power; while the 
 judicial department has remained covered with 
 the dust and mildew of antiquity, and has been 
 more an engine of mischief and oppression to the 
 people, than a protection to their rights, liberties, 
 property and happiness. Shall we approach this 
 department with an honest purpose of remedying 
 the evils which all admit are past endurance, or 
 shall we, by a tenacious adherence to individual 
 opinions, and an obstinacy which at the present 
 crisis is almost criminal, defeat the just expecta- 
 tions of the people, and cover ourselves with an 
 indelible disgrace which no future merit ought 
 ever to efface ? It is apparent that concessions 
 must be made, that many if not all of the authors 
 of the various projects which have been submit- 
 ted to this body for its consideration, must yield 
 some portion of preconceived opinion for the sake 
 of harmony arid agreement, or our efforts to re- 
 form the judiciary will prove entirely abortive. 
 I am by no means insensible to the vast import- 
 ance of the subjects, and I think I can fully 
 appreciate the great anxiety of gentlemen, 
 who doubtless regard the establishment of a 
 judicial system as of last importance to the 
 people, and therefore surrender opinions form- 
 ed on the most mature deliberation with the 
 utmost reluctance ; but before any gentleman here 
 comes to the unalterable resolution not io change 
 liis ground, it behooves him to be well assured that 
 his efforts tend to improvement and reform, and 
 not to the aggravation and perpetuation of exist- 
 ng evils. To this end it is proper to enquire 
 whether the difficulty lies with the officers charg- 
 ed with the administration of justice, or is to be 
 bund in a defective organization. A little re- 
 flection will, i imagine, suffice to satisfy the 
 statesman or the jurist, that the judicial depart- 
 ment of this state was originally organized on 
 erroneous principles, and that a blind adherence 
 to those principles has steadily resisted all im- 
 provements. This department had little or no 
 
716 
 
 agency in producing the revolution ; and in or- 
 ganizing the new government, the attention of 
 the framers of the constitution of 17 1 7, was main- 
 ly directed to those departments, whose en- 
 croachments had so long been the subjects of 
 complaint and resistance. The encroachments 
 of legislative power, taxation without represen- 
 tation, and the usurpation of the royal preroga- 
 tive, were felt by the mass of the citizens ; and 
 when resistance resulted in success,- all orders of 
 men, the farmer, mechanic, and artizan, as well 
 as the learned professions, addressed themselves 
 to the work of reform, and co-operated in placing 
 the executive and legislative authority of the new 
 government on such a basis as would secure the 
 people against their encroachments. But it was 
 not so with the judiciary department. In this 
 branch of the government the lawyer alone was 
 supposed to be well informed of the wants of the 
 community, and able to provide an adequate pro- 
 tection to the citizen through the courts. What 
 was the American lawyer at that early period, 
 but an ardent admirer of English jurisprudence : 
 His attachment to, and admiration of Coke and 
 Littleton, of Bacon and Blackstone, undoubtedly 
 equalled the almost blind devotion so often ex- 
 hibited on this floor by the learned and ingenious 
 gentleman from Essex,. (Mr. SIMMONS.) He 
 saw, or thought he saw, in the English common 
 law, and in the system of administration on which 
 it was based, all that was beautiful, just, grand, 
 and useful ; and could no where perceive a sin- 
 gle element of mischief, or a single error which 
 demanded reform. He saw this pyramidal edifice 
 of justice rising upon the broad base of country 
 justices, by regular gradation, through the Barons 
 or leet courts, court of common bench, king's 
 bench, chancery and exchequer, to that splendid 
 apex the house of peers; and erroneously supposed, 
 that an edifice so beautiful in all its proportions, 
 so harmonious in all its parts, left nothing for hu- 
 man wisdom to improve, and nothing for human 
 wants to desire. In his blind admiration of ihe 
 splendid exterior, he omitted to look behind the 
 trappings and imposing paraphernalia of the tem- 
 ple, to discover the fount of tears, the vase of bro- 
 ken hearts, sick with " hope deferred;" the niche 
 where the serpent lay coiled in involved and in- 
 explicable folds, around the very neck of the god- 
 dess, hidden, it is true, from the common gaze by 
 the ermine and the robe, the full flowing wig, and 
 t:ie meretricious ornaments; with which she was 
 decorated. True to his education, the Anglo-Ame- 
 rican lawyer fashioned his edifice after this great 
 examplar. The justices' court, with its ten 
 pound jurisdiction, was his corner-stone, then 
 came the common pleas or common bench the 
 supreme court or kings' bench, the court ol chan- 
 cery, and lastly the house of peers or court for 
 the trial of impeachments and the correction of 
 errors. IS T ot content with transplanting the ma- 
 .chinery of his system from mother England, he in 
 an ill-starred moment, by one of those unaccount- 
 able follies or blunders which occasionally seizes 
 upon nations as well as individuals, transferred 
 " the common law of England, and the statute 
 law of England and Great Britain," in force on 
 the lyth day of April, 1115, to the constitution 1 , 
 and therein declared that it should be and conti- 
 nue the law of the state, subject to alteration by 
 
 the legislature. Here was the great first error, 
 and from it has flowed, silently aud seductively it 
 is true, almost all the evils which h.o-e surround" 
 ed and still surround the administration of jus- 
 tice in this state. Allow this organization to re- 
 main, and no human effort, no skill or ability of 
 man, will be found able to relieve the people of 
 one jot or tittle of the infamous and odious judi- 
 cial oppression under which they now sutler and 
 groan. To the lawyer, the reason is obvious. 
 With the adoption of the common and. statute law 
 of England, came the books of practice, forms of 
 pleading, and rules of proceeding, of the English 
 courts, both of law and equity ; not the rules and 
 practice of the courts of England as they now ex- 
 ist, purged, pruned, expurgated and improved, by 
 the spirit of wholesome reform, which lias found 
 its way into Westminster HalUin spite of intense 
 and ominous warnings of power and precedent 
 but the pedantic, technical and ceremonious forms 
 of the last century, the "orders in council," so far 
 above all improvement, so replete with philoso- 
 phy and eclecticism, as to command the admira- 
 tion, and to beget for them the most extravagant, 
 eulogies of the learned gentleman from Essex. 
 The first of the judges of our courts took their 
 seats on the bench prepared to perpetuate, what 
 the convention thus began, by a law education 
 strictly and thoroughly English. Hence our sys- 
 tem of jurisprudence at its outset became wholly 
 English ; and precedent, English precedent, en- 
 tirely controlled the decision of all questions both 
 of principle and practice. The judges, instead of 
 looking for the principles of justice aud equity.,. 
 and adjudging between man and manmcoiuorm- 
 ity to those principles, directed their efforts to a 
 laborious search of the Year Books, of Coke, Lit- 
 tleton, Blackstone and Bacon, to ascertain what an 
 English judge had said in a similar case, and de- 
 cided according to precedent, regardless of its in- 
 justice, or its inapplicability to our condition 
 
 How often have American judges remarked, 
 that were the question before them a new or un 
 open one, they should feel constrained to decide 
 differently, so manifestly unjust was the rule 
 found in the book; but the precedent was tiie 
 other way, and thus an acknowledged judicial 
 atrocity must be committed, rather than abandon 
 so respectable an authority as the opinion of au 
 English judge. The practice of the courts was 
 also controlled by Sauaders, Law and other En- 
 glish text writers. The action of the courts ne- 
 cessarily controied the actions and thoughts of 
 the bar; wfio became by the force of circum- 
 stances and education, the merest copyists of En- 
 glish jurisprudence; and when room, was made 
 on the bench by death, resignation or promotion, 
 for a new judge, the place was supplied by au 
 American lawyer with an English education. 
 Thus the errors in the practice of the English. 
 courts of the last century have been engrafted on 
 our system, and perpetuated, and at this moment 
 the text book of forms in almost every lawyer's 
 library, is Chitty, Saunders, or some American 
 copyist, less accurate, and more technical, than 
 the English author. The task of reforming these 
 evils, 01 ire-organizing the courts on a new plan, 
 more homogeneous with our institutions and ha- 
 bits of thinking, and of bursting the bonds ol le- 
 gal thraldom, so inexorable and destructive, is an. 
 
717 
 
 herculean one. It becomes the more hopeless 
 when we Find the most talented and command- 
 inir lawyers of this body throwing tiicir united 
 and gigantic force in the way of all legal re- 
 form. When we hear the gentleman from 
 Cnautauqii", i iif gent I email ti oin Ki te, . h.- yen lie- 
 Hi. m from Oneida, the gentleman from Tmi>a, tin 
 gentleman Ir-'tn Si. Lawrence, the gentletna' 
 from Kssex.and I o some ' Nteiit. rnoie lh,m one 
 honorable nentleman from Hie city < f New YI rk, 
 uriiiriLT with unsurpassed eloquence, Curve and skill, 
 the ft '-nil on, as a dl-itinct and sepai ate 1 1 ibunal, oi 
 that gre.it ItiMtrus en the body puhtic, the Court H 
 Chancery, and I he enmity cnuits, manv of \\hich 
 in UK: esiirmiilun ot the people have -alien hc-ku\ 
 contempt, we must despair ot accomplishing an\ 
 thniLj of ie,d, substantial reform. '1 he vain/us 
 pians submitted by ihose gentlemen, while tne\ 
 change the names of the courts, do not chance 
 the substance; because Ihe sunsfaiice is to be 
 looked for in the action and modes of proceeding 
 in the court>, and not in I he name. A change oi 
 na':j.- merely, is gtos!y hypocritical, if it is to be 
 given to (lie peo.oe ;:s therefoim which they h-ive 
 demai.ded and have a nu;ht to expect They have 
 ask d f. r bread, bu; \<>n would tzive them hack H 
 stone baptized anew. Is this to be regudrd as ihe 
 pffecf of education, ami of long practice in the 
 courts as no \v organized, or dots it arise from in- 
 dividual ami professional interest ? Can it not be 
 said of these Dentil-men, as was said of Ephr tiui 
 of old "tht-y h.ive joined themselves io their 
 idols, let them aloie?" Abandoning alt tiope of 
 patching up, tinkerinii, and resuscitating the pre- 
 sent sysU-n,. [ess ourselves to the work 
 ot real reform. To accomplish this, in my pooi 
 judgment, our list duty is so io reorganize the 
 courts of recoid, as m -ccss.inly to re(]uire an en 
 tire change in the practice, pleadings and modes 
 of proceeding. VVithont this, nothing will be 
 gained. YOU m.iy add to the number of your jutig 
 es vou may impose additional bur: liens on (he 
 people in the foi m of .>alanes and tees of oilirer- 
 you tnav fj.ake \">ur courts more august, and in 
 the vi, 'W ot so;j;e i(:-'itiemei here, more dignified 
 and ic -3hli.it' they are notonlv allowed, 
 but invred by our aclmn here io proceed according 
 t:> the pies.-n: practice in l<'w and equity our 
 latter end will be n. finitely \vorse ihan the begin- 
 nirm. Gentlemen still talk of tiling bills in 
 equity, as a, di-- ; inct and separate remedy 
 I le-i-et to hear it, because it implies ihot 
 the presei t cumbersome, technir.il, involved 
 tt'id ex:i<Misi v.-- i.r.ifM'c-' is i mi ispen.-ihle to 
 the attainment of justice in our courts. Such 
 is the infirmity oi' the human intellect, and par- 
 ticularly of the cultivated intellect, thai when it 
 ice hern directed in a particular channel, it. 
 continues to run on in thatchanncl. however dusty 
 -!i, rather than turn aside into a 
 more i ,jj r ,w.t way. \]y w i ltl t 
 1 have heard in this HuJt, | am painfully impres- 
 sed with the conviction that the discipline of the 
 
 nns and tcciinicalities of hia 
 n, serves to cramp the mind, ;>nd (ill it with 
 the most inco sional bigotry. 
 
 It seems to be thus with several h-gal gentlemen 
 on this floor. ihiving been accustomed to a 
 Court of Chancery as a distinct court, and to 
 courts or law of separate jurisdiction, thev cannot 
 
 conceive that a single court can dispense justice 
 according to law and equity. Is justice so slip- 
 pery, so coy and coquettish, that she must be 
 \\ooed in set forms of cunningly devised fiction, 
 io gain her confidence ? And if the suitor fails 
 nre her favor, through the elegancies of 
 common law diplomacy, may ho then, humbled 
 and subdued by the rebuff, approach her in the 
 sycophantic verbiage of the Court of Chancery, 
 " humbly complaining showeth unto your honor, 
 your orator, &c"? Here, of course, the trem- 
 bling culprit can open his whole heart hero he 
 may speak in eloquent and glowing phrase of all 
 his wrongs, and give full scope to his invention 
 provided he does so with becoming humility. 
 Has not the American mind yet vigor, and force, 
 and independence enough, to rise above the stu- 
 pid pedantry, and miserable trickery, of the dark 
 ages? Is it still willing to be circumvented, co- 
 zened and wronged by technical ace urn en, and 
 smothered in the smoke and mist which envel- 
 op the courts of record'of this stale ? Is it not a 
 reproach that we cannot speak the plain, direct, 
 and manly language of freemen, in the courts of 
 the People ? Is it still necessary that pleadings 
 should be a falsehood and a mystery, calculated 
 to mislead even the high priest at the altar of 
 justice, and replete with vexation, mortification 
 and disappointment to counsel, and downright 
 robbery and destruction to parties ? Must there 
 still be a magic, fatal as the fascination of the 
 serpent, in declarations, pleas, replications, 
 rejoinders, lebuueis, >uri eoui iris, ivi .[< uU^is, de- 
 muireis, avownes, and the long catalogue ot t.ar- 
 barous names of equity proceedn gs? So we must 
 think, when ue hear gentlemen of high kgal a{. 
 lainmenls and vast learning singing psalms to the 
 simplicity of the common law toims. Is it still 
 be'ieved that low, barren fiction, is necessary to 
 (lie investigation of f>cr, v.i.d ihe asci riainmt nt of 
 iiulii? Can a bald, palpable, tau e.iood, aid the 
 conn, or be just to an atheisarv? And yet. the 
 forms of the common law not "idy allow of fali-e- 
 bood, but require silly, stupid fie; ion, in a variety 
 of piejdin^s. Even the in'ich lauded action on a 
 promissory note, which is said to be so direct and 
 simple, is usually preceded or followed b\ the ng- 
 rn.irole of the common comts, whicii only s-.-rve to 
 mislead and perplex a plain man, \N!.O km:,\> ihe 
 ii'ite is r he only just claim which c..n be made 
 against him ; andjhere is hardly a common law 
 action which may riot be made complicated aid 
 dilatory, t/y what is known as special pleading. 
 So troublesome, unceitain, at;d unj'isi the the sys- 
 tem ot ii, ere special (.leading become, that Uio 
 Cnuits were ('billed to lessen MM- t vil ' 
 
 of judicial ingenui y. Tne general iNxiic 
 was allowed to take the place oi ei.n.-mon 
 against legal subilety. and all im.iuinable deience, 
 na'-hing back to theoituin ni cause oi Action, may 
 now be given in evidence under tin's plan. Hut not 
 having gained an entn e redemption li orn tile -i;iii< s 
 of technicality by the general issue, the no- 
 special defences, attached to i hi8 plan, w;.s niM-it- 
 d a- -...u aid. and the j;nf. operation c! i:.e I-.VM 
 
 n of immense service !; the c< Ul'ts, : 
 Iliiyatifs. All thir. siious thiit relol in is ehSuV Hi- 
 
 tamable by u^ing the language l iiuiiim all 
 
 to the enure exclusion c f fiction, ami a disre.^,,rd 
 
 to form. HOW is it to be accomplished ? Do >ou 
 
718 
 
 not, by keeping the two juried ic ions distinct, 
 inviie to a continuance of ihe same system, the 
 same practice and form, 10 which the court and 
 the bar have been so long acrusiomed ? Gen lie- 
 men may on this fl tor manifest a strong desire 
 to see simplicity take ihe place of complexity 
 directness the place of circumlocution arid 
 truth the place of falsehood and fiction ; but 
 do they not hope against expectation ? Where is 
 the work to begin ? Who is to become the pion- 
 eer in securing to the people this great benefac- 
 tion ? The bar cannot, if it would, without the 
 aid of the courts; and the courts will never find 
 time and inclination to direct it to be done. The 
 bar will follow the practice with which they are 
 familiar, rather than study principles, and frame 
 or invent new modes of proceeding, unknown to 
 the courts, with the hazard of meeting a judicial 
 determination against them. The court finding 
 rules and forms ready made to their hands, will 
 not enter up< n the labor of abolishing the worth- 
 less, remodelling the bad, 'and improving the tol- 
 erable. They have had the power, but instead of 
 exercising it, they have constantly been multi- 
 plying the evils. Does the future promise any 
 thing better ? This work requires boldness, in- 
 telligence and integrity, for it will be met and op- 
 posed by cunning, artifice, interest, learning and 
 numbers, by all the arguments which sophistry can 
 invent and cupidity enforce. We have heard 
 them here. Difficulties have been multiplied and 
 heaped upon us, like " Pelion on Ossa piled." 
 We have heard that the two systems are incom- 
 patible, and the union, therefore, impossible; 
 and where argument has failed, the quaint autho- 
 rity of long lost centuries has, with immense la- 
 bor, been exhumed, and its spectral form held up 
 to our view, to terrify us back into obedience. 
 The objections to the union of the systsms, are 
 objections of mere learning ; they smell of the 
 shop. I do not wish to be regarded as an enemy 
 of learning: it is the aliment of true wisdom, 
 and it is only when books, and the maxims of 
 writers, banish original thoughts and tie down 
 the faculties to mere precedents, that they be- 
 come pernicious. The mere scholar or stickler 
 for precedent, never wrought out a reform or 
 struck out a new principle for the advantage 
 of humanity ; but the master-spirits who have 
 shed a broad blaze of living and eternal light 
 on the world during the lasj two 'centuries, 
 have spurned the trammels of authority, and 
 plunged into the arena of matter and mind, 
 pursuing their researches and investigations by 
 the aid of strong original common sense, in de- 
 fiance of precedent and authority. Had Lord Ba- 
 con (so freely quoted by the gentleman from Es- 
 sex) regarded the authority of Aristotle, whose 
 erronous dogmas had enthralled the world for 2UOU 
 years as mfalliable, his A ovum Or gauum, would 
 still have been a sealed book in the Chancery ol 
 Heaven, unknown to mortals. Had Copernicus and 
 Gallileo, pursued their investigations by the 
 lights of precedent, instead of the lights of the 
 stars, we should probably at this day feel the 
 same security for our habitations, which gave 
 confidence to Deacon Homespun's faith, that his 
 mill-pond stood on a foundation as firm as a rock, 
 because it was tlat as a pancake. Had Watts, and 
 Fitch, and Fulton, been content with the devel- 
 
 opments which had preceded them, in the dis- 
 covery and application of motive powers, that 
 mighty agent, which now annihilates space, and 
 with untiring sinews performs the labour of man 
 and beast, might still have sung its evening lulla- 
 by to the good housewife's chimney-corner nap, 
 from the nose of her tea kettle, undisturbed. But 
 of all the mighty arguments against the policy of 
 doing nothing, for which we cannot find a prece- 
 dent in the opinion of some great man or a series- 
 of great men, our own form of government fur- 
 nishes the strongest. Had the tisk of framing a 
 constitution to perfect the work of the revolution, 
 been committed to the gentleman from Essex, 
 (Mr. SIMMONS,) deplorable indeed would be our 
 condition. A curious patchwork of incongruous 
 principles, more motley than Joseph's coat of ma- 
 ny colours, would it have been. Wherever a pre- 
 cedent could have been found in all the language 
 of all the nations of the earth, it would have been 
 transferred to the new instrument, and the courts 
 in expounding it, could have diversified their la- 
 bours with singing " God save the King" the 
 " Marsailles Hymn," the " Blue Bonnets over the 
 Border" and a variety of National airs but the 
 treason of Yankee Doodle would have stuck in 
 their throats. The system which we shall form, 
 requires originality. Shall it be said that in 
 this body this necessary element cannot be 
 found ? I trust this is an admission which 
 no delegate will be found ready to make 
 The originality, which I conceive to be 
 indispensible, is not incompatible with syme- 
 try, nor destructive of utility. I am happy to be- 
 lieve that it has already been discovered and ap- 
 plied by the committee on the judiciary, and 
 given to us in the report of the majority of that 
 committee. After the most mature examination 
 which I have been able to give that report, I am 
 persuaded of its feasibility, and ready to give the 
 principal features of it my most hearty support. 
 1 believe it contains the elements of that great re- 
 form which 1 ardently and earnestly desire to see 
 adopted ; and with the aid of certain other provi- 
 sions, which the report of the committee on the 
 codification of the laws will furnish us, and the 
 hand of the legislature which is to come after us, 
 I have no doubt a new era in the history of juris- 
 prudence will dawn upon us. 
 
 In yielding my assent to this report, I must not 
 be understood as admitting that, it contains the 
 best system which, in my opinion, could be de- 
 sired ; but its excellence is so pre-eminent over 
 all the other propositions which have been sub- 
 mitted to the Convention, that I am willing to for- 
 go my individual preferences, and support it as- 
 the best which in the present posture of affairs 
 is attainable reserving to myself the right to 
 propose such amendments as in my judgment 
 would improve it. The court for the trial of im- 
 peachments finds no opponents here; it is there- 
 fore to be regarded as established. The commit- 
 tee having passed over the sec )nd section, rela- 
 ting to the court of appeals, I am led to conclude 
 that it is generally acceptable to the members of 
 this body, and for that reason I do not think it 
 worth my while to occupy the time of the com- 
 mittee in examining it. Still, I must be allowed 
 to suggest a single objection to it, in its present 
 form. I should have preferred it, had the judges 
 
719 
 
 of the court held their offices by the same tenure. 
 This court is emphatically the court of the whole 
 .mil in my judgment. tin- judges should be 
 id In the people In general ticket Thcv 
 would then have come into ollice by the 
 constituent authority, have held their offices by 
 the same tenure, and have felt a perfect equ;>lit\ . 
 By the report, one half of them are brought in 
 from the bench of the supreme court, elected in 
 districts and not by the whole people, responsible 
 to a different constituency, and with the weight 
 of judicial authority which a six years' service in 
 another court will give them. This may lead to 
 unpleasant difference^ of opinion, and to such a 
 division of the court that no judgment can be 
 pronounced ; as the court would be likely to be 
 equally divided. Again, I do not think it a de- 
 sirable principle of organization, to so constitute 
 the court of last resort, that one half of its judges 
 shall sit in review of its own decisions, pronoun- 
 ced in another tribunal. They should be entirely 
 free from pre-conception and bias, arid be able to 
 bring an impartial judgment to the examination 
 of questions brought to that court for final adju- 
 dication. This is important to the last degree, 
 when grave questions of constitutional law are to 
 be definitely settled. If I cannot get the section 
 amended in this particular, I shall still cheerfully 
 abide the result 
 
 The constitution of the supreme court, meets 
 my hearty concurrence. I should have preferred 
 a division of the state into twelve instead of eight 
 judicial districts. Still this does not ati'ect the 
 principle. I feel confident that this part of the 
 plan of the Committee will secure a variety of 
 most important and valuable reforms, and first 
 and foremost is that greatest of all, deliverance 
 from judicial oppression, the virtual annihilation 
 of the court of chancery or in other words, the 
 union of the two jurisdictions of law and equity 
 in the same court. Ihave long indulged the hope 
 that U,ie time would come at last, when all judi- 
 cial determination should be but the application 
 of equity and immutable justice between man 
 and man. To accomplish this, I cannot think 
 two independent jurisdictions and two entirely 
 distinct modes of proceeding are necessary; and 
 T am quite sure that the same court will be tound 
 fully competent to the task of doing such equal 
 and exact justice, as is attainable here below, 
 whether schoolmen would call it law or equity. 
 By uniting the jurisdictions, 1 have no doubt the 
 practice will be assimilated and simplified, and 1 
 may add purified and intelligible. This union 
 will create a necessity for a new practice, in 
 which 1 hope to see all that is useless and perni- 
 cious stript away and rejected forever. Another 
 valuable feature" of the plan is, the bringing of 
 the courts, both in bane and nisi prius, into al- 
 most, if not quite, every county in the state. In 
 addition to breaking up an onerous monopoly, 
 which has been the inevitable consequence of 
 the present system, it will bring the courts with- 
 in tiie reach of the country practitioner, and re- 
 dound greatly to the advantage of the country- 
 lawyer and his client, who is entitled to the be- 
 nefit of his investigations and his superior know- 
 ledge of the cause. .Now the country lawyer is 
 obliged to abandon his client's cause at the criti- 
 cal moment when his services are most important, 
 
 and entrust the case to a new man ; who must 
 from necessity, argue from a brief, with such 
 knowledge only as the papers may furnish him. 
 rganization of eight b;mc courls, linvioir 
 authority to sit in any county in the district, will 
 obviate this difficulty, and relieve the profession 
 and the community from the burthensome tax 
 which the present s\stem imposes. I regard the 
 
 election of the judges as a great improvement. 
 
 Of all the various kinds of tyranny, judicial ty- 
 ranny is the most provoking and injurious to the 
 public welfare. The judge who sits alone, cold 
 and isolated, and exclusive, insensibly to h'imself 
 becomes a petty tyrant, and is very apt to lord it 
 over his fellow-citizens and equals possessing a 
 heart, dead to sympathy, and a mind habitually 
 ascetic and indisposed to social intercourse. By 
 electing the judges for reasonably short periods, 
 they will come to regard the people, the source 
 of all power, with more leniency, and, I trust, 
 learn to respect the rights of jurors, witnesses' 
 counsel and parties. I have too often seen the 
 judge, instead of giving the law to the jury, di- 
 rect them to find a verdict of a particular kind, 
 and frown down all independence and deny all 
 right to judge on the part of the jury; carrying 
 their authority so lar as to fine a juror for not 
 agreeing to a particular verdict. Such usurpation 
 renders the trial by jury a mockery ; and it is but 
 reasonable for a judge to know and feel thatthere 
 are well defined limits to his authority, where the 
 authority ot others begins. If he shall be sub- 
 jected to the ordeal of frequent election, it can- 
 not deprive him of rightlul authority and needful 
 independence, but will restrain a tendency to 
 tyranny and encroachment on the rights of others. 
 The wise system of requiring the same judge to 
 perform bane and circuit duty, will be of essen- 
 tial aid to the judge. By mingling with the peo- 
 ple at the circuit, he will learn to know them 
 he will become acquainted with the wants of the 
 community, and will carry into his study a know- 
 ledge of every-day life, instead of the Irigid, tech- 
 nical maxims of the dead, and the wire-drawn 
 subtilities of the law, found in the writings of 
 both the living and the dead. Another most es- 
 sential reform is the result ofthis plan, the aboli- 
 tion of the common pleas courts, as now organized. 
 Worthless and expensive to the last degree, it is 
 
 wisdom to correct the evil by abolishing them. 
 
 The people have long since come to regard this 
 court with the most, decided disfavor, and no court 
 can be useful which has lost the public confidence. 
 The error, 1 think, may be found in the mode of 
 compensation. I have never believed that any 
 oih'cer was unproved by per diem compensation, 
 and I am sure that experience has shown this to 
 be the very worst mode of compensating a judicial 
 officer. In the county of Utsego, the court of 
 common pleas, with a calender of from eight to 
 twelve issues of fact, occupies from six to ten 
 days in trying them ; but the circuit judge, with 
 a calender of from thirty to forty issues, seldom 
 sits over four, and often not over two days. Suit- 
 ors, witnesses, jurymen and counsel, feel the dif- 
 ference, and appreciate the superior excellence 
 of the circuit, compared with the common pleas; 
 and all are desirous of getting rid of an evil so 
 onerous and expensive. 1 think, however, a little 
 reflection must satisiy us that a kind of county court 
 
720 
 
 will be indispensable. It is true the 13th section of 
 this report confers power on the legislature to 
 organize tribunals of inferior jurisdiction, but I 
 am by no means satisfied that such power should 
 be reserved to the legislature. I incline to the 
 opinion, that it is safer to provide a complete 
 judicial system in the constitution itself, leaving 
 as little to legislative discretion as possible. 
 
 The proposition of the gentleman from Catta- 
 raugus (Mr. CROCKER) with some amendment, 
 would meet my approbation. A single competent 
 judge in each county, having no original jurisdic- 
 tion, but having jurisdiction to hear cases arising 
 on certiorari to justices courts, and to discharge 
 the various duties of a special character now per- 
 formed by the court of common pleas, or a judge 
 at chambers, such as proceedings under the 
 landlord and tenant act, and the statutes in rela- 
 tion to bastardy, the poor, insolvent debtor, &c, 
 &c. will be found to be indispensible ; but I do 
 not believe that this court should be allowed to 
 call a jury from the county at large. If it had 
 this power, the people would gain nothing by the 
 change. The surrogate can very properly be in- 
 vested with these necessary judical powers. 
 Make your surrogate a judge, and give him a 
 competent salary instead of fees ; and you will get 
 a good officer, and the people will get relief from 
 certain unjust exactions which have for a long 
 period been the subject of very just complaint. 
 Can any man tell me why the public has provi- 
 ded tribunals for the use of the living, but have 
 neglected to do that justice to the dead ? No man 
 is obliged to litigate, but who can escape the final 
 doom which awaits us all. No man may be ob- 
 liged to use the court, but whose heirs, sooner 
 or later, may not be obliged to use the surrogate, 
 and subject to such exactions as the law may al- 
 low him to make ? The state, in the plenitude of 
 its justice, affords facilities to the litigious, the 
 vicious, and the evil disposed ; but taxes the wi- 
 dow, the orphan, and the unfortunate. In my 
 opinion, the people should provide the orphan's 
 court, first; and to do this, is a controling object 
 with m - in supporting the project of the gentle- 
 man from Cattaraugus, modified as I have sugges- 
 ted. The provision for a county, judge contained 
 in this proposition, the court of appeals, and the 
 thirty-two judges of the supreme court divided 
 into eight districts, I am confident will be found 
 to be amply sufficient; and I confess the system 
 commends itself so strongly to my favor, that I 
 cannot under any circumstances be induced to 
 abandon its main features. 
 
 I cannot dismiss this subject, Mr. Chairman, 
 without briefly examining the domestic courts, and 
 considering some of the propositions to change 
 their organization and improve their character. 
 The justices' courts are invaluable and indispensa- 
 ble to the community. It is the cheap, convenient 
 court of all classes of the people; the tribunal of 
 neighborhoods. I see no reason for changing 
 them. If it shall be found advisable to enlarge 
 their jurisdiction, the power to do so will always 
 be found in the legislature, and can and will be 
 exercised us occasion may require. 'lh:s power 
 has frequently been exercised by the legislature, 
 raising the jurisdiction from $25 to $50, and sub- 
 sequently from $50 to $100. No complaint has 
 been heard against this legislative action, and I 
 
 believe we shall act wisely if we let this matter 
 stand where we found it. The gentleman from 
 New-York (Mr. MORRIS) has proposed to make 
 the justices' court a town court, with a town 
 house, a clerk, a jury box, with theparapharnalia 
 of a court of record: This, in my judgment, 
 would greatly impair their usefulness, and des- 
 troy their domestic character. If the gentjeman 
 had gone a little farther in his reform movement, 
 and transferred the cart loads of chancery rubbish 
 to his august town court, and conferred exclusive 
 chancery powers .on it, it would have been a glo- 
 rious remedy for all " the ills which flesh is heir 
 to," past, present, and to come. 
 
 The gentleman from Genesee, (Mr. RICHMOND) 
 my honorable colleague, (Mr. ST. JOHN,) and the 
 gentleman from Monroe, (Mr. STRONG,) have 
 proposed that the jurisdiction of justices should 
 be increased to $250, giving them exclusive and 
 conclusive jurisdiction nominally to $100, but 
 really to $250. I confess I was surprised at this 
 proposition. Do gentlemen suppose that the in- 
 fallibility of judicial judgment is increased in the 
 ratio of the ignorance of the judge ? When it is 
 known that justices must often act under the in- 
 fluence of neighborhood excitement, catching the 
 prevailing spint,and being moved by its impulse, 
 can it be a safe rule to declare that a judgment, 
 the offspring of such passions, shall be conclu- 
 sive? I am aware that a review is provided for, 
 but if manifest errors require that a new trial 
 should be had, it is to be sent back for a second 
 chance to the same town or an adjoining town, 
 and the second trial is to be final and conclusive. 
 If sent back to the same magistrate for re-trial, I 
 ask what guarantee have we that the justice, 
 knowing that his acts can never be reviewed, 
 may not yield to passion or prejudice, and judi- 
 cially punish an enemy or reward a friend? How 
 would justice be administered between the rich 
 and powerful on the one hand, and the humble 
 citizen seeking justice on the other, befqje the 
 friend and neighbor of the former? .Sir, I am 
 sorry, sincerely sorry, that any gentleman should 
 have fe[t such insane confidence in the im- 
 maculate integrity and infallibility of justices 
 of the peace. Let these gentlemen, while 
 they are so prolific in charges of a want of 
 integrity and motives of self interest of the legal 
 profession,, ask themselves, whether this propo- 
 sition has received a more favorable consideration 
 with them in consequence of their peculiar posi- 
 tion ? The gentleman from Genesee is a justice 
 of the peace ; the gentleman from Otsego is or 
 has been a justice ; and my excellent friend 
 from Monroe, if not a justice, is a celebrated 
 practitioner in that tribunal. It cannot be sup- 
 posed that interest or personal vanity can have 
 had any influence with either of them ; and I am 
 sure that all my honorable friend from Monroe is 
 seeking, is to enlarge the sphere of his useful- 
 ness. "Sir, I do not object to enlarging the juris- 
 diction of justices of the peace to $250 or $500 
 in actions of assumpsit; but I do most solemnly 
 protest against our making the judgment of a 
 justice final and conclusive between the parties, 
 it is not safe or prudent to do so. Leave these 
 courts to legislation, and let us in making a Con- 
 stitution, provide only for such departments as 
 must enter into the organic law. 
 
721 
 
 Sir, I have said all that I deem it advisable to 
 say in relation to the judicial system which we 
 are about to create. Having urged the adoption 
 of the report of the majority of the committee on 
 the judiciary, from a sincere conviction that the 
 people of this state will derive incalculable ben- 
 efits from its practical operation, I am content to 
 leave it to coming time to develope those practi- 
 cal truths which shall cover' it with the glory it 
 deserves. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said when he took his seat in 
 this Convention he brought with himself only an 
 ardent desire to aid with his humble powers in 
 the great work of judicial and legal reform. He 
 came wedded to no peculiar notions or precon- 
 ceived opinions of his own. He came fully pre- 
 pared for all the conciliation and concession that 
 might be necessary to accomplish the changes re- 
 quired by the people. He had felt a high degree 
 of reluctance to take any part in the debate upon 
 the great subject of judicial reform. His reluc- 
 tance arose from the fact that so many giant 
 minds had been already employed upon the sub- 
 ject. He distrusted his own ability to give any 
 view of that subject that could prove useful to 
 the Convention. But from his position in rela- 
 tion to some portions of the questions before them, 
 he felt constrained to ask the indulgence of gen- 
 tlemen while in a few brief words he should give 
 the result of his reflections. He should gratify 
 some gentlemen by taking up as first in order 
 the subject of justices courts. Few members o] 
 this body could have had more experience in 
 these humble courts than himself. These are 
 emphatically the courts of the great body of the 
 people. They are entitled in the main to much 
 of the encomium bestowed so liberally upon them 
 He could not agree with gentlemen who desirec 
 to extend the jurisdiction of these courts to two 
 hundred and fifty dollars. Their present juris- 
 diction is large enough. The popular voice has 
 never demanded an increase of jurisdiction. 
 Give to these courts only concurrent jurisdiction 
 to any amount, and my word for it you will fine 
 but few plaintiffs who would seek the recover 
 of their demands in these courts. They woul< 
 almost invariably go to a more stable and eleva 
 ted tribunal. They will go where they can fine 
 legal learning upon the bench to determine the 
 questions of law that may arise in their causes 
 They will go where they can recover some costs 
 however small the amount, to repay their counse 
 for seeking redress for their opponent's wrong. 
 There could be no possible inducement for sue! 
 plaintiffs to prosecute their claims in justices 
 courts. While many of these courts had prove( 
 to be safe and useful depositories of power, other 
 had too often been perverted into engines of in 
 justice and oppression. Their position as we) 
 as their governing principle was too often locali 
 ty. They are too often controlled by some sec 
 tional power and influence. The magistracy o 
 his own neighborhood was equal to the averag 
 in the state, but my honorable friend from Chau 
 tauque [Mr. MARVIN) will bear me witness tha 
 the opinion has long prevailed in his village tha 
 their citizens could not always find equal and ex 
 act justice when prosecuted before justices m th 
 neighborhood of my residence. The citizens c 
 my own vicinage have an equal dread of prosecu 
 
 ons from the village which he inhabits. How 
 ver free other older and more favored portions of 
 state may be from these sectional influences, 
 exemption has not been universally enjoyed, 
 n many of the new settlements this influence is 
 elt as an evil of fearful magnitude. He had 
 nown justices' courts where the justice, consta- 
 le, jury and counsel for the plaintiff were all 
 ound together by kindred ties. The poor wretch 
 vho was prosecuted in a court so constituted, 
 nust necessarily feel the utter hopelessness of all 
 efence. He might as well and often did aban- 
 on his defence, after making his pleadings in 
 orm. The manner of selecting j uries in justices 
 ourts was defective and ooened the door for the 
 most gross corruption. The constable if he was 
 .onest, summoned those who were nearest at 
 land and who were generally unfit to be trusted 
 vith the decision of causes. He could not for 
 he pittance paid him for the service, select the 
 ury with care from competent, safe and intelli- 
 ent men. The idlers and vagabonds who had 
 10 business of their own, hanging around the 
 ;ourt, like vultures around a carcass, formed the 
 great mass of its juries. In very many causes 
 he evil was of a stronger character. In strongly 
 contested trials the people discussed the merits 
 
 and took sides with the parties in the contest. 
 
 A corrupt constable would summon a jury at the 
 selection 'and dictation of the plaintiff, who al- 
 ways chooses his ground on which to prosecute, 
 as well as the officer to serve his process. These 
 glaring evils could only be remedied by chang- 
 ng and improving the mode of selecting juries in 
 these courts, and by giving the right of peremp- 
 rory challenge to a limited number ot the panel. 
 He had long felt the necessity of the right of 
 aeremptory challenge in all civil and criminal 
 auses. It would greatly aid in the due and pure 
 administration of justice. Since he had taken 
 tiis seat in this body he had been called home to 
 re-try a civil cause in a court of record, which a 
 second time resulted in a disagreement of the 
 jury. The cause must again go upon the calen- 
 dar for trial. If he could have been allowed the 
 right of peremptory challenge to two jurors on 
 either trial, he could have obtained a verdict. He 
 commenced and went through this trial on both 
 occasions with a full conviction of what would 
 be the result, but could not avoid going through 
 with the mockery and farce. Another great 
 evil that disgraced our justices courts, and in- 
 deed all others, was the technical nicety required 
 in its proceedings. The practice in that humble 
 court was too much entangled by the nets and 
 mazes of form. To understand correctly its practi- 
 cal lorms required the siuily and the labor of \ears. 
 It had all the ridiculous fi-nns ofnur higher courts 
 of record It required more or tact and (alent to 
 piactice auccessidtiy in that court than in the 
 higher courts. An error in (he supreme court in 
 practice or pleading could be amended on motion, 
 while in a justices court the same error would be 
 fatal to the cause of the client. The practice o( 
 all our com (s oitjht to bu simplified and rendered 
 intelligible to all. Tne iviuile train ot chicanery 
 in le^al practice ought to be brushed away as cob. 
 webs, by the broom of progress and legal reform. 
 Above all things, in this humble court where all 
 men are compelled to seek redress for petty 
 
 65 
 
722 
 
 wrongs, the road 10 right and justice should be 
 plain and visible. Its foims and its practice 
 should be so simple that "all who run may read, 
 and all who read may understand." There were 
 other evils of a minor character. Bui the lemedy 
 for these evils incident to justices courts, ts well 
 as the duiyof limiting or exieiidm* their jurisdic- 
 tion belongs to legislation and notto this Conven- 
 tion! It is"our duty to provide tor its retention as 
 a court We set up the frame work ot the tribu- 
 nal and leave the fitting and finishing of aij us 
 details of practice, jurisdiction and powers to the 
 legislature that shall come after us. There was 
 in fact but little propriety in discussing these 
 questions in this body, and in what he had said on 
 this subject he had only found his apology in the 
 course of remark pursued by gentlemen who had 
 preceded him in this debate. These remarks he- 
 hoped might not be wholly lost. They would 
 serve to call the attention of succeeding legisla- 
 tures to those works of reform that the people 
 expected at their hands. He trusted it would not 
 provetobea" hope deferred." Thereportot theju- 
 diciary committee makes no intermediate court be- 
 tween the justices and the supreme court; and he 
 wouid now pass to a consideiation of that part ot 
 the report which related to the supreme court, and 
 the duties imposed upon its judges. He lelt a strong 
 and 'anxious desire to approve everything thai 
 he could in that report. It was the result of the 
 laborious investigation and study ot a numerous 
 and very learned comimilee. He fell but too sen- 
 sibly his own inability to discuss successfully with 
 them the merits or demerits of their report. He 
 rejoiced to say that he highly approved ot their 
 general plan." But. he felt constrained to. differ 
 with them in relation to the ability of their judges 
 to iH'iionn the duties assigned them, lo this 
 tonic and the remedy 10 be applied, he should 
 principally confine his remarks. By this report 
 the court of errors, the com t of chancery and the 
 courts ot common pleas and general sessions, are 
 abolished. Such, if not in terms, is the fair m- 
 tendrnent of the report. The duties of all these 
 tribunals, together with all the judicial dutres ot 
 the state, ate cast upon the thirty-six judges re- 
 commended by the committee. An appeal I rum 
 a justices court must go up to the circuit for trial. 
 A cerlioMii from the same couit must go to one 
 ot the cou.-ts in bane or to the circuit judge, for 
 reversal or affirmance. In addition to all this, it 
 is proposed to make the supreme court justices 
 perform the duties of masters and examiners in 
 chancery He would now examine for a few mo- 
 ments the amount of business thus thrown upon 
 that court, and see what time and labor would be 
 required to perform it. Eight of your judges are 
 set apart for a court of appeals. They are to per- 
 form the duties now assigned to the court ot er 
 rors The court of errors was usually in sessior 
 a iaJge portion of the year, with a celendar con- 
 stantly accumulating upon them. The judges o 
 the court of appeals would be compelled to devot< 
 their whole time to the business of their owi 
 court. The remaining twenty-eight judges rnus 
 then perform the duties now performed by 
 
 The Supreme Court in bane, 4 terms 4 weeks 
 
 each, 
 
 6 weeks of special motion terms, 
 
 Chancellor's general and special terms, say 24 
 
 8 Vice Chancellors terms at least 4 weeks each 3-2 " 
 Vice Chancellor's special motion terms 2 weeks 
 
 each, 16 " 
 
 2 yearly circuits each, in 69 counties, 118 " 
 
 59 courts Common Picas and General Sessions. 
 
 4 weeks to each county yearly. 236 " 
 
 The duties of 3o6 masters and examiners in 
 
 chancery, say 4 weeks each, J 12-t " 
 
 1S72 weeks. 
 
 Thus we have 1872 weeks service to be per- 
 ormed by the 28 judges not occupied in the court 
 if appeals. He felt confident that his computa- 
 ion of time was too small rather than too large. 
 n holding the terms in bane the time is allowed 
 or a single judge only, while three or four could 
 lold the court. To perform this 1872 weeks la- 
 or, you have a judicial force of 28. If you di- 
 ide the 1872 weeks labor by the 28 judges, you 
 rill find that more than sixty-six weeks of labor 
 Nil] be yearly required of every single individual 
 udge of your court. In other words, you require 
 hem to perform yearly 416 weeks of labor more 
 han their whole time united. No allowance is here 
 made for time required to consider or digest cases, 
 r draw up opinions either in law or equity cau- 
 ses, decided before them. The herculean labor 
 hus thrown upon this court appeared to his judg- 
 ment to be entirely beyond its capacity and pow- 
 ers. No set of judges could ever be found equal 
 o the performance of their vast and varied du- 
 ies. Their physical ability would very soon sink 
 under the weight of the accumulated load. The 
 _ittle aid that the judges of the court of appeals 
 could bring to their relief, after performing the 
 Business of their own court, would be of no avail. 
 There was not enough of judicial force. Some 
 court must be devised that shall perform a large 
 amount of their business. Some court that shall 
 jring real aid, substantial relief, to the judges be- 
 comes imperatively necessary. This state of 
 things seems to require at our hands the construc- 
 tion of some kind of a county court. Our county 
 courts have become objects of much disfavor in 
 most portions of the state. Why is it that these 
 courts are in such bad repute ? It is not because 
 their jurisdiction is too large or too small. The 
 reason is most obvious. It springs from the mode 
 of appointment of the' judges, their pitiful com- 
 pensation, and the consequent want of talent and 
 legal learning upon the bench. We cannot ex- 
 pect for the pittance of two dollars per diem for a 
 few days in the year, to employ legal science in 
 the judicial office. Professional men who are ca- 
 pable offulfilling the high duties of the station, 
 cannot afford to accept it. We are compelled to 
 take men for the bench whose only recommenda- 
 tion is the profundity of their ignorance of the 
 laws of the land and the practice of our courts. 
 The office is too often given as a reward for po- 
 titical prostitution to those individuals upon whom 
 the party is unwilling to throw away a better of- 
 fice But it seems to be now conceded that we 
 are to have a county court that can discharge 
 some of the duties that would otherwise 
 devolve upon your supreme or circuit courts. 
 The more difficult question to decide is, how 
 shall that court be constructed, and what its ju- 
 risdiction and powers? Various propositions 
 are before us. His own plan for the construc- 
 tion of a county court had been submitted by him 
 with great diffidence. He did not submit it with- 
 
723 
 
 out the approval of several intelligent members 
 invention. He had endeavored to con- 
 rt that would render an essential ser- 
 to the supreme and circuit courts, proposed 
 e committee a court that would relieve 
 courts from a vast amount of petty and vex- 
 atious litigation, at the same time that it would 
 :lio people comparatively nothing. It was 
 ! upon all hands that the duties of the Sur- 
 
 must be performed by a local officer. 
 ]>y tho |>1. in he had the honor to submit, a single 
 county judge was to be elected, who was to per- 
 form the duties of the Surrogate, and to hold 
 the county court for the trial of causes brought 
 up from justices' courts. He would also re- 
 quire him to perform the special duties now 
 imposed by law upon any county judge. He 
 proposed to give that county judge a salary suf- 
 ficient to insure a high degree of talent and legal 
 attainment in the officer. The present fees of 
 the Surrogate, and the ordinary fees of the county 
 judge, paid into the treasury, would form a fund 
 sufficient for his salary. No new burthen would 
 be cast upon the people by the operation. 
 To form a court of general sessions, he added 
 two justices of the peace to be annually selected 
 by the boards of Supervisors. This mode of se- 
 lection he believed to be preferable to any other 
 that could be devised. It would secure the best 
 talent that the county afforded, to associate with 
 the county judge for the trial of criminal causes. 
 It would secure a court of a high character at a 
 trifling expense to the people. He proposed to 
 give to the court of general sessions jurisdiction 
 of all offences not punishable by imprisonment 
 for ten years. Such is the plan, as the gentleman 
 from Genesee ssid, " that the gentleman from 
 CattaraugUb has seen fit to introduce." The 
 learned gentleman from Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) 
 while he in the main approved this plan, seems 
 to think that appeals are an evil, and that to lim- 
 ited amounts justices' judgments should be final 
 and conclusive upon the facts. That would be a 
 very fruitful source of injustice and oppression. 
 The strongest security that the people now have 
 for the purity of these tribunals, is to be found in 
 that very right of appeal that gives a new trial on 
 the facts of the case. It gives two trials by jury, 
 one of which may be had beyond the re'ach of 
 passion, excitement and prejudice. He had often 
 seen damages remitted to a sum under twenty-five 
 dollars to avoid new trials upon the merits. Pet- 
 ers arid those who riled up and perverted 
 
 ure streams of equity and law in justices' 
 courts, disliked appeals. Injustice and oppres- 
 sion were more frequently wrought upon a small 
 
 . and upon the poor. He was therefore dis- 
 
 iv the right of appeal in all its force 
 
 irenllernun from Herkimer 
 
 LOOMIS) thinks th<; ex-parte allowance of 
 
 "vil. We allow parties to commence 
 
 MI all our courts without oaths or bonds. 
 
 Hut in order to obtain an allowance of appeal, the 
 
 par'.- ' forth the facts of his case, 
 
 as pr :<iavit, and show under oath the 
 
 grounds of his appeal. He is obliged to pay the 
 
 costs beioru the justice as though he was really 
 
 in the wrong, and also to give his opponent good 
 
 and suHk-.ieut. security to pay 'all damages and 
 
 that may be recovered against him So far 
 
 from the facility afforded for appeals being an 
 evil, in his judgment if we required the oath, 
 the bond, and the payment of the costs, the 
 appeal should be without ceremony, a mat- 
 ter of course, and of right. If the appellant 
 tailed in his cause, the payment of all damages 
 and costs was a sufficient punishment for his false 
 clamor. The gentleman from Herkimer proposes 
 to have the salary of the county judge fixed by 
 the several boards of supervisors. This mode of 
 fixing salaries is highly objectionable. You would 
 have no uniformity of compensation. While some 
 counties would pay him well and liberally, others 
 would give him but a meagre pittance Men of 
 the proper qualifications would be unwilling to 
 accept an office of that character, if its salary de- 
 pended upon the supervisors. The supervisors 
 were men generally ambitious of saving (he money 
 of the people. Political feeling and personal 
 friendship or animosity would have too much to 
 do in fixing the amount of salary. The salaries 
 oir^ht to be fixed, permanent and uniform, by the 
 legislature. They ought to be paid from the state 
 and not the counly treasury. The slate ought to 
 furnish to the whole people a cheap and easy road 
 to justice. The gentleman from Herkimer objects 
 to the plan introduced by him, (Mr. C.) because 
 it gives too great criminal -jurisdiction. His first 
 objection is made in behalt of the accused, and 
 secondly, because it will require a jury and all the 
 paraphernalia of a court. To all this he would reply 
 thai his own mind had been in some doubt as to the 
 extent of the powers to he given to it. When he 
 drew up his plan he gave the court much less of cri- 
 minal jurisdiction. He had changed it at the sug- 
 gestion of a gentleman of great learning and expe- 
 rience. Our present courts of general sessions had 
 jurisdiction when the punishment was less than 
 imprisonment for life. Its jurisdiction was far less 
 than our present county courts. The accused need 
 riot be tried in it if he chose to go into the over 
 and terminer for trial. He could at any time sue 
 out a writ of certiorari and remove his cause out 
 of the court of general sessions if he pleased. He 
 could do it without expense, as we are to abolish 
 the fees of judicial officers. He had then his 
 choice of either court as suited his fancy.' If it 
 was intended to form a county court that should 
 operate to aid the justices of the supreme court, 
 a jury was indispensable. You might do without 
 a grand jury by having all your indictments found 
 in the oyer and terminer and sent into the gene- 
 ral sessions for trial. But without a jury you 
 could try no yssue of fact. Your court would have 
 but little power, and could render but very little 
 service. The gentleman from Herkimer also ob- 
 jects to the plan because it fixed a limit to one 
 judge. If his objection arises from the fact that 
 the "court is held by one judge, the same objection 
 is equally good against the lour thousand justices, 
 who have original jurisdiction to as great an a- 
 rnount as the county judge has merely appellate. 
 You will secure afar better officer by having but 
 one to pay, than you will ifyou increase the num- 
 ber. -The more you add to the number of judges 
 upon the county bench, the more you dissipate 
 and weaken the strength, intelligence and effic- 
 iency of the court. You increase the expense 
 and get no corresponding benefit secured. He 
 was fully and deeply impressed with the convic- 
 
724 
 
 tion that some kind of a county court was neces- 
 sary to perform the business of a minor kind and 
 character. In some of the counties it would be 
 necessary to hare some court almost constantly 
 in session. Bat he assured the Convention that 
 he had no strong partialities for this " pet child" 
 of his own. He had attempted only to construct 
 a county court out of few and simple materials 
 that would cost the people but little. He had en- 
 deavored to make it respectable and to give it ef- 
 ficiency. If gentlemen offered substantial im- 
 provements, no member of the body would be 
 fiiore ready to adopt their amendments than him- 
 self. If any better or more simple or efficient 
 plan was offered, he was ready to abandon his 
 own and support the belter proposition. He had 
 no p/ide of opinion. If he knew his own soul, 
 he was only arxious to perfect a judiciary system, 
 that, freed from the subtleties and technical ni- 
 ceties of legal practice, should hereafter be the 
 pride and glory of the state, and a lasting honor 
 to this Convention. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM felt bound, in the remarks he 
 was about to make, in consideration of the res 
 olution adopted this morning, to confine himself 
 to the questioa directly before the committee, 
 upon the motion of the gentleman from New 
 York to amend the third section. He went on 
 to state his objeetion to the erection of common 
 pleas courts. In the first place the business 
 which once made them necessary was gone, it 
 did not exist in any court whatever. Again, 
 the confidence of the people in those courts had 
 been in a great degree lost. The influence of 
 education and the promulgation of religious prin- 
 ciples had not made the people more quarrelsome, 
 but had rather tended to modify and moderate 
 such elements in society. He replied to state- 
 ments made by Mr. STETSON. It was very ques- 
 tionable whether, if these common pleas courts 
 were continued, they would not, in the blunders 
 and errors which they would commit, make 
 more business for the supreme court in correct- 
 ing them; and it was the design of most of the 
 gentlemen who had spoken, to get rid of the 
 great number of appeals and certioraris now ex- 
 isting, by the adoption of some other plan. He 
 then went on to review the expenses of the coun- 
 ty court, as set down in the returns made to the 
 Convention, comparing them with the amount of 
 judgments rendered. TKe great deparity in the 
 two items conclusively proved that the business 
 which formerly went into those courts was now 
 gone; and they existed in no tribunal. ; The 
 arguments deduced from precedent were of no 
 force under these circumstances. He could not 
 consent to have thirty-two Supreme court judges 
 appointed, and then to go on and set up 59 courts 
 of inferior jurisdiction, in order that the latter 
 might furnish business for the former in cor- 
 recting the blunders made. He did not agree to 
 the wisdom of establishing one great overshad- 
 owing court, for the transaction of the greater 
 matters of justice, and having some smaller 
 courts in which the business of a less important 
 character should be disposed of. Such a plan 
 might be illustrated. Gentlemen had urged pre- 
 cedents instead of argument precedent was al- 
 ways appealed to against any change that might 
 be proposed he begged to furnish gentlemen 
 
 with one precedent, immortalized by poetry, that 
 had not been used : 
 
 Southampton's wise folks found the river so lar" e, 
 It would carry a ship but would not a barcej 
 But soon the detect their wise noddles supplied, 
 They dug a snug ditch to run close by its side. 
 Like the man with two cats, the one great, t'other smalJ, 
 For which he made holes to pass through the wall; 
 He made a large hole lor great puss to pass through, 
 And he made a small hole for liis little cat too." 
 
 He drew a parallel between the costs of the cir- 
 cuit court system and that of the common pleas, 
 and found by actual computation that the people 
 were obliged to pay $39 for every civil cause 
 tried by the circuit judges, while in the common 
 pleas they had to pay $170 for every such suit ;. 
 and this was something like the comparative dif- 
 ference between the two systems. He believed 
 that much of the powers given to the common 
 pleas judges over4ocal matters, which were now 
 thrown into that court as a common reservoir,, 
 might be given to the board of supervisors, or the 
 surrogate, or the supreme court judge. He then 
 went on to speak of the expenses of these courts f 
 and said that the people, having examined the 
 subject, would not consent to its continuance. 
 But if it was the intention of gentlemen to esta- 
 blish these inferior courts, he should give up hi 
 proposition to make thirty-two judges of the su- 
 preme court. It would not do to spread out this 
 system to such an extent as it would be carried, 
 by making so large and extensive a supreme 
 court, and then establish these numerous local 
 tribunals. Nor would he leave it to the legisla- 
 ture, nor allow them the privilege of establishing 
 such inferior courts; because it would impose 
 upon those who were in favor of few and inex- 
 pensive courts the necessity of constantly stand- 
 ing guard against its increase. So far as to the 
 reorganization or improvement of the justices' 
 courts, he did not believe that it came under the 
 duties of this convention to perform any such 
 work. It would not do to double the force of the 
 superior courts and continue the unnecessary and 
 expensive county tribunals. The expenses paid 
 by taxation were but a small portion of the costs 
 of these courts to the community. The hundreds 
 of men that as jurors and witnesses and suitors,, 
 were compelled to wait their turn at these 
 dilatory courts should be taken into the account. 
 Provide for saving this to the people, and you 
 will save enough to provide liberal salaries for 
 your supreme court judges, and to endow two or 
 three colleges, if that were desirable or proper. 
 Mi. S'l LT^GN \.ished lo comci some of the 
 taiistics he presented to flu- Cunventi n the other 
 daj, in regard to the number of uppevils and cer- 
 tk'ians tioin jus- ice.-' courts. Referring ajsu to 
 the calculations made bv other gentlemen from 
 the returns received by (he Convention as to the 
 expei ses ol count} courts, he pointed out wherein 
 he considered them to be in error no allowance 
 was n:ade lor the tines received which in the ag- 
 gregate were often very large. He was not op- 
 posed lo this transfer of jui isdiction from the 
 common pleas to the Supitnie Court, but theie 
 was wuthoriij' over local milters which had to he 
 vested soinewheie. 
 
 ivii bTUW lose to call attention to the fact that 
 nasmuch as we nfl>*t ncces>ari'ly have a judiciary 
 , v, e should, while we take (art to make it 
 
725 
 
 what it should be as States riyht men, and men 
 proud of the state, make ovir court so lar prefera- 
 ble to the U. S. States Court, as not to drive suiiors 
 into these courts rather than our sfate coin-is. - 
 Such was the case now in Illinois. In reference 
 to what had been aaid by the gentleman from - 
 sego, he denied that he was opposed to reform and 
 alteration in the practice anc] proceedings in the 
 courts. On the contrary he considered that what- 
 ever might be done here, no judicial reform, 
 would have been procured without some provison 
 lor a reform in that particular. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIKLD explained. He had contend- 
 ed that as long as the separate jurisdictions were 
 kept up, and the courts were organized as they 
 now are, all hopes of reform were idle. The gen- 
 tleman had advocated the proposition which lead 
 to this conclusion. 
 
 Mr. S TOW said that was a mere matter of dif- 
 ference of opinion. But he insisted that so far as 
 he was concerned, his course in the Convention 
 was evidence that he was an advocate of legal re- 
 form to (he fulfbst extent. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS preferred the provision of the 
 committee to any plan proposed here. If the 
 Convention adopted his plan,to have twelve judges 
 of general territorial jurisdiction throughout the 
 State, he would prefer it, but if they did not, he 
 would then adopt that of the committee. It re- 
 quired the exercise of considerable self denial on 
 his part to avoid speaking with something like 
 contempt of the many plans for county courts he 
 had seen proposed here. He considered the plan 
 of Mr. CROOKER to'be merely a little court for 
 the correction of errors in justices courts. In 
 fact it was an appeal system from one man to an- 
 other man, and he having perhaps less practical 
 knov/ledge and experience than the one whose 
 decisions he was to review. Mr. S urged that 
 the whole popular branch of this or any other 
 system, should be left to the legislature. Be- 
 sides if this little court of errors was to be alter- 
 nate in its decisions, it would leave us with two 
 distinct systems of jurisprudence the one of com- 
 mon sense, and the other the learned or profession- 
 al system, and no communication between them. 
 Mr. S. in conclusion, said that he had a strong 
 impression that the plan of the judiciary commit- 
 tee which left the matter to the legislature, was 
 sufficient and would work well. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that having the other day 
 given his views at considerable length, on this 
 subject, and having discovered since, as he 
 thought an inclination on the part of the Conven- 
 tion, to adopt substantially the plan of the judi- 
 ciary committee, he had made up his mind to 
 take no further part in the debate until we come 
 to the business of perfecting it, when he intend- 
 ed to render what aid he could in making it as 
 little objectionable as possible, consistently with 
 the general plan marked out by the committee. 
 But us he and those who thought with him, had 
 been referred too, and particularly by the gentle- 
 man from Otsego, (Mr. CHATFIELD) as opposed 
 to reform, he was desirous of obtaining the floor 
 when that gentleman concluded his remarks.with 
 a view of stating broadly, that the plan for the re- 
 organization of the courts which he had the hon- 
 
 or of submitting, in his judgment contained more 
 thorough, radical, practicable and useful reform, 
 than any other that had been submitted. Why 
 charge him then with opposing reform. A man 
 brought up at the tail of the plow, who had al- 
 ways lived in the country with and among the 
 people, who had often honored him with their 
 confidence, remote from cities and their influen- 
 ces, who during a long practice had aided in set- 
 tling more controversies among his neighbors and 
 friends, than he had ever brought into court who 
 never sued out a writ or error that he should be 
 charged with opposing reform and desiring to 
 foster litigation, because he stood up against hav- 
 ing the rights of the citizen in the hands of any 
 one man without the right of appeal. [Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD explained, he had spoken of the effects of 
 the gentleman's plan, and of what he regarded as 
 inseparable from it, not of any sentiment the gen- 
 tleman, (Mr. M.) had avowed here.] 
 
 Mr. MARVIN was glad the gentleman had made 
 the explanation. J t was then after all a matter of 
 opinion which plan was most conducive to re- 
 form. In his (Mr. M.'s) opinion the judiciary 
 system reported by the committee and defended 
 by the gentleman from Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD) 
 was incapable of producing the reforms desired.- 
 It struck him at first that the plan of the commit- 
 tee was complicated difficult in practice, and 
 necessarily involving a continuance of the evils 
 which all desired to get rid of. 
 
 He laid it down as a first principle in a country 
 of laws as ours was, that the citizen should be 
 furnished with convenient and competent tribu- 
 nals for the redress of grievances ; that there 
 should be judicial force enough provided for the 
 speedy administration of justice so that no man 
 should be long kept from the enjoyment of all his 
 rights; that justice should be administered io every 
 citizen, who was compelled to resort to our courts, 
 at a moderate and reasonable expense; and would 
 not the accomplishment of these objects effectuate 
 a great reform ? He had expressed a decided 
 opinion that these reforms could be better effected 
 by preserving the separate jurisdiction of the courts 
 ot law and equity, expressly on the ground that it 
 would result JD a saving of time and expense, and 
 require less judicial lorce to do all the business. 
 He desired great reforms in the proceedings in the 
 court of chancer) ; his position was that a large 
 portion of the business now done in that court 
 should never have gone there ; and hdd the legis- 
 lature provided for its transfer to the law courts, 
 the court of chancery would not have been over- 
 whelmed as it was; that the forms usi-d in that 
 com i were too long and cumbrous, and should be 
 simplified and abreviated. li hud been dt to u.ined 
 to unite the two jurisdictions in the same court. 
 Me submitted to the decision, arid should not re- 
 debate the question. Time would show whether 
 this decision was productive of rtal, substantial 
 reform, or whether it was only a change. He 
 could not help thinking that if this iquny busi- 
 ness was brought into this single court, it would 
 be broke down ; not lor want of numerical force, 
 hut on account ol the otgainzalion of the couit, 
 and the manner in which the business was to be 
 done. And Mr. M went into the details of the 
 working ol this, insisting that it would not work 
 well, especially in the equity business of the court, 
 
7:26 
 
 and must involve the suitors in much greater ex- 
 pens- and delays than the plan he proposed. He 
 urged lujthei Ui-.it the svsf em would invite con- 
 stant appeals, which would overwhelm the court 
 of last resort. He urged that there would be 
 conflicting opinions cons'-amly in these courts 
 sitting in bane, as the supreme court, so called, 
 owing to the number or tins.; courts in bane, and 
 the constant changes ot the judges who held them. 
 He would suppose that he h;id tried three causea 
 at the Cnautauque circuit, all of them involving 
 the same principles, an! at the same circuit deci- 
 ded the same way. Suppose thai cases are made 
 in all of them, and tlu-y are carried to the court 
 in bane fora leviewot the decision at the circuit. 
 The court holds a term t?t Buffalo, and judges A. 
 B. and C. constitute the court. His three causes 
 were all on the calendar. One of them was 
 reached and argued and decided by A. and B., a 
 majority of the court, C. dissenting, the other two 
 causes noi reached. The next month, this su- 
 preme court, so called, holds a term at Rochester, 
 and judges B. C. and D. compose the court, A 
 having gone to hold a circuit or to compose a part 
 of a court in bane somewhere ele ; lie attended 
 the term at Rochester, argued his second cause, 
 and D., now agreeing with C., (hey overrule B., 
 and make a decision exactly the reverse of 'he de 
 cision made at Buffalo. The thud cause \et re- 
 mained undisposed of, and he attended this su- 
 preme court, so called, at its session in bane, at 
 Ithaca, and here he found judges D E. and F. 
 He stated his cause arid made the btst argument 
 he could, when judges E. and F. told him that 
 b ;th the decisions made at Buii'Jo and Rochester, 
 were wrong, and they made an entirely new one, 
 and laid down a new set oi principles And ihus 
 you may go through with these thirty-two judges, 
 any three of whom may hold bane lerms, and now 
 many different coui ;s could be made by the differ- 
 ent combinations of these thirty- two judges, he 
 should noi stop lo enquire. But wh t would be 
 the result of these conflicting decisions ? Why, 
 the cases would all be appealed nothing had 
 been settled. 
 
 Mr. BROWN remarked that such a case was 
 within the range of possibility, but were it to oc- 
 cur the gentleman at Rochester would very na- 
 turally suggest to the court the fact of the decisioi 
 at Buffalo, and tiie judges at Rochester woulc 
 probably follow their decision or being hones 
 and intelligent men might reserve the case fo 
 consultation. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN insisted that each judge as an 
 honest man would be bound to decide the law as 
 he believed it to be, without regard to the opinioi 
 of any other judge of the same court 
 
 Mr. CHATFiELD: How would it be with tit- 
 ty-nine courts ot common pleas, would not thei 
 decisions conflict ? 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said certainly they would an< 
 did conflict, but not often, as tiiey looked con 
 stantly to the supreme court for the law, and wer 
 bound by the decisions of that court. They al 
 looked to a common source. And when the su 
 preme court as now constituted, \*\\\ but on 
 court composed ot the same judges ail the time 
 decided a question coming from any one of th 
 courts of common pleas in the State, it became th 
 law of all the courts, anil hence -their decisioi 
 
 vere kept remarkably uniform; but the supreme 
 ourt, so called of the comnnt'ee, was no supieme 
 ourt in the proper sense of ihe ierm; but a mul- 
 plicity of courts whose decisions are not binding 
 pon each other, and hence you are to go lo the 
 ourt of last resent to procure unifoimity, and 
 o find what we now have in our present supreme 
 ourt; and this was just what he had been main- 
 aining all the time, and that such a system would 
 nd in throwing upon this court of last resort an 
 mount of business it could never do. 
 
 If it was objected to his plan of the county 
 ourts, that there were too many appeals, the 
 ame objection lies to the plan of the committee, 
 s they are precisely the same. You carry the 
 .ecision of the judge made at the circuit to one 
 if these numerous courts in bane, called the Su- 
 n-erne Court, and then to the court of appeals. s 
 Jnder the county court system, you carry the 
 ,ause to the supreme court, and then, if necessa- 
 y, to the court of appeals. But there was this 
 fifference in his favor. The coijrt of common 
 >leas, being a court of original jurisdiction, could 
 ,-rant relief on the spot with little cost, or trouble 
 o the parties, without going out of the county. 
 He had known, in Pennsylvania, the attorney to 
 >resent, at the same court the cause was tried, 
 iis " grounds for a new trial," which simply 
 itated ihe points, and were usually on less than 
 lalf a sheet of paper, and proceed without mak- 
 ng up any case, the facts being all fresh in the 
 nind of the judge, to argue the motion for a new 
 rial, arid if the judge was satisfied that error had 
 been committed, either by himself or the jury, he 
 granted relief on the spot, by granting a new trial 
 without cost or expense to the parties. But un- 
 ler the plan of the committeee, a long case of 
 ;he facts must be made up, and the cause must 
 je carried before the court in bane some months 
 after, copies of the case furnished to each judge, 
 and counsel must be employed, and all this in- 
 volved great expense to procure a correction of 
 the error committed by the judge in the hearing 
 of the trial. 
 
 Now, sir, who is the practical reformer, he 
 who would provide for each county a court with 
 a judge sitting in it as competent as any in the 
 state, having the power to correct errors without 
 cost to the suitors, or he who would deprive the 
 people of such a court and compel them TO resort 
 to one, where these great expenses and delays, so 
 rauch talked about, must be incurred ? Let it be 
 borne in mind that the courts of common pleas 
 he advocated were vastly superior to the present 
 county courts, and still more economical, as a 
 system. He would have a president judge for 
 four and five counties, a first* rate man, and pay 
 him a liberal salary, so as to command the best 
 talent, and keep him constantly employed. Let 
 him be a working man, and he would make a 
 better judge. He did not advocate the present 
 system of county courts, with five judges in each 
 county, many of them incompetent, and so little 
 employed that they often felt embarrassed, and 
 made slow progress with the business. There 
 were other considerations having great \v 
 with him in favor of preserving the county court 
 organization, as connected with the reforms which 
 he desired to see effected. He could see no good 
 reason why the supreme court clerks' orficea 
 
'27 
 
 itiivly dispensed wiih^und thus 
 
 limn ihe suitois. lie would 
 
 ;:11 the papers lilcd in the clertrs office of 
 
 the county whrrr the venue was laid, ami the 
 
 ted there. NO Confi 
 
 - 
 thai no jud en in any county 
 
 ...t of the docket of the jir.i. 
 Ued in the office of tli:: clerk of the county, 
 and the judgment there docketed, and also allow- 
 transcriptof the docket of a judgment in 
 untv court to be sent into any other county. 
 followed by an execution. These were va- 
 luable reforms. And under this system there 
 10 dilliculty in abolishing the supreme 
 court clerks' oitices. Would not this be a great 
 reform ? and would it not save large expenses ? 
 
 Mr. LOOMiS said it was no pare of ll.e plan ol 
 the eimimitee to have (lie Supreme Court clerk's 
 offices. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said, true, there is nothing said 
 in the lep Hi anmit them, but the gentleman from 
 Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) the other clay, in givin- 
 the de ails of the system, and ihe mode of doing 
 business told us, that there were to be eight Su 
 preme court clerk's offices in eight dinVuat purls 
 of tne stale, ;;!id everybody could see that (bat was 
 intendec; of couise tiie records ot the court were 
 to be kept there, and whenever a ivco.d was 
 needed at the circuit, the parly must be at the 
 expense of getting an exemplified copy of it, in- 
 volving considerable expense. \Vbt-reas, if the 
 record was in the county where the cause arose, 
 anil where it was tried, as it always would be un- 
 der Hie reform he proposed, it would be always 
 in any subsequent litigation, and 
 coidd be kou-htinto court from the clerk's ol- 
 id nst-d in evidence without one cent's ex- 
 pense. This, he thought, would he a saving ol 
 expense and a valuable reform. 
 
 lie proceeded TO show how his system would 
 vf.-.i:< m N-'W Yoik, dispensing with aH their pre- 
 sent courts of record, and substituting the court ot 
 
 common pleas with a president 
 
 and as ma- 
 
 ;iate judges as Should be necessd% to d 
 
 the ou-iti. ss, permittina; each judge to try al 
 issues of fact, and three of tnetn to constt'ite 
 court in bane tc hear law arguments. Thus th 
 couit could be enlarged in accordance wilh the 
 
 wants of the city, and yet. there would be but one 
 court, one clerk's oilice, where all records wouh 
 be kept, and where a man could go himself au> 
 tain as to all liens, and one practice simila 
 throughout the state. He submitted that tni? 
 and woul.l avoit 
 
 IITS that might be thus transferred, still there will 
 
 :>le business lhat must be done on the 
 
 equity side of the calendar. What he claimed 
 
 was that under his system, giving the people a 
 
 with equity powers, to hear, try and 
 
 .,1. home, he provided the 
 
 c/tt'ajicfit, most feasible and expeditidus mode that 
 had been surest ed, and in these respects, lit; be- 
 lieved, if he understood the workings of the sys 
 ems proposed, his contemplated and would ef- 
 ect more thorough and practical reform than any 
 :'them. Ivlr. M. proceeded to explain his sys- 
 em of the supreme court, composed of nine 
 udges only, instead of thirty-two, and divided in 
 Is bane, session into two parts, instead of into 
 ight, and with a fair prospect of bringing it all 
 ogether in a few years ; certainly so if his friend 
 rom Erie (Mr. Stow) was right in his opinion, 
 nd he, Mr. M. believed he was. 
 Mr. M. proceeded to show how his plan of county 
 ourts could now be engrafted on to the plan of 
 he committee, notwithstanding the union of law 
 nd equity in the same court, by reducing the 
 hirty-two judges to sixteen and the districts 
 rom eight to four. This would in his opinion be 
 valuable improvement. He had risen mainly 
 o satisfy the gentleman from Otsego (Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD) that the system he had submitted contain- 
 d and contemplated great reforms and which he 
 /vas willing to contrast with any other plan, and 
 also to satisfy him (Mr. C.) that he i^Mr. M.) was 
 lot opposed to reform; but it must be borne in 
 mind that all change is not reform, and every 
 man, when a change is proposed to him, must 
 udge honestly for himself whether it be for the 
 )etter or the worse, and if he judge it to be for 
 ;he better, he should still anxiously enquire whe- 
 :her something still better could not be devised, 
 and he must avail himself of all the knowledge 
 md experience he possesses and then make an 
 lonest decision. 
 
 He proceeded to examine briefly the plan for a 
 county court submitted by his friend from Catta- 
 raugus (Mr. CROOKER,) and remarked that he 
 :hought if they had any county court they better 
 have a good one in which the business of the peo- 
 ple could be well done. Either have a good one 
 with sufficient jurisdiction and an able judge, or 
 otherwise a new county court, to transact the mis- 
 cellaneous business of the county, and hear per- 
 haps, certioraris from justices courts, but do not 
 allow it to have a jury, and sheriff, and constables, 
 and all the parapharnalia of a court. He appn- 
 hcnded that it would not secure the confidence of 
 
 would make a very able court 
 
 the contusion arising from so many courts, am 
 
 would be a great reform. 
 
 It was well known that he was one of those 
 who believed that, as a matter of economy, tin 
 saving of time, and the diminution of the arnoun 
 of force to the employed, the equity and law prac 
 tier should not be united in the same court. The 
 convention had decided otherwise, and he cheer 
 full 1 . d; but it would be borne in mine 
 
 that in- contemp -I thorough reform ii 
 
 the whole procedure in the court of Chancery 
 He proposed to transfer a lar^o portion of thebu 
 siness nov\ dour in that court to the law courts 
 all in fact, that could be conveniently done there 
 and Mr. M. proceeded to specify numerous mat 
 
 the people, and yet that it would be expensive 
 and vexatious to the county by calling out jurors 
 to attend its terms, for the criminal busi 
 
 In relation to justices courts, he should not op- 
 pose any reforms, but he was very well satislicd 
 with them as they were and there was some dan- 
 ger of spoiling a good thing. They had better \te 
 left to the legislature, which had the power to in- 
 their jurisdiction and mould (hem in such 
 mann from time to time be thought 
 
 He doubted the propriety of extending 
 their jurisdiction. Mr. M. closed with some re- 
 marks having reference to allusions which hud 
 occasionally been made to the profession to which 
 he belonged. He deprecated any distinction in 
 society or division into classes in this country. 
 
728 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY, in reply to a portion o 
 Mr. M.'s remarks, explained the part he ha 
 taken, and his object, in relation to the legal pro 
 fession. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought the fact that so man 
 of the legal profession had been honored wit] 
 seats in the Convention, was a sufficient commen 
 tary on what had been said in disparagement o 
 them, and significant of the estimation in which 
 they were generally held. He then proceeded t 
 give his views in relation to the county court 
 and repelled the imputations which had been 
 thrown upon the institution, so far as his owr 
 county was concerned. He had never heard i 
 complaint against the common pleas of that coun. 
 ty ; and he could say for it that, notwithstanding 
 its business exceeded greatly the business of the 
 circuit court, the appeals from its decisions were 
 rare compared with those from the circuit. Bu 
 he was content, if the Convention were disposec 
 to abolish these courts, that they should do it 
 provided the 13th section was retained, which 
 gave the legislature power to establish local anc 
 inferior tribunals. He would venture to say that 
 his county would be the first to come in under 
 this 13th section, and petition the legislature to 
 restore their county court. 
 
 The committee here rose and reported progress 
 and the Convention adjourned to 9 o'clock to- 
 morrow morning. 
 
 SATURDAY, (69th day,) August 22. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. STEELE. 
 Mr. YAWGER presented a communication 
 from the Trustees of Cayuga Academy, on the 
 subject of the Literature fund, which* was refer- 
 red to the committee of the whole having in 
 charge the report of the committee of which Mr. 
 NICOKL is chairman. 
 
 EVKNING SESSIONS. 
 
 Mr PATTERSON offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That on and after Monday next, the Conven- 
 tion will hold evening sessions, except on Saturdays, 
 commencing at 7 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that he was induced to 
 offer that resolution, because he thought the time 
 was approaching when it would be necessary to 
 wind up the business of the Convention and go 
 home. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said he would vote for the re- 
 solution if it was amended so that it could or 
 should arrange business so that in the evening 
 there should be nothing but discussions except in 
 committee of the whole. He did not want to al- 
 low any votes to be taken at a time when it was 
 evident there would be but a thin attendance of 
 members. He would attend himself, though 
 quite indisposed. He moved so to amend the re- 
 solution. 
 
 Messrs. W. TAYLOR, CLYDE, PATTER- 
 SON, NICOLL, and STRONG, opposed the 
 amendment of Mr. CROOKER. 
 
 The amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD opposed the adoption of the 
 resolution. However it might be with other gen- 
 tlemen, the time occupied during the two daily 
 sessions, was as much as he could give to his du- 
 ty here with safety to himself. Since the com- 
 mencement of the' session, he had scarcely been 
 outside the bar when the house was in session. 
 
 His constitution would not endure more labor 
 than was already imposed upon the members of 
 this body, nor did he believe any further labor 
 could be done and result in benefit to our consti- 
 tuents. No man with brains in his head can pro- 
 fitably devote more than ten hours in each day to 
 intellectual labor. Physical exercise was neces- 
 sary to preserve health, and this was not permit- 
 ted when sitting constantly in this chamber. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER thought i! they hud less talk on 
 some subjects for instance on striking the word 
 "native" from the article on the Execuiive De- 
 partment, they might have done all their business 
 within a reasonable time, without resorting to ses- 
 sions which m';st be destructive of health. Even 
 uow, if gentlemen would confine themselves to 
 short explanations, if they would discuss the 
 point at issue rather than ramble all round crea- 
 tion they would yel along well enough. But if 
 gentU-men must make seven speeches a day, and 
 talk on everything but the question, for the pur- 
 pose of making shows of themselves, he knew not 
 when they would ^ef to voting. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON defended the resolution. 
 
 Messrs. CROOKER and STETSON entered into 
 a trifling personal explanation. 
 
 Mr. STETSON did not wish to compel mem- 
 bers to come here if they were sick. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN opposed the resolution. His 
 health would not permit him lo remain here at 
 night j and it would be very hurtful to the mem- 
 bers alter a hard day's labor, tu sit here at night, 
 with gas lights helping lo consume the vitality of 
 :he atmosphere. 
 
 Mr, NICHOLAS said it was out of the ques- 
 
 ;ion to meet here these hot nights. They had 
 
 much better meet in the mornings; and he moved 
 
 o amend the resolution, by striking out all after 
 
 he word resolved and inserting "That the morn- 
 
 ng sessions commence hereafter at 8 o'clock A. 
 
 VI." By adopting this as the hour of meeting, 
 
 and meeting an hour earlier after recess, two 
 
 lours would be saved every day. This would 
 
 ~>e preferable to having evening sessions. 
 
 Mr. CONELY moved to lay the whole subject 
 in the table. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD called for the ayes and noes on 
 his motion of Mr. COJVELY'S. 
 
 They were ordered. 
 
 The motion of Mr. CONELY was lost. Ayes 
 J9, noes 44. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was desirous to accommo- 
 ate the gentleman from Chautauque, by fixing 
 he time of meeting so that there could be some 
 vork done, and therefore he would move; if in 
 order, that the hour of meeting should be 7 A. 
 VI.. [A VOICE That is half an hour before we 
 reakfast."] 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN said he was unwilling by 
 is vote, to compel gentlemen to do what he was 
 nable to do himself. He should vote against 
 he resolution. 
 
 Some further conversation ensued between 
 Messrs. MANN, RICHMOND, PATTERSON, 
 JROWN, F. F. BACKUS, BASCOM, STET- 
 ,ON and CROOKER. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH rose to debate the question, 
 ut was cut short (amid much laughter,) by the 
 rrival of 10 o'clock, the hour set apart for con- 
 idering the special order of the day. 
 
729 
 
 The Convention then went into committee c 
 the whole on the reports of 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG resumed the Chair, and 
 Mi. BROWN rose to remove if in his powe 
 some of the objections made to the report unde 
 consideration. This duty properly and more ap 
 propnately belonged to the chairman of the judi 
 ci;iry committee, Whose illness none regrette 
 more than himself, and whose absence at this tim 
 all would regard as a public loss. He was happ 
 to find himself concurring with the gentlema 
 from Gtsego (Mr. CHATFIELD) in moat of his pro 
 positions for j"dicial reform, and most especiall 
 in regard to the system of special pleading. Plead 
 ings were the statements of parties, prosecutingo 
 defending suits in courts of justice, made for thi 
 information of the court, and of the parties them 
 selves, and should contain a clear, concise ana 
 correct account of the facts which formed the 
 ground of complaint upon the one side, and the de 
 fence upon the other. These written statement 
 should be clear and concise, because brevity ana 
 perspicacity enable the mind to comprehend, aru 
 the memory to retain, what it is designed to com 
 wiunicate. They should also be true, because the 
 establishment of truth, is the legitimate purpose 
 of all enlightened investigation. Pleadings in 
 courts of record are in the main destitute of al 
 these requisites The declaration designed to ap- 
 prize the defendant of the nature of the plaintiff's 
 claun, is in too many instances, false from begin- 
 ning to end, and intended to be so, while the plea 
 the office of which should be to communicate to 
 the plaintiff the nature of the defence to be set up 
 at the trial is also without a shadow of truth to 
 support the fcl legations it too often contains. That 
 such A system of pleading should exist in coun- 
 tries, where the mode of administering justice is 
 concealed from the great mass of the people, and 
 the practice of the law is confined to a privileged 
 class, will not excite surprise; but that it should 
 be suffered to exist amongst a free people, where 
 all are equal* who have undertaken to create go- 
 vernment, and to administer justice for themselves, 
 is certainly to be deplored by all those who look 
 to the pure and wholesome execution of the law, 
 as a means of social or individual happiness. The 
 gentleman from Otsego had illustrated the folly 
 and injustice of our antiquated and barbarous sys- 
 tem of special pleading, by tracing the progress of 
 i cause upoi, a special demurrer, from its com- 
 mencement to its determination, when the par- 
 ies, atter a great expenditure of time and money, 
 iitui themselves just where they started, without 
 having touched the merits of the question. He 
 (Mr. B ) might, with a similar object, allude to 
 e proceedings of a kindred character in the 
 court ol chancery. Large sums of money and ma- 
 ny months of valuable time, are often wasted in 
 this court to settle whether a bill or an answer 
 contains a tew words more or less than strict prac- 
 t.ce requires. In the mean time the important 
 question which the suit was instituted to settle 
 and determine, is left in abeyance and remains in 
 a measure forgotten. He sometimes heard his 
 professional friends denominating the practice of 
 special pleading a wise and beautiful system. One 
 ich made good lawyers, required great power of 
 language, great skill, and which brought the ques. 
 
 tion in controversy to a single point for the judg- 
 ment of the court. It was a beautiful system in- 
 deed. Beautiful lor those who had the time and 
 the skill to comprehend it. Pleasant enough for 
 his learned friend from New York, (Mr O'COIVOR) 
 who understood it to perfection, and in this de- 
 partment of legal knowledge, stood at the head of 
 his profession. But not quite so agreeable for the 
 clients of those unfortunate wights whosomefimes 
 come in contact with him. War was sometimes 
 beautiful to look upon, by those who were bejond 
 the reach of its dangers. The combined move- 
 ments of great armies the passage of lolty nioun. 
 tains and rapid rivers the Rhine the Po the 
 Danube the Alps and the Pyrenees, were grand 
 and beautiful when beheld by those who saw from 
 a distance. But they were terribly destructive of 
 human life, human happiness, and all the valuable 
 and beautiful creations of human art. So it was 
 to some extent with operations of special plead, 
 ing, when applied to the prosecution and defence 
 of legal controversies. They m.'ght be a source c.f 
 no inconsiderable pleasure and satisfaction to the 
 mere spectator. 1 hey might yield no inconside. 
 rable emolument to the mere performer. But to 
 the suitors themselves to those whose rights, 
 whose property, whose all mi^ht be the sport and* 
 plaything of this abstruse science, ihey were too 
 often attended with the most unhappy consequen- 
 ces. Like the operations of war, they too often 
 lestroyed the objects they were designed to pro- 
 tect. He had risen, however, 10 answer some of 
 ;he objections made by the gentleman from Chau- 
 :auque (Mr. MARVIN) to the report under consi- 
 deration, and to that task he would now address 
 himself. He thanked him for the candor and kbe- 
 rality with which he had dealt with the report of 
 ,he committee, and so far from regarding any ef. 
 brts he might make to amend the article before 
 he Convention, h& was sure^he spoke the senti- 
 nents of his colleamies, when he assured him they 
 would feel grateful for any aid he might contii- 
 jute to perfect the plan. The mind of that gen- 
 leman was embarrassed with doubis, as to the 
 manner in which the equity causes would be tried, 
 hould the report be adopted ; and for his infor- 
 nation he, Mr. B., would state that the chancery 
 auses would go upon the ordinary circuit calen- 
 er for the trial of issues at law, or the judges 
 would at their pleasure appoint circuits in thedif- 
 erent counties, especially devoted to equity busi- 
 
 es3. In either event, there would be no jury 
 
 nless an issue had been made up and the cause 
 /ould be called in its regular order upon the ca- 
 ender. The complainant would proceed to exa- 
 une his witnesses, and the court would dispose 
 fall the questions in the same manneras witnes- 
 es are examined and questions disposed of, in a 
 rial at common law. Gentlemen would see that 
 ast masses of irrelavant matter, which now find 
 leir way into the depositions taken before an ex- 
 miner, would be rejected. When the evidence 
 n the part of the complainant was closed, tliede- 
 endant would be at liberty to move to dismiss the 
 ill tor want of equity, as he now moves for a non- 
 uit in a trial at law, when the plaintifl'sevidence 
 as failed. Should the judge order the bill to be 
 ismissed, an order or decree to that effect would 
 e entered. On the other hand, should the com- 
 lainant establish his case, the defendant would 
 
 66 
 
730 
 
 proceed with the examination of his proofs; and 
 should he fail to make out his defence, the judge 
 in a clear case, would decide the question upon 
 the spot, and a decree would he forth with entered, 
 granting the relief prayed for in the bill. The 
 party dissatisfied with the judgment of the court; 
 would have leave to move to set the decree aside. 
 A case would be made up by the party dissatisfied, 
 amendments would be proposed by his adversary, 
 and the case settled by the judge who heard the 
 cause, as cases are now made up before the circuit 
 judge, in actions at law. It would be noticed tor 
 hearing, argued and determined by the three or 
 four judges sitting at the term in bane held for the 
 judicial district, in the same manner and upon the 
 same papers, as causes are now heard and deter 
 mined at, one of. the general terms of the supreme 
 court. Should the questions involved in the case 
 at the circuit be so numerous, or ot such magni 
 tude, that the judge would be unwilling to settle 
 it without an elaborate argument, he might then 
 reserve all the questions to be settled bv the court 
 at one ot the bane terms, upon a case containing 
 all the evidence as before mentioned. His profes- 
 sional friends would observe that the proceeding 
 was in all respects similar, and as simple as the 
 trial and argument of an action of assumpsit in the 
 supreme court, with the single exception that 
 there was no jury. When he added that the plead- 
 ings and papers were to be filed, and the decrees 
 and orders enteied with the clerk, and the cause 
 heard in the immediate neighborhood of the suit- 
 ors and their solicitors, he had completed his de- 
 scription of the mode in which equity causes were 
 to tie heard and determined under the proposed 
 plan. He had great confidence it would commend 
 itself to the favor of the Convention and the 
 country. 
 
 Another objection of the gentleman from Chau- 
 tauque, was 10 ihe esr<iblishment of eight supreme 
 couit clerk's offices. The report of the committee 
 was silent on I he subject of these offices, designing 
 to leave it to the wisdom ot the legislature. A por- 
 tion of the committee, and amongst others the 
 member Irotn Herkimer, (Mr. Loomis,) proposed to 
 confide this class of duties to the county clerks, 
 and if it was practicable it should have his hearty 
 concurrence. Another portion of the committee 
 supposed that a clerk's office in each judicial dis- 
 trict would be indispensable, and such was his 
 opinion. The principal duty of the county clerks 
 was to recrrd conveyances, fo preserve the public 
 recoids, to act as clerks ol ihe courts of oyer and 
 terminer and the county courts, and to perform ma- 
 ny other offices connected with the internal admi- 
 nistration and police of the county. They had am- 
 ple employment at present. The duties of the 
 clerks of the supremo court, under Ihe new judi- 
 cial plan, would be of a different character, requi- 
 ring some professional knowledge, and an accurate 
 and exact method of keeping books and accounts. 
 Upon them would be devolved all the duties now 
 performed by the clerks of the supreme court, and 
 the registers and clerks in chancery. If gentle 
 men would look at ihe difficult and complicated 
 character of these various employments, the great 
 variety of hooka to be kept, the entries to be made 
 and Ihe moneys to be paid and received by the 
 clerks, upon the equity side of the court, he thought 
 they would umie with him in the opinion, that 
 
 they could not be advantageously coupled with the 
 already multifarious and onerous duties performed 
 by the county clerks. At present (hero were four 
 supreme clerk's offices, two registers and six chan- 
 cery cleik's offices, making twelve in all. with as 
 many officers. The "plan suggested by the com- 
 mittee requires but eight in all, thereby reducing 
 the offices and the incumbents one. third, and thus 
 making no inconsiderable saving to the treasury. 
 If, however, the Convention thought, otherwise, 
 the committee would cheerfully acquiesce in the 
 proposition to throw the performance of these du- 
 ties upon the clerks ot the counties. 
 
 It had also been suggested that the several 
 benches or bane courts under the proposed system, 
 would make conflicting decisions and pronounce 
 conflicting judgments upon the same identical state 
 of facts, and thus introduce disorder and uncertain- 
 ty into the judicial administration. When asked 
 how the judiciary committee proposed to obvi- 
 ate this objection, his answer was, that it could 
 not be obviated or removed. It was no use to 
 deny or attempt to conceal what was apparent to 
 every observer, that the separation of the court 
 was much to be deplored, and must sometimes 
 lead to conflict of opinion. The severance could 
 only he justified by the severest necessity. This 
 had been conceded by the committee from the 
 commencement. But they had insisted in reply, 
 and they still insisted, that this plain and obvious 
 defect was more than compensated by the vast 
 and manifest advantages which would follow the 
 distribution of the judicial power over the vari- 
 ous portions of the state. The case put by the 
 member from Chautauque, he would say, was a 
 most improbable and extreme case, and one, he 
 would venture to say, which never would occur. 
 The same parties have two suits pending at the 
 same time one in the 8th and one in the 7th dis- 
 trict upon two several bills of exchange of the 
 same form and the same date, and involving legal 
 questions similar in all respects, and resting upon 
 the same state of facts. One of these causes is 
 argued and determined at the city of Buffalo in 
 the month of June, and the other cittnes on to be 
 argued at the city of Rochester in the month of 
 July. What, says the gentleman, shall secure 
 these parties against a decision at Rochester which 
 may not be in direct hostility with the opinion of 
 the court delivered at Buffalo ? The answer is, 
 that there can be no assurance that the opinion of 
 these two different benches of the same tribunal 
 may not be in conflict. But he w r ould ask, what 
 would naturally and inevitably occur upon the 
 argument of the second cause at Rochester ? 
 W T hy, the counsel would naturally indeed it 
 would be their duty to inform the court that a 
 question similar in all respects had been recently 
 decided at Buffalo, and the opinion of the judges 
 there weuld be read to the court setting at Roches- 
 ter. 
 
 The judges sitting at Rochester would either 
 concur with their brethren at Buffalo, or they 
 would declare that the questions were so novel, so 
 difficult and unsettled in this country and in Eng- 
 land, that it was a proper subject for tjie judgment 
 of the court of appeals. And so it would be. 
 One of the causes would be removed into the 
 court of appeals, and execution upon the other 
 would in the mean time be suspended. The cour 
 
731 
 
 -t resort would proceed in due season, to set- 
 tle the law finally and forever upon the facts sub 
 tnitted, find that would be a rational, enlightened 
 and just disposition of the controversy. The 
 Various circuit and district courts of the United 
 States, were usually in session at one and the same 
 time, in the various commercial cities of the 
 Union. Questions of admiralty and commercial, 
 law, questions under the revenue, the land and 
 bankrupt laws, of precisely similar character were 
 constantly brought before them for settlement and 
 adjudication. No difficulty had ever grown out 
 of a conflict of decision amongst these numerous 
 tribunals. Whenever a conflict of opinion occur- 
 red, whenever a different rule of interpretation 
 xvas laid down an event which rarely happened, 
 it was disposed of by writ of error to the supreme 
 court at Washington, precisely in the manner he 
 had indicated in regard to the supposed hostile 
 in duration in each of these nine counties in every 
 year, would be abundantly sufficient and more 
 than sufficient to transact all the business, both 
 legal and equitable, that would be found in this 
 district. And if sufficient for this district, it would 
 be equally so for every other in the state, except 
 in the great cities, where some additional force 
 would be required. Upon this calculation there 
 would be eight weeks of circuit duty to be done 
 for each of the nine counties, making in all sev- 
 enty-two weeks, which would be eighteen weeks 
 for each of the four judges. Four terms of the 
 court in bane, are also to be held in each judicial 
 district every year ; and if these bane terms oc- 
 cupy three weeks each, which is nearly as long 
 as the terms of the supreme court now are, it 
 would add twelve weeks more to the court duty 
 of the judges, supposing them all to sit at the 
 terms. Thus making the entire duty of the judges 
 performed at the bane terms and circuit courts to 
 consume thirty weeks every year. It was true 
 that under the plan submitted, four out of the 
 thirty-two judges are to be withdrawn to serve in 
 the court of appeals. Yet this is more than com- 
 pensated by the fact, that only three of the judges 
 are required to set at the bane terms. And the 
 large amount of circuit duty allotted in the cal- 
 culation to small counties which could not under 
 any circumstances be demanded. He trusted that 
 with this explanation the honorable member from 
 Clinton would see that the force provided was 
 amply sufficient. 
 
 His honorable colleague upon the committee, 
 (Mr. O'CoNoK.,) entertained the opinion, if he 
 understood him correctly, that the court of ap- 
 peals would soon sink to the position now occu- 
 pied by the 'supreme court, and ia the end become 
 overwhelmed with the pressure of its business. 
 He could not doubt but upon more mature reflec- 
 tion, that gentleman would reverse this opinion. 
 "We have been told over and over again, that a few 
 more judges added to the bench of the supreme 
 court, would soon relieve it from it^present em 
 barrassments. And no one, he thought, would 
 doubt, that if its force was increased to eight, and 
 relieved from attendance upon the court of errors 
 it' three judgi-s as now were empowered to hold 
 the court, and the ability was thus given to make 
 its sittings continual, that the business which 
 now overloads its calenders and overpowers its 
 judges, would soon disappear, and that which 
 
 would hereafter occur, be despatched with ease 
 and convenience. Now if this was so, what will 
 prevent the eight judges, which the judiciary 
 committee have provided for the court of appeals, 
 from disposing of an equal amount of business 
 should it ever come before them. They are to 
 hold four terms in each year, and the co\irt is so 
 constructed that it may be at all times in session. 
 What reason is there to think that the business 
 of the court of appeals will be greater, or require 
 more time or greater labor, than the business of 
 the present court of errors ? What reason is 
 there to apprehend that the public, that suitors 
 or their counsel, will be less satisfied with the 
 judgments of the court which this Convention 
 propose to create, than they now are with the 
 judgments of the supreme court or the court of 
 chancery ? None whatever. The present judges 
 and the chancellor are most upright, able, faith- 
 ful and enlightened men, distinguished for their 
 learning and legal knowledge, their industry, 
 their powers of application and research. But 
 may we not hope that the new judicial officers may 
 be equally so ? May we not hope that this same 
 chancellor and these same judges may compose a 
 part, a most useful and influential part, of the judi- 
 cial force to be created under the new r constitu- 
 tion ? The new judges will, it is to be hoped, 
 be as liberally compensated as the old. Their 
 labors will be less, the means and the sphere of 
 their usefulness is to be greatly enlarged ; and 
 why shall not their opinions and their judgments 
 be equally learned and equally satisfactory ? No 
 one would doubt it for a moment. If, therefore, 
 this reasoning was no't wholly delusive, the ap- 
 peals to the court of last resort, under the new 
 system, would be no more numerous than they 
 were under the old. He would remind gentle- 
 men, that the court of errors was not in its organ- 
 ization very well calculated for the speedy and 
 and enlightened despatch of the public business. 
 Fe\v would be disposed to call in question the 
 learning and ability displayed in its judicial de- 
 cisions, but none would deny that its sessions 
 were marked by a great want of attention on the 
 part of its members. Some employed themselves 
 in walking about the room, some in conversation, 
 some in writing letters, some in one way and some 
 in another, and all this, too, while counsel, emi- 
 nent for their qualifications and acquirements, 
 were arguing questions, upon the examination of 
 which_they had spent the labor of many weary 
 hours questions involving, sometimes, the prop- 
 erty, the personal liberty and the happiness of 
 their fellow men. This inattention upon the part 
 of many members of the court of errors to what 
 some might deem their most solemn duties, was 
 the inevitable consequence of the great number 
 of its judges, for it is a well known fact, that 
 when the weight of responsibility is shared 
 among a multitude of men, the obligation rests 
 lightly upon the person of the individual. In 
 the character of Sir William Grant, we have the 
 I model of a great magistrate, that judges of the 
 I present day would do well to imitate. Those 
 who desire to behold the most illustrious example 
 of judicial dignity, united to great learning and 
 uncommon ability, on record,\vill do well to look 
 at the sketch of his manners upon the bench, as 
 we have it from the pen of his friend and com- 
 
732 
 
 panion, Lord Brougham. The hearing of a cause 
 was marked b^ long and patient and protracted 
 attention ; by silence unbroken and profound, 
 Uninterrupted by interference or interrogation ; 
 by deportment as noble and gentle as the language 
 of his judicial opinions was elegant and simple, 
 and their argument exalted and incontestable. 
 In the construction of the court of appeals, re- 
 gard was had to this great defect in the constitu- 
 tion of the court for the correction of errors. It 
 was to be made sufficiently numerous to command 
 the public confidence, and to transact the public 
 business, but not so large as to become oppressive 
 on account of its expenses, or to induce indolence 
 or inattention on the part of its members. That 
 it would accomplish the great purposes for which 
 it was to be instituted, he entertained no manner 
 of doubt. 
 
 Mr. B. next examined the several propositions 
 for a county court, submitted by the member 
 from Cattaraugus (Mr. CROOKER,) and the mem- 
 ber from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS). If either of 
 these plans contemplated the attendance of a 
 grand or petit jury, he could not give them his 
 support. The judiciary committee had been 
 influenced by a sincere desire to diminish the 
 number of courts wherever it was possible, and 
 to lessen the charges annually made upon the 
 county treasury for the expenses of judicial ad- 
 ministration ; and he could not therefore concur 
 in the establishment of a county court, demand- 
 in " the attendance of jurors, officers and wit- 
 nesses, and charging the counties with the ex- 
 penses of their attendance. If the judgment of 
 the Convention should be- in favor of a county 
 court, he would greatly prefer a judge of the 
 common pleas to be elected in each judicial dis- 
 trict to hold these courts, upon a plan originally 
 adopted by the committee. Such a court could 
 be framed upon the report now under considera- 
 tion, without any derangement whatever, by 
 simply reducing the number of supreme court 
 judge* to three in each district. This judge 
 would hold all the courts of common pleas in 
 the district, and with the aid of two justices 
 of the peace, might also hold the courts of gen- 
 eral sessions. He also declared his opposition 
 to any extension of the jurisdiction of justices 
 of the peace. Professional men, who resisted 
 the proposition to enlarge the jurisdiction of 
 these courts, were no longer obnoxious to the 
 charge of interest, for the collection business 
 had ceased to be an object worth their attention. 
 He believed the public interest would be greatly 
 promoted by limiting the jurisdiction to fifty 
 dollars abolishing the remedy by appeal, and 
 restoring the old method by certiorari to the su- 
 preme court. He was not unwilling, however, 
 to leave the whole subject to the judgment of 
 the legislature. He also alluded to the compen- 
 sation paid under the present system to public 
 officers to clerks, to surrogates, to masters and 
 examiners, to registers and clerks, who appear- 
 ed as guardians in foreclosure and other suits for 
 infants.' He hoped that the legislature, which 
 was to assemble here in January next, would co- 
 operate with this Convention in the noble work 
 of judicial reform. That they would contribute 
 their aid to purify and exalt the administration 
 of justice, and thus make it worthy of a great 
 
 and enlightened people. He trusted the judi- 
 cial officers to be appointed or elected under the 
 new constitution would be required to assemble 
 yearly at the seat of government, and apply them- 
 selves diligently and faithfully to simplify their 
 rules of practice and modes of proceeding, and 
 to impart some degree of truth and common 
 sense to their forms of pleading. In conclusion, 
 he commended the report of the majority of the 
 judiciary committee to the approbation of the 
 Convention not as a plan wholly free from ob- 
 jection nor as one that was wholly without ifc* 
 faults and imperfections. But he commended it 
 to their approbation as a system embodying many 
 great and valuable reforms, and which could not 
 fail to be followed by the very best results, should 
 it be adopted. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR said it was his fortune or 
 misfortune the other day to make a few remarks 
 without premeditation on the subject before them. 
 He did not intend to have said a word more but 
 he felt it due to himself to say something in re- 
 ply to the gentleman from Otsego, (Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD,) who yesterday classed him, with others, 
 among the opponents of legal and judicial reform. 
 He had heard the explanation the gentleman had 
 given to others who were included in the charge, 
 and though it sounded much broader to his ears, 
 as it seemed, it did also to those of others, when 
 made, than it does as explained, he nevertheless- 
 accepted the explanation. But he rose now to 
 say, and to show, that if he was to be classed 
 among the opponents of reform, so was the gen- 
 tleman himself, for on almost every point, the 
 gentleman's views and his own were identically 
 the same. He understood that gentleman to be 
 opposed to an amalgamation of equity and law 
 powers though in favor of having them united 
 in one court, he (Mr. C.) would have them kept 
 distinct. The gentleman's modification of this- 
 third section, as Mr. T. understood it, would per- 
 petuate the distinction in this one court at all 
 events it was susceptible of that construction 
 whilst Mr. T.'s modification of the section would 
 have enabled the legislature to amalgamate the 
 two jurisdictions. That Mr. T. desired to see 
 done, as far as it could be done safely, and if 
 there was any difference between the gentleman 
 and himself, Mr. T. was the reformer, and the 
 gentleman from Otsego was not. Again, the 
 gentleman had avowed himself in favor of the 
 report, of the majority of the committee. So had 
 he. The gentleman desired to see the court of 
 appeals all holding by the same tenure. That 
 was precisely Mr. T.'s position. The gentleman 
 went for the election of the judges. So did Mr. 
 T., and the only difference between them was, 
 that the gentleman preferred to elect them by 
 general ticket, and he by districts. Mr. T. was 
 willing to leave it to the convention to say which 
 was most democratic. The gentleman had no 
 objection to the judges ambulatory. He had none. 
 The gentleman went for some kind of county 
 court, but against them as at present organized. 
 Precisely Mr. T.'s position the other day. Mr. 
 T. expressed himself favorable to the proposition 
 to make surrogates salaried officers. So did the 
 gentleman. And the gentleman indulged in the 
 same train of remarks in relation to justices courts 
 that Mr. T. did. In fact throughout, the gentle- 
 
733 
 
 man's positions and his own were precisely the 
 same. Mr. T. confessed to his astonishment to 
 find himself concurring in opinion so entirely 
 with the gentleman from Otsego and much more 
 astonished to find himself classed by that gentle- 
 man with those who were opposed to reform. 
 Indeed, so entirely coincident were their views, 
 that had Mr. T. made his remarks after the gen- 
 tleman had made his, he should not have presen- 
 ted them without giving the gentleman credit for 
 them. Mr. T. was in favor of legal reform, and 
 had he ever been a member of the legislature, as 
 the gentleman had, he should have made at least 
 an effort to carry out his views. The legislature 
 had done much in this way, but they might and 
 should have done more. They had done much 
 by the non-imprisonment act and there gentle- 
 men would rind the long looked for substitute for 
 a creditor's bill in chancery. He went, in a word, 
 for the largest reform, and as a lawyer, he was as 
 much interested in having them made, as any lay- 
 man could be. As to the proposition more imme- 
 diately before the house in regard to county courts, 
 there were several projects here that would work 
 well. There was good in almost all of them. 
 The proposition of the gentleman from Cattarau- 
 gus (Mr. CROOKER) would answer very well with 
 some modifications. The proposition of the gen- 
 tleman from Orange struck him, however, more 
 favorably. 
 
 Mr. < HATFIELD remarked that in all he had 
 said, and which seemed to. call gentlemen out in 
 explanation, he had intended to speak rather ol 
 ttie effect of the proposition* than of tho*e who 
 advocated th> in. Mr. C. at some length pointed 
 out the various reforms in legal practice, which 
 were requited; r.id winch he supported Among 
 oilier illustrations as showing to whal extent this 
 reform mi^hi be earned, he read four forms ol 
 declarations he had hasiily drawn up on a hall sheet 
 of paper, in actions on a note, on an account, foi 
 as.sauit and battery, and lor slander as follows: 
 
 [Supreme Court.] 
 
 A. B. complains that G D. owes him the amount of the 
 following note, made by the defendant: 
 
 $100. For value received, I promise to pay A. B. or 
 bearer one hundred dollars, with interest, ten days from 
 date, anl claims payment of the same. G. D 
 
 Aug. -2-2d, 1M6. C. F., Att'y. 
 
 [Supreme Court.) 
 
 A. B. complains that G. D. is indebted to him in account 
 of which the following are the items, to wit: 
 
 To 1 bushel wheat, 1 00 
 
 1 sheep, 1 00 
 
 1000 leet pine boards, 10 00 
 
 12 00 
 And claims payment thereof. C. F., Att'y. 
 
 [Supreme Court ] 
 
 A. B. complains that G. D. on the 1st day of August, 
 1846, at Albany, struck him the said A. B. to his damage. 
 
 C. F., Att'y. 
 [Supreme Court.] 
 
 A. B complains tliat G. D. on the 10th day of August, 
 1846, at Albany, spoke concerning the said A. 15 , the lol- 
 lowing false and slanderous words, to wit: You are a 
 thief He is a thirf. Ho stole a sheep. He stole, and 
 ought to go to state prison. To the damage of the said A . B. 
 
 C. F , Att'y. 
 
 Mr. C. then, to contrast those forms which he 
 contended would answer ail the pnrpnsrs, wilh 
 the present inf.uuou-; and dirly relic of barbar- 
 ism now in use, read a declaiahon under the pre- 
 sent 9\sU'ln, fie had ha.sliiy drawn up. 
 
 SUPREME COURT. [Oi the Term of January, in the 
 year one thousand eight hundred and loi ty-flve.J 
 Otsego Gounty, ss. John Doe, plaintift'in this suit, by 
 Richard Roe his Attorney, complains ol James istiles, de- 
 butant in this suit, by the him- and service of a declara- 
 tion and not by a writ ol a plea of tiespass on the case 
 For that whereas the said plaintiff now is a good, true, 
 and honest and faithful citizen ot this state, and as 
 as such hath always behaved and conducted himself, 
 and had deservedly obtained the good opinion and 
 esteem of all his neighbors, and other good and 
 worthy citizens of this state, to whom he was in any 
 wise known, to wit, at the city of Albany, and until the 
 committing of the several grievances by the said defendant 
 as hereinafter mentioned, the said plaintiff had not been 
 guilty, or been suspected to be guilty of the crime of lar- 
 ceny, or any other such crime; yet the said defendant well 
 knowing the premises, but greatly envying the happy 
 state and condition of the said plaintiff, and contriving and 
 falsely intending to injure the said plaintiffin his said good 
 name, lame and credit, and to bring him into public scan- 
 dal, infamy and disgrace, with and amongst all his neigh- 
 bors and o'ther good and worthy citizens of this state, and 
 to vex, harass, impoverish, and annoy him the said plain- 
 tin heretofore, to wit, on the 22d day of August, 1846, in a 
 certain discourse which the said defendant then and there 
 had in the presence and hearing of divers good and worthy 
 citizens at Albany, in the county of Albany, lalsely and 
 malicously spoke and published, to, of, an.l concerning the 
 said plaintiff these false, malicious and defamatory words, 
 following, that is to say: You, the said plaintiff are a 
 thiel; you (the said plaintiff, again meaning) st?le; you 
 (the said plaintiff again meaning) stole a sheep; you (the 
 said plaintiff again meaning) robbed a hen-roost; you (the 
 said plaintiff again meaning) stole, and you (the said plain- 
 tiff ag .in meaning,) ought 10 go to states prison; he (the 
 said plaintiff again meaning) is a thief; he (the said plain- 
 tiff again meaning) stole; he (the said plaintiff again mean- 
 ing) stole a sheep; he (the said plaintiff a^ain meaning) 
 robbed a hen-roost; he (the said plaintiff again meaning) 
 stole; and he (the said plaintiff again meaning) ought to go 
 to the states prison, and thereby then and there meaning, 
 that the said plaintiff had been and was guilty of larceny. 
 By reason whereof, the said plaintiff hath been greatly 
 injured in his said good name, fame and credit, and hath 
 been brought into public scandal, infamy ana disgrace, 
 with and amongst all his neighbors and other good and 
 worthy citizens of this state, insomuch that divers of those 
 neighbors and citzens have wholly refused to have any 
 intercourse, transaction or acquaintance with the said 
 plaintiff, as they were before the committing of the said se- 
 ve al grievances by the said defendant herein before men- 
 tioned, used and accustomed to have, and otherwise would 
 have had, sustained great damage to wit: Ten thousand 
 dollars, and therefore he brings suit. E. F., Atty. 
 
 * Was he, (Mr. C. asked) to be denounced because 
 he supported such reforms as these. The pro- 
 priety and necessity was obvious to all and this was 
 what he was desiring and striving to secure. Mr. 
 C. then went into an examination of the judiciary 
 plan introduced by Mr. MARVIN. He urged that 
 it was, in his opinion, open to the very same ob- 
 jections, and in a much stronger degree, which 
 the gentleman had himself applied to the report of 
 the majority of the committee. He (Mr. M.) 
 objected to the majority plan as introducing too 
 great a number of judges. That objection appli- 
 ed with far greater force to the gentleman's own 
 plan, which contemplated an army of one hun- 
 dred and fifty judges. In regard to what had been 
 said about the clerk's officers, Mr. C. insisted 
 that the plan of the judiciary committee did not 
 necessarily contemplate the employment of eight 
 clerks ; but that all the duties supposed to de- 
 volve on them, could be discharged by county 
 clerks under legislative regulation. As to the 
 county court, Mr. C. expressed the opinion that 
 it was necessary to give it a jury trial, under the 
 plan of the committee ; but that an officer acting 
 as Surrogate, having appeals from justices courts. 
 
734 
 
 and performing certain chamber duties, would be 
 all that was required. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS said that reference had often 
 been made to the plan of a county court, as agreed 
 upon once by the judiciary committee, but it had 
 not been before the committee in a distinct shape. 
 It was one which could be adopted without im- 
 pairing the harmony of the plan of the commit- 
 tee, and although he was opposed to a common 
 pleas court himself, still he would present it to 
 the Convention, as the best one to be adopted, if 
 it was determined to adopt one at all. Mr. S. 
 sent up the following : 
 
 ^ 1. There shall be established in each of the counties of 
 this state a court of common pleas, with the same powers 
 and jurisdiction which now belong to the court of common 
 pleas in the several counties of this state. 
 
 2 There shall be elected in each of the judicial districts 
 of this state, by the electors thereof, at such time and in 
 such manner as the legislature may direct, a judge who 
 shall be known as the president judge of the court of com- 
 mon pleas, for the district in which he shall be elected, 
 who may hold courts of common pleas in any ot the coun- 
 ties of the state, and who shall hold his office lor eight 
 years. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was taken, he confessed, some- 
 what by surprise by the quasi report of the judi- 
 ciary committee, and he took this occasion to 
 express his entire dissent from any such proposi- 
 tion. He must say also that he was antonished 
 at what seemed to be the backing out of the gen- 
 tleman from Orange from sustaining the report of 
 the committee, in the idea advanced by him, that 
 the courts the committee had proposed might be 
 cut up. Mr. L. contended that the plan he had 
 submitted for a county court was in perfect con- 
 sonance and harmony with the main principles 
 of the report of the committee, which was to have 
 one general court of original jurisdiction for the 
 trial of issues of fact in all cases. 
 
 Mr. BROWN denied that he or Mr. STEPHENS 
 intended to depart at, all from the principle o 
 the report of the judiciary committee. He had 
 as he believed, discovered strong indications tha 
 the committee were disposed to have a count} 
 court, and they desired to present a plan whicl 
 they preferred to either of the other propositions 
 Mr. LOOMIS again insisted that his plan dit 
 not contemplate the slightest departure from tha 
 of the committee. Mr. L. went onto explair 
 and advocate his plan as preferable to the om 
 just presented, which, in his opinion, did cori 
 flict with the report of the committee. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN replied to Mr. CHATFIEI/D, am 
 in defence ot his plan for a county court. H 
 denied that it proposed the increase of judicia 
 force. The gentleman from Otse^o had ass< j rte 
 for leaving out his associate judges, and substitu 
 ting (or them justices of the peace, or the surro 
 gate and justices of the peace, or the surrngat 
 and a justice, which could lie done, and his judi 
 cial force would be less than that proposed by th 
 corn rnit tee. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS wished to have the deliberat 
 opinion ot the judiciary committee, as to th 
 number of circuits which \\nuld be held uride 
 their system, in each county. If four, as had bee 
 said, it would materially affect the question of 
 county courr with original jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that the number of circui 
 a year in each county would be entirely withi 
 t .e contiol and regulation of the legislature. A 
 
 this matter of county courts, il the convention 
 lould be of opinion that we had not judicial 
 )rce enough here, it might be advisable to adopt 
 ther of the'plans presented by Mr. STEPHENS or 
 ROOSTER, but, that of Mr. MARVIN'S would en. 
 irge the entire report, and induce the necessity 
 ir an entire remodelling of it. As to the clerk's 
 (fices, that was a matter of detail that could be 
 ettled or left to the legislature, as might be deem- 
 d advisable when we come to details. 
 
 Mr. KIHKLAND moved that the committee 
 
 ie. Agreed to, 
 
 The Convention adjourned to 9 o'clock on Mon- 
 
 MONDAY, (10th day>} August 24. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. STEELE. 
 Mr. 'KIRKL AND presented a memorial from 
 e trustees of Clinton grammar school, Oneida 
 o., on the subject of the literature fund. Also, 
 nemorials from citizens of Oneida county in re- 
 ation to the rates of interest, and the form of 
 eeds and mortgages. They were severally re- 
 erred to appropriate committees. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM presented a petition from Che- 
 lango co. respecting the organization of county 
 ourts which, on his motion, was read and re- 
 erred to the judiciary committee. 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 Mr. ALLEN submitted the following minority 
 eport, he having been absent when the majority 
 if committee number fourteen reported : 
 & 1. No special act for incorporating any city or vil- 
 age shall be granted; but xhe legislature shall pass gene- 
 "allaws for incorporating, organizing and defining tLe 
 duties and powers ol cities and villages, including the lol 
 .owing provisions: 
 
 ^2. For the opening, widening or altering streets and 
 ivenues, in incorporated cities and vil'ages, the consent of 
 i majority of the persons to be assessed for each opening, 
 widening or altering, shall be necessary ; and the asses.- 
 mcnt for such impio^ ement shad be confined to the street 
 or avenue co be opened, widened or alteied; and no such 
 assessment shall exceed fifty per cent of the value of the 
 and assessed. 
 
 ^3. No city or village corporation shall borrow mon?y 
 on the ere !ir or liability of such city or village, or lend 
 their credit to others, except to re\ el invasion or suppress 
 insurrection, and lor other purposes, except by the mi-inu 
 mous consent of every member elected to the common 
 council ot cities, or of every member elected to the board 
 of trustees of villages; and also, unless by an actof the le- 
 gislature, or prool ol su"h unanimous consent, which act 
 shall specify the object of such law; and shall provide the 
 waj s and means, by directing a pro rata amount of the 
 principal of such debt to be annually asse-sed on and col- 
 lected trom'.the estates, real and personal, in such city or 
 village, as a sinking iund for the redemption of such debt 
 or liability ; 'but such corporations may nevertheless make 
 temporary loans in anticipation of tin ir annual revenue, 
 not exceeding, in any oneytar, twenty -five percent of 
 such revenue, or for a longer period than six months. 
 
 It was read and referred to the appropriate 
 committee of the whole. 
 
 HOURS OF MEETING 
 
 Mr. BROWN offered the following resolution : 
 llesolved, That on and after to-morrow, the afternoon 
 sessions shall commence at 3 o'clock P. Al. 
 
 Mr. NI*COLL moved to amend so as to com- 
 mence the morning session at half-past eight. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND, further to amend, so as to 
 commence the afternoon sessions at half-past 
 three. 
 
 The amendments were carried, and the reso- 
 lution as amended was adopted; so the hours of 
 
735 
 
 meeting now are half-past eight A. M. and half- 
 past three P. M. 
 
 .SIMPLIFICATIONS OF PLEADINGS. 
 Mr. SHEPARD ollered the following, to be 
 
 added to the judicary report; and it was referred 
 to the committee of the whole having in charge 
 the judiciary reports : 
 
 ^ The Legislature shall, at as early a period as practica- 
 ble after the adoption of the Constitution, provide by law 
 for the sirnplilicaiion of the pleadings and practice at law 
 and in equity. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR offered the following addi- 
 tional sections : 
 
 ^ It shall be the duty of the first Legislature that shall 
 assemble under this Constitution, to revise the practice, 
 pleadings and proceedings in all the courts of justice, with 
 the view to rejfo: rom them every thing useless, to pro- 
 mote brevity, clearness, and simplicity, to lessen delays 
 and expenses, to provide lor the amendment of pleadings 
 and proceedings so as to save costs, and the rights of par- 
 ties, and in all w;iys to further justice. It shall also be the 
 duty ot the Legislature, as otlen as once in live years 
 thereafter, again to revise such practice, pleadings and 
 proceedings with a like view. 
 
 ^ The Legislature may provide for the election of three 
 commissioners, to revise the practice, pleadings and pro- 
 ceedings, in all courts of justice, and to report to the Leg- 
 islature such reforms therein as shall be calculated to pro- 
 mote brevity, clearness and simplicity in such practice, 
 pleadin/s and proceedings, to lessen the. expense and de- 
 lays of litigation, and in every way to further the admin- 
 istration ol justice to the best advantage, and least expense 
 to the public and individuals. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR offered the following : 
 5) The Legislature shall have discretionary power to pro- 
 vide by law for abolishing the distinction between suits at 
 common law and equity; and shall from time to time, as 
 may be necessary, revise the forms of proceedings in all 
 courts of justice, with the view to reject from them all 
 useless matter, 10 promote simplicity and further justice 
 ^ No party, in any civil suit or proceeding, shall fail ol 
 relief from having misconceived his action, or the form ol 
 his remedy; but it shall be the duty of the Legislature to 
 provide for the amendment ol proceedings in cases where 
 it may be necessary to save the rights of parties. 
 
 Some explanations were made by Messrs. 
 SHEPARD, W. TAYLOR, J. J. TAYLOR, 
 CHATFiELD, TAGGAKT, NICOLL, HOFF- 
 MAN, .MANX, and MURPHY. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART then moved to amend Mr. W. 
 TAYLOR'S resolution so as to make it mandatory 
 on the Legislature, instead of permissive. 
 
 The amendment was agreed to, and the proposi- 
 tions were ?ll referred to the committee of the 
 whole having in charge the judiciary reports. 
 
 Mr.WATERBURY offered the following, which 
 had the same ieferei.ce: 
 
 Resolved, That there shall be elected by the people one 
 supreme judge, chosen by the people, whose duty it shall 
 be to simplify the pleadings of law and tquny, and bring 
 in unUon the proceedings through all the courts; said 
 judge to be elected once in three } ears. 
 INCORPORATIONS. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY offered the following, which he 
 consented should lay on the table: 
 
 Resolved, That the reports of the several committees 
 on incorporations other than banking and municipal, on 
 currencj an 1 banking, and on the organization and powers 
 of ciuYs and Incorporated \ihages, be consecutively con- 
 sidered in committee o! tin- whole, immediately alter the 
 report <f the committee on oa:. improvements 
 
 and public revenue*. &.<?. shall be dispo.-ed of. 
 
 EXPENSES OK GOVERNMENT. 
 Mr. STOW ollVied the following: 
 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to report 
 the annual expenditures ol the government, (other than for 
 the purposes of canals and rail roads and works connect- 
 
 ed therewith,) from and including the year 1817 up to 
 and including the yrar 184;}; and also a statement, 
 showing from what sources the money thus expended was 
 derived; specifying the iummnts reCelWd and expended in 
 ii.-h yiarjand generally the oljects or purposes lor which 
 such expenditures u ere made. 
 
 The hour of 10 o'clock having arrived, 
 
 Mr. BROWN called for the order of the day, the 
 judiciary report. 
 
 Mr. STOW hoped the gentleman would allow 
 lution to be adopted. 
 
 Mr. BROWN was afraid it would lead to dis- 
 cussion. 
 
 Mr. STOW could not conceive that it could 
 possibly lead to debate. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said it could only be con- 
 sidered by unanimous consent. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN objected, and the resolution 
 was passed over. 
 
 THF. JUDICIARY. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole on the judiciary reports, Mr. CAM- 
 BRELENG in the chair. 
 
 Mr. STRONG sent up the following amend- 
 ment to the llth section which he desired to have 
 read : 
 
 " They shall have exclusive jurisdiction of all civil ac- 
 tions on contracts to the amount of one hundred dollars 
 anil concurrent jurisdiction 1o the amount o two hundred' 
 and fiity dollars; laws shall be passed to abolish appeals as 
 now authorized, from courts ol justices ol the peace, and 
 providing for further trial and fiml decision in such cases 
 in the same town where the first trial was had, or in 
 an adjoining town." 
 
 The amendment pending when the committee 
 rose on Saturday, was then announced. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said he presumed when one 
 of those who have here been denominated lay- 
 men, rises to speak upon questions pertaining to 
 the judiciary, legal proceedings, and legal reform, 
 the committee would be relieved from any appre- 
 hension of a tedious speech as to its length, what- 
 ever they might apprehend in other respects. 
 He had listened with what attention he had been 
 able to command to this protracted, and he 
 would add, very able and learned debate; for 
 he had not been unmindful of the responsibili- 
 ty of his place in the Convention, and had 
 been anxious that the votes he should feel it his 
 duty to give, on the uilitientj*pi< p< smoi s htfore 
 the commitiee, should be given understanding!;)', 
 and in such a manner as not hereafter to he *, 
 source of regret h 
 
 himself, or dissatisfaction to his 
 constituents He found Jt no easy matter to 
 corne to an entirely satisfactory conclusion upon 
 ail the points involved in this most important 
 subject. No less than six or eight different pl-ns 
 for rt'-orgamzmg our judiciary system had been 
 minted and laid upon our tallies, most of which 
 h;id been supported with much zeal and learning. 
 It had heen, he said, resolved to lake this matter 
 out ot committee this afternoon, and yet but one 
 or two votes h&d been taken in committee upon 
 this whole suhj.-ct. One important point, how- 
 ever, had been settled so tar as the committee 
 ci.uld settle it. It had been decided by a very 
 large majority to unite t he jurisdiction in law and 
 equity in oui Supreme CoUit. i-'o much had heen 
 agreed to, at:d \et in ibis he apprehended the lan- 
 guage used, would not permit ail the changes in the 
 system which might be desired. So far as the 
 decision goes to abolish a seperate court of chan- 
 
736 
 
 eery he had great confidence that it was na,ht. 
 He believed so from the arguments that had been 
 used here, from the best reflection he had been 
 able to give the subject, and from the opinion of 
 others most competent to jud*e. But a few days 
 since he had the pleasure to meet in this halt a 
 distinguished gentleman of the legal profession 
 from the State of Georgia, with whom he had 
 formerly had some acquaintance, and almost the 
 first thing he said to him was this: you are about 
 to make a most important improvement in your 
 judiciary system, by uniting" in one court your law 
 and equity proceedings ; we have tried it in Geor- 
 gia, and it works well ; there is no difficulty at all 
 in the matter, and you will find it a valuable im- 
 provement. He had also recently liad conversa- 
 tion with a gentleman of the legal profession from 
 the State of Louisiana, whose opinion was simi- 
 lar upon this subject, and who added that he 
 thought we should do well to go further and have 
 no distinction in the practice, as was the case in 
 that State; the forms of proceedings were less 
 technical, more plain and simple, and reached the 
 ends of jusi ice in a more direct manner. It has 
 been said here that in those states where a sepa- 
 rate court of chancery does not exist, difficulties 
 and embarrassments are experienced in some of 
 their legal proceedings for the want of such a sys- 
 tem as ours, which is regarded as superior 1 to any 
 other, and anxiously desired. Can this be so, sir ? 
 Then how has it happened that no steps have 
 been taken to adopt it ? The State of Louisiana 
 has recently revised her Constitution, a State 
 where .no distinction exists between equity and 
 common law, either in the construction of her 
 courts or the forms of practice, and yet the peo- 
 ple are contented with it, and no movement made 
 to change it. He apprehended there was 
 some mistake in this matter. He admitted 
 it was but natural that gentlemen should be wed- 
 ded to a system in which they had been educated, 
 and attached to forms which they had long prac- 
 ticed, and perhaps but natural that they should 
 be prejudiced against innovation, even should 
 that innovation promise some salutary improve- 
 ments. . 
 
 The people desired reform ; they desired to see 
 the useless forms, the fictions, and the unneces- 
 sary technicalities of legal proceedings done away 
 with ; they wished to see things called by their 
 right names, and more plainess and simplicity in- 
 troduced ; they wished to prevent unnecessary 
 delavs, to lessen the expense and cheapen the ad- 
 ministration of justice. All this they hoped, they 
 expected, and would not be satisfied without it. 
 Why, sir, specimens of the useless, and he had 
 almost said senseless jargon of some of the forms 
 of le"-al proceedings had been exhibited here by 
 several gentlemen, and justly held up to ridicule, 
 which he supposed might have had their origin 
 in the dark ages, in the school of metaphysical 
 subtleties and technical absurdities, where an 
 elaborate syllogism would be gravely put forth to 
 prove that a possibility differed from an impossi- 
 bility He believed the delays and the expense 
 in chancery proceedings had, from some cause, 
 been more complained of than any other. A 
 gentleman from Onondaga county, in a recent 
 conversation upon this subject, stated that he had 
 in the hands of the Chancellor sixty-five dollars, 
 
 which he wanted, and applied to a lawyer to ob- 
 tain it for him, and which he supposed would 
 cost but a few dollars. Some time after, he call- 
 ed for his money, and was informed by the law- 
 yer that the money had been obtained, and also 
 ;hat there was a bill of costs for him to pay of an 
 mndred dollars. The lawyer, moreover, very 
 undly agreed to compromise by taking the sixty - 
 ive dollars for the trouble of getting it, leaving 
 the gentleman to reflect upon the advanta- 
 ges of a system which afforded such admirable 
 acilities for transferring his own money from the 
 ;he hands of a public officer to the pocket of his 
 L awyer. He also stated that he had been a joint 
 owner with some heirs of an estate to a small lot 
 of land in Syracuse, and one of the heirs desiring 
 a partition of the lot, applied to an attorney to 
 get the business done for him. The. gentleman 
 said he called on the attorney to enquire what the 
 expense would be, and was answered about forty 
 or fifty dollars, perhaps sixty, not more than six- 
 ty-five. Well, in due time the partition was ef- 
 fected, and a bill of costs charged of about two 
 hundred and eighty dollars. Now, without know - 
 ng what the proceedings and costs should have 
 been, conducted in the most economical manner, 
 he could well conceive what the law, in his judg- 
 ment, should direct in such a case. Application 
 should be made to the judge of the county court, 
 who upon examining the subject, should appoint 
 a commission of two or three discreet men to 
 make the partition in a just and equitable man- 
 ner, and their decision should be recorded in the 
 county clerk's office, and that should be the end 
 of the matter ; and all this could be accomplished 
 in a few days, and at an expense of not more than 
 twenty or twenty-five dollars at the most. The 
 attention of the people has been for some time 
 directed to these things, and they have demanded 
 a reform in such tones as must and will be obey- 
 ed. The evils complained of, so far as they have 
 grown out of the organization of our judiciary 
 system and the want of sufficient force to do the 
 business, he trusted would be corrected by this 
 convention ; and the legislature and the courts 
 must perfect the work. The taking away the 
 fees and perquisites of judicial officers, and lop- 
 ping off examiners in chancery, would do much 
 to diminish cost. Other corrections in this res- 
 pect by the legislature, and revising and simpli- 
 fying rules and forms of proceeding, so as to make 
 them plain and simple, would be a still further 
 improvement. Forms and rules must exist; 
 forms are essential to the substance, but let them 
 be significant ; rules are necessary to order and 
 despatch of business, but let them be such as are 
 calculated to promote those objects. With all 
 the improvements that can be made, the adminis- 
 tration of justice must be expensive. We must 
 have a sufficient number of judges qualified and 
 competent to do the business, who must be libe- 
 rally compensated ; we must have lawyers, men 
 educated to the profession, who must be reasona- 
 bly paid for their services, for he did not expect 
 these things were to become so plain and simple 
 that every man would become his own lawyer, 
 any more than we expected every man to become 
 his own physician. But he did expect an im- 
 provement in both respects; he did expect the time 
 would come when many diseases of the organised 
 
737 
 
 man, and of the organized society, would be more 
 successfully prevented or removed by very sim- 
 ple means, perhaps within the knowledge and 
 reach of all. He did expect the time would come 
 when that golden rule, that common law Chris- 
 tian principle, so happily alluded to by the gen- 
 tleman from Erie, (Mr. STOW) in illustration of 
 his argument, which requires us to do unto others 
 as we would they should do 'unto us, would be- 
 come more universal in its practical influence 
 upon the conduct of men. 
 
 The gentleman from Tioga (Mr. J. J. TAYLOR) 
 said the other day, that retaining ,the words 
 *' jurisdiction in law and equity," in the 3d sec- 
 tion, would prohibit the legislature from abolish- 
 ing the distinction which exists in the rules of 
 practice, that the forms of proceedings would of 
 necessity be continued separate and distinct. 
 This he knew was the opinion of some others, 
 and under the impression that such would be the 
 effect, he had voted for the amendment of the 
 gentleman from Kings, (Mr. SWACKHAMMER,) 
 {'or he desired to see the experiment made to abo- 
 lish this distinction ; he desired the legislature 
 and the courts should have no constitutional res- 
 triction in the way of making an effort, gradually 
 if necessary, to assimilate the different modes of 
 proceedings. And now he had offered the amend- 
 ment this morning, which authorised the legisla- 
 ture to abolish the distinction. It has also been 
 suggested, not by any member of the convention 
 that he was aware of, but by others competent to 
 judge, that by regulations of the court the princi- 
 ciple of the division of labour, which has been 
 urged here as a strong argument in favor of the 
 separate court of chancery, might still be pre- 
 served under the plan of the committee, by con- 
 ferring upon a part of the court the chancery bu- 
 siness. If this is so, it may not be regarded as 
 constituting an objection to the plan, certainly 
 not by some, for viewed in this light it is calcu- 
 lated to deprive the opponents of the measure of 
 one of their strong points of opposition To what 
 extent this may be carried in the working of the 
 system, and what were the views upon this point 
 of the majority of the committee who reported 
 the plan, he was not informed. If the system 
 possesses that elasticity that it can accommodate 
 itself, or be accommodated by law to circumstan- 
 ces, and become either the one thing or the other 
 in this respect, it may be a feature that will com- 
 mend it to favor. He had, however, supposed 
 that by uniting law and equity jurisdiction in one 
 court, each and every member of the court would 
 be both a law and an equity judge, so long as the 
 distinction is kept up, that it must of necessity 
 be so at the trial of causes at the circuits, and that 
 the natural tendency of the working of the sys- 
 tem would be to assimilate the practice. 
 
 This committee having disposed of the 3d sec- 
 tion for the present, had very properly gone to 
 the consideration of the question of county courts; 
 for upon the establishment and construction of 
 these, would depend to some extent the organi- 
 zation of the supreme court, particularly as to the 
 number of judges which would be required. Se- 
 veral propositions had been made on this subject. 
 The judiciary committee propose to abolish these 
 courts as at present organised. The gentleman 
 from Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN) proposed to elect 
 
 ay districts president judges, each of whom shall 
 hold the county courts in the several counties of 
 which his district is composed, and to elect two 
 judges in each county. The gentleman from 
 attaraugus proposes to elect one county judge, 
 who shall perform the duties of surrogates, The 
 special duties ordinarily conferred on county 
 judges, the trial of criminal cases of a limited de- 
 gree, and appeals from justices courts. He pre- 
 ferred the latter plan, with perhaps some modifi- 
 cation, for the reason that he was disposed to adopt 
 the plan of the majority report of the judiciary 
 committee, as to the number of the judges of the 
 supreme court. The estimates which have been 
 made by the chairman and some othw members 
 of that committee, went to show that the number 
 proposed would be able to do all the business 
 heretofore done by the district and county courts, 
 and have ample time for the requisite number of 
 courts in bane in each district. Other gentlemen 
 thought differently, but he was inclined to rely 
 upon the estimate of the chairman, whose expe- 
 rience in these matters qualified him to judge. 
 
 If then the judges of the supreme court can do all 
 the business required, can hold as many courts 
 in each county as may be necessary, then we shall 
 have the best county courts we possibly can have, 
 courts in which the public can have confidence* 
 and at less expense to suitors than our county 
 courts as at present organized. He thought the 
 people would prefer this, provided there was force 
 enough to do the business with nee*dful despatch. 
 The plan of the gentleman from Chautauque, (Mr! 
 MARVIN,) although it has many things to com- 
 mend it, is objectionable in some respects. It 
 would increase the number of judges in the ag- 
 gregate, and although suitable men might be se- 
 lected as district judges of the county courts, it 
 would still be an inferior tribunal, in which the 
 public would not be likely to have as much con- 
 fidence as in the higher courts, and hence might 
 give rise to more frequent appeals. Adopt the 
 plan of the judiciary committee as to the court of 
 appeals and the supreme court, and add for the 
 county courts something like the proposition of the 
 gentleman from Cattaraugus, with a provision for 
 theeleciion oi an aaM^iaie jud^e in those counties 
 where the business rnijjht require, and authoriiy 
 to the legislature, say alter two years, to confer upon 
 ihe county courts original jurisdiction in civil 
 causes, which would yive sufficient time to ascer- 
 tain the necessity lor .such a measure, to become 
 satisfied as to the ability of I he judges of the Su- 
 oreme Court to do all the business which would 
 be devolved upon them, and it appeared to him it 
 would present a plan tor a judiciary system as sim- 
 ple, economical, and efficient as can well be de- 
 vised. Some kind of a county court seemed to 
 ba indispensibly necessary. The vast amount of 
 special business, enumerated by the gentleman 
 from Oneidii, (Mr KIRKLAND,) which ia devolv- 
 ed upon the county judges, must be performed by 
 some local officers, ana the distribution of those 
 p;>wers as was proposed by the gentleman from 
 S ineca, (Mr. BASCOMB) would be attended with in- 
 c mvenience to the public, arid a proper discharge 
 of the duties would not be as well secured. Each 
 county must have a surrogate, and if he' is (he 
 judge of the county court as is proposed, the ex- 
 pense so Jar would not be much increased. It 
 
 67 
 
738 
 
 has been objected to making the surrogate a sala- 
 ried officer, thereby throwing upon the counties 
 the burden of that court which should be paid by 
 those who have business before it. To this he 
 would say, that if any court should be a cheap 
 one, it should be that where the widow and the 
 orphan are obliged to come. The expense of 
 this court is often onerous in a high degree in the 
 settlement of small estates, burdensome to those 
 who are the least able to bear it ; and the expense 
 of this court was an evil complained ot and much 
 needed correction. The remedy 'would be found 
 in giving the surrogate a fair salary, and exacting 
 but a small lee tor services performed, which 
 should be paid into the county treasury to help 
 make up the salary. This would be an important 
 reform. 
 
 He had but a few words more to say, and he 
 would take his seat. He hoped to see the propo- 
 sition adopted for the establishment of courts of 
 conciliation The idea when first suggested here, 
 had bee.n scouted by some gentlemen, but he was 
 happy to believe it had now many friends in the 
 Convention. The plan was worthy a trial ; it was 
 benevolent and. noble in its conception, and praise- 
 wprthy in its objects, and he did not doubt it 
 would become popular and save a vast amount of 
 litigaiion. The better part of community, men 
 who are not litigious in their habits, would resort 
 to such a court to seitle their diiierences, which 
 would be attended with. but little expense or trou- 
 ble; and these would encourage others to go and 
 do likewise, until, in a certain class ot cases, men 
 would bt; regarded as disposed to be quarrelsome 
 who would not submit their differences with their 
 neighbors to this amicable mode qf settlement: ; 
 and he doubled not its influence would be most 
 salutary in neighborhoods and society generally. 
 He therefore hoped to see the plan adopted. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that he had a few remarks to 
 make upon the report under consideration, and 
 some propositions to offer in committee, in order 
 that the propositions might be acted upon in Con- 
 vention. He was aware that it would not now be 
 in order to propose amendments to the report un- 
 der discussion, but the third section, more imme- 
 diately under consideration, as now amended, he 
 considered a very dangerous one, and created a 
 judiciary power entirely beyond the control and 
 reach of the people. He believed the laymen of 
 the Convention, as well as most of the profession, 
 were in favor of abolishing the Court of Chance- 
 ry as at present organized, and giving equity pow- 
 ers to, and blending law and equity in other 
 courts of record. He would ask gentlemen if 
 there was not danger in doing this, as proposed 
 by this third section as it now stood 3 would they 
 not create thirty or forty little monsters instead of 
 the one great monster which it was proposed to 
 destroy ? He thought there was great danger of 
 doing this, if this section was allowed to remain 
 as it was; but he proposed to amend it, and would 
 read in his place this amendment to be added to 
 the section, " Subject to such restrictions anc 
 regulations as shall be from time to time prescri- 
 bed by the legislature." The judiciary powers 
 here created without any check or defining of its 
 powers, gentlemen would find, to far outstrip any 
 of its predecessors in mischief and oppression 
 should the Convention adopt it as it is. And he 
 
 call upon the laymen of this house, an*-* 
 varn them to reflect arid pause, before thc-y len^ 
 heir aid, or supported a section that was so dan- 
 erous, and to his mind so replete and full of 
 mischief. If the section was to stand as it now 
 s, the amendment he proposed would place this 
 unlimited section and power where the people, 
 'hrougli their representatives, when the neccssi- 
 ies of the case required it, could have a control- 
 ng power over its actions. 
 
 There had been several propositions introduced 
 ;his morning by way of resolutions and sections, 
 ivhich if any one or all of them were adopted,might 
 )bviate the difficulty, it was apparent to his mind 
 o be very mischievous and full of danger. Whe- 
 ;ner any of those propositions would be consider 
 ed and adopted by the committee, he was unable 
 o determine, and should therefore adhere to the 
 imendment he had offered, and hoped and trust- 
 ed that the Convention would adopt it. The gen- 
 leman from Kings had proposed an amendment 
 which he had desired to see adopted, but it had 
 ailed, which rendered it more necessary to have 
 some amendment, whereby the people could con- 
 trol the action of this tribunal. He would ask if 
 any gentleman supposed that the unrestrained and 
 unlimited power conceded by this section as it 
 stood, could or would be kept within any reason- 
 able or ordinary bounds, in their course of pro- 
 ceedings. He thought not. You create an un- 
 limited judicial power like this, his word for it, 
 the members of this Convention would rue the 
 day that they had favored or supported such a 
 measure, thereby creating a despotism to rule 
 over the people. Who was to decide to what ex- 
 tent this court might go ; none but the judges 
 placed upon the bench. Would they not pre- 
 scribe their own rules and regulations, and by 
 degrees usurp to themselves a gigantic power over 
 the destinies of the whole people, not to be resist- 
 ed by them ; and why, because the people through 
 their representatives here, have unalterably fixed 
 the authority of this court, and parted with their 
 right to restrain or restrict its authority. 
 
 The third section is a short one, but it is very 
 significant in its meaning and phraseology, as 
 well as dangerous, without further amendment. 
 In his opinion there should be some controlling 
 power of the people over this court, and all oth- 
 er judicial tribunals created by this Conven- 
 tion. The amendment he had offered would ef- 
 fect this object, and he should bring it forward 
 in its order ''at the proper time, and hoped to see 
 this addition made to the section or the section 
 stricken out and a better one substituted in its 
 place Mr. M. said in making the few remarks 
 he had made and those he intended to make be- 
 before he took his seat, were predicated upon 
 the presumption that the majority report of the 
 judiciary committee was to be the basis from 
 which a judiciary system was to be formed. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD : "Will my colleague allow 
 me to ask him whether the report of the majority 
 provides, or any where near provides a sufficient 
 amount of judicial force to do the necessary busi- 
 ness of the city of New York." 
 
 Mr. MANN replied, that the judiciary report 
 of the majority had excepted New York from the 
 general provision, giving to New York a force 
 proportionate to their population, which he 
 
739 
 
 deemed might be inadequate to transact the ju> 
 dicial business of the city promptly and efFect- 
 
 . but from the suggestions and expressions 
 >, he was satisfied that they were dis- 
 posed, and would, leave the organization and in- 
 crease of the judicial force for -the city, to the 
 
 -Uture, to meet the wants of the people 
 that there appeared to be no disposition on 
 the part of the Convention to give New 
 York city au inadequate judicial force. 
 With this view that the majority report was to be 
 made the basis of the system, he had prepared a 
 number of amendments. He had examined the re- 
 ports of the minority, and in fact all the numer- 
 ous reports submitted to the Convention upon the 
 judiciary, and he for one tendered to the gentle- 
 men who had presented them, his thanks, and 
 was much obliged to them for the labour and 
 attention bestowed upon the subject. All of the 
 reports contained many excellent provisions, and 
 were entitled to the consideration of the Conven- 
 tion. The report under consideration at the time 
 did not meet his (Mr. M's) views in many respects, 
 and could not have his support without very es- 
 sential and material alterations. The report of 
 the majority could be made to suit him, but it 
 would require many erasings and some matter ad- 
 ded and inserted, before (in his opinion, from the 
 knowledge he had of member's views on the sub- 
 ject,) they would vote to sustain it. The amend- 
 ments he' had drawn, he would read in his place 
 as it would not be in order to ofler them now. The 
 second section had been passed over by the com- 
 mittee, but he had prepared an amendment to this 
 section, to obviate some of the difficulties com- 
 plained of: since he had done so, he was inform- 
 ed by one of his colleagues that the gentleman 
 from Albany had suggested the same thing, and 
 
 would oiler thus to -amend the section, 
 tk-mari from Albany not being in his 
 
 The gen 
 place he 
 
 would read the proposition, vi/.. strike out and 
 , . so that the section would read : " There 
 shall be a court of appeals, composed of 8 judges, 
 who shall be elected by the electors of the State 
 fore.. selected from the class of justices 
 
 of the supreme court, having the shortest time to 
 ; provisions shall be made by law for select- 
 ing surh justices of the supreme court, from time 
 to time ami for so classifying those elected that 
 iiall be ekcted every second year. A chief 
 o shall be elected by the electors of this 
 State, who shall hold his oflice for 4 years and 
 shall preside over tiie judiciary of the State ; it 
 shall be his duty to prescribe forms and rules 
 "i jiruclice in the supreme and all subor- 
 l;n.i;e com is, and sucn ioims and rules shall 
 plain, ;itid concise express the sub- 
 ject ; -':npi'.' I acts requisite, and nothing 
 
 criminal jurisdiction may be established by the 
 Legislature, and writs of error therefrom may be 
 brought to the supreme court or court of appeals, 
 as shall be provided by lavv. 5> 
 
 This, (13th section) as it gives the Legislature 
 unlimited power to create all and jiny civil courts, 
 as well as criminal; which he was unwilling to 
 extend or give to the Legislature. The section 
 as proposed to be amended, would give the Lfgis. 
 lature power ta create criminal courts, which 
 would be found necessary in cities where they had 
 no police courts at present ; and cities to be crea- 
 led might require such couits. Beyond this he 
 would not go. He desired to name the civil courts 
 here, to be created, and have their powers defined 
 as far as possible by this Convention, and not leave 
 t to the Legislature to create as many and every 
 court they thought proper to create. The 15th 
 section he proposed to amend, which relates to 
 the election of justices of the peace* and jus- 
 tices courts and their jurisdiction so that the 
 section as he proposed to amend it would read 
 " The electors of the several towns and wards 
 shall, at their annual town meetings and munici- 
 pal elections, and in such manner as the legisla- 
 ture may direct, elect their justices of the peace, 
 whose term of office shall be four years. Their 
 number and classification may be regulated by law. 
 Their exclusive civil jurisdiction shall be $'50, 
 their concurrent civil jurisdiction shall be $250, 
 but in all civil suits or actions brought in a court 
 of record, the plaintiff bringing any such suit for 
 the sum of $ or less, shall not be entitled to 
 recover any greater amount of costs from the de- 
 fendants than could have been recovered on a trial 
 of the same cause before a justice of the peace; 
 and in cases of appeals (in such cases) by either 
 party from a justices court to a court of record, or 
 from one court of record to a higher one, no grea- 
 ter amount of costs shall be allowed than would 
 have occurred in a justices court on such trial of 
 appeal." 
 
 This 15th section, as he (Mr. M.) proposed fo 
 amend it, would prevent a great amount of litiga- 
 tion ; and if persons having demands to collect, 
 desired to do so at a small expense, this would 
 but if suitors would 
 
 
 perfecily veiling and would be 
 (he care of 
 
 ^i.id lo hand inj, |,roj);,sn ion over to 
 Ihe gentleman from Ainany, bi-lieving him {as he 
 was t. IM ou .--'inndi man) io be quite as competent, 
 if not mme M/, than himself, to present an amend- 
 ment which would tiled the object he had in 
 VH w. He pit 
 judiciary 
 
 ID amend the i3th sec;ion 
 (-omtntiu.-e had in the 3d section 
 
 abolished the courts ot erior and chancery, and 
 in the K'ih SiOii<m had abolished the county 
 couttg, atao. ilf prt>u< (.,! t. >;:incnd the 13th SL-C- 
 liou so that it would ieuU : ** Interior cuufts ot 
 
 give them the opportunity ; 
 go into the higher courts, when they could obtain 
 their j udgment at a small expense, they should 
 be made to pav the extra costs and expenses. It 
 had been objected to by many, that suitors had 
 not sufficient confidence in the justices to bring 
 their suits before them. Then he would allow 
 them to go to the courts of record. But if they 
 would go there, let them pay the extra expenses 
 they would incur. Should this convention de- 
 cide upon establishing a county court, then a ma- 
 terial change will be requisite in the force pro- 
 posed by the committee's report ; for the Supreme 
 Court, if a county court is to be so organized for 
 the State as to do a large proportion of the judi- 
 cial business, a small force only will be required 
 for the Supreme Court much less at least than 
 is now proposed. Ho had hoped that this ques- 
 tion would have been settled before this, whether 
 we were to have a county court or not. He was 
 of opinion that such a court might well be dis- 
 pensed with, and save much expense to the coun- 
 ties ; but he was willing to leave that matter to 
 the decision of the members from the interior ; if 
 
740 
 
 they deemed it necessary to have such a court for 
 the interior counties, he should not object to it. 
 As to the rules and practice of the courts as at 
 present organized, a great deal had been said by 
 the profession and laymen about the abuses of 
 the practice as it now exists. The ridiculous 
 special pleadings, long declarations and tomfool- 
 ery now in use, had been fully and fairly exposed 
 and shown up here. The gentleman from Otse- 
 go in his remarks on Saturday, had drawn a faith- 
 ful and true picture of these ridiculous practices, 
 so long submitted to by the people. It was un- 
 necessary for him to say more on that subject. 
 He desired, in the judiciary system which we 
 were about to adopt, to see it so constructed as to 
 produce an expeditious decision of judicial pro- 
 ceedings; that these proceedings should be cheap, 
 plain and simple in all their details, and suited to 
 the exigencies of the people, to conform to the 
 common sense understanding of every man in the 
 community and from what he had seen and heard 
 expressed by members, he was constrained to be- 
 lieve that the Convention were anxious and de- 
 sirous of producing such a system. Before he 
 took his seat he would again call the attention of 
 the Convention, and particularly the lay members 
 to the third section. He asked them to reflect and 
 pause before they gave their votes to adopt that 
 section as it now stood ; he hoped and trusted 
 they would amend it or strike it out and substi- 
 tute another and better one for it. 
 
 Mr-BRUNl?AGEwas weii aware of the niagni 
 tude of the subject under consideration. We aie 
 about to esiabhsh a tribunal, on which, will hang 
 the rights of property, and even the liVes of indi- 
 viduals ; and on the decision of which the Consti- 
 tution itself, and its construction, depends mak- 
 ing this a civatuie to sit in judgment on us crea- 
 tor. On such a subject, therefore, we should en 
 deavor to act judiciously. This was one of the 
 great subjects which led to the calling of this Con. 
 veniion being, as it was, btyond the reach o{ the 
 Legislature. That there were evils attendant up- 
 on the administration of justice, was not to be de- 
 nied. It we were lo call a physician to visit a 
 Sick man, he first examined the patient, and as 
 eerlftined the nature of his disease; and irun he 
 could act judiciously and understaiidingly in ih<- 
 application of the remedy. And so we should 
 proceed in this case fir=t,.ascertaining the detects 
 in the administration of justice, and then we could 
 proceed unders!andinu;ly to relorm the evils. In 
 his judgment, the evils were <>l a three lol i char- 
 acter first, *< to 'he delay < f justice ; s-econd, 
 to the expenses of obi aining jusiire ; and third, as to 
 the uncertainty of gelling justice. The fust is 
 clearl> within the reach or the Convention, and it 
 may, and ought to, apply the remecy. But the re- 
 medy for the uncertainly of obtaining justice i! 
 
 which relief was now demanded. As to ;he blend. 
 
 of the two systems 
 competent to udge 
 
 of pleadings, he was 
 
 The majority report 
 
 it was attainable 
 scope ot legislation 
 
 ali was cleady within the 
 So far as the retention of ihe 
 
 court of errors was concerned, lie apprehended it 
 was not necessary to say a word ; Ihe utter absur- 
 dity of rnaun g a co-ordinate branch of the Legis 
 lalure part of the judiciary,- was obvious to all, and 
 it found no favor here. Mr. W. expressed IJH it 
 ciination to favor a separate oiganization ot equity 
 cour's, from an uppiehension that the equity du 
 ties might burden ihe courts ol common law, de- 
 laying justice", and thereby continuing the tvii lor 
 
 in many respects met his views, and perhaps he 
 ought to be satisfied with it, but so far as regards 
 the organization of the courts, he preferred the 
 plan of Mr. BASCOM, as being most simple. Mr 
 B. then referred to the previous portions of the 
 proposition from which he dissented the mode 
 of electing the judges, the shortness of the term, 
 rendering it liable to the fluctuations of political 
 sentiments. He feared that sufficient force was 
 not provided for the supreme court, and he waa 
 not satisfied altogether with the constitution of 
 the court of appeals. His plan would be to elect 
 five judges in each district, and make their term 
 of office for ten years one to go out every two 
 years authorising any one of the judges to hold 
 the county courts, for all the purposes of present 
 circuit and county courts and authorising a cer- 
 tain number of them, having the shortest time to 
 serve, to hold the general sessions of the court, 
 and to perform such duties as are- now performed 
 by the supreme court. Then he would authorize, 
 ;ay three of them, having the next shortest time 
 o serve, to hold bane terms in the districts. By 
 his, the judges would have six years service in 
 he county courts, then two years in the capacity 
 )f district judges, and for the last two years of 
 :heir term would serve in the court cf last resort. 
 This would secure experience, ability avid com- 
 petency, in the discharge of these important du- 
 ;ies. Mr. B. expressed his opposition to any 
 )lan for a common pleas at all similar to the pre- 
 sent. He desired the supreme court judges to 
 icld the county courts. He would not allow a 
 udge to sit in a county in which he resided, for 
 n his opinion a judge should knew nothing of 
 the parties or of the cause, but what was given 
 "o him|"in evidence. There was danger of bias- 
 where a judge was acquainted with the facts, cir- 
 cumstances, and parties, and this would be obvia- 
 ted by bringing the judge from a different county. 
 As regarded the matter of justices of the peace, 
 Mr. B. expressed his opposition to extending 
 their jurisdiction. He referred to his own expe- 
 rience in that capacity for a number of years past, 
 as convincing him that such a thing would be un- 
 wise. Indeed he would rather reduce than in- 
 crease their jurisdiction. Mr. B. then spoke of 
 the plan for a court of conciliation. He had very 
 little confidence in it, although he had no objec- 
 tion to the experiment. In conclusion Mr. B. 
 expressed his conviction that the funds of the 
 court of chancery were not now safely disposed 
 of, and expressed his preference or the idea of 
 placing them under the direct control of the state. 
 Mr. KIRKLAND addressed the committee in 
 substance as follows : 
 
 When I had the honor, Mr. Chairman, nearly 
 a fortnight since to address the committee on the 
 
 subject of the judiciary, my remarks were con- 
 fined mainly to an exposition of the reasons which 
 led the judiciary committee to recommend several 
 substantial and Very material changes in the ju- 
 dicial system ; changes, in the utility of which 
 I fully concurred, and which I was well aware 
 would receive the cordial assent of the Conven- 
 tion. The chief and principal of these were the 
 union of the duties of term and circuit judges in 
 
741 
 
 the same individuals ; the bringing of the courts 
 comparatively within the vicinity of suitors, their 
 attorn ies and counsel ; the trial of cases in law 
 and equity substantially in the same manner, and 
 the consequent abolition of the offices of examin- 
 er and master; the abolition of fees and perquis- 
 ites and of judicial patronage ; the alteration of 
 the term of office from a term substantially for 
 life to a reasonable term for years ; and the union 
 of legal and equitable powers in the same tribu- 
 nal. I anticipated, sir, that the Convention would 
 nearly unanimously approve these reforms and 
 changes and it was only to explain, to justify 
 and to defend before our constituents and the com- 
 munity these our anticipated doings, that my 
 efforts" on the occasion alluded to were chiefly di- 
 rected. Since that time anticipation has became 
 reality ; and notwithstanding earnest and ingen- 
 ious arguments, the most important change pro- 
 posed, that of a union of the tribunals, has been 
 determined on by an overwhelming majority the 
 opponents of that measure, in spite of their per- 
 suasive appeals, having obtained only seven votes 
 in support of their views. And since that vote, 
 sir, I have been informed that one of that minor- 
 ity of seven, and he the most urgent and earnest 
 in opposition, has renounced his heresies and be- 
 come a sincere convert to our " faith." In the 
 remarks to which I have referred, I also stated 
 briefly some of my objections to the plan of organ- 
 ization proposed by the majority of the committee ; 
 but I entered into scarcely any explanation or 
 defence of the system which I myself proposed, 
 and deferred to another opportunity such argu- 
 ments as I might have to urge in its behalf. The 
 time has now arrived, and the proposed amend- 
 ment presents the proper opportunity for me to 
 present my views in support of one part of the 
 plan as contained in the article reported by me 
 from the minority of the judiciary committee 
 and a part too, sir, which is deserving of the most 
 serious and deliberate consideration in the forma- 
 tion of a judiciary system for this state. I pre- 
 sented that article, sir, on the first day of the 
 present month ; and I see that other articles since 
 presented, contain all the substantial elements of 
 mine in relation to this interesting and important 
 part of the judiciary system. I feel obliged to 
 gentlemen for this concurrence in my views. 
 
 The amendment now under consideration pre- 
 sents directly the question whether the Conven- 
 tion will concur in the recommendation of the 
 majority of the committee to abolish county courts 
 not tlie county courts as now organized, for 
 not a man in this Convention desires or would 
 consent that they should be retained butto abol- 
 ish the tribunal and leave the system without any 
 representative or substitute for it, however well 
 or efficiently such representative might be arran- 
 ged and organized. This, Mr. Chairman, is a 
 question of no secondary importance ; it deserves 
 tne careful and anxious attention of the Conven- 
 tion. On the threshold of this matter, I earnestly 
 beg gentlemen not to be influenced in their views 
 and action upon it by the prejudices existing here 
 and elsewhere against these courts as now organ- 
 izedprejudices very extensively, and I may well 
 say not unjustly or causelessly, entertained. It 
 is not to be questioned that this tribunal, with its 
 five incumbents, appointed as they are, paid as 
 
 they are, unqualified, nay, disqualified as many 
 of them must he admitted to be, is in many instan- 
 ces full of any thing but attraction to the eye of 
 the beholder, and of any thing but comfort and 
 satisfaction to those, who are brought within its 
 judicial administration. It is at present far from 
 being a useful or an ornamental column in our ju- 
 dicial edifice. But all this furnishes no argument 
 whatever, not the slightest, against a properly or- 
 ganized tribunal with the powers and jurisdiction 
 now existing in the county courts. Much less is 
 any such argument furnished by the statement 
 made a few days since by the gentleman from 
 Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) of the barefaced 
 extortion attempted to be practiced by a judge in 
 his county, when acting individually in the capa- 
 city of a committing magistrate ; and I regretted 
 to see that worthy gentleman appealing to passion 
 instead of reason, by the use of an illustration so 
 totally inapt and irrelevant. 
 
 Some gentlemen on this floor are opposed to 
 the establishment of any county courts of any 
 name or form they contend for but a single court 
 intermediate, the court of final resort and the 
 justices' courts they would annihilate every 
 thing of every kind between the tribunal of the 
 highest and the tribunal of the lowest grade 
 while others propose, what I believe they would 
 dignify with the name of " county court," but 
 without any original jurisdiction a sort of court 
 of errors to a justices' court a kind of inferior 
 and subordinate board of commissioners to do up 
 the odds and ends of local business, without a 
 jury at all as proposed by one gentleman, and 
 with a jury in criminal cases of small degree, as 
 proposed by another a kind of nondescript, 
 whose like has not yet been seen or every before 
 i i agined. A man in every degree qualified for e 
 judicial station, who would consent to become the 
 incumbent of such a judgeship would manifest a 
 " hungering and thirsting" for office rarely wit- 
 nessed even in this hungering and thirsting day. 
 I dissent entirely from the views I have just re- 
 ferred to ; and my deliberate and firm conviction 
 is that county courts, suitably and efficiently or- 
 ganized, are indispensable to the success of any 
 judiciary system which this Convention can adopt, 
 consistently with those great and essential, arid 
 as I believe, valuable and beneficent changes on 
 which it has already resolved. These tribunals 
 are in my judgment equally requisite to the suc- 
 cessful canying out of each of the plans present- 
 ed, whether that of the majority or those of the 
 minority of the committee, or those presented by 
 other members of the Convention. 
 
 In the first place, Mr. Chairman, let us consid- 
 er the immense amount of business to be devolved 
 on the supreme court as organized by the majority 
 of the committee. This fact is of primary im- 
 portance, and should be constantly borne in mind 
 during this discussion. In that court is to be 
 done all the business now done 
 
 1 . By the court of chancery in all its branches ; 
 
 2. By the supreme court; 
 
 3. By the circuit judges ; 
 
 4. The principal part of that now done by ex- 
 miners ; 
 
 5. Much of that now performed by masters. 
 This enumeration perfects an immense mass, 
 
 and it is to be observed that an entirely new ele- 
 
742 
 
 ment is introduced into trials at the circuit, viz : 
 equity causes. The amount and extent of this 
 no man can tell ; many alledge that this alone will 
 overburden and bear down any system into which 
 it is introduced, and though I entertain no such 
 apprehension and regard this as one of the great- 
 est and most salutary reforms that will be made 
 by the Convention, still it is manifest that it will 
 very greatly add to the circuit business, and any 
 system we adopt should be framed in view of this 
 fact. One hundred and sixty-eight examiners are 
 now in commission, and many of them, as appears 
 from the returns made to us, are extensively and 
 lucratively employed in their official capacities. 
 Cut to all this the majority of the committee pro- 
 pose to add the whole business, civil and criminal, 
 now done at court in all the county courts in the 
 state ; and whatever may be said of" the incapacity 
 of these courts as now existing, it cannot be de- 
 nied that they annually dispose of a vast number 
 cases, civil and criminal. The county courts in 
 Oneida county are busily occupied during ten 
 weeks of the year ;-and I take pleasure in saying 
 that the presiding judge of those courts in that 
 county is fully adequate to his station, and is not 
 surpassed by any of that choice few, whose eulo- 
 giurns have been pronounced on this floor. 
 
 Now, sir, in view of these facts, I do not hesi- 
 tate to say, that neither the supreme court, as 
 proposed by the majority of the committee, nor 
 any other one court, with any reasonable num- 
 ber of judges, could, by any possibility, exist un- 
 der these accumulated masses of business its 
 creation and its extinction would be almost si- 
 multaneous the rejoicings at the birth would 
 scarcely have ceased before the requiem would 
 be sung. This, sir, I am persuaded, is no pic- 
 ture of fancy ; it is plain, sober truth, and is but 
 a very slight sketch of what would soon be a 
 most sorrowful reality. 
 
 As an aid then to the supreme court, as pro- 
 posed by the committee, (and to any tribunal 
 which is to represent the present supreme 
 court and court of chancery,) to relieve that court 
 of burdens it could not bear, to insure its con- 
 tinued existence, and to promote its suitable and 
 proper organization, a well arranged system of 
 county courts is vitally essential. 
 
 Moreover, sir, those most hostile to these lat- 
 ter courts, concede the necessity of some tribu- 
 nal or officers for the transaction of that immense 
 amount of local and miscellaneous business now 
 performed by those courts, or by the judges of 
 those courts, a partial etaternent of which 1 gave 
 in the remarks addressed to the committee on a 
 former occasion. By organizing proper county 
 courts, the whole of this last class of business 
 will be provided for, and at the same time the 
 essential and indispensable object before men- 
 tioned, will be accomplished. These courts 
 must, of necessity, if my positions are correct, be 
 courts of original jurisdiction, civil and criminal. 
 It is said, sir, that in preference to establish- 
 ing county courts, the number of the judges of 
 the supreme court should be increased. It is 
 easy, sir, thus to say but I think gentlemen 
 would find the people of this state very unwil- 
 ling to unite with them in thus saying ; and thei 
 to act accordingly by increasing the number o 
 those supreme court judges to the extent which 
 
 would absolutely be required. Such an increase, 
 could it be obtained, I regard as unwise and in- 
 expedient in every point of view. 
 
 It is an undoubted fact that there is a large 
 amount of business, both civil and criminal, of 
 comparatively small importance, which is now 
 done, and will continue to be done, and which 
 at present devolves principally on the county 
 courts. These matters, though in a comparative 
 sense small and unimportant, are yet full of in- 
 erest to the parties concerned, and occupy quite 
 is much time in their trial and decision as those 
 )f greater magnitude. Did time permit, many 
 llustrations of this might be given, though it 
 'ould scarcely be necessary, for numerous in- 
 tances must be fresh in the recollection of all 
 tfho hear me. 
 
 I have heard the senseless, sophistical cry, 
 :hat there should not be one kind of justice for 
 lie poor and another for the rich one court for 
 aTge causes and another for small. But, sir, it 
 .s not the poor more than the rich, who have 
 :hese small causes indeed, the poor are seldom 
 mind engaged in litigation in your courts. 
 These small and severely contested cases, more 
 requently arise between persons of good es- 
 ,ates, whose wills and whose passions gain the 
 ascendency over their reason, and lead them to 
 the expenditure of hundreds of dollars in cases 
 where the pecuniary amount involved is scarcely 
 five, as in the instance mentioned a few days 
 since by the gentleman from Tioga (Mr. TAY- 
 LOR). And in criminal cases, which consume 
 as much time as those of the highest grade, you 
 will often find the parties, men who would deem 
 themselves insulted by being called poor. How 
 many months are occupied in the trial of indict- 
 ments for assault and battery, riot, libel, nui- 
 sance, and the like, where the defendants are 
 quite as likely to be found among those abound- 
 ing in this world's goods as among the opposite 
 class. Besides, I am yet to learn that all the 
 criminals of this land of the higher grade are to 
 be found among the " poor." Pecuniary means 
 have not yet, I believe, been ascertained to be a 
 certain preventive of vice and crime in the pos- 
 sessor. I cannot, then, believe, Mr. Chairman, 
 that the rights of the rich would be exalted, or 
 those of the poor depressed, either in civil or 
 criminal matters, by the establishment of county 
 courts. The argument, too, in its legitimate 
 and necessary results, would lead to the aboli- 
 tion of justices' courts ; it is, indeed, sir, hardly 
 worthy of refutation, and I should not have no- 
 ticed it had it not been seriously put forth. It is 
 not then a question between the rights of the 
 rich and the rights of the poor, but simply a 
 question of convenience and propriety, of econo- 
 my of time and money ; and so lung as there is a 
 difference between ten thousand dollars and ten, 
 between punishment by death on the gallows, 
 and punishment by imprisonment in the county 
 jail for a day, so long will there be propriety, 
 convenience, fitness, in organizing judicial tribu- 
 nals of different grades. 
 
 Now,, sir, the judges of your supreme court 
 will find abundant employment in disposing of 
 the larger and more weighty matters that will be 
 brought before them. Vast and extensive inter- 
 ests are to come under their judicial cognizance. 
 
743 
 
 w it' l-<w I of such county, and shall hold their offices tor lour 
 ey lire to transact the united bus.; law oi^jo ^^ ^^ .^^ _ iiid t . X(jrci8e th(j powe -. s ^ 
 
 dial chancery. Men competent to the discharge lluties Q f smr ogate in his county. Each oi said county 
 i duties must have -at ' 'table sal- I judge* sh, 'il also have -and . xercise sum other powers and 
 
 aries and I hold that it would be a waste of the juiisdictlon a, .nay be confei . 
 
 ro f Q of tho mn 1'rovisioii shall bo madi: t.y law t-r cases of vacancy in 
 
 ,le tune ot these waste e mo- I , lit . eofsaidfirstand associate judge, or either of them 
 
 ney of the people, to require or allow them ^ to 
 devote themselves alike to great and to triflin 
 
 , n ,if or r | lt . : case. .f the aii.s.-nr.' or inability of them, orei- 
 ther of them, to perform any ol their oiricial duties. 
 s, and to occupy their days and weeks and I beg the attention of the connnitte for a few 
 
 months in that description of business, which is 1IU)luel , tSi while 1 explain the provisions of this 
 now transacted in the county courts, which must L t . tl ,, 11$ ail( ] stale suriie ot the advantages which in 
 - exist to a greater or less extent, and my judgment would lesult from the adoption of 
 which would naturally and ordinarily devolve lni , syslem j, proposes. 
 
 on the county courts, if such are established. - t j s , n ,p rtarit that the jurisdiction of the tribu- 
 To throw all this on the supreme court would naUhnukl be declared ; the mode of s atmg it as 
 naturally require an increased number of judges in tile SIJC , U) ,,, j s perfectly safe as well as intelli- 
 in that court and thus the same compensation Ljble ; the legislature is invested with power to 
 would be paid, and the same expenses incurred : ake away any "j >ar t ,,f rhe jurisdiction if deemed 
 for doing this smaller class of business as for that advisable, and also to conler additional jurisdic- 
 higher and more important character. tion, including jurisdiction in equity, if the public 
 Besides, "sir, is that a wise system which com- inte ,. ests demand. As to equity jurisdiction, I am 
 pels a judge, who has cognizance of matters ot inc i, nt; d to think that it may be very useful, per- 
 the greatest magnitude, to devote a considerable na , )S necessary, to confer it t ) a limned extent, a.s 
 share of his time to the hearing and disposition tor j llslariC e in cases of infants' estates, parti, iou of 
 of those of trilling consequence ? By the estab- l(iud> CdSe3 ()t divorce, arid probably in all cases 
 lishment of county courts, the additional force wnere the amount in controversy does not exceed 
 required would be obtained at a materially less ve hundred dollars or some other fixed sum. 
 expense, for it is not contemplated that the sala- This ()OWer should at any rate, on every conside 
 ry of a judge of that court should equal that ol a ratum O f p lu deuce, be given to the legislature. 
 judo:e of the supreme court. . The next provision to which I would call the 
 
 But, sir, let it not be understood that these attent j on ( t ne committee, is that which arranges 
 courts are to be so organized as to be competent tne tr ibunal j ol - the city cf New York : it furnishes 
 to do only this smaller business ; they should tnat cl)y w ith j - our courts of common pleas, to com. 
 and can be arranged and constituted so that, mence with ; and by the provisionsof asubsequent 
 while they must and naturally will do the whole I sect j on> t hi s number may be increased according 
 or the greaier share of this smaller business, L () |1)e nx jg en cies of business; it also furnishes a 
 they will at tb'i same time be fully qualified and sale and a j eqi , at e criminal court, in lieu of the 
 competent to the doing of such portion ol the L )f . ese ,,t Recoider's court. By adding to the num- 
 more important kind as may be brought before ' 
 them. 
 
 As a member of the judiciary committee, Mr. 
 Chairman, I devoted no little time and attention 
 to a consideration of the mode in which these 
 
 courts could be organized, so as to remedy ex- 1 can discover no difficulty whatever in this m< deof 
 isting evils and objections, and to render them I u ,,pi v j n g t he city of New-York with all the 
 an efficient, useful, and valuable part oi our ju- cou ', ts s \^ may desire, in addition to the courts of 
 dicial system. The result of my deliberations L hlgher Kra de, provided by rhe fourth section of 
 was presented to the committee in- the following ffly arl i c i e . a ud which latter court is also capable 
 section of the article which I had the honor to O f exten8 ion according to her wants, in a mode per- 
 lay before them on the first of the present month : { ec( i y slm p| e . 
 
 This district system of county courts is attended 
 with many advantages; the district judge will be 
 
 ber of the district judges, that city may be sup- 
 plied with as many courts, civil and criminal, as 
 her necessities require, all founded on the same 
 Ian, governed by the same rules, and in perfect 
 unison witn the courts throughout the Slate. I 
 
 5)9. There shall in each county, be a county court 
 which shall have tin- jurisdiction now exis 
 
 county courts, subject to modulation and alteration by I tne incumbent of a responsible and respectable 
 J kW ^ ldal b 8U 1 c a h Ar e< l uil y afldotherjari8di may office, and it may well be believed that men of 
 
 8 Inthe^lrt judicial district, there shall be lour district | competent ability will, under such an organiza- 
 
 ofthe county court; each of th hold ri ()1) , occupy the station, and thus the community 
 
 county court- i iot tor the trial and c n| hp (,-,,. j snei j w jth a,n efficient, well qualified judge, 
 
 said district judges. I State. This judije too will he free from the oh- 
 
 hot the other judicial districts there shall be^a j j ect i on of local and personal prejudices and influ- 
 ences which might be made against one, who was 
 
 
 county court : he shall a d 
 
 judges shall he associated v, ith him. '1 he term of 
 said district judges shall he igUt yedis : they shnl! 
 pointed by the joint ballot ol the members of UK 
 ana Assembly. Any aistiiot judge appointed to liil <t va- 
 cancy shall hold h 
 
 The district judges oi one district nv.iy i'cld courts in 
 anv other district, and shall do so, when ruiuived by law: 
 ;lges may be authorised by law to hold 
 
 Theral! in < ach county be a first judge and an asso- 
 
 Ciatc judge: they shall be eke tod by the qualified electors 
 
 will be entitled to respect and confidence; he will 
 every imaginable inducement to perform his 
 duties well and satisfactorily, so that his court may 
 compare favorably with that next above him, and 
 il IK- may justly be entitled to a promotion to 
 r tribunal. This system of district coun- 
 ty courts has worked successfully in other states, 
 whi-n- it has lonu been in operation. For the trial 
 and disposition of civil causes in this tribunal, one 
 
744 
 
 judge is abundantly sufficient; and so well satis- 
 fied is the community of this fact, that several 
 counties in the Stale have applied for power to 
 have the common pleas court held by one judge, 
 and acts accordingly have been passed. 
 
 The section under consideration provides for a 
 first and an associate county judge in each county ; 
 these judges are to form a constituent part of the 
 criminal court of the county: they are to sit with 
 the circuit judge in the over and terminer and with 
 the district judge in the general sessions, and thus 
 a sate and convenient court is Jormed tor the ad- 
 ministration of justice in criminal cases. It is also 
 proposed to devolve on the first judge the powers 
 ut surrogate, and this I deem an important and 
 salutary provision. It will elevate both offices by 
 rendering the station more responsible and im- 
 portant j it will tend to secure adequate ability, 
 and all this at diminished expense to the counties. 
 By another provision of this section, the Legisla 
 lure have the power of conferring on this surro 
 gate some equity powers, such as those relating to 
 fhe estates 01" lunatics, infants, habitual drunkards, 
 partitions in certain cases, &c., which it has been 
 deemed by many could safely and to the great con- 
 venience of the public, be conferred on that officer. 
 The further power is vested in the Legislature to 
 give such jurisdiction to the associate judge as may 
 be desirable, and under this he might be invested 
 with much, if not all of that power which is now 
 exercised by the individual judges of the county 
 courts. 
 
 It is further provided that these district judges 
 may hold courts for each other and also circuit 
 courts, a provision that will tend to equalize the 
 labors of the judges and to provide for various con- 
 tingencies. But, sir, it is scarcely necessary for 
 me to argue farther in favor of the tribunal propo- 
 sed by this section. The gentleman from Chau- 
 tauque (Mr. MARVIN) has'in the ariicle presented 
 by him to the Convention on the twelfth ot this 
 month, inserted a section in all substantial parti- 
 culars in harmony with that now under considera- 
 tion, and he made an able argument in suppoit of 
 the substance of my plan. I was happy, also, sir, 
 to hear that gentleman say that after hearing ihe 
 convincing remarks of the gentleman from Erie, 
 (Mr- STOW,) he was in favor of my proposed union 
 of the offices of judge and surrogate in one person. 
 
 NDW, sir, one word to the gentleman from Chau- 
 tauque,' in reference to the matter of the trial of 
 equitv causes at the circuits and their subsequent 
 disposition, a matter in relation to which the gen- 
 tleman, from the remarks he made on the floor a 
 few days since, does not yet seem to be satisfied. 
 The explanation, sir, is summed up in a word 
 equitv cases properly triable at a circuit court, are 
 to be'tried and disposed of precisely as cases at 
 liw it' no legal questions arise, the party prevail- 
 ing 'will be entitled to his decree, as he would 
 beat law to his judgment ; if such questions do 
 at-HH the paity deleaied prepares his papers and 
 argues his' cause in bane precisely as he would, 
 were it a case at law. And, sir, if any man can 
 fch'iw why there should be any difference in the 
 mode of trying and disposing of these two classes 
 of caes, (where tne facts are such as to render a 
 trial by jury suitable,) he will accomplish no ordi- 
 nary task. 
 
 I might, Mr. Chairman, extend my remarks on 
 
 the ability and necessity of county courts not 
 such as now exist but county courts properly and 
 efficiently organized; but if the facts and conside- 
 rations I have already presented fail to convince 
 the committee, nothing that 1 could . dd would 
 produce conviction. The union ot the two tribu- 
 nals (of law and equiiy) and the trial of equity 
 cases at. the circuits, is an experiment, but an ex- 
 periment which I most sincerely believe, under a 
 well organized judiciary svstem, would be emi- 
 nently successful, and would produce results the 
 most happy and beneficent. Bui, sir, if the Con. 
 venlion adopt the organization ot the supreme 
 court as proposed by the majority of the judiciary 
 committee, and (as is also substantially proposed 
 by that majority) refuse to establish county courts 
 of original jurisdiction, it requires, I think, no 
 spirit of prophecy lo foretell the faie of the new 
 judiciary system. It will prove totally inadequate 
 to its task ; it will linger out a brief and a mise- 
 rable existence, arid will then suffer an UD lamented 
 death and be consigned to an unhonored grave. 
 In the responsibility of causing such a calamity, I, 
 for one, sir, can never consent to share j on others 
 must this heavy burden wholly rest. 
 
 Mr. WARD said it was his intention to have 
 submitted his views on this subject, somewhat 
 at length but so much time having been occu- 
 pied by members of the judiciary comm t ee and 
 others, that he should content himself with a 
 very brief statement of s<>me of the reasons for 
 the vote he was about to give on this impor- 
 tant subject. And before doing this, he must be 
 permitted to congratulate the chairman of the 
 committee on the near termination of his arduous 
 duty, and the Convention on having reached a 
 point where we could see our way clear through 
 this important report. This discussion, if it had 
 done little good, as some thought, had certainly 
 done no harm ; and he trusted that we should 
 soon come to a vote upon the great question be- 
 fore us. We had already disposed of the legis- 
 lative and executive departments of the govern- 
 ment; and this question of the judiciary being 
 settled, the labors of this body, he trusted, would 
 soon be brought to a close. He confessed that he 
 came here fully impressed with the belief that no 
 olher'changes would be necessary in our j .dietary 
 system (ban to make some further provision in re- 
 gard io our court of errors, and perhaps lo add 
 somewhat to the force in our supieme court and 
 court of chancery, keeping them as now, separate 
 and distinct tribunals. But after the overwhelm- 
 ing vote in f,tvor of uniting these twojurisdictions, 
 he felt constrained to yield his opinions and to ac- 
 quiesce in that of the convention. He did this 
 cheerfully, and he believed his constituents would 
 warrant that course. Nor could he doubt from the 
 almost entire unanimity here on that point, that 
 the great mass of the people were prepared tor this 
 change. And having made this concession, he 
 would say further, that being compelled lo make 
 his choice between the several systems before u , 
 and after having duly reflected on the subject, he 
 had come to the conclusion to sustain the plan of 
 the judiciary committee, as the next best plan to 
 that which he had in view. He should sustain it 
 by his vote, as the best plan under all the circum- 
 stances, thai could be had, with such modifications 
 in its details as would probably be made, and with 
 
745 
 
 the entire assent, he had no doubt, ot the judiciary 
 committee, if in harmony with the mum features 
 of it. How stood our present judiciary system, 
 and vvhat the force now on the bench ? We had a 
 court of errors, consisting of thirty-two senators, 
 and ;i Lieut. Gov a court of chancery with ach,ui 
 cellor at its head, two vice chancellors and an as- 
 sistant a supreme court of three judges and the 
 common pleas, consisting of five judges in each 
 county. The plan of the judiciary committee pro- 
 posed a court of appeals of eight members and a 
 supreme court ot thirty-two judges in all (as four 
 of the latter were to be taken to make up the court 
 of appeals) but thirty-six There weie differences 
 of opinion as to the ability of such a court to dis- 
 charg a the duties that would devolve upon it some 
 being confident that it would be quite adequate, and 
 others that it would not. And in connection with 
 this question, we had heard much in respect to the 
 practice in the courts of law and equity asfi this 
 convention could stop to arrange the practice in 
 these courts, or undertjake to assimilate them. The 
 truth was we could do nothing ourselves beyond 
 instituting a commission, or enjoining upon the 
 legislature some such reforms and indeed it was 
 scarcely necessary to do that, as the legislature 
 would no doubt see to it, if demanded by the pub- 
 lic voice, that 'provision was made for all needed 
 relorms in this particular, and especially if it 
 should be found necessary to carry out successfully 
 the plan here laid down. Our attention should be 
 turned in another direction. The convention had 
 virtually settled the question that our present judi- 
 ciary system should be demolished, and we must 
 make up our minds what system we would substi. 
 cute in its ulact. There could be no doubt that we 
 were to hare one court, in which the two juris- 
 dictions of law and equity were to be blended. We 
 had agreed to abolish the court of errors as now 
 organized, and to substitute in its place a new court 
 of appeals. That was not the recommendation of 
 the majority of the committee alone All the mi- 
 nority reports recommended the same thing 
 though they differed somewhat as to the mode in 
 which this appeal court should be organized. And 
 he felt warranted in saying further that the sense 
 of this body was decidedly averse to the common 
 pleas as now organized. 
 
 This ancient institution, of which we had heard 
 so much, was gone, and gone forever. And the 
 question which would probably occasion the most 
 difficulty, was whether we should establish such 
 a court in this constitution, and if so, what kind 
 of court it should be or whe'her the whole sub- 
 ject should be left to the legislature. Mr. WARD 
 glanced at the various substitutes for the county 
 court that had been proposed showing that they 
 all contemplated an entirely different thing from 
 the present county court, and in fact an entire 
 extinction of the county court to which we had 
 been accustomed, and with which some insisted 
 the people were well satisfied. This might be 
 said of the plan of the gentleman from New- 
 York (Mr. O'CoNOR). The plan of the gentle- 
 man from Oneida, (Mr. KIRKL AND,) contemplat- 
 ed a circuit court to all intents and purposes 
 the very court, as some say proposed by the ma- 
 jority of the judiciary committee. So with the 
 playi of the gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. 
 LOOMIS.) That too proposed a court of a higher 
 
 grade than the present county court having in 
 fact all the attributes of a circuit court. The 
 plan of the gentleman from Ontario, (Mr. WOR- 
 DEN,) from New York, (Mr. STEVENS,) and from 
 Chautauque, (Mr. MARVIN,) also contemplated 
 very much the same plan all these contemplat- 
 ing a presiding judge, with associates in the 
 counties this presiding judge being scarcely in- 
 ferior in qualifications and learning to a judge of 
 the supreme court. Certainly neither of these 
 was the inferior court which gentlemen professed 
 to desire and to erect. Again the gentleman from. 
 Otsego (Mr. ST. JOHN,) would have one of the 
 judges of the supreme court preside in the gene- 
 ral sessions or common pleas and in other re- 
 spects would make a circuit, not a county of it. 
 
 It did not differ materially from the plan' of the 
 
 gentleman from Catturaugus (Mr. CROCKER). 
 
 This plan, though in many respects a good one, 
 did not meet with favor. Others had suggested 
 plans for a county court, and we must select be- 
 tween them all. * That we could not have the first 
 
 judge and four associates, was definitely settled 
 
 and the question was whether we would retain it 
 in any shape. It was a fact within the know- 
 ledge of all, that our county expenses had in- 
 creased, were increasing, and would increase, un- 
 less we adopted some remedy. Mr. W. said he 
 had read with attention the report of Mr. J. J. 
 TAYLOR, from the select committee on this sub- 
 ject, and he proposed to make a slight reference 
 to the results which had been brought out in re- 
 gard to the expenses of this court compared with 
 the circuit. 
 
 And he desired in connection with this, to im- 
 press upon the Convention the importance of 
 looking to the interests of the people as well as 
 the suitor, in this matter and to urge that whilst 
 we provided good courts for the litigants, it was 
 our duty to save to the people as much as possible 
 of the expense to which they were now subject- 
 ed. It appeared that the amount allowed county 
 judges, for attending county courts and courts of 
 over and terminer, during the year 1845, in forty- 
 three counties from which returns had been re- 
 received, was $14,063. The remaining sixteen 
 counties, would, at the same ratio, increase the 
 amount beyond $20,000, which would be some 
 $8,000 more than the salaries of all the circuit 
 'udges, or the salaries of the justices of the su- 
 preme court and the chancellor. The whole 
 aumber of causes tried in the common pleas court 
 in the same counties, with the exception of the 
 city and county of New- York, was GO], while the 
 whole number of eases tried at the circuits, with 
 :he same exception of the city and county of 
 New- York, was 7 10. The verdicts at the cir- 
 cuits, with the like exception, amount to $232,- 
 31G GO; in common pleas to $37,7G4 85- beimr 
 |196,601 7] less than the verdicts rendered at 
 the circuits. The common pleas courts were in 
 session, to discharge the small amount of business 
 in the counties mentioned, one thousand six hun- 
 dred and fifty-six days : the circuits four hundred 
 and eighty days. Making a difference of one 
 ;housand one hundred and sixty-eight. There 
 was allowed as chargeable to counties, for fees 
 during that year in these county courts of grand 
 $11,232 98 
 
 For petut j u i or 
 
 Of sheriils and constables- 
 
 68 
 
 19,219 64 
 9,93867 
 
746 
 
 Criers 1672 Oc 
 
 County clerks 4169 91 
 
 Add the amount paid county judges alieady 
 
 ...... '. 14, 653 0( 
 
 $60,915 22 
 
 Gentlemen could calculate for themselves to 
 what extent the remaining sixteen counties wouk 
 swell the aggregate expenses, to which must be 
 added the heavy expense of sustaining poor wit 
 nesses, while attending court. 
 
 Mr. WARD here gave way for a motion to rise 
 which prevailed, and 
 
 The Convention took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. WARD (having the floor from the morn- 
 ing) said that when the committee rose this 
 morning, he had shown from the report of the 
 gentleman from Tioga (Mr. J. J. TAYLOR) tha 
 one-half of the expense, if not more, of our coun 
 ty court system, might be saved if we could have 
 a court that would dispatch business with the ra- 
 pidity and ease with which it had been dispatch- 
 ed by the circuit judges. Half the judges provi- 
 ded for in this article could do the business now 
 done by the circuit judges. But in the remarks 
 he had submitted, he had had reference simply to 
 county expenses. But there was still another 
 consideration that would not be without weight 
 with those whom he had the honor of addressing 
 for they were all probably familiar with the 
 evil to which he should advert it was well 
 known at least to the profession, that by reason 
 of the delays in our courts to the circumstance 
 that the court found itelf unable to get through its 
 calendar the jurors and witnesses whose com- 
 pensation was any thing but adequate to their ex- 
 penses, to say nothing of the loss of time in at- 
 tending upon the court, were often compelled to 
 return again, and term after term to attend the 
 trial of the deferred causes. If, then, in the re- 
 organization of our judiciary system, it was pos- 
 sible for us to establish such a court as should be 
 able to dispatch business, civil and criminal, with 
 ease and facility, and to the satisfaction of parties 
 and the public, so that the docket at each term 
 should be cleared, we should not only secure a 
 vast saving to the counties, but a vast saving in 
 the aggregate, in time and money, to those who 
 received no remuneration in fact, but who were 
 obliged, under severe penalties, to attend these 
 courts. But having said thus much this morning 
 in references to the re-crganization of the com- 
 mon pleas, he proposed to advert a moment to 
 the disposition proposed to be ^nade of this sub- 
 ject by the majority of the judiciary committee. 
 They proposed to leave this whole matter of the 
 organization of inferior courts to the legislature, 
 as the U. States Constitution left it to Congress 
 to create courts inferior to the supreme court of 
 the U. S. His own impression was that the pub- 
 lic interest would be better subserved by leaving 
 it there. He was not, however, so wedded to his 
 opinion that he could not yield it, if the majority 
 here should think otherwise. But if left, as the 
 majority ui the judiciary committee udvintd, to ihe 
 good sense of the legislaiuie, under a lull view ol' 
 the operation of the system, he must be permitted to 
 say that this power could scarcely be more wisely 
 vested, if the legislature deem it advisable to or- 
 
 ganize such a court, they ui duublfdly would do 
 so, and we should save ourselves a great deal of 
 time and trouble in e?ideavoring to icconeile utws 
 on this difficult subject. How did this ma:ter 
 stand ? Probably one of the best courts in the 
 state was the creature of legislation. He alluded 
 to i he: superior court in the cny ot New York. 
 There could be no doubt that there should be (;>< - 
 cial provision made lor the large cities as requir- 
 ing a greater judicial force than the rural districts 
 of the slate. It wa* important especially for such 
 large cities as New York and Brooklyn, that the 
 power of establishing interior com is there, or <. .{' 
 regulating such as might be established by this 
 constitution, should be left to the legislature. He 
 would by no means lake this power from theli- 
 gislaiute. Btooklyn prcbabh now required a su. 
 perior court. This would doubtless be the case 
 wiih Buffalo, Rochester, Utica, Troy and Aibauy, 
 and that loo at no distant day. It was beyond a 
 doubt that they would require additional force 
 there. II the power to es<,!biish these interior 
 tribunals was left with the legislatuie, there could 
 be no doubt, from what had been done, that they 
 world provide such tribunals as the public exi- 
 gencies from time to tune might demand ; and 
 more satisfactorily meet ihesa requisitions than 
 we could hope to do in advance. iVir.W. re- 
 marked here that it was a most gsatifyin^ cir- 
 cumstance to him, ihar in the course of this 
 whole discussion, not a word of complaint had 
 fallen from any gentleman, in disparagement of 
 the integrity, intelligence, ability, and learning 
 of our present chancellors and judges. And 
 the fuel could not bui be gratifying to the 
 incumbents of these high stations, (be results < f 
 whose arduous labors had been more or less passed 
 n review before u^. For himself, he regarded 
 fhem with pride, as a citizen of New York, :<s 
 men who had contributed much to the tame of ihis 
 yreat state. Their decisions were not merely re- 
 garded as high authority here and throughout the 
 union, but they were sought for arid read abroad; 
 and had been read as authority in the English 
 courts. Th^re was no feeling, he was sure, either 
 here or in the public mind, against these able 
 'unctionaries; and if this reorganization of ifm 
 courts should Lake place, and the constitution lati- 
 fied by the people, he should teel paiticulsrly 
 gratified to see the honorable and distinguished 
 gentlemen now holding judicial stations under the 
 present system, provided fo< under the new. No 
 doubt that would be so, if they had a desiie |r 
 continue in this arduous and responsible field of 
 duty. 
 
 Mr. W. here glanced at the proposition to pay 
 he surrogates a salary from the county treasury, 
 f called upon to vote on such a proposition, he 
 ihould vote against it. He thought the free sys- 
 em decidedly preferable ; the fee bill has been 
 educed. It was a system under which we had 
 long lived, and which the legislature could at any 
 time adjust, to meet any complaints that might 
 exist against it. Already had the legislature act- 
 ed in reference to the fees of these officers ; and 
 he believed that since that time, there had been 
 no complaints against the system. At all avents, 
 he should very much regret to see the counties 
 burthened with the additional expense of a saltry 
 
747 
 
 of $3000 per year for the surrogate. Better leave 
 that where it is. 
 
 Mr. W. next proceeded to a brief review of the 
 several plans of a judiciary system that had been 
 proposed by the members remarking that the 
 plan of the majority of the judiciary committee, 
 in his opinion, was not only in all respects ade- 
 quate to the business of the state, but in the main 
 the plan which best comported with his views of 
 a judiciary system. The plan of the hon. gentle- 
 man from' New- York, (Mr. O'CoNOR,) one of the 
 judiciary committee, provided for a supreme 
 court to consist of a chief justice and twelve jus- 
 tices ; any of whom may hold the court civil 
 causes at issue to be tried before any of the 
 judges any three, or any one of them with one 
 or more county judges, to hold county courts, and 
 courts of over and terrniner and general jail de- 
 liveryall causes and matters depending in the 
 court of chancery to be transferred to the supreme 
 court. This plan, as far as regarded the organi- 
 sation of the supreme court, was the same in 
 every respect, as the present system, with the 
 addition of ten judges, which seemed to meet 
 with no favor in this Convention. The terms of 
 the court would no doubt, be alternate between the 
 cities of New- York, Albany, Utica and Roches- 
 ter, as now. If there was any weight in the ob- 
 jection urged to the plan of a majority of the com- 
 mittee that the number of judges would not be 
 adequate to discharge all the business which 
 might come before them, the same objection ap- 
 plied with much greater force against this plan of 
 Mr. O'CONCR'S. For these thirteen judges are 
 required to perform all the equity, civil and 
 criminal bi(sin ,-,s in the state, and to hold the 
 circuits and courts of oyer and terminer in the 
 several counties. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said he provided for forty-seven 
 judges. 
 
 Mr. WARD alluded to the matter of appeals, 
 and to the great complaints made in the expense 
 now of taking a cause up from court to court. 
 The plan of the hon. gentleman from Oneida, 
 (Mr. KIRKLAND,) another of the judiciary com- 
 mittee, provided for dividing the state into six 
 districts, with a superior court in each district, 
 to have jurisdiction in all matters of law and 
 equity within the state, and such supervisory 
 and other power, over inferior tribunals and 
 officers within each district, as now existed 
 in the supreme court subject to the appellate 
 jurisdiction- of the supreme court of appeals. 
 i'ht; city ot New-Yu:k lo be the first dismci, and 
 to have six judges; each of the other distiicis. 
 lour; numbering in all twenty-six judges ol the 
 superior court, beside* the judges of the court ol 
 a.-pt-ais the laiter as well as the judges ot the 
 superior Court to hold circuits and courts of oyer 
 and terminer, with whom were lobe associated 
 two judges of ti)9 common pleas; the judges to be 
 elected and to hold their offices Tor ten years. 
 The gentleman lii-.d rnade no provision for a su- 
 preme court witli general jurisdiction, but there 
 \\f< to b>' an appeal from the *tipenor court duect- 
 ty to the couit of appeals the latter to have ap- 
 pellate jurisdiction only. The numerical force of 
 the court of appeals and supreme court in ihis 
 plan exceeded the number recommended by the j 
 loiumitiee. It did not present the advantage of] 
 
 its being a less expensive judiciary system than 
 the present one. As regarded this Superior court, 
 it presented no difference from that court as now 
 provided tor by statute law, for the city of New- 
 York. Mr. W. confessed that he could not view- 
 it as possessing the merits which the author seem- 
 ed to think it did, and which he had maintained 
 with much eloquence. 
 
 He (Mr. W.) thought that the plan of taking 
 appeals in this way would be attended with great- 
 er expense and greater delay than the present sys- 
 tem. The committee's plan is preferable; it is a 
 Supreme court with four judges for each Senate 
 District ; they are to hold the Circuit courts and 
 Oyer and Terminer. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that those superior courts 
 would have the same power as the Supreme court; 
 as much as the courts in Massachusetts, and double 
 that of those in Connecticut. There was to be no 
 intermediate appeal. 
 
 Mr. WARD : No ; the appeals are to be had di- 
 rectly from this inferior court to this superior 
 court. He could see no difference between that 
 plan and the plan of a majority of the committee, 
 except that the plan of the committee was the 
 best. The plan of the honorable gentleman from 
 Seneca, (Mr. BASCOM,) another member of the 
 judiciary committee, provided for the election of 
 thirty-two judges the state to be divided into 
 four judicial districts circuit sessions to be held 
 by one of the judges of the Supreme court in 
 each of the counties of the judicial district, for 
 the trial of all issues civil or criminal the sur- 
 rogate and one of the justices of the peace to be 
 associated with the circuit jud^e bane sessions 
 to be held in each county by not less than three, 
 nor more than four judges of the superior court, 
 to review the decisions and proceed ingsot the cir- 
 cuit sessions, and to transact such other duties in 
 relation to the administration and the establish- 
 ment of lights, as shall be prescribed by lav% ap- 
 peal sessions composed of the judges whose term 
 of office shall be within one year ot its expiration, 
 to be h-eld in the several judicial districts. The 
 honorable gentleman seemed to think that the legal 
 business in the state, and therefore dispensed with 
 the court of errors o^r appeals, and the court of 
 common pleas, which the gentleman thought 
 worse than useless. It was the same in regard 
 to the number of judges as the committees; 
 it has many good points but has not the pre- 
 ference as a whole. Mr. W. said he would not 
 detain the committee with any further remark 
 on this plan than this : that the people of this 
 state had been so long accustomed to a court 
 of last resort to pass upon proceedings in 
 these inferior courts that they were not yet pre- 
 pared to dispense with it. The plan of the hon- 
 orable gentleman from Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) 
 provided for a court for the correction of errors, 
 a court of equity, a supreme court, county courts, 
 and courts of oyer and terminer, and such inferi- 
 or courts as may be prescribed by law the court 
 of last resort to consist of a chief justice and nine 
 associate justices the court of equity of a chief 
 justice, and not less than four associate justices 
 the supreme court of a chief justice and twelve 
 associates, any four of them to hold the court the 
 state to be divided into not less than five districts 
 terms of the supreme court and of the court of 
 
748 
 
 equity to be held in each judicial district th 
 legislature to have power to confer equity powei 
 on the supreme court. This plan in its main fea 
 tare the separation of the equity and law juris 
 diction having been in effect rejected by th 
 Convention it might be regarded as wholly ou 
 of the question, and he should not remark furthe 
 on it. Such a plan can never be adopted by th 
 Convention ; it not only retains all the objection 
 able features of 'the old system ; but goes farthe 
 and confers equity powers on the inferior courts 
 The plan of the honorable gentleman from Otse 
 go, (Mr. ST. JOHN,) vested all the judicial powe 
 in a supreme court, to consist of a chief justic 
 and sixteen associates, the former to be electe 
 by the people the state to be divided into eigh 
 judicial districts,- and courts to be held in eac! 
 justices' courts to have original jurisdiction in al 
 cases where the actual balance between the par 
 ties does not exceed $250. It differs from the plai 
 of Mr. O'CoA-oR only in adding three judges. 
 There was no special provision here conferring 
 equity powers on the supreme court, nor for 
 court of appeals, and the plan was, it seemed t 
 him, in other respect* imperfect. Mr. ST. JOH 
 proposes to confer much greater power than the 
 committee does on the Legislature. But so far a 
 allowing this circuit judge to hold the oyer an* 
 terminer, he (Mr. W.) had no objection. Am 
 it must be manifest that if the present judicia 
 force in our court of chancery r supreme am 
 circuit courts was not adequate to transact the 
 present business, that the force proposed in 
 this plan would be equally inadequate. The 
 plan of the honorable gentleman from Genessee 
 (Mr. TAGGAKT) vested on the judicial power in 
 a supreme court, and in district, circuit, surrogate 
 and justices courts -the supreme court to have 
 appellate jurisdiction, and to consist of eight jus- 
 tices the state to be divided into four districts 
 a district court to be held in each with such equi- 
 ty powers as the legislature might confer five 
 judges to be elected'in each district, in all twen- 
 ty-eight the supreme court to hold one term in 
 each and every year by not less than three nor 
 more than four judges circuit courts to be held 
 in each county by a district judge or a justice of 
 the supreme court the surrogate and one justice 
 of the peace to be associated with a supreme court 
 judge in all criminal cases the legislature to have 
 power to establish inferior courts in counties hav- 
 ing more than (JO/JOO inhabitants, and to confer 
 equity powers on them. He (Mr. T.) probably 
 proposed to confer equity jurisdiction on all these 
 courts; and his highest term of office is 14 years. 
 Mr. W's. objection to this plan was the entire 
 change which it proposed in our judicial system, 
 and the absence in it of any feature answering to 
 our present court of errors. So great a change 
 he could scarcely expect would be well received 
 by the people. Again his supreme court, except 
 as regard to the members is the same as the 
 present supreme court. It will save us delay or 
 expense, and these are the only grounds of com- 
 plaint against tho present judicial system. The 
 plan of. the honorable gentleman from Chautau- 
 que (Mr. MARVIN) vested the judicial power in 
 a court for the trial of impeachments, a court of 
 appeals, chancery, supreme court, common pleas, 
 surrogates' and justices' courts, and courts of oyer 
 
 and terminer the State to be divided into com- 
 mon pleas districts each of them to choose a 
 president judge of the common pleas, to preside 
 m those courts and hold general" sessions of the 
 peace in each county. This plan was in fact the 
 present system, revised and enlarged upon and 
 from the votes already taken, it was manifest that 
 it could not find favor here, or elsewhere. It is* 
 not such a system as this Conventin will adopt 
 now, or the State adopt hereafter. It will much 
 increase the expense, and add greatly to the num- 
 ber of officers and also add to the delay. The au- 
 thor of this plan resided near Pennsylvania, and 
 no doubt from having attended the courts of that 
 State, had become somewhat wedded to that sys- 
 tem. The judicial power of that State was vest- 
 ed in a supreme court, common pleas, oyer and 
 terminer, an orphan's and a register's courts, a 
 court of quarter sessions for each county, and in 
 justices of the peace. The judges of the courts' 
 of record were appointed by the Governor and Sen- 
 atethe supreme court judges holding for fifteen, 
 and the.presjdent judges of the common pleas for 
 ten years the associate common pleas judges for 
 ive. The jurisdiction of the supreme court judges 
 is coextensive with the state, and they held courts 
 of oyer and terminer ; so did the president judges- 
 and one associate. The plan of the judiciary 
 committee had decided advantages over the Penn- 
 sylvania system. The supreme court and com- 
 mon pleas of that state were the only courts of 
 common law jurisdiction, and the supreme the 
 only court of appeal. This plan allowed an ap- 
 >eal from the circuit court to the supreme court, 
 and thence to the court of appeals, and the duties 
 equired of the circuit judge were the same as 
 hose performed by the presiding judge in Penn- 
 ylvania. And if two judges were to be elected 
 n each county to sit with the presiding judges in 
 he common pleas, then it was obvious that we 
 ould dispense with a part of the judicial force 
 >rovided for in the committee's report for we 
 hould then have a force more than adequate to 
 ransact all the equity and civil business at cir- 
 uit and in bane. 
 
 Mr. W. continued: Other gentlemen had spok. 
 n of the immense business of their districts 
 n the large cities, and especially at the west. 
 "^he hon. gentleman from JCrie, (Mr. So^w,) had 
 welt, in the com sent his remarks, at some length, 
 pun it. Now, he (Mr. WARD,) was willing to 
 oncede some extraordinary judicial aid to ihe 
 
 rge cities; besides that ot New York; for in. 
 tance, the city of Buffalo; that city was growing 
 vith astonishing rapidity iu wealth, enterprise, 
 itelligence, and commercial importance; she 
 ould soon vie with the Atlantic cities, arid the 
 ay is not tar distant when she will become one 
 f the greatest cities in the Union. All the iin- 
 ense amount of commerce and produce from the 
 ighty and far west must pass down our great 
 dkes to pour treasures into the growing and widen- 
 g lap of the city of Buffalo. Slate after State will 
 rise in that most remarkable region, the great west, 
 eopled by a race or the most industrious and en- 
 n rising ot the sons of men, and overflowing 
 ith intelligence, wealth and eneray The En- 
 ish language contained no words adequate to dt- 
 ribe the future prospects ol that wonderlul re- 
 oi), the recipient ol whose treasures must be 
 
Buffalo; and therefore that city must become th 
 principal city of the western world. Such a oily 
 therefore (with others) must have an adequate an' 
 efficient judicial force ; she must have her superio 
 court, and a supreme court lor rhat county anc 
 district ; and whatever else i.s necessary and ade 
 quate to her wants. Now, therefore, the question 
 is, is the plan proposed bv the committee adequate 
 to what is thus required?. Distinctly and une- 
 quivocally, he thought that it was! He could 
 speak tor the district he had the honor, in part 
 to represent and his imnression was, from his 
 knowledge of it, that there was not a district 
 in the state where- there was so much litigation in 
 law and equity, as in that district. The chair- 
 man of the judiciary committee (Mr. RTJGGLES,) 
 had been for years the judge of that circuit and 
 to his (Mr. W.'s) knowledge, he had transacted 
 not only all the equity business which was there 
 very large owing to the fact that it had been long 
 settled, and had a great amount of equity cases 
 growing out of the settlement of estates (the equity 
 business of which district exceeds probably that 
 of any other in the state but had, with perfect 
 ease and facility, transacted all the business ol 
 the circuit all the civil and criminal business at 
 every term leaving nothing to go over, when 
 the cases were ready. And if our circuit judges 
 could perform all that duty, with ease and facili- 
 ty, and with such benefit to suitors and the pub- 
 lic with satisfaction to the people with how 
 much more ease could this business be done un- 
 der the system proposed by the majority of the 
 judiciary committee. If you add one more judge 
 to a circuit, and let him go through his circuit 
 and try the bvilance of the business left at the com- 
 mon picas and general sessions. It could be done 
 with vast ease, and then you will have two judges 
 idle. But you say they will have to take testi- 
 mony in chancery cases ; well that will not amount 
 to one-eighth of the testimony now taken in all 
 these circuit court cases ; one judge could do it in 
 one-fourth of the time and one judge still be idle. 
 Then these four judges can do all the circuit duty 
 . the civil duty the criminal duty and the equity 
 cases and hold four terms in bane, and discharge 
 all with ease. These facts he regarded as con- 
 clusive and as worth more in arriving at a correct 
 result than any mere arithmeticarcalculations 
 that could be made. Mr. W. submitted some re- 
 marks in regard to the details of the plan of the 
 judidiciary committee, expressing a preference 
 for an election of judges of the court of appeals 
 by general ticket, rather than to have part of 
 them elected by the whole state and part by dis- 
 tricts. At the same time, he should vote on all 
 these matters of detail with a view to harmonize 
 opinions and to procure for the state the very best 
 system that could, under the circumstances, be 
 agreed on. 
 
 Mr. W. would say in conclusion that it was not 
 to be presumed that the judiciary committee, in 
 presenting their report 1'or the consideration of 
 the Convention, entertained the opinion that it 
 was in every respect perfect, but they presented 
 it alfer having devoted much time to its conside- 
 ration, as the best plan they could devise, leav- 
 ing it to the combined wisdom of this Convention 
 to alter, modify or confirm the sumo as in its 
 judgment it should seem meet; and from his ac- 
 
 quaintance with the members of this Convention 
 individually, he had no hesitation in stating as his 
 firm belief, that they would meet the subject in 
 a spirit of mutal concession and compromise, and 
 if they should err in coming to a result, it would 
 not be owing to a wish to gratify personal consid- 
 erations nor a desire to promote personal aggran- 
 dizement, but to an error of judgment. We must 
 therefore meet the question promptly, fearlessly 
 and honestly, and if the provisions in this article 
 were not in exact accordance with our own de- 
 sires, let us nevertheless, yield to the wishes of 
 the majority of this Convention, and he trusted 
 when the people came to act upon it, they would 
 be actuated by the same spirit and would approve 
 and ratify our doings. 
 
 Tne true plan to proceed upon, in the opinion 
 of Mr. W., was the one recommended by the 
 judiciary committee; that would effectually an- 
 swer for the despatch of business, and for the at- 
 tainment of sound and cheap justice. When they 
 came to thre details, and come to vote thereon, he 
 would feel constrained to vote for a general tick- 
 et. Gentlemen had spoken of the uniformity in 
 the decisions of these courts. If there was any 
 thing in that complaint, you must remember you 
 have eight circuits now ; each judge hears his 
 own causes and decides in his own way ; so you 
 have fifty-nine courts of common pleas. They de- 
 cide according to the law of the land; and where 
 they have differed, it is taken to the court above ; 
 and it is in this upper court that we have to look 
 for uniformity of decisions. 
 
 We have tried our old system : it has worked 
 well; except that it has been overloaded by a 
 flood of business this has overwhelmed it. We 
 are about to make an experiment. We can only 
 make the best effort in our power ; it is our sa- 
 cred duty and proud privilege to do this ; and for 
 his own part he (Mr. W.) was entirely satisfied 
 that every gentleman would discharge his duty 
 faithfully and honorably to his constituents. If 
 we err it will not be owing to a want of zeal or 
 exertion or watchfulness on any point; but ari- 
 sing from the common imperfections to be found 
 in human nature every where. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE submitted the following, with 
 a view to have it printed, and to move it at a 
 proper time, as an amendment: 
 
 1. The Legislature shall provide against frivolous and 
 vexatious appeals and writs 01 error, by requiring that a 
 udgment or decree rendered by the supreme court, shall 
 >Q executed, notwithstanding an appeal or writ of error, 
 upon adequate security being given to make lull restitu- 
 ion in the event of a reversal or modification ol such 
 udgment or decree, or appeal. 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. MANN submitted the amendments in 
 brm, he had indicated in his remarks this mor- 
 ning. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN addressed the 
 Convention at much length, in explaining 
 at he conceived to be the views of the people 
 n regard to the re-organization of the judiciary 
 system. They did not expect this Convention to 
 establish a system which was to remain unchang- 
 ed for a half or a whole century. They intended 
 hat the details should be left to legislation, and 
 le conceded that the judiciary committee had 
 
75(T 
 
 acted o.i this principle. They expected also the 
 aboliti m of the court of errors, and in this too 
 the judiciary committee had met their expecta- 
 tions. He did not object to the abolition of the 
 court of chancery 'but he did to the blending of 
 the practice in law and equity. Mr. V. S. then 
 proceeded to examine the details of the report, 
 of most of which he was in favor. He was in 
 favor also of a common pleas of some sort, but not 
 of the character that now existed. He believed 
 however, that no system amid the variety of 
 opinions that prevailed could be settled in this 
 Convention, and in his opinion, therefore, the pro- 
 vision of the report giving this matter to the 
 Legislature was abundantly sufficient. The 
 legislature could create local courts as wisely arid 
 as fully meet the wants of the State in regard to 
 them, as could this Convention, and the legis- 
 lature couid also reform the errors of its own 
 creating. He did not have that distrust of the 
 Legi- l.ature which seemed to characterize some 
 gentlemen. In conclusion Mr. V. S". said that 
 he had fully reflected on the report of the major- 
 ity, and had been forced to conclude that unless 
 that report was 'substantially adopted being as 
 it was b:~t a mere designation of generalities and 
 not of detail that there would be a failure to 
 settle upon any one which could be drawn from 
 the conflicting propositions presented by gentle- 
 men. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD urged that the remaining few 
 minutes which were allowed to the committee of 
 the wh'ue on this question, should be occupied 
 he voting upon the amendments proposed. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS for the purpose of disembar- 
 rassing the question of all other matters, than 
 that simply relating to the formation of separate 
 courts of common pleas, modified his amendment 
 offered on Saturday by striking out all that re- 
 lates to the election of' judges, so that it would 
 read as follows : 
 
 1. There shall be established in each of the counties of 
 this state a court of cornmun pleas, wiih the same powers 
 and jurisdiction which now belong to the court of com- 
 mon pleas in tl:e several counties of this siate. 
 
 There shall be in each ol tbe judicial districts of this 
 state, a judge who shall be known as the president judge 
 ol the court of common pleas, for the district in which he 
 shall be elected, who may hold courts ol common pleas in 
 any ot the cou ..tes of the state, and who shall hold his 
 ollice for eight years. 
 
 Pending a conversation which then ensued the 
 hour of six arrived and in pursuance oi the order 
 the committee rose, and reported the article to 
 the Convention. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that the committee 
 have leave to sit again upon the report on the 
 codification of the laws, referred to same com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to adjourn. Agreed to. 
 
 TUESDAY, (list day) August 25. 
 
 The Convention met this morning at k past 8; 
 and thert! were only 22 members present at that 
 hour. 
 
 There was no clergyman present. 
 
 Mr. DODD presented I he memorial from citi- 
 zens of W ; ishin^ton county,^against the proposed 
 plan to N take away the literature fund trorn the 
 acadamies of the st;itc. Referred to the appropri- 
 ate committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN presented a irTeinnrial from citi- 
 zens of Km^s county, condemning those who op- 
 pose the election of judges by the people. It was 
 lead and referred. 
 
 Mr. TUTHILL presented a remonstrance from 
 citizens of Orange county, against the proposed 
 diversion of ihf literature fund. Referred as usual. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a report from the 
 Clerk in Chancery of the 4th district, relative to 
 the funds now in the hands of the Registers and 
 Clerks of the Court of Chancery. 
 
 On motion of Mr. MANN, it was ordered to be 
 printed and laid on the table until the other re- 
 ports should come in. 
 
 CANALS AND FINANCES. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL presented a plan to pay the debts 
 of the State as a substitute for the report on the 
 canals and finances as presented some time since 
 by Mr. HOFFMAN. It was read, as follows : 
 
 1. The distinction between the general fund and the 
 canal fund is abolished. All the revenues of the State, 
 from whatever source derived, shall constitute a fund, 
 which shall be deemed the St ite fund. All cents owing 
 by the State, and all liabilities incurred by the State, shall 
 in the aggregate be denominated the State debt. 
 
 2. Alter paying the expenses of the collection, super- 
 intendance and ordinary repairs, one million, six hundred 
 thousand dollars, of the revenues ol the State canals shall 
 in each h'scal year, and at that rate for a shorter period, 
 commencing 1st June, 1846, be set apart as a sinking fund, 
 to pay the interest and redeem the principal of the State 
 debt until the same shall be wholly paid, and the princi- 
 pal and income of the said sinking fund shall be sacrtdly 
 applied to that purpose and no other 
 
 3 The surplus revenues of the said canals, after paying 
 the said expenses of said canals and the sum appropriated 
 by the preceding section as a sinking fund, shall be ap- 
 plied in such manner as may be directed by law, to the 
 payment of the expenses requisite to complete the Erie 
 canal enlargement, and the expenses requisite to com- 
 plete all such other canals as have bi en commenced and 
 partially completed, under and by virtue of any of the 
 laws of the State 
 
 5) 4. After completing the aforesaid enlargement and un- 
 finished canals, the entire nett revenue ol all the canals of 
 the State shall be inviolably applied to the payment of the 
 interest and the redemption of the principal of the State 
 debt, until the same be fully paid and extinguished. 
 
 5. The legislature shall not sell, lease, or otherwise 
 dispose of any of the canals of the State, but they shall re- 
 main the property of the State and under its management 
 forever. 
 
 It was referred to the committee of the whole 
 having charge of the reports of Mr. HOFFMAN 
 and Mr. BOUCK, on the subject of the canals, 
 public revenues, finances, and state debt and or- 
 dered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. STOW presented the following resolu- 
 tion: 
 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to furnish 
 a statement showing from what sources the sums paid 
 f;om the treasury, tor the support of the government Irom 
 and including the year 1817, up to and including the year 
 1845, were derived in each year, and the aggregate amounts 
 received from the treasury each year iiom those sources. 
 
 It was adopted. 
 
 -THK JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 The PRESIDENT announced the unfinished 
 business to be the article on the judiciary, as re- 
 ported by the committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved that the committee 
 have leave to sit again, (as he proposed last night) 
 in order to consider the report of Mr. WHITE, on 
 the codification of the laws; which report had 
 been referred to the same committee of the 
 whole. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the committee of the 
 

 751 
 
 whole which had that subject in charge having 
 been discharged, the proper motion would be to 
 ' recommit that of Mr. WHITE to a committee of 
 the whole. 
 
 To this Mr. CHATFIELD assented, and a 
 count was taken : ayes 4o, noes 19 no, quorum, 
 but it was declared to be carried. 
 
 The question was on agreeing to the 1st sec- 
 tion, as amended in committee. 
 
 It was read as follows: 
 
 & 1. The Assembly shall have the power of impeachment 
 by vhe vote ot a majority o! all the members elected. The 
 court lor the trial ol impeachmen s slull ho composed of 
 the president of the Seua'.e, the Senators, or the major part 
 of them-, and the judges of the court of appeals, and the 
 majr part of them. On thr trial ot an impeach merit agaiust 
 the Governor, the Lieut. Governor shall n'ot iorm i art ol 
 the court. No judicial officer shall exercise his office af- 
 ter he shall have been impeached, until his acquitdl. Be- 
 fore the trial of an impeachment, the members ot the court 
 shall take an oa'h or affirmation, truly and impartially to 
 try the impeachment, iiccording to evidence; and no per 
 son shall he convicted, without the concum-ncc ol "two. 
 thirds of the member* present. Judgment in cases of im- 
 peachment shall not extend further than to removal from 
 office, or disqualification to hold and ei joy any office ot 
 honor, trust or profh under this state; but the purty im- 
 peached shall be liable to indictment and punishment ac- 
 cording to l*w. 
 
 Mr. HUNT'moved to amend the 14th line by 
 inserting the word " convicted" instead of the 
 word " impeached." 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said that the section was right 
 as it stood. The amendment would have the ef- 
 fect of causing the parties to be twice tried. 
 
 Mr. HUNT withdrew it. 
 
 The 1st section was then agreed to. 
 
 The 2d section was then read, as follows : 
 
 ^ -2. Th< re shall be a court of appeals, composed of eight 
 judges, of whom four shall be elected by the electors of 
 the t>tate for eight years, and lour selected from the class 
 ol" Justices of the Supreme Court having the shortest time 
 to serve. Provision shall be made, bj law, for designat- 
 ing one of the number elected, as chief judge, and for se- 
 lecting such Justices of the Supreme Court, from time to 
 time, and lor so classifying those elected, that one shall 
 be elected every second year. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN suggested that this section should 
 be passed over until the Convention has decided 
 on the, constitution or organization of the supreme 
 court. This point should be decided definitely 
 before they acted on the 2d section. 
 
 Mr. HART moved to strike out all after the 
 word judges in the 1st line and insert the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 " Elected by the electors of the state, by general ticket; 
 and provision shall be made by law so to classify the judges 
 first elected that one-hall thereof shall hold their offices 
 four years, and the other hall eight; and the judges of the 
 said court shall thereafter he elected in like manner a^d 
 hold their offices eight years " 
 
 Mr. HART had one or two reasons for offering 
 this amendment. He considered that the court ot 
 last result should represent the entire state, and 
 not a meie section of the state; and he believed 
 this leeiing was very genes al. Fuither, it. would 
 be inconvenient tor the judgis to go in and out ol 
 this court in every one or iwo years. Again, he 
 believed thai we should need the entire thirty-two 
 judges to do t 3s of the stale, trial ol 
 
 cau-e-;, ^ & The-e were his reasons, and he 
 should rouble the house no turiher. 
 
 Mi. MANN called tor the leading of his amend- 
 ment to tins section, presented yesterd-iy. It was 
 read, as 
 
 A chief justice shull br i ie electors of ihis 
 
 stale, who shall hold his office for four years, and shall 
 
 S reside over the j'n'ii.-i.iry of the s ate, It shall be his 
 uty to prescribe forms and rules ol practice in the su- 
 preme and all other subordinate courts; and such powers, 
 forms, and rules, snail be simple, plain, and concise ex- 
 pro s the subject matter, or simple facts requisite, and 
 nothing more. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD opposed the amendment of 
 Mr. MANN. He was in favor of the amendment 
 proposed by Mr. HART, to have eight judges 
 taken from the State at large, and elected by the 
 people, to form the court of appeals ; and he 
 hoped the judiciary committee would consent to 
 this plan. He wished the judges either to be all 
 taken from the people, or else all from the other 
 32 judges. He preferred this court of last resort 
 to be taken entirely from the people. He would 
 not have that court sit in judgment on the deci- 
 sions previously made by its members in other 
 courts ; for it was exceedingly difficult for a judge 
 to alter his opinion or reverse his deliberate de- 
 cision, made but a short time previously. He did 
 not like the parti-colored feature of the section 
 as reported by the committee (judiciary.) Again, 
 he believed with his friend from Oswego, (Mr. 
 HART,) that either at the present, or, at any rate, 
 in a very short time, we should be in need of the 
 whole thirty-two judges to do the other judicial 
 business of the State ; thirty-two would be none 
 too many. And he should therefore vote for the 
 amendment of Mr. HART. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE wished this 2d section lo 
 be considered and disposed of by itself. It is not 
 only necessary to administer ju-tice hut to satisfy 
 the people that it is justice. The Courts must be 
 so oryai.ized, that the people will believe it to be 
 justice when it is done. Many gentlemen had 
 blamed the Court ot Errors because it never pro. 
 nounced a law unconstitutional which they, the 
 Senators had made; and }et we were going to 
 uidke this Court of Appeals take one-half of its 
 judges from the Supreme Court. Let us, for 
 God's sake he consistent. And with tnis excep- 
 tion he agreed with the committee. Bui the 
 Court of Appeals ought to be separate from any 
 legislative functions whatever. Let them come 
 from Ihe State in any manner you please, so that it 
 is done fairly. But let them not be taken from 
 i he Court which has already made the decisions 
 they have got to pass upon Lit us rather say 
 (here shall be no appeal from the Supreme Court 
 at all. They may b.? very lair men, but still they 
 are of Ihe fraternity j they hcive been in consulta- 
 tion before, and he who is condemned by them will 
 never believe he had a fair trial. We should have 
 this court of new material; then the parly iried, 
 would see iie i.ad two trials and in two new courts, 
 and he would then believe he had had justice. 
 We must have this court free from all suspicion, 
 or we must have no such court at all; it must be free 
 from all sorts of petty influences, and petty pdicians 
 Let this court have eight j^cl^.s, if \on please, 
 and let them be elected for eight years. lie(;VJr.T.) 
 would be satisfied enher to make the judges by 
 appointment of the Governor and Senate, or have 
 them elected by the people; but they must be 
 lofiv they must be pure ; and they must above 
 all be beyond suspicion ; or they will do no good 
 to society at. all. Tne.iv will be no econornv in 
 having a poor court. If we have; a supreme court 
 of high talent and integrity we shall have but few 
 
752 
 
 appeals. The legislature may pass a law to giv 
 thes eight judges of your court ol appeals as a con 
 pensaiion $3 a day, and that will be but a sma 
 sum (e/en if they sit all the year round) in the ag 
 gregate for each, or for the eight ; only about $250 
 each or $20,000 for all. But they will not be re 
 quired to sit half the year round. And thus b 
 adopting this plan you can have a court of si in 
 plicity, and a court of elevated dignity a court a 
 unsuspected purity ; and one which will comman 
 the respect and admiration of the world. Abov 
 all, do not let us commit the ridiculous error c 
 constituting a court of last resort, with the sam 
 defects as the present one; where they sit anc 
 pass on, (as a court of errors) their own decision 
 made when sitting as judges of the supreme cour 
 benches These were his views; and with tl 
 exception he had pointed out, he agreed with the 
 report of the majority of the judiciary committee 
 Mr. M ANN thought that there was but very 
 little difference in the real meaning or the inten 
 tion of the amendment of the gentleman from Os 
 wego (Mr. HART) and his own. He was no 
 quite sure that Mr. HART'S would not effect th< 
 object desired, w'hich -was to have the whole cour 
 elected by the people, independently of the othei 
 courts, better than that which he had presented 
 Mr. JORDAN opposed the amendment of Mr 
 HART, and he wished to call attention to a prin- 
 ciple that he desired the Convention to reflect up 
 on, before voting now. The judges ot the court 
 of appeals ought to be practically acquainted with 
 the operations of the courts and the wants of the 
 people. For years we had been complaining thai 
 our judges were excluded horn the circuit, and 
 that they have not an opportunity of mingling 
 with the business affairs ot the people, to see 
 their operations and their circumstances as they 
 exist, and w'hich it was important lor them to 
 know, in order to secure an enlightened adminis- 
 tration oi justice in the State. Now the majority 
 of the judiciary committee had endeavored tc 
 guard against the objection to the court of ap- 
 peals; but nevertheless, several amendments had 
 been here offered which would go to establish such 
 a court, and to seclude the judges from the cir- 
 cuits and from the law business of the state a 
 court entirely aloof from the administration of 
 justice in any form except in this court of dernier 
 resort, where they were to be cloistered to decide 
 on abstract questions. If however, it weie ne- 
 cessary that these judges should be acquainted with 
 the practical operation of the affairs of the State, 
 then the system ol the majority of the committee 
 was the best; for they proposed to elect four judg 
 es for the court of appeals. They had a class of 
 eight judges ot the supreme court, out of which 
 tour were to be selected to be members of the 
 court of appeals, as he observed the other day,tak- 
 ing their terms in rotation in holding the terms ot 
 the court. There were to be eight of them, hut 
 four only were to sit at the same time, and tbey 
 were to serve for the two last years of their term 
 as judges, one half at one term and the other half 
 at the next; and thos<> not on duty there, could be 
 performing duty on circuit or in bane, the same 
 asthe other class of judges Herethen they would 
 have four judges who had been six years on circuit 
 and engaged in bane duty throughout the state; 
 and four j'udgea to be elected. But the plan which 
 
 had been suggested this morning steered cleai of 
 
 this, and he desired to call attention to this prin. 
 ciple, that they deliberate and pronounce their 
 
 be^t judgment upon it, and that was all he desired. 
 In regard to the objection which had been staled 
 against the court of appeals, that no judge who 
 decides cases at nisi prius, oi in bane, should be 
 a member of the couri ot appeals, when the cases 
 decided by them came in review, he observed that 
 it was not necessary that it should be so. He pre- 
 sumed that in reducing this system to practice, it 
 never could be so. But if it were necessary to 
 guard against it in the Constitution, it would be 
 easy to bring in an amendment to prohibit the 
 judge from pronouncing an opinion in court, who 
 had sat at the trial below. There would be no 
 difficulty about that. Was it then desirable to 
 make the court of appeals a secluded court, and 
 to keep the judges from practical experience on 
 circuits? That question being decided, he should 
 be prepared to act on the proposition. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS was in favor of the proposition as 
 it stood. He did not think there was danger in 
 making this court of appeals to consist of four or 
 eight of the judges of the supreme court, having 
 had four years experience. He was in favor of this. 
 And this mode would tend to preserve uniformity 
 of decisions. Each portion of the state would 
 also thus have its fair representation under this sys- 
 tem. This would be a very great benefit. He 
 was willing to increase the number of districts to 
 :en, with four judges in each, making forty judges 
 is proposed by the gentleman from Oswego (Mr. 
 iART.) It would but rarely happen that any 
 one of the eight judges in the court of appeals 
 Yould be called upon to pronounce upon any of 
 ;heir own decisions in the court below ; and if he 
 vas, it would only be when he first took his seat 
 n the court of appeals, and even then there 
 fl-ould be seven other judges who had had no- 
 hing to do with the previous decision. He would 
 lave it so that each judicial district should have 
 me judge in the court of appeals. And he would 
 Iso have a chief justice, whose duty it should be 
 nade to reform the practice of the courts, and 
 vho shpuld report annually to the legislature and 
 lo such other duties as the legislature might 
 hink proper to impose upon him. But he would 
 n'ovide for his election in a separate section. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL concurred entirely in the re- 
 narks made by Messrs. JORDAN and HARRIS that 
 ve should carry the highest learning and integrity 
 nto the great state court. When the time came, 
 lowever, he should offer an amendment in effect 
 rflit no judge in the court of appeals should be al- 
 owed to vote on any question which he had de- 
 ided upon in the court below. 
 
 Mr. SHEP ARD wished the question to be taken 
 eparately as to the simplifying the pleadings 
 nd practice Let this be taken separately from the 
 ther part of his colleague's (Mr. MANN'S) amend- 
 ment. He called for this division of the question, 
 nasmuch as there was no necessary connection 
 etween the two parts of the amendment. 
 
 Mr. MANN assented to this suggestion. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was in lavoi ot having as small a 
 umber ot judges as could properly do the work. 
 [e was in favor of paying them propeily, but if 
 lere were too many, the Legislature would not 
 o so. Again, he thought it desirable to mingle 
 
753 
 
 the tribunals as much as possible; as had been done 
 in the Court of Errors at present, where the Chan, 
 cellor and judges of the Supreme Couit had seats. 
 The irgument of that gentleman (Mr. TALL- 
 MADGE,) was the objection there would be to 
 having these eight judges pass on their own decis* 
 ions, made in the courts of below. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE: No, sir no, sir. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS: I so understood him. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE explained that he did not 
 mean that. 
 
 Mr. VAN SO HOONHOVEN differed from the 
 gentleman from Albany, (Mr. HARRIS,) in rela 
 tion to the election of judges for this court, be- 
 cause to take its members fiom the judges of the 
 Supreme court was to confine the people in their 
 selection to a class of men who might not be the 
 best men. He though*- there were many gentle- 
 men practicing ow the circuits who were as well 
 qualified to constitute the court of appeals as the 
 judsjes. But again, he saw no necessity of limit- 
 ing the choice to gentlemen of the legal profes- 
 sion. The objection that there would be a pride 
 of opinion in the judges, who would seek totob- 
 tain the affirmance of a decision or a principle 
 advocated on circuit, he thought was a weighty 
 objection to the selection of judges. He hoped 
 to see the court of appeals made independent of 
 every other court, so that there should be no sym 
 pathy or fraternal feeling between them. He de- 
 sired the matter to be lelt in the hands of the peo- 
 ple to select where they pleased. 
 
 Mr. MANN then withdrew the first part of his 
 amendment, in order that he might have the ques- 
 tion taken on the latter part. 
 
 Mr. WHITE wished at this time to call the at 
 tention o t the convention to an amendment which 
 he proposed to add to Mr. HART'S amendment 
 at the proper time, he would add to it as follows 
 
 " At the first election in pursuance of this section, no 
 elector shall vote for more than five person^; and at every 
 ensuing election under this section, no elector shall vote 
 for more than three persons." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR regarded the constitution of the 
 court of appeals as a matter of the first impor- 
 tance. It was to be the head of our judicial sys- 
 tem and indeed the only state court in the sys- 
 tem. Its decisions will go forth to the world as 
 embodying the combined learning and wisdom o 
 the judicial state ; and in its firmness and justice 
 will rest the last hope of the citizen, when hi: 
 dearest interests are brought into legal jeopardy 
 Private safety, ;tnd national honor, are there to be 
 vindicated and maintained, and consequently \v< 
 cannot be too circumspect in laying the founda 
 tions of this court. The existing court of last re 
 sort is to be dispensed with ; but he would reminc 
 the convention that that court had many and higl 
 claims to the respect and veneration of the peo 
 pie. From his early years he had been taught b) 
 the opinion of our ablest jurists, many of whom 
 were now no more, to entertain a high regard fo 
 that court. He believed that its judgments as 
 whole, would bear a favorable comparison wit! 
 those of any other court in this country. Th 
 theoretical defect that it was a part of the legis 
 lative department, and the practical defect that ' 
 was too numerous, ought both to be avoided 
 the construction of a new tribunal; but its be 
 nign features ought to be preserved. Standing a 
 
 head of the judicial power, the new court of 
 ppeals should be completely above the control 
 ad influence of the subordinate branches of that 
 ower, otherwise it could not possess the inde- 
 endence absolutely necessary to a vigorous exer- 
 ise of its paramount authority. In a court of ap- 
 eals a tie vote produces an affirmance, yet the 
 Ian of the majority forms one half of this court 
 rom the judges of the court below. Although 
 bese judges should not have participated in the 
 udgment to be reviewed ; still, from causes not 
 o be controlled, they will feel a strong tendency 
 o affirm their greater intimacy with the practice, 
 nd their official connection with the ordinary ad- 
 ministration of the law, will be apt to give them 
 n undue influence over the other members and 
 f this design should be adhered to, he (Mr. O'C.) 
 ;reatly apprehended that causes appealed to the 
 ourt of last resort would no longer enjoy the great 
 dvantage of being transferred to a new, pure 
 .nd elevated judicial atmosphere, where new 
 iews and new arguments may be urged with con- 
 fidence with the hope of being heard without 
 mpatience, and weighed without prejudice. He 
 nought a small number, say one or two justices 
 >f the supreme' court, in conjunction with sixteen 
 udges of appeals, to he elected in districts com- 
 )osed of two adjoining senate districts, would 
 ~orm a court combining all the benefits of our pre- 
 sent court of errors. 
 
 This arrangement, whilst it secured, as in the 
 jresent court, at least, one member having a prac- 
 ical intimacy with the course of the lower court, 
 :o aid in dealing with mere matters of form, 
 would avoid an undue preponderance of judicial 
 nfluence in favor of the decisions of the court 
 jelow. He saw no objection to the term of the 
 udges in this court being made as short as any 
 member could desire. Four to eight years would 
 suffice. The election in districts was also unob- 
 ^ectionable ; because the judges from all the 
 several districts meeting together, and acting to- 
 gether in one forum, it could not be said that one 
 portion of the state gave law to the other. When 
 all its members were assembled, it would derive 
 its authority from the united powqf and authority 
 of the whole people. He conceived that it was 
 desirable to have a considerable number of mem- 
 bers in this court, and that they should be elected 
 in districts. Unless a considerable number of 
 members was provided for, none but members of 
 the profession could ever be elected to this court. 
 If to four law judges, taken from the supreme 
 court, we are to add only four more as a court of 
 appeals, it would be altogether unsafe to permit 
 any of this small numb -r of independent appel- 
 late j dges to be other than persons deeply versed 
 in the law, by study and experience. He was 
 therefore, in favor of a larger number. He would 
 go for the arrangement of the gentleman from 
 Oswegu (Mr. HART,) and have eight,if he could 
 get no more ; but he was in favor ot a still gi eater 
 number. He had always deemed it to be an ad- 
 mirable feature in our present court, that it usual- 
 ly combined a very high grade of professional 
 learning, with a large proportion of sound prac- 
 tical good sense, unlettered by the restraints of 
 
 69 
 
754 
 
 By this union at the terminus of the legal admin- 
 istration, of those two elements of judgment, the 
 learning of the court, and the less artificial good 
 sense of the jury, it was thought, a happy result 
 was attained. The common sense of the nation 
 had its full representation in the judgment of its 
 court, and that common sense had always, hither- 
 to been, and always would be too sound and practi- 
 cal, to extend its power further that; to moderate 
 the rigor and undue strictness with which profess 
 ional men are prone to apply their peculiar rules 
 Mr. O'C, quoted the words of Mr. Senator J. C 
 Spencer, in 8 Cowen's reports, 733. 
 
 Such a court we have always had, he hoped 
 yet to see it retained ; it would be the best safe- 
 guard for private right, for public liberty, for the 
 legal reputation of the state most adapted to 
 carrying onward in safety the progressive devel- 
 opment of our social and political systems, and 
 of preserving the esteem, and affection of our 
 citizens for their tribunals of justice. Even if 
 this court were composed of a large number, he 
 believed that lawyers would most frequently be 
 chosen, but it would not be so invariably. He 
 could point to a probable exception in one distin- 
 guished individual the oldest member of this 
 Convention the pride of its most numerous del- 
 egation, (Mr. ALLEN.) A gentleman whose 
 opinions given as a senator in the court of errors, 
 furnisheS full proof of his capacity. He believed 
 if an election for members of such a court as he 
 (Mr. O'C.) suggested were to take place in New- 
 York to-morrow, that gentleman would be the 
 choice of very many, and very prob; 
 sen of a majority. Mr. O'C. offered many illus- 
 
 the cho- 
 my illus- 
 trations of the soundness of judgment which had 
 marked the decisions of the court of errors in re- 
 versing judgments of the courts below, given on 
 technical grounds. As to the mode of election, 
 he had already answered the objection that if 
 elected in districts the members would not repre- 
 sent the whole state. Aside from this objection, 
 he thought election by districts had many advan- 
 tages over election by general ticket. In the lat- 
 ter method, a central state caucus would control 
 the whole power of appointment; the people 
 could not became acquainted with all the candi- 
 dates, and if those of one district should vote 
 against their neighbor, whom they knew to be 
 unworthy, the party nomination would still se- 
 cure his election by votes given in other districts 
 where his demerits were not known. This evil 
 would be guarded against by an election in dis- 
 tricts : and the minority in this case could by its 
 local majority in particular districts exercise some 
 patronage and so far influence the administration 
 of the law as to protect its rights. The amend- 
 ment preferring a general ticket system, but res- 
 training the elector to a vote for two-thirds of the 
 judges, he deemed very objectionable. In the 
 case of inspectors of elections that method had 
 worked well, because the office was not desirable 
 to the individual. It was only important to the 
 party, and consequently there was no individual 
 struggle for pre edence. But it would not operate 
 well in reference to high offices, high enough to 
 
 tempt the candidate. If eight judges were to be 
 elected, and five only could be placed upon a 
 ticket, three of each party-ticket would generally 
 be sure of an election. A nomination would be 
 
 an election to that extent. The friends of a par- 
 ticular individual might be, and would often be, 
 tempted to erase two names and even more from 
 his ticket, and many other like practices calcula- 
 ted to bring election into odium and contempt, 
 would necessarily result from such a system. 
 
 He hoped the proposed court, composed of four 
 judges of the court below, some of whom niay have 
 participated in the decision under review, would 
 find no favor. An appeal to the judge who has hi- 
 ready heard the case and committed himselt by a 
 published opinion upon it, \\bs illusory. An a;.- 
 peal to a couit ot moderate numbers, in which the 
 judge appealed from had a seal, was nearly so. 
 The statistics ol legal decision in the House of 
 Lords, would prove this. It is well known thai no 
 members of that body vote on appeals or writs of 
 error, except those who have held high judicial 
 offices. In she late O'Connell case, Lord Chancel- 
 lor Lyndhur-t, ex Chancellors Cutienham, Catiip- 
 b 11 and Brougham, and Loid Ch^ef Justice Deri- 
 man, of ihe King's bench, alone voted. An <-i- 
 tempi by some lay-lords to depart Irorn the usage, 
 wa$ discountenanced and defeated. The Li-id 
 Chancellor piesides, and the last half century ex- 
 hibits tew instance* of ihe reveisal of a d cree in 
 chancery; whilst many' judgmenis of other couns 
 have been overtuined. This shows that if a pre- 
 ponderating influence in the court of appeal be al- 
 lowed to the judges of the court below, the right 
 of appeal becomes a mockery. He ue*ired to see 
 a court ot last report free from the control or ir-flu. 
 ence of the inferior tribunal, where ihe best minds 
 selected from every part of the slate, would unite 
 in forming the legal judgment of the s ate We 
 had long lived in safety under the guaidianship of 
 such a court; and he hoped such a couit would be 
 retained in the new system now to be adopted. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said the question of how the 
 udges of the court of last resort shall be elected, 
 was one of great importance. The proposuion < i 
 he gentleman ftom Oiwego(Mr. HART,) in effect 
 was that the party that happens lo be in the As- 
 cendant when the first election lakes place, shall 
 secure the whole bench, and go far to secure a 
 areponderatice in perpetuity, whatever partv 
 changes may afterwards take place. Would gen- 
 tleman for a moment think ot the prize ofivrtd to 
 stimulate the activity of parties ? Four judges to 
 lold eight years, eight to hold for tour yeai.s in 
 he aggregate forty.eight year- of official term, to 
 be secured by one or the o'her of the contending 
 parties by a single contest ! We elected a Govc r- 
 u>r and Lieut. Governor tor two years each, and 
 uch contests have produced activity and bitter, 
 less enough in party contests, but by this propo. 
 ition, we offer forty-eight years of official term, and 
 f the salary is to be $2,500 $116,000 of salary, to 
 timulate an unhealthy, unsafe activity, iu our 
 great political parties. 
 
 The proposition of the committee to elect a part 
 of the judges ol this couit, and to lake a pait from 
 the supreme court, was li.-ible to the same objec. 
 (ion. He h< pt-d that neither proposition would 
 he adopted, but that vv<; should consider which of 
 the two other propositions before tue house was 
 the safest ar.d best. The one was the proposition 
 of the gentleman from New Yoik (Mr. O'CoivoR) 
 lo elect the judges of this couit in the several ju- 
 dicial districts, so that each would be repiesented 
 
755 
 
 in tnai inbuual. And the other was the proposi- 
 tion in the report he (Mr. B) had submitted, that 
 the jiKigc-s ot i he supieuie court should sit the last 
 year ot tia ir term in the court of last resort. He 
 hoped that one or the other of these propositions 
 would be adopted; and although he had a pref 
 erenee for his own, he would not deny that there 
 were strong reasons in favor ot the proposition of 
 the gentleman from New York. It would permit 
 other than lawyers, and the law-bred judges, to sit 
 
 I here 
 have 
 
 in that court. The nine had been when 
 was an almost indispensable necessity to 
 judges in (hat court, who were not so much bound 
 by technical lules, or influenced by precedents as 
 mere lawyers would be. 
 
 Mr. MCHOLAS said in settling this question, 
 we snould avoid extremes. He desired to retain 
 lor the court of appeals to some extent its pres- 
 tnt practical character and influence. He would 
 give it what has been called in inlusion ot a pop- 
 ular spirit, by continuing it somewhat larger in 
 numbers than the other courts, and let alargepio 
 
 portio 
 
 of its members be elected by the people, as 
 
 ion in relation to it reported by the commute*. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said, that having a tew days 
 since stated very generally his views in icUtion 
 o the general system, he should confine his at- 
 ention, as neaily as he was able, to the precise 
 motion before the house. What should a court 
 of errors be? Having examined its essential 
 characteristics, how does the projet of the slang- 
 ing committee compare with the various imposi- 
 tions to amend it ? In the early stages of civiliza- 
 tion, when legislation was weak, inexperienced, 
 and feeble, he admitted that a large share of the 
 law must be made by the judge ; but in any decent 
 civilization, after man had made progress in the 
 arts and in letters, legislation is to speak the law, 
 find it, and declare it ; and it is the business of a 
 judiciary to find how the law was setiled at the 
 time the act in review took place. They aie not * 
 to make any new law, and where they do it, it 
 only proves, either that they go beyond their duty, 
 or that society has been remiss in finding and es- 
 tablishing the rule that should be pursued. The 
 advances in civilization during the last two hund- 
 red years, has, to a considerable extent, removed 
 the necessity for judicial legislation; ai.d any just 
 enlightened reform of the law, would be as to the 
 condition in which we may say to the judge You 
 shall not make the law you must find the rule 
 which society has established, and apply it. 
 We have not entirely reached that condition 
 as yet, but we are fast approaching to it. It is 
 proposed here (said Mr. H.) that what is calitd a 
 popular element, should be infused in the judicial 
 system. It was somewhat difficult to understand 
 what was meant by that term, but if H was, as he 
 supposed, it was that there shall be a representa- 
 tion in the courts. He denied it. Representation 
 was right and proper in making the rule of law, but 
 representation was not necessaiy in any sense in 
 finding it. That was the solemn duty of the judge 
 and the court. He therefore disapproved entire- 
 ly the notion that the judge should represent a 
 locality, bring to the bench his local feelings in 
 any way. In this court of last resort he was the 
 judge of the State, bringing there the settled rules 
 which the State has fixed, and should stand there, 
 and should sit there, uninfluenced and unshaken 
 by anything that is local. Wherever this has been 
 the case, a judicial system has pretty well succeed- 
 ed and been a benefit to society, and where local 
 feelings had been sufiered to interfeie, it had prov- 
 ed a failure. Mr. H. referred to the Couit of Ap- 
 peals of Great Britain, as an example of this, and 
 also to the Supreme Court of tSie United States. 
 He preferred a few able, thinking, acting men for 
 
 e of four able and experienced men to counter- a Court of Errors, men who heard all the aigu. 
 act the effects of the deficiencies of those elected | men t s , and were present during the whole trial. 
 AH to electing these judges by general ticket, he y ne y WOU 1<J no t read, write, whisper or walk 
 should prefer the district system proposed by the 
 report, because the judiciary will, in his opinion, 
 be much less exposed to undue political or party 
 influences, than it would be should the election 
 be by a general ticket. He should vote against 
 the amendment, and hoped the provision with 
 such a restriction as he suggested, might be adopt- 
 ed. 
 
 in tiie case at present with our court of last resort; 
 and give the people an opportunity, as now, to se- 
 lect their judges by districts, men they kaow per- 
 sonally. And this view oi the subject accords, 
 he believed, with the opinions of every gentleman 
 who has expressed a wish tp exclude the supreme 
 court judges from this court of appeals. In giv. 
 niii to the court this important practical element 
 redesigned to prevent the court being extremely 
 technical. He could not think it wise to deprive 
 the court of the beneficial influence of great lega" 
 learning at. i judicial experience, tor which the 
 report made by the chairman provides, by requir- 
 ing four 1 1 the members of this court to be select, 
 ed'iioir the oldest judges of the supreme court. 
 These four judges would certainly be valuable 
 inembeis ( f the court of appeals, and the only ob- 
 jection he had heard to the court being I bus con- 
 stituted, arose from an apprehension that they 
 
 may act upon appeals from 
 when made in the supreme 
 
 their 
 ;ourt 
 
 own decisions 
 He would ob- 
 
 viate this objection by an amendment to the re- 
 port, requiring that no judge of this court, who 
 participated as a judge of the supreme court in a 
 trial of a cause appealed from or brought to this 
 court by a writ of e'rroi, shall have a voice on its 
 final adjudication- It had been urged here to-day 
 that thtjse old>-st judges might be the least com- 
 petent members of the supreme couit, and so they 
 might oe the most able men in that court, and, 
 should these judges elected prove to be inferior 
 men, then you aie fortunate in having the servic- 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY considered the court of 
 errors as the most important tribunal, and hoped 
 that it would be constituted with that view. He 
 w9 in doubt as to the propriety of the proposi- 
 
 about when the trial was going on. They would 
 sit in judgment and judge. AJr. H. expressed his 
 preference for the report of the committee, be- 
 cause although not unobjectionable, it was the best 
 submitted, and there must be some compromise 
 of feeling He would not in any manner make a 
 Court of Errors of district judges they must re 
 
 present the State. He repelled and 
 distinctly all idea of making state 
 
 repudiated 
 judges by 
 
 the district system. They sink, in his mind, 
 and they would in tue public mind, to mere dis- 
 trict judges'. This objection lay in all its force to 
 
756 
 
 the other plans, and untortuoately against hall of 
 the court proposed in the plan ot the committee. 
 Mr. H.expiessed himself at a loss to know how 
 to employ the tour State judges of the Court of 
 Appeal^, during all the time, tor he did not be- 
 lieve, he trusted they would not, find employment 
 in the Court of Appeals more than one-fourth of 
 the yesr. In conclusion, Mr. H. said that much 
 as he found to object to in the plan of the Com- 
 mittee, yet as some plan must be agreed upon, 
 and as the leport of the Committee presented the 
 Jeast objection, he should vote for that. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE thought the great question 
 to be considered was, whether there should be a 
 court of appeals, and ultimate jurisdiction or not. 
 It was in that point of view that he wished to 
 discuss it. Mr. T. coincided with the remarks of 
 Mr. HOFFMAN, as to the importance and necessi- 
 ty of guarding as far as was practicable the judi- 
 ciary from exercising the right of legislation in 
 the law making power. Mr. T. urged the neces- 
 sity of the boundary of legislative and judicial 
 power being distinctly marked, and each being 
 confined to its own jurisdiction. In the condi- 
 tion of the legislature declaring the law in one 
 way, however, and the judiciary another, he 
 urged the necessity of a third tribunal was appa- 
 rent. Neither would bow to the other, and a third 
 power independent of them all, was requisite to 
 decide between them. Why was it that juries, 
 
 elector shall vote iormore than live persons; and at every 
 ensuing election under this section, no elector bhail vo'e 
 lor more thau three persons." 
 
 Mr. WARD asked for a division ot the question, 
 so as to test the sense of (he Convention directly 
 on the question of electing these judges by .gen- 
 eral ticket. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said thar some days since, he had 
 expressed the opinion it would be better to elect 
 the supreme court judges by genetal ticket. His 
 reason for it was, mat he found lhat the judge 
 elected in a district might be unconsionsly per- 
 haps, stayed by ihe loc;l feelings under winch 
 
 he was elected, and have his 
 and otherwise, towards thos 
 
 rejudices, political 
 in his district who 
 
 might have laktn an active part for or aguinst him 
 in the canvass And he vvas oppose.! to it, tor the 
 very reason lhat he was now opposed to electing 
 the court of last resort by general ticket. 'J he re- 
 sult would be thai all of them would be of the 
 same political cast or cornplfxion and the elec- 
 tors would have to vote tor men ol whom they 
 knew little, if any thing, and would have to take 
 them on a parly nomination. He could see no 
 danger in eleciing them by drsfi ids loi if a judge 
 wns elected by any particular excitement in a dis- 
 trict, however much he might partake of that 
 excitement, he could scarcely cairy with him alt 
 the rest, or perhaps auy of them. A judge, how- 
 ever, silting at nisi prius would be there alone, 
 
 through hundreds of years,have always been pure? and his opinion and teehngs would control the 
 It was, because a court sits above them, and 
 they dare not be dishonest. And yet there might 
 often be found in those juries the rogue in the 
 streets, the villain from the county jail, and the 
 marauder at midnight. Neither would the legis- 
 lature from corrupt or party feelings pass a wrong 
 law, or the judiciary from similar feelings give a 
 wrong decision. He urged if there was a court 
 of appeals, it should be with the power of nega- 
 tion, and not of condemnation. He would have for 
 such a tribunal one that was independent and 
 above the legislature and judiciary, and a legisla- 
 ture and a judiciary independent of each other. 
 He would not have the judges in the court of ap- 
 peals sit at the circuit. He would have him 
 chosen for the express purpose of sitting in that 
 court. He would elect one every year. J t would 
 be eight years in changing its character, and thus 
 it would be preserved from the bias of mere tein- 
 pory excitement of public feeling. It would al- 
 so secure stability in justice and indecisions, now 
 ao much to be desired. He would have the court 
 of appeals with no possible power to pronounce 
 original decisions, for rather he would have none 
 at all. He would even be glad to make them in- 
 eligible to office afterwards, the more effectually 
 to guard against the possibility of bargain and 
 corruption. With such a court we should never 
 have seen that conflict of decision between the 
 Supreme Court and the Court of Errors, as was 
 presented in the case of the General Banking 
 
 Law. 
 
 The question was then taken 
 amendment, to that of Mr. HUNI 
 
 on Mr. MANN'S 
 -the longer pro- 
 
 thu- election of a chief justice of the court 
 
 of appeals, and il was lost. 
 
 Mr. WHITE then moved his amendment, as 
 lows : 
 
 fol- 
 
 At the first election in pursuance of this section, no 
 
 cause. He felt compelled therefore to vote against 
 the proposition 10 elect all these judges by gen- 
 eral ticket. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS proposed to amend so us to pro- 
 vide that the court of appeals should be 
 entirely of the class of justices of the supreme 
 court baring the shortes; tune lo serve. 
 
 Messrs. JORDAN and STOW further brufly 
 debated the question, when 
 
 On motion ot Mr. CHATFIELD the Convec- 
 tion took a recess!. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The Convention met at half past 3 P. M. After 
 calling the loll, and waiting until a quorum wa* 
 present, the committee resumed the consideration 
 of the 
 
 JUDICIARY REPORT. 
 
 The amendment previously offered by Mr. HAR- 
 RIS now came up for consideration. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD spoke at length in /aver cf 
 the principle of electing all these judges of the 
 court of appeals by general ticket. He would be 
 willing to increase the number of this court to 
 twelve. Bui he thought the (bice here recom- 
 mended, was as large (with the addition lhat 
 would be made to it by tins amendment,) as the 
 people would justify. And one reason why he 
 favored this amendment was, lhat it would in- 
 crease the judicial force adding force to the 
 court of appeals, and leaving the 32 supreme court 
 judges. As to the mode ot selection, he preferred 
 the general ticket system, and he was surprised to 
 see the gentleman irom New Yoik (Mr. O'CONOR) 
 converted to the dis-trict system. Il was the only 
 general court in this system for the supreme 
 court, instead of one court, practically became 
 many courts. The court of appeals was the court 
 of the people at large, and should bec-lecttd by the 
 
757 
 
 people at large. He win vMlln.g as a parly man, 
 to take his chance in electing them. It the parly 
 M:-d to him elected them all, he should MI\ 
 : to if. It iiis own parly s'leceeded he should 
 be gratified. He was not one of those who would 
 throw- every tiling valuable to his party out of the 
 hands of that parly. He would be gratified to see 
 his parjy retain their integrity. If he did not. be- 
 lieve that the principles of his party were better 
 HMH any other, he would not support them. 
 When he sprue of the general ticket system, lie 
 .silling to have it understood that he did 
 think of his party. He wished it to be under- 
 stood, that in desiring a general ticket system, he 
 had an eye to the men to be elected. He had no 
 concealments on the subject no disguise no 
 skulking. He was not willing to concede that i! 
 the democratic puly should cany all these judges, 
 that therefore they would be the worst men in the 
 state. He put himself on the open and manly 
 ground in this inaUer. He was influenced by 
 party considerations, and he hoped never to see 
 the day when he should forget it. He avowed 
 that in voting for this amendment he acied en p ir 
 ty considerations, and so/tlid every body else, dis- 
 guise it as 'hey mi ht But there weie other 
 reasons wr.ich induced him to go for it in pref- 
 erence to an election by districts. He wanted the 
 whole people represented in this court ot appeals, 
 and nor mere sections and localities. If elected 
 by district system the judge might be in favor ol 
 anil influenced by his feelings in favor of the pai- 
 ticular section from which he came. Ifelec'etl 
 by the people at large, the judge would kn#w no 
 constituency <ut the people of the whole state. 
 He rep'.uii it- j (J the idea of having this court ol' ap- 
 peals a sort of combination ot bench and jury. It 
 was to decide on the law of of the land. To place 
 foui laymen and tour lawyers they would either 
 rnake it a bench ot lawyers the laymen deferring 
 to the opinion of their associates or the court 
 would be divided equally, and no decision would 
 h'j made, except on the principle, that as neither 
 Bide had a majority, the proceedings lell. Yon 
 array thus one half against the other and you will 
 never have a decision. But how were you to begin 
 the system on this hypothesis ? HOA- were you in 
 have the four experienced judges to be^in with? 
 The question was then taicen on l;ie proposition 
 previously offered by Mr. HART, providing for the 
 election of all the judges of the court, of *ippeaN, 
 by general ticket. The ayes and noes were called 
 and the motion was lost : 
 
 A YK* Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Bowdish. Chamberlain, 
 Chatfield, Clark, Cornell, Danforth, Forsytti, Hart, Hotch- 
 kiss, Mann, .McXitt, O'Coaor, !' s.uiloid, 
 
 Shaw, Tallnwdg*, Vache, Van Schoonhoven. Ward, 
 
 \Vitbeck-24. 
 
 IS Messrs. Angel, Archer, F.F. Backus, B. Backus, 
 B;iscom, Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Hull, Burr, D.D. Camp 
 bell, R. Campbell, jr., Candee, Clyde, < , Cr< o- 
 
 ker, Dana, DodJ, Dorlon, Flanders, Gardner, Oebhard, 
 Greene, Harris, Harrison, Hawley, Holl'man. Hunur, A. 
 Huntir.g'on, K. Muntington, Hyde. .Ionian, Kernan, Kings- 
 ley, Kirkiand, Loomis Mr Neil, Miller, Morris, Nellis, 
 Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Ponei, Powers, 
 Richmond, Kikcr, Salisbury, Shav r, Sheldon. Shepard 
 W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, Strong Sw 
 mer, Tali, Tagaart, J J. Taylor. W. Taylor, Tuthill, 
 Warren, Waterbury, Wood, V/ordrn, A Wright, W. B. 
 Wright, Yav.ger, Young, Youngs 71. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS hoped the Contention would par- 
 don hioi, if in this case he violated n rule which 
 
 he had laid down tor himself, not to speak more 
 than once io the same question It was with si me 
 ie^ret that he heard the remarks which had just 
 fallen from the gentleman from Olsego, (Mr. 
 CHATFIELD ) Mr. H. knew nothing which he 
 admired more, than to see a body of men like this, 
 win se situation entitle them to influence whose 
 talents eniitle them to take the lead in public al- 
 fairs rising supeiior Io party influences, casting 
 off parfy connections, forgetting party interests, 
 and devoting themselves to the public good, reri- 
 deiing party objects subservient to the public 
 welfare. He had therefore with some pride seen 
 the course which had hitherto been taken by this 
 Convention. In the most part it has been charac- 
 terized by an enlightened and magnanimous poii. 
 cy. From all quariers were heard congratulations 
 that party lines had been disregaided, and that 
 party interests had been forgotten in our delibera- 
 tions. It was with pain then that he had wit- 
 nessed the attempt of the gentleman from Otsego 
 to bring party interests to bear upon the question 
 which had just been decided. The result of ;hat 
 vote had however re-assured his faith in the fa- 1 
 vorable result of the deliberations of this body. 
 That gentleman had sprung his, party rattle here, 
 but it was to little effect ; and he was glad to see 
 that his appeal had failed to secure a parly vote 
 upon the question. But enough of this. In re. 
 gard to the court of appeals, he regarded it as a 
 matter of immense importance in settling the or- 
 ganization of the judiciary of the state. He had 
 little faith in the proposition to elect four judges 
 of this court by general ticket, as they must be if 
 the report of the committee was adopted. He had 
 no faith that it would be adding much to the effi- 
 ciency or ability of the court to pursue that course. 
 If we would have an efficient court, which would 
 maintain the credit of the state, and secure the 
 confidence of the people, the judges should be se- 
 lected from the most experienced met. to be found 
 in the state. It was his desire therefore that they 
 should be taken from among the senior judges of 
 the supreme court. This was the only way in which 
 we should be able to maintain the character of the 
 court, and secure uniformity in judicial decisions. 
 He would have them chosen from the different 
 districts in the state, so that we sho*uld have each 
 district represented upon that bench, and by a 
 judge who was familiar with the course of judi- 
 ciaf decisions. As to the position of the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN,) that the 
 judges of this court of last resort should eminent- 
 ly be the representative of the whole state, Mr. 
 HARRIS asked if they would not be the represen- 
 tatives of the state just as much as though elected 
 by general ticket ? How was it now in reference 
 to the court for the correction of errors ? The 
 judges were elected from eight separate districts ; 
 and yet who had ever heard it objected to that 
 court that it did not represent the entire state, 
 although each one was elected by only one-eighth 
 of the people of the state ? We found this prin- 
 ciple running through all our popular elections. 
 Suppose these judges were elected by general 
 ticket, and were nominated by a convention for 
 the whole state, would not one judge be selected 
 from each of the several districts of the state ? 
 This course was taken in regard to all officers 
 elected by the state at large; they were always 
 
758 
 
 distributed throughout the different parts of the 
 state. He had some pride in the composition of 
 this highest court, and desired that it should be 
 made up of the most able judges. To them would 
 deference be paid by all other tribunals, and their 
 adjudications would be referred to by all the le- 
 gal men in the state. Their decisions would 
 alone h'nd their way into our books of reports, and 
 stand as models for future judicial proceedings. 
 These were his reasons for desiring to give to the 
 court of appeals a dignified and stable character. 
 
 Mr. ChL-i I'FiELD ieulied that the remarks he 
 mifrie were drawn out by the Irequent allusions 
 here to parties, and hy the position laken by some 
 that these judges, if elected by general ticket, 
 would be pariy judges. He said, and he repeated 
 that he was willing to declare the grounds of his 
 action here He would not act the hypocritical 
 part or' deprecating party feeling, and ytt aiming 
 all the while to accomplish p-irty purposes. He 
 made no charge upon any body, but he had had 
 reason to believe that there was a party who were 
 exceedingly gratified to see no party lines here, 
 and because they were getting all the benefit ot 
 this state of things. The gentleman from Albany 
 was happy to see no partv here. Very well. It 
 might increase his chances for the office of gover- 
 ernor For himself whilst he had a place here, 
 and whilst he believed that as good men could 
 be selected from his paity as fiom the other, he 
 shoul I act on the principle that duty required that 
 be should make that selection. He had yet. to 
 learn that the judges in district would not be nom- 
 inated and elected by parties, as much as if elect- 
 ed by general ticket, or that tl.e people at large 
 Could not elect as good judges as the people of a 
 district. In going for ihe general ticket system, 
 he did avow what every other man would perhaps 
 disavow, and yet act upon. If he did start his 
 party rattle here, its effect had been to drive one 
 party with two exceptions in phalanx against the 
 amendment whilst his own party divided. On 
 another occasion, the same party went en masse 
 one way here. These fac;s showed on what prin- 
 ciple certain gentlemen acted here, whatever 
 might bp their pn fissions. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that he voted on this amend- 
 ment without designing to commit himself on the 
 question of the manner in which these judges are 
 to be elected. He voted with reference to the 
 question as to whether four of these judges should 
 or should not be taken from the Supreme Court. 
 Mr. B. denied that any question of party politics 
 was involved in the vote just taken. He was 
 gratified that the deliberations of the convention 
 thus far had been conducted with a total absence 
 of party feeling, and he hoped it would continue. 
 He apprehended that although there might be 
 party leaders here, yet they might be found with- 
 out any party followers. He should endeavor to 
 lead no one, and certainly should not be lead 
 himself his attachment to party was suffici- 
 ently known to be as strong as that of any other 
 man, and he apprehended that he had reached too 
 mature an age to be suspected of a desire to change 
 them now r . He spoke, he believed, the senti- 
 ments cf his constituents the people of a county 
 as strongly democratic in principle, and as firm 
 in their attachments to them, as those of any 
 other when he paid he desired to Bee these 
 
 judges composed of the members of both parties. 
 There was nothing in the judiciary that had any 
 connection with the strife of party politics. Mr. 
 B. concluded by reminding gentlemen that in 
 proposing amendments to the report, they should 
 be careful to observe that it should also be in har- 
 mony with the other provisions of the report. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON briefly expressed himself 
 in favor of the amendment of Mr. HARRIS. This 
 and one or two trifling points were probably all 
 the difference he should have with the report. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that the great complaint 
 he had heard against the court of errors, was that 
 they satin judgment on their own acts, and were 
 not therefore as independent as they ought to be. 
 He looked upon this proposition as proposing the 
 same thing, and he did not believe that judges 
 were any more independent, honorable or high- 
 minded than legislators. He would not make a 
 court of appeals like this, it was but continuing 
 the present system. He would have a court of 
 errors elected by the people, and separate entire- 
 ly from the Supreme court. This having a court 
 of appeals, a supreme court, and a justices court, 
 all from one court, was rather more court than he 
 was willing to go for. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said this proposition of the 
 gentleman from Albany, by taking the judges 
 from the supreme court, would be to lessen its 
 force. It was feared that there was not a suffi- 
 cient force now. He was in favor of electing 
 some of the judges of the court of appeals by the 
 people of the whole state, and also of having some 
 of it members taken from the supreme court. 
 He was inclined to favor the proposition of the 
 gentleman from Ontario, which provided for the 
 election of eight judges the court to consist of 
 twelve by the people at large. The people 
 would undoubtedly select men amply qualified to 
 occupy those high and exalted stations It ap- 
 peared to him that a court thus composed would 
 possess all the qualifications required it would 
 contain men learned and experienced in the laws, 
 and men of standing in community for their sound 
 sense and wisdom, and selected with particular 
 reference to their qualifications for it. As re- 
 garded party influence, whatever mode of elec- 
 tion was adopted, and however men may desire 
 to avoid such influences in their selection of 
 judges, he ventured to say that such feelings would 
 not be smothered no matter what mode of ap- 
 pointment or election might be adopted. It was 
 utterly impossible to avoid it. All that could be 
 expected was that men should discard party in- 
 fluences in their action after selection as judges. 
 He hoped therefore either the report of the com- 
 mittee or the amendment of the gentleman from 
 Ontario would be adopted. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said it was not his intention 
 or desire, in the suggestion made, that these 
 judges should be elected by general ticket. If 
 they were to b*e chosen in that way, the fewer 
 there were of them the better. Of all the curses 
 that could befall us, a political judiciary would 
 be the greatest ; and the result ot a general ticket, 
 system might be to inflict upon us a political ju- 
 diciary. An election by districts would not only 
 give us a judiciary made up of both parties, bu 
 would tend to break up centralization an obj 
 of no small importance, as he regarded it. 
 
759 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAXD continued the debate in favor 
 of the amendment of Mr. HARRIS. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN replied. 
 
 The question being then taken on Mr. HAR- 
 RIS' amendment, it was rejected ayes 24, noes 
 76, as follows: 
 
 A YES-; Messrs. Archer, F. F Backus, H. Backus. Ba- 
 ker, Bascom. Bruce, Burr, Candee, Chatlield. Cook, Dod(i, 
 Flandem. Gardner, Harris, E. Huntington, Kitkland, Pat- 
 terson, Penniman, Porter. Salisbury, tohaver, J. J. Taylor, 
 A. Wright W. B. Wright -24. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Angel, A> rault, Bergen. Bow- 
 dish, Brown, Bull, D 1). Ottmpbell, Clark, Clyde, Conely, 
 Cornell. Crookcr, Uana, Danlorth, Dorlon, Forsyth, Oeb- 
 haid Graham, Greene. Harrison, Han, Hawley, Hoffman, 
 Hotchki>s, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchmson, 
 Hyde, Jor Ian. Kemblf, Kennedy, King^ley, Loomij, Mann, 
 McNitt, Marvin, Miller, Morris. N tills, Nicholas, O'Con- 
 or, Peikins, Powers, President, Richmond, Riker, Rug- 
 
 les, Shaw, Sheldon, Shrpard, W. H Spencer, Stanton, 
 tephens, Stetson. Stow. Strong, Swackhamer, Taft, Tag- 
 gart,Ta!l nadge. W Taylor, TiMen, Townsend, Tuthill, 
 Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Warien, Waterbury, White, 
 Witbeck, Wood, Wor.len, Yawgt-r, Young, Youngs 76. 
 
 Mr. STETSON moved to amend, by inserting 
 after " serve," in the 4th line, " and at whose 
 election all the electors of the State shall have a 
 right to vote." 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved to adjourn. Agreed to. 
 
 Adjourned to half-past 8 o'clock to-morrow 
 morning. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (12nd day) August 26. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. STOVER. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved that the returns made 
 some time since by the Chancery Clerk of the 8th 
 Circuit relative to monies in the hands of the 
 Court of Chancery , be returned to the clerk to 
 assist him in making out some further returns 
 which the Convention had called for. Agreed to. 
 
 The committee then took up the unfinished bu- 
 siness, being the reports on ' 
 
 THE JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 Mr. STETSON withdrew the amendment to 
 the second section which was pending yesterday 
 when the Convention adjourned. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to strike out the sec- 
 tion down to and including the word " serve" in 
 the 4th line, and insert, " There shall be eight 
 judges of the Court of Appeals, elected by the 
 electors of this State, who shall hold their office 
 for 8 years." 
 
 This was opposed by Mr. A W. YOUNG, who 
 said he first wished to know how the judges were 
 to be elected. He wanted them by single districts. 
 
 Mr. BURR said he did not know and could not 
 tell how these judges were to be employed. He 
 should be unwilling to pay them large salaries 
 unless there was employment for them ; and he 
 could not conceive that they would have employ- 
 ment for all parts of the year. Nor was he able 
 to discover why one of these should be a " chief 
 justice." He was democratic enough to desire 
 the judges to be placed on a common level. 
 
 Mr. I AGliAKT said tru-y \\ould have plenty to 
 do, it they did their duty faithfully. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD demanded ihe yeas and nays 
 on his amendment, an! they wore ordered. 
 
 Mr. SIOW wished to have the elec'nm by four 
 double district-, instead ot eight single districts; 
 and he further wished so to classify the judges 
 that they should go out in classes. So he must 
 
 vote against tins, in order lo gel a betier amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mf. STETSON contended that 'he judgesof the 
 Court of Appeals should represent the entire peo- 
 ple, and Dot be the mere leprrsentalivcs of local 
 districts. Many local piejudices might linctuiea 
 local judge lor iri.-t.tnce, ant i-rnasonry or aboii- 
 Horns. n, and many other matters. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that he (.Mr. S.) must have 
 supposed he was talking to school-boys; he takes 
 it for certain that a judge elected in the eighth 
 district, must be a scoundrel, a villain, &,c. It is 
 all moonshine no sound argument about it. He 
 wants all the judges appointed,!)} the Governor. 
 But he has blown oil' some of the gas that has 
 been a long time collecting, and the gentleman 
 would feel betier, he hoped. It the amendment to 
 the amendment was adopted, then he couid not 
 vote lor the amendment, because if eight judges 
 were to be elected by the people, it had bei-n said 
 thai four more must be taken in. m the Supreme 
 Court, making 12 in all; and that was loo many. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY opposed the general ticket 
 systtm. He wanted to know a judge betoie he 
 voted for him. 
 
 The yeas and nays were then taken on CHAT- 
 FIELD'S amendment, and it was lost, thus: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ayrsult, F. F. Backus, 
 H. Backus Baker, Bascom, Bruce, Brundage, Bun. Can. 
 dee, Chamber ain, Cook, Crocker, Dana, i)odd, Dorlon 
 Flanders, Gebhard, Graham, Harris, Harrison, Hawley, E. 
 Huntington, M&rvin, Miller, Morris, Nicho as, Parish" Pat- 
 terson, Penniman, Porter, lih ades, Richmond, Salisbury, 
 Shaver, Shepard, W H. Spencer. Strong, Ta.ngart, Town- 
 send, Warren, Waterbury, VVorden, A. Wright W. B. 
 Wright, Young, Youngs 48. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Bergen, Bowdi h, Brown, Bull, 
 D. D. Campbeil, R. C ampbell, jr., Chath'eld. Clark, Clyde, 
 Conely, Cornell. Danforth, Gardner, Greene, Hart, Hoff- 
 man, Hotchk ss, Hunt Hunter, A. Huntington, Hu'tciun- 
 son, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble, Kennedy, Keinan, King-ley 
 Kirkland, Loomis, Mann, Mc\ei , >cNitt, Nellis, NJcoU 
 O'Conor, Perkins, Powers, Pre ident, Hiker, Ruggles, St'. 
 John, Sanford, Shaw Sheldon, Stanton, Stephens, Siet-on, 
 Swackhamer, Taft, J. J.Taylor, Tilden, 1 uthill, Vache, 
 Van Schoonhoven, Ward, White, Witbeck, Wood Yaw 
 ger 61 
 
 Mr. BROWN said they ought to test the ques- 
 tion whether they would have four of these judges 
 to be judges of the supreme court. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD explained that he did so 
 mean. 
 
 Mr. BROWN was opposed to having more than 
 eight or nine judges. More than that number 
 did not attend to their business. If by this amend- 
 ment it was to be left open to add four more judges 
 to these eight judges of the appellate court, he 
 should vote against it. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON wished to offer a substitute 
 for the two first sections. 
 
 The PRESIDENT : Not in order. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said in order to test the sense 
 of the Covention as to the number of judges and 
 whether any are to come from the supreme court, 
 would offer the following : 
 
 " There shall be a court oi appeals composed of twelve 
 judges, of whom lourshalt be.elect.d Irom the cl*ss of 
 judges of the supreme court having- the ?hoi test time to 
 *erve. and eight shall be eltcttd by the electors ol the 
 state, ;} &c. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that if the court ot appeals 
 was to be in session all the year round twelve 
 judges would not be too many but if the system 
 was to be so adjusted as to enable that court to 
 
760 
 
 do all its business in two or three months, then 
 he thought twelve would be too many. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS did not wish eight broken down 
 politicians put on the bench of the court of ap- 
 peals ; he did not want to provide any such sine- 
 cure by putting them along side the four judges 
 who would do all the work. They would be any- 
 thing but ornaments, and he should vote against 
 the amendment. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON opposed it. 
 
 The ayes and nays were then ordered on Mr. 
 TAYLOR' amendment to the amendment, and re- 
 sulted ayes 12, noes 25. 
 
 So it was lost. 
 
 Mr. CONELY moved to strike out part of the 
 amendment, and insert " At their first meeting 
 they shall determine by lot the time each mem- 
 ber respectively shall serve, which shall be from 
 one to eight years inclusive, and annually there- 
 after one "shall be elected every eight years." 
 
 This was lost only 28 voting for it. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS wished to have eight judges 
 elected to form part of the court ; but not to con- 
 stitute the whole court. 
 
 The yeas and najs were then ordered on the 
 amendment, and resulted thus: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen. Bergen, Bowdish, Cambreleng, 
 D D. Campbell, Chatfield, Clark, Conely, Cook, Cornell, 
 Danforth, Hart, Hotchkiss, Kennedy, Mann, McNitt, Mor- 
 ris, O'Conor, Porter, President, Sanford, Shaw, Tallmadge, 
 Vache, Van Schconhoven, War.), Waterbury, White, 
 Witbeck 29. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 H Backus, Bascom, Brown, Bruce, Brundagu, Bull, Burr, 
 B'. Campbell, jr., Candee, Clyde, Crooker, Dana, D.dd, 
 Dorlon. Flanders, Forsyth, Gardner, Gebhard, Graham, 
 Greene, Harris, Harrison, Hawley, Hoffman, Hunt, Hun- 
 ter A. Huutington, E. i'untington, Hmchinson. Hyde, 
 Jordan Kemble, Kernan, Kiugsiey, Kirkland, Loomis, Mc- 
 Neil, Marvin, Miller, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoil, Parish, Pat- 
 terson Peunimau, Perkins, Powers, Richmond, Kiker, Rug- 
 gles, St. John, ,-alisbury, Shaver, Sheldon, Shepard, Sim- 
 mon's, W. H Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Stow, 
 Strong Swackhamer, Taft, Taggart, Tollm,,dge, J.J. Tay- 
 lor Townsend, Tuthill, Warren, Wood, Worden, A. 
 Wright, W . B. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 81. 
 
 Mr. STOW offered the following amendment 
 to the second :-ection : 
 
 There shall be a court of appeals, composed of twelve 
 judges, of whom eight shall be elected, and four shall be 
 selected from justices of the supreme court. The said 
 eight judges shall b chosen in districts, for which purpose 
 the state shall be diviaediiito ioui districts, anil two judges 
 shall be elected from each district. One of the judges 
 thus chosen from each district at the tirst election shall hcttd 
 his ortice lor three ye.irs, and one lor six years, as shall be 
 determined by lot, at the ftist assembliag ol the said court. 
 After the first election, the judge elected shall hold his of- 
 fice for six years, except when chosen to fill a vacancy 
 occasioned otherwise than by the expiration of the term of 
 the juJp'e; but when elected to fill a vacancy thus occa- 
 sioned the term of such judge shall only be for the unex- 
 pired term of the jud^e whose place he shall have been 
 choen to supply. Provision shall be made by Jaw for de- 
 siffnating one of the number elected as chief judge, and 
 for selecting justices of the supreme court from time to 
 time. No justice shall bi entitled to a vote in the court oi 
 appeals in any case which was tried or det-ided by him. 
 He may, however, assign the reasons for his opinion. 
 
 After some slight explanation between Mr. 
 STOW, Mr. BROWN, and Mr. RUGGLES, the yeas- 
 and nays were, oidered, and resulted thus: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ayrault, Bergen, Can- 
 dee Chatfield, Cornell, Dorlon, Harris, Marvin, Miller, 
 Morris Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish,- Patterson, Penniman, 
 Richmond, W. H Spencer, Stow, Waterbury, Worden, 
 W. B. Wright 23. 
 
 NOES Messrs. F.F. Backus, H. Backus, Baker, Bas- 
 
 com, Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Bull, Burr, Cambreleng, 
 D. D. Campbell, R. Campbell, Jr, Clyde, Conely, Cook, 
 Crooker, Dana, Danforth, Dodd, Flanders, Forsyth, Gard- 
 ner, Graham, Greene, Harrison, Hart, Hawley, Hoffman, 
 Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, 
 Hyde, Jordan, Kemble. Kennedy, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirk, 
 lana, Loomis, Mann, McNitt, Nellis, Perkins, Powers, Pre- 
 sident, Riker, Ruggles, St. John, Salisbury, Sanford, Sha- 
 ver, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, 
 Strong, Swackhamer, Tafft, Taggart, Tallmadge, J. J. 
 Taylor, Townsend, TuthilJ, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, 
 Warren, White, Witbeck, Wood, A. Wright, Yawger, 
 Young, Youngs 77. 
 
 So it was lost. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES then moved to amend so as to 
 provide that " no member of the court of appeals 
 shall have a vote in the decision of any question 
 on which he may have given a written opinion 
 in the courts below." 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to strike out the words 
 " written." 
 
 Mr. PERKINS suggested that the words " in a 
 court at bane," should be substituted for the word 
 " written." 
 
 After a brief debate in which Messrs. SIM- 
 MONS, KIRKLAND, RUGGLES, HOFFMAN, 
 HARRIS, TAGGART, and RICHMOND, took 
 part, the question on striking out the word 
 " written," was taken, and it was rejected ayes 
 28, nays 76. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then moved to strike out 
 the words " in the court below" after the word 
 " opinion." 
 
 This was rejected. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment, and there were ayes 23, nays 83. So it 
 was rejected. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS then moved the section by inser- 
 ting after the word " serve" in the fourth line, 
 the words " the judges to be elected shall be cho- 
 sen by districts for which purpose the state shall 
 be divided into four districts." Mr. H. briefly 
 expressed his opposition to any election by gen- 
 eral ticket. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS urged that the question should 
 first be taken on the number of which the court 
 should consist, and expressed the hope that Mr. 
 H. would withdraw his amendment for that pur- 
 pose. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS assented to this and the amend- 
 ment was accordingly withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS then moved to strike out of the 
 first line the word "eight," and to insert the word 
 " ten," and to strike out from the second line the 
 the word " four," and insert " six." He explained 
 that his object was to constitute the court of ten 
 members, and to make a majority of these six 
 elective by the people. He desired to give them 
 a preponderance over the judges of the supreme 
 court. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL thought that eight was quite 
 em.'Ugh lor I he discharge ol business. Ten would 
 perhaps tend to reiaid a. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY was not satisfied that even 
 eight would find enough to employ themselves, 
 and he certainly was opposed 10 any increase of 
 the number. 
 
 Air. CHATFIELD suggested that by making 
 the number seven, tour to be elected by the peo- 
 ple, the gentleman from New York could ditam 
 ins object, without an increase ot the force. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS modified his amendment so as to 
 
761 
 
 propose to strike out eight and insert, seven, and 
 to strike out four and insert, "three." 
 
 Mr. BROWN thought it should be made obli. 
 gatory on all the judges to be present, especially 
 those elected by the people, or else the end de- 
 sired by gentlemen could not be attained. He 
 added that the committee had m their report ar- 
 ranged the number of judges in proportion to the 
 circuit, and therefore this amendment would de- 
 range the whole plan. 
 
 The question being taken the amendment was 
 rejected aye* 29 nays 76. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL then moved to amend by striking 
 out the words " the shoitest time to serve" in the 
 fourth line, and inserting " four ye-irs to serve." 
 This he said would obviate the objection that if 
 these judges were to sit in this court during the 
 two last years ot their time, they might be influ- 
 enced by a desire tor a re-election. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr- HARRIS then renewed his amendment 
 {withdrawn at the request of Mr. MORRIS) and the 
 
 question being taken 
 nays 70. 
 
 it was rejected, ayes 38, 
 
 Mr BROWN moved to amend by striking out 
 ' one" in the seventh line, and inserting "two," 
 and striking out " second" in '.he eighth line and 
 inserting " four." He desired to make the section 
 so that one half th* judges should go out, at the 
 end of four years, and the other halt' at the end ol 
 eight years. Their might be a difficulty in get- 
 ting a good lawyer to give up his business and be- 
 come a judge when perhaps he might only serve 
 two years. 
 
 This amendment, after a brief debate, in which 
 Messrs. SI MMCNS, STEPHENS, MORRIS and 
 PATTERSON, participated, was rejected. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART offered the following amend- 
 ment to come in at the end of the section. 
 
 " And no judgment, order or decision of the Su- 
 preme Court, shall be reversed without the concurrence 
 of at least five judges oi the Court of Appeals." 
 
 This was rejected. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART then proposed to add: 
 " The Court of Appeals shall have a general superinten 
 ding control over inferior jurisdictions. It shall have pow- 
 er to issue writs of error and supersedeas, certiorari, ha- 
 beas corpus, mandamus,quo warranto, and other remedial 
 writs, and to hear and determine the same." 
 
 Mr. T. briefly supported his amendment, when 
 
 The question being taken it was rejected. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved the following amend- 
 ment : 
 
 " A session of said court shall be held as often as once in 
 two years in each of the judicial districts of the state." 
 
 This, Mr. B. said, would prevent a centraliza- 
 tion of the courts at Albany, in relation to which 
 there had hitherto been so much complaint. 
 
 The amendment was rejected ayes 34, noes 
 68. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to strike out the word 
 * elected" in the fifth line, so as to place all the 
 judges of the court of appeals, whether elected 
 or selected, on a par in respect to the eligibility 
 to the station of chief justice. 
 
 This amendment, after ajbrief debate, wa s re- 
 jected ayes "> ( >, ir.iys 5o, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, F. F. Backus, H. Back- 
 us, Baker, Bascom, Bowdish, Brown, Bruce, Bull, Burr 
 Candce, Crooker, Dana, Dodd, Dorlon, Flander-;, Gardner, 
 Harris, Harrison, Hawley, A. Huntington, E. Huntingtcn, 
 Kemblc, Kennedy, Kirkland, Loomis, Mann, Marvin, Mil 
 
 ler, Nellis, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Porter, Rugglee, 
 Salisbury, Sanford, Simmons, \V. H. Spencer, Stephens, 
 Strong, Taggart, Tuthill, Vache, Waterbury, A. "W right, 
 W. B. Wright, Young 60. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, Ayranlt, Bergen, Brundage 
 Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, Chatfiekl, Clark, Clyde, 
 Conely, Cook, Cornell, Danforth, Forsyth, Gebhard, 
 Greene, Hart, Hofi'man, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, Hutch- 
 inson, Hyde, Jordan, Kerrran, Kingsley, McNitt, Morris, 
 Nicholas, Nicoli, O'Conor, Perkins, Powers, President, 
 Richmond, Riker, St, John, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, 
 Stetson, Stow, Taft, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, 
 Tilden, Towns-end, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Warren, 
 White, Witbeck, Wood, Yawger.Youngs 65. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS desired to tkae the sense of the 
 convention on a|propositk>n, which he feared, 
 however, would not be received. He moved to 
 amend so as to make the term of the elected 
 judges of the court of appeals four years, instead 
 of eight. Mr. L. briefly argued in favor of a short 
 term of office. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN briefly opposed the amendment, 
 as did Mr. SIMMONS. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was 
 rejected. Ay-s 27, nays 79, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs Archer, F. F. Backus, Bascom, Bow- 
 dish, Burr, Chatfield, Danforth, Flanders, Harris, Hart, 
 Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hutchinson, Loomis, Mann, Morris, 
 Richmond, St. John, Saniord, Sheldon, W. H. Spencer, 
 Taft, Vache, Waterbury, Wood, A. Wright, W. B.Wright, 
 27. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Allen, Angel, Ayrault, H. Backus, Ba- 
 ker, Bergen, Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Bull, Cambreleng, 
 D. D Campbell, Candee, Clyde, Conely, Cook, Cornell, 
 Crooker, Dana, Dodd, Dorlon, Forsyth, Gardner, Gebhard, 
 Graham, Greene, Harrison, Hawley, Hoffman, Hunter, A. 
 Huntington, E. Huntington, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble, Ken- 
 nedy, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirkland, McNitt, Marvin, Mil- 
 ler, Nellis, Nicholas, NicolJ, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, 
 Penniman, Perkins, Porter, Poweis, President Riker, Rug- 
 gles, Salisbury, Shaver, Shaw, Shepard, Simmons, Ste- 
 phens, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Tagyart, Tallmadge, J. J. 
 Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, 
 Ward, Warren, White, Witbeck, Worden, Yawger.Young, 
 Youngs-79 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN here moved the previous ques- 
 tion on the second section, and there was a sec- 
 ond, &c. 
 
 The question was then stated be on Mr. HAR- 
 RISON'S amendment as follows: 
 
 ^ 2. The Supreme Court of Appeals shall be composed 
 of a chief justice and seven associate judges, who shall 
 hold their offices for eight years. The chief justice and 
 three associate judges shall be elected by the electors of 
 the State, on a general ticket; and four associate judges 
 shall be selected from the class of justices of the district 
 court having the shortest time to serve. Provision shall 
 be made by law for the selection of such justices, from 
 time to time, and lor classifying those elected by the peo- 
 ple, as that one shall be elected every second year. 
 
 This was negatived; and the second section 
 was adopted in the precise shape in which it was 
 reported ayes 03, noes 43, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Ayrault, H. Backus, Ba. 
 ker, Bowdish, Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Burr, Cambre 
 leng, D. D. Campbell, il. Campbell, jr., Clyde, Conely 
 Crooker. Dana, Dunforth, Dodd, Dorlon, Forsyth, Gard, 
 ner, Gebhard, Greene, Harris, Harrison, Hawley, Hofl'- 
 man, Hotohkiss, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson. Jor< 
 dan, Kemble, Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, McNitt, Miller- 
 Nellis, Nicoli, Powers, Riker, Ruggles, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Stephens, Stetson, Taft, J. J.' Taylor, W. Taylor, Town-, 
 send, Tuthill, Vanschoonhoven, Ward, Warren, White, 
 Witbeck, Wood, A Wright.W. B.Wright, Yawger, Youngs 
 63. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Archer. F. F. Backus, Bascom, Ber- 
 gen, Bull, Candee, Chatfield, Clark, Cook, Cornell, Flan- 
 ders, Hart.Hunt, E. Huntington, Kennedy, Kirkland.Mann, 
 Marvin, Morris, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Pen 
 
 niman, Perkins, Porter, President, Richmond, St. John, Sal- 
 isbury , Saniord, Shepard, Simraons,|W. H. Spencer, Stow, 
 
 70 
 
762 
 
 Strong. Swaokhamer, Taggart, Tallmadge, Vache, Wate 
 bury, Worden, Young 43. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. HUNT offered an amendment which wa 
 ordered printed, as follows : 
 
 Strike out the 12th section of the report, an 
 insert the following- : 
 
 12. Each senate district, at its bienial election for sen 
 ator, shall choose three electors of judges. No citize 
 shall vote for more than two of such electors, and th 
 three persons having the highest number ot votes shall I 
 elected. Should fewer than three electors be chosen a 
 'any such election in consequence of two or more of th 
 four persons receiving the highest number of votes ha 1 
 ing an equal number of votes, one or more of such person 
 as the case may require, shall be selected to fill the defi 
 ciency by lot. The electors thus chosen throughout th 
 state, shall convene, at such time and place as may b 
 
 Srescribed by law, and elect the Justices of the Suprem 
 ourt, and fill all vacancies therein occurring. 
 
 Then the 3d section of the Judiciary Report a 
 amended in committee of the whole, was read a 
 follows : 
 
 ^ There shall be a supreme court having general juris 
 diction in law and equity. 
 
 Mr. MANN proposed to add to this section 
 " subject to such regulations and restrictions ai 
 shall from time to time be prescribed by law." 
 
 Mr. MANN said that in creating these tribu 
 nals he wanted them under the control of the peo 
 pie, either directly or through the legislature. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND rose to a question of order. 
 They ought to vote on all the questions that were 
 pending when they adjourned in the morning. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said, that however necessary 
 these words might have been in the original sec- 
 tion, they were unnecessary now, as the section 
 stood amended. It would be tautology to say thai 
 this jurisdiction would be subject to legislative 
 control. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES did not agree with the gentle- 
 man as to the true meaning of the section. He 
 regarded these words as unnecessary, to give the 
 legislature power to control the jurisdiction oJ 
 this court. He would vote for the amendment, 
 because it placed the section in the same shape 
 that it was in before. 
 
 Mr. BROWN urged that the convention should 
 come back to the original section, and restore the 
 words struck out in committee. He suggested 
 the following: 
 
 ' There shall be a supreme court having the same ju- 
 risdiction which the court of chancery and the supreme 
 court now have, subject to such additions, limitations, 
 and regulations as may be prescribed by law." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR did not see any great difference 
 between the section as proposed to be amended, 
 and the original. They would both essentially 
 effect the same object. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD did not like the original sec- 
 tion ; but the amendment did not improve it any. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD insisted that the section was 
 right as it stood ; it didliot confer all jurisdiction 
 on this court, but left the legislature to confer ju- 
 risdiction on other courts. 
 
 Mr. BROWN'S proposition then came up in 
 order to be considered ; it was, to add to the sec- 
 tion the words " subject to such restrictions, ad- 
 ditions and regulations as may from time to time 
 be prescribed by law." 
 
 Mr. SWACKH AMER did not much care which 
 
 of the amendments prevailed ; but as the highest 
 legal gentlemen here differed about their effect, 
 it was high time they were settled. 
 
 A personal explanation here ensued between 
 Messrs. SHEPARD and SWACKH AMER. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR asked whether his amendment 
 relative to county courts (as it was modified by 
 Mr. STEPHENS) did not take precedence of this 
 amendment of Mr. BROWN'S, because his (Mr. 
 O'CoNOR's) was offered in committee of the whole. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that it was first in or- 
 der. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR'S proposition relative to the pro- 
 viding of president judges for county courts with 
 original jurisdiction was then read. [It has al- 
 ready been published.] 
 
 Mr. HARRISON said that he had listened with 
 profound attention to the debates on this subject 
 for the last ten days, and as some of the launeu 
 (as they w;ere called here,) had participated to 
 some extent in the discussions, he too should ven- 
 ture to express his views on the matter now ui>. 
 ler consideration. But in doing tins, he should 
 not be inconsiderate he should endeavor not to 
 wade into " deep water," where he would* he lia- 
 ale to be overwhelmed, but should confine him- 
 self to such topics, as a lav man might venture to 
 speak upon with safety. In the b'rst place, he 
 bought that in this article, a brief enumeration 
 of (he courts about to be instituted ouht to be 
 refixed at its head ; as an enumeiation o: tnem, 
 with their proper, and distinctive n/mes, would 
 >e more comprehensive, to the people, and would 
 serve as a kind of index to the whole, and enable. 
 us to see the kind and number ot courts we were to 
 lave, and besides, he wished too, to see things 
 called by their right names; for, with all due 
 espect with all the profound respect he felt 
 or the judicial committee, he must s.iy that the 
 erm supreme court, as applied to the great court 
 vhich they had erected, was a tnisnon.er it was 
 n no respect, as he could peiceive. a supreme 
 :ourt. It was, in a'll its distinctive features, a 
 ;ircuit courf ; and as such he must consider it, 
 nd had so designated it in the heading 10 the 
 ections he was about to offer for the consideration 
 f the Convention. Again, although he would 
 iOt pretend to enter into any discussion with the 
 egal gentlemen of the house, in respect to the 
 >eculiar functions to be di.-,chaiged by a court of 
 ppeals and last resort, yet as it respected its 
 tructure and formation, he had somethn g to say ; 
 :ir he had learned something in the course of this 
 ebate, and more especially from the remarks of 
 he truly able gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. 
 ' FFMAN) made yesterday. From his obser- 
 ations, as well as from what had fallen from 
 ther gentlemen, it was evident that this court 
 
 most emphatically intended to be a court of 
 aw a court for the expounding of law alone, 
 nd for the correction of those errors in which 
 le application of its true principles had failed, 
 the court below, from whatever cause.. Now, 
 this be the case, and we all know that it is, I 
 sk whether it is not a mistake to believe that 
 lis court should be made up of a numerous body, 
 think it is, and a great mistake, too ; for num- 
 ers will only serve to retard its action, and to 
 mpair, to a great degree, in my opinion, its effi- 
 ency. It has been said, too, that this court 
 
763 
 
 >ln>uld have in it something of what has been 
 d " a popul** expression." Now, this, too, 
 I think is a mistake; the less we have of this, in 
 my opinion, the better will our laws be expound- 
 ed and administered. It is clear to me, sir, that 
 this court should consist of a small body of men, 
 but that it ou;ht to compose the highest legal 
 ability in the State. 
 
 A debate then ensued as to the propriety of the 
 amendment being proposed to this section, it be- 
 ing insisted on the one hand that it could not de- 
 cide whether the proposed number of Supreme 
 court judges would be required, if a county court 
 was provided for ; and on the other, that it was 
 better to proceed in regular order and finish up 
 the section; when the matter dropped. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN briefly addressed ^the conven- 
 tion in favor of county courts, with original and 
 appellate jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS also regarded a county court as 
 essential in some form. 
 
 Mr. W. W. TAYLOR followed, indicating an 
 amendment he intended to offer at the proper 
 time, designed to leave it to the legislature, after 
 a trial of the new system) to confer certain juris- 
 diction on the county courts. 
 
 Mr. STRONG gave notice of a motion to re- 
 consider the section establishing the court of ap- 
 peals. 
 
 Adjourned to half-past 8 o'clock to-morrow 
 morning. 
 
 THURSDAY, (73<2 day,) August 27. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. STOVER. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG presented the petition of 
 females of Covington, Wyoming county, in favor 
 of woman's rights. Referred to the committee 
 of the whole having in charge the report of com- 
 mittee number eleven. 
 
 Mr, DUBOIS presented the petition of inhabi- 
 tants of LaGrange, Dutchess county, against the 
 establishment of free schools. Referred. 
 
 The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention 
 a report from the clerk of the seventh chancery 
 circuit in answer to a resolution of the Conven- 
 tion. Laid on the table. 
 
 The PRESIDENT also presented a communi- 
 cation from an association of teachers in Conven- 
 tion at Utica, against any diversion of the litera- 
 ture fund. Referred to the appropriate committee 
 of the whole. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN offered the following 
 resolution which was agreed to : 
 
 Rt solved. That the Compti oiler report to this Conven- 
 tion a statement in detail .showing the amount of State 
 stocks outstanding on the first day c>f September, 1846 ; lor 
 what purposes it was issued, and when payable > that lor 
 canal purposes ia one column and that for all other pur 
 poses in another column. Also, the amount af funds be- 
 longing to the State available and unavailable, separately 
 sta'ed, and the sources ironi which it was derived, and the 
 purposes to which it is Applicable. Also his opinion when 
 the unavailable portion may be realized. 
 
 THK JUDICIARY REPORT. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved a reconsideration of the vote 
 taken yesterday on his amendment to the third 
 section of the judiciary report. 
 
 There were no objections and it was taken up. 
 
 The amendment was to add the words " subject 
 to such restrictions and regulations as shall from 
 time to time be prescribed by law," to the sec- 
 tion providing for a supreme court 
 
 Mr. WHITE called for the ayes and nays and 
 they were ordered. 
 
 After some conversation, 
 
 Mr. BROWN proposed that the call for the 
 ayes and noes be withdrawn, by unanimous con- 
 sent, and that the reconsideration be agreed to. 
 
 This was assented to by the Convention and 
 the reconsideration agreed to. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS asked and obtained unani- 
 mous consent to change the record of his vote on 
 agreeing to the second section yesterday, and he 
 voted " no." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR withdrew his proposition of 
 yesterday for a county court. 
 
 Mr. BROWN then offered an amendment to 
 the third section, creating a supreme court in the 
 words following: " Subject to such additions, 
 Imitations and regulations as may be provided 
 By law." 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that although the pro- 
 position in form united the two jurisdictions of 
 law and equity, yet he considered that it allowed 
 the legislature, if they chose,at the very next ses- 
 sion to separate them again. He desired to see 
 no possible chance for this, 
 
 Mr. BROWN said if these consequences would 
 follow, he certainly should unite in voting down 
 this section, because one of the greatest encour- 
 agements he had in coming to this conclusion 
 was the hope of uniting these two jurisdictions. 
 He denied that the proposition left any power to 
 separate them in the legislature. Mr. B. referred 
 to the language of the proposition to show that 
 this was so. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD raised a point of oider, as to 
 whether the amendment could be received. The 
 proposition was to strike out the word " regula- 
 tion," which was not now in the section, having 
 been stricken out in committee of the whole. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the motion was 
 equivalent to a restoiation ut the section, and 
 which was in order. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD would waive his point of 
 o'xler, as he bad no desire to embarrass the propo- 
 sition by any technicalities. He could nut under- 
 stand what objection gentlemen had lo the section 
 as amended. It gave tiie Legislature full power 
 to make all needful regulations, without as he 
 conceived the pending proposition did giving it 
 power at any moment to restore the separation of 
 these I wo juris'.Mctions. They would certainly 
 have the power to regulate, limit, and add lo its 
 duties ; and what more power could possibly be 
 conferred on them? 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES briefly opposed the views of 
 Mr. CHATFIELD, and urged lhat the amendment 
 of the gentleman irom Otsego was equally liable 
 to the objections he had raised to the pending pro- 
 position. Mr. R. then went on to sustain the 
 amendment of Mr. BnowN. There was nothing 
 in this section as it sio;)d, to limit the equity ju. 
 nsdiction of the supreme court. He desired the 
 amendment to prevail, because he thought there 
 was much chancery business which ought to be 
 done somewhere else for instance, in the surro- 
 gate'? courls, where it could be done for less than 
 half the expense it now cost. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was opposed to the amendment. 
 He could never agree that the Legislature should 
 have control of the judiciary. He desired to see 
 
764 
 
 the three departments of government, indepen- 
 dent of each other, and deriving their power alone 
 from the Constitution. He therefore would put 
 no clause in the Constitution which would allow 
 the Legislature to interfere with (he judiciary. 
 He was s-atisfied with the section as originally re- 
 ported by the committee, or as amended, on the 
 motion of the gentleman from Otsego, but could 
 not for the reasons he had slated, give to the 
 pending proposition his assent. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN continued the de- 
 bate in favor of the proposition of Mr, BROWN. 
 
 Mr, BASCOM, after a brief explanation, offered 
 the following amendment: 
 
 ^ 3. There shall be a supreme court haying general 
 Common law jurisdiction, and such special equity jurisdic- 
 tion as shall be enumerated and pi escribed by law. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN opposed the amendment of Mr. 
 BASCOM. He desired to transfer the present equi. 
 ty jurisdiction to the Supreme Court. The Su- 
 preme Court from its very const i'tution had juris- 
 diction in law, -and if it was not intended to trans- 
 fer to it equity jurisdiction also, it would be un- 
 necessary to say a word about it in the Constitu- 
 tion. The proposition from Mr. BROWN, in his 
 opinion, fully attained this point. As to the Le- 
 gislature having control over both these jurisdic- 
 tions, he insisted that they alwa'ys had control 
 over it, and exercised it in the most unsparing 
 manner, and they would still r?o it, if they were 
 given the same power they had heretofore over 
 both these jurisdictions 
 
 Mr. HARRIS urged upon the Convention the 
 necessity of bringing the debate to a close. Ev- 
 ery gentleman was prepared to vote, and why 
 then waste more time. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was very much obliged to some 
 gentlemen for their lectures, but when he wished 
 to go to school! he would choose his own instruc- 
 tors. He was opposed to action without full dis- 
 cussion, and he should avail himself of his law- 
 ful rights here to discuss, without wearying the 
 patience of the committee. Mr. S. went on to re- 
 ply to Mr. JORDAN, and to reiterate his argu- 
 ments on the pending question. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY said he arose for the purpose 
 of making a motion, which in his limited experi- 
 ence in deliberative assemblies, he had not be- 
 fore made. He had always been opposed to the 
 application of the previous question in ordinary 
 cases, and had generally voted against it. He 
 would not now resort to it, were it not that he be- 
 lieved that the progress of business demanded it. 
 It could not have escaped the notice of the con- 
 vention, and if it had, it certainly could not have 
 escaped the observation of the people of the state, 
 that there is a class of members here who can 
 talk from January until January, on any and every 
 question, or even without any question, legiti- 
 mately under consideration. Indeed, it appears 
 that they can talk longer and waste more time in 
 speaking to just no question at all, than they are 
 capable of doing, when confmd to a question 
 really at issue. He believed that the working 
 portion of the Convention were and had been for 
 some time past ready to vote on this question and 
 wished no more time wasted in useless debate. 
 He spok,e as he felt on this subject. He would 
 not follow the example of his learned friend from 
 Albany, (Mr. HARRIS,) by even alluding to this 
 
 abuse in complimentary language. Neither did 
 he wish to treat gentlemen withadisrespect. But 
 when members arise here in the very teeth of the 
 decided disapprobation of a large majority of the 
 convention, consume its valuable time, object to 
 being " lectured" therefor \ and declare that they 
 will " choose their own school masters," he held 
 it to be treating the business portion of this con- 
 vention with marked contempt. Mr. H. said he 
 arose to make a motion to facilitate the business 
 of the convention, to husband the small portion 
 of time still left, to do the business for which it 
 assembled, and to prevent if possible, at this late 
 day of the session, the convention from stultify- 
 ing itself for want of time to perform its duties. 
 He moved the previous- question on the section 
 under consideration. 
 
 There was a second; ayes 62, nays noteounted, 
 and the main question ordered. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. BROWN, and it was rejected, ayea 
 38, nays 68, as follows r 
 
 AYES- - Messrs. Allen, Angel, Ayrault, Baker, Bergen x 
 Brown, Biaaidage, Crooker, Caudeback, Dana, Dorlon, 
 Pubois, Gardner. Graham, Grtene, Hawley, Hunter, A. 
 Huntingdon, Hutchinson, Jordan, Kemble, Loamis, Mann, 
 Murphy, Nellis, Nicoll, PatUrson, Poweis, Rhoades, Bug- 
 gies. Stephens, Swackhamer, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, 
 Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, W. B. Wright. 38.. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Archer, F. 7. Backus, Bascom.BoW 
 dish; Bruce, Bull, Cambrel^ng, D. D. Campbell, R. Camp- 
 bell, jr. Candee, Chatneld, Clark, Clyde, Conely, "ookr 
 Cornell, Dantorth, Dodd, Flanders. Forsyth, Gebhard, 
 Harris, Harrison, Hart, HoS'naan, Hotchkiss, Hunt, E- 
 H.ntingu>n f Hyde, Kingsley, Kirkland, Miller, Moiris, 
 Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Penniirian, Porter, President, 
 Richmond, Riker, St. John, Sanlord, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Shepard, Simmons E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, 
 Stetson, Stow f Strong, Taft, Taggart, Tallmf:dge, Town' 
 send, Vache, Ward, Waterbory, White, Willaid, W it- 
 beck, Wood, A. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 68. 
 
 The question v* as then taken on Mr. BASCOM'S 
 amendment, and it was n jected ayes 10 r na}s 100. 
 
 Mr. MANN'S amendment, heretofore with- 
 drawn, was then voted upon and negatived 43- 
 voting in the affirmative and 54 in the negative. 
 
 The question was then on agreeing with the 
 section as amended in committee of ihe whole. 
 It was agreed lo, ayes 96, nays 19. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN offered the following, to come in 
 as an additional section : 
 
 {5 4. The Legislature shall hare the same power to alter 
 and regulate the jurisdiction in law and in equity as they 
 have heretofore possessed. 
 
 Mr. J briefly urged the necessity of the adop- 
 tion of a provision of this description. 
 
 Mr. CH ATFIELD, after saying that he regarded 
 the remarks 01 Mr. HAWLEY, upon moving the 
 previous question, us the coolest piece of impu- 
 dence he had ever listened to, moved the following 
 addition to the section proposed by Mr. JORJ>AN 
 not because he deemed it necessary, but because 
 other gentlemen did. He should offer il, but 
 should vote against it ; 
 
 But proceedings in law and equity shall not be separated 
 as dktinct jurisdictions, to be administered by diflerent 
 judges, but provisions shall be made by law for blending 
 them hi a common system of pleadings, proofs and prac^ 
 tice, as far as shall be consistent with the ends of justice. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN, rather than consume time, it 
 the Convention was determined to fix an iien rule 
 in relation to this matter, withdrew his amend- 
 ment. 
 
 And so the matter dropped. 
 
765 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR proposed the following amend. 
 ment, to come in as sections 4 and 5 : 
 
 !\ 4. There shall be in each county a court of common 
 pleas and a court of general sessions of the peace; and one 
 or more c unity judges as may be prescribed by law. 
 
 6. The State shall be divided into a convenient number 
 of districts, subject to alteration by law, as the public good 
 may require; for each of which districts there shall be one 
 or more president judges, to hold their offices for eight 
 years, who shall be authori^edto hold their county courts 
 in the several counties of their districts as may be pre- 
 scribed by law. 
 
 Mr. EASCOM offered the following amendment- 
 .to the amendment: 
 
 There shall be a court of common pleas with such pow 
 ers and jurisdiction as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 One of the judges thereof shall be elected in each of the 
 counties of the State entitled by its number of inhabitants 
 to a member of Assembly. 
 
 The State shall be divided into judicial districts so as to 
 embrace as near as may be, five of the counties entitled to 
 elect a judge of said court. 
 
 There shall be a circuit sessions of the said court by one 
 of the judges thereof in each of the counties, jf a judicial 
 district shall seem proper. 
 
 There shall be bane sessions of the said court by four 
 judges thereof in the several counties of the district, as 
 
 often as the judges thereof shall deem proper 
 An appeal shall b 
 
 be from the decision of the four judges 
 in bane to the courts of appeals; but the party appealing 
 shall recover no costs upon hit; appeal. 
 
 For the trial and decision of criminal causes there shall 
 be associated with the judge of the common pleas, the sur- 
 rogate of the county and one justice of the peace of the 
 county, or in the absence of the surrogate, two justices of 
 thffepeac'e. 
 
 The Governor may detail judges for judicial service 
 from any of the judicial districts to any other district. 
 
 Mr. B. explained and advocated his amendment. 
 
 Mr: KIRKLAND offered the following as an 
 amendment to Mr. BASCOM'S amendment: 
 
 There shall in each county be a county court, which 
 shall have the jurisdiction now existing in the county 
 courts, subject to modification and alteration by law, and 
 also such equity and ether jurisdiction as may be confer- 
 red by law. 
 
 In ihe first judicial district, to be composed of the city 
 and county of New-York, there shall be four district 
 judges of the county court: each of them shall alone 
 hold county courts in said districts for the trial and dispo- 
 sition of civil cases. In criminal cases two of the Alder- 
 men of the city of New-York shall be associated with any 
 one of said judges. 
 
 In each of the other judicial districts, of which there 
 shall be seven, to be established by law, there s-hall be a 
 district judge of the county court: he shall alone hold 
 courts for the trial and disposition of civil cases in each 
 county in his district. In criminal cases, the two county 
 judges shall be associated with him. The term of office of 
 said judges shall be eight years. 
 
 The district judges of one district may hold courts in 
 any other district, and shall do so when required by law: 
 and said district judges may be authorized by law to hold 
 circuit courts. 
 
 There shall in each county be a first judge and an asso 
 ciate judge: they shall be elected by qualified electors of 
 such county, and shall hold their offices for four years. 
 
 The first judge shall have and exercise the powers and 
 duties ot Surrogate in his county. Each of said county 
 judges shall also have and exercise- such other powers 
 and jurisdiction as rnay be conferred by law. 
 
 Provision shall be made by law fur cases of vacancy in 
 the office ol first and associate judges, or either of them, 
 and for the case of the absence or inability ot them, or ei- 
 ther of them, to perform any of their official duties. 
 
 A debate then arose on these propositions, 
 in which Messrs. liASCOM, RICHMOND, 
 BROWN, O'CONOR, KIRKLAND, MARVIN, 
 LOOMIS, STOW, SIMMONS, STRONG and 
 HOFFMAN, participated. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that for the purpose of dis. 
 embarrassing the question of the establishment oi 
 county courts from all the details attached to it, 
 
 le would ask for a division of the question upon 
 upon the amendment of Mr. KIRKLAND, so 
 that it should be had on the first paragraph alone. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER sent up the proposition lor a 
 county court he had heretofore submitted. 
 
 Messrs. MORRIS and SIMMONS also each 
 Dresented substitutes for the proposition already 
 DfTered, which were laid on the table, not now 
 Deing in order. 
 
 Messrs. JORDAN and W. TAYLOR laid on 
 the table amendments to Mr. CROCKER'S propo- 
 sition. 
 
 The question was then taken upon the first di- 
 vision of Mr.. KIRKLAND'S proposition and it was 
 rejected ayes 34, noes 73, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ayrault, Bergen, Bull, R. Campbell, jr. 
 Candee, Gardner, Hunt, E Hunungton, Hutchinsou, Ken 
 nedj , Kirkland, Marvin, Nicoll, O'Conor, Penniman, Per. 
 kins, Porter, Richmond, Riker, St. John, Sanford, Shepard, 
 W. H. Spencer, Stow, Strong, Taggart, Tallmadge, Tilden, 
 Vache, White, Young-31 
 
 NA\S Messrs. Angel, F. F. Backus, Baker, Bowdish, 
 Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Burr, Carohreleng, D. D. Camp- 
 bell, Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Conely,Cook,Cornell,Crook- 
 er, Cuddeback, Dana, Danioith, Dorlon, Dubois, Flanders, 
 Forsvth, Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Harris, Harrison, 
 Hart, Hawley.Hoft'rnan, Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Hunting- 
 ton, Hyde. Jordan, Kemble, Kingsley, Loomis, Miller, 
 Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Powers, Presi- 
 dent, Rhoades, Kuggles, Shaw, Sheldon, Simmons, K. 
 Spencer, Stanton, Stephen-, Stetson, Swackhnmer, Taft, 
 J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Townsend, Tuthill, Van Schoon- 
 hoven, Ward, Warren, Waterbury, Willard. Witbeck, 
 Wood, A.Wright, Yawger, Youngs 73. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The question was taken on Mr. BASCOM'S pro- 
 position, by sections, and it was rejected. 
 
 The question was then taken on the first sec- 
 tion of Mr. O'CONOR'S proposition " That there 
 shall be in each county a Court of Common Pleas 
 and General Sessions." 
 
 It was rejected, ayes 35, nays 57, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Ayrault, Bergen, Bruce, Bull, 
 R. Campbell, jr., Candee, Cornell, Crooker, Gardner, 
 Harrison, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hutchinson, Kirkland, Marvin, 
 Maxwell, Murphy, Nicoll, O'Conor, Parish, Porter, Rich- 
 mond, Riker, St. John, Sanford, W. H. Spencer, Stow, 
 Strong, Taggart, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, Van Schoon- 
 hoven, Waterbury, White 35. 
 
 NOES Messrs. F. F. Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bowdish, 
 Brown, Brundage, Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, 
 Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Cuddeback, Dana. Danlorth, 
 Dodd, Dorlon, Dubois, Flanders, Forsyth, Gebhard, Gra- 
 ham, Greene, Hart, Hoffman, Hunter, A. Huntington, Jor- 
 dan, Kemble, Kingsley, Loomis, Miller, Morris, Nellis, 
 Nicholas, Patterson. Powers, President, Ruggles, Salis- 
 bury, Shaw, E. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Swackhamer, 
 W. "Taylor, Townsend, Tuthill, Ward, Warren, Willard, 
 Witbeck, Wood, W. B. Wright, Yawyer, Young, Youngs 
 57. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR then withdrew the remainder 
 of his proposition. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM gave notice that he should move 
 a reconsideration of the last vote. 
 
 The question was then on Mr. MORRIS' amend- 
 ment, as follows : 
 
 ^ 4. There shall be elected in each county of this State 
 by the electors thereof, a president judge of county 
 courts, who shall perform the duties and exercise the 
 powers of Surrogate for such county, and such other du- 
 ties and powers as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 There shall be in each county a county court, to be 
 held by the president judge and the justices of the peace; 
 any two of the justices of the peace with the president 
 judge may hold such court. 
 
 ^5. The county court shall have appellate jurisdiction 
 over the proceedings of justices of the peace, and over the 
 
766 
 
 proceedings of officers of the towns and counties; and 
 may try persons charged with offences, the punishment of 
 which shall not exceed imprisonment in State prison for 
 ten years, and may have such other and further powers 
 and jurisdiction as may be prescribed by law. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued as to whether 
 this subject should not be passed over until the 
 Supreme Court was definitely disposed of, when 
 
 Mr. MORRIS withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM then moved to pass over the^ 
 13th section. The motion was negatived. 
 
 The 4th section was then read, as follows : 
 
 4. The State shall be divided into eight judicial districts. 
 of which the city of New York shall be one. 'The others 
 to be bounded by county lines; and to be -compact and 
 equal in population as nearly as may be. There shall be 
 four justices of the supreme court for each district, and as 
 many more in the district compo.~ed of the city of New 
 York as may from time to time be authoriz. d by law, but 
 not to exceed the number ot justices in the other districts in 
 proportion to their population. They shall be classified so 
 that one of the justices ot esch district shall go out of of- 
 fice at the end of every two years. After the expiration 
 of their terms under such classification, the term of theii 
 office shall be eight years. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved to strike out " Tour" 
 in the fourth line, and insert tk two.'' Sixteen 
 justices of the Supreme Court would be amply 
 sufficient, he believed, to perform all I he duties 
 of the Supreme Court in connection with the 
 county courts. 
 
 The motion was negatived. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN offered the following substitute 
 lor the entire section: 
 
 There shall be a supreme court. The state shall be di- 
 vided into four districts; each district shall be divided into 
 three circuits. There shall be four justices of the supreme 
 court in e^ch district. They shall be classified so that the 
 term of office of one of the justices in each district shall ex- 
 pire at the end of every two years. After the expiration 
 of their terms under such classification, the teim of their 
 office shall be eitiht years. The chief justice and the said 
 four justices, or only three of them, may hold general 
 terms of the said court in the said district, and any of 
 whom may hold special terms. The chief justice or any 
 one of the justices of the supreme courts may hold 
 circuit courts, and preside at the courts of oyer and tenri- 
 ner in any county in the state. 
 
 Motions to amend the original section taking 
 precedence, 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to amend the original sec- 
 tion by st i iking o'lttiom the word '* law," in the 
 7th line, to the end of the sentence. 
 
 This question was discussed by Messrs MANN 
 SHEPAKD, LOOMIS, TILDEN, STEPHENS, 
 BROWN and PATTERSON. 
 
 A discussion then arose as to what means hould 
 be devised to provide for an increase of judicial 
 force in proportion to the increase of judicial bu- 
 siness in the city of New York, in which Messrs 
 NICOLL, RUGGL.ES, STETSON, HARRIS, VAN 
 SCHOONHOVEN, CHATFIELD, HOFFMAN and WA 
 TERBURY participated, when without taking any 
 question, the Convention adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, (14th day} August 28. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. STOVER. 
 
 Mr. GEBHARD presented a petition from 01- 
 ney Briggs, Esperance, Schoharie co., against 
 laws for the observation of the Sabbath and for the 
 prevention of the use of religious books in the 
 common schools, &c. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to lay the petition on the 
 table. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER hoped the motion would not 
 
 prevail, but that it would receive a respectful re- 
 ference, notwithstanding the absurdity of some of 
 its notions. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE asked for the ayes and nays, and 
 they were ordered. 
 
 The motion prevailed ayes 74, nays 19. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY presented four memorials from 
 the county of Kings against electing judges by the 
 people. 
 
 The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention 
 a report from the assistant register of the 1st cir- 
 cuit, in relation to the sale of infants' estates, &c. 
 Referred to the committee of five. 
 
 The PRESIDENT also presented a report from 
 the register in chancery of the 6th circuit of the 
 securities and monies in his hands Laid on the 
 able for the present. 
 
 Mr. STETSON gave notice that he should 
 move to reconsider the vote on the second section 
 of the judiciary report, and offer an amendment. 
 To strike out " four," in the third line, and insert 
 " three ;" and after " serve," in the fourth line, 
 add, "and two from the class having four years 
 to serve." 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved a reconsideration 
 of the vote adopting the 3d section. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND, the same motion with re- 
 gard to his amendment proposed yesterday to the 
 4th section. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND, the same with regard to his 
 proposition as to the 4th section. 
 
 These motions lie on the table by consent. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH had leave of absence for one 
 week. 
 
 REPORT ON THE JUDICIARY 
 
 The committee then resumed the consideration 
 of the reports on the judiciary. 
 
 The question being on the amendment to the 
 amendment, pending at the adjournment last even- 
 ing, it was lost. 
 
 The amendment then coming up, Mr. MANN 
 called for the yeas and nays, and they were or- 
 dered. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said the judiciary committee had 
 the impression that the local courts of New York 
 were not touched by this article, but were to re- 
 main as they are. If there was any doubt about 
 it, when the section was reached which was sup- 
 posed to abolish it, it could be provided for by a 
 special exception. With those courts and the 
 four supreme judges he thought the city of New 
 York would have sufficient judicial force. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN enquired if the gentleman be- 
 lieved that this force would be sufficient for the 
 increasing business of the city of New York. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN thought it would. He had ob- 
 served that the courts in New York now were 
 adequate to the business. Those courts were not 
 blocked up, and he thought that with the addi- 
 tion of a judge to take the testimony in equity ca- 
 ses instead of examiners in chancery, the force 
 would be quite sufficient. This was his opinion, 
 but if the delegation from New York were not 
 satisfied as to that, let them bring forward a plan, 
 and he would yield to it. There were the second 
 and third districts, convenient to New York, and if 
 there was a lack of judicial force, could be 
 called in as the exigencies of the case might re- 
 quire. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN was surprised at the opinion first 
 
767 
 
 expressed by Mr. JORDAN ; he might have mis- 
 understood the gentleman, but he certainly sup- 
 posed his opinion to be the contrary. As to the 
 blocking up of business, there were now, he be- 
 lieved, more causes on the calendar of the circuit 
 court than had been disposed of for the last three 
 years. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN had no reference in what he said 
 to the circuit court, he referred to the local courts. 
 He certainly supposed an increase of force was 
 required in the circuit, and this he thought was 
 provided for. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that to his certain knowl- 
 edge, the local courts were several terms in ar- 
 rear. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN resumed, arguing the inadequate- 
 ness of the judicial force of the city of New York, 
 and the failure of the provisions of the report, to 
 meet and provide for the inconvience. 
 
 The debate v\ as continued by Messrs. MORRIS, 
 VAN SCHOONHOVEN, LOOMIS, and O'CoNOR, when 
 
 Mr. HAWLEYsaid it was with reluctance thar 
 he arose to make a motion similar to that which 
 he felt compelled to make yesterday, and for Hie 
 same reasons which he then gave tor so doing. 
 He did not intend that his remarks yesterday rela- 
 tive to the waste of time in debate, should have 
 any particular personal application. They were 
 general in their nature, and applied to a certain 
 portion ot the Convention as distinguished from a 
 certain other portion. Yet he was perfectly wil- 
 ling i hut any gentleman, who thought the coal 
 would fit him. should put it on. Soon alter he 
 moved ihr previous question yesterday, he was 
 called fiom 'iis seat for a few moments to trans 
 act busit.Hss with a gentleman from another State, 
 who was about to leave in the cars. On his re- 
 turn, he was informed that the gentleman from 
 Otsego (Mr. CHATFIELD,) had made a personal 
 attack upon him. He regretted that he was ab 
 sent when his action and motives had been thus 
 assailed. He could assure the gentleman from 
 O -rgo, that in his remarks yesterday, he did not 
 assume that he (Mr. H.) belonged to the class 
 \vhich he had designated as working members 
 He had not regarded it as necessary in order to be 
 considered a working member by his constituents, 
 to waste the time of the House by rising frequent- 
 ly in his place to announce to the Convention and 
 to the people "that he was constantly in his seat, 
 attending to his duties here" as the gentleman 
 from Otsego had been careful to do. He fiankU 
 admitted the gentleman from Otsego had been in- 
 dustrious from the very commencement of the 
 session, and had kept his constituents advised of 
 the fact by announcing every few days, in debate, 
 that " he had been almost constantly in his seal 
 since the Convention assembled and that he had 
 seldom been seen outside the bar of the House." 
 The gentleman from Otsego yesterday complain- 
 ed that he (Mr H.) had done nothing to eniitle 
 him to be considered a working memoer had 
 brought forward no new proposition hwd made 
 no amendments, &,e. Mr. H confessed that this 
 was true to some extent. He had not, like the 
 gentleman from Otsego been in the h.-b;' of bring 
 ing forward a great many propositions every day, 
 which weregenerally mere mailers of IrgisUtivede. 
 tail, and not proper subjects to be embiaced in a con- 
 stitution : thereby lumbering up our way, blocking 
 
 th'c wheels, and retarding the progress of this body. 
 Had he presented alabored report to this House, and 
 had he, alter that leport had been consider" d, 
 and amended by the Convention, been constrain- 
 ed to say, as the gentleman from Otsego had said 
 on this floor, " that there was scarcely a shred of 
 the original left not even enough for him to 
 swear by," he might perhaps be considered by 
 that gentleman as one of the working members. 
 But he did not make any such pretensions, he 
 would not arrogate so much to himself. He felt 
 bound in justice to the gentleman from Otsego to 
 say, that he did not intend yesterday to charge 
 him with making long speeches. Unlike some 
 others who seemed to be in pursuit of a single 
 idea for hours without being able at last to reach 
 it, that gentleman generally made his point, 
 spoke directly to it, (sometimes stopping even 
 short of it) then rung it through all the changes 
 of which his fertile imagination was capable, and 
 closed by ringing the party bell, and taking his 
 seat. Yet on a vote, he was generally defeated. 
 On the question " shall the main question be now 
 put," taken yesterday, he (Mr. H.) believed that 
 the gentleman from Otsego was found standing 
 " solitary and alone." 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD No, one gentleman voted 
 with me. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY Very well; some working 
 man, I suppose ! Mr. H. said he did not feel dis- 
 posed to question the motives of any gentleman 
 in regard to this abuse but it is too well known 
 that a greal deal of the time of this convention is 
 wasted in useless debate an end to which it ap- 
 peared impossible to find, without a resort to the 
 previous question. Hoping that the gentleman 
 from Otsego would appropriate to himself no more 
 of his remarks than he is entitled to, he moved 
 the previous question on the amendment proposed 
 by the gentleman from New York. 
 
 The question being on the amendment of Mr. 
 MANN, it was rejected ayes 29, nays 77 as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 A YF.S Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Brundage, Oonely, Cor- 
 nell, Harris, Harriscn, Hunt, Hyt'e, Jones, Kemble, Ken- 
 nedy; Mann, Murphy, Nicoll, O'Conor, Hiker, Buggies, 
 Sanford, Shepard, Stephens, Swackhamer, Tallmadge. \V. 
 Taylor, Tiiden, Townsend, Vache, Van Schoonhoven, 
 White 29. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, Baker, 
 Bascom, Bowdish, Brown, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Cambn leng, 
 D. D. Campbell, R. Campbell, jr. Candee. Chamberlain, 
 Chnttield, lark, Clyde, Cook, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, 
 Dod.!, Dorlon, Dubois, Flandeis, Korsyth, Gebhard Gra- 
 ham, Hart, Hawley, Hoflman, Hotchkiss, Hunter, A.Huut- 
 inglon, E. Huiuington, Hutchinson,Jordan, KernaiijKings- 
 ley, Kirklan.i, Loomis, McNeil, Marvin, Miller, Morris, 
 Nellis, Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Porter, 
 Powers, llhoades, Salisbury, Shaw, Simmons, E. Spencer, 
 W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stftson, Stow, Strong, Taft, J. J. 
 Taj lor,. Warren. Wsterbury, Willed, Witbeck, Wood, 
 Worden, A. Wright, W. B. Wright, Yawger, Young, 
 Youngs 77. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS proposed to modify the section 
 not to change the meaning, but to make it a little 
 more certain so as to make it read : " But not 
 to exceed in the whole such number in proportion 
 rn its population as shall be in conformity with 
 the number of such judges in the residue of the 
 stale, in proportion to its population." 
 
 Mr HAHRiS-said that on tiie last question he 
 voted in the affirmative Afiei the best reflection 
 he had given to the subject, he could not but in. 
 dulge,some fears that the judicial force may be 
 
768 
 
 insufficient. The equity business in that city was 
 very large, and he believed it would require three 
 judges for that alone, leaving but one to take charge 
 of the law courts. It may be that with the local 
 courts, there will be a sufficient force, but he 
 feared not. To prevent any evils that would 
 thereby ensue, he desired to propose the following 
 amendment, in lieu of that proposed by Mr. LOO- 
 MIS. He was willing that the city of New York 
 should have two additional judges, if the Legisla- 
 ture should see fit to give them. Hence he mov- 
 ed an amendment to produce that result, by insert- 
 ing " not exceeding two" after the word "law.' 
 
 Mr. TILDEN thought this would place the city 
 in a worse condition than the present. This 
 amendment might prevent the increase that un- 
 der this Constitution, New York would be en- 
 titled to by her increase of population. It would 
 give us six judges, but it would make that num- 
 ber perpetual. For these reasons he should be 
 compelled to vote against it. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said if the gentlemen from N. Y 
 did not like that amendment he would with- 
 draw it. He desired to satisfy them. 
 
 Mr. CONELY hoped it would not be with- 
 drawn. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS asked if the gentleman from 
 Herkimer was intending to improve the condi- 
 tion of New York by this amendment. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS designed to place the minimum 
 on the basis of population. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS contended that the basis 
 should be on the increase of business and not of 
 population. 
 
 Mr. BROWN desired to do justice to the city 
 of New York, if he knew what they required. 
 He was willing to give them six judges, and to 
 provide for the continuance of the present local 
 courts or he was willing to vote for an amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL renewed the amendment of the 
 gentleman trom Albany. 
 
 Mr. BROWN further explained the amendment 
 and expressed his willingness to vote for it. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL thought that while this would 
 give to the city of New York such additional 
 force, it would not conflict with any other section 
 of the Constitution, in relation to the re-organi- 
 zation of districts. He urged the necessity of in- 
 creasing the force of the judiciary in New York, 
 and said if he could not get a whole loaf he would 
 take a half one. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said there appeared to be a great 
 solicitude as to whether the members from New 
 York were agreed on a subject. If they were, it 
 would be the first time he had even known of a N. 
 York delegation thus agreeing. He considered 
 the amendment wrong, for the reason that New 
 York should have no more of the State court than 
 other districts. He considered it of importance 
 to the country, that some of the courts should oc- 
 casionally go to New York to hold the courts 
 there. As to the blocking up of business com- 
 plained of in the courts of New York, he insist- 
 ed that if the lawyers and the courts in that city 
 would work as arduously as they did in the coun- 
 try, much of that evil would be obviated. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD repelled the charge that the 
 judges in the city of New York were not diligent 
 and industrious in the discharge of their duties. 
 
 The greater part of litigation arose from matter 
 abroad, and was not chargeable to the city of New 
 York. He expressed his willingness to vote for 
 the amendment of the gentleman from Albany. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS again briefly urged his amend- 
 ment. 
 
 - Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN hoped this amend- 
 ment would be voted down. He would not fix a 
 limit in the constitution which would operate 
 perpetually. If an additional force was needed, 
 of the Supreme Court, he further insisted, it 
 should be created by the State. Is could not be 
 known as a local court in any form. 
 
 The question being taken on the amendment of 
 Mr. HARRIS, as renewed by Mr. NICOLL, it was 
 voted down. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. LOOMIS' 
 amendment, and it was adopted 1 ayes 49, noes 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to strike 
 out in the 6th and 7th lines, " in the district com- 
 posed of the city of New York," also to strike out 
 the words introduced by the amendment of Mr. 
 LOOMIS. He wished to be understood as desiring 
 that the increase should be made by the state at 
 large, and riot by any particular district. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to add, " not to exceed 
 one in each judicial district." 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVKN assented to this as 
 a modificaiion ot his motion. So his proposition 
 was that the clause should read as follows: 
 
 " There shall be four justices of the supreme court for 
 each district, and as many more, not to exceed one in each 
 judicial district, as may from time to time be authorized by 
 law." . 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND called the ayes and nays on 
 this amendment. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that this was an amend- 
 ment in which hn concurred, and went on briefly 
 to support i . 
 
 The debate was continued bv Messrs. HOFF- 
 MAN, VAN SCHOONHOVEN, LOOMIS, and 
 MORRIS, when 
 
 l\lr. STETSON moved the previous question on 
 ihe pending amendment, b^ing that ot Mr. VAN 
 SCHOONHOVEN, as amended on the motion of 
 Mr. JORDAN, and there was a second, and the 
 main question ordered. 
 
 The amendment was rejected ayes 14, nays 
 89 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen. Archer, F. F. Backus, Bruce, 
 Conely, Cornell, Dana, Gardner, Greene, Hunt, Simmons, 
 Townsend, Van Schoonhoven, Warren 14. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Ayrault, Baker, Bascom, Ber- 
 gen, Bowdish, Brown, Brundage, Bull, Burr, Cambrelengf, 
 D. D. Campbell, Candee, Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Cook, 
 Crooker, Cuddeback, Dodd, Dorlon, Dubois, Flanders, Geb- 
 hard, Graham, Harris, Harrison, Hart, Hawley, Hoffman, 
 Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Huntington, E. Huntington, Hutch, 
 inson, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble, Kennedy, Kernan, Kingsley, 
 Kn-kland, Loomis, Mann, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Mor- 
 ris, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, 
 Penniman, Porter, Powers, President, Richmond, Riker, 
 Ruggles, St.John, Salisbury, Sanford, Shaw, Sheldon, She- 
 pard, E. Spencer, W H. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, 
 Strong, Taft, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Vache, Wa- 
 terbury, White, Willard, Wood, Worden, A.Wright, W. 
 B. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 99. 
 
 On motion oi Mr. BROWN the woid " in" was 
 substituted in place of "lor," after "court," in 
 the 51 h line. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved to amend by adding to the 
 section as follows: 
 
769 
 
 And it shall be the duty of the chief judge of the court 
 of appeals, as often as necessnry, to assign justices of the 
 supreme court to the several districts, as nearly as may be 
 in proportion to the judicial business of such districts, and 
 when occasion shall require to assign special duties to par- 
 ticular judges. 
 
 Mr. BAKER asked for the previous question, 
 and it was seconded ayes 48, nays 26, and the 
 nain question ordered. 
 
 The amendment was rejected ayes 44, nays 60 
 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen. Bergen, Brown, Brundag,Cam- 
 breleng, Conely, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dorlon, Dubois, 
 Harrison, Hart," Hunter, A. Huntington, Jones, Kemble, 
 Kennedy, Kingstey, Mann, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, 
 Murphy, Nellis, Nicoll. O'Conor, Parish, Porter, Powers, 
 President, Ruggles, Sanford, Shaw, She^ard, . Spencer, 
 Stanton, Stephens, Stet-on, W. Taylor, Tilden.Townsend, 
 Vache Waterbury, White 44. 
 
 NAYS -Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, Baker, Bas- 
 com. Bowdish, Bruce, Bull, Burr, D. D. Campbell, Candee, 
 Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Cook, Crooker, Dana, Flanders, 
 Forsyth, Gardner, Gebhard Graham, Greene, Harris, 
 Hawley, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, E. Huntington, Hutchi'ison, 
 Hyde, Jordan, Kernan, Kirkland, Looinis, Morris, Nicho- 
 las, Patterson, Penniman. Richmond, Rikr, St. John Sal. 
 isbury, Sheldon, Simmons, W. H. Spencer, Stow, Strong. 
 Taft, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, Van Schoonhoven, Willard, 
 Wood, Woiden, A. Wright, W. B. Wiight, Yawger, 
 Young, Youngs 60. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved to amend by making the 
 term of office sixteen years, classified so that one 
 in each district should go out every four years. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM gave notice of a motion to recon- 
 sider the motion of the gentleman from Otsego. 
 
 Without taking the question, the Convention 
 took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The question being taken on the amendment of 
 Mr. BERGEN, it was rejected. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to amend so that two of the 
 justices should go out of office every four years, 
 
 The amendment was lost ayes 33, nays 44, as 
 follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bergen, Bowdish, Brown, Cambreleng, 
 R. Campbell, jr , Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Cornell, Crocker, 
 Cuddeback, Dana, Dorlon, Graham, Greene, Harrison.Hart, 
 A. Huntington, Hyde, Kemble, Kernan, Maxwell, Miller, 
 Murphy, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, Patterson, Sal- 
 isbury, Simmons, E. Spencer, Stephens, Townsend, White 
 33. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen. Archer, Ayrault, F F. Backus, 
 Baker, Bascom, Bull, Burr, D. D. Campbell, Candee, Cook, 
 Dubois, Gardner, Hawley, Hoflman, Hotchkiss, Hunt. 
 Hunter, Loomis, Marvin, Morris, Parish, Perkins, Presi- 
 <tent, Richmond, Riker, St. John, Sheldon, W. H. Spncer, 
 Stetson. Stow, Strong, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, Tilden, 
 Ward, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, Yawger, Youag.Youngs 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD offered his proposition in 
 order to test the principle whether these judges 
 should be re-eligible or not. He would never 
 consent to elect a judge who should use his office 
 for the sake of a re-election. And it was with a 
 view to prevent that state of things, that he moved 
 to add at the end of the section, " and shall not 
 be eligible to a re-election." 
 
 Mr. HARRISON moved to add to the amend- 
 ment, " for two years after the expiration of his 
 term of office." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER remarked that this would be 
 worse than putting the word " native" in. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that any judge who should 
 thus exercise his office would carry with him his 
 own punishment He would not vote for ostra- 
 cism. 
 
 Mr. STOW should prefer a longer time. He 
 proposed to amend so as to make the term of a 
 judge twelve years, classified to go out one in 
 three years, and would make judges ineligible for 
 a certain period after their term has expired. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD accepted this amendment 
 
 Mr. BROWN enquired if the gentleman from 
 Erie was in favor of the elective system, 
 
 Mr. STOW said he was not. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said this was one way of making 
 the elective system so distasteful to those in favor 
 of it that they could not vote for it. The princi- 
 ple could not be maintained in any other way than 
 to make the term so long that the judges would 
 not desire a re-election. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said sheriffs were now inel- 
 igible, and no misery hid resulted to mankind 
 thereby. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that as to the matter of a 
 judge making efforts for re-election, he certainly 
 would object to improper efforts. But he would 
 like him to make proper efforts by a faithful dis- 
 charge of his duties for are-election. Besides he 
 wished the judge to feel responsible for the dis- 
 charge of his duty. 
 
 Mr. DANA agreed perfectly with th gentle- 
 man from Orange. As to the matter of sheriff, 
 there were very good reasons why he should be 
 held accountable and guarded against such influ- 
 ences. We already elected some four thousand 
 judicial officers justices of the peace, and he had 
 never heard of an instance where they had pros- 
 tituted their offices for are-election. He thought 
 it would be safe therefore to trust the highest ju- 
 dicial officrsi. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD had known of instances 
 where justices of the peace had gone into an 
 election, and he apprehended that the gentleman 
 must be one of of the few exceptions to it. 
 He believed that whoever was elected to the su- 
 preme court bench, would still be a man 
 and subject to the influences of human nature, 
 He would offer them no motive to enter the po- 
 litical arena. And he would guard against it. It 
 was said of the old supreme court that they were 
 prominent in politics, and political movements, 
 and if these men had held their office by election, 
 he asked if they would not have acted partywise 
 and with a view to secure the votes of his party. 
 He would even prevent his election to any other 
 public office whatever, in order to make all sure. 
 Twelve years he thought was sufficiently long 
 enough for the term and he would not make him 
 ineligible unless he had served his full term. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR was satisfied with the term 
 of eight years as fixed by the committee. He 
 was opposed to making the officer ineligible to a 
 re-election. He could see no good reason why 
 the people should be deprived of the services of 
 a faithful judge if they desired him for a second 
 term. He would rather elect such a man than 
 one who had had no experience. The argument 
 that a judge would prostitute his office for polit- 
 ical purposes he regarded as scarcely worth notice. 
 Such a course of conduct would inevitably de- 
 stroy him. Nor did he care what might be the 
 age of a man, if he was capable and competent, 
 he was willing to vote for him. If the people 
 chose to select such a man it was their right. 
 
 71 
 
770 
 
 Ke was therefore entirely opposed to the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. STOW was not in favor of the election of 
 judges, and he challenged gentlemen to produce 
 the slightest evidence that the people had called 
 for such a thing. He was willing to meet the 
 gentleman on that subject before the intelligent 
 free holders of Erie county. The great funda- 
 mental objection to this principle of election was, 
 that it claimed the right of the majority to be re- 
 presented on the bench whereas it was the law 
 only that should be represented. The extension 
 of the term he confessed, commended the election 
 system more to his favor. So did the exclusion 
 of re-eligibility, to a greater degree. He trusted 
 this last great security would be retained in the 
 constitution. "Lead us not into temptation," 
 was as applicable to the bench as any where else. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to strike out the two 
 last words "or re-appointment." 
 
 Mr. HUNT said this, like all good rules, would 
 work both ways. If he went to a shoemaker or 
 hatter and ordered an article, he will not say to 
 you do this and I will never give you another job. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL thought the effect would be to 
 also limit the range of selection. Gentlemen 
 would not leave their professions for so short a 
 time, destroying, as the acceptance of the office 
 would, all his business. He would offer every 
 inducement to the judge to discharge his duties 
 faithfully. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE expressed himself in favor 
 of the term, as reported by the committee. He 
 would also make the officer in no wise liable to 
 temptation in the matter of prostituting his sta- 
 tion to political objects. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND, in reply to Mr. NICOLL, 
 thought there was no fear of this office going a 
 begging. There were plenty of competent men 
 who would be glad to take it. 
 
 Messrs. A. W. YOUNG and BASCOM further 
 discussed this proposition. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON called for the ayes and noes 
 on his amendment. He desired the question to 
 be decided as to whether these judges should be 
 elected or appointed. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL urged that the great question 
 should not be brought in here now, and thus has- 
 tily disposed of. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS deprecated this piling up of ques- 
 tions one on the other. He was opposed to in- 
 creasing the term. Eight years was the utmost he 
 would extend it. This matter of preventing the 
 re-election of a judge originated in a lurking dis- 
 trust of his popular election and he should oppose 
 it on that ground. Mr. L. urged that for a judge 
 to prostitute his station for a political object would 
 be to destroy him. The people would never con- 
 sent to elect him. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND considered this amendment 
 as seeking to get an indirect expression from this 
 Convention on this important question. He 
 thought also this to be an improper place to 
 bring it up. It would come up properly and di- 
 rectly on the 12th section. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN : In what manner does this a- 
 mendment decide any question. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND apprehended it would settle 
 nothing, and he hoped therefore, it would be vo- 
 ted down unanimously 
 
 Mr. STOW modified his amendment by insert- 
 ing" re-eligible" in the place of " eligible to a 
 re-election or re-appointment." 
 
 The question was then on the amendment of 
 Mr. CHATFIELD. Mr. C. called for a division of 
 the question to be taken on striking out. The 
 Convention refused to extend the term to twelve 
 years, ayes 27, noes TO, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bergen, Bruce, Brundage, D. D. Camp- 
 bell. Cariclee, ChatneliJ, Clark, Cook, Cornell, Gardner, 
 Hart, Jordan, Kemble, Ktnnedy, Kirkland Marvin, Mr.r- 
 phy, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Perkins, Richmoud, Ri- 
 ker, Ruggles, Simmons Stow, J. J. Taylor 27. 
 
 NAYS- Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. 
 Backus, H. Backus, Baker, ^ascoin, Bowdish. Brayton, 
 Brown, Bull, Burr, Cambreleng, Chamberlain, Clyde, 
 Conelv, Crocker, Cuddeback, Dana, Dorlon, Dubois, 
 Flanders, Graham, Green, Harrison, Hawiey, Hoffman, 
 Hotchki's, Hunt, Hunter,A.Huntington,hmcliinson,Hyde, 
 Jones, Kernan. Kingsley, Loomis, McNeil, Maxwell, Mil- 
 ler, Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, Patterson, l j enniman, 
 Powers, President, St. John, Salisbury, Sanlord, SUaw, 
 Sheldon, Shepard, E. Spencer, W. H. S, eiicer, Stanton, 
 Stephens, Stetson, Strong, Ta:t, Tallmadge. W. Taylor, 
 Tilden, Townsend,Vache,Ward, \V hite.VV illard, V> i.beck', 
 Wood, W. B. Wright, Yawger, Young, \oungs 76. 
 
 Tne remainder of the amendment, the "one 
 term principle," was lusi, a^es '21, noes y5, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bergen, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, D. D. 
 Campbell, Candee, Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cornel), 
 Gardner, Kennedy, Murphy, O'Conor, Richmond, Sails- 
 bury, Simmons, Stow, J. J. Taylor, Vache 21. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. 
 Backus, Baker, Ba^coin, Bowdish, Brown, Brundage, 
 Burr, C. '. Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr , Chiiinberlani, 
 Conely, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, DorJon, Dubois, J. R, 
 Flanders, Graham, Gn-ene, Harris. Harrison, Hawiey, 
 Hoffman, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A Hunting, 
 ton, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, Jordan, Kembie, Kernan, 
 Kingsley Kirkland, LoomU, Mann, McNei , .v.arvin, Max- 
 well, Miller, Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll. Par.sh, Pat. 
 terson, Penniman, Perkins, Powers, President, Rhoades, 
 Kiker, Ruggles, St. John, Sanlord. Shaw, Sheldon frht-p- 
 ard.E Spencer, W H. Spencer, Stanton, Stepluns, Stet- 
 son, Strong, Taft, Tallmad^e, W. Taylor, Tilden, Towns- 
 end, Ward, White, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, U'orueu, A. 
 Wright, W. B, Wright, Yawger, Young. Youngs 85. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to amend so as i<> reduce 
 the term from eitiht years to lour, ir wns rejected 
 
 Mr. MARVIN offered an amendment which in* 
 said would be sufficiently understood without ;i 
 lengthened explanation. His object was > make 
 room for a capable, efficient court oi common 
 pleas, by reducing the number of justices to six- 
 teen, the four districts to be divided into circuits. 
 He desired by this amendment to prepare I he w, ;iy 
 for county courts on a proper basis. And (he fate 
 of this amendment would settle the question of 
 county courts. 
 
 Mr MARVIN'S substitute was lost, ayes 36, 
 noes 63, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Ayrault, [Bergen, Bull, Candee, Cham- 
 bprlain. Cornell, Gardner, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hutchinson, 
 Kennedy, Kirk land, vlann.Marvin, Murphy, Nicoll O'oonor, 
 Parish, Perkins, Richmond, Riker, St. John. Salisbury, 
 Sanlord, Shaw, Shepard, Simmons, W. H. Spencer, M .n- 
 ton, Stow, Tallmadge, Tilden, Vache, White, Worden, 
 Young 36. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Allen, F. F. Backus, Baker, Bascom, 
 Bovvdish, Brayton, Brown, Brumiage. Burr, Cambreleng, 
 R. Campbell, jr. Chaifield, Clark. Clyde Condy, Cook, 
 Crooker, Cuudeback, Dana, Durlon, Dubois, Flunlerg, 
 Harris, Harrison, Hart, Hawiey, Hoffman, Hunter, A. 
 Huntington, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble, Keman. Kingsley, 
 Loomis, McNict. \laxwi-ll, Miih-r, Morris, Ntllis. Mcho. 
 las, Patterson. Powers, President, Rusrg.es, Sheldon, E. 
 Spencer Stephens, Stetson, Strong, Taft. J. J Taylor, 
 W. Taylor, Townsend, Ward, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, 
 A Wright, W.E. -Wright, Yawger, Youngs- 68. 
 
771 
 
 Mr, BAKER laid. on the t<ble a motion to re- 
 
 C'Misuier ill*-" vole just taken. 
 
 Mr KiRKLAND moved to substitute the fol. 
 lowing in IUMI of the section: 
 
 $ 4. The State shall be divided into six judicial districts, 
 .^nominated the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and 
 Bixth judicial districts, of which the city of New York 
 shall form the first. There shall be a Superior Court in 
 each of the said districts, which shall have jurisdiction in 
 nil ma; tors of law and equity within the State, and such su- 
 pervisory and other power over inferior tribunals and ot- 
 h'.-ers wrhm its district as now exists in the Supreme 
 Court, subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme 
 Court of Appeals. It shall in the first district be composed 
 pi six judges, and in each of the other districts of four 
 judges. One- of said judges in each of said districts shall 
 be commissioned as chief justice of the court in his district 
 Each of said judges shall, during his continuance m office, 
 reside in his district. 
 
 ^ b. Die judges of the Court of Appeals, and of the 
 Superior Court, may hold courts in any district, under 
 such regulations as'may be prescribed by law. Each ol 
 said judges shnll j os.-ess ihe power now possessed by any 
 judjje of the Supreme Court or the Chancellor at Cham 
 bers, subject to regulation or modification by law. Cir 
 cuit Courts may be held by any one of said judges; and 
 general terms ol the Superior t ouit in any district by any 
 three of the-n; and special terms by any one of them for the 
 hearing and disposition of matters usually heard at special 
 te ms 
 
 Courts of Oyer and Terminer may be held by any one 
 of said judges with whom in said court shalf be associated 
 the tv.'o county judges, except in the city and county of 
 V rK, where two Aldermen of said city shall be as- 
 sociated with such judge in said court ol oyerand terminer. 
 
 Pi o vision shall be made by law lor the transler of causes 
 from one district to another, and lor the change of venue 
 to a count > in the same or another district, as the ends ol 
 usuce nifty require. 
 
 ^ 6. Thejudgt-s of the Supreme Court of Appeals and of 
 the Superior Courts shall hold their offices for ten years. 
 
 $7. </n>es, bo: l i .11 law and iqu.ty, shall be tried at said 
 Ciicuit courts, an.; without a jury , w, hcneve' thepaitiesin 
 interest in a suit, a.; i the j >dge holding the cir,-u,t. absent 
 thereto. Provision shall ulso be ma, e by law for cases in 
 law or equity not propeily triable at a Circuit Court. 
 Provision siiail also be nr.de by law forthe performance of 
 the dutie^ heretofore perfosmed by masteis in cbancery. 
 
 S Laws :naj be passed to diminish the number of the 
 j'ldg- s of til-? Supreme Court, court of appeals, and of the 
 judges of the superior cour , and of tbe district j;idgesof 
 the oiim\ court in any dis.riot, if ti.e number hereby au- 
 thorized Shall be um.e^e*sary. Laws may be passed to in- 
 crease tru* number of tin- judges of the supreme cour; of 
 u;.'pra:s. und the judges of tbe Miperiorcouit, and the said 
 tlmric ju'lgf-s m ai.y clis:rict whenevtr andas often as the 
 public nit iv-ts don. and. Any suchadi.i i n.ai judge shull 
 D elected or apj .ointed as shall be pi escribed by the law 
 autho.ising rucii a.ldit oual judge. '1 he districts in this 
 article m.-.ritio- ed may be altered by law whenever anrl as 
 oft. n as the public iuteret demand, No law authorising 
 A diminution or increase in the number of judges or the 
 alteration of any di.-trict shall be passed wiihout the 
 votes ol two- hiids ol the members eUcUdto each branch 
 ot the legislature, and no such law shall afiect any judge 
 then in oflice. 
 
 The proposition w.is rej< c'e.d. 
 
 Mr. KiKKLAMD laid on tiie table a motion foi 
 a reconsid. Million. 
 
 Mr WOKDKN enquired vvhar provision was 
 intended for ihe appointment of a Chief Justice? 
 
 Mi. HAGGLES said it was in tended, to put none 
 in the (J.)u>M<, 11 .0,,; the Legislnture \\ere to be 
 left to designate the judge to preside at the term. 
 
 Mr. WOROEN said tint he did not know how 
 the records ol our courts could be made evidence 
 in the couits of the United States, without the 
 cenificaie of a Chief Justice, under the law of 
 Congress. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES thought there was no difficulty 
 about, it all. There would be a presiding jud^e, 
 and he would be the presiding magistrate within 
 the act of Congress. It there was any doubt about 
 
 it, the Legislature could remedy if. 
 
 A Her some tun her con vet sat ion between Messrs. 
 WORDEN, RUGGLES, and BROWN, the matter 
 dropped 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that by the section, 
 New York was to be continued as long as the 
 constitution should last, a separate and distinct 
 district, and he could therefore see no objection 
 to allowing the city to elect judges in proportion 
 to her population, 
 
 Mr. BROWN explained that it was the twenty 
 shilling fee which the judge received for every 
 cause on his calendar, that prevented it from be- 
 inir cleared off. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said he had no doubt that the mo- 
 tion just made would prevail and this section of 
 the report would be adopted by a large majority 
 of the Convention. But the section as it now 
 stood could not receive his support for several 
 reasons, but as the hour of adjournment had so 
 nearly arrived, it would prevent his giving at 
 length all the reasons that induced him to to give 
 his Vote in the negative. By the section under 
 consideration, the state was to be divided into 
 eight judicial districts, of which the city and 
 county of New- York was to be one, and each 
 district to have four judges, who would probably 
 have an annual salary from the State. This sec- 
 tion gives to the city of New Yc r< 4 judges, and 
 " as many more as may from time to time be 
 authorised by law" True, there was an appa- 
 rent restriction, that made an increase of popu- 
 lation in that district over any other requisite, in 
 order to such an increase of judicial force. But 
 he did not believe that the population of a dis- 
 trict was a correct criterion in all cases, from 
 which to estimate the amount of judicial busi- 
 ness. By reference to the documents upon our 
 tables, we find, for instance, the county of Jeffer- 
 son, with a population of 62,000, has had two 
 terms of the Circuit Court the last year, and nine 
 days session ; the county of Kings, with a popu- 
 lation of 61,000, had three terms and thirty days 
 session; the county of Lewis, with a population 
 of 19,125, two terms and five days session ; while 
 the county of Madison, with a population of 40,- 
 000, had two terms and six days session. He had 
 collected these statistics within the last few 
 minutes, and he had no doubt many more show- 
 ing the like inequality, could be mention- 
 ed. We had been told by the gentleman 
 from New York that ihe circuit courts in 
 that city were unable to dispose of the busuuss 
 before them. Why was it ? 'ihe true re^on hat 
 been given, and is not denied even by the delrgj- 
 lion from that city. It is found in ihe fact that 
 the courts there hold their sessions day after c;ay, 
 from 10 o'clock, A. M , to 2i or 3 o'clock, P. M., 
 without clearing their calendar, while ihe courts 
 in the country worked all day, and disposed of 
 their business. Mr. B. said he nad just heard one 
 ot the most able circuit judges in the state, who 
 was a working judge, (and had been somewhat 
 acquainted with New York business in those 
 courts,) who said there WHS no more difficulty in 
 keeping down the calendar and disposing ot the 
 causes, in the county of New York, than there was 
 in the county of One da. Why, then, allow a ne- 
 cesfeity for increase ot the judges, first, to exist, 
 in the city ot New York ; and there have six 
 
772 
 
 judges, to be paid by the state, while other dis- 
 tricts have but lour? Why give to that city ad- 
 vantages over the other patts of the state ? Enough 
 has been done already, in legislation, and in this 
 Convention, of special favoritism. He would ask 
 of that city " nothing but what is right, and sub. 
 mit to nothing- wrong." There were several other 
 reasons why he should vote against this section 
 but as the hour was late he would not detain the 
 Convention with arry further remarks. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said tbat New Yorfe had, under 
 the ratio, a less representation on the bench than 
 the other districts would have according to po- 
 pulation. 
 
 The vote on the fourth section as am ended? was 
 then taken, and it was agreed to,- ayes 70, noes 
 33, as fallows '. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, F. F. Backus, 
 Baker, Bascorn, Bowdish, Brayton, Brown, Brundage, 
 Burr, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr., Chatfield, Clark, 
 Clyde, Cook, Crocker, Cuddeback, Dana, Dorlon, Dubois, 
 Flanders, Grahm, Greene, Harris, Harrison, Hart, Haw- 
 ley, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. HuntingUm, Hyde, 
 Jordan, Kemble, Kerrran, Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, Mc- 
 Neil, Maxwell, Morris,. Nellis, Nicholas Patterson, Pow- 
 ers, President, Rhoades, Hiker, Rubles, Salisbury, Shaw, 
 E, Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, S'etson, Strong, Tait, J. J. 
 Taylor, W. Taylor. Townsend, Ward, VVjliaid, Witbeck, 
 Wood, A. Wright, W. B. Wright,. Yawger, Youngs 70. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Ayrault, Bergen, Bruce, Bullj, Candee, 
 Chamberlain, Cornell, Hunt, E Huntwvgton, Jones, Ken- 
 nedy, Kirkland, Marvin, Murphy, Nicoil, O'Conor, Par- 
 isb, Penniman, Perkins, Richmond, St. John, Sanford, 
 Sheldon, Shepard, Simmons, W. H. Spencer, Stow, Tali- 
 madge ? Tilden, Vachse, White, Worden, Young 33. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned to halt past 8 
 to-morrow morning. 
 
 SATURDAY, (16th day} August 29. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. SPRAGXJE. 
 Mr. WHITE offered the following resolution : 
 " Resolved, That the Convection will meet this after, 
 noon at the usual hour.'* 
 
 After some conversation Mr, White withdrew 
 the resolution. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY called up his resolution provid- 
 ing that after the report on finances was- disposed 
 of, that the convention would then consider the 
 reports in relation to corporations in the order in 
 which they were presented. 
 
 The motion was sustained by Mr. LOOMIS and 
 opposed by Messrs. CROOKEK, SIMMONS and 
 KIHKLAND, who moved to lay the motion on the 
 table. 
 
 The motion prevailedayes 49? noes 39. 
 FUTURE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION. 
 
 Mr, MARVIN, from the committee on future 
 amendments to the constitution, reported as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 ART1CE . 
 
 {51. Any amendment to this Constitution may he pro- 
 posed in the Sen-tie or Asserobl\ j and ifttie same shall be 
 agreed to by a majority o the members elected to each of the 
 tv>'o houses, such proposed amendment or amendments, 
 shall be entered on their journals, with the yeas and nays 
 taken thereon, and reierred to ih- legislature then next to 
 be chosen^ and shall be published ior t:iree months previ- 
 ous to the. time of making such choice ; and if, in the legis- 
 lature next chosen as aforesaid, such proposed amend- 
 ment or amendments, shall be agreed to by two-thirds of 
 all the members elected to each nouse, then it shall be the 
 duty of the legislature to submit such proposed amend- 
 ment or amendments to the people, in such manner and at 
 such times as the legislature shall prescribe; and if the 
 people shall approve and ratify such amendment or amend 
 ments by a majority of the electors qualified to vote for 
 members of the legislature voting thereon, such amend. 
 
 ment or amendments shall become part of the CorstituE 
 lion, 
 
 2. At the general electron to be held in the year J866, 
 and in each twentieth yt-ar thereafter, and also at such 
 time as the legislature may by law provide, the question, 
 " Shall there be a Convention to revise the Constitution 
 and amend the same?" shall be decided by the electors 
 qualified to vote for members of the legislature: and in- 
 case a majority of the electors so qualified, voting'at such 
 election, shall decide in favor of a Convention for such 
 purposes, the legislature, at ita next session, shall provide 
 by law for the election of Delegates to such Convention. 
 By order of the Committee, 
 
 R. P. MARVIN. Ch'n. 
 
 The report was referred to the committee of 
 the whole and ordered printed. 
 
 REPORT ON THE JUDICIARY". 
 
 Mr. MANN offered the following additional 
 section : 
 
 M The legislature shall have the same power to alter and 
 regulate the jurisdiction and proceedings in law and equi- 
 ty as they have heretofore possessed." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS expressed his willingness to see 
 the amendment adopted, 
 
 Mr. BASCOM briefly supported the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 After a brief debate, in which Messrs. SIMMONS, 
 BASCOM, SWACKHAMER, BROWN end MANN 
 participated, as to whether the language was suf- 
 ficiently definite to attain the purpose, it being 
 feared that it would give the legislature power to- 
 separate the jurisdiction, to which all objected, 
 
 Mr. MANN modified his amendment so as to- ' 
 read: 
 
 "The legislature shall have the same power to alter and 
 regulate the jurisdiction and proceedings in law and 
 equity as they have heretofore possessed, but proceedings 
 in law and equity shall not be separated as distinct juris- 
 dictions to be administered by different judges." 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. HOFF- 
 MAN, RUGGLES, CHATFIELD, STETSON, 
 LOOMIS and JORDAN, when 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES moved to amend the amend- 
 ment by inserting after the word "equity," the 
 words "in the supreme court," and at the "end of 
 the amendment the words, "in that court." 
 
 Mr. MANN accepted the amendment. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS would have no objection to the 
 amendment if the word "alter" was left out. Mr, 
 S. went on at length to explain his views on the 
 subject. 
 
 Mr. BROWN then proposed the following 
 amendment: 
 
 . The powers, jurisdiction and proceedings of the su- 
 preme court, shall be subject to such additions, limitations 
 and regulations as may be prescribed by law." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS and CHATFIELD objected to 
 the amendment as being precisely the one be- 
 fore voted down. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND expressed at some length his 
 fears that the amendments tended to enable the 
 legislature to interfere with the remedies of the 
 court of chancery. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN enquired if the gentleman sup- 
 posed that his amendment conferred power upon 
 the legislature to take away the jurisdiction of 
 the court of chancery. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND supposed it would. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN asked if the gentleman supposed 
 that we had been living 70 years under such a 
 state of things. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND not for orie day. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN called the attention to the lan- 
 guage of the amendment of 
 
773 
 
 Mr. MANN, which conferred upon the legis- 
 lature only such power in the matter as they had 
 heretofore possessed. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND went on to insist that the 
 amendment was liable to the objections he urged 
 against it. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS objected to the amendment of 
 Mr. RUGGLKS to the proposition of Mr. MANN, 
 and expressed the hope that the latter gentleman 
 would withdraw his assent to the amendment. 
 
 Messrs. SHEPARDand MORRIS continued the 
 debate, when the question being taken on the 
 amendment of Mr. BROWN, and it was rejected, 
 
 ' Mr. LOOMIS then moved in effect to strike out 
 the amendment of Mr. RUGGLES, assented to by 
 Mr. MANN, and incorporated in the latter gen- 
 tleman's amendment. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN opposed the motion of Mr. L. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS replied. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES urged that his amendment 
 should be retained. 
 
 Messrs. FORSYTH, CHATFIELD, RUG- 
 GLESy MANN, and SIMMpNS continued the de- 
 bate, when the question being taken, the amend- 
 ment of Mr. LOOMIS was rejected. 
 
 Messrs. STETSON, RICHMOND, and BAS- 
 COM continued the debate, when the question 
 being taken on the amendment of Mr. MANN, it 
 was rejected, ayes 32, nays 64. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN then offered the section as orig- 
 inally offered by Mr. MANN. 
 
 (j . The legislature shall have the same power to alter 
 and regulat'- the jurisdiction and proceedings in law and 
 equity that they have heretofore possessed. 
 
 It was adop-fd, ayes 45, nays 32. 
 
 Mr. BROWN was satisfied that some provision 
 should be made in reference to the judicial busi- 
 ness of New-York. With that view he proposed 
 the following section. He asked to have it prin- 
 ted and laid on the table for the present. 
 
 $j . Whenever the population of any judicial district 
 
 shall exceed thousand, provision may be made by 
 
 law for the election, by the electors of such district, of as- 
 sistant justices of the supreme court therein, who shall 
 have power within such district to hold circuit courts, to 
 preside at courts of oyer and termincr, and to act as assis- 
 tant justices with one or more justices of the supreme 
 court in holding general terms of said court, to exercise 
 and perform all the powers and duties of a justice of the 
 supreme court at chambers. They shall be compensated 
 in like manner as the. justices of the supreme court, and 
 hall hold their offices for tue term of eiglit years. 
 
 It was so disposed of. 
 
 Mr. HUNT offered the following substitute for 
 section 1'2 of the report: 
 
 ^ 12. Each Senate district, at its biennial election for Se- 
 nators, shall choose tun e electors ol judges. No citizen 
 shall vote for more than two of such el ctors. and the three 
 jx.'isuns having the highest number of votes shall be elec- 
 ted. Should fewer than three electors be chosen a 1 ;niy 
 such election, in consequence of two or more of the four 
 persons receiving the highest number of votes having an 
 equal number of votes, one or more of such persons, as 
 the case may require, shall be selected to fill tlie <.U-nVicn- 
 cy by lot. The electors thus chosen throughout the State 
 shall convene at such time and place as may be prescribed 
 by law, and elect the justices of the supre'me court, and 
 fill vacancies therein occurring. 
 
 This amendment was disposed of as above. 
 
 The fifth section being then read as follows : 
 
 5. Any three of tlr.-m in iv holl general terms of said 
 
 court in any district ; and any one o! tlu.-m may hold spe- 
 
 cial terms and circuit courts und preside at thecouitsoi 
 
 oyer aad teiminerin any county 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved a substitute as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 5) o. Any four of "the justices of the supreme court of 
 whom th senior justice in ago, who is not of the court of 
 appeals, shall always be one land shall preside, 'nvij hold 
 general terms in any district; and ny one of thr;n may 
 hold special terms and circuit courts and preside at the 
 courts of oyer and terminer in anv county. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said he had not hitherto during 
 the protracted discussion of now nearly three 
 weeks upon the report of the committee on the 
 judiciary, said a single word on the subject. He 
 had observed this silence not because he thought 
 the subject unimportant, but on the contrary, be- 
 cause he deemed it one of the principal objects, 
 if indeed it were not the chief object, of the as- 
 sembling of this convention. He had been con- 
 tent to be a listener, rather than a speaker to 
 learn rather than to attempt to teach to give the 
 report the full benefit of the expositions of its 
 friends without cavil and without embarrassment. 
 But now we we're recording our names upon the 
 different portions of the system, and a silent vote 
 might perchance be hereafter misconstrued, even 
 if it might not possibly be censured as unjust to 
 the constituency. We had also reached a part of 
 the report of the committee of the whole when 
 he was compelled by the honest convictions of 
 his judgment^ to express his dissent, and to make 
 the attempt, unavailing as he believed it would 
 be, to render it, as far as it could b^ made, con- 
 formable to his views. He said unavailing, be- 
 cause the convention as if in " wandering mazes 
 lost," seems bewildered by the number of plans 
 presented, and as if it had found itself compelled 
 rather to make its escape from its embarrassments 
 by carrying straight forward the report of the 
 committee, than to attempt to perfect their sys- 
 tem. It would appear as if a large majority of 
 the Convention were opposed to the proposed plan 
 as a whole, yet that each member was fearful of 
 the least innovation upon it, lest we should be 
 compelled to begin a reconstruction. Else why 
 is it that amendments come from all parts of the 
 house, as well from a majority of the committee 
 who have devised the pLm, and who have become 
 sensible of its defects, as from others, and that 
 all are steadily voted down ? Like the enchanted 
 ship, with sail all set and rudder nailed, the plan 
 of the judiciary committee seems doomed to hold 
 its course regardless of the hidden rocks which 
 past experience has made known, and which are 
 kid down upon the charts. The pilots even who 
 set our course, havebetn displaced from the helm 
 and onward we speed indifferent to consequences. 
 Unavailing as he considered the attempt, there- 
 fore, he had nevertheless in the discharge of duty 
 determined to make one effort to arrest this head- 
 long course, by submitting the amendment which 
 had just been read. As a sincere advocate of 
 substantial reform, he wished to see an efficient 
 judiciary system adopted. Every change was not 
 reform. " Bad as was the present system, there 
 might be a change for the worse ; to avoid which 
 we should keep steadily in view the evils under 
 which we now suffer, and as steadily seek to ob- 
 viate them. He knew of no better test to apply 
 to the proposed alterations, than whether they 
 corrected those evils, at the same time that they 
 did not impair those other parts of our system 
 which it is not desirable to disturb. And what 
 
774 
 
 are those evils ? Are they not the delays in pro- 
 curing lecisions, and the expense attending the 
 administration of justice ? Certainly no one will 
 deny that public opinion has pointed out these as 
 the principal, if not the only ones to be corrected. 
 He proposed, then, in the few remarks which he 
 should now submit, to subject the proposed sys- 
 tem to this test. He was happy, however, to 
 bear testimony to the fidelity, industry, and abili- 
 ty with which the committee had discharged its 
 duty. He believed that it had been actuated by 
 a sincere desire to effect the reforms to which he 
 had alluded ; and that it had presented us rn this 
 plan with some proposed changes which would 
 go very far to that end. If it has failed in other 
 respects to accomplish this purpose, it was per- 
 haps to be expected from the complication which 
 must exist in any judiciary system, for a state of 
 such important and varied interests as this, and 
 from the intrinsic difficulty of devising any new 
 plan entirely sufficient. He would first refer to 
 those points in which he thought the committee 
 had succeeded, and then to that in which it had 
 failed, with a view of presenting his amendment 
 to the consideration of the house. First in im- 
 portance of the advantages of their system, is the 
 adoption of the principle suggested by the gentle- 
 man from Seneca, (Mr BASCOM,) that of giving 
 the best justice, by which I mean the best talent 
 and learning and intellect, for the trial of all 
 causes, whether the amount involved be large or 
 small. This idea is worthy of a true reformer. 
 It is to me a grand conception, that the suitor who 
 shall have a small amount in controversy, an 
 amount as important^ perhaps to him, as a large 
 sum to others, shall have the same judicial wis- 
 dom and learning as the suitor who may have his 
 thousands at stake. One of the greatest vices of 
 our present system has been the administration 
 of inferior justice, as it has come to. be consider- 
 ed in our common pleas court, in consequence of 
 their being subordinate to the supreme court. 
 There have been in many of the counties of the 
 state judges of those courts, of distinguished 
 ability, yet in general they have been otherwise. 
 Suitors have in consequence had no confidence in 
 their decisions ; writs of error have multiplied, 
 delays have consequently ensued, and the system 
 itself has become odious. The committee has 
 wisely recommended that there shall be but one 
 court of record for the trial of causes in the 
 county, and that a judge of the highest court of 
 original common law and equity jurisdiction shall 
 preside in it. A leform, which will give us a 
 good administration of the law, and therefore 
 speedy and cheap, will be in this manner, at 
 least partially accomplished. Besides, the more 
 you lessen appeals and writs of error, the more 
 you lessen expense. It is not the compensation 
 which the law officers and attorneys receive for 
 any particular service that is burdensome, but it 
 is x the multiplication of services in each suit 
 which is the cause of the ruinous expenses of 
 litigation in our courts. If you send a supreme 
 court judge in your counties to try causes, liti- 
 gants will be satisfied with his determination, 
 and not seek to carry their suits any further. 
 They will know that it will be, in general, money 
 
 hrown away to attempt to get a reversal, because 
 the judge who tried their cause will be also a 
 
 judge of the highest court. In regard to expense 
 another great saving is made to the tax-payers in 
 abolishing county courts. The summoning of 
 two sets' of grand jurors and two seta of petit 
 jurors, one of each for the oyer and terminer and 
 circuit courts, and the other for the special ses- 
 sions and common pleas, oftentimes as has hap- 
 pened in the county of Kings, at one and the 
 same time, will be avoided. The plan of the 
 committee meets these evils in another respect, 
 by abolishing the expensive and dilatory prac- 
 tice of written examinations before an examiner 
 in chancery. 
 
 Every lawyer knows how those examinations are 
 oftentimes protracted from day to day, sometimes 
 month alter mouth, until he becomes wearied 
 with them himself. The expense is oftentimes 
 enormous, and generally the most serious por- 
 tion of the costs. By the abolition of this prac. 
 lice, and the substitution of oral examinations at 
 the hearing in court, both this time and this ex- 
 pense will be saved. It. is idle to suppose that 
 there is any difficulty in taking this testimony just 
 as easily as evidence is now taken in a trial at 
 law; for although from the forms ot proceeding in 
 chancery by bill and answer, more issues of tact 
 are presented by the pleadings than in pleadings 
 at law, in consequence ot the latter being ficti- 
 tious; yet the same number of issues of fact anse 
 on the trial at law, when the fictions are discarded 
 and the true case presented. But even it more 
 time be required to take the testimony by thejudge 
 in chancery than on a trial at law, it will be more 
 han compensated by the time saved in not having 
 to wade through the mass of written evidence of 
 an irrelevant character, which under the present 
 system is collected, and winch he must read. 
 
 Another excellent feature of reform, is the obo- 
 lition of fees and perquisites, which all our judges, 
 except the three justices of the supreme court and 
 the chancellor, have enjoyed. JNo plan could be 
 devised by human ingenuity more effectually to de- 
 feat the regular and prompt administration of jus- 
 tice than the allowance of perquisites to the judge. 
 It holds out to him constantly bribes to delay nis 
 business, or ai least to dela^ suits. Interlocutory 
 orders, as they are called, such as ciders for fur- 
 ther time to plead, to stay proceedings, and the 
 like, tor each of which he receives a lee, necessa- 
 rily serve to protract the litigation, while the 
 temptation of the fee is held out to influence the 
 judge to kindness in granting them. The same 
 temptation exists as to taxation of costs, and the 
 judge knows that the attorney will take his busi- 
 ness where the most liberality ex ; sts in taxation. 
 This is unjust to 'he judge himself. Even it he 
 can resist these influences, still he is likely to be 
 suspected; lor men will attribute the same motives 
 of action to him as ar known to govern other in- 
 dividuals. These fees also operate to delay the 
 administration of the law in another way. The 
 judges ol'the first circuit have tor many years de- 
 voted the best part of the day, that is the morning, 
 to chamber business during the term of the cir- 
 cuit. In my own county, these courts ha\e rarely 
 opened before eleven o'clock in the morning So 
 far as these reforms are effected, I am pleased with 
 the report of the committee. But the report falls 
 short in other particulars. It was not to be ex. 
 peeled that they would have given us a perfect 
 
775 
 
 wotk. They h.ive, it appears tome, committed a 
 great error, and one which will continue the de- 
 lays in liw, and 'hat 13 contained in the section to 
 which my amendment applies. That section, as 
 it now stands, creates eisfht dill'-rent parts of the 
 supreme courf, by declaiing that any three of the 
 justices may hold the terms in each of the eight 
 dis nets. Undei tins plan, two of these cotjn's 
 m-iv he silting at the same time, anil may decide 
 differently on the same state of tacts existing in 
 two causes before them respectively. Or should a 
 court sitting on Long Island deckle to-day one way, 
 another portion of the court sifting at Buffalo the 
 next month might be of a different opinion in a 
 similar case, and would differently decide, because 
 one of these courts canno f give law to the other. 
 The only court in which you can obtain a deci 
 sion which will be law 10 (he whole slate, will be 
 the court of appeals. The supreme court, as such, 
 will no longer exist; at least you will have no 
 such court ot original jurisdiction. A supreme 
 court is one which declares the law for the whole 
 state ; as well for itself as lor inferior tribunals, 
 and lor the public. But eight courts sitting in as 
 many districts, and all having equal powers, can- 
 not act i:i concert and be uniied in the law. There 
 can be no connection between I hem. They become 
 district courts, arid sink at once to an interior po- 
 sition in the public estimation. The consequence 
 will be that no confidence will be felt in them, 
 especially if they occasionally give different deci- 
 sions; and suitors will consequently resort to the 
 court of appeals in much greater numbers than if 
 the decisions ot the supreme court weie uniform 
 and consjstur. I am not satisfied with the system 
 proposed l/y t. >-> commit'ee in other particulars; 
 but I am willing to saciifice my own opinions in 
 regard to them to the decision of the Convention, 
 if a remedy be provided lor the difficulty which 1 
 have now referred to. I have voted in favor of the 
 establishment of county courts, in the hope that 
 by adopting them a new plan would be fix d for a 
 supreme court. That idea is now hopeless, lean- 
 not consent to the present plan, and at the same 
 time claim to have cured the evils of which the 
 public complain. These evils must continue un- 
 der it. Appeals and writs of error will multiply, 
 and the court of appeals will, in less than five 
 years, become completely clogged, and be unable 
 to proceed. The amendment which I propose, is 
 offered with the view of making a connection be- 
 tween the districts, without interfering with the 
 distinctive features ot the [dan of the committee 
 It leaves the s-ime number ot j idges, and i he same 
 districts. Ii provides that one of the judges, or 
 more if it be necessary, may be designated to pre- 
 side in these courts; to go from one district to the 
 other, and carry wi' h him the opinions ot his breth- 
 ren from one branch of the court to the other ; and 
 by taking part in the decisions, to draw them to- 
 gether, and to produce uniformity. This, I admit, 
 is not a perfect system. It is the be*t, however, 
 of which the plan of the committee is susceptible 
 It may be objected that one man cannot sit in all 
 these bane courts; that the physical power of no 
 single individual would be sufficient to go through 
 witti the labor. The plan which the amendment 
 conte nplates, is to prevent any two or more ol 
 these district bane couits sitting at the same time. 
 The presence ot one man in all of them will re- 
 
 quire that they be held consecutively. According 
 to the sugges ion of the chauman of Ihe commit- 
 tee, (Mr. KUGGLES,) then- would probably be thiee 
 basic UTIUS held in each di>tncf in a year. This 
 would make twenty-tour terms in all, and require 
 the presidmgjudge to make, the circuit of the .style 
 three nines a year. It' each of tlie.se terms avera- 
 ged two weeks, f>rt \-t-ight weeks in tne ytar 
 would be occupied by him in court. Of course no 
 time would be allowed hirn for writing out his opi- 
 nions But 1 apprehend that three terms a year 
 will he more than will be necessaiy. With two 
 terms in each districl, he will have lime enough, 
 especially if this presiding duty be assigned annu- 
 ally or biennially to different judges. Bui the dif- 
 ficulty can be entiiely obviated by the designation 
 ot two or even more for the purpose. The object 
 is to connect these couits; to provide a means of 
 inteichange of opinion*; and to approximate as 
 near to uniformity as under the system we can do. 
 There are other advantages flowing from this un- 
 ion besides keeping down appeals. The judges 
 thus appointed to preside will become more skilled. 
 The office will ^e a preparatory school lor the 
 couit of appeals, in which four of them are by ihe 
 committee to sit. Liberality of views will be pro- 
 moted, the spirit ot the whole people ol the slate 
 appreciated, and that progress of law as a science, 
 based upon the rights of man, secured I have vo- 
 ted atrainst the union of the tribunals of law and 
 equity as provided lor by the committee, simply 
 on the ground that it effects no reform of itself. 
 The only effect of it will be to impose a double du- 
 ty upon the same judge, wheieas a division of la- 
 bor in law, as in every other art, trade or profes- 
 sion, is of advantage to the public in securing a 
 moie perfect and speedy work. The plan of the 
 committee keeps up the distinction between the 
 two tribunals as before. Equity poweis wilt be 
 exercised t>y twenty-eight judges, instead of by 
 one chancellor and nine vice chancellors, as now. 
 I am prepared to hike the step proposed by the 
 gentleman fiotn New York, (iVJr. O'CONOR.) and 
 to adopt one common mode of procedure in law 
 and equity, and that is by bill and answer. Unless 
 that step be taken, your union of the law and 
 chancery courts into one, with a separate and dis- 
 tinct mode of proceeding, as now, works no re- 
 form. 1 wish to see a plan by which a suitor will 
 not be thrown from one court to another beca.se 
 his counsel has mistaken the remedy, and such a 
 plan is secured by the proposition of ihe gentle- 
 man from New-York. Still, as I have said, I am 
 will, ng to waive my objection to this and some 
 other parts of the report, if we only remove the 
 evils which the public have called upon us to re- 
 medy. Justice administered promptly and at a 
 fair charge, will satisfy the intelligent conslituents 
 whom we represent; provided it flow from honest, 
 independent and capable tribunals. With the 
 adoption of my amendment, I will be content to 
 sustain the plan of the committee. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL concurred in the remarks of Mr 
 MURPHY, but he saw great difficulty in carrying 
 into effect his proposition. He believed it would 
 be physically impossible for any one judge to do 
 all the duty. Mr. N. suggested a modification of 
 the plan by which t,wo judges could be selected 
 for this purpose. He did not think it a safe rule 
 to prescribe that the senior judge should alone be 
 
776 
 
 eligible. He would leave it to the legislature to 
 prescribe some plan by which the end could b 
 attained. He would therefore suggest the follow 
 ing amendment : 
 
 General terms of the said court may be held in any dis 
 trict by three or more judges thereof. Two of the saic 
 judges shall be selected in a manner to be provided Cor bj 
 law, for the purpose of presiding in said courts. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY would not object to any amend- 
 ment which would carry out his views. 
 
 Mr. BROWN -felt inclined to think favorably 
 of the spirit of this proposition, although he 
 thought it to be impracticable in the way in which 
 it was presented. This he confessed was the grea 
 difficulty of this system but one which the com- 
 mittee had thought would be compensated by the 
 many advantages secured. But Mr. B. expressed 
 himself disposed to look upon the amendment fa- 
 vorably and suggested that it be laid on the table 
 for the present. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM thought this to be a proposition 
 worthy of consideration. But he did not wish to 
 vote immediately on the question, and suggested 
 that it be deferred for the present. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD proposed the following a- 
 mendrnent : 
 
 ^5. General terms of said court shall be annually held 
 in each of the suid districts ; and may be held by any three 
 of said judges ; and any one of said judges miyhold spe- 
 cial terms and circuit courts, and one or more of said jud- 
 ges shall preside at the courts of oyer and terminer in any 
 county. 
 
 After some further consideration, 
 
 Mr. BROWN offered the following substitute 
 for the section : 
 
 !j 5. Provision may be made by law for designating irom 
 time to time one of the said justices to preside at the gen- 
 eral terms of the said court to be held in the several dis- 
 tricts. Any three or more of said justices, of whom the 
 said justice so designated shall always be one, may hold 
 such general terms and any one of them may hold circuit 
 courts and courts of oyer and terminer in any county. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY withdrew his substitute. 
 
 These several propositions were ordered to be 
 printed. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS laid on the table a resolution, 
 that the Convention would adjourn sine die on 
 the first Saturday of October next. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, (16th day) August 31. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. SPRAGTJE. 
 
 Mr. SHAW presented the memorial of teach- 
 ers of the Moravian Institute in relation to the 
 proposed diversion of the literature fund, &c. 
 
 Mr.WORDEN presented a similar remonstrance 
 from the trustees of the Genessee Wesleyan Semi- 
 nary. Each was referred as before. 
 
 CANALS, FINANCES, &c. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT presented the following, as a 
 counter proposition to that of Mr. HOFFMAN'S : 
 
 1. The legislature shall not sell, lease, or otherwise dis 
 pose of any 01 the navigable canals of this State, including 
 such as the State may hereafter finish and make navigable; 
 but they shall remain the property of the State lorever ; 
 and the tolls and all the revenues accruing therefrom shall 
 be applied as provided for in this Constitution. 
 
 ^ -2. The tolls shall be so regulated as to best preserve 
 the public faith, and to provide lor the punctual payment 
 of the public debt as hereinafter speciiied ; and no reduc- 
 tion of tolls shall be made unless in view of those objects, 
 until the whole of said debt shall be fully paid. 
 
 3. For the purpose pf completing the unfinished canals, 
 the legislature may have power to increase the present 
 
 State debt to the amount of, but not exceeding in the ag 
 gregate $25,000,00'J, (exclusive of a contingent liability for 
 the payment of $1,713,000 loaned to solvent corporations,) 
 provided it can be loaned at a rate of interest not exceed- 
 ing 5 per cent ; but such increase shall not exceed in any 
 one year $1,000,000; and no such further increase shall 
 be made unless for the better enabling the Skate to fulfil 
 its engagements, by prosecuting with a view to comple- 
 tion some part or all of the unfinished canals, to wit : The 
 Erie canal enlargement ; Genesee Valley canal and Black 
 River canal ; but the present State debt shall not be in- 
 creased for tiny other purpose, unless to repel invasion 
 or suppress insurrection. 
 
 ^ 4. After paying the expense of collecting, superinten- 
 ding ar:d ordinary repairs, $1,500,000 of the re venues of the 
 State canals, shall in each year, and at that rate for a shor- 
 ter period, commencing first July, 1846, be applied or set 
 apart as a sinking fund for the next ten years, to pay the 
 interest and redeem the principal of the State debt, until 
 first July, 1858, when $2,000 000 of said revenues shall 
 thereafter continue to be applied or set apart annually, or 
 in that proportion for a shorter period, in like manner, 
 and to the like effect, until the whole of said debt, and the 
 interest thereon, is fully paid and satisfied. 
 
 5. The balance of the revenues of the canals, be the 
 same more or less, after paying as provided in the last pre- 
 ceding section, together with tne auction audsalt duties and 
 all other receipts into the Treasury not otherwise specifi- 
 cally appropriated, shall be applied at the discretion of the 
 Legislature in defraying the ordinary expenses of the Go- 
 vernment, the completion of the unfinished canals, and the 
 payment ot the public debt; that is, the said canal reve- 
 nues are thus sacredly pledged, until the State debt and 
 -"nterest thereon is fully paid and extinguished. 
 
 6. If tho funds herein provided for paying the public 
 creditors shall not be realized in time to meet the state 
 stocks falling due, provision shall be madebv Jaw for is- 
 suing new stock for that purpose: -said new stock shall 
 be made payable at such time as the revenues will meet 
 the same. 
 
 EXPLANATORY 
 
 The balance of the agjriegate state debt, including all 
 sums borrowed from specific state lunds, is believed to be 
 less than $22,000,0.10, and cannot exceed $22.800,000 bor- 
 :-ow $2,-20U,000, is $25,000,000. Appropriate in payment 
 $1,500,000 annually iorjjten years, and $2,000,000 annually 
 :hereafter, will pay a debt of $25,000,000, and interest 
 thereon, in 28 years. Or apply all the revenues after com- 
 peting the canals, and it is believed the debt will be ex. 
 jnguished at a much earlier period. 
 
 This plan simplifi ;s the state debt by treating the amount 
 n the aggregate instead of the numerous specific and gen- 
 eral funds in which it has betua heretotore considered; and 
 it secures the early completion of the public works, there- 
 by increasing the revenues from the increased business 
 caused by cheapening transportation without a reduction 
 of tolls. 
 
 JUDICIARY EXPENSES. 
 
 MR. PERKINS united the following: 
 
 Resolved, That the Comptroller be requested to furnish 
 his Conveniion with the amounts paia within the last 
 :hree years to judges of the several courts of oyer and 
 :erminer, in this state, for services, under part fourth, 
 chapter first, title one, section thirteen of the Revised 
 Statutes. 
 
 Mr. P. explained his object to be toc;ill for the 
 amounts paid for returns of testimony made to the 
 governor in capital cases under the statute. His 
 ^solution was suggested mainly bv a knowledge 
 )f the fact that the circuit judge had charged $7(JO 
 or furnishing a copy of his notes to the Governor 
 n the case of Freeman the murderer, and $600 
 or I he notes of the trial of Wyatt. 
 
 The resolution was agreed to. 
 
 THE JUDI IARY. 
 
 The Convention resumed the consideration of 
 he judiciary article, the fifth section, being still 
 mder consideration. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR moved to amend by insert- 
 ng (he words "or any judge of the couit of 
 ippeals," after the word "then," in the2d line. 
 Hr. T. explained his object to be to enable any 
 udge of the court of appeals, as well as any 
 
777 
 
 
 .if the siDivtne court, to hold special terms, 
 an<l circuit courts, and to preside at the courts of 
 
 :tid terminer in any county. 
 
 . HOFFMAN supported the amendment, for 
 he thought it would be wise to requiie the judges 
 of tiie court of appeals, not only to sit in bane, 
 but to sit on circuit. He would amend the section 
 so that the judges of the court of appeals might 
 be employed every where in bane, in circuit and 
 in nvor and terminer, so as to leave the door open 
 to a beneficial arrangement by the legislature. 
 lie proposed to amend the section so as to read as 
 follows: 
 
 The judges of the supreme court and of the court of 
 appeals, or any two or more of them, may hold terms of 
 saiiJ supreme court ; and any one of them may hold cir- 
 cuit courts, and preside at the courts of oyer and terminer 
 in ;my county. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN understood it to be the intention 
 of the judiciary committee, (whose chairman was 
 now absent, he feared in consequence of ill 
 health,) to have a court of appeals disconnected 
 with the judges of the inferior courts, so that when 
 sis came up they might be heard by a class 
 of men who had not mingled in anyway with the 
 decisions and reasonings of the inferior tribunals, 
 a:id as a consequence had no preconceived opin- 
 ions. He feared the amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer would produce an effect that 
 was not intended. He did not belisve the legiti- 
 mate business of that court would permit them to 
 hold circuit courts ; and feared that there was a 
 disposition to throw too much upon the court of 
 last resort, where judges should have abundant 
 time to make up their opinions upon the cases 
 brought before them. Nor did he think their 
 knowledge of the practice in these courts would 
 be sufficient to make them competent to the du- 
 ties of holding terms in nisi prius. He should 
 therefore oppose the amendment. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS agreed with the gentleman from 
 HIM Uiiner that two or more judges should be per- 
 mdu'd to hold special terms, and he would be even 
 willing to adopt the phraseology of the present 
 constitution, and say one or more, so that the peo- 
 ple might have courts held occasionally at t In-m- 
 own doors. He would not, however, make this a 
 consiitutional provision, but leave it to the legis- 
 alun-i . 
 
 Mr PATTERSON said as part of the court of 
 appeals would be elected by general ticket, that 
 part might consist of laymen, and it was held to 
 be desiiable lhai they should be so ; but it would 
 be obviously improper that laymen should hold 
 circuit coin t.s. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said it wag not proposed to 
 make it obligatory on them to do so, but merely 
 to give them the discretionary power which it 
 could not be supposed the lay members of that 
 court would exen i>.-. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN objected to the judges of I he 
 court of app.'.ils sitting at circuit, it they did rn>t 
 sit at bane, and others" objected to their sitting in 
 circuit if they did sit in bane. How should they 
 reconcile these differences. He thought the dis- 
 charge oftyanc aud circuit duties would increase 
 the abililiesot' the judges of the court of appeals 
 for discharging their peculiar duties, and tend to 
 expose incompetency, it it should find its way in 
 to the court of last resort. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND asked what the gentleman 
 from Herkimer meant, by proposing (o leave out 
 the words, " any district." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN replied that he feared these 
 courts would be considered district, instead of 
 state courts. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND feared the omission of those 
 words would lead to a continuance of that central- 
 ization of which so much complaint had been 
 made. He suggested some modification which 
 would obviate his objections and make the amend- 
 ment a valuable one. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN replied, and the debate was 
 continued by Messrs. SIMMONS, RICHMOND, 
 MORRIS, 'HARRIS, PATTERSON, TALL- 
 MADGE, STETSON and RUGGLES. 
 
 Mr. STETSON moved to amend the amend- 
 ment by striking out the words " and of the court 
 of appeals," and insert " or a judge of the court 
 of appeals," after "them," in the third line, so 
 that the judges of the appeal court may hold cir- 
 cuit courts and courts of oyer and terminer, but 
 not terms of the supreme court. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said this would make the 
 whole nothing more than a district system, in- 
 stead of a system for the state at large. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES explained the purposes of the 
 committee in framing the fifth section, and re- 
 plied to the arguments which had been brought 
 in favor of the proposed amendment. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. STETSON was lost 
 ayes 20, noes 34. 
 
 The question then recurred on the amendment 
 of Mr. TAYI-OR, as amended by Mr. HOFFMAN". 
 The ayes and noes were called, and there were 
 yeas 18, nays 70. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR renewed his amendment 
 in its original form before it was amended on the 
 suggestion of Mr. HOFFMAN. 
 
 The amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY offered an amendment to the 
 fifth section, as follows : 
 
 Provisions may be made by law, for designating, from 
 time to time, one or more ot" the said justices of the sunrerne 
 court, not of the court of appeals, cither of whom may pre- 
 side at. the general terms of the -said court to be held in tho 
 several districts. Any three or more of the; said justices 
 of whom one ol the sai.l justices so designated shall always 
 be one, may hold such general terms. And any one of 
 them may hold special terms and circuit courts, and may 
 preside in courts of oyer and terminer in any county. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved to amend so that it would 
 read " two of them may hold special terms," &c. 
 
 This was briefly debated by Messrs. BAKER, 
 and BROWN, when the vote was taken by rising, 
 and there were ayes 34, nays 32. 
 
 Mr. STETSON demanded the ayes and nays, 
 and they were ordered. 
 
 Messrs. STETSON and SIMMONS farther de- 
 bated the amendment, when 
 
 Mr. BAKER modified the same so that it would 
 read " any one or more," &.c. 
 
 Mr. Murphy accepted the amendment. (It is 
 embodied above.) 
 
 The substitute of Mr. MURPHY was then adopt- 
 ed without a division. 
 
 The 6th section was then read as follows : 
 
 6. They shall severally at stated times receive for their 
 services a compensation to be established by law, which 
 shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. 
 
778 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved to strike out all afte 
 the word " law." 
 
 This amendment was lost, ayes 13, noes 68. 
 Mr. BROWN offered the following substitut 
 for the clause proposed to be struck out, at the 
 request of Mr. LOOMIS, who penned it, and woul 
 not be here until this afternoon : 
 
 " But no law shall be passed by which the salary of anj 
 judge shall be diminished below" the amount establishec 
 by law at the time of his acceptance of his office nor shal 
 any law increasing the salary of a judge take effect with 
 in two years after its passage." 
 
 Mr. B. said the object was to allow the legisla- 
 ture to reduce the salary of a judge to the point 
 where it stood when the judge took office, but not 
 below that amount and to prevent any increase 
 of salary taking effect within two years. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS preferred the original section 
 as it stood. That had a well settled meaning. 
 We should only mystify the section by the 
 mendment. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND dwelt at much length on the 
 original section contending that it would in- 
 vite efforts on the part of the judges to get their 
 salaries increased, and once raised to a high point, 
 they would not be reduced during their continu- 
 ance in office. He was for paying them well, but 
 he would not fix it in the constitution that a sala- 
 ry once fixed, no mailer how high it was, should 
 not be reduced for eight years. He should pre- 
 fer to see the word diminished struck out and in- 
 creased put in. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN opposed both the original sec- 
 tion, the amendment, and the suggestion of Mr. 
 RICHMOND. The object of such provision should 
 be to make the judges independent of the legisla- 
 ture, and it had nothing to do with the popularity 
 hunting question of confidence or want of confi- 
 dence in the people. It was not necessary that a 
 man, in settling this question, should have a pop 
 ularity halter in his pocket, going about to see ij 
 he could not find a popularity horse to mount. 
 The question was how could we make judges in- 
 dependent of the legislature. We should see to 
 it that the legislature should not increase the pay 
 of the judge. If they could, they could pension 
 him they might reward him for his decisions, or 
 punish him for his decisions, by refusing to re- 
 
 ward him. They ought not to have the power to 
 reduce or increase the pay of a judge. He went 
 on to urge that the minimum compensation of a 
 judge should be named in the constitution that 
 the legislature ought not to be permitted to go 
 below it and the least compensation he would 
 name would be $3,000. He was free to confess 
 that opinion, and that the danger was, under this 
 increase of the judicial force, that their compen- 
 sation might be fixed at too low a sum. A man 
 who would not go on the bench frofh any other 
 motive than pay, was unfit to be there. So was 
 the man who would go there without adequate 
 pay. They must have bread, a shirt and lodg- 
 ings. If you did not give it to them by law, they 
 would have it, he would not say how. But they 
 would have it. He urged that $3,000 was little 
 enough for a judge who had to travel over the 
 whole state, leave his family, and his affairs to be 
 managed by others, and to live a good part of the 
 time in your large cities, where he must pay the 
 high prices which transient persons had to pay 
 there. He would have the judge speak the law 
 
 without the fear of losing his bread, or the hope 
 of acquiring the favor of the legislature and mon- 
 ey. Without an independent judiciary to stand 
 
 by the constitution, there was no vitality in it. 
 
 And to be really independent, the legislature 
 should have no power to deal with them in the 
 matter of salary. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM followed. He should not be de- 
 terred from doing his duty, if gentlemen did un- 
 dertake here to asperse (he motives of those who 
 differ from them. He did not come here with a 
 popularity halter in his pocket, looking after pop- 
 ularity horses; and he regretted that gentlemen 
 could riot vote in a minority on such a question, 
 :hougb it was a silent vote, without having sunn 
 mputations cast in their leeth, He voted with 
 he thirteen in favor of the amendment just nega- 
 tived ; arid because, he was not w -illinj? to give the 
 lower to increase salaries and withhold the power 
 o diminish also. The control of this whole mat- 
 er of salary he would leave to the legislature, let 
 gentlemen denounce the motive tor such a vote as 
 hey would. He had another reason tor voting to- 
 trike out the clause in question. It was because 
 heie was no prohibition* in this article against 
 udges receiving fees or perquisites. Had the ju- 
 iciary committee adhered to their decision, and 
 eported such a clause, he should not have made 
 var upon this section. He opposed the principle 
 f having a minimum salary. It was based only 
 n the assumption that the judges would have a 
 tinted compensation, and that we were sent here 
 > see to it that public officers did not do injustice 
 o themselves in the matter of compensation 
 tfuch more watchfulness, he ?pprehended. would 
 e required to prevent them from getting more 
 lan they should. Unless this section was amen- 
 ed as he desired, he should move to strike out 
 he whole of it, and insert the 13th section of his 
 plan which provided for a fixed salary, without 
 fees or perquisites, alterations of salary to affect 
 only those to be chosen after such alteiafion 
 travelling expenses to be allowed to a judge in one 
 specified case 
 
 Mr. BROWN said injustice was done to this 
 proposition of the gentleman from Herkimer as 
 
 one object was 
 
 >rovide against an 
 
 specifically to pi 
 
 increase of salary taking effect during the term of a 
 judge. The proposition was not his own. He 
 was in favor of another provision like that sug- 
 gested by Mr. HOFFMAN and such an one, he 
 understood, would be offered. The minimum he 
 would have a liberal and just one, such as would 
 command the very best talent in the state. He 
 was not, with the gentleman from Genesee, fo* 
 cutting down salaries to the very lowest point. 
 
 The debate was continued bv Messrs. RICH- 
 MOND, BROWN, WATERBURY and BRUCE 
 when the question being taken, Mr. LOOMIS 
 amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. W. H. SPENCER then moved to amend 
 so as to provide that the law fixing salaries, once 
 passed, should not be altered oftener than once in 
 ten years or after the taking of the census. Lost. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to provide that no law 
 ncreasing or dimifiishing salaries shall take ef- 
 fect within two years of its passage. Lost. 
 
 Mr. COOK moved to add this proviso in lieu of 
 the original that the salary of no judge of the 
 supreme court or court of appeals shall be increas- 
 
779 
 
 ed or diminished during his continuance in office 
 Mr. WHITE moved to amend so as to provide 
 that the salary of a judge should not be less than 
 per annum and which shall not be increas- 
 ed or diminished during his continuance in office 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY moved to fill the blank with 
 JO. Mr. WHITE, $3,000. Mr. NICOLL 
 $.2,500. The question was first put on $2,000 as 
 the minimum, and lost, ayes 18, noes 73, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 AYKS Messrs. F.F. Backus, Bouck, Hoffman, Jones 
 Kennedy, Maxwell, Morris, Murphy, Nicoll, O'Conor 
 Peimiman, Hiker, Ruggles, Stephens, Tallmadge, J. J 
 Taylor, Vache, White 18. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, H, Backus 
 Riker, Bascom, Bowdish; Bray ton, Brown, Bruce, Burr 
 R i a-nbell, jr, Candee, Clark, Cook, Cornell, Crooker 
 Cuddeback, Dana, Dodd. Dorlon, Dubois, Flanders, Geb- 
 hard, Graham, Greene, Harris, Harrison, Hare, Hawley 
 Hotehkiss, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Keinan, Kingsley 
 Kirkland, Mann, Marvin, Miller, Nellis, Nicholas, Parish 
 Patterson, Perkins, Powers.President.Rhoades.Richmond.s 
 John, Salisbury, Sanford, Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon, E. Spen- 
 cer, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Taft 
 W.Taylor, WHrren.Waterbury, Willard, Witbeck.Wood 
 Worden, A. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 73. 
 
 And next on $'2,500. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE preferred not to name 
 any sum, but to leave the whole matter to the 
 Legislature and hence he should vote against 
 filling the blank with any sum. Others proba 
 bly voted against $3,000 on the same ground 
 There was therefore no use in trying to fill the 
 blank, when a majority probably were against the 
 whole amendment. 
 
 Mr. W H. SPENCER was also opposed to 
 filling the blank with any sum. 
 
 The Convention refused to insert $2,500, ayes 
 27, noes 61; , as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bouck, Brown,Candee, Dorlon,Dubois, 
 Harrison, Holi'man Jones, Kingsley, Mann, Maxwell, Mil- 
 ler, Morris, Murphy, Nellis, Nicoll, O'Conor, Penniman, 
 Perkins, Powers, Rhoades, Ruggles, Sanford, Stephens, J. 
 J.Taylor, W. Taylor, Vache, White 27. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Kaker Bascom, Bowdish, Brayton, Bruce, Burr, 
 R. Campbell, jr., Clark, Conely, Cook. Cornell, Crooker, 
 CudJeback, Dana, Dodd, Flanders, Gebhard, Graham, 
 Greene, Harris, Hart, Hawley, Hotchkiss, A. Huntington, 
 Hutchinson, Kennedy, Kernan.Kirklaud.Marvin, Nicholas, 
 Parish, Patterson, President, Richmond, Riker, St. John, 
 Salisbury, Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon, E. Spencer, W. H. 
 Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Taft, Tallmadge, 
 Warren, Waterbury, WHlard, Witbeck, Wood, A. Wright, 
 Yawger, Young. Youngs 62. 
 
 Mr. WHITE then withdrew his proposition. 
 
 Mr. COOK'S amendment was then adopted, 
 75, to 11 and the sectien, as amended, was 
 agreed to. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 The seventh section was read, as follows : 
 (j7. They shall not hold any other office or public trust. 
 All votes lor either of them for HHV elective office, (ex- 
 ccpt that of justice of the supreme court, or judge of ap- 
 peals,) given hy the legislature or the people, shall Jx; 
 void. Tn-y shall njt exercise any power of appointment, 
 except in licensing practitioners in their courts. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to amend by striking out 
 all after the word " appointment." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR suggested the addition, after the 
 word appointment, of these words : '* But may 
 be authorised to appoint trustees, receivers, audi- 
 tors, referees, elisors, capers, and other agents, to 
 perform duties in any pending suit or matters, 
 and to license counsellors and attorneys." This 
 
 would allow the legislature, whilst they deprived 
 the judge of all patronage, to allow him to ap- 
 point such assistant officers as might be necessary 
 in the progress of a cause. As to the power to 
 license attorneys, &c., that, under his amendment 
 would depend entirely on the legislature. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL suggested that the entire clause 
 should be struck out. The only patronage the 
 courts had was the appointment of clerks, and if 
 their appointment wcs provided for in another 
 manner, there was no necessity for enumerating 
 all these officers. 
 
 Messrs. KIRKLAND and TAGGART took the 
 same view of the question and \ 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR waived his suggestion, saying 
 that the entire clause had better be struck out. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY alluded to his resolution of en- 
 quiry offered at an early stage of the session, into 
 the propriety of providing in the constitution that 
 no other duties should be assigned to a judge than 
 those which w r ere strictly judicial saying that 
 he intended by that to reach not merely the ap- 
 pointment of clerks but all other duties which 
 the legislature had thrown upon judges. Some 
 such general provision, he urged, would be all 
 that was necessary to reach the end which these 
 amendments had in view. He had also offered a 
 resolution of enquiry into the propriety of incor- 
 porating into the institution a prohibition of all 
 inspection laws, and against licensing any par- 
 ticular calling, business, or profession. He was 
 still of that opinion, though he would not deprive 
 judges of the power of excluding improper per- 
 sons from practicing in their courts. What he 
 objected to was the power of conferring affirma- 
 tively the power to practice. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved by way of amendment, to 
 strike out the words" except licensing practition- 
 ers in their courts," and inserting : 
 
 1 Nor shall they prohibit any citizen from practising as 
 attorney and counsellor in any court, except lor want of 
 good moral character." 
 
 Mr. S. said his object was to improve the charac- 
 ter of a profession, which was now disgraced by 
 the conduct of some unworthy members of it. 
 He would have all of them stand on their own 
 bottoms, and not on a mere piece of parchment 
 tied with a blue ribbon. He was also opposed to 
 any power to grant privileges to any class of men 
 but would leave suitors to choose their own 
 counsel as they could now their own physician" 
 
 Mr. BROWN urged that we should not leave 
 this matter open, as proposed, but should affirma- 
 tively prohibit the exercise by judges of all power 
 of appointment to public office, and of all patron- 
 age whatever. As to the power of licensing at- 
 torneys, he cared nothing about it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said the principal object of 
 the judiciary committee in inserting this clause, 
 was to prohibit judges from appointing their 
 clerks. He suggested, therefore, that it would 
 
 better to strike out all after the word " void" 
 and then have a separate section to this effect : 
 " The legislature shall provide bylaw for the election 
 of one or more clerks ot the supreme court." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER hoped the profession would ex- 
 ercise a becoming liberality and vote for Mr. 
 STRONG'S proposition. 
 
 Mr. WHITE proposed the following addition 
 :o Mr. STRONG'S amendment : 
 ' And the ability to read and write." 
 
780 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS did not want the protection of 
 the constitution thrown over his profession as 
 such, but he could not assent to having a provi- 
 sion in the constitution which would prohibit 
 the courts, composed of high public officers, from 
 preventing men who were totally unfit to advise 
 them upon questions of law, or to be of any ser- 
 vice to them, or to clients-, from practising in 
 them. It was not the profession that were inter- 
 ested but the public, in the despatch of business 
 in the courts, and in their character. He could 
 not yield to any paltry prejudices of this kind, 
 nor stultify himself by the adoption of such a pro- 
 vision as this. Let it remain open for the legis- 
 lature to provide for; and if they make such a 
 law, and find it to be unwholesome, they can the 
 next year abolish it. It will not be so if made 
 permanent in the constitution. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY hoped this amendment 
 would take. Let every man who had a lawsuit 
 look up the man that he chooses to take care of 
 his rights. He had no idea of conferring on the 
 profession the exclusive privilege of practising 
 in the courts, any more than he would grant ex- 
 clusive privileges to any other calling. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER looked upon these special li- 
 censes to practice law as on a par with licenses 
 to sell ardent spirits. They were designed for 
 the protection of the public but if the public 
 desired to play with edge tools, let them do it, 
 and cut their fingers if they chose. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER sustained Mr. STRONG'S 
 proposition at some length. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM would be obliged to vote against 
 the motion as it stood ; but if one should be made 
 to sweep away all the privileges now enjoyed by 
 his profession, he would go for it. It would 
 seem invidious to apply this principle only to 
 those who are to enter the profession hereafter. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said if gentlemen would come 
 down to the question whether they would recog- 
 nize any such profession or office as a lawyer's, 
 doctor's, or teacher's in schools, he might not find 
 any difficulty in voting with them ; because he 
 knew that in a few years they would be obliged 
 to come back to the present system. There must 
 be such a class of men as lawyers, and the only 
 question was how they were to be appointed. He 
 preferred the present mode of appointment by ex- 
 amination, (although he confessed that he regard- 
 ed the rules of examination as illiberal, because 
 it supposed that study in a certain place for a 
 given period gave the necessary skill,) because 
 by it the appointments could not be made parti- 
 zan favors, and did not enter into politics at all. 
 
 Mr. BROWN opposed Uie amendment. He was 
 not in favor of the rule winch required seven 
 years study ; there were many things which re- 
 quired to be liberalized ; but he could have no- 
 thing to do with the amendment of the gentle- 
 man from Monroe. He would be found joining 
 in no miserable cry against lawyers as a profes- 
 sion. 
 
 Mr. STRONG withdrew his first amendment, 
 and offered the following in its place : 
 
 " Any male citizen of tha age of 21 years, of good mo- 
 ral character, and who possesses die re(j incite qualifications 
 of learning and ability, shall be entiUed to admission to 
 practice in all the courts of this State. ' 
 
 Mr. MURPHY combatled the views of Mr. 
 
 HOFFMAN as any thing but the views of a reform- 
 er ; and he denied that (in reply to Mr. BROWN) 
 the effect of this proposition would be injurious 
 to the profession, or that all those who voted for 
 it, joined in any miserable cry against lawyers. 
 He regarded it as calculated to rid the profession 
 of a class who by virtue of their parchment and 
 blue ribbon only, were admitted to practice (for 
 the examination was a mere form) and through 
 whose ignorance or negligence many a just cause 
 had been lost. He preferred to leave suitors to 
 choose their own counsel instead of being forced, 
 as they often were now, to employ ignorance or 
 indolence, or both, and suffer all the consequen- 
 ces. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY sustained the amendment 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved the previous question, 
 and there was a second. 
 
 The main question was ordered to be put, when 
 the question upon the amendment of Mr. STRONG 
 was taken by ayes and noes and carried, ayes 60, 
 noes 17. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought it was preposterous 
 to have any such tiling in the constitution, and 
 moved to strike out what had just been inserted. 
 
 This was ruled out of order. 
 
 Mr BROWN moved to insert after "appoint- 
 ment," the words " to public office." Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to alrike out the 
 first sentence, and insert, The judges of the 
 court of appeals and the justices of the supreme 
 court shall not be elected or appointed !o, or hold 
 any other office or public trust during (he term lor 
 which they shall respectively have been elected." 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND believed this was going far- 
 ther than the Convention was prepared to go at 
 this time. In effect, it would disfranchise the 
 judges for a certain time, it from any cause they 
 should resign before the close of their term. 
 
 Mr. J. J TAYLOR hoped the amendment would 
 prevail. In this way alone could judges be pre- 
 served from becoming partiz.ms. If allowed to 
 take office at any time they chose to resign, they 
 might lay their plans while on the bench, and 
 only occupy it from motives of ambition and 
 aggrandizement. 
 
 Mr BASCOMjj apprehended the object of the 
 mover of the amendment, woo Id not be attained 
 by its adoption. He thought these officers, aa 
 well as others, should have every inducement to- 
 discharge their duties well. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG feared that those least 
 qualified for the office would be the mo^t likely to 
 hold on. He thought the amendment a good one, 
 and hoped it would be adopted. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE desired to place the judi- 
 ciary beyond the reach of offers of place or pro- 
 motion either at the hands of the Executive or 
 the legislature. He would have a judge, when 
 he accepted office to devote himself strictly to hi* 
 duties, instead of being approachable by the dis- 
 pensers of patronage or place. In no other way 
 could we have a pure bench. The judge must not 
 be looking out for promotion during his term, if 
 we would have him attentive to his duties rather 
 than to politics. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said this identical proposition 
 was before the judiciary committee and rejected. 
 The effect of it, if adopted, would be this. If 
 a man should be elected a judge of the supreme 
 
781 
 
 court, no matter what his eminent abilities for 
 
 other stations might be, however much the rouu- 
 
 try naight need thrsc scr\ ires, hero would be a 
 
 -fitntional prohibition against appointing him 
 
 !l il Si;iti(>!l I'<M- ''ij:1 
 
 TALLMADGE "replied, IT.- did not be- 
 li.-vi' (n.'se -10 judges would so monopolize the 
 ! (it Ihe state that no one would be found to 
 discharge the dntirs of other oU 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said the committee suppos- 
 ed they had made ample provision against elec- 
 tioneering judges in this 7th section. He point- 
 ed c.ut objections to the amendment. A judge 
 wlio had been in office' only a year might 
 fiicted witli sickness which might be so protrac- 
 ted as to induce him to resign. Then this amend- 
 ment would utterly preclude the people from 
 electing him to any office until the expiration of 
 eight years. He could sanction no such principle. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR hoped the constitution we 
 should adopt would confer no exclusive privilege 
 upon any class of citizens, nor impose any unjust 
 restrictions upon any. He deemed this an unjust 
 and uncalled for restriction. 
 
 The amendment of Air. TALL MADGE was 
 negatived, as follows: 
 
 AYF.S Messrs. Allen, F. F. Backus, Cook, Cornell, 
 Gardner, Mar. ison, Holiman. Jones, Kennedy, Mann, Mar- 
 vin, Morris, Nicholas, IVnmman, IVrkins, Richmond, Hi- 
 ker, Shaw, Sheldon, Swackhamer, Taft, Tallmadge, J. J. 
 Taylor. Vache, Waterbury, Wood, Yawger, Young. 23. 
 
 NOES Messrs. H. Backus, Bascom, Bray ton, brown, 
 Bruce. Brundage. Burr, R. Campbell, jr., Candee. Clark, 
 Concly, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, Dodd, Dorlon. Du- 
 bois. Flanders, Graham, Gn-ene, Harris, Hart, Hawley, 
 HotehkLs-, A. T'undnsjton, Kernan, Kingsiey, Kirkland, 
 Loomi.s, Mci'., Maxwell, Miller, Nellia, Nicoll, Parish, 
 Patterson, Power.-, President, Rhoades, Ruggles, Salisbu- 
 ry, Sun ford, Shaver, W.H. Spencer, Stanton, Stevens, Stet- 
 son, Taggsrt, W. Taylor, Tilden, Van Schoonhoven, 
 Warren, White, Worden, A. Wright, W. B. Wright 55. 
 
 Mr- MANN moved to amend the amendment 
 of Mr. STRONG by inserting the word " white, "so 
 that it would read" any white male citizen," &c. 
 
 AJr. S TET.SON moved the pieviuiis question on 
 the sec' ion and it wus seconded. 
 
 The 7th section was adopted as amended. 
 
 The 8th section was tht-n read ur.d adopted as 
 follows: 
 
 {; 8. The classification of the justices ot the supreme 
 court, the times and places o : holding the linns of the 
 court oi appeals, and ttte general and special terms of the 
 supreme court within the several districts, and the circuit 
 courts an>! ourts of oyer and terroiner withto the several 
 countius, shall be provided for by 1 .w. 
 
 TheOth section was then read: 
 
 *) 9. The testimony in equity cases shall be taken before 
 
 I'ige, who shall hear and" dcide the case in the same 
 
 manner as testimony is taken upon the trial of an iisue at 
 
 law. 
 
 .Mr. BROWN < -fi'-red the following amendment, 
 to come in at the tnd of th^ section: 
 
 " Aijdthe legislature may provide for the trial of issues 
 of fact in ah !", v a jury." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS deemed the section imperfect as 
 it, stood, and he uflered the following as a substi- 
 tute theivfiT : 
 
 ^ 9. The oflice of master and examiner in chancery are 
 abolished The testimony ia equity <-a-es sh ill lie tak**a 
 before the judge who shall hear and decide the same ; but 
 the legislature m,i law lor tin- examinational 
 
 foreign and distant witnesses, and the taking ol testimony 
 conditionally, and for the reference of any question or 
 caim;t<j;m auditor or auditors, referee or reierees, upon 
 special application, or by content ol parties. 
 
 Air. NICOLL thought we had better leave all 
 the detail of this matter to the legislature. All 
 thai was necessary w*s to provide that testimony 
 in chancery cases should be taken in open court. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER. was also opposed to the section 
 as it stood. 
 
 Mr. HOTCHKISS moved to adjourn. Agreed 
 to 3S to 35. 
 
 Adj. to 8i to-morrow morning. 
 
 TUESDAY, (llth day} September 1. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. SFRAGUK. 
 
 The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention 
 a communication from the Comptroller relative 
 to the sums paid to the judges of the several courts 
 of oyer and terminer in this state for services un- 
 der part 4, chap. 1, title 1, sec. 13 of the revised 
 statutfl 
 
 DAY OF ADJOURNMENT. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS called for the consideration 
 of his resolution offered on Saturday, directing 
 that the Convention do adjourn sine die on the 
 first Saturday in October. 
 
 Mr. STRONG wanted to adjourn on Monday. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to insert the last Tues- 
 day in September instead of the first Saturday in 
 October. Accepted by the mover. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved to insert 12 o'clock on 
 that day. Accepted by the mover. 
 
 Mr. BURR said he doubted if they would be 
 ready to adjourn on that day. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL called for the ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. STRONG wished a day fixed if they were 
 not ready on that day, they could rescind this re- 
 solution. The people wanted at least a month 
 to consider, what we have been four months 
 about. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER wished they could stop this in- 
 terminable talking in some way ; and he thought 
 this would be the best, viz : to fix a day to ad- 
 journ, and then members would certainly go to 
 work in earnest and vote. Within even the last 
 few days since they had the judiciary report in 
 the house, and when the time was come for their 
 voting, they had had four speeches in one day 
 from one gentleman on one subject and five from 
 another. Now was this not a little too bad, and 
 many members could hardly control themselves 
 to listen. 
 
 Mr. YOUNG hoped they would not now fix a 
 day. He moved to lay the resolution on the table. 
 
 Mr. WHITE called the ayes and noes on this. 
 They were ordered and resulted ayes 31, noes 57, 
 as follows : 
 
 A \ KS -Messrs. Archer, Ayrault. Baker, Bascom, 
 Brown. Brundage, Candee, Clark, Conely, Cuddeback, 
 Dana, Graham, Hart, Hotchkiss, Kennedy, Loomis, .\;ann, 
 Xelns, President, Salisbury, Sai.ibni, Shaver, Shaw, W. 
 11. Spencer, Swackhamer, Townsend, Van Schoonhoven, 
 Willard, A. Wright, Yawger, Young- 31. 
 
 K(1E5 Messrs. Angel, F. F. Backus, H Backus, Ber- 
 gen, Bowdish, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Cambreleng, 
 K. < arnpbell.jr. Cook. Crooker, Dodd. Doilen. Dubois, 
 Klander*, Greene, Harrison, Hawley, Hoffman, A. Hunt- 
 ington, HutcMnson, Hyde, Jones, Kemble, Kernan. Kings- 
 ley, Khkland, Marvin, Maxwell. Aiilier, Nicholas, .\i- 
 coll, O'Connor, Pan , lowers. Richmond, l!i- 
 
 ker, St. John, Sears, E Spencer, Stahtta, Stephens, Stet- 
 son, Stow, Strong, Taft, J. J Tay:or, Warren, Waicrbu- 
 ry, White, Wood, Worden, W. B. Wright, Youngs- bl. 
 
 So the motion to lay on the table was lost. 
 Mr. BROWN moved to amend that resolution 
 and make it the first Tuesday in October ; viz. the 
 
782 
 
 6th. That would give the people four weeks t< 
 reflect on it ; and that would be time enough fo: 
 the people knew all about their labors as the] 
 went along ; and if members would only sit a lit 
 tie later to-night and to-morrow night, he felt sa 
 tisfied they could get through the judiciary re 
 port by Wednesday night, and take up the finance 
 report on Thursday. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that the convention had 
 made as much progress with their work as any se 
 of men on God's earth could reasonably be expect- 
 ed to do. He did not want them to hurry, and so 
 do the work badly ; but to keep cool, (if they 
 could keep cool this very hot weather,) and to ac 
 like men of sense. The charge of delay was mosi 
 baseless. He hoped the convention would not be 
 hurried on this or any other occasion, and be com- 
 pelled to do the very mischief which hurry always 
 brings with it. 
 
 He admitted there were three or four subjects 
 before them which must be acted upon. If they 
 separated without settling them the convention 
 would have done nothing. If they could not set- 
 tle the disputed question of finance if they could 
 not settle the disputes relative to banks if they 
 could not adopt some general rules relative to 
 corporations if they could not defend the public 
 against the extravagance of municipal bodie*s hav- 
 ing the taxing power, then the result of their la- 
 bors would be an abortion. But notwithstanding 
 all this he would again say to gentlemen that if 
 they would be deliberate, if they would keep cool 
 if they would act herewith ordinary common 
 prudence, they would succeed by the day mention- 
 ed for the adjournment by the gentleman from Or- 
 ange. He knew the public had examined what 
 has been done here completely they get along 
 with it as fast as the convention. They would not 
 take the people by surprise if they continued to 
 sit to the day which the amendment would fix. 
 
 The people read the discussions of this body so 
 far as they are pertinent they form their opi- 
 nions on the subject arid on the first of October 
 they will not be taken by surprise. 
 
 Mr. BROWN'S amendment was then put and 
 carried, without a division. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS'S resolution as amended was 
 then carried. 
 
 So the Convention decided to adjourn on Tues- 
 day the 6th of October at 12 o'clock at noon. 
 
 Mr. WHITE offered the following : 
 
 Kesolved, That it be referred to a select committee to 
 consider and report what business should be transacted by 
 thi> Convention before its adjournment; and that said com. 
 mittee be also instructed to consider and report, what 
 measures, if any, should be adopted in case it shall be 
 found impossible to consider and determine upon the sev- 
 eral important reports ol standing committees which have 
 been or may be made, at a sufficiently early period to 
 enable the Conveniion, to submit at the ensuing Novem- 
 ber election, the result of its deliberations upon such re- 
 ports. 
 
 On motion of Mr. NICHOLAS this was laid on 
 the table. 
 
 The Convention then took up the unfinished 
 business, being the reports on 
 
 THE JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 The question was on the amendment of Mr. 
 BROWN to the 9th section. The following is the 
 section : 
 
 Jj 9. The testimony in equity cases shall be taken before 
 the judge who shall hear and decide the case in the same 
 
 manner as testimony is taken upon the trial of an issue at 
 
 Mr. BROWN'S substitute for this section wag 
 this: "Provision shall be made bylaw for the 
 taking of testimony in equity cases in open court 
 in the same manner as testimony is taken upon 
 the trial of an issue at law ; cases proper for a re- 
 ference may be referred to one or more auditors 
 or referees and the legislature may provide for the 
 trial of issues of fact in all proper cases by a jury." 
 
 Mr. TAGGART objected to the section as it 
 stood, and offered the following : 
 
 $ 13. The Legislature shall, by law, so regulate the 
 practice and proceedings in all courts, that every party to 
 any action or proceeding may have any remedy or relief 
 to which he may be entitled in reference to the subject 
 matter of such action or proceeding either legally or equi- 
 tably in the same action or proceeding, without resorting 
 to any other action; and the testimony in all cases shall be 
 taken at the trial, or hearing before the court, referee or 
 referees, except such as may be taken out of court upon 
 commission, or conditionally, or to perpetuate testimony, 
 in cases provided by law. 
 
 The question was first upon the proposition of 
 Mr. BROWN. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said the phraseology of the 
 amendments would not accomplish the object 
 contemplated by all of them. It would require 
 the taking of testimony in all cases before a jury. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said the subsequent clauses shew f 
 that such a construction could not be put upon 
 this section, as seemed to be supposed by Mr. 
 KIRKLAND. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said he doubted that, and 
 would therefore propose to amend as follows : 
 
 9. Cases both in law and equity shall be tried at said 
 circuit courts; and without a jury whenever the parties in 
 interest in a suit, and the judge holding the circuit, assent 
 thereto. Provision shall be made by law for cases in law 
 or equity not properiy triable at a circuit court. Provi- 
 sion shall also be made by law, for the peiformance of the 
 duties heretofore performed by masters in chancery. 
 
 Mr. K. said that by a section of this sort, the 
 duties would be distributed among various agents. 
 He sent up his proposition as containing every 
 ;hing that was to be desired, and as not liable to 
 any misconstruction. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought this was going a lit- 
 le too much into detail. Why not insert a clause 
 n the Constitution relative to the mode of taking 
 estimony in common law courts (so called) in 
 certain cases. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to strike out the last two 
 ines of Mr. BROWN'S amendment. The legisla- 
 ure had this power now, and it was useless to put 
 his clause in the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. BROWN had inserted the last words in or- 
 der to qualify the preceding words. He hoped 
 he motion would not prevail. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to amend by substitu- 
 ing " Legislature shall provide," for " Legisla- 
 ure may provide." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR thought, the use of the impera- 
 ive term " shall" would be highly dangerous, and 
 mischievous. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL thought that as long as the words 
 ' in all proper cases" remain, the word " shall" 
 lid not have the objectionable bearing complain- 
 dof. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND replied and explained the 
 [istinction between his amendment and that of 
 Mr. BROWN. His amendment was absolutely ne- 
 essary to induce the legislature to act on this sub- 
 ect. 
 
783 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS rose amid loud cries ot "ques- 
 tion." He contended that the word "shall" 
 would be best. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR called for the ayes and noes. 
 They were ordered. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS did not like the amendment of 
 Mr. BROWN, and he would read a section which 
 he had drawn up as containing in a condensed 
 form his own views on that subject. He read it 
 as follows: "The testimony in all civil cases 
 shall be taken in the same manner as testimony 
 is taken in issues at law subject to regulation by 
 law. All trials of issues of fact will be tried be- 
 fore a court and jury except when parties agree 
 to try the same by the court alone; and also when 
 the cause is referred by an order of the court ac- 
 cording to law." Mr. H. went on to say that this 
 was the first step towards amalgamating these two 
 classes of causes which had been so much spoken 
 of: which were different only in name and not in 
 substance and reality. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. KIRK- 
 LAND'S motion on striking out the word " may'' 
 and inserting "shall," in Mr. BROWN'S amend- 
 ment. It was carried, ayes 60, nays 36. 
 
 The question then recurred on Mr. BROWN'S 
 substitute for the 9th section, 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said he apprehended that the 
 amendment proposed would not accomplish the 
 purpose, and that it would give rise to much dif. 
 ficulty. Was it intended that all equity causes 
 should be tried by a jury ? The amendment pro- 
 vided that the evidence should be taken in open 
 court, in the same marine" as testimony is taken 
 upon the trir.-' of an issue at law. In the trial of 
 an issue of tact at law, a jury was always em 
 ployed, an > he suggested whether the amendment 
 would not required jury in all equity causes. The 
 object desired was tne hearing ot the witnesses 
 by the judge who was to make the decision, and 
 get rid of taking evidence before examineis. But 
 they must be careful not to prohibit the taking ot 
 the evidence ot foreign witnesses, and evidence ot 
 witnesses conditionally. The power to issue com- 
 missions, &c., must exist ; and Mr. M. read a sec- 
 tion which bethought would accomplish the pur 
 pose, and which abolished the offices of Master 
 and .Examiner in Chancery, and authorized the 
 reference of proper cases to an auditor or referee. 
 Mr. HARRIS wished the House to adopt the 
 following, which had been prepared by Mr. RUG- 
 GLES, and which he thoyght would meet all cases 
 of taking testimony in causes alluded to and re- 
 lieve the legislature of any difficulty in constru- 
 ing the language of the section : 
 
 " The testimony in equity cases, heard on pleadings 
 and proofs shall be taken before the .judge who shall he 
 
 the case in the same manner as testimony is taken upon 
 the trial of an issue at law. The trial may be by or with 
 out a jury according to the nature of the case, and as may 
 be icscnbed by law. Ca--es proper lor ielt rence may be 
 relerred to one or more auditors or relerees." 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHULLNHOVEN said that to hav< 
 trie testimony taken in opt n couit, \\ould necessa 
 rily involve the taking of it befbie a jury. Now 
 he wished the substitute proposed by Mr. BROWJ> 
 to be voted down, in order to have either the pro 
 position of Mr. MARVIN introduced, or that which 
 had just been read by the gentleman i'rom Albany 
 (Mr. HARRIS) and which was drafted by Mr. RUG 
 GLES, in order to avoid any misconstruction of the 
 language. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that many persons thought 
 hat his amendment would have a different effect 
 rom what Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN thought it 
 vould have; and that was the difficulty. He 
 bought the difference between the two as not 
 vorth the five minutes they had spent in discuss- 
 ng it. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said if it was free from ambi- 
 uity, and he thought it was, he infinitely pre- 
 srred the proposition of Mr. BROWN to any 
 ther. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN asked if the effect of the amend- 
 ment was to abolish the office of masters in chan- 
 ;ery ? 
 
 Mr. BROWN said it would only abolish the 
 iffice of examiners in chancery. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that if they (the members of 
 he Convention) could not agree as to what was 
 he true meaning of several of the provisions in- 
 :erted in the Constitution, how could they expect 
 he people would understand them. If 'they in- 
 ierted an error in the Constitution, it would be 
 fatal; but if the legislature erred, they could cor- 
 rect it. It was an important consideration. 
 
 The question-was then taken on Mr. BROWN'S 
 amendment for the 9th section. 
 
 It was lost 24 ayes ; noes not counted. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS offered the following, which was 
 ead : 
 
 ^9. The testimony in equity cases heard on pleadings 
 md proofs, shall be taken before the judge who shall hear 
 he case, in the same manner as testimony is taken upon 
 he trial ot an issue at law. The trial may be by or with- 
 out a jury, according to the nature of the case, and as may 
 be prescribed by law. Cases proper for reference may be 
 referred to one or more auditors or referees. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved first to amend the origi- 
 nal section to make it read thus : 
 
 9. The testimony in all civil cases shall be taken in 
 the same manner as testimony is taken in issues at law, 
 subject to regulation bylaw. All trials of issues of lacts shall 
 ae tried by a court and jury, except where the parties shall 
 agree to try the same before the court, or where the same 
 shall be relerred according to law. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that in all he had to say or 
 do upon the subject, he wished utterly and thor- 
 oughly to abolish all distinction between law and 
 equity. The same uniform practice should be 
 preserved in relation to both. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM wished to introduce his propo- 
 sition as an amendment to that of Mr. MORRIS ; 
 it accomplished the same^object and with much 
 less of verbiage fewer words. 
 
 It was read as follows : 
 
 " The mode of trial and taking of testimony in all clas- 
 ses of civil causes shall be uniform, as near as may be. 
 And the office of master and examiner in chancery is here- 
 by abolished." 
 
 The CHAIR. It appears to be carried, cries 
 of " a count." A count was taken and it was lost. 
 Ayes 33, noes 37. 
 
 O'CONOR wished to offer an amendment to the 
 9th section, so as to make it read : 
 
 ^ 9. The testimony in equity cases shall be taken in like 
 manner as in cases at law." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS here read an amendment: 
 
 (It was the same as printed alipve.) 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR explained the effect of his 
 amendment. We could get rid of all these diffi- 
 culties by a simple declaration of assimilation. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL asked Mr. O'CONOR if under the 
 provision just offered by him testimony in colla- 
 
 
784 
 
 teral proceedings in equity cases, and in matter 
 of accounts, could be taken out of court as at pre 
 sent. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said it could. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL then said, that he would vote fo: 
 it. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR'S amendment was then put and 
 carried unanimously. 
 
 Mr. MANN offered the following amendmen 
 to the 9th section : 
 
 "The offices of masters and examiners in chancery are 
 hereby abolished." 
 
 Mr. MANN said, that he should not go int 
 any lengthy discussion of this proposition, he of- 
 fered it with the expectation that it would suc- 
 ceed, and he desired to have a direct vote upon 
 it. He also desired to know if this Convention 
 were prepared to retain the host of officers, who 
 imposed a tax upon the people of one or two hun- 
 dred thousand dollars. The precise amount he 
 would not undertake to state, but it was very 
 large; their charges and expenses to litigants 
 were enormous, and could be dispensed with. 
 As he desired a distinct vote on the question, and 
 wished to ascertain what members were in favor 
 of continuing this host of judicial offices, he 
 should call for the ayes and nays, which were 
 ordered. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then said that the amend- 
 ment of JVJr. HARRIS was first in order. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said it had been disposed of by 
 the adoption of Mr. O'CONOR'S amendment. All 
 left was this, " that the offices of Examiners and 
 Masters in Chancery should be abolished." And 
 this had just been offered by Mr! MANN. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said you could not so frame a Con- 
 stitution as to dispense with office of Masters in 
 Chancery ; that is you must have some officers to 
 do those^duties ; the legislature could abolish the 
 office ; but if this ninth section passes, as propos- 
 ed, there will be nothing for them to do. He de- 
 sired to see nothing of this kind in the Constitu- 
 tion, though he would go with all of them in di- 
 minishing the number of these officers. So ar- 
 range the Constitution that there shall be nothing 
 for these officers to do. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said he could now understand 
 why his amendment providing for uniform modes 
 of trial'and taking testimony in all classes of civil 
 causes, as far as might be, was voted down be- 
 cause it also proposed the abolishment of the of- 
 fices of Master and Examiner in Chancery. And 
 he was glad that the proposition was now dis- 
 tinctly presented, and that the ayes and noes were 
 ordered, and he might be indulged a moment up- 
 on the question. It was so generally admitted 
 that we have made such provisions as to the taking 
 of testimony, as to render the office of Examiner 
 no longer necessary, he should not take up time 
 upon that branch of the subject. The office of 
 Master was entirely unnecessary, as he would 
 show by a reference to the most important parts 
 of the duties of that officer. Masters make sales 
 of real estate, by order of the court. The Sher- 
 iffs, too, discharged the same duties, and he pre- 
 ferred that the .laTter class of officers should dis- 
 charge all such duties, because they were not so 
 influential a body of men but that we had been 
 able to keep their compensation for such services 
 within comparatively reasonable bounds. If a 
 
 mortgage was foreclosed in one manner, a Master 
 must sell the premises if in another, the Sher- 
 iff, or the party, or his attorney, might make the 
 sale. In 1840, the Legislature cut down the fees 
 of Masters, upon mortgage sales, to about four 
 dollars ; but such was the influence of this horde 
 of officers, distributed throughout the state, that 
 the next Legislature repealed the laws, and left 
 them to receive from $25 to $50, for merely 
 bringing down the hammer upon a bid and 
 signing a deed. This was one of the numerous 
 cases in which they received enormous fees for 
 trifling services. Another part of their duties 
 was to state accounts between parties upon mat- 
 ters referred by the court ; now a standing class 
 officers for such purposes was not only unneces- 
 sary but wrong. The court would often require 
 the aid of accountants, or of some persons for this 
 and such like service. If the subject was in ref- 
 erence to a piece of work upon a canal or rail 
 road, as to quantity or value, a reference to an en- 
 gineer might be well, if it was in relation to mer- 
 cantile accounts, the aid of merchants might be 
 most desirable. The course had been to refer all 
 such subjects to a master who though a good law- 
 yer, would have no particular acquaintance with 
 the subject. An English Chancellor upon being 
 pressed to refer a complicated matter of merchants 
 accounts to a master, opened his watch and ex- 
 tricated its machinery and said do you think I 
 would send this to a blacksmith for examination 
 or repair? I refer this matter to a merchant to 
 examine and state the account. We have provi- 
 ded for 36 judges to be salaried at from 2 to $'3000. 
 N"ow unless we should provide for retrenchment 
 and reduction of the expenses of other branches 
 of the judicial service, the people would repudi- 
 ate the whole of our work, as thev ought to. The 
 abolishment' of these offices would save a large a- 
 mount of unnecessary expenses. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said there were in this state at pre- 
 sent no less than 188 masters in chancery, and 
 10 less than 168 examiners. Now the people 
 lad distinctly asked to have these men or their 
 offices abolished. He believed they all under- 
 stood this matter, and he therefore moved the 
 arevious question. 
 
 The previous question was seconded, and the 
 main question was ordered to be put. The ayes 
 and noes having previously been ordered, 
 
 Mr. NICOLL called for a division of the ques- 
 ion ; to take it first on abolishing examiners in 
 Chancery and then on the masters in chancery. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that such a short amend- 
 ment could not be divided. [Laughter.] 
 
 The CHAIR, (Mr. JONES pro. tern.) said it 
 ould be divided. 
 
 Mr. DODD asked him how he could divide it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON asked the chair what would 
 e left if the question was divided ; only the word 
 ' masters." 
 
 THE PRESIDENT (pro tern.} said on further 
 eflection he thought the question was not divisi- 
 le. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY rose to a privileged question 
 o move a reconsideration, to explain his vote. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR asked to have his name record- 
 d. 
 
 CLERK Mr. O'CONOR is recorded absent. 
 
 The CHAIR said that the vote having been an- 
 
785 
 
 nounced, and the section declared to be carried, it 
 svas too late to vote. 
 
 One or two members having said that they had 
 not heard their names called, 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said, that on this 
 subject probably several gentlemen had not heard 
 their names called. (Much laughter.) 
 
 Mr. MURPHY rose to a privileged question 
 moving a reconsideration of the vote just taken 
 for the purpose of making an explanation. The 
 amendment just voted upon purports to abolish 
 the office of master and examiner in chancery. 
 Another was offered yesterday to abolish licensed 
 lawyers. He thought both amendments had fail- 
 ed to accomplish their purpose. Masters and ex- 
 aminers were only abolished in name. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN raised a point of 
 order. The gentleman had no right to argue 
 this question, he being suffered to make a perso- 
 nal explanation. 
 
 The CHAIR decided in effect, Mr. MURPHY 
 in ordr. 
 
 After some further discussion, 
 
 Mr. VANSCHOONHOVEN appealed from the 
 decision of the Chair. 
 
 Some further conversation ensued on the point 
 of order, when the decision of the Chair was sus- 
 tained. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY resumed. After remarking 
 briefly on the point of order, he said he was in fa- 
 vor of the reform which this resolution proposed 
 to carry out. But it merely abolished the office 
 in name, but retained the duties to be performed 
 by some other officer. He had no desire to make 
 the promise to the ear and break it to the hope 
 What he wanted was substantial, real reform. 
 This was his reason -for voting in the negative, 
 and not because he was opposed to the principle 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN briefly replied to 
 Mr. MURPHY, in some personal allusions to the 
 cause which lead to the call to order. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said he had refused to vote omthis 
 last question, and for this motive. This resolution 
 simply proposes to abolish these offices, and ac- 
 complishes another. The true way of abolishing 
 them was to provide some mode of performing 
 these duties. If a proposition should be intro- 
 duced providing for the abolition of these offices 
 and also of their duties, he would go for it. Be- 
 fore an institution was destroyed something mus' 
 be provided to take its place. 
 
 After some further conversation, Mr. MUR 
 PHY withdrew his motion. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN, in behalf of Mr. TAYLOR, offered 
 the following amendment: 
 
 " The legislature, as far as practicable, shall assimilate 
 the forms ot pleadings and the mode of taking tesumonj 
 ou trials of causes at law and in equity." 
 
 Mr. T. had Irotu The beginning favored the ide 
 of assimilating the proceedings in courts of law 
 arid equity. He was one who believed this couk 
 ^be done by cautious and gradual legislation. 
 this character he thought was this amendment 
 Mr. T. submitted a tew turther remarks concurrin 
 mainly 'vii.h Mr. BROWN and Mr. MURPHY, as t 
 the character of the vote just taken on the propo 
 sition t<> abolish masters &c. in chancery. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS moved an amendment to re 
 quire the legislature to revise the pleadings an 
 practice in all courts of law and equity, so as t 
 
 ender them simple, brief, intelligible, and subject 
 o as little expense as possible. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said if all this was to be done 
 y legislation, the convention had better reconsi- 
 er the 90 days limitation of the session. This 
 work if done at all should be by a commission. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS amendment was rejected 21 
 yes only. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. TILDEN'S 
 amendment, and it was also rejected. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM gave notice of a motion to recon- 
 ider the vote taken on the amendment he had of- 
 ered. 
 
 The question was then put on the motion of Mr. 
 VI ANN, and resulted thus Ayes 88, noes 5. 
 
 The ninth section as amended was then adopt- 
 d. 
 
 The tenth section was then read, as follows : 
 
 10 Surrogates shall be elected for four years. They 
 hall be compensated by fixed salaries, and they skall not 
 eceive any fees or perquisites of office. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out the sec- 
 tion, and insert the following: 
 
 " There shall be elected in each of th counties of thi 
 itate, except the city and county of .New-York, onecoun- 
 y judge, who shall hold his office for four years, and 
 who shall hold the county court, perform the du- 
 ies ot the office of surrogate and the duties now performed 
 by any county judge " 
 
 Mr. HARRIS thought the section must have 
 3een placed through inadvertance where it was. 
 [t ought to come after the 13th section, a kindred 
 subject. He moved that its consideration be post- 
 poned until the 13th section was reached. This 
 was agreed to. 
 
 The eleventh section was then read, as follows : 
 (j 11. Justices of the supreme court and judges of the court 
 of appeals may be removed by joint resolution of both 
 douses of the legislature, if two-thirds ot all the members 
 elected to the assembly and a majority of all the members 
 elected to the senate, concur therein. Surrogates and all 
 judicial officers, except those mentioned in this section, and 
 except justices of the peace, may be removed by the senate 
 ou the recommendation of the governor, but no such re- 
 moval shall be made unless the cause thereof be entered 
 on the journal, nor unless the party complained of shall 
 have been served with a copy of the complaint against 
 him, and shall have had an opportunity of being heard in 
 his defence. On the question of removal, the ayes and 
 noes shall be en'ered on the journals. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out' judges of 
 the courts of appeals, supreme court, &c.,and in- 
 sert " all judicial officers ;" but withdrew it, and 
 moved to strike out the words "surrogates, and" 
 in the 6th line. It was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that if the section prevail- 
 ed, the officer should be heard in his own de- 
 fence ; but that it did not say whether before the 
 Governor or before the Senate. If so it would 
 make the body extremely like a new court of im- 
 peachments. He thought the officer should be 
 first heard before the Governor and moved to 
 amend accordingly. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought the section was 
 clear enough on this point. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was opposed to this mode of try- 
 ing officers, and did not think it arose in this 
 country. He preferred that officers as such should 
 neither be tried by a tribunal worse than any 
 other or better. He desired that they should be 
 tried by the ordinary tribunals of the country. To 
 carry out his views he proposed the following 
 section *. 
 
 73 
 
786 
 
 " The Legislature shall define by law offences, miscon 
 duct and negligence in office, which shall be deemed cause 
 of removal. Any officer who may be indicted, tried and 
 convicted of any such oftence, misconduct or negligence 
 in office, or for an} offence committed while holding any 
 public office, the punishment for which by law may be im- 
 prisonment, shall by such conviction and the judgement 
 thereon, be ousted from such office.' 
 
 Mr. L.'s amendment was rejected, only seven- 
 teen ayes. 
 
 Mr/CROOKER enquired whether the former 
 question of construction would not authorize the 
 legislature to remove the justices of the court of 
 appeal without any cause, and on mere political 
 
 gl Mr. BROWN corrected the language of the sec- 
 tion so as to guard against trial as to construction. 
 
 After some further debate, the amendment was 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said the intention of this section, 
 which was in part copied from the old constitu- 
 tion was originally to reach and remove officers 
 who had become broken in mental vigor, or im- 
 becile ; but it had been perverted and used to 
 justify removals on grounds that if true, would 
 have justified an impeachment. To prevent this 
 abuse, an amendment had been adopted, the ef- 
 fect of which had been to create two modes by 
 which persons might be dismissed from office 
 the one having all the effect of an impeachment, 
 without the opportunity being given to the in- 
 cumbent to meet the charge^ He proposed to 
 make the section mean what it was intended to 
 mean, and not to have two modes of conducting 
 proceedings in the nature of an impeachment. 
 He proposed to amend by inserting after the 
 word " may" in the second line" for inability 
 ID discharge the duties of his office, arising since 
 
 This was debated by Messrs. PATTERSON 
 BROWN and others, when 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. MORRIS'S 
 amendment, and it was rejected. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to strike out "joint' 
 and insert " concurrent," in the second line. 
 This was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER objected to two kinds of tria 
 for different kinds of officers. He wanted county 
 iud-es to be tried by as good a tribunal as an; 
 other. He proposed a substitute for the whol 
 section providing for the removal of all judicia 
 officers (except justices of the peace) in one am 
 the same manner, by the legislature, for cause 
 for which they could not be impeached. 
 
 The amendment was rejected, ayes;34,nays 39 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved to insert after the wor 
 " opportunity," in the 12th line, " to introduc 
 witnesses and." 
 
 The amendment was rejected ayes 31, nay 
 
 32 
 
 No quorum voting the ayes and nays wer 
 ordered. There were then ayes 53, nays 39. S 
 the amendment was adopted. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS offered the following substitut 
 for the section : 
 
 Any public officer may be removed from office, bcfor 
 the expiration of his term ot office, by the governo 
 alter trial and conviction of any crime, gross immoralitj 
 misconduct or negligence in office, or inability to di 
 charge its duties. 
 
 After a brief debate this amendment was rejec 
 ted, ayes 5, nays 75. 
 
 Mr. TXLLMADGE ottered a substitute provi- 
 ing that judges of the court of appeals and of the 
 upreme court might be removed by a majority 
 f all the members elected to the Senate, on the 
 ecommendation of the Governor. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved further to amend by re- 
 uiring the Governor to assign the reason for the 
 emoval in the recommendation. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE opposed this amendment, 
 when without taking question, the Convention 
 .djourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The question first came up on the amendment 
 f Mr. PERKINS, to the llth section, to refer 
 iack the whole matter. It was rejected. 
 
 The question was then put on the amendment 
 f the gentleman from Dutchess (TALLMADGE,) 
 as published before. This was rejected. 
 
 Mr. BROWN then moved to reconsider the 
 vote on Mr. MORRIS' amendment to the llth sec- 
 ion, the words being to add in the 12th line after 
 he words " opportunity of," the words " intro- 
 ducing witnesses and ;" the unanimous consent to 
 econsider this was granted. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said there was a quietness in 
 some men's energy that was truly astonishing ; 
 and such was the case with the gentleman from 
 Orange (Mr. BROWN,) who, when most cool, was 
 most powerful. He (Mr. M.) had introduced 
 ;hese words because he was unwilling to have a 
 man damned to all eternity, without being allow- 
 ed, properly and fully, in his defence, to intro- 
 duce witnesses to clear up the charges against 
 his character. He was willing the legislature 
 should charge a man (a judicial officer,) with be- 
 ing a dolt a fool or of being incapable but he 
 was not willing that he should be so declared be- 
 cause he was a rascal, and himself disgraced, and 
 tiis family lacerated, without being permitted to 
 3ring witnesses to prove his innocence. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said he moved to reconsider now, 
 
 ty in order to save time. The language of the 
 reported section was precisely the same as that 
 hTthe old constitution. 
 
 Mr. STOW asked Mr. MORRIS if he thought it 
 was advisable to have witnesses introduced in a 
 case where a man had already been convicted in 
 a court of a record, ot a state prison or other in- 
 famous ofience. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said, yes; and in that case the 
 record itself would be the witness. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to pass over the section ; 
 he thought a judge had a right to introduce wit- 
 nesses to sustain his character as Mr. MORRIS had 
 proposed. But he (Mr. LOOMIS) moved to pass 
 over the section. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : No ; settle it now. 
 
 The Convention refused to pass over it by a 
 large vote. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN was opposed to allowing witnes- 
 ses to be introduced as proposed by Mr. MORRIS. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN was in favor of a 
 judge being fully heard in his defence, and of in- 
 troducing witnesses. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought that if a judicial 
 officer was to be allowed to introduce witnesses, 
 the government or people ought also to be allowed 
 to introduce witnesses. 
 
 The question was put on reconsidering Mr. 
 
787 
 
 MORRIS'S amendment, and the House agreed to 
 reconsider the same. 
 
 The question then came up on Mr. MORRIS'S 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS called for the ayes and noes. 
 They were ordered and resulted thus : Ayes 28, 
 noes GO. 
 
 So the House refused to agree to the amend- 
 ment of Mr. MORRIS ; thus reversing their vote 
 of the morning. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN moved the previous question 
 on the llth section. Ayes 35, nays 13 no quo- 
 rum. A second count was taken and there were 
 ayes G4, nays 11. 
 
 The previous question was seconded, and the 
 main question was ordered. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS called for the ayes and noes on 
 the passage of the section. They were ordered 
 and resulted, ayes 86, noes 11. So the llth sec- 
 tion was passed. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that before they passed to 
 the 12th section, he wished to call attention to 
 the 6th section, because there was no provision 
 made there for the salary of the judges of appeals. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that an amendment 
 had been passed to that section, providing for 
 that very matter. 
 
 The 12th section was then read, as follows : 
 
 12. " The justices of the Supreme Court shall be nomi- 
 nated by the Governor, and appointed by and with the 
 consent ol the Senate " Or. 
 
 12. " The justices of the Supreme Court shall be elect- 
 ed by the electors of the respective districts, at such times 
 #s may be provided by law, but not within 90 days before 
 or after the general election." 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to strike out all 
 down to ard including the word " or" in the 4th 
 line. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend by striking out in 
 the second and third lines the words " the Se- 
 nate," and insert in lieu thereof the words " a 
 majority of the Senate, and at least one half of 
 the members of the district where the judge 
 should be elected." Mr. S. said this question 
 was not intended to decide whether the people 
 should elect the judges ; but he wished to have 
 it understood whether the Governor should be al- 
 lowed to appoint them with the consent of a bare 
 majority of the Senate, without giving the mi- 
 nority the privilege of being heard. The judi- 
 ciary system was intended for the protection of 
 minorities, and he was disposed to raise his voice 
 here against the present form of appointment. 
 If it was decided to appoint the judges, he con- 
 tended that it should be as he proposed. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said he wished to raise the dis- 
 tinct question now, whether the Convention 
 would have these justices of the Supreme Court 
 elected by general ticket or not. If he could not 
 get them elected by general ticket, then he want- 
 ed them appointed by the Governor and Senate. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said if he could riot have these 
 justices of the Supreme Court elected by the 
 electors of the respective senatorial districts of 
 the State, then he wanted them appointed by the 
 Governor and Senate; and he moved accordingly: 
 
 The justices of the Supreme Court shall be elected by 
 the electors ol the respective Senatorial districts of the 
 State, at such times as may be provided by law." 
 
 Mr. MURPHY defended his proposition. He 
 wished if the judges were elected by the people, 
 
 to obtain all the virtue arising from that mode. 
 It would be necessary that the people should 
 know them ; and this could only be accomplish- 
 ed by adopting his proposition. If they were to 
 be elected by general ticket, the people would 
 not know one tenth part of these judges; for they 
 would all be nominated by the party machinery 
 in caucus of the Convention at Syracuse or some 
 other place ; and the adherents of the party would 
 vote for them on faith, (without knowing them) 
 because they were regularly nominated. Bring 
 this down directly to the people, and then if a 
 judge is corrupt the people will know him to be 
 corrupt; and if he has been maligned by some 
 political aspirants or opponents that will also be 
 known. And for this reason he wished the judg- 
 es of the supreme court to be elected by the elec- 
 tors, one in each Senatorial district. And he 
 called for the ayes and noes on this proposition. 
 
 Mr. BROWN asked Mr. MURPHY if he wished 
 by his proposition to have one of these 32 judges 
 elected by the electors. in each Senate District of 
 the State. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said he did. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that then the question of the 
 mode of election of these justices of the Supreme 
 Court, would now come distinctly tobe acted upon 
 by the Convention; he would not detain the 
 House ; he believed all had deliberated on it ful- 
 ly, and had made up their minds on it; and he 
 was glad the sense of the Convention would now 
 be taken on a direct question. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND called for a division of the 
 question; take it on the time of election on strik- 
 ing out " the 90 days before or after the annual 
 election," and separately on electing them by sena- 
 torial districts. 
 
 Mr. CROOKERsaid that they would settle the 
 large principle first, and the little principle after- 
 wards. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that he could not sit silent 
 whilst such a proposition as this of Mr. MUR- 
 PHY'S was about to be submitted ; so subversive 
 as it was of all the true principles of that demo- 
 cracy which our fore-fathers fought for. He thank- 
 ed God he belonged to a republican government, 
 and so long as Jie lived, he would vote for nothing 
 tha' had any tendency to an oligarchy as ihis had. 
 These 32 judges were to be judges of the whole 
 of the great State of New York, and not of a 
 mere locality. They ought to be elected by the 
 whole people, and not by the people of a section, 
 because they were to try the whole people for life 
 or death. The plan of the gentleman from Kings 
 (Mr. MURPHY) might be convenient to some gen- 
 tlemen, but it would be unjust to the people. The 
 gentleman might argue that by this plai you could 
 get a better m;m for a judge here and there, by 
 having him elected by a lew of the people, and 
 not by the whole of them ; but such an argument 
 would sustain a monarchy ; it was this argument 
 that sent Ireland her Lord Lieutenant., Lord Cnan- 
 cellor, &c., and that now sends Canada her 
 Governor; that allows a king to select these 
 officers, because it is asserted i.hat this one 
 man is better qualified to jud^e of the fi'ness 
 of certain men lor these offices, than the 
 whole people can be. This ptyn of Mr. MUR- 
 PHY'S was as much an oligarchy as the appoint- 
 ment of judges by a king. It \\srn true that it was 
 
788 
 
 a somewhat numerous oligarchy, but still it was 
 quite as much an oligarchy as that of any monar- 
 chy in Europe. Here is an attempt to fasten an 
 odious oligarchy on the democracy of this state ; 
 for an oligarchy is the governing of the whole 
 people by a small party of the people. You might 
 as well say that one town or one county should 
 elect all the judges for the whole state; it would 
 only be refining a little on the proposition of the 
 gentleman; the principle would be the same. 
 The appointment of these judges as now, by the 
 governor, who is the agent of the whole people, 
 and in whose election the whole people had a 
 voice is now considered not democratic enough. 
 And yet now you propose, in this age of reform, 
 to allow one-*eighth to elect a judge lor the other 
 seven-eighths ; by and by you will let one-tenth 
 elect for the other nine tenths, or allow one-thirty- 
 second, or one-hundreth of the people or by and 
 by you may give this power to one man. It was 
 very likely to do this. He would never by his 
 vote consent to form sach an odious oligarchy. 
 Political motives have influenced this. If any 
 curse could be inflicted on the people greater than 
 another, it would be to have political judges. They 
 should be free as air. He did not want a judge of 
 the supreme court, when he came down to pieside 
 in Clinton county, to be the representative of a 
 small locality. He had long seen the power at 
 work to endeavor to get this district system of 
 judges at work, in 'the Convention and out of it ; 
 a id if it was not for political motives, then it must 
 be for some private or personal motive, which mo- 
 tive he could not understand. He had been put 
 down the other day in the " Argus" as wanting to 
 prove, or as saying, that a judge was a mere local 
 r 'preservative, when he had been laboring assidu- 
 ously tor half an hour to prove the contrary. This 
 very proposition would, if adopted, be removing 
 the power of electing these judges farther from 
 the people. You might as well elect my governor 
 f-.r me, and I elect your senator for you ; it is even 
 so, to say that one-eighih of the people shall elect 
 \ man who is to preside over the property, the 
 interests, the life and death of the whole state 
 He would never consent to this. And if he slood 
 alone, he would forever oppose this scheme to re- 
 move the power of erecting judges^so far from the 
 people. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said he had no objection to the 
 gentleman from Clinton (Mr. STETSON) laying 
 down his notions of democracy ; but he did ob- 
 ject to his manner of doing it. He (Mr. STET- 
 SON) loaves his seat, comes over to the seat which 
 I have a right to, (having drawn it by a game o f 
 chance) he slaps his hands down on my desk 
 he slaps them together close to my face, (laugh- 
 ter) he causes the seats all around me to be de- 
 serted ; and if I had not been a brave man, and 
 seen bears before, I might have been frightened. 
 
 Mr. STETSON I call the gentleman to order. 
 
 Mr. STR.ONG Go on, and send up your point 
 of order. Oh ! I'm perfectly cool. 
 
 Mr. STETSON I call him to order for gross 
 personalitiey in alluding to " bears," and stating 
 things that are not true. 
 
 Mr. STRO.NG. I said what was true every 
 word of it. 
 
 Mr. STETSON. But sir, perhaps it would be 
 useless to call to order a person who seems to lay 
 
 claim to a genera] license to insult and use gross* 
 personal abuse and untruths. 
 
 Mr. STRONG. Well, the gentleman withdraws 
 his point of order, and perhaps it is the best way 
 for him to get out of it. He has blown off all his 
 gas and may feel better. He talks about going to 
 the school houses, and testing this question ; why 
 if the school houses contain children one half as 
 intelligent as they are in the western part of New 
 York they would laugh at such stuff as he has 
 been talking about. As to those who advocate 
 this judicial district system having political mo- 
 tives, perhaps the gentleman from Clinton, (Mr. 
 STETSON) judged from himself; perhaps he might 
 expect if this passed to become a judge in his own 
 county. . 
 
 Here Mr. STETSON left the Hall, and Mr. 
 STRONG concluded with a very few words more, 
 
 Mr. BASCOM advocated the district system, 
 and denounced the blighting effect of party. He 
 said that much was said about the forms of gov- 
 ernment, and the world had long been engaged 
 in discussing which form was the best but after 
 all f that was the best government that provided 
 the mode that would secure the designation of the 
 best rulers. No matter how abstractly right may 
 be the principles upon which a government was 
 established ; if it failed to provide the best pos- 
 sible mode for securing good rulers, it would fail 
 to accomplish the legitimate objects of a good 
 government. An elective government was right 
 in the abstract ; in an intelligent community it 
 was not only the right but the expedient form, 
 but here even, if the best possible mode of bring- 
 ing the popular intelligence to bear directly upon 
 the designation of rulers was not provided,it might 
 be little better than an oligarchy or a monarchy. 
 
 "The people are always right," was- a sort of 
 abstract proposition to which we must submit, 
 from the necessity imposed by our form of gov- 
 ernment ; as the subjects of monarchy, must sub- 
 mit to that, " that the King can do no wrong." 
 But in the general the people are really right, 
 when individual knowledge and personal ac- 
 quaintance lights the path, and influences the ac- 
 tion of the elector ; not so always when he is 
 guided by the alluring representations of party 
 friends, or the objections of party opponents. 
 
 Mr. B. continued in reply to Mr. STETSON, 
 arguing in favor of the senate district system as 
 the surest mode of getting good judges. 
 
 Cries of " Question Question." 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that he rose to secure the 
 question, and for that purpose he moved the pre- 
 vious question. 
 
 Mr. BROWN. Thank you, sir. 
 
 Mr. BAKER said he moved to apply it to the 
 two pending amendments, but withdrew it as to 
 Mr. BROWN'S amendment. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved to adjourn. Cries of No, 
 No. 
 
 The motion to adjourn was lost. 
 
 Mr. K1RKLAND said he had made a motion to 
 divide the question. The previous question was 
 then seconded, 55 to 18. 
 
 The main question was then ordered. 
 
 The ayes and noes were then ordered a second 
 time on MURPHY'S amendment to BROWN'S 
 amendment, which was to have the judges elect- 
 
789 
 
 ed by Senate Districts. This was carried. AYES 
 60 NOES 49. 
 
 Mr. BROWN gave notice of a motion to recon- 
 sider the last vote ; and wished gentlemen to re- 
 flect on the effect this system (if adopted and 
 persisted in) would have on the whole Judicial 
 System. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned till to-morrow 
 at 9 A. M. 
 
 WEDNESDAY (18t/i day) Sept. 2d. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. POHLMAN. 
 Mr. NICOLL presented the following resolution : 
 Resolved, That the fifth section of the report of the ju 
 diciary committee be recommitted to that committee, with 
 instructions so to alter the same that the judges of the su- 
 preme court be limited in the exercise of their judicial 
 powers to the districts in which they shall have been cho- 
 len. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said he felt it to be a solemn duty 
 to his constituents to present the resolution just 
 read. After the decisive vote of the Convention 
 yesterday afternoon, it was apparent that the judg. 
 ' es ot the supreme court would be elected in sin- 
 gle senate districts. In his judgment it was not 
 only a matter of the highest expediency but of 
 the plainest principle, that these judges should be 
 confined in the exercise of their judicial duties to 
 the district in which they are to be chosen. He 
 felt satisfied that the constituency which he in 
 part represented, would never consent that their 
 lives, liberty and property should be at the mercy 
 of judges over whose election thev would have no 
 control and such he fully believed would be the 
 feeling of tho people generally, when they should 
 learn in what manner we i;ad determined to elect 
 the judge?. The argument adduced in favor oi 
 the district system was founded on a palpable fal- 
 lacy, tg wit: that our judges were the representa- 
 tives of the people, acting as the component parts 
 of a great whole, in which the state was fully, 
 fairly and equally represented. This was not in 
 any manner true. It might, he admitted, if the 
 court were only to act when assembled as a whole, 
 as in the case of the legislature and the court o! 
 errors, where every constituency has a voice, and 
 ij entitled to be heard in every matter brought 
 before those bodies; but according to the plai 
 adopted by the Convention, any three of the judg 
 e.s ot the supreme court will be not only author- 
 ized but required to hold its terms The severa 
 districts in which the court will be held cannot be 
 expected to have their own judges beyond a mere 
 fraction of the time. As a general rule, justice 
 will be administered to them by magistrates elect- 
 ed at a distance, irresponsible to them in any 
 manner, and perhaps indifferent to the approbation 
 of any but their own immediate constituency 
 This was a violation of all the principles or 
 which the foundations ot popular governmen 
 rested. It was not democracy it was not eqna 
 rights, but absolute despotism. He felt it lobe 
 an imperative duty to resist ,in every manner tli 
 establishment ot a system which he regarded as 
 in the highest degiee tyrannical and at war with 
 the sentiments of the people of the state. He 
 should therefore press the consideration of the re- 
 solution he had j'ist offered. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved that the resolution be 
 laid on the table. 
 This motion was carried. 
 
 The convention then resumed the consideration 
 f the unfinished business, being 
 
 THE JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 Mr. BROWN said that he must now call up the 
 motion he made last night to reconsider the vote 
 n relation to the election of judges by senatorial 
 districts. The vote was on the amendment of Mr. 
 MURPHY to the 12th section. He (Mr. B.) said 
 ic was in favor of an election by general ticket. 
 
 Mr. B. went on to speak of the importance of 
 the amendment of Mr. MURPHY in various bear- 
 ngs, and of the considerations that had actuated 
 lim and the committee in making up the report 
 which they were then discussing. He had wish- 
 ed to have no one party control the election of 
 these judges. He wished a plan that would give 
 good satisfaction. He only spoke to vindicate his 
 own course in this matter, and to sustain the re- 
 port. The nominations of state officers at Syra- 
 cuse, was a mere mockery ; this had been said to 
 him a dozen times ; and he felt the importance of 
 this remark. But he felt pleased that a change 
 in the system was at hand. That time had passed 
 away. The vote of yesterday was an expression 
 to which he would bow. Some of his best and 
 warmest friends, had said that perhaps he had 
 gone a little too far in his advocacy of the plan 
 before them. But he had only stated his own 
 judgment in the matter candidly and freely. He 
 had put the question yesterday fairly, and with a 
 view to get a direct vote, and now he would take 
 the least worst of three alternatives. He hoped 
 the convention would retrace their steps. The 
 expression of yesterday is that there shall be an 
 election, and not by general ticket, but by 
 senate districts. His constituents, and those who 
 come after him, shall know theft he, at least, was 
 true to the principles he commenced with. 
 
 Mr. COOK called his attention to the fourth 
 section. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : That's all very well, but they 
 must retrace their steps ; and if they adopt the 
 district system must remodel the whole system of 
 of a judiciary which we have presented. 
 
 Mr. STRONG : Well then, why not insert 
 " Judicial" instead of "Senatorial" districts. 
 
 Mr. BROWN was sorry to see two gentlemen 
 of opposite sides introduce party politics into this 
 matter as they did yesterday. He wished for 
 peace and harmony to prevail. But to come back 
 to the point. If a judge is elected in Orange and 
 Sullivan he is to 'exercise the greater part of his 
 influence out of those two counties, and vice 
 versa. How can that work well ? He spoke of 
 the opposition out of the House to the proceedings 
 of the Convention ; and he entreated gentlemen 
 seriously to consider before they gave the people.'a 
 system that they would not vote for. He hoped 
 they would agree on a system commanding pub- 
 lic confidence in every respect. And he would con- 
 clude with one word to the gentleman from Kings, 
 and entreat him most earnestly to reconsider this 
 matter. He would move to modify by inserting 
 the word " Judicial" in the place of "Senatorial" 
 districts in the resolution of yesterday. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND replied. The {feu tie man from 
 Orange (Mr. BROWN) urges as a reason for recon- 
 sideration, that the whole machinery of this sys- 
 t^m will not work if the vote of last, night should 
 be adhered to. Mr. R. said no one principle had 
 
790 
 
 been better settled by this Convention, than the 
 question of electing the judges by single districts. 
 It was settled after mature deliberation, and by 
 the decisive majority of eleven votes, and this, 
 too, in a full Convention. And now, he said, the 
 gentleman comes in here this morning, and asks 
 this body to reverse its deliberative act of yester- 
 day, for no other reason, as he (Mr. R.) could per 
 ceive, but to gratify that gentleman's feelings. 
 There might be other and particular reasons which 
 had not yet been brought out to view. He thought 
 the gentleman's object would be better attained 
 by reconsidering and changing such other portions 
 of -the report as were inconsistent with that vote. 
 Mr. R. would go with -him for such a reconsidera- 
 tion, but not for the one just moved. As to the 
 objection that the judge elected in one district 
 would not act for the whole state, he would remind 
 the gentleman that such would be equally the fact 
 with senators and members of the assembly. He 
 said members of the senate and assembly were to 
 be elected by single districts, and still the mem- 
 bers from Orange county could vote taxes on to 
 the constituents of Mr. R., and might vote to 
 abridge their privileges in many respects, yet they 
 had no voice in their election. Arguments in fa- 
 vor of electing Senators and members of Assem- 
 bly in single districts applied in their fullest 
 force in favor of single districts for the election of 
 Judges. This would prevent, combinations be- 
 tween candidates. All would have to stand upon 
 their own merits. Elect by general-ticket, and 
 politicians would combine their forces, and the 
 result would be the nomination of some hack 
 politician, a person entirely unfit for the respon 
 sible office of Supreme Court Judge. The peo- 
 ple would not, afld could not know him, and his 
 being placed on the ticket, perhaps with other 
 candidates who maybe unobjectionable, his elec- 
 tion may be made sure, especially when in addi- 
 tion to all of this, he has all the aid which a 
 strong political party can give by means of its 
 most perfect organization. Mr. R. would guarc 
 against this The same objection would apply, 
 though perhaps not so strongly, to the electior 
 by Judicial Districts. In that case, there woulc 
 be four judges to be elected in each district, anc 
 the chances would be that some one or two o: 
 them would be bad ones. The influence of the 
 central cliques in the various counties, when 
 united, having so large a field for action anc" 
 management, would be too powerful for the hon 
 est yeomanry; but bring this election neare: 
 home, so that the people could see to it all, am 
 his word for it, they could not smuggle in an un 
 fit or incompetent man ; if the wire pullers sue 
 ceeded in getting such a tool nominated, thej 
 could not get the people to vote for him ; the; 
 would know him, and would promptly rejec 
 him. 
 
 Mr, KIRKLAND said, I voted yesterday, Mr 
 President, for the amendment of the gentlemai 
 from Kings, (Mr. MURPHY,) providing for th 
 election of a judge of the supreme court in eacl 
 of the thirty-two Senatorial districts of the State 
 Having given this vote, I owe it to myself an 
 others to state my precise position on this sub 
 ject. As I had occasion to remark on a forme 
 occasion on this floor, there are in my judgmen 
 serious if not insuperable objections to selectin 
 
 ic incumbents of all your judicial offices from 
 le highest to the lowest grade by means of elec- 
 on. These objections do not arise from any 
 'ant of capacity, moral or mental, on th part of 
 le people, to select suitable persons for these 
 ;ations ; on the contrary, my firm conviction is 
 lat a choice made by the spontaneous, indepen- 
 ent, impartial action of the electoral body of this 
 tate, would place in your judicial tribunals in- 
 umbents as well qualified as any that could be 
 rocured in any mode that has been or can be de- 
 ised. But we must look at facts as they exist 
 nd as they are likely to exist. We all know 
 mat nominations to these offices will be made, as 
 thers are, by party caucuses and cpnventions 
 ye know that these assemblages, and the nomi- 
 ations they make, are very often the result of 
 ntrigue, of management, of personal and local 
 rrangements and of the contracts and bargains 
 f mere politicians. We understand well too, 
 he iron rule of these caucuses and conventions ; 
 heir decrees are despotic, and political death 
 waits him who refuses to them passive obedi- 
 nce. The consequence is that to one case where 
 hese decrees are disregarded, there are ninety- 
 ine where they ere implicitly obeyed by all par- 
 y men. 
 
 Indeed, strict adherence to " regular nomina- 
 ions" is the watchword of all parties, and has 
 ;ome to be regarded as an essential article of 
 >arty faith. Thus, sir, the nomination by the 
 >arty happening at the time to have the majori- 
 y, is tantamount for all practical purposes to the 
 actual election, and thus in fact the irresponsi- 
 _le members of a party convention, acting under 
 no official sanction, and assembled for a day or an 
 hour, and then dispersing to meet no more, will 
 n fact appoint your judges. I prefer for this 
 purpose a more responsible appointing power. 
 But again, sir, objections' of a still graver cha- 
 racter arise out of the circumstances in which an 
 elected judge would be placed, and the tempta- 
 tions to which he would be exposed. A judge is 
 liable to the same passions, prejudices and influ- 
 ences with other men ; his nature is not changed 
 by his official character ; judicial robes cover the 
 same infirmities that are found under meaner 
 garbs. Will not the judge be apt to remember 
 the man who greatly promoted, perhaps secured 
 his election? Will he forget him who opposed 
 him with zeal and energy, and perhaps intempe- 
 rate heat? In view of re-election, will he be 
 sure to do impartial and exact justice in a contro- 
 versy between the powerful and the powerless ? 
 Between him who may control many votes and 
 him who can control none ? 
 
 In periods when the public judgment may be 
 misled, (and such periods sometimes happen,) 
 will the judge disregard that erroneous public 
 judgment or will he, to secure his re-election, 
 yield to it, and at the hustings and in the public 
 prints proclaim himself the advocate> if needs be, 
 of repudiation as has been done by the candidates 
 for judgeships in Mississippi ? When there pre- 
 vails some great popular excitement, as has seve- 
 ral times during the last ten years occurred in ex- 
 tensive districts in this very state, will he stand 
 manfully up against those excitements and ad- 
 mister justice with entire purity and impartiality? 
 Especially, will he do this on the eve of an elec- 
 
791 
 
 tion, which is perhaps to determine whether he 
 is to be consigned to the obscurity of private life, 
 perhaps to penury, or whether he is to enjoy a 
 competent salary and the honors of the ermine 
 for another eight years' term ? Under such and 
 similar circumstances, will the judge be always 
 sternly just and virtuous, or will he prove too 
 weak to resist temptations so powerful ? Many 
 other views of a similar kind might be presented; 
 and they all derive additional force from the short- 
 ness of the term (eight years) already determined 
 on by a decisive vote of the Convention. 
 
 These objections, Mr. President, it will be seen 
 all arise, either from the mode in which candi- 
 dates are according to our customs presented to 
 the people, or from the effect which this method 
 of obtaining his office would inevitably be calcu- 
 lated to have on the incumbent ; from the dan- 
 gers, the difficulties and temptations, the mo- 
 tives, prejudices and passions, to which he would 
 so certainly be exposed. Not one of these objec- 
 tions casts the least doubt on the intelligence and 
 virtue of the people, and implies the slightest dis- 
 trust of their capacity to select their own agents 
 and officers. Such doubts and distrusts form no 
 part of my political creed : they cannot be har- 
 bored in the bosom of any one, who believes with 
 me, that " man is capable of self-government." 
 I ought further to add, that our constituents do 
 not, as I believe, desire o.r expect this change. 
 It is a mode unknown and untried in our sister 
 States with a solitary exception and I see it sta- 
 ted in the public prints that the new constitution 
 of Missouri is just now rejected ; and in part be- 
 cause it proposed the election by the people of a 
 portion of the judiciary. But, sir, I shall not 
 dwell longer on this subject: the objections to 
 the election of the judiciary, which I consider so 
 serious, are not so regarded by others, and any ar- 
 guments I might urge in this behalf would not I 
 am well aware in any manner influence the 
 opinion entertained by a majority of this Conven- 
 tion. That majority have doubtless decided that 
 the judicial office shall be filled by el action, and 
 with that decision, so far as this body is concern- 
 ed, I am not to quarrel. But, sir, I was called 
 on to vote on the mode of carrying out this decis- 
 ion ; and when I gave my vote yesterday, I was 
 persuaded as I still am that the mode proposed by 
 the amendment of the gentleman from Kings is 
 the most safe, suitable and reliable manner of 
 giving effect to the principle of popular election, 
 and therefore I sustained and shall continue to 
 sustain it, until some proposition for filling these 
 offices less objectionable to me than that of elec- 
 tion is presented. 
 
 I supported this amendment, sir, because in 
 my judgment it will diminish in some degree the 
 danger of corrupt intrigues and selfish bargains 
 and combinations at nominating conventions ; it 
 will enable the elector to know better the char- 
 acter and qualifications of the candidate and thus 
 more intelligently and more safely to cast his 
 vote; it will create on the part of "the elector a 
 deeper sense of responsibility ; it will exonerate 
 him from being compelled to vote for those of 
 whom he knows nothing and of whom perhaps he 
 never heard ; and in my view it is the only true 
 and consistent mode of carrying out the principle 
 of popular election, if it is to be applied to our 
 
 udicial tribunals. I trust, sir, for the reasons I 
 lave briefly stated that some other mode of fili- 
 ng these offices than that of election may yet be 
 adopted by the Convention but if that is not to 
 
 , then I shall unwaveringly adhere to the vote 
 [ have already given. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE was greatly embarrassed and 
 very much puzzled how to consider and decide on 
 this motion to reconsider. At the early part of 
 the session they had been taught again and again 
 how absolutely necessary it was that all these 
 matters relative to the election of all the candi- 
 dates for office should be given to the "dear people." 
 And yet now they are asked by the very same peo- 
 ple to unlearn all that they have been taught and to 
 take the back track. How could any one act cor- 
 rectly, with such a contradiction of views? He 
 voted yesterday for the motion which gentle- 
 men now wanted to reconsider, and he was proud 
 that he had so voted ; and he would stick and 
 stand by that vote. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said, that although he 
 had voted yesterday for the election of judges by 
 single senate districts, he would to-day vote for a 
 reconsideration. He conceived this course due to 
 gentlemen who preferred another mode of elec- 
 tion the election by judicial districts or general 
 ticket. While he considered the election of judges 
 an important principle, yet the manner of elec- 
 tion was a matter of detail about which he would 
 not dispute with gentlemen. He had on a previ- 
 ous occasion given his views on the judiciary 
 question and the election of judges, to which he 
 still adhered. He was in favor of the election of 
 judges by the people in any shape in which it 
 could come. Many gentlemen had said they 
 would not vote for their election unless they 
 could have their own way in relation to such elec- 
 tion. He would not say this was a mere subter- 
 fuge for opposing this just and democratic mea- 
 sure. He merely rose for the purpose of showing 
 the very strange position in which members had 
 placed themselves. The gentleman from Oneida 
 (KIRKLAND), and the gentleman from Seneca 
 (BASCOM), and the gentlemen from Dutchess 
 (TALLMADGE), had all professed to be strongly 
 in favor of the election of judges by the people, 
 while it seemed to him that their whole argument 
 was against the measure, and he should be agree- 
 ably disappointed if two out of the three did not 
 finally vote against the proposition. The first 
 gentleman had even gone so far, in his attempt to 
 frighten this body as to refer to that much abused 
 state, Mississippi. This state had been so fre- 
 quently referred to during the controversy be- 
 tween those who believe in the intelligence, pa- 
 triotism and capacity of the people for self- 
 government, and those who do not; and the 
 libels against her elective judiciary were so 
 often repeated, that he was apprehensive that 
 the calumniators would eventually believe they 
 were telling the truth unless it was refuted. He 
 would not now enter into a defence of that state 
 but he must be permitted to say that some of 
 her most able statesmen, who were originally 
 opposed to the judicial election system, have 
 borne testimony to the excellency of the judicia- 
 ry of that state it was the best feature in her 
 government. The fact was that this falsehood 
 originated with the repudiators of that state, and 
 
792 
 
 of other states men who in the legislature of 
 that state had violated their trust, sold themselves 
 to stockjobbers and swindlers, trampled under 
 foot the constitution, and oppressed the people, 
 by mortgaging their property and taxing their 
 labor for the benefit of repudiators. It was in 
 this crisis that the judiciary stepped between the 
 people and their oppressors, vindicated their 
 rights, and sustained the constitution. It was 
 for this that the enemies of free institutions had 
 been defaming and calumniating that state, not 
 only in this country, but throughout all Europe. 
 The second gentleman (BASCOM) has read from 
 a book showing, as he supposed, the manner in 
 which the people could be controlled by party 
 leaders this was a singular argument in favor of 
 the elective principle. The slang about the 
 " dear people," and all this kind of talk, was for 
 the purpose ot bringing reproach upon the elec- 
 tive system, and was unworthy any honorable 
 member of this Convention. He desired to see 
 this question fairly met by gentlemen, and with 
 this view he would vote to give them one more 
 chance, though he was confident that they could 
 not resist the progress of republican institutions, 
 or the adoption of correct principles in this Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. TILDEN, 
 and PATTERSON, when 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to lay the motion to re-con- 
 sider on the table and with it the first portion of 
 this section. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY enquired if the motion if suc- 
 cessful would not lay the whole section on the 
 table. 
 
 The CHAIR ruled that the amendment of Mr. 
 MURPHY having been proposed in the first part 
 of the section it would apply only to that. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY then enquired if the whole sub- 
 ject would not then be disposed of. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said this 12th section con- 
 sisted of three distinct parts the first of which 
 only had been considered. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued as to the point 
 of order, when 
 
 Mr. MANN, (at the suggestion of Mr. CAM 
 BRELENG) waved his motion so as to move the 
 postponement of the question for the present. 
 This motion being debateable, 
 Mr. MURPHY addressed the Convention in 
 support of his amendment. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG regretted that these pro- 
 positions had not been passed over. He was de- 
 cidedly in favor of electing judges of every class 
 by the people, and as they were to be judges of 
 the whole State, he preferred they should be 
 elected by the State. But after much discussion 
 in the committee, they had to compromise the 
 question, and this he urged would be the result 
 to which the Convention should be obliged to 
 come. This proposition of Senate district elec- 
 tions came from a gentleman opposed to the elec- 
 tion of judges by the people, and was sustained by 
 such. 11 it had come from the other side, it would 
 be a different thing. This was adopted by a bare 
 majority, and would the committee send su impor- 
 tant a question as this to the people on a meagre 
 majority. Mr. C. referred to the nominating con- 
 vention, all of which machinery would be in 
 operation in the districts as well as in the state 
 
 Elect judges by the people and both parties will 
 put forth their best men. This would not be an 
 ordinary election. And no matter what the poli- 
 tics of the judge, if he has been faithful and corn- 
 Detent, no party machinery would defeat him. 
 The most illustrious and enlightened men for 
 ages had contended for the principle, and its suc- 
 cess, he urged, had been fully demonstrated. The 
 gentleman from Seneca, (Mr. BASCOM) had urged 
 that party should be left entirely out of the con- 
 ideration of th^ question. The gentlemen stood 
 n an isolated position. He was too learned a 
 man not to recollect, (for Mr. C. had forgotten the 
 precise language, but would give the idea,) of 
 what Mr. Burke once said when placed in a posi- 
 tion with one of his own party who thought he 
 occupied a similar isolated position. Mr. Burke 
 ridiculed the idea of a free government being ad- 
 ministered without party, but his friend admon- 
 ished that it was illiberal, and that party had bet- 
 ter be dropped. Mr. Burke replied that he was 
 not disposed to go into a war on such grounds, 
 and to place militia in opposition to regulars, or 
 of sacrificing his friends one by one by an admit- 
 ted sacrifice in a most contemptible struggle. 
 When we shall see the day arrive, said Mr. C., 
 when we shall not have conflicts of mind with 
 mind, principle with pririciple,when parties cease 
 to divide us, then there will be an end to liberty. 
 Nothing but these conflicts kept alive the spirit 
 of liberty, when that shall cease our government 
 is at an end. 
 
 Mr. COOK called for the previous question, 
 and there was a second, and the main question 
 ordered. 
 
 The Convention refused to postpone, ayes 37, 
 nays 68. 
 
 Mr. STOW replied to Mr. C. He denied that 
 the illustrious men of this country and of the past 
 were in favor of the election of judges, and refer- 
 red to Hamilton, Jay, and others, in illustration 
 of his position. In no where but the assassin, re- 
 pudiating slave state of Mississippi, was this 
 ground sustained. 
 
 Mr. CAMRRELENG wished to correct the 
 gentleman. The gentleman was too well inform- 
 ed not to know that the world was divided, by 
 two sets of politicians and philosophers, one of 
 whom believed in the virtue and intelligence of 
 the people, and their capacity for self-government, 
 and another, at the head of whom the gentleman 
 himself had named gentleman who believed in no 
 such principle whatever who had no belief in 
 the virtue, patriotism, intelligence and capacity 
 of the people for self-government. What he, 
 (Mr. C.) had said was, that every philosopher of 
 the popular school had always contended for this 
 principle, while every one on the opposite side 
 had contended for the opposite side. 
 
 Mr. STOW insisted that the general voice was 
 in opposition to the election of judges. He con- 
 sidered the principle as a fallacy, and pointed to 
 the difference of office in reference to its applica- 
 tion, as evidence of its fallacy. He was afraid that 
 it would make the election so frequent as to be- 
 come oppressive to the people. We may yet 
 reach the situation of degraded Rome, where her 
 voters had to be bought to come to the polls. 
 Mr. S. then argued that either the general ticket 
 election or the single district system, and advo- 
 
793 
 
 rated his plan of appointment laid on the tabli 
 yesterday as preferable. At some length he ar 
 gued on this point, and in oppostion to the elec 
 tion of judges by the people. He denfed that the 
 people had called for this thing, there was no 
 evidence of it.' All there was of it was the adop- 
 tion of some petty caucus resolutions, or the o- 
 pinion of some penny a liner, in a newspaper. 
 As well might the birds that shrieked over the 
 Niagara, be considered the voice of the great cata- 
 ract, as those expressions the voice of this great 
 people party conflicts, he urged in conclusion, 
 would tend to warp the mind of man however 
 sincere he might desire to act. He wished his 
 vote to stand. But he had endeavored to preserve 
 a system that had been carried on as prosperously 
 from the very existence of our government. As a 
 choice of evils, he should vote for single districts 
 as against the general ticket system. Even 
 adopting the general ticket system, it would be 
 found that each Senatorial district would claim 
 its own judge thus practically adopting the 
 single district system. 
 
 Mr. KINGSLEY briefly explained the reasons 
 why he should vote for the reconsideration. Be- 
 lieving that the majority report was to be adopt- 
 ed, he desired not to disarrange its operation. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE explained also the reasons why 
 he should vote for a reconsideration. He voted 
 yesterday for the amendment of Mr. MURPHY, 
 and did so as a choice of evils. He was in favor 
 of the judicial district system as reported by the 
 committee. 
 
 The question was then', taken on the motion to 
 reconsider, and it was carried ayes 56, nays 48, 
 as follows 
 
 AYES Me?srs. Anejel, Brown, Brundage, Cambreleng, 
 D.D.Campbell, R. Campbell, jr., Clark, Clyde, Conely, 
 Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana, Dubois, Gardner, Graham, 
 Greene, Hart, Hoffman.Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Hunt- 
 tington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, Kemble, Kennedy, 
 Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, McNeil. Maxwell, 
 Morris Nellis, Nicoll, Powers, President, St. John, San- 
 ford, Sears, Sheldon, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Swacft- 
 hammer, J. J. Taylor. W. Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, White, 
 \Villard, Witbeck, Wood, Yawger, Youngs 66. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. 
 Backus, Baker, Bascom, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Can- 
 dee, Chamberlain, Cook, Crooker.Dodd, Dorlon, Flanders, 
 Forsyth, Harris, Harrison, Hawley, Marvin, Miller, Mur- 
 phy, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Por- 
 ter, Iluoades, Richmond, Riker, Salisbury, Shaver, Shaw, 
 E. Spencer, W. H Spencer, Stow, Strong, Taggart, Tall- 
 madge. Townsend, Vache, Waterbury, Wwrden, A. 
 "Wright, W. B. Wright, Young-48. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved to adjourn. Lost. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN protested against forcing a vote 
 on so important a question with so thin a house. 
 If gentlemen insisted upon that course, he should 
 feel it to be his duty to submit some remarks. 
 
 Mr. WHITE asked the gentleman to yield, and 
 moved a recess, and the Convention took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. * 
 At half-past four there were 27 members pre- 
 sent. 
 
 Mr. BROWN withdrew his original amendment 
 and moved to amend the 12th section, so as to 
 make it read thus : 
 
 " The Justices ol the Supreme Court shall be elected by 
 the electors of the Senatorial Districts of the State at such 
 time as may be provided by law" 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to amend the amend- 
 
 ment by striking out the word " Judicial" and in- 
 sert " Senatorial." 
 
 Mr. MANN : And on that, sir, I move the pre- 
 vious question. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : And on that move a call of the 
 House. 
 
 The roll was called and 69 answered to their 
 names ; 12 more came in, and 81 then were pre- 
 sent. 
 
 Mr. MANN withdrew the call for the previous 
 question to let Mr. WORDEN explain. He could 
 have shown Mr. BROWN that the general ticket 
 system was not pernicious. As there were only 
 81 members present now, less than when the vote 
 was taken in the morning, he therefore hoped the 
 House would pass over this section now, and or- 
 der a vote to be taken upon it to-morrow. Seve- 
 ral said " No." 
 
 Mr. WORDEN then renewed the call for the 
 previous question. This was seconded 61 to 14. 
 
 Mr. GRAHAM explained that he voted yester- 
 day for Senate districts because he thought there 
 was no alternative between that and the general 
 ticket system ; but he preferred the judicial dis- 
 tricts. 
 
 The main question was ordered to be put. 
 
 The ayes and noes were then called on Mr. 
 MURPHY'S amendment and resulted, ayes 45, 
 noes 60. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. 
 Backus, Baker, Bergen, Bull, Burr, Candee, Cook.Crook- 
 er, Dodd, Flanders, Forsyth, Harrison, Hawley, Kirkland, 
 Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Murphy, Nicholas, O'Conor| 
 Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Porter, Rhoades, Richmond, 
 Salisbury, Shaver, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stow) 
 Strong, Swf ckhamer, Tail, Tallmadge.Townsend, Vache, 
 Waterbury, Worden, W. B. Wright, Young 43. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ana:el, Bascom, Bouck, Brown, Brun- 
 dage, Cambreleng, D.D. Campball, R. Campbell, jr., 
 31ark, Clyde, Conely, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana, Dorlon, 
 )ubois, Graham, Greene, Hart, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, Hunt, 
 iunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde,Jones,|Kemble, 
 Cennedy, Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, Mann. McNeil, Mor- 
 is, Nellis, Nicoll, Powers, President, Riker, Ruggles, St. 
 'ohn, Sanlord, Sears, Sheldon, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson 
 Taggart, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, White 
 Villard, Witbeck.Wood, A. Wright, Yawger, Youngs 60. 
 
 So the amendment was lost. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. BROWN'S 
 
 Amendment, and it was carried ayes 86, noes 17. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. 
 
 Backus, Bascom, Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish, Brown, Brun- 
 
 age, Bull, Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, R. Camp- 
 
 >ell, jr. Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cook, Crooker.Cuddtback, 
 
 )ana, Dodd, Dorlon, Dubois, Flanders, Forsyth, Graham, 
 
 Greene, Hart, Hawley, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hun- 
 
 er, A. Huntington, Hulchinson, Hyde, Jones, Kernan, 
 
 Cingsley, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, Marvin, Maxwell, Mil- 
 
 ir, Morris, Nicholas, Parish, Patterson.Penniman, Porter, 
 
 owers, President. Rhoades, St. John, Salisbury, Sanlord, 
 
 ears, Shaver, Sheldon, Simmoas, E. Spencer, W. H. 
 
 pencer, Stanton, Stephens, Strong, Swackhamer, Taft, 
 
 'aggart, J.J.Taylor, W.Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, 
 
 Jut hill, Waterbury, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, Worden. 
 
 A. Wright, W. B. Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 86. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angul, Cornell, Harrison, Kemble, 
 
 Kennedy. Kirkland, Murphy, Nellis, Nicoll O'Couor, Ri- 
 
 :er, Ruggles. Stetson, Stow, Tallmadge, Vache, White 
 
 Mr. MURPHY gave notice of a motion to re- 
 econsider the last two votes. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to add to the section as 
 mended, " but not within ninety days before or 
 ftet the general annual election." Mr. N. aup- 
 >osed it was desirable to remove the election of 
 udges as far from the influence of party conflicts 
 as possible. This was a question upon which the 
 
 74 
 
794 
 
 purity of our judiciary and the liberties of the peo 
 pie greatly depended. 
 
 Mr. RICHiMOND hoped the amendment woul 
 not pass. He believed the people would act a 
 wisely upon this subject at a general election a 
 at one held specially for the purpose of electin; 
 judges. The people would all be out then, an> 
 at other times they would not be no likely to giv 
 their attention to this subject, and the whole con 
 trol would be thrown into the hands of those wh 
 were most interested in the choice made. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS opposed it. He said the cost o 
 an election was now half a million of dollars ; h 
 was for having but one election each year. 
 
 Mr. SPENCER said that 90 days preceding 
 would be in the middle of harvest. He woulc 
 move to insert 40 days instead of 90. 
 
 Mr. PENNIMAN said that if they held a spe 
 cial election, intrigueing demagogues would elec 
 the judges. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL protested against any such infer 
 ence being drawn. There would be no more de 
 magoguism than if they have it at the genera 
 election. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that a great question lik( 
 this should be kept separate from the general 
 election. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that he was in favor o 
 and defended the 90 days plan. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL accepted the amendment of 40 
 days. 
 
 Mr. COOK moved to amend that it shall not be 
 less than 90 days before or after the election ; so 
 as to prevent any log-rolling. This giving each 
 man {2,000 would control any senatorial caucus. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL accepted it, provided they were 
 all to be elected in one day. 
 Mr, PATTERSON wanted a separate election. 
 Mr. WORDEN was in favor of Mr. COOK'S mo 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES also supported it. 
 Mr. LOOMIS suggested that the first election 
 for judges shall be held the 1st of April, 1847 
 the day of most of the town meetings in the state. 
 Mr. SPENCER would suggest that the legisla- 
 ture provide by law a special election for judges. 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said they ought to have it 40 
 days before the general election of 1847 ; so that 
 the term should begin the 1st of January. 
 
 Mr. A. WRIGHT wished to vote down all 
 these plans and leave it to the legislature 
 
 The ayes and noes were had on having it at 
 least 40 days before the general election, and it 
 was carried ayes 56, noes 47. 
 
 The CHAIR : The question now is on the sec- 
 tion, as amended. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN suggested that the judges of the 
 court of appeals should be chosen at the same 
 time but 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS objected. The judges of the court 
 of appeals had better be chosen at the annual 
 election. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN then moved to amend so that it 
 should read; " but the first election of judges of 
 the supreme court, after the adoption," &c. 
 This was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CONELY moved to amend by changing 
 the phraseology, as follows : " The justices of 
 the supreme court shall be elected in the respec- 
 
 tive judicial district by the electors thereof," &c. 
 Lost. 
 
 r Mr. HUNT moved to add to the section, 
 " 1 hey shall exercise jurisdiction only in the dis- 
 tricts in which tbey shall be elected." Lost. 
 
 Mr. W. H. SPENCER moved to insert " of the 
 judges of the courts of appeals" after " election." 
 He thought unless the judges of the appellate 
 court should be selected at the same special elec- 
 tion with the judges of the supreme court, the 
 object of a special election would be in a great 
 degree lost. 
 
 This amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to strike out the first clause 
 of the section, and insert as follows : " The jus- 
 tices of the supreme court to which each district 
 is entitled, shall be elected in the respective ju- 
 dicial districts by the electors thereof." Lost. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to add at the end of 
 the section, " The judges of the court of appeals 
 shall be elected at the same time." Lost, 32 to 42. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought it to be equally im- 
 portant to elect the judges of the court at the 
 same special election. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER suggested that the same 
 amendment had been voted down. 
 
 The CHAIR thought it to be in order inasmuch 
 as it was proposed to insert it in another plan. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS wished to give a few of the 
 reasons why he should vote for this section. His 
 only fears as to the election of judges by the peo- 
 ple was that perhaps the term was too short. If 
 the term was a little longer he should prefer a 
 popular election to any other mode of appoint- 
 ment. 
 
 The section was then adopted, ayes 75, nays 32. 
 
 Mr. BROWN proposed to offer the following as 
 a new section : 
 
 ^ The legislature may provide by law for the election by 
 he electors of the judicial district composed of the city of 
 New- York, of associate justices of the supreme court 
 therein, who shrill have power within such district to hold 
 circuit courts, to preside at courts of oyer aud terminer, 
 and to act as associate justices, with one or more justices of 
 the supreme court, in holding general terms of said court, 
 md to exercise and perform all the powers and duties of a 
 ustice of the supreme court at chambers. They shall be 
 compensated in like manner as the justices of the supreme 
 court, and shall hold their olticps for the term of eight 
 fears, and shall be subject to the disabilities imposed by 
 he 7th section of this article upon the justices of the su- 
 preme court. 
 
 Mr. BROWN urged that the population of New 
 fork was no criterion by which to judge of the 
 egal force required them. He therefore thought 
 t would be doing injustice to the city unless some 
 neans were provided to meet the exigencies of 
 he case. Mr. B. thought the proposition would 
 >e sufficient, and went on to explain and advocate 
 he proposition. The Convention, when it reach- 
 d the 13th article could preserve the Superior 
 ourt, and the court of Common Pleas, if the 
 Convention so pleased. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved to add after the words 
 he " the city of New-York," the words " and 
 lochester." 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said if the wishes of the New- 
 Vork delegation were to be gratified in this mat- 
 er, he would move a reference of the matter to 
 bat delegation. 
 
 Mr. STRONG briefly supported his amend- 
 
795 
 
 ment, as equally demanded by the press of busi- 
 in the county of Monroe. 
 
 Mr. STOW wished to move to add the district 
 in which Buffalo was situated. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS suggested a general provision, 
 authorizing the legislature, from time to time, as 
 the business exigencies of any judicial district 
 might require, to provide for the election of one 
 or more associate justices of the supreme court 
 in such district, who would have all the powers 
 of the justices of the supreme court, except sit- 
 ting in bane and in the court of appeals. 
 
 Mr. STRONG was opposed to increasing the 
 judicial force for the particular benefit of New- 
 York. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN was satisfied that this matter 
 was worthy of serious consideration, and he 
 therefore urged that this matter should be special- 
 ly referred to the judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. STRONG here proposed the amendment 
 suggested by Mr. STOW. 
 
 Messrs. KENNEDY and STOW had leave to re- 
 cord their votes against the 12th section as 
 amended. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, (79M. day) Sept. 3. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. POHLMAN. 
 
 Mr. J. J." TAYLOR from the select committee 
 on preparing abstracts of returns from clerks of 
 law courts made another report, which was re- 
 ferred. 
 
 Mr. BROWN'S proposed section then came up 
 for consideration; 'it related to the judicial force 
 of New- York city, and was presented last eve- 
 ning. 
 
 Mr. STRONG wished to add the cities of Al- 
 bany, Utica, Rochester and Buffalo to New York. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said the amendment of the gen- 
 tleman from Monroe was evidently right, if the 
 amendment itself should be agreed to, and the 
 number of requisite judges would be not less than 
 the number of members of assembly, for equal 
 justice w r ould be required for all parts of the 
 state. By the addition of four judges for New- 
 York, making the number of judges forty, the 
 bar would be enabled to have their bills taxed 
 and other business done by these judges, which 
 elsewhere must be done by supreme court com- 
 missioners on the payment of fees. In this there 
 was an inequality which ought not to be tolera- 
 ted. He then entered into an 'examination of the 
 proposed judicial system, comparing it unfavora- 
 bly with the existing system. He advocated the 
 uiving to the legislature the power to erect sub- 
 ordinate courts in all the counties of the state. 
 11'.' did not believe that any form of county courts 
 which the Convention would consent to adopt, in 
 connection with the superior courts already es- 
 tablished, would succeed at all. He predicted 
 that in five years at the most, the whole system 
 would fail. While this was the fact, he could 
 not agree further to extend the number of the 
 judges of the supreme court, but would leave to 
 the legislature the duty of erecting such inferior 
 tribunals as the exigencies of the times may re- 
 quire. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY wanted to finish this work 
 in righteousness. He wished the Convention to 
 go right on and do up all their business and go 
 
 home. They had been here long enough and a 
 little too long. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to pass over this section 
 and take up the 13th. 
 
 Lost ayes 38, noes 41. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND called for the reading of the 
 memorial from the Convention in the city of New 
 York. It was read. Mr. T. then explained why 
 he voted for passing over the section. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said he would have the district 
 
 Kay the extra expense whenever they wanted to 
 ave a greater number of judges than their popu- 
 lation entitled them to. He moved to amend the 
 amendment of Mr. STRONG to Mr. BROWN'S pro- 
 position. 
 
 Mr. BROWN accepted that part of it which 
 limits the number of judges to three. 
 
 The resolution as amended was then read. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said it was understood that he 
 would sanction nothing that could make a dis- 
 tinction either for or against any locality. He 
 would not consent to give New York any favor 
 that was not enjoyed by other cities ; nor would he 
 take away from her any rights exercised by other 
 cities. All were entitled to the same rights and 
 privileges. He alluded to other attempts to retain 
 to New York royal franchises and privileges, long 
 enjoyed, to which he was uncompromisingly op- 
 posed. He had endeavored to draw a distinction 
 between private and public franchises, both of 
 which were claimed by municipal corporations. 
 It was to the latter that he was opposed. He 
 could not admit a franchise in courts which could 
 not be disturbed. He would give to every part 
 of the state all the judges that were requisite, but 
 they should be state judges and paid by the state, 
 and not by particular cities. There had been 
 read here this morning a report from the Conven- 
 tion in the city of New- York, claiming the pre- 
 servation of the local courts in that city on ac- 
 count of the antiquity of their charters, some of 
 them extending as far back as Gov. Montgomery. 
 He (Mr. M.) could not agree to recognize as sa- 
 cred any franchise of this nature. He was wil- 
 ling to grant to New- York city all that she could 
 claim in common with other cities of the state, 
 and no more, and therefore to provide for her an 
 adequate judicial force for all her business at the 
 expense of the state, as was provided for the 
 country. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG did not wish to engage in 
 this war between New-York and Brooklyn. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said the gentleman from Suf- 
 folk did him injustice, he had not made nor did 
 he invite a war with New- York city in favor of 
 his own or any other city. He could not consent 
 to be charged with such motives. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG did not intend to do so. 
 He said that the legal gentleman here and else- 
 where had all complained that the courts at pre- 
 sent were completely blocked up with business. 
 Three fourths of all the chancery business, and at 
 least half of the writs of error came from the city 
 of New York. He was not willing after having 
 made the agricultural parts of the State to pay for 
 twenty judges (more than they wanted) to go on 
 now and make them pay still more for new judges. 
 He said justice was a general State officer. But 
 is one county to be called on to pay expenses of 
 the litigation ot men in another county or actions 
 
796 
 
 of property? Certainly not. Criminal prosecu- 
 tion is another affair ; but in all cases contending 
 for property in suits of law, the parties litigating 
 ought to pay the expense. He was willing to 
 give New York, Albany, Utica, Rochester, Buf- 
 falo, or any town, as many courts as they pleased 
 to have ; but let them pay for them themselves. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said he had no personal interest 
 in this matter, but he wished to relieve New 
 York city of the great burthen of litigation which 
 occurs there. There was a class of cases there 
 that did not properly belong to local courts ; but 
 ought to go to the Chancery court and court of 
 appeals. But he would have these suits taxed 
 pro rata, and the money go into the State Trea- 
 sury. 
 
 Mr.CAMBRELENG. How much goes in now? 
 
 Mr. BROWN. Not a cent. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG. No, nor ever will ! 
 
 Mr. BRUCE complained that New York want- 
 ed so much special legislation. They asked for 
 a registry law and to be specially legislated for 
 on the license law, and he knew not how many 
 more. He (Mr. BKOWN) had said the other day 
 that if lawyers and judges would do in NewYork 
 as in the country, and work as many hours, there 
 would be a sufficiency of judiciary force. And 
 yet this morning he brings in this singular propo- 
 sition to give additional judges. Mr. B. would 
 vote for no proposition that gave privileges to the 
 city of New York, that were not extended to the 
 whole people. We had had enough of this spe- 
 cial legislation heretofore, and it could never 
 meet his sanction. 
 
 Mr. HUNT said that New York city paid one- 
 half the taxes of the state, and there was some 
 reason, therefore, why she should have more 
 judges. 
 
 Mr. STRONG would not give New York city 
 any privileges that the rest of the state did not 
 have. The state ought not to pay for that litiga- 
 tion which relates merely to the collection of 
 debts. Give this thing the sleep of death, and 
 then tread lightly upon its ashes. He did not 
 want the farmers taxed to pay law expenses of 
 the speculators and other fellows in New York 
 city. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that in speaking and acting 
 on this subject, every man ought to feel that he 
 was not a citizen of any particular locality, but a 
 citizen of the whole state whether he lived at a 
 spot washed by the Ocean wave, or on the top ot 
 the loftiest mountain. He had been alluded to by 
 one of his colleagues, as one who always voted 
 with the majority, in speaking of a proposition 
 heretofore presented in reference to the city of 
 NewYork. He was happy to admit that he did 
 usually vote with the majority, because that ma- 
 jority expressed a decision in accordance with his 
 views of what was right. The proposition re- 
 ferred to he had opposed merely because it was a 
 provision applied to a certain locality only, and he 
 should always oppose any attempt to make distinc- 
 tions of this kind. He would now read his pro- 
 position, which he wished 10 offer as a substitute 
 for that of Mr. BROWN : 
 
 " The legislature shall have power from time to time, 
 as the business exigencies of any judicial district shall re- 
 quire, to piovideby law for the election of one or moro 
 assistant justices of the supreme court in such district, who 
 shall have all the powers of a justice ol the supreme court, 
 
 except sitting in the court in bane and the court of ap- 
 peals." 
 
 Mr. M. thought that the thirty-two judges 
 would not be sufficient for the whole state. If 
 they did not authorize any additional judicial pow- 
 er to be conferred by the Legislature, and it came 
 to be found that they had not provided enough, 
 then there would be no relief. His amendment 
 would authorize the giving of additional judicial 
 power, without creating a separate tribunal hav- 
 ing the same original jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that as his proposition did not 
 meet with much favor though he had offered it 
 to oblige others he would withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked Mr. MORRIS to withdraw 
 his proposition, and have a vote on Mr. CAMBRE- 
 LENG'S suggested alteration to the 13th section. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said he would stop talking, so as 
 to take a vote on his proposition ; and he called 
 for the ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said that the judicial force provi- 
 ded for New York city at present, was not suffi- 
 cient. He would suggest an amendment, which 
 he read : 
 
 Insert after ' legislature' in Mr. MORRIS' amendment, 
 "may provide by law for the election, by the electors ot 
 any judicial district,of one or more associate justices of the 
 supreme court, who shall hold his office for the same term 
 and have all the powers within such district, and be sub- 
 ject to the same disabilities as a justice ot the supreme 
 court ; provided however, that the salary of such justices 
 shall be provided for in the law authorizing their selec- 
 tion, and shall not be made chargeable upon the treas- 
 ury of the state." 
 
 Mr. H. said that this would give such a flexi- 
 bility and expansibility to the system as would 
 enable it to meet the exigencies that might arise. 
 A fixed rule might endanger the system. This 
 was not drawn for the exclusive benefit of New- 
 York. The whole state was interested in the 
 speedy and satisfactory disposition of litigation in 
 that city. He hoped the section would be well 
 considered before the vote was taken. He wished 
 the judiciary system to have a fair chance, for he 
 believed it would then work well. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR objected to the amendment 
 of Mr. HARRIS as far as it relates to the pay of 
 judges. He wanted the system uniform. The 
 means taken to get lid of the pay of the judges by 
 State was an objection to the whole proposition. 
 If a judge was to be paid by a certain locality, he 
 would be nothing but the judge of that locality, 
 and thus there would be an end to the harmony of 
 the whole system. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said this subject had been discuss- 
 ed all day yesterday, and before then, and had 
 been considered settled. Gentlemen started on 
 the wrong supposition that this judicial system 
 was to be a district svslem. This was wrong. 
 It was to be the Supreme Court for the State. One 
 class ought not to be represented by their proper- 
 ty, and not by their numbers. He was opposed 
 to the amendment to the amendment, and also to 
 the amendment itself. 
 
 Mr. HUTCHINSON moved the previous ques- 
 tion. 
 
 This was seconded. 
 
 The main question was ordered. So were the 
 ayes and noes on Mr. HARRIS' amendment. They 
 resulted thus: ayes 30, noes 77. So it was lost. 
 
 The ayes and noes being called on Mr. MORRIS* 
 amendment it was lost ayes 27, noes 81, 
 
797 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS oliered this : 
 
 In case the office of any judge of the court of appeals 01 
 justices of the siiprome court shall become vacant, before 
 the expiration of the regular term for which he WHS elect 
 ed, the vacant} maybe filled by appointment by the <io 
 vi-i nor until it shall be supplied at the next general elec 
 tion of judges, when it shull be filled by election for the 
 residue ol the unexpircd term. 
 
 He did this to provide for filling vacancies. 
 
 A MEMBER : Oh, but office holders never die. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to strike out the 
 words " it shall be supplied," and in lieu insert 
 the word " the," but withdrew it. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to strike out all after the 
 word " until," and insert so as to provide that the 
 governor should fill the vacancy for the balance 
 of the term of the judge whose place is to be sup- 
 plied 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said it was evident that 
 that Mr. PERKINS was in favor of giving the go- 
 vernor the power to appoint all these judges. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS' amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to amend as follows : 
 " The legislature shall have the power to fill the 
 vacancy." This was lost 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend by adding " and 
 the senators of the district." Lost. 
 
 The proposition of Mr. LOOMIS was carried 
 58 to 16. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER then offered the following as 
 a new section relative to county courts : 
 
 13, There shall be elected in each of the counties of 
 this state, except the city and county of New-York, one 
 county judge who shall hold his office for four years, and 
 who shall hold tho county court, perform the duties of the 
 office of surrogate, and such other duties as shall be pre- 
 scribed by law 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER asked why he would ex- 
 cept New- York. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER : Because he thought one coun- 
 ty judge would not be sufficient for that county. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved to add to exclude the 
 county of Kings as well as New- York. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR sent up a substitute to be 
 read : 
 
 There shall be established in each county a county 
 court consisting of one judge, or more than one, accord, 
 ing as the business and population shall require, but not 
 to exceed in the number of judges the number of 
 members ol assembly, to which such county may be 
 entitled ; and not to exceed three in any county ; such jud- 
 ges shall he elect* d by the electors of the respective coun. 
 ties, and shall hold their offices for four years respectively. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN said the surrogate could not do 
 all this county court business in Brooklyn. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said he should make provision 
 as intimated by a subsequent section, to meet the 
 objection of the gentleman. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN asked if the gentleman from 
 Cattaraugus by the last words intended to consti- 
 tutionalize the powers of these courts so as to 
 prevent any alteration by the legislative power. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER suggested a modification so as 
 to meet the objection, by leaving power with the 
 legislature to regulate by law the duties. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER entreated his colleague 
 to withdraw his amendment. 
 
 The amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND again reiterated that the com- 
 mittee on the judiciary had given them assurances 
 that a system of which the thirty-two judges 
 were a part, would be complete and ample for the 
 despatch of all its business. He had not enter- 
 
 tained that opinion, and consequently he moved 
 to strike down one-half of those judges with the 
 intention of getting county courts, but he was un- 
 
 <st'ul ; and now additional courts and j; 
 were pressed by those very gentlemen win 
 the thirty-two judges would be sufficient. This 
 afforded proof either that those gentlemen did not 
 believe the thirty-two sufficient, or that a pen- 
 sion system was to be provided by creating judges! 
 with no judicial duties. He examined the exist- 
 ing and proposed systems, and objected to the 
 creation of an overgrown supreme court when 
 there were to be so many common pleas judges 
 to do the business. He should, therefore, oppose 
 this amendment until he could get the number of 
 the supreme court judges reduced. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that in all the votes he had 
 given sustaining the supreme court of the com- 
 mittee, he had supposed there were to be no other 
 courts. But if we were to have a county court in 
 addition, instead of reducing the expenses of the 
 judiciary we should increase it to a large amount. 
 He could not consent to vote for any county court 
 until the number of the supreme court judges was 
 reduced to at least one half. He had supposed 
 from the arguments of gentlemen that this force 
 would be adequate to all the business. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said that the judiciary committee 
 had expressed the belief that the 13th section al- 
 ready made ample provision for the inferior 
 courts. If the convention coincided \\*ith that 
 view they would sustain the motion he was about 
 to make. He called for the previous question. 
 
 There was a second, ayes 52, nays 18, and the 
 main question being ordered. 
 
 The question being on the amendment of Mr. 
 TAYLOR, to Mr. CROCKER'S proposition, at the 
 suggestion of Mr. LOOMIS, Mr. T. withdrew all 
 but the first section of his amendment. 
 
 The question being taken by ayes and nays, and 
 the amendment was rejected, ayes 18 nays 80. 
 The question was then on the section as propos- 
 ed by Mr. CROOKER, and there .were ayes 37, 
 nays 66, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Baker, Burr, Cambreleng, R Campbell, 
 jr., Chamberlain, Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cook, Crooker, 
 Dodd.Greene, Hart.Hawley/Jrtytckhiss, Hyde, Jones, Kem- 
 ble, Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, Marvin, Maxwell, Morris, 
 JVlunro, Nellis, Porter, Russell, Sanford, E. Spencer, J.J. 
 Taylor, W.Taylor, Townsend,Waterbury,Willard,Wood, 
 Youngs 37. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Archer, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, 
 Bascom, Bergen, Brayton, Brown, Bruce, Lrundage, Bull, 
 D. D. Campbell, Candee, Cuddeback, Dorlon, Uubois, ! hin- 
 ders, Forsyth, Gardner, Graham, Harris, Harrison, Hoff- 
 man, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Kennedy, 
 Kirkland, Mann, McNeil, Miller, Nicholas, O'Conor, Par- 
 ish, Patterson, Penniman, Powers, Khoades, Richmond, 
 Riker, St. John, Salisbury, Sears, Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Simrnons.W.H. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Stow, 
 Strong, Swackhamer, Tat't, Taggart, Tilden, Tuthill, War- 
 ren, White, Worden, A. Wright, W. D. Wright, Yawger, 
 Young 66. .- 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 Mr. HARRIS proposed the following section : 
 There shall be elected in each of the counties of this 
 state, except in the city and county of New York, a judge 
 who shall hold his office for four years. He shall receive 
 an annual salary to be fixed by the board of supervisors, 
 which shall not be increased or diminished during the 
 term for which he shall have been elected. He shall have 
 appellate jurisdiction of all causes from justices courts, 
 jut shall have no original civil jurisdiction. Such judge 
 shall also perform the duties of surrogate. 
 
 Mr. IL could never consent to allow the legis- 
 
798 
 
 lature to organize courts under this 13th section, 
 or vote for a county court with juries. On the 
 other hand, he was satisfied that there was a vast 
 amount of local business which must be vested in 
 some officer, and this he thought would attain the 
 end. If the legislature saw fit to invest him with 
 some small criminal business he should not ob- 
 ject, but he thought the civil business of the state 
 was already provided for. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH called for the previous ques- 
 tion, and there was a second ayes 44, nays 24 
 and the main question ordered. 
 
 The question being taken by ayes and noes 
 there were ayes 49, noes 57, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Baker, Bouck, Brayton, Burr, 
 Cambreleng, Candee, Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cook, Crook- 
 er, Dodd, Dorlon, Flanders, Graham, Harris, Harrison, 
 Hart, Hawley, Hotchkiss, Hunter, Kingsley, Loomis, Me 
 Neil, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Morris, Munro, Nellis, Ni- 
 cholas, Nicoll, Patterson, Porter, Powers, Sears, Shaver, 
 Shaw, E. Spencer, Stephens, Taft, Townsend.Waterbury, 
 Wood, A. Wright, W. B. Wright, Young, Youngs- 49. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, Allen, F. F. Backus, H. Back- 
 us, Bascom, Bergen, Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Bull, D. D. 
 Campbell, R. Campbell, jr., Cuddeback, Dubois, Forsyth, 
 Gardner, Hoffman, Hunt, A. Hunlington, Hutchinson, 
 Jones, Kennedy, Kernan, Kirkland, Mann, O'Conor, Parish, 
 Penniman, Perkins, President, Rhoades, Richmond, Riker, 
 Russell, St. John, Salisbury. Sanford, Sheldon, Simmons, 
 W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Swackha- 
 mer, Taggart, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, 
 Vache, Warren, White, Worden, Yawger 57. 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. GROOKER then proposed the following 
 section : 
 
 . There shall be elected in each of the assembly dis. 
 tricts of this state, one coun.y judge, who shall hold his 
 office lor four years, and who "shall within his district hold 
 a court for the trial of petty offences, perform the duties of 
 Surrogate, and such other duties as shall be required by 
 law. >>uch county judges shall have appellate juri diction 
 from justices' courts, and such criminal jurisdiction as 
 shall be prescribed by law, but shall have no original 
 civil jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. BROWN thought the vote given already 
 was a clear indication that the Convention would 
 not adopt any of these propositions. If the Con. 
 vention would adopt the 13rh section, it would 
 leave it to the Legislature to provide for these 
 courts. 
 
 SEVERAL : That is just what we do not want. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said if would be obliged to be left 
 there the Convention had not time to frame a pro- 
 position that would work. With the addition of rhe 
 17th section, restricting any officer except justi- 
 ces of the peace from receiving any fees he thought 
 the matter might well under the circumstances 
 be left to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. COOK said that it appeared we were to be 
 handed over to the tender mercies of this 32 
 wheeled carriage for all our law reform, for the 
 purpose of hastening the catastrophe, he would 
 call for the previous question. 
 
 There was a seoond and the main question or- 
 dered, and the amendment rejected ayes 3, nays 
 102. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER explained his vote. He did 
 not offer the proposition with a view of voting for 
 it, but solely to open the subject for a debate in 
 order that some provision might be adopted after 
 a little discussion and reflection. He desired al- 
 so to lay on the table a motion to reconsider the 
 vote on his first proposition. 
 
 Mr. N.ICHOL oil'cred the following amend- 
 ment : 
 
 There shall be in every county a county court hav 
 ingthe same jurisdiction which the surrogate now has, sub. 
 ject to regulation by law-, and exercising such other civil, 
 criminal and equity jurisdiction as maybe prescribed by 
 law, subordinate to the jurisdiction of the supreme court. 
 
 Said county court shall be held by a judge to be called th 
 'udge of the county, and who shall be elected for five 
 years. The legislature m.y, it' two-thirds of all the mem- 
 
 bers elected to each of both houses shall deem it neces- 
 sary ,'pass a law authorizing each county, to elect one, and 
 not to exceed two county judges, who shall hold their of- 
 fices for the term of four years; any one or all of whom 
 may hold said county court The number of judges in each 
 county to be determined by the supervisors of such coun- 
 ty. The first judge and the county judges shall be com- 
 pensated by fixed salaries, which shall not be increased or 
 diminished during the term for which they were elected, 
 and they shall not receive any lees or perquisites of office 
 for their own use. 
 
 Mr. HOTCHKISS called for the previous 
 
 question, and there was a second, and the main 
 
 question ordered. The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN offered the following amend- 
 
 ment : 
 
 5} . Any of the justices of the supreme court may hold 
 the courts of common pleas in any county. 
 
 ' Mr. MARVIN said it would be recollected that 
 he had, from the beginning been an ardent friend 
 of county courts. One of his objects, was that the 
 people might have the power of doing the bu- 
 siness in their own counties. He did not see why 
 county courts might not be kept up and a justice 
 of the Supreme Court furnished to each without 
 disturbing the system of the committee. This 
 would be sufficient tor civil business, and further 
 provision may be made for the criminal business. 
 If this should be adopted, and more force was ne- 
 cessary, the Legislature could create an addition. 
 al district and four more judges. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER enquired if the gentleman be- 
 lieved the force would be sufficient for all this 
 
 Mr. MARVIN thought that the force was de- 
 fective, but if these justices were authorized to 
 hold common pleas, it would have a tendency 
 to keep them within the districts in which they 
 were elected, arid thus be able to do more busi- 
 ness. 
 
 Mr. W.TAYLOR enquired if the gentleman in- 
 tended to have the Legislature designate any of 
 these Supreme court judges particularly to hold 
 these county courts. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN did not. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART suggested that the word county 
 courts should be substituted lor common pleas 
 He was opposed to retaining these obsolete terms 
 in the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS briefly opposed the amendment. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said if he understood this amend- 
 ment, he rather liked it. It would have the ef- 
 fect of preventing the legislature from creating 
 these courts, and this was what he desired. 
 this should be adopted, he should offer a propo- 
 sition which would relieve all apprehension of 
 difficulty from the blocking up of these courts. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE congratulated the Convention on 
 the progress made in business this morning, and 
 called for the previous question. 
 
 There was a second, and the main question or- 
 dered, and the amendment rej ected ayes 27, 
 
 . BASCOM wished to offer the following, 
 to come in before this 13th section. If this mat- 
 ter of county courts was to be left to the legisla- 
 ture, he would prefer that they should have the 
 
799 
 
 choice of providing tribunals, rather of a 
 peace-making character, than like these county 
 courts which have too often been the hot-beds o 
 . rel and litigation. It. was not made impera- 
 tive on the legislature to do this, although he 
 should prefer that it should be so : 
 
 There may be established in the city of New York one 
 or more tribunals of arbitration or conciliation, each to be 
 co;npied of three arbitrators or conciliators, one of whom 
 shall be elected clerk thereof. They shall be paid a rea 
 sensible compensation to bo fixed by law, and all fees re 
 ceivcd by them shall be paid into the public treasury. 
 The legislature may provide for similar tribunals in other 
 localities of the state if it shall be deemed expedient, anc 
 may aSbrd parties inducements to submit their differences 
 to the arbitrament or conciliation of such tribunals, by 
 regulation as to costs in other courts. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS was gratified that this ques- 
 tion was now brought up. He preferred rather 
 to leave it discretionary than to make it manda 
 tory on the legislature to erect these tribunals, 
 for the reason that it might otherwise be stifled 
 here. As it stands he could not conceive that 
 any evil could grow out of it. 
 
 Mr. STETSON referred to the revised statutes 
 providing for the arbitration of suits, as covering 
 all the ground designed to be altered by this 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to add after the word con- 
 ciliation in the third line, "only one of whom 
 shall be of the legal profession." 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said the difference between 
 the section of the R. S. was that then either par- 
 ty might refuse to go into the conciliation courts, 
 while here the parties were required to go there 
 first. 
 
 Mr. STETSON asked if the gentleman desired 
 to force thi* reconciliation upon parties. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND would oblige parties to go 
 there first. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS said the law referred to by 
 the gentleman from Clinton, was a dead letter 
 from the facts of its being unknown and being so 
 encumbered with forms and expense as to defeat 
 its object. 
 
 Mr. \VATERBURY was informed by a gentle- 
 man who had resided for some time in the Danish 
 islands, that this system of courts had worked 
 admirably. He thought with such evidence that 
 the question should not be passed over without 
 due attention. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND considered this an inappro- 
 priate time to call up this question. If the propo- 
 sition of the gentleman from Seneca would attain 
 the end designed, he was satisfied. The only 
 question with him him was whether the propo- 
 sition was sufficiently extensive for the purpose. 
 If this was a salutary principle to be adopted he 
 would have it extended throughout the State ; he 
 would not confine the experiment solely to the 
 City of New York. If the section would attain 
 the cud he should go for it, but he thought we 
 should have more time to consider it. 
 
 Mr. NtCOLL said he heartily concurnd in the 
 views of his friend from Oneida, (Mr. KIKKLAND) 
 and was decidedly in favor of a prov;.su.u autho- 
 ri-inu; tin- Legislature to establish courts of con- 
 ciliaiion. He doufoud much, however, tht- pro- 
 priety of making their creation obliyatoiy. It 
 was an experiment, and no one could s.tlely assert 
 that it would be successful. Where these tribu- 
 nals have existed, and have been a benefit, a tar 
 
 different state of society prevailed Irorn what was 
 to be found in our country here we were politi- 
 cally, if not socially, equal. No man regarded 
 another as his superior, or perhaps, as more capaj 
 ble than himself. He could see much in this to 
 raise doubts as to the practicability of (lie propos- 
 ed system. Still he was willing to have it tried, 
 and would support any measure which would tend 
 to diminish litigation. He regretted much, how- 
 ever, to find his colleague (Mr. MANN) offering 
 an amendment, which he could riot but regard as 
 invidious, and as in character with that unworthy 
 prejudice against the legal profession, which he 
 lamented to find existing to so great a degree on 
 this floor. It seemed to him an absurdity to ex- 
 clude that profession to the extent proposed, from 
 these tribunals- When men were bent on going 
 to law, they generally had some confidence in 
 their own views of their legal rights. Whose 
 duty ought it to be to advise them ? Assuredly 
 one who was competent/by his knowledge, learn- 
 ing, and experience. Mr. N., therefore, believed 
 that these courts would not afford the relief ex- 
 pected, unless constituted of lawyers men in 
 whom the people had confidence, in respect to 
 matters of law. Mr. N. said that all respectable, 
 men of the profession, in thousands of instances, 
 acted as conciliators. He could speak from per- 
 sonal knowledge of the lawyers of his own city. 
 And he would say that a very large majority of 
 them, who were in extensive business, settled a 
 vast amount of litigation. No man could enjoy 
 the confidence or respect of the community, who 
 would pursue a different course. Mr. N. said that 
 much as the profession had been sneered at on 
 this floor, he would say in ail sincerity, that he 
 believed them to be the true friends of legal re. 
 form ; and that they would be found on all occa- 
 sions advocating all measures which would tend 
 to diminish litigation and lighten its expense. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER was opposed to this r- 
 mendment of Mr. MANN. He cared not whether 
 the court was composed of lawyers or not he en- 
 tertained none of the prejudices that prevailed 
 with some. He hoped this amendment would be 
 voted down. He earnestly desired to see these 
 courts established. 
 
 Mr. MANN replied to Mr. S. All the courts 
 of arbitration ever held in this Slate, have been 
 composed as he proposed in his amendment. The 
 object he had, was to place this court on the same 
 ooting. Thelaw\ers who would be most; likely to 
 get into those courts, would be, he believed, those 
 who would be the most desirous to promote litigi- 
 'ion. Also, high-minded men would not consent 
 o sit in those rouris from I he smallnrss of the 
 compensation provided. He disclaimed any in- 
 ention of casting any inflections on the legal pie. 
 erence as a cl 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS should oppose the ammend- 
 nent of Mr. MANN as lending to create invidi- 
 >us distinctions between different clashes, of citi. 
 ens. Mr. N. briefly supported the proposition. 
 
 Mr. MANN'S amendment was then rejected. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE proposed to amend by striking out 
 he words " city of New York," and insert in lieu 
 hereof "any county in the St.ite." 
 
 Mr. HAWLKY urged that the provision should 
 >e extended to any town or ward in the Stale. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM did not desiie the ceurt to settle 
 
800 
 
 meie justices of the peace quarrels. He desirec 
 to have it Sfftle the large quarrels. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE thought that this amendmen 
 would attain the end desired by Mr. HAWLEY. 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved to amend so that it shoul< 
 provide for conciliation courts in any town o: 
 county. 
 
 Mr' TAGGART answered, the proposition al 
 ready provided for this. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. HUNT was rejected. 
 
 Mr. BURR dsired to have the legislature mak< 
 it compulsory on parties to go into these courts. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. BRUCE was then adopt 
 ed. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND proposed the following sub 
 stitute for the proposition, briefly urging it as be 
 ing more direct : 
 
 "Tribunals of conciliation shall be established by law 
 Such laws shall be general and of uniloim operation 
 throughout the state." 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG inquired if the legislature 
 would have power to destroy them if they should 
 fail. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE thought not. 
 Mr. KIRKLAND would then modify his amend- 
 ment so as to leave it dis,cretionaay with the le- 
 gislature, instead of compulsory. 
 
 After some further consideration Mr. KIRK- 
 LAND withdrew his proposition. 
 
 Mr. HUNT thought there was no necessity of 
 providing imperatively for these conciliators. 
 One- might be sufficient. 
 
 After some conversation, it was amended so as 
 to empower the court to consist of one or more 
 conciliators. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said if this proposition was 
 made compulsory, it would be the most magnifi- 
 cent court ever established in the Union. The 
 court of 32 judges would sink into insignificance. 
 How were its officers to be appointed, how 
 chosen, for there was no proposition that they 
 should be elected by the people ? He may be 
 appointed by the Governor and Senate, and if so, 
 it would give them more patronage than they ev- 
 er wielded before. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS would insert after the word 
 " conciliators" the words " to be elected at the 
 annual town meeting." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that would carry the 
 idea that there was to be one of these courts in 
 every town. Then, why not abolish the justices 
 courts at once ? 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS would modify his amendment 
 by providing for the election in such manner as 
 the legislature may direct. 
 
 Mr.' PATTERSON said that would make it a 
 little better. Mr. P. said there was to be no li- 
 mitation upon the power of these courts, and 
 what then became of the right of trial by jury in 
 all amounts over $20 ? Defendants would be com- 
 pelled to go into these courts at the instigation 
 of the plaintiff, and compel him to waive that 
 right. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS would add, but such arbitra- 
 ments shall in no case preclude the right of trial 
 by jury. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that then the proposi- 
 tion was to make a good justices court perhaps in 
 every town, in which equity and law by this 
 court would be mixed up. Mr. P. thought the 
 plan would never operate. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS said that if the gentleman 
 had heard this proposition he never could have pre- 
 sented it in the light he has. There was no com- 
 pulsory provision about it at all. No man would 
 be compelled to waive the right of trial by jury. 
 Its great recommendation was that it was a vol- 
 untary tribunal. The only clause that was in any 
 way or shape compulsory, was the one allowing 
 the legislature to offer if deemed expedient, in- 
 ducements to parties to come before the court. 
 Even that was not in the slightest degree com- 
 pulsory. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said if there was no com- 
 pulsion about it, then it was precisely on the same 
 footing that arbitrators now were under the re- 
 vised statutes. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY believed the question was not 
 fully understood, and in order to afford time for 
 reflection, he would move that its further consid- 
 eration be postponed until the remainder of the 
 article was passed over. 
 
 The motion was rejected. 
 
 Mr. FORS YTH opposed the system of concilia- 
 tion courts in any form as unsuited to our system 
 of government. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY also opposed the proposition. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS' amendment providing for the 
 election of the conciliators as the legislature may 
 direct, was then agreed to. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to strikeout the last three 
 lines of the section. 
 
 Mr. SPENCER moved to adjourn. Lost, 39 
 to 56. 
 
 Mr. YOUNGS moved the previous question, 
 and it was seconded. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. NICOLL was rejected. 
 
 The section providing for conciliation courts 
 was then adopted, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messr*. Angel, Archer, H. Backus, Baker, Bas- 
 com, Bowdish, Bruce, Burr, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr. 
 Clark, Conely, Cornell, Dubois, Flanders, Greene, Harris, 
 Garrison, Hunt, Kemble, Kingsley, Kirkland, Mann, Mil- 
 er, Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, Pennimaii, Rich- 
 mond, St. John, Salisbury, Sears, Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Stanton, Stephens, Strong,' Swackhamer, Tail, Taggart, 
 Tallmadge, W. Townsend, Warren. Waterbury, White, 
 Willard, Worden, Yawger, Young 53. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Allen, Ay rault. F. F. Backus, Bergen, 
 Jouck, Brayton, Brown, D. D. Campbell, Cook, Crocker, 
 <\>rsyth, Graham, Hart. Hawley, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, 
 lunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Loomis, Max- 
 well, Murphy, O'Couor, Parish, Patterson, Porter, Presi- 
 dent, Rhoades, Riker, Russell, Sanford, W. H. Spencer, 
 Tuthill, Vache, Wood, A.Wright, W.B.Wright, Youngs 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY moved to reconsider, 
 he table. 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 Laid on 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR had leave to record his vote in 
 avor of the proposition for conciliation courts 
 VIr. E. SPENCER against them. Mr RHOADES 
 lad leave to change his vote to the affirmative. 
 VIr. STRONG to the negative. Mr. DANA, who 
 oted "no," had leave to have that vote recorded, 
 eiug omitted by mistake. 
 
 The 13th section of the judiciary report was 
 ead : 
 
 13. Inferior courts of civil and criminal jurisdiction 
 may be established by the legislature, and appeals and 
 writs of error therefrom may be brought to the supreme 
 ourt or court of appeals as shall be provided by law. 
 
801 
 
 
 Proceedings U|>ou this section was waived by 
 consent, to allow Mr. LOOMIS to offer as a separate 
 sri-lion, a provision declaring that the tribunals 
 Authorized by the last section (conciliation courts) 
 shall not have power to render judgments obliga- 
 tory on parties; but that their power shall be ad- 
 visory only. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said this repealed one important 
 part of the section establishing courts of concilia- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS thought there would be nothing 
 to prevent the legislature from creating courts ot 
 common pleas under the title of courts ot concilia, 
 (ion. He proposed to have these courts just what 
 they purported to be and nothing more. 
 Mr. STOW took the same view. 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought it would be wise to 
 decide what kind of jurisdiction these courts were 
 to have. There was nothing which made them 
 subordinate to either the supreme court or the 
 court of appeals, nor to declare that their proceed, 
 ings should be in accordance with the form of the 
 common law. Nor, if every thing was to be un- 
 der the original section, did he see that we should 
 want any other court in the state. We had better 
 define in the Constitution whether the powers ot 
 these courts should be obligatory or nuiely advi- 
 sory. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM proceeded to describe the organ 
 ization and powers of these courts*as they existed 
 in Denmark, at some length. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL, believing this subject was suffr 
 ciently understood, moved the previous question 
 and there was a second. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS asked consent to change the word 
 court to substitute the word tribunal, 
 
 Mr. MURPHY objected and Mr. L's section, 
 as offered was adopted, 52 to 40, as follows : 
 
 AYES Angel, Ayrault, H. Backus, Bergen, Brown, 
 Brundage, Bull, Catnbreleng, D. D.Campbell, Cook, Cud- 
 deback, Dodd, Dorlon, Forsyth, Gardner, Graham, Harri- 
 son, Hawley, Hofl'man, Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Huntington 
 Hutehinson, Hyde, Keruan, Kingsley, Loomis, Maxwell 
 Munro, Murphy, Neilis, Nicoil, Parish, Patterson, Porter 
 Powers, President, Hiker, Russell, St. John, Sanford, E 
 Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stetson, Stow, Strong, J J. Tay- 
 lor, Townsend, Wood,, W.B. Wright, Youngs 52. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Archer, F. F. Backus, Baker, Bascom, 
 Bowdish, Bruce, Burr, R. Campbell, jr., Clark, Conely, 
 Cornell, Dubois, Flanders, Greene, Hunt, Kemble, Ken- 
 nedy, Kirkland, Mann, McNeil, Miller, Nicholas, O'Conor, 
 Penniman, Rhoades, Richmond, Shaver, Sheldon, Stanton 
 Stephens, Tail, laggart, Tallmadge, W. Taylor. Warren, 
 Waterbury, White, Worden, Yawger, Young 40. 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved a reconsideration. 
 Mr. BASCOM moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote upon the section establishing conciliatior 
 courts. It might perhaps be further perfectec 
 hereafter. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY laid on the table a section 
 authorizing the legislature to establish courts o. 
 conciliation, whenever asked for by a majority o 
 the electors of any town, city or county, the ex 
 pense thereof to be paid by fees. 
 
 The Convention then recurred to the 13th sec 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG moved to amend by in 
 serting after " Legislature 5 ' the words, "man) 
 county at the expense of such county." 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to amend by insertin; 
 " city or" before " county." 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG assented. 
 Mr. STOW moved to strike out " city or." K 
 
 ould not agree that expensive courts in cities 
 hould be chargeable altogether upon the cities. 
 Arrangements had always been made between 
 ities and the county in which they are located, 
 o divide the expenses of the county. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved that the 10th and 16th sec- 
 ions of the report of the judiciary committee be 
 eterred to a select committee of one from each 
 icnate district to determine what plan, if any, 
 hould be adopted for the organization of local 
 ;ourts. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to amend by recommit- 
 
 ing the whole subject of the organization of the 
 
 udiciary committee and the amendments thereto. 
 
 Mr. FORsYTH moved the previous question on 
 
 )oih these propositions, and there was a second. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS demanded the ayes and noes, 
 
 and the amendment was negatived, ayes 14, noes 
 
 86. 
 
 The motion of Mr. BAKER was also lost, ayes 
 48, noes 54, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, Baker, Bray- 
 on, Bull, Burr, 11. Campbell, jr., Candee, Crooker, Dana, 
 Dodd, Dubois, Forsyth, Gardner, Graham, Hawley, Hofl- 
 man, Hotchkiss, Hutchinson, Kennedy, Kirldand, Mann, 
 Murphy, Nicoil, O'Conor, Penniman, Porter, Russell, St. 
 John, Sanford, Shaver, E. Spencer, W. H Spencer, Ste- 
 )hens, Stetson, Stow, Taft, Taggart, J. J. Taylor. Town- 
 send, Warren, White, Willard, Worden, A. Wright, Young 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Allen, F. F. Backus, H.Backus, Bascom, 
 Bergen, Bowdish, Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Cambreleng, 
 D.D.Campbell, Clark, Conely, Cook, Cuddeback, Dorlon 
 Flanders, Greene, Harrison, Hunt, Hunter, A. HuntingtonJ 
 
 Hyde, Jones, Kembla, Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, McNsil, 
 Maxwell, Miller, Morris, Munro, NelJis, Nicholas, Parish, 
 
 Patterson, Perkins, Powers, President.Rhoades, Richmond! 
 
 Riker, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Stanton, Strong, W. Taylor 
 
 Tuthill, Waterbury, Wood,W. B. Wright, Yawger, Youngs 
 
 54. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said he should have voted for the 
 proposition just rejected, if he could have been as- 
 sured that the committee would have reported to- 
 morrow morning ; and he renewed the proposi- 
 tion, including in it the two sections in regard to 
 the courts of conciliation, and directing the com. 
 mittee to report at 10 o'clock to-morrow morn- 
 ing. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG did not think it at all pro. 
 bable thaftany committee would be able to report 
 any thing which the Convention would agree to, 
 any more than they would to the proposition made 
 this morning by Mr. CROOKER, which came with- 
 in seven votes ol being adopted. He did not be- 
 lieve the business of the Convention would at all 
 be advanced by the method suggested. But goon 
 and perfect, so far as we could, the report, and 
 then let the gentlemen consult together in groups, 
 and corne in to-morrow morning ready to settle 
 this questi< n definitely. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE moved to include also the 12th 
 section. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was opposed to any new com- 
 miitee. There was not time to take any such ac- 
 tion. There was, in his opinion, only one difficul- 
 ty about county courts, and that was that the new 
 Supreme court had been too large and unwieldy. 
 Reduce the number of those judges, and he would 
 go for a county court. He concluded by moving to 
 refer the entire article to this committee of eight, 
 for the purpose of remodelling it. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN urged the propriety of adopt- 
 ing some system of county courts. He would 
 
 75 
 
802 
 
 never leave the matter to the Legislature. It was 
 better to give a committee the opportunity be- 
 tween this and to-morrow morning, to agree on a 
 plan for county courts. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND here withdrew his motion 
 and after some further conversation between him 
 and Mr. BROWN, Mr. KEMBLE withdrew his mo- 
 tion, and \ 
 
 Mr. BRUCE moved the previous question but 
 there was no second. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend so as 
 to exclude the section relating to conciliation 
 courts from the reference. 
 
 This was rejected. 
 
 After a further debate, in which Messrs. WOR- 
 DEN, BROWN, SWACKHAMER, PATTER- 
 SON, NICHOLAS, BAKER and RICHMOND 
 participated, the question was taken on Mr. 
 BROWN'S resolution and it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS gave notice of a motion to recon- 
 sider the vote on his substitute for the 13th sec- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS gave the same notice in relation 
 to the vote on the 4th section. 
 
 The PRESIDENT announced the following as 
 the committee under Mr. BRUCE'S resolution : 
 
 Messrs. BAKER, BRUCE, FORSYTH, R. CAMP- 
 BELL, CAMBRELENG, TOWNSEND, STOW and W. 
 TAYLOR. 
 
 The convention then adjourned to 8i o'clock 
 to-morrow morning. 
 
 FRIDAY, (80th day) Sept. 4. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. POHLMAN. 
 
 A memorial was received trom the inhabitants 
 ot Whitehall, praying* for the further support of 
 the Free School system. 
 
 CANALS, FINANCES, &c. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN ptesented the following: 
 
 ^ 1. The aggregate debt of the state at the time of the adop- 
 tion of this constitution shall not be increased, except to 
 repel invasion or suppress insurrection; nor shall the cre- 
 dit of the state in any manner be given or loaned to or in 
 aid of any individual, association orcoiporation. 
 
 2. The auction and salt duties and all receipts into the 
 treasury , not appropriated to other funds or specific objects, 
 shall be appropriated to the use of the general fund. 
 
 3. The tolls collected on all the canals and railroads, 
 the use of water and all the proceeds of property belong- 
 ing to the canals, shall constitute the canal fund and shall 
 be appropriated as follows: 
 
 ^ 4. After paying for all expense of superintending, col- 
 lecting and ordinary repairs, justly chargeable to the canal 
 fund, $1,500,000 shall be appropriated in each fiscal year, 
 commencing first July 134t, for twelve years as a sinking 
 lund, and after that. $2,000,000 in each fiscal year to pay 
 the interest and redeem the principal of the whole debt of 
 the state, until it shall be fully paid, and shall not be di- 
 verted to any other object whatever. 
 
 5. The remaining revenues, after complying with the 
 preceding section, shall be applied to the enlargement of 
 the Erie canal; the completion of the Genesee Valley and 
 Black River canals, and the Oneida river improvement, as 
 shall be directed by law. 
 
 6. Provision may be made by law to make temporary 
 loans to meet any deficits or failures in the re venues or for 
 expenses not provided for; but the aggregate of such tem- 
 porary loans shall not exceed $1,000,000. Besides such 
 temporary loans, the Legislature shall not create a debt 
 which in the aggregate shall exceed $5,000,000, except it 
 be to repel invasion or suppress insurrection; and every 
 law authorizing a loan oi money, except for temporary 
 purposes, shall provide a fund from available sources, for 
 the payment of interest on such loans and the extinguish- 
 ment of the principal in twenty -five years from the time oi 
 contracting such loans; and the fund thus provided for the 
 payment of interest and principal shall not be diverted to 
 any other purpose whatever. 
 
 7. If any state stocks outstanding shall fall due, and 
 the fund herein provided shall not be sufficient to meet the 
 same, the Legislature shall provide for such payment by 
 authorising the issue of new stock, payable at the short- 
 est period, which shall enable the sinking fund provided 
 in the fourth section of this article to meet the same. 
 
 8. The tolls on the other stdte canals shall not be redu- 
 ced until the debts ot the state are paid or provided lorj 
 except with a view to increase the revenues thereof. 
 
 ^9. All the state canals, finished and unfinished, shall 
 forever remain the property of the people of this state, 
 and shall not be leased or otherwise disposed of. 
 
 NOTE The foregoing sections are based upon a debt 
 of $22,254,083 78. excluding the contingent debt (which is 
 believed to be amply secured), and by actual calculations 
 at a rate of 5i per cent interest will pay the whole debt of 
 the state in less than 24 years, and in less than 12 years 
 complete the unfinished works of the state. 
 
 Mr. C. said that this plan contained his own 
 views on this subject, and was the result of much 
 and careful deliberation; and if adopted, would 
 pay the debt in the time stated, less than twenty- 
 four years, and complete the canals in less than 
 twelve years. 
 
 It was ordered to be printed, and referred to the 
 committee of the whole having charge of Mr. 
 HOFFMAN'S report on Canals, Finance, &c., &c. 
 COUNTY COURTS. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR presented the following, 
 which, at his request was laid on the table. He 
 had received it from a gentleman in Allegany 
 county : 
 
 1. Abolish our present justices courts. 
 
 2. Let the boards of supervisors divide each county into 
 such a number of judicial districts, that one man may be 
 able to try all the c&uses, civil and criminal, cognizable 
 before a justice within each district, say two or three to 
 each member of Assembly. 
 
 3. Elect one justice for each district, either by the elec- 
 tors of the county at large or by the voters in each district. 
 
 4. Let the clerk of each town be a clerk of the justices 
 courts 
 
 5. Let the process be issued by the clerk and issues be 
 joined before him. 
 
 6. Let a list ot the legal jurors in each town be kept by 
 the clerk, and one or two days previous to the term, let 
 the clerk draw and the constable number twelve persons 
 to attend, out of which jurors of six may be drawn for 
 each cause. 
 
 7. For the purpose of facilitating collection?, allow a 
 plaintiff' in actions on contract, with the first process to 
 have a declaration served and bill of particulars ot his de- 
 mand, and of the credits he is willing to allow the defend- 
 ant, and unless the defendant put in a plea within six days, 
 and swears to a defence, iet judgment be enteied by the 
 clerk by default. 
 
 8. Let the justice have power to set aside or correct 
 judgments improperly entered by the clerk. 
 
 9. Let a gross amount of justice's fees on each trial be 
 paid by the plaintiffs and recoverable of the defendant, and 
 let such fees be paid into the county treasury. 
 
 10. Let each justice be paid a competent salary out of the 
 county treasury. 
 
 11. Let one or more justices be elected in each town as 
 conservators of the peace, with power to issue warrants 
 and hold criminals to trial, &c. 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. BAKER, from the select committee of 
 eight on that subject, presented the following : 
 
 10. Surrogates shall be elected for four years. They 
 shall be compensated by fixed salaries; and they shall not 
 receive to their own use any fees or perquisites of office. 
 The Surrogate may be made a judge of any inferior court 
 
 hich may be established in any county. 
 
 13 Inferior courts of civil and criminal jurisdiction 
 may be established by the legislature in any county upon 
 the petition of its Board of Supervisors, at the expense of 
 the county, and appeals and writs of error therelrom may 
 be brought to the .Supreme Court or Court of Appeals, as 
 shall be provided by law. But the judges or justices ol 
 all such ceurts shall be elected by the county, city or 
 town, for which they shall be chosen, shall hold their of- 
 
803 
 
 for lour years, shall have no power of appointment to 
 office, aud shall be compensated by fixed salaries. 
 
 ^ . There may be established in any county one or 
 more tribunals of conciliation, each to be composed of not 
 more than three conciliators, to be elected as the legisla- 
 ture may direct. They shall be paid a reasonable com- 
 pensation to be fixed by law, and all fees received by them 
 shall fee paid into the county treasury. The legislature 
 may afford parties inducements to submit their differences 
 to the conciliation of such tribunals by regulation as to 
 costs in other courts. 
 
 . The courts by the last section authorized, shall 
 have no power to render judgment to be obligatory upon 
 the parties, except the parties voluntarily submit their 
 matters in difference, and agree to abide the judgment or 
 assent thereto in the presence of the court in such cases 
 as shall b4 prescribed by law. 
 
 ^16 The court for the trial of impeachments and the 
 correction of errors, the court of chancery, the supreme 
 court, and the county courts as at present organized, are 
 abolished. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER presented the following as a 
 substitute for the report of the committee: 
 
 13. There shall be elected in each of the counties of 
 this state, except the city and county of New York, one 
 county judge, who shall hold his office for four years. 
 The county judge shall hold the county court, perform the 
 duties of the office of surrogate, and such other duties as 
 shall be prescribed by law. The county court shall have 
 such jurisdiction of causes arising injustices court as shall 
 be prescribed by law, but shall have no original civil juris- 
 diction except in special cases to be prescribed by law. 
 
 The county judge, with two justices of the peace, may 
 "hold courts of sessions with such criminal jurisdiction as 
 the legislature shall prescribe, and perform such other du- 
 ties as may be required by law. 
 
 The county judge shall receive an annual salary, to be 
 fixed by the board of supervisors, which shall be neither 
 increased nor diminished during his continuance in office. 
 The justices, for services in courts of session, shallbe paid 
 a per diem allowance out of the county treasury. 
 
 In counties having a population exceeding forty thou- 
 sand, the legislature may provide for the election of a sep- 
 arate officer to peiform the duties of the office of surrogate. 
 
 The legislature may confer equity jurisdiction in spe- 
 cial case's upon the county judge. Appeals shall lie from 
 the county court and court of sessions to the supreme 
 court in bane. 
 
 Interior local courts of civil and criminal jurisdiction, 
 maybe established by the legislature in cities and incor- 
 porated villages; and such courts, except for the city of 
 New York, shall have an uniform organization and juris- 
 diction in such cities and villages respectively. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER would l,e satisfied if the con- 
 vention would only fix this principle in the con- 
 stitution, to limit the action of the legislature, so 
 that they should not be allowed to authorize more 
 than one Judge of any county court. 
 
 Mr. C. said he had no desire to consume a mo- 
 ment of the time of the convention, but he appeal- 
 ed to the convention to agree upon one principle 
 and he should be satisfied, for he was unwilling 
 to leave the power to the legislature to fasten up- 
 on us the old and odious system of five judges. If 
 they would give the people county courts with 
 one county judge, he should be satisfied, but there 
 i l.licsp judges scattered throughout the 
 late so many, in short, that the very title be- 
 came obnoxious. If the members of this conven- 
 tion were called by their titles, how often would 
 they hear "judge" this, or "judge" that. [Mr. 
 MORRIS " There are a few "generals".] 
 [Laughter.] Yes, and the title of " general" was 
 as objectionable as "judge." He hoped the con- 
 vention would not leave such a power to the le- 
 gisht.ure as would enable it to fasten the old rot- 
 ten system upon the people by which such cattle 
 as many of these judges were, were placed on the 
 bench. Numbers of such judges did not add 
 strength or efficiency to such a court. It was 
 
 constituted by a judge at the head, and a fool at 
 each side ; and strange spectacles were sometimes 
 witnessed in courts so constituted. To one he 
 would advert. A judge, an intelligent and learn- 
 ed man. who was presiding in such a court, with 
 two such judges to aid him, once, probably with- 
 out consulting them, made a decision, as the opi- 
 nion of the court. When he had concluded, one 
 of the side judges rose, and drawing himself up to 
 his full length exclaimed "'Such may be the 
 opinion of the court, but it aint mine by a damn'd 
 
 sight.". The other judge then rose and added 
 
 " By the Great Jehovah God ! nor mine." The 
 judge then quietly remarked, " Gentlemen, I am 
 overruled." Now he asked the convention if it 
 would perpetuate a system which would put such 
 men on the bench, and continue a system which 
 was but a mere mockery of justice. [Mr. KEN- 
 NEDY " Are -they not elected ?"] No, they were 
 put there by the mighty appointing power of tjhe 
 governor and senate : and there was nothing of 
 party in it, for he believed the two gentlemen he 
 alluded to were of opposite politics. Perhaps the 
 gentleman from Allegany (Mr. ANGEL) could tell 
 the locality where this scene was laid. 
 
 The PRESIDENT There is no question be- 
 fore the convention. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that the report of the se- 
 lect committee was certainly first in order. 
 
 The 10th section was then read : 
 
 Surrogates shall be elected for four years. They shall 
 be compensated by fixed salaries, and they shall not re 
 ceiveany fees or perquisites of office." 
 
 The select committee's report proposed to amend 
 this by adding after the word "fees," the words 
 " for their own use." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON wished the Convention to 
 take up that part of the report of the select com- 
 mittee that related to county courts ; fur if thev 
 adopted that, then surrogates would be needed. 
 
 The Convention then dropped I he 10th and took 
 up the 13tb section. It gives to the Legislature 
 power to establish inferior courts of criminal ju- 
 risdiction. 
 
 The report of the select committee proposed to 
 amend this by inserting the words "In any county 
 at the expense of the county." 
 
 . Mr. F. F. BARKER moved to amend as fol- 
 lows : add after the word " county" the words 
 " upon the unanimous petition of the board of su- 
 pervisors." 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to strike out " una 
 nimous" and insert " a majority." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER objected to the use of the word 
 
 supervisors" at all in the amendment; they 
 were a body whose sole object was to save ex- 
 pense. 
 
 JVlr. F. F. BARKER contended that the board 
 of supervisors were the proper persons to judge 
 whether the county wanted a court or not. 
 
 Some conversation followed between Messrs 
 BROWN, TALLMADGE, VAN SCHOONHOVEN, and 
 LOOMIS. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was opposed to voting for a 
 county court in any shape, until they got the 32 
 judges of the supreme court reduced. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER was opposed to the existence 
 of a board of supervisors at all. It cost the coun- 
 ty $1,500 a year to audit the petty accounts of the 
 
804 
 
 court, which would be as well done by three com- 
 missioners for $50, 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY wished to see the system of 
 these courts of a uniform character all over the 
 state. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE withdrew his amendment. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr- BACKUS'S 
 amendment ayes 51 noes 53. 
 
 Mr. HUNT offered the following : strike out 
 of the report of the select committee, the words 
 *' at the expense of the county," and inserting at 
 the end of the section the words, " but no such 
 court shall be a charge on the state treasury." 
 
 Mr. BRUCE, by unanimous consent, presented 
 the following plan for a 
 
 COUNTY COURT. 
 
 . There shall be elected in every county of this state 
 (except the citv and county ef New-York) a county judge, 
 -who shall hold his office for lour years,,* Said judge shall 
 hold a county court and perlormall the duties of suirogate 
 for said county, 
 
 . Such county court shall have appellate jurisdic- 
 tion in all cases tried in jurisdiction in all cases tried in 
 justices courts, and shall have original jurisdiction ab here- 
 inafter provided. 
 
 ^ . The county judge, with two justices of the peace, 
 (to be annually elected by the board of supervisor!-} shall 
 hold courts ot general sessions for the trial of all orf'ences 
 punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for a term 
 not exceeding ten years, and shall perform such other spe- 
 cial duties as may be required by v law. 
 
 ^ .... The county judge shall receive an annual salary, 
 to be fixed by law and paid from the county treasury; and 
 all moneys received by him as surrogate or judge shall be 
 paid into the county treasury. 
 
 ^ . In every county having a population of 50,000, or 
 more, the legislature may, by a majority of all the mem- 
 bers elected, authorize the election ol one or two associate 
 judges, and may confer upon such courts such original ju- 
 risdiction as may be necessary. After two years from the 
 adoption of this constitution, the legislature may, by a 
 majority of all the members elected, confer upon the court 
 of any other county such original jurisdiction as the 
 business thereof may require. 
 
 The question recurred on Mr. HUNT'S amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said it was only a verbal amend- 
 ment, to make provisions for suitors to be charged 
 so much each suit, in order to pay the expense of 
 a court. 
 
 Mr. DANA objected to Mr. HUNT'S amend- 
 ment. He did not believe there was much dan- 
 ger in trusting the legislature to establish these 
 inferior courts. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM was in favor of the amendment. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART supported Mr. HUNT'S amend- 
 ment ; so did 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG, who said there were ma- 
 ny local courts that could not properly be called 
 county courts ; and they should be supported in 
 the way pointed out by Mr. O'CONOR. 
 
 Mr. HUNT'S amendment was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. COOK moved to amend the section thus : 
 by adding at the end of the section the words 
 " No county, unless it contains 50,000 inhabit- 
 ants shall be entitled to more than two judges 
 one of whom shall discharge the duties of surro- 
 gate." On that amendment he called for the yeas 
 and nays. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to amend still further 
 He wished to have two judges or more, to large 
 counties. He wanted justice brought home to 
 every man's door. 
 
 Mr. STOW was opposed to the adoption of any 
 general system of county courts; what would do 
 
 or the small counties would not do for the larger 
 Bounties ; the latter should not be compelled to 
 ake tribunals they did not want in order to ac- 
 ommodate the smaller counties ; these little pet- 
 y tribunals we;e the curse of the country. 
 
 Mr. COOK said he had offered his amendment 
 as a protection to the smaller counties. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL considered it necessary that the 
 egislature should have power to establish county 
 courts, particularly in large and populous coun- 
 ies not having cities within their limits. In his 
 (pinion, it was desirable to keep up old county 
 associations and institutions. In this great state, 
 vith its diversified pursuits, and interests, it wa 
 especially important to give each section the ful- 
 est scope for working out its own social progress. 
 .n St. Lawrence county, with its large territory 
 and increasing population and business, he felt 
 mre its citizens would be disappointed if they 
 should be deprived of their own county courts. 
 
 It was true that the old system of five county 
 udges for every county whether having 15,000 
 or 80,000 inhabitants without discrimination re- 
 garding relative business and litigation, had be- 
 come justly odious. In the larger counties it had 
 worked well, but in others, had proved useless 
 and even ridiculous. He hoped that the defects 
 of the present system, would not lead the Con- 
 vention to the opposite extreme, and produce the 
 rejection of the positive good secured by county 
 :ribunals. It was unjust toward large counties, 
 where the system worked well, to deprive them 
 of a desired local judiciary, because smaller coun- 
 ties not yet appreciating the distinctive advantage 
 and. independence secured by local institutions, 
 were willing to have the individual rights of their 
 citizens dependent, solely, upon one great state 
 court. He protested against such an application 
 of consolidation to St. Lawrence county. It now 
 had efficient county courts and desired to retain 
 them. 
 
 The Convention should permit the legislature 
 to establish county courts of original common law 
 jurisdiction, at least in counties requiring such 
 courts. In artificial municipal corporations such 
 courts are always established. If a city of 10,- 
 000 inhabitants may have its Recorder's or May- 
 or's court, why prohibit the same privilege to a 
 county ot 70,000 inhabitants, not blessed with a 
 great city ? There can be no reasonable objec- 
 tion, unless judicial institutions of localities shall 
 be swallowed up in one great supreme court. 
 The Convention has already adopted the propo- 
 sition , that county courts might be established in 
 counties whose boards of supervisors should so 
 determine. Where such courts were obnoxious, 
 and in cities otherwise provided for, the super- 
 visors would not apply for them. It was perfect- 
 ly safe to leave the expediency of establishing 
 such courts to be determined by the practical 
 working of our new judicial system, and the in- 
 creasing business and population of the various 
 sections of the state. 
 
 Mr. R. believed that several counties, whose de- 
 legates now oppose county courts, would imperi- 
 ously require them within ten years. At all events 
 delegates who now i eject them for their own 
 counties, ought not to interdict other counties 
 from a desired and useful institution, maintained 
 at local expense, and without general charge upon 
 
805 
 
 the state, especially as it would necessarily relieve 
 (he great court ot thirty-two state justices of much 
 business, and give a lar^e share ot its privileges, 
 to the counties rejecting local courts. 
 
 By the lust section of the committee's report, 
 "all county courts, as afc present organized, are 
 abolished," but the local courts of cities are all 
 to be retained. It would be unjust and invidious 
 to prohibit the legislature from extending the 
 same judicial rights to counties, which cities en- 
 joy, if required hy the counties. He regretted to 
 see gentleman from the cities so generally oppos- 
 ing this extension of equal privileges to the coun- 
 try. Did they desire to prevent any possible ex- 
 pansion of our judicial system, to meet future ex 
 igency, except in cities alone ? Such a plan 
 would not be endured. Let counties, who desire 
 it, have their courts of civil and criminal jurisdic- 
 tion, tet the office of surrogate be administered 
 by a judge ot these courts, the number of associ- 
 ate judges corresponding to the number of mem- 
 bers of Assembly in each county, and then their 
 local associations would be preserved, and their 
 judicial organization placed on a more equal foot- 
 ing with that of cities. All the larger counties 
 would sustain usetul and respectable courts, and 
 enable the supreme court to be much more effi- 
 cient and valuable, by relieving it from a mass of 
 business more properly belonging to local courts. 
 
 Mr. R. proposed that each county having a 
 county court, should (New York city excepted,) 
 have the number of county judges corresponding 
 to the number of members of Assembly from 
 the county, one of whom should be surrogate, and 
 he hoped this, or a similar plan would be adopted 
 by the Convention. 
 
 Mr. R said, the Convention had adopted the 
 substitute of Mr. CROOKER, permitting the legis- 
 lature to establish county courts for criminal pro- 
 ceedings, and to adjudicate matters arising in jus- 
 tices' courts, but prohibiting jurisdiction to origi- 
 nate civil proceedings, except in certain special 
 cases. By the same section, local courts of general 
 civil and criminal jurisdiction could be established 
 in cities and incorporated villages. Should the 
 section be adopted, as it now stads, it would sanc- 
 tion the most anomalous inconsistency. No county, 
 however large and populous, could have its local 
 court of record of original civil jurisdiction, with 
 its jurors drawn from the whole body of the coun- 
 ty., but roust hold its court for criminal business, 
 and review of justice court proceedings, requiring 
 the same attendance of jurors, and of the county 
 clerk. Yet every incorporated village in the same 
 county might have its court with civil jurisdiction, 
 to which much of the local judicial business of 
 the county would be drawn. The excellence of 
 our admirable jury system could not so well be 
 sustained by village jurors, as by those drawn from 
 the whole mass of the county. Nor would these 
 village courts administer justice so impartially as 
 one court appointed by the whole county. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Convention were of the opin- 
 ion that the judges of the supreme court will be 
 able to discharge the duties of all the courts of 
 law arid equity, except as a court of final review; 
 and, in addition, the duties of some 300 masters 
 and examiners in chancery and that it would be 
 both sate and wise to prohibit, by stringent con- 
 stitutional rule, the establishment of county, or 
 
 courts, of concurrent ongivnd jutisdie.tion. 
 Mr. R. could not fed so cfH.iiii of the success of 
 thin new judicial ex;>criii,i nt. 
 
 If one single court of original jurisdiction 
 should be found inadequate to the disc! 
 the judicial business of the state, should the: con- 
 stitution restrain the legislature from establishing 
 concurrent tribunals of some sort to obviate the 
 difficulty ? It is urged that local courts in cities 
 and villages may be created, and that the juris- 
 diction of justices of the peace may be extended 
 to all actions. Was this the wisest and best 
 mode ? Were these inferior courts so well calcu- 
 lated to attain the ends of justice, as well regulat- 
 ed county courts ? Jf, from any cause, one court 
 of 32 judges should'prove inadequate to perform 
 all the duties imposed upon it, good county courts 
 would afford the best relief. Power in the legis- 
 lature to establish them, need not be exerted, un- 
 less it should be found necessary. If suitors are 
 compelled to originate causes in justices courts, 
 and remove them to the county court for review, 
 capable and experienced county judges will be 
 required. If the county court has general juris- 
 diction , and the presiding judge shall be properly 
 compensated, efficient and sound county courts 
 will be the result, in all counties having much 
 business, and suitors will prefer to rest their 
 causes in such courts except in important, or un- 
 usual, cases. 
 
 Mr. R. did not like the idea of one oversha- 
 dowing court, to which all must resort for jus- 
 tice. An enlightened rivalry between courts of 
 concurrent powers, had long been found benefi- 
 cial in calling into exercise the best judicial abi- 
 
 1 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN objected that there 
 was no limit to the number of judges in counties 
 with over 50,000 inhabitants. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out two and 
 insert " one, who shall be surrogate." 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to strike 
 out " in counties containing 50,000 inhabitants." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS was opposed to this section. 
 The legislature would be embarrassed and bur- 
 dened with all sorts of schemes for local courts, if 
 it was adopted. He wanted ja uniform system, 
 and not all sorts of courts of counties. 
 
 Mr. BROWN hoped they would cgme to a vote 
 on this matter without delay; this Convention 
 would never agree on settling the details ot these 
 local courts; the plau ot Mr. CROOKER with a 
 slight modification he was willing to go for. He 
 condemned the plan of surrendering the people's 
 power to the will of the board of supervisors ; so 
 that if any board refused to petition for a court, 
 why a county would go without a county 
 court. If this section was to be adopted, there 
 would be no civilized people under God's heaven 
 that would have so contemptible a judicial system 
 as we should have. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said the objections to a want of 
 uniformity in these courts, would apply with 
 equal force to the mayor's courts, recorder's courts, 
 &c. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that himself and colleagues 
 were in favor ol county courts. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTHiwould not consent to vote for 
 any place for these county courts that was not uni- 
 form throughout the whole state. He had riodis- 
 
806 
 
 trust of the board of supervisors ; but he did not 
 want an appeal from ajustice's court in one county 
 to a court of common pleas, and an appeal from a 
 justice's court, to the supreme court, in another 
 county ; this was a state of things that co'uld not 
 be tolerated. 
 
 Mr. BARKER explained the action of the com- 
 mittee, of which he was chairman. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER'S amendment then came up 
 again for consideration. [It is given above.] 
 He withdrew his amendment to Mr. COOK'S 
 amendment, so as to get a direct vote. 
 
 Mr. WILLARD said the legal gentleman must 
 think that the laymen were either deficient in in- 
 tellect or minus in memory. They were told 
 sometime since, that these thirty-two judges 
 would do all the work, and that there would be 
 no necessity for any county courts. Now the 
 tune is changed. The old judiciary system cost 
 the state $30,000; our new system is to cost 
 $100,000. He would consent, perhaps, to have a 
 surrogate ; probably they could not do without 
 some such system. But he thought it would be 
 very injudicious to give him the powers of a 
 judge. He wanted to see real reform in this 
 matter. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY was of the same opinion 
 It was idle to have too many of these ridiculous 
 judges. Once they came from Sullivan co. to 
 Delhi, and after righting and quarrelling with 
 each other three or four days, they all had to go 
 back where they came from, like the dog, with 
 his tail between his legs, 
 
 Mr. COOK said he was in favor of the plan ol 
 Mr. CROOKER, because it limited the number oi 
 judges; and on that account it was that he had 
 offered his amendment. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER suggested , that they 
 should pass over this 13th section, as amended by 
 the committee, and take up Mr. CROCKER'S pro- 
 position. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said he should vote for 
 Mr. CROCKER'S plan let the fate of the 13th sec- 
 tion be what it might. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM inquired whether it was possible 
 if the amendment ol Mr. CROOKER was adopted 
 to go back to the 4th section, and reduce the uum 
 ber of judges there, He believed that those judges 
 were competent to do all the judicial business in 
 the state that we ought to have. To add county 
 courts to them, would be to make them sinecures 
 and to increase, rather than decrease, expense. 
 If we were to have a county court, he must say lha 
 he preferred the president judge system. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER, in reply to Mr. BASCOM, deniei 
 thai (he proposed system would be more expensive 
 than the present, and insisted that, on the contra 
 ry, it would be far less. 
 
 The question being taken on Mr. COOK'S amend 
 ment, it was rejected ayes 38, nays 44. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER then proposed his substitute to 
 the 13th section, as given above. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to add, " And such court 
 except in the city of iNew Yoik, shall have an un 
 form organization and jurisdiction." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER assented to the amendment. 
 Mr. STETSON objected to that portion of th 
 amendment which gave the county courts appe 
 late jurisdiction in justices' courts, and propo.se 
 
 amend so as to leave it to the legislature to say 
 ow these cases should be carried up. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to amend so as to provide 
 hat the Board of Supervisors should fix the sala- 
 y of these officers. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER preferred to leave the matter 
 
 the legislature. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN sustained the 
 mendment. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY followed on the same side 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said he would withdraw all 
 pposition to the proposition. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment was 
 dopted ayes 93, nays 14. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to amend by adding the 
 vords " as such cases," so as to limit the appeal* 
 o civil cases. 
 
 This was debated by Messrs. CHATFIELD, 
 IROOKER and PERKINS, when Mr. M. with- 
 rew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to add the words " county 
 )f Erie" after the words " city of New-York," so 
 
 to exempt Erie also from the provision. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY briefly opposed the proposition. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL opposed the proposition gene- 
 ally, and could not vote for it unless the court 
 lad original civil jurisdiction vested in it. He 
 moved to amend 'in accordance with these views. 
 
 Mr. STOW continued the debate, when 
 
 Mr. HOTCHKISS asked for the previous ques- 
 ion, and there was a second, and the main ques- 
 ion ordered. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. STOW was rejected. 
 
 The question was then taken on the proposi- 
 tion of Mr. CROOKER as amended, (heretofore 
 given,) and it was adopted ayes 52, nays 44, as 
 bllows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Baker, Bergen, Bow- 
 dish, Burr, Cambreleng, Clark, Cook, Crocker, Dodd, Dor- 
 Ion Flanders, Forsyth, Graham, Harris, Harrison, Hart, 
 Hawley, Hotchkiss, A. Huntington, Hyde, Kemble, Ker 
 nan Kingsley, Loomis, McNeil Maxwell, Miller, Morris, 
 Munro, Murphy, Nellis, Nicholas, Patterson, Porter, Pow- 
 ers, Bhoades, Sears, Shaver, Stetson, Swackhamer, Tag- 
 gart W.Taylor, Townsend, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, 
 Waterbury , Witbeck, Wood, Youngs 52. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Ayrault, F.F. Backus, H.Backus,Bouck, 
 Brayton Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Bull, D. D. Campbell, 
 Candee, Conely, Dana, Dubois, Greene, Hunter, E. Hun- 
 tington Hutchinson, Parish, Penniman, Perkins, President, 
 Richmond, Riker, Ruggles, Russell, St. John, Salisbury, 
 Sanford, Simmons, E. Spencer.W.H. Spencer, Stow rait, 
 Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, Tuthill, Ward, A. Wright, W. B. 
 Wright, Yawger, Young 44. ^ 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR laid on the table a motion 
 to reconsider. 
 
 The question then recurred upon the section 
 as amended. 
 
 Mr. A. HUNTINGTON said he did not get 
 hold of the question decided by the Inst vote. lie 
 voted against the proposition which he had just 
 before voted to sustain. He desired to change 
 his vote. 
 
 Leave was given, and the question recurred on 
 Mr CROOKER'S substitute for the 13th section. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE rose not to discuss this 
 question, but in justice to himself, to say that he 
 was an advocate for a county court, and had so 
 expressed himself in the early proceedings of the 
 convention. He would gladly have had such a 
 court made a part of the judicial system, which 
 would then, as a consequence, have reduced the 
 number of tlie supreme court judges to twelve ; but 
 
807 
 
 in this he was unsuccessful. Now those who de- 
 sired county courts, have met with no straight- 
 lunviinl opposition, but the wisdom of the con- 
 vention h;is been to nriki- lunemlments, and of so 
 incongruous a character as to force the friends of 
 county courts to vote ;ig;unst their own measure. 
 He desired county courts for he dissented en- 
 tirely from the policy of establishing this army of 
 judges, and had no idea that they would answer 
 the purpose with original civil jurisdiction. 
 The amendment was entirely discordant with 
 every rule of propriety, and he though a friend of 
 a county court, voted 'against it. He denied that 
 by the language of the amendment that the legis- 
 lature would have the power to confer this juris- 
 diction. As it was, his only hope was that when 
 this strange army of supreme court judges, was 
 submitted to the people, it should be in a separate 
 proposition, for he believed the people would ne- 
 ver take them off our hands. In conclusion Mr. 
 T. remarked, that he made this explanation in 
 order that his votes might not appear incongru- 
 ous, nor be understood as in opposition to a mea- 
 sure of which he was an advocate. The objects 
 of amendment could not be misunderstood. It 
 had been to compel the friends to vote against 
 their own measure. 
 
 Some further conversation ensued, when Mr. 
 J. TAYLOR desired to propose an additional 
 section, in substance that which Mr. PERKINS 
 proposed to offer providing that the county 
 should have such jurisdiction of causes arising in 
 justices' courts, and such original civil jurisdic- 
 tion as might be prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND objected to the proposition 
 and it could not be entertained, unanimous con- 
 sent being required. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR asked leave to propose an 
 amendment, conferring on the legislature, by the 
 vote of a majority of all elected, to authorize the 
 election of one or two associate judges, in coun- 
 ties having a population of 5U,OUO, and to confer 
 original civil jurisdiction; and after two years 
 to confer on any other county courts the like juris- 
 diction, if necessary. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY objected, and it was no 
 received. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that he should vote agains 
 the section, and went on to give his reasons fo 
 so doing. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN replied, afte 
 some further conversation. 
 
 Mr. BROWN thought this difficulty might be 
 got over if, as he believed, there was a majority 
 here m favor of giving the legislature power ove 
 this subject. To test the sense of the body, h( 
 moved to re-corninit this section to the committee 
 of eight with instructions to make this exceptioi 
 cover any case where the legislature might see fi 
 to confer this jurisdiction and that they repor 
 instanter. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND occupied the time with 
 personal explanation, and withdrew his objection 
 Mr. HOFFMAN advocated the resolution pro 
 posed by Mr. BROWN, and pointed out whereir 
 he considered the pending proposition was dfec 
 tive. 
 
 Tne debate was continued by Messrs. CROOKER 
 
 MURPHY, FORSY 1 H, and J. J. TAYLOR whe 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to amend the motion o 
 
 /Jr. BROWN, so as to recommit with instructions 
 o report the following sections: 
 
 {) . The legislature may cstabJislAa county court to be 
 eid by a single county judge, and courts of sessions to be 
 eld by the county judge and two justices of the peace. 
 'he county judge shall "be elected lor four years, and shall 
 erlorm the duties oi the office of surrogate and the special 
 uties prescribed by law. The board of supervisors may 
 x the salary of the county judge, and the legislature muy 
 rescribe the power and jurisdiction of the county court 
 rid court of sessions. 
 
 ^ . Inferior and uniform local courts of civil and crimj- 
 ial jurisdiction may be established by the legislature in 
 ities. In counties having a population ol 50,000, the le- 
 ;islature may provide for the election oi a separate officer 
 o perform the duiks of the ottice ot surrogate. 
 
 . The legislature may prescribe the number and time 
 f election of commissioners in the several counties to per- 
 orm certain duties of a judge at chambers which shall be 
 pecified by law. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. FORSYTH 
 and STETSON when 
 
 The Convention adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. BAKER would avail himself of this oppor- 
 unity to explain, briefly, the action of the select 
 committee, inasmuch as some gentlemen seemed 
 to regard the 13rh section as i sported by him, as 
 antagonistic to the plan proposed bv the gentle, 
 man from Chautauque, (Mr. CROOKER.) Imme- 
 diately after their appointment last evening, the 
 committee assembled, and addressed themselves 
 (with earnest desire to harmonize the conflicting 
 views entertained in this body,) to the first duty 
 assigned in the order under which they were ap- 
 pointed, viz: whether it was expedient that a 
 plan for the organization of local courts should be 
 settled in the Constitution. This they agreed to, 
 affirmatively, with great unanimity; but, like their 
 predecessors in the committee of thirteen, when 
 they proceeded to make an effort at perfecting 
 such a plan, no system could be devised to which 
 a majority could assent. The committee was 
 equally divided, on conferring upon these courts 
 original jurisdiction, as well as to agreeing to 
 any^of the various plans which had been sng- 
 
 jted, providing such courts with limited or spe- 
 cial jurisdiction. Having failed in these efforts, 
 they returned to the consideration of the 13'h sec- 
 tion, referre-1 to them and perfected it so as to 
 meet the unanimous approval of the committee. 
 
 Considering the rapid growth, in business and 
 population, of our cities and towns, it would pro- 
 bably be found necessary to make provision in the 
 Constitution lor the future organization c.f inferi- 
 or or subordinate courts in such localities, whe- 
 ther a general system for the State were here 
 adopted or not. In his view, therefore, the 13th 
 section, as reported, was necessary in any event, 
 and would be found to synchronize with the main 
 features of the plan under consideration, or any 
 other which might, be adopted. 
 
 It had been objected by the gentleman from 
 Rensselaer (Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN) that under 
 the provisions of the 13th section it was to be ap- 
 prehended that courts differently organized and 
 having diverse forms of practice, might be estab- 
 lished in various localities and in some none 
 so that appellate jurisdictio'n from the justices' 
 courts, might in one place be conferred upon one 
 of these local courts and in others ypon the su- 
 preme court, and thus produce great confusion 
 
 
808 
 
 and embarrassment. He would suggest to that 
 gentleman, that his objection might be obviated 
 by providing, by the adoption of a part of the plan 
 under consideration, or otherwise, a uniform ap- 
 pellate jurisdiction in these matters, and yet pro- 
 vide for the future wants of cities, &c., by the 
 passage of the 13th section as reported. 
 
 He had himself been very reluctant to give up 
 county courts with original jurisdiction, and had 
 until quite lately entertained the hope that local 
 courts with such characters and jurisdiction as to 
 secure for them the respect and confidence of 
 suitors, would be established. But it being now 
 evident that no county court, with original juris- 
 diction would be provided by this Convention, he 
 cheerfully acquiesced, and would endeavor to aid 
 in perfecting whatever system should secure the 
 approval of a majority of this body. He believed 
 the proposition of Mr. CROOKER was regarded 
 with most favor and should therefore vote for it, 
 if upon further examination he found it to con- 
 tain nothing more objectionable than he now was 
 aware of. 
 
 If, however, the whole matter should be left 
 to the legislature under the 13th section, he did 
 not then think the objection of the gentleman 
 from " Rensselaer well taken. The legislature 
 \vould, he believed, adopt a uniform system for 
 the State. We had no reason to suppose that 
 they would organize a court not proceeding ac- 
 cording to the course of the common law unique 
 in its structure, jurisdiction and practice but 
 that the authority to organize courts of limited 
 jurisdiction would be understood to contemplate 
 the creation of such courts as were known to the 
 people, the Constitution and the laws of the 
 State, such as accorded with existing institutions. 
 He had no fear that the legislature would, under 
 this section, establish a Star Chamber, a Pretori- 
 am or an Inquisition ; but would, as a sensible 
 representative of a free and orderly people, pro- 
 vide a uniform system for the whole State. 
 
 ;Ylr. BRUNDAGE was in favor generally of the 
 plan ot the judiciaiy committee ; but he was op- 
 posed to the 13th section. He was opposed to 
 these local courts; and would have but one kind 
 of court to try alt issues. 
 
 Mr. LOO MIS remarked that therejwas one lead- 
 ing leatuieand principle running through the plan 
 of the judiciary committee, and that was that we 
 should have only one single court that should do 
 the duty and have the jurisdiction now exercised 
 originally by all the courts of record in this state 
 -the 'Urt of chancery, the supreme court, and 
 the court of common pleas. He had undertaken 
 to employ an adequate torce to do all this. Mem- 
 bers of the judiciary committee, in making their 
 explanations when the report came in, apparently 
 succeeded in convincing this body thai the num- 
 ber of judges and the organization of thar tribunal 
 would be sufficient and he had been exceedingly 
 gratified to see the perseverance with which the 
 Convention had resisted all temptations to depart 
 from that principle. To establish a county court 
 having original civil jurisdiction, or to grant to the 
 legislature such power, would be an entire de- 
 parture from this principle. If we believed that 
 the force provided here was not sufficient, then 
 we could noT be excused for making the judges so 
 numerous. He had not changed his opinion on 
 
 this subject; and he asked, if under the demon- 
 stratioa made by the gentleman from Clinton, that 
 there were but 227 causes tried by the common 
 pleas, originating in that court, the last year- 
 making four to each county, except the city of 
 New York whether gentlemen were prepared, 
 in order to get these four causes in each county 
 tried, to endanger the execution of the system we 
 had thus far projected ? With four circuits a year 
 in each county, under this system, for the trial of 
 issues of fact and in equity, what were we to gain 
 by having another court of original jurisdiction, 
 with all its machinery and expense of jurors and 
 witnesses, &c. , under the name of a county court ? 
 He conceded the necessity for some local officers 
 to discharge special and local duties, such as su- 
 preme court commissioners and county judges, 
 and perhaps masters and examiners, had been 
 charged with . But they need not be charged with 
 any duty contemplated in this report. Fix the 
 duties of surrogate and those he had enumerated, 
 and they would have ample employment, and the 
 fees paid to the surrogate would pay them. He 
 urged the Convention to adhere to the principle of 
 this plan, and not to confer on the Legislature the 
 power to give these tribunals original civil juris- 
 diction. If we did so, he feared the Legislature 
 would at the start organize such courts and then 
 we should have thiity-two judges half employed, 
 half paid, and of course not half qualified. For 
 one, he was willing to conciliate and compromise 
 differences, but he could not give up the leading 
 principles of the report that the supreme court 
 was intended to try all issues of fact. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR wanted to get a vote on Mr. 
 BRUCE'S proposition ; he regarded it as a com- 
 promise and platform where the friends of each 
 plan would meet. It was also the most simple 
 and economical plan. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said it did not differ materially 
 from his plan. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR: Yes, it does, in regard to 
 ncorporated villages. 
 
 Mr. BROWN desired to strike out incorporated 
 villages. He proceeded to vindicate himself and* 
 the committee, from the strictures made upon 
 both. The charges of inconsistency and fraud, 
 he could not receive in silence. The part he had 
 taken in this debate was not his own seeking. 
 The gentleman from Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) at 
 an early stage of the debate, turned his back upon 
 this report. The gentleman from New-York, 
 (Mr. O'CoNOR) did not like it, and had said little 
 in support of it. The gentleman from Seneca 
 lad been incessant in his attacks upon it. The 
 gentleman from Columbia (Mr. JORDAN) had 
 3een called away by professional business and 
 the chairman (Mr. RUGGLES) had been struck 
 down by sickness. He, therefore, with the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) had stood 
 almost alone in defence of this report. As to his 
 own course, he denied that he was committed on 
 ;he mode of appointing judges, and in proposing 
 :he general ticket system, advocated opinions 
 which he had in no way compromised. And in 
 regarclto this thirteenth section, he could say that 
 le assented to it from no belief that the force pro- 
 vided here was inadequate, but because from the 
 ears entertained and expressed in other quarters 
 that it was not. Mr. B. went into a review of 
 
809 
 
 the proceedings and course of debate on this plan 
 from the beginning glancing at the objection 
 which had been made to the report, particularly 
 at. what had been said of this " army of judges" 
 insinuating that, from the statistics before us, i 
 any thing had been proved here, it was that thii 
 system was greatly superior to the present ineffi 
 cient system, and much cheaper. Indeed, j 
 worse system could scarcely be devised than th 
 present. All that the committee asked for this 
 plan was, that this convention would provide foi 
 supplying deficiencies in it, if in the progress o 
 time, and the increase of population and business 
 deficiencies should be found in it. And undei 
 either of the plans proposed by Messrs. CROOK.' 
 ER and BRUCE, such deficiencies might be sup- 
 plied, without entailing any additional expense 
 upon the counties. The fees of the surrogate 
 would be ample to meet all its requisitions. In 
 his own county, and in the adjoining county 01 
 Dutchess, these fees amounted in the aggregate to 
 some $5,900 annually. Either of these two pro- 
 positions would suit him, and some such section 
 we should adopt, if we intended to give full effec 
 and a fair trial to this system. It might prove to 
 be absolutely essential to its effective working 
 And he called upon the gentleman from Kings, 
 (Mr. MURPHY) if he had really enlisted under his 
 banner, to follow him to the end of the war and 
 not to stop short at the " Palm Ravine," as if all 
 had been done, that was yet to be accomplished. 
 He insisted that the legislature should be empow- 
 ered, as a matter of precaution as a sort of safe- 
 ty-valve to this system, to create a court of small 
 original jurisdiction. 
 
 Mr. PEUKINS considered that Mr. BROWJT had 
 maintained his consistency as well as any of them. 
 Now, he was satisfied that if our eight circuit 
 judges were relieved from chancery powers ; they 
 and the three supreme court judges, five chancel- 
 lors making sixteen in all, would do up all the 
 business except that of the court of appeals. But 
 after all some power must be given to the legisla- 
 ture; adopt what provision they might to relieve 
 the system. These thirty.two judges could not do 
 all the common law, and equity business, masters' 
 and examiners' work, without the help of the le- 
 gislature to establish inferior courts. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that the gentleman from 
 Orange (Mr. BROWN) had most completely vindi- 
 cated himself and the judiciary committee ; but 
 at the same time a vindication of either was unne- 
 cessary. The convention was told by the judi- 
 ciary committee at the outset that they did not 
 consider this system perfect by any means, with- 
 out the aid of inferior tribunals ; this 13th section 
 was intended to supply that requisite. Neither 
 did members here seriously believe that this su- 
 preme court was to try all the petty assault and 
 battery cases, or all the paltry slander suits 
 that are now tried in the courts of common 
 pleas. The legislature must have power giv- 
 en them to establish these inferior courts. 
 Statistics, it is true, only showed 227 causes dis- 
 posed of in the county courts in a year ; yet these 
 227, with 20, 30, and even 50 witnesses, would 
 constitute themselves quite an important item in 
 the business of these courts. He had conclusive- 
 ly shown that the expense of these courts 
 would be much less than under the present sys- 
 
 tem ; but the expense he regarded as a seconda- 
 ry consideration when compared with speedy and 
 sound justice. He liked the plan of the gentle- 
 man from Madison, (Mr. BRUCE,) and in adopt- 
 ing that, for the sake of caution, it would be well 
 to have a power somewhat resembling that which 
 the 13th section proposes to confer. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN denied that from the expression 
 of the committee and the arguments here, it was 
 asserted that this supreme court would be sufficient 
 to discharge all the business of the state. It was 
 in vain to hope that they could do so. They could 
 never take cognizance of the petty cases of slan- 
 der and assault and battery. If they did, it would 
 sink the court to the level of the repudiated com- 
 mon pleas. It was for these reasons he was in fa- 
 vor of having the local courts vested wilh some 
 original jurisdiction in matters ol this kind, and 
 of having the Legislature empowered to do it. 
 He preferred the plan of Mr. BRUCE, as being 
 more flexible to the wants ot the public, leaving 
 it to the Legislature to bring it forward when de- 
 sired. In relation to the chamber business, those 
 county judges would be required, he urged, also, 
 for that purpose. In regard to the expense, he 
 urged, that even with the addition of these county 
 courts, the proposed system would be far more 
 economical than the present one. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH said that no one mora fully sym- 
 pathized with the unfortunate situation of the gen- 
 tleman from Orange, and the judiciary committee, 
 but he could not admit that any thing that had oc- 
 curred yet would relieve the gentleman from 
 Orange from the inconsistency of his position. 
 Mr. F. urged that the effect of adopting the pro- 
 position of the gentleman from Orange this morn- 
 ing, would be to defraud those who had voted for 
 the great supreme court. All these plans for coun- 
 ty courts, he contended, were in direct interference 
 with the plan of the committee. Mr. F t went on 
 at some length on this point. He was originally 
 opposed to all courts of common pleas, and voted 
 with the judiciary committee on their proposition 
 with the understanding that no such court would 
 :)e needed. Nor did he believe it was needed 
 now, but as a compromise he yielded to the adop- 
 tion of the proposition of the gentleman from Cat- 
 taraugus And now it was proposed that an amend- 
 ment should be adopted, which changed the whole 
 character of the proposition. He differed entirely 
 rom the gentlemen from Orange and Herkimer, 
 as to the necessity of the amendment, to prevent 
 he blocking up of the supreme courts. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question on 
 he amendments, and there was a second, and the 
 nain question ordered. 
 
 The question was first taken on the amendment 
 >f Mr. BRUCE. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH asked for a division of the ques- 
 ion, so as to vote first on the motion to recommit. 
 
 The CHAIR decided this motion not to be in 
 irder. 
 
 The question being taken by ayes and nays, 
 here were ayes 26, nays 79. So the amendment 
 .vas rejected. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER withdrew his amendment. 
 
 The question was then on the resolution of Mr. 
 JROWN to recommit, with instructions to amend, 
 s moved this morning, and it was negatived, 
 yea 38, nays 72. 
 
 76 
 
810 
 
 Mr,. CAMBRELENG asked consent to move to 
 strike out the words " incorporated villages" in 
 the proposition as it stands. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON inquired if the section would 
 still be open to amendment? 
 
 The PRESIDENT replied in the negative, un- 
 less by unanimous consent. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said unanimous consent could 
 not be given unless another change was made. 
 There was a phiase '* in special cases" which was 
 interpreted differently by different gentlemen 
 one saying the legislature under it could not give 
 original jurisdiction to these courts, while another 
 contended that it could be given to any extent. 
 He must have words that at least we could under- 
 stand. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said: I have taken, Mr. 
 President, very little part in the debate the last 
 two days, on the subject of a county court, a court 
 of common pleas, or by whatever name a court in 
 every county in the state, intermediate between 
 the justices' court and the supreme court, may be 
 called. The Convention being now about to take 
 the final vote on the thirteenth section, and, as it 
 seems, to adopt the substitute as amended, I feel 
 it incumbent on me to submit a few remarks on 
 this very interesting subject. 
 
 In the early proceedings of this Convention, I 
 avowed myself the advocate of a county court, or 
 a court intermediate between the justices and the 
 supreme court. I rise now to re-assert my belief 
 in the expediency and the necessity of establish- 
 ing such a tribunal. I have, on a former occa- 
 sion, taken part in the debate on the " New Judi- 
 ciary System" now under discussion,and explained 
 my views and expressed a decided opinion against 
 the plan proposed by the committee, which is, in 
 substance, to abolish the county courts, and to es- 
 tablish a supreme court, with thirty-six judges, 
 (and the right to increase the number,) to be 
 charged with all the business of the state, in law 
 and equity, down to the justices' courts. It 
 never will work well. It cannot satisfy the pub- 
 lic desire. If you will have a high and dignified 
 court, you must pay for it, and command the talent 
 of the state, and assign to it a corresponding order 
 of business. But if you require it to descend to 
 the justices' court in the details of small county 
 business, it must and will sink in its character to 
 a corresponding grade. For such an order of bu- 
 siness the public will not bear its burthens, and 
 the court must lose its character of elevation. 
 
 But, sir, it is not my purpose now to reargue 
 this important question. Enough has been said. 
 I rose only to explain the peculiar predicament 
 in which, in common with other friends, I find 
 myself placed on this interesting question. From 
 the beginning to the end, we have been the 
 avowed advocates for the establishment of county 
 courts, with appropriate civil and criminal juris- 
 diction, and yet we appear as voting in the nega- 
 tive, upon almost every proposition which has 
 been submitted, and we intend now, to vote in the 
 negative on this final question. We impute no 
 blame to others. It shall be called honest differ- 
 ence of opinion among the friends of a common 
 measure. It is our pleasure to say there is not a 
 visible opponent on this floor not a voice yet 
 raised against the establishment of county courts. 
 All are unanimous in an evident and ardent de- 
 
 sire to accomplish this common object. It is ac- 
 cidental, and the merest accident in the world, 
 that there is such an honest difference of opinion 
 among the friends of this measure of county courts 
 that they cannot agree upon any thing. We all 
 remember a portion of these friends, on the for- 
 mation of the supreme court, would have thirty- 
 six judges and said they would do all the busi- 
 ness of the state above the justices' court and 
 that county courts were not needed. The other 
 portion of those friends had insisted upon only 
 twelve judges of the supreme court, as adequate 
 to the business of the state, with county courts to 
 do the lesser class of civil and criminal business. 
 Yet now we are all happily here in favor of county 
 courts all united in one effort for this common 
 object. We have spent the last three days in bo* 
 najicle endeavors to fix upon the details every 
 possible variety of amendments have been moved 
 one to cut off its civil jurisdiction and another 
 to limit its criminal powers a third to restrict its 
 jurisdiction to special cases and to a single judge r 
 and to stay its going into operation for two years 
 and another to commit its fate, and its pay, and 
 formation, to the will of the boards of supervisors , 
 &c., &c We were a little time since about to 
 have taken a final vote upon the thirteenth sec- 
 tion, as amended, and which would have been a- 
 vailable for some good but then a " substitute" 
 for the whole section was moved and accepted. 
 The clerk had not breathed after reading this mo- 
 del substitute for a new court, when instantly 
 new amendments were sent in from five persons, 
 all written out then came the previous question 
 to stop other amendments and now the main 
 question is to be put upon the whole as amended. 
 To a by-stander, unskilled in legislation, this 
 might "look like pre-concert to defeat the object 
 in view, while to those who understand the mat- 
 ter, it looks like extra zeal to accomplish the ob- 
 ject of county .courts, for which we are all so 
 unanimous. We have already taken the division 
 of the house about a dozen times on amendments 
 to a county court, while we cannot get a question 
 on a county court alone, or to leave it to the leg- 
 islature. It must be coupled with rrTatter to se- 
 cure its defeat, by the vote of its friends. 
 " Amendments may be made so as totally to alter 
 the nature of the proposition ; and it is a way of 
 getting rid of a proposition, by making it bear a 
 sense different from what was intended by the 
 movers ; so that they vote against it themselves." 
 2 Hats. 79 ; Claris Manual, 146. 
 
 Our case is much like the one of a fond parent, 
 who had long desired an addition to his house- 
 hold ; and' when at length the little blessing 
 came, and by which the inheritance of many ex- 
 pecting and anxious relations was cut short, yet 
 all assembled to join in the family joy, and lend 
 their willing aid to amend and make the little in- 
 nocent more perfect. All had plans for its im- 
 provement. It was too long for one, and he moved 
 to shorten it a foot another would have its hand 
 taken off a third would clip off its nose, and a 
 fourth put out its eyes a fifth and a sixth dis- 
 liked exceedingly its pallid complexion, and the 
 one wished to give it the small pox another 
 thought leprosy would be far better while one, 
 yet more willing to be useful, moved a " substi- 
 tute," that had no vitality, or power, and thus he 
 
811 
 
 i better promote the common welfare. To 
 
 ill agreed, and to evince greater honor to 
 
 hope, it was unanimously named after 
 
 leader of great renown, called KUT- 
 
 FF! 
 
 We are entangled, Mr. President, in a net of 
 forms and bound so tight by rules of our own 
 making, and the cords of our own tying, that we 
 are constantly baffled in the very objects in which 
 xve are all agreed ; and yet, even the "responsi- 
 ble majority" of this house cannot relieve us. 
 Kt-:u-s are entertained, that the unlearned and 
 suspicious public will not appreciate the queer 
 dilemma in which we are placed, and may not 
 only doubt the fairness of our motives, but may 
 even accuse some of the younger members as in- 
 tending, by adopting the thirty-six judge sys- 
 tem, to provide good places for ourselves. 
 The only possible remedy which I can suggest a- 
 gainst these impending evils, is, that we add a 
 clause to this constitution, declaring any member 
 ot this convention to be ineligible to take office 
 under this constitution for the term of three years 
 from its adoption. 
 
 We have heard described in this discussion, in 
 glowing colors, the fall and the degraded condi- 
 tion of "the present county courts as a reason why 
 we must not amend and re-establish the county 
 courts. Some have even described particular 
 cases, and- stated one in which a presiding judge 
 the judgment of the court, whilst the 
 other two judges protested in violence and lan- 
 iruage which my friend near me (Mr. DANA) has 
 :ed to, ns too profane and indecent to be ad- 
 mitte.; even in a recital. Several gentleman near 
 me, say tuey know all the particulars of the case, 
 'that the 'disorder did not arise from the judges 
 that it all came from Justice Alchohol ! which 
 had been infused too freely into the court. We 
 now give the right of election to the county ; 
 such cases will hereafter depend upon the choice 
 of the county. I remember with satisfaction the 
 old county court of Dutchess county, in which it 
 was my pride once to practice a Brooks, a John- 
 ston, an Emott, and a Pendleton, were in succes- 
 sion the presiding judges, with associates worthy 
 of such principals all gentlemen of intelligence 
 and integrity and for many years held an elevat- 
 ed county court. Other counties may look back 
 with the same proud result. In those days 
 those judges served for the distinction and the 
 honor, and they were well paid. In latter times 
 it has been discovered, to use a word I have 
 learned on this floor, to be "undemocratic" to 
 hitve an office without pay, and which thereby 
 the poor man cannot afford to hold. The legis 
 lature have provided two dollars a day, and havi 
 opened the road of this profit and promotion t< 
 the village justice and the bar-room politician. 
 The result, the character and condition of tin 
 court, are before us. The county court require 
 only to be repaired, and made efficient for the 
 medium business of the state, and then twelve 
 judges for the supreme court would only be re 
 quired, or could find business for their employ 
 inrtit. It is certain the thirty-six judges and th< 
 county courts cannot exist together. If the for 
 mer is adopted, it must end in multiplied com 
 missioners and a swarm of petty officers to do th< 
 local business. Since the adoption of the systen 
 
 or the supreme court, with its thirty-six judges, 
 t seems a difficult matter to get a hearing for the 
 ,ounty court, and every effort to present the ques- 
 ion of a county court has been amended to its 
 it'er ruin. 
 
 Gentlemen express surprise that in a measure 
 A T here there is no opposition, and to which all are 
 greed, every effort to advance is constantly 
 iefeated by amendments, to make the thing more 
 )erfect until there is not a friend left for it. 
 Some have said they are lost in the labyrinth of 
 ules, and questions of legislative usages ; and 
 hat such a case of confusion never before exist- 
 3d. Will those gentlemen ,allow me to differ 
 rom them, and state that a like case existed, in 
 all its features, in the legislature of 1824 ? It was 
 my lot to have been a member of that body. 
 The memorable question of the electoral law, 
 proposing to give the choice of the electors to 
 ;he people, came before that legislature. That 
 .egislature, like this Convention, had no ulterior 
 jarty politics in it. All were agreed in the pro- 
 position ; but each one wished to render it more 
 perfect by some slight amendment. All was 
 confusion, from the collisions of these honest ef- 
 brts. The session thus passed away. An extra 
 session was called by the Executive ; and that too 
 jassed off and no electoral law. The confusion 
 of amendments, rules, orders, committees and ref- 
 erences, was such that the honestest members of 
 the house could not tell how,why or when the elec- 
 oral law was lost. But lo and behold, the people 
 understood it ! and there was a day of ample ret- 
 ribution. This created "the immortal seventeen!" 
 Will not the friends of this system of thirty-six 
 udges, and the necessary clerkships, subaltern 
 officers, and commissioners for local business 
 Jake warning and learn a lesson of wisdom from 
 the past ? Thirty-six judges, with expected sal- 
 aries of $3000 each, and $500 for travelling ex- 
 penses, with the consequent retinue of needy de- 
 pendents, will be one very rank slice of party 
 patronage. May it not be mistaken for a compa- 
 ny of California volunteers? I hope it may be 
 submitted to the people at the next election as a 
 separate article. I fear the people will not take 
 it off our hands, and that the vastness of the 
 scheme will have defeated its own consumma- 
 tion. True we have provided for the election of 
 the judges by the people ; but will this be satis- 
 factory ? At the beginning of this Convention, 
 we were told that the elections must all be bro't 
 home to the people. The old senate districts 
 were too large and the counties have been cut up 
 into single assembly districts, that the electors 
 may know the particular candidate. Yet when 
 we come to the election of the judges, the thirty- 
 two single senate districts are too small for thirty- 
 two judges. They must have a judicial district 
 provided ; embracing several large and distant 
 counties with an election of four judges at one 
 time and to elect only once in four years will 
 this redeem our pledge for single districts and to 
 bring the elections home to the people ? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to recommit to a commit- 
 tee of one, with instructions to strike out the 
 words* "incorporated villages," and report forth- 
 with. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to adjourn. ^ Lost. 
 
812 
 
 Mr. STETSON moved the previous question, 
 and the motion of Mr. LOOMIS was agreed (o. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS, who was appointed said commit 
 tee, immediately reported. 
 
 The 13th section as amended (heretofore given) 
 was then carried, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Baker, Bowdish, Bray- 
 ton, Burr, Cambreleng, (Jonely, Cook, Crooker, Donon, 
 Flanders, Forsyth, Graham, Harris, Hait, Hawley, Hoff- 
 man, Hotchkiss, A. Huntington, Hyde, Kingsley. Mann, 
 McNeil,' Maxwell, Morris, Towers, President, Rhoades, 
 Sears, Shaver, Shaw, Sheldon, Stetson, Taggart, W. Tay- 
 lor, Townsend, Waterbury, Wood. Youngs 40. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, F. F. Backus, Bouck, Brown, 
 Bull, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana, Dubois, Green, E.Hun- 
 tington, Hutchinson, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Penni- 
 man, Perkins, Porter, Richmond, Riker, Russell, St. John, 
 Salisbury, Sanford, Simmons, W. H. spencer, stow, 
 Swackhamer, Taft, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, Tuthill, 
 Ward, White, Willard, Worden, A. Wright, Yawgt-r, 
 Young 39. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT moved to reconsider. 
 Mr. SHEPARD had leave of absence for 4 days. 
 The Convention then adjourned to half past 8 
 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 SATURDAY, (Slst day) Sept. 5. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Mr. SCHNELLER. 
 
 Returns from the clerk of the 8th chancery cir- 
 cuit were received and referred. 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS' propositions to do up unfinished 
 business of the courts then came up thus. He 
 said they were necessary, in order to perfect the 
 judiciary system, and he moved to refer them to 
 select committee, with instructions for the com- 
 mittee to report them back to the Convention in 
 ooe hour : 
 
 At the time when this constitution shall take effect, all 
 suits and proceedings then pending in the court for the 
 correction of errors, shall be deemed pending in the court 
 of appeals; and all suits and proceedings then pending in 
 the court of chancery, in the supreme court, and in the 
 court of common pleas, shall be deemed pending in the su- 
 preme court hereby established. 
 
 The chancellor and justices of the supreme court shall 
 continue to have and exercise the powers, duties and com- 
 pensation of their respective offices in respect to all causes 
 and proceedings in their respective courts when this con- 
 stitution shall take effect, and then ready for htaiing be- 
 fore them respectively, until said causes and proceedings 
 have been adjudicated and finally disposed of in said 
 courts; bat such time shall not in respect to the courts of 
 chancery exceed two years, and in respect to the justices 
 of the supreme court one year from the time this constitu- 
 1ion takes eflect. 
 
 Any causes or proceedings pending in the court of chan- 
 cery and in the supreme court and ready for hearing before 
 the chancellor or before the justices of the supreme court 
 may, notwithstanding the last section, be heard and deter- 
 mined in the supreme court by the consent of parties; and 
 all causes and proceedings pending in the court of chance- 
 ry or in the supreme court, when this constitution shall 
 take effect, shall be subject to the appellate jurisdiction of 
 the court of appeals in like manner as if originally com- 
 menced in the supreme court by this constitution ordained. 
 
 The chancellor, vice chancellors and assistant vice chan- 
 cellors, th justices of the supreme court and circuit judges 
 are hereby declared to be severally eligible to the office of 
 judge of the court of appeals, or justice of the supreme 
 court within the districts in which they may reside. 
 
 Any vacancy in the office of chancellor within two years 
 from the time this constitution shall take effect, or in the 
 office of justice of the supreme court within one year from 
 the time this constitution shall take effect, shall be filled 
 by appointment by the Governor with the advice and con- 
 sent of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that he had been told by 
 the chancellor that he could do the business of his 
 court up in 90 days at the iurthest ; and he would 
 
 not then have more than he received from Chan- 
 cellor Jones. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said there were over 1000 causes 
 on the calendar. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said he never would vote for any 
 extraordinary commissioner to settle up this bu- 
 siness. The thirty-six judges could do it all. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that if they were going 
 on increasing this army of judges and now pro- 
 posing sixteen or twenty more, they had better 
 send runners out to New England tell them to 
 get ready for we have not enough here in this 
 state. We should have two systems going on in 
 full blast one deciding one way, and the other, 
 the other way. This was too monstrous for the 
 people to swallow. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said they ought to consult the 
 present judges. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved a change of reference. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND: We want to hear the 
 thing read. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : There is nothing to be read, 
 sir ; there is nothing there. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND : Very well, then I raise a 
 question of order. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS presented his" proposition. Ques- 
 tion on referring them to a select commitee of 
 three. 
 
 Mr. STOW did not want a matter so important 
 as this hurried over in an hour. He wished it re- 
 ferred to the judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS agreed to this motion. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said that it could be settled in 
 two minutes. Transfer the unfinished business 
 to the new courts and then decide whether we 
 are to have a commission or not ; it could be done 
 in half an hrfur. They could not get the judiciary 
 committee together at the present term. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES thought it .ought to go to the 
 judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said they ought to go on 
 in righteousness and finish the one thing needful 
 first. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY moved to lay it on the table- 
 Lost. 
 
 Mr, NICHOLAS thought it ought to go to the 
 judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD did not. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to refer the whole subject 
 matter to the judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to refer them to 
 the committee of the whole. Lost. 
 
 The question was then on sending these propo- 
 sitions to the judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr STOW" And the subject matter *of 
 them." 
 
 The PRESIDENT That carries the whole 
 subject along with it the report and all. 
 
 They were finally referred to the judiciary 
 committee ayes 44, noes 23. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM offered this resolution : 
 
 The Governor may require the judges of the supreme 
 court to perform duties without the judicial districts to 
 which they belong, and a sum equal to their travelling ex- 
 penses, besides their salaries, may be allowed the judges 
 while on such service. 
 
 He moved to refer it to the judiciary committee. 
 This was lost, 33 to 40 ; and it was laid on the 
 table. 
 The PRESIDENT announced the question to 
 
813 
 
 be on the 10th section of the judiciary report as 
 amended by the select committee : 
 
 10. Surrogates shall he elected for four years. They 
 shall be compensated by fixed salaries, and they shall noi 
 receive to their own use any lees or perquisites of office 
 The surrogate may be made a judge of any inferior court 
 which may be established in any county. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out the whole 
 section. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved as a, substitute : 
 
 14. The preceding section shall not be construed to 
 authorize the legislature to confer upon any county courts 
 original jurisdiction in actions at law. 
 
 The 10th section was then struck out. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS offered his as a new section. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL opposed it. It would tie up 
 the whole judicial system ; and if you wanted to 
 get the whole system rejected, then pass the 
 whole section. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS' proposition was declared out of 
 order. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR offered this additional section : 
 
 . The judgment, decrees and decision of inferior lo- 
 cal courts in cities shall be subject to review in the su- 
 preme court or court of appeals, as may be prescribed by 
 law. 
 
 The rest of the report of the select committee 
 was read ; it related to courts of conciliation. Mr. 
 O'CONOR'S section was out of order. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to strike out the two 
 sections and insert "Courts of conciliation may 
 be organized by the Legislature." 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR said Mr. PATTERSON'S resolution 
 was too broad better stick to the proposition of 
 the select committee. 
 
 Mr. WATEIU;URY was astonished at the mov- 
 er he was a^toni3hed at his motive, and more, 
 te was astonished at his sincerity. We have got 
 a court to travel all over God's creation. He was 
 thunderstruck. 
 
 ' Mr. YOUNG moved to add " And without 
 cost to parties," to Mr. PATTERSON'S amendment. 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved to strike out the" words *' they 
 shall be paid a reasonable compensation to be fixed 
 by law, and all foes received by them shall be paid 
 into the county treasury," which being part of the 
 select committee's report, took precedence of the 
 other motions, 
 
 Mr. HUNT wished these courts to be supported 
 by fees from the parties they succeed in remedy- 
 ing. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said it was farcical to talk 
 about compelling men to go to courts of concilia- 
 tion, and if it is a voluntary thing then its no bet- 
 ter than our present courts of arbitration. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that these were the 
 Greeks, the Huns, the sharks and the Shylocks 
 that prey on the people, who oppose these courts. 
 He also said that Mr. CHATFIELD was god-father 
 to Mr. PATTERSON'S plan. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY : We shall never do any- 
 thing whatever if we go on in this way. 
 
 Mr. DANA said the people would say to us 
 "physicians heal thyself," calling each other 
 shark," " Shylock," " Greek" and " Turk," does 
 not become those sent to revise the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS agreed with him. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS opposed the proposition as be- 
 ing impracticable, and impossible to be carried in- 
 to effect. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD was not opposed to the pro- 
 position of the gentleman from Chautauque. He 
 
 did not believe such a provision necessary, but 
 there were those who did, and he was disposed to 
 gratify them. Mr. C. urged that the county courts 
 could never be carried into successful operation; 
 
 Mr. YOUNGS asked for the previous question, 
 and there was a second, and the main question or- 
 dered. 
 
 The yeas and nays were then called for on the 
 motion of Mr. HUNT, renewed by Mr. HART, 
 and it was adopted, yeas 69, noes 20. 
 
 The next question was on the motion of Mr. 
 YOUNGS, to add ' without cost to parties." Lost, 
 33 to 47. 
 
 The question was then laken on Mr. PATTER- 
 SON'S amendment, and it was rejected ayes 29, 
 navs 58. 
 
 The question now recurred on the first section 
 as amended. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS inquired what had become of his 
 amendment, which was in these words " Such 
 tribunals shall be governed by the law of the land 
 and the evidence in the case." He handed it up 
 to come in when in order. 
 
 A conversation ensued on the propriety of en- 
 tertaining it at this time, and Mr. MORRIS inti- 
 mated that he would offer it hereafter. It was 
 therefore withdrawn. 
 
 The ayes and noes were then taken on the sec . 
 tion authorizing conciliation courts, and there 
 were ayes 42, noes 43, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Bascom, Burr 
 Cambreleng, R. Campbell jr., Conely, Cornell, Dubois 
 Flanders, Greene, Harris, Hart, Hoffman, Hunt, Kemble* 
 Kernan, Kingsley, Miller, Morris, Nellis, Nicholas, Pen" 
 niman, Rhoades, Richmond, Salisbury, Sears, Shaw, She!" 
 don, Stephens, Swackhamer, Taggart, Tallmadge.W. Tay- 
 lor, Townsend. Warren, Waterbury, White, Worden, Yaw 
 ger, Young 42. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Ayrault, F. F Backus, Bouck, Brayton, 
 Brown, Bull, Chatfield. Clark, Cook, Crocker, Cuddeback, 
 Dana, Dorlon, Gardner, Hawley, Hotchkiss, Hunter, Hut- 
 chinson, Hyde, Loomis, McNeil, Munro, O'Conor, Parish, 
 Patterson; Porter, Powers, President, Riker, Russell, St. 
 John, Sanford, Shepard, Simmons, W. H. Spencer, Stetson, 
 Strong, Ward, Witbeck, Wood, A. Wright, W. B. Wright, 
 Youngs 43. 
 
 Mr. Miller gave notice of a motion to reconsi- 
 der, to lie on the table. 
 
 The sixteenth section was then read, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 The court for the trial of impeachments and the correc- 
 ion of errors ; the court of chancery ; the supreme court, 
 and the county courts, as at present organized, are abo- 
 lished." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR opposed the section as by no 
 means necessary, and as imprudent. He thought 
 there was no necessity of using this term abo- 
 lished in any parf; of this constitution. Every 
 ;hing in the old constitution that conflicted with 
 this work of revision would of course be swept 
 away. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR suggested that this section 
 was referred already to the judiciary committee, 
 or if riot it should be. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR made a motion to that effect, 
 and it was adopted. 
 
 The fourteenth section was then read, as fol- 
 .ows : 
 
 {) 14. The legislature may reorganize the judicial dis" 
 ricts at the lirst session after the return of every enumer" 
 ition under this constitution in the manner provided for in 
 ection four, and at no other time ; and they may at such 
 ;ession increase or diminish the number ol districts, but 
 iuch increase or diminution shall not be more than one 
 district at any one time. Each district shall have four jus- 
 
814 
 
 ticss of the supreme court, but no diminution oi the dis- 
 tricts shall have the effect to remove a judge from office 
 
 The section was adopted without a division. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered an additional 
 section, that there should be but one appeal in ci- 
 vil causes, unless the judgment of the court ap- 
 pealed from be reversed, in which case an a di- 
 tional appeal may be allowed. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR opposed the section, as did Mr. 
 BROWN. 
 
 Mr. STRONG supported it, as did Mr. TALL- 
 MADGE. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. CROOK- 
 ER, LOOMIS, BASCOM, when 
 
 Mr. TAGGART offered the following as a sub- 
 stitute for the amendment of Mr. SWACKHA- 
 MER. 
 
 "There shall be no appeal from justices' courts, but 
 causes may be removed oy certiorari from such courts 
 after judgment therein, to the county court. The court to 
 which such cause shall be removed, shall receive the 
 'proceedings and decision of the justice, and render such 
 judgment as ougiit to have been rendered beiore the jus- 
 tice. S.ut ifbyieasonof the exclusion oi evidence, or 
 inability to procure the evidence beiore the justice, a new 
 trial ought to be granted, such court shall order a ue\v 
 trial beiore the county court, or betore a justice, and in 
 such manner as shall be provided by law." 
 
 Mr. T. briefly explained and urged the adop- 
 tion of his proposition. 
 
 Messrs. CROOKER, LOOMIS and. HOFFMAN 
 continued the debate, when 
 
 The convention adjourned until Monday. 
 
 MONDAY, (82nd day) Sept. 7. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. SCHNELLER. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR presented the following, for the 
 purpose of accomplishing the object named by 
 Mr. LOOMIS, <>n Saturday, relative to disposing of 
 the business lhat would be left unfinished in the 
 courts, when the new judiciary s^siem should go 
 into operation : 
 
 - 1. That part of this constitution which relates to the 
 supreme court shall not take eflect until the first day of 
 June, 1848, excepting so much thereof as directs the 
 election of justices of the said court; and the first election 
 of the said justices and of the judges of the court oi ap- 
 peals, shall be had on the first Tuesday of May, 1847. 
 
 2. The legislature shall at its first session in 1S47 pro- 
 vide for organizing the court of appeals established by this 
 constitution and for transferring to it tne business pending 
 in the present court ior the correction of errors, and for 
 bringing to the said court, appeals and writs of error 
 from the decrees and judgments of the present court ol 
 chancery and the present supreme court, as well as from 
 the judgment and decrees of the courts that may be orga- 
 nized under the provisions of this constitution. 
 
 3. The legislature shall at the same session make pro- 
 vision lor assigning so many of the justices of the supreme 
 court, elected as aforesaid, who are not designated to be 
 members of the court of appeals, as may be necessary to 
 the duty of hearing and deciding all causes and matters 
 pending in the present court of chancery and in the pre- 
 sent supreme court which shall not have been argued be- 
 fore the chancellor or before the justices of the present su- 
 preme court previous to the first day of day of June, 1847; 
 and for that purpose such of the said justices as shall be 
 assigned to hear and determine causes and matters pend- 
 ing in the court of chancery, and the justices so assigned 
 to hear and determine causes and matters so pending in the 
 supreme court, shall possess all the powers and authority 
 and be subject to the restrictions and regulations conferred 
 and imposed by law upon the present court of chancery 
 and upon the present supreme court, and shall hold terms 
 of the said courts at such times and places as shall be pre- 
 scribed by law. Clerks of the said courts and the necessa- 
 ry officers to attend their terms and sittings shall be pro 
 vided in such manner as the legislature shall direct. 
 ^ 4. The remaining justices of the, supreme court to be 
 
 elected as herein provided, not designated as members '( 
 the court of appeals, and not assigned to the hearing and 
 determining of causes pending as aforesaid, in the court of 
 chancery and the supreme court, shall hold circuit courts 
 and courts of oyer and terminer, and shall perform sucE 
 other judicial duties as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 5. The present supreme court and the court of chance- 
 ry shall continue under their existing organization and 
 with the powers and authority now vested in them, until 
 the first of June, 1848, lor the purpose ol deciding such cau- 
 ses and matters as may have been argued before them re 
 spectively, previous to the 1st ol June, 1847 and for the pur- 
 pose of heaiing and deciding any causes or matters that 
 may be brought before them according to law, excepting 
 such as shall be pending and not argued on the first of June 
 1S47, and the hearing and determination of which are here- 
 in before provided for. In case any vacancy should occur 
 in the office of chancellor or of a justice ol the present su- 
 preme cuurt the duties of the office so vacant shall be per- 
 formed until first of June, 1848, by such justice of the su- 
 preme court hereafter elected, as shall be designated for 
 that purpose by the Governor. 
 
 <j 6. The office of circuit judge, of the vice-chancellors 
 and theassistantvice chancellor shall expire and be abolish- 
 ed on first of June, 1847 ; and ail causes and business then 
 pending undetermined before the vice-chancellors, before 
 the circuit judges as vice-chancellors, and beiore the as- 
 sistant vice-chancellor shall be transferred to the courts or- 
 ganized by the legislature under the provisions of this 
 constitution, or to any of the justices of the supreme court 
 to be elected hereafter, as may be directed by law. 
 
 $7. After the first ol June, 1848, the causes and business 
 which may then be pending undetermined in the present 
 court of chancery , in the present supreme coui t, and in the 
 courts organized under the 3d section of this article, shall 
 be transferred to, and determined by, the courts perma- 
 nently constituted under the provisions of this constitution. 
 
 These were referred to the Judiciary committee, 
 and ordered to be printed. 
 
 The Convention then took up the unfinished 
 part of the report of the judiciary. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART called up Ins amendment to 
 the proposition which Mr. SWACKHAMER offer- 
 ed on Saturday. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that thjft. subject was a 
 mere matter ot legislation He desired that the 
 Convention should not restrict the Legislature in 
 this respect; for it would not be 8afe to restrict 
 them in the means which they might deem neces- 
 sary to secure a safe and pure administration of 
 justice. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said that it would not unwise- 
 ly restrict the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. HUNT offered as an amendment to that of 
 Mr. TAGGART'S, the following: 
 
 Add " When the decision upon any appeal or review 
 shall confirm the original decision, all costs occasioned by 
 any further appeal shall be paid by ths appellant." 
 
 Mr. HUNT went on to say that it was said here 
 on Saturday, by some of the ablest lawyers among 
 us, that the sections of the article on the judiciary 
 already adopted, cooler upon litigants an almost 
 unlimited right ot appeal that we have already 
 authorized any man who is dissatisfied with the 
 decision in a justices' court to carry his suit first 
 to the county court thence to the circuit court 
 thence to n bane court, and thence to the court of 
 appeals. The practical operation of this will be, 
 to place every litigious rogue above the law en- 
 tirely, so long as he practices his frauds upon the 
 poor and feeble only, or those who have not both 
 money enough and fortitude enough to run the 
 gauntlet ot' all the courts of the state. The sec- 
 tion proposed to obviate this evilby the gentleman 
 from Kings, was opposed on the ground, 1st, that 
 it conflicted with various sections already adopted, 
 and 2d, that it would be unjust to the poor to pre- 
 vent them from carrying their small suits into the 
 
815 
 
 
 highest courts of the state, and obtaining all the 
 justice to be had in all our courts. The first of 
 these objections cannot be brought to bear against 
 my amendment; and to the second 1 would say, 
 that while I am deeply grateful for the 1'rien isl.ip 
 manifested for the class lo which 1 have the honor 
 to belong, and which i mainly represent lor the 
 greater part of the people ot theciiy of New York 
 are poor men yet, as the benefit sought to be con- 
 ferred on ns, \ve would respccttully decline it, or 
 rather decline it with all our might. I believe 
 the Anglo-Saxon race have enjoyed this high pri- 
 vilege, as the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN) esteems it, ever since they came under 
 the Norman yoke ; and I am certain that the peo- 
 ple of New York have possessed it, as they think, 
 quite long enough. I have never yet seen a poor 
 man who was at the same time an honest man, 
 who would not gladly surrender his chance of a 
 trial in live or six courts for the certainty that 
 when he had won his cause twice, his trials should 
 cease. Thousands of poor men have been forced 
 to submit to the frauds and wrongs of cheats and 
 oppit'ssors in silence, not because there \\-AS any 
 doubt that they had good cause of action, but be- 
 cause they had not time and means to follow the 
 wrong-doer through all the courts, and knew that 
 they would be ruined by law expenses and thus 
 forced to drop their suit before they could bring it 
 to an end. Talk ot the poor man's right to have 
 his cause tried five times ovei ! Why. a man who 
 would not be ruined by winning his cause only 
 twice even, cannot be very poor, and should not 
 be admitted lo the honors of poverly. All real 
 poor men shoulJ repudiate him as an irr.postor. 
 
 It was assumed by one or more of the speakers 
 on Saturday, that the justice to be obtained in our 
 higher courts would be a very superior article to 
 common justice. I know not how this may be 
 but fear it may sometimes be very different. 
 However, common justice and common sense are 
 *' good enough for poor folks," and I hope we 
 shall soon have no other. The greatest lawyer 
 does not always make the best judge. Lord Ba- 
 con was convicted of taking bribes ranging from 
 50 to JE2UOO in more than twenty cases, and 
 sometimes from both parties to a suit, which was 
 not only wrong but imprudent. Sir Edward 
 Coke, too, severely punished a man for petition- 
 ing the King in relation to Bacon's injustice, 
 though it was afterwards proved, and confessed 
 by Bacon himself, that he had received a bribe of 
 100 from the party opposed to the petitioner. 
 f his famous law writings, asserts 
 that it is utterly illegal to put suspected persons 
 on the rack to compel confession ; yet he affixed 
 his name to at least one warrant for that purpose, 
 which is still in existence. I am aware that there 
 have been some changes of fashion since the year 
 1020, but human nature still is pretty much the 
 same. " Put not your trust in Princes," even the 
 princes of the law. Though always unpleasant 
 it is often useful to reflect, that the strongest 
 minds are weak, the strongest bodies mortal. Or 
 high courts like our subordinate courts will be 
 constituted mostly of every day-men the crea- 
 tures of circumstances and of habit. There are 
 not enough of truly great men to fill the bench 
 of our higher courts, though there may be more 
 than enough who think themselves great, and 
 
 who may perhaps bring the multitude pro tern. 
 o the same opinion. 
 
 My amendment is too simple to need explana- 
 ion, and it seems to me too just to require any 
 urther argument. I shall therefore say no more. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER advocated his amend- 
 ment at some length. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND protested against this practice 
 of attempting to defeat real itlorm by saying al- 
 ways that it was a matter of meie legislation. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES was opposed to the adoption of 
 either of the propositions. It all belonged to the 
 Legislature to settle and arrange. 
 
 Some conversation ensued between Messrs. 
 BASCOM and CHATFIELD. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY .noved to amend the amend- 
 ment of Mr. HUNT by adding " No court shall 
 grant more than one new trial in any cause which 
 shall be pending in such court." 
 
 Mr. S. then moved the previous question upon 
 the several propositions pending; and there was 
 a second. 
 
 This cut off his own proposition. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. HUNT was negatived : 
 ayes 28, noes 50. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. TAGGART was also re- 
 jected : ayes 20, noes 61. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER asked unanimous con- 
 sent to accept Mr. HUNT'S modification ; this 
 made the trial upon an appeal at the cost of the 
 appellant, when the former decision was confirm- 
 ed. 
 
 Several members objected, and no further 
 amendment was allowed to be received. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER called for the ayes and 
 noes on his proposition. 
 
 They were ordered and resulted as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Burr, Chamberlain, Clark, Conely, Da. 
 na, Hotchkiss, Hutchinson, Hyde, Kernan, Kingsley, Mor- 
 ris, Penniman. Richmond, Si. John, Sallisbury, Sears, 
 Strong, Swackhamer, Townsend, Young, Youngs 21. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F F. 
 Backus, H. Backus, Bowdish, Bray ton, Bull, Cambreleng, 
 Chatfield, Cornell, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dubois, Flanders, 
 Gebhard, Greene. Harris, Hoffman, Hunt, A. Huntington , 
 Patterson, McNeil, Miller, Munro, Mellis, O'Conor, Parish, 
 Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Simmons, W. II. Spencer, Ste- 
 phens, Stetson, Stow, Taggart, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, 
 Van Schoonhoven.Ward, Witbeck, Wood, A. Wright, W. 
 B. Wright, Yawger 52. 
 
 Mr. STOW offered the following additional sec- 
 tion : 
 
 . Nothing contained in this Constitution shall be con- 
 strued so as to impair the power or jurisdiction of any 
 court of record (other than com ts of equity) now estab- 
 lished by act of the Legislature in any city of this state. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to lay it on the table, 
 but his motion was lost. 
 
 The section was rejected without a division. 
 The 15th section was then read, as follows : 
 
 15. The electors of the several towns shall, at their an- 
 nual town meeting.and in such manner as the Legislature 
 may direct, elect their justices of the peace. Their term 
 of oflice shall be four years. Their number and classifica- 
 tion may be regulated by law. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved the following substitute : 
 
 ^ 15. Justices of the peace in the several towns shall be 
 elected by the electors of such towns at their annual town 
 meetings. Justices of the justices courts in any city or 
 village in which a justices court is now or may hereafter 
 be established by law, shall be elected by the electors of 
 such city or village at such time as may be provided by 
 law. 
 
816 
 
 The term of office of such justices shall be four year 
 except when otherwise provided by law. Their numbe 
 nd classification may be regulated by law. Police jusl 
 ces in cities and villages shall be appointed by the commc 
 council or the board of trustees of such cities or village 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY moved to amend by makin 
 the justices elective by the county instead of th 
 city or village. 
 
 After some desultory conversation, Mr. CROOK 
 ER suggested that the substitute be withdrawn 
 to allow the question to be taken upon section 15 
 Provision for cities might be made in another sec 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS assented. 
 
 Mr. STRONG offered an amendment to the sec 
 tion, extending the exclusive jurisdiction to $10( 
 and concurrent to $250, and providing for a nevs 
 trial upon appeal in the same town or in one ad 
 joining. Mr. S. advocated his proposition, am 
 reviewed and replied to the objections which ha< 
 been urged against it. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD would leave the control o 
 the jurisdiction of justices' courts where it has al 
 ways been, vested in the Legislature. They woulc 
 always exercise this control with safety and pru 
 dence, as they had heretofore done. He did no 
 believe that the interest of the people requirec 
 that exclusive jurisdiction should be extended to 
 sums of $11)0. In many cases it would produce 
 losses and inconvenience. He believed the peo- 
 ple would demand a restoration of the concurrent 
 jurisdiction, as soon as they had felt the evils 
 which would grow out of a provision like that 
 now proposed. He was sorry to see a proposition 
 so pernicious introduced here, which, if placed 
 in the Constitution, could not be altered, however 
 loudly the people might call for it. If it was de- 
 sirable to prevent appeals, the Legislature might 
 provide that the cause should be carried up only 
 by certiorari, upon questions of law merely. And 
 if the decision be reversed, (he case might be re- 
 turned, not to the justice^who had tried it, but to 
 the person who had appealed, allowing him to 
 brina; it again whenever he chose, instead of mak- 
 ing it necessary to bring it in the same town or in 
 one adjoining; because his change of residence 
 might make it more convenient to bring it some- 
 where else. 
 
 Mr. STRONG replied, stating in what cases his 
 proposition would afford relief. Gentlemen might 
 endeavor to stave off this question by saving that 
 these reforms might be obtained at 'any time 
 of the Legislature ; but those who remembered 
 the failure of the attempts to procure legal reform 
 in 1840, would not have so much dependence upon 
 their assertions. Among the names recorded as 
 voting against the bills then attempted to be pass- 
 ed, was found that of the gentleman from Otsego 
 (Mr. CHATFIELD) and nearly all the members who 
 belonged to the profession. Here we could settle 
 this matter free from any of that excitement and 
 bitterness which was fell in the Legislature at the 
 period he alluded to. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND advocated the amendment. 
 Mr. RHOADES said he believed he could give 
 as a reason why the Legislature had not heretofore 
 consented to extend the jurisdiction of justices' 
 courts, that the people of the State had never de- 
 manded it. He could say that this was the fact 
 as regarded his own county. [The gentleman 
 from Madison (Mr. DANA) said he might include 
 
 his county likewise.] He (Mr. R.) was rn favor 
 of leaving this matter with the Legislature, as 
 were other gentlemen. They could improve the 
 character of these courts as far as they thought 
 advisable, and would never refuse to accede to the 
 demands of the people in regard to it. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER thought it unwise to bind down 
 by an iron rule the jurisdiction and tenure of jus- 
 tices' courts, and thus prevent any future improve- 
 ment of a court which was susceptible of very 
 great improvement- 
 
 Mr. STETSON also opposed the amendment. 
 
 Mr. DANA believed that the duties of this 
 Convention did not relate to matters which were 
 not those of a fundamental character. The peo- 
 ple might elect to the Legislature those who 
 would make reforms in such cases as this, when 
 they were demanded. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM called for a division of the ques. 
 tion, and the Convention refused to extend the ju- 
 risdiction as follows: Ayes 26, noes 44. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, Burr, Catnbreleng, 
 ?ook, Hart, Hotchkiss, A.Huntmgton,Hutchinson, Hyde. 
 Kernan. Kingsley, Miller, Penniman, Richmond, St. John, 
 Salisbury, Sears, W. H. Spencer, Strong, Townsend. Wa- 
 erbury, Witbeck, Yawger, Young, Youngs 26. 
 NAYS Mesrs F. F. Backus,H. Backus, Bascom, Bray- 
 n, Chatiield, Clark, Conely, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, 
 )ubois, Flanders, Gardner, Greene, Hawley, Hoffman, 
 lunter, E. Huntington, Jordan, Loomis, McNeil, Muiiro, 
 fellis, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Perkins, President, 
 Rhoades, Riker, Russell, Shaw, Sheldon, E. Spencer, Ste- 
 phens, Stetson, Stow, J. J. Taylor, W~. Taylor, Ward, 
 Wood, Worden, A. Wright, W. B. Wright 44. 
 
 The second clause was also lost, ayes 30, noes 
 2, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, Burr, Clark, Conely, 
 Harris, Hart, Hotchkiss, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jordan, Kings, 
 ey McNeil, Miller, Penniman, Richmond, St. John,' Sal- 
 sbury, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, 
 trong, Townsend, Waterbury, Witbeck, Yawger,Young, 
 'oungs 30. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, F.F. Backus, H. Backus, Bas- 
 om, Cambreleng, Chatfield, Cook, Crooker, Cuddeback, 
 Jana, Dubois, Flanders, Gardner, Gebhard, Greene, Haw 
 ey, Hoft'man, Hunter, A. Huntington, E. Huntington, 
 Lernan, Loomis, Munro, Nellis, O'Conor, Parish, Patter- 
 on, Perkins, President, Rhoades, Riker, Russell, Sanford, 
 tephens, Stetson, Stow, J. J. Tavlor, W.Taylor, Ward. 
 Vood, Worden, W. B. Wright 42. 
 
 Mr. STRONG then offered the amendment 
 eretofore proposed by Mr. MAISHV, giving exclu- 
 ive jurisdiction in $50, and concurrent in $250; 
 laking the costs in courts of record the same in 
 
 rial of civil actions and appeals therefrom as 
 
 vould occur in justices' courts ; and applying the 
 revision to justices' courts in cities. 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to substitute the 10th 
 lapter of the revised statutes. 
 Mr. WORDEN did not agree exactly with his 
 iend from Otsego, although he would rather this 
 tatter should be left to the legislature. He did 
 ot think it necessary that a man having a claim 
 
 gainst another for more' than $50, should be ob- 
 ged to employ a lawyer and take it into a court 
 * record. He would make it merely necessary 
 i have the claim preferred before a justice, and 
 there is no defence, let a judgment be docketed 
 once. The employment of lawyers in the col- 
 ction of debts only degraded the profession, 
 e offered the following as a substitute for the 
 iction : 
 Justices of the peace may render judgment for any 
 
 mount not exceeding $500, on money contracts or agree- 
 ents for the payment of money, where no defence is in- 
 
817 
 
 terposed; and where such defence is interposed in any case 
 where the plaintiff shall claim to recover over $100, the 
 justice before whom the cause is pending shall adjourn 
 the cause into the supreme court; but when the plaintiff 
 shall not claim to recover over $100, the justice shall re- 
 tain jurisdiction of the cause and may render judgment 
 thereon. No costs shall be allowed in any court of re- 
 cord where the recovery is by default and does not exceed 
 $500, and the parties reside in the same county. In similar 
 cases where the parties reside in different counties, actual 
 expenses and disbursements, with $5 costs, may be allow- 
 ed where the recovery is over $100. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved the previous question. 
 There was a second. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. MANN was rejected 
 without a division. 
 
 The 15th section was agreed to : ayes 65, noes 
 9. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved the amendment of M-r 
 WORDEN as an additional section. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to strike out all after 
 $500. This would prevent crossing notes over 
 county lines, to get rid of judgments. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY moved to lay the whole on the 
 table. 
 
 Mr. STRONG demanded the ayes and noes on 
 this motion, and it was lost, 40 to 43. 
 
 Mr. RUSSEL moved the previous question up- 
 on the section and the amendments. Seconded. 
 
 Mr. STRONG desired to accept the amendment 
 of Mr. BASCOM, striking out the last sentence, 
 and was allowed to do so by unanimous consent. 
 
 The proposition was rejected; ayes 9, noes 58. 
 
 Mr. $TOW offered a section providing for the 
 election of justices of the peace in cities. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to adjourn. Agreed 
 to. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 A quorum was not obtained until 4 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. STOWS amendment was announced as 
 the pending question : 
 
 " Justices of the peace in the citis shall be chosen by 
 the electors thereof, or by the wards thereof, as shall be 
 prescribed by law. They shall kold their offices, after 
 the first classification, for lour years. Their number, 
 classification, and compensation shall be regulated by 
 law." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS offered this as a substitute : 
 {) Justices of justices' courts, and justices of the peace 
 in cities shall be selected by the electors of such cities, or 
 wards thereof, at such time and lor such term as shall be 
 prescribed by law. Police justices in any city or village 
 hall be appointed by the common council or board of 
 trustees of such city or village. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN offered the fol- 
 lowing as an amendment to Mr. STOW'S section ; 
 to come in after the words "justices of th 
 justice:" 
 
 " Police justices of cities, recorders, and all other officers 
 now authorized or who may be hereafter authorized undex 
 this constitution, or existing laws, to hold a court or dis- 
 charge judicial functions in municipal or justice*' courts, 
 in eiuier of the cities of this state, shall, after the adoption 
 of this article of the constitution, be elected to their re- 
 spective offices as may be provided by law. The legisla- 
 ture shall determine such times and terms, at its next an- 
 nual session. Justices of city courts, who may be in the 
 office on the first day of January next, shall hold their 
 offices until the 2Lst day of December following, but no 
 longer." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that this proposition 
 required some amendment. It ought to leave the 
 mode of election to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said that that was precisely what 
 his proposition was intended to effect. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that it did 
 not apply to recorders of cities. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said he wanted these recorders 
 to be elected ; but the proper place for such a 
 provision would be in the article reported by Mr. 
 ANGEL. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said he wanted 
 but one section for this whole subject. The of- 
 fice of recorder was a very important one. But 
 in his (Mr. V. S's) proposition, he extended the 
 principle to all local judicial officers. He would 
 accept the suggestion of Mr. PATTERSON, and 
 modify his section so that it should read, after the 
 word ** office," " at such times, for such terms 
 and in such manner as shall be prescribed by 
 law." 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD desired to get a division of 
 this question ; he wanted a vote put separately 
 on some of these officers recorders for instance. 
 He did not want to seethe recorder of New- York 
 city affected by any such provision as this. The 
 recorder of New- York had a more extensive ju- 
 risdiction than any other recorder in the state. In 
 fact his criminal jurisdiction is co-extensive with 
 that of a circuit judge, except for capital offences. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that he would 
 strike out " Recorders," 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved to insert after the word 
 * offices" these words 4 * the officers for districts 
 by the electors of their respective districts, and 
 the officers for the whole city, by the electors of 
 the whole city." 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN accepted this mo- 
 dification 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that in New York city, they 
 had assistant justices for particular districts; and 
 these are appointed by the common council; and 
 have jurisdiction co-extensive with the city; as 
 justices of the peace were elected in towns, and 
 nad jurisdiction co-extensive with the county. 
 Now he desired to have these justices elected by 
 their respective distticis But the police justices, 
 and the various court justices whose jurisdiction . 
 extended over the whole city, he desired to sec .- 
 elected bv the voteis f the whole island. 
 
 Mr, SHEPARD said that this division of th< ; 
 city into districts was merely for the despatch o f 
 business ; any district judge can have jurisdictioi i 
 over the whole city, and also has power to tr y 
 causes in a neighboring district, in the absence o r 
 sickness of the district judge. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said there was a great deal 
 too much of detail in this rule ; true, it might be 
 necessary to elect some by districts, and some Iby 
 the State at large; some for a longer term some 
 for a shorter term. But all that was really nec- 
 essary to insert in the constitution, was to pro- 
 vide generally that judicial officers in cities shall 
 be elected in such manner and in such terms as 
 the legislature shall hereafter prescribe. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he wanted the constitu- 
 tion to say exactly how the officers in the city of 
 New York were to be elected ; and he did so, be- 
 cause he did not want that city to be compelled to 
 come here, and ask for special legislation; because 
 those applications on her part were always re- 
 garded with much jealousy, as designed to secure 
 some special privilege not enjoyed by other sec- 
 tions of the State. All he had desired to effect 
 by his amendment was, to secure to the city New 
 
 77 ; 
 
818 
 
 York with regard to the justices what the country 
 had in regard to theirs ; and nothing more. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said that New York had not 
 applied for any special legislation since 1813, ex- 
 cept to change these districts. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR thought it desirable that this 
 matter of the appointment of city officers, should 
 riot be taken up now; but that it should be left 
 until vve came to the article reported by Mr. AN- 
 GEL. But he would now oif'er an amendment, 
 excepting the city of New York from the opera- 
 tion of this rule. He did not want New York in- 
 terfered with at all. He would not pretend to 
 say how far justices courts in the country had 
 answered the purposes of their creation ; but in 
 regard to similar courts in New York, he would 
 say that a better class of institutions for judicial 
 purposes did nor, exist any where. As early as 
 1820, the legislature organized the justice's court 
 there divided the city into districts, giving 
 each a justice of the peace, holding for four years, 
 appoinied by the common council, with a salary 
 and a clerk. The constitution of '21 recognized 
 these courts, and made them permanent. These 
 courts had worked well, disposing of a great mass 
 in minor causes, affecting a greater amount of pe. 
 cuniary interest, and a much greater Amount oi 
 individual interest than many, perhaps than most 
 of the courts of superior jurisdiction, or record in 
 Ihe State. Now in organizing county conns, the 
 convention had excepted the city of New Yoik. 
 He asked, in organizing the inferior or justices' 
 courts for other counties, that the convention 
 would pursue the same course except the city 
 of New York, and leave it to the action of the law. 
 It would lead to no more special legislation than 
 it had heretofore, and as his colleague h-ad tated, 
 there had been none since 1813. Mr. O'C. hoped 
 that the senior delegate from the city, who seldom 
 asked the attention of the bcdy, would favor the 
 convention with his view on this uhject. 
 
 Mr. ALLEN did not know that he could add 
 any thing to what had been said by his colleague. 
 These district courts were organized in 1820, as 
 had been stated. He was at that time a member 
 of the common council and he had occasion to 
 know something of them. Previous to that, we 
 had a court in each ward, which gave great dis- 
 satisfaction, owing to the great amount of small 
 litigation which was promoted by the justice. 
 In that state of things these district courts were 
 organized by an act of the legislature the judges 
 were men of the legal profession, and had the 
 confidence of suitors. He had heard no complaint 
 of them. Every body was satisfied with them and 
 to break them up would be to inflict injury on the 
 city. The aldermen were all justices of the 
 peace, and two of them always sat with the mayor 
 in the court of sessions. We had also the ma- 
 rine court, and the common pleas. The people 
 were perfectly satisfied with the arrangement ot 
 their courts. * They asked nothing of the legisla- 
 ture or the Convention but to be left as they were. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS did not intend by his amendment 
 to cast an imputation against the justices of the 
 peace of the city of New-York. The argument 
 in favor of salaried justices in New- York was to 
 be found in the fact, that those so paid then dis- 
 charged -an immense amount of business. But he 
 did not say this of all the police magistrates, be- 
 
 cause he did not believe it. He would elect eve- 
 ry officer in the state except the immediate attache 
 of other officers, and he could see no reason why 
 the city of New York should be excepted from this- 
 proposition. He desired no local court for New- 
 York, or that there should be a shadow of differ- 
 ence between the judiciary of that county and that 
 of the other counties-all he desired was a sufficient 
 force to transact the business there. He never 
 would consent that the judiciary of New-York 
 should be appointed at Albany, while it was elec- 
 ted by the people in the rest of the state. When 
 he found that the convention were not disposed 
 to grant to the city of New-York increase of force, 
 then he was obliged to go for a local court. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD desired that the question here 
 should not be tried on the principle of an election, 
 New- York was as strongly in favor of that princi- 
 ple as any other portion of the state. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND was reluctant to vote to ex- 
 cept New- York from the general election princi- 
 ple that was was about to be applied to the other 
 parts of the State. He thought this matter might 
 better be deferred to the City Convention now be- 
 ing held there. Rather than appear to be asking 
 for an exception he should vote against it. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN accepted the 
 amendment of Mr. MORRIS. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND moved to lay the whole sub- 
 ject on the table, as the amendment proposed by 
 the gentleman from Erie, was not necessarv. 
 Messrs. ALLEN, P ATTERSON,CHATF~IELD, 
 
 :AMBRELENG and O'CONOR, continued the 
 
 debate, when the- question was taken on the 
 amendment of Mr. O'CONOR, and it was adopted, 
 ayes 38, nays 31. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Bascom, Bouck, Bowdish, Bull, 
 Candee, Chatfield,. Clark, Goncly, Cornell, Cuddeback, 
 Flanders, Gardner, Greene, Hart, Hofl'man, Hunt, Hunier. 
 A. Huntington, E. Huntington, Jordan, Kemble. Kernnn, 
 Kingsiey, Nellis, O'Conor, Parish, Perkins, Rhoades, Hi- 
 ker. Russell, St. John Sanlord, Shepard, Stephens, Stet- 
 son, W. '1 ay lor, Ward 38. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Brayton, Cambreleng, Cook, Dana, 
 Gebhard, Hawley, Hotchkiss, Looniis, Miller, Alorris, 
 Munro, Nicholas, Patterson, I'enniman, Richmond, Salis- 
 bury, Sears, Sheldon, \V. M. Spencer, Stanton, M. 
 S'-vackhamer, Townsend. Van Schoonhoven,' Wateihury, 
 Wood, A. Wright, W. B. Wright, Yawger, Young, 
 Youngs 31. 
 
 The question being then on the amendment of 
 Mr. VANSCHOONHOVEN as amended, 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to add the words "in- 
 corporated villages" after the word " cities." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS had some doubt as to the expedi- 
 ency or propriety of electing police justices. 
 There were circumstances connected with the 
 discharge of their duties which rendered it pro- 
 per that they should be elected by boards of trus- 
 tees and common councils. He should move to 
 amend by striking out that portion of the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER considered this as doubt- 
 ing the correctness of the principle of an elective 
 judiciary, and was the move surprised to see it 
 come from a gentleman who had been so ardent 
 in his advocacy of that principle. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN followed on ihe 
 same side. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to insert , after justices of 
 
819 
 
 the peace, "and justices ot justice's courts in 
 cities, shall he elected by the electors of such 
 cities, at such times and for such terms as rn;\y b>- 
 prescribed by law." His amendment was adopted. 
 Mr. VAN SCHOGNHOVEN-iiow moved to 
 amend by inserting ' police magistrates" but 
 without taking the question, the Convention ad- 
 journed to 84 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 TUESDAY, (S3rd day) Sept. 8. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. SCHNKLLER. 
 DEBATE ON THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. COOK offered the following: 
 " Resolved, That all debate on the judiciary article and 
 the several propositions oil the same subject, shall cease 
 at or before 12 o'clock at noon this day." 
 
 Mr. DANA asked if the judiciary committee 
 were ready to report upon the propositions recent- 
 ly referred to them ? 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said they would report in the 
 afternoon. 
 
 On ino'iou of Mr. KEMBLE, the resolution was 
 laid on the table, ayes 46 to 19. 
 
 The Convention then took up the unfinished 
 business, beinjt the report on the 
 
 JUDICIARY SYSTEM. 
 
 The question pending was Mr. VAN SCHOON- 
 HOVEN'S amendment to Mr. STOW'S proposition, 
 (which Mr. V. S offered last night.) 
 
 This was put and lost. 
 
 Mr STOW'S proposition, (offered yesterday,) then 
 came up. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that as the section 
 now stood, ii would prevent the election of justices 
 in the city of New York. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved to amend as follows; or 
 offered the following as a substitute for the sec- 
 tion already adopted by amendment: 
 
 All judicial officers of cities and villages, and all such 
 judicial officers as may be created by law therein, shall be 
 wlected at such times and in such manner as the legisla- 
 ture may direct. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON called for the ayes and noes. 
 
 They were ordered. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said the amendment was so 
 drawn os to imply unlimited power in the legis- 
 lature to create judicial offices. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he intended to give the 
 legislature power to make provision for the ap- 
 pointment of such officers as he pointed out and 
 no others ; but that the appointment of them (like 
 others) should be by election by the people. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. MORRIS was adopted. 
 Ayes 60, noes 13. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to add a 
 provision that the legislature should provide for 
 the election of these officers, and making the 
 term of those now in office expire on the 1st of 
 Janui 
 
 Mr. STOW thought the election of these offi- 
 cers would be provided for by some general law, 
 and he did not consider it necessary to make 
 especial arrangements for the election of justices 
 in cities. k 
 
 Mr. RIIOADES moved to except incorporated 
 villages from the provisions of the new section. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the proposition of Mr. 
 MORRIS having been adopted as a substitute to all 
 the other propositions, it was not now amendable. 
 The gentlemen, however, could accomplish their 
 
 purpose by having their amendments as separate 
 sections. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN : My dear sir, I 
 do not offer my proposition as an amendment, but 
 as a new section. I supposed the other matter 
 was disposed of by the last vote. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said the final vote was yet 
 to be taken upon the new section. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that he would like to have the 
 section so amended that these officers might be 
 elected either by the city or by the county. In 
 some cases it might be proper to have them elec- 
 ted by the county at large. The city of Buffalo 
 had GOOO inhabitants who resided without the 
 bounds of the municipality, and the expenses of 
 these local magistrates who had jurisdiction in 
 .11 parts of the county was paid jointly by the city 
 and county. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he intended his amend- 
 ment should give power to the Legislature to 
 make all necessary provisions to meet the circum- 
 stances of the several cities arid counties, so that 
 New York city should not be an exception. 
 
 A question was here raised, whether, by the 
 proposed section, there would not be latitude giv- 
 en to the Legislature to give the appointment of 
 these officers to the Common Council or to the 
 Board ot Supervisors. 
 
 Messrs. PATTERSON, TALLMADGE, MUR- 
 PHY, STOW, MORRIS, LOOiVlIS, and VAN 
 SCHOONHOVEN differed on this point. 
 
 Mr- TALLMADGE was opposed to making 
 these minor police officers elective by the people. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was opposed to making any pro- 
 vision >n the Constitution as to the election or ap- 
 pointment of these officers. There was a great 
 difference of opinion jn regard to the propriety of 
 the election of these officers, and such persons 
 would vote against the Constitution if it contained 
 this provision. He would merely say, the Legis- 
 lature mav provide for theelectian or appointment 
 of such officers, and leave it open to their discre- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY protested against any distinc- 
 tion between the cities and country towns in re- 
 gard to this matter. The Convention had already 
 decided that the towns might elect justices of the 
 peace, but they seemed to fear for the intelligence 
 of the population in cities. He demanded the 
 ayes and noes on the final adoption of the section, 
 when it was agreed to ayes 54, noes 25. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved a reconsideration. He had 
 doubts as to the legal construction of the language 
 of the section. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved the following addition- 
 al section: 
 
 . Police justices in incorporated villages shall be ap- 
 pointed by the board of supervisors of the several coun- 
 ties in which such villages are situated, in such manner as 
 shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to include cities. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS doubted if this was in order. The 
 section that the House had already adopted made 
 this new provision nugatory. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the proposition 
 was in order. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he desired and would 
 move to except the city of New York. He felt 
 convinced that the police magistrates of cit 
 above all other officers, should be elected by 
 
820 
 
 people, and most especially in the city of New 
 York. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that he must 
 also move to except the city of Troy. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS : And I move also to ex- 
 cept the city of Rochester. 
 
 Mr. STOW : Then I will withdraw my mo- 
 tion 
 
 Mr. RHOADES was in favor of and supported 
 his own proposition. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to amend 
 the proposition of Mr. RHOADES as follows : 
 Strike out all after the word " be," and insert 
 '* elected by the electors of the counties in which 
 such villages are located, in such manner, and 
 for such terms, as the legislature may direct." 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY thought this proposition 
 was backing water upon the principle of election. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES accepted the amendment of 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN. 
 
 M. LOOMIS thought the section already adopt- 
 ed covered the whole ground. This would only 
 imply the power to appoint a new batch of of- 
 ficers. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said this provision gave the 
 counties the right to vote for those police officers 
 who were paid a salary out of the county treasury. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN said this was not the case in all 
 instances, and would operate unjustly where 
 these officers were paid by the localities in which 
 they exercised their powers. 
 
 Mr. COOK said that the village of Saratoga 
 Springs had a police justice who was paid by the 
 town ; it was a place of great resort during the 
 summer months, and from that fact a large amount 
 of petty criminal business was of necessity done 
 before that magistrate during those months, and 
 it would be very unfair to make the county of 
 Saratoga pay for the regulation of the morals of 
 the place whilst the disorderly &c. from other 
 places caused the expense 
 
 The proposition of Mr. RHOADES was rejected : 
 ayes 3, noes 76. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote adopting the 7th section of the article and 
 proposed the following amendment : 
 
 Strike out after the word " officer," in the fifth line, and 
 insert: " Any male citizen of the age of 21 years, of good 
 moral character, on application to the supreme court,shall 
 be admitted to practice as an attorney and counsellor, and 
 every party in any cause, prosecution or suit may appear, 
 plead pursue or defend, in his proper person, or by any 
 citizen of good character." 
 
 Mr. STETSON believing that we had already 
 sufficient legislative provisions in the article,, 
 moved to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY demanded the ayes and noes on 
 this motion, and it was lost: ayes 20, noes 58. 
 
 The motion to reconsider was also lost : ayes 
 42, noes 42. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN proposed the fol- 
 lowing as an additional section : 
 
 & . The Legislature shall provide for the election of the 
 judicial officers mentioned in tne preceding section at its 
 next annual session. Those justices of the peace and jus- 
 tices of city courts who may be in office on the first day 
 of January next, shall hold their offices until the 31st day 
 of December, 1847, and no longer. 
 
 This was rejected: ayes 18, noes 43. 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN then offered |the 
 following additional section : 
 
 A U justices of city courts and other city judicial 
 officers who may be in office on the first day of January 
 next, shall hold their offices until the 31st day of Decem- 
 ber next thereafter, and no longer. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN supposed that it would be abso- 
 lutely necessary to insert some such provision as 
 this before the Judiciary article was accepted ; 
 but he believed it would be advisable to wait un- 
 til all the details were settled. He moved to lay 
 the matter on the table. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN was willing to 
 refer the subject to the judiciary committee. 
 
 It was so referred. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE proposed the following as an 
 additional section : 
 
 . The Legislature shall provide that a judgment or 
 decree rendered by the Supreme Court shall be executed, 
 notwithstanding an appeal or writ of error, upon adequate 
 security being given to make full restitution in the" event 
 of a reversal or modification of such judgment or decree,, 
 on appeal. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY advocated the section. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to amend so that the se- 
 curity should be a lien upon unincumbered real 
 estate. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE : Suppose the party has no real 
 estate ? 
 
 Mr. JORDAN : Then let him get some friend 
 to aid him. 
 
 Mr. KEMBLE said that he really was astonish- 
 ed to think that real estate should be required 
 when a party was willing to pay the necessary 
 sum into court. If the gentleman would add, "or 
 the money may be paid into court," he would not 
 object, but as it was now proposed it would de- 
 prive all those of justice who were not in posses- 
 sion of real estate. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN only desired to guard against the 
 fluctuations of mere personal property. A man 
 who was rich to-day might be poor to-morrow, 
 and his personal guarantee would be worthless 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said this whole subject was 
 within the control of the legislature, and we had 
 better stop somewhere, and he thought that this 
 was about the right spot. If we adopt this, we 
 might as well go on until we incorporate the 
 whole of the Revised Statutes and Cowen's Trea- 
 tise in the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that he should oppose the a- 
 mendment for the same reason, and also for the 
 greater reason that this was the most unjust and 
 unreasonable provision that could be devised. 
 The matter should be left to the legislature, to be 
 accomplished mainly by a regulation in relation 
 to cost. This provision would be saying in point 
 of fact that the rich man might appeal, but that 
 the poor man should not appeal. He solemnly 
 protested against any such a state of things. 
 
 Mr WOKDEN believed (he argument that this 
 was a subject of legislation, would prevent our 
 putting anything in the Constitution. For unless 
 we make a constitutional provision, then the Le- 
 gislature would have power to act on any subject. 
 He thought favorably ot the provision, and spoke 
 of the manner in which appeals were now brought. 
 Was there not more reason in giving the party who 
 had obtained the judgment in the supreme court, 
 the rieht to receive what has been awarded him, 
 on his giving abundant security, than to allow the 
 other party to keep him out of his rights, on giv 
 ing bail which might prove worthless? He an 
 
821 
 
 swered the argument, that this would favor the 
 rich at the expense of the poor, alleging that it 
 was unsound. He considered this to be a sound 
 principle, and hoped it would be incorporated into 
 the Constitution, doubting very much, it we failed 
 to do so, whether the Legislature would have the 
 power to pass such a law. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said if there was any necessity 
 for this provision, then the Convention had failed 
 to provide such a judicial force as would prevent 
 delays of justice. There might have been a ne- 
 cessity for such a provision under the old system ; 
 and if itHvas still required, he would suggest that 
 we should go to the Legislature for a new lease of 
 time, in older to get up a new system. He could 
 not agree to such an extension of credit in the 
 courts. It provided that a man should be executed 
 first and tried afterwards. 
 
 Mr. O'CONORsaid that it would be exceedingly 
 unwise to carry such details of practice into the 
 Constitution j he regarded it as a mere matter ol 
 legislation. He was opposed to the incorporation 
 of any of these provisions into the fundamental 
 law. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said that if folks could be 
 satisfied with these arguments, that when a judg- 
 ment is rendered against a man he must allow his 
 property to go with it, then he had nothing more 
 to say ; but he was surprised that it should be 
 contended that property should follow the decis- 
 ions of courts which were so often reversed. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES was in favor of allowing all 
 persons to go through every one of our courts 
 when he had once entered upon 3 suit. There 
 might have been cases when an appeal was bro't 
 merely for the sake of delay ; and he supposed 
 that this section was intended to meet such cases, 
 which blocked up our courts. He was not op. 
 posed to the adoption of a provision to prevent 
 such abuses. 
 
 Mr. STETSON alluded to the statute, by which 
 interest can be charged upon verdicts rendered in 
 cases of wrongs, which had removed the delays 
 from a numerous class of cases, to show that there 
 was no necessity for such a section in the Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS believed that the object of this 
 section was to prevent fiivolous and vexatious 
 writs of error. The advantages of these appeals 
 were in a majority of cases, in favor of the rich 
 man to the injury of the poor man. He was 
 therefore in favor of putting an end to such as 
 were merely frivolous, and intended to embarrass 
 a man who was not able to pursue justice to the 
 last extent. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN opposed the adoption of the 
 section as a cruel and unjust provision. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS continued the debate on the 
 same side. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER regarded the whole proposition 
 so absurd that he was surprised that it had receiv- 
 ed so much discussion. He hoped the question 
 would now be taken. For the last three days we 
 had only been " running emptyings," in finishing 
 up the latter part of this article. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question. 
 Seconded. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. JORDAN was lost. 
 
 Mr. WHITE demanded the ayes and noes, and 
 the section was rejected, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Burr, F. F. Backus, Kemble, Ste- 
 phens, Worden 6. 
 NAYS 76. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM proposed the following as an ad- 
 ditional section: 
 
 ^ The clerks of the several counties of this State shall be 
 clerks of the supreme court with such powers and duties 
 as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. B. apprehended that without the adoption 
 of that section or something like, we should run 
 the hazard of having clerks, with great salaries. 
 Perhaps it was proper that the city of New York 
 should have a separate clerk, from the fact of its 
 great amount of business. 
 
 Mr. STETSON remarked that it was not cer- 
 tain that terms of the court would be held in every 
 county. It was not right there he thought to al- 
 low a particular locality alone to have the choice 
 in allAkis matter. 
 
 Mr^HATFIELD thought as the business of 
 the clerk would be merely to make up the cal- 
 endar, that the question as to the locality of a 
 clerk, was of but very little importance. This 
 proposition he favored, as it would dispense with 
 these clerks, which were not required, and save 
 money to the State. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that the proposition met his 
 entire approbation. He would go a little further 
 and provide a clerk for the court of appeals, for 
 if this clerk business was to be gone into at all, it 
 was better to do it up at once. It was better per- 
 haps that the whole should be left to legislation, 
 but as it was brought in here he should vote for 
 it. Mr. S. then proposed to add the following to 
 the amendment of Mr. BASCOM ; which he said 
 would enable all persons by an application to this 
 office to ascertain all the judicial business of the 
 State. 
 
 " There shall be appointed a clerk of the court of ap- 
 peals, who shall be ex-officio clerk of the supreme court, 
 and to keep his office at the seat of government. He shall 
 be appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and 
 consent of the Senate shall hold his office for three years, 
 and be paid a compensation to be fixed by law and paid 
 out of the public treasury." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS enquired if it was not best to 
 add some provision requiring bail Trom these 
 clerks. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said the legislature could do that 
 without any constitutional provision. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER urged that the matter had bet- 
 ter go to the judiciary committee and be brought 
 into shape. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON offered an amendment so as 
 to make this clerk elective by the people. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved the reference of the 
 subject to the judiciary committee. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM urged that the question could be 
 settled without such a reference. Mr. B. further 
 urged his proposition, and deprecated the amend- 
 ments that had been offered to it. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN hoped all this matter would be 
 .eft where it belonged to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND believed Mr. BASCOM to be 
 right in his proposition, and went on to sustain it. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY then called for the previous 
 question, and there was a second, and the main 
 question ordered. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. CROOK. - 
 ER'S motion to refer, and it was rejected. 
 
822 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. 
 Backus, Bouck, Brayton, Burr, Cambreleng, R. Camp, 
 bell, jr., Crocker, Dubois, Flanders, Gebhard, Hart, Haw- 
 ley, Hotchkiss, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jor- 
 dan, Kingslev, Mann, Morris, Munro, Patterson, Penniman, 
 Porter, President, Rhoades, Richmond, Russell, St. John, 
 Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Smith, W. H. Spencer, 
 Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Strong, Taggart, W.Taylor, 
 Townsend, Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Waterbury, White, 
 Willard, Witbeck, Worden> A.Wright, W.B.Wright, 
 Yawger, Young, Youngs 56. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Bascom, Bergen, Cuddeback, Dana, 
 Gardner, Greene, Hunt, Hunter, E Huntington, Kemble, 
 Looinis, McNeil, Nellis, Nicholas, Riker, Simmon, Tall- 
 madge 17. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. LOOMIS as thus amend- 
 ed, was also adopted, ayes 51, noes 18. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bouck. Burr.Cambreleng, R. Campbell, 
 jr. Crocker, Flanders, Gebhard, Hart, Hawley, Hotchkiss, 
 Hunt, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble, 
 Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, Morris, Munro.Nellis, Patterson, 
 Penniman. Perkins, Porter, Richmond, Russell, St. John, 
 Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Smith, W. H^pencer, 
 Stanton, S.ephens, Stetson, Stow, Strong, l^Taylor, 
 Townsend, Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Waterbury, White, 
 Willard, Witbeck, Worden, Yawger, Young, Youngs 51. 
 
 NOES Messsrs, Allen, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Bas- 
 com, Bergen, Dana, Dubois, Gardner, Greene, Hunter, 
 McNeil, Murphy, Nicholas, President, Riker, Simmons, 
 A. Wright. W, B. Wright IS. 
 
 The question then being on this amendment 
 thus amended to Mr. BASCOM'S proposition. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY asked for a division of the 
 question so as to be first on Mr. BASCOM'S propo- 
 sition. The question was so taken, and it was 
 adopted ayes 66, nays 7. 
 
 The question was then taken on the residue of 
 the section that in relation to the court of ap- 
 appeals, and it was adopted ayes 58, nays 22. 
 
 The whole section was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. WHITE proposed the following as an ad- 
 ditional section : 
 
 . The Legislature shall provide, by law, that all mo- 
 neys in the custody or under the control of any of the 
 courts of law or equity, for the bene.nt of suitors and oth- 
 ers, at the time this Constitution shall take eftect, and all 
 moneys which shall thereafter bnpaid into any of the 
 courts of record of the State, lor the benefit of suitors and 
 others, shall be paid into the Treasury of the State, at 
 such times and under such regulations, and be held by the 
 State for the benefit of such suitors and others, at, such 
 rates of interest as the Legislature may prescribe. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS opposed the amendment. In 
 the present case a man has a right to sue for his 
 money or to demand security, which he would 
 not have if this amendment was adopted. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS concurred with Mr. SIMMONS 
 in the view just taken. 
 
 The debate was further continued by Messrs. 
 RHOADES, ALLEN, TOWNSEND, STETSON, SIM- 
 MONS and VAN SCHOONHOVEN. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved to adjourn. Agreed to. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Only 37 members present at a quarter 4 o'clock. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY (who had the floor) rose to op- 
 pose the adoption of the section proposed by Mr. 
 WHITE, relative to the monies now under the 
 control of the clerks, registers, &c. of the courts 
 of this State. He insisted that if all this money 
 was to be paid into the State Treasury it would 
 cause a great deal of trouble over the State, and 
 would not benefit the suitors in the least. The 
 returns showed clearly where, and how these 
 $3,000,000 were invested. He did not mean to 
 say that this mode of keeping the public funds 
 was the best that could possibly be devised; but 
 
 he did know that they had always been sacredly 
 preserved, and not a single dollar had been lost. 
 This money was at the present time all under the 
 supervision of the law, or of the court directly; 
 and the only question was shall we transfer it to 
 the State Treasury. The owners of this money, 
 or parties, have received interest on the invest- 
 ments. If they were to transfer the money to 
 the State Treasury, they must have a separate 
 department to keep an account of it, and to dis- 
 burse it when called for. Now we have had 
 some experience in regard to the State's mode of 
 investing money, in the case of the loaning of 
 the U. S. deposite fund. He could not tell how 
 it was with some other counties; but he did know 
 of the monies loaned in Kings county, one-half 
 of it had been lost. To send these funds then to 
 the State would not be wise; and he much pre- 
 ferred that the whole matter should be left to 
 the legislature. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said this subject was one of 
 vast moment. He had no doubt, when the matter 
 was lully investigated, that the amount of lunds 
 under the control of the court of chancery would 
 be found to be much more than the public had 
 any idea of. Young and rising members of the 
 profession might leel that it was discreet to speak 
 cautiously on this subject, in order to stand well 
 with the court. But we could have no such mo- 
 tive to influence us. The gentleman from Rens- 
 selaer this morning seemed to think that any en- 
 quiries into this matter implied a censure on the 
 chancellor. Mr. T. felt that in this he was act- 
 ing in accordance with the feeling and wish of 
 the chancellor himself. Mr. T. had no arrow to 
 throw at him. But many of his officers held this 
 money. Some of them might not hold itdiscreei- 
 ly, and it might be lost. Mr. T. had reason to 
 know that the chancellor himself desired to be 
 relieved of this responsibility. The chancellor 
 stated the amount at about $'3,000,000 but did 
 not include the amount under the control of the 
 district couits. There were receivers also who 
 had millions of money in their hands. He urged 
 that it was but just to the chancellor, to his suc- 
 cessors, and to the fund itself, that in changing the 
 jurisdiction ot the court that we should see how 
 this thing stood. It would be a sinful omission 
 not to do'this. He spoke of the library that had 
 been purchased out of the unclaimed funds in 
 chancery. This library had cost from $50,000 to 
 100,000 and some $5,000 a year was spent in 
 keeping it up. Some $20,000 of this money was 
 lost in "the Franklin Bank. In saying this, and in 
 urging that these moneys should be transferred to 
 the state treasury, he intended no imputation on 
 the chancellor but he urged that this account 
 should be stated, that the successors of the* chan- 
 cellor, and the chancellor himself, should know 
 how the matter stood, and that persons interested 
 might have the security of the state for the safe 
 keeping of the moneys. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART said that he would move to 
 amend, by striking out Mr. WHITE'S proposition 
 on this subject, and insert this : 
 
 1. The legislature shall provide by law for transferring 
 and depositing all funds and securities now held, or which 
 may hereafter be held, by or under the control of the court 
 of chancery, or of any other court or courts, or of any 
 register, assistant register, clerk or receiver of any court, 
 for sale keeping, investment or disbursement in the state 
 treasury, or with a county treasurer, as follows, viz,: 
 
823 
 
 1. All funds secured by real estate in any county, with 
 all securities relating lo the same, with the county treas- 
 urer of the county in which such real estate is situated. 
 
 2. All funds belonging to infants, widows or lunatics, not 
 secured by real estate, with the county treasurer ol the 
 county in which the infant, widow or lunatic, entitled to 
 the same resides, if a resident of this state. 
 
 :t. All luuds arising from the sale of real estate, hereaf- 
 ter to be made, directed to be invested by order of any 
 court, and all securities taken upon the sale of real estate 
 hereafter made, by order or direction of any court, with 
 the county treasurer of the county in which such real es- 
 tate shall be situated. 
 
 4. All other funds and securities mentioned in this sec- 
 tion in the state treasury, or with a county treasurer, as 
 shall be provided by law. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY, in reply to Mr. TALLMADGE, 
 and the intimation that some of the younger mem- 
 bers of the profession might be influenced here by 
 fear of the chancellor, remarked that he had be- 
 gun to look upon the court ot chancery as defunct, 
 and that whatever foundation there might have 
 been otherwise for the insinuation, it could scarce- 
 ly be applicable now. He went on to say that he 
 did not pretend that there should not be a change 
 in the mode of investing the money, but he insist- 
 ed that it was a pioper subject for legislation 
 and that it should not be so tied up in the Consti- 
 tution that a change could not be made in the 
 place of deposit, if the convenience of suitors or 
 other circumstances might demand it. But the 
 greai objection to transferring these moneys to the 
 state treasury was that we should have to organize 
 a separate department tomanage these funds. Mr. 
 M. repelled the intimation that we had not before 
 us in the returns a full statement of the amount of 
 these funds :;nd that the amounts in the hands of 
 receivers shouU: have been included. They gave 
 good securi'}, ai .1 no complaint had been made 
 I hat a dollar was ever lost by them. The funds 
 in their hands were paid over with convenience 
 and satisfaction to parties, and they should riot be 
 compelled to come to Albany tor ihern. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that whilst 
 these funds were well and safely kept there was 
 no necessity for taking them from the custody of 
 the Chancellor ; nor of making a grave constitu- 
 tional provision, which places them in the hands 
 of the Treasurer of this State; or of the County 
 Trfitsurrr.s. If any change was to be made, he 
 preferred Mr. TAGGART'S proposition ; but he 
 much rather wished they should stay where they 
 are, subject to the control of the Legislature, 
 
 Mr. BERGEN believed this to be entirely a 
 matter of legislation. He thought that the Con- 
 vention also thought so. And it should not to oc- 
 cupy their time for a single moment; and so he 
 would move the previous question. 
 
 This was seconded 54 to 21. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART'S amendment was then nega- 
 tived without a division. 
 
 Mr. WHITE'S amendment was then rejected, 
 23. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Ayrault, Bouck, Burr, Cornell, 
 
 Hotchkiw, Kemble, Kmgsley, Mann, Miller, 
 
 l'..n*h.. Salisbury, Santord, S.jars, Shaw, Sheldon, Stephens, 
 
 Tallinadge, W. Taylor, Towusend,W a ttjibury, White -23. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Jligei, Archer, F. F- Backus, H. Bdck- 
 us, Baker, Bascom, Bergen, Bowdish, Brayton. Bull, Cam- 
 breleng, 11. Campbell, jr., Chatfield, Clark, Cook, Dana, 
 Flanders, Gebhard, Greene. Harris, Hart, Hawley, Hoff- 
 man, Hunter, E. Huntin^ton, Hyd<., Jordan, Kernaa, Kirk- 
 land, Loornis, Munio, Murphy, Ntllis, Nicholas, letter, 
 son, Penniman, President, llhoades, Kiker, St. John, She. 
 j.:ml, Simmons, E. Spencer, W. H. Sptncer, Stauton, Stet- 
 son, Strong, J.J. Taylor, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Wil- 
 
 lard, Witbeck, Wood, Worden, A. Wright, W. Ji. Wright, 
 Yawger, Young, Youngs 59. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND rrioved a reconsideration of 
 the vote on Mr. TAGGART'S motion. 
 
 The 17th section of the report was then read as 
 follows : 
 
 17. No judicial officer, except justices of the peace, 
 shall receive any fees or perquisites of office. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to add as follows: 
 
 After " receive," insert " to his own use." AdJ at the 
 end, " Provision shall be made bylaw requiring parties 
 prosecuting suits or proceedings before judicial officers, 
 other than justices of the peace, to contribute towards the 
 expense of administering justice by the payment of a spe- 
 cific sum in each suit, or of a rate per centage on the 
 amount claimed, or value of the matter to be adjudicated 
 in each case, to some officer for the use of the public treas- 
 ury, before a hearing or a trial shall be heard thereon. 
 
 iMr, LOOMIS urged that it was but just that 
 parties litigant should contribute towards the 
 payment of the officers employed in their service, 
 and to a greater amount than others. It was also 
 desirable to have something in the constitution 
 imposing the duties of the legislature to make 
 some such provision. It was the more necessary 
 also as \ve proposed to pay these judges a salary, 
 who had heretofore received large amounts from 
 suitors by way of fees. Without prescribing any 
 detail to the legislature, he would state how he 
 should desire to see such a provision carried out. 
 He would compel a party on commencing a suit, 
 to pay a certain fee. Before trial, he should also 
 pay a certain sum, say $5 and out of the sums 
 thus paid he would require the clerk to pay the 
 jurors by the day, and the other officers, if suffi- 
 cient, taking their vouchers, the calendar to be 
 handed over to the county treasurer at the close 
 of the term, and the clerk to account to him for 
 the amount received. If the party appealed to 
 the supreme court in bane, he would compel him 
 to pay again, before his cause should be entered 
 on the calendar. And on his appealing to .the 
 court of last resort, he would require another sum 
 increasing the amount at each stage with a 
 view in some degree to repress litigation. And 
 under a simple form of pleading, such as he hop- 
 ed to see adopted, the cost of litigation might be 
 reduced very much, even under such a tax upon 
 it. As the public provided tribunals for the set- 
 tlement of controversies, it was eminently proper 
 that those who had occasion to use them should 
 contribute more towards the expense of maintain 
 ing them than peaceable citizens who never did 
 use them. He regarded it also as essential to 
 make such provision mandatory on the legisla- 
 ture, in order that the people, when they come to 
 calculate the expense of this system to them, in 
 the shape of salaries, might also see that suitors 
 would be compelled to contribute a fair share of 
 the expense. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS asked for a division of the 
 question. He was in favor of the first proposi- 
 tion, intended to prevent judges from receiving 
 for their own use any fees or perquisites of office. 
 This was right, as judges were to be paid by sa- 
 laries for their services. As to the second branch, 
 which proposed to tax parties to suits to defray 
 the expenses of the courts, it might be right and 
 proper to impose such a tax, but he would have 
 it done by the legislature. It was certainly a fit 
 subject for legislation, but not a matter to be pro- 
 
824 
 
 vided for in the constitution. The Convention 
 had been legislating for several days, and would 
 have hereafter to confine its action to its appro- 
 priate sphere, or many subjects requiring atten- 
 tion could not be disposed of during the short time 
 thatjwe should continue in session. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said he agreed to this section 
 sweeping away fees, in committee, but reflection 
 had led him to doubt about it. He agreed that 
 judges should be paid by salary and not by little 
 fees for judicial duties proper but he doubted 
 charging on the public the payment of their ser- 
 vices at the chambers, in order to get it back 
 again in some other shape. Besides to strip these 
 officers of fees for chamber duties, he was afraid 
 would make them less accessible, less competent 
 and less careful in the discharge of their duties. 
 He disliked the idea of making the salary of the 
 surrogate a county charge, instead of requiring 
 those who needed his services to contribute to his 
 compensation as now. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD was understood to take the 
 ground that the proposition was altogether too 
 sweeping and indiscriminate and from a diffi- 
 culty inherent in the subject, which would re- 
 quire the detail of a statute book, if we went into 
 it at all. There were suits that it was not worth 
 five dollars to litigate, which had to come before 
 our courts; and others which were worth* more. 
 All this was matter for legislation, and not pro- 
 per in a constitution. Besides, parties now paid 
 a great variety of fees, which come out of their 
 pockets, and though burthensome to them, the 
 public would not be saddled with them. But a 
 tariff on suits to pay jurors and constables and 
 other county charges was another matter. 
 
 Mr J. J.TAYLOR conceded that there were 
 many wrongs growing out of the system of fees 
 and perquisites, and he wished to see them abo- 
 lished, so far as they could be with propriety. 
 But we should require in some counties, othei 
 officers than the county judge, to do chambe$ du- 
 ties, and these certainly should not be paid by 
 salary. Referres also, auditors and others might 
 for the time being be regarded as judicial officers. 
 He would, not pay them a salary. To prevent 
 this difficulty he proposed to amend by striking 
 out the exception of justices of the peace and in- 
 serting, " for whose compensation provision shall 
 be made by salary." 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS replied to the objection that this 
 was legislation. The original section was legis- 
 lation, providing that the judges should be com- 
 pensated by salary only. He desired to carry 
 with this before the people the assurance that 
 they were not to be taxed for all these salaries. 
 He objected to Mr. TAYLOR'S amendment as con- 
 templating a class of officers in counties who 
 were to do certain duties and receive fees say- 
 ing that we had provided a county judge to do 
 those duties, and paid him a salary, the conse- 
 quence would be, if the amendment was adopted, 
 that the county judge would do none of this busi- 
 ness, but turn parties over to the officers who 
 could take fees. 
 
 The Convention agreed to insert " to his own 
 use." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS did not see how a rule of the 
 kind proposed by Mr. LOOMIS could be adopted 
 without laying it down either too broad or too 
 
 narrow. He was in favor of such a rule, and had 
 proposed it in the judiciary committee, but he 
 now regarded it as the safest plan to leave it to the 
 legislature. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN urged that the judiciary was one 
 of the departments of the government as much as 
 the executive or legislative and he could see no 
 reason founded in justice, why a person should 
 pay a fee before approaching the one any more 
 than the others, to aid in paying the salaries of 
 public officers. For one, he was opposed to ma- 
 king the profession to which he belonged tax ga- 
 therers for the purpose of raising a fund to pay 
 judicial officers and bearing the odium of the 
 suspicion which would attach to them that they 
 pocketed these fees, would in many instances 
 come out of the pockets of the profession. The 
 approaches to justice had better be left free, as 
 were those to other departments of the govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. STETSON urged that taxation should be 
 equal that the great mass of the people who con- 
 tributed to support your higher courts, and yet 
 never used them that the mass had also to pay 
 fees to sustain justices' courts and county courts 
 and that it would be unequal to make them pay a 
 double tax to sustain the two classes of courts, 
 while those who used them paid only their share 
 of the general taxation to support them. He 
 trusted this system or some other would be adopt- 
 ed to equalize these burthens. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR took similar ground in favor 
 of the proposition of Mr. LOOMIS. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN moved the previous question, 
 but withdrew it at the request of 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS, who desired to make an explan- 
 ation, and agreed to renew the motion. He be- 
 lieved that the provision should be to prohibit 
 judges from receiving fees; the duties of other of. 
 ficers weie in many cases merely ministerial, and 
 fees were properly imposed upon those who made 
 use of them. But all the people were benefited 
 by the judges. A man was hanged, for instance, 
 not for his own benefit, bu^ tor the benefit of all 
 the community and those who should feel disposed 
 to follow his example. Mr. S. went on to illus- 
 trate his position, and sat down forgetting to re- 
 new the previous question. 
 
 Mr. STRONG, however, got the floor and mov- 
 ed the previous question, but he too withdrew at 
 the request of 
 
 Mr. JORDAN, who regarded this as a new and 
 important question which ought not to be deci- 
 ded without deliberation. He could riot agree to 
 what gentlemen appeared to suppose, that going 
 to law was a luxury for which we ought to be 
 taxed. People did not go to law merely from a 
 Litigious spirit, and this could not be urged as a 
 reason for their being taxed when they entered 
 into a lawsuit. The cases were very rare where 
 persons went to law when they were not driven 
 into such a necessity. 
 
 Mr. STRONG again renewed his call for the 
 previous question, declining to withdraw it again 
 and there was a second, and 
 
 The last clause of Mr. LOOMIS'S amendment 
 was negath ed as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, H. Backus, Bascom, Bergen, 
 Bowdish, Brayton, Cmldeback, Dubois, Greene, Hart, 
 Uutchinson, Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, McNiel, 
 Morris, Munro, Nellis, St. John, Salisbury, Sanford, Stan- 
 
825 
 
 ton, Stetson, W. Taylor, Townsend.Waterbury, Willard, 
 Wood. Yawger, Young, Youngs 32. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Ayrault. F F. Backus, Baker, 
 Bouck, Bull, Burr, R. Campbell, jr.. Chatfield, Cook, Cor- 
 nell Crocker, Dana, Dodd, Flanders. Forsyth, Gardner, 
 Gebhard. Harris, Hawley, Hoffman, Hotchkiss. E. Hunt- 
 ineton, Jord.in, Maxwell, Miller, Nicholas, O'Conor, Par- 
 ish, Patterson, Porter, President, Rhoades, Hiker, Russell, 
 Shaw, Sheldon. Shepard, Simmons, W. s. Spencer, Strong, 
 Swackhamer, Taggart, Talimadge, J. J. Taylor, Vache, 
 Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Worden, A. Wright, W. B. 
 Wright 61. 
 
 The 17th section was then agreed to, as amend- 
 ed, without a division. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR, from the judiciary committee, 
 reported several sections, in pursuance of the ref- 
 erence made to that committee on Saturday last, 
 of the propositions presented by Mr. LOOMIS, for 
 transferring the business in arrears in the several 
 courts to the newly organized tribunals. 
 
 These sections were ordered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN laid on the table a motion to re- 
 consider the vote on the section making clerks of 
 counties clerks of the supreme court. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned to 8 1-2 o'clock 
 to-morrow morning. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (84th day) Sept. 9. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. VAN RENSSELAER. 
 Mr "COOK rose and made the following expla- 
 nation of what appeared in the " Albany Evening 
 Journal" of yesterday : 
 
 Mr. C. said he was reported in an evening pa- 
 per as having yesterday made the following re- 
 mark upon this floor : " The village of Saratoga 
 had a police justice and it would be unfair to 
 make the counry pay for the regulation of the 
 morals of su-:n a place as that." 
 
 Residing in an adjoining village, also a water- 
 ing place, he was unwilling to be recorded as 
 having made an unkind, if not an unjust remark 
 in relation to that village. He would also say 
 that the necessity of a police justice for that vil- 
 lage existed only from the large number of stran- 
 gers visiting it during the summer months. 
 
 The necessity of making any correction in this 
 matter arose not from the reporter having given 
 what he (Mr. C.) did not say, but from the fac 
 he did not catch the whole of his remark. Wha 
 he did say was this : 
 
 " The village of Saratoga Springs had a police 
 justice who was paid by the town ; it was a place 
 of great resort during" the summer months, am 
 from that fact a large amount of petty crimina 
 business was of necessity done before that magis- 
 trate ; and it would be unfair Co make the count) 
 of Saratoga pay for the regulation of the morals o 
 so large a watering place as that." 
 
 Mr. HOTCHKISS presented a petition from 
 citizens of Warren co., in favor of the establish 
 iiHMit of free schools. Referred. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE, the petition of citizens of Madi 
 son co. in relation to the unfinished public works 
 Referred. 
 
 The Convention then took up the unfinishec 
 business relating to the Reports on 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY said perhaps some gentle 
 men thought this was not a bad idea. He di< 
 not know himself but that he might be in favo 
 of creating a few wiorejudges "of the same sort. 3 
 We would be willing to get up a pretty respecta 
 
 le army, and then would have them all marched 
 iff to Texas. We had already given two addi- 
 ional judges to each county, and it appeared to 
 lim if they should die (here would be but few 
 mourners, as it would decrease the burthens of the 
 eople. 
 
 iVJr. J. J. TAYLOR thought it rather doubtful 
 whether such provision should be passed. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY moved to strike out the last 
 clause of the section, the words " powers in 
 ipecial cases." 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that his amendment was an 
 mportant one, and it or something closely re- 
 sembling it, ought to be adopted. He certainly 
 should oppose the motion to strike out. He had 
 not attempted during the progress of this debate 
 o embarrass for a single moment, the passage of 
 ;he judiciary article ; he had steadily adhered to 
 ts principles throughout. He thought it was not 
 asking too much to have this little provision in 
 serted, which gives the legislature discretion to 
 appoint an additional officer in the large counties 
 when it becomes necessary to do so. He did not 
 aropose that this officer should have the power to 
 ;ry issues. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR said that this person would, 
 after all, be a judicial officer, and he wished to 
 inow how it was proposed that he should be paid? 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that as his fees were to be 
 paid into the county treasury, he might be allow- 
 ed a moderate compensation out of that treasury 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that the substantial part of 
 this ought to be adopted. We must give the leg- 
 islature a little elbow room. The office of sur- - 
 rogate would by and by be one of the most impor 
 tant in the State. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN was in favor of the proposi- 
 tion of Mr. LOOMIS. It would be found necessary 
 for the convenience of local business, such as 
 granting landlord's warrants, attachments for ab- 
 sconding debtors, &c., that such a officer should 
 be at hand, without compelling the applicant to 
 travel over the whole extent of a large county. 
 Without some provision of the kind now propos- 
 ed, it would be necessary to confer such powers 
 upon fifty or sixty justices of the peace or supreme 
 court commissioners. 
 
 The motion cf Mr HAWLEY was negatived. 
 Mr. RUSSELL offered the following as a sub- 
 stitute for the section under consideration: 
 
 ^ . The legislature may authorize the election of an 
 associate county judge iu each county, who shall discharge 
 the duties of the surrogate and first county judge in case 
 of vacancy of such officer, or of inability to the incumbent* 
 to discharge the duties thereof, and who may be authoris- 
 ed to discharge such special duties out of court as shall be 
 prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said this amendment, if pass- 
 ed, would give the new officer nothing to do, 
 when the judgo first appointed was able to per 
 form all the duties devolved upon him. Here was 
 an absolute necessity for the appointment of these 
 additional officers, and to let it be known that it 
 was distinctly presented to the Convention who 
 ther they would allow these Commissioners to be 
 appointed or not, he would call for the ayes and 
 noes. They were ordered. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said since the Convention had 
 refused to allow the Legislature to establish coun- 
 ty courts whenever petitioned for, to be paid for 
 at the couptie.s expense, he supposed they would 
 
 78 
 
826 
 
 not agree to the appointment of these extra com- 
 missioners, and he had offered his substitute with 
 a view to make the proposition less objectionable 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend the sec- 
 tion proposed by Mr. LOOMIS by restricting the 
 number that might be appointed to two in each 
 county. Lost, 33 to 33. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that gentlemen seemed deter- 
 mined in every possible way to increase the num- 
 ber of judges. We were first told that 32 woulc 
 be able to do up all the business of the state. 
 Next that it was necessary to have county courts 
 and county judges. Now there was to be another 
 batch of them created. We have too many al- 
 ready, and he should vote against every proposi- 
 tion to increase their number. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS could not be contented wit! 
 arguments of the kind used by the gentleman 
 from New-York. Here was a clear case of omis- 
 sion,which ought to be provided for beyond doubt, 
 and he hoped the Convention would assent to it. 
 he did not like the proposition of Mr. RUSSELL. 
 A Lieutenant 1 Governor he was in favor of; but a 
 Lieutenant Judge, who was to wait until the first 
 judge died or was incapable, he could not think 
 necessary. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND agreed to the necessity for the 
 appointment of some such officer as was provided 
 for in the latter part of the section proposed by 
 Mr. LOOMIS. He regarded the discretionary pow- 
 er proposed to be conferred upon the Legislature 
 as very necessary, and he had no fear that any 
 Legislature would ever abuse it. 
 , ivJr. BASCOM said there was now to be one 
 county judge in every county, and two in some, 
 besides a surrogate and a district attorney, and he 
 could see no necessity for the appointment of an 
 additional officer. The duties now proposed to 
 be devolved upon these new officers might be 
 given to either of the officers named. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY described the offices that 
 had already been contemplated by the Convention, 
 and the compensation that must necessarily be paid 
 to them; he was tremendously astonished lhat 
 these constant efforts should be made to increase 
 this army of judges these public officers that, 
 like leeches, latien on the iile blood of the people 
 through a hateful tax. 
 
 Mr. A. WRIGHT asked that the vote rejecting 
 Mr. CHATFIELD'S amendment should be recon- 
 sidered. Agreed lo. 
 
 The question recurred on adding the words 
 ' not to exceed two in any county.'' 
 
 Mr. STRONG called fur the ayes and nays.- 
 They were ordered. 
 
 M'r. J. J. TAYLOR said that if the proposition 
 did not contemplate the creation of new officers, 
 if was necessary to put in this limit to two. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said he would accept Mr. CHAT- 
 YIELD'S amendment. 
 
 Mr. SALISBURY said there should be a gene- 
 ral and not a special provision to supply all va- 
 cancies that may occur in offices. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to amend the propo. 
 sition by adding the words, " the election ot," at 
 the end ot the 1st line, after the word " lor." 
 
 Mr. BURR said that he could not bring himself 
 to vote for a proposition which created any new 
 olficeis, after the array that had been created al- 
 ready. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN insisted that there 
 should be a more extensive provision for supplying 
 all vacancies; and he wished the amendment 
 should be so modified. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON'S amendment was then 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL withdrew his substitute. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY asked what special duties were 
 to be conferred on these new officers, which were 
 not possessed and exercised at present, by suno- 
 gatesand other officers. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that it was intended to make- 
 provisiun for cases contingencies lhat n 
 arise. 
 
 Mr, HAWLEY said lhat then this proposiiion 
 was what he supposed, the creation of a new of- 
 fice, with new powers and duties, and to this he 
 was opposed. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN was of the same 
 opinion. He was decidedly opposed to the un- 
 limited authority, which this section would give 
 to the legislature to create offices, and pay them. 
 He did not see that there was any or could be any 
 emergency that could ever arise, that would ren- 
 der this necessary. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was very anxious that this propo- 
 sition should pass ; the officers contemplated in 
 it were very necessary in many cases ; in small 
 ejectments for instance ; and the expense would 
 not be increased. Their compensation might be 
 very small, and would be all raised by the fees 
 and perquisites of office. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH wished to know whether the 
 " inability" described in this section, as the con- 
 tingency on which these appointments were to 
 depend, was to be deemed a mental or physical 
 inability, or one arising out of a pressure of busi- 
 ness. The contingency ought to be more defi- 
 nitely described. We already had too many ju- 
 dicial officers. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that by and by he should 
 move to amend the proposition so as to remove the 
 objections raised by the gentleman from Jefferson, 
 (Mr. DANFORTH.) 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was surprised that there was 
 not a general sense of appreciation of some such 
 provision to provide officers to do the business 
 here contemplated, in the respective counties. 
 The thirty-six judges were held sufficient to do 
 the judicial business, but the judiciary committee 
 had never represented that they were sufficient to 
 do all the local business. 
 
 Mr. STETSON urged the adoption of this pro- 
 position. The wants of the country required it. 
 He regretted that there should be any opposition 
 to this proposition. He had often been obliged to 
 travel thirty or forty miles to have a small matter 
 of business transacted, which would not take the 
 officer more than half an hour to attend to, and 
 yet which it was very necessary should be trans- 
 acted. This new officer was very necessary, and 
 those who turned a deaf ear to this necessity were 
 willing to inflict a greater inconvenience upon the 
 people, even than they had ever felt before. Un- 
 ier the old law there were three officers who 
 might perform this local business, while there is 
 now provided but a single one. He had no other 
 motive in advocating this section, than to afford 
 accommodation to the people for the transaction 
 f their local business. 
 
827 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought gentlemen were at 
 Dotting their eyes open to the necessity of 
 ^ local officers. Gentlemen had heretofore 
 stoutly refused to allow that there Was a necessity 
 for these " ornaments" to be stuck up about the 
 county. Give. us a good strong superior court, 
 said they, and that will be sufficient to do all our 
 local business. Yet they had gone on and made 
 other county judges; and not yet satisfied, they 
 throw in a proposition to elect two more of these 
 common pleas judges to be called " officers." He 
 believed there was a necessity for these local offi- 
 '>nt he would not smuggle them into the con- 
 stilution in such a manner that the people would 
 be misled with regard to the courts which we are 
 !<> give them. He could not vote for this propo- 
 sition under the present circumstances, because 
 he did not believe the present system could be so 
 patched up as to render it acceptable to the peo- 
 ple. The supreme court must be cut down to 
 twelve or fifteen judges in the first place, and 
 then the inferior courts might be organized with 
 reference to this diminution of judicial force. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN said that this trifling proposition 
 had already been discussed enough. He moved 
 the previous question. 
 
 Several members urged him to withdraw it. 
 He did so. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to strike out the last 
 clause, and insert. " who shall possess the pow- 
 ersand discharge the duties of a justice of the su- 
 preme court, or a judge at chambers." 
 Mr. ANGEL said allusion had been made to a 
 matter which 5iad been dragged into this debate a 
 few days ago by the gentleman from Cattaraugus, 
 (Mr. CROOK. ER,) who recited language which he 
 said had been used by two side judges in a locali- 
 ty which " the gentleman from Allegany" could 
 fix thereby creating the impression that such a 
 scene had occurred in the county of Allegany at 
 recent day. Now he should be inexcusable 
 if he allowed such an injurious reflection to ope- 
 rate to the disadvantage of the very respectable 
 judges of that county. He would not deny that 
 some such scene was said to have occurred, but it 
 was mere'}' a " tradition" of something which, if 
 it occurred at all, occurred in the early history 
 and settlement of that county when good judges 
 were not so easily to be had as at present. The 
 gentleman from Cattaraugus knew the judges to 
 i the language. was attributed, and he knew 
 Unit they had left respectable families who would 
 read these reminiscences with great pain. The 
 gentleman knew that one of these judges came 
 Vermont in poverty, and by his industry ob- 
 tained a competency. The other rose so high in 
 the estimation of the district around him, as to ob- 
 tain a seat in the state senate, and the gentleman 
 from us voted for him at that election. 
 
 Thai Headed faithfully to his duties 
 
 through his entire term. Mr. A. next alluded to 
 the ungenerous remark of the gentleman from 
 Dutchess, (Mr. TALLMAUGE,) on a subsequent 
 occasion, who intimated that the judges of that 
 county were under the influence of King Alcohol. 
 Mr. JORDAN objected to any and all proposi- 
 tions that came here without having had the con- 
 sideration of a committee. He moved the follow- 
 lowing a,s a substitute for the whole section : 
 . The legislature may provide for the election o 
 
 county commissioners, not exceeding two in any county, 
 with powers to perform the duties of the justice of the su- 
 preme court or county judge at chambers, and to discharge 
 the duties of a county judge and surrogate, in case o( the 
 absence or inability of such judge or surrogate and in ca- 
 ses of a vacancy in said office. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD withdrew his proposition, 
 leaving Mr. JORDAN'S as the pending amendment. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND moved the following as an 
 amendment of the substitute: 
 
 Alter " may," in the first line, insert " confer upon jus- 
 tices of the peace special judicial powers, to be exercised 
 in the absence or inability of the county judge or surro- 
 gate." 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question > 
 and it was seconded 33 to 1 no quorum. The 
 vote was again taken, and stood 56 to 11. The 
 main question was ordered to be now put, and on 
 the demand of Mr. TOWNSEND, the yeas and nays 
 were taken on his amendment, and were yeas 
 13, nays 71. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN'S proposition was next in order, 
 and there were ayes 44, noes 46. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS' proposition was then adopted, 
 ayes 51, noes 38. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH moved to reconsider this vote. 
 
 Laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND then moved a reconsideration 
 of the vote taken last night, upon the proposition 
 of Mr. LOOMIS, in relation to the taxation of suit- 
 ors at courts of law. Without some such propo- 
 sition as this, he (Mr. R.) really believed that the 
 people would not adopt this judiciary system. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM hoped the proposition would be 
 adopted upon a reconsideration, and that it would 
 not be thrown out merely because it appeared to 
 be a legislative provision. There was much 
 force in the argument that the poor man, if he 
 had any property, would be taxed for a great 
 amount of the litigation in the higher courts. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD contended that it was wrong 
 to call the justices' courts the courts of the poor 
 He also went on to oppose legislation in a consti- 
 tution. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND replied and contended that 
 the gentleman had steadily voted to put matter in 
 the constitution which was legitimately the busi- 
 ness of legislation ; but whenever it was desired 
 to put any thing in the constitution to protect the 
 poor from being ridden down, the gentleman 
 from Otsego exclaimed, "Oh, that's legislation.' 
 He hoped some provision would be made by 
 which those litigous people who were so fond of 
 lawing, should be made to pay some proportionate 
 part of the expenses of our courts. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR urged a reconsideration, 
 
 Mr. RHOADES opposed the reconsideration, 
 because this was the business of legislation. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND approved the proposition to 
 Lish these local tribunals, and he thought 
 those who used them should pay for them. He 
 hoped the reconsideration would be agreed to, 
 because lie believed it involved a principle which 
 should be made to appear upon the face of the 
 co, imitation. The Convention had provided a 
 large judicial force, whose salaries were to be 
 pan! out of the county and state treasuries, and 
 taking away the principle of fees arid perquisites 
 It appeared" to him that the people should be re- 
 lieved from the payment of the entire amount of 
 the large sums which must be paid for the sala- 
 ries of judges. The mode proposed, by which 
 
828 
 
 those who resorted to the courts for their own 
 individual purpose, should be made to bear an 
 equitable proportion of the expenses of those 
 courts, he regarded as a proper one to afford that 
 relief. The legislature had certainly the power 
 to make this provision, but we had no security 
 that they would ever exercise that power. They 
 had never done so heretofore, and he was desi- 
 rous that this matter should be settled by a fixed 
 constitutional provision. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought we were foolishly 
 bothering our heads about such propositions as 
 this ; better leave it all to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that this proposition would 
 secure to the Convention itself a great deal oi 
 favor. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY hoped the Convention would 
 adhere to the vote of yesterday. 
 
 The previous question was then moved and 
 seconded. 
 
 The main question was then ordered. 
 
 The yeas and nays were ordered on the call of 
 Mr. RICHMOND. They resulted, AYES 49, NOES 
 43. 
 
 So the question was reconsidered. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to add the words, "or 
 sum recorded," after the word "claims." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said this amendment would 
 fix the payment on the suitor, and not on the 
 debtor, by whose refusal to pay this just debt had 
 rendered the suit necessary. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL, jr. moved the previous 
 question. /It was ordered, 46 to 28. 
 
 The main question was then ordered and put 
 on the amendment of Mr. BASCOM. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND called for the ayes and noes 
 on the adoption of the section. 
 
 They were ordered and resulted : AYES 41 
 NAYS 53. 
 
 So the proposition of JVlr. LOOMIS was again 
 negatived. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR desired to offer a section to 
 provide that "the legislature may authorize the 
 judgment, decrees or decisions of any local infe- 
 rior court established in a city, to be removed for 
 review directly into the court of appeals." He 
 said if a party litigant in the superior court of 
 New York where the judges of high character 
 presided desired to obtain the decision of the 
 court of lasc resort, the case had to be carried 
 through an intermediate court, where two or 
 three years might be spent in obtaining the judg- 
 ment of the supreme court judges a local court 
 in fact before the cases could be carried to the 
 court of last resort. To obviate this he had of- 
 fered his amendment. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said, very well, then, if 
 you give this privilege to the big superior courts 
 of New York, you must also give it to the poor 
 one-horse-cab courts of the counties. [Laugh- 
 ter.] 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said there was a 
 good deal of propriety in all this. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN suggested the addition of the 
 words "of original civil jurisdiction" to meet the 
 objections. He thought the local courts of the 
 city of New York would stand in the position of 
 the supreme court in the country and that they 
 
 should have the right to appeal from the court in 
 aanc to the court of appeals. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR accepted Mr. JORDAN'S amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY suggested an amendment to add 
 "concurrently with the supreme court" illustrat- 
 ing his amendment by reference to an inferior 
 court in Brooklyn. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR had no objection to including 
 county courts, if it would not endanger the original 
 proposition. He did not believe*that the legisla- 
 ture would allow a direct appeal from petty 
 courts, like the Marine Court of New York, or 
 iVlunicipal Court of Brooklyn ; he wished to 
 leave that a discretion with the legislature. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS thought that some such provis- 
 ion as this was necessary and just to the city of 
 New York. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN asked of Mr. O'Conor, what 
 proportion of the causes that now go into the su- 
 preme court on appeals, from the local courts of 
 the city of New York, stop in that court. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said he could only judge from 
 his own private practice. All, or nearly all his 
 causes that went from the inferior court, went 
 into the court of errors the supreme court being 
 a sort of stepping stone to the court of errors. 
 Probably it was not so with the common pleas 
 most of the judgments carried up from that court 
 to the supreme court stopped there. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped the proposition would 
 be adopted. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to strike 
 out the words "established in a city." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said that if Mr. V. S. thought 
 that by this mode he was accommodating the 
 country, he was very much mistaken. The 
 country did not want to be dragged all the way 
 here to Albany to try their little petty appeals. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said there was no 
 harm in giving them this power. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY wanted no distinction be- 
 tween city and county courts. 
 
 Mr. MURRIS replied that if this new supreme 
 court was adequate to all the business of the city, 
 the city would need no local courts, and then 
 they would be on a footing with the country, as 
 there would be but one appeal. But as the Con- 
 vention had refused to New-York any additional 
 local force in the supreme court, they would be 
 driven into the local courts first, and to get to the 
 court of appeals must take two strides, when the 
 country would take but one, as the force provided 
 for them would do all their business. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN varied his amend- 
 ment so as to add the words " and from county 
 courts" and 
 
 The amendment was lost, without a division. 
 The section proposed by Air. O'CoivoR was 
 then adopted, ayes 49, noes 21. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND oflered the following : 
 
 {. Remedies existing at the period when a contract is 
 
 made, shall not be disturbed or impaired by subsequent 
 legislation. 
 
 Mr. T. stated that this was a proposition in- 
 volving a direct principle, proper for constitu- 
 tional consideration, and not obnoxious'to the re- 
 marks now so frequently heard, that the legisla- 
 ture have- always ample power to control the sub- 
 ject matter sought to be introduced into the Con- 
 
829 
 
 stitution. When, in 1842 he gave an affirmative 
 vote upon the act extending in the sum of $150, 
 the amount of furniture, tools, &c., which previ- 
 ously had been exempt from execution for debt, 
 a after having made an effort to declare in 
 the law itself that the effect of that act was pro- 
 spective. Not succeeding in this, he with other 
 friends of the principle of keeping the tranquili- 
 ty of the domestic fireside in a degree at least sa- 
 cred from the inroads of the sheriff took occa- 
 sion to say that he hoped the law would be con- 
 strued to have no retrospective bearing by the 
 courts. He believed that such, at least in a qual- 
 ified sense, had been the case in an opinion given 
 by the supreme court of this state. To place, 
 however, this matter beyond the fluctuations of 
 legal opinions, he sought to introduce the prin- 
 ciple as a part of the constitutional law, not wil- 
 ling to content himself with what existed in the 
 Constitution of the United States, which should 
 have secured us against retrospective state legisla- 
 tion, and he hoped that the Convention would 
 go with him in all these efforts. The gen- 
 tleman from Essex, (Mr. SIMMONS,) some 
 time since, in alluding to the blocking up of the 
 state courts with litigation, stated rightly, that 
 where you have no remedy your system of laws 
 proved'but an abortion a failure. Practically 
 where the legislature assumed to diminish the re- 
 medies existing at the formation of a contract, 
 they contributed towards the ^extinguishment of 
 legal redress, and left the business classes, upon 
 their own resources as to their sagacity in select- 
 ing that class or' debtors for their ledg'ers, whose 
 correct principles of honor and pecuniary fidelity 
 were so thorougly engrafted upon their nature, as 
 to place them entirely beyond the effects of the 
 co-ercive of laws. , As far as Mr. T. understood 
 the commercial feeling of the metropolis, which 
 he had the honor to, in part, represent it was 
 strongly tending to a belief that, owing to the ex- 
 perience of the fluctuating character of our laws, 
 national and state, affecting the enforcement of 
 contracts which the last few years has develop- 
 ed, it was rapidly coming to the opinion that com- 
 pulsory laws for the collection of ordinary debts 
 where no fraud or criminality can be substan- 
 tiated in their inception furnished no adequate 
 return for the expense and attention required to 
 invoke their assistance. The propos tion to his 
 mind was undeniable, that some certain remedy 
 and benefit should be secured, in order to justify 
 a system that called a man for hours or days from 
 his ordinary means of livelihood, to sit in the ju- 
 ry box and listen to the details of transactions in- 
 to which the suitor entered of his own free will, 
 and now from a defect of his own judgment, or 
 misplaced confidence, sought to draw upon his 
 neighbor's time, and the state treasury, to restore 
 to him compensation for the effects of the erro- 
 . neous principles in relation to credit, upon which 
 as contrasted perhaps with his innocent friends 
 upon the jury panel, he conducted his business. 
 As a consequence, when your system of remedies 
 is admitted in practice as a failure, many of the 
 leading minds among the commercial classes, are 
 resolving to conduct their system of credits for 
 the future, without reference to any redress which 
 your laws profess to afford. The 400 millions 
 and upward of indebtedness 5 swept from existence 
 
 by tne U. S. Bankrupt act of '41 , has no doubt pow- 
 erfully contributed to the formation of this resolu- 
 tion, on the part of those who have begun to con- 
 sider character as the best guarantee of fidelity. 
 He might detain the Convention in illustrating 
 the many instances where the unscrupulous might 
 surround themselves with all the luxuries of life 
 under the sanction of trusts and other subtle 
 evasions, whilst those to whom they are indebted 
 were compelled to deny themselves even the 
 comforts of life. When views somewhat in 
 analogy to what he was here touching upon, were 
 advanced a few days since upon this floor, the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. HOFFMAN,) who 
 he regretted not to see at the moment in his seat, 
 spoke of them as only found in barbarous and un- 
 civilized centuries. So far as Mr. T. could speak 
 of the practice of the oldest government of the 
 Asiatic world, and which he understood was 
 pointedly alluded to, he could say that on the 
 contrary the merchant, who on one day might be 
 seen in the streets of Canton, with the retinue and 
 pomp of a prince, would perhaps ere another 
 month had passed, be seen in chains hurried by 
 the officers of government, to the cold countries, 
 the most -extreme, and, by contrast with the 
 milder climate of the south, the most inhospital 
 portion of China, that bordering on Siberia, for 
 no greater offence than what is known with us as 
 ordinary insolvency. He trusted that the Con- 
 vention would not give the great principle of 
 right which in substance he had attempted to as- 
 sert in the section proposed, the go-by, but would 
 meet the question now, and not wait until it 
 should come up perhaps more strictly in order 
 under the report of some other committee, which 
 our time would never permit us to reach for the 
 purposes of substantial action. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that the principle of the 
 amendment was worthy of consideration, though 
 it was susceptible of improvement in point of 
 form. The U. S. Constitution attempted to es- 
 tablish the entire principle under a prohibition 
 of ex-post facto laws, and laws impairing the obli- 
 gation of contracts. But this had never answer- 
 ed the end intended, on account of the construc- 
 tion put upon it by the courts ; and the states 
 were left to pass re-trospective laws, if they did 
 not violate contracts. The courts have broken in 
 upon many cases of retrospective legislation which 
 we have had ; but it would be as well to have 
 some such thing as this in the Constitution, though 
 it more properly came in under the head of pri- 
 vate rights. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND : I am aware of that, but I 
 am afraid we never shall reach that article. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS : Oh ! but it will never dp to 
 go home without considering that report, if it is 
 only for half an hour. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that the committee of 
 which he was chairman, did propose a section 
 going the full length against all these retrospec- 
 tive laws, but the Convention voted it down. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said the word " remedies" in the 
 section had a broader meaning than probably the 
 mover intended. It covered the proceedings and 
 practice of the courts, and to pass this section in 
 the shape in which it was drawn, would fix and 
 fasten on us these forms of practice. 
 
830 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND proposed to say " Statutory 
 Laws. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that that would not help the 
 matter ; there was a very wide distinction be- 
 tween remedy and right ; and it would be the 
 right of imprudence, if we intended ever to see a 
 change in the present forms of legal practice to 
 adopt the amendment in the shape in which it 
 now was. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said the gentleman confounded 
 two things together that were widely different. 
 He was surprised that he should do it after hav- 
 ing had an opportunity to read his speech. 
 [Laughter.] Blackstone also made the distinc- 
 tion, and that made him marvel more. A rem- 
 edy was a right. The legal proceeding was an- 
 other thing. He agreed that the section was am- 
 biguous but he was against abolishing remedies, 
 in the sense in which he understood the word. 
 The supreme court of the U. S. he found were 
 travelling back, and had recently decided unani- 
 mously that a state legislature had no power to 
 do ft. And they had applied this doctrine to Il- 
 linois, Ohio, and other half civilized states. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he really had not read 
 the gentleman's speech ; but he had seen it in the 
 *' Atlas" and laid it aside to be read at leisure, 
 and he expected a treat. But he well knew the 
 event that had made the distinction which he 
 took between remedies and rights, and the dis- 
 tinction was as he said, and understood. 
 
 JVJr. JORDAN said the courts had decided that 
 the remedy might be varied, but not so varied as 
 to take away (he right. The j roposition was thai 
 the remedy existing at the time the contract was 
 made, shall not be varied but it allowed that to 
 be done prospectively, as to future contracts. The 
 proposition was certainly a pi oper and harmless 
 one and ho regarded it as important lo place 
 some such restrictions on the legislature, which 
 had shown a disposition materially to impair the 
 rights of parties by varying the remedies retro- 
 spectively. He instanced several cases where the 
 legislature and the courts had recognized a prin- 
 ciple winch it carried out to their extreme appli- 
 ed, ion would operate effectually to destroy right 8. 
 
 JVJr. BASCOM remarked that frome contracts in 
 this country had been in existence a great while, 
 and it might be well to inquire what the existing 
 remedies were, when they were entered into. He 
 moved to refer this section to the committee on 
 land tenures saying ih.it he tiusted the reference 
 would quicken the action of that committee. 
 s Mi. JORDAN said there could not be a more 
 unsuitable committee, and he could not believe 
 the gentleman from Seneca was serious in propos- 
 ing that reference, especially in the al> ence ol 
 the chairman. 1! the gentleman meant to give 
 the sriction the go-by, as a thing unworthy if con- 
 sideration, he trusted others would not coniritAite 
 to put it in that, position. We were not all dt-bt- 
 ois in this community, and some ol us enteitam. 
 ed, and he hoped to God always would entertain, 
 .1 disposition to hold men rigidly to the payment 
 of their debts, and to prevent the legislature :roin 
 virtually taking away the light of a ciedifoi io 
 collect his honest debts, or taking away three- 
 fourths of his debts by varying the remedy. He 
 had no objection to a select committee, ai.d that 
 the gentleman fromSentcashould be chairman of it. 
 
 The Convention here look a recet-s till half oast 
 3 o'clock P. M. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 At the close of the morning, Mr. BASCOM 
 moved to refer the following, offered by Mr. 
 TOWNSEND, to the committee on rights and pnvi. 
 leges : 
 
 . Remedies existing at the period when a contract 
 is made, shall not be disturbed or impaired by subsequent 
 legislation. 
 
 Some one said that committee, of which Judge 
 NELSON is Chairman, had never met. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said thin might induce them to 
 meet and report. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE had wished it referral to 
 his committee. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM'S motion was put and lost. 
 
 Mr. STRONG gave notice that he should move 
 to reconsider the vote of this morning, adopting 
 Mr. O'CoNOR's proposition to carry up causes 
 from courts in cities to the court of appeals. 
 
 The PRESIDENT communicated an invitation 
 from the officers of the State Agricultural Society 
 inviting the mernbeis of the Convention to attend 
 their annual meeting at Auburn. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to lay u on the table. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS demanded the ayes and noes. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said he would withdraw his 
 motion if there were any objections to it. Nooi,e 
 supposed we could adjourn to go to the Fair. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said they would charge us 50 
 cent? to go in after we got there. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS renewed the motion to lay on the 
 table, and it was agreed to. 
 
 The proposition of Mr. TOWNSEND was, on 
 motion of Mr. O'CowoR, referred to standing com- 
 mittee No. 11 aves 44, noes 21. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND gave notice of a motion to 
 reconsider this vote. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY offered (he following pro- 
 position : "Every qualified elector shall be eligi- 
 ble to every judicial office." Mr. W. said that on 
 looking over the statutes, he found that it was ne- 
 cessary to be a counsellor at law in order to be eli- 
 gible to the office of first judge. In-some counties, 
 when a judge was necessary to be appointed, there 
 was no timber to be found to make one out 
 of. He supposed it was not necessary for 
 lim to talk about this matter further than to 
 show what the facts were at present. He de- 
 manded the ayes and noes however. 
 
 Mr. BURR did not think the proposition of his 
 colleague should be laughed down. The object 
 of it was to prevent the legislature from prescri- 
 bing qualifications like those which had been al- 
 "uded to. He thought they should be restrained 
 'rom doing this. 
 
 Mr. STRONG : Will the gentleman accept of 
 a very small amendment to except lawyers ? 
 ' Mr. O'CONOR moved to strike out " judicial. " 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH thought we had better see 
 before acting on this, whether we should extend 
 the right of suffrage to women and children and 
 colored people. He moved to lay the section on ' 
 he table. 
 Mr. WATERBURY assented to that course. 
 
 It was laid on the table, ayes 53, noes 12. 
 TRANSFER OF BUSINGS. 
 
 The first section of Mr. O'CojvoR's report, made 
 
831 
 
 filing, from the judiciary committee, upon 
 the suliji-ct. oftiMiisferring unfinished judicial bu- 
 siness to the new courts, was read as follows : 
 I) 1 Thelegiilatme, at its first session after the adoption 
 of this constitution, shall provide for the organization of 
 the court of appeals, and lor transferring toil the business 
 pending in the court lor the correction of errors; and for 
 the allowance ot writs ot error and appeals, to the court 
 of appeals, from the judgments and decrees of the present 
 court of chancery and supreme court, and of the courts 
 th.it m;,y be organized uir-ier this constitution. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD offered the following sub- 
 stitute for the entire report : 
 
 ^ . The legislature shall, at the session next after the 
 adoption of this constitution, provide by law for finishing 
 the business and suits which may be pending in the seve- 
 ral courts in this article abolished when this constitution 
 shall take efi'ect; and for that purpose may provide at 
 what time the justice* of the supreme court first elected 
 s!i til enter upon the duties of their offices; but the consti- 
 tutional term of said justices shall be deemed to com- 
 mence on the first day of January in the year 1848. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD Said that his object was to 
 turn this matter all over to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he did not think this 
 section was broad enough. Perhaps a short sec- 
 tion like that might supersede all the other sec- 
 tions proposed; but it ought to go further and 
 provide for continuing all the old courts in ope- 
 ration up to the time (say a year) that the mass of 
 business now pending might be disposed of by the 
 old courts and the new. It was also defective on 
 another point ; it did not provide for transferring 
 business from the old courts tw the new ones. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was also of the same opinion, If 
 the legislature was to provide for finishing the 
 pending business, they must employ some court 
 or courts for they could not institute a commis- 
 sion to do it and how much more convenient to 
 continue these courts for a certain period. The 
 expense of a double force for a short time, to dis- 
 poae of the present accumulation of business, was 
 not to be regarded in view of the importance to 
 suitors of having their causes decided. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that nevertheless he 
 believed that this proposition would accomplish 
 all that was designed, and all the useful purposes 
 of this long report. It gave the legislature full 
 and ample power to make the transfer of the un- 
 finished business. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked Mr. CHATFIELD if there 
 should not be some provision jnade for the selec- 
 tion of the judges of the court of appeals, who are 
 to be taken from those having the shortest time to 
 serve ? 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that as a matter of 
 murse the legislature had that power; the grant- 
 ing of general powers to the legislature implied 
 the right to arrange a"nd put in motion the whole 
 system, therefore there was no necessity for spe- 
 cial provisions. He was opposed to making a 
 sjjrcial commission to perform the unfinished bu- 
 siness, or of keeping the old courts in existence 
 for a year or two longer for this purpose, leaving 
 the new courts comparatively nothing to do. He 
 -desired to give the legislature power to transfer 
 business and for the doing up of the old business. 
 If the report of the committee was adopted, the 
 new court of appeals would have nothing to do, 
 for a year or so, (if the old courts were kept going) 
 and yet they would be under pay. Neither would 
 the Supreme Court have any thing to do in bane 
 
 for s,ix months. He (Mr. C.) was not willing to 
 increase the expenses of the state. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that still he thought there 
 would be difficulties which the gentleman's pro- 
 position did not reach ; one difficulty was that 
 there were suits finished in the old courts on 
 which no execution had issued and that without 
 a transfer, the legislature could not authrize an 
 execution on the record in another court. And 
 unless provisipn was made for continuing the 
 function of the old courts for a short time in re- 
 lation to causes that may have been heard but not 
 decided the parties must be heard again by the 
 new court. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD'S proposition was then put 
 and lost. Ayes 28, noes 38. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved to strike out all after the 
 first section, and insert the' three other sections 
 which he said had been drawn up by. Mr. O'CoN- 
 OR, with a view of condensing the remaining sec- 
 tions, and embracing every thing in them. 
 
 The first section was adopted without amend- 
 ment and without debate, when 
 
 Mr. WORDEN sent up the following, as a sub- 
 stitute for the residue : , 
 
 The court of appeals, and the county courts hereby 
 established shall be organized, and the judges thereof 
 shall respectively enter upon the duties of their offices, on 
 the first Monday of July, 1347. The judges of the court of 
 appeals, justices of the supreme court and county judges, 
 shall be elected at such times as may be prescribed by law, 
 but the first election of such judge.; and justices, shall be 
 held before the first day of July, 1S47 ; and their terms of 
 office, as limited by the constitution, shall be deemed to 
 commence on the first day of January, 1848. 
 
 ^ . The present supreme court and court of chancery, 
 and the present officers of chancellor and justices of 
 the supreme court, shall continue under their existing or- 
 ganization, until the first Monday of July, 1848 The su- 
 preme court hereby established shall not be organized un- 
 til the last named day ; but the justices thereof shall pcr- 
 lorm such judicial duties as may be prescribed by law iu 
 the present supreme court or chancery, prior to that day. 
 
 (; . Provision shall be made bylaw for the transfer of 
 suits and proceedings, from courts now existing, to the 
 courts to be organized under this constitution, at such 
 time or times and in such manner as may be proper, and for 
 assigning the same to the proper districts. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR suggested that the 3 last sec- 
 tions of the original report ought to be retained. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN assented and varied his motion 
 accordingly. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought the substitute did not 
 correspond with the sections proposed to be 
 striken out. If he understood it, it kept up the 
 old courts one year longer. . 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR : One year shorter. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that was so much the 
 better ; but his objections were that it kept up 
 two complete systems under pay for a year. He 
 understood the gentleman from Essex, (Mr. SIM- 
 MONS,) the other day to say that in three months 
 they would work off' all their business. The 
 best way, in his judgment, to dispose of the un- 
 finished business would be to transfer it all over 
 at once to the new supreme court; thirty-two 
 new bright, fresh judges would soon have it all 
 fixed and taken care of. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS explained that the remark of 
 the chancellor, which he had given a few d.iys 
 since, related to the causes argued in his court, 
 which was but a small part of the business pend- 
 ing. One of the judges of the supreme court had 
 informed him lately that it would require one 
 
832 
 
 year to dispose of the unfinished business in th 
 court, if there should no more come in ; and h 
 (Mr.S.) supposed the court of chancery woul 
 require about as much time. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said the proposition of the gen 
 tlernan from Ontario was new to him, though h 
 found it printed here in due form like our othe 
 documents. He was the mover of the origina 
 proposition on which the report of the judiciar 
 committee was based, and that committee adopt 
 ed substantially his proposition the temporar 
 chairman being left to draw it up and yet, her 
 was a new proposition, said to have been draw: 
 up by the temporary chairman, never submittei 
 to the committee, but radically different from tha 
 which they had adopted. Mr. L. went on to poin 
 out wherein it differed from the original report 
 among other things, saying that it deferred thi 
 organization of the new supreme court from Jan 
 uary, 1848 to July, 1848. He supposed the re 
 port agreed on by the committee, was to be sus 
 tained by them substantially. For one, he pre 
 ferred the proposition of the gentleman from Ot 
 sego to this new one. He had rather see the nev> 
 courts organized in July, 1847, than July, 1848 
 if practicable, and to hteve the old courts go ou 
 of existence then. But since this new propositior 
 had been offered, he had a substitute to propose 
 which he would make. Mr. L. read as follows : 
 
 fj . The legislature shall, at its first session after the 
 adoption of this constitution, provide for the transfer o 
 suits and proceedings in the courts hereby abolished to the 
 courts hereby ordained. The legislature shall also pro- 
 vide for the organization of the supreme court before the 
 first day of January, 1848, and for the hearing and decision 
 before the said supreme court hereby granted, of any writs 
 and proceedings pending in the present supreme court and 
 in the court of chancery in aid ot the chancellor and jus- 
 tices of the supreme court. 
 
 The term of office of the justices of the supreme court 
 and of the judges of the court of appeals and of county 
 judges and surrogates, as limited by this constitution, shalJ 
 commence on the first day of January, 1848. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said these sections were drawn 
 by the gentleman from New- York (Mr. O'GONOR) 
 without consultation with him, with a view to 
 condense the three sections following the first and 
 to vary them so as not to continue the old courts 
 so long. The substitute provided that the pre- 
 sent courts should continue as they now were un- 
 til July, 1848, and that meanwhile the new court 
 should be organized and come in aid of the old 
 supreme court so, that together they might work 
 off the old business. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR confessed to the impeachment 
 of having drawn up the original report and this 
 substitute for a part of it ; but he added that 
 the former was submitted to the committee and 
 altered in several respects, and reported as they 
 had amended it, he objected to no alteration. As 
 to the substitute for the 2d, 3d, and 4th sections 
 submitted by Mr. WORDEN, he said he drew that 
 at the request of several members who thought 
 the original sections too long but he had no 
 feeling or taste about either of them, having acted 
 only the part of reducing to shape propositions 
 agreed on in one case, and in the other endeavor- 
 ing to condense a part of it to avoid objections 
 made to its prolixity. Mr. O'C. went on to ex- 
 plain the general propositions and in what respect 
 they differ from each other, leaving it entirely to 
 the convention to choose between them. 
 
 Mr. SliMMONS said he had not seen this sub- 
 stitute until a moment ago ; but it embodied the 
 idea he had entertained that the old business 
 should continue in the old courts as long as should 
 
 be necessary to dispose of it, or the mass of it. 
 
 He would not dismiss the judges unceremoniously 
 believing they deserved better of us than to be 
 told abruptly to go out of office, without so much 
 as making a bow to them. He did not beli.eve 
 they would eke out the business for the purpose 
 of remaining in office a few months longer but 
 they would go on with the industry and ability 
 for which they were distinguished, to work off the 
 business which had accumulated on their hands. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said he had no right to be sur- 
 prised at this substitute from the gentleman from 
 Ontario; but he thought he had some occcasion to 
 be surprised at its earning from him with the de- 
 claration that it was (he same thing substantially 
 as the original report, or that part of it for uhich 
 it was a substitute, If the gentleman from Essex 
 had never seen it before, Mr. JORDAN had. It 
 was essentially the proposition submitted to the 
 judiciary committee last evening and voted down. 
 Mr. J. went on at some length to point out the 
 difference between it and the original proposition, 
 which he preferred as contemplating pulling the 
 new courts in operation as soon as possible after 
 :he election of judges, and leaving the old judges 
 o work off the accumulated business on their 
 lands. 
 
 Messrs. HARRIS, BASCOM, HOFFMAN and 
 WORDEN continued the conversation. 
 
 Messrs. WORDEN and LOOMIS then with- 
 drew their propositions. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to adjourn. Lost- 
 ayes 38 noes 39. 
 
 Mr CHATFIELD offered tne following as a 
 ubstitute for the whole report : 
 
 . The legislature, at its first session after the adoption 
 >f this constitution, shall, by law, make provision for or- 
 ;anizing the several courts in this Article mentioned, and 
 or tranferring the suits, business and proceedings which 
 hall be pending in the several courts hereby abolished to 
 he appropriate courts herein established, for carrying 
 utigments, orders and decrees which may remain in the 
 aid courts so abolished, into full effect. The term of of- 
 ce of the several judicial officers first elected under this 
 onstitution shall commence on the first day of January, 
 848 ; but the justices of the supreme court shall perform 
 uch judicial duties as may be prescribed by law in aid of 
 he supreme court and court of chancery, prior to that day. 
 
 In order to act on this it was necessary to re- 
 onsider the vote on the first section. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND objected to this. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that then he would 
 move a re-consideration to lie on the table, and 
 Iso offered the above proposition as a substitute 
 or the balance of the report. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN then suggested a 
 eference of all the propositions to the judiciary 
 ommittee. 
 
 Mr. W. WRIGHT moved to adjourn. Agreed 
 
 , and the convention adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, (85th day) Sept. 10. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. VAN RENSSELAER. 
 
 Mr. ALLEN offered a resolution that the Con- 
 ention do respectfully decline the invitation to 
 le State Agricultural Fair at Auburn. Adopted. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved the following : 
 Resolved, That on and after Monday next, this Conven- 
 en will hold evening sessions, commencing at 7 o'clock. 
 
833 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN moved to lay this on the ta- 
 ble. Carried. 
 
 TERMINATION OF THE DEBATE ON THE 
 JUDICIARY. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called up the resolution offer- 
 ed by Mr. COOK on Tuesday, (and then laid on 
 the table, by consent of the mover,) to terminate 
 all debate on the judiciary reports, &c., at 12 o'- 
 clock this day. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that he most sincerely 
 wished that {lie Convention would pass this reso- 
 lution. This subject (although a very important 
 one) hud now been debated with much skill and 
 research, for nearly twelve weeks ; that is, in 
 the judiciary committee, and in this house; and 
 he most certainly thought that three months was 
 time enough to talk about it, and that they ought 
 now to go to work and vote upon it. He did not 
 for a moment assume to he one ot the monitors 
 of the Convention, but his opinion was that there 
 had been time enough devoted to discussing. He 
 did riot agree with the gentleman from Albany, 
 (Mr. HARRIS) who had said, that when one sub- 
 ject, that which had engaged the attention of the 
 gentleman from Allegany~, (iMr. ANGEL) that on 
 the appointment or election of all officers whose 
 functions are local, and their tenure of office, 
 powers, duties, and compensation; that when 
 this subject, and the financial article, should be 
 .disposed ot, he should be ready and willing to go 
 home j by no means. For his own part and he 
 knew many gentlemen agreed with him he con- 
 sidered that there were others that must be dis- 
 posed of before they could go home with the as- 
 surance that they had done their duty; and he 
 hoped that every subject which had been present- 
 ed to them would at least be voted upon. 
 
 Mr. COOK'S resolution was then considered. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to sirike out 12 o'clock 
 and insert 6 P. M. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said he hoped this would not 
 pass; lour and a half weeks were long enough to 
 talk about this mailer ; and some men would talk 
 on it till the first, of January. Speaking on it 
 ought to stop at noon, and the voting go on longer. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE did not think so; the first 
 six weeks ot i lie session were consumed in con- 
 sidering abstract propositions of little or no con- 
 sequence; and now, when great constitutional 
 questions are involved, some latitude should be 
 allowed. He wished it left to the discretion of 
 the members, and to the good sense of the Chair, 
 to keep them to the question. 
 
 Mr. WATERS URY Then we will never get 
 through. 
 
 A VOICE: No! not till the resurrection morn- 
 ing. 
 
 Mr. DODD: Sir, I am tired of this trifling; I 
 move the previous question. 
 
 This was seconded ayes 55, noes 11. 
 
 The main question was ordered. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND'S amendment was negatived 
 
 Mr. COOK'S resolution was adopted, almost 
 unanimously. 
 
 THE AMENDMENTS TO THE PRESENT CONSTI- 
 
 TUTION AND THEIR REVISION. 
 Mr. CHATFIELD ofiered the following: 
 Resolved, That a committee of five be appointed to ar- 
 range apd reduce to lorm the several amendments of the 
 constitution adopted by this Convention and to engrait 
 
 such amendments upon the constitution and to put the 
 whole body of the constitution in proper form to be sub- 
 mitted to the people. 
 
 It was laid on the table by consent of the mover. 
 CONTRACTS AND EX POST FACTO LAWS. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE from committee No. 11, on 
 rights and privileges, made the following report, 
 in pursuance of the reference of the section as 
 proposed by Mr. TOWNSEND yesterday : 
 
 No ex post facto law either civil or criminal shall be 
 passed; nor any law impairing the obligation of a contract; 
 or the remedy existing at the time such contract shall be 
 made. 
 
 It was referred to the committee of the whole 
 having charge of the report of committee No. 11 
 on rights and privileges and ordered to be printed. 
 CONCILIATION COURTS. 
 
 Mr. MILLER moved the reconsideration of the 
 vote by which the authorizing of the legislature 
 to establish courts of conciliation was rejected. 
 He said that he most sincerely thought that such 
 courts ought to be established ; they would most 
 assuredly be of very great utility. He had no 
 particular tenacity in respect to the form in which 
 these courts should be established, but he did 
 desire that the Convention should indicate to the 
 legislature, by. their action on this subject, that 
 they believed in the propriety of such tribunals. 
 He (Mr. MILLER) was sure that a large number 
 of petty suits could fcnd would be settled there 
 without a resort to courts of law. It was not his 
 desire to open a way for the creation of any addi- 
 tional number of public officers ; and he had no 
 doubt that there might be found in every county, 
 worthy and competent individuals who would 
 consent to act without fee or reward in this mat- 
 ter. The attention of the people had been called 
 to this subject ; they had earnestly desired to have 
 them to try them ; there was a great demand for 
 them throughout the state. The PRESIDENT of 
 the Convention himself had been addressed on 
 this subject through the newspapers by able per- 
 sons who took a deep interest in the subject 
 These courts would not lead to additional ex- 
 pense ; true, they would cut down law business ; 
 two-thirds of the cases involving $20 or less would 
 be settled there ; and he hoped the Convention 
 would agree to reconsider. By the adoption of 
 some affirmative proposition on this point, they 
 would greatly increase the chance for the adop- 
 tion of the whole judiciary article, or the consti- 
 tution if submitted as a whole. 
 
 Mr. BURR hoped that this motion to re- 
 consider would be carried ; for like his friend 
 (Mr. MILLER) he did wish to see something 
 in the constitution that should say to the le- 
 gislature, that this convention was desirous 
 they should establish their tribunals for con- 
 ciliation. He did not so much care about the 
 form of them ; he felt sure they would stop 
 much litigation ; save time, trouble and expense 
 to the people; and be hardly any or no additional 
 expense to the state. He knew one humble good 
 man, a magistrate near him, who acting as conci- 
 liator, had settled more than the disputed cases 
 that came before him. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR hoped they were not going 
 to run into the error complained of on another oc- 
 casion debate this all day. (Laughter.) He 
 moved the previous question. 
 
 79 
 
834 
 
 It was seconded. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said he was determined to 
 have the ayes and noes on this, that all should 
 show their hand; and be put on the record to 
 show they were opposed to peace and truth. 
 
 They were ordered, also the main question and 
 resulted ayes 64 noes 22. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayranlt, Baker, 
 Bascom, Bergen, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Cambreleng, 
 K. Campbell jr , Chamberlain, Clark, Dantorth, Dodd, Du- 
 bois Graham, Greene, Harrison, Hart. Hotchkiss, A.Hunt- 
 ineton E Huntington. Kemble, Kingsley, Kirkland,Mann, 
 McNeU, Maxwell, Miller, Munro, Nellis, Nicholas, Sears, 
 Shaver Shaw, Sheldon, W.H. Spencer.Stanton, Stephens, 
 Stow, Strong, Tail, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, W. Willard, 
 "Worden, Yawger, Young- 64. 
 
 NOES Messrs. F. F. Backus, Chatfield, Cook, Dana, 
 
 Gebhard, Hawley, Hoflman. Hunter, Jordan, Loomis, 
 Murphy "O'Conor, Powers, Hiker, Shepard, Simmons, E. 
 Spencer! Stetson, Wood, A. Wright, W. B Wright, 
 Foung 22. 
 
 So the vote was reconsidered, and the proposit- 
 ion for conciliation courts took its place, with 
 others, on the table, to be considered in regular 
 
 order. 
 
 THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then announced the question 
 to be on the amendment pending last night, to 
 the supplemental report made by Mr. 0'CoNOR. 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to reconsider the 
 vote adopting the 1st section of the supplemen- 
 tary report of the judiciary committeee, present- 
 ed by Mr. O'CONOR. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that he sincerely believed 
 that this amendment would not prevail. The 
 section ought not to be reconsidered ; and he be- 
 lieved that the report submitted by Mr. O'CoN- 
 OR, with some amendments which (Mr. J.) 
 would indicate would be the best that could pos- 
 sibly be adopted ; perhaps this was the best time 
 to present his amendments ; they were somewhat 
 numerous but they prescribed the precise mean- 
 ing of the section, merely reducing the verbiage 
 about one-third. He then moved the amendments, 
 which added to the original report of Mr. O'Cow- 
 oR,make the report read as follows : 
 
 t> 1. The Legislature at its first session after the adoption 
 of this Constitution, shall provide for the organization ol 
 the court ol appeals, and for transferring to it the business 
 pending in the court for the correction of errors, and for 
 the allowance of writs of error and appeals, to the court 
 of appeals, from the judgments and decrees of the present 
 court of chancery and supreme court, and of the courts 
 that may be organized under this Constitution. 
 
 (5 2. The first election of judges of the court of appeals; 
 justices of the supreme court, and judges of the county 
 courts shall take place at such time as may be prescribed 
 by law, between the first Tuesday of May, and the second 
 Tuesday of June, 1847. The said courts shall respectively 
 organize, and enter upon their duties, on the first Monday 
 of July next thereafter; but the terms of office of saic 
 judges and justices as declared by this Constitution, shal. 
 be deemed to commence on the first day oi January, Ib48 
 5) 3. On the first Monday of July, 1S47, jurisdiction ol ah 
 suits and proceedings then pending in the present supreme 
 court and court of chancery, and all suits and proceedings 
 originally commenced and then pending in any court o. 
 common pleas, (except in the city and county of New 
 York) shall become vested in the supreme court hereb) 
 established. 
 
 5)4. But the Chancellor and present supreme court shal 
 respectively have power to hear and determine any of sucl 
 suits and proceedings then ready to be noticed for hearing 
 and shall for their services therein be entitled to their pre 
 sent rate of compensation until the 1st day ol July, 1849, 01 
 until all such suits and proceedings shall be sooner hean 
 and determined. The supreme court hereby established 
 shall also have power to hear and determine such of sai j 
 suits and proceedings as may be presented l.y law. 
 
 fj o. In case any vacancy shall occur in the office of chan- 
 elior or justice of the present supreme court, previously 
 o the 1st day of July, 1849, the Governor may nominate, 
 and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, may 
 .ppoint a proper person to fill such vacancy. Any judge 
 if the court of appeals or justice of the supreme court, 
 lected under this article, may receive and hold such ap- 
 lointment. 
 
 {j 6. The offices of chancellor, justices of the supreme 
 court, (except as herein otherwise provided); circuit and 
 Bounty judges; vice chancellors; assisting vice chancel- 
 or, and masters and examiners in chancery, as now exist- 
 ng, shall expire on the first Monday of July, 1847. 
 
 7. The chancellor, the justices of the present supreme 
 >ourt, and the circuit judges, are hereby declared to be 
 everally eligible to any office at the first election under 
 his Constitution. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that as he drew up the 
 upplemental report, it might be necessary that 
 le should express his concurrence in these 
 amendments. He gave his full assent to them, 
 and hoped they would be adopted. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that he opposed the report be- 
 bre it was amended, and as these amendments 
 .engthened instead of shortened the original re- 
 jort that therefore he should oppose it. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that on his honor, he could 
 assure the gentleman from New-York that he 
 was mistaken for he had counted the words iu 
 he two, and found that he had reduced the re- 
 port from 165 to 351 words. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that there was also another 
 reason why he was opposed to this ; it allowed 
 he present judicial officers to remain in office for 
 he avowed purpose of disposing of the arrears of 
 Business that would accrue ; and thus they might 
 lold on for two or three years. In his judgment 
 all these constitutional provisions should be short 
 and explicit. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said, that having adopted one 
 section, we ought to go on and act upon the rest 
 without returning back to sections disposed of. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR hoped the reconsideration would 
 be carried. 
 
 Mr. BURR did not like the welding of the old 
 upon the new systems. 
 
 Mr. UASCOM said they could accomplish their 
 object by moving to jstrike out one year. 
 
 Mr, STRONG moved the pievious question. It 
 was seconded 63 to 4 
 
 The main question was ordered, and the [notion 
 to reconsider was not agreed to -dyes 25, noes b'5. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN sea; up the section as lie had 
 amended it, as a subsiitule lor the second seciion 
 as reported irom the coimnitiee. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend by striking 
 out as ibll<ms:"Tne said courts shall respectively 
 oraainzi and^eti'er upon their duties on the first 
 Monday of July next thereafter." 
 
 Mr. "LOOMIS opposed the amendment; the ob- 
 jection oi the gentleman from Oist-go was preuio- 
 lure. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR concurred with the gentleman 
 from HetUimer. The gentleman trom Oisego had 
 entirely misapprehended the section. Mr. O'C. 
 explained the object or ihe section. 
 
 Mr. MILLER moved the previous ques:ion, and 
 it was seconded 56 in tiie affii mauve. The main 
 question was ordered. 
 
 The motion to strike out was negatived ayes 
 28, noes 55 
 
 Mr~. DANA asked consent to insert " April" for 
 " May, 5 ' and it wad assented to. 
 
835 
 
 The section, as amended, was agreed to. 
 
 Tin- third section was rc-ad. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved his amended section as a 
 substitute. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved the previous qmg'ion, and 
 it. v\as seconded by <H voles. The main question 
 was ordered, ihe substitute adopted, and the sec- 
 tion as amei.ded was agreed to. 
 
 The fourth section was lead. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN'S amended section was submitted 
 as a substitute. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved to strike out "nine" and 
 insert, "tight" to diminish the peiiod of office of 
 the present judges as proposed, one year. 
 
 Mr KIRKLAND hoped gentlemen would pause, 
 and remember that there was a vast amount ol 
 business in our courts now, undisposed of. At 
 JOOO causes were ready lor trial. He spoke 
 fiom observation. With a calendar of 900 causes, 
 the supreme court was able to dispose of not more 
 ihan 70 or SO in a term of four weeks. The Chan, 
 cellor, dunntc his recent term, had heard but one 
 cause in the fourth class of cases. He begged 
 that this new plan might not be burdened with all 
 this old business, which in addition to what 
 would constantly arise, would be too much and 
 would break it down. 6 
 
 Mr. STRONG hoped the Convention would 
 not be frightened by this exhibit of causes. He 
 ventured to say that if you continued the old 
 court of chancery for ten years, it would be in the 
 same condition as now. If that court had been 
 able to hear but one cause during an entire term, 
 it was time that its days were numbered. The 
 people had sealed its death warrant. He was 
 willing to t?.ke the statement they had so often 
 heard from the judiciary committee, that the thir- 
 ty-two judges would do all the business. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN was sorry to see his friend from 
 Monroe, (Mr. STRONG)SO blood-thirsty this morn- 
 ing. It was entirely contrary to his nature, and 
 from the smile on his face directly after sealing 
 the death-warrant of the old courts, he was satis- 
 fied he did not mean exactly what he said. He, 
 (Mr. J.) was in favor of getting rid of the old 
 shyster as soon as possible, and he thought that 
 by the provisions of the article they would cease 
 to receive the salaries the moment they had fin- 
 ished the causes which were ready for hearing 
 on the 1st of July, 18-1-7, if it was one month after- 
 l. Gentlemen had said that they did not 
 think much of the new system if it could not do 
 up all the business without aid from the old courts. 
 ;iould think itss of them if they could do so. 
 lie was anxious to give the new system a fail- 
 trial., and not burthen it with too much business 
 at the start. The only thing to be feared was the 
 dishonesty of the old judge, and he was not pre- 
 1 to believe that either the chief justice or 
 his associates were dishonest men, but had con- 
 tinence that they would dispose of all their un- 
 liuished business as soon as possible. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought the gentleman from 
 Columbia had conceded too much. If the new 
 court could not dispose of the business without 
 aid from the old courts, why not let them go on 
 her and remain in full blast all the time. 
 Th.- arguments of the gentleman would apply to 
 the Omrt of Errors, and then they would have a 
 little more pickings. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said it was utterly impossible to 
 tell what was the exact amount of business on 
 hand. The calendar told the minimum, but it 
 did not tell the maximum. His proposition was 
 a plan to prevent the new courts being clogged 
 un with these accumulated arrears of years; and 
 if the judges could not be trusted to do it without 
 a suspicion that they would knavishly protract 
 the time, for the sake of the perquisites of office, 
 they should not be trusted at all, whether with or 
 without restrictions. 
 
 Mr. TALL MADGE said he would not consent 
 to extend the time beyond Jan. 1st, 1848. If the 
 eight courts now established, together with the 
 two existing, could not dispose of all the arrears 
 of business in a year, then the people ought to 
 call another convention, and to abolish them. 
 (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND called for the ayes and noes. 
 On motion of Mr. MANN, they were ordered. 
 
 The motion to strike out " 9," and insert " 8," 
 was agreed to ayes 54 noes 40. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to amend by striking 
 out from the word " respectively," in the 4th sec- 
 tion, and insert as follows : " have power to de- 
 termine any of such suits or proceedings as may 
 have been argued in said courts respectively ; and 
 for that purpose shall be entitled to their present 
 rate of compensation, after the first day oi Janua- 
 ry, 1848, until all such suits and proceedings as 
 shall have been previously determined ; but such 
 compensation shall not continue after the first day 
 of July, 1848." 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said this proposition was entirely 
 unnecessary. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that this amendment 
 tended to bring the services of the oid courts in 
 aid of the new, and the business to a close sooner 
 than they would be by the proposition as amended. 
 He wanted to save as much time as possible. The 
 Convention, by the arnedment just adopted, had 
 determined that the term of the present judges 
 should terminate on or before the 8th day of July, 
 1S48. They should therefore not be allowed to 
 hear any arguments alter the first day of January, 
 that they might have six months to decide on 
 those argued. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that he was one of those 
 who did not believe that the new system would 
 be able to do ail the business of the state; yet he 
 was disposed to give them as fair a start as possi- 
 ble, by preventing them becoming embarrassed by 
 too great an amount of business. He was sorry 
 to see that those who did not believe in the < Ui- 
 ciency of ihe new system, were willing to throw 
 upon the courts burthens yyhicn would seriously 
 embarrass them at the commencement of their du- 
 I ties. He thought he saw a combination amongst 
 the friends and enemies of it, to ihiovv upon it a 
 great amount of business, which would have the. 
 cil'ert of breaking it down; the motives might be 
 different, but the result would be the same. The 
 morion which had just prevailed he regarded as 
 iniurious to the new system, and tending to throw 
 obstacles in the way of its success. He could not 
 regard it as objectionable, or as any reflection up- 
 on the ability of the new courts, to allow the oid 
 ones to give them all the aid which they Would 
 require in the commencement and until the busi- 
 ness in arrears was finally disposed of. He hoped 
 
836 
 
 the amendment would not prevail, but that the 
 section would be passed exactly as it was at pre- 
 sent. He was one of the enemies of this new ju 
 diciary system, because he did not believe in its 
 capacity ; but common justice required it should 
 have a fair trial and not be ovei whelmed with 
 business. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD'S amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to amend the amendment 
 of the gentleman from Columbia, thus : 
 
 " The legislature may confer upon the present chancel- 
 lor and justices of the supreme court, or in case either of 
 these offices shall become vacant, then upon such other 
 persons as may be designated by the Governor in their re- 
 spective places, power to hear and determine any of such 
 suits and proceedings ready to be noticed for hearing on 
 the 1st Monday of July, 1847, and they shall while so em- 
 ployed be entitled to their present rates of compensation. 
 
 1348. 
 
 uch employment shall not extend beyond the 1st of July, 
 
 Mr. L. explained the difference between the 
 amendment of the gentleman from Columbia and 
 his own. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR also explained. 
 
 Mr. MILLER moved the previous question and 
 there was a second, &c. 
 
 Mr. HOTCHKISS called for the yeas and nays 
 on the amendment, and there were yeas 12, nays 
 75. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN'S amendment was adopted, and 
 the section as amended agreed to. 
 
 The fifth section was next read, and also Mr. 
 JORDAN'S substitute, and the figures " 1849" 
 were altered to " 1848" to conform to a previous 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to strike out the last sen- 
 tence thus : 
 
 "Any judge of the court of appeals or justice of the su- 
 peme court, elected under this article, may receive and 
 hold such appointment." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR explained the necessity of the 
 words proposed to be stricken out. 
 
 The amendment was lost 27 only voting in the 
 affirmative. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN'S substitute was agreed to, and 
 the section as amended passed a motion ot re- 
 consideration being laid on the, table. 
 
 The sixth section was read. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved to amend the amendment 
 of Mr. JORDAN by adding '* supieme court com- 
 missioners" atter the words " vice chancellor." 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN'S amendment was adopted as 
 amended. And the section and likewise the 
 seventh were agreed to. 
 
 Mr. MILLER called for the question on the 
 section to establish conciliation courts, the vote 
 rejecting which was this morning reconsidered, as 
 follows : 
 
 . There may be established in any county one or 
 more tribunals of conciliation, each to by composed of not 
 exceeding three conciliators, to lie elected as the legisla- 
 ture may direct. The legislature may afford parties in- 
 ducements to submit their differences to the coBciliation 
 of such tribunals, by regulations as to cost in other courts. 
 
 Mr. BAKER desired to amend so as to obviate 
 the objections which heretofore caused its rejec- 
 tion. He was proceeding to give his reasons, but 
 was called to order, the hour of 12 having arrived. 
 He then moved his amendment and it was adopt- 
 ed, 54 to 37. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN moved to strike out the section 
 and insert a simple provision thus, " conciliation 
 
 courts may be established with such powers, and 
 duties as may be provided by law." 
 
 It was adopted 47 to 35. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to strike out " courts," 
 and insert tribunals." Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to amend by adding the 
 words of the next section, so as not to make the 
 decision obligatory. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said that was a motion to 
 murder the proposition by the way side. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to amend the amendment 
 by adding " or subject them to any penalty or for- 
 feiture." Lost, 41 to 49. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN asked if any thing provided a 
 forfeiture or penalty on the parties, although the 
 judgment was not binding. 
 
 The PRESIDENT replied in the negative. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. TAGGART was adopted, 
 66 voting in the affirmative. 
 
 So the entire section reads as follows : 
 
 ^Tribunals of conciliation may be established with 
 such powers and duties as may be prescribed by law ; but 
 such tribunals shall have no power to render judgment to 
 be obligatory to the parties, except they voluntarily sub- 
 mit their matters of diflerence and agree to abide the judg- 
 ment or assent thereto, in the presence of the tribunal in 
 such cases, as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER inquired ii any appeal were 
 allowed from the decision of these conciliators? 
 [Cries of " oh no, it is unnecessary "] Mr. C. 
 thought there should be preserved the right of ap- 
 peal to a town meeting. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to amend by adding "the 
 magistrates of such tribunals shall be such justic- 
 es of the peace as may be provided by law." Lost. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY moved to amend by adding "the 
 members of such tribunals shall receive no salary 
 fee.--, or perquisites of office." Lost. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS rose to speak, but was informed 
 that by the order ( f the House, debate must cease 
 at 12 o'clock, which was now passed. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS. I ask unanimous consent to 
 make an exposition of four lines only. 
 
 About twenty voices weie heard " I object." 
 
 The section as amended was adopted ayes 71, 
 noes 22. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved a re-consideration of the 
 amendment which he offered (and which was re- 
 jected) to provide that no penalties or forfeitures 
 shall be entorced against parties to compel sub- 
 mission to the decisions of these courts. If such 
 system were to be allowed it would be the worst 
 kind of despotism. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS hoped thewjuestion would be 
 taken now and finally dispose 
 
 Mr. JORDAN preferred not to take the ques- 
 tion now. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND called for the question. 
 
 The PRESIDENT ruled that the question could 
 not be taken now, unless by unanimous consent. 
 
 Messrs. JORDAN and O'CONOR objected so 
 the motion lies over. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND moved a re-consideration of 
 the section in relation to conciliation courts in 
 order that the question might be finally settled. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN objected to that, so long as his mo- 
 tion was pending to re-consider the vote rejecting 
 his amendment an amendment designed to pre- 
 vent conciliators from subjecting parties to penal- 
 ties and forfeitures unless they agreed to their 
 judgments. 
 
_ 
 
 837 
 
 Mr. TOWXSKAD UK-II gave notice of a motion 
 to re-consider the vote adopting the section allu- 
 ded to. He desired to close up that question. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR offered the following additional 
 section to the judiciary report : 
 
 *} . The court of appeals shall have power on motion 
 to determine the venue of suits and proceedings depending 
 in the supreme court. 
 
 Rejected, ayes 10, noes 72. 
 
 O'CONOR moved to reconsider. 
 Air. LOOM1S offered the following section: 
 ^ . The legislature shall provide for the speedy publi- 
 cation of all state laws and of such judicial decisions as it 
 may deem expedient, so as to render the same easy of ac- 
 quisition by tne people; and all laws and judicial deci- 
 sions shall be free for publication by any person. 
 
 Mr. VV. H. SPENCER moved to amend, so that 
 a copy of all laws and decisions ot a general na- 
 ture should be deposited in each school district ot 
 the state. Lost. 
 
 The question being then on Mr. LOOMIS' propo- 
 sition, 
 
 Mr. DANA rose to inquire, whether, as this 
 section related puiely to the legislative depart- 
 ment, it felt under the rule adopted this morning, 
 closing deb;ife on the judiciary article ? 
 
 Tiie PRESIDENT (Mr. PATTERSON occupy- 
 ing (lie chair) ruled that it did as tne rule em- 
 Draced ail matter connected therewith. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM suggested it was only intended 
 to cover matler then connected therewith. He 
 did not want to sec: new propositions poked in 
 here, and members torced to a vote on them with- 
 out debate. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN called for the ayes and noes on 
 Mr. LOOMIS' proposition arid it was adopted, as 
 follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, F. F. Backus, H. Back- 
 us, liaker, Bascom, Bergen, Bouck, Bowdish, Bruce, K. 
 Campbell, jr., Clark, Cornell, Dana, Dodd.Dorlon, Dubois, 
 Flandois, (Jebiiard, Gfaham, Harris, Harrison, Huiirnau, 
 Hotchkiss, Hunter, A.Huutington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jor- 
 dan, Keinble, Keinan, Looinis, Mann, U'Conor, Patterson, 
 Powers, at. John, Salisbury, Sanlord, Shaver, Shaw, Shu- 
 mons, Smith, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Tuft, 
 Townsend, Tuthill, Warren, Waterbury, White, Wood 
 Worden, A. W. Wright, W. B. Wright, Yawger, Youug 
 5i). 
 
 NOES ;\lc=srs. Angel, Braytou, Bull, Burr, Chambre- 
 leng, Chatlield, Cook, Cr.-oker, Cuddeback, Danforth, 
 Gardner, Hart, HawJey, E. Huntingtou, Kirkland, Mc.Nitt, 
 Marvin, filler, Munro, Nicholas, Nicoll, Parish, President, 
 Hiker, Russell, Sears, E. Spencer, Taggart, 'i'allmadge, 
 Vache, Ward, Youngs 3:2. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART offered the following section : 
 <J . The legislature shall by law so regulate the prac- 
 tice and proceedings in ail courts, that eveiy paity to any 
 action or proceeding may have any remeuy or relief to 
 which he may be emitiea in le'.creuce to the subject mat- 
 ter ot such action or proceeding, either legally or equita- 
 bly in the same action or proceeding without resoiting to 
 any other action. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN enquired whether this was de- 
 bateable ? 
 
 The PRESIDENT ruled that it was not. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN then enquired if the proposition 
 was in order ? If it was then, after spending so 
 much time in maturing this system, amendments 
 might be thrown in here, and in the absence of 
 all debate or explanation, might be adopted, that 
 would completely overthrow the whole fabric 
 which we had taken so much pains to erect. He 
 insisted that the rule cutting off debate could not 
 apply to propositions not pending when the rule 
 was adopted. 
 
 The PRESIDENT directed the resolution al- 
 luded to, to be read, and, it having been read, 
 
 Mr. JORDAN reiterated his point of order 
 and in reply to a remark that Mr. LOOMIS' pro- 
 position was in the same position as this said he 
 thought that proposition was debateable, but the 
 question was not then raised. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to lay on the table the 
 proposition of Mr. TAGGART, and the point of 
 order. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said he had riot yielded the floor. 
 He asked for the decision of the chair on the 
 point of order. 
 
 The PRESIDENT, (Mr. PATTERSON,) said 
 upon the reading of the resolution, and examin- 
 ing it more critically, the Chair was of opinion 
 that it applied only to propositions pending when 
 it was adopted. And being a resolution restric- 
 tive of the freedom of debate, it should be con- 
 strued liberally. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD appealed from this decision. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL insisted on his motion to lay on 
 the table as taking precedence of the appeal. 
 
 The motion prevailed. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN offered the following : 
 
 The court of appeals shall have power to issue writs of 
 habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, in- 
 formations in the nature of quo warranto, and other o<igi- 
 nal remedial writs, and to hear and determine the same. 
 in case an issue in fact i>e issued in any such case, the said 
 court may refer such issue of fact to the supreme court to 
 be tried by a jury. 
 
 Mr. M. was proceeding to explain his proposi- 
 tion, when 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD called to order and formal- 
 ly raised the point whether the rule adopted this 
 morning did not preclude debate on all proposi- 
 tions relating to this article. 
 
 The PRESIDENT reiterated the decision be- 
 fore made, that debate was inadmissable only on 
 propositions pending when the rule of this morn- 
 ing was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD appealed and 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG sustained the appeal. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN sustained the chair. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said he did not want to be re- 
 sponsible for the consumption of one moment of 
 time, and therefore should not discuss the appeal. 
 Had he been permitted to go on, he should not 
 have consumed one moment. He now moved the 
 previous question on the appeal. 
 
 The call was seconded 55 to 12, and 
 
 The decision of the chair was sustained, ayes 
 82, noes 8. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN (his proposition now coming up) 
 urged that there should be a single court some- 
 where in the stale, having the power to issue 
 these original prerogative writs. But he would 
 not debate the question, supposing the matter to 
 be fully understood. He offered the section not 
 to embarrass this system, but to improve and per- 
 fect it. He drew it up some ten days ago. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS had no objection to the section, 
 provided the mover would so word it as to give 
 :his power concurrently with the supreme court. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN supposed it would be concur- 
 rent. He added that lie had no objection to vary- 
 ing it so as to leave it to the legislature to confer 
 this power. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said the very statement that 
 the section proposed to give the court of appeals 
 
838 
 
 concurrent power with the supreme court to issue 
 these prerogative writs, showed that it was en- 
 tirely unnecessary. If the supreme court had 
 this power now, why give the same power, to be 
 exercised concurrently, to another tribunal ? 
 
 Mr. JORDAN had no doubt the mover of this 
 proposition offered it with the best, motive, but he 
 thought the gentleman had entirely mistaken the 
 effect of it. We had already heard that this court 
 of appeals would be broken down in eighteen 
 month?; and he confessed, were he an enemy or 
 this system, and desired so to arrange it as to pro 
 duce ihat result, he should propose as one of the 
 means of doing it, this very proposition. When 
 these applications 1'or writs of mandamus, or pro- 
 hibition or quo warranto came before a court, there 
 must be a hearing before the writ issues, and a 
 hearing after it was returned and there would be 
 no doubt that this court of appeals rnisht find it- 
 self seriously burdened with this business. He 
 did not believe that the mover intended to make 
 this prediction history that this court of appeals 
 would break down in eighteen months. But Mr. 
 J. believed lhat such would be its effect. 
 
 Mr. STRONG here moved a recess. Agreed to. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The President presented a report from the 
 Comptroller in answer to the call made on him 
 a few days since by a resolution of Mr. CHAM- 
 BERLAIN, showing the amount of state stocks 
 outstanding, and the several purposes for which 
 they were issued. 
 
 On motion of Mr. J. J. TAYLOR, it was refer- 
 red to the committee of the whole having charge 
 of the report of committee No. 3, of which Mr. 
 HOFFMAN was chairman. 
 
 The pending question, as announced by the 
 Chair, was on the proposition of Mr. MARVIN, 
 which was offered at the morning session. 
 
 Mr. MANN, to get at a vote, moved the previ- 
 ous question. 
 
 This was seconded. 
 
 The question was taken, and Mr. MARVIN'S 
 proposition was negatived, ayes 12, noes 64. 
 
 Ivir. SIMMONS moved to reconsider this vote. 
 He was sure that this question had been taken in 
 too much of a hurry. (Laughter.) 
 
 A VOICE : Have not we been in too great a 
 hurry all the way along. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped that gentlemen would 
 allow the vote to be reconsidered ; it was a pro- 
 position which he regarded as necessary to the 
 safely of the system. 
 
 ivn. 6fRuNG: Well, there ! lei's have it, at 
 once (laughter) let's have unanimous consent 
 on to it, at once and settle it whilst we got our 
 minds <,n to if. 
 
 Several members objected, and the reconsidera- 
 tion, of course, was laid over. 
 
 CODIFICATION OF THE LAWS 
 Mr. WHITE offered the following: 
 . The Governor of the state, at the first session of the 
 Legislature, alter the adoption of this Constitution, shall, 
 by and with the advice au.l consent of the senate, appoint 
 five commissioners, whose duty it shall be, as far as practi- 
 cable and expedient, to reduce into a written and system- 
 atic code, the laws of this state, and also the civil and cri- 
 minal procedure. The said commissioners shall specify 
 such amendments and alterations therein as they shall 
 deem proper, and they shall from time to time, when re- 
 quired, make reports of their proceedings to the Legisla- 
 
 ture, And if iound to be practicable and expedient, the 
 said commissioners shall provide for the abolition of the 
 listinct torms of action at law now in use-, and that justice 
 !)t? administered in all civil cases in an uniform mode of 
 pleading, without reference to the distinction between law 
 nd equity. 
 
 ^ . At the first session of the Legislature after the adop- 
 ion of this Constitution, and from time to tirm; th^realter, 
 as may be necessary, provision shall be made by law for 
 filling vacancies and for regulating the tenor of office and 
 compensation of the said commissioners. And the said 
 code shall be published prior to its being presented to the 
 Legislature for adoption. 
 
 Mr. BAKER rose to a point of order; viz: that 
 this subject, having already been referred to a se- 
 lect committee of the whole, it was not in order 
 to consider it at this time. 
 
 Mr. WHITE said that the subject matter of 
 these sections had not been referred. It was a 
 different proposition that had been referred. 
 
 Mr. BAKER said (hat he was aware that some 
 additions had been made to the original proposi- 
 tion, but still he contended that the main subject 
 had been referred. 
 
 The PRESIDENT decided thai the proposition 
 was now in order. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said that he was not, by any 
 means satisfied with the proposition of Mr WHITE, 
 in (he shape in which it now was placed. He de- 
 sired to have the general Statute Law revised; 
 whether it was done by the commissioners ap- 
 pointed by the Governor, or in some other way, 
 was not material; it ought to be done; and the 
 commissioners ought to be tied down to that duty, 
 lie also desired to have another commission to 
 simplify and cheapen the practice and the pro- 
 ceedings in the courts of record ; and he would 
 also tie that commissioner down to that point. 
 Again, he would have a third commissioner for 
 the purpose of revising the laws in reference to 
 town and county affairs. The former revisers of 
 the statutes of this State, though they were able, 
 skilful, and well qualified to revise the general 
 laws of the State, had mystified rather than sim- 
 plified the local laws of every day applications. 
 He here alluded to the highway acts, the laws re- 
 lating to common schools, &c.; there were four- 
 fifths of these laws more than there ought to be. 
 We ought to have practical men to revise Ihese 
 laws, and when a proposition having some such 
 objects as these in view, should be presented here, 
 he would go for it ; it should have his vote and 
 hearty support. Although, after all, it might, 
 perhaps, be better to turn this whole subject over 
 to the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said he fully appreciated the dis- 
 position of the Convention to bring this protract- 
 ed discussion on the judiciary to a close. That 
 however important he might think the proposi- 
 tion now under consideration and in his judg- 
 ment it was in that respect second to no subject 
 which had been or would be brought before the 
 Convention he could not under the present feel- 
 ing of the House venture to take up their time 
 with any extended remarks. The subject was 
 one which ought not to be passed over with a 
 hasty and imperfect discussion. Rather than be 
 compelled to treat so great a subject of reform* 
 in so unworthy a manner he preferred to let it iro 
 before the Convention to meet with its fate what- 
 ever it might be trusting that there might be 
 here such a conviction of its necessity as shouM 
 
839 
 
 induce members to give their votes in its favor; 
 in doing so they risked nothing. The proposi- 
 tion was simply to direct, an effort to be made to 
 e into a systematic code the great body of 
 \v <>(' this state ; that law which governs the 
 ie. in their daily relations and which they 
 are required and at their p>eril bound to know : 
 that law which is only to be found in the de- 
 cisions of the courts too often confused and con- 
 flicting scattered through more than a thousand 
 volumes inaccessible but to a few, and by them 
 incapable of being mastered except after the la- 
 bor of life. He knew it had been said again and 
 a^ain that this could not be done, but if the ques- 
 tion were to be decided upon the weight of au- 
 thority he would assert and without fear of con- 
 tradiction that of the eminent men who had 
 thought and written or spoken upon the subject, 
 the preponderance was vastly in favor of those 
 who had advocated this great reform. A reform 
 like this which should strike at the root of the 
 evil was in his judgment imperatively demanded. 
 The Convention could ask for no greater triumph 
 than to have it said of them that they had at least 
 directed the attempt to be made to bring about so 
 praiseworthy a reform. Mr. NICOLL, said that 
 under the very evident and indeed excusable anx- 
 iety of the Convention to bring the debate to a 
 close he would not detain them with any further 
 remarks. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that before he voted on 
 this, proposition, to direct the Governor to appoint 
 these commissioners to codify the laws, he wish- 
 ed to know, if it was possible, the number of vol- 
 umes which this code would be likely to run 
 through. It had been suggested to him '(Mr. P.) 
 that a code of our written and unwritten laws 
 would extend through 15 or 20 volumes. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that it was utterly impossi 
 ble to speak with any degree of certainty or pre- 
 cision as to the extent of a code like the one con- 
 templated. The code Napoleon embraced about 
 articles, and was comprised in 1 vol. about 
 the size of one of the volumes of the rev. statutes. 
 The law now(written or unwritten)spread through 
 3,OUU vols. ! 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that, then he though 
 that at all events, knowing as little as we did 
 about the extent of such a work, that this section 
 instead of being obligatory on the legislature 
 should be only permissive. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that in his opinion we had 
 gone on legislating here long enough, under th 
 title of a Judiciary Report ; now it was ver) 
 rable that we should wind this matter straight 
 up close it up and iix it; and so he moved th< 
 previous question on the Judiciary Report, and 01 
 belonging to all, and the matters relating to it. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS thought this question had bet 
 ter be left with the legislature for this code, i 
 formed, must be made under the direction of th< 
 legislature. He did not doubt the right of the 
 4ature to appoint suitable persons to form th< 
 s into a code, and should this work be deem 
 ed expedient, it would be commenced and tinish 
 ed when the people required it, and their repre 
 sentatives could best judge when the proper tune 
 arrived to undertake it. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that as it was eviden 
 that the previous question was to be sprung upon 
 
 his and all other propositions, perhaps it had 
 >etter be withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. WHITE withdrew his proposition. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR asked Mr. PERKINS to with- 
 raw his motion for the previous question, to al- 
 ow him to make a single remark. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS did so. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR then suggested that thisjudi- 
 iary article should be printed, as it had been 
 mended, and laid upon their tables before pass- 
 ng finally upon it, as had been done with all the 
 eports which had been previously passed. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that they had better finish 
 he thing and get it out of the way at once. For 
 e was quite sure that unless they disposed of this 
 article right away forever, whenever it should be 
 called up, by and by, there would be just as big a 
 lumber of legislative propositions as have al- 
 eady been introduced. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS sat down, and forgot to renew 
 lis motion for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said that some days since he had 
 ntirnated his intention to move a section which 
 was designed to carry out another great reform 
 which he regarded as not at all of inferior import- 
 ance to any of those already inserted in this arti- 
 le. He (Mr. H.) was fully persuaded that what- 
 ever judicial force we might provide here, that it 
 would prove insufficient unless they were connec- 
 ;ed with some valuable measure of legal reform. 
 Now various modes have been suggested to effect 
 this object, but none of them appeared to be ad- 
 equate to effect the end in view. And in short 
 it would only be effectually carried out by a co- 
 operation between the judiciary and the Legisla- 
 ture ; and therefore with a view to secure this, 
 which he believed to be a most valuable object, 
 he would move the following additional section : 
 
 5) 5. A chief justice of the supreme court shall be chosen 
 by the electors of the state, who shall hold his office for 
 yars. He may perform any of the duties of a judge of the 
 court of appeals or a justice of the supreme court. Ho 
 shall subject to the power of the legislature to alter or 
 change the same, prescribe s"uch rules and forms of prac- 
 tice of the supreme court and all subordinate courts as 
 shall tend effectually to simplify the practice and reduce 
 the expense of proceedings in said courts. And to this t nd 
 he shall report annually to the legislature and recommend 
 such action as he may deem necessary. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD offered the following substi- 
 tute : 
 
 {5 . The legislature, at its first session after the adoption 
 of this Constitution, ^hall provide by law for the appoint- 
 ment of three commissioners, whose duty it shall be to re- 
 vise, reform, simplify and abridge the rules of practice, 
 pleadings, forms and proceedings of the courts of record 
 of this state, and to report thereon to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to amend the substitute by 
 adding the following : 
 
 The commissioners, if practicable, shall provide for the 
 abolition of the various forms of actions at law now in 
 use, and that justice be administered in all civil cases in 
 a uniform mode of pleading without reference to the dis- 
 tinction of law and equity. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that, as far as he could re- 
 collect, this subject had already been acted upon. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that it had actually 
 been acted on in substance, some four or five days 
 ago. 
 
 Mr. MANN wished to ask the gentleman from 
 Albany, (Mr. HARRIS) if he designed to elect a 
 judge who should have power to make fttws ? 
 This power should most certainly be put under 
 
840 
 
 the control of the Legislature, and not of that of 
 any one man. 
 
 Mr.LOOMIS said that he supposed thegentleman 
 expected that this constitution would be adopted; 
 very well ; and taking that for granted, if it was 
 adopted, we shall have taken a very great stride 
 towards the important object v\hich the gentle- 
 man (Mr. HARRIS,) and all of us had in view, 
 viz : the simplification and cheapening of legal 
 practice and proceedings. He had this great re- 
 form much at heart, but he could never consent 
 to give to any one individual the power to pre- 
 scribe these reforms. Because the true way to 
 accomplish it was, through a commissioner, 
 whose proceedings should be subject to the re- 
 vision and control of the legislature. He, (Mr. 
 L.) never would consent to commit the vast pow- 
 er over this whole subject to the hands of any 
 one man or to any three men ! 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that this whole subject had 
 already been referred to a committee ; that com- 
 mittee had reported ; and that report was already 
 before a committee of the whole. He therefore, 
 moved to lay all these propositions on the table. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR withdrew it however, at the re- 
 quest of Mr. HARRIS. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said that he regarded this move- 
 ment or proposition, as an evident intention to 
 give this important subject the go by. He would 
 desire very much to urge on the convention, the 
 magnitude and importance of this subject, and 
 the absolute necessity for some action on it, on 
 the part of this convention if we were ever to 
 look after or to expect anything like substantial 
 legal reform. 
 
 Messrs. STETSON, PATTERSON, and KIRK- 
 LAND continued the debate. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said he would suggest the 
 following section : 
 
 (j With a view to diminish costs and expenses, to 
 abolish injurious and useless forms,and to promote justice, 
 the governor shall without delay, appoint three commis- 
 sioners whose duty it shall be to prepare and report a code 
 for the simplification of tue pleadings, proceedings and 
 practice in the courts of this state. The said code shall be 
 submitted to a board composed of commissioners, and of 
 the judges of the court of appeals; and the same, or so 
 much thereof as shall be approved by a majority of said 
 board, shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State, 
 and shall thereafter govern the pleading, proceedings and 
 
 Eractice in said courts, subject, however, to alteration by 
 iw. 
 
 Messrs. STOW and NICOLL continued the de- 
 bate, when 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question. 
 Seconded. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL'S amendment was negatived, 35 
 to 51, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Bas- 
 com, Bouck, Chatfield, Clark, Cornell, Crocker, Cudde- 
 back, Dana, Dorlon, Dubois, Flanders, Harrison, Hutchin- 
 son, Loomis, Mann, Nicoll, O'Conor, Porter, St. John, 
 Salisbury, Salisbury, Sheldon, W. H. Spencer, Stephens, 
 Taft, Townsend, Waterbury, White, "VVillard, Wood, A. 
 Wright, Young, Youngs 3d. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Ayrault. Baker, Bergen, 
 Bowdish, Brayton, Bruce, Burr, Cambreleng, Danforth, 
 Gardner, Graham, Harris, Hawley, Hoffman Hotchkiss, 
 Hunter, A. Huntington, Hyde, Jordan, Kemble, Kernan, 
 Kirkland, McNitt, Marvin. Maxwell, Miller, Munro, Nich- 
 olas, Parish, Patterson, Perkins, Powers, President, Russeil, 
 Sanford Snaver, Simmons, E. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, 
 Stow, J. J. Taylor, Tuthill, Ward, Worden.W. B. Wright, 
 Yawger 51 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD'S substitute was adopted, 
 ayes 64, noes 18, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Baker, 
 Bergen, Burr, Cambrelen-g, Chatfield, Clark, Clyde. Cor- 
 nell, Crooker, Cuddeback, Dana, Danforth. Dorlon, Du- 
 hois, Flanders, Gebhard, Graham, Harr.son, Hoffman 
 Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Jordan, 
 Kemble.Ketnan, Kirkland, Loomis, Mann, McNitt, Mar- 
 vin, Maxwell, Munro, Nicoll, O'Conor, Parish Porter. 
 Powers, Rhoades, Riker, St. John,' Sheldon, E. Spencer, 
 W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Stow, Taft, 
 T. J Taylor, Townsend, Tuthill, Ward, Waterburv 
 White, Willard, Wood, A. Wright, Yawger, Young. 
 Youngs 64. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Bowdish, Brayton, Bruce. Gar- 
 dner, Hawley, Hyde, Miller,Nicholas. Patterson. Perkins, 
 President, Salisbury, Sanford, Siramons.Warren, Worden 
 W. B. Wright 18. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved that there be added to 
 the section " subject to their adoption and modi- 
 fication from time to time." Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved a substitute for the sec- 
 tion giving to the legislature power to provide for 
 the revision of the practice, g&c. of the courts. 
 Ruled out of order. 
 
 The section adopted by substitution was then 
 agreed to as amended. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved the question on the re- 
 consideration of the 9th (now 10th section which 
 is as follows : 
 
 (jlO. The testimony in equity cases shall b taken in 
 like manner as in cases at law. The offices of masters and 
 examiners in chancery are hereby abolished. 
 
 After a few remarks from Messrs. HARRIS and 
 JORDAN the motion was negatived. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved the reconsideration on 
 the section adopted last night, authorizing ap- 
 peals. Carried, 36 to 35. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved to amend by inserting the 
 words of " of record" after the word " court." 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to strike out the words 
 " in a city." Lost. 
 
 The section as amended was adopted. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY called up his section, dej 
 claring every elector eligible to judicial office. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to lay the section on the 
 table. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN (the whole article being gone 
 through with) moved that the same be laid aside 
 and be agreed to. 
 
 The entire article on the subject of the judi- 
 ciary, as perfected, is as follows: 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 1. The A ssembly shall have the power of Impeachment 
 by the vote of a majority ol all the members elected. The 
 court for the trial of irepeachments, shall be composed ol 
 :he president of the Senate, the Senators or a major part of 
 them and the judges of the court of appeals, or the major 
 part of them. On the trial of an impeachment against the 
 Gtovernor, the Lieut. Governor shajl not act as a member 
 of the court No judicial officer shall exercise his office 
 after he shall have been impeached, until his acquittal. 
 Before the trial of an impeachment, the members of the 
 court shall take an oath or affirmation truly and impartially 
 to try the impeachment, according to evidence, and no 
 person shall be convicted without the concurrence of 
 :wo-thirds of the members present. Judgment in cases ot 
 impeachment shall not extend lurther than to removal 
 rom office, or removal from office and disqualification to 
 lold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under 
 this state; but the patty impeached shall be liable to in- 
 dictment, and punishment according to law. 
 
 2 There shall be a court of appeals, composed of eight 
 ud'ges of whom four shail be elected by the electors of the 
 state for eight years, and four selected from the class of jus- 
 .ices of the supreme court having 1 the shortest time to serve. 
 "revision shall be made by law," lor designating -one of the 
 
841 
 
 number clivted, us chief judge, and lor selecting such jus- 
 I ;hc Supn-iiu- r.ourt, from time to time, and lor so 
 :vu.g tnose elected, that one shall be elected every 
 i year. 
 
 3. There shall be a Supreme Court having general ju- 
 tion in law and equity. 
 
 The Siato shall bo divided into eight judicial dis* 
 trictu, of which this city of New York shall be on*. The 
 others to be hounded by county lines; and to be compact 
 jnal in population as nearly as may be. There shall 
 bo fo ir justices ui tue Supreme Court in each district, and 
 as muny more in the district composed of the city of New 
 York, as may trom time to time be authorized by law, but 
 not to exceed in the whole such number in proportion to 
 its population, as shall be in conformity with the number 
 of such judges in the residue of the state in proportion to 
 its population. They shall be classified so that one of the 
 justices of each district shall go out of office at the end oJ 
 every two years, after the expiration of their terms under 
 such classification. The term of their office shall be eight 
 years. 
 
 5. The legislature shall have the same powers to alter 
 and regulate the jurisdiction and proceedings in law and 
 equity, as they have heretofore possessed. 
 
 6 Provision may be made by law for designating from 
 time to time one or more of the said justices who is not a 
 judge of the Court of Appeals to preside at the general 
 terms of the said court to be held in the several distiicts. 
 Any three or more of the said justices, of whom one of the 
 said justices so designated shall always b<- one, may hold 
 such general term. And any one or more of the justices 
 m;iy hold special terms and circuit courts, and any one of 
 them may preside in Courts of Oyer and Terminer in any 
 county. 
 
 7. They shall severally at stated terms, receive for 
 their services a compensation to be established by law; 
 but the salary of no judge of the Court of Appeals or Jus 
 tice of the Supreme Court shall be increased or diminish' 
 ed, during his continuance in office. 
 
 8. They shall not hold any other office or public trust. 
 All votes for either of them lor any elective office, (ex- 
 cept that of Justice of the Supreme Court, or Judge of the 
 Court of Appeals,) given by the legislature or the people, 
 shall be void. They shall not exercise any power of ap- 
 pointment to pui lie office. Any male citizen of the age 
 of twenty -pne years, of good moral character, and who 
 possesses tne qualifications of learning and ability, shall 
 be entitled to admission to practice in all courts of this 
 State. 
 
 ^ 9. The classification of the justices of the Supreme 
 Court; the times and place of holding the terms of the 
 Court of App als, and of the general and special terms of 
 thr Supreme Court within the several districts, and the 
 Circuit Courts and Cour s of Oyer and Terminer within 
 . oral counties, shall be provided for by law. 
 
 10 The testimony in equity cases shall be taken in 
 like manner as in cas'es at law. The offices of Master and 
 ilxamiuer in Chancery are hereby abolished. 
 
 11. Justices of the Supreme Court and Judges of the 
 Court of Appeals, may be removed by concurrent resolu- 
 tion of both houses of the legislature, if two-thirds of all 
 the members elected to the Assembly, and a majority of 
 all members elected to the Senate concur therein. All 
 judicial officers, except those mentioned in this section, 
 -,-cpt Justices of the Peace, may be removed by the 
 Senate, on the recommendation of the Governor; but no 
 removal shall be made by virtue of this section, unless the 
 cause thereof be enteied on the journals, nor unless the 
 complained of shall have been served with a copy 
 of the complaint against him, and shall have an opportu- 
 tunity of being heard in his defend;. On the question of 
 removal, the ayes and noes shall be entered on the jour- 
 nals. 
 
 j 12. The Justices of the Supreme Court shall be elected 
 iu the respective judicial districts by the electors thereof, 
 at such time as may be prescribed by law, but the first 
 election of justices of the Supreme Court after the adoption 
 of this Constitution, shall be held at least forty days before 
 the general annual election of 13 17. 
 
 13. In case the office of any judge of the Court of Ap- 
 peals or justices of the Supreme Court shall become va- 
 cant before the expiration of the regular term for which he 
 cted, the vacancy may be filled by appointment by 
 tlie (ijvernor, until it shall be supplied at the next general 
 election of judges, when it shall be lilled by election for 
 the residue of the une\pired term. 
 
 ^ 14. There shall be elected in each of the counties of 
 this State, except the city and county of New York, one 
 county judge, who shall hold his office for four years. 
 
 The county j udge shall hold the county court, perform the 
 duties of the office of surrogate and such other duties as 
 may be prescribed by law. 'ihe county court shall have 
 such jurisdiction of causes arising in justices' courts as 
 shall be prescribed by law; but shall hare no original civil 
 jurisdiction except in special cases to be prescribed by 
 law. 
 
 The county judge, with two justices of the peace, may 
 hold courts of sessions with such criminal jurisdiction as 
 the Legislature shall prescribe, and perform such other du- 
 ties as may be required by law. 
 
 The cuunty judge shall receive an annual salary, to be 
 fixed by the board of supervisors, which shall be neither 
 increased nor diminished during his continuance in office. 
 The justices, lor services in courts of sessions, shall be 
 paid a per diem allowance out of the county treasury. 
 
 In counties having a population exceeding forty thou- 
 sand, the Legislature may provide for the election of a 
 separate officer to perform the duties of the office of surro- 
 gate. 
 
 The legislature may confer equity jurisdiction in special 
 cases upon the county judge. Appeals shall lie from the 
 county court and court ot sessions to the supreme court, 
 in bane. 
 
 Inferior local courts, of civil and criminal jurisdiction 
 may be established by the legislature in cities; and surh 
 courts, except for the city of New York, shall have an 
 uniform organization and jurisdiction in such cities res- 
 pectively. 
 
 15. The legislature may reorganize the judicial dis- 
 tricts, at the first session alter the return of every enume- 
 ration, under this Constitution, in the manner provided 
 lor in section four, and at no other time; and they may, 
 at such session, increase or diminish the number of dis- 
 tricts, but such increase or diminution shall not be more 
 than one district at any one time. Each district shall have 
 four Justices of the Supreme Court; but no diminution of 
 the districts shall have the effect to remove a judge from 
 office. 
 
 $16. The electors of the several towns shall, at their 
 annual town meeting, and in such manner as the legisla- 
 ture may direct, elect their justices of the peace. Their 
 term of office shall be for four years. Their number and 
 classification may be regulated by law. 
 
 17 All judicial officers of cities and villages and all 
 such judicial officers as may be created by law therein, 
 shall be elected at such times and in such manner as the 
 legislature may diiect. 
 
 18. The clerks of the several counties of this state 
 shall be clerks of the supreme court, with such powers 
 and duties as shall be prescribed by law. A clerk for the 
 court of appeals to be ex-officio clerk of the Supreme 
 court, and to keep his office at the seat of government, 
 shall be chosen by the electors of the state; he shall hold 
 his offioe for three yeais, and his compensation shall bo 
 fixed by law and paid out of the public treasury. 
 
 19. No judicial officer, except justice of the peace, 
 shall receive, for his own use, any fees or perquisites of 
 office. 
 
 20. The legislature may authorize the judgments, de- 
 crees and decisions of any local inferior court of record of 
 original civil jurisdiction, established in a city, to be re- 
 moved for review directly into the court of appeals. 
 
 21. The legislature shall provide for the speedy publi- 
 cation of all statute laws, and of such judicial decisions 
 as it may deem expedient, so as to render the same easy 
 of acquisition by the people. And all laws and judicial 
 decisions shall be free for publication by any person. 
 
 fj22. Tribunals of conciliation may be established, with 
 such powers and duties as may be prescribed by law; but 
 such tribunals shall have no power to render judgment to 
 be obligatory on the parties except they voluntarily sub- 
 mit their matters in tiiiT'erence and agree to abide the judg- 
 ment, or assent thereto in the presence of the tribunal in 
 such cases as shall be prescribed by law. 
 
 (5 23. The legislature at its first session after the adoption 
 of this Constitution, shall provide by law for the appoint- 
 ment of three commissioners, whose duty it shall be to re- 
 vise, reform, simplify and abridge the rules of practice, 
 pleadings, forms and proceedings of the courts of record 
 of this State, and to report hereon to the legislature, sub- 
 ject to their adoption and modification Irom time to time. 
 -24 The Legislature at its first session after the adop- 
 tion of this Constitution, shall provide lor the organization 
 of the court of appeals, and for transferring to it the busi- 
 ness pending in the court for the correction of errors, and 
 for the allowance of writs of errorjand appeals to the court 
 of appeals, from the judgments and decrees of the present 
 
 80 
 
842 
 
 court of chancery and supreme court, and of the courts 
 that may be organized under this constitution. 
 
 25. The first election of judges of the court of appeals, 
 justices of the supreme court, and judges of the county 
 courts, shall take place at such tune as may be prescribed 
 by law, between the first Tuesday of April and the second 
 Tuesday of June, 1847. The said courts shall respective- 
 ly organize, and enter upon then 1 duties, on the first Mon- 
 day of July, next thereafter; but the terms of office of 
 said judges and justices as declared by this Constitution, 
 shall be deemed to commence on the first day of January, 
 1848. 
 
 26. On the first Monday of July, 1847,' jurisdiction of 
 all suits and proceedings then pending in the present Su- 
 preme Court and Courc of Chancery, and all suits and pro- 
 ceedings originally commenced and then pending in any 
 Court of Common Pleas, (except in the city and county of 
 New-York) shall become vested in the Supreme Court 
 hereby established. 
 
 27. But the Chancellor and present Supreme Court 
 shall respectively have power to hear and determine any 
 of such suits and proceedings then ready to be noticed for 
 hearing, and shall for their services therein be entitled to 
 their present rate of compensation until the 1st day of Ju- 
 ly, 1848, or until all such suits and proceedings shall be 
 sooner heard and determined. The Supreme Court here- 
 by established shall also have power to hear and deter- 
 mine such of said suits and proceedings as may be presen- 
 ted by law. 
 
 28. In case any vacancy shall occur in the office of 
 chancellor or justice of the present supreme court, previ- 
 ously to the 1st day of July, 1848, the Governor may nom- 
 inate, and Dy and with the advice and consent of the Sen- 
 ate, may appoint a proper person to fill such vacancy. 
 Any judge ol the court of appeals or justice of the supreme 
 court, elected under this article, may receive and hold 
 such appointment. 
 
 29. The offices of chancellor; justices of the supreme 
 court, (except as herein otherwise provided); circuit and 
 county judges; vice chancellors; assisting vice chancel- 
 lor; supreme court commissioner, and masters and exami- 
 ners in chancery, as now existing, shall expire on the first 
 Monday of July, 1847. 
 
 30. The chancellor, the justices of the present supreme 
 court, and the circuit judges, are hereby declared to be 
 sever .illy eligible to any omce at the first election under 
 this Constitution. 
 
 Adjourned to 83 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 FRIDAY, (8Qth day} Sept. 11. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. VAN RENSSELAER. 
 
 Mr- GARDNER presented a remonstrance of 
 the trustees of Yates Academy, against the diver- 
 sion of the Literature Fund. Referred to the 
 committee of tne whole having in charge the re- 
 port of the committee on education, of which Mr. 
 NICOLL is chairman. 
 
 DEBATES. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG offered a resolution pre- 
 scribing as a general rule, that whenever tne Con- 
 vention shall decide that all debate shall cease 
 upon any article, at any particular time, or upon 
 any amendment thereto, that it shall not be in or- 
 der to propose or debate any amendment which 
 had not previously been offered in some form ; but 
 the question on any such amendment that was 
 pending shall be taken without debate. He had 
 intended this resolution in order to obviate the 
 difficulties in which the Convention ha J last night 
 found itself, in consequence of the decision of the 
 chairman pro tern., (Mr. PATTERSON ) 
 
 Mes*r*. CAMBRELENG, MURPHY, PAT- 
 TERSON, M ARVIN, SIMMONS, &.C., had a per- 
 sonal explanation. 
 
 The resolution was referred to the committee 
 
 D ARRANGEMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD called up his resolution, of- 
 fered the other day, relative to the forming of a 
 
 committee in order to arrange several articles and 
 amendments to the present Constitution. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that there wan a previ- 
 ous resolution of Mr. BRAYTON'S on the same sub- 
 ject. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIEED adopted the resolution of 
 Mr. BRAYTON as a substitute for his own ; to form 
 a committee to arrange the several articles and 
 sections of the new constitution as amended and 
 adopted the manner and form in which the con- 
 stitution as amended and adopted shall be sub- 
 mitted to the people the publication of the 
 amendments or the constitution as amended the 
 form of the notice of the election and the form 
 of the ballot. 
 
 The resolution was adopted, and the chair ap- 
 pointed as the committee the following : Messrs. 
 CHATFIELD, BRAYTON, HOFFMAN, JOR- 
 DAN, NICOLL, HARRIS, W. TAYLOR. 
 REPORTS NOT YET SENT IN. 
 
 Mr. BAKER offered a resolution directing the 
 several standing committees, which have not yet 
 reported, to bring in their reports on or before the 
 16th inst. 
 
 Laid on the table by consent of the member. 
 EVENING SESSIONS. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved that evening sessions be 
 held on and after the 17th inst. for the considera- 
 tion of the report of the committee on education. 
 
 Laid on the table. 
 
 MESSENGER'S PAY. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That owing to the length and numher of the 
 daily sessions of the Convention, the compensation allow- 
 ed the messengers is inadequate to the value of their servi- 
 ces, and that the secretaries communicate this resolution 
 to the next Legislature as a petition from this body that the 
 same be increased. 
 
 Mr. Sf MMONS hoped this resolution, or some- 
 thing better, would be adopted. It was perfectly 
 disgraceful that the great state of New-York 
 should cut down the wages of any body to so low 
 a rate as 50c. a day. 
 
 Mr. MANN advocated the resolution. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to add " door-keepers," 
 but finally withdrew it. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER said that he desired to call the 
 attention of the Convention to an article that ap- 
 peared in the Tribune a few mornings since. He 
 felt that the explanation was due to himself. He 
 had figured so Irequently of Idle in the remarks 
 of the reporter for the Tribune, that he could not 
 allude to all the objectionable matter that was 
 personal to himself that was contained in its re- 
 cent numbers. He should refer to that portion 
 only that imputed corruption of motive, founded 
 upon a direct and positive falsehood. And it was 
 a falsehood at which he (Mr. C.) was the more 
 surprised, because the reporter for the Tribune 
 was informed of its falsity before the article was 
 written. The article to which he referred was as 
 follows. He would read so much only as was ne- 
 cessary for his purpose : 
 
 < When Mr. Strong did ihis, lawyer Crooker rose up, 
 and with great apparent candor advised his lc>Ka l brethren 
 to place every elector of the State on the same platlorm 
 with themselves, by voting for Mr. Strong's motion. This 
 was, for the. public eye. 
 
 While advising the Convention to support Mr. Strong s 
 plain and sensiole resolution, Mr. Crooker secretly advised 
 
843 
 
 him to withdraw it, at the very moment when it was like- 
 ly to pass, and to present in its' stead the resolution which 
 did pass, and which, Mr. Crooker drew up, though Mr. 
 Strong presented it. 
 
 I he saw the honorable gentleman from Mon- 
 roe in his seat, he would'now ask him (o rise in 
 his pljce and s.w whether he (Mr. C ) had secret- 
 ly, or in any other way, advised him to withdraw 
 anv propos-iion on the t-ubject referred to. 
 
 Mr. STRONG rose and said that neither Mr. 
 CROOKER, nor did any other man advise at all 
 upon the subject that he did not know from 
 whom the section offered by him, in lieu of his 
 own, had come. He had become satisfied that his 
 own could not pass, and the one that was adopted 
 was put into his hands, and thinking it better and 
 more liberal than the old rule, he submitted it for 
 his own. He was still satisfied his own would 
 have been rejected, and it was so shown by a sub- 
 sequent vote of the Convention. That what he 
 had done, he had not been advised by the gentle- 
 man irom Cattarangns or any one else. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER then said he would call upon 
 every member of the Convention to rise in his 
 place and say whether he (Mr. C.) had ever had 
 any secret or other conversation with them, or 
 any one of them on the subject. No one rising, 
 Mr. CROOKER continued. He had all his life 
 been favorable to a liberal rule in relation to the 
 admission of attorneys, and his course on that 
 subject in his own county was well known. The 
 article, so far as it imputed unfriendliness to a 
 liberal admission of all men to practice in our 
 courts, was, as far as he was concerned, unfound- 
 ed. When Mr. STRONG first introduced his sec- 
 tion he (Mr. C.; rose and implored his profess- 
 ional brethr n a:- an act of magnanimity to vote 
 for it in a body. Subsequently, finding that it 
 could not pass, he drew up and sent to the gen- 
 tleman from Monroe the section that was adopted. 
 He did it in the hope and belief that it would libe- 
 ralize the old and rigid rule. That it would do 
 away with the seven years' study now required, 
 and admit all men to practice in all our courts, 
 whenever they were fitted, if they became so in 
 one year or one hour. Had it not been for the 
 imputation of corrupt intentions so grossly and 
 so falsely imputed to him, he should not now 
 have alluded to the subject. He was the more 
 restrained by the fact that the reporter could not 
 appear and speak on this floor. The denial was 
 an act of justice to himself. And though the ar- 
 ticle was in its most important particulars, he felt 
 compelled to say, wilfully false, he had not risen 
 to make this statement from any unkindness of 
 feeling towards the reporter for the Tribune. 
 H.iving said thus much here ended the matter 
 with him. 
 
 The Convention then resolved itself into com- 
 littee of the whole, on the report of committee 
 
 imber three, of which Mr. HOFFMAN is the 
 
 lairman, on 
 
 CANALS, FINANCES, &c. 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR was called to the chair. 
 
 cretan read the first section as follows : 
 1. Alter paying the expenses of collection, superin- 
 trn ence ana ordinary repairs, [$1,&00,000] one million 
 and five hundred thousand dollars of the revenues of the 
 state canals shall, in each iiscal year, and at that rate for a 
 shorter period, commencing on the first day of June, one 
 thousand eight hundred and forty-six, be set apart as a 
 
 sinking fund, to pay the interest and redeem the principal 
 of that part of the state debt called the Canal Debt, as it 
 existed at the time aforesaid, and including three hundred 
 thousand dollars then to he borrowed, until the same shall 
 be wholly paid > and the principal and income of the said 
 sinking fund shall be sacredly applied to that purpose. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN addressed the committee at 
 length in explanation of his views and of the re- 
 port of the committee. 
 
 [The length of his remarks, and the volumi- 
 nous character of the reports and tables referred 
 to by him, render their insertion at this point im- 
 practicable. They will be found at the close of 
 the volume.] 
 
 The Comptroller transmitted an answer to the 
 resolution as to the sum paid for the support of 
 the government since 18 17, and from what source; 
 which was ordered to be printed. 
 
 SATURDAY, (81th day} Sept. 12. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. WELCH. ' 
 
 Only 34 members present at a quarter to 9. 
 
 Returns were received from the clerk in chan- 
 cery of the second circuit, relative to moneys de- 
 posited in that court. Referred to the appropri- 
 ate committee. 
 
 Mr. DANA had leave of absence for five dayg. 
 
 Mr. TO WNSEND offered the following : 
 
 " Resolved, That on and after Tuesday next, this Con- 
 vention shall hold evening sessions, to commence at half 
 past 7 o'clock, and to he continued every evening (Satur- 
 days excepted) for the purpose of considering the report 
 of the committee on education, &c." 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole, on th'e report of committee No. 3. 
 THE FINANCES, CANALS, &c. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR resumed the chair. 
 
 Mr. ARCHER : The embarrassment under 
 which I labor, in attempting to address this com- 
 mittee, every gentleman will readily understand 
 by recalling to himself the emotions he experi- 
 enced in his first attempt to speak in a delibera- 
 tive body. Nor is my embarrassment relieved by 
 the contemplation of the magnitude of the sub- 
 ject before us, nor when I reflect upon the power 
 and ability of those with whom I may be brought 
 in conflict. Nothing but an imperative sense of 
 duty to my immediate constituents and to the 
 state at large, would tempt me to stand torth in 
 this debate against the Ajax Telamon who ad- 
 dressed the committee yesterday, supported as he 
 is, by so large a share of the talent of this body. 
 I have not had the assistance of the Ulysses of the 
 gentleman's party, and the clerks in a department 
 of the state government, in furnishing documents 
 and statistical tables prepared with great care and 
 consummate skill. I claim not to be able to meet 
 these gentlemen, that task I leave for those whose 
 legislative or other experience in public affairs, 
 has made them conversant with the whole sub- 
 ject, and eminently fitted them to grapple with 
 the difficulties with which it is surrounded. 
 What I shall have to say, will be merely prelimi- 
 nary ; I shall riot attempt to follow the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer through all the details of his 
 elaborate speech, but content myself with a sim- 
 ple indication, that this subject is susceptible of 
 being viewed in other lights than those which 
 have been presented. 
 
844 
 
 To prevent misunderstanding, let me in the 
 outset, state some of the points in regard to which 
 we shall not differ from the honorable gentleman. 
 We agree with him in the necessity of maintain- 
 ing the credit of the state. The doctrine of re- 
 pudiation, whether direct or by implication, 1 
 can assure the committee, will find no favor on 
 this side of the house. The faith of the state 
 must be preserved, not only unimpaired, but 
 above even the breath of suspicion. That body 
 of my fellow citizens with whom it is my pride 
 to be associated in opinion and principle, has 
 ever regarded the maintenance of public faith, 
 sacred and inviolate, as the highest obligation of 
 a sovereign people, and one of the chief corner 
 stones upon which rests the system of self gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 Nor shall we differ with him in respect to an 
 increase of the state debt. This, we think, ^ un- 
 necessary, and would be unwise and impolitic. 
 The gentleman will find those disagreeing with 
 him in regard to the leading features of his finan- 
 cial policy, as anxious as himself, that ample 
 provision be made for the payment of the entire 
 debt, and this too, at the earliest period compati- 
 ble with the ability and interests of the state. 
 
 There was a time, when the project of uniting 
 the great lakes with the Atlantic, through the 
 Hudson, was deemed chimerical, Utopian and ab- 
 surd. But time has shown the futility of the 
 doubts and iears then entertained, and placed the 
 fame of the great projector on an imperishable 
 basis. I will not now undertake to prove what it 
 may become necessary hereafter to show, that 
 there are those men of rank men in whom 
 public confidence has been largely reposed, who 
 have from the outset, been actuated by feelings 
 of secret hostility to our system of canals, and 
 through whose efforts, serious embarrassments 
 have arisen. But I have no allusion in this re- 
 mark, to the honorable gentleman from Herki- 
 mer. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN. It would not be true if you 
 did. 
 
 Mr. ARCHER. If the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer is not now as much a friend to internal im- 
 provements as we could desire, evidence might be 
 adduced from his own recorded opinions, that he 
 has been in times past, one of the champions of 
 the system, disposed to go as far as the farthest, 
 in securing to the state a great thoroughfare for 
 trade, by means of an enlarged canal. 
 
 But to return to the history of our canal policy. 
 As soon as the Erie and Champlain canals were 
 brought into full operation, all saw their im- 
 mense utility. Of those who had opposed their 
 construction, some frankly acknowledged then 
 mistake, and thence forward vied with its earli- 
 est friends in support of the policy ; while others 
 nursed their spleen in secret, ready whenever 
 opportunity should offer, to strike a blow at that 
 system which had so completely falsified their 
 predictions. 
 
 From the rapid increase in wealth and popula- 
 tion of the immense region, opened to commerce 
 by the Erie canal, many saw at an early day, thj 
 necessity we should soou be under, to extend our 
 accommodations to this rapidly increasing com- 
 merce. If any at that time fell into a mistake 
 either in regard to the time in which such facdi- 
 
 ies should be made, or the extent to which 
 hey should be carried, the circumstances then 
 existing, may well be plead in palliation, or full 
 excuse of the erroneous views they entertained. 
 Vlany things conspired to stimulate men to great 
 indertakings. Uninterrupted prosperity through 
 a series of years, was rapidly filling the country 
 with wealth ; the tide of emigration was continu- 
 msly rolling westward, filling that vast and fer- 
 ile region with an enterprising population 
 tfhose wants must be supplied from the Atlantic 
 sea-board, and the products of whose industry 
 ld seek a market through the same channel. 
 The revenue of the canals had exceeded the an- 
 icipations of all its friends, and the debt incur- 
 ed, was in process of speedy liquidation, without 
 laving drawn from the people a single dollar by 
 axation, or embarrassing in the least, the finan- 
 cial interests of the state. Stimulated by our 
 example, Pennsylvania was putting forth her 
 mightiest efforts to complete a system of improve- 
 ments that should divide with us the carrying 
 rade of the Great West. Jealous of what might 
 be the effect of this movement, and confident of 
 the ability of the state to carry through both the 
 system of lateral canals and the enlargement of 
 ;he Erie, those who had at that time the charge 
 of our public affairs, engaged in those arduous 
 undertakings perhaps somewhat prematurely, or 
 at least, suffered them to be carried on with 
 greater rapidity than the strictest prudence would 
 warrant. Reliance seems also to have been 
 placed on means for these purposes to be derived 
 from the general government. In 1830 a com- 
 mittee of the legislature held the following lan- 
 guage : " Means to advance this object may also 
 be expected with confidence from another quar- 
 ter. Shortly the national debt will be paid, 
 when the surplus revenue of the United States 
 will be probably divided among the states ac- 
 cording to the ratio of their representation. 
 Our share of this revenue will exceed annually 
 one million of dollars. And it is by no means 
 improbable that the states will receive also por- 
 tions of the avails of the sales of the public 
 lands ; which added to the two former sources 
 ; of revenue, will be abundantly adequate to con- 
 struct all the works of internal improvement in 
 this state which have hitherto attracted public 
 'attention." 
 
 And besides the commissioners of the canal 
 fund repeatedly expressed the opinion, that the 
 revenues of the canals themselves, would be 
 found adequate for all the contempla'ed works, 
 and warmly commended them to the attention of 
 the legislature and the people at large. In Janua- 
 ry, 1835, a report was made to the legislature, 
 (Assembly Doc., No. 143, pages 8, 9, 10, 11 and 
 20) from which I will read : 
 
 "But it to secure these reduced expenditures and tolls, 
 improvements and the enlargement of the capacity of tue 
 c nal be neglected or long delved, the business ot the 
 country, so enlarged and rapidly iiicreasiig, will exceed 
 the capacity of the canal, and setking new and rival 
 routes, it will with the tolls from it be lost to the state." 
 
 Again, on page 9 of the report, alluding to the 
 Erie canal : 
 
 < It is the common navigable strait between the Atlan- 
 tic and the great western lakes, and by position designed 
 to accommodate the trade and travel ot the enterprising 
 and rapidly increasing population of the territory border 
 
845 
 
 ing on those lakes and their tributaries, almost illimitable 
 in extent, and inexhaustible in their fertility. The neces 
 sity now felt, of affording increased cnpaoi'y to the canal, 
 cast ul' SviMeuse, will in a t"\v ye;u-> be 1 It in its whole 
 extent ; the precise period may be disputed, but the EVKNT 
 
 IS CKRTAl.N." 
 
 On page Jo : 
 
 "Wlun the irregularities of trade "are considered, the 
 period of this anticipated excess, appears still shorter. 
 It is known that the necessities of trade, agriculture and 
 manufactures require a much larger transportation in 
 spring and autumn, than during the other parts < f the 
 season of navigation. In part, but not without injury to 
 these branches of industry, it may be delayed, but great 
 delay wouM prove fatal to the revenue and business of the 
 canal. Agriculture, manufactures and commerce, rather 
 than submit to injurious delays, will seek and find other 
 channels of transportation. 
 
 1 It therefore appears indispensable that the water of the 
 canal should be widened and deepened, and the locks ex- 
 tended, &c " 
 
 I ought to ask pardon of the committee for de- 
 taining them so long in reading these lengthy ex- 
 tracts ; my apology is, the forciblene:?s and just- 
 ness of the views presented ; besides the SOURCE 
 from which they emanated, entitles them in a 
 peculiar degree, to the patient attention of this 
 body. I will read the concluding portion of the 
 report : 
 
 " If in the spirit of an enlightened and liberal policy 
 adequate capacity shall beaftbrded to the canal, our we^t- 
 em Brethren will be accommodated and their comforts in- 
 creased, the revenues of the state will be augmented ; a 
 rich and increasing commerce will excite and rewaid the 
 industry, enterprise and skill of our citizens, in agricul- 
 ture, ar;s. and commerce, ana the state, b\ affording the 
 utmost facility to that busy intercourse of trade, which 
 improves the moral and social relations of civili/ed lie, 
 will at once confer on its own citizens the most lasting bene- 
 fits, and on all others, in the only measure in which a bounti- 
 ful Provi'Ien :e permits states to do them good -the great- 
 est benefits dirl blessings. Called by position to perform 
 this higli a-i I .s..o;ed duty, the state will perform it. in the 
 spirit of v isdom. The commissioners therefore, respect- 
 fully submit to ihe legislature that provision be now made, 
 by law, for all improvements in the canal, which the leg- 
 islature slnll deem necessary. The extent of these once 
 settled, every step in the progress will be uniform, con-is- 
 tent, and lead to the desired result. The limits of the ca- 
 nal once prescribed beyond the reach of probable change, 
 our own citizens will be the better enabled to make their 
 contiguous and substantial improvements, and direct their 
 energies to the increase of their wealth and substantial hap 
 piness. The citizens of other states, in these improvements, 
 once authorized, will find a perfect guaianty, that the pro- 
 ducts of their industry, through this canal, will always find 
 a free and e^sy transit to and from the Atlantic and the 
 Lakes and trade ami transportation will be invited to it by 
 the strong inducement ot interest. Signed by 
 
 ' S. VAN UKNSSELAER, 
 M1CHAF.L HOFFMA.N, 
 S. YOUNG. 
 W. C. BOUCK, 
 JONAS EARLL, Juw. 
 
 Such language as this would sound somewhat 
 extraoidmary, it uttered by a member of this Con- 
 vention, yet it embodies the deliberate opinions oi 
 men eminently distinguished tor their ability, and 
 possessing in a high degree the confidence of their 
 party. 
 
 It has of late become so common to charge the 
 creation of the Stale d<-bt upon those to whom it 
 does not belong, that I .shall venture still lurtliar 
 to trespass upon your patience, in presenting other 
 extract showing to whom the credit of these new 
 impulses properly attaches. (Assembly Doc. Is'o. 
 334, 1835.) 
 
 The Canal Board concur in the opinion expressed in the 
 proceedings referred to, (public meeting at Utica.) that the 
 rapidly increasing business of our own state and the states 
 of <' Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Missouri, and the territories 
 
 lying north and west of these states," renders it necessary 
 and proper, that tin-- mean^ and facilities for the transpor- 
 tation of property should l>e commensurate with tin: wants 
 of that fertile, productive and rapidly populating region of 
 country." (Page 2 ) 
 
 " The Canal Board entertain the opinioii that an enlarge- 
 ment ol the Kiie canal would he in all respects, the best 
 plan to accommodate the tmrir-portation between the Hud- 
 son riverand the western lake-;. (Page G.) It is, li<>\ve\ er, 
 quite certain that the time is not veiy distant when 
 tional facilities will be necessary; and the Canal Board take 
 this occasion to express the opinion that the enlargement 
 of the Kiie canul should be directed at the present session, 
 of the legislature." (Page 6.) 
 
 Similar opinions were expressed by the varioiis 
 state officers, both prior and subsequent to the. 
 times above referred to. In 1834 Si 5, Gov. JVIarcy 
 recommended the Genesee Valley and Black River 
 canals, Erie rail-road, and the speedy enlargement 
 of the Erie canal. In March, 1837, the Senate 
 called on the Canal Board by resolution, to know, 
 whether, in their opinion, it would not be lor the 
 interest of the state to proceed with the enlarge- 
 ment of the Erie canal, so as to finish it sooner 
 than was contemplated by the act of May 11, 1S35. 
 They replied : 
 
 " Tt is the opinion of this Board that it is for the interest 
 of the state to proceed with the enlargement of the Erie 
 canal, so that it may be completed sooner than was con- 
 templated by the act of May 11, 1835." 
 
 They still thought the expense would not ex- 
 ceed the estimates made in 1S35. This report was 
 signed by A. C. Flagg and others. 
 
 These were not mere ephemei&l views, the im- 
 pulsive thoughts of ardent minds.but thesetiled con- 
 victions of sober minded men, and not less true to- 
 day than they were ten years ago, although their 
 authors may have seen tit to change front in the 
 mean time. In 1S38, the canal commissioners 
 say, (see their report in doc. No. 61, p. 22,) -'that 
 in their opinion the public interest would be es- 
 sentially promoted by as speedy a completion of 
 the enlargement ot the Erie canal from the Hudson 
 to lake Etie, as the facilities tor obtaining means 
 with economy will justiiy." But I need not en- 
 large on this topic further Enough has been pre- 
 sented to show most conclusively upon v> horn the 
 responsibility of the present debt rests. 
 
 Nocv, sir, I am not one of I hose who regard a 
 public debt a public blessing. I do not hold that 
 slates, any more than individuals, should reck- 
 lessly rush into debt, or incur liabilities, without 
 at fhe same time making reas< nable provisons lor 
 their liquidation. But when it becomes necessary 
 to contract a debt, to secure to ourselves and to 
 future ages the blessings of a great public improve- 
 ment, it should be done. Nur is it a valid objec- 
 tion against so doin^, that a portion of the liability 
 may remain to be discharged, by those who are to 
 succeed us upon the stage of action. The princi- 
 ples of justice are by no means violated, piovided 
 we leave to them a valuable consideration. It is 
 not that they should pay our debts, but simply 
 that they should contribute a share, in return for 
 the advantages and blessings transmitted t<> them 
 through our instrumentality. Opinions analagous 
 to these, appear to have been entertained by Gov. 
 Marcy in 1S3G. In his annual message of that 
 year, he says: "1 must not be understood to main. 
 " tain the position that the people of the present 
 "day should turnish the means ot reimbursing the 
 " loans that they may make for the purp< se of in- 
 " ternal improvement's. These improvements will 
 
846 
 
 " be left lor the benefit of future ages, and I see no 
 " injustice in transmitting to them the obligation 
 " to contribute a fair proportion towards the ex- 
 ' penses." 
 
 We come now to the year 142. At this time a 
 wonderful rhange appeals to have taken place in 
 the views of those who had previously been firm 
 supporters of the improvement policy. In the gen- 
 eral embarrassments of that period, our finances 
 became involved: it doubtless required great wis- 
 dom and prudence so to manage affairs, that the 
 interests of the state should not suffer serious del- 
 riment. Sound policy required a more cautious 
 progress, but did not require an entire suspension 
 of the public works. The tax that year imposed, 
 brought our stocks up nearly or quite to par, but 
 the state did not avail itself of its improved cr?dit 
 in carrying forward the unfinished works. Heie 
 was the great error. The increased value given 
 to our state scrip accrued rather to the benefit of 
 capitalists and moneyed men who held such scrip, 
 than to the great body of the people. Sir, who pe- 
 titioned for that stop and lux law ? Did the people, 
 or any considerable portion of them? I have yet 
 to learn that that law was asked at the hands of the 
 legislature, by any except the capitalists of New- 
 York Unless I have been misinformed, and if 
 so, I wish now to be informed, only three men, 
 who might be considered as the representatives of 
 the moneyed influence of Wall-street, petitioned 
 for the law of 1842. 
 
 Although I am by no means disposed to distrust 
 the legislature although I cannot join in the 
 charges which have been so frequently made as to 
 its venality and corruption, regarding itasldo, 
 the true conservative branch of our government, I 
 cannot disguise to mvselt the fact, that on this oc- 
 casion its action appears to have been shaped more 
 to suit the policy of moneyed men, than to meet 
 the wishes of the great body of the people. 
 
 The gentleman from Herkimer has presented a 
 long array of figures to show how much mere our 
 improvements have cost, by our having used our 
 credit in their prosecution. His argument goes 
 the whole length against the employment ol credit 
 in any shape. I will ask gentlemen if they in can- 
 dor believe, that without using the state credit, 
 ar ; y of these works would have been built? No sir. 
 The people would never have consented to the im- 
 position of a direct tax equal to the annual expen- 
 ditures on our canals during the process of their 
 construction. The credit system might have been 
 abused: it HAS been grossly abused. But if we 
 have gone too fast or too far, let us retrace our 
 steps and proceed more cautiously in future. Credit 
 properly used, is a legitimate means of business; 
 it has been the great engine of our prosperity as a 
 state, and I can not endorse the course of gentle- 
 men who now, instead of redressing grievances 
 and correcting the mistakes of the past, turn round 
 and kick from under them the ladder upon which 
 they had mounted to this eminence The honora- 
 ble gentleman who has addressed the committee 
 on this subject, has not given us to unders'and that 
 he is in favor ol a completion of the enlargement 
 of the Erie canal, or the finishing of the late- 
 ral canals at any time. His argument went 
 o show directly the contrary- He would con- 
 tent himself for all time to come with such im- 
 provements as might be effected with less than 
 
 two millions of dollars. This might give us five 
 feet water in the canal and double locks : it will 
 scarcely do more. I would respectfully ask gen- 
 tlemen, if they are willing to see the immense 
 sums which the state has already expended, be- 
 come a total loss ? That those costly structures 
 which have already been built, should go to ruin 
 and prove of no advantage to any one, as they as- 
 suredly will unless by a timely prosecution of the 
 work, they be brought into active requisition ? 
 By the natural action of the elements, these struc- 
 tures in their present unfinished and exposed 
 condition, are rapidly deteriorating in value ; the 
 loss to the state from this source alone, cannot be 
 less than five per cent on their first cost annually ; 
 it may be much more. As they now are, they 
 are nearly worthless so far as the production of 
 revenue is concerned. Of the amount expended 
 on the enlargement and in the construction of the 
 Genesee Valley canal, more than two-thirds, and 
 all that has been expended on the Black River 
 canal, is entirely unavailable. We then lose ne- 
 cessarily, the interest on the sums thus paid out, 
 amounting annually to more than half a million of 
 dollars. It is not my purpose at this time, to 
 take into account the loss sustained by our fellow 
 citizens whose business interests are suffering 
 from this suicidal policy. On another occasion I 
 may have something to say on this head. But 
 why thus abandon our public works ? Why de- 
 part from what appeared to be our well settled 
 policy ? The gentleman from Herkimer, although 
 lot in plain terms, gives us to understand with suf- 
 icient distinctness, the reasons for the course he 
 las proposed. 
 
 He leaves us to infer that in his opinion the day 
 .s not far distant when the Erie canal will be 
 mostly if not entirely superseded, by tne use of 
 rail roads, and the diversion of the great, carrying 
 trade through rival routes through the Mississip- 
 pi and St. Lawrence, and the Pennsylvania canals. 
 With regard to the fiist part of this argument, I 
 would ask how a rail road could by any possibility 
 compete with our enlarged canal in the transpor. 
 tation of heavy products. Does he not see that 
 no rail road that ever was built, could do the bu- 
 siness now done on the canal ? And when the en- 
 largement shall have been completed, the cost of 
 transportation will be diminished one half; and 
 at the present time, aside from the tolls paid to 
 the state, the cost of transportation is less than 
 for an equal distance on any other route, whether 
 by land or water. How, then, could even a par- 
 allel road divert any considerable business from 
 the canal, when enlarged ? So far as relates to 
 rival routes, the argument only goes to show that 
 we should, without any unnecessary delay, make 
 such improvements as will retain to our state the 
 great advantages it at present possesses. I will 
 admit, if the gentleman's policy should prevail in 
 this body and with the people of the state, it we 
 are to fJld our arms and sit quietly by, while En- 
 gland is improving the route by the St. Lawrence, 
 and until Pennsylvania recovers from her piesent 
 embarrassments and resumes her public works, 
 the great tiade of the West may be lost to us 
 but not otherwise. 
 
 Sir, the city of New. York is the great centre oi 
 business for the whole country. To this point 
 will the agricultural products of the west, tend. 
 
847 
 
 They will find their way to that city, through 
 the most ready, convenient and cheap modes of 
 conveyance. Through the same channels, the 
 :n productions used in th;il: portion o!' our 
 country, will pass from the sr-.-bo;ird.; thus giv- 
 ing us the carrying trade both \v;iys, if we are 
 wist enough to improve our present advanl 
 Another reason adduced by the gentleman from 
 Herkimo.r, and the one upon which he seems to 
 lay the most stress, and is in fact the soul of his 
 whole arirument, is the deplorable condition of 
 our finances. He has indeed presented us with a 
 picture sufficiently appalling But it is proper 
 for us to examine, and ascertain if we can, wheth- 
 er or no, that gentleman has not used some of his 
 own peculiar coloring, to give to the picture that 
 hue, most consonant with his own views and best 
 suited to his present purposes. The state of New- 
 York, has expended in canals about $31,000,^00, 
 nearly half of which is at present unavailable ; 
 yet she derives a nett revenue equal to seven per 
 cent upon the whole outlay. The amount ex- 
 pendea in the enlargement and in the construc- 
 tion of the Genesee Valley and Black River ca- 
 nals, as I have before stated, contributes but little 
 to the aggregate amount of revenue. We are at 
 this time deriving not less than twelve per 
 cent annually, from the amounts expended 
 and which have been made available ; and ev- 
 ery consideration favors the idea, that as soon as 
 our improvements shall be completed, we may 
 derive an annual revenue from the whole in 
 about the same proportion, or ot less in any 
 event, than from 7 to 10 per cent, Our present 
 debt Its about 22k millions. In the Governor's 
 annual mes-i.i.re, is 10, our canal debt is stated to 
 be s 57. (See Assembly Doc. 1846, 
 
 No. 3, p. 19.) The debt of the general fund was 
 stated by him to be $5,885,549 24. (See same 
 doc. p. 24.) To meet this we have an annual 
 revenue from the canals, which has been steadily 
 increasing ever since the system went into opera- 
 tion ; and notwithstanding the reverses of a few 
 years in the series, and the diminution of the rates 
 of toll, the nett income has nearly doubled every 
 ten years. To complete the enlargement of the 
 Erie and finish the Genesee Valley and Black 
 River canals, will require about ten millions. 1 
 have prepared a table with some care exhibiting 
 what will probably be the nett. receipts from tolls 
 for the next twenty years. This is not, how T ever, 
 upon the supposition that the tolls will continue 
 to increase through this period in the same ratio 
 as heretofore. Should the gross revenue increase 
 for six years at the rate of 3i per cent year b} 
 year, then for another term of five years (after th( 
 enlargement shall have been completed) at tin 
 rate of 7 per cent then in an arithmetical rati< 
 equal to the average of the preceding five years 
 for five years further, and then remain stationary 
 it would give us in twenty years an aggregate o 
 more than 70 millions nett revenue. Whoeve 
 will look carefully at the past, and consider at 
 tentively the causes that must operate in fu 
 ture, cannot regard this statement as visiona 
 ry or at all improbable. Who will say ther 
 that the State of New York does not possess th 
 ability to liquidate every dollar of its indebt 
 edness, and carry out its system of unfinishe< 
 works ? When has the State " broken down be 
 
 eath its debt" as the gentleman from Herkimer 
 ntimates ? Whence the prospect that it will do 
 or A State whose tax rolls show upwards of 
 .illions of dollars; whose citizens are 
 vorih at this instant not less than 900 millions; 
 vhose property owned and possessed by itself and 
 n its own name, will fall little short of 50 mil- 
 ions, estimating it as other property is estimated 
 y its productive capacity ; and if the State is 
 iblc, is it not expedient, is it not just is it not 
 ^ccessary to go forward ? Shall we retain our 
 n-esent proud position among our sister states ; 
 r shall we through apprehensions that, have no 
 jetter foundation than the morbid fears of an ex- 
 ite i imagination, suffer her to retrogade and 
 ventually take up with an inferior position ? 
 Shall we pursue our onward path in the spirit of 
 >ur own glorious motto " Excelsior," or shall we 
 jermit that banner to trail in the dust ? Sir, if 
 ve pursue in the spirit of enlightened wisdom, 
 he course which lies open before us ; if we con- 
 inue to exert ourselves in extending to commerce 
 he accommodations which it requires and which 
 lature has placed within our reach, we shall se- 
 cure to ourselves and to those who shall come af- 
 er us, advantages such as no other people ever 
 enjoyed. All this we may accomplish, without 
 esorting to taxation. Let the State only be true 
 .o itself, and its credit cannot be impaired. Pur- 
 sue a liberal policy, and within twenty-five years, 
 kve shall possess a heritage unencumbered with 
 debt, of which our citizens might well be proud. 
 On the other hand, adopt the policy of the gen- 
 leman from Herkimer, and we shall soon find 
 ourselves receding, our present advantages disap- 
 Dearing, and the bright fame of our State obscured. 
 
 When Mr. ARCHER had concluded, there was 
 a long pause ; no member appeared to disposed to 
 address the committee. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN ordered the section to be 
 ead. It was read. No one rose to speak. 
 
 Several gentlemen called out " question." 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY suggested that the first section 
 e passed over. 
 
 SEVERAL, Oh no ! surely somebody has got 
 something to say about it. 
 
 Finally the first section was passed over sub 
 silentio. 
 
 The Chair ordered the clerk to read the second 
 section. 
 
 It was read. 
 
 No member rose, or appeared desirous of rising 
 to debate it. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN said that he' was aston- 
 ished at this ; and he would move that the com- 
 mittee rise and report progress. This was lost. 
 
 The second section was read again : 
 
 -2. In liquidation of the state claims lor advances to, and 
 payments for, the canals, [<i672,o0(.ij six hundred and sev- 
 enty-two thousand and five hundred dollars of the reven- 
 ues of the said canals, shall, forever, in each fiscal year, 
 and at that rate for a shorter period, commencing on the' 
 fiist da}' of June, one thousand eitjht hundred and ior:y-si_\, 
 be paid into the Trea-<my-i'..r the use of the State : and if 
 the payment of that sum, or any pait thrivol, s;i:ili be de- 
 v reason of hie prim ;(! in the preceding 
 
 section, the amount so delayed, with quarterly interest 
 thereon, at the then current rate, shall he so paid out of 
 the said revenue as soon as can he done consistently with 
 such priority. 
 
 The third section was read as follows : 
 ^3. The surplus olthe revenues of the canals, after pay- 
 ing the said expenses of the canals, and the sums appropri- 
 
848 
 
 ated by the two preceding sections, shall in each fiscal 
 year be applied to the improvement of the Erie canal, in 
 such manner as may be directed by law, until such surplus 
 shall amount in the aggregate to the sum of [2,500,000] 
 two millions and live hundred thousand dollars. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH moved to amend by inserting 
 after the word " Erie" the words "Black River." 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD did not rise to oppose this 
 motion, but to express the hope that this entire 
 section would be stricken out. He was opposed 
 to tying up these surplus revenues by a constitu- 
 tional provision. After securing the payme t of 
 the public debt, he would leave the legislature 
 free to make such disposition of the revenues as 
 might to them seem fit. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he thought he had 
 most fully and satisfactorily explained this point 
 when he was up yesterday; but as it appeared 
 that he had been misunderstood, he would detain 
 the committee a few moments now, by way of 
 explanation. The committee were charged with 
 the duty of making ample provision for the dis- 
 charge of the public debt as speedily as possible. 
 They could not be blind to the (act that, do what 
 they might on this subject, that there would ac- 
 crue surplussojj. Now he (Mr. H.) considered 
 the Erie Canal as much a local work as any other 
 canal in the state ; but the question was not this, 
 but it was, " how can you best promote the inter- 
 ests of the state by cheapening the facilrties ot 
 transportation?" Now, on the Erie enlargement 
 there are more than $10,000,000 of contracts still 
 unlet, besides the large portion that is still lelt 
 unfinished. Whilst, therefore, these surplusses 
 which must arise would go but little way in the 
 completion of the work, they still would, by ap- 
 plication to the improvement of the navigation, 
 afford additional tacilities tor trade and commerce 
 to pass upon the canal. The committee, in their 
 best judgment, had supposed that $2,500,000 might 
 be laid out in this way to great advantage ; and 
 over and above this amount, they were willing 
 to leave the Legislature to dispose of any sur- 
 plusse* that might accrue or be on hand, in any 
 way that in their wisdom they thought best. 
 The reason why the committee agreed to give the 
 preference to the Erie canal, was, not in order to 
 gratify a locality, but solely with a view to make 
 the public secure of an instrument to perform 
 transportation, and to secure the means of taxa- 
 tion to pay the debt for the construction of all 
 these works. Now he would ask the committee 
 here whether it would do to undertake to get 
 along with the unfinished canals with these sur- 
 plusses, be<they what they might ? Suppose you 
 were to take them and go on with all three of 
 these great works, or select, if you please, the 
 Genesee Valley canal. It would cost to com- 
 plete the one above at least $3,000,000. Of 
 course, other estimates can be had to order, 
 reducing the amount to $2,000,000 if you please; 
 and one member had even said it could be com- 
 pleted for $'1,000,000. But at his estimate it 
 would require at least $20(r,000 every year for 10 
 or 15 years from the annual revenues of the canal 
 to complete it. Gentlemen here have said that 
 if the Black river and Genesee valley canals were 
 completed, they would pour an enormous amount 
 of tolls into the Erie canal ; increase its revenue 
 and more than pay for the outlay. This might be 
 so; but for his own part he had never been able 
 
 to compute it in that way. The estimates in re- 
 gard to it have never been collected. On the oth- 
 er hand the committee have not thought it neces- 
 sary to advise for the enlargement of the Erie ca- 
 nal, neither have they advised against it. Nor 
 have they advised for the completion of the Ge- 
 nesee valley or Black river canals, neither have 
 they advised against their completion. That 
 matter has been left to be decided by this conven- 
 tion. But with regard to the means, which the 
 state would have in its hands, to do either of these 
 things, he (Mr. H.) did not honestly believe they 
 would be increased by any means, beyond the 
 amount he had already stated to the convention. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH endorsed the principle that 
 strict justice to the creditors of the state should 
 be maintained. There was however a class of 
 creditors, whom the gentleman from Herkimer had 
 noj; included : if he had, Mr. D. would riot have 
 troubled the Convention with any remarks. Jeffer- 
 son county had contributed largely to every pub- 
 lic work and, had received no return. He was 
 pledged to carry out, the policy of 1842, he desir- 
 ed to make ample provision to pay all our debts 
 as they became due ; he had no wish to dip deep 
 into the treasury, but where there was a surplus, 
 as was contemplated by the section under conside. 
 ration, the Black River canal had claims on it as 
 great as the Erie canal. He had moved this 
 amendment that the state might do justice to Jef- 
 ferson county, and he intended to follow it up by 
 another increasing the total mentioned in the sec- 
 tion to $4.000,000. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN said the amendment of 
 the gentleman trom Jefferson was partial. If, 
 however, he would withdraw it and allow Mr. C. 
 to propose an amendment,the 5th section of a plan 
 he some time since proposed, including several 
 public works, it would be more satisfactory. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH declined withdrawing his 
 proposition. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY" moved to amend the amend- 
 ment, by adding the words "Genesee Valley ca- 
 nal." He thought the partial provision of the 
 committee's report was unworthy of a conslitu- 
 tion. He added, though he offered the amend- 
 ment, he reserved the right to oppose the whole 
 section. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK suggested that as the Convention 
 was very thin, it would be better to pass by this 
 section, and proceed to others, to which there 
 might be less objection. He threw out the sug- 
 gestion lor the consideration of the movers of 
 these amendments. 
 
 Mr DANFORTH had no objection. 
 
 The CHAIR asked if the gentleman withdrew 
 his amendment. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH did not. 
 
 Some conversation ensued, in the course of 
 which Mr. HAWLEY expressed his willingness to 
 withdraw his amendment and Mr. CHATFIELI 
 said he desired to have a vote on striking out th< 
 section. His reason was that he should be absen 
 next week. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH moved to postpone the fur 
 ther consideration of this section. Lost. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY'S amendment was lost 24 tc 
 43. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH'S amendment was lost, 11 vo 
 ting in its favor. 
 
849 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD then moved to strike out 
 the entire section. He asked if it was wrong 
 that localities that had received no benefit from 
 the works of public improvement, which they 
 had helped to build, should ask for some portion 
 of their revenues ? He would not, however, pro- 
 vide for localities in the consti'ution, but leave 
 it open for the legislature to hear their claims, 
 giving the revenues of the state as a trust in the 
 hands of its representatives, to be applied for 
 the general benefit. The gentleman from Her- 
 kimer had said that we should look solely to the 
 security of the creditors of the state in our ac- 
 tion upon this subject. He dissented entirely 
 from, and would refuse to co-operate in,any such 
 principle. He held that we did all that we could 
 justly be called upon to do, when we provided 
 tor the payment oi the debt to our creditors. 
 He went into some statistics to show the incor- 
 rectness of the estimates of revenue given by 
 Mr. HOFFMAN. The expenses of the canals for 
 the last five years were greater than the amount 
 which the report had set apart for such purpose. 
 He did not believe with some gentlemen that the 
 revenues of the canals were to increase year by 
 year. The anticipations of statesmen in regard 
 to this had not been thus far realized. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked if he meant state officers, 
 by the term statesmen ? 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said he had no reason to 
 suppose that the state officers who had given es- 
 timates upon this subject were other than states- 
 men. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN again inquired if the gentleman 
 intended to say that the estimates of those officers 
 had not been realized ? 
 
 Mr. CHATFiELD said he alluded to the cal- 
 culations nrade by Mr. RUGGLES, and contended 
 that the anticipations of that statesman had not 
 been realized. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said the revenues had increas- 
 ed above his estimate over his estimate over $2, 
 000,000. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD took a different view of the 
 matter than that of the gentleman from Ontario 
 Mr. RUGGLES had provided a sinking fund which 
 was to extinguish the debt at a certain period, 
 which he believed had not been realized thus far, 
 and if the gentleman imagined that it would be 
 found correct in a period of ten years to come, he 
 was more insane than he had supposed him. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said he only took the ground 
 that they had been more than realized up to this 
 time. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD proceeded with his argu- 
 ment, and closed his remarks by reiterating what 
 he had said with regard to the rights of locali- 
 ties in this matter of benefits from the canal re- 
 venues. 
 
 The motion to strike out was lost 29 to 37. 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN moved to strike out the 
 third section and insert the following : 
 
 The remaining revenues, alter complying with the pre 
 ceding sections, shall be applied to thr; enlargement of the 
 Erie canal, the com >l*nion of the Genesee Valley ant 
 Black river canals and the Oneida river improvement, a 
 shall b di.ected by law. 
 
 This motion was lost, 16 to 38. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK again suggested that these impor 
 tant sections should be passed over as the house 
 was very thin. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said nothing 
 vould be lost by going through all the sections, 
 is motions to amend could hereafter be enter- 
 ained. 
 
 The Secretary proceeded to read the fourth sec- 
 ion and there were no propositions to amend, 
 t was as follows : 
 
 ^ 4. Of the sum of six hundred and seventy-two thou 
 and five hundred dollars required by the second section of 
 his article to he paid into the treasury, [$5iiO,000,] five 
 mndre 1 thousand dollars shall, in each fiscal year, and at 
 hat rate for a shorter period commencing on the first day 
 f June, one thousand eight hundred and forty-six, be set 
 part as a sinking fund to pay the interest and redeem the 
 i-rincipal of that part of the state debt called the General 
 Fund debt, including the debt for loans of the state credit 
 o railroad companies which have failed to pay the interest 
 hereon, and also the contingent debt on state*stocks loan- 
 id to incorporated companies which have hitherto paid the 
 nterest thereon, whenever and as far as any part thereof 
 may become a charge on the treasury or General Fund, 
 until the same shall be wholly paid ; and the principal and 
 ncome of the said last mentioned sinking fund shall be sa- 
 jredly applied to the purpose aforesaid ; and if the pay- 
 ment of any part of the said five hundred thousand dollars 
 shall at any time be deferred by reason of the priority re- 
 cognized in the second section of this article, the sum so 
 deferred, with quarterly interest thereon, at the then cur- 
 rent rate, shall be paid to the last mentioned sinking fund, 
 is soon as the sum so deferred shall be received into the 
 reasury. 
 
 The fifth section was next read as follows : 
 5. The claims of the state against any incorporated com- 
 pany to pay the interest and redeem the principal of the 
 stock of the state loaned or advanced to such company, 
 shall be fairly and duly enforced, and not deferred, releas- 
 ed or compromised ; and the moneys arising from such 
 claims shall be set apart and applied as a part of the sinking 
 fund provided in the fourth section of this article. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to strike out the words 
 
 and not deferred, released, or compromised" in 
 the fourth line, and insert " but may be deferred 
 or compromised as may be most consistent with 
 the interest of the state." He thought the rule es 
 tablished by the committee was too stringent and 
 might operate to the loss of the state. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN thought the whole 
 section should be stricken out. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN defended the section as right, 
 proper and necessary. The term " released" of- 
 ten meant robbery of the treasury. He mention- 
 ed several cases in which the treasury had been 
 defrauded by the release of companies. He de- 
 sired that it should be made known to companies 
 that they are to make efforts to meet their respon- 
 sibilities to the government. If it was meant 
 that they should not pay, the amendment would 
 prevail, but if it was desired that they should pay 
 their just liabilities, the section, stringent as it 
 was deemed, should be retained. It required a 
 two-thirds vote to change the character of these 
 companies. One of them after pocketing $70,- 
 00,0 of the public credit came here in 1844 and 
 asked for relief, which is only another name for 
 public robbery. That is a very good translation 
 for the term. A two-thirds vote looked rather 
 dubious, and so the lobby changed ground. They 
 got a joint resolution passed directing the Comp- 
 troller not to sell the road. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN : What road was it ? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that the name was so 
 long, he did not know that he could repeat it. 
 He believed it was called the Tioga Coal, Iron 
 and Mining Company. Well, they got relieved 
 from the two per cent to the sinking fund, and 
 
 81 
 
850 
 
 thus the state and public creditors were defraud- 
 ed. Another of these roads got permission to ex- 
 pend its sinking fund on the improvement of the 
 road. When he remembered these things, and 
 how often, here and elsewhere it had been sworn 
 to that these sums would be paid, and yet we 
 saw these results, he wanted this section adopted. 
 He was willing to allow an extension in behalf 
 of the New-York and Erie road, but nothing far- 
 ther. He would have all these railroad compa- 
 nies know that they must pay or take the conse- 
 quences. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN inquired .whether provision 
 had been made to meet the payment of this con- 
 tingent debt that from the Delaware and Hud- 
 son Canal Company. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN only knew that the stock of 
 that company was above par. They might thus 
 be able to pay. But the state had no funds with- 
 in its control" to meet that contingent liability. 
 The canal itself was all that could be reached by 
 the state. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN had inquired, because last win- 
 ter when a member of the finance committee, he 
 had been told by the majority of the committee 
 that that sum was provided for, and no. sort of le- 
 gislation was required. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN supposed those who had in- 
 formed the gentleman knew no more than he did 
 
 that is, they supposed the company could and 
 
 would pay. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN was afraid that the gentleman 
 from Herkimer was disposed, not only to lock up 
 his bowels of compassion and turn state Shylock, 
 but to defeat his own objects in his zeal to pro- 
 mote the interests of the state. In examining into 
 these matters, we should regard them as an indi- 
 vidual would. He should think it the very worst 
 policy, if a person owed him a debt, to compel 
 him to a sale and sacrifice of his property, when 
 by deferring the debt he might enable the debtor 
 to retrieve his affairs and ultimately not only pay 
 the whole debt but save something. The course 
 of the gentleman from Herkimer cut through all 
 considerations of policy, mercy, justice and every 
 thing else. The gentleman was disposed to take 
 a rigid course with these corporations to put his 
 knife right into the very spot, and taKe out the 
 
 defer the payment of the two and a half per cent, 
 to the sinking fund, to enable them to apply their 
 means to greater advantage. They obtained this 
 relief, and were thus enabled to prosecute their 
 work and to put themselves in a condition to pay 
 the debt due the state. If the rule of this section 
 had been rigidly enforced against them, the road 
 must have been sold out for little or nothing, and 
 perhaps have become the property of the state 
 and from the examples we had had of the expen- 
 diture of money by public agents, on the state 
 works, we should then have had a pretty exhibi- 
 tion ot state policy and economy. Mr. J. conce- 
 ded the policy and necessity, not only on the part 
 of the state, but of individuals and corporations, 
 of meeting obligations to the utmost farthing. 
 But he insisted there was no wisdom in crippling 
 and crushing either an individual or a company, 
 when by indulgence there was a probability of 
 their being able to pay and to save themselves. 
 Such a policy was perfectly suicidal. But it did 
 not follow, if we left this power to the legisla- 
 ture, that they would indulge companies, when 
 there was no prospect of their being able to pay. 
 Mr. RICHMOND understood the gentleman to 
 say that the company he alluded to had obtained 
 the relief sought and was doing well. He asked 
 whether it had returned to pay ? 
 
 Mr. JORDAN replied that the time was not up 
 yet; but when it did come, the company would 
 return to pay. Mr. J. went into the his'ory of 
 this company a little further. It was to build a 
 railroad from Hudson to the state line. There was 
 another company chartered to build a road from 
 Berkshire to Castleton, but nothing was done un- 
 der this charter, nor likely to be done, when the 
 other raised its funds, constructed its road and had 
 it nearly completed, when the le.-islature charter- 
 ed another to run along side of it nearly half its 
 length, and destroy it. This was old Castleton 
 charter, altered, so as to terminate at Albany. Al- 
 bany sold it out to a Boston company, and they 
 buiit it. Such was the effect upon the Hudson 
 road, that they had to apply for the relief mention- 
 ed. If the constitution was to freeze up the pow- 
 er of the legislature to ^rant these little indulgen- 
 ces, on similar occasions, the consequences were 
 obvious. The interests of stockholders must be 
 
 j i . i UUV1UU3* Jl lie iiiLiricoi.0 vi otx'vivu 
 
 very heart's blood the moment a debt was due, gacrificed) for nobo dv would buy a road under such 
 unless it was paid. This was neither good policy , circumstances _ cert aj n [ v not the rival road, and 
 nor magnanimous, nor the course which the true j one tenth ot the lien of the State on it. But 
 interests of the state demanded. Mr. J. knew . f - tnig para n e l road, the Hudson road would have 
 some companies that had great difficulties to-strug- 1 bgen & (aif &{ock He had the honor> the enter . 
 glewith. He knew of individuals in the same situ. lse and a]1 the profit of being a stockholder in 
 ation. But these companies had paid or were pay- { HudgoQ road , o a large am ount. But this did 
 ing as fast as they could, and he believed with a j {b& principle . Every farthing of inter- 
 
 little indulgence they would not only do justice ^ an / loan had go ; to be paid up and would be, 
 to the state, but save something to themselves , f a reasonab!e indulgence was' extended. But 
 And he had known individuals, who, if they had | jf . shvlock rule was to be put into the consti- 
 been pressed and coerced by their creditors, must 
 have been inevitably destroyed, and yet, who had 
 bv indulgence been able to go on and pay their 
 debts, and save something for their families. 
 
 He knew one company that had $150,000, that 
 paid interest regularly on it semi-annuallypaid 
 two and a half per cent, towards a sinking fund, 
 and extinguished a portion of the debt. But they 
 were under the necessity within a year or two of 
 applying to the legislature, not to forgive them 
 the payment of. any portion of the debt, but to 
 
 tution, that if a man did not pay on the day, you 
 may cut his heart strings, both the state and the 
 companv must suffer by it. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was glad to hear that com- 
 panv was paying its interest, and intended to do 
 so hereafter. He would take the gentleman's 
 word for that, but he should like to enquire 
 whether any of the rail road companies that had 
 stopped payment and had come here and got relief, 
 ever resumed payment ? 
 
851 
 
 Mr. JORDAN believed there was no case in 
 
 which a road had been granted similar relief un- 
 
 irnilar circumstances. He ventured to say 
 
 y have, they have performed their obliga- 
 
 There are some rail roads that have failed, 
 
 and one that is in no very promising condition to 
 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND was ready to grant that this 
 Hudson company had been somewhat patriotic. 
 He. had seen the slate either by chartered privilege 
 to a company, or by its ovyn woik, furnish two 
 facilities forgetting to market, and in addition to 
 that to gratify private speculation, charter anoth- 
 er company and loan them its aid for the con- 
 struction of their road. And this had been done 
 by wise legislators men who stood high in the 
 on of the community. He had been 
 ;ed some times, he was so in the discussion 
 on the judiciary committee with seeing some 
 very important things a good way off, and with 
 being gifted with a remarkable sagacity. He was 
 charged first so when these loans of the credit of 
 -late to incorporated companies were made. 
 But time had shown that as to some of them his 
 predictions had been verified. If there could be 
 any way devised by which these companies could 
 pay up, lie was disposed to be liberal towards 
 them, but he did not want this matter kept open 
 and these men never to pay. 
 
 Mr. bRUCE would be glad to see the whole 
 .section s'rickei) out, as he did not believe it would 
 add to the strength of these claims, and he trusted 
 tiu.'ie was no intention of diminishing them. But 
 if we were to have the section, then he though! it 
 needed amendment, and h should at least go lor 
 the amendment of Mr. JORDAN. But he rose t 
 st to him, whether it was not best to strike 
 oat the vvof' is proposed and insert nothing. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that the action of the Le- 
 gislature last winter had been referred to, and that 
 some of the remarks made by gentlemen who had 
 spoke, had been made there. He believed that 
 tin- Legislature then, in reference to the law in 
 relation to the Hudson and Berkshire road, acted 
 very much on this principle. That if the road 
 was sold, the state would gain little^or nothing, 
 but that :f the law was passed, the interest would 
 be paid for a little while at least, and thus the 
 s'ate saved from its payment. It was also said 
 that the road was to be repaired, and the rails ie 
 laid, which would improve it very much, and that 
 if the state should ever be driven to enforce its 
 lien upon the road, and sell it, that at least there 
 would be more iron there, and more value. He 
 >sed that these" were the views of perhaps a 
 majority of the house, and he did not know but 
 ot tht-; \vhole of them at least they were his own 
 Mr. WORDEN said as reference had been made 
 to this bill, and some remarks made calculated to 
 throw a cloud upon the credit of the company 
 and as he was a member of the committee of the 
 last legislature that reported the bill, he desirec 
 to say one word in reference to it. When the bil 1 
 was introduced in the committee he opposed it 
 and he was the only one there that did. He die 
 it very much on the grounds taken by Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN to-day that the state should enforce its con- 
 tracts to the very letter, until public policy die 
 tided to the contrary. The considerations sub 
 nutted by the gentleman from Columbia in refer 
 
 nee to the river road were then suggested, and 
 here was no suggestion that if the bill did not 
 ass, the road would become a defaulter. It was 
 nade to appear that the road was of greater value 
 han the debt, but that it had become necessary 
 o expend in repairs almost as much as was due 
 he state, in order to compete with the rival road, 
 and they therefore asked to be enabled to go on 
 and make these extensive improvements in the 
 )roperty mortgaged to the state. Under these 
 considerations he yielded his assent to the bill up- 
 on just principles of public policy. These facts 
 may occur again they have in relation to the 
 Ei ie rail road. If that road had been sold, no man 
 n his senses can believe for a moment that it 
 ever would be built, and the people of the south- 
 ern tier of counties must have given up all 
 lopes of its construction. It would have been 
 sold under the hammer of the comptroller, 
 and Boston capitalists would have bought and 
 Broken it up, in order to make a monopo- 
 ly of the travel through the centre of the 
 State. Some legislation may yet be necessary for 
 this road, for the State has only partially released 
 its lien upon it. If this provision is adopted, you 
 have a rigid constitutional rule that ties up the 
 Legislation of 1845 in regard to that road. Any 
 little contingency, any unfortunate state of the 
 money market that might delay a small expendi- 
 ture, would bring down upon it the Comptroller's 
 auction hammer. Is it wise or just to have this 
 provision in the constitution and thus to say to 
 the legislature, you are totally incompetent to 
 manage or honestly to legislate in questions of 
 this kind. You will say to the people we dis- 
 trust your intelligence. Are we sorry to hold 
 this language, and ask them to pay respect to our 
 opinions and declarations. He thought not he 
 thought that the people of the State, if they had 
 not some time since, would then begin to believe 
 that past legislatures and future legislatures were 
 quite as competent, as intelligent, and as honest 
 as we are, and without imparting any want of it 
 to us. There are other circumstances that may 
 arise to show the propriety of excluding this pro- 
 vision. Take the case of the Ithaca and Oswego 
 rail-road, sold by the Comptroller, unwisely he 
 submitted. It was bought by a company, which 
 was immediately incorporated, and who have 
 more than quadrupled the money paid for it. He 
 insisted that under a wise husbandry of this claim 
 the State might have realized its whole amount. 
 He submitted that it was wiser to leave this sub- 
 ject to the legislature. He was averse to loaning 
 money to these roads, nor had he ever advocated, 
 or voted for one of them, but he was opposed to 
 prohibiting the legislature from dealing with pro- 
 perty to the amount of $1,600,000 in any way 
 they might deem most wise and prudent for the 
 State. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN corrected a previous statement 
 as to the amount of the sinking fund of the Hud- 
 son and Berkshire rail-road. He should have 
 stated it at 2 per cent. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that the gentleman from 
 Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) seemed to suppose in the 
 case, that if we lay down any rule to guide this 
 judgment of the legislature in their action in 
 matters of this sort, that we would injuriously 
 curtail the powers and rights of the people. He 
 
 
852 
 
 (Mr. H.) thought different. It was obvious that 
 we should lay down a rule to prevent the legis- 
 lature from taking a course calculated to injure 
 the just rights of the people of the state. The 
 gentleman seems to suppose also that if the 
 Erie railroad had been sold under the power of 
 the state, that it would have operated injuriously 
 as to the completion of that great work. He (Mr. 
 H.) had had occasion to look into this matter and 
 study it with a Considerable degree of attention, 
 and in his opinion it would have been the great- 
 est good fortune that could have happened to the 
 district through which it passes. It would have 
 disconnected it from all old rotten contracts writ- 
 ten and by parole entered into by the old mana- 
 gers and of the fictitious stocks, which in his 
 opinion together with these claims, are the great- 
 est burthens upon it. And if it had been season- 
 ably sold, he had no doubt but that it would have 
 been in a much move forward state of completion 
 than it is. But this had gone by, and the com- 
 mittee did not desire to interfere with the com- 
 pletion of that road. It may be very convenient 
 to have these roads come here and ask relef, and 
 to grant it, and when two or three of them had 
 some kind of relief granted, the remainder can 
 ask it with great propriety, and it could hardly 
 be refused, and in this way the entire rights of 
 the state, to compel payment be from time to time 
 frittered away. The railroads have abundant 
 time to perform their obligations to the state. 
 All of them but the Erie road were completed 
 and in operation, and had nothing to do but to go 
 on and pay. When the gentleman from Columbia 
 argues here that the state by granting a rival char- 
 ter injured a company and made it a subject for 
 relief, he (Mr. H.) thought it was putting the re- 
 lief on a bad ground. When a route had been 
 granted he hoped it was not claimed that the le- 
 gislature could not grant a rival route. He was 
 strongly apprehensive that the state would be 
 obliged to do it. And that in some districts the 
 people would hardly be able to get along with 
 these companies, so naturally disposed to become 
 monopolies, unless they could by rival routes keep 
 down their claims. He did not consider that the 
 Hudson and Berkshire road by taking a charter 
 acquired any right that could not be given to a 
 rival charter. He did not believe at all in any 
 such monopoly. He saw nothing in the argu- 
 ment of the gentleman from Ontario that this 
 would be tying up the useful and beneficial pow- 
 er of the people. He believed in any of the ca- 
 ses that had occurred, if the people of the state 
 had been consulted they would have said to those 
 companies you can pay and you must when you 
 agreed to. The people stand in this case securi- 
 ty for those debts, and their rights should be 
 strictly though not severely enforced. He did not 
 wish to leave the power with the legislature to 
 compound, to extend and to fritter away all these 
 debts, and at last leave the people to do, as they 
 are now doing in relation to the $3,715,000,to pay 
 the interest, and ultimately to pay the principal. 
 If they will bring any thing on sale, he was quite 
 willing that it should go into their sinking fund. 
 The gentleman thinks that the people will begin 
 to learn, he did not know but they had already, 
 that there would be as much wisdom in future 
 legislatures as in this Convention. He (Mr. H.) 
 
 believed they always knew, that they expected 
 more than they found, from the complaints he had 
 heard, and were not satisfied with the wisdom of 
 making these loans or of extending them. He 
 did not believe that any one of these companies- 
 that was really determined to pay had not abund- 
 ant time to do so, if they will be faithful and hon- 
 est in the trial. And it was to that fidelity and 
 honesty he wished to appeal in this section. He 
 did not wish that they should be obliged to come 
 to the legislature and persuade conscientious, lib- 
 eral gentlemen, like the gentleman from Ontario, 
 jy a cock and a bull story, that it was right to 
 extend them credit. The gentleman supposed 
 that the state had suffered loss by the sale of the 
 [thaca and Owego railroad he (Mr. H.) was glad 
 ;hat it was gone and sold and had brought some- 
 thing into the treasury, and we knew the end of 
 t. He did not desire to deal with them in such 
 i way as if they were solvent, although we doubt- 
 ed it. If they are solvent, let them pay, if they 
 are not, let them be sold. The state loses less 
 by this rule than by a lax liberality. It had lost 
 $3,000,000 already by it; and he did not wish to 
 extend that rule for their benefit any further. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD hoped that the amendment 
 of iMr. JORDAN would not prevail. If any por- 
 tion of it was adopted, he hoped it would be noth- 
 ing more than to strike out the words " defend." 
 The gentlemen from Columbia had enquired why 
 should we go mad on this subject more than any 
 other. Now he (Mr. C.) viewed this proposition 
 as an evidence of returning sanity. The day of 
 madness on the subject had gone by. and we could 
 point to the time when the incubus on the rights 
 of the people was fastened upon them by the leg- 
 islature as a time of public insanity. He believ- 
 ed he had the honor of a seat in the legislature 
 during most of that time, and he did not recollect 
 that a previous loan had ever been made to a rail 
 road corporation, except the New York and Erie 
 rail road. There was a loan to one corporation, 
 the Delaware and Hudson canal Co. so qualified 
 that he could point to it as the evidence of the 
 safety of previous legislation compared with that 
 of '39 and '91. He looked back toth'.se periods 
 now with something like astonishment, when 
 these lobbies and even this hall were filled to> 
 overflowing with cormorants asking literally to be 
 allowed to put their hands, up to the elbows, into 
 the public treasury. And he remembered very 
 well that when the*e large and liberal promises of 
 secuiity were made to tne State, he took occasion- 
 to say, that they were just about as good for the 
 State as a hatful of log. It was the period of in- 
 sanity, and the people in many districts, lie knew 
 that they did in the county he represented de- 
 precated these loans as the very worst of all the 
 bad legislation of that period, and they have not 
 changed their opinion. Could any man now 
 doubt that a majority of the tax-paying citizens of 
 the State and those who are not to be bent fitted 
 by any of tho=e works of internal improvement, 
 desire that there should some barrier be interpos- 
 ed between legislation and popular rights? Aa 
 the gentleman from Herkimer had said, there is 
 ample time for these roads to come to a conclusion 
 whether they will or will not pay, or to do the 
 other thing surrender their charter to the State. 
 There is but one that is within a short peiiod of 
 
853 
 
 redemption, and that, is the Delaware and Hudson 
 Canal company. The Auburn and Syracuse has 
 twelve years ample time. The Auburn and Ro- 
 chester, fourteen or fifteen years. The Long Island 
 fifteen years. The Hudson and Berkshire, nmeieen 
 years 5 and he ventured lo predict that the name ol 
 tbat road would be hardly known it will have pas- 
 sed to the tomb of ihe capulets. If it had not begun 
 to pay its interest to the sinking fund, then the 
 only chance WHS for the State to save what little 
 it can from the iron of '.he road. He had been in 
 sight ol that road this summer, and heard that it 
 was not the design of the company to relay their 
 tracks; if they did not, he lelt it to the gentle- 
 man from Columbia to say whether there had 
 been entire fairness in this matter. We are 
 not to look at these matters as though we had 
 to regard only the rights of the stockholders 
 ot the road, we are to look at the rights ol 
 the great people, because it is their money 
 that must ultimately pay these debts. The credit 
 of the state is pledged lor the payment of every 
 dollar of it, and unless the slate realizes the 
 amount in some way, the people have to pay, and 
 not the holders ot the stock. And he did not be- 
 lieve that when the time came, and a road failed 
 to pay interest on this stock, that when the lime 
 arrived to nay the principal, they could be ex- 
 pected to do'that. When capitalists fail to pay in- 
 terest, it is time to calculate that they are in a 
 failing condition. He held th,it the more roads 
 that were sold when they failed to pay their debts. 
 the belter it was for the interest of the state and 
 all concerned. He did not believe that the sale 
 of the Ithaca and Owego road was injurious to the 
 company. The state had been admonished from 
 time to lime; that the company never expected lo 
 do any Jliinjj and that the time had gone by when 
 they could pay either interest or piincipal, and 
 the'r-late could only have the satisfaction of wait 
 ing from year to year, until what little was left to 
 the state was lost from time to tune. He hoped 
 this section would be adopted. He hoped never 
 to see the lobbies filled by the representatives of 
 these companies, urging the stale to do a wrong 
 thins to release them from their debts, and dis- 
 charge them from their liabilities. He had not 
 that entire confidence in legislation, as to money 
 matters, which the gentleman from Orleans seem 
 ed to hate he haJ seen loo much of it. In times 
 when legislation seemed to have lost common 
 sense, arid all sense of what was due to their con- 
 stituent 11 , it yielded to the importunities of thes. 
 corporations and localities, to the great injury o 
 the people of the slate; and he would put in the 
 Constitution a provision which would say to fhose 
 gentlemen, prepare to pay at the day your debt be- 
 comes due, and if not, do not expect to prevail 
 upon legislation to release you from it, and cas 
 its burden upon the people of the state. He was 
 not able to say that this debt was any portion of i 
 what theComptroller calls the contingent debt, or 
 is lost, but at all events he would put it out o 
 the power of letjislation, if it was lost, to releas( 
 them. He would have them foreclose immedi- 
 ately the rights of the state. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said there seem 
 ed to be on the part of some gentlemen in thi 
 Convention, a sort of morbid disposition to visi 
 vengeance upon associations who have obtainec 
 
 he state credit. This must have struck the 
 mind of every impartial gentleman that observed 
 he peculiar gratification the gentleman from 
 lerkimer took to himself in his rabid denuncia- 
 ions of the legislature and corporations that had 
 been before it, and also of the state works gener- 
 ally. He even went so far HS to venture to de- 
 nounce the salt tax, the steam boat tax and the 
 auction duties, in opposition to the whole senti- 
 ment of the state, and said that it was a luxury to 
 iim to give them a kick to help them along as 
 they were going down hill. He (Mr. V. S.) should 
 not stop to comment upon the luxury of this mat- 
 ter, but he would remind the Convention, that 
 when gentlemen avowed such sentiments, so di- 
 re^tly in opposition to the general sentiment and 
 action of the state, it was time to consider wheth- 
 er those gentlemen were proper counsellors, par- 
 ticularly when propositions of that character were 
 proposed to be inserted in the Constitution. But 
 he should not refer further to these matters now, 
 although he might hereafter more in detail. 
 What was the question before the Conven- 
 tion now ? Was it whether it was proper ten, fif- 
 teen or twenty years ago, to establish these roads 
 or loan the credit of the state to them ? Was it 
 worth while to discuss the point whether the le- 
 gislature at the period to which the gentleman 
 from Otsego referred, was insane or not, or 
 whether the gentleman was right, or whether the 
 legislature all wrong. Now he apprehended that 
 the gentleman might very well be right at this 
 moment, and yet not claim any superior wisdom 
 over those w'ho then acted. These gentlemen 
 are now speaking under the light of experience, 
 and what they have said only goes to show that 
 calculations made at that time, were unfounded 
 and erroneous. So in regard to all the predic- 
 tions made by the very best state officers in re- 
 gard to the canal expenses, all of them varied ve- 
 ry widely from the fact: just so ivith regard to 
 these loans to these companies. What then did 
 all this denunciation amount to ? 
 
 Mr. GHATFIELD. There is a principle in- 
 volved. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that would 
 open the discussion of another question. He 
 held that it was proper, if the State could, to 
 aid any of the works, and she ought to do it. He 
 held that all these public improvements were 
 public blessings, and therefore ought to receive 
 the aid of the State. In principle therefore he 
 differed with the gentleman from Otsego. He ad- 
 mitted that the State should not do this unless it 
 could see its way clearly, and he had no objec- 
 tions to putting all the guards in the constitution 
 on the subject that could be devised. The diffi- 
 culty had been that the State had loaned its mon- 
 ey under misrepresentations. It had acted as all 
 creditors in community were liable to do: it was 
 a fallible organization and was liable to these mis- 
 takes. He did not stand up there to advocate the 
 policy that the State shall loan its credit as it has 
 done heretofore, although he had no doubt that the 
 men who did it acted honestly, and as they sup- 
 posed wisely. It seemed to afford much gratifi- 
 cation to the gentleman from Herkimer, that the 
 Ithaca and Oswego rail road was sold, in order 
 that it might be wound up, and we might see the 
 
854 
 
 end of it, and know where it stood. As if know- 
 ledge on the subject was of great importance. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : It was. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that it 
 was, if it was important, for the state to know 
 that by a little forbearance and indulgence it 
 might have saved half of the loan instead of losing 
 nearly the whole amount. This certainly was ve- 
 ry valuable information, very gratifying to know. 
 It might have been, had we known it before the 
 road was sold. The state ought not to be placed 
 on a higher level than individuals in the state, in 
 the matter of collecting and enforcing the pay- 
 ment of debts, and we ought not to go beyond 
 that rule in making a Constitution. This 
 was a rule which no sane man could impose 
 upon himself in his private dealings. Under 
 such a rule as this, a company having a loan of 
 the State credit that might desire to expend mo- 
 ney on and improve the property mortgaged to 
 the State, could not do so the rigid enforcement 
 of payment by the day, whether the State wanted 
 its money or not, would be the only alternative. 
 He cited the case of a rail-road which last year 
 applied for leave to pay in the money borrowed, 
 and leave was refused, merely because the State 
 could make more by compelling the company to 
 hold on. So long as a company was solvent, and 
 only asked an extension from circumstances that 
 sometimes embarrassed the men of the highest 
 credit, the legislature ought to be left the discre- 
 tion to extend the time of payment, if the interest 
 of the State would not be jeoparded, and those of 
 stockholders might be promoted by it, or they 
 saved from making sacrifices. This was the sub- 
 stance of the amendment, and it could by no tor- 
 turing be made to have a tendency to encourage 
 " cormorants" or 
 public treasury. 
 
 foragers" to depredate on the 
 The whole idea of this section 
 
 was a distrust of the legislature or the Executive, 
 which for one he did not feel and there was 
 scarcely a governor of recent date, that had not 
 signed some of these bills, with the exception of 
 the present governor. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said the present Governor in- 
 troduced the bill to loan the credit of the State 
 to the Delaware and Hudson canal company. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN was aware that 
 he had advocated the doctrine denounced here 
 with all sorts of epithets, when entertained and 
 acted on by legislators as if epithet and denun- 
 ciation was to carry through this section. He 
 trusted the entire section would be struck out 
 and because it enforced that course upon the le- 
 gislature, which circumstances might make utter- 
 ly suicidal. But at all events, he hoped the 
 amendment proposed by Mr. JORDAN would pre> 
 vail. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY said that the section as report- 
 ed by the committee was uncalled for, and in his 
 judgment ought to have no place in the constitu- 
 tion. He thought, however, that if the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from Columbia (Mr. JOR- 
 DAN) should be adopted, it might not then be 
 very mischievous. He should therefore, vote for 
 the amendment, but hoped to have an opportuni- 
 ty of voting for the motion to strike out the whole 
 section, which the gentleman from Rensselaei 
 
 HOFFMAN,) asserts that this section is designed 
 to remedy abuses which past experience has 
 brought to light. To prevent the legislature 
 from extending the time, and varying the condi- 
 tions upon which certain rail roads obtained loans 
 of the credit of the state. He has given us some 
 instances of such legislation ; but he has not told 
 us how, in what manner or to what extent, the in- 
 terest of the state has suffered thereby. He has 
 not informed us how the state would have been 
 benefited by pressing these defaulting rail roads 
 to an immediate and unconditional sale. He 
 should have been able to give a reason why this 
 section would remedy the evil of which he" com- 
 plains ; but this he had utterly failed to do. The 
 gentleman from Herkimer has made no allusion 
 to the default of the Ithaca and Owego rail road 
 company, to show the necessity of this provision. 
 But a reference to the result of the sale of that ' 
 road, would fully illustrate the mischevious ten- 
 dency of this section, if it should be adopted as a 
 constitutional provision. 
 
 A law of 1838, authorized a loan of the credit 
 of the state to that company to the amount of 
 $300,000. The act provided that when proof 
 should be made to the satisfaction of the Comp- 
 troller, that $500,000 had been actually expended 
 in construction, and the road completed from Ith- 
 aca to Owego, the stock should be issued. It ap- 
 pears that the requisite proof was made to the 
 satisfaction of the then Comptroller (Mr. FLAGG,) 
 nd bonds to the amount of $287,700 were issued 
 by him in the fall of 1838. Subsequently, by 
 irtue of an act of the legislature of 1840, there 
 was a further issue of $28,000, making a sum to- 
 tal of $315,700. In case the company should 
 ail to fulfil the conditions upon which the above 
 .oan was made, the Comptroller was authorized 
 law, to advertise and sell the road to the high- 
 est bidder, or to bid it off for the state. This law 
 was not mandatory, but permissive, leaving him 
 to exercise a sound discretion in regard to the 
 sale, and so to act as to secure the best interests 
 of the state, and to re-imburse to the greatest ex- 
 tent the state treasury. 
 
 In 1841, the company failed to pay the interest 
 due on the loan, and the Comptroller decided, 
 (whether wisely or unwisely, I will not say) that 
 the interest of the state demanded the immediate 
 sale of the road, and he advertised it for sale to 
 the highest bidder, in April, 1842. 
 
 It may not be improper here to remark, as to 
 the manner in which that sale was conducted. 
 And in the history of this matter, it may be ne- 
 cessary to allude to the action of other individu- 
 als besides the comptroller. But in so doing, I 
 wish to be understood as imputing no improper 
 motive to either, and shall only make such allu- 
 sions so far as may be necessary to bring the facts 
 in the case fairly before the convention. The 
 Comptroller attended at the capitol on the day ap- 
 nnintfid and offered the road for sale. I am credi- 
 
 had intimated that he should 
 time. The chairman of the 
 
 make at a propei 
 committee (Mr 
 
 pointed and offered 
 bly informed that a number of gentlemen were 
 present for the purpose of bidding for the pur- 
 chase of the road, and I will believe until other- 
 wise informed that they were prepared to enter 
 into a competition in the purchase. Mr. Flagg 
 then informed the bidders present that he should 
 not bid a dollar for the road, on the part of the 
 state, thereby withdrawing all competition from 
 
855 
 
 that quarter. Messrs. Yates &McIntyre request- 
 ed that the sale be postponed, until they should 
 opportunity tor e ,i, und intimated 
 
 that they would become bidders on the adjourned 
 The sale was adjourned in accordance with 
 that request until the '--'(Mil of May following. I 
 believe, sir, that an arrangement was made by 
 the bidders by which the road was purchased 
 without competition which as speculators they 
 doubtless had a right to do, for it appears that 
 on the adjourned djy, Mr. iVlclntyre purchased the 
 road for the paltry sum of four thousand five hun- 
 dre.d dollais. Now, sir, here was a rail road ot 
 about thirty miles in length, upon which evidence 
 had been turmshed to the satisfaction of the Comp- 
 troller of an expenditure of $500,000 inxonstiuc- 
 tion, and upon which the credit ot the state had 
 been loaned to the amount ot $315,700, sold with- 
 out competition tor 4,500. 
 
 Sir, I have been informed that the iron alone for 
 purposes other than rail road iron, was worth ovei 
 $30,000 00; and that the tiansportation ol the iron 
 irorn tide water to Ithaca cost some $7000; neaily 
 double the amount actually obtained lor the entire 
 road. Subsequent events show that this road was 
 not considered valueless by the purchasers. At 
 the next session of the legislature following the 
 sale, the company applied for a charter under a 
 new name, with a capital of $150,000. But 
 the parties interested appeared to be unwilling at 
 that time, so soon after the purchase, to admit 
 that they had made a speculation out ol the state 
 to the amount of over $140,000, and the legisla- 
 ture not being willing to create fictitious capital 
 to that amount, the company was obliged to take 
 a charter 1> r the time being with a capital of 
 $18.000. This was the amount said really to have 
 been invested in the purchase of the road from 
 the state, and the cars and fixture? from the old 
 company. But legislation on tins subject did not 
 end here. I find by reference to the proceedings 
 of [he legislature of last winter, that this company 
 o'tt; nued an amendment to their charter, authori- 
 zing an increase of the capital to the amount ot 
 ')00. I am not aware what inducements 
 were brought to bear upon the legislature to pro. 
 cure this amendment, but suppose that it would 
 not be done without a plausible reason. I have 
 no doubt, sir, that there is real value in the road 
 I do not believe it is worth $500,000, neither 
 am I convinced that it is worth $300,000. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR. It hasrrade but one divi- 
 dend since the piuchase was made. 
 
 Mr. HAYVLEY. Will the gentleman from Ti- 
 og i it'll us what per cent that dividend was upon 
 tne capital stock, and what was the amount of 
 capital stock at the time? 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR. I cannot say. 
 Mr. HAVVLEY. I am obliged to the gentle- 
 man lor the information. He admits that there 
 has been one dividend to the stockholders since 
 the purchase, and I doubt not he is well informed 
 on the subject; tor I apprehend, if he is not per 
 '1 in this matter, .some of his con- 
 stituents art-. _ Hero has been a dividend of profit*, 
 and it cannot be denied that there is.-ome value in 
 the road. I believe, sir, that if an 
 policy had been pursue 1 in this matter if the 
 Comptroller had determined otherwise, and al- 
 lowed a succeeding legislature to have taken mea- 
 
 es lo secure in the best manner a reimbursiuent 
 of the treasury, the sacrifice need not have been 
 so great. The road i.s now valuable, and when the 
 New-York and Erie railroad :-l all be completed, 
 it.s value will be greatly enhanced. It is not ex- 
 travagant to suppose that il this lien had been 
 kept in life by wise and prudent legislation, in- 
 stead of the meagre sum of $4,500, a sum not less 
 than some hundred thousand doiluis, might have 
 been realized to the treasury. Thus to shackle 
 the power of the representatives of the people 
 over matters of this character, would be unwise, 
 and he hoped the whole section would be strick- 
 en out. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN did not know what the proof 
 was that $500,000 had been expended on the Itha- 
 ca and Owego road. But he had once the plea- 
 sure ot seeing if, and he could say that it was very ' 
 small. The rail was very light indeed, and he 
 believed that the quality was at least as bad as the 
 quantity was small. The $317,000 O f state credit, 
 should be applied ft improve the road, which was 
 then very much out of repairs. But on the best 
 enquiry he could make, he did not think that 
 there was the least reason to suppose that- a sin- 
 gle dollar derived from the sale of the Stale stocks 
 ever got into that ioad in the shape of repairs. 
 The road needed, when the loan was made, at 
 least $300,000 ot repairs, and it continued to wear 
 out. And gentlemen will see, from this statement 
 of i'acts, that the purchasers, on the usual princi- 
 ples of relief laws, would be entitled to get back 
 the money they paid for it. Some part of the 
 $317,000 was applied in getting engines and cars, 
 but these are moveables, not fixtures. But it was 
 decidtd that these fixtures were not within the 
 Slate mortgage, and the old company said to the 
 new one, if you will have these cats and engines,.,' 
 you must pay for them. And they did pay $13.,- 
 000 tor them. He had never entertained even a 
 suspicion that the interests ot the State were sa- 
 crificed by the sale of that road. He should have 
 regarded it as a misfortune, if the State had be- 
 come a bidder and purchased the road, for then it 
 would have been bound to keey and maintain 
 the road in good, sound, operative condition. 
 They would have been bound not to have 
 made $^00,000 of repairs only, but make pro- 
 vision for the relay of the road, and he be. 
 lieved that no one pretended that those ^ivho 
 had the management of the road had taken unrea- 
 sonable care to keep it in repair. It was true 
 that the comptroller did say that he should not 
 bid it in, and if he had said any thing else, he 
 would have been insane. He had no very great 
 idea of that high morality which conceals on the 
 lips the truth that is in the heart, and if the gen- 
 tleman commends it in his own practice, he (Mr, 
 II.) did not commend it in a public officer, when 
 the state imposes a duty upon him.' The gentle- 
 man from Rensselaer (VAA T SCHOONHOVKN,) 
 seemed to suppose that he (Mr. H.) had a morbid 
 feeling on the subject of these debts ; he ^Mr. H.) 
 was not aware that he had he had never done 
 any thing to create them. When the Erie en- 
 largement on some scale was proposed, not as had 
 been adopted since, among the last acts of his 
 official life here, he signed a report part of which 
 had been read by a gentleman here to-day (Mr. 
 ARCHER) and had been alluded to by others, on 
 
 
856 
 
 the subject of a ship canal from Oswego to the 
 Hudson river, as against a canal 8 feet by 80. The 
 gentleman read to the very point, and there he 
 stopped and there the gold adder lies. The ca- 
 nal board argued that these canals should be im- 
 provedso Car he read but he did not like the 
 truth that followed, for they said also, that no 
 debt should be created for any such improvement; 
 and the gentleman had the integrity in reading 
 it, to read one half, and omit the other half, and 
 because he (Mr. H.) entertained thai, opinion, the 
 gentleman supposed that he had grown rabid, and 
 run mad on the subject of the public debt. As to 
 the rail roads, the public treasury has been pretty 
 largely foraged upon by them. It is a mat- 
 ter of history : and with a rail road debt, on 
 which the state is paying the interest on a 
 principle of more than $3,000,000, he was not 
 very easily lead to believe that all of it had fallen 
 upon the treasury through the honest mistake of 
 those who made application for it. It might be 
 so there was a mere naked possibility but it 
 was entirely incredible. He believed that in too 
 many instances, at leastsome of the operators and 
 actors, cared very little whether the state would 
 ever be recompensed or not. Honest men may 
 have been deluded into it, and the possibility was 
 that if they could be brought here to speak for 
 themselves, they would say to the undertakers 
 and operators you have plundered the state, as 
 you have plundered us. Whether the legislature 
 acted honestly or dishonestly in these matters, he 
 would not be removed from his position. If they 
 are so likely to be imposed upon if three or four 
 millions of debts are to come out of these impos- 
 tures practised upon them then he desired to 
 guard the people by constitutional amendment 
 against any future imposture in the matter. If 
 they acted from improper motives, certainly even 
 the gentleman from Rensselaer would not decline 
 to tie them up if from proper motives, but under 
 mistakes, he desired to prevent a repetition of 
 them. That was what he desired. He never had 
 any objection to any of thesQ rail roads or canals. 
 That was not the difficulty. What he objected 
 to was that the state should be made debtor on a 
 credit system for constructing the works. That 
 was the ground of difference between the gentle- 
 man from Rensselaer and himself. The gentle- 
 man^ was willing to go into a debtor system, to 
 carry out these projects. He (Mr. H.) was 
 willing that all men who had means should 
 engage in any project they might judge for their 
 interest each man judging in his own case. But 
 when the question takes a form that disguises and 
 conceals from the' people that they are to be made 
 debtors and mortgaged when it takes the form of 
 a debtor then it is that he objected that the whole 
 people of the state shall be sold into bondage for 
 the sake of carrying on these projects. That was 
 the difference, the gentleman thinks that the 
 thing should be left open. He (Mr. H.) thought 
 after our fatal experience, it would be quite as 
 well to close it. He knew that localities, seeing 
 the general scramble after the public treasure, in 
 the shape of public debts, have cast themselves 
 on the treasury, and he had hardly even blamed 
 them for this, because it was almost impossible for 
 a man when he sees that he is to be charged, 
 not to endeavor to get his share of the thing 
 
 charged. The impropriety was that it should 
 be concealed from the people, that it was 
 done by a debtor system, and that it was to be a 
 charge and a mortgage upon them. And he be- 
 lieved that nothing was more unfortunate for the 
 roads themselves than to come forward and take 
 these credits, for it gave countenance to the debt- 
 or system, which did them no good but injury. 
 Where a road in point of fact offers a fair invest- 
 ment, there will be capitalists ready to take its 
 stock. When the road from Schenectady to Uti- 
 ca had its books open, was there any difficulty 
 found in getting the stock taken ? And so with 
 the other western roads. Whenever a road pro- 
 mises a fair profit to the undertakers, the money 
 is readily, raised; it is only where the success of the 
 project is doubtful that the state credit has been 
 invoked, and the state made a debtor in order to 
 give credit and countenance to the undertaking. 
 He entertained no hostility to any of these works. 
 Go on with the Erie enlargement get the means 
 and not make debts. Do not stop it up, or bur- 
 then it with tolls ! Leave it useful for navigation, 
 and not withered and blasted lor use. Go on 
 too, with the Black River canal but get the 
 means he did not object to it it was all well 
 but do not wither and blast the energies and the 
 industry of the state, by creating a debt. Go on 
 with the Genesee Valley canal he did not object 
 but put your hand on the earth's all-teeming 
 bosom, and get means for these works. Do not get 
 them with a falsehood, and it would be a falsehood 
 if it is done by a credit system, and a state debt. 
 He had no morbid sensibility about the matter 
 he should be enabled to live out his few days in 
 paying this interest. If the gentleman from Rens- 
 selaer and the Convention should agree to do iV 
 he would have to do the same. He was in the 
 same boat and would have to go along with them. 
 But the gentleman's argument or his complaint of 
 his, Mr H's denunciation against those frauds 
 and foragers on the public treasury, could not in- 
 duce him to go with them willingly. If he went 
 he must go by force he would resist. He did not 
 say that these applications were always made from 
 corrupt motives, but the state had suffered by it, 
 and now the question was, will you leave to the 
 legislature a power in relation to these debts, 
 which may reach the people in direct taxes. If 
 you think best do so, but the standing committee 
 thought otherwise, and he had heard nothing here 
 to induce them to alter their opinion. He did not 
 want these companies to come here at all. He 
 wanted them to understand, having long years be- 
 fore them to prepare for payment, that they need 
 expect no extension. He cared not for the past, 
 that was gone he desired to guard the future. 
 If they shall say, let the people be taxed, we will 
 want until the 'last day and hour, and then ask 
 for relief he desired some rule that should ope- 
 rate on them severely. This was the intention 
 of the proposition. 
 
 Mr. F. \ BACKUS moved to amend the sec- 
 tion so that it should read as follows : [The 
 amendments in italics.] 
 
 " The claims of the stat* against any incorporated com 
 pany or individuals to pay the inteicst and ledeem the prin- 
 cipal st-ck ol the state loaned or advanced to such compa- 
 
 ny or of the interest or principal on moneys loaned to such 
 individuals shall be fairly ana duly enforced, and not defer- 
 red, released or compromised, and the moneys arising from 
 
857 
 
 such claims shall he set apart and applied as part of the 
 sinUlntr fund provided in the fourth section of this article, 
 and in the case of individuals, be crtdited to the several funds 
 respectively from which the money was loaned. 
 
 \f\er some conversation between Messrs. VAN 
 SCHOONHOVEN, HOFFMAN and WORDEN, 
 as to a reply of Mr. H. to Mr. W. yesterday, 
 
 The committee rose and reported progress, and 
 the Convention adjourned until Monday morning 
 at half past. 8 o'clock. 
 
 MONDAY, (88th day) Sept. 14, 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. WELCH. 
 
 Mr. BAKER called up his resolution instruct- 
 ing all those committees that have not yet report- 
 ed to present their reports on the 16th inst. He 
 finally modified it to the 22d inst. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND proposed the following sec- 
 tion, to be offered as an additional section to the 
 article on finance : 
 
 $ . The revenues of the State shall after the first day 
 ol July, 1S47, be collected in gold and silver coin, or in 
 such cash evidences of debt as are secured by the faith o 
 the State. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN opposed any reference of this 
 proposition, as had been suggested by the gentle^ 
 man from New- York, (Mr. TOWNSEND,) yester 
 day, to the committee on finance, unless that com 
 mittee was to be allowed to present a written re 
 port upon the subject. And indeed under all the 
 circumstances of the case, he was opposed to the 
 proposition. The State had chosen to make 
 banks, and heaven knows she has made these 
 banks bad enough ; and now he had no idea tha 
 the sovereign, after choosing to make these banks 
 should turn round, and try to escape from the dis 
 agreeable necessity of taking its own currency. 
 This convuunuy should say to the State, " if yo 
 choose to make a rag currency, you shall take i 
 in payment for your own dues !" 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said that the gentlema 
 from Herkimer had evidently misunderstood th 
 full import of the proposition that he had made 
 He thought that the question of the security 
 the public revenues was immediately connecte 
 with the propositions respecting the finances o 
 the state, now being considered in the com 
 mittee of the whole. Whilst the facts were ap 
 parent from the document before us that the re 
 ception of certain kind of paper money have in 
 flicted a loss of between five and six hundre 
 thousand dollars on the part of the state, it \va 
 in vain to say that, the question of wh it medim 
 the public revenue shall be collected in, is not on 
 of the deepest importance. The adoption of th 
 policy adopted in the section proposed would ten 
 greatly to prevent a recurrence of a suspensio 
 of specie payments by our banks, an event whic 
 in 1S37, compelled the state to lose upward, s? 
 sixty thousand dollars, to make up the deficient 
 in the value of bank paper, in payments due th 
 foreign creditors for interest on the public deb 
 Under this section the warrants of the officers 
 the state and the bills of banks secured in full b 
 NewYork state stocks, and gold and silver wou 
 constitute the only medium received. He sumrc 
 ted however, that the proposition should be la 
 on the table for a day and be printed. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD thought that the propositioi 
 or a similar one, recommended by his colleagu 
 had been reported to a committee, some tim 
 
 nee. There was great importance in having a 
 vorce between the banks and the state, and col- 
 cting the revenues in gold and silver ; and when 
 ic report of the committee on currency and bank- 
 ig should come up he would move an amend- 
 ,ent to that effect. Until then he wished it to 
 e postponed. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND consented to let it lie on the 
 able for a day ; and it was ordered to be printed. 
 
 The convention then went into committee of 
 he whole on the report on the 
 
 FINANCES, CANALS, &c. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR resumed the chair. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN rose to notice a remark 
 r two that had fallen from the gentleman from 
 Herkimer. On Friday he (Mr. Hoffman) said it 
 Arould cost $1 ,000,000 to finish the Genesee valley 
 anal. Saturday he asserted that it would cost 
 >3,000,000. That the convention might know 
 low much weight such assertions were entitled 
 o, Mr. C. begged to read from a report of the ca- 
 lal commissioners in 1S44, giving the items, and 
 which were worth far more than the assertions of 
 limself or others, Mr. C. then read from that 
 eport, based upon the high contract prices of 
 L839, and yet the total cost on that basis was on- 
 y $1,414,869 81. Mr. C. should undertake to 
 show before this debate closed, that this canal 
 could be completed for less than $1,000,000, and 
 :hat when completed it would be one of the best 
 5aying canals in the state. In relation to the 
 .arge land slides, alluded to by the gentleman from 
 E-Ierkimer, Mr. C. begged to say that there were 
 no such land slides, either great or small. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said he felt the weight of the re- 
 sponsibility resting upon him most sensibly. The 
 duty I owe my constitnents, (said he) impels me 
 to exert the feeble faculties I possess, to avert the 
 frightful danger that threatens them. With them, 
 sir, this is a question of life and death ; it is a 
 question upon the issue of which their dearest 
 hopes are suspended; if the proposition offered by 
 the gentleman from Herkimer is engrafted into 
 the Constitution, their hopes will wither and die. 
 None but those who suffer the miseries we endure, 
 can realize them or fully sympathise with us. 
 We have often implored relief from the legisla- 
 ture we have represented our grievances and our 
 afflictions to that body but owing to the unfa- 
 vorable state of the finances, we have found no re- 
 lief. We have cherished the hope that with the 
 return of prosperity, the wisdom and justice of the 
 legislature Would promptly and frankly grant the 
 relief we desire The proposition before us, and 
 which we are now considering, is designed to tie 
 up the hands of the legislature, and deprive it of 
 the power to grant relief. It seems to me that 
 there is no existing necessity for the rigid rule and 
 iron rigor that is proposed to be adopted. The 
 entire debt of the state according to the documents 
 furnished us by I he Comptroller, is $22,254,083 78. 
 It is represented by the gentleman from Herkimer 
 (Mr. HOFFMAN) "to be $23,401,668 It appears 
 by the Comptroller's report, that on the first day 
 of June las', there were funds in his hands appli- 
 cable to the payment of the debt to the amount of 
 $1,291,514 17. I arrived at the amount of the 
 public debt by deducting the contingent debt, as 
 is called, from the gross sum of all the debts and 
 liabilities of the state, as stated in table A. in the 
 82 
 
858 
 
 Comptroller's report to this Convention of the 
 7th of July last. The gentleman from Herkimer 
 took the amount from another table in the same 
 document, but I understand him, that he made no 
 allowance for the sum of $1,291,514, which the 
 Comptroller reported as funds on hand, applica- 
 ble to the payment of the debt. 
 
 The contingent debt of the state is $1,713,000. 
 This debt arose from the loan of the credit of the 
 state for the benefit of the Delaware and Hudson 
 canal, and for certain rail-road companies, all of 
 which continue to pay the interest on the loans, 
 and I am informed that the companies are all 
 sound and solvent with one or two exceptions. 
 The gentleman from Herkimer asserts that the 
 state will lose $300,000 by the anticipated failure 
 of some of those companies, which assertion is 
 disputed by other gentlemen. For myself I can 
 say nothing 1 of their solvency or insolvency, hav- 
 ing no knowledge on the subject. The difference 
 between myself and the gentleman in regard to 
 the amount of the debt is not very essential. Call 
 it $227500,000 or 23,000,000 or 23,400,000, and 
 the difference is so small that we need have no 
 bickering about it. The interest on the debt, as 
 I have calculated it, is $1,223,974 60 annually. 
 This interest we must pay as it falls due. It is 
 true and beyond all doubt that this is a serious 
 concern. It is not to be wondered at, that the 
 people should hesitate to incur further indebted- 
 ness with such an amount of debt already con- 
 tracted staring them in the face ; but, sir, when 
 you compare the debt with the resources and 
 ability of the State to pay it, it dwindles down and 
 is stripped of its alarming features. Sir, I am not 
 the friend of a public debt or of a rotten funding 
 system, as the gentleman from Herkimer is pleas- 
 ed to style our present financial condition. I was 
 never the friend of unnecessary taxation. I al- 
 ways abhored it, knowing that taxes, direct or 
 indirect, with their leaden weight, always find 
 their way to, and settle down upon the hand of 
 labor. When we take into consideration our con- 
 dition as it really and naturally is, I would en- 
 quire what necessity exists for conjuring up im- 
 a'inary bankruptcy, and holding oyt frightful bug- 
 bears and hydras, in regard to the State debt ? 
 Sir, it can be paid with ease and without a resort 
 to taxation, i am aware that it is a bad thing to 
 to be in debt, and the fact that the State owes 
 over $22,000,000, does not, in my humble opin- 
 ion, justify any man in enlarging and magnifying 
 it, and frightening people out of their wits about 
 it. My friend from Herkimer has been many 
 long years brooding over the dark side of this 
 picture ; he has been employed in calculating and 
 compounding interest, and footing up millions ; 
 he has wandered so long among the mysteries of 
 the Comptroller's reports, he has lost his balance, 
 frightened himself, and now comes here to frighten 
 others. Every thing appears dark and sombre to 
 him. 
 
 Sir, a few days ago, when we were considering 
 the question whether we would first take up the 
 judiciary or finance report,the gentleman came out 
 with a solemn speech, fitted to a funeral; he told 
 us that this subject of finance would not be ex- 
 citing ; that it would elicit feelings of a far difier- 
 entcast; that we should come to this discussion 
 with heartfelt grief; that we should sit down to 
 
 it in sorrow, and that the direful condition of the 
 state would, fill our hearts with a solemn gloom. 
 Sir, so sad were the views he presented and so 
 loleful was his tone, that I almost expected to 
 hear him move a resolution that the Convention 
 set apart a day for humiliation, fasting and prayer. 
 His strong aversion to being in debt, and his dis- 
 like of those who run into debt and do not pay, 
 has given him the spleen against all indebtedness, 
 and led his judgment astray. Sir, I desire to in- 
 vite the attention of the house to that side of the 
 picture which the gentleman from Herkimer has 
 kept out of view. Who are we ? We are now 
 nearly or quite three millions of people ; we in- 
 habit a state unparalleled in resources ; we have 
 a healthy climate, a productive soil, and our lo- 
 cation and facilities for trade, commerce and man- 
 ufactures is not surpassed by any region on the 
 globe ; who, if he owned the state of NewYork, 
 would exchange it for the best other territory 
 double in extent that could be selected on this 
 continent ? Sir, there are no two other states in 
 this Union, possessing the intrinsic value that be- 
 longs to this state. A document laid upon our ta- 
 bles, from the Comptroller's office, informs us of 
 the value of the public property of the State. It 
 consists of your canals, your state house, your state 
 halls, your public grounds, your lunatic asylums, 
 your state prisons, your arsenals, your ordnance., 
 your arms and munitions of war, and your salt * 
 springs of the aggregate value of $54,340,481. 
 In addition to all this, sir, public buildings and 
 edifices abound throughout the state. Your court 
 houses, your jails, your churches, your colleges, 
 your Academies and common school houses are 
 worth millions more. You have a common school 
 fund and literature fund, which, together, exceed 
 two and a half millions of dollars ; and canals that 
 yield an annual revenue of $2,700,000. This pro- 
 perty, except the canal revenues, I know cannot 
 be disposed of to pay the debt, but I mention it to 
 show that it is in existence, and that we are not 
 liable to be taxed for such things. It shows a 
 flourishing and most flattering state of prosperity. 
 The private property of the individual citizens 
 and corporations in the state is assessed at $605,- 
 640,095. This vast sum falls far short of the re- 
 al value of private property in the state. Our 
 condition may be likened to that of a man having 
 a s:ood improved farm, well stocked with good 
 buildings, well furnished, worth $10,000, himself 
 in tie vigor of manhood, enjoying perfect health, 
 and in debt about $200. This being our condi- 
 tion, what cause have we for alarm ? Instead of 
 mourning, we ought to rejoice; instead of fasting 
 we ought to give thanks, Thus situated, ought we 
 to refuse to complete our unfinished works ? The 
 question is, whether we are so poor, so pauper- 
 ized and ground down with poverty, that we can 
 not safely set apart $4,000,000 or' $5,000,000 of 
 the canal revenues to complete those works, and 
 give relief to the complaining and suffering thou- 
 sands whose condition so loudly demands it? My 
 friend from Herkimer has sounded his note of 
 alarm, and says there is no certainty that the tolls 
 will hold out to pay the public debt ; that com- 
 merce may be diverted from the canals, and we 
 may be obliged to resort to direct taxation to pay 
 the debt? tax and terror is the burden of his ar- 
 gument. His argument was not addressed to the 
 
859 
 
 whole man; it went only in search of cold-heart- 
 : ozen avarice. The better and more liberal 
 feelings of the. human heart were not addressed 
 by it; they were frightened into the non-per- 
 formance of their functions, by the terrors which 
 accompanied his appeal to avarice. 
 
 I will no; accuse my friend ol intentionally put- 
 ting forth an argument designed to deceive. I 
 know him too well to believe that his honest 
 heart would have any share in such an undertak- 
 ing. I know thai avarice will lie, will cheat, will 
 steal, will plunder, rob and murder, and 1 will 
 not be so unkind or so unjust as to charge him 
 with intentionally invoking that infernal "passion 
 alone to his aid. I have long, intimately and fa- 
 vorably, known my friend from Herkimei; I know 
 his worth, and I love him ; but when he yields to 
 a strange delusion and goes counter to what ap- 
 prars to me to be right, I cannot go with him. 
 When he tells us that the lolls upon the canals, 
 after a few years, will diminish, and that there is 
 such fearful danger of their falling below the sum 
 necessary to pay the public debt, can I believe 
 him ? When he tells us that there is danger that 
 insolvent Pennsylvania will construct canals and 
 steal away our ttade on the south, and that the 
 Welland canal, the St. Lawrence and the Ogdens- 
 faurgb railroad will steal it away on the north, can 
 I believe that ? When I am told that the western 
 states will find other avenues to market, which 
 they will piefer to our canals, shall I believe 
 that? The commerce of the upper lakes runs 
 as naturally into the Erie canal, as the Mo- 
 hawk river runs into the Hudson ; and it would 
 be as difficult to divert the commerce of the ca. 
 nal, as it would be to turn the Mohawk into some 
 other channel. Sir, in proportion as the fertile 
 lands of the west are brought under cultivation, 
 in that same proportion will the commerce of our 
 canals increase. Tf e progress cf settlement in 
 the western states is astonishingly rapid ; emigrants 
 are pouring into them by thousands daily. By a 
 letter written from Germany, and published in the 
 Washington Union, it appears that over 200,000 
 persons will emigrate from Europe to the United 
 Slates this year; that many of them are wealthy, 
 and will bring large fortunes with them. These 
 emigrants will pilch their homes in the west. An- 
 other account, taken from a Milwaukie paper, 
 states that over 1,500 passengers arrive in the 
 steamboats from the east at that place daily ; that 
 most of them are entrants, seeking homes in 
 Wisconsin. With these evidences before me, how 
 can I join with the gentleman from Herkimer in 
 his belief? 
 
 This report, sir, takes from the canal revenues 
 yearly $2,672,500. It fixes a fund of $1,500,000 
 to siuk the canal debt; a fund of $500,000 to sink 
 the general fund debt, and applies $172,070 to 
 the support of goverment. The sum to be taken 
 from the tolls varies but little from the nett mon- 
 ey from tolls for this year ; so that under the pro- 
 visions of this report, it is certain that there is 
 nothing to enable the work to be started next 
 year. If the tolls should increase $100,000 or 
 even $200,000 next year ,what would that increase 
 perform of the work necessarv to complete the 
 canals? Sir, it seems to me idle to talk of per- 
 forming this great work with the mere increase 
 of toll:*. I will reler my friend from Herkimer to 
 
 a case in point, which he will undoubtedly ac- 
 knowledge as good authority, for I have often 
 heard him approve of ir. He will recollect that 
 in the spring of 1845, the legislature passed an act 
 appropriating $197,000 to the public works, which 
 was sent to the Governor for his approval, and it 
 came back vetoed, with the Governor's reasons for 
 the veto. If my recollection serves me rightly, 
 one ot the reasons assigned by the Governor was 
 that the sura was too small to be of any practical 
 benefit to the work. I do not pretend to quote 
 the Governor's language literallv, but the substance 
 of it was that the whole would be swallowed up 
 in engineering, and there would be nothing left to 
 pay for the other labor. This proposition ol the 
 gentleman in effect suspends the execution of the 
 public works until after the payment ol the pub- 
 lic debt, or nearly so ; and this too upon princi- 
 ples which he has hitherto acknowledged to be 
 correct. There seems to me to be a manliest in. 
 consistency and unfairness upon the face of the 
 proposition. Whilst it excites expectations and 
 hopes that the works will be resumed at no dis- 
 tant day, it reaches so lar into the tieasury as to 
 defeat those hopes and expectations. It would be 
 far more in accordance with fair plain dealing, to 
 unveil the design, and come out openly, and de- 
 clare in express terms, that the further prosecu- 
 tion of the public works shall be suspended uniil 
 the state debt is paid and extinguished. I had 
 rather vote for such a proposition than the one 
 under consideration. The people would then 
 know what to depend on, and they would be re- 
 lieved from the tantalizing hopes and disappoint- 
 ments with which they have so long been har- 
 rassed. 
 
 Sir, before the public works could be completed 
 upon the plan the gentleman from Herkimer pro- 
 poses, one half the me i now alive would be dead. 
 The injustice of the proposition is too palpable to 
 be denied ; the privations and hardships of the 
 people in the south-western counties are to be 
 continued for long years, and perhaps made per- 
 petual, under a pretended fear that at some future 
 day a half mill or a mill tax may fall upon the 
 property of the people of the state. It is obvious 
 to every intelligent mind that will take t^.e trouble 
 to look into the matter, that the unfinished works 
 may be completed out of the canal revenues, with- 
 out the slightest danger of a compulsory resort lo 
 taxation. I put the question to this committee, 
 will you sit and look coldlv on and see the people 
 of Ailegany and Cattaraugus pine in suffering and 
 poverty, when they can be relieved without a call 
 Iipon your pockets? Will you, for fear that, by 
 some possibility you may be called upon at some 
 unknown period to disgorge a sixpence or a shil- 
 ling out of your abundance, tarnish the honor and 
 violate the faith of this great state, with her ten 
 hundred millions of wealth, by backing out of a 
 work of the greatest public utility, which she 
 stands pledged to execute, and which she has more 
 than halt completed? Will you bring such a stain 
 upon her character, and leave a halt finished, di- 
 lapidated canal to remain as a monument of her 
 folly and parsimony, to bescolr'ed at by future gen- 
 erations, and will you do all of this through an un- 
 founded fear of a little contemptible contingent 
 lax? Sir, the sum of $672,500 proposed by this 
 report to be perpetually paid by the canals into 
 
860 
 
 the general fund, is the interest of $13,451,167 74, 
 which the Comptroller claims to be due irom the 
 canal fund to the general fund. This interest, if 
 this report is adopted, will be payable for all time 
 to come, by the canals to the general fund. I am 
 willing that the canals should fully reimburse the 
 general fund for every dollar, with interest, which 
 the general fund has ever advanced for the benefit 
 of the canals ; but I deny that the canal fund owes 
 anything like $13,451,167 to the general fund. 
 The claim to the extent insisted on is unjust and 
 unfounded. 
 
 Sir, my frief.d from Herkimer admits what is 
 just and right in principle, that is, that the canals 
 should only be taxed with their cost of construc- 
 tion, superintendence and repairs, and that they 
 should in no wise be taxed for the support of gov- 
 ernment. This principle being admitted, we have 
 only to look at the accounts between the two funds, 
 strike the balance, calculate the interest, and thus 
 liquidate the sum which the canals fairly and hon- 
 estly owe to the general fund. These accounts, 
 as stated to us by the Comptroller, stand as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 The Canal Fund Dr. to the General Fund. 
 
 To salt dunes $2,056,458 06 
 
 To auction duties, 8,59-2,039 05 
 
 To steamboat tax, 73,50999 
 
 Tolandsales, 103755 18 
 
 To deficits ot lateral canals, 1,386,498 88 
 
 To direct tax of 1842, 280,553 74 
 
 Making a total of 
 
 Canal Fund Gr. by cash,"- 
 
 7,491,824 74 
 2,137,602 73 
 
 Balance, 5,354,222 01 
 
 Upon this balance the Comptroller compounds 
 the interest and swells the debt due from the ca- 
 nals to the general fund to the sum of $13,451,167. 
 The interest of this latter sum, at 5 pel cent., is a 
 little over the sum of $672,500, which this report 
 requires shall be forever paid by the canals to the 
 general fund. From these statements it will be 
 perceived upon what this perpetual annuity of 
 $672,500, to be paid by the canals to the general 
 fund, is based. The claim set up for the general 
 fund against the canal fund is more than twice as 
 large as it should be. The salt duties tiom 1803 
 to 1845 inclusive, should be charged to the gene- 
 ral fund, as properly belonging to the canal fund. 
 The steamboat tax belonged to the canal fund ; and 
 the general fund, in the charge for land sales 
 against the canals, has included about $40,000, 
 which were the avails of the sale of lands which 
 were given to the canal fund to encourage the con- 
 struction of the canals. 
 
 I insist that these three items, that is, the salt 
 dudes, the steamboat tax and $40,000 of the land 
 sales, properly and rightfully belong to the canal 
 fund, and that the general fund has no claim what- 
 ever upon the canals tor them. Ttus is the his 
 tory ot the salt duties: In 1803 the legislature 
 passed an act levying a duty ot 3 cents per bushel 
 on all salt manufactured at the Onondaga springs. 
 This duty was laid with a view to a revenue barely 
 sufficient to indemnity the state against the expen- 
 ses it should incur in the inspection of the salt 
 a id regulation of the works. The duty was con- 
 tinued down to 1817, during which time small in- 
 cidental surplusses accrued, which were paid into 
 the state treasury. These surplusses, in thp ag- 
 gregate, amounted to something over $40,000. 
 
 Down to 1817, H never entered into the imagination 
 of any person that the salt was taxed for the 
 purpose of raising a revenue for the state. A tax 
 for that purpose would not have been tolerated for 
 an instant. The palpable and glaring injustice of 
 such a partial tax would have produced a bloody 
 revolution. A tax upon an indispensable neces- 
 sary of life, and that falling upon less than one- 
 half of the state, and upon the less wealthy part of 
 it, could not have been sustained, The people in 
 the eastern part of the state were wholly exempt 
 from it, and it was entirely paid by the "people of 
 the western part. None of the salt scarcely came 
 east of the central part of the state before the con- 
 struction of the Erie canal , and but little has passed 
 to the eastern part of the state since the canal wa 
 constructed. 
 
 As an evidence that but a very trifling amount 
 of Onondaga salt ever found its way to tide water, 
 1 will refer gentlemen to a document on our tables 
 from the Comptroller's office, by which it appears 
 that within the last three years, a large sum has 
 been paid out of the treasury in theshapejif boun- 
 ties to encourage the transportation of salt on the 
 canal from Onondaga to tide water. The tax on 
 the salt has been almost exclusively paid by the 
 western people. In 1817 it became necessary to 
 provide funds for the construction of the Erie ca- 
 nal. The canal then as now had its deadly ene- 
 mies, and its friends were obliged to make the best 
 shifts they could to get on with it. Among other 
 expedients resorted to, the salt duty was increased 
 by law to twelve and a half cents on the bushel; 
 this increased duty was imposed expressly for the 
 benefit of the canal, and unequal and burthensome 
 as it was upon the western people, they consented 
 to it for the sake of opening a way to the market 
 for their produce. Had they been told and made 
 to believe that this onerous and unequal tax was 
 intended for the benefit of the general fund, was 
 to be claimed by it and was to be a perpetual tax 
 upon them and their children, for the support of 
 government forever, they would have laid down 
 their lives before they would have submitted to it- 
 No, sir, the general fund has no more right in 
 pqui'y to the avails of the salt tax than the state 
 has to levy a tax sufficient to defray one half of the 
 expenses of government upon your single county. 
 The avails of that tax, as I have said, is the 
 rightful property of the canal fund. The steam- 
 boat tax, I am informed, was likewise levied for 
 the exclusive benefit of the canal. 1 have been 
 told by a gentleman lately a member of the legis- 
 lature, that the owners of the steamboats them- 
 selves petitioned for the imposition of this tax, and 
 that he had within a very few years, seen the pe- 
 titions on the files of the assembly ; that the grounds 
 on which they desired the tax was to benefit and 
 hasten the completion of the canal, which, when 
 done, would augment the travel upon the river to 
 an exfent that would more than indemnify the 
 boat owners arid the public for whatever taxes 
 they might pay under the law imposing them. I 
 have looked for that petition, but have been una- 
 able to find it. Now, sir, by what authority the 
 claim of the general fund to these taxes has been 
 instituted, I do not know; there has been no leg- 
 islative action on the subject, and I am at a loss 
 where the power, out of the legislature, exists to 
 transfer these taxes from the fund to which they 
 
861 
 
 rightfully belont;ed, to a fund having no founda- 
 tion of a claim to them ? It has been clone, sir, by 
 the one man power in the Comptroller's otiioe. 1 
 will not use the harsh and grating epithets that 
 my friend from Herkirner has used in respect to 
 other transactions; I will not call this unauthori- 
 zed transfer, robbery, theft, pilfering, plundering 
 or foraging the treasury, but I will give it its 
 rightful name; it is downright injustice and rank 
 usurpation. Does the gentleman suppose that the 
 people of the western part of the state are so stu- 
 pid, so void of understanding, and of respect for 
 their right.-, that they will sanction a principle 
 like that contained in this attempt to enslave them 
 to the eastern part of the state? Does he think 
 that this hocus pocus way of getting up a debt 
 and saddling it upon them for all time to come, 
 will go down with them without a manly struggle 
 to resist it ? 
 
 The entire amount of salt duties received by the 
 general fund and charged by it to the canal fund, 
 is $3,18-2,205 39. The steamboat tax is $73,509 
 99, which, added to the $40,000 improperly 
 charged for land sales, makes up a total of $3,295, 
 713 38 This sum, deducted from the balance of 
 principal claimed by the general fund, $'5,354,222 
 Ul, leaves a balance still in favor of the general 
 lund of $2,059,506 38. This sum, with the inter- 
 est upon the several advances from time to time, 
 as they were made, would, in rriy opinion, consti- 
 tute the true sum due from the canal fund to the 
 general fund. The heavy advances have been but 
 recently made. I have no data by which I can 
 calculate the interest, but from the best judgment 
 that I have been able to form, the most riaid com- 
 pound lule of interest would not increase the 
 debt to much v ver four millions of dollars ; it might 
 raise it some higher, but could not possibly raise 
 it to six. 1 aver, sir, that the principle I have laid 
 down in respect to the salt tax, the steamboat tax, 
 and the $40,000 of land sales, is correct, and would 
 be sustained in a court of equity. I wotild wil. 
 lingly go to the trial of the question before the 
 chancellor ; or, if possible, I would willingly sub. 
 mit it to the chancery of heaven, nothing doubting 
 but my position would be sustained. The gentle, 
 man has said that Gov. Clinton, in 1817, pledged 
 his word that, the salt and auction duties should lie 
 restored to the general fund, and that the cana 
 board, in J843, had given a direction to that effect. 
 The auction duties properly belong to the genera 
 fund, and it is right and proper that they should 
 be restored: but Governor Clinton or the cana 
 board had no right to make this unceremonious 
 disposition of the constitutional rights of nearly 
 halt of the people of this stale, in respect to salt 
 duties. 
 
 A different power from that which either of 
 them possessed was necessary to give validity to 
 such a promise or direction. The consent of the 
 people themselves was necessary, which consent 
 they have not given, never would give, or wil 
 give. My friend from Herkirner has had much to 
 say about good faith. [ desire to see good faith 
 every where observed. In good faith we ou;ht to 
 retard the fights of ever) part of the stale as equal, 
 and we should act accordingly. We should pro 
 ceed to our work in honesty and sincerity. I de- 
 sire to know how the general fund has accom- 
 plished so much as is claimed for it ? I have heard 
 
 nuch about the general fund being swallowed up 
 nd absoibed by the canals. I believed there was 
 
 something in the assertion until I came here and 
 ooked into it. It was Ihe argument we used to 
 
 make against the canal in old limes. I was a buck- 
 ail and a young man. 1 heard my seniors talk it 
 
 over, and took it for true, as most young men take 
 hings. Since I came here, I have taken pains to 
 
 go to the records, and search tins fund out. I oe- 
 an with the year 1817, at the time the public 
 
 works were commenced. I find a statement of the 
 
 whole fund in the Comptroller's report of that 
 
 year. It consisted of the following items : 
 
 Debt due from Bank of the State,- 
 
 Three per cent U. S. stock, 
 
 608 shares Bank of America, 
 
 100 
 100 
 600 
 300 
 1000 
 2000 
 2000 
 1000 
 2000 
 1000 
 
 :ne amount 01 ine 
 ',905,335, which 
 ic general i'wul, 
 lount of the fund 
 
 New-York, 
 
 Albany, 
 
 Farmers, 
 
 N. V.stiitu, 
 
 Manhattan, 
 
 Mechanics' & Farmers'. 
 
 Middle District, 
 
 Newburgh, 
 
 Troy. 
 
 Lansingburgh, 
 
 Balance on loan of 1786, 
 
 do 1792, 
 
 do 1808, 
 
 Loan to Niagara sufferers and others, 
 
 Bonds and mortgages for land sold, 
 
 250 shares Inland Lock Navigation Co 
 
 500 do Seneca do do 
 
 Bond of Mayor, Aldermen, &c. of N. York,- 
 
 Total, $4,470,169 80 
 
 In addition to which, the .state owned about 
 780,000 acres of land, the value of which is not 
 stated. The same report gives the amount of the 
 state debt at that period at " 
 deducted from the amount of the 
 leaves $1,575,504 80, as the amount of 
 over the debt of the state. This million and a 
 half and the 780,<JOO acres of land constituted the 
 entire fund in 1817 ; considerable of the fund 
 was unavailable ; the stock in the lock naviga- 
 tion companies was good for nothing. The Mid- 
 dle District bank failed, and that stock was lost, 
 arid large donations were made from time to time 
 to the school fund of lands, loans, &c., which 
 were taken from the general fund. The Comp- 
 troller reports to us that since 1817, there has 
 been paid out of the treasury and for special ap- 
 propriations, the sum of $15,931,700 41. No 
 part of this vast sum was paid for the benefit of 
 the canals, and still this magical little fund of 
 less than a million and a half, in 1817, has con- 
 trived to pay out for the support of the govern- 
 ment, &c., the enormous sum of $15,931,706 41, 
 and bring the canals in debt to the amount of 
 #13,451,167 74 ; making a total of $29,382,874,- 
 15. The facts and figures show this state of 
 things in regard to the general fund. I have en- 
 deavored to ascertain from what sources the gen- 
 eral fund has been replenished since 1817, to en- 
 able it to disgorge so freely. A resolution some 
 time ago was sent to the Comptroller, from this 
 Convention, requiring him to report to us where 
 the general fund got all this money to pay out. 
 I am informed that his reply to the resolution 
 was sent in a day or tw r o ago, and that it is in the 
 hands of the printer. I have not seen it, and 
 very much regret that I arn deprived of the bene- 
 fit of it on this occasion. 
 
862 
 
 In searching for the accounts of moneys paid 
 into the treasury since 1817, I find that the sum 
 of about $1,399,390 83 was collected from the 
 half-mill tax which expired in 1S2G ; that $1,- 
 706,238 05 was collected under the tax law of 
 1M2 ; that $115,503 47 was collected under the 
 law of 1844, imposing the one-tenth of a mill 
 tax ; that .$'2,508,346 24 was received into the 
 treasury from salt and auction duties since 1836. 
 There are some other receipts which I have not 
 been able to ascertain, but their amount cannot 
 be large, say they might amount to $2,000,000, 
 and this I think is a very liberal allowance, and 
 these receipts all put together amount to $8,731,- 
 479 64 ; and out of this sura the general fund 
 has paid in cold cash for the support of govern- 
 ment, &c., the sum of $15,931,706 41, and has 
 got the canal in debt to it $13,451,167 74. Now 
 sir, this seerns strange to me ; I cannot under- 
 stand it ; I impute no blame to any one about this 
 matter, but. I really want to know the manner of 
 doing the thing. When a thing presents itself to 
 me and stands up before me in the light this 
 matter does, am I not justified in making the in- 
 quiry, how it can be so ? 
 
 Sir, if the committee will indulge me for a few- 
 moments, I will say a few words in regard to the 
 Genesee Valley canal. This work has been made 
 odious by false and vindictive representations. Its 
 enemies have lacked principle as well as informa- 
 tion on the subject of it. They have acted as people 
 sometimes act who have a great spleen against a 
 particular dog ; they go into the street and cry 'mad 
 dog.' Every thing that ignorance combined with 
 impudence and vindictive feeling could invent, 
 has been said and done to disparage that work in 
 
 * -gislature. Its friends have been charged with 
 fraud and corruption in getting tne law passed for 
 its construction and in getting appropriations to 
 construct it ; the country where.it is located has 
 been ridiculed and efforts have been made to dis- 
 grace it and its inhabitants. One miserable driv- 
 eller has gone into calculations and pretended to 
 show that it would be cheaper for the state to 
 hire teams to do all the carrying for that region 
 than to complete the canal. Sir, I do not desire 
 to be censorious, but when I see what ought to be 
 senatorial dignity, turned into low, sneaking, ly- 
 ing species of pettifogging, I cannot refrain from 
 rebuking its perpetrator. I will now, sir, in my 
 poor way, endeavor to give you a true description 
 of that persecuted region. I regret my want of 
 graphic power to do it justice. The Genesee 
 Valley canal commences at Rochester, and termi- 
 nates at Olean, with a branch terminating at 
 Dansville. The distance from Rochester to Mt. 
 Morris is thirty-seven miles, and from Mount 
 Morris to Dansville fifteen miles ; the distance 
 from Mount i\l orris to Olean is sixty-six and a 
 half miles, making in all, one hundred eighteen 
 and a half miles. From Rochester to Dansville 
 the canal is completed, and is doing as good a 
 business as any of the lateral canals. From Mt 
 Morris to Olean, it is unfinished. The state has 
 expended over three and a half millions of dol- 
 lars upon the work, and the estimates show that 
 it will require about $1,300,000 to complete the 
 unfinished part. This estimate is based upon the 
 high prices at which the work was let in the 
 years 1838 9. I have no skill in engineering 
 
 but I believe that the cost of the work to finish 
 he canal, will fall far below the estimate. Gen- 
 lemen who are acquainted with the state of the 
 infu)ished part of the canal, and who are good 
 udges, inform me that it will not cost over a 
 million. 
 
 The canal from Mount Morris to Belfast, in 
 Allegany county, is located in the valley of the 
 Genesee river, and from Belfast to Olean it is lo- 
 cated in the valleys of Black creek and Oil creek. 
 There are no better lands in this state than those 
 forming the entire margin of the canal ; the sur- 
 rounding country has every where a good and 
 fertile soil. The unfinished canal and the deso- 
 lation along its borders present a mournful ap- 
 pearance that beggars description ; you will there 
 find mounds of earth grown over with grass, locks 
 partly finished, piles and acres of stone, decaying 
 timbers and plank prepared for finishing the 
 work ; you will find farms cut in two, the roads 
 every where obstructed and in places rendered 
 almost impassable ; there, sir, you will see the 
 deserted shantees of the workmen, the forsaken 
 homes of the injured victims of a cruel disap- 
 pointment, and you will see those who continue 
 to reside there brooding over their hard fate ; and 
 you would hear from them the anxious inquiry, 
 an hundred times a day, is the Convention going 
 to prevent the finishing of the canal ? This, sir, 
 is but a faint description of what exists along the 
 line of the unfinished part of the Genesee Valley 
 Canal. Sir, I believ'e that canal would yield a 
 handsome revenue to the state and would much 
 more than pay the interest of the siim it would 
 cost to finish it and keep it in repair. There 
 would be no lack of business on it. Allegany, 
 Cattaraugus and the northern counties of Penn- 
 sylvania, afford the greatest quantity of pine tim- 
 ber, of the best quality that can be found upon 
 an equal extent in the United States. There is 
 oak timber enough to supply the demand for 
 staves and ship building for many years. Were 
 the canal completed, it would extend the naviga- 
 tion to the junction of Potato creek, with the 
 Allegany river, a point not twenty miles distant 
 from the richest beds of iron ore and stone coal 
 in the state of Pennsylvania. These are articles 
 that are used. Coal is now hauled by teams from 
 the beds near Smithport to Nunda, a distance of 
 eighty or ninety miles. It is preferred to any 
 coal that can be procured by way of the canal. 
 Perhaps I may be considered as visionary, when 
 I say that I believe it would be but a very few 
 years if the canal were finished, before the navi- 
 gation of the Allegany river would be improved 
 so that steamboats would pass from Olean to 
 Pittsburg. Could that river be improved and 
 unite its navigation with the Erie canal, through 
 the valley of the Genesee, it would afford a line 
 of communication but little inferior, if any, to 
 that from Rochester to Buffalo. In 1837, seven 
 years after the veto of General Jackson on the 
 Mayville road bill, a survey was made by order 
 of Congress, of the Allegany river from Potato 
 creek, twenty miles above Olean to Pittsburg. 
 The survey was made by G. W. Hughes, Civil 
 Engineer for the government of the United States. 
 It resulted in a report from him that the naviga- 
 tion of the river could be improved so as to ad- 
 mit steamboats of over a hundred tons, to run 
 
863 
 
 from Pittsburg to the mouth of Potato creek, 
 0,000. The Genesee Valley ca- 
 nal should not be abandoned. It was one of the 
 venues of communication that w:is often 
 -.rnestly recommended by that great in;m 
 masterly mind and carried out 
 
 ..struction of the Krie canal. 
 However much the (Iniesee Valley canal may 
 be disparaged by our little fry of small lights, it 
 can boast of the friendship and patronage of the 
 lament I'd Clinton. If the proposition we are 
 considering is carried, it will operate as an ex- 
 tinguisher of our hope ; and we, poor outcasts of 
 ..any and Cattaraugus, must pine away our 
 
 in poverty and obscurity. We have paid 
 our share of the taxes to build a splendid $:!(>(),- 
 OIID palace for your state officers ; we have also 
 paid our share of the taxes to embellish and adorn 
 your public grounds ; to make^your geological 
 survey ; and to build your lunatic asylums, &c. 
 When taxes are wanted we are sure to be remem- 
 bered ; the tax gatherer is as sure to find his way 
 to our humble cabins as he is to find his way to 
 the lordly mansions of the cities and more favor- 
 ed portions of the state. Would it not be good 
 policy for you to make our canal and improve our 
 condition, so that we may be able to lessen your 
 burthen of taxation, by contributing more large- 
 ly ourselves to the taxes that may be required ? 
 In lieu of this, we are told that the revenues of 
 the state must be seized while they can be got 
 hold of, and used up instantly in the payment of 
 the state debt, and that our hopeles condition is 
 past relief. Well, sir, I suppose we must grin 
 and bear it. Nearly every other part of the state 
 
 .en most bountifully provided for, and I find 
 that modern morality teaches men that when 
 their own ends are answered the rest of mankind 
 may take care of themselves. Now, sir, I will 
 turn my attention to the proposition I had the 
 honor to submit to the Convention some days ago, 
 and compare it with that of the gentleman from 
 Herkimer. I propose, in the first place, to abolish 
 the distinction between the general fund, and canal 
 fund and get rid of the perplexities and financial 
 mysteries that have given us so much trouble. 
 I want to see business done in a plain w r ay, so that 
 we can all understand it without laborious study. 
 If my faculties were as acute as those oi 
 gentlemen, I might enjoy the same facility they 
 do in being able to dive by intuition to the bot- 
 tom of what appear to rne to be deep and dark 
 
 ones. Sir, I am told that the very simple 
 :ier in which our financial accounts are kept, 
 
 ! lutes the very reason that prevents me from 
 understanding them. Perhaps this may be the 
 case ; for I have no exalted opinion of rny capa- 
 city ; it has failed me so often that I have great 
 
 .1 to distrust it ; but notwithstanding the ex- 
 callent simplicity which attends the keeping oi 
 those accounts, 1 desire to see that simplicity sim- 
 plified. I propose to set apart a sinking fund of 
 ', which, will pay the interest and re- 
 duce the principal of the state debt in tv. 
 seven years and sixteen days ; I have had the 
 calculation carefully made by able experts, and 1 
 can with conlid that the sum byrnepro- 
 
 i, will extinguish the entire debt, as I un- 
 derstand the debt, in the time I have mentioned. 
 Should this proposition be adopted, it secures the 
 
 payment of the debt, without the least danger of 
 a resort to taxation. The canal revenues now up 
 ti nearly three millions will never fall below s'l ,- 
 10; and tax need not be dreaded. That word 
 TAX seems to have a peculiar charm for my friend 
 from Herkimer ; he is able to make such ud- 
 iniraMe use of it, he ought to like it; it would 
 spoil his trade if the word was struck out of the 
 language ; it is his battering ram to storrn canals 
 and the most glorious bait to catch the votes of 
 the miserly and avaricious, that could be inven t- 
 ed. With a sinking fund of $1,600,000, we 
 should have a respectable sum to begin the com- 
 pletion of the public works with ; they could be 
 resumed next year ; the increasing revenues 
 would enable us to expend a million a year upon 
 them by Is H), and the" Erie canal could be im- 
 proved and Genesee aud Black river canals com- 
 pleted within six years or seven at the farthest. A 
 gentleman asks me, how are we to get on with 
 the support of the government if you appropriate 
 all your surplus tolls to the completion of the 
 works ? The half-mill tax will be continued ; 
 every gentleman that I have conversed with in 
 this Convention has said that he was willing that 
 tax should be continued until the works were 
 finished ; but all unite in objecting to an addi- 
 tional tax ; there will be no necessity for -an addi- 
 tional tax to support government. I will refer 
 gentlemen to the Comptroller's report on that 
 subject ; he says the annual wants of the govern- 
 ment are as follows : 
 
 For ordinary expenses of government, 
 
 Interest on railroad and treasury debts, 
 
 For special appropriations, 
 
 $687,321 76 
 
 The salt and auction duties, he says, are esti- 
 mated at ' $150,000 00 
 
 Which leaves $537,321 76 
 
 Now, the debts are to be assumed by the canals, 
 and the treasury will be relieved from the payment 
 of $237, 321 76 for interest on (he rail road and 
 treasury debt ; deducting this there will remain 
 but $300,000. The half mill tax and other per- 
 quisites of the treasury will considerably overrun 
 (lie $300,000, so that gentlemen may see that the 
 support 01 government is iully and tairiy provided 
 fur. Tbe gentleman from Herkimer insists that 
 the Comptroller's estimates in tins respect aix en- 
 tirely too low; that support of government will 
 call for a sum exceeding his estimate, but I will 
 ask you, sir, whoever knew our Compi roller to err 
 on that side of the question; the sum is amply 
 sufficient. The expenses ol government maybe 
 cheapened; it is not necessary to pay a $3000 sala- 
 ry to get a good judge ; experience shows it unne- 
 cessary ; you may put a judge-ship with a $1500 
 salary in the market, and the best lawyers we 
 have would scramble for the prize ; we have seen 
 it done and know it so to be. Mr,l have not said 
 ill I could wish t,,siy on i his subject, but (he state 
 of my health admonishes me to- proceed no further 
 at present- 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. JORDAN, and there were ayes 27 
 nays 27, not it quorum. 
 
 The Clerk then counted the House and report- 
 ed 63 members a quorum to be iu attendance. 
 
864 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN had desired to say nothing 
 further on this subject, but the aspect of the vote 
 just taken compelled him to call the attention to 
 this question. The state has authorized the lo- 
 cation of a road by the side of the Hudson and 
 Berkshire rail-road, that has lead beyond a doubt 
 to an application for relief in this matter. The 
 Long Island road has got $100,000 of this money, 
 which it can now pay very well, but if the state 
 shall authorize a parallel road on the main, that 
 will compete with its business, thai road will 
 have an apology for doing as some of these roads 
 have heretofore done, apply for relief. The state 
 has, by a bounty of some &3,000,000,authorized the 
 construction of the New-York and Erie rail-road 
 almost to a point where it reaches the Delaware 
 and Hudson canal, and which beyond a doubt will 
 be connected with the coal beds of Pennsylvania. 
 That canal, which derives its tolls from the trans- 
 portation of coal, will thereby be furnishd with 
 strong ivasons to say to the state, by your bounty an 
 injurious rival to us has been created,and therefore 
 we ought not to pay you. It appeared to him that 
 the rail-road from Syracuse to Auburn, which has 
 received $5200,000 ; with the Auburn and Roches- 
 ter which has received $200,000 also, can 
 verv well pay. But it" a railroad from Syracuse 
 to Rochester by the canal valley, witnout the eleva- 
 tions and depressions that belong to the southern 
 route, shall, as was asked last winler, be authoriz- 
 ed, (of wnich he hardly entertained a doubi,)that 
 too may be made an apology for asking, not only 
 an extension of the time for the payment ot this 
 $400,000, but, oeihaps, become a sort of equity 
 for general relief against the debt. What he said 
 upon this subject, he would very willingly have 
 avoided to say. He had felt a strong desire that 
 this section should be made strong arid definite 
 that the railroads should pay whatever they can 
 that early notice, long belore the money became 
 due, should be given them to prepare for the day 
 of payment. But it it was believed that a more 
 indulgent rule should be given to them, it was not 
 in his part and duty strongly to object to, after 
 having stated clearly its results. These roads did 
 not stand toward the State in the ordinary relation 
 of debtor and creditor. When the State loans 
 money lor the sake of gain, it should, like every 
 other h ndc-r, treat its debtor with the utmost li- 
 berality. But when the State, without the possi- 
 bility of gain, has unfortunately advanced its credit, 
 where it can make no profit, it should be treated 
 as honest men treat their endorsers who expect 
 nothing for the loan of their ciedit, arid the strict- 
 est rule, should be applied. But if it was the 
 pleasure of the Contention that a more lax rule 
 should be applied, he had nothing further to say 
 Mr. JORDAN said that his proposition was riot 
 conditional. It left it in the power of the legis 
 lature to release nothing whatever, but simply to 
 compromise or extend, as is most consistent with 
 the inierest of the state, not of the rail roads. He 
 did not know but what the better j.olicy of the 
 state was to sacrifice all these concerns because 
 if sold, they undoubtedly will be both to the state 
 and the individuals, many of whom had invested 
 large sums in them-if they failed to pay every 
 cent due on the very day it was due; but he did 
 insist that his proposition did not ask the release 
 of a single dollar of the interest and capital of 
 
 these debts. He only desired that the state au- 
 horities should have the power of compromising, 
 where the best interests should dictate that is 
 where it can secure $20,000, for instance, by a 
 little delay, instead of going on with an iron hand, 
 a miser's grasp, and a Shylock art, and getting 
 only one cent. That was all he asked. The case 
 of the Long Island rail road, as was put by .the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, was a fair illustration 
 of the harshness with which such a rule as this 
 might operate, and of the policy of leaving it to 
 the legislature to defer payment, or otherwise re- 
 lax the terms, as the interest of the state might 
 seem to require, in case the road, uader the 
 effect ot a rival road, might find itself obliged 
 to ask for it. He thought some little considera- 
 tion was due to the individuals who had invested 
 in these operations. He did not look upon 
 these roads as mere private matters, they were all 
 for the benefit of the public in a very extensive 
 sense. They all act as facilities for travel and 
 commerce, and thus enlarge and liberalize public 
 feeling and sentiment. Under the old turnpike 
 system many excellent roads were made through- 
 out the state, and which, although all the stock 
 and capital on the part of the individuals, had 
 gone into non-entity, and was annihilated, were 
 yet of immense benefit to the public. So may it 
 be with these rail roads, when the stockholders 
 and the capital which furnished them are gone, if 
 kept running they may benefit the state to a large 
 amount. At all events he did not think it was so 
 culpable in a man's investing his capital in a 
 rail road for public use, that he should be yielded 
 up to the Shylock vengeance of a system like this. 
 Give him time to live through it, in God's name, 
 if he can for it is enough to kill him off when 
 he cannot pay. He repeated, that no sane man, 
 as an individual who had debts due him, would 
 treat his debtor in that way without reference 
 to compassion for the debtor, but to his own in- 
 terests if he found they were to be promoted by 
 an extension of the debt. He would be insane if 
 he did not. All he asked in this amendment is 
 that whenever a debt is from any of these institu- 
 tions to the state, not to release it, but to compro- 
 mise it, to take a part of it if they could not pay 
 the whole, and the interests of the state would be 
 promoted by it. It was leaning backward, it was 
 jumping too decidedly from one extreme to anoth- 
 er after the liberal course that had been hereto- 
 fore pursued, to say that, without regard to the 
 state interests, as a mere matter of financial 
 policy that the very moment the debt is due, 
 you will put in the knife, if they do not 
 pay. We are a people quite too much prone 
 to extremes, and when any statesman how- 
 ever eminent his talents, particular his views, or 
 honest his purpose mounts a hobby, that pursues 
 an extreme so sudden, so vast, so contrary to all 
 former policy, and those that govern the transac- 
 tions between man and man, and when the inte- 
 rests of the state were in question , we should pause 
 and reflect. Mr. T. concluded by urging that this 
 matter should be left to legislation to the pre- 
 vailing temper and circumstances of the times 
 when the application is made in short to trust 
 posterity with themselves. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that in his opinion it was 
 better to strike out the fifth section altogether, 
 
865 
 
 than to adopt the amendment. He would prefer 
 to leave it entirely to the discretion of future le- 
 gislatures, than to put in the constitution what 
 Will be considered by them, and claimed by the 
 companies as a constitutional recommendation to 
 compromise the claims of the state upon them. 
 As he should vote against the amendment and for 
 the section however, he desired to repel the 
 j,o of shylockism, which the gentleman had 
 so liberally bestowed upon all who favored this 
 section. It was not a very pleasant matter to 
 stand up in such a position, and he hoped the gen- 
 tleman would allow him to escape from it, 
 
 Mr. JORDAN: I'll let you off, sir. 
 
 Mr. STETSON WM very glad to hear it. In 
 going over the list of these roads he found that, 
 with the exception of the Hudson and Berkshire, 
 which became due in 1858, most of the loans did 
 not become due until some twenty years. And 
 it appeared from the statements of the gentleman 
 from Columbia that the Hudson and Berkshire 
 road was making arrangements to pay within the 
 time specified. He tells us this and yet desires 
 an amendment which shall seem to recommend to 
 the legislature that if desired by the company this 
 debt shall be put off or compromised. It was im- 
 possible to do entirely as individuals would do, 
 in a matter where the state was a party. An in- 
 dividual supervised his own affairs and conduc- 
 ted his own business. But the business of every 
 body was not so well taken care of. The state 
 was a corporation, constantly changing its popu- 
 lation and its intention, and it was impossible 
 therefore to provide for the future payment of 
 money without some decided, strong and absolute 
 provision in advance for them. To do that was 
 the duty of thi-> convention. Adopt the amend- 
 ment, and could any business man doubt that 
 when the time arrived, if they were not prepared 
 to pay, they would point to that provision as evi- 
 dence that indulgence was intended to be granted 
 to them. The State must provide for this matter 
 before hand. The second section of the second 
 report of this committee provides against any fu- 
 ture loaning of the credit of the state for any pur- 
 pose whatever. And from what he had heard 
 from gentlemen of both parties in relation to that 
 section there was a unanimous expression in its 
 favor. This being so, it is an admission that 
 these loans, at the time they were made, were im- 
 politic and unwise. Therefore he thought we were 
 called upon to use all due diligence to see that 
 these debts were collected in. It was a question 
 involving taxation, for the more of these companies 
 that failed to pay, the more of this contingent debt 
 falls upon the state. It was one way of endanger- 
 ing or postponing the completion of the unfinish- 
 ed lateral canals, and of preventing attention being 
 paid to the applications from other parts of the 
 state. The part of the state he represented had 
 long ago made application for a canal, and after 
 for a railroad. It was promised them repeat- 
 edly under executive recommendation. But 
 those promises had never been fulfilled, the 
 policy had been abandoned, and the road was 
 now being built by private subscription. 
 Here then is the principle established that it is 
 unwise to give further aid to these companies, 
 thus cutting his constituents off entirely, at the 
 same time that it is proposed to give additional 
 
 aid to these other companies by compromising 
 and deferring their indebtedness. These rail- 
 roads were now wearing out, and if they could 
 not now keep up their sinking funds for the pay- 
 ment of this debt, when it became due, they never 
 would be prepared to pay it, and like the in 
 stances of the Ithaca and Oswego, the Catskill 
 and Canajoharie, enlarge the debt and add addi- 
 tional burthens to the tax-paying portion of the 
 state. These views should induce him to sustain 
 this section whether he should be classified 
 among the Shylocks or misers, or not. All say 
 that this state debt must be paid, and yet who 
 proposes to make provision for it ? Where is the 
 man who comes forward and says that when the 
 time comes the money will be paid and we shall 
 be in a situation to pay it ? He knew the person- 
 al unpopularity of such a course, but somebody 
 had got to break his neck upon the question, by 
 taking this money from the scramble of localities. 
 What had been would be again, and he thought he 
 perceived an evidence of this now. In 1842, how 
 different was the feeling. Not a voice was then 
 raised to express the sentiments which seem to 
 meet no little approbation now. The state was 
 then in peril, and the men trembled and looked 
 pale, who had been concerned in bringing this 
 great state to a condition almost of insolvency 
 We had done a little better since four years had 
 gone by and our finances have improved and 
 there are some who now come out and say we are 
 just now in a condition to begin that career again. 
 It was his opinion that if it was begun again, the 
 machine thus put in motion, could not be con- 
 trolled. No, there was no middle course about 
 this matter we must apply to it the doctrines of 
 the temperance party touch not, taste not. On 
 the other hand, by the exercise of a very little pa- 
 tience, and in a very brief time, a few short years, 
 the state will be in a condition to resume its pro- 
 gress, and to use the surplus revenues of the ca- 
 nals. We shall be without debt, and the state 
 will, as he desired to see it, occupy the highest 
 and proudest position in the Union, or that of any 
 sovereign people in the known universe. We 
 shall be out of debt, paying as we go, with abun- 
 dant revenues and no liability to taxation. For 
 he could give his assent to no dabbling policy of 
 shoving off a $100,000 a year under the pretence 
 of prosecuting the public works. Let us pay our 
 debts, and then we shall have ample means for the 
 purpose. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN further explained and advocated 
 his proposition. He denied that it held out an in- 
 vitation to the legislature to compromise, or ex- 
 tend or release, any portion of these claims. He 
 supposed the case of this H. & B. road, which 
 was earning its $15,000 a year, and paying its in H 
 terest regularly, being by flood or fire or other ac- 
 cident compelled to expend $100,000 in repairs 
 that by extending this loan, it might be able to 
 raise the means of making repairs, resuming ope 
 rations, and ultimately paying the state its debt ! 
 His amendment would permit this. The section 
 as it stood, would compel the comptroller to sell 
 it at auction, for a mere pittance, for nobody would 
 pay it, and thus lose nearly all the debt, which a 
 little indulgence would have saved. The policy 
 of this section he had characterized as a shylock 
 policy, and such it was, whatever might or might 
 
 83 
 
866 
 
 not attach to its advocates. There was no way 
 of accounting for this tenacity in favor of this sec- 
 tion, as it stood. There was an idol set up here 
 to be worshipped an idea that we must sweep 
 every thing oft' and begin anew killing off all the 
 faults of former legislatures by one death stab. 
 The debt must be paid up at once, though your 
 public works perished, and your great canal was 
 dried up. He would go with gemlemen to pro- 
 vide a fund for the extinguishment of this debt 
 gradually, and to prevent the legislature from go- 
 ing on with further improvements until the means 
 should be provided ; but he would not go with 
 them to stop the works already begun and on which 
 millions had been expended, permitting them to 
 perish, rather than extend a few years the final 
 extinguishment of the state debt. But he would 
 assent to no course which should look like repu- 
 diation or for the postponement of a dollar beyond 
 the time, unless by the consent and choice of the 
 public creditors. 
 
 Mr. Si'ETSON insisted that the fact of provid- 
 ing for such a contingency as a compromise ot 
 these debts in the Constitution, was in reality and 
 effect an inducement and an invitation to these 
 companies to produce that contingency. They, 
 at least, would consider it so. The gentleman 
 had followed his (Mr. S's.) example, and gone 
 beyond the mere question at issue, and shown 
 what would be an acceptable policy to him in re- 
 spect to tile payment of the State debt. He had 
 the firmest conviction that not a dollar less than 
 $1,500.000 would be set apart as a sinking fund, 
 to pay oft this debt, and he had the fullest confi- 
 dence that it would have a majority of the votes 
 heie. He agreed with the gentleman that it was 
 desirable to" enlaige the Erie canal, and to do 
 something for the others as soon as it might be 
 done wisely and safely, but that this sinking fund 
 would be established to the amount of $1,500,000, 
 he had no doubt at all. He was not goin$ back 
 to relate to the Convention what took place in 
 1842, all were aware of that. We know what 
 Happened then, our constituents know, and we 
 know what pledges were then given. We also 
 know whai pledge was superadded, and explana- 
 tory of those of 1842, in 1844. It was that this 
 debt should br paid in twenty-two and a hall 
 years. There was none here except those per- 
 haps, who brought the State into the condition in 
 which it was in 1S42, who would deny that, ex- 
 cept, perh.-ips.it might be the gentleman from 
 Wayne, (Mr. WORDEN,) who leads off the oppo- 
 sition to thi report. As yet. he was the only one 
 who had done it although he expected to hear 
 others. Even he did not distinctly say that 
 this debt should not be paid according to the 
 act of '42. But there was the sentiment of the 
 people and of the press in ravor of it. The ques- 
 tion' here, then, was rneiely one of computation, 
 and he was a^surtd by the committee that the sum 
 of $1,500,000 was the smallest which would pay 
 off the canal debt, within the time specified in the 
 act of '42, ;>9 explained by the act of '44. If this 
 was so, tin should doubt the fidelity of gentlemen 
 to the public sentiment to the pledges contained 
 in those acts if they should go for a le-s sum for 
 this sinking fund. If party politics had ceased 
 here, as said by some, then all are democrats 
 and he asked where was the democrat who would 
 
 violate the duty he owes to the people, and his. 
 fidelity to his principle, that will violate those 
 pieties in the act ot '42, and recognized and ex- 
 plained in the act of '44? He expected, there- 
 fore, to see no one here advocating a less amount 
 for a sinking fond than would nay the debt in 22 
 years. As he said belore, it was a mere question 
 of computation, and if gentlemen would show 
 that the committee have placed the sum too high, 
 and that the debts can be paid within that time r 
 by a less sum, then he would go wrth them. But 
 until that was done, he should stand here, though 
 alone, steadily and throughout, to sustain the re- 
 port. And he believed that every democrat, at 
 least, would do the same. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said he should be content 
 to leave it to the legislature to enforce the pay- 
 ment of these debts when they fell due, instead 
 of saying now, twenty years in advance, that un- 
 less they were paid by the day, the companies 
 owing them should be crushed. As to compro- 
 mising these, there were two ways of doing this 
 one was to get all you could, if you could not 
 get the whole ; and the other to tell these corpo- 
 rations that if they did not pay by the day, they 
 should be sold under the hammer, and that the 
 state would not be a competitor, and that persons 
 who desired to bid had only to combine together 
 and take the road at their own price. That was- 
 a kind of compromise that he would prevent if he 
 thought it necessary to instruct the legislature on 
 the subject. But he was opposed to the whole 
 section. He believed the legislature thought, 
 when they made thesejoans, that the security 
 was ample. The loan to the Troy and Schenec- 
 tady, for instance, was not only secured by a 
 mortgage of the road, but by the bonds of the city 
 of Troy. 
 
 Mr. STETSON did not doubt the security, 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought the gentleman did, 
 
 Mr. STETSON said expressly that he did not. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said he inferred as much 
 from what the gentleman said of the refusal of 
 the legislature to grant a bounty to the gentle- 
 man's constituents for building the northern rail- 
 road as if the one project was deserving of more 
 consideration than the other. But be this as it 
 might, the gentleman's constituents had got a 
 prison instead of a railroad, and it remained to be 
 seen which was the better investment the rail- 
 road or the state prison bounty. But the gentle- 
 man had thrown all the blame of these loans up- 
 on one party, and as he thought very unjustly. So 
 in regard to his imputations in reference to the 
 creation of state debt. If this was a sin, the gen- 
 tleman himself was not free from the taint. He 
 voted for the Black River canal. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : It is true Jhat I did unfortu- 
 nately vote for the Black River canal, but it was 
 on information then received. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : I wish to throw out no 
 imputation on the gentleman for that vote. No 
 doubt when he voted for that canal he thought it 
 was all right, but he ought not throw out impu- 
 tations against others. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : I plead guilty of voting for 
 that canal, the only one I ever voted for. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : I can only recollect that 
 that canal run in the gentleman's neighborhood. 
 
867 
 
 Ii it had run in the other direction perhaps he 
 Would have voted against it. 
 
 Mr. STETSON: It does not run within 150 
 miles of me. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON intended to make no charge 
 against any body. Here was a debt incurred, and 
 whether properly or improperly, it must be paid ; 
 but whether on that particular day or on this,was 
 a matter of minor importance, so it was paid. 
 Ho went on to argue further against the adoption 
 of an iron rule here, which would compel the sale 
 of these roads, and the sacrifice of the interests of 
 the state and of the stockholders, if the loans were 
 not paid by that day. He preferred leaving it 
 to the legislature to say, when the exigency should 
 arise, what would be best for the interests of the 
 state. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND preferred the amendment to 
 the second section as it stood ; but he believed it 
 would be as well to strike out the whole section. 
 He did not like the idea of advertising these rail- 
 roads, so long in advancejthat they need not pay 
 up punctually; nor would be bind the legislature 
 to enforce payment rigidly, without regard to con- 
 sequences. Better say nothing about it. 
 
 The committee here rose, and the Convention 
 took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 There were only 1-9 members present at the 
 usual hour of meeting half past 3 o'clock, 
 
 A long delay took place as to whether the Con- 
 vention had better adjourn or not. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH moved to adjourn, and called 
 the a>es and noe^ thereon, in order losee who was 
 in attendan 
 
 They were ordered, and resulted thus ayes 8, 
 noes 50. No quorum. 
 
 Alter waiting until past 4 o'clock, a quorum was 
 attained. 
 
 The Convention then again went into commit- 
 tee of the whole on the leport on 
 
 THE FINANCES. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR resumed the chair. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN addressed the 
 committee at length in opposition to the fifth sec- 
 tion of the report. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND continued the debate in re- 
 plv to some of the positions of Mr. V. S. and Mr. 
 VAN SCHOONHOVEN replied. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. JORDAN was negatived, 
 31 to 39. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. F. F. BACKUS, offered 
 on Saturday, applying the section to individuals 
 as well as corporations, now coming up, 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS said he had offered this 
 amendment, not because he intended to vote for 
 the section if amended, but because he could not 
 consent to extend to these companies a partial 
 rule. No fault had been found with these com- 
 panies, and. yet they were selected out of the 
 whole class of debtors, and were to be subjected 
 to this iron rule. Several millions of dollars were 
 owing the state by individuals, and why should 
 they be exempted ? .These companies had, it is 
 true, been found in bad company, but they had 
 always been found faithfully fulfilling their own 
 obligations. One of them the Delaware and 
 Hudson canal company was itself a model for 
 
 the state in the management of its financial con- 
 cerns. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to strike out the whole 
 section. It seemed to him most unwise to fix any 
 rule on this subject, which could not be modified 
 by circumstances that might arise. It appeared to 
 him that some in this Convention were disposed 
 to act, as if all wisdom, present and to come, was 
 contained in this Convention. He had no doubt 
 that men would be found in future legislatures full 
 as wise as we are ourselves, and he would leave 
 them free to act as the best interests of the state 
 at the time might dictate. He examined the ope- 
 ration of the section, and showed its folly if ap- 
 plied to the ordinary transactions of business. 
 What man of ordinary prudence, who had loaned 
 his money on the security of landed estate, would 
 be so foolish as to foreclose his mortgage, and sell 
 the farm at half its cost, when it would bring its 
 full value six months afterwards ? Adopt this sec- 
 tion, and it would be an inducement for knaves to 
 get control of these companies, retuse to pay the 
 interest and then the Comptroller would sell out 
 the road, and this same combination being on hand 
 to buy it for a mere song. He would have no iron 
 rule on the subject. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said when the enemies of the 
 section propose to amend, it was time to look af- 
 ter it. These corporations and corporate pro- 
 perty seemed to have been held as something sa- 
 cred. The artificial man that the Legislature 
 made had been constantly regarded and treated 
 on a different principle from the natural man that 
 God made. He had hoped that we had got over 
 this partiality for the creature. But the state had 
 not loaned its credit to these corporations for 
 gain. The state gained nothing by it. The gain 
 was to be all on one side. The state, according 
 to the promises made when the loans were ask- 
 ed for, was to lose nothing by the operation, and 
 the advantage, if any, was all on the side of the 
 road. Not so in the case of loans between indi- 
 viduals there both parties were the gainers, 
 and a different rule should be applied to them. 
 But here debts to the amount of nearly four 
 millions had been saddled on the people by the 
 bankruptcy of the concerns that represented the 
 security as ample. But again, we weie making 
 provision here for the payment of this debt 
 which had been saddled on the treasury, and for 
 the contingent debt which might fall upon it. 
 And if we were obliged to make provision for the 
 payment of this contingent debt, he held that it 
 was perfectly right, and that it could not be re- 
 garded as Shylockism to say to these companies, 
 you have got our credit, we have got to pay, and 
 we give you notice to go on like honest men and 
 prepare to meet it by the day. He said that in 
 regard to the Erie railroad, which was not finish- 
 ed, he had no objection to allow that company 
 time to complete its road but all the rest being 
 finished and in operation, lie would retain the 
 rule in regard to them. He warned the Conven- 
 tion that unless they made provision to coerce 
 payment by these companies, whilst provision 
 was made for paying their debts, not half of it 
 would ever be paid. But the matter being now 
 fully understood, the Convention would deal with 
 it as they chose. He hoped, however, the sec- 
 tion would be retained. 
 
868 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said he had advanced no argu- 
 ment in favor of releasing, deferring or compro- 
 mising any debt due from these corporations. He 
 only contended that this should be left to future 
 legislation that by putting a fixed, iron rule in 
 the constitution, you might work injury to the 
 state itself. He believed the interests of the state 
 might be trusted to its representatives in the 
 halls of legislation. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL : Does not the gentleman so- 
 lemnly believe, that unless this is fixed in the 
 constitution, all the companies will come here 
 tnd get released ? 
 
 Mr. MARVIN replied in the negative. Had 
 he entertained such a sentiment, he would not 
 avow it. If he was a member of the legislature 
 and one of these companies should come there 
 and ask for an improper release of its obligations, 
 he would stand up and oppose it. He only claim- 
 .ed that this should be left to the representatives 
 of the people. We had always had a legislature 
 we always were to have one, and when the day 
 should come that they were not to be trusted with 
 the interests of the people, he should cease to 
 take any interest in the affairs of the state. Mr. 
 M. did not pretend to say but what the legislature 
 had acted unwisely at some time. All of us had 
 erred at some time. But all this might be trust- 
 ed to the corrective hand of the people. The 
 gentleman from Herkimer had given an illustra- 
 tion in his own argument. He had told us that 
 in 1842 the state was on the verge of bankruptcy 
 on account of extravagant expenditures on the 
 canals. Mr. M. would not admit that this was so. 
 But allowing the premises of the gentleman, still 
 was not there found a Hercules on this floor, who 
 was able to call those around him who had the 
 ability and who did stop these expenditures short 
 off? Mr. M. was- not saying whether the law of 
 that year wag wise or not ? It might have been 
 good enough for a short time, and as such, might 
 have been approved by the people. But that the 
 people had endorsed theviews of certain gentlemen 
 here, that the state of New- York shall be put into 
 swaddling clothes, and lully-by-badied to sleep 
 for all time to come that the energies of this 
 great people are to be prostrated, and the state 
 put to sleep in the lap of Delilah, and her locks 
 and strength shorn off. He apprehended that 
 this could not be done, though you might by com- 
 pounding interest ibur times a year, placing your 
 debt at the highest point to begin with. These 
 great works of internal improvement would be pro- 
 secuted to completion, not in the short time ori- 
 ginally intended, but in due time, they would be 
 completed, do what we would. The people of 
 this state never would be content to see works on 
 which so much had been expended, go to ruin for 
 want of comparatively small expenditure that 
 would be required to do it, and to save the state 
 from reproach of having begun what it had not 
 the energy or enterprise to finish. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS in reply to Mr. HOFFMAN, 
 said he could see no distinction between the two 
 classes of debts. All these loans to the compa- 
 nies had been made in pursuance of special acts 
 of the legislature. The state took into conside- 
 ration the benefits tolbe derived from these works, 
 and received its gain in that way. What he ob- 
 jected to, was that these companies, which had 
 
 done nothing wrong, should be selected out and 
 publicly branded in advance as probable default- 
 ers. He would not like to have a friend, who had 
 loaned him a sum of money, proclaim in the pub- 
 lic newspapers, that the moment the debt was due 
 it should be enforced immediately. And yet we 
 proposed to do that and even worse ; for the con- 
 stitution was more public than a newspaper. He 
 objected to this principle, but if it was applied 
 to one class of debtors, he contended it should be 
 extended to all. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN continued the debate in reply. 
 
 The committee then rose and reported and the 
 Convention adjourned till 81-2 o'clock to-mor- 
 row morning. 
 
 TUESDAY, (89th day) Sept. 15. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. WELCH. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS moved his amendment to 
 the 5th section of the report on the Finances. 
 
 This was published on Saturday. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM should vote against this amend- 
 ment and probably against all amendments. He 
 had come to the conclusion that it should be left 
 to the friends of the section to perfect it. He ap- 
 prehended this section belonged legitimately to- 
 the report, and was calculated to effect the prin- 
 cipal object of the report itself. If an amendment 
 should be moved as indicated by the author of the 
 report, to except from this section, the largest 
 and worst of these debts, he (Mr. B.) should vote 
 against it. He wanted the report to stand as a 
 whole. He considered it all to be wrong. After 
 the State had expended millions of dollars in the 
 public works, he could not see the propriety of 
 abandoning all idea of their completion. He did 
 not feel so much anxiety about the speedy en- 
 largement of the Erie canal, for that work run- 
 ning as it did through the most populous parts of 
 the State, could at any time command the neces- 
 sary influence to ensure any improvement that 
 the experience of the future should prove to be 
 necessary or wise; but not so as to the two unfin- 
 ished canals. He was not prepared to say that 
 after at least three-fourths of the necessary ex- 
 penditure had been made, it was wisdom or eco- 
 nomy to withhold the comparatively small sum 
 required for their completion. Hopes and ex- 
 pectations had been created among the citizens- 
 of the sections of the State particularly interested 
 in these works, which it was now intended to 
 blast forever. He remembered too well the feel- 
 ings of the people of Onondaga and the counties 
 west of it, while the Erie canal was in an unfin- 
 ished condition, not to sympathise with the anxie- 
 ties of those similarly situated with respect to the 
 present unfinished canals. 
 
 He was not prepared to say after both the great 
 political parties had united in spending so large 
 a proportion of the means necessary for their 
 completion, that it was right or just for this body 
 to undertake to take the power away from the 
 Legislature and the people of expending the small 
 amounts necessary to complete and make them 
 useful. Regarding the attempts to prevent for- 
 ever the completion of these works upon which 
 so much had been expended as not only unwise, 
 unjust, and unfeeling, he should vote against the 
 proposed amendment, although he could see little 
 difference between the [debts of individuals and 
 
869 
 
 the liabilities referred to in the section, and per- 
 haps against all others upon the ground that he 
 did not desire to increase the chance of adopting 
 the article to which this section belongs. 
 
 Air. PARISH said: Residing as 1 do, Mr. Chair- 
 man, in that section of'tne State through which 
 the route or the Black River canal passes, and rep- 
 resenting a county bordering upon, and interested 
 in the completion of that work, it is tny intention 
 in rising to address the committee at this time, to 
 confine myself, principally, in the few remarks 
 which 1 purpose to make, to that part of the re. 
 port now before us, which relates, if relation it 
 may be supposed to have, to the Black River canal. 
 It is now more than twenty years since the first 
 legislative action, in regard to this work, was had 
 on the part of the State. As early as eighteen hun- 
 dred and twenty-five, the legislature passed an act 
 by which it was made " the duty ot the canal com- 
 missioners to cause examinations, surveys and esti- 
 mates, to be made of the most eligible routes for 
 navigable communications" in certain places there- 
 in enumerated; among which, one was " from the 
 Erie canal in the county of Herkimer, to the upper 
 waters of Black river, thence on the most eligible 
 route to the river St. Lawrence, at or near Otjdens- 
 burgh ;" another was " from the Erie canal near 
 the village ol Rome, in the county of Oneida, by 
 the way of Black river, to Ogdensburgh:" Provi- 
 sion was also made by the same act for a survey ol 
 a like route and fora like purpose " from Roches- 
 ter to the Allegany river at Olean, through the 
 valley of the Genesee river," being, as I suppose 
 the present line of the Genesee Valley canal. Al 
 though the legislature authoiized a survey of two 
 routes from t:u Erie canal to Ogdensburgh, yet it 
 did not contemplate the actual construction of a 
 navigable communication on mote than one ol 
 them. The two routes were rival and antagonis- 
 tic, and were so understood to be. Each had its 
 friends and advocates. Tnere was a time it was 
 after the passage of that act and before it was set- 
 tled which of the two routes was to be preferred 
 when a Black River canal found favor even in 
 the county of Herkimer, and had the benefit of the 
 talents, the counsel and the influence of the hon- 
 orable gentleman, who as chairman of committee 
 No. 3, reported me article now under conside- 
 ration. 
 
 Air. HOFFMA^J. The gentleman is entirely 
 mistaken. 
 
 Mr. PARISH. Did not the gentleman, at the 
 time to which I reter, give his attendance at a 
 meeting held in the county of Lewis, in favor of a 
 BUck River canal ? 
 
 iVlr. HOFFMAN. Yes, I was at the meeting 
 but I must not be understood as being in lavor o 
 the canal. 
 
 Mr. PARISH. That was a meeting of the friend, 
 of the canal, and the gentleman being present, 
 supposed as a matter of course, that he was to be 
 numbered with its friends. Herkimer was tiiei 
 an interested party; the question of prelerence 
 between the two routes being still pending and un 
 determined. 
 
 In due season an engineer was employed am 
 sent on to examine the country through which th 
 respective routes would lead, and it soon becam 
 apparent on a cursory examination, lhatacana 
 oil the Herkimer route would be much more ex 
 
 ensive than one connecting wiih the Erie canal 
 t Rome, and so much so, as to render it altogether 
 nexpedient to construct one on that route Pre- 
 eience being thus given to the Rome route, Her- 
 imer from that time withdrew from the contest, 
 nd instead of lending a helping hand to the work, 
 as thrown the weight oi her influence against it. 
 But times and circumstances change and men some- 
 imes change with them. 
 
 Applications continued to be made in behalf pf 
 his work until IS36, when a law was passed au- 
 horizing the construction of the Black river canal 
 nd Erie canal feeder. It received a triumphant 
 ote in both branches of the legislature. The vote 
 n the assembly being eighty-two in its favor to 
 eighteen against it, and in the senate, seventeen in 
 is favor to ten against it. The design of the act 
 vas to provide for opening a navigable cornmuni- 
 :ation from the Eiie canal at Rnne to Carthage in 
 he county of JehYrson, and also to furnish a sup- 
 )ly ot water for the Erie canal, in its enlarged 
 condition, on the long summit level extending east 
 and west of Rome. 
 
 The canal extends from Rome in a northerly di- 
 rection to the foot of the High Falls in the county 
 of Lewis, a distance of thirty-five miles, where it 
 connects with the still waters of Black river. From 
 that point to Carthage, a distance of 42 1 2 rules, 
 he river is navigable for steamboats, but would 
 require some improvement There is a navigable 
 eeder, ten miles in length, from the Black river 
 to the summit level at Boonville, in the county of 
 Oneida, making together eighty-seven and a half 
 miles. There are also some six or eight miles of 
 additional river navigation, part at the head of the 
 eeder, and pait on Beaver river, which connects 
 with the navigable waters of Black river, making 
 in all about ninety-five miles of navigation. 
 
 Under the law authorizing its construction, the 
 work was commenced and prosecuted until it was 
 brought, with other public work*, to a dead stand, 
 mdeV the tenth section of the act of 1S42, which 
 suspended all further expenditures on those works 
 until the further order of the legislature. There 
 has already been expended upon this work some- 
 thing over $1,500,000, and it is supposed that it 
 will require about $500,0uu to complete it. 
 
 I know the gentleman horn Herkimer while ad- 
 dressina the committee a few days since, estimated 
 the cost of completing the work at $500,000, but I 
 a.rn not aware upon what data the estimate was 
 based. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN. Upon estimates of the canal 
 commissioners ot 1842. 
 
 Mr. PARISH I will also refer gentlemen to 
 official estimates on this subject. Full arid de- 
 tailed statements of the condition of the Black 
 River cat/al and Erie canal feeder, of the expendi- 
 tures thereon, and of the amount required to com- 
 plete the work, may be found in the annual report 
 of the canal commissioners, Assembly document 
 No. 25 of 1843, and in a special report made in 
 obedience to a call of the senate, by the acting ca- 
 nal commissioner having the work in charge, sen- 
 ate document No 49 of the same year. By refer- 
 ence to these documents it will appear that the 
 excavation is nearly finished, that two-thirds of 
 the locks have been constructed, and that the work 
 as a whole is trom three.fourthb to four-fifths com- 
 pleted, dependent upon the manner in which the 
 
870 
 
 unfinished part shall be constructed. That the 
 cost of the work thus far is $1,675,357 16, and that 
 it would require to finish it with stone locks $639.- 
 000 01, and with composite locks and wooden 
 bridge abutments $436,740 96. A portion of this 
 work is finished, but no part of it has been brought 
 
 into use for the purpose of navigation, 
 in size is the same as the Erie canal. 
 
 The canal 
 The locks 
 
 in convention document No. 47, pages 35 ai.d 36, 
 and admitting $375,909 38, being, as is claimed, 
 one-third of the interest of. the maximum canal 
 debt, to be the true sum to be annually applied as 
 a sinking fund to the redemption of the principal 
 of the debt, the extent of the claim would be. 
 For the annual interest on the canal debt, $935.001 32 
 For general fund," iOU.OOO 00 
 
 For sinking fund,- 
 
 375,909 39 
 
 are of stone, and the work thus lar has been well 
 and substantially done. Large sums have also 
 been expended noon the other unfinished works, 
 including the Erie canal enlargement, most ot 
 which is wholly unavailable for the purpose of 
 revenue. 
 
 The question which now presents itself for con- 
 sideraiion is, whether the prosecution ot the un- 
 finished works is to be resumed, or whether they 
 are to be suffered to go to ruin by leaving them in 
 their present condition. And if the work is re- 
 sumed, when is it to be commenced, how fast and 
 to what extent is it to be carried on ? 
 
 Hitherto I have seen nothing which indicated an 
 intention on the part of the State, totally to aban- 
 don the whole or any part of these works; nothing 
 which indicated any other than a temporary sus- 
 pension. Large sums have been expended from 
 time to time to protect and preserve them, and the 
 legislature no longer ago than at the close of its 
 last session appropriated the sum of twelve thou- 
 sand and five bundled dollars to be expended in 
 protecting and preserving Irom decay the unfin 
 ished works upon the Black River and Genesee 
 Valley canals. Every thing thus far has looked to 
 a luture resumption. 
 
 The most that has been claimed was, that the 
 suspension should continue until the finances ot 
 the State, without violating the pledges of the act 
 ot 1842 and without increasing the indebtedness 
 of the State, would allow a resumption, when the 
 work was to be re> commenced and prosecuted as 
 fast as the finances would admit. 
 
 Whether regard be had to the financial condi- 
 tion of the" State, or to the pledges of the act o 
 1842, or to both, the time has come when the 
 Stare, without increasing her debt, may, and when j J"h e " surplus revenue of the canals after redeeming 
 
 Making a total of $1,610,910 70 
 
 This sum exceeds the amount of the claim, for 
 t includes the interest on the $30,000, which is 
 not a charge on the canal revenues under the act, 
 and there are also available funds on hard appli- 
 cable to the redemption of the canal debt, which 
 would reduce the claim considerably below $1,- 
 500,000; but admit for the sake of illustration, the 
 latter sum to be the amount of the claim at the 
 present time, and allow $2,172,500, the sum pro- 
 posed by the article before us to be taken from the 
 canal revenues, to be equal to the nett revenue of 
 the canals for the present season, which does not 
 vary much from the estimated amouni, and there 
 would remain, after complying with the pledges 
 of the act ot 1842, the sum of $672,500 to be ex- 
 pended on the unfinished works, but not a cent for 
 that purpose after complying with the provisions 
 of the article. This sum of $672,500 shows the 
 difference in amount between the requirements of 
 the act and the article at the present time; and 
 this difference will become greater and greater 
 from year to year, inasmuch as the sum of $2,172,- 
 500 is to remain a fixed sum yearly chargeable up- 
 on the canal revenues, until the principal and in- 
 terest of the canal debt shall be paid ; whereas the 
 sum necessary to meet the requirements of the act 
 would become less and less iiom year to year, in 
 proportion as the annual interest of that debt is re. 
 duced by a reduction of the principal by applying 
 to its redemption the sinking fund created by that 
 act. 
 
 Taking into view the yearly reduction of the 
 sum necessary to meet the pledges ot the act of 
 1842, and the prospective increase of canal tolls, 
 
 her true interests would seem to require that she 
 should, again commence and continue the prose- 
 cution of those- works. 
 
 The 12th section of the act of 1842 provides in 
 substance, (hat the surplus of the canal revenue, 
 after paying current charges and the interest on 
 the canal debt and two hundred thousand dollars 
 to the general fund, shall, to an amount at least 
 equal to one-third of the interest of me canal debt 
 remaining unpaid, be applied as a sinking fund 
 to the redemption of the canal debt then existing 
 and authorized by the act. What sum would now 
 satisfy the pledges of the act? As different esti- 
 mates have been made of the actual amount of the 
 present canal dehf, and consequently of the amount 
 of annual interest thereon,and as different construc- 
 tions have also been given to the act of 1842, as. to 
 the amount to be annually applied as a sinking 
 fund to the redemption of f .hat debt, so also differ- 
 ent results have been arrived at as to the extent of 
 the claim upon the canal revenues under the act. 
 Assuming, however, the amount of the canal debt, 
 including $300,000 authorized to be borrowed by 
 fhe act of 1846, to be $16,944,815 57, and the an- 
 nual interest thereon to be $935,001 42, as stated 
 
 the pledges of the act, Would enable the State lo 
 resume the prosecution of the public works, and 
 make some reasonable progress towards their ulti- 
 mate completion, but not so with this fixed sum 
 of $1,172,500 annually preying upon the revenues. 
 
 The arncle makes no provision whatever for any 
 of the public works except the improvement of 
 the Erie canal, and the aggregate amount applica- 
 ble to that object is limited to $2,172,500, a sum 
 altogether inadequate, according to any estimate 
 that I have seen, to complete the work or to be of 
 any real practical utility. A sum, too, which it 
 would take about the same time to realize under 
 the article, that it would to realize under the acr, 
 a sum sufficient to complete all the unfinished 
 works. 
 
 The article, I herefore, contemplates substantial- 
 ly an abandonment of the Erie canal enlargement, 
 and an actual abandonment of the unfinished ca- 
 nals. There is, to be sure, a saving clause in the 
 article against an absolute sale of the finished and 
 navigable canals, but none whatever against the 
 sale of the unfinished ones. I do not know but the 
 Convention is prepared to sustain this article in 
 its whole length and breadth, even to an excision 
 
871 
 
 or the unfinished works from any further aid from 
 the State, but I have yet to be convinced that such 
 is the case. 
 
 My constituents, in common with many others, 
 did not subscribe in its lull extent to (he stop po- 
 licy of 1&4-2; and yet the suspension act, grievous 
 as it was felt to be, was tender mercy compared 
 with this article. The former contemplated a 
 tcmporaiy suspension, the latter proposes a per- 
 manent abandonment of the unfinished works. 
 The litile finger of the article is thicker than the 
 loins of the suspension act; one, it is true, chas- 
 tiM-s us with whips, but the other proposes to 
 chastise us with scorpions. I know not why it is 
 so, but it would seem as if efforts, studied efforts 
 had been made in certain quarters to under-value 
 the importance and produciiveness ol .he lateral 
 canals. Their value has been estimated by their 
 tolls proper, that is, by the amount of tolls and 
 articles actually transported on them. This is not 
 a fair, nor is it a true criterion lor estimating their 
 value. Many articles as is well known, pass upon 
 the Erie canal which would never have reached it 
 WITH it not for the lateral canals. Give the latter 
 credit, as they should have, for their just propor- 
 tion of tolls for the transpoitation of such articles 
 on the Erie canal, and we should have a different 
 result, and one that would furnish a much lair test 
 of their value, and show that they are, in fact, a 
 source of revenue to the State. The tolls of the 
 lateral canals have more than doubled in the last 
 five years, and nearly doubled since 1842, show 
 ing a ratio of increase far greater than that ol the 
 Erie and Charnplam canals. 
 
 The true question, however, is not whether the 
 surplus revenue of the unfinished canals, aftei 
 paying their ordinary charges, would pay the in 
 teiestof their . n tire cost ; nor is it whether it 
 would pay the interest of a sum sufficient to com- 
 plete them, of which, by the way, there can be no 
 doubt. There is still another and higher conside- 
 lation, one affecting the justice and good faith o 
 the State. It is whether there is to be an aban- 
 donment of works upon which so much has beer 
 expended, and which have been brought so near 
 to completion, and in anticipation of which, anc 
 in full reliance upon the plighted faith of th 
 State, property to a large amount has changed 
 owners, and business arrangements and locations 
 fir life have been made, and which, it completed 
 by furnishing increased facilities of transpoitation 
 would give a new impulse to business, more full) 
 develope the resources of the country, arid greatl) 
 add to the wealth, power and piospenty of the 
 State. 
 
 The gentleman from Allegany (Mr. ANGEL) in 
 the course of his remarks yesterday, gave us a 
 glowing, and I doubt not, a faithful description o 
 his own county ; and I also can say in inference U 
 the country adj lining the Black River canal, tha 
 it is not surpassed by any other portion of the 
 State of equal extent in the ft-rtility of its soil o 
 the abundance of its agricultural productions. 
 Such will appear to be I he case by a reference tr 
 the census ot 1S45. By puch reference it will ap 
 p< ar that the county of Lv.vis, with one huridiei 
 and fourteen thousand acres ot improved land,an< 
 a population little exceeding twenty thousand, ir 
 addition to her other large and varied products 
 creditable to her industry, manufactured in 184< 
 rising of six hundred and thirty tons of butter, anc 
 
 even hundred and ten tons of cheese, a large por- 
 ion of which reached the Erie canal, but at an ex- 
 cuse onerous to the producers and for the want 
 f the means of transportation which this work 
 vou Id atford. 
 
 Without going into an examination of theques- 
 ion of revenue, 1 would barely observe, that esti- 
 nates based upon information .obtained with great 
 :are and labor have been made, which exhibit a 
 avorabie result in regaid to the* Black River ca- 
 lal. Independent of its agricultural and other 
 products, the capacity of the Black River district 
 or tonnage in the single articles of iron and ium- 
 >er is almost boundless. 
 
 This district of country has not hitherto partici- 
 pated with the other portions of the Slate in the 
 jounties of government. It has been taxed to pro- 
 mote public improvements in which it had little 
 or no interest. Of this there has been no serious 
 complaint, but it asks in return, and claims it as 
 an act of justice that it should be placed upon a 
 more equal footing in this respect with other and 
 more favored parts of the State. 
 
 The friends of this canal are looking, anxiously, 
 but confidently looking to this Convention, not 
 only not to interpose any obstacles in the way of 
 its advancement, but to provide for an early re. 
 sumption and completion of a work, which now 
 is, and tor over 24 years has been the subject of 
 their sleeping and waking hours, and upon which 
 there exists an intensity of feeling of which a 
 stranger can form no just estimation. I trust that 
 they ate not to be disappointed in their hopes of 
 the future that they are not, with this work, to 
 be stricken down, crippled in their industry, and 
 palsied in their struggles for life, by an act that 
 shall receive the sanction of this Convention. 
 
 With these remarks, Mr. Chairman, which I 
 feel it my duty to make, I leave this much abused 
 but meritorious work to the calm sense of justice 
 of this honorable body, in the full belief that it 
 will receive, as it deserves, a favorable considera- 
 tion, and that provision will be made to bring it 
 at no distant day, into actual use, that it may be. 
 come not only a source of revenue, but dispense to 
 those who have hitherto shared in the burdens 
 without partaking of the bounties of government, 
 a portion of the blessings which their lellow citi- 
 zens in other parts of the State have long and li- 
 berally enjoyed. 
 
 Mr. STRONG hoped the section would be 
 stricken out. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. BACKUS was negati- 
 ved. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN asked if the question did not 
 now come up on his amendment. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to strike 
 out the word " deferred." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL was in favor of the amendment. 
 For, he said, that it was well known that rail 
 roads never pay back any thing to the state. 
 He was happy to be able to agree with the 
 gentleman from Rensselaer, upon one ques- 
 tion connected with State Finances. If the 
 claims of the state against railroad compa- 
 nies for credit and monies advanced for them, 
 were secured against release or compromise by 
 the legislature, he could not see the necessity for 
 retaining the word " deferred" in the section. It 
 might be well, for reasons of sound public policy, 
 
872 
 
 that the legislature should have some power to 
 extend the time for payment of the debts due the 
 state, from several of the rail road companies. If 
 the debt fell due, in a time of severe pressure, 
 from a road of public utility, and possessing pro- 
 perty' sufficient for ample security, it might be 
 desirable to delay the enforcement of the claim of 
 the state for a brief period. These companies are 
 now paying interest, and two per cent annually 
 of the principal, of the sums borrowed. In all 
 probability, before another commercial revulsion 
 shall excuse a suspension of payment by these 
 companies, a large share of the amount required 
 to meet the whole liabilities will have been paid 
 into the state treasury. Mr. R. was satisfied, 
 with the constitutional provision prohibiting re- 
 lease or compromise of these claims, that all ap- 
 plications for indulgence, by way of extension, 
 would be made in good faith and could lead to no 
 serious imposition upon the state. From the 
 time the state first loaned its credit for the bene- 
 fit of railroads, Mr. R. had ever been of the opinion 
 that the people would be saddled with the debts, 
 and the corporations would get released by the le- 
 gislature. About three-fourths of these loans were 
 already shouldered by the state, and the remainder 
 certainly would be, if there shall be no constitu- 
 tional restriction. Give the Legislature the power, 
 and w r hat gentleman would say, that, during the 
 next ten years, some one of these companies 
 would not obtain a release ? Let the time arrive, 
 when other exciting questions of local interest are 
 agitated in this capitol; when some question like 
 the Albany Bridge, nearly divides the members 
 of the legislature, and some railroad would be 
 sure to take advantage of the occasion, to enforce 
 a discharge of state claims against it. Very plau- 
 sible claims for relief, on the score of justice, 
 would be urged. It would be said that millions 
 had been expended by the state to build canals 
 and public works in other localities, and the cor- 
 poration would claim, in behalf of its own sec- 
 tion, an equal right to drain the public treasury. 
 One release granted to a single company, and all 
 the rest would swiftly follow. 'I he state would 
 not dare to be partial in her favors. Grants to 
 one would be extended to all. The whole line 
 upon the railroads would be lost. But the loss 
 would not end here. The Delaware and Hudson 
 Canal Co. have borrowed $,'800,000 of state stocks, 
 and are abundantly able to redem them. It is un- 
 derstood that provision is already made by the 
 company. Do gentleman suppose, that where all 
 the railroads should have their debts gratuitously 
 forgiven, this canal company, will not urge, 
 with an irresistible appeal for just impartial- 
 ity, that the state shall assume its debt also ? 
 The same public interest and policy which 
 would justify a release of claims upon the rail- 
 roads, could with much greater force be urged 
 in favor of the canal company. When this ca- 
 nal was constructed, it was a public benefit 
 that a comuiunicauon should he opened, vvh.cli 
 would bring to the Hudson River iis hundreds ol 
 thousands tons of coal annually, and cheapen rs 
 cost to all classes of our citizens. The slate 
 could not then assume the consi ruction of this 
 combined canal and railroad, with safety to its fi- 
 nancial condition. The alternative was presented 
 should the canal be constructed and managed b\ 
 
 the state ? or should the credit of the state be 
 loaned for a part of its cost ? The statesmen 
 that day preferred the latter course, though with 
 many fears that it would be held an example of 
 of evil influence upon succeeding legislation. 
 Their confidence in the security of the loan was 
 not misplaced. But their tears of the evil exam- 
 ple have been more than realized. Do the best 
 we can, millions must be drawn from the public 
 treasury, without any corresponding public ben- 
 efit. 
 
 The gentleman from Herkimer never made a 
 more just confession, than when he said that these 
 loans of state credit to railroads had generally 
 been of no real benefit to the works, for which 
 they were intended. In the opinion of Mr. R. 
 the $3,000,000 loaned to the Erie railroad, had it 
 been contributed from the pockets of the stock- 
 holders and expended with the skill and economy 
 with which our Eastern railroads are built, would 
 have performed four times the value ot construc- 
 tion, which was achieved by the state loan. 
 
 He hoped that road would be completed. It 
 was vastly important, in a public, as well as local 
 view. He could forsee that strong reasons of 
 sound policy might induce the state to defer the 
 completion ot that road, now a condition of the 
 release of the $3,000,000 loan. 
 
 Upon the whole, he thought the section quite 
 as valuable without the word "deferred" as with 
 it perhaps better. He had agreed with the gen- 
 tleman from Rensselaer in amending the section, 
 but could not go with him in striking it out as 
 now amended. This state, burthened with its 
 large debt, and under the necessity of continuing 
 a direct tax upon the people to pay the interest 
 of this very class of debts, should be made secure 
 of the ultimate payment ot these claims by the 
 debtors, by a stringent constitutional provision. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEiYS motion was car- 
 ried. Ayes 37, noes 34. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN then moved to 
 strike out the whole section. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND supported the motion. The 
 section would deprive the agents of the State from 
 doing what mighi be absolutely necessary for the 
 best interests of the State. There may be cases 
 in which it might be for the interest of the credi- 
 tor to make some arrangement with his debtor, 
 rather than to enforce it at the exact time of pay. 
 ment. Such cases were constantly occurring. 
 Now he would put in the Constitution no iron 
 rule to prohibit the agents of the State to do this 
 necessary act. The object of the gentleman from 
 Herkimer to preserve the funds of the Slate, was 
 praiseworthy, but this section would defeat that 
 very object. He would not hold out any induce- 
 ment to these companies to compromise or repu- 
 diate. There was no necessity for this. But he 
 would leave the agents of the Stale free to act as 
 the exigencies of (he case might require. He had 
 no tear that any of them would hereafter squan- 
 der the hinds of the State. As the section stood, 
 without amendment, if one of these companies 
 should neglect to pay on the day it VVF.S due, it 
 would be the absolute duty of the Comptroller on 
 the very next dav, to proceed and sell out the ef- 
 fects ot the company, no matter how much of a 
 sacrifice was thereby produced. And with the 
 amendment it was but little better. He hoped 
 
873 
 
 the whole section would bo stricken out and the 
 Legislature be left to act as might be for the in- 
 not of ihese companies, bur of the !St;ttr. 
 He wanted nothing put in the Constitution thai 
 would bring about a reperion of the, he had almost 
 said, corrupt scenes ol' the Ithaca and Ovvego Rail 
 Road tr:Hi^iffion. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN stated that the section ought 
 by all n eans to be ret uried. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY thought they had better 
 compromise, and sell off' some of these old horses 
 If they could not get a dollar for a debt, take six 
 shillings 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that if there were none 
 who desired to speak or throw a club, he would 
 take the floor. On the question as to which of the 
 two great parties were at fault in creating the 
 twenty-eight millions of debt he had literally no- 
 thing to say. It was a question which had been 
 fully agitated, discussed, decided and could not 
 be recalled. But since gentlemen supposed that 
 some distinction ought to be taken in the matter, 
 there was one thing he was bound to admit, that 
 is that the whigsas a party, by their leaders, have 
 never committed themselves in any manner to the 
 payment of the debt. Promises to pay they have 
 cheerfully made, but when the ways and means 
 -ke such payment were to be procured, he 
 did not recollect that as a party they ever stood 
 committed to any such thing. But it was not his 
 purpose to discuss the question as to which of 
 these great parties were responsible for this debt. 
 Party responsible for a debt ! Why party is a.n 
 impersonation it pays no taxes it has no indus- 
 try to be taxed no arm to be palsied by taxation. 
 How make a party responsible for taxes ? The 
 weight of the debt is upon the laboring millions 
 the men who t-.il in the fields, workshops and 
 cities, they are the men upon whom debt, like 
 an incubus, sits. Parties will never pay debts 
 they were not made for it. We are now making 
 an effort to end this debtor system, and he asked 
 the whigs if they doubted that their own party 
 was not borne down to the dust by the debtor sys- 
 tem in 1841 and 1842 ? Why then should they 
 desire to repeat it again ? Why should any de- 
 mocrat adopt it ? Two administrations have been 
 obliged to employ all their energies and powers 
 to pay the debts of its prodigal predecessors and 
 nothing else. The present and past administra- 
 tion for the want of ways and means, have been able 
 to do nothing except to pay debt. He therefore 
 could follow no invitation to resume the journey 
 on that road to ruin. Mr. H. could prove that by 
 the project of the standing committee, the debt 
 would be paid at millions less of public cost, than 
 by any system of delay that the ways and means 
 will be abundantly afforded to make the Erie 
 Canal to perform three times its present labor, so 
 that its toll might be so reduced as to f lessen the 
 cost of transportation one half, and yet bringing 
 into the treasury more than four millions per an- 
 num. He believed this us much as he believed 
 anything in mathematics or that wns formed upon 
 human experience. Why then should he go Cm 
 renewing the miserable debtor system, or for an} 
 increase of the debt; and yet gentlemen call hin 
 no friend to internal improvement, because he 
 would not pursue such a course. On the contra- 
 ry the most ardent friend of internal improve- 
 
 ments could not desire a more liberal, or a more 
 munificent provision than was made for the pro- 
 secution of these works, by the project of the 
 standing committee. He was not more opposed 
 o the debtor system than he had been through a 
 ong life. Circumstances in early life obliged him. 
 o think on the subject that thinking and reading 
 ed to certain convictions too strong and too deep 
 ;o be removed by the delusions of any period. 
 When he had had an opportunity to do so, he had 
 met the question manfully. It was the accursed 
 )ower of taxation, that made pauperism, produ- 
 ced crime, misery and distress in all countries, 
 and he looked to his children as a parent when he 
 said that he desired not to see their limbs 
 ettered, or their bodies withered by anv accur- 
 sed debtor system, by whomsoever begun. 
 Vtr. H. denied that he had ever acted inconsistent- 
 y in this matter. He had never in any report or 
 n any plan recommended the increasing of a debt 
 :br these works ; gentlemen who made these 
 charges were aware of this and yet they had the 
 candor not to say it. A degree of efficacy has also 
 )een attributed to the minority report of the com- 
 mittee of ways and means in '41, which it had 
 never entered his mind to suppose that it posses- 
 sed. A vast government of two millions of peo- 
 jle a sound system of finance an able chief 
 magistrate and the paper batteries of the minori 
 ty of ways and means in 1841, overthew the whole 
 edifice ! It was not the report which did this 
 t was the voice of truth which gained an utter- 
 ance in that report The report had been attrib- 
 uted entirely to him he had a humble part in it, 
 aut he was aided by an able, intelligent gentle- 
 men, acquainted with matters of finance, accus 
 tomed to look into the money market, who 
 cnew where we were going and was not obliged 
 to guess. That gentleman would do no dishonor 
 to the Convention he would grace it, and he, 
 (Mr. H.) felt bound to vindicate him when he 
 was slandered. Mr. H. further insisted that that 
 report was a fair statement of the events that led 
 to the unfortunate condition in which the State 
 then was, and to which it would come unless its 
 course was changed. The committee had no 
 choice but to make such a report, if they intend- 
 ed to deal honestly with the people. And 
 it was only after five years of sleeping, 
 that the gentleman from Cattaraugus com- 
 plains of that report, and pretends to point out 
 its errors. He will find that the statements 
 of the report are sustained by the documents in 
 the public offices. We come down now to 1842. 
 The state was in debt, its credit was down, its 
 banking institutions tumbling to piece.-;, and the 
 act of that year was the only possible mode of re- 
 lief. It raised the credit of the state, and it 
 pledged the faith of the state that this debt should 
 be paid off in *2i years. He (Mr. H.) had never 
 entertained a doubt (and he drow up the act him-' 
 self,) as to what its construction should be. In 
 1M 1 a question was raised on the subject, arid the 
 friends of the then administration, consulting he 
 had no doubt with the head of that administra- 
 tion, found a necessity for borrowing #'JO(J,000 
 (],2UO,OOL> it should have been, for 3QO,OOG has 
 had to be borrowed since) and they renewed in 
 the most explicit manner the pledges of the act 
 of '42. What was then promised, let us perform. 
 
 84 
 
874 
 
 Never let it be said that in the hour of our neces- 
 sity, we made engagements and pledges, which 
 when temporarily relieved, we were disposed to 
 withdraw. Abide by your faith it is just. 
 Good faith is a jewel. Stand by your pledges- 
 do as was promised in '38 pay "your debts by 
 1865. Do as was promised in '42, pay your debts 
 in 22k years. Do as was again promised in '44 
 pay your debt within the same period whig or 
 democrat whoever or whatever made these en- 
 gagements, or in whatever form made, let the 
 faith of the state be inviolably preserved. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY did not feel disposed to conti- 
 nue the debate needlessly, but the gentleman in 
 opening his speech had got up a false issue, and 
 had made a long speech on those premises. He 
 had charged that he (Mr. H.) was opposed to any 
 system that would pay the debt of the state. Mr. H. 
 denied this in all its length and breadth, and the 
 gentleman must have known that his remarks 
 would not bear such a construction. He had on- 
 ly referred to other plans submitted here, which 
 he preferred, because they paid off the debt with- 
 out taxation and without ruin to our public works. 
 He knew of no man in the state who was in favor 
 of the system which had been charged against 
 him. Mr. H. replied to the remarks in defence 
 of the minority report of 1841, and reiterated the 
 charges which he had before made and referring 
 to facts to sustain his accusations. He read from 
 the table relating to estimated deferred works, as 
 contained in the report of 4.1, to sustain his posi- 
 tion, and then referred to the action of the legista 
 ture thereon. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN replied, insisting that the 
 items in his report of 1841 were legitimate. The 
 great error of that report consisted in the sin 01 
 omission, and he proceeded to allude to what 
 were omitted. The report did no injustice ex- 
 cept in putting the amount too small. The whol 
 state was bequeathed. Every locality was to be 
 fed. Votes had been given tor " the system." 
 That was the word, and if the system had been 
 carried out, this state would have been in the con- 
 dition of Pennsylvania, with its snake railroads 
 and immense debt. 
 
 iVJr. S'iE 1 bOiN said lhat very distinct rel 
 erence had been made 10 him repeatedly 
 as being responsible tor bringing in here a politi 
 Cul discussion, with reference lu the state indebt 
 ednes-s. Mr. S. denied that he nad done so, he 
 hud merel) it-plied to Hie charge of Shyh ckisn 
 \\iiich had been so litquently thrown out by >ir 
 Jordan, and had utt:d ti.a! the course propnse( 
 by that gentleman was much in hanr.ony wit] 
 that which had brought the State to the disastrou 
 condition in wriicn it was placed in '42 But h 
 would say now after 'what hud follow* d, that i 
 one party was chaigeable iiioie than anothe 
 with the creation of the State debt, it wa 
 the Whig party. Mr. S. referred to the rnes 
 sage of Gov. Seward in 1839, and the flatterin 
 and glowing picture it gave of the then condition 
 of the State, with an immense work of internal 
 improvement, and with a debt of a little over 
 $0,000,000. Mr. S. then referred to the gradual 
 increase of the debt down to 1842, when the De- 
 mocratic party carne into power, when it reached 
 the sum of $28,000,000. These facts he urged 
 were conclusive evidences as to whose door the 
 
 in of creating this debt was to be laid. Mr. S . 
 eferred to other documents on this point, all 
 ending, he urged, to show that the debt wa* 
 ncurred under what was denominated the 
 speedy impulse" policy of the Whig party. 
 'hey provided also he contended that this debt 
 hould be paid in 1865. And he called upon the 
 Vhigs to sustain the promise they had made, and 
 heir Governor for them. And this he urged was 
 11 that the report of the committee called upon 
 hem to do. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN regretted that the gentleman from 
 Ilinton had found it necessary to misrepresent 
 im in regard to the use of the term Shylock. 
 lr. J. had no disposition to raise a tempest in a 
 ea-pot 
 
 " To lash the waves on high, 
 
 To waft a leather or to dro\yn a fly." 
 
 Ie rose chiefly to tell gentlemen who were not 
 >resent yesterday, that he had been totally mis- 
 epresented by that gentleman. He regretted it, 
 >ecause he had avowed distinctly that he was a* 
 eady as any body could be, to go any reasonable 
 ength to uphold the state credit, by creating a 
 sinking fund that should ultimately and surely 
 :>ay oft' the debt. And how could the gentleman 
 ustify himself in bringing in a political discuss- 
 ^on here in drawing disparaging distinctions be- 
 ;ween democratic and whig legislatures, on the 
 jasis of any thing Mr. J. had said in connection 
 with this classical word Shylock ! Mr. J. went 
 on to allude to the precise question which was up 
 yesterday, under his amendment to the 5th sec- 
 tion, and re-stated the positions he took in de- 
 fence of it, as against the iron, rigid, harsh and 
 mpolitic rule which the section proposed to es- 
 tablish saying that he said then, what he re- 
 peated now, that the policy of crushing one of 
 these corporations, and selling its property at a 
 sacrifice, when by a little indulgence, the state 
 might get its loan and the company save some- 
 thing was a Shylock policy. But he did not 
 apply this term to the general policy of this re- 
 port for the only point of difierence was as to 
 how soon the debt should be extinguished or 
 rather Mr. J. was paying off and prosecuting the 
 public works at the same time, and not leaving 
 them to perish, when our reliance must be on 
 them to pay., But on the other question the po- 
 licy of crushing and sacrificing these little rail- 
 roads for not being able to pay up at the day and 
 hour the Shylockism of the policy had been con- 
 fessed by the motion made by the gentleman from 
 Herkimer himself to strike out this word deferred. 
 
 Mr STETSON : He voted against it. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN did not oppose it. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said the gentleman's vote may 
 have opposed it his speech did not and by the 
 vote of the Convention the obnoxious word that 
 he desired' to get rid of had been struck out as 
 a little too Shylocky for practical use. That mat- 
 ter having been disposed of, and that so far as 
 the general principles of the report were concern- 
 ed, the gentleman from Clinton would have no 
 farther occasion to raise a whirlwind on the use 
 of this word Shylock. 
 
 Some lurther explanations followed between 
 Messrs. SI ETSON and J ORDAIN. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON followed. He should not 
 have risen to speak yesterday, but for the remarks 
 
875 
 
 which fell from the gentleman i'rom Clinton. 
 Cornplunt had been made ot that reference. HI 
 (Mr. P.) lud -aid what he did, because that gen 
 tleman had travelled out of his way to charge the 
 \vh >le State debt on the Whig party. Mr. P. de 
 precated these chaises and to the dragging in c 
 parry considerations. But when such charge 
 were made, they would be repelled. Mr. P. had 
 said, that it it was a sin to vote for public improve 
 ments, some small portion of that sin lay at the 
 door of the gentleman from Clinton, for he hac 
 voted for the Black River Canal. Mr. P. had beet 
 asked to look at his own votes for works of inter 
 nal improvements. He w;is ready to answer ibi 
 ail those votes here or to his constituents. Whal 
 wore those voles ? He voied for the Genesee Val 
 ley canal, the Black River canal, and the Eiie en- 
 largement. This last had been recommended in a 
 <ri drawn up, and signed by the gentleman 
 from Herkimer. He was the h'ist man that re- 
 commended that enlargement. The bill was pass 
 ed authorizing the Canal Board to enlarge the ca 
 nal at such times and in such manner as they 
 misjht determine. In the Legislature of that year 
 there were but about 30 Whi^s, all told. The Ca- 
 nal Board were composed entirely of the genile- 
 man's friends. They fixed upon a size of 70 by 
 7 feet. Some wanted a larger canal some not so 
 large that size was finally determined on The 
 estimates were placed before the Legislature, 
 showing thai: the enlargement could be made for a 
 little over $12,000,000. On this estimate he voted 
 lor the enlargement. 
 
 The highest estimate for the Genesee Valley 
 canal was about two millions for the Black river 
 one million. Had these canals been built within 
 these estimate, he never should have regretted 
 his votes lor them and he had every reason to 
 believe that they were correct. In 1838, when 
 the whigs for the first time had a majority in the 
 assembly, the commissioners told the legislature 
 that they could economically expend that year, 
 one million over and above all that could be real- 
 ized Irorn canal tolls. The assembly passed a bill 
 appropriating one million for the enlargement, 
 and sent it to the senate, where the whigs had 
 but four members. When the bill came back, the 
 one million had grown to four. The assembly 
 Concurred. 
 
 iV.r. LUOMIS said that amendment was made in 
 committee of the whole in the house. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said the gentleman was 
 mistaken. The second section of the house bill 
 did place three millions moie at the discretion of 
 the commissioners but the senate made this con- 
 tingent appropriation absolute. Prior to 1840, 
 when the whigs c^me into power, in all the 
 branches of the government, contracts had been 
 made on the canal to the extent of over fifteen 
 millions. The whigs had to provide the means 
 tor fulfilling these contracts. When the other 
 party came again into power, they took the course 
 of violating these contracts, and instead of raising 
 means to go on, thev contented themselves with 
 borrowing to pay contractors for breaking up con- 
 tracts. So with the Genesee Valley and Black 
 river canals. They were both entirely under con- 
 tract prior to 1840. And since '40 but one mil- 
 lion had been put under contract by the whigs. 
 As for the Erie rail road loan, he voted for that 
 
 also, and was in a minority here ot seventeen 
 members, all told the democrats having all but 
 seventeen in the house and lour in the senate. 
 He wished to say a few words while up in regard 
 to this report ol the finance committee. He was 
 in favor of providing a sinking fund for ihe extin- 
 guishment otthe debt; he was willing the amount 
 of debt which the State might at any time incur, 
 should be limited and that provision should be 
 made for the support of government, because he 
 took it that the people never would again submit 
 to direct taxation for it. But he was unwilling 
 to tie up the hands of the legislature hereafter, 
 and to say that they should not expend more than 
 $2,500,000 on the enlargement of the Erie canal. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN: I hope the gentleman does 
 not suppose that I have brought in any such pro- 
 vision. It was imperative that they should ap- 
 propriate that amount in the aggregate leaving 
 entirely to the legislature every thing beyond that. 
 
 Mr. PATTKRSON understood the gentleman 
 to give it as his deliberate opinion that $1,000 ,000 
 was all that should be expended on the Erie can- 
 al- 
 Mr. HOFFMAN did say that two and a half 
 millions would treble ihe power and capacity of 
 the canal, enable you to reduce tolls one half, and 
 even surplusses enough to complete the enlarge- 
 ment and other works. Nobody thought of tying 
 up the appropriation lor the canal to two and a 
 half millions. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON was very glad to hear that. 
 But he understood the gentleman to say that 
 
 , 000,000 would be sufficient to enlarge the can- 
 al to such a size as would answer all the purpos- 
 es of navigation. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN was satisfied that amount 
 would be ample for the purpose he specified but 
 he did not intend to tie up the funds beyond that. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON continued. He supposed it 
 would be fifteen years before this aggregate of $1- 
 500,000 would be realized. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said he had stated that on the 
 owest estimate of increase, it might be realized 
 n ten years. According to Mr. RUGGLES' esli- 
 nafe, it would be sooner. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON had understood all along 
 hat Mr. RUGGLES' estimates were repudiated en. 
 irely 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : Not at all. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON was very glad to hear that. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN continued. He stated the rule 
 hat he thought would apply and that Mr. RUG- 
 GLES' esiimaie of the increased tolls, so far cor- 
 esponded with the matter of fact. His error 
 onsisted in stating the current expenses of the 
 anal at a lower rate than they were. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON here gave way for a motion 
 o rise which prevailed. 
 
 The Convention took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 There were only 33 members present 5 minutes 
 fter the usual hour of meeting. 
 
 A motion to adjourn was lost ayes 7, noes 35. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON addressed the committee at 
 ength, in opposition to the report of the finance 
 ommittee. 
 
 The question was put and the motion lost. 
 
876 
 
 The next question was to strike out the 5th sec- 
 tion, on motion of the gentleman from Chautauque. 
 (Mr. MARVIN ) Lost, ayes 35, noes 39. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said thai in any mode of pay- 
 ing the canal debt, by any fixed sura, there would 
 always be a certain amount in arrear. Ordinarily 
 it is believed that the sinking fund would enable the 
 officers to procure all <he extension necessary. By 
 the act of 1844 thc-re is a direct tax of $'56,000 for the 
 benefit of the canals; and by adding this $15U,000 
 you would liberate that tax, one tenth of one mill, 
 and let it be used for the ordinary current expen- 
 ses of the State. And the committee believe that 
 by this section, they comply with the spirit of the 
 act of 1844. The salt and auction tax, the half 
 null tax and the $'56,000 tax, will meet the current 
 expenses of the State. The act gave the credi- 
 tors the taxing power of I he State, and the canal 
 tolls; and the committee have acted on this 
 strict principle. No matter who advanced you the 
 money; the rroney has been leni ; and the sove- 
 reign is guilty in the sight ol God and man, it 
 you suffer your credit to sink ; it is different from 
 a promissory note ; to neglect to pay your State 
 debts or to suffer your State stocks to decline, you 
 rob your creditor, and keep him out ot so much 
 amount of capital which he lent you, in propor- 
 tion as you let your slocks decline. A blighted 
 harvest, and other circumstances may curtail your 
 revenue in future years; and these yoa ought to 
 provide against Delay is dangerous on every 
 ground. He felt almost tempted to go back and 
 go over the whole ground to explain the plan ot 
 surplussage. But time was too precious. Every 
 delay that is gained, is p^id lor by millions. In 
 1825 we promised to pay a debt in 1836. It was 
 nor done. In 1S33 we promised to pay a forty 
 million debt in 1865. This was postponed j till 
 you disgusted the people. And so with all the 
 other delays. The heart sickens at them. Look at 
 Ohio; taxation is obliged to be resorted to. to pay 
 eleven millions debt; and they clamor for the 
 sale of some of the canals. And if you delay and 
 try to borrow, you will be met with the cry of re- 
 pudiation; and pay for it dearly and with dis- 
 grace ; sneedy pavment is the cheapest alter all 
 The legislature has not been very abusive in 
 the taxing power, or in the giving away of money ; 
 but in borrowing money they have been most dis- 
 gracefully abusive. When gentlemen who ask 
 for delays will bring forward their projects and 
 what they intend to achieve by them, I shall then 
 be able to show still more the dangers of these or 
 any other delays. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND wanted to ask two or three 
 questions. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : I will hear them. 
 Mr. KIRKLAND : Is it the intention that this 
 $1,500,000 should be annually applied to the ex- 
 tinguishment of the interest and principal ? [f 
 so, how can money be borrowed on the strength 
 of this sinking fund ? Is it the intention to give 
 the state officers power under this section to bor- 
 row money ? And finally, what is meant by 
 " equitable taxes ?" 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said it was designed so to ap- 
 ply the sums. 
 Mr. KIRKLAND : And as to the ability to bor- 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : As to that, if on the 1st of 
 Sept. 1847, it is known that there is $1,500,000 in 
 sinking fund, that fund will have considerable 
 credit, and I, as a public officer holding public 
 stocks in credit, I should not, would not hesitate as 
 to that course. And as to giving them the loaning 
 power, I have 4 shown that this matter should be 
 attended to by the legislature. The words " equi- 
 table taxes" are used instead of " direct taxation," 
 because it might be necessary in the contingency 
 of a war, not only to tax real and personal estate, 
 but also trades, professions, and every source 
 within the reach of the taxing power of the state. 
 
 The 6th section was passed over. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN asked if it would not be as well 
 to strike out the word " quarterly." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that on ail these loans the 
 state paid interest quarterly whatever might be 
 the rate. 11 therefore the state advanced money 
 to the canals to pay interest on the canal debt, it 
 certainly ought to receive quarterly interest in re- 
 turn. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said this would be applying on 
 behalf of the slate, a rule to charge compound in- 
 terest that was not allowed in the case of an indi- 
 vidual. He moved to strikeout that word. 
 
 Mr. PATTJ&RSON supposed this was the rule 
 applied to make up the sum of $672,500 in this 
 article. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN; No; that is based on annual 
 costs. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : To make that up, I sup- 
 pose you include the salt duties, which were 
 created for the very purpose of constituting a ca- 
 nal fund ? 
 
 Mr. TILDEN; All the state officers, from the 
 beginning of the canals until now, have considered 
 these salt duties a a part of the canal fund. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Well, if they have so con- 
 sidered them it does not follow that the whole peo- 
 ple of the state were 30 green as to believe that 
 this duty of 12 cents a bushel, which was created 
 for the express purpose of making the canal fund, 
 belonged to the general fund. Not a man believes 
 it, here or elsewhere. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : I believe it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON : Then I will put you down 
 as No. 1. This tax was paid by the people of 
 Western New York for ihesole purpose of build, 
 intc the canals. Not a dollar belonged to the gen- 
 eral fund. The canals had made these duties. In 
 1817 they were only some $8000, and from that 
 they had increased to $250,000. 
 
 Mr. LOO MIS: You might as well credit the 
 canal fund with the increased value of the farms 
 in Wes'ern New York. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON: If the gentleman insists 
 that the increased value of these farms beloi gs to 
 the general fund, then the rule will apply. He 
 (Mr. P ) could not assent to any such doctrine as 
 vas contained in this proposition, and charge the 
 canal fund wilh funds that were created expressly 
 lor it. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN replied, contending that it had 
 always been admitted from 1817 down, that these 
 salt duties did belong to the general fund and 
 should be restored. To contend for the contrary 
 now, was but another species of repudiation. He 
 read from a report in 1830 in proof of his asser 
 tion. 
 
877 
 
 The debate was further continued by Messrs. 
 RHOADKS and VAN SCHOONHOVEN. 
 
 Mr. l!.\S('o.M said thai sin<-<> the remarks of 
 tlie chairman of the committee in favor of com- 
 pelling the canals to pay to the general fund the 
 whole amount of salt duties and compound inter- 
 est thereon, he was disposed to say a word upon 
 that subject. The salt duty was strictly a local 
 tax. By the act of 1817, providing for the con- 
 struction of the Erie and Champlain canals, the 
 duty upon salt manufactured in the Western 
 District was raised from 3 to 12 1-2 cents, and 
 appropriated to the canals. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN inquired if salt was made ex- 
 cept in the western district? 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said there was not, but the act 
 -ii carefully drawn as to permit salt manufac- 
 tured in other parts of the State", if springs should 
 be found, to escape this duty. 
 
 The salt was consumed, too, almost exclusively 
 by the people of' the Western part of the State, 
 and the high duty of 12 1-2 cents upon a bushel 
 of salt, worth sometimes from G to 10 cents, was 
 cheerfully paid by the consumers, because the 
 tax went to aid in constructing this important 
 State work. It would not have been borne for 
 any other purpose. Would it have been tolerated 
 if the State had undertaken to impose a local tax 
 of this character upon one-quarter of the State for 
 the payment of the current expenses of govern- 
 ment? And yet it would have been just as right 
 to have done so as to convert these duties, and 
 the compound interest, to such a purpose now. 
 The effect would be this, because the people of 
 the Western part of the State had proposed and 
 consented to pay 9 cents additional duty upon 
 each busLel oi salt they consumed, in considera- 
 tion of the canal beii.g built, they should now pay 
 a sum equal to all those duties, together with in- 
 terest compounded, in the'shape of tolls upon the 
 produce they sent to market upon a canal they 
 built. 
 
 Bui this wns not all that the people of We,' tern 
 part of the State had to do to ensure the com- 
 mencement ot tht work. The 7th section of the 
 act of Ibl7 had this provision: 
 
 " That it shall be the duty of the said canal commission- 
 ers to raise the sum oi two hunched and fitly thousand dol- 
 lars to be appropriated towards the making and complet- 
 ing of the said canals, 1'rom the Ajohawk nver to the St:- 
 4ieca river, and fiom Lake Champlain to Hudson's river, 
 by causing to be asse-sed ana 1. vied, in such manner as 
 the said commissioners may determine and direci.the said 
 sum of two hundred ai.d liny thousand dollars upon the 
 lands and real estate lying along the route ol the said ca 
 nals and within twenty-five miles of the same, on each 
 side thereof. 
 
 ' And the said assessment shall be made on said lands 
 according to the ben- lit which they shall be considered by 
 th s.u<l commissioners as drawing from the making of the 
 said canals respectively." 
 
 The lands within 27 miles of the canal Iron: 
 the Mohawk to the Seneca rivet, were in etiir 
 mortgaged for a quarter of a milin,n, and had nut 
 the success of the enterprize disappointed the op- 
 ponents of ii, this sum would have been Collected. 
 and this sum too, wiih i.s inh-icst, migM with a> 
 much propiiety gs the salt duty, be made to swell 
 th's claim upon the canal fund. 
 
 Mr. TlLDEN said lhat when the canals came 
 to be constructed, in Older to 'provide ways and 
 means for that purpose this tax was increased, but 
 in noae of the discussions on this occasion is it, 
 
 to be found that they were treated in any manner 
 different from any other \\ays and means provided 
 for that ohjec 4 . Ir w.is the propeiiy arid icvenue 
 of the Slate, and \\as so deemed at ihe time, and 
 included in other revenues and property of 
 lie Stale, applied to the formation of a fund to 
 (ietray the expenses of conducting of the canal. 
 At that time, the men who had main charge of 
 i he undertaking and through whose exertions it 
 was adopted by the people, in eveiv form held out. 
 as^an inducement that these advances would ulti- 
 mately be reimbursed, and that the people would 
 even derive profit Irom the investment. On the 
 completion of the canal this same doctrine was 
 sustained, and from that time to this, whoever has 
 been at the head of the financial depai fluent, whe- 
 ther democrat or whig, the same doctrine has 
 been maintained. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. MARVIN was negatived. 
 
 The 7th section was then read, as follows : 
 
 ^ 7. The Legislature shnll not sell, lease, or otherwise 
 dispose of any of the canul* of the State, so far as the same 
 an- now finished and navigable-, but they shall remain the 
 property of the State and under its management, forever. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to strike out the 
 words " so far as the same are now finished and 
 navigable." There was something in the section, 
 as it stood, that looked like a permission to the 
 legislature to sell out the unfinished canals. He 
 did not know whether such was the object or not. 
 But he would provide against such a course. He 
 hoped there would be no opposition to the motion. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said there would be. The 
 Black River canal was unfinished. It was uncer- 
 tain when the State could go on to complete it. 
 If the inhabitants of that region should find it for 
 their interest to complete this canal, by a compa- 
 ny or otherwise, he would not tie up the hands 
 of the legislature so that they could not comply 
 with such a request. So too with the Genesee 
 Valley Canal. It would be unjust to fix such a 
 rule in the Constitution. So far as the canals 
 were finished and productive of revenue, he would 
 guard against any alienation of it by the legisla- 
 ture. He objected most, decidedly to the amend- 
 ment. It might be that the State could not go on 
 with these works for six, eight or ten years. The 
 people in the vicinity might have the ability in a 
 year or two. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON now saw that this section 
 looked to what he supposed a probable sale of 
 these canals. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN. Not at all. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON. Yes, sir \ He apprehen- 
 ded if this clause should be stricken out, and the 
 people from those localities came here and asked 
 for a local tax to complete the canals, the legisla- 
 ture could comply. But this, as it stood, was lit- 
 tle else than a proposal to sell out these canals. 
 On that point, the people had the right to demand 
 that the gentleman and this Convention should 
 show their hands. The faith of the state had 
 been pledged to complete these canals. The peo- 
 ple expected that pledge to be fulfilled. Proper- 
 ty had changed hands in that expectation. Now 
 if you profess to sell out these canals, say so 
 openly and not in this indirect way. Let the 
 people understand that these canals are to be com- 
 pleted at some time if not soon, yet at some fu- 
 ture day. They were the veins which led to the 
 
878 
 
 main artery. And will you say to the people of 
 that section that they may tax themselves, com- 
 plete these works, which will bring money to our 
 own pockets ? Such was the section as it stood, 
 and he desired it should be so understood. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN took the floor, but the hour of 
 adjournment having arrived, he gave way, and 
 the Convention adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (90th day) Sept. 16th. 
 Prayer by Rev. Dr. POTTER. 
 
 THE FINANCES. 
 
 The Convention went into committee of the 
 whole on the finance report. 
 
 After waiting a little while, Mr. HOFFMAN 
 said that if there was a quorum present, he would 
 say a few words until the gentleman from Onta- 
 rio (Mr WORDEN) arrived. 
 
 The question was on Mr. PATTERSON'S motion 
 to amend the 7th section. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that Mr. P.'s amend- 
 ment went to render inalienable these unfinished 
 canals. He had no desire to tie up the legisla- 
 ture in this particular. He would go into no en- 
 gagement direct or indirect as to whether these 
 canals were to be finished or not. The Conven- 
 tion could not tie up the people in this respect. 
 It was never attempted in this government but 
 once and that was in 1838. If he was a member 
 of the legislature and the people of the district 
 where these unfinished canals were should come 
 to the legislature and with any tolerable degree 
 of unanimity asked to be allowed in any proper 
 way to finish these lateral canals, he would con- 
 sent that they should do so. He spoke of the 
 Cayuga and Seneca canal as compared with the 
 Black River and Genesee Valley canal, and with 
 its superior advantages it had never paid to the 
 state its original cost, its expense of superintend- 
 ence, repairs, interest, &c. The expense of this 
 and other lateral canals he said could be found in 
 the table from 35 to 47 in the Comptroller's re- 
 port. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON desired to ask the gentle- 
 man a question, which he had no doubt the gen- 
 tleman could answer from the facts before him. 
 He wanted to know if the line of the Erie canal 
 between Utica and Albany, if it should be credit- 
 ed only with the produce carried on it, which 
 was brought to it from all the points between here 
 and Utica, and the merchandize transported to all 
 the points between Albany and Utica applying 
 the same rule which had been by the Comptroller 
 to the lateral canals whether that line of the ca- 
 nal had ever paid the expense of superintendence 
 and repairs and the interest on its cost, or whe- 
 ther it had ever paid half that amount ? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said he could only give Con- 
 jectural answers. But he could say that if the 
 Erie canal had only reached as far as Syracuse or 
 Mntezuma, it would have been far more profita- 
 ble in proportion to its length. He alluded to the 
 Cayuga and Seneca canal as settling the question 
 of the profitable completion of the Geneste Val- 
 ley canal. In 1841, he had written out his views 
 in full, as to the contributions of produce made 
 to the Erie canal by the lateral canals ; these lat- 
 ter should be credited for what they produce, de- 
 ducting about one-fourth for the expense, &c ; so 
 the converse was true that the Erie canal should 
 
 be credited for the produce it brings to the lateral 
 canals. By and by it would be made a question 
 whether all public institutions should be made a 
 charge on the right of way. He stood there to 
 oppose any such doctrine. He would not allow 
 the entire expenses of society to be pensioned on 
 the right of way. He wished these unfinished 
 canals to be left in the hands of the legislature 
 he would not have them tied up, nor would he 
 have the convention committed on this subject in 
 any way He entered his protest against all these 
 debtor systems. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN was in his seat. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that seeing the Hon. gen- 
 tleman from Ontario in his seat, he would say no 
 more at present. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON having said that Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN misunderstood his (Mr. P:'s) question, 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN insisted that he had not. The 
 question could only receive a conjectural answer. 
 
 Mr WORDEN said that he could show Mr. 
 HOFFMAN very easily how this question could ba 
 answered. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN: Very well; then you can 
 answer it yourself when you get the floor. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN (having the floor from yesterday) 
 then rose and spoke at lengthen opposition to the 
 report of the committee. 
 
 [His remarks, at length, will be found at the 
 close of the volume, succeeding those of Mr. 
 HOFFMAN.] 
 
 Mr. MARVIN was surprised at this section, es- 
 pecially when it was attached to such a rep'ort. 
 If these canals were so miserably poor, and were 
 running thestate into debt all the time, and some- 
 body should be foolish enough to take them off our 
 hands, reimbursing us for every dollar we had ex- 
 pended, and several millions of dollars over, why 
 should these gentlemen, who appeared lobe troubled 
 with the nightmare on the subject, object to allow 
 them to do so, and relieve us from all these appre. 
 hensions .' Why, men could be found who would 
 do this, and give abundant security to pay every 
 dollar of outstanding stock and every possible lia- 
 bility, and take the work. The stockholders will 
 do it, and throw you in a few millions surplus, and 
 obligate themselves to complete the enlargement 
 and the unfinished canals. Mr. M. replied to Ihe 
 objection urged by Mr. HOFFMAN to the plans pro- 
 posed, contending that it was utterly unsound. 
 But it it was true, and we could sell the canals 
 to-morrow and pay off all the debt, and we should 
 save many millions in the shape of interest, now, 
 he would submit, whether such an argument was 
 a legitimate one to address to a deliberative Con- 
 vention? He examined the rival projects, con- 
 tending that the compromise suggested by Mr. 
 WORDEN was one that the extremes in the Con- 
 vention ought to harmonize upon. He went on to 
 show the beneficial operation of that plan as con- 
 trasted with that submitted by the standing com- 
 mittee. He also spoke at length of the great in. 
 creasing trade of the West, which would seek a 
 market by way of the Erie Canal. 
 
 Mr. ALLEN denied that the New York dele- 
 gation had come forward here as a body to sus- 
 tain the proposition of Mr. HOFFMAN. There 
 had been no consultation among them so far as he 
 knew on the subject. They acted he believed 
 from their own impressions of the propriety or 
 
879 
 
 impropriety of a measure. Gentlemen here had 
 
 undertaken to instruct them as to their duties, but 
 
 he believed the delegation from the city knew 
 
 ,\hat the interests of New York were. 
 
 The question being taken on the motion of Mr. 
 BROWN to strike out the 7th section, it was re- 
 jected. 
 
 The article having been gone through with, the 
 question was on rising and reporting it to the 
 house. 
 
 After some conversation as to the course to be 
 pursued, 
 
 Mr. HARRISON said that before the article 
 was laid aside, he desired to offer an amendment. 
 He wished to restrict the legislature from authoriz- 
 ing any canal or rail road at the expense of the state, 
 until the present canal debt should be extinguish- 
 ed. Mr. H. said that the people of his county had 
 often complained of the sacrifices they had been 
 obliged to make to the canal policy, and that 
 they had been called upon to pay it. The debt 
 he considered, had been incurred in consequence 
 of a departure from the original intentions of the 
 projectors of the Canal. His section of the State 
 us was known was originally opposed to the con- 
 struction of the Erie and Charnplain canals, but 
 upon its being demonstrated that the project was 
 feasible, they yielded their assent to it. But they 
 did not suppose that these lateral canals were to 
 follow, and they complained that the greater por 
 tion of the debt had arisen from the construction 
 of these canals. Their property had depreciated 
 from 1817 down to 1830 or '35; indeed until the 
 overflow of the population of New York began to 
 affect the neighboring counties. They thought 
 no reflections should be cast upon them for com- 
 plaining of taxation. They did protest against 
 being taxed either for this debt, or for carrying 
 out this canal policy. He proposed there' ore to 
 amend by adding at the end of this section, as 
 follows: 
 
 "But the legislature shall have no power to authorize 
 hereafter, any canal or railway to be constructed at the 
 expense of the State, until the present canal debt is fully 
 liquidated and paid." 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND went halfway with the gen- 
 tleman's amendment. He would willingly pro- 
 hibit the legislature from authorizing the con- 
 struction of any railroad by the state, until the 
 debt was paid. On the other question he hac 
 not fully determined. It was certain, however 
 that it was the worst kind of policy for the Stat( 
 to go into the construction of railroads as stat( 
 works, and he thought the time had gone by when 
 any danger was to be apprehended from that. 
 But in former times we came very near to doing 
 such a thing, and he remembered that a bill fo 
 the construction of the Erie railroad by the State 
 defeated in the Assembly of 1841, by a verj 
 small majority indeed, and that no little odium 
 Attached to him for voting against it. Bu 
 time had shown him to have been right. He ob 
 jected to the blending of the severat funds of the 
 State into one, as he understood the gentleman 
 from Allegany (Mr. ANGEL,) to desire. If an) 
 gentleman wished to see our canal system ; 
 ted, he could tell him that it never would be don 
 by such a course as that. Perhaps the gentlemai 
 desired to see the School fund incorporated wit! 
 the rest. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL wanted only one fund to support 
 overnment. He would leave all other funds to 
 tand as they are. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND believed he understood the 
 ;entleman. It was better by far, that each fund 
 hould be kept separate and sacredly appropriated 
 or specific objects. When this was so, they could , 
 ot so easily be got at by the sharks who always 
 lang about the legislature, seeking to get hold of 
 he public money. Mr. R. went on to oppose the 
 reposition of Mr. BOUCK, setting apart a portion 
 >f the surplus canal revenues for the benefit of the 
 common school fund. He was opposed, to sad- 
 Iling the expenses of education upon the public 
 vorks. Mr. R. also insisted that the salt duty 
 >elonged to the canals was a local tax raised for 
 heir benefit and submitted to only for that pur- 
 >ose. He also opposed throwing the rail road 
 debt incurred in all sections of the state upon the 
 canals. It would be in effect he urged, bringing an 
 ndirect tax on the west to pay ofl'a debt in which 
 every section of the State had a share. 
 
 Mr. STOW here obtained the floor and moved 
 hat the committee rise. Agreed to. 
 
 A communication from the Secretary of State, 
 nviting the Convention to attend the closing ex- 
 ercise of the State Normal school, was read. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 At quarter to 4 o'clock, there were only 53 
 :>re*ent. A quorum was at length obtained. 
 Mr. HARRISON'S amendment was rejected. ' 
 Mr. STOW (having the floor from this morn- 
 ng,) rose and addressed the committee at length 
 n opposition to the report of the committee on 
 finance. 
 
 The following is the amendment offered by Mr. 
 STOW ; although it was not in order, at that 
 time, it was read : 
 
 1 After paying the expenses of collection, superinten- 
 dence and ordinary repairs, $1,500,000 ot' the revenues of 
 the State canals, shall in each fiscal year, arid at that rate 
 fora shorter period, commencing on the first day of June, 
 1846, be set apart as a sinking fund to pay the interest and 
 redeem the principal of the state debt until the first day 
 ol July, 1856, after which $-2,000,000 of said revenues shall 
 continue to be applied or set apart annually until the 
 same shall be wholly paid; and the principal and income 
 of the said sinking fund *hall be sacredly applied to that 
 purpose. 
 
 LA.ND TENURES. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS, from committee No. 18, submit- 
 ted the following report: 
 
 ARTICLE . 
 
 <}1. All feudal tenures of any description, with all their 
 incidents, are abolished. 
 
 fy2 Any lease or grant of agricultural land for a longer 
 period than ten years, herealter made, in which shall be 
 reserved any rent or service of any kind, shall be void. 
 
 ^3. All covenants or conditions in any grant of land 
 whereby the right of 'he grantee to alien is in any manner 
 restrained, and all lines, quarter sal(;s and other charts 
 upon alienation, reserved in any grant of land herealter to 
 be made, shall be void. 
 
 The report was referred, and the Convention 
 adjourned to S 1-2 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 THURSDAY, (91** day} Sept. 17. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. POTTER. 
 
 At five minutes past the usual hour of meeting, 
 there were only 53 present. A lony pause ensued, 
 but no quorum was obtained till past 9. 
 
880 
 
 Tiie Convention, however, resolved into a com- 
 mittee of the whole, on the report of committee 
 No. 3 on 
 
 THE CANALS, FINANCES, &c. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR resumed the Chair. 
 
 The pending question was on the amendment 
 offered by Mr. STOW, settinjj aside $1 000,000 
 of the canal revenues annually for 10 years, as a 
 sinking fund (or the extinguishment of the State 
 debt, and $2,000,000 annually thereafter till the 
 same is enfirelv paid. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he regretted to see so 
 few present. If any body else wanted the floor, 
 he would not say anything; more at this time. It 
 not, he would reply to some of the speeches that 
 had been made. He earnestly desired to see this 
 State, by its peoule, become the merchant, the 
 banker, and the carrier of this Union. And so 
 far as such a desire is calculated to benefit the 
 people of the whole State, and not to impair its 
 credit, he would adhere to it. In 1835, he had 
 th ; s de-are, and so desired to see the Erie canal 
 enlarged, as in the best judgment of the Legislature 
 they rnisjitt think proper; but not that a d bt 
 should be inclined to do i! ; and in this he agreed 
 with the canal board. So in 1S41, he labored to 
 procure, a sinking fund, to meet (he debt which 
 had been shadowed forth by Mr Haggles in 
 183S. It was then that we were in the deliri. 
 um fremens of our fiscal debauch. He then lent 
 himself as a feeble instrument in the legislature 
 tosavethe State fVom bankruptcy. Mr. WORDEN 
 and he (Mr. H.) agreed in 1841 to limit the ap- 
 propriations for these canals. But he, (Mr. H.) 
 asked for still further limitation to that work of 
 destruction, that ruinous debt. He asked that the 
 sinking fund held out in 1838 in figures, and ask- 
 ed for by the committees in 1840 and '41 should 
 be complied with in truth and in fact. He was 
 sorry that Mr. WORSEN would not go with him 
 as fur as he wanted, in this very important mat- 
 ter. But he did not. He wished the payment to 
 go on, and to rely on the surplusses, not for pay- 
 ment, but for whatever the public interest may 
 require for improvement of this canal. He had 
 persisted in this just policy for some years and he 
 would not now abandon it. Truth requited no 
 subterfuge ; let a man think freely and fearlessly 
 of anything human, and let him utter freely and 
 fearlessly what he thinks, and he then possesses 
 the power of leading and of commanding the res- 
 pect of his fellow men. As to the arguments ad- 
 duced about the Salt Tax, it was notorious that 
 the Salt Taxes and Auction Taxes did not pro- 
 ceed from the canals ; and therefore the canals 
 should pay what has been advanced to them from 
 any source not produced by themselves. The salt 
 and auction tax are derived from sources indepen- 
 dent of themselves. The canals do not produce 
 them. As to compounding interest yearly, he 
 would make this remark : a creditor may sue year- 
 ly for his money, but a State cannot thus sue ; 
 but must w..jt till the expiration of the loan ; and 
 the comptroller had only charged a proper amount 
 of interest for the money. Again the State cannot 
 pay the creditor when it pleases even if it has 
 the money. The Comptroller had the rule of com- 
 putation prescribed to him by the committee 
 and the Convention. You have the tables of 
 the interest of the debt at simple interest and 
 
 by compound interest ; you can take the choice 
 of the two. They all could see that there are 
 three estimates spread before them. Take the 
 highest estimate and you will see that direct tax 
 es must be resorted to ; and this would be con- 
 trary to all former promises and pledges to all 
 your creditors. It would lie a re-galvanized copy 
 of the argument that led to creation of the debt, 
 as was Mr. STOW'S argument ; except that half 
 of the Niagara cataract of debt and taxation by 
 which the Gov. of Gibraltar is made to read a les- 
 son of political economy to this house. It- is the 
 same in spirit as that policy of '37 '38, that led 
 this State on in '4 1 to the verge of social bankrupt- 
 cy It is seeking for a loan in disguise though it is 
 not honest and bold enough to come out and say 
 so. It amounts to this, if it really means what 
 it says. He (Mr. H.) denied having said any 
 thing about the culmination of western produce. 
 And he did not say that any boatmen had told 
 him they disregarded this rule of easiest trac- 
 tion that had been alluded to. The rule of easi- 
 est traction was understood but all this noise 
 about the greatest and easiest traction, has very 
 little to do with the practical question involved 
 in these canals and the report of the committee. 
 Narrow, as it is known that the canals are, they 
 are able now to admit boats of 80 tons. And if 
 you deepen the water but one foot, you can add 
 to the tonnage, and add several feet to the 
 length of the boat. 
 
 The gentleman from Erie, (Mr. STOW,) had 
 not acted with his usual candor about this. He 
 had passed over the facts of the case, brought in 
 again for argument the Niagara Cataract of debt 
 and'of spending money, rushed across the Atlan- 
 tic to draw illustrations from the imprisoning 
 rock of Gibraltar, and brought us back by the 
 aid of a British governor to the system of how to 
 create a debt in order to get capital to carry on 
 the public works. If that gentleman (Mr. STOW) 
 had wished to show how to cripple, and bear 
 down labor to the dust, he could go to no better 
 place than the British government, and to that 
 Gibraltar, where the commander holds a place 
 probably next in tyranny and oppression to that 
 held by the infamous Sir Hudson Lowe, on the 
 imprisoning rock of St. Helena. The taxes are 
 the iron heel that presses down the heart of 
 labor all over the world. 
 
 If we want a great charnel house of pauperism, 
 go on with these debts and taxation. Go on, and 
 borrow money and squander it all over the state 
 again. They ought not to tie up the hands of the ca- 
 rial board against making a reduction of tolls on 
 the canals, when such a reduction must become 
 necessary, and would become necessary in a very 
 few years. The canals might go on increasing 
 for eight or ten years in the ratio of the last ; 
 but after that, the rail roads other routes of 
 transportation three months of winter 
 all would combine to make the revenues 
 slacken after ten years, and render it necessary to 
 reduce the rates of tolls in fii'teen years from the 
 present time at the very farthest. He was not sa- 
 tisfied that rail roads would cut down the revenue 
 of the canals as some gentlemen said they would. 
 They would do it for when railroad stockholders 
 could riot make eight or six per cent on their ca- 
 pital, they would learn how to make one or two 
 
881 
 
 per cent. He had placed his calculations on the 
 ground that it might be eight or ten, or twelve 
 years before this took place. It might be longer 
 or shorter. The debt makes the tolls heavy 
 and it is the debt that cripples the canal 
 more than the mud that was in it in 1841. 
 Mr. H. went on to speak of the surplusses that 
 would accrue in each succeeding year, (commenc- 
 ing with a common difference of $40,000, or say 
 in round numbers $50,000; two times $150,000 
 next year and so on,) and repeated his former 
 statement relative to these surplusses being suffi- 
 cient to double the line of locks to Syracuse raise 
 the water to five feer, enlarge the capacity of the 
 chamber, &c. He instanced the fact that 30,000 
 boats had passed the old lock at Schenectady, 
 (Schemerhorn's not Alexander's,) in a season, 
 and at Lockport, only about half that number. 
 And whilst he deprecated the destruction of the 
 old line of combined double locks at Lockport, as 
 being a wanton, and unnecessary destruction of 
 the public works; yet he considered that this 
 great cry about the detention of boats at Lockport 
 was all humbug. He thought the groceries and 
 groggeries there detained the boats more than any 
 thing else. He repeated that the surplusses in 
 10 years would enable the Canal Commissioners to 
 double the locks from Albany to Syracuse, deep- 
 en the water to five feet, &c., &c. ; and thus, for 
 that distance, to triple the capacity of the canal. 
 He alluded to the proceeds of canal tolls 
 for 1846; that in the first year by his plan, 
 there would be, say in round numbers, $60,- 
 000 of surplus ; the second year $160,000 r 
 the third year #240,000, and so on. By the safest 
 estimate that ci:uld be made, they could get $4,- 
 500,000 in ?0yehis; or if yon take the surplus for 
 the first year at $100,000, then it would be 
 $1,000,000 at the end of 10 years; and following 
 on in the calculations he had before brought 
 forward for them, the sum of the surpluses 
 must exceed $5,500,000, ot which $2,500,000 
 was to be laid out on the canal under his plan 
 Now he would ask, what will this $2,500,000 do 
 with a proper expenditure ? Enable you to, reach 
 Syracuse with all the facility you want enable 
 you to construct a line of enlarged locks all the 
 way from Albany to Buffalo. You may lengthen 
 the old locks to any length for $3,000 each they 
 cost 8 or $10,000 originally. You may raise the 
 water from the dock at Albany to 5 full feet 
 and have it 3 feet wider in the canal; that is what 
 this 2& millions will do! Who desires more ? 
 You can with this 2i millions give to the Erie 
 canal triple its present capacity ; and all this 
 labor will come directly in aid of any future en- 
 largement of the canal. They could (he ob- 
 served) have their boats lengthened safely so as 
 to carry 120 tons ; and even have wider boats. A 
 boat made externally on the plan of the present 
 line boats, of 17 feet beam, 95 feet long, drawing 
 3 feet 3 inches water, could be made to carry J so 
 tons ; and if this can be done with the present 
 means, is there (he would ask) any danger 
 to apprehend that the trade of the great West 
 would go down through Canada, before the 
 canal can earn surplus enough to enlarge it 
 to any extent that might be desirable. It 
 business comes in full as it is expected,^ and 
 you triple the capacity of the canal, then at the 
 
 present rates your tolls will be $8,000,000. But 
 be (Mr. H.) supposed that in fifteen or twenty 
 years, these tolls must be reduced fifty per cent.; 
 and then we should have $4,000,000 of tolls; and 
 the surplusses then would be sufficient to enlarge 
 the Erie canal to the full extent, as soon as want- 
 ed, and finish the Genesee Valley canal, if it cost 
 $3,000,000, and the Black River canal, even if it 
 cost $1,000,000. He thought that we could not 
 finish the public works for less than $15,000,000 
 others thought a less sum, and they go on the 
 plan that to pay a debt is not the best thing a man 
 can do with his money. The great west will 
 know that the plan of the committee is calculated 
 to secure the enlargement of this great canal in 
 such a manner a? they want, and as large as they 
 want it. Now, New York and Brooklyn are large 
 contributors to these canals. They helped to build 
 and pay for them It is of importance to them to 
 see these tolls reduced ; it is the interest of com- 
 merce and agriculture to see these tolls reduced 
 of every branch of industry, except those who 
 are to lay out the money. When the city of New 
 York sees that without any extraordinary outlay 
 the capacity of the canal can be enlarged one 
 half, and by a proper outlay of the means we 
 have, that we can triple its capacity in ten years, 
 and get the tolls reduced one half, and then get 
 $4,000,000 of tolls, they will see that the plan of 
 the committee is safe, honest, and secure. The 
 Convention of 1821 was a paying Convention. 
 They provided the means to pay the Erie and 
 Champlain canal debt ; and he begged of this Con- 
 vention to follow that example. Stamp on your 
 Constitution no project of delay, but let it be 
 marked for all time as a paying Constitution. If 
 they did not, he should regard it as an evidence 
 that they did not intend to pay at all ! 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said Before proceeding, Mr. 
 Chairman, to the discussion of the question un- 
 der consideration, I will state what the precise 
 question is. The committee on canals, &c., in 
 their reported plan propose that out of the nett 
 revenues of the State canals, the sum of fifteen 
 hundred thousand dollars shall annually be set 
 apart as a sinking fund to pay the principal and 
 interest, ot the canal debt ; that out of said reve- 
 nues, the further annual sum of $672,500 shall be 
 annually paid forever into the treasury for the 
 use of the State, in liquidation of the (alleged) 
 State claims for advances to the canals ; that out 
 of the last mentioned sum, five hundred thou- 
 sand dollars shall annually be set apart as a sink- 
 ing fund to pay the State debt, called the general 
 fund debt, until the same is paid : that the sur- 
 plus of the said net revenues, after deducting the 
 aforesaid sums of $1,500,000 and $672,500, (mak- 
 ing an aggregate of $2,172,500,) shall annually 
 be applied to the improvement of the Erie canal, 
 until such surplus shall amount to $2,500,000. 
 
 The gentleman from Erie (Mr. STOW) has pro- 
 posed an amendment, providing for the setting 
 apart out of the net revenues of the canals $1,- 
 500,000 annually for ten years as a sinking fund 
 for the payment of the whole debt of the State, 
 (including the canal and general fund debts,) and 
 after ten years for setting apart $2,000,000 out of 
 those revenues annually for the same purpose, till 
 the whole debt is fully paid. The plan of the 
 
 85 
 
882 
 
 committee and the amendment just stated show 
 the question under discussion. 
 
 Our proceedings on this subject, Mr. Chairman, 
 are watched with intense interest by vast num- 
 bers of our constituents, indeed by all who are 
 anxious for the prosperity, jealous of the honor, 
 regardful of the character of the State of New- 
 York ; and the subject is one which well justifies 
 this intensity of interest The question now to 
 be determined is no more nor less than whether 
 the unfinished public works of this state shall, 
 by the Constitution be sentenced to an enduring 
 suspension, be consigned to the sleep of death. 
 
 -. * -t -j _ il ;; _^* AT 
 
 of " debt and taxation." In the sentiments ex- 
 pressed by him on this subject I entirely concur. 
 And I utterly deny for myself and for those who 
 with me on this occasion advocate the proposed 
 amendment, all charge or insinuation that we 
 thereby advocate in any manner or to the slight- 
 est extent the principle, which in common with 
 that gentleman we earnestly reject from our po- 
 litical creed. In consonance with these views, I 
 regard it as a duty we owe to the people of this 
 State to provide for the certain and seasonable 
 extinguishment of the public debt, and for this 
 
 For disguise it as you may, the proposition of the 
 committee which thus takes from the net canal vides, 
 revenues the sum of $2,172,500, a sum exceed- 1 strate. 
 
 great and desirable object, the amendment 
 in question most fully and effectually pro- 
 as I hope clearly to able to demon- 
 In devismg the means to tfiect this ob- 
 
 ing any net revenue they have ever yet until the ject, we must of couise regard our existing con- 
 present year produced, is equivalent to a propo- ditioo and make our arrangements accordingly; we 
 
 sition so to cripple and limit expenditure on the 
 Erie canal as practically to prevent such 
 provement as may be indispensable to enable it 
 to maintain its present claim to the title of " the 
 great thoroughfare" between the vast West and 
 the Atlantic; and as to the unfinished canals, it 
 is tantamount to declaring that they shall remain 
 as they are for a long term of years at least ; a 
 term so long that its expiration will find them in 
 a condition little if any better than if the first dol 
 lar had never been expended upon them. Propo- 
 sitions presenting results like these may well ex- 
 cite the deepest and most anxious interest here 
 and elsewhere. I am glad, sir, that the amend- 
 ment has been offered, for it seems to me to fur- 
 nish to us a safe " middle way," a course which, 
 while it will enable us on the one side speedily to 
 extinguish the public debt without additional 
 public burdens, will on the other conduct us safe 
 ly, economically and with reasonable expedition 
 to the required improvement of our " grand" ca- 
 nal, and to the rescuing the others from the dila- 
 pidation and ruin now impending over them. 
 
 I desire now, Mr. Chairman, to express in 
 terms the most emphatic my abhorrence of pub- 
 lic debt; my utter dissent from, and rejection of 
 the doctrine that such a debt is a public bles- 
 sing. The citizen of New-York who has wit- 
 nessed the condition in which many of our sister 
 States are now placed, the intolerable burdens 
 devolved on them by the masses of debt under 
 which they labor, heavy taxation, public faith 
 violated, the fatal doctrine of repudiation become 
 familiar, character injured at home and ruined 
 abroad, nonaof us, I say, who have witnessed 
 all this, can for a moment advocate the doctrine 
 that a public debt is not an evil, that should ne- 
 ver be imposed on our people without great and 
 powerful reasons, and when imposed, should be 
 removed as speedily as the exigencies of our situ- 
 ation will allow. Such a debt may be useful in 
 the monarchies of Europe, and it is said that the 
 enormous debt of Great Britain, held as it is by 
 all classes of her subjects, is one of the strongest 
 ties that bind that people to their government 
 but in a republic no such ligament is wanted to 
 attach the citizen to its institutions, and its ex- 
 istence is to be regarded only in the light of a 
 burden, to be imposed as seldom and to be re- 
 moved as speedily as possible. The gentleman 
 from Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) has often during 
 this debate, painted in glowing colors the evils 
 
 are to be governed in this as in all other matters 
 by facts as they are not as we wish they might 
 have been. Had we no Erie canal in the condu 
 tion in which that work is, and no other canals 
 in an incomplete and partly finished state, and 
 had we in that event the same debt to pay and the 
 same revenues to pay it. with which wen; w have, 
 our line ol duty and action could not be mistaken. 
 An immediate application ot those revenues to 
 the payment of that debt would be demanded by 
 the principles above stated, piineiples entertain- 
 ed alike by the advocates ut the plan of the com- 
 mittee, and by the advocates ' of the proposed 
 amendment. But, sir, this is not our condition 
 we find ouiselves with out "great woik" requir- 
 ing material improvement, and with other impor- 
 tant works, on which very l^rge sums have been 
 t-xpended ; m an incomplete and useless state, and 
 demanding, by every consideration of duly to the 
 commonwealth and to tens ol thousands ot indivi- 
 dual citizens, their resumption and completion, 
 if that can be done consistently with the higher 
 duty .of providing for the certain extinguishment 
 of the public debt within a reasonable period In 
 my opinion, our financial condition, our sources 
 and means of revenue enable us safely and surely 
 to accomplish all these objects; and by the adop- 
 tion of the proposed amendment they will be el- 
 fected in such manner as to preserve inviolate the 
 public faith, and 10 impose no additional burdens 
 whatever on Ihe people ot the stute. 
 
 There has already been expended on the Erie 
 canal enlargement upwards of {$'13,000,000 ; much 
 of which, in consequence of the suspension of 
 that work, is of necessity producing no benefit ; 
 it is literally a "dead" investment. But of this- 
 suspension I make no complaint and it is unneces- 
 sary further to speak. But it will be conceded on 
 all hands that material improvements in that ca- 
 nal and additions to its present capacity are in- 
 dispensable ; without them it will be in vain to 
 expect, that transportation can be so cheapened 
 a~hd facilitated as to enable us successfully to 
 counteract the sharp and increasing competition 
 on the one hand of the southern and southwestern 
 natural and artificial channels of communication, 
 and on the other of the lakes, rivers and canals 
 of Canada, for the magnificent prize of the trade 
 of the West. What the expense of these requi- 
 site improvements and additions will be, a^id how 
 soon it will be indispensable to furnish them, it is 
 not important, perhaps it is not practicable to 
 
883 
 
 determine; the gentleman from Herkimer alleges 
 that every necessary expenditure to produce all 
 the beneiits, ever contemplated from the most ex- 
 tensive enlargement that has been at any time 
 sted, would not exceed $2,500,- 
 1 i n\v nearly correct he may be in this state- 
 ment, it is not material now to enquire; it is 
 sufficient to say that the plan proposed by him 
 affords no certainty of furnishing at the proper and 
 suitable times the required means, or any means 
 availably calculated to answer a call, on the com- 
 pliance with which the momentuous question 
 may depend, whether the vast trade above allud- 
 >all be retained in, and brought to the Erie 
 canal, and thus be made to keep up our rich rev- 
 enues and to contribute enduringly to the wealth 
 and prosperity of the state, and to the pre-emi- 
 nence of our commercial metropolis, or whether, 
 with all its varied and immense benefits, it shall 
 be borne far off to tb.e South and to the North, 
 under the influence of that energetic, skillfully 
 directed and ceaseless competition so forcibly 
 described yesterday by the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer. It seems to me, sir, under these circum- 
 stances that it is the dictate of prudence, nay o 
 self-preservation, not to tie up, and perchance to 
 effectually prohibit the use of, the means anc 
 revenues, which our vital interests may absolute 
 ly require. 
 
 The plan of the standing committee, as has 
 been seen, absolutely and effectually appropri- 
 ates exclusively to other uses the net revenues o 
 the canal to an amount exceeding the sum they 
 have reached in any year prior to the present 
 and tor all this we are compensated and consolec 
 by the allegation of the chairman of the commit 
 tee, that the aggregate increase of those revenues 
 in a period of ten years will be $2,500,000. Bu 
 we are not assured by the gentleman that that in 
 crease, assuming it to occur, will happen at time: 
 and periods, when our necessities may imperious 
 ly demand it. It is the extreme of rashness, as i 
 seems to me, thus to jeopard and peril interest, 
 of such magnitude ; and this too, sir, when n 
 necessity demands it, and no argument deserving 
 the credit of even plausibility has been or can b 
 urged in its favor. 
 
 Considerations of great if not of equal force ap 
 ply to the unfinished works, the Genesee Valle 
 and the Black River canals. On the uncomplete 
 part of the former, the sum of $1,802,000 ha 
 been expended ; and to complete it, as appear 
 from the report of the canal committee of the As 
 sembly in 1814, the sum of $1,322,000 is re- 
 quired, though in the same report it is stated that 
 responsible contractors have offered to do the 
 whole remaining work for one million of dollars. 
 On the Black River canal, there has already been 
 expended the sum of $1,675,357; and is stated 
 in the canal commissioners report of 1843, the 
 further sum of only $436,000 will fully complete 
 the work including the Erie canal feeder, an aux- 
 iliary to the latter canal, which there is the best 
 reason to believe will, at no remote period, be 
 found indispensable. The question is not now 
 whether these two canals shall be constructed ; 
 were that the question, it would doubtless re- 
 ceive from this convention an unanimous res- 
 ponse in the negative ; but it is, sir, whether we 
 shall expend the sum of $1,322,000 to complete 
 
 tie one, and $436,000 to complete the other; or 
 whether it is worth while for the State (were the 
 uestion now an original one)to obtain the Genesee 
 /"alley canal for $l,322,000,and the Black River ca- 
 lal and Erie canal feeder for $436,000. This being 
 he true state of the case, and the real point pre- 
 euted and the requisite funds being obtainable 
 rom the canal revenues, without creating a dol- 
 ar of debt or a shilling of taxation, I cannot hes- 
 tale to give an affirmative answer to the question, 
 tad to pronounce it as rny deliberate opinion that, 
 :onsidered in a financial and politico-economical 
 new merely, these works should be resumed and 
 completed with such reasonable diligence as the 
 urid* applicable to that purpose will allow. On 
 ,his branch of the case it becomes a relevant mai. 
 er of inquiry, whether the revenues derivable 
 :rorn these works would pay the expenses of re- 
 repairs and collection, and the interest on the sum 
 now required for their completion; for it they 
 would not do this, it, might with plausibility be 
 urged that they should be abandoned lorevei,"tho' 
 their completion could be effected without increase 
 of debt or taxation, and notwithstanding the rea- 
 sons of public faith and policy demanding their 
 completion. Let us look for a moment, Mr. 
 Criairman, at this question of revenues from these 
 works. Preliminarily it is to be remarked, that 
 on every principle of common sense, of common 
 justice, these works would in an estimation of 
 their productive value be entitled to be credited 
 with two classes of items: First, with the tolls 
 received on them directly; secondly, with the 
 Erie canal toll furnished by them. It has been 
 otten asserted that the lateral canals are a dead 
 weight on the State, and that their contributions 
 to revenues fall ruinously short of paying the ex- 
 pense of their repairs, &c. and the", interest on 
 their cost ; and this assertion arises from the fact 
 that the direct tolls received on them have alone 
 been taken into the account; but when they are 
 credited with the amount contributed bv them to 
 the Erie canal revenues, a totally different result 
 is exhibited and a brighter as well as truer pic- 
 ture is presented. Thus, the Comptroller's re- 
 port of 1836 shows, that it the lateral canals then 
 existing had been credited with the tolls they 
 brought to the Erie canal, instead of there being 
 a deficiency of revenue tor payment of inter- 
 est, repairs, &c. of $48.000, there would be 
 a surplus ol $73,000! The comptroller says 
 that much of this would have been transport- 
 ed on the Erie canal, had there been no luteral 
 canals this is a measure doubtless true ; but he 
 gives no credit for the return freight they create, 
 and it is a well known fact in reference to our ca- 
 nals, that any increase in what is sent to the east- 
 ern markets produces as a general rule a corres- 
 ponding increase in the return or " up" freight. 
 By the Comptroller's report of 1845, it appears 
 that including the tolls received immediately 
 from the lateral canals, and those which they con- 
 tributed to the Erie, the excess of their revenues 
 over and above the interest of their costs and the 
 expenses of their maintenance, was for the prece- 
 ding year $347,000. Applying these just rules 
 to the^works in question, /^ino reasonable doubt 
 can be entertained that they will each afford 
 a revenue, adequate at least to defray^ their cur- 
 rent expenses and the interests on the sums now 
 
884 
 
 required for their completion. In reference to 
 the unfinished portion of the Genesee Valley ca- 
 nal, the gentleman from Allegany (Mr. ANGEL,) 
 has given us a detailed statement of facts, show- 
 ing what may reasonably be expected from that 
 work if completed. I will not repeat his state- 
 ment. It will suffice to say that, the various pro- 
 ducts of the region through which it passes, the 
 extent of territory that would be tributary to it, 
 its connection with the navigable waters of the 
 Allegany, must impress every candid mind with 
 the conviction, that if completed, it would not 
 fail on the principles I have stated, to furnish a 
 fund fully adequate to the payment of its expen- 
 ses, and of the interest on the sum now required 
 for its completion. 
 
 As to the Black River canal, the same proposi- 
 tion may be unhesitatingly asserted, if any con- 
 fidence is to be placed in investigations made with 
 the greatest caution by men of unquestioned char- 
 acter and intelligence. In the Senate Documents 
 of 1836 is the i esult of such an investigation made 
 by Messrs. H. A. Foster of Oneida, N. J. Beach 
 of Lewis, and P. S. Stewart of Jefferson, gentle- 
 men known to majry members of this body to be 
 as reliable and respectable as any within our bor- 
 ders. It cannot be amiss to read for the informa- 
 tion of the Convention the following extract from 
 that document, bearing the signatures of the per- 
 sons I have mentioned : 
 
 Our information shows conclusively that the 
 imports and exports for the past year of the dis- 
 trict of country comprised of the towns of Lee, 
 Western, Steuben, Boonville and one half of Rem- 
 sen, in the county of Oneida, the whole of Lewis 
 county, the towns of Champion, Rutland, Rod- 
 man, Watertown, Wilna, Le Ray, Pamelia, Ant- 
 werp, Philadelphia and one half of Orleans and 
 Alexandria in Jefferson, and Edwards, De Kalb, 
 Fowler, Gouverneur and Rossie in St. Lawrence 
 county, amounts in 
 
 Tons of merchandize to 2,293 
 
 " potash.. 1,290 
 
 butter 1,217 
 
 cheese.. 517 
 
 pork and beef in barrels. . ] ,052 
 
 whiskey 350 
 
 flour 911 
 
 salt 3,117 
 
 staves 40 
 
 plaster 1,500 
 
 wool 25 
 
 cordage and hemp 125 
 
 beer 60 
 
 lumber, includ'g shingles 0,258 
 iron, iron ore & castings 2,167 
 
 sundries 335 
 
 It is ascertained that upwards ol 20,- 
 GOO head of cattle have been driven 
 to market the past season from this 
 district, one half of which we may 
 safely calculate would be slaughter- 
 ed near Carthage the beef barrel- 
 led and sent by the canal in tons, 3,750 
 Many inquiries were made to ascer- 
 tain the average transportation per 
 family of grain of all description, 
 flour, butter and cheese contracted 
 to be delivered along the line of the 
 
 Erie canal ; stock, grass seed and 
 the various articles not enumerated 
 above, which do not find a market 
 in the country where they are pro- 
 duced, but are sold at Utica, Rome 
 and Ogdensburgh; the result by 
 combining a great number of opin- 
 ions is that the average is not less 
 than one ton per family 9,940 
 
 To show the above estima.te to be with- 
 in the truth, it is proper to state that 
 the town of Philadelphia, in Jeffer- 
 son county, containing 278 families, 
 has sent to market the present sea- 
 son upwards of 15,000 bushels of 
 wheat, this item alone making 540 
 tons, and the town of Ly me, in the 
 same county, with a population of 3,- 
 816, has produced upwards of 52,000 
 bushels of wheat; these are but spe- 
 cimens of the productiveness of the 
 country many others might be ad- 
 duced, showing an equal productive- 
 ness. Add for the towns of Hermon 
 and Pierpoint in St. Lawrence coun- 
 ty, not embraced in the above esti- 
 mate in proportion to their popula- 
 tion, 583 
 
 Add for the north part of Herkimer co. 
 which would get its supplies of salt, 
 flour and plaster by the contempla- 
 ted canal a like amount, 583 
 
 Making a total amount of. .... 36,113 tons. 
 
 Which at 9 mills per ton per mile on 
 sixty miles, being the average distance 
 to the Erie canal, will be in tolls $19,- 
 501, $19,501 
 
 Your memorialists have taken due pains 
 to ascertain the probable quantity of 
 pine timber which would find its way 
 to the Hudson immediately upon the 
 opening of the canal, exclusive of what 
 is now forwarded by different modes 
 of conveyance, 15,000,000 feet, for 200 
 miles, including the additional trans- 
 portation on the Erie canal, add 5 mills 
 per ton per mile*. 15,000 
 
 10,000 M. shingles at 5 mills per ton per 
 mile, 2,000 
 
 200,000 cubic feet of square timber in 
 rafts, 4,000 tons at Ic. 5 mills per ton 
 per mile, 12,000 
 
 The country upon the head waters of the 
 Black, Moose, Independence and Bea- 
 ver rivers, and Woodhull, Otter and 
 Lewis creeks abounds with timber; 
 we may safely calculate that 100,000 
 cubic feet will pass in rafts to the Hud- 
 son annually, to 2,000 tons at Ic. and 
 5 mills per ton per mile, 6,000 
 
 Making for the lumber business alone,. . $35,000 
 Add for merchandize, &c 19,501 
 
 And we have for the first year's business, $54,501 
 If it is assumed that the preceding estimates are 
 greatly beyond the reality, still it seems to me 
 impossible to say that the business that will be 
 furnished to the Black River canal, and through 
 
885 
 
 its means to the Erie, will not, in all reasonable 
 probability," afford a full ant 1 }< . nty to 
 
 the Sfote for the comparatively small sum now 
 required to bring it into use. It is to be also ob- 
 served, as 1 have stated, that, one prominent mo- 
 tive, which induced the law authorising this 
 work, was the supplying an additional feeder for 
 the Erie canal ; even now this addition to the ca- 
 pacity of that canal is often needed, and when it 
 comes to be enlarged or improved, even to the 
 extent intimated by the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer, I hazard little in saying that this feeder will 
 be indispensable. The Legislature were exceed- 
 ingly careful to secure this subject the very ti- 
 tle of the act is " for the construction of the Black 
 River canal and Erie canal feeder " and its last 
 section expressly provides for securing to the 
 Erie canal not only all the w r ater required for the 
 Black River canal itself, but all the surplus wa- 
 ters, and prescribes the mode of conducting these 
 surplus waters to the Erie canal. It is known to 
 all that it is a work of difficulty to furnish the 
 proper supply of water for that level of the Erie 
 canal into which the waters of the Black Rner 
 canal would flow ; on many occasions that level 
 would scarcely have been navigable without the 
 aid afforded by the waters of the Chenango canal 
 uniting with it at Utica ; and I am just informed 
 by my colleague near me, (Mr. CANDEE,) that in 
 a single season the Erie canal was for the space 
 of two months dependent on, the waters of the 
 Chenango. 
 
 Again, Mr. Chairman, viewing this question 
 as enlightened men should view it, is it irrele* 
 vant, is it chimerical to refer to the unquestioned 
 benefits which the completion of these works 
 would produce, irrespective of the question of 
 direct revenue from them ? Is it nothing, sir, to 
 know that thereby extensive tracts of country 
 would be open to settlement aud cultivation ; that 
 a vast amount of productions <<f the forest, of the 
 mines, of agriculture, now precluded from use by 
 inability to reach a market, w r ould thus be made 
 a means of comfort and of competency to thou- 
 sands ; that our population and wealth, our moral 
 and physical power would be thus increased ; and 
 while the sum of human happiness would be thus 
 augmented, this commonwealth would at the 
 same time make mere and more sure, more and 
 more just its title to pre-eminence among its sis- 
 ters of the confederacy ? I speak this, sir, in no 
 visionary, no " new impulse" sense. I am not 
 one of those who believe that, for the sake of the 
 ry" of the State, or for the sake of adding to 
 ite wealth and population by means of 
 " public improvements" in localities, the trea- 
 sure of the people should be expended and public 
 burdens imposed; but, sir, 1 do believe that such 
 considerations, among others, are properly to be 
 taken into view, when the question is such as 
 that now before us ; and I believe that the most 
 strenuous advocate of economy and retrenchment, 
 if he has a single spark of humanity, philanthro- 
 py or patriotism in his bosom, will not disregard 
 them. 
 
 We have heard much, sir, of " public faith" 
 during this debate, but so far as that faith has 
 thus far been discoursed about, it has had refe- 
 rence solely to the public creditor ; in all that 
 has been said I fully concur; but in my judg- 
 
 ment there are other matters than merely the 
 pnt of debt, in reference to which there may 
 public faith." If I err not greatly, this 
 "faith" can be and has been pledged to others 
 than public creditors, and this faith thus pledged 
 has been relied on and has been acted on by great 
 numbers of our fellow citizens. The people of 
 this State, acting in their sov icity, 
 
 through the only agents and representatives of 
 that sovereignty, the legislature, solemnly ordain- 
 ed and declared on the 19th day of April, l^-'Jii, 
 that the Black River canal should be constructed 
 with all reasonable diligence, and on the Gth day 
 of May, in the same year, they made the same 
 solemn declaration as to the Genesee Valley Ca- 
 nal. The work was accordingly commenced and 
 has been carried to different stages of completion 
 throughout the whole line of both. On these or- 
 dinances and declarations, on this plighted faith 
 of the sovereign power, multitudes of men have 
 relied; and so relying, have purchased their 
 farms, built their houses, erected their work- 
 shops, expended and invested their money, made 
 their arrangements for business and for life, aban- 
 doned their old residences and pursuits and en- 
 tered upon new. And was there, sir, no " faith" 
 here ? nothing which could be violated nothing 
 that imposed any obligation? I say, sir, that 
 there was ; and while we sacredly and inviolably 
 preserve our faith to thje public creditor, let us 
 beware how we break it to thousands of our citi- 
 zens. Let me not be misunderstood or misrepre- 
 sented ; I do not for a moment pretend that the 
 state was bound at all events to prosecute these 
 works to completion ; such a doctrine would be 
 monstrous and absurd. Many circumstances might 
 occur to forbid and prevent such a result ; any un- 
 foreseen public calamity depriving the State of 
 the means except by resorl to debt and taxation ; 
 or even the inability of the State without the aid 
 of general direct taxation, these and similar events 
 I am willing to concede would answer all allega- 
 tions of a violation of plighted faith in this regard. 
 I do not believe that " internal improvements" 
 local in their character are to be constructed 
 through means of creation of public debt to be dis- 
 charged only by direct taxation on the whole 
 people ; I advocate no such proposition. 
 ' But, sir, I do mean to say that when these leg- 
 islative acts have thus been passed, when citizens 
 in vast numbers have acted on the faith of them, 
 and will be made to suffer inconvenience, dis- 
 tress and loss, by their not being executed, it is 
 the solemn duty of the state to carry them out, if 
 it ca-n be done consistently with the principles I 
 have above stated ; and their needless, reckless 
 abandonment is to every substantial purpose mor- 
 illy and equitably a violation of the plighted 
 faith of the State, second only in turpitude to its 
 violation in the case of the public creditor, 
 .ieving as I do, that by means of the canal reve- 
 nues, without resort to taxation or to debt, and on 
 the plan proposed by the amendment in question, 
 ;hese works can be completed in a reasonable 
 :ime, I cannot refrain from saying that their aban- 
 lonment as substantially proposed in the plan of 
 he standing committee would violate our faith, 
 fully our honor, and sow far and wide the seeds 
 of discontent and dis-ention. Further, sir,j[ wish 
 hat the members of this Convention, with my 
 
886 
 
 venerable friend (Mr. ALLEN) from New York 
 at their head, could accompany me along the 
 lines of these unfinished public works, including 
 the Erie canal enlargement, and witness the 
 scenes of desolation that would every where 
 meet the eye ; expensive structures going to de- 
 cay, costly materials scattered along in shape- 
 less masses, miles of canal here and there in a 
 partly finished state, other miles entirely comple- 
 ted but now deserted and rapidly filling up and 
 choked with weeds and brambles ; locks firmly 
 and well built crumbling under the influence of 
 the elements in fine, all the outward eviden- 
 ces thatdistress,bankruptcy, ruin, must have fallen 
 with a mortal weight on that power, whatever 
 it might be, that had thus commenced, and thus 
 left these structures. What a spectacle for a 
 citizen of New York ! 
 
 Again, sir, this is not all. In years gone by, 
 persons clothed with the authority of the 'sove- 
 reignty" of New York entered on the gardens, 
 and door yards, and orchards, and beautifully cul- 
 tivated fields of hutidieds of your citizens, and 
 there commenced to plough and dig and scrape, 
 saying that they did so by authority of the State, 
 and consoling the citizen for this desecration of 
 his estate by the promise and the assurance, that 
 this was all for the public good, and that, his eye 
 should soon be rejoiced wllh the view of a beau- 
 tiful artificial river bearing on its bosom varied 
 productions of his and his neighbgr's farms and 
 forests and workshops ! Well, sir, this went on; 
 the citizen quietly submitted to this intrusion, 
 looking to the performance of the promise ; and 
 what now is the result ? Why, sir, a miserable, 
 halt-finished, mis-shapen ditch, marring and de- 
 facing his lands; useless materials.strewn along by 
 its side; his property depreciated; his comfort 
 and his interests seriously affected. Now, sir, if 
 my brethren of the Convention could personallv 
 witness these spectacles of desolation, they would 
 say, not that debt and taxation should be incurred 
 to remedy these evils, but that it, without resort- 
 ing to either, and by a judicious application of the 
 resources of the Stale these spectacles should scon 
 cease to dishonor and disgrace us, they would 
 with one loud accord say, Tet this state of things 
 no longer continue, let the hopes and expectations 
 of the citizen be realized, let the promises of the 
 State be performed. Were it necessary, for the 
 persons who are thus suffeiing, to endure the ex- 
 isting state of things for the sake of some great 
 good to the commonwealth, beyond all doubt they 
 would patiently and patriotically make the sacri- 
 fice ; but when no such necessity exists or can 
 justly be alleged, you may well imagine that they 
 are brooding with no good feeling over the inju- 
 ries they are enduring, and are looking forward 
 with impatience to the day of their deliverance. 
 The multitudes in various modes affected by this 
 question are loudly calling for redress this re- 
 dress they are entitled to demand and it is in the 
 power of the State to afford it to them, gradually, 
 perhaps, but certainly, by means of the canal 
 funds and revenues remaining after the applica- 
 tion of $1, 500,000 in the manner proposed by the 
 amendment under consideration. 
 
 While it is conceded that the discharge of the 
 public debt is first and at all events to be provi- 
 
 ded for, I contend that it is our imperative duty to 
 secure the suitable and requisite improvement of 
 ;he Erie canal, and the resumption of the unfin- 
 shed canals, including the Oneida River improve- 
 ment, if these latter objects can be accomplished 
 consistently with our first duty to the public cre- 
 ditor. I appreciate the magnitude and import- 
 ance of this subject in its various bearings; I have 
 approached and examined it with a full sense of 
 the responsibilities it involves, and my conclu- 
 sions have been formed with the deliberation 
 which it demanded. These conclusions are, that 
 the proposition contained in the amendment pre- 
 sents a sure and safe mode in which the public 
 debt may be discharged and the public improve- 
 ments just mentioned completed in a reasonable 
 time, and thus the public faith be preserved alike 
 with the creditor and the citizen. To show the 
 practical workings of the proposed sinking fund 
 of $1,500,000 and its sure extinguishment of 
 the public debt within a reasonable period, name- 
 ly, within twenty-three years, I will read the fol- 
 lowing table prepared by the gentleman'from Liv- 
 ingston, (Mr. AYRATJLT,) as skillful and able a 
 financier as is found on this floor, and who 
 vouches for its absolute accuracy: 
 
 Table showing the extinguishment of the pub- 
 lic debt of this State, by applying thereto annual- 
 ly out of the canal revenues the sum of $1,500,000 
 for ten years, and $2,000,000 thereafter: 
 
 Amount of Principal Debt July 1, 1846,- $22,300,000 
 Int. one jear ato percent ................... 1,226,500 
 
 Payment, 
 
 23,526,500 
 1 500.000 
 
 Debt July 1, 1847, ....... ................. 22,026,500 
 
 Int one year at 5 per cent, ................. 1,211,457 
 
 Payment,. 
 
 Debt July 1, 1848, 
 
 Int. one year at 6 per cent. 
 
 Payment," 
 
 Debt July 1, 1349,...-. 
 
 Int. one year at 5 per cent, 
 
 Payment, 
 
 Debt July 1,1850.. : 
 
 Int. one year at 5 per cent- 
 
 Payment- 
 
 Debt July 1, 1851 
 
 Int. one year at 5 per cent- 
 
 20,773,568 
 1,142,545 
 
 Payment- 
 
 Debt July 1, 1852 
 
 Int. one year at 6 per cent- 
 
 Payment 
 
 Debt July 1,1853, 
 
 Int. one year at 6 percent. 
 
 Payment- 
 
 1,102,144 
 
 21,141,142 
 1,500,000 
 
887 
 
 Debt July 1,1854 19,641,142] 
 Int.one yearato} percent 1,080,262 
 
 3,839,373 
 
 20,721,404 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1,983,841 
 July 1, 1869, $2,000,000 will over-pay the debtby 16,159 
 
 $2,000,000 
 
 Any gentleman can examine this table at his 
 pleasure. It can be understood by any one the 
 Least conversant with the commonest rules of 
 arithmetic, and it furnishes an unanswerable 
 demonstration of the important truth that the 
 public debt will beyond casualty or peradventure, 
 be fully paid and overpaid on the 1st day of Julv, 
 1869, by creating the sinking fund we propose ; 
 and this too, entirely out of the canal revenues, 
 without the creation of a dollar of new debt or 
 the imposition of any additional tax whatever ; 
 while at^the same time, as I will soon show, a 
 liberal annual sum will remain of the surplus of 
 those revenues, applicable to the improvement 
 of the Erie canal and of the gradual completion 
 of the other canals and applicable also to other 
 purposes of the government, if it is just and equi- 
 table that they should be so applied. I must con- 
 fess myself, sir, highly gratified at having been 
 able to arrive at a conclusion so auspicious to the 
 .best interest of our state, and so well calculated 
 to diffuse joy and giadness among so many thou- 
 sands of our people. You have perceived, sir, 
 that this table assumes the debt at $22,300,000, 
 and I affirm that this sum in fact exceeds the 
 whole of the existing debt of the state, deducting 
 therefrom the available means on hand. There 
 has been for a long time a sort of mystery hang- 
 ing around this question of the amount of the 
 public 'debt; and I have heard frequent com- 
 plaints that the accounts at the public offices are 
 kept in such a way, and the statements furnished 
 by them are made in such a manner, that it is 
 quite difficult to ascertain what the precise and 
 exact amount of our debt is. I believe I can 
 now solve the difficulty and present an accurate 
 view of this matter. The Comptroller, whose 
 peculiar financial notions I do not wholly admire, 
 but to whose capacity, integrity and fidelity, I 
 bear willing testimony, made a report on the 9th 
 instant in answer to a resolution of the Conven- 
 tion, which furnishes the data for precisely as- 
 certaining the present actual debt of the ^tate 
 over and above available funds on hand. This 
 debt for all practical and substantial purposes 
 may be stated at $21, 864, 998 35 on the 1st day 
 of September instant. I will state the mode by 
 which I arrive at this result, and every gentle- 
 man can then form his own opinion as to its sub- 
 stantial accuracy. 
 The Comptroller reports the whole debt as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 
 20,273,581 
 
 
 
 The interest for the ten preceding years has been 
 cast at 5 1-2 per cent, and $1,500,000 applied 
 as an annual sinking fund. 
 From July 1, 1856, the interest has been cast at 
 5 per cent., and $2,000,000 applied annually as 
 a sinking fund. 
 
 
 
 19,717,510 
 
 
 
 
 18,603,385. 
 
 
 
 
 17,433,554 
 
 
 
 
 16,205,231 
 
 
 
 14,915,492 
 
 
 
 13,561.266 
 
 
 
 12,139,329 
 
 
 
 10,646,295 
 
 
 
 9,078,609 
 
 
 
 7,432,539 
 
 
 
 
 
 Comptioller s bonus I,o07,002 59 
 
 
 $23,879,140 12 
 Add Indian annuities lor which 
 no stock is issued $1226V4,87 
 Also dues of specific funds 740,151,78 
 862,846 65 
 
 5.70-i ]/i 
 
 
 
 Total $24.741,937 37 
 
888 
 
 From this aggregate of $24 741,987 37, 1 de 
 duct as follows : 
 
 (1 ) Amount deposited $193,6-2256 
 
 (-2.) Loaned to solvent ctmal 
 
 and Railroad Companies- 1,713.000 00 
 (3.) Available funds 
 
 (4) Loan to city of Alba ay.- 
 
 (5) Loan to Banks 
 
 (6.) One half of "balance in 
 
 Banks" 
 
 505,44-J 14 
 
 30,000 00 
 
 314,443 02 
 
 15,476 30 
 
 $2,376,989 02 
 
 Leaviag as the true indebtedness $21,864,998 35 
 
 I will now explain the reasons for the pre- 
 ceding deductions. 
 
 Item No. 1, is deducted as being the amount 
 stated by the Comptroller to be actually deposit- 
 ed in the bank of the Manhattan Company in 
 payment of State stock past due. 
 
 Item No. '2, is deducted because it consists of 
 State stocks loaned to solvent companies, who 
 have punctually paid the interest, and who, there 
 is no reason to doubt, will continue to pay the 
 interest and redeem the principal when it fails 
 due. Some of these companies in addition to the 
 payment of the interest, pay a certain annual sum 
 for a sinking fund. This item [No. 2,] is com- 
 posed as follows : 
 State stock loaned to 
 
 Delaware and Hudson Canal Co $793,000 
 
 Auburn and Syracuse Railroad Co. 200,000 
 
 Auburn and Rochester Railroad Co 200,000 
 
 Long Island Railroad Co. 100,000 
 
 Hudson and Berkshire Railroad Company 150,000 
 
 Toaawanda Railroad Company 100,000 
 
 Tioga Coal-Iron Mining and Manufacturing 
 
 Company 70.000 
 
 Schenectady and Troy Railroad Co. 100,000 
 
 $1,713,000 
 
 Item No. 3 is deducted because in the same re- 
 port the Comptroller states it to be the amount of 
 cash on hand deposited in hank. 
 
 (ti'iu No 4 is deducted because it is a loan to 
 the city ot' Albany ; it is classed by the Compl rol- 
 ler among " unavailable*" Cor the reason that it 
 was not paid at maturity. The city of Albany 
 as well as the public in general, will be astonished 
 to learn thai a debt of $30,000 against that city is 
 an " unavailable" demand. Had the Comptroller 
 put the d< ; bt in suit, I am of opinion that the 
 sheriff would before this time have made it 
 ''available" 
 
 Item No. 5 is deducted for the following reason : 
 The .Comptroller (in the same report) states that 
 " if the banks continue to pay their several con- 
 tributions to the Safely Fund to the end of their 
 charters, this sum will be paid as it matures from 
 1830 to LSOS." Now I apprehend it may be safely 
 affirmed that the existing solvent safety fund banks 
 "will continue to pay their contributions to the 
 end of their charters." I do not believe that this 
 admits of any reasonable doubt. 
 
 Item No. 6 is deducted under the following cir- 
 cumstances : The Comptroller in the same re- 
 port, among unavailable items, enumerates " bal- 
 ances in banks. $230,952.60* and on this item he 
 remarks as follows: " Of the balance of $2?0,- 
 952.b'0, due from broken banks, some portion will 
 be paid from the safety fund and a portion will be 
 lost." It may well be believed by all, who know 
 the proverbial caution of the Comptroller and his 
 disinclination to show the '"sunny side" in fi- 
 
 nancial matters, that under the statement 1 have 
 just extraeted from his report, it will be very safe 
 to estimate his " some proportion" at 50 per cent, 
 and I have made the deduction accordingly. I 
 have been thus particular, Mr. Chairman, in this 
 statement, for the purpose in part ot contributing 
 my share to satisfy the public curiosity as to the 
 real amount of our public debt, but mostly to 
 show that this debt is not assumed at too small a 
 sum in the table 1 had the honor to read. 
 
 For the sake of convenience I will call the to- 
 tal debt $22,000,000, composed of the canal debt 
 say $17,000,000, and the General Fund debt say 
 $5,000,000; these sums of course are not precise- 
 ly accurate, but for all the purposes of this dis- 
 cussion they are sufficiently so. It will be seen 
 then that by the plan I advocate, the whole debt 
 of the State of every kind will be cancelled, in- 
 eluding; the debts created by the lateral canals, by 
 I he defaulting railroads, &c., arid that the debt 
 denominated the general f un d d en t w jU be extin- 
 guished, by means of the canal revenues. This 
 latter debi, as has already been stated, -amounts to 
 about five millions of dollars, and by paying that 
 in this manner, the canal revenues pay to the 
 General Fund that sum. It is beyond ill doubt 
 or question that the canals ought to pay t<r the 
 General Fund, or in other words, to the State for 
 general purposes, such sums as have been ad- 
 vanced from that fund for the canals. The ques- 
 tion what the amount of these sums is has been 
 fully discussed on this floor by the gentleman from 
 Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) and the gentlemen 
 from Allegany (Messrs. ANGEL and STOW); the 
 former contends that the debt due from the canals 
 to the General Fund is thirteen millions of dol- 
 lars, the greater part of which is composed of the 
 auction and salt duties and of compound interest. 
 The latter gentlemen have most ably, and in my 
 judgment, most successfully argued that this debt 
 does not on any just ground exceed five millions 
 of dollars, and that the auction and salt duties 
 cannot on any legal or equitable principle be 
 leemed a part of it. Without that part no one 
 would contend that this debt exceeds five millions. 
 I s-hall not perform (he superogatory part of re- 
 peating the arguments of the gentlemen I have 
 mentioned, but if I mistake not, they demon- 
 strated that the auction duties were mainly brought 
 into being by the canals, that they were created 
 by and for the canals specially, and that thev 
 ,vere so levied and paid that they were in fact a 
 local and not a general tax ; that as to the salt du- 
 ties they scarcely existed prior to the canals; that 
 they were raised 400 per cent per bushel expressly 
 for the canal; and by means solely of the canals the 
 manufacture was so increased as to raise a large, in- 
 stead of a trifling sum from this source ; that from 
 the very nature of the case, this tax was a local tax 
 imposed on the western section of the State. in con- 
 sideration of the peculiar benefits they were to de- 
 rive from 'he Eri< j canal ; these arid various other 
 arguments adduced by those gentlemen demonsira- 
 ed, in my judgment, that these items could, on no 
 >roper principle, be used to swell the debt of the 
 canals to the General Fund ; and they thus show- 
 ed that this debt dues not exceed the sum of five 
 millions. Indeed, sir, so strong is rny conviction 
 n this point that I would be willing to risk the 
 decision of the whole question now pending, on 
 
889 
 
 the issue of a submission ot' these claims to the 
 General Fund against the canals, to the arbitra- 
 ment of any impartial tribunal, of the present 
 Chancellor or present Judges of the Supreme 
 Court ; and it on a lair view ot all the facts, and 
 after hearing the gentleman from Herkimer as 
 counsel foi the General Fund, and the gentleman 
 from Erie in behalf of the canals, either of those 
 tribunals would award against ihe latter over the 
 sum of five millions of dollars, I would be almost 
 willing 10 say that I would adopt the sinking fund 
 proposed by the standing committee, and yield ip 
 that pioposed by the amendment. And, sir, this 
 is a matter not of idle theory or curious specula- 
 tion merely, but ot practical importance; for up- 
 on it the gentleman from Heikimer mainly builds 
 his arguments in support of the sinking funds, 
 which he has advocated and in behaH of the uses 
 Co which the latter ot his proposed funds (.$672,- 
 500) should be applied. If the debt of the canals 
 to the General Fund is only five millions, the gen- 
 tleman concedes that this last sum should be re. 
 ducedto $200,000. The gentleman has repeated- 
 ly, in the course of this debate, staled, and assum- 
 ed as ptinciple, that as between the canals and 
 the General Fund, all that could be required ot 
 the tormer was to pay the debt justly due fiom 
 them for advances out of the General Fund; he 
 has over and over again repudiated the doctrine 
 that tne canals should be burdened with the sup- 
 port of ihe government and the payment of its 
 annual current expenses. I atn not to say wheth- 
 er the views of the gentleman on this point are or 
 are not sound. 
 
 I iie>ire, in connection with this branch of the 
 subject, Mr. Chairman, to call the attention of the 
 committee if a U.cl that cannot fail to excite their 
 unfeigned astonishment. The distinguished gen- 
 tleman, to whom 1 have so often alluded, (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN) has, as I have before remarked, often 
 in tins debate spoken in terms of just abhorrence 
 of the violation of the public faith ; he has insist- 
 ed that that faith would be violated by the adop- 
 tion ot any plan that did not provide lor the pay- 
 ment of the public debt as early as the year 1864, 
 and all thete allegations he has based mainly, at 
 times apparently entirely, on the pledge, contain- 
 ed, as he alleges,. in the famous act of 1842, that 
 the public^ debt should be paid within 22 and 
 one-half yvars after that time. VVe have heard 
 mucn now and heretofore, within and without 
 this hall, of the vaunted " policy of 1842," as ex- 
 hibited by that act, and as marufe-ttd among other 
 provisions of that act, by thai above mentioned in 
 reference to the float time of paying the public 
 ciedilor. Now, Mi. Chairman, will it not excite 
 your special wonder and that of all who hear me, 
 when I state the fact, that the provisions of the 
 proposed amendment not only do not violate the 
 public f.uth by extending the payment of the pub- 
 lic debt beyond the time limited in the act of 1842, 
 but they actually preserve it more than inviolate 
 by shortening that time three >ears! 80 much 
 has been said on this subject, and so much reli- 
 ance has been placed by that gentleman in various 
 parts of his argument on that ptovision of the act 
 ot 1842, thai it cannot be amiss, sir, to devote a 
 few moments to demonstrating that that celebrated 
 act extends the time of payment of the public- 
 debt to thirty years instead of twenty -two and an 
 
 half to 1871 or 1872 instead of to 1869, as is pro- 
 vided in the amendment, which the gentleman 
 denounces us a violation of the public faith, for 
 the reason, as he asserts, that it postpones beyond 
 the period plighted and pledged by the act of 
 1842, the payment of the just deotsof the state. 
 
 This act was passed on the 29th day of March, 
 1842 ; it provides among other things that the 
 commissioners of the Canal fund shall, "at the 
 close of every fiscal year, ascertain and state the 
 amount of canal debt now existing, and author- 
 ized by this act, so far as the same shall remain 
 unpaid, and distinctly, the annual interest on 
 said debt ;" and that "the surplus of the canal 
 revenue, after paying all just expenses, &c., 
 shall, to an amount at least equal to one-third of 
 the interest of the canal debt remaining unpaid 
 be sacredly devoted as a sinking fund," &c. The 
 bare reading of these provisions of this act- must 
 satisfy any person ordinarily versed in the Eng- 
 lish language, that its true and only construction 
 is, that the sinking fund thereby provided is a 
 sum equal to one-third of the interest on the ca- 
 nal debt remaining unpaid at the close of every 
 fiscal year. Besides, sir, is it possible to suppose 
 that the author of that act, or the legislature 
 which passed it, if he or they had intended that a 
 fixed and certain sum should annually be set a- 
 part as a sinking fund, would have resorted to the 
 clumsy circumlocution of saying that "it should 
 be a sum equal at least to one-third of the inter- 
 est of debt," &c., instead of stating directly the 
 sum itself? Yet, sir, the whole argument of the 
 gentleman, that that act promised and pledged the 
 public faith to the payment of the debt in 22i 
 years, is founded on the assumption that the true 
 construction of the act is, that the sinking fund 
 provided by it, is a sum equal to one-third of the 
 interest of the debt as it then was, instead of 
 one-third of the interest on the debt remaining 
 unpaid at the close of each year. Sir, that debt 
 as it then existed was well known it was $20,- 
 710,33o one-third of its interest was $375,909 
 and if this latter sum had been intended as the 
 fixed and permanent sinking fund, it is impossible 
 to believe that the sum would not have been 
 named and stated in the act. [Here the gentle- 
 man from New York (Mr. TILDEJV) inquired 
 whether the debt would ever be fully paid on 
 the construction given to the act by'the gentle- 
 man from Oneida.] 1 answer the gentleman, by 
 informing him that under the operation of the 
 sinking fund provided by the act, an "infinitesi- 
 mal" sum would remain unpaid after the expira- 
 tion of thirty yt ars but if this is an absurdity, 
 it is one for which the authors of the act not oth- 
 ers, are responsible, Besides, I will furnish the 
 gentleman, in a moment, with an authority as to 
 the construction of the act, with which he at 
 least, will be satisfied I said, sir, that this act 
 of '42 provided for the payment of the debt in 
 thirty years, and no sooner ; and the following 
 table proves the truth of my assertion. [See 
 statement A.] 
 
 I promised, sir, to furnish the gentleman from 
 New York with an authority, to which he at 
 least, would bow with reverence and that au- 
 thority is no le-s than the present Comptroller. 
 In the annual report of that officer for the year 
 1845, he expressly asserts the precise construe- 
 
 86 
 
890 
 
 tion for which I contend ; and he ascertains the 
 sum of the sinking fund for that year according- 
 ly 
 
 The following is his language : 
 
 The act of 1842 provides that the Commissioners of the 
 Canal Fun 1 shall, at the close oi each year, make a staie- 
 ment ot all the expenditures on account of the several ca- 
 nal funds, and also a statement uf all the canal revenues, 
 and of the canal debt, and the amount required to pay the 
 annual interest thereon. 
 
 The an ual stat^rmnt made out according to the require, 
 ments of th- liw i cirri CN! to, shows a surplus o! canal rev- 
 enues, beyon i th payments made, as provided in the sr.me 
 law, ior the fiscal year ending on the 30th September last, 
 (1844 ) of $572 645 35. The annual int. on the ranal debt re- 
 7/zamni unpaid at the dose oj the year, is $1,1-26,697 90 one 
 thiid of this sum is $575,465 96, and the 12th section of the 
 act of 1842 declares, that the canal surplus, shall, to an 
 amount et least equal to one-third of the interest of the ca- 
 nal debt remaining unpaid, be sacre lly devoted and appli- 
 ed as a sinking hind lor the redemption of the canal fund. 
 
 It will be seen that this officer states the sink- 
 ing fund for that year to be $375,465, being one 
 third of the interest on the debt remaining un- 
 paid at the close of the preceding fiscal year, in- 
 stead of $375,909, one third of the interest on the 
 debt as it was at the time of the passage of the 
 act of '42. What could be more explicit? and 
 what then becomes of the argument of the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer, based as it mainly is in 
 many of its wholly important parts on the assump- 
 tion that the act o"f '42 pledged the faith of the 
 State to the payment of its debt in 22g years ? 
 
 Having, as I trust, sir,incontrovertibly demon- 
 stated that by the plan proposed in the amend- 
 ment the entire debt of this State would be cer- 
 tainly extinguished in the year 1869, and this 
 great and primary object being thus secured, I 
 will proceed to consider the effect and bearing of 
 that amendment on the farther great and impor- 
 tant question of the Erie canal improvement and 
 the completion of the Erie canal improvement 
 and the completion of the unfinished canals. 
 
 [The gentleman from Clinton ^Mr. STETSON) 
 here inquired whether the act of '42 contained 
 any provision necessarily postponing the payment 
 of any part of the public debt as it falls due ; and 
 intimating that such was the effect of the amend- 
 ment under consideration.] 
 
 I inform the gentleman that in this respect there 
 is no difference between the act of '42 and the 
 proposed amendment ; neither of them' contains 
 any such provision or any thing bearing any re- 
 semblance to it. 
 
 The nett canal revenues of the present year 
 may be safely stated at about $2,200,000 ; deduct 
 from this the proposed sinking fund of $1,500,- 
 000, and it leaves the sum of $700,000 to be ap- 
 plied, if desirable, to the works in question or to 
 other State purposes. 
 
 [The gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN) inquired how the current expenses of the 
 government were to be provided for under the a- 
 mendment ? 
 
 I a-k the gentleman if he has not often in this 
 debate, asserted, and if he does not now maintain, 
 that these expenses should not be charged on the 
 canal revenues ? [Mr. H. replied in the affirma- 
 tive.] I then answer the- gentleman that, ifhispo- 
 sitwn is correct, these expenses would be provi- 
 ded for in the ordinary manner in which this go- 
 vernment and all other governments provide for 
 such expenses; but I go farther, and say that this 
 
 question does not arise under this amendment: it 
 should be a subject of discussion and adjustment 
 under some subsequent amendment to be proposed. 
 If a portion of this surplus should justly and pro- 
 perly be applied to and should be required for the 
 ordinary support of the government, still there 
 would be a large and available sum to be devoted 
 to the improvement of the Erie and the resump- 
 tion of the unfinished canals. Should there be no 
 increase at all in these nett revenues, the sur- 
 plusses in six years would amount to the sum of 
 $4,200,000, a sum which would accomplish much, 
 perhaps every thing, for these works, while at the 
 same time it might liberally contribute to the cur- 
 rent annual expenses of the government, if such 
 contribution shall be required by justice or poli- 
 cy. But Mr. Chairman, there is no rational doubt 
 that the average annual increase of these nett re- 
 venues will be large, and the gentleman himself 
 states the increase in the aggregate, for the ensu- 
 ing ten years, at $2^500,000, and he declares that 
 it is not improbable that they may in that period 
 exceed $4,000,000. Assuming, sir, the smallest 
 increase contemplated by that gentleman, and for 
 six years take one-half of that increase and add it 
 to the $4,200,000 above stated, and you hav^, un- 
 der the plan I propose, within six years, an ag- 
 gregate of $5,450,000 of surplus, while at the 
 same time the sinking fund of $1,500,000 is si- 
 lently and surely gnawing at the vitals of the pub- 
 lic debt, and preparing the certain way for its final 
 consignment, at the prescribed period, to a grave, 
 from which I agree with the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer, there is to be no resurrection. This, sir, 
 is no sketch of fancy, no gathering of flowers 
 from the field of imagination; it is simple, sober 
 reality necessary results from facts which can- 
 not be disputed, and from figures which cannot lie. 
 Again, Mr. Chairman, we are told and we agree 
 that the canals are one system ; that they are 
 parts of a whole. It is on this ground that the 
 Erie canal, after honestly paying every dollar of 
 its cost, has been, and is still called on to pay, or 
 to furnish the njeans to pay, for all the lateral 
 canals. To save the general fund from the bur- 
 den of the cost of the lateral canals, that burden 
 has been cast on the Erie on the ground that all 
 were parts of a system, members of one body ; 
 and well and nobly has she responded^ the call 
 and borne the burden. All we ask flw is that 
 the principle be continued and carried out, and 
 that the unfinished works be regarded as they al- 
 ways have been, as parts of this great system, -and 
 as such that they may, from the same source, re- 
 ceive the same aid and sustenance that has been 
 extended to the other parts. And who can com- 
 plain of this ? Not the tax-payer for nothing is 
 asked of him. Not the creditor of the state, for 
 he is already superabundantly secured, and his 
 security is in no degree to be affected. Not the 
 Erie canal, for she is able and ready to answer 
 the call. No, sir ; justice requires that this call 
 should be answered, and consistency and duty 
 alike demand that the system should be com- 
 pleted, and hereafter that all its parts should work 
 together in harmonious union, reciprocally aid- 
 ing and assisting each other, and all dilfusing 
 their blessings and their benefits, directly and in- 
 directlv, throughout every part of our proud 
 " Emp'ire." 
 
891 
 
 1 will briefly consider some of the objections, 
 wliich have been urged by the gentlemen from 
 llerkimer against the proposed amendment, and 
 the results it is designed and calculated to pro- 
 duce. 1 trust I have already sufficiently answer- 
 ed the argument as to the violation of the public 
 faith. I iiavo shown it to rest mainly on a foun- 
 dation of sand. It is true, if it can be proved that 
 a debt t'.n.?htiz in ' -12 and on which sundry pay- 
 ments have been made is the debt remaining un- 
 paid at the close of any given number of years 
 thereafter, then it is true that by the act of '42, 
 the public debt was to be paid in 22 years; but 
 if it is impossible that such a statement can be 
 true, then equally impossible is it for the gentle- 
 man to sustain his argument of " violated faith." 
 
 The genileman has argued that it would be un- 
 sa;e lo limit the sinking lund to so small a sum as 
 one million and a half of dollars j and he argues 
 thus b 'cause he apprehended that after ten years 
 the tolls may diminish. But, sir, at the same timt 
 the gentleman tells us that at the lowest compu- 
 tation they will increase to i-j3,500',OOG at the end 
 of the ten years, and I believe the gentleman him- 
 self would hardly be willing to. rise in his place 
 on this floor and assert a belief that lor the re- 
 mainder of our lerm, the thirteen years immedi- 
 ately ensuing the fiist ten, the tolls would so di- 
 minish as in any one of those thirteen years to 
 bring them down to $2,000 000, the annual sum 
 which we provide for our sinking fund during those 
 thirteen years. But, sir, it is unnecessary to dwell 
 on this point; th..se who heard the able exposi- 
 tions Q( this matter by the gentleman from Krie, 
 and Ihe gentleman from Chautauque, (Mr. MAR- 
 VIN,) must regard these apprehensions, if sincere- 
 ly entertain _d, os wholly groundless. No one 
 who will ior a moment look at the map of our 
 country and ponder upon the illimitable resources 
 of I he western world beyond us, yet in its early 
 infancy, and notwithstanding the immaturity of 
 us years, already exhibiting what would in anv 
 other country be deemed the resistless energy and 
 giant strength of mature manhood, no one" who 
 will look at facts as they are, and as they are 
 certain to be, as surely as time continues, can 
 unite in the fears and forebodings expressed by 
 that able, but, as I respectfully insist, or. irns oc- 
 casion, mi-taken gentleman. 
 
 Again, sir, the gentleman has dwelt at length 
 and repeatedly on the great amount of addition- 
 al interest required by the plan contained in thf 
 amendment, and he has wiih an appearance of 
 gravity presumed to us a statement showing the 
 amount of debt to be, not only \hedebt as it exists 
 but that amount with millions of interest added ; 
 as il, sir, in truth the man who has given his bond 
 dated this diy tor one thousand dollars, payable in 
 ten years with interest, is this day a debtoV to the 
 amount of seventeen hundred dollars ! We do not 
 pay ihe debt now for the simple reason that we in 
 laci save nothing by doing so; we retain and us* 
 the money we pay our interest at maturity and 
 in the meantime make profitable use ot our funds 
 Again, sir, by the very statement of our proposi- 
 tion, the interest to fall due hereafter is adequate- 
 yl .certainly provided lor, and then it becomes 
 wholly immaterial in any practical sense; and it 
 can in no manner be regarded as the gentleman's 
 lancy seems to view it as some awful evil to foil 
 
 upon us and strike us down at a future day. The 
 gentleman's views on this point seem to me veiy 
 analagous to those of the man, who after having 
 nearly completed his house should stop short and 
 reluse to finish the roof, because forsooth he owed 
 a dt-bt payable at a I emote day, and he proposed 
 to invest the cost of the roof in a sinking fund to 
 provide for the payment of that rernoie debt and 
 its interest; Ite elements in the meantime hav- 
 ing free accea^po his house and performing their 
 work of destruction upon it. In truth, if the gen- 
 tleman's doctrines are sound, it would seem inev- 
 itably to result, that the better policy were to sell 
 our canals at mce for the amount of our existing 
 debt, because on the gentleman's computation ot 
 interest according to his own plan we should save 
 $15,000,000 of interest. I do not pretend to be 
 versed in the mysteries of finance; but if all the 
 gentleman's expositions of its doctrines are 
 correct, I for one should desire to be delivered 
 from further acquaintance with a science so oc- 
 cult and so extraordinary. 
 
 The plan of the gentleman himself assumes the 
 existence at the end ot each of seveial years of 
 "deficiencies" as he denominates them, and the 
 consequent addition of interest; our plan does the 
 same there is no difference in principle. In fact, 
 sir, the question and difference between us is 
 purely one of time and that time merely the 
 brief space of five years. He proposes to extin- 
 guish the debt in 18 years, we in 23. With his 
 plan of eighteen years the result would be an in- 
 efficient, teeble, uncertain provision for such im 
 provemenis of the Erie Canal as ihe gentleman 
 himself admits may be required by the most per- 
 suasive considerations of duty and of policy ; his 
 plan involves the abandonment of the unfinished 
 canals for ten years at least, and such a delay un- 
 der the circumstances, I regard as equivalent to 
 their abandonment forever. When that period 
 shall have expired, time and the elements will 
 have accomplished their task of decay and di- 
 lapidatio'n and those costly structures, on which 
 so much of our treasure has already been ex- 
 pended will have sunk, as I apprehend, to rise 
 no more. 
 
 On the contrary, with the proposed plan of 23 
 years, reasonable means are afforded to do much, 
 if no.t all that may be required, toward the Erie 
 canal improvement, and to commence arid gradu- 
 ally to continue the completion of the Gent-see 
 Valley and Black River canals, and thus lo per- 
 fect our canal system now so near its consumma 
 tion. At the same lime that these wise and salu- 
 tary and beneficent results are secured, provision 
 the most ample, as I have already shown, is made 
 for our entire and absolute exoneration from pub- 
 lic debt. 
 
 The path of duty then, Mr. Chairman, is plain 
 before us; and why shall we hesitate to walk in 
 it ? Are we called on to refuse to enter it in obe- 
 dience to some favorite financial theory, or for the 
 purpose of gratifying some morbid fancy or some 
 Apprehension of the bugbear of accumulating in- 
 terest? Or is it, sir, that we are to be frightened 
 from it by the cry of " Debt and Taxation," when 
 no debt and no taxation are in it or about it, or can 
 by possibility enter it, shielded and guarded as it 
 is by the secure barriers which the plan we pro 
 pose throws around it ? 
 
89:2 
 
 Seriously, Mr. Chairman, I apprehend that 
 much of the opposition to this plan arises from a 
 
 should this unfortunately be the result, it has yet 
 to undergo the ordeal of the ballot-box, and there 
 it will. I believe and trust, be met and over- 
 thrown. 
 
 sort of " point of honor," from ptide of opinion, 
 from a set of ideas and sentiments so long enter- 
 tained and dwelt upon, as to have become as it 
 were second nature, and therefore proof against 
 the light of truth and the force of argument. Sir, 
 
 STATEMENT A. 
 Showing the manner in which a six per cent stack will diminish by applying " one-half the amount of the interest of 
 
 the deb* remaining unpaid" to accumulate at six per cent as a sinking fund, according to the provisions of the 
 
 law ol 184-2^ 
 
 this opposition may succeed, and the plan of the 
 standing commiitee may be adopted here; but 
 
 No. 
 
 End of 
 
 Amount of debt 
 
 Interest on debt Om; half interest 
 
 Interest on sink- 
 
 Amount of sink 
 
 years. 
 
 year. 
 
 unpaid. 
 $ cis. mills. 
 
 unpaid. on debt unpaid. 
 $ cts. mills. $ cts. mills. 
 
 ing fund. 
 $cts mills. 
 
 ing fund. 
 $ cts. mills-. 
 
 i 
 
 1342 
 
 100 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1843 
 
 98 
 
 6 2 
 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1844 
 
 95 92 
 
 5 88 
 
 96 
 
 12 
 
 2 08 
 
 4 
 
 1845 
 
 93 75 6S 
 
 5 75 52 
 
 61 84 
 
 24 43 
 
 2 16 32 
 
 5 
 
 1846 
 
 91 50 7072 
 
 5 fr 5408 
 
 87 5136 
 
 37 45P2 
 
 2 24 9723 
 
 ft 
 
 1647 
 
 89 16 73jo 
 
 5 49 0424 
 
 83 0141 
 
 50 9576 
 
 2 33 0717 
 
 . 7 
 
 1848 
 
 83 73 4050 
 
 5 35 0041 
 
 78 3347 
 
 64 8958 
 
 2 43 3305 
 
 8 
 
 1849 
 
 84 20 3412 
 
 5 20 4043 
 
 73 4681 
 
 70 5957 
 
 2 53 0638 
 
 9 
 
 1850 
 
 81 57 1549 
 
 5 05 2204 
 
 63 4068 
 
 94 7795 
 
 2 63 1863 
 
 10 
 
 1851 
 
 78 83 4411 
 
 5 89 4292 
 
 63 1430 
 
 10 5707 
 
 2 73 7138 
 
 11 
 
 1852 
 
 75 94 7788 
 
 4 73 0064 
 
 57 6688 
 
 26 9935 
 
 2 84 6623 
 
 It 
 
 1853 
 
 73 02 7300 
 
 4 55 9-267 
 
 51 9766 
 
 44 0732 
 
 2 96 0488- 
 
 13 
 
 1854 
 
 69 94 839-2 
 
 4 38 1638 
 
 46 0546 
 
 61 8362 
 
 3 07 8903 
 
 14 
 
 1<<65 
 
 66 77 9662 
 
 4 19 6903 
 
 36 5634 
 
 80 3096 
 
 3 16 8730 
 
 15 
 
 1856 
 
 63 45 0849 
 
 4 00 6779 
 
 33 5593 ' 
 
 99 3220 
 
 3 21 881* 
 
 16 
 
 1S57 
 
 69 98 8883 
 
 4 80 7050 
 
 26 9016 
 
 2 19 2949 
 
 3 46 1966 
 
 17 
 
 1358 
 
 56 38 8439 
 
 3 59 9332 1 19 9777 
 
 2 40 0667 
 
 3 60 0444 
 
 19 
 
 1859 
 
 52 64 3977 
 
 3 38 3306 1 12 7768 
 
 2 61 6693 
 
 ' 3 74 4462 
 
 19 
 
 IStiO 
 
 48 74 9737 
 
 3 15 8638 1 05 2879 
 
 2 84 1361 
 
 3 89 4240 
 
 20 
 
 1861 
 
 44 69 9727 
 
 3 92 4984 97 4994 
 
 3 07 5015 
 
 4 05 0010 
 
 21 
 
 1-6-2 
 
 40 48 7717 
 
 2 68 1983 89 3994 
 
 3 31 8016 
 
 4 21 2010 
 
 2-2 
 
 1863 
 
 36 10 7226 
 
 2 4-2 1263 80 9754 
 
 3 67 0736 
 
 4 33 0491 
 
 23 
 
 IS64 
 
 31 55 151ft 
 
 2 16 6433 72 2144 
 
 3 83 3566 
 
 4 65 5710 
 
 24 
 
 1865 
 
 29 18 2547 
 
 94 6145 63 5515 
 
 2 05 3454 
 
 2 36 8969 
 
 25 
 
 1366 
 
 24 34 9780 
 
 1 75 0952 58 3650 
 
 4 24 9171 
 
 76 65 0220 
 
 2& 
 
 1867J 
 
 19 32 7105 
 
 1 46 0986 48 3662 
 
 4 53 9013 
 
 80 67 2895 
 
 27 
 
 1868^ 
 
 14 10 0190 
 
 1 15 96-26 38 6542 
 
 4 84 0373 
 
 85 89 9810 
 
 28 
 
 1869 A 
 
 8 66 4199 
 
 84 6011 28 2003 
 
 5 15 3989 
 
 91 33 6301 
 
 29 
 
 1870i 
 
 3 00 4101 
 
 53 9351 17 9950 
 
 5 48 0143 
 
 96 99 5899 
 
 30 
 
 1871 
 
 0' 064-2 
 
 9 0123 3 0041 
 
 2 90 9876 
 
 99 93 5816 
 
 Mr- S'lOVV should not feel j us. i tied m continu- 
 ing this debute, had he not been alluded to by the 
 gentleman from Herkimer, in a manner hardly 
 consistent with couriesy. His. arguments had been 
 misrepresented. But 'he should not bd diverted 
 from the great point at issue by any personal 
 charges. If the gentleman desired a personal con- 
 troversy, he must seek it in another quarter. Mr. 
 S. pointed <>r t tie misrepresentations of Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN. He (Mr. H ) said that he (Mr. S, 1 admitted 
 that the canals should pay me general fund lor all 
 I hat was created for their constiuction. No such 
 thing. His argument was entirely against this. 
 He had said that Uie canals should pay what was 
 fairly ( 'ue from them. Mr. S. recapitulated his 
 argument u on the salt, auction and steamooai 
 duties, showing that the gentleman h.ad misun- 
 derstood him. Mr. S. then refeired to the objec- 
 tion against his argument as to tii injustice of 
 compounding the interest against the canals. He 
 (Mr. H ) said this was not right as between indi 
 vuiuals, because an individual could sue tor his 
 money and recover it. Did not that gentleman 
 know that even if compound interest was made 
 the subject of solemn contracts, courts would de- 
 cree it void ? Here then lell the gentleman's ar 
 guinent at once. As to the justice ot charging 
 the canals with the salt and auction duties, Mr. S. 
 added to his icmarks of yes'erday, authorities 
 drawn from leports and from the. law ol 1841, in 
 full proof of his o.vn position, and to show the 
 fallacy of the claim upon which this article was 
 
 based. 'J hai act settled all accounts between the 
 two funds, and .$,'200,000 was fixed as the annuity 
 which was required to liquidate the debt between 
 the two funds. Where then was your claim of a 
 debt of $13,000,000? On what principle of com- 
 putation would $200 ,000 pay the interest and sink- 
 ing (and on $13,000,000? If one act of the Le- 
 gislature was so sacred that it must not be touched., 
 why not apply the same principle to this other 
 act ? Mr. S. alluded to the charge that he had 
 revamped old arguments. He did not deny this, 
 noi pretend lo claim originality. He had no ge- 
 nius to invent arguments. He had followed in 
 the tracks of that gentleman when he advocated 
 an enlargement of the canal to a size sixty feet by 
 six. Had he (Mr. S.) tried to be original, he would 
 probably have done as did that gentleman, hut 
 while he was original, he also would have been 
 erroneous ! Mr. S. referred to the complaints of 
 Mr. H., that he (Mr. S.) had misrepresented his 
 (Mr. H 's) arguments. He reviewed what he had 
 said as to the culminating point in the tolls of the 
 canal, and left it to the Convention to say whether 
 there had been any such misrepresentation. 
 
 [Some explanations here followed between 
 Messrs. HOFFMAN and STOW as to a remark of 
 Mr. HOFFMAN.] 
 
 Mr. STOW proceeded to prove that his posi- 
 tion as to the incapacity of the present narrow 
 canals for large boats, was strictly correct. How 
 would you help this difficulty by enlarging the 
 locks ? As to the probable diversion of the pro- 
 
893 
 
 duce of the West to New Orleans, Mr. S. showed 
 the utter fall, icy of the gentleman's prediction 
 and argument. Mr. S. proceeded to answer the 
 other objections to his positions seriatim. He de- 
 nied the assertion of the gentleman that the canal 
 \v,i> ;;t present large enough. On this subject he 
 referred to the last annual report of the Canal 
 Commissioners to the fact that boats were actu- 
 ally detained and subjected to great loss and to 
 other facts that demonstrated the truth of his as- 
 sertion. He had read from a paper in Lockport, 
 of the gentleman's own political faith, complain- 
 ing of the great delay and loss at that place for 
 want of a double set of the combined locks. In 
 answer, the gentleman had referred to the lock- 
 ages at Alexander's lock, and said that there 
 would be no difficulty in passing the same number 
 .of boats at Lockport. Did the gentleman suppose 
 he could make this House believe that as many 
 boats could pass through five combined locks as 
 rapidly as through one ? He (Mr. S.) referred to 
 demonstrated facts to prove that while the capa- 
 city of a single lock was 200 lockages, that of the 
 combined locks at Lockport was but 120. But 
 the gentleman says the delay at Lockport is prob- 
 ably occasioned by the boatmen lounging around 
 the groceries. Mr. S. would submit whether that 
 was an argument worthy of that great subject ? 
 Mr. S. said the gentleman had repeated this mor- 
 ning the charge that all this was got up by the 
 " shrieks of locality." Mr. S. had read from the 
 paper that followed implicitly the creed of that 
 gentleman. Did he mean to charge that the 
 editor of that paper had put forth deliberate false- 
 hoods to keep up this shriek of locality ? Mr. S. 
 had heard these shrieks of locality before. There 
 was a time wr.on these shrieks clamored for the 
 termination of the Black River canal at the vil- 
 lage of Herkimer. But that time has passed 
 that canal terminated at another " locality," and 
 since then nothing but groans were heard from 
 Herkimer against that canal. Mr. S. further an- 
 swered the position of the gentleman that the 
 present canal was sufficient for its present busi- 
 ness. He referred him to authority which he 
 would not question himself. Mr. S. read from 
 the report of Mr. HOFFMAN in 1835, where he 
 proved that the canal could not be deepened to 
 five feet water unless it was widened to an extent 
 of at least sixty feet. He also read from reports 
 of other state officers, all proving the same fact, 
 that if the canal was deepened it must be enlarg- 
 ed. Mr. S., in conclusion, commented on the 
 strange perversion of an allusion made by him 
 (Mr. S.) yesterday, to the eulogy passed upon De 
 Witt Clinton by the Governor of Gibraltar. Upon 
 that allusion the gentleman had based a charge 
 that he (Mr. S.) had advocated a British debt 
 funding system ! Truly the gentleman's imagi- 
 nation had reached the highest flight it was capa- 
 ble of. Why that gentleman himself the other 
 day called De Witt Clinton that great man, and 
 was he now so jealous that he could not bear to 
 hear his fame pronounced by others ? Mr. S. 
 commented upon this, and also upon the other 
 strange positions advocated by the -gentleman 
 from Herkimer, who appeared to have lost him- 
 self in compound interest and the multiplication 
 table. 
 
 Mr. GARDINER desired to say a few words in 
 
 reference to the dispute between the gentle- 
 man from Erie and Herkimer having been per- 
 sonally appealed to on the subject by the gentle- 
 m 'ii from Erie. He lived at Lockport, the place 
 where these detentions on the canal were said to 
 occur. Gentlemen should understand that at that 
 place, there were five locks rising consecutively 
 one above the other, and so combined that they 
 must be used altogether. In consequence of the 
 removal of the old locks there was now but one tier 
 and there can be at the utmost but tw r o boats pass- 
 ed through at a time. It was therefore necessary so 
 to arrange the lockages so as to lock through 
 boats arriving from one direction for one hour, and 
 those arriving from the contrary direction an- 
 other hour, and so on alternately. Consequently 
 boats were obliged to wait until their hour had 
 arrived, and if there was a crowd of boats, might 
 be detained beyond their hour. He stated what 
 he knew and he had seen from day to day, an ac- 
 cumulation of boats numbering from five to twen- 
 ty detained there from five to six hours. This 
 was not uncommon, and he left the Convention 
 to draw its own conclusion from the facts. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that the general good 
 temper with which the gentleman from Erie had 
 discussed this question to-day, required that he, 
 (Mr. H.) should express himself with equal good 
 humor. It had always been a great satisfaction 
 to him, whenever he heard any man misrepresent 
 him, to call his attention to it at the time, in or- 
 der that he might have an opportunity of correct- 
 ing it. He (Mr. H ) had always endeavored to 
 act with becoming courtesy in debate he had 
 never had any personal controversey in debate 
 with any man, and he never would have, so long 
 as he supposed that by calling his attention at the 
 time to any erroneous statement, he would cor- 
 rect them, but he did not feel authorized to go 
 further. When as he (Mr. H.) understood him, 
 the gentleman from Erie, had misrepresented him 
 he, (Mr. H.) called his attention to the fact and 
 asked him to correct it. This Mr. H. understood 
 him not to do. Let that pass however, he would 
 not refer to it again. He was not disposed to en- 
 ter upon the argument again, as to the capacity of 
 the locks. He had shown by historical results what 
 a poor old single lock does, a little westofSche- 
 nectady ; and he knew how much better it might 
 perform, if properly improved. The gentleman 
 from Erie had supposed that he had high authori- 
 ty in saying that 200 lockages would be the max- 
 imum of the capacity of a lock. There had been 
 a great many maximums on that canal which had 
 been transcended, and in performances vastly ex- 
 ceeded the limits set upon tiiern. By the wisdom 
 of the state officers, in his judgment, from the 
 sworn results in the public offices, three minutes 
 was sufficient to pass a boat through a lock, and 
 600 minutes would be practically sufficient to 
 despatch 200 boats. He knew that this was an 
 extreme case, but it would be practical, and if 
 that one single lock to which he had alluded, 
 could get along with 30,000 lockages in a year, 
 although all that the gentleman from Niagara 
 (Mr. GARDNER) stated might be true, no man 
 could induce him to believe that the detention at 
 Lockport, with only half that number of lock- 
 ages, could be serious, if sufficient attention and 
 care was paid to working the locks. He did not, 
 
894 
 
 therefore, feel himself removed at all from his 
 position that although combined locks might not 
 be as efficient as single locks, yet for a series of 
 years the combined locks at Lockport, properly 
 worked and improved, would answer all the pub- 
 lic purposes. Mr. H. said that he said enough on 
 the salt tax, but in reply to the gentleman, he re-as- 
 serted the fact that the legislature and the financial 
 officers of the state had, through aseries of years, 
 recognized the debt due from the canals to the 
 general fund on account of the advances made to 
 them in the shape of auction and salt duties. Mr. 
 H. insisted that bv the plan of the committee 
 there would be continually afforded means for the 
 improvement of the canals tor temporary pur- 
 poses until sufficient means should be provided 
 for its proper enlargement. He denied that he 
 had ever expressed the idea, and he knew he 
 never thought it, -that a large boat could be drawn 
 as well, as swiftly, or as easily through a small 
 channel as a large one. But the facts prove that 
 a very large boat can with considerable facility 
 be drawn through the present canal. $2,500,000 
 will complete a line of enlarged locks from Alba- 
 ny to Buffalo, if is thought advisable, and raise 
 the canal banks so as to carry five feet water. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : If you get five feet water will 
 there be any additional width ? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN : Precisely such an increase 
 of width as the present slopes will give you. He 
 planted himself here upon the distinct position 
 that the canal could, -without extraordinary ex- 
 pense, be made sufficient for present use,and any 
 increase that may reasonably be hoped for. He 
 insisted that it was better to prepare for the en- 
 largement than at the expense of $10,000,000 of 
 interest, by removing the debt further down. 
 
 Mr. T1LDEN moved that the committee rise 
 Agreed to. 
 
 And the Convention took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN, having the floor, addressed th< 
 committee in support of the projet of the finan 
 cial committee. 
 
 Mr. STRONG then obtained the floor, and the 
 committee rose. 
 
 Adjourned to 83 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 FRIDAY, (92nd day) Sept. 18th. 
 Prayer by Rev. Dr. POTTER . 
 
 The PRESIDENT laid before the Convention 
 communication of rather a rambling or indefinit 
 character, from a Mr. Georgo Lawaon, of Hainil 
 ton county. He suggested in it a good many mat 
 ters for the consideration ot the Convention, an 
 commented upon many others. He complame 
 bitterly of the length of time which the Conven 
 tion v had consumed upon matters of little or ri 
 importance. As to whether the judges should b 
 elected or appointed, he thought was a very im 
 material mater; but it was of considerable itr 
 portance whether they were honest and able, o 
 whether they were dishonest and stupid. He sai 
 that the duties of surrogate ought lobe discharge 
 by the overseers of the poor, and that the office 
 surrogate ought to be abolished, and a good man 
 
 others 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN moved to dispense with th 
 
 uriher reading ot it, and thai it belaid on the 
 
 ble. This morion was lost. 
 
 The memorial &c. was then read through. In 
 
 Mr. Lawson snil that he had not consulted his 
 eiijhbois on this subject, (or they were all dead, 
 much laughter,] and he was surrounded by a 
 econd generation ! [We believe he is nearly 90 
 ears old ] The paper was laid on the table. 
 OATHS AND AFFIRMATIONS. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES, from a majority of committee 
 lo 9, made the following report: 
 
 1. Members of the legislature and all officers, execu- 
 ve and judicial, except such inferior officers as may be 
 y law exempted, shall, before they enter on the duties of 
 icir respective offices, take and subscribe the following 
 ath or affirmation: 
 
 I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be.) 
 lat 1 will support the constitution of the United States, 
 nd the constitution of the state of New York; and that I 
 /ill faithfully discharge the duties of according to 
 
 e best of my ability. 
 
 A. d no other oath, declaration or test shall be required 
 s a qualification for any office of public trust. 
 
 Mr. CORNELL from the same committee, made 
 he following minority report, which wasalsodis- 
 >osed of as was the majority report : 
 
 ?j 1. No man shall be deemed incompetent as a witness 
 i any court, matter or proceeding, on account of his opin- 
 ons on the subject of religion, nor shall any witness be 
 uestioned, nor any testimony be taken or received in re- 
 ition thereto, either before or alter such witness shall 
 iave been sworn or affirmed. 
 
 Both reports were ordered to be printed, and 
 ef'ened to the committee of the whole. 
 
 DEBATE UPON MR. HOFFMAN'S TWO REPORTS. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that when he was up the 
 ither day, he stated that great suspicion existed 
 n the public rnind that there were some gentle- 
 men now in this Convention, that were desirous 
 )f defeating all i;s efforts and objects by their ever- 
 asting and ridiculous talk upon every conceivable 
 subject. Now if gentlemen here were honest 
 (much laughter) and honestly desired to work 
 ^rnore laughter) why then they would vote for a 
 resolution he was about to offer. It was as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee of the whole be instruct- 
 ed to report to the Convention, on or beiore the hour of 
 four o'clock, p. m this day, the two articles reported by 
 the committee on finance, now referred to the committee 
 of the whole, with the amendments proposed theieto, or 
 to be proposed before that time; and that the Convention 
 
 proceed on the day of September instant, at 10 o'clock 
 
 a. m., to vote upon amendments and articles, and that no 
 new amendments shall be thereafter proposed. 
 
 Mr. R. said that he had purposely left a blank 
 f<r trie day on which all debate' was to cease in 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that he objected to the 
 latter part of the resolution, and it ought to be 
 left out. He had an amendment to offer to the 
 second section, and this resolution, if carried, 
 would cut him off' from doing so. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL agreed to strike out the latter 
 part of 'he resolution. 
 
 Mr. HUTCHINSON moved to fill the blank 
 with " the 22d" inst. He thought that they then 
 ought- to begin voting on this article. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that this course was ex- 
 ceedingly unjust and improper And he would 
 remind Mr. RUSSELL and others that the second 
 report of this committee No. 3, on which it was 
 now proposed to limit all debate, had not been 
 discussed in Convention in any way for a single 
 
895 
 
 moment. He would suggest that so much of the 
 report as related to that article should be omitted. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said that he really would not con- 
 sent to have the 2d article included in this reso- 
 lution. It contained very important propositions, 
 which would have the effect of changing the 
 C"U'se of our government ; and they ought not to 
 be decided without thorough debate. The ut- 
 most latitude ought to be given to it. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL replied that his resolution did 
 not propose to limit debate in the Convention 
 He proposed to take these articles away from de- 
 bate in committee of the whole; but they could 
 be legitimately and properly debated in Conven- 
 tion, although riot a single vote would be changed 
 by continuing the discussion, no matter how pro- 
 tracted it might be. The members have all fully 
 examined and made up their minds upon it. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN believed there were 
 very few gentlemen that desired to speak on the 
 subject before the committee, and 'they, himself 
 among the number, were those who had not ob- 
 strucfed the business of the Convention j on the 
 contrary, they had sat for 3 months listening to 
 the speeches of others, and therefore should not 
 now be thus cut off'. He suggested that the reso- 
 lution should lie over until to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL acceded, and the resolution 
 was laid on the table. 
 
 RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE offered the following resolution. 
 He said the Convention had passed articles defi- 
 ning the powers and duties and privileges of the 
 Executive, the Legislative and Judicial Depart- 
 ments, and before adjourning they should say who 
 the people were, and what were their powers, 
 privilege--, an*i duties : 
 
 Resolved, That the Convention will, after disposing of 
 the report of standing committee No. 3, next pass to the 
 consideration of the report ol committee No. 4, "on the 
 
 elective franchise, the qualification 
 office." 
 
 to vote, and hold 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to lay the reso- 
 lution on the table. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES called for the yeas and nays, 
 and there were yeas 54, nays 43. So the resolu- 
 tion was laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS desired to submit a proposition 
 in relation to the financial reports. It was evi- 
 dent that there was a wide difference of opinion 
 between members on this important subject. It 
 had been our good fortune hitherto to avoid the 
 array of political parties and to adopt what had 
 been agreed to by most decided majorities. He 
 trusted such a result would be attained on this fi- 
 
 been submitted. Mr. L. further explained his 
 proposition, which is as follows : 
 
 \rm-ndtiierepoit by striking out of section 1, the first 
 six lines, and insert as follows: 
 
 (5 1. After paying the expense* of collection, superinten- 
 dence, and ordinary repairs, then- sh-.iil be appropriated 
 and set apart, out of the monies of the S'ate canals, in each 
 y ar, commencing on the first day ot June, 1846, the sum 
 of $1,300 000, until the first day of June, 1835 and from that 
 time the sum of$l 700,000 in each year as a sinking fund 
 to pay the interest, &c. 
 
 Strike out sections 2 and 3. 
 
 In section 4, strike out the first six lines and insert as 
 follows: 
 
 ^ 2. Alter complying with the provisions of the first sec- 
 tions of this article, there shall be appropriated and set 
 apart out ot the surplus revenues of the state canals in 
 each year commencing on the 1st day ol January, 18<!6, the 
 sum of $300 000, until the time when a sufficient sum shall 
 have been appropriated and set apart under the said first 
 section, to pay the interest and extinguish the entire prin- 
 cipal of the canal de'it, and after that period then the sum 
 ot one million and five hundred thousand dollars in each 
 year, as a sinking tund to pay the interest, &c. 
 
 Line 16 strike out "$500,000" and insert 
 " sinking fund." 
 
 Line 18 strike out " second" and insert "first." 
 Insert a new section as follows : 
 
 3. The surplus revenues of the canals, after complying 
 with the provision of ihe two last preceding sections, shall 
 be appropriated, at the discretion of thi> legislature, to de- 
 fray the ordinary expenses of government, and for other 
 purposes; but no lnw shall be passed appropriating or 
 pledging lor the construction or improvement of any canal 
 or rail road, any part ol said revenues beyond those of the 
 year current at the time of passing such law. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that if he understood this 
 :>lan of Mr. LOOMIS'S, it appropriated a certain 
 amount of money out of the canal revenues to 
 pay the debt of the state, the canal debt, and the 
 general fund debt, leaving the surplusses to be 
 disposed of by the legislature as they might 
 think proper to direct. Now he (Mr. W.) thought 
 that the argument of the gentleman would apply 
 with equal force to entrusting the legislature to 
 taking care of the public debt. But he would 
 not debate this question, as he could not at pres- 
 ent fully understand its whole bearing. He rose 
 to offer the following additional section to the 
 
 nancial question, 
 any action that 
 
 He should seriously deprecate 
 should array either one of 
 
 the great political parties against the Constitution, 
 on account of the article we might adopt. To 
 avoid this disastrous result, he had prepared a 
 modification of the report of the standing com- 
 mittee, which he trusted would meet witli favor 
 as a compromise measure. Mr. L. referred to the 
 extreme views of members and explained what 
 the effect of his measure would be. He propos- 
 ed to establish such a sinking fund as would pay 
 the canal debt in the. time contemplated by the 
 acts of lb-i'2 and 1844, leaving payment of the ge- 
 neral fund to be postponed to a period about equal 
 to that proposed by the rival plans which had 
 
 plan of Mr. LOOMIS : 
 
 . The residue of the surplus revenues of the canals 
 after complying with ;he provisions herein contained, shall 
 until the canal debt of this state and interest is fully paid, 
 be applied and appropriated to the completion of the un- 
 finished canals of this state. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to refer the two, to 
 the committee of the whole having charge of the 
 financial reports. 
 
 Mr. STOW begged only to say, that in the a- 
 mendment he had offered, he had acted in a spirit 
 of compromise. It was not by any means the 
 proposition, which his own judgment dictated as 
 that demanded by the true interests of the canals. 
 In that same spirit of compromise, he desired to 
 examine these propositions of his friend from 
 Herkimer and to do so fully and impartially. 
 While willing to agree to a compromise on this 
 subject, he by no manner of means admitted that 
 the friends of the canal were compelled to sub- 
 mit to a hard compromise. They came not here 
 ;i> ;in insolvent debtor or to beg favor ; they had 
 the power to appeal to a higher power than this 
 Convention. But Mr. S. would not pursue this 
 subject. He only asked that this plan just sub- 
 mitted, might not be pressed to a vote, until he 
 
 
896 
 
 with others hadad full time ht o examine its ope- 
 ration in all its bearings. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON suggested that the proposi- 
 tion should be printed immediately and laid on 
 their tables this afternoon. 
 
 Mr. STOW sincerely hoped so ; for he wished 
 to have a night to sleep upon it. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought that all this subject 
 might with great propriety be laid upon the table 
 for a day to give time for reflection and the Con- 
 vention c^uld in the mean time take up some 
 new subject. 
 
 Cries of "Oh ! no ! no ! " 
 
 Mr. STOW was very much of Mr. RICHMOND'S 
 opinion. 
 
 The question was then put on referring Mr. 
 LOOMIS'S proposition to the committee of the 
 whole and on printing it. Both motions were car- 
 ried. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN then moved that the 
 Convention proceed to the unfinished business ; 
 and accordingly it went into committee of the 
 whole on the report on 
 
 THE CANAL FINANCES. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR resumed the chair. 
 
 Mr. STRONG took the floor. He apologized 
 for intruding himself upon the Convention. He 
 had determined to be silent until yesterday. No 
 one had before then Spoken in favor of the report, 
 except the chairman, (Mr. HOFFMAN) and Mr. 
 S considered that that gentleman had been fully 
 answered. But when the gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. TILDEN) took the floor, Mr. S. began 
 to be alarmed, and thought it might be well 
 enough for him to show up some of the positions 
 of that gentleman. 
 
 Mr. S. said that gentleman started off upon 
 pretty high grounds, by saying he was willing to 
 do all he could do to advance the interests of 
 trade and commerce. This was all right, but 
 before he got through, Mr. S. was sorry to find 
 that all this was nothing but lip service. He went 
 on to show that New York was deeply interested 
 in the prosperity of the Erie canal. Mr. S. said 
 all this was true. The interests of New York 
 city were vitally connected with tha canal. He 
 was glad to hear that this avowal came from a re- 
 presentative from that city. Mr. S. wished to 
 appeal to the delegates from that city, and show 
 the truth of this assertion of their colleague. He 
 referred to the action of 1835. TJie mighty west 
 was seeking to pour its immense wealth into the 
 lap of the Queen of Cities. The State officers 
 Mr. HOFFMAN among the number represented 
 these facts to the Legislature, and urged the ne- 
 cessity of the enlargement of the Erie canal. 
 The "Legislature believed this, and passed the 
 law. The people sanctioned that action, and he 
 asked when they had repudiated that policy ? 
 Never. Why then this effort to fix this iron rule 
 in the Constitution that would prohibit the con- 
 summation of that work ? The only reason he 
 could conceive of, was that gentlemen began to 
 perceive their boasted policy of 1842 was weak- 
 ening and needed this bolstering up. The people 
 began to perceive that their debt was within their 
 grasp and that there were surplusses subject to 
 the direction of the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. S. next answered the assertion of that gen- 
 tleman, that the canal had never been excavated 
 
 to its original depth. This was a broad charge, 
 brought at one fell swoop against Canal Commis- 
 sioners, Engineers, Contractors, &c. Mr. S. 
 could tell the gentleman there was not the sem- 
 blance of truth in this charge. And he said that 
 in 1842 the canal was first bottomed out. Why, 
 any boy on the line of the canal would laugh at 
 such an assertion. They knew that every spring 
 since it was made, the Superintendents bottomed 
 out the canal. 
 
 Mr. S. next commented upon the answers to 
 the allegations of Messrs. STOW and GARDNER, 
 about the detention at Lockport. The cnairman 
 of the committee and his lieutenant had given a 
 most conclusive answer to this, and what was it? 
 Why that the lock-tenders were lounging around 
 the groceries. Why, did the gentlemen believe 
 the Canal Board would keep in lock-tenders that 
 would do that ? Mr. S. did not, if they did. Such 
 a pretence was preposterous. But the gentleman 
 from New York, admitting the delay, said he 
 could remedy this by marshalling the boatmen 
 into line ! Mr. S. would like to see him trying to 
 marshal the boatmen on the Erie canal into line. 
 He rather thought the gentleman didn't know 
 much about these boatmen. Why, it would take 
 more men to marshal them into line, than would 
 be necessary to kill every live Mexican ! They 
 were rather rough customers to handle in that 
 way. 
 
 Mr. S. said the gentleman had got so far when 
 a friend put into his hands a printed copy of his 
 speech in advance. Here it is, (holding up a 
 copy of the New York Democrat, yesterday laid 
 on the tables of members,) and Mr. S. read the 
 whole of his speech an hour and a half before he 
 got through ! Here was all about Alexander's 
 lock, the time to pass a lock, and all the tolls in 
 fact every thing the gentleman said, except the 
 little trimmings thrown in, like about "marshal- 
 ling the boatmen into line," and such matters. 
 This was something new to him for a man to 
 get his speech printed before it was delivered. 
 He hoped the practice would not grow; and then 
 he would not object. 
 
 Mr. S. remarked at some length on the proposi- 
 tion of the committee to improve the canal by 
 lengthening the locks and bottoming out the ca- 
 nal, so as to give five feet of water. He said it 
 would be a miserable, contemptible canal, unfit 
 for large boats. It was no use to bottom it below 
 the bottom of the locks. The banks would have 
 to be strengthened. A break last spring, in the 
 town where he resided, cost six thousand dollars. 
 It would be far better to complete the enlarge- 
 ment, on the plan adopted by the Canal Board. 
 
 Mr. S. next commented on the New York and 
 Erie railroad. He said the members from the Erie 
 canal counties had always been liberal with other 
 portions of the State. They had voted for the 
 three million loan, believing it justly due to the 
 southern counties. He only asked gentlemen to 
 be as liberal as they had been. 
 
 Mr. S. said he had something to say in relation 
 to the act of 1842 the stop doctrine, so called. 
 He had heard it refeired to so often, in the Legis- 
 lature, and in this Convention, that it had become 
 common-place words with him. He wished to 
 know what there was about it ? what magic there 
 was in the act ? what binding force more than any 
 
897 
 
 other act on our statute book ? It maybe altered 
 or repealed. But it is said this act is the Simon 
 Pure principle of democracy ; and he supposed 
 gentleman from llerkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) 
 had studied and pondered over it, until it had be- 
 come his evening and morning prayer book, and 
 that a violation of one line would destroy his de- 
 mocracy and ruin the state. 
 
 Mr. S. denied that this act had been sanctioned 
 by the people. The Convention may put the iron 
 rule in the Constitution, but you cannot bind, for 
 any length of time,-the energies and enterprise of 
 the people. They will break through all the pa- 
 per checks and bars that you place in their way, 
 by rejecting this Constitution, or by calling ano- 
 ther Convention to strike them out. 
 
 Mr. S. said he had a few remarks to make in 
 relation to the Black River canal. When the en- 
 largement of the Erie canal was determined upon, 
 the Canal Commissioners reported to the Legis- 
 lature that in order to supply the enlarged canal 
 with sufficient water, it would be necessary to 
 construct a feeder and navigable canal from Black 
 River to the Erie canal ; and in 1836 an act was 
 passed authorizing the construction, thus pledg- 
 ing the faith of the state to perform the word. 
 
 Mr. S. said he was pleased to have the privilege 
 of addressing the gentleman from Jefferson,. (Mr. 
 DAW FORTH, who was occupying the chair at the 
 time.) He was surprised to hear that gentleman 
 say, a day or two since, that he would vote for 
 the completion of the Black River canal, and no- 
 thing more. Coining as this did from a repre- 
 sentative of Jefferson county, through which this 
 canal runs, he could not view it in any other light 
 than a narrmv. selfish policy, very different from 
 that which has heretofore been extended to that 
 work by the members from Western New York. 
 You could not have passed the bill, nor obtained 
 a single loan, had you not received the support 
 of the members of the west ; and now you say you 
 will vote for that canal and abandon all others ! 
 A poor, miserable, selfish,return for our liberality! 
 
 Mr. S. said he would ask the attention of the 
 
 Genesee Valley canal. Whether this work should 
 have been commenced, is not the question now. 
 The work has been begun, and something over 
 three millions of dollars has been expended upon 
 the undertaking. Shall the work be suffered to 
 go to decay ? Shall the money there spent be ut- 
 terly lost ? or shall the state, in the exercise of a 
 wise discretion and providential economy, appro- 
 priate at least something towards the completion 
 of a canal, which is regarded, if not by the entire 
 state, yet by a large and populous district, as re- 
 spectable and influential as any one represented 
 on this floor, as a work of permanent necessity to 
 its inhabitants? 
 
 Mr. S. said the solemn faith of the state is in 
 reality pledged to the completion of this canal. 
 Let us not wantonly break it. Can gentlemen 
 deny that if the canal were extended to the point 
 originally intended for its termination, it would 
 go into the heart of a region of excellent pine 
 lumber, which is carried some 3U or 40 mileS by 
 land to the canal ? If the canal was completed, 
 that lumber would find a market throughout the 
 state, and even at tide water, and our great me- 
 tropolis. 
 
 Mr. S. said he had a few words to say in rela- 
 tion to the act of 1835, authorising the enlarge- 
 ment of the Erie canal, and he spoke from his 
 own knowledge, having had the honor of a seat 
 on this floor at the time. The leading member 
 from the city of New York was a warm advocate 
 of the bill. He said the enlargement was neces- 
 sary to secure the trade of the Western States to 
 the city of New York that if this work was not 
 prosecuted with due diligence, the products of 
 that fertile region would find a market through 
 some other channel, and this state would lose tolls 
 which it might, by the completion of the enlarge- 
 ment, secure forever. 
 
 Mr. S. said the Canal Commissioners in their 
 report to the Legislature, (he believed the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer was one,) recommended 
 this work that the capacity of the canal was not 
 sufficient to transport the freight which would in 
 a few years be sent to market from the Western 
 States' The eleven members from the city of 
 New York held the power in their hands to pass 
 or defeat the bill. It was passed the people 
 sanctioned it, and the work was begun. The 
 faith of the state was pledged for their completion 
 of the works. 
 
 Mr. S. said he had a few words to say to gen- 
 tlemen from the river counties. One of the re- 
 presentatives from Westchester, who possessed a 
 noble soul and enlarged views, supported the bill 
 with energy and zeal. He said the Erie canal 
 was the great thoroughfare designed by the Great 
 Ruler of all human events, to connect the inland 
 seas with the ocean that the Black River canal 
 was the right arm, and the Genesee Valley was 
 the left. 
 
 Mr. S. said the member from oldDutchess sup- 
 ported the bill with commendable zeal, that was 
 an honor to himself and his constituents. 
 
 Mr. S. said he wished to say to gentlemen re- 
 presenting the river counties in this Convention, 
 and with the kindest feelings, and if he knew his 
 own heart, with the best intentions, that he sin- 
 cerely hoped they would stand by the friends of 
 
 Convention, for a few moments, in relation to the 1 'this great work, and aid them in carrying out the 
 
 measures to final completion, which their prede- 
 cessors had aided in commencing. 
 
 Mr. S. said he would say to the gentlemen 
 from the city of New York, and with no other 
 feeling than that of friendship and sincere desire 
 for the best interest of this state, that he hoped 
 they would be found among the friends of inter- 
 nal improvements, and by their votes would res- 
 cue it from a premature death. One of your 
 members (Mr. TILDEN) said yesterday that the 
 city of New York had a greater interest in the 
 enlargement of the Erie canal than any other part 
 of the state. That is true no one will deny it 
 here or elsewhere. 
 
 Mr. S. said he would appeal to the gentlemen 
 from the city of New York to stand by their own 
 nursling, a child they had created, arid not "to 
 suffer it to be strangled in its infancy, by support- 
 ing the report of the committee, and by so doing 
 put an iron rule in the Constitution. He could 
 not believe that the honest, upright and well-in- 
 formed citizens which they represented, wish 
 you to vote against their greatest and dearest in- 
 terest. 
 
 Mr. S. said he had a few more words to say and 
 
 87 
 
898 
 
 he was through. If the Convention adopt the re 
 port of the committee, it will be eighteen years 
 before we can proceed with our works of inter- 
 nal improvement. Before that time expires the 
 Welland canal will be finished, and the Lachine 
 canal on the St. Lawrence river. There a schoon- 
 er can load at Chicago and discharge at Liverpool. 
 The trade of the Western States will take that 
 and other routes, and the state of New York has 
 lost it forever; but if the Convention will adopt 
 the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
 Erie (Mr. STOW) which only puts off the payment 
 of the state debt five years longer, we can pro- 
 ceed with our public works, and by prudence 
 and economy complete the enlargement of the 
 Erie canal in time to enable us to compete with 
 other routes, by reducing the tolls and the price 
 of freight, and by so doing secure a fair share of 
 the products of the broad, fertile regions of the 
 West. 
 
 A boon is now within our reach ; if we are wise 
 we will take it and secure to the people of this 
 state and their posterity the richest legacy ever 
 bequeathed to any people. 
 
 iVJr. S. said it was but the work of a moment to 
 say the little words aye and nay, hut they will re- 
 main recorded on the pages of history after we 
 have passed away. 
 
 ;\lr. S. said when we had lost this great and 
 important heritage, and when generations yet un- 
 born, shall inquire into the cause why the trade 
 of the West was not secured to the Empire State, 
 the only natural thoroughfare, formed and design- 
 ed by the God of Nature for that purpose and 
 when they trace back the history of the pa^t, and 
 come to the record of the Convention, and sit in 
 solemn judgment on the vote we are about to give, 
 he apprehended if we could look from our own 
 narrow house, we would see them drawing the 
 black lines around that vote, arid in letters of liv- 
 ing lisiht, write the word "Expunged." 
 
 Mr. WARD said that the gentleman from Mon- 
 roe had introduced the river counties of this 
 State in a manner which required some notice 
 from him. He insisted that in coming to a con- 
 clusion on this great subject, the Convention was 
 in duty bound to look to the river counties, to as- 
 certain the tone of public sentiment there. It has 
 been said by able and intelligent gentlemen upon 
 this floor, that the revenues of the canals would 
 be sufficient to pay the debt of the State, and to 
 complete the enlargement of the canal. Now, as 
 a representative of one of those river counties 
 which have been spoken of here, I only want to 
 be satisfied in my own mind, that the revenues of 
 the canal will be sufficient to save the State from 
 taxation, and I will go to the fullest extent with 
 the friends of the canals, not only for the post- 
 ponement of the payment of some portion of the 
 debt, but for the completion of the unfinished 
 works. But he could not possibly see how this 
 could be done. He asked for information. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said, that on looking at the reve- 
 nues of the canal, it was very evident that they 
 would pay the debt and interest thereon, and leave 
 a good surplus to complete the public works. 
 
 Mr. WARD. That to a certain extent may be 
 true ; but the gentleman has made some omis- 
 sions. The plans which have been submitted 
 here propose certain things ; but there is nothing 
 
 said about the ordinary and extraordinary expen- 
 ses of government, which have now swelled up 
 to a large amount : to meet this a tax is imposed 
 upon the people. Now, I apprehend that that tax 
 upon the people of this State is proposed to be 
 continued; for if it is continued, the debt will 
 most certainly be paid by it and not by the reve- 
 nues of the canal. Now, I cannot go back to my 
 constituents and tell them that I have encumbered 
 them with a tax, which is to be continued by a 
 clause in the constitution ! 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that it would require this 
 tax to be continued for but a very short time ; for 
 if the postponement of the payment was made for 
 but a few years the canal would be enabled to pay 
 its own debts, and then no tax would be neces*- 
 sary. 
 
 Mr. WARD. Still, sir, I am by no means sat- 
 isfied upon this important point. Provision should 
 by all manner of means be made for the extin- 
 guishment of this debt ; also for the payment of 
 the interest accruing thereon, for the repairs that 
 will from time to time be necessary, and also for 
 the gradual enlargement of this great work. But 
 whence are the means to be derived ? That is the 
 question to be determined. Not a word is said in 
 this constitution as to when this tax is to be ta- 
 ken off. How are the expenses of government to 
 be paid in the mean time ? 
 
 Mr. STRONG. The committee proposes to pay 
 off the debt in eighteen years; the plan of Mr, 
 STOW proposes to do it in twenty-two years. That 
 is the only difference between the two of them. 
 
 Mr. WARD said that the amendment proposed 
 to the report of the committee by the honorable 
 gentleman from Schoharie, (BoucK,) and the one 
 proposed by the honorable gentleman from Herki- 
 mer, (LooMis,) leaves the question entirely open 
 with respect to taxation. The legislature, they 
 say, may, at its discretion, continue this di- 
 rect tax; but in his (Mr. WARD'S) judgment, 
 should there be sufficient funds in the treasury 
 to meet all the 'wants of the government, and 
 the demands of the friends of internal improve- 
 Hiient upon it$ then, as there will be no neces- 
 si*:y for the continuance of this tax, the legis- 
 lature, doubtless, will relieve the people from it. 
 On the other hand, the amendments proposed by 
 the honorable gentleman from Erie, (Sxow,) and 
 the honorable gentleman from Ontario, ( WORDKJV) 
 provide for the payment of the interest and grad- 
 ual payment of the principal of the canal and 
 State debts, by setting apart the'sum of $'2,000,000 
 annually, out of the canal revenues, after which 
 they propose tq appropriate the whole of the bal- 
 ance of the canal revenues to the enlargement of 
 the Erie canal, and the improvement of the Black 
 river and Genesee valley canal ; thereby drain- 
 ng the treasury, not leaving a single dollar 
 therein to be applied either to the ordinary or to 
 the extraordinary expenses of the government, if 
 we except the money to be derived from the auc- 
 tion duties and salt tax ; which, together, will not 
 exceed $'100,000. He (Mr. WARD) did not desire 
 :o occupy much of the valuable time of this Con- 
 vention, but no gentleman, by his plau, hud yet 
 satisfied his (Mr. VV's.) mind as to how this debt 
 was to be paid without the tax. 
 
 It is conceded on all hands, that it is the duty of 
 the Convention to make a provision for the pay- 
 
899 
 
 ment of the canal and State debt, to provide for 
 the gradual completion of the canals, to restrain 
 the legislature from giving or loaning the credit 
 of the htate either in aid of individuals, associa- 
 tions or incorporations, and from contracting debts 
 on behalf of the State, except to contract debts 
 to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, or to de- 
 fend the State in war, without first submitting 
 the question to the people. 
 
 Mr. W. said he would not stop to inquire into 
 the causes of our State indebtedness, as some gen- 
 tlemen, in the course of the debate, had done, nor 
 would he allow himself to cast reproaches on any 
 man or set of men on account thereof. It was 
 enough for him to know that the State was in 
 debt and that some provision should be made to 
 meet it. 
 
 The question is. what shall we do ? Shall we 
 stop here \vith our public works until our debt is 
 paid, or shall we provide for the gradual payment 
 of the debt and at the same time provide for the 
 gradual completion of the canals ? He was in fa- 
 vor of completing the works with l all convenient 
 despatch. 
 
 But whence comes the means ? Have we the 
 means to do all this? That is the question. If 
 we have the necessary means to do all this, I, as 
 one of the humblest members upon this floor, will 
 go for it. We have yielded up to this great work all 
 our means, and as I said before, have nothing left 
 but the salt tax and auction duties, whilst the ex- 
 penses of the government have been gradually roll 
 ing up, till last year they were nearly $800,000. If 
 the annual expenses of the government amount 
 to between $,'(300,000 and $900,000, it will be seen 
 that, should either of the last mentioned amend- 
 ments prevail, the present tax will not only be 
 continued, bul it must be greatly increased, This 
 is not all ; for it will be irrevocably fastened up- 
 on the people for fifty years or more. Indeed, 
 the legislature, should they feel disposed to re- 
 lieve the people from it, cannot do so, because the 
 fax- will be fastened upon them by the constitu- 
 tion ; and there will be no way to obtain relief, 
 but by calling another Convention to altter and 
 amend the constitution in this respect. He, (Mr. 
 W.,) therefore, most solemnly entered his protest 
 against a feature in every respect so obnoxious. 
 
 If we look at the Comptroller's report, we find 
 the ordinary expenses of government for last year 
 to be nearly $400,000, ihus: 
 
 ORDINARY EXPENSES : 
 
 Salaries ot officers, including the Supreme 
 court, court of chancery, ;<nd circuit judges, $ 50,967 59 
 
 Cl rks of Supreme Court, and Registers in 
 Chancery, including expenses ot their offi- 
 ces, 
 
 Pay rnd contingent expenses of the Legisla- 
 ture, 
 
 Court of Errors, 
 
 Expenses ot State Prisons, (transportation of 
 convicts, &c.,) 
 
 Annuities to Indians, &c., 
 
 Commissary's Department, courts martial and 
 brigade inspectors, 
 
 Printing, 
 
 Public Libra: if s, 
 
 Public otticus, for clerk hire, fuel, postage, &.C. 
 
 Appi ehensiou of fugitives from justice, 
 
 Expenses of State Lunatic Asylum, 
 
 Expenses and repairs of Capitol, ' 
 
 Miscellaneous, 
 
 Whilst the extraordinary expenses of the gov- 
 ernment amounted to nearly as much in the fol- 
 lowing items : 
 
 Special appropriations 8f temporary 
 
 Bounty on coal, gypsum, &^. ,.... 
 
 (Geological survey, 
 
 State Lunatic Asylum, 
 
 Clinton State Pri.-on, 
 
 Mount Pleasant Prison, 
 
 Roads, 
 
 Expenses of Military in Columbia, Delaware, 
 &.C., 
 
 41,370 06 
 
 89,306 59 
 27,097 ^0 
 
 14,555 46 
 9,674 93 
 
 27,277 37 
 
 61,763 74 
 6,899 19 
 
 22,113 66 
 5,381 84 
 3,833 57 
 2,985 49 
 
 26,944 44 
 
 Improvement of the Cayuga and Seneca canal, 
 Paid judgment against agent of Auburn prison, 
 
 Deaf and dumb and blind, 
 
 Agricultural societies and premiums on silk,.. 
 
 expenses* 
 
 $ 73,383 03 
 61,622 07 
 528,000 00 
 56,848 38 
 17,800 00 
 4,508 63 
 
 64,391 19 
 7,176 83 
 3,348 83 
 
 38,06-2 73 
 8,698 03 
 
 $368,839 72 
 
 Now what is to be done, with this state of things 
 surrounding us ? Shall we still resort to a direct 
 tax ? Shall we go home and say that this great 
 work shall be done, and done immediately, but 
 at the same time shall we tell our constituents 
 that \\e will still continue to tax ihem on account 
 I hereof. If proper provision was not made to re- 
 lieve the people, at least within a icasonable time, 
 from this burthen, thoae living in his part ot the 
 country, he was atraid, would not ratify this in- 
 strument. And on the, other hand we are told 
 that our western brethren will not vore for the 
 constitution unless provision is made therein for 
 the speedy completion of the public works. We 
 are surrounded with difficulties and dangers on 
 every side. The present question is one involv- 
 ing more important consequences to us than all 
 the others we have had, or may have, under con- 
 sideration. The judiciary question, in compari- 
 son with this, did not weigh a feather. The leg. 
 islative and executive departments were of little 
 comparative consequence. And whilst I am libe. 
 ral to a fault, and have so been in every position 
 where 1 had the honor to be a representative, yet 
 I must look to the direct interests of my constitu- 
 ents; I must still bear steadily in mind what I 
 know to be their wishes. 
 
 When this great work was commenced there 
 were apprehensions on the part of the represen- 
 tatives from the River counties, from Long Is- 
 land and New York, that it would be a failure; 
 and they urged strong objections against the build- 
 ing of the original Erie ar^d Champlain canal. 
 The population of the state at that time did not 
 exceed 1,000,000, and it was apprehended that 
 the canal would nut produce a revenue sufficient 
 to redeem the debt contracted for its construction, 
 and that it would burthen the public with a 
 heavy tax. But they were mistaken in their 
 fears ; and he, for one, returned his hearty thanks 
 to those, who, in that day, had the firmness to 
 stand by the canal. In April, 1817, the act was 
 p.assed, and the representatives from the districts 
 that I have named mostly voted against it ; not 
 that they were in the abstract opposed to having 
 a canal; but they said that it was too early to 
 construct so great a work. The vote on the pas- 
 sage of that stood thus : 
 
 For. Against. 
 
 New York 7 
 
 Suffolk 2 
 
 Total ordinary expense* of government,- $380,218 83 
 
 Queens 
 
 Kings 
 
 Westchester- 
 
 DutchebS.t.. 
 
 Absent. 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
900 
 
 Rockland 
 
 Orange 3 
 
 Columbia 3 
 
 Greene 
 
 Ulster 
 
 Albany * < t ..... \ 
 
 Kensselaer.- 3 
 
 Washington and Warren 0' 
 
 Thus stood the vote on the passage of that im 
 portant act, as far as the River counties were con 
 cerned. They probably did not exercise a wise an< 
 prudent foresight, but they were not willing to en 
 cumber the State with * heavy tax ; they though: 
 it was asking too much for a population of 1,000,- 
 000 to assume a debt of $8,000,000 to $10,000,000 
 But yet this act passed by a vote of 51 to 40 ; anc 
 again he commended the firmness and good sense 
 of those who accomplished it. What have been 
 the proud results of this great work ? Our popu- 
 lation has increased from 1,000,000 to 3,000,000, 
 being nearly equal to the estimates of Malthtis on 
 population, that where there are no checks, the 
 population will double itself once in 14 years. 
 And within a short time after the commencement 
 of the canal, the people every where were will- 
 ing to sustain their share of the debt. Our prede- 
 cessors told us truly whence this original debt 
 would be paid, and when it would be paid ; and 
 that debt for the original construction of the 
 Canal has been extinguished. And now, even 
 with the large debt of $23,000,000, if the canal 
 was blocked up, and would yield no revenue, the 
 people of the River counties generally, would 
 most, willingly pay their mite, and submit to taxa- 
 tion until every dollar of the debt was paid. But 
 whilst they would cheerfully submit to this when 
 it was necessary, does it follow that they will sub- 
 mit to be taxed when it is no longer necessary, 
 more especially when the Treasury was overflow- 
 ing with the revenues of these canals. The half 
 mill tax, which amounted to $500,000 annually, 
 drew from the people of the River counties inclu- 
 ding Richmond and Long Island, $364,000, lea- 
 ving only $136,000 to be paid by the Western and 
 Northern counties. Mr. W. dwelt her* at some 
 length upon the hardship and inequality of this 
 state of things, and insisted that they would have to 
 satisfy the searching inquiries of their constituents 
 in this respect, and they understood this matter 
 most thoroughly. But notwithstanding all this, he 
 (Mr. W.) would be prudently liberal he believed 
 his constituents woulovbe so too. There is patriot- 
 ism enough left in the people there, that if there 
 should be a real necessity to complete these 
 works immediately, they would be willing to 
 postpone the payment of the debt not only for 20 
 years, but even for 30 years, if by so doing this 
 great canal could be so properly enlarged as to 
 bring in the large additional revenues which gen- 
 tlemen contemplated in their estimates, and the 
 people could be saved from taxation. He believed 
 that the canal revenues, which now amount to $2, 
 750,000 annually, were sufficient to keep the canal 
 in repair, to pay the interest, and gradually to 
 redeem those canal and state debts, and to com- 
 plete the canals; and that too without imposing 
 unnecessary burthens on the people. He (Mr. 
 W.) was willing to admit that there was a neces- 
 sity for the enlargement of this canal. What 
 (said Mr. W.) was the condition of that work 
 now ? The Erie canal was divided into four large 
 divisions : 
 
 1st. Commencing at Albany, and ending at Lit- 
 tie * alls, Herkimer county, 90 miles. 
 
 2d. Beginning at Little Falls, and ending at 
 Canastota, in the county of Madison, 58 miles. 
 
 3d. From Canastota to Cartersville, in Wayne 
 county, 106 miles. 
 
 4th. From Cartersville to Buffalo, Erie countv- 
 105 miles. 
 
 On the first section, from Albany to Little Falls 
 90 miles in extent, 30 miles remained to be en- 
 larged 7 miles of which was between Albany 
 and Schenectady. It would require, to complete 
 these 7 miles, $210,000 H locks on this sec- 
 tion were to be entirely doubled, one of which is 
 9 miles west of Schenectady, and 1-2 at Little 
 Falls 7 other pair of locks were nearly comple- 
 ted, but not in use. The 1st lock was 6 miles 
 from Schenectady; the 2d lock, 3 miles west of 
 Amsterdam ; the 3d lock, at Spraker's Basin; the 
 4th lock, at St. Johnsville ; the 5th lock, at Fort 
 Plain ; the 6th lock, at cross locks, 6 miles west 
 of St. Johnsville ; the 7th lock, 5 miles east of Lit- 
 tle Falls. The 30 miles of canal which remained 
 to be enlarged on this section, would cost about 
 $1,000,000. The Champlain canal entered into 
 this section, but below the locks at Cohoes. Of 
 the second section, from Little Falls to Canastota 
 passing through the counties of Herkimer, Onei- 
 da and Madison, a distance of 58 miles 32 miles- 
 remained to be enlarged, with 7 pair of locks be- 
 gun and nearly completed, but not in use. These 
 locks with those on the first section, would re- 
 quire, as estimated, the sum of $295,000 to com- 
 plete them. These were all the locks on which 
 abor is required, upon this section. The 32 
 miles of the canal might be enlarged for about 
 $1,000,000. This section received the following 
 ateral canals the Chenango, the Oneida Lake, 
 md the Black River canals. Of the third section, 
 'rom Canastota to Cartersville, in Wayne county, 
 a distance of 106 miles, only 16 miles had been 
 completed. The remaining 90 miles had never 
 >een put under contract. The number of locks 
 on this section, to be completed, was 5 dou- 
 ble, or 11 single locks. These had never been 
 put under contract. The estimated cost of these 
 ocks was $500,000. The lateral canals that fall 
 nto this section, were the Oswego, the Cayuga 
 md Seneca, the Oneida River improvement, the 
 Seneca River towing-path, the Chemung, and 
 brooked Lake canal. Of the fourth section, from, 
 Cartersville to Buffalo, a distance of 105 miles, 
 >nly S miles had been completed. The remain- 
 ng 97 miles had never been put under contract. 
 <"ive single locks on this section had been, com- 
 peted 5 pair of locks had had no work done 
 upon them, and never had been put under con- 
 ract; and the estimated cost to complete these 
 ocks was $500,000. There were 6 locks partly 
 ompleted, the estimated cost for completing 
 v h ic h w as $300,000. The Genesee Valley canal 
 ell into this section. The whole number of miles 
 >f canal between Albany and Buffalo, which re- 
 nained to be enlarged, was 250 miles, and had 
 lever been put under contract. The estimated 
 ost per mile for completing the enlargement of 
 he canal was $30,000, independent of the locks. 
 !"hus we see that only one-third part of ihe canal 
 s completed, or has been enlarged. So fa? 
 s regards the first section and the locks which 
 
901 
 
 remain in an unfinished -state, they should be 
 completed with all possible despatch. As to tin 
 2d and 3d sections there was no necessity the) 
 should be so speedily completed, lie (Mr. W.) 
 had asked the friends of the 'canals, lo show him 
 a plan how this work could be done within 3 
 years, as named by them, so as at the same time to 
 prevent this great debt on the people. If the re- 
 venues can do all that is contemplated and desir- 
 ed, by postponing the payment of the debt even 
 for 20 or 25 years, he was perfectly willing (with- 
 oui a tax) that these works should be Completed 
 immediately. Mr. W. only asked that during the 
 ensuing 20 years the people miuht not be subject- 
 ed to the annual tax of $500,000 for the support ol 
 the government. First make an appropriation for 
 this purpose, and he would go with gentlemen in 
 the expenditure of every dollar of surplus to the 
 completion of this great work. The gentleman 
 from Erie had given a glowing picture of the pro- 
 bable increase of business on the canal. Mr. W. 
 believed all ot it. He had not a doubt but what 
 in 20 years the immense produce coming from 
 the mighty West would be more than could 
 be transported on the Erie canal, even if it isgreat- 
 ly enlarged, nor upon the railroad upon its banks 
 also, nor even with the Erie railroad to help 
 them. Can we not all comprehend the enormous 
 gro.vth of this mighty West. No less than 200,- 
 000 emigrants had arrived in this country dunng 
 this year alone being 50,000 more than this state 
 had at the commencement of the Revolutionary 
 War. Why, this population alone would build 
 up a city larger than Buffalo, and Utica, and 
 Hudson, and the cities ot Albany and Rochester, 
 all put togei '" r. 
 
 But looking at the unparalleled strides of this 
 country in every respect dating its commence- 
 n.ent Irom the landing at Plymouth Rock, upwards 
 of 200 \ears, and what is our population ? It may 
 be estimated at 20,000,000, or more and from our 
 experience in the past, we may calculate with 
 perfect certainty thar its increase during the next 
 2U years will lully equal that of the last 200. 
 That is to say, that we shall have an addition to 
 our population within the next 20 years, as large 
 as we are at. present, without reference to the 
 enormous emigration from abroad, to swell it be- 
 yond that point. This lide of increase is mostly 
 settling West. And already (he states of Ohio, 
 Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, and those territories, 
 bordering on the great Lakes contain a population 
 of nearly 3.000,000. Those states, embarrassed as 
 they unfortunately are at present, in their finan- 
 cial ullans, are yet prosecuting their works ol in 
 ternal improvements, and what is to be the con- 
 sequence of theircoinpletioi) ? Why, that the im- 
 mense amount of produce, arid the rich minerals 
 from tne borders of the Mississippi and Lake Su- 
 perior, seeking a market on the Atlantic, nu.t ol 
 necessity pass in this direction. Their gram, then 
 provisions, and every thing of that character must 
 come here; oeciuse it is well known thai passing 
 down the Mississippi to Mew Orleans, that hot 
 climate deteriorates many of those ailicles imnie- 
 diately they get (here 'They will he seeking this 
 Northern market the best in the union the city 
 of New York. If then that interesting portion of 
 country now contains 3,000,000 of inhabitants, in 
 20 years in my view, owing to these circumstances, 
 
 they would contain upwards of 7,000,000. And 
 all their vast productions from those fertile re- 
 gion-', passing in this direct inn who can believe 
 that the canal nnd all our other means of trans- 
 portation combined will be adequate for itstransii? 
 Entertaining these views, he (Mr. W.) was in- 
 clined to think that the calculations of even the 
 most sanguine, would fall short in respect to the 
 future increase of these canals. Let us then, said 
 he, engraft in the Constitution some equitable and 
 reasonable proposition that will secure the people 
 against taxation in lime to come. He would say 
 to the friends of these great woiks, present such 
 a proposition, and he would go tor it. If none was 
 presented, he should feel constrained to vote for 
 that of the committee, because it made provision 
 for the payment of the debt, and also for an annui- 
 ty to be paid to the stale for the support of gov- 
 ernment, and for the gradual completion of the 
 canals. 
 
 Why was it that the friends ot the measure 
 were backward in coming forward with a pro- 
 position, when all conceded that there was 
 to be such a vast increase in the revenues of 
 these works ? If they would do if, it seemed 
 to him there could be" no doubt that a majority 
 would be found hereto sustain them. If they 
 would not, then he apprehended they had no con. 
 fidence in their estimate in respect to the increase 
 of tolls, but were desirous of continuing the tax 
 on the people from this time until the debt should 
 be paid. His views were, that we should imme- 
 diately rid the people of this burthen. He would 
 take the revenues of the canals, and apply them to 
 the payment of the interest, the gradual extin- 
 guishment of the debt, to the expenses of govern- 
 ment and after sodoing, he was willing to allow 
 the whole ot the balance to the completion of the 
 canals. $400,000 might be applied to the com- 
 pletion of the canals, the next year; and as the 
 canal revenues increase, the annual appropriation 
 to this object would be increased in the same ra- 
 tio. This, in his opinion, might be done whilst 
 the amount paid of $650,000 which we here set 
 apart for the canal revenues, would be perform- 
 ing its duty. 
 
 Let the friends of this measure bring forward a 
 proposition of this character arid he believed it 
 would be favorably received ; and would, at the 
 same time, give satisfaction to the people of eve- 
 ry section of this State. More than this, they 
 ought not to demand, for there is not the slightest 
 prospect that the lateral canals, when completed, 
 will yield a revenue sufficient to keep them in re- 
 pair. They will, in this way, here attain all that 
 they desire, a pledge secured by this constitu- 
 tion that this work shall be done as speedily as 
 prudence will permit the debt be paid the tax 
 discontinued and the interests of all parties ju- 
 diciously satisfied, and definitely disposed of. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN took the flooi and said 
 he rose under embarrassments which weight d him 
 down, for although he had been six years in public 
 life, yet he was not a public speaker, and would 
 not at ibis time attempt to address this Conven- 
 tion did he not feel it an imperative duty which 
 he owed to his constituents, but placed here as he 
 was by the partiality of a confiding constituency, 
 he could not do less than present their interest in 
 the question, and to the utmost of his ability sua- 
 
902 
 
 tain the right. He had given hts best attention to 
 this subject tor the last four years ; and, if he 
 were not well acquainted with it, he was not with 
 any subject relating to legislation. He had be- 
 fore this, in the senate of this stare, given a his- 
 tory of tne Genesee Valley canal, trorn the first 
 movemenis ot the people inure than a quarter of a 
 century ago, up to the )ear of 1836, and to the act 
 of the legislature of that year, authorizing its con- 
 struction ; and to this and the Black River canal, 
 he proposed to confine his present remarks. In 
 the senate before alluded lo, he gave adescription 
 of the country through which it is located, the 
 junction with the Erie canal at the city of Roch- 
 ester, 245 miles from Albany, then up the Geriesee 
 Valley to Mt. Morns, one of the richest valleys 
 within the United Stales; then to the Genesee 
 feeder in the town of Canadea, Allegany county, 
 then up Black Creek to Cuba upon the summit 
 level on the waters running south; thence to 
 Olean in the county ot Cattaraugus, passing and 
 penetrating the pine forests of the southern coun- 
 ties of (his state, and the northern counties of 
 Pennsylvania, abounding with the best pine tim- 
 
 ber in this or any other country. 
 
 The country from the Genesee Valley to 
 
 the 
 
 Sections 
 
 Locks 
 
 Aqueducts ' 
 
 Culverts 
 
 Bridges 
 
 Waste wiers 
 
 Dams and Bulkheads- 
 
 $J35.373 35 
 
 421.77778 
 
 83, d42 34 
 
 29,069 48 
 
 36,-i-40 69 
 
 9,975 S3 
 
 ' 4,090 00 
 
 Total. 
 
 .$1,019,569 22 
 
 Allegany, is one ot the best for grazing in the 
 state, and produces abundant crops of grain of all 
 kinds produced in this region. At Olean it con 
 nects with that beautiful stream, the Allegany riv 
 er, which was so eloquently described by his friend 
 from Chautauque, (Mr. MARVIN,) as bending its 
 course into this state and washing the northwest- 
 ern base of one of the spurs of the Allegany moun- 
 tains, and gradually wending to the southwest a- 
 bout 300 miles; connecting with the Monongahe- 
 la at, Pittsburgh, both forming the Ohio, and con. 
 necling with more than fifteen thousand miles o 
 river steamboat navigation of the west and south- 
 west. The particular descriptions and statements 
 he would now omit as his honorable colleague hac 
 done a triple justice to that subject, and he was 
 happy to rind that he fully endorsed all that 
 had heretofore said in relation to the beauty and 
 resources of that section of the state. But now 
 he would restrict his remarks to a narrower 
 field. 
 
 The first thing he should present to the con- 
 sideration of the committee, would be the cost of 
 the completion of the unfinished part of the Gen- 
 esee Valley canal : and secondly, the probable re- 
 venue from that source, after its completion. The 
 first he should show from documents which he 
 presumed would not be disputed by any gentleman 
 here. 'Jhe first document to which he should 
 refer was the report of the canal commissioners to 
 the senate on the 27th March, 1844, document 
 111. On the second page ot that document would 
 be found the following table, of which, however, 
 he would say that the contract prices were those 
 of 1838-'39,"when every one knew that the mate- 
 rials necessary to construct a canal were higher 
 than they now are by 25 per cent. Why, at the 
 time at which these estimates were made, they 
 had to pay tiom $8 to $10 a barrel for flour, and 
 from $15 to $20 a barrel for pork. He need not 
 remind gentlemen of what they now were. The 
 statement he was about to make then, of work let 
 in 1838-'39, it must be borne in mind, was based 
 on such prices, and was as follows : 
 
 The work which has not been put under 
 
 contract at estimated prices was as 
 
 follows : 
 
 Sections $93,779 69 
 
 Locks 56,860 00 
 
 Aqueducts 5,900 00 
 
 ulverts 11,100 00 
 
 Bridges 13,980 00 
 
 Waste wiers 6,000 00 
 
 Lockhouses 6,000 00 
 
 Reservoirs 96,400 00 
 
 $295,300 59 
 
 Total $1,314,869 81 
 
 This included all the work to be done on that 
 canal, and for convenience he would call it $1,- 
 315,000. But from this he proposed to strike 25 
 per cent, for the difference of prices now of pro- 
 visions and labor and all the other things that 
 were necessary to construct a canal, and he ap- 
 pealed to the judgment of gentlemen if it was not 
 a reasonable deduction from the high prices of '38 
 and '39. The amount to be deducted then was 
 $328,750, leaving a balance of $986,250, as the 
 cost ot the completion of that canal at this time. 
 This however did not include the reduction to be 
 produced by a-changeof plan of mechanical struc- 
 ture, extra land damages, or the amounts paid by 
 the canal board for violated contracts on the part 
 of the state. But he proposed to test this matter 
 in another way. Call the amount necesssry for 
 the completion of the canal, as above stated, $1,. 
 315.000, then the state has paid on the contracted 
 part of the work $167,000, as was shown by the 
 Comptroller's report of 1846; deduct tor a change 
 of plan of mechanical structure see canal com. 
 missioners report for 1844, document three the 
 sum of $85,000, also deduct 25 per cent, from that 
 portion not under contract, but estimated at con- 
 tract prices for similar work, amounting to $295,- 
 000, as referred to before, being the sum of $73,- 
 750, and for extra land damages in case the canal 
 is abandoned at least $50,000; and there was a 
 sum of $376,250, which leaves a balance necessa- 
 ry to complete the canal of $938,750 only. It his 
 calculations were correct, and of their correct- 
 ness he h?.d no doubt, the work could be complet- 
 ed for less than $1,000,000, including engineering 
 and all contingencies. 
 
 Mr. W. B WRIGHT enquired if the gentle- 
 man took into the account the expenses necessary 
 to repair the tunnel which had fallen in ? 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN replied that his calcula- 
 tion included every thing to be done on the ca- 
 nal; but what the gentleman meant by a fallen 
 tunnel, he was at a loss to know, for he had never 
 heard of such a thing. 
 
 Mr. W. B. WRIGHT said he had received 
 information that a portion ot the tunnel had fallen 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said he was there in August, 1845, 
 and it was not so then. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN said the information of 
 the gentleman from Sullivan was news to him, 
 and would be to the inhabitants of that part of 
 
903 
 
 the country trom which he caine. While on this 
 subject he would say a word to the gentleman from 
 Herkimer, (Mr. HOFFMAN,) lespei-tmg (lie land 
 slides of whTch that gentleman had spoken; lor 
 ht; desired fully to m>vt t v. TV objection, and to 
 remove all that could be removed fairly and truth- 
 lully. It was irue that in 1841, there was a land 
 slide of which a description was given in the ca- 
 nal commissioners' repmt ot 1641. Some twenty 
 rods uave way where by the operation of the wa- 
 ter, the land btcame soil, in section fifty-eight, if 
 his recollection seived him, a;;d that was all the 
 foundation for these stories of land slides. 
 
 But in the canal commissioners' report of 1842, 
 they clear away all the log and mist thrown around 
 this matter. They say that the place where the 
 slide occurred last year, had been rebuilt in such 
 a manner as to stand well thus far, and gave evi- 
 dence of permanency ; and Mr. C. would here say 
 that it stands well up to the present year, and no 
 doubt to the present hour. 
 
 lie hoped after this explanation they should 
 hear no more oi the caving in ot tunnels or of 
 l.md slides, for he decLred the statements to be 
 untrue. The works all stood as they weie when 
 Ihe work was abandoned, with Mjch injury only 
 as the natural d. cay ot the materials was ever 
 subject to. He then propped to show the nro- 
 bal-le revenue resulting from the completion ot 
 this work; and said he should claim the tolls 
 through to tide water, deducting a reasonable pro- 
 portion for superintendence and repairs on the 
 Erie canal. By a caretul estimate, he had the 
 quantities of lumber manufactured on the waters 
 of the Allegany ai.d Genesee rivers which would 
 find a marke'. easrwaid through the canal if com- 
 pleted, and w'lich he had no doubt w;,s entirely 
 correct. Mr. C read, as follows : 
 Statement of lumber manufactured on the Jll- 
 legany river above W~arren. 
 
 There are now forty-five sawmills on the river, 
 cutting on an average one million of feet each, 
 making in all 45,OJO,000 feet. On the same ter- 
 ritory are manufactured at least the same quantity 
 of shingles, 45,000,000. Included in the same 
 territory there is at least 2uO,OUO leet of square 
 lumber. 
 
 On tributary streams of the Allegany river, of 
 which there are eleven that he would mention, he 
 had estimated the amounts of the several kinds of 
 lumber as follows : 
 
 The Hengua creek 10,000,000 of boards, 10,- 
 000,000 of shingles and 50,000 feet of timber. 
 The Sugar Run 5000,000 of boards and 5,000,- 
 000 of shingles. Quaker Creek 2,000,000 of 
 boards and 2,000,000 of shingles. Backtooth Run, 
 1,000,000 of boards and 1,000,000 of shingles. 
 The Great valley, 5,000,0000 of boards and 5,< PO, 
 000 of shingles. 1 he Tunangwant, 1"), 000 ,000 of 
 boards, 20,000,000 of shingles and 100,000 feet of 
 timber, The Oleun, I0,0()0,ooo of boards and 15,- 
 000,000 of shingles. Dodge's Creek, 8,000,000 of 
 boards and 10,000,000 of shingles. Haskill Creek, 
 fboardsan > of shingles. The 
 
 Oswugo Creek, 20,000000 of tboards, 20,000,1 
 shingles and 50,000 feet of timber. Potato creek, 
 1(1,000,000 of boards, 10,000,000 of shingles and 
 50.000 feet of timber. Also on the Allegany riv- 
 er above Potato creek, S, 000,000 of boards, 8 ,000,- 
 000 of shingles and 100,000 feet of timber. Ma- 
 
 king in all on the Allegany and its tributaries : 
 144,000,000 of boards. 
 
 15ti,0!JO,000 ...I, 
 
 660,000 ft ct of square lumber. 
 
 One half of this amount would be transported the 
 whole distance of the Genesee Valley canal (107 
 miles) to Rochester, if the same were completed. 
 The tolls on 
 
 One half would be 72,000,000 of boards $38,520 00 
 
 76,000,000 of shingles 8,453 00 
 
 " " " 276,000 ft. sq. lumber 2,942 60 
 
 $49.910 60 
 
 He had also made an estimate of the quantity of 
 lumber on the Genesee river, as follows : 50,000,- 
 000 of sawed lumber, 50,000,000 of shingles, 500,- 
 000 feet of square timber; the whole of which 
 would be transported on the Genesee Valley ca- 
 nal to Rochester, a distance of eighty miles, if the 
 same were completed. The tolls on 
 
 50,000,000 of lumber would be $20,000 00 
 
 50,000,000 of shingles " " 4,00000 
 
 3UO.OOO ft. of sq. timber " " 2,40000 
 
 Making in all $26,400 00 
 
 Making in all three articles of lumber, timber and 
 shingles : 
 
 On the Allegany and its tributaries, $49,915 50 
 
 On the Genesee, 26,400 00 
 
 $76,315 50 
 
 Now if we give credit to the Genesee Valley 
 canal for tolls on the Erie canal, 245 miles more, 
 it would amount , 
 
 On 122,000,000 of boards to 
 " 1^9,000,000 shingles 
 " 775,000 ft. of sq. timber 
 
 $200,042 50 
 Add to this the tolls on the G. V. canal, 76,315 50 
 
 And you have the sum of 
 
 $276,358 00 
 
 Giving then the Genesee Valley canal credit for 
 the revenues it brought to the Erie canal, deduc- 
 ting 25 per cent, to cover the expense of collec- 
 tion, repairs, &c. of the Erie canal, and there 
 would be then a revenue which would certainly 
 pay the interest of constructing this canal, and to 
 form a sinking fund which would pay the debt in 
 a very few years. He had a table of tolls show- 
 ing the amounts which had been credited to the 
 part in operation since the fall of 1840, when it 
 was opened for navigation, and which showed 
 that the tolls had doubled in the last three, over 
 the three years preceding them. The tolls were 
 in 1840, $0,930, in 1841, $9,257, in 1842, $13,- 
 204 ; total, $29,430, or an average of $9,810. In 
 1843, they were $15,291, in 1844, #19,041, and 
 in 1845, $25,173; being a total of $58,105, or an 
 average of $19,300 ; besides a large amount which, 
 it must be recollected, had been embezzled by 
 the canal officers, the sum total of which had ne- 
 ver been ascertained. Now suppose the increase 
 of tolls should continue in the same ratio up to 
 I M in, and they would have $184,000 from that 
 " pauper canal" alone. (Laughter.) The increase 
 up to the first of August had been over $<'>,iOO 
 more than the whole of last year, as he learned 
 from ofiicial documents. 
 
 The next question was will this business con- 
 tinue? What were the resources of that part of 
 the state which was to furnish business for this 
 
904 
 
 canal, if it should be completed for that was an 
 important matter if, as was stated, they intended 
 to run a canal to the foot of the Allegany moun- 
 tains, and there connect with nothing. He then 
 asserted that the resources of that part of the coun- 
 try were almost illimitable, and he proposed to 
 show some facts in connection with it. He had a 
 statement showing the number of acres of pine 
 timbered land which would be accessible on the 
 completion of the Genesee Valley canal, with the 
 estimated quantity of lumber which would be 
 manufactured from the same. He read as follows: 
 In Warren county, Pa., 100,000 at 20,000 feet per 
 acre, would be 2,000,000,000 of feet, or 2,000,000 
 thousands of feet. Cattaraugus county, 100,000 
 acres at 20,000 feet per acre, would be 2,000,000,- 
 000 of feet, or 2,000,000 thousands of feet. In 
 Allegany county, 125,000 of land at 20,000 feet 
 per acre, would be 2,500,000,000 of feet, or 2,500,- 
 000 thousands of feet. McKean county, Pa. 150,- 
 000 acres of land at 20,000 feet per acre, would 
 be 3,000,000,000 of feet, or 3,000,000 thousands 
 of feet. Potter county, Pa., 175,000 acres of land, 
 3,500,000,000 of feet, or 3,500,000 thousands of 
 feet. In all 650,000 acres of land, and 13,000,- 
 000,000 of feet, or 13,000,000 thousands of feet of 
 lumber; and to consume the above quantity, at 
 the rate of 150,000,000 per year, would take 80 
 years and over. But assume this amount to be cut 
 down one half, then it would require over40yrs 
 to consume this one article of tonnage alone, am 
 it would more than pay for the completion of th< 
 canal, twice over, in tolls, aside from the tolls i 
 would bring to the Erie canal. 
 
 The inducements to transport this lumber to 
 the eastern markets would be apparent to all 
 
 on it ; nor the revenue arising therefrom But he 
 thought it would be ample to pay all expense of 
 superintendence and repairs, if weJl constructed. 
 He presented the following facts, found in the 
 Comptroller's report, assembly document No. 113, 
 which shows a balance in favor of this canal of 
 $72,000. He also referred to the report of the 
 commissioners of the canal fund on trade and ton- 
 nage. On the 29th page would be found that of 
 the Genesee Valley canal, and it was as follows : 
 
 B , oards . 27,000,000 of feet. 
 
 Shingles, 19,000,000 
 Square timber, 106,000 cubic feet 
 
 Staves, 5.000 tons. 
 
 Ashes, 1,000 tons. 
 
 when he presented a few facts to the committee 
 relating to prices in Albany and in Cincinnati, 
 and the cost, risk and loss of transportation. The 
 cost of raiting, running and delivering at Cincin- 
 nati from Oleau was about $4 per thousand feet, 
 the loss and risk at least 20 per cent., and the av- 
 erage price at that market might reach the sum 
 of $16 for the three first qualities. 
 Deduct the price of running, delivering, &c., and 
 
 $!2 00 
 
 you hud left, 
 Deduct ri:k aad loss (20 per cent.,) 
 
 Which leaves $8 80 
 
 He next proceeded to show the result on the ca- 
 nals and the eastern market. The cost of trans- 
 portation on the Genesee Valley canal and the 
 Erie canal to Albany, would be about $5 to $6 
 per M. feet, and the average price at Albany for 
 such lumber was about $27. There was no loss 
 or damage to be sustained. The boards would be 
 worth for this market more than double the sum 
 for the other say $21 per thousand feet. Now, 
 suppose the opening of this immense legion of 
 lumber to market should reduce the price in the 
 eastern market $5 per thousand i'eet, it would 
 then give the manufacturer at home $16 per thou- 
 sand feet full as much as it would bring in Cin- 
 cinnati. And who would get the benefit of this 
 reducticin? Certainly the consumer at Albany 
 and other eastern cities. And would it be said 
 that this statement is not correct? He asked a 
 refutation of it. Nay, he challenged it. Now, he 
 had not in this estimate of business to be done on 
 this canal, made any calculations on the immense 
 amount of other property which would pay toll i 
 
 And other articles amounting in all to ninety 
 thousand tons. And all this without penetrating 
 the main timbered region of the Genesee or Alle- 
 gany rivers. The advantages of this canal, not 
 only to that part of the state, but to the people of 
 ;he whole state, surpassed his ability adequately 
 to present. But let any man look at these state- 
 ments, and unless he was blinded by deep-rooted 
 prejudices, he would decide at once that no time 
 should be lost in completing it. He well knew 
 hese prejudices were strong and abiding ; yet he 
 lad entire confidence that they would-be over- 
 come by an examination of these statements and 
 acts. And if he should succeed in doing this, he 
 should be satisfied, for he should have rendered 
 his constituents a great service. 
 
 They did not compLin of the provisions of the 
 suspension act of '42. In tact, he did not venture 
 to .say that they were distinctly understood ; nor 
 did he understand (he "policy of '42 " The "po- 
 licy" and "the law" appeared to him to be two 
 different things. If the "policy of '42" were to 
 
 abandon the public works commenced if it were 
 to abandon the enlargement of the Eiie Canal, and 
 the completion of ihe Genesee Valley and Black 
 ttiver canals, the people m his section of the coun- 
 try were opposed to it, aou never would consent 
 to it, nor be satisfied with it. But he desiied to 
 read to the Convention something in this connec- 
 tion, which would show that they had a right to 
 expect i hat as soon us the credit of the state had 
 been raised, the public works would be lesumed 
 and completed and (hat the etnbairassment of 
 state stocks had passed away, and money become 
 cheap, could not be denied. The extract to which 
 he alluded was liom the Legislative Address of 
 mis memorable )ear '42. It was as follows : 
 
 In this emergency, we have been impelled to the alter- 
 ternative ot suspending for the present, our public works, 
 except so far as is necessary to preserve ttie ame; and to 
 call upon you, fellow-citizens, to come forward, and by a 
 dir-ct tax, to sustain your own credit. We are aware 
 :hat the alternative presented to you is an unpleasant one ; 
 ;hat the suspension of the public works will produce pecu- 
 liary embairassment among some portions of our consti- 
 .uents; and that an increase of taxes at this season of linan. 
 3ial depress! n, will subject you to inconvenience. But 
 vhich of you would not rather submit to almost any pecu- 
 niary sacrifice, than that the honor ol the state should be 
 mpairtd, or its credit fall '.'" 
 
 Now did that cany the idea that the works 
 vere to be abandoned, or even suspended for any 
 t length ot time? He submitted to the judg- 
 ment of gentlemen whether ttiey had not good 
 eason k) suppose that the works would be con- 
 inued as soon as the stocks were brought up to 
 )ai, and money could be procured at a reasonable 
 ate of interest ? But he had another address from 
 
905 
 
 which he would read an extract to show that on 
 this subject there could be no mistake. It was an 
 extract from the Address of the democratic state 
 convention of the same year, '42, the delegates 
 holding the following language: 
 
 "This suspension of further expenditures on the public 
 works, which had taken place in fact, was declared by law 
 except so far as it was necessary to preserve the work al- 
 ready done from dilapidation. This course was inevita- 
 ble; not indeed as a permanent mtaaure, but until there- 
 sources of the state could be called out and its prostrate 
 credit invigorated and restored," 
 
 He again asked the Convention it there was any 
 indication of an abandonment of the woiks in this, 
 or even a long extended suspension of them ? 
 Should they then be met by the statement that 
 stocks were below par and that money could not 
 be obtained but at a great sacrifice ? No. No one 
 there would say that, nor any man elsewhere. It 
 was known to the world that our state stocks were 
 as good as gold There were no better stocks in 
 the country. In saying this, he did not'wish to 
 be understood to intimate that he would have the 
 state issue its credit, or increase its debt to go on 
 and finish the canals, though strict justice would 
 require that it should do so. They would submit 
 with all patience and humility to the fair working 
 of the canals, but they required the canals to have 
 a fair chance. There was a feeling in the stale 
 against an increase of the state debt, and he con- 
 sidered it his duty to sustain that principle; but 
 justice could be done to the sections of country of 
 which he had spoken, consistently with that sen- 
 timent. It had been suggested by the gentleman 
 from Herkimer that the whole revenues of this slate 
 which are produced by the canals alone for there 
 are no other worthy of notice should be pledged 
 for the extinguishment of the debt of the slate in 
 the time he has specified; and the reason assigned 
 was that the lolls would fall off. Now he (Mr. 
 C.) did not belfeve that there would be any dimi- 
 nution of revenue from the canals. To that sub- 
 ject however, ample justice had been done by his 
 friends Irom Erie, Ontario and Chautauque, and 
 therefore he should not attempt to do that which 
 they had done so well. 
 
 He should merely say, that we had two great 
 objects to effect one was to secure beyond all 
 contingency the payment of the public debt, and 
 the other was to secure the completion of the un- 
 finished works within a reasonable time. And in 
 view of the facts which he had submitted to the 
 committee, he asked if there was not something 
 due to the portion of the state whence he came ; 
 and if the revenues should not be so managed as 
 to secuie the accomplishment of both the objects 
 he had just specified. It could readily be done, 
 but not by the proposition of the gentleman from 
 Herkimer. Whoever voted for that proposition, 
 voted to abandon the canals, and it remained for 
 the Convention to say if such manifest injustice 
 should be perpetrated. There was no danger of 
 afalling offin the revenues of trie canals nay, they 
 might go on and complete the canals; and add to 
 them railroads, and the business of the state would 
 increase faster than the facilities of transit. If 
 the proposition of the gentleman from Erie (Air. 
 STOW) were adopted, both the enumerated desira- 
 ble objects would be accomplished. He proposed 
 to appropriate 81,500,000 for the first ten years, to 
 pay the interest and create a sinking fund to re- 
 
 deem the principal of the debt, and the best cal- 
 culation of the Comptroller did not make the debt 
 more than $22,000,000. The proportion of the 
 gentleman from Erie, would pay the whole of that 
 debt in 23 years, and afford a sufficient sum to en- 
 able the state to go on prudently and economically 
 with the enlargement of the Erie canal, and com- 
 plete the two unfinished canals; arid thus save 
 the four millions of dollars to the state that have 
 been expended upon them. But this was not all. 
 The gentleman from Herkimer again and agaiu 
 had lold them that good faith was a jewel. Mr. 
 C. joined with the gentleman in the reiteration of 
 that truth ; and he called upon the Convention to 
 act with good faith to the neglected portion of the 
 state for which he had been pleading Did the 
 gentleman from Herkimer intend to do this ? No; 
 on the contrary, he desired effectually to provide 
 for the sale of those unfinished works; he would 
 alienate them, and sell them out body and breeches. 
 [Laughter.] Did the gentleman from Herkimer 
 ever intend to prosecute the enlargement of the 
 Erie canal ? No such thing. The word "enlarge- 
 ment" was carefully excluded from the report. 
 He proposed an appropriation for the "improve- 
 ment" of the Erie canal, and what was meant by 
 "improvement/' He proposed to lengthen the 
 locks take out the upper or the lower gate and 
 splice them clean out or bottom out the canal. 
 And would gentlemen be caught with such a bait? 
 His constituents and the people of Western New 
 Yok never would submit to such a proposition as 
 that. He had fairly and plainly presented the 
 facts of the case to the Convention. He had shown 
 the origin of this work, and its situation. He 
 had read what was said of it in the Legislative 
 address of 1842, and also by the democratic con- 
 vention of that year, and would the convention 
 say, when it came here to do justice to every part 
 of the state, aside from party predictions, that 
 important parts of it should be sold out, and alien- 
 ated, and that all the improvement to the Erie 
 canal should be the lengthening of the locks ? 
 He however would say nothing further on that 
 subject. There were gentlemen here much bet- 
 ter qualified for the task than he was ; but he had 
 a duty to discharge, and he should do it firmly, 
 relying on the good sense, intelligence and justice 
 of the Convention to sustain him. Was it possi- 
 ble that the gentleman from Herkimer could be 
 deluded into the belief that the delegates to this 
 Convention would be brought to support his pro- 
 position ? Did he suppose that he could have the 
 support of the friends of the Erie enlargement? 
 The gentleman from Clinton (Mr. STETSON) had 
 said there was no democrat here that would vote 
 against the article reported by the committee. 
 This he denied, and he asserted that no democrat 
 who was governed by just principles would vote 
 for it. He was at issue with the gentleman from 
 Clinton on that subject. ' But after all this if he 
 were mistaken in the opinion which he had ex- 
 pressed, and the report of the gentleman from 
 Herkimer is to prevail, then he would advise this 
 Convention to take down that emblem of justice 
 which stands in bold relief upon the dome of this 
 Capitol, and haul down those stars and stripes, 
 and run up in their stead the black flag of repu- 
 diation, and take to yourselves a name not that 
 
906 
 
 of Democracy, but one corresponding more with 
 your principles. 
 
 Mr. C. said he had another matter to notice, 
 and he trusted the Convention would continue its 
 patient attention a few moments longer. It had 
 been said that the laws for the construction of the 
 Genesee Valley and Black River canals were pro- 
 cured by fraud. Such a statement he was bound 
 to notice for many reasons. One was, that he was 
 a member of the Assembly at the time the Gene- 
 8ee Valley canal bill passed, and he there stated 
 hat if fraud was connected with it it was without 
 his knowledge. But he denied the statement ; it 
 was a slander on the legislature of which he was 
 a member, and of the constituency that he repre- 
 sented. No canal act ever passed with greater 
 unanimity than that for the Genesee Valley canal. 
 And after being passed by a large majority in 
 fact it was almost unanimous it was sent to the 
 executive, than whom a more upright man was 
 not to be found in the state ; and if there had been 
 fraud in the matter, that Governor never would 
 have sanctioned it. He again most emphatically 
 denied that there was fraud in the matter. Mr. 
 C. then referred to some action taken in the legis- 
 lature of 1837, on a resolution introduced by Dr. 
 CASH of Orange, of the 27th February, of that 
 Year, in relation to the postponement of the works 
 on this canal, and after an able argument on the 
 3d of March, 1837, it was almost unanimously vo- 
 ted down, only five being found to sustain it, 
 while ninety-lour were found voting on the other 
 side. After this expression of the legislature, 
 had not the people the right to believe that it 
 was the settled policy of the state to go on and 
 complete these works ? And what was the ac- 
 tion of the government in relation to it ? Why, 
 money was permitted to by used for the construc- 
 tion of these canals, and they were so far advan- 
 ced that at one time but about $500,000 was ne- 
 cess try to put the Black River canal in operation. 
 For the Genesee Valley canal too, three fourths 
 of all that was required was expended, which by 
 the policy now proposed was to be scattered to 
 the winds. It was true that our embarrassed fi- 
 nancial condition required a pause in our expen- 
 ditures, and the avowed object to raise the credit 
 of the state, that money might be obtained at par 
 for the completion of the works was a good 
 one. 
 
 Mr. BURR had one word to say. If that meant 
 fourteen minutes he might want as much time. 
 He desired only to define his position. Mr. B. 
 went on to remark that when the project of con- 
 structing a canal from the Hudson river to Lake 
 Erie was first started, it found little favor in that 
 section of the state to which he belonged. It was 
 (said he) ridiculed by prominent men among us, 
 and strenuously opposed by our representatives 
 on this floor. A large majority of my neighbors 
 deemed it a visionary scheme. But, sir, I some- 
 times form my own opinions without stopping to 
 enquire whether they coincide with those of my 
 neighbors. I did so in this case. I believed in 
 the practicability of such a work. I believed that 
 the state might borrow the necessary means to 
 construct it with a reasonable prospect that, when 
 finished, it would yield a revenue sufficient to pay 
 the interest of its debt, and gradually to reim- 
 burse tho principal. I believed that such a work 
 
 would greatly increase the population and wealth 
 of that portion of the state through which it pass- 
 es; when, at the same time, it might diminish 
 both in other sections remote from it ; that there- 
 fore it would be unjust to raise the necessary 
 funds by a general tax upon the people of the 
 state. When this great work was completed, I 
 doubted the policy of adding side cuts to it, for I 
 believed that every branch that could be added, 
 except the Champlain canal, would diminish its 
 value. But one branch after another was added, 
 and at length the magnificent scheme of the en- 
 largement was projected and pursued, until, in 
 1842, all was " brought up standing" as a sailor 
 would say. Now, sir, I confess I am not quite 
 such an ardent canal man as I once was. I should 
 be willing to have the state sell out the whole es- 
 tablishment, if purchasers could be found who 
 would take it, even at cost. But, sir, I am not 
 altogether hostile to the canals and as I am sa- 
 tisfied that they are to remain the property of the 
 state, I should be glad to see them finished, and 
 placed in a situation to produce the greatest a- 
 mount of revenue, if it can be done without in- 
 creasing the debt, or subjecting the people of the 
 state to a direct tax ; and shall endeavor to vote 
 in accordance with these views. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that he had not intended 
 until this morning to say a word on this subject, 
 ! feeling that there were those here who had some- 
 thing like a local interest to look after, that would 
 lead them to give to it the necessary attention, 
 and feeling also that as the debate was soon to 
 close he should not be justified in going at large 
 into details, with which perhaps he was not as 
 conversant as some others. But there were con- 
 siderations that had not been dwelt upon to the 
 extent at least that seemed to be called for, under 
 the circumstances in which we found ourselves 
 for it was not to be disguised that we had local 
 and conflicting opinions, perhaps local prejudi- 
 ces long indulged, growing out of local interests, 
 that were to be conciliated and harmonized on 
 this question. Mr. B. said he happened to be so 
 situated that he had no such feeling to indulge 
 no interest or feeling that was not common to 
 every gentleman here for the little county that 
 he represented had all that she could ask or de- 
 sire in the way of internal improvement, and 
 nothing that we could do could impair her posi- 
 tion. But he could not participate in the feeling 
 that would shut down the gate against the people 
 of the Genesee Valley or the Black River. He 
 could not but turn back to other times, when the 
 county of Seneca was differently situated. He 
 was one of the two or three in this body who 
 were born and reared west of the county of Onei- 
 da and he could remember when that section of 
 the state w r as riot only shut out from the eastern 
 markets, but cut off almost from intercourse with 
 the people of the eastern section. He could re- 
 member with what gratitude the efforts and influ- 
 ence of the great and noble hearted men of the 
 east in favor of the canal policy was received 
 there ; for at that time, the people of Onondaga 
 were hesitating whether to remain at ii< 
 and struggle with their position as best they 
 could, or emigrate to the far off' and then 
 dangerous and fatal climate to them of th 
 wesi and many ot ttiem did emigrate only to ia 
 
907 
 
 their hones, alter a few years of dial, on the banks 
 of the VW.hash. and other points of emigration 
 
 vard. The people of the western section of 
 this state had omitted no opportunity to repay the 
 
 it gratitude they owed to their eastern breth- 
 ren, and to the people of the whole state; and 
 Mr. E. glanced rapidly over the evidences which 
 legislation presented of the liberal, generous and 
 enlightened course which the representatives of 
 the western section had ever pursued, in refer- 
 ence to the lateral improvements and other enter- 
 prises in which other sections of the state were 
 interested and this too with the knowledge that 
 the last of these improvements and enterprises 
 must ultimately be a charge on their resources 
 Mr. B. urged the cultivation of a similar spirit, of 
 mutual sympathy and regard between all sections 
 of the state. But what, he asked, was this pro- 
 position of the standing committee? (Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN'S.) It was on its face a cold, heartless pro- 
 position, having for its object, if not the entire 
 prostration, at least the abandonment of the long 
 cherished canal policy of the state. It did not 
 provide for the enlargement. It was silent in re- 
 gard to the two unfinished canals. Nor was there 
 any thing in the whole argument of the gentle- 
 man from. Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) about the 
 propriety or the possibility of the enlargement- 
 On the contrary, the burthen of that argument 
 was that it was entirely unnecessary that there 
 was to be a culminating point in the canal rev- 
 enues and that we ought to struggle along for 
 some ten years, as well as we could, and that 
 by that time trade would have sought and found 
 other channels to market, and thus relieve us 
 from the necessity of jjoing on with the work. 
 Mr. B. went on to contrast the different proposi- 
 tions witii which a compromise had been sought 
 to be effected between extreme opinions on the 
 subject of the debt. All, he said, concurred in 
 the policy of making entire and adequate provis- 
 ion for the payment of the public debt and the 
 only question presented was a question of time 
 and how long policy and economy called for an 
 extension of the debt. But these propositions of 
 compromise were such by calculations of interest, 
 and we had been shown how many millions it 
 would cost to postpone the payment of a debt as 
 if it was an argument why we should not make 
 improvements which the public interest demand- 
 ed, that we. must do it on similar terms with in- 
 dividuals who undertook any enterprise. If there 
 was any thing in this interest argument, it was 
 this that the State being able to borrow money 
 at a less rate than individuals, should in the short- 
 est possible time, draw from those who had to pay 
 more for the use of money, the means of payment. 
 But he would not go into this interest argument, 
 nor the salt argument, which had already been 
 elaborately argued. He was happy to see that 
 gentleman who had sympathised with the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer (iVlr. HOFFMAN) had seen 
 fit to change ground and change tone on this ques- 
 tion, and to give a little hope to the friends of the 
 enlargement and of the two unfinished canals, 
 that they might look forward ultimately to the 
 completion of these works though he confessed 
 the hope was small enough. Mi\ B. alluded to 
 the compromise offered by Mr. STOW, and to the 
 appeal which it had become the duty of that gen- 
 
 tleman to make, in the absence of any cham- 
 pion of the canal interest from the quarter 
 where all were looking for it and had a 
 right to expect it. He asked where was 
 the city of New York on this question ? 
 Why it was that the queen city of the west 
 was compelled to come forward unaided by the 
 valuable co-operation of any of the able repre- 
 sentatives from the city of New-York in behalf 
 >f the canal interest ? He insisted that it was the 
 city of New York that was mainly interested in 
 keeping this great channel of business in efficient 
 order to meet all the demands of trade that the 
 interest of Buffalo was a comparatively minor 
 matter and that from New York, of all other 
 places in this Union, it was proper that this ap- 
 peal should have come. And yet, we heard a 
 iiote of another description from that great city, 
 (alluding to Mr. TILDEN'S speech yesterday.) 
 We had an essay on canalling from that quarter, 
 and coupled with an avowal that the delegation 
 from the city were all internal improvement men, 
 entertaining no hostility to the completion of the 
 public works we had a labored argument to 
 show that a little lengthening of the locks and a 
 Little deepening of the canal were all that was 
 necessary to the interests of New York or of the 
 state ! And this too whilst a rival city, with but 
 a portion of the wealth of our great commercial 
 emporium, was putting forth all her energies to 
 counteract the natural advantages of that great 
 mart of the Union. He confessed to a little state 
 pride in contemplating our noble works of inter- 
 nal improvement, and the position of the state as 
 the great highway through which the inexhausti- 
 ble products of the illimitable west must, unless 
 obstructed by a narrow policy and a still narrow- 
 er canal, flow in its course to the sea-board. And 
 he confessed also to some surprise to see these 
 great works, the pride and glory of the State and 
 of the Union, made the object of local and illi- 
 beral jealousies and saddled with what had been 
 well termed trumped up amounts of indebt- 
 edness, calculated, if not designed, to bring 
 them into odium and contempt with the people. 
 As to direct taxation, of which so much had been 
 said in the course of this debate, Mr. 13. said that 
 was not by far the worst evil that could bel'al us. 
 lie denied the neces>iiy for direct taxation to sup- 
 port government, or that such would necessarily 
 be the effect of certain propositions belure Us 
 but he wondered at the objection to direct taxa- 
 tion as a matter of principle, coupled vviih a lean- 
 ing towards the principle taxing the right of way 
 to do it towatds the principle of taxing labor 
 rather than property to support government. All 
 knew the effect of direct taxation to excite a 
 greater scrutiny on the part of those \\ho paid it, 
 to its expenditure, and to promote economy in 
 public expenditure and all must see that it the 
 rich revenues of the Erie c.mal were to be sala- 
 ried and fed, the tendency would be lo profuse 
 and lavish expenditure, at the expense of the toil- 
 ing million. He trusted \\e had done something 
 towards the reduction of the expense of government^ 
 and that this should satisly gentlemen that we were 
 not to be taxed to death . Let this be carried out in 
 your counties and towns, and his word for it, your 
 taxes, which now run up to four millions, would 
 be reduced one million, and without any injustice 
 
908 
 
 to your official list. He scouted the idea of the 
 great state of New York, with her immense re- 
 sources and with her position in the Union, being 
 bankrupted, and her high credit prostrated, by 
 the completion of the enlargement and of the 
 two unfinished canals. He rejoiced to see a pros- 
 pect that the compromise offered by the gentle- 
 man from Erie, or something like it, was likely to be 
 adopted, which, without the issue of a new bond, 
 or the increase of the public debt one dollar, 
 would ultimately lead to the completion of the 
 great system of internal improvement, in which 
 not the State only, but the Unioiv, was so largely 
 interested. 
 
 The committee here rose and reported progress. 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. TAN SCHOONHOVEN addressed the com- 
 mittee at length in support of the proposition of- 
 fered by Mr. STOW. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN then obtained the floor and mov- 
 ed that the committee rise. 
 
 The committee rose and 
 
 Tbe Convention adjourned to 8i o'clock to-mor- 
 row morning. 
 
 SATURDAY, (93rd day,) Sept. 19' h. 
 
 Mr. ALLEN presented the remonstrance of 
 Henry Parish and other citizens of New York 
 against the liability of stockholders in corporations 
 beyond the amount of stock held by them. Mr. 
 A, mo\c j <i its printing. Referred. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented a communication 
 Irom T. Clowes, of Queens county, setting forth 
 thai he had made many and very valuable discove- 
 ries in arithmetic, and asking for the use of the 
 Assembly Chamber some evening next week. 
 
 Mr. NICOL said that be understood this gen- 
 tleman had made many very valuable discoveries 
 in arithmetic. He moved to allow him to use the 
 chamber. 
 
 Cries of <*"h no." 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER : Do not let us have a de- 
 bate on that. 
 
 Mr. MANN : I move to lay it or* table. Agreed 
 to 
 
 Mr. YOUNGS moved to appoint a committee of 
 five to prepare an address to the people in relation 
 to the results of this Convention. 
 
 Laid on the table by consent. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he really did not know 
 what they had to address the people about. 
 (Laughter") He thought they had addressed them 
 through their speeches quite enough, and per- 
 haps a little too much. 
 
 Mr. STETSON offered the following resolu- 
 tion : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee of the whole be instruct- 
 ed to report this day, as early as 12 o'clock, the first article 
 reported by the committee on finance, together with the 
 several amendments adopted or proposed, and the several 
 propositions as substitutes or amendments referred to said 
 committee, and that all such 
 pending amendments. And 
 or any amendment 
 
 ae considered as 
 lat'the debates on said article 
 in committee be limited to fifteen mi- 
 Dutea to be made thereon. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that they must come to 
 some conclusion on this subject right away. They 
 had but 13 working days left; and it was highly 
 important that they should now atop talking and 
 go to work. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN moved to strike out the 
 words " this day at 12 o'clock," and insert " Mon- 
 day at 6 o'clock p. M," It was also very import- 
 ant that gentlemen should be heard on this great 
 subject. The gentleman from Clinton (Mr. STET- 
 SON) was one of the ten or dozen men who had 
 talked for three months and a half, and he was 
 now willing to cut off debate. Perhaps that gen- 
 tleman did not like to hear the discussion of this 
 question. He protested against this rule being 
 applied to those who had sat here for three and a 
 half months, listening to the endless speeches of 
 that gentleman and a few others. He meant to be 
 plain on this point. He trusted the Convention 
 would not tolerate such a move as this. All he 
 asked was that the few gentlemen who had kept 
 silent, and not consumed the time of the Conven- 
 tion, might be heard on a subject in which they 
 were so deeply interested; when they had uncom. 
 plainingly allowed other gentlemen to talk away 
 all the time. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS said that he had occupied time r 
 it wag true, but not very long at any one time ~ 
 but he had been unwilling to restrict debate; but 
 the time had come when they must do so, and he 
 would vote to restrict it to 15 minutes. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN said he would not object 
 to speeches of 15 minutes, 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN said that the gentleman from 
 Herkimer (Mr.Loc-Mis) had made over 70 speech- 
 es on the judiciary, and some pretty long ones. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked if every attempt to restrict 
 debate had not been a mere waste of time ? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was surprised that gentlemen 
 could not see the importance of this. They had 
 had speeches day after day that were not listened 
 to by the Convention speeches which had not 
 furnished any instruction and he asked il they 
 had time now to waste in this manner ? Were 
 they to go home, to the eternal disgrace of every 
 one", by leaving many important subject* untouch- 
 ed, merely that certain gentlemen might gain an 
 im.nortality by making speeches, which it wa& 
 said somebody was going to publish in a book? 
 The time had come for voting, and he was willing 
 to take the sense of the Convention on any propo- 
 sition, after an explanation of fifteen minutes. 
 
 Mr. MANN said he would not debate this, and 
 above all, he would not waste two or three hours 
 in the discussion of a simple resolution. He 
 therefore moved the previous question. 
 
 It was seconded, 57 to 19. 
 
 The main question was ordered. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN wished to change his 
 former amendment td Monday, 12, M. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND : Say six this evening, and 
 let us have an evening session. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN'S amendment was nega- 
 tived. Ayes 34, noes 5892. 
 
 The resolution was then adopted. Ayes 67, 
 noes 26. 
 
 Mr. KINGSLEY moved that there be an after- 
 noon session to-day. 
 
 It was agreed to, ayes 48, noes 37. 
 
 EVENING SESSIONS. 
 Mr. BAKER offered the following : 
 ' Ordered that on and after Tuesday next, this conven- 
 tion will hold eve'ning sessions to commence at halt-past 
 7 o'clock. 
 Mr. NICOLL called for the yeas and nays on 
 
909 
 
 the adoption of the order, arid there were yeas ' J , 
 nays 41. 
 
 The Convention then went into committee of 
 the whole on the report on 
 
 THE CANALS, FINANCES, &c. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR resumed the chair. 
 
 The question was taken upon the amendment 
 offered by Mr. STOW, and it was negatived, 41 
 to 52. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN offered the following amend- 
 ment, as a substitute for the 1st, 2d, 3d and 4th 
 sections : 
 
 " The legislature at its first session after this Constitu- 
 tion takes effect, shall provide by law, in the manner here- 
 in provided, for the creation of a sinking fund to pay the 
 canal debt and the general fund debt of this state and the 
 interest on such debts, and for such purposes, lor the peri- 
 od of ten years from and alter January 1, 1847, the sum of 
 $1,500,000, and from and after the 1st of January, 1857, 
 $2,000,000, until such debts and interest are fully paid, 
 shall be in each fiscal year, and at that rate tor a shorter 
 period from the revenues and tolls of the canals of the 
 state, after paying the expenses of collection, superintend- 
 ence and repairs, be set apart for such sinking fund and 
 pledged to the payment of such debts and interests in such 
 manner that all the preferences and pledges in favor of the 
 creditors of this state shall be preserved and continued. 
 After applying the aforesaid sums to supply the said sink- 
 ing funds, there shall be paid of the remaining nett reve- 
 nues and tolls of the said canals, $200,000 annually into 
 the Treasury of this state. The remaining nett revenues 
 and tolls of the canals shall be appropriated and applied 
 to the completion of the enlargement or improvement of 
 the Erie canal and the completion of the other unfinished 
 canals of the state." 
 
 Mr. WORDEN insisted that the agricultural 
 portions of New-York had paid the expenses of 
 this canal. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD had no idea that those coun- 
 ties like his own that derive no benefit from the 
 canals should be taxed so heavily as they now 
 are. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS then moved to amend the report 
 speaking in favor of his proposition until his 
 fifteen minutes had expired. His amendment is 
 as follows being part of his proposition submit- 
 . ted a day or two since to strike out the first six 
 lines of section 1, and insert 
 
 After paying the expenses of collection, superintendence 
 and ordinary repairs, there shall be appropriated and set 
 apart out of the revenues of the state canals in each year, 
 commencing on the first June, 1846, the sum of $1,300,000 
 until first June, 1855, and from that time the sum of 
 $1,700,000 in each year, as a sinking fund to pay the in- 
 terest, &c. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN rose to a point of order. How 
 did the gentleman's proposition differ from his 
 own ? 
 
 The CHAIR said the gentleman from Ontario 
 had offered a substitute, the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer had offered an amendment, and the amend- 
 ment took precedence of a substitute. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that in reality it was the 
 same as his own. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that he should be under the 
 necessity of modifying his amount, having dis- 
 covered an error in the computation of interest; 
 this, instead of being $237,000 a year, amounted 
 to 337,000 or $324,000 as some have stated. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE spoke in favor of these ca- 
 nals, and of their enlargement in a judicious man- 
 ner, and as speedily as possible consistent with 
 the public interest. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that, the amendment of 
 Mr. WORDEN was but the revival of a proposition 
 
 that had already been voted down. It was a pro- 
 position to increase the state debt, and nothing 
 else, and would, if adopted, bring the state into 
 disgrace, by extending the time in which it was 
 pledged to pay its debt. The proposition of his 
 colleague (LooMis) would pay the debt within the 
 prescribed limit, it is true, but then it would in- 
 crease the amount the state would have to pay in 
 interest more than $1,000,000 ! 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE again took the floor. He 
 said that all who would take the pains to examine 
 this continent from the Gulf of Mexico to the 
 Canadas, must be convinced that the commerce of 
 the great west must come through this state. The 
 God of Heaven and of nature had given us advan- 
 tages of which we could not be deprived, and in- 
 stead of complaining that Boston tapped this com- 
 merce at Albany, we should help her to tap the 
 commerce on the St. Lawrence at Montreal. He 
 depicted the joyful hallelujahs through this state 
 on the passage of the first boat from Buffalo to 
 Albany, mothers standing on the banks and dating 
 the ages of their children from that day and con- 
 trasted this feeling with the funeral dirge that 
 would be heard through the state if the policy 
 should now be changed. He entreated the Con- 
 vention to let the enlargement of the Erie canal 
 go on peaceably and certainly. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that as to the remark 
 which had been very unjustly thrown out here as 
 to the general government regulating our canal 
 commerce, he felt bound to deny any such thing. 
 He was an officer of that government, and he felt 
 bound to defend himself from the sneers or impu- 
 tation of being a member of any government so 
 mean as that course would make them. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN spoke of the proposition of the 
 gentleman from Erie as a proposition based on a 
 spirit of compromise, on which the friends of ca- 
 nals from the west were united, and therefore it 
 was entitled to more respect than it had met with. 
 He protested against the accusations against its 
 friends, which had been made, that they were de- 
 sirous to repudiate the faith of the state, and to 
 break its promises. He spoke with great warmth 
 against the injustice to be done to the west, where 
 he assured them a fire would be enkindled which 
 not only the waters of the Erie canal but of the 
 Atlantic would not be able to extinguish. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK entreated the gentleman to give 
 way, that he might offer an amendment, the hour 
 of 12 when the article must be reported having 
 nearly arrived. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN yielded. 
 
 Mr. JiOUCK submitted a modification of Mr. 
 LOOMIS'S proposition, by making- the appropria- 
 tion lor (he canal debt fcl,2uO,000, (instead of 
 ft], 300,000, ) -r.o increase ilie appiuprtatioD for 
 the General Fund debt to &32o,UOO (instead of 
 .100,) and then beyond inese amounts appro- 
 priate $172,51)0 lor the ordinal) purposes of go- 
 vernment. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to strike 
 out of the 3d section (hi- following: " but no law 
 shall be passed appropriating or pledging for the 
 construction or improvement of any canal or rail- 
 road, any part of such revenues, beyond those of 
 the year current, and at time ol passing such 
 law." 
 
 The hour of 12 having arrived, the Contention, 
 
910 
 
 by its resolution, having directed the committee 
 of the whole to rise and report at that time, the 
 committee rose accordingly, and iis chairman re- 
 ported the original article to the Convention, and 
 progress on the other, asking leave to sit again 
 thereon. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to discharge the 
 committee of the whole from the second report 
 also. Carried, 49 to 40. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then s'ated the question to 
 
 be on the first section of the committee's report. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to amend by striking out 
 
 the first section, and inserting his amendment. 
 
 [Given above.] 
 
 Mr, MARVIN 3upposed the question would 
 first be taken on the amendment he had ottered in 
 committee, on behalf of Mr. STOW. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN contended that the motion ot Mr. 
 LOOMIS was first in order. 
 
 Mr MARVIN thought they were to be taken in 
 the order in which they were offered in commit- 
 tee. 
 
 The PRESIDENT decided that they took pre- 
 cedence as they were moved. 
 
 In this case, Mr. STOVV's amendment took pre- 
 cedence, because it had been acted upon in com- 
 mittee, and Mr. LOOMIS' had not. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN then briefly advocated the amend- 
 ment, and warned gentlemen of the consequences 
 of rejecting this important compromise. If the 
 plan of the committee should be adopted, there 
 would be a flame, a tornado, and an upheaving of 
 the waters throughout the state. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN stated briefly his objections to 
 the amendment of Mr. STOW expressing his pre- 
 ference for that of Mr. LOOMIS. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG did not see any occasion 
 for so much excitement as had been exhibited by 
 the gentleman from Chautauque. (Mr. MARVIJV : 
 " I am not excited.") The gentleman had talk- 
 ed of " flames," "tornadoes," and " upheavings 
 of the waters," in a way which looked very much 
 like excitement ; but if there was any question 
 which should be decided without excitement i 
 was this. The gentleman forgot that the people 
 of the western section of the State were now in 
 the precise position that the people of the river 
 and southern counties were some twenty-fiv< 
 years ago and that the question was not now be 
 tween sections of our own State, but between the 
 State at large, and the great west bordering th 
 lakes. For one, he wished the Erie canal was 
 as broad as the Hudson below the Highlands fo: 
 the west would soon fill up with its trade all the 
 avenues we and other States would furnish. He 
 begged gentlemen, when addressing themselve 
 to local feelings and interests, to consider tha 
 we were all alike interested in this question 
 that if the western portion of the State was en 
 titled to the credit of paying a large share of th 
 revenues of the canal, so other portions of th 
 State had contributed their share. He showe< 
 that the agriculturists of Long Island had a grea 
 and a common interest now in the matter wit 
 the people of Chautauque. All alike were inter 
 ested in the payment of the debt contracted i 
 the construction of the canals, and all agree tha 
 the debt must be paid. With respect to the eu 
 minating point ot which the gentleman from Her 
 kimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) had spoken, Mr. C. sai 
 
 here was no such point in the business of a canal 
 hose extent was commensurate with the great 
 Ices, bordered, as they were, by a region inex- 
 austible in its resources, at it was illimitable 
 lout its geographical boundaries. We had in 
 lese canals a proud monument of the enterprise 
 f the state, and we had now a proud duty to dis- 
 harge in extinguishing the debt. Such was the 
 anguage of De Witt Clinton, and such should be 
 ur language. On all sides there was a desire to 
 ay the debt which had been contracted, and to 
 herish these great works ; but there was a desire 
 Iso in doing this, to avoid imposing direct taxes, 
 hich would be felt in the west as well as in the 
 ast. He hoped we should see the time when we 
 liall have a government without a debt, and a 
 overnment supported without taxation, not al- 
 ogether without taxation, but with incidental tax- 
 tion only which all could afford to pay. He 
 egged western gentlemen to remember that of 
 >'2, 775,000 collected by taxation, the city of New 
 fork paid $1,000,000. Whereas the people of 
 tie west did not send a barrel of flour to New 
 fork without getting back the amount paid for 
 ending it there. It was useless to attempt in 
 his discussion to gainsay the great truth, that 
 he consumer paid the indirect tax, and that was 
 he only tax he wished to see in the State. He 
 oncluded by paying a most eloquent tribute to 
 he genius of De Witt Clinton. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND replied, insisting that the tolls 
 m the produce of the west came directly out of 
 he pockets of the producers, and that the south- 
 ern section of the state was immensely benefitted 
 >y the canal. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved the previous question. 
 
 There Was no second ayes J2, noes 92. 
 
 Mr. JBOUCK offered am amendment, appealing 
 o Mr. MARVIN to withdraw his. 
 
 [Mr. BOUCK'S amendment was read. It pro- 
 poses to reduce the appropriation for a sinking 
 und for the canal debt from $1,300,000 to $1,200,- 
 000 to increase the annual payment towards the 
 inking tund tor the general fund debt, from $200,- 
 000 to $250,000 and appropriates, in addition, 
 $172,500 annually to the support of the govern- 
 ment all from the canal revenues.] 
 
 Mr. MARVIN agreed to waive his amendment 
 until the question should be taken on that of Mr. 
 BOUCK. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that his first section was of- 
 fered as an amendment to the first section of the 
 article as reported by the committee that being 
 the section under consideration. Therefore this 
 
 reposition of Mr. Boucx.whether adopted or not, 
 ..e did not consider would indicate the sense of the 
 Convention as to the other amendments, proposed 
 to the other sections. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD explained his object in mo- 
 ving to strike out the 3d section of the original 
 report. He never would consent to pledge the 
 surplus revenues to the improvement of these 
 public works, because he believed it would in- 
 duce the necessity of perpetuating the direct tax. 
 After making specific provision tor the State debt 
 and the general fund, he would leave the remain- 
 der of the revenues at the disposal of the legisla- 
 ture. Mr. C. went into a detailed examination 
 of the debts due from the canals to the general 
 fund, showing that giving the canals credit all 
 
911 
 
 that was due to< them, they were in debt to the 
 
 1 land to the extent of over $7,000,000 with 
 
 All he desired was that the funds of 
 
 should redeem their pledges and pay 
 
 bade these advances. 
 
 Mr. STETSON sustained the proposition of 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS, as it would extinguish the canal 
 
 debt within the time limited by the act of 1842 
 
 . 'lainedby the act of 1844. He desired to 
 
 comply strictly with the pledges of the act of 
 
 On the other hand, the proposition of Mr. 
 
 K. was directly in violation of the pledges of 
 
 those two acts. He objected to it also on the 
 
 ground that the appropriation it proposed of 
 
 to the general fund, was insufficient, 
 
 and would perpetuate the direct tax. This he 
 
 could never consent to while the state had so 
 
 an amount of surplus revenue. 
 .Air. ANGEL said he did not know that it was 
 in order ; but he desired, before the present ques- 
 tion should be sprung upon us again, to place his 
 sum-ndment in such a situation that it might be 
 voted on. If in order, he would move it now 
 and he wanted to say a word in explanation of it. 
 He wanted to call attention to it and in offering 
 it, he knew that he appeared in a very suppliant, 
 beggarly attitude asking, as he did, the smallest 
 pittance that tight-fisted officers would possibly 
 give. But he was forced to this. It was repul- 
 sive to him, and were it a matter that he was per - 
 sonilly interested in, he should disdain it. But 
 he appeared here in behalf of suffering thousands 
 that would be glad of a quarter of a loaf, rather 
 than no bread at all. His amendment proposed, 
 that if money could not be raised on the credit of 
 the sinking fund, that the surplus tolls might be 
 used for that purpose. He desired to place this 
 surplus within reach, so that it might be thus ap- 
 plied, if the state should be so miserably poor 
 that it could not raise money on the credit of a 
 sinking fund. Next, it proposed to pay into the 
 treasury for the support of government, $200,000 
 a year. That was a more liberal proposition than 
 that of the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN) for the support of government for that 
 gentleman proposed $172,500 only and in his 
 explanation of that portion of his article, he said 
 it would be, or might be necessary to increase 
 the half- in ill tax to a mill tax, to support govern 
 merit. Next, his proposition was to apply the 
 residue of the surplus tolls, for ten years to the 
 improvement or enlargement of the Erie canal 
 and the completion of the unfinished canals. 
 
 .Mr. PATTERSON sustained the proposition of 
 
 Mr. BOUCK, as offering a ground for a compromise. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved that the committee rise. 
 
 d to. 
 And the committee took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON, SESSION. 
 THK CANALS, KINANCES.&c. 
 The Convention again took up the subject o 
 the report of the finances. 
 
 Mr. 'MARX-' IN continued the debate. He had 
 charged that this attempt to get up a large debl 
 i fund dm.- the general fund, was, 
 a trumped up account. There were first ilie salt 
 duties. What was the history of this matter ? 
 When the construction of the Erie canal was ii 
 contemplation, there existed great fears in cer- 
 
 ain quarters of the state that they would be tax- 
 ed for its construction. The friends of the canal, 
 vent to work to provide a fund which would ob- 
 iate such a necessity. Up to 1817, the total salt 
 evenue received by the state from the salt springs 
 was but $40,000. The tax was then three cents 
 a bushel. For the purpose of providing funds 
 'or the canal, the tax was raised to twelve cents 
 i bushel. This was paid willingly, although it 
 ,vas considered by everybody as a local tax. The 
 canals were built, and in consequence of that, 
 and the increased tax, the salt duties increased to 
 as large an amount as $250,000 in a single year. 
 All this was pledged by the Constitution of 1821, 
 o the payment of the canal debt. So, too, with 
 he auction duties, which were pledged by the 
 same Constitution, and he never had heard a 
 word about the canal fund paying this back until 
 within a few years. 
 
 Mr. M. next examined the charge on account 
 of land sales, referring to the fact that large por- 
 tions of the land thus sold, consisted of that de- 
 voted to the state. He went into a statement 
 showing what the canals had paid to the general 
 iund, showing that on a fair computation they 
 were entitled to a credit of $9,951,453. Was he 
 not right then in saying that this was a trumped 
 up account ? It was an imposition to which the 
 people would never submit. Mr. M. further ex- 
 amined the proposition of the standing committee 
 showing its injustice. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that if this was a trump- 
 ed up account, it was trumped up by some of the 
 most honorable men in the State ; and if the gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque ^Mr. MARVIN) chose to 
 calumniate them, he left that gentleman to settle 
 that matter with the gentleman from Schoharie 
 (Mr. BOUCK) who had himself not only endorsed 
 all these charges, but the mode of computing the 
 interest. Now, if what the gentlemen had said 
 was true, that the west had paid this tax, so had 
 the people of other counties, (Otsego for instance) 
 and when gentlemen sought to get rid of restor- 
 ing this tax to the treasury to keep down taxa- 
 tion, it was they who trumped up an excuse, and 
 not others who trumped up an account. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES enquired how much they paid 
 for salt in Herkimer before the canal was built ? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he could not recol- 
 lect just at this moment, but he was glad that the 
 gentleman had asked the question, because it re- 
 minded him of a matter he intended to have pre- 
 sented. He still insisted that the consumer of 
 this produce paid the tax in all these cases. And 
 nothing could be fairer than that the state should 
 have the salt tax, whilst the canals had the tolls 
 on it. As to the proposition of the gentleman 
 Irom Schoharie, what was it ? Why nothing but 
 the skeleton and shadow of his own" It was true 
 that up to 1865, both proposed to pay $172,500 
 annually into the state treasury. But after J-<!i5 
 the committee proposed that $072,100 should be 
 paid yearly. The amendment only continues the 
 payment of $17:2,500 after 1MJ5 as well as before. 
 If he makes his amendment to appropriate $672,- 
 500 after 1M)5 then il will be equivalent to the 
 proposition ot 'the committee. 
 
 Mr. VVORUEN: Very well, then; but will the 
 gentleman Irom Herkimer accept of this plan 
 with that amendment .' 
 
912 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN: I have no right to accept 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : Will you agree to it, then 
 
 with such an amendment? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN: I cannot tell. I want to wai 
 and see the whole proposition first. I do not wan 
 to take prussic acid, because there,happenslo be ; 
 little wine mixed up with it. (Laughter.) HI 
 insisted on it that in a very short time the expen 
 ses of the government would swell up to a rrril 
 lion of dollars a year ; in about ten years. Mean 
 time they would not be less than six or seven 
 hundred thousand dollars a year; and he wantec 
 to get that sum to meet that expense without any 
 further taxation. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK said that in order to please Mr 
 HOFFMAN, if it would be more satisfactory to th 
 Convention, he would now amend his proposition 
 so as to provide that after the public debt shal 
 have been paid, the sum of $672,500 shall be se 
 apart annually for the suppoit of government. 
 Mr. WORDEN : Make it $800,000. 
 Mr. BOUCK: Well, I will say $-800,000, i 
 gentlemen please, (laughter) or I will provide for 
 paying the expenses of the government from the 
 canal revenues, without specifying the amount. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG: But 1 wish to ask and 
 to know what we are to do rn the meantime? 
 Are we to have direct taxation until the debt is 
 paid ? That is the point ! 
 
 Mr. BOUCK said that it was true that such was 
 a feature of the original article ; but if the mem 
 bers had looked through his proposition, they 
 would have seen that after the completion of the 
 unfinished works, (that is in eight or ten years,) 
 the entire surplus of the revenue would be at the 
 disposal of the legislature. The time, therefore, 
 would depend on the amount of the surplus. He 
 was willing to limit the expenditures to the Black 
 River and Genesee Valley canals, and the present 
 enlargement of the Erie canal. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG : And meanwhile the 
 tax must continue. So I thought. Now when are 
 these canals to be finished ? It was now 1846, 
 and we were a little further off from it than we 
 were in 1825. We at first began to enlarge the 
 old canal ; and then to double the locks ; and then 
 to make new canals ; and he supposed that the 
 next thing would be to widen every lateral canal 
 in the state. If gentlemen would only tell him 
 when the canals would be finished, and when we 
 should be relieved from taxation, he would go 
 with them, and not without. 
 
 Mr. WARD : Nor can I in justice to my con- 
 stituents. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK said that he was quite willing to 
 meet the gentleman, and to say that the appropri- 
 ations should be applied to the completion of the 
 unfinished works on the present plan of construc- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG: Yes; but when will 
 they be finished ? 
 
 Mr. BOUCK : If the surpluses are large, they 
 may be completed in about eight years. 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG : Not before? 
 Mr. BOUCK y No, sir. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG: Then at all events we 
 are to have this direct tax for that time. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said the gentleman would be 
 in the same position in that respect, under the 
 proposition of Mr. BOUCK, as under that of Mr. 
 
 HOFFMAN. The latter gentleman had admitted 
 over and over again in debate, that under his plan 
 the present tax was to continue. Mr. BOTJCK'S 
 proposition relieved the state from the tax, just as 
 soon as that of Mr. HOFFMAN, if not a little soon- 
 er. As to the proposition of Mr. LOOMIS, it was 
 not as favorable for the canal interest as that of 
 Mr. HOFFMAN. It was not intended to be so. 
 Instead of securing the surplusses for the com- 
 pletion of the unfinished works, it left the door 
 open to seize on them for general purposes. That 
 of Mr. HOFFMAN was far more liberal than that 
 of Mr. LOOMIS, for it did make substantial pro- 
 vision for the completion of these works. And 
 he understood the gentleman from Clinton to say 
 the other day, that Mr. HOFFMAN'S was the only 
 democratic proposition. 
 
 Mr. STETSON : i did not say that, sir. That 
 remark applied to that portion of the plan of the 
 gentleman' from Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) which 
 contemplated the payment of the canal debt with- 
 in the period contemplated by the acts of 1842 
 and 1844. 
 
 Mr, WORDEN said then the gentleman used 
 language that did not express his ideas. B? that 
 as it might, that proposition contemplated a direct 
 tax for the support of government. But he would 
 not occupy lime. The proposition of the gentle- 
 man Irom Schoharie covered the whole ground; 
 and he hoped it would be offered and accepted in 
 the spirit of compromise that had been so often 
 invoked. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK said that he would now send up 
 he following amendment to be added to his former 
 amendment: 
 
 After the payment of the public debt, $672,000 shall 
 )e annually appropriated from the canal revenues to the 
 jeneral fund, to meet the expenses of the Government." 
 
 Mr. TILDEN followed in a very able review 
 of the debate of the whole week. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR followed, say ing that he stood 
 lere pledged to the principles of the policy of 
 1842, and he could vote for no proposition that 
 lid not embody the principle of that act. Our 
 first duty was to pay the debt and then prose- 
 cute your public works to any extent. He was a 
 riend of internal improvement, and was proud of 
 ,vhat had been done but il there was a period in 
 ur history to which he could point with greater 
 n-ide than another, it was to 1838, when the State 
 A-as comparatively free from debt. He alluded to 
 he change wrought in our financial condition in 
 he five years succeeding, and to the strong repug- 
 lance throughout the state to the revival of a po- 
 icy which had led to such results. While he 
 .ccorded with the original report ot the commit- 
 ee, he should give his support to the substitute 
 flfered by Mr. LOOMIS. He desired to see the 
 Irie enlargement, the Genesee Valley and Black 
 liver canals completed, and this would leave sur- 
 >lus enough to meet all this expenditure, and give 
 ;eneral satisfaction to the people of the state. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK said if gentlemen would look to 
 
 he propositions he had the honor to submit, they 
 
 would find that they were more stringent than any 
 
 ther that had been offered. He felt as deep an in - 
 
 erest in dispensing with taxation as any other 
 
 member. His own constituents were as remote- 
 
 Y interested as those in any other part of the 
 
 tate. Mr. B. read from the Comptroller's re- 
 
913 
 
 
 port to show that his estimate of the annual ordi- 
 nary expenses of the government were only $380,- 
 000. Under his plan, reserving only half the pre- 
 sent tax, there would be an annual income of 
 nearly $500,000, leaving over $ 100,000 to meet 
 the extraordinary appropriations by the legisla- 
 ture. He could not see how more than one-half 
 of the existing tax could be dispensed with, until 
 the debt should be paid. 
 
 Mr. B. said this whole matter lay in a nutsnell. 
 And he was happy that the Convention had at last 
 arrived at a point when a Harmonious result might 
 be attained. The friends of the canals those re- 
 siding in the western counties, and deeply inter- 
 ested in the speedy completion of the unfinished 
 canals came here with a proposition to secure 
 the payment of the entire canal and general fund 
 debts, out of the revenues of the canals. They 
 offered farther to assent to the annual appropria- 
 tion of $172,500, annually, to the ordinary expen- 
 ses of government, and after the debt shall be 
 paid, the sum of $672,000 per annum forever to 
 the support of government. They submitted to 
 all this, and only asked in return, that the poor 
 surplus over these amounts should be applied to 
 the completion of the public works. Was this 
 too much to be acceded to ? He trusted not, but 
 that we should in our action set an example to 
 the whole Union, worthy of all commendation. 
 Adopt the plan suggested by him, and he was sat- 
 isfied it would be entirely satisfactory to the cre- 
 ditors of the state. He had not a doubt but what 
 it would advance our stock, at least one percent, 
 forthwith. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY had an amendment to propose 
 in the spirk of compromise. He wanted to save 
 his constituents from the burden of taxation. 
 Then he had no objection that the surpluses 
 should be applied to the canals. He concluded 
 by offering the following : 
 
 But no appropriation shall be made of any surplus to 
 wards th said improvements until the tax authorized by 
 the act entitled lk An a^t to provi le for paying the debt and 
 preserving the credit of the state," passed March -.29, 1842 
 shall cease. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said if gentlemen were sin. 
 cere in believing the annual expenses of govern- 
 ment would be only $380,000, they would con- 
 sent to the appropriation of a sufficient sum t 
 meet these expenses out of the canal tolls. He 
 believed for the next ten years these annual ex- 
 penses would be over $700,000. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. PAT 
 TERSON, CHATFIELD, PERKINS and LOO- 
 MIS. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said this question had been discus- 
 sed at great length. Very little time was left to 
 the consideration of the other important matters 
 before the Convention, if the present debate 
 should be much prolonged. He therefore askec 
 unanimous consent to offer a resolution termina- 
 ting debate on this report with all the pending 
 amendments on Monday at 12 o'clock. 
 
 No objection being made, Mr. B. offered such 
 resolution. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERBAIN moved to adjourn. A 
 greed to, 51 to 3y. 
 
 MONDAY. (94th day} Sept. 21. 
 No clergyman present. 
 Mr. HUNT presented the petition of severa 
 
 ersons it) New York praying that clergymen may 
 je made eligible to office, and that females may 
 e allowed to go the polls and deposits their bal- 
 ot. Referred to the committee on human rights, 
 rivileges and arrange men ts. 
 
 Mr. "TOWNSEND nreserited a remonstrance 
 rom Prime, Ward & King, Saul Alley, and oth- 
 ers, against making members of corporal ions lia- 
 >le individually and personally for the debts of 
 hose corporations Mr. T. moved that it be laid 
 in the table. Agreed lo. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAJVIER offered this: 
 
 Resolved, That every profession, trade, occupation or 
 msiness not hurtful to the community, should be open and 
 ree to all the citizens of the state, without license or any 
 mpediment whatever. 
 
 It was referred to that committee of the whole 
 laving charge the report on human rights. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE offered the following in place of 
 hat presented on Saturday: 
 
 Resolved. That the Convention will proceed to a final 
 rote on all the amendments proposed or to be proposed on 
 :he first article of the report of the committee on Finance 
 at 4 o'clock this day. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS said that he desired and trusted 
 hey would get a vote on this matter before that 
 ime. He wished Mr. BRUCE to change the 
 ihraseology, or the resolution would prevent their 
 voting at an earlier hour. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN suggested a verbal amendment 
 to meet this ; the words " at or before four." 
 
 Mr. BRUCE accepted this ; and the resolution 
 was passed. 
 
 The Convention then took up the cons'deration 
 of the report of commiltee No. 3 on 
 
 THE CANALS, FINANCES, &c. 
 
 The question was on the amendment of Mr, 
 BOUCK. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said he desired to address the 
 house once more on this occasion. Much had been 
 said by the gentlemen of the Convention about the 
 good faith of the state; it had been called a jewel. 
 Sir, (said Mr. A.) I admit it is a jewel and that 
 we should regard it as the apple of the eye. To 
 whom is the faith of the state pledged? It is 
 pledged to the holders of the state stock for its re- 
 demption. Is the state pledged to nothing else ? 
 Is she not pledged to the completion of the pub- 
 lic works she has avowed she would make ? Sir, 
 is there no faith in your statute books ? Is the 
 state at liberty to repudiate the faith she pledged 
 for the completion of the unfinished works? 
 What will be the effect of such repudiation? 
 Have not the laws for the construction of those 
 works and the appropriations made for their con- 
 struction, virtually bound the state to complete 
 them ? They have invited hundreds, nay thou- 
 sands, to sell out their property in other places, 
 and vest it in the purchase of lands and in mak- 
 ing improvements along the line of these works. 
 Hundreds, nay thousands, encouraged by the 
 plighted faith of the state, have disposed of their 
 property and located themsYlves along the lines 
 of.these" unfinished works, nothing doubting that 
 the state would inviolably observe its faith com- 
 plete what she had undertaken, and carry into 
 fulfilment the assurances she had given in that 
 respect. Encouraged, I say sir, by such assu- 
 rances, hundreds and thousands of good and 
 worthy citizens, mechanics, farmers, trades, 
 men, laborers, &c., sold out their homes and 
 
 89 
 
914 
 
 their all, and located themselves on the line 
 of the unfinished canals. They entered with 
 alacrity into the preparations necessary to es- 
 tablish them in a good and lucrative busi- 
 ness ; they purchased farms, lots and locations 
 built houses, barns, shops, stores, &c., thousands 
 and tens of thousands were expended under the 
 flattering hope that the time was at hand when 
 the works would be finished and their sacrifices 
 and labors would be rewarded. Many had com- 
 pleted their arrangements, and many others had 
 partially done so When the suspension of 1842 
 came, it came with a crash that sunk the proper 
 ty and desolated the homes of those poor people. 
 To refuse to complete those works would be the 
 worst kind of repudiation, it would be as criminal 
 and unworthy as to procure property under false 
 pretences. Shall we confine our entire sympathy 
 to the rich stock and fund holders, and abandon 
 poor men in the miserable and cruel condition 
 into which your policy and plighted faith had 
 plunged them ? I cannot perceive the difference 
 between repudiating the debts of the state and its 
 plighted faith to this injured people. They have 
 lost and suffered much already, and will be nearly 
 all ruined, should the state persevere in its refu 
 sal to complete the canals. Is it not as wicked 
 to refuse to relieve those people, as it is to refuse 
 to pay the stockholders ? The one is a debt pay- 
 able in money, and the other in kind. What 
 earthly difference can there be between repudia- 
 ting a note payable in money and a note payable 
 in cattle and horses? Will my conscientious 
 friends who quake and tremble at the idea of re- 
 pudiation, inform me of the moral difference be- 
 tween the two cases ? Gentlemen hav*e earnestly 
 insisted that they were willing to continue the 
 half mill tax to pay the debt, but would not con- 
 tinue it for the purpose of completing the ca- 
 nals. This kind of logic I cannot understand. 
 This kind of morality has no place in my affec- 
 tions or esteem. They may be sincere ; if so, 
 they must be blinded by a sordid, selfish, avari- 
 cious feeling. Our canal, our section of country 
 and our people have been grossly misrepresented 
 in the legislature. Why is the country so tradu- 
 ced ? In 1807, when Allegany and Cattaraugus 
 were detached from Genesee, the whole territory 
 was a wilderness ; it did not contain much over 
 three thousand inhabitants in 1810. In 1820, it 
 had increased to some ten or twelve thousand ; 
 and in 1845, it had increased to between seventy 
 and eighty thousand ; and who are these seventy 
 and eighty thousand people in Allegany and Cat- 
 taraugus ? But few of them who are adults were 
 born on that territory. Sir, whence did they mi- 
 grate ? Not from New England or other states ; 
 no sir, but few of them were born out of this 
 state. They went there from the Eastern coun- 
 ties of this state. I believe there is not a gentle- 
 man in this convention representing a county east 
 of the centre of the state, whose constituents 
 have not either sons or daughters, brothers or 
 sisters, or other relatives in that region. Sir, I 
 know people there from Long Island, the city of 
 New-York, the counties of Westchester, Dutch- 
 ess, Columbia, Rensselaer, Washington, Saratoga, 
 Albany, Greene, Ulster, Orange, Rockland, Scho- 
 harie, Delaware, Otsego, Oneida, Madison, Che- 
 nango, Broome, &c. These are the persons who 
 
 have been treated and seem to be regarded as 
 aliens. Yes, sir, as alien enemies. These are 
 the people who are to be enslaved and turned into 
 hewers of wood and drawers of water for the 
 people of the eastern cities and countries. Did 
 they think when they left their eastern friends 
 and homes, that they were to expatriate them- 
 selves, and forfeit all benefits and privileges by 
 settling in Allegany or Cattaraugus ? Think you, 
 sir, when they come here and ask the representa- 
 tives of their fathers and friends in the old coun- 
 ties, for what is fairly and legitimately due to 
 them, they will be satisfied with rude rebuffs ? 
 Sir, when they have asked for bread they have 
 earned, you have given them a stone. When 
 they have asked for fish, you have given them a 
 scorpion. 
 
 The gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS) 
 sent up his amendment the other day as an olive 
 branch. He told us it was offered as a compro- 
 mise, and he doubted not it would be acceded to. 
 The thing appeared plausible on its face, and on 
 the start I thought favorably of it. I told the 
 gentleman I thought I would support it, but I 
 wanted time to consider and reflect upon it 
 Having taken such time, I am satisfied it would 
 be more injurious to the canals than the proposi- 
 tion from the standing committee, were we to 
 adopt it. It has too many and too sharp thorns 
 for an olive branch. It proposes to place the 
 whole surplus revenues of the canal at the dispo- 
 sition of the legislature. The accumulating mil- 
 Lions of this surplus are, by the proposition, to be 
 placed under the discretion of a body of men that 
 gentlemen have told us over and over again, ought 
 not to be trusted with more money than will eco- 
 nomically support government. I have never had 
 the honor of a seat in the legislature, and know 
 nothing of the manner of doing business there. 
 [ take upon the trust what gentlemen have in- 
 formed me about it. They have repeatedly on 
 this floor inveighed against entrusting large sums 
 of money to the disposition of the legislature. 
 They say it has a most corrupting influence ; that 
 the legislature will be besieged by lobbies, that 
 members will log-roll, bargain and squander the 
 money upon worthless objects. Has not that gen- 
 'leman (Mr. LOOMIS) and others on his side of 
 he question, kept up a continual cry against the 
 corruptions and profligacy of the legislature, 
 and did not the gentlemen from Herkimer origi- 
 nate the famous resolutions called the " peo- 
 ple's resolutions," and is he not now striving to 
 jrocure the principles embodied in those resolu- 
 ions to be incorporated into the constitution ? 
 And now, sir, all at once, the gentleman's tone is 
 changed. Now, ihe honesty and discretion of the 
 legislature may be confided in to any extent. Sir, 
 his blowing hot and blowing cold in the same 
 treath, is a disease I have understood sometimes 
 ifflicted intriguers in politics, but that never 
 ittacked a plain,open-handed, open-hearted states 
 man. The remedy that the gentleman has offered 
 us is worse than the disease whicn the report of 
 lis colleague has brought upon us. If the Legis- 
 ature is as corrupt and wicked- as has been repre- 
 ented by many gentlemen in this Convention 
 who have occupied seats in that body, I feel thank- 
 ul that I have escaped the disgrace ot ever hav- 
 g been a member of it. I will allude (continued 
 
915 
 
 Mr. A.) once more to the unfair manner in which 
 the accounts have been kept with the lateral ca- 
 nals. They have not been credited as much as 
 they ought to be. 1 fearlessly assert the fact that 
 if you take the Erie canal and divide it into sec- 
 tions of equal length of the lateral canals, and sub- 
 ject such sections to the s.ime rigid rules of ac- 
 countability that you do the lateral canals, only 
 giving them credit for the revenue arising from 
 tonnage contributed by their own territory and 
 floated on their own waters, the several sections 
 of the Erie canal would not pay the interest upon 
 the cost of their construction, and the expense of 
 their superintendence and repairs. I desire to say 
 to my friends in the Convention who are opposed 
 to internal improvements, that I regard this ques- 
 tion a* one of expediency, not involving political 
 principle. The difference between them and my- 
 self upon the question does not affect our general 
 political feeling and sentiments. I am cordially 
 with them in all the great and fundamental princi- 
 ples that have been cherished by the democracy of 
 the country. I regret that many of our newborn 
 radicals have not been sooner awakened and soon- 
 <er come to the rescue of pure and genuine democ- 
 racy. I desire to say to them that hostility to in- 
 ternal improvements, is not characteristic of 
 sound and elightened democratic principles. 
 Democracy does not consist of selfishness, and a 
 mere computation of cent for cent. It despises 
 the miser's calculations, and holds no fellowship 
 with the pitiful narrowness of two-penny parsi- 
 mony. It has for its end a higher and holier ob- 
 ject. It conforms itself to the divine injunction 
 *' Do ye unto others as ye would that others 
 should do unto you." Refuse to give the canals 
 a constitutional recognition, and blot out the 
 hopes of those whose dearest interests depend 
 upon their completion, and you disarm, nay, you 
 annihilate, all your friends in the western part of 
 the state. You will beget heart-burnings, and 
 generate an undying hatred. You will inflict a 
 wound that can never be healed, and when you 
 send out your new constitution for ratification, it 
 will be met by the most determined resistance. 
 No fallacious arguments, no intriguing tergiver- 
 sation, and no political legerdemain can smother 
 the truth or avert the attention of the peoplet 
 from the authors of thf ir calamity. They will 
 not be deceived, and they will refuse assent to 
 your doings. In the name of all that is sacred 
 of all that is dear to the security of equal righs, 
 1 implore you to stay the desolating hand that 
 seems to be raised to crush and wither the hopes 
 and prosperity of an interesting and valuable por- 
 tion of your state. 
 
 [The operation of the fifteen minute rule, here 
 put a stop to further remark on the part of Mr. 
 A.] 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said he should give his vote for 
 the proposition of the honorable gentleman from 
 Schoharie, (Mr. BOUCK) not because he thought 
 it embraced all that the friends of internal im- 
 provement had a right to expect or demand at the 
 hands of this, Convention, but for the same reason 
 the gentleman had offered it ; as a compromise, 
 For (said Mr. B.) it is very well understood that 
 opposite opinions are entertained by gentlemen on 
 this subject, and those opinions are so diametri- 
 cally opposed, that for either to yield and em- 
 
 brace the opposite is more than can reasonably 
 be expected. This proposition takes the middle 
 ground and has strong claims to the support of 
 both extremes. It makes ample provision for the 
 payment of every dollar of the State debt, and 
 then provides for the support of the government, 
 and appropriates a considerable sum every year 
 for the completion of the Erie and finishing the 
 lateral canals already commenced. The internal 
 improvements in this great and growing state, 
 have been the wonder and admiration of not only 
 our own, but the people of other states and other 
 counties, and from the very moment that the bil- 
 lows of the Erie dashed over the waves of the 
 Hudson down to the present, we have one con- 
 tinued and uninterrupted tide of prosperity. The 
 revenues of the canals have far exceeded the 
 most sanguine expectations of the whole people, 
 and if the revenues continue to increase for the 
 next ensuing twenty years in the proportion that 
 they have augmented for the past, who can 
 estimate the value of the great enterprises? At 
 the early period of 1835, the canal commissioners 
 foresaw the necessity of an enlargement of the Erie 
 canal in order to meet the wants of this and other 
 states, the business of which was so rapidly in- 
 creasing. They accordingly made a report to the 
 legislature urging the necessity of the enlarge* 
 ment. Gov. Marcy then at the head of the state 
 Government, concurred in opinion with the com- 
 missioners, and recommended the enlargement 
 to the Legislature, who made large appropri- 
 ations for that purpose. All parties were 
 agreed on this subject, and all looked forward 
 with pleasure and pride to the period when their 
 expectations should be realised in seeing the 
 Erie canal enlarged to a seventy feet surface, and 
 seven feet deep, and the lateral canals completed. 
 To this the faith of the state was most solemnly 
 promised and pledged. And sir, we find among 
 the actors in this great canal enterprise one who 
 was at that time a Canal Commissioner, and assur- 
 ed the Legislature and the people that a " neces- 
 sity did then exist" for the erilargementof the Erie 
 canal who has since been and is now,a conspicuous 
 manager in the financial affairs of the state, and 
 that gentleman is now at the head of the financial 
 committee of this Convention, (Mr. HOFFMAN.) 
 But, sir, where is he now ? Does he advocate the 
 same policy now he helped to originate then ? 
 No, sir. We find him not only repudiating the 
 opinions in '40, that he cherished in '35, but com- 
 ing into this Convention with a report in which 
 provision is made for the Legislature to sell out 
 the lateral canals. Yes, sir, that honorable gen- 
 tleman who was one of the fathers of the policy 
 of '35, now proposes to handover to the cold 
 charities of a corporation, a child, who was chris- 
 tened at his own baptismal font, and forever 
 withdraw from it his paternal care and protection. 
 But this is not all: I will read sir, from that gen- 
 tleman's speech, which he delivered in this hall 
 a few days since, an extract which (taken in con- 
 nexion with the provision in his report to which 
 I have referred) in my judgment shadows forth a 
 doctrine which is a dangerous one,and one which 
 I trust will find but little favor here or among the 
 people. In his printed speech he says " He is 
 " opposed to the system adopted of laying taxes 
 " upon the Railroads for carrying freight. This 
 
916 
 
 " was a tax on trade and commerce. If we 
 " should attempt to rivet the system by a consti- 
 * tutional provision, he believed we should utter - 
 " ly fail, owing to surrounding circumstances, 
 " There were too many rival routes for trade. 
 " He could never consent that the sovereign 
 " should ever tax a line of trade and travel built 
 * by private enterprise," 
 
 Here, sir, we have the honorable gentleman 
 "defining his own position/' Sell out the canals, 
 except the Erie, construct railroads to run along 
 its banks, as is already done, allow those railroads 
 to carry what freight they please, and {hat with- 
 out paying one cent of tax or tolls to the treasury. 
 Sir, this is indeed a bold proposition, and when 1 
 came to this convention I had heard of radical 
 Tvhisrs, arid conservative whigs, hunkers and barn- 
 burners; but, sir. I did not expect to see or hear 
 of such kind of politicians as canal burners. Now 
 I ask gentlemen to show me if this is not a mo.st 
 mischievous proposition, to frame a provision in 
 the Const itutjon by which railroad corporations 
 shall he enabled to compete with the c.mals, and 
 that too without any sort of restrictions. Sir, the 
 canals belong to the people, the whole people, 
 and nothing but the people, and the moneys de- 
 rived Irorn the canals are flowing into the state 
 treasury, and so far as they can go to pay your tax, 
 my tax, and the tax of every citizen in just pro- 
 portions. But it you turn the transportation of 
 the produce and merchandize of the country from 
 the canal* to the railroad, you only enrich the 
 stockholders of the railroads by robbing the trea. 
 cury of the state and the pockets of the people. 
 But, sir, I must pass on, and cannot follow this 
 subject so far as I desire, because, under the rule 
 of the house, I am conscious that your *' ivory 
 mallet" will soon give me notice that my timeha^ 
 expired. To return, then, to the subject under 
 consideration. If a necessity existed in 1835, 
 (which is not denied,) it does, in my judgment, 
 extst in a sMIl greater degree at the present mo. 
 merit. By reference to the report of the commis- 
 sioners of the canal fund, made to the legislature 
 at the last session, we find (in Senate Doc. No 59 
 at pasie 194) that the amount of tolls received 
 from the canals of the state, in 1835 was $1,548,- 
 986'. In 1845, they were $2,646,181, showing an 
 increase in the last, over the first year mentioned 
 ol $1,097,195. The whole number of tons trans- 
 ported on the canals in 1835 was 753,191. In 
 1845, J, 204,943, being an increase of 451,752 tons. 
 
 The honorable gentleman from Erie, (Mr. 
 STOW,) in the course of his very able and elegant 
 speech the other day, alluded very briefly, to the 
 increase of business on the Erie canal from the 
 city of Buffalo. I regret that he did not speak 
 more in detail of the increase at that port. By 
 reference to Convention Doc. No. GO, we find that 
 the increase of the tonnage of merchandize re- 
 ceived in that city through the Erie canal, during 
 the past year, is 12,138,071 pounds, and the in- 
 crease of tolls received at that point is $116,050 22. 
 Now, sir, with these facts, and a great multitude 
 of others equally important, which have been 
 presented to us during the progress of this tie- 
 bate, I ask if the necessity for the enlargement 
 of this great canal has "ceased to exist ?" Since 
 1835, the business done on that canal has in- 
 creased more than six hundred per cent, and yet 
 
 we are told, day after day, on this floor, that the 
 " Erie canal is abundantly large to do all the 
 business required. " I ask gentlemen who were 
 in favor of the enlargement in 1835, because a 
 " necessity then existed," to reconcile the decla- 
 rations then made with the opposition now to this 
 policy of enlargement. Sir, they do not attempt 
 to do so, but even now, claim to be the friends of 
 the enlargement and the completion, and yet act 
 in every way and support propositions calculated 
 and designed to defeat such an enterprise. I 
 know not what to think of the sincerity of those 
 gentlemen who commence their speeches with 
 the declaration "I am as anxious as any one to 
 see the canals of this state carried forward to com- 
 pletion," and before they sit down use every argu- 
 ment their ingenuity can devise to show that it is 
 all entirely unnecessary. My honorable friend 
 from Onondaga, (Mr. TAYLOR,) in his speech a 
 day or two since, avowed his attachment to the 
 policy of enlargement and then argued against it 7 
 and came to the same conclusion of other gentle- 
 men who had preceded him, that the Erie canal 
 was " sufficient to do all the business required 
 upon it." Sir, if this position be true, we can 
 with safety stop now and forever the whole canal 
 system, and keep it where it is. Indeed, we need 
 never to have done what we have. The old fa- 
 shioned turnpike roads, with the six, eight and 
 ten horse teams, were entirely sufficient to do all 
 the business. At all events, all the business of 
 transportation was done. We should never have 
 constructed our railroads to carry passengers. 
 The post coaches upon the turnpike, from this to 
 Buffalo, were sufficient to afford facilities for the 
 travel. At all events they did do all that kind of 
 business. But, sir, there is one position that has 
 been taken as a ground of opposition to this great 
 enterprise. I allude to what is called the stop 
 and tax policy of '42. Gentlemen here seem to 
 talk as though this law was paramount to all 
 other obligations Sir, what wa& the origin of 
 this famous ** stop and tax" policy. Did the 
 people of this state ever petition your legislature 
 for the passage of this or a similar law ? If so, 
 when ? From what county, town or section of 
 the state ? Not a single petition was ever pre- 
 sented and no community ever asked for such a 
 iaw. The first, last and only petition was a de- 
 sire on the part of the brokers and stock job- 
 bers from Wall-street in the city of New York, 
 They, sir, were the first to ask and first to re- 
 ceive the benefits of this system of direct taxa- 
 tion upon the people. This abominable system 
 of taxation never was asked for by the people 
 nor demanded by the condition of the finances of 
 the state, and yet the faith ot the state is talked 
 about in connexion with this law, as it it had 
 never been so solemnly plighted to any other mea- 
 sure. I contend that the laith of the state was 
 most solemnly plighted in '35 1 , and it nas' been 
 most clearly shown that alter the passage of the 
 canal law at that period, cneulais were sent to 
 foreign countries and the poor and oppressed yeo. 
 manry of those countries were induced to leave 
 the land of their nativity and make this the land 
 of their adoption, with the assurance that they 
 should have constant employment with adequate 
 reward for a term of years in constructing canals. 
 But what is- their condition now ' They are anx- 
 
917 
 
 ious tor employment but cannot obtain H, and are 
 compelled to go to and fro through ihe country-end 
 gain a sca.ity subsistence as best they can. Again 
 sir, there are multitudes of our own citizens who 
 emigrated to remote parts of the state which had 
 before been almost a wilderness, and there com- 
 menced clearing vour forests and cultivating the 
 soil confidently believing that the state of New 
 York would fulfil her engagements and construct 
 the lateral canals to their localities, that would 
 enable them to have a sate and sure channel of 
 communication on which to transport their lum- 
 ber and their produce to our large cities. Sir, 
 have these our citizens no claims on the state for 
 a fulfilment of her promises? But there are other 
 and if possible still greater reasons why the st-itf 
 should redeem her pledges on this great question. 
 The people of the western states have relied upon 
 the promised action of this stale in reference to 
 the enlargement of the Erie canal, as was most 
 ably and conclusively shown by the honorable 
 gentlemen from Allegany, (Mr. ANGEL and Mr 
 CHAMBERLAIN) and I will not enlarge as my time 
 has nearly expned. Reference has been rn de to 
 this as a party question. Sir, does the great ca- 
 nal enterprise of this the Empire state belong to 
 a political party! Has it come to this, that a 
 party is to have [Here the PRESIDENT informed 
 iYli. H. 'hat his time under the rule had expired.] 
 
 Mr. BOUCK said that upon examining the act 
 of 1842, he found that it pledged an amount equal 
 to one-third of the annual interest on the canal 
 debt, as a sinking fund to redeem the principal. 
 But he begged to say to Mr. BRUCE and to others 
 who had accused him of an endeavor to violate 
 that law, that he had no such desire. He would, 
 however, in ord: r to obviate these charges here 
 after, so modify his amendment as to appropriate 
 the sum of $1^225,000; which was precisely the 
 amount that the legislature pledged by the act of 
 154-2. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT said I am aware of the im- 
 patience of the Convention, and I do not rise to 
 inflict upon the members a speech. I have no 
 desire nor am I prepared to do so. Besides, my 
 occupation and pursuits in life have not made me 
 familiar with public speaking, and our protracted 
 sittings have admonished me to refrain from pro- 
 longing the debate. But, sir, I owe it to myself 
 to define or explain the reasons that will govern 
 me in the vote I am about to give on the impor- 
 tant subject now before us ; and this I consider 
 the more necessary from the remarks on Saturday 
 of the gentleman from New- York, (Mr. TILDEN) 
 who I perceive is not now in his seat. Now, sir, 
 the subject matter before us is one of finance, 
 and as such one of vital importance to the integ 
 rity, pledged faith, and the best interests of the 
 people of this State. The State of New- York 
 holds in common an interest or an estate in her 
 canals, worth, as is believed, more than twice the 
 amount of all her debt or liabilities, producing 
 the last year in their present unfinished state, a 
 net revenue, of about $2,200,000. This, Mr 
 President, will pay the interest at 5 per cent on 
 44,000,000. I do not mention this as an induce- 
 ment for contracting a debt, but as evidence oi 
 our ability and means to meet our engagements. 
 I am opposed, in private or in public capacity, to 
 contracting debts unless urgent interest or impe- 
 
 rious necessity require it. Our state debt in th,e 
 aggregate -is but one half that amount. Still, sir, 
 our debt is large, too large, and should have been 
 avoided ; and we all look upon it now as a greater 
 burthen, from the fact that the expenditure of the 
 money has been in a way and manner requiring 
 about $10,000,000 to complete the undertaking. 
 And, sir, I consider it out of place here to inquire 
 nto the origin of these difficulties, great as they 
 are, for in my judgment all classes participated in 
 their inception ; or in other words, no one class 
 of men are exempt from their due share of the 
 responsibility. I mean by this the people as well 
 as the legislature. 
 
 The people called and demanded, and the leg- 
 islature yielded and obeyed. The times were 
 marked every where with ruinous extravagance 
 and folly private as well as- public. The last 
 ten or twelve years have worked out great results 
 and produced wonderful changes in the views of 
 men ; and, sir, it admits of a question, whether 
 our own legislature, extravagant as they have 
 been, were not behind the spirit of the times, in- 
 stead of being in advance of their constituency. 
 Now, sir, this being so, is it not wise to look at 
 things as they now are that is, our debt and our 
 engagements and apply the remedy, instead of 
 criminating one set of men, and recriminating 
 another ? We have quite too much of that else- 
 where. My own knowledge of these canals is of 
 a general character only, and that obtained in va- 
 rious ways ; and here let me say that while I dis- 
 approve of much of the undertaking, as being at 
 the time unwise, still, taking the circumstances 
 as they now exist, I have an ardent desire, and 
 believe it lor the interest of the state, to prose- 
 cute them to their completion. Sir, in this I 
 have no personal interest, neither have the con- 
 stituencs' which I in part represent, other than 
 as residents of the state at large. That I may 
 not be misunderstood in regard to the state debt, 
 permit me here to say, that I am as rigid, and 
 hold the obligation to provide payment, and to 
 pay, as binding and as sacred as any other man. 
 Yes, sir, in that I will not except the gentleman 
 from Herkimer himself, (Mr. HOFFMAN.) 
 
 To accomplish both objects from the revenues 
 of the canals, is the matter under consideration, 
 and to this is our attention now directed. I fully 
 believe a large majority of this Convention desire 
 to accomplish both objects in the most speedy, 
 economical way possible. And to effect this what 
 have we ? We have first the article as reported 
 by the chairman of the standing committee, and 
 what does that do ? It appropriates first from 
 the revenues $2,172,500 each year, for about 18 
 or 19 years, oi until the debt is paid ; after which 
 it appropriates $2,500,000 towards improving the 
 Erie canal only, and to accomplish this it will 
 require 10 years from the most favorable estimates. 
 I am able to make prospectively, and fom*l the 
 estimate upon past experience. For this I can- 
 not vote. It is taking 10 years to begin to accom- 
 plish the object. Besides the delay is adding 
 more and more to the decay and damage to work 
 partly done ; and perhaps it is not too much to 
 say that the decay in 10 years upon the millions 
 of work now half finished or more, would more 
 than balance the advance made in expending the 
 $2,500,000 appropriated by the committee. These 
 
918 
 
 considerations induced me to mature a plan, 
 which seemed to meet with so much approval, 
 that in the exercise of my privilege, I submitted 
 it to the Convention. It provides a sinking fund 
 of $1,500,000, for 10 years, and $2,000,000 there- 
 after, which pays the present debt ($22,300,000 
 as estimated,) in 23 years, or a debt of $25,000,000 
 in 28 years. Either of these secure the payment 
 of the debt within a reasonable time, under all 
 the circumstances; and after applying for the use 
 of the government about $200,000 annually, from 
 the remaining revenues, we have according to 
 estimates from 6 to $9,000,000 to be expended in 
 ten years in completing the canals. 
 
 I should not have mentioned this here had not 
 the gentleman from New York in his argument 
 charged inconsistency in refusing to sustain the 
 compromise offered by the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer, (Mr. LOOMIS,) alleging that the proposi- 
 tion of the gentleman from Herkimer contained 
 the same provision as the one offered by me. 
 Now, sir, the two propositions are entirely differ- 
 ent, agreeing only in the manner of applying the 
 sinking fund. The proposition of the gentleman 
 from Herkimer makes no provision whatever for 
 the canals, but annexes a provision, that virtually 
 prohibits their completion for works of this 
 kind and of this magnitude cannot progress by 
 annual appropriations, or annual movements only. 
 The second proposition of the gentleman from 
 Schoharie (Mr. BOUCK,) is now before us, to 
 which I give my support, and although yielding 
 more than the friends of the canal intended, I 
 hope the Convention will sustain it by their 
 votes, as a compromise. It provides for the pay- 
 ment of the State debt within a reasonable time, 
 and secures the progress of the unfinished works, 
 and, as I trust, their completion at some remote 
 period; thus fulfilling our engagements, and 
 awarding the justice long delayed to portions of 
 the State. While our internal improvements are 
 the cause of our debt, and, in some respects, 
 their prosecution has proved a fraud upon the 
 public treasury, and in others ill advised, still 
 taken as a whole they are the elements of our 
 prosperity and the source of our revenue, and the 
 Erie canal enlarged is a monument the people of 
 any State may justly feel a laudable pride in hand 
 ing down to posterity as a legacy. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY said that the hour was drawing 
 near, when all debate on the important question 
 whether our public works should be arrested or 
 prosecuted slowly indeed, but with certainty to 
 a final competition. The propositions submitted 
 by the gentleman from Schoharie (Mr. BOUCK) 
 he believed would barely admit of construction 
 under which these canals might at a distant day 
 be completed. As a last resort, he was inclined 
 to vote for that proposition, because from the dis- 
 position manifested by a majority of the conven 
 tion, he^ould hope for nothing better. It was 
 however far from doing justice to the constituen 
 cy which he had the honor in part to represent. I 
 would put far away the day at which we might even 
 hope for the completion of the Genesee Valley 
 canal. The proposition of the gentleman froir 
 Herkimer, did not contemplate a resumption o 
 that work, but it did contemplate an abandonmen 
 and a sale of the unfinished portion of it. A 
 gainst a proposition so vile so unjust to the peo 
 
 pie along the line of that canal, he was in duty 
 bound to enter his protest. He held that the 
 faith of the State was solemnly pledged to the 
 construction of the lateral canals. We had heard 
 much said on this floor on the subject of the faith 
 of the State. Nothing else seemed to have been 
 forgotten by the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN) as within the scope of the plighted 
 faith except these poor lateral canals. He ad- 
 mits that the faith of the State may be pledged to 
 particular localities, and to individuals, where 
 the construction of a railroad is in question. That 
 the faith of the State may be pledged to pay debts 
 to itself, and more particularly to money len- 
 ders and the bankers and brokers of Wall street. 
 Was it the less pledged to the construction of the 
 Genesee Valley canal ? Certainly not The 
 State in justice to that secluded section passed 
 the law of 1836, authorizing the construction of 
 this canal. This was but tardy justice to that 
 section of the State, which had borne its portion 
 of the burdens common to the whole State ; which 
 had paid its proportion of the direct and indirect 
 taxation necessary to meet the wants of the gov- 
 ernment ; which had paid its salt tax and its auc- 
 tion tax ; and donated its lands in consideration 
 of the construction of the Erie canal ; and had its 
 trade and travel as a great natural thoroughfare 
 iverted to other channels. By the passage of 
 his law, the faith of the State was pledged to its 
 ompletion. Public expectation and confidence 
 ested implicitly in the guarantee thus given. 
 Capitalists from our large cities were induced to 
 nvest their money in the purchase of lands and 
 yater power for manufacturing purposes, and to 
 purchase village property, in the just expectation 
 )f reaping rich reward from the development of 
 he great natural resources of the country. But 
 here were other classes of men who were more 
 entitled to sympathy than those he had just nam- 
 ed. M en of moderate means had paid out their 
 ittle all, for property rendered almost worthless 
 jy this abandonment they were in many in- 
 stances left in debt and their means buried beyond 
 .he hope of recovery Men of large families have 
 been influenced by the inducement here held out, 
 ;o stop short of the fertile garden of the west 
 ;o purchase wild lands, in Cattaraugus and Allega- 
 ny, and thereby enjoying the institutions and edu- 
 cational privileges of our own State, to which 
 they were strongly attached. They too are bound 
 to remain poor the balance of their lives. There 
 was another class of sufferers by the adoption of 
 this suicidal policy. Young men of genius, en- 
 terprize and talent, have fastened themselves for 
 life, by relations here formed, who otherwise 
 would have sought a more inviting field of 
 operations. Still all these obligations are here 
 to be repudiated. And for what ? Why sir, not 
 only to enable us to pay the public creditor, but 
 to raise the price of public securities in the 
 hands of speculators and stockjobbers, &c. 
 Mr. H. was in favor of redeeming the faith of 
 the state whenever and however pledged. Wheth- 
 er to the rich or to the poor. To the laboring 
 citizen or to the wealthy bond holder. He held 
 that the public faith had been kept inviolate, 
 with the public creditors. To what, he asked, 
 was the public faith pledged with these creditors 
 was it not to pay the interest as it accrued, and 
 
919 
 
 th<> principal when it should fall due ? Was it 
 anything beyond that? The state undertook to 
 do nothing more. And he challenged gentlemeii 
 here, or elsewhere, to show the time, or the 
 place, where these obligations had not been fully 
 and literally complied with. Where had inter- 
 ests accrued, and not been discharged on demand? 
 When had a bond when due been presented and 
 not been promptly paid ? No such case has ever 
 occurred. Still the state had been declared to be 
 on the very verge of repudiation bankruptcy 
 and ruin. But the gentleman from Herkimer 
 was not satisfied with this. He said the other 
 day in debate, these public acts were different 
 from obligations resting between individuals. 
 That capitalists purchased state bonds, as trans- 
 ferable property for the purposes of trade, and 
 that the state was bound to see to it that they did 
 not depreciate in the market. He was surprised 
 to hear such a preposterous doctrine advocated, 
 even by the gentleman from Herkimer. Again, 
 the faith of the state was held to be pledged to 
 the general fund, to pay the amount alledged to 
 have been paid by that fund to the completion of 
 the Erie canal, and this imaginary and fictitious 
 pledge, is to be regarded as more sacred than the 
 claims of the lateral canals. Again, the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer, in his argument upon the 
 fifth section of this article, admitted that the faith 
 of the state might be pledged to a local improve- 
 ment, even where the work was undertaken by 
 an incorporated company. He was pleased to 
 say, that in case the state had purchased the Ith- 
 aca and Owego Railroad at the Comptroller's sale, 
 it would have been bound in good faith to that 
 section of the state, to put the road in repair at a 
 cost of $300,000, and keep it in repair, and in op- 
 eration through till coming time. How, said (Mr 
 H.,) does this pledge compare with that to 
 the Genesee Valley canal. In the latter case 
 you have a law upon the statute book bind- 
 ing the state to construct the canal, upon 
 which the people rested with implicit confidence. 
 In the former, the state loaned the means in aid of 
 a company, but never by legislation or otherwise, 
 became pledged to the completion or the success 
 of the enterprise. The State never undertook to 
 do any thing more than to protect the treasury 
 against loss in case the company should fail to 
 pay the interest or the principal of the loan. 
 This was the nature of the pledges set over 
 against the claims of the Genesee Valley canal 
 The seal of condemnation, ought to be placed up 
 on the proposition ot the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer. After taking from the people along the line 
 of that work, all that could be gathered in the 
 shape of direct and indirect taxes after taking 
 the avails of over one hundred thousand acres o: 
 the land in Cattaraugus county, and which was 
 donated for canal purposes this project pro- 
 poses to allow of the sale of the canals, to those 
 who were called upon to submit to this petit lar- 
 ceny, and coolly to say to them if you will have 
 your canal build it yourselves. This would be 
 magnanimous indeed. As a representative in 
 part of this abused constituency, he here denoun- 
 ced this scheme as unworthy of the support o 
 this Convention. 
 
 He had a word to say on the subject of the loca! 
 character of the Erie enlargement. Gentlemen 
 
 epresenting the portion of the state along the 
 n ine of that work, between Buffalo and the Hud- 
 ion river, had been charged with acting from lo- 
 cal feeling and local interest. This was an illib- 
 eral view of this question. The city of Buffalo, 
 he city of New- York, and some intermediate 
 joints were indeed locally interested. The city 
 of New-York was in a pre-eminent degree inter- 
 ested in the completion of this important work. 
 Who did not know that the Erie canal was abun- 
 dantly sufficient for all the local purposes of this 
 state. It was entirely sufficient to develop all its 
 resources. It was not necessary to enlarge the 
 canal for any such purpose. It was a question far 
 above these local considerations, a question 
 whether the great and growing trade of the fertile 
 west should continue to flow into the lap of the 
 
 Queen of Cities," or be diverted by other chan- 
 nels of intercommunication to other cities of the 
 Atlantic coast. This great trade is now ours, 
 and it is now perfectly in our power to take such 
 action as to forever secure it to our great com- 
 mercial emporium; and the revenue consequent 
 upon it to the treasury of the state. It was purely 
 a question of revenue and trade, in which the 
 river, the central and western counties had an 
 identity of interest. 
 
 He believed the people would take an enlarged 
 view of the subject. There was no evidence that 
 they would sanction the stop policy of 1842 as a 
 permanent measure. They had been found un- 
 willing to sanction it in their legislative capacity. 
 The people's representatives had thrice repudia- 
 ted it through their representatives by majority 
 votes. No petitions were found on their files in 
 favor of it. The gentleman from Herkimer has 
 himself admitted, yes, endorsed these views in a 
 public speech upon this subject. He has said, 
 "that he did not believe that the legislature could 
 deal with this subject. Quashee may be- 
 lieve in his Mumbo Jumbo, but surely no man 
 with a white skin who has any brains, can look 
 upon the legislatures which have passed, and in 
 the presence of his God, with his hand upon his 
 heart, say he believes the legislature will ever 
 do what is here required. No, it is impossible." 
 With what evidence of truth can the gentleman 
 from Herkimer claim that the people demand the 
 adoption of this provision in the constitution. Is 
 he unwilling that they should speak their senti- 
 ments through their "representatives? Does he 
 wish to save them from themselves ? A few short 
 years ago, he was in favor of this system of inter- 
 nal improvement. In *his official" capacity as a 
 canal commissioner, he recommended the en- 
 largement. He then looked forward to large rev- 
 enues, extended works, and permanent advance- 
 ment, in this system. Strange as it may seem, 
 the very works which he then endorsed as proper 
 and worthy of legislative favor, he now denounces 
 as the offspring of vile, wicked and corrupt legis- 
 lation. The change of his views and sentiments 
 seems to have been radical and complete. It could 
 not have escaped public notice that the prevail- 
 ing temper and spirit of the gentleman, is that of 
 gloom misanthropy and horrid imaginings The 
 misery of debt the torture of taxation the abase- 
 ment of poverty beastly servitude the scourge 
 the curse and all the kindred horrors, seem to 
 have taken possession of his inmost soul. He 
 
920 
 
 would now have it understood, that by this vile 
 legislative action, the cup of our future prosperi- 
 ty had been drugged with poison. That the can- 
 ker-worm, internal improvement, was reveling 
 deep in the body politic, and must corrode and 
 eat out its very vitals. But men of unbiassed 
 minds and sound judgment thought and reasoned 
 differently. Notwithstanding this constant sound- 
 ing the alarm, by the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 a great majority of the enlightened people of this 
 state sleep as soundly breathe as freely tread 
 as lightly hope as strongly yes, and boast as 
 proudly of this great system of internal improve- 
 ment, as ever. They view it not as a system cal- 
 culated to wither the hopes blight the prospects 
 and destroy the prosperity of the " empire 
 state," but as a grand, growing source of revenue, 
 which is to increase our wealth augment our 
 resources and raise us to a still higher niche, in 
 the comparative fame and glory of the states. 
 
 (His remarks were arrested by the fifteen min- 
 ute rule.) 
 
 Mr. BOUCK said that there was no doubt, 
 whatever, that the framers of the act of 1842 in- 
 tended that one third of the interest should be 
 pledged for the reduction of the debt. For his 
 own part, he did not wish, even in appearance, to 
 violate any pledge given by that law ; and he was 
 therefore, willing, as he said before, to amend his 
 amendment, by inserting $1,225,000, which 
 would be a sum equal to one-third of the interest 
 and in strict compliance with the letter of that 
 law. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL would not sit still under the re- 
 newed attempt of the gentleman from Modison 
 to pour obloquy upon the grey hairs of the chair- 
 man of the committee on finances. It had be- 
 come the constant practice of gentlemen, pro- 
 fessing to be exclusive friends of the Erie canal, 
 to impute, to the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 most unfounded hostility to our great canal. 
 What gentleman, making these accusations, had 
 introduced so just and liberal provisions for the 
 Erie canal, as the chairman of the committee of 
 finance had done ? not one of them. The third 
 section of the original article proposed to reserve 
 from surplus canal revenues $172,500 annually 
 for general state expenses, and to apply the whole 
 of the remainder of the annual revenue, beyond 
 the requirments of the two sinking funds, to the 
 Erie Canal, until it should reach the sum of $2,- 
 500,000. He consented to continue the half mill 
 tax for the support of government, during a pe- 
 riod, variously estimated from six, to ten years, 
 so that this expenditure for the canal might be 
 made within that time. Was this hostility to the 
 Erie canal ? Yet gentleman, who had voted to 
 strike out this very provision from the report, 
 presumed to make such charges. They forced 
 the Convention to bring in other canals to share 
 the first surplus revenues, and thus compel- 
 led the finance committee to give up their 
 intended preference for the improvement of 
 the canal, which was the rich source of nearly 
 all the revenues. We were compelled by 
 the action of the professed friends of ihe Erie 
 canal to share the first Surplus with two other 
 unfinished canals, thus inevitably delaying 
 the improvement of their favorite work. 
 
 Gentlemen should exhibit more consistency be- 
 fore making such charges. 
 
 The gentleman from Madison, charged that the 
 chairman of the committee, was in favor of the 
 law of 1835, authorizing the improvement of the 
 Erie canal from its own surplus revenues, and that 
 he now would withdraw "all care and protection 
 from a child christened at his own baptismal 
 font." It was true, that the gentleman did sus- 
 tain that law, as a wise and just law. Could it 
 have been observed to this day, that "child" 
 would have grown to full manhood, and the state 
 would have been saved from $20,000,000 of debt 
 and $2,000,000 of direct taxation. But the new 
 impulse of 1838, took the "child" from its own 
 parents, and prohibited all the prudent care of 
 the gentleman from Herkimer over it. 
 
 Now, when all admit it would have been far 
 better to have perpetuated the principle of the 
 act of 1835, which would have completed the 
 enlargement without debt or taxation, and all are 
 compelled to return to sound and safe action, 
 what does the gentleman from Herkimer propose ? 
 He proposes to perpetuate by constitutional law, 
 the very principles of that act to secure the 
 first practicable surplus revenues, to this same 
 Erie canal, of which he is charged to be an 
 enemy ! 
 
 For one, Mr. R. preferred the third section of 
 the original article to any which had been offered, 
 but as that section had been voted out, he must 
 take the best provision he could, which would 
 benefit the canals themselves,and at the same time 
 make such specific appropriation, as would pro- 
 tect the legislature from a general scramble of 
 localities, or private objects, to scatter and dissi- 
 pate to unworthy purposes, revenues arising 
 from an indirect tax upon those who produce and 
 those who consume the property conveyed on 
 our canals. He could vote for no proposition 
 leaving a yearly revenue so large, to the mercy 
 of legislative lobbies. 
 
 Mr. HUNT said he rose not with a view to in- 
 fluence the vote of any other member, but to 
 state the considerations that would govern his 
 own. He was opposed to state debts, and to the 
 whole British system of finance I mean, he said, 
 the system of William Pitt arid Alexander Ham- 
 ilton. It may be a very good sytem for aristocrats, 
 but is the worst of all possible systems for demo- 
 crats. I am in favor of taking the state of New- 
 York out of pledge as soon as possible, and of 
 fixing a constitutional guarantee against its ever 
 being mortgaged at the pawnbroker's again. And 
 as the amendment proposed by the gentleman 
 from Schoharie to the first section will somewhat 
 prolong the term of our debt and bondage, I shall 
 vote against it. I do not wish to wait more than 
 nineteen years for the state of New York to be- 
 come free and independent. If I must lead a life of 
 debt and dependence, at least let my bones be 
 laid in an unmortgaged grave. On the other hand 
 I am in favor of the enlargement of the Erie ca- 
 nal. The repeal of the British corn laws and of 
 the tariff of '42 will give a mighty impetus to 
 our trade, and render such enlargement neces- 
 sary, not merely to the state, but to the Union, 
 and the world. The city which I in part repre- 
 sent, is not only a portion of the state of New 
 York, but a portion of the Union a province of 
 
921 
 
 the commercial world. In the name of the Union 
 in the n;Mn<> of the commercial world I claim 
 the prosecution (but not a reckless prosecution) 
 ;it great work. I am willing to pledge a 
 portion of the canal revenues to that object. I 
 shall not be frightened from my course by the cry 
 of direct taxation. That is the only fair mode of 
 taxing the only mode under which capital can 
 hi- made to bear its just share of the public bur- 
 thens the best possible check upon the profliga- 
 cy of the legislature and the rapacity of the lob- 
 by. So long as government shall be permitted to 
 steal its hands into the pockets of busy trade and 
 unconscious labor, either by indirect taxation or 
 by borrowing, it will be apt to waste its revenues 
 with the same recklessness that the pickpocket 
 squanders his plunder. One word to our western 
 friends in return for the many words they have 
 addressed to the delegation of the city of New 
 York. Beware how you sutler the canal policy to 
 be made a pretext for again carrying our noble 
 state to the sign of the three balls. Our posterity 
 must not be mortgaged under any pretext what- 
 ever. It is little better than infanticide. It is a 
 very great crime to kill our offspring; it is a very 
 mean crime to pawn them. So long as govern- 
 ment possesses the taxing power while the en- 
 tire wealth of the state is at its disposal, to take 
 tor public use all that the public exigencies re- 
 quire it can have no excuse for again resorting 
 to the borrowing system a system under which 
 we have paid and have to pay to the money lend- 
 ers, or paper lenders rather, for the bare article 
 of interest an article you can neither eat, nor 
 <lrink, nor wear a far greater amount of our earn- 
 ings than we have paid for the actual construction 
 of all our public works. It is to the ruinous, im- 
 moral and demoralizing state debt system, and not 
 to the canals, that the city of New York is oppos- 
 
 ed. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK. 
 propose, would pay the debt in a little less than 
 
 The pbn I had the honor to 
 
 23 years. 
 HUNT, 
 rate. (Laughter.) However, I shall go for that 
 
 I am very glad to hear that, at any 
 
 system that will 
 time, after all. 
 
 pay the debt in the shortest 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL Jr., said he was sorry that 
 
 recriminations had been permitted to enter into 
 this discussion. To him it mattered but little wha 
 had been the previous course of any delegate upon 
 -this floor in reference to the creation of the State 
 debt, he believed their several constituencies had 
 sent them here to consult together, as to the best 
 in-inner in which provision could be made for its 
 extinguishment. He said that different members 
 who spoke in opposition to the report of the com- 
 mittee, had amused themselves, and perhaps, the 
 Convention, by reading legislative documents to 
 prove that certain other members, who in former 
 times held public offices, had advocated the en- 
 largement of the Erie canal. Mr. C. said he be- 
 lieved that the persons alluded to then and now 
 believed that the enlargement of the Erie 
 canal, in a manner consistent 
 sources of the State, would 
 
 with the 
 promote 
 
 re- 
 the 
 
 be-t interests of the people. He was also willing 
 to admit that the acts of no one administration 
 were the sole cause of our large State debt, that 
 in his opinion the cause was to be found in the 
 
 acts of a political party ; that prior to 1835 cer- 
 tain prominent newspapers and a large portion of 
 the citizens of this State, complained that the 
 Erie canal was not large enough to do the trans- 
 portation business of the western States; and they 
 presented to the public so strong an array of facts 
 and aiguments in favor of its enlargement, that 
 the administration then in power were induced 
 by such facts and arguments to recommend a 
 moderate enlargement of the Erie canal, (but 
 fifty feet wide and five feet deep,) and that the 
 work should proceed only as the surplus tolls of 
 the canals should justify. He said that a few years 
 after the period to which he had just alluded, 
 there arose a " new impulse'' party partaking in 
 zeal and in judgment of the " unregulated spirit 
 of speculation" of 1836; and that in 1837 and 1838, 
 the same party, through its presses and public 
 speakers, proclaimed that the State of New York 
 " was in its shell," and " was loosing cast" that 
 Pennsylvania and other sister States would, in the 
 course of a few years divert a large portion of the 
 trade of our canals, and that if " a more speedy 
 enlargement" was not adopted, the profits of the 
 western trade would be lost to New York; and 
 that no administration was worthy of the confi- 
 dence or support of the people which did not sub- 
 scribe to the "new impulse" policy, and exten- 
 sion of our canal system. Sir, these advocates of 
 the " new impulse'' kept the ball in motion until 
 they obtained the entire control of the executive 
 and legislative branches of our government, and 
 in 183S assumed the position that it was sound 
 policy, to borrow the sum of four millions of dol- 
 lars in each of the ten successive years, upon 
 the strenglh of government, to be expended in the 
 enlargement ot the Erie canal and other works of 
 internal improvement. Sir, this " new impulse" 
 running in debt policy, was continued until the 
 entire resources of the State treasury and Stale 
 credit were exhausted, anH the government wag 
 upon the eve of bankruptcy. Yes, sir, the State 
 treasury was swept and garnished the last piece 
 of silver could not be found to defray the expens- 
 es of government, the people then became alarm- 
 ed, and with a stentorian voice demanded that the 
 " new impulse" administration should give place 
 to one that would act upon a ' stop and pay" po- 
 
 licy. Sir, I have felt called upon by the wu'e 
 K range this debate has taken, and the erroneous 
 T%tatements of some who have spoken, to give thig 
 brief sketch of the rise, progress and decline rf 
 the " new impulse" and debt-creating party. Mr. 
 C. said the history of all political parties in all gc- 
 vernments has usually been the history of strife be- 
 tween two antagonist principles of government. 
 The political contests in this State during the past 
 ten years, have been between the credit system, and 
 "pay asyou go" policy. Sir, the honorable delegaio 
 from Madison (Mr. BRUCE) enquired who petitior . 
 ed for the law of 1842 ? He, Mr. C. said he cou'd 
 not answer that question, but he could inform that 
 gentleman, that a large majority of those who com- 
 posed the Legislature of 1844 were instructed by 
 their constituents to vote for the " stop and p; y 
 law" of 1842, and that a large majority of tie 
 people of this State had since repeatedly appn v- 
 ed of such law, and he would further inform him 
 that a majority of delegates of this convention 
 were instructed to engraft the main features of 
 
 90 
 
922 
 
 that law upon (he Constitution, that it should be- 
 come the fundamental law of the State. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN asked the gentleman to 
 explain what he meant by the policy ot 1842, 
 
 Mr. CAMPBELL replied that it was embodied 
 in the act of 1842, and was well knovyn to the 
 people as the " stop and pay" law, that it contem- 
 plated the payment of the State debt from the sur- 
 plus tolls of the canals in the period of 22 years. 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN enquired upon what 
 part of the act of 1842, he founded such an in- 
 terpretation. 
 
 Mr. CAMPBELL replied upon the whole of 
 that act, from the understanding and speeches ot 
 those who advocated it, and from the interpreta- 
 tion given to it by the act of 1844. Mr. C. said 
 he should vote for the amendments of the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) ; they were, he 
 said, offered in a spirit of compromise, and were 
 extremely liberal in creating a fund to complete 
 the unfinished canals; that if they were in- 
 troduced into our Legislature, they would, in con- 
 junction with the act of 1842, be entitled an act 
 to extend the time tor the payment of the public 
 debt, and to provide a fund for the completion of 
 the unfinished canals. He said that, in his opin- 
 ion, the surplus tolls of the Erie canal beyond the 
 amount appropriated to pay the canal and general 
 fund debts, would be sufficient in eight or ten 
 years to complete the Genesee and Black river ca- 
 nals, and the Erie canal enlargement, and that he 
 believed the interest of the lateral canals would 
 be promoted by leaving the surplus tolls, not ap- 
 propriated by the first and second section of the 
 report under consideration, to the discretion of the 
 Legislature; that it there should be at any lime 
 half a million of dollars unappropriated in the trea- 
 sury, the Legislature would act more wisely in ap. 
 propriating that sum to the completion of one of the 
 lateral canals than in distributing upon the entire 
 line of the Erie. Genesee and Black river canals ; 
 that if distributed rateably between those works, 
 so small a sum would hardly be sufficient to sharp 
 en the pick axes of the laborers who should be 
 employed to do the work. (Mr. C. was proceed- 
 ing wilh his remarks when the President announc- 
 ed by his hammer that Mr C.'s 15 minutes had ex- 
 pired.) 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said, when the fifteen min- 
 utes allowed him on Saturday expired, he was re 
 marking upon the indebtedness of the canals 
 the general fund for the advances which had been 
 made from that fund, and he had intended to con- 
 tinue som'e further remarks upon that subject,and 
 upon some other topics connected with the section 
 under consideration. But lie found himself com- 
 pelled to turn his a'tention for the present to the 
 remarks which had just fallen from the gentleman 
 from Madison, (Mr. BRUCE ) That gentleman has 
 seen fit to come out wuh the bold and sweeping 
 charge, not only upon the chairman ot the com- 
 mittee, (Mr. HOFFMAN,) accusing him with hos. 
 tility to the cana.s, and saying that he believed 
 he would burn up the canals il he could, but. also, 
 Mr. T. said, upon himself, saying that he profes- 
 sed to be a friend to the canals and came here to 
 make war upon them. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE here rose to explain. 
 Mr. TAYLOR said he noted the words at the 
 time/ and they were precisely as he had stated 
 
 th^m; a charge, he said, utterly and entirely with- 
 DVjt foundation; nothing in his public or private 
 life, nothing that he had ever said or done would., 
 in the least, justify the assertion. He had said, 
 and said truly, that he was and ever had been, a 
 friend to our system of internal improvemr nts,but 
 there are different ways in which gentlemen man- 
 ifest their friendship for the system. And he 
 would ask which were to be regarded the true 
 friends of the canals, those who professing to be 
 their friends, rush forward in a career of indebted- 
 ness, borrowing without providing any means of 
 paying, looking only to the future, glorying in the 
 brilliant prospects presented to then imaginations, 
 unmindful of the sober realities around them, of the 
 impending danger which hangs oven them from 
 deranged and mismanaged finances, until compel- 
 led from stern necessity, from the sinking of cied- 
 it, from the magnitude of indebtedness, to stop in 
 the midst of their progress, suspend operations, 
 and indefinitely postpone the completion of the 
 public works? or those who would progress with 
 a system of internal improvements upon a basis of 
 sound financial policy, a policy which, when a 
 debt is created, looks to the means of payment, 
 and steadily pursues its object, safely, prudently, 
 cautiously to'complete and final success, without 
 embarrassment or any of that visionary rashness 
 that jeopards and endangers the accomplishment 
 of the work? Such was the policy pursued previous 
 to 1838, and which enabled the state to complete 
 more than 650 miles of canals, and put them in 
 successful operation ; and such was the credit of 
 the state during the period all this was going on, 
 that she had borrowed more than eleven millions 
 of dollars, on which she had received $340,000 in 
 premiums on her stock, and had paid off her 
 canal debt, principle and interest, leaving only a 
 debt 'unprovided for of about $2,700,000 ! This, 
 sir, is such a policy, such a plan of carrying out 
 a system of internal improvements, as commends 
 itself to the approbation of the people, and such' 
 as he was the friend of. But, sir, after the close 
 of the year 1837, anew state of things existed, a 
 new set of men were in power, and then com- 
 menced the go-ahead policy, the hurried indebt- 
 edness, the calculations of the future, the procla- 
 mations that all was safe, the glorification of the su- 
 perior wisdom of the policy then pursued, the dis- 
 regard of impending danger ; and in the midst of 
 to ^the revel and the feast, the hand writing was 
 seen upon the wall, the awful words were pro- 
 nounced by the sovereign constitutional body, 
 and the men in power were compelled to give 
 place to other men, and to another policy. And 
 what was the state of your finances and public 
 works after- the short period of five years, from 
 1838 ? Instead of a debt, canal and general fund, 
 of a little over four millions of dollars, it 
 was found, or has since been ascertained to have 
 been at that time, (1842) about $28,000,000 ! The 
 public works stopped, or nearly so; your credit 
 impaired, and your finances generally deranged. 
 The gentleman from Cattaraugus (Mr. HAWLEY) 
 has charged the embarrassed state of the finances 
 and the fall of state stock to the minority report 
 of the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr.HoFFMAN) 
 in 1841. Sir, how could this be, when the chair- 
 man of the finance committee in his report of that 
 session, which was made some time before the 
 
923 
 
 minority report was submitted, stated the state 
 stocks to be then but eighty three per cent; anc 
 it was stated by himself and others, on this floor 
 at that time, and uncontradicted, that the state 
 stocks were twenty per cent below par. Then 
 how could that truthful report, panic report as 
 the gentleman calls it, produce this effect, unless 
 he imputes to it powers that no other thing ever 
 possessed, the power of producing the effect be- 
 fore it had an existence ! Now, Mr. T. said, he 
 would ask the gentleman from Madison, who thus 
 rashly accuses the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN) of hostility to the canals, how has it 
 happened that since 1842, when a change, a 
 ladical change of policy was adopted, that the 
 stale has been enabled to arrest the progress of 
 indebtedness, to pay promptly the interest and to 
 rede'ern about $6,000,000 of her debts, and that 
 we are now enabled to make sure and certain pro- 
 vision for the redemption of all our state stocks by 
 the time they will fall due' and to commence again 
 the prosecution of our public works upon a safe 
 sure, and successful basis, and to go on with them 
 until all our canals, the enlargement and the lateral 
 canals, shall be completed, and which we may 
 confidently anticipate at no very distant period; to 
 what he would inquire is this, to be attributed 
 but to the policy of '42? And to whom are the 
 people of this state chiefly indebted for that poli- 
 cy ? Who more than to the gentleman from Her- 
 kimpr, whostood here then with unflinching firm- 
 ness in the maintenance and adoption of the plan 
 proposed by himself, and then as now, incurred 
 the denunciations of the professed exclusive friends 
 of the canals^ friends whose policy was ruinous to 
 the system ?\V;d yet charge that gentleman with 
 hostility to your canal ? you might as well charge 
 him who perils his life to rescue a drowning friend 
 with hostility to that friend, as charge him (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN-) with hostility to the system of in- 
 .lernal improvement The people have long since 
 pronounced judgment upon this matter, and they 
 will now see more clearly than ever who are the 
 true friends of the canals, the friends of a sound 
 system of finance, the friends of the credit of the 
 state, its honor, and its faith, and who would se- 
 cure them from the like embarrassments, indebt- 
 edness, and taxation, tor the future. He said his 
 time would only p.-rmit him to add, that he con- 
 sidered the plan proposed by the Chairman of the 
 committee, (Mr. HOFFMAN) regarded as a finance- 
 measure, so far as he was capable of judging of 
 these matters, as preferable to any other, but he 
 was gratified that the other gentlem<in from Her- 
 kimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) had submitted his amend, 
 ment, because, as he understood it, it would sub- 
 stantially meet the engagements of thestate in the 
 extinguishment of her debts, and would afford a 
 much larger sum for the public works for the first 
 nine years; in which time much, and perhaps all 
 that would be of any pressing necessity, would 
 be accomplished. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND stated that the question im- 
 mediately presented was, will you trust subse- 
 quent legislatures as to the completion of the pub- 
 lic works, or will you constitutionalize the meas- 
 ure. This was the difference between the plans 
 of the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS) 
 and the gentleman from Schoharie (Mr. BOXJCK.) 
 It certainly was a singular spectacle that we now 
 
 saw presented by gentlemen who had at the early 
 period of our session claimed all merit for the 
 character of the legislature to such a degree 
 even as to doubt the necessity or propriety of 
 calling this Convention to find them so anxious 
 to deprive the legislature of a discretionary pow- 
 er over the sums that may be at their disposal, 
 from the surplus revenues of the canals. Under 
 the plan of the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. 
 LOOMIS) an amount increasing from 500,000 to 2 
 million per annum contemplating the probable 
 increase of business upon the canals will be left 
 at the discretion of the legislature for the comple- 
 tion of the public works. This amount would of 
 course be effected by the course that the legisla- 
 ture might choose to take upon the question of a 
 direct tax for the civil expenses of this State. 
 Should they continue a small tax say that of a 1-4 
 1-3 or 1-2 mill, strictly for the purpose of de- 
 fraying the civil expenses, for one he believed it 
 would really prove an economical measure. Un- 
 der a proper appraisment of the property of the 
 State, 1000 millions would probably be presented, 
 for State taxation, 1-4 of a mill would pro- 
 duce 250 thousand per annum a sum sufficient 
 to defray the civil expenses, when general laws 
 have produced short and inexpensive sessions of 
 the legislature and an economical management of 
 our prisons and public chanties, if not a revenue 
 a much diminished expenditure on their ac- 
 count. Whether this plan will be adopted or not, 
 he considered that any reliance for a permanency 
 upon the Auction and Salt duties, for the support 
 of the State government was futile. The comp- 
 troller had told us that not over $40,000 might be 
 expected from the salt duty, now reduced to one 
 cent per bushel. And he would tell gentlemen 
 that we probably held the 100 thousand from the 
 auction duties upon but a slight tenure, resting 
 only upon the fact that the auctioneers had not 
 combined and brought the legality of the tax to 
 the decision of the supreme court of the United 
 States. As a New Yorker, this matter of direct 
 axation was not the bug-bear that it appeared to 
 se even to many of his own political friends from 
 other quarters of the State. We were now in the 
 city taxed towards defraying the annual interest 
 on a local improvement (the Croton,) some $400,- 
 000 or more per annum and our contribution 
 towards the State tax had been as large as $230,- 
 000 ; within a few years an aggregate of between 
 D and 600,000 dollars, was annually drawn from our 
 citizens for the purpose of sustaining local and 
 State internal improvements. The chairman of the 
 committee whose report we were considering(Mr. 
 HOFFMAN) would agree in the^assertion that no 
 irmer nor earlier friends to the proposition for 
 he preservation of the State credit by the impo- 
 ition of direct taxation exist, than the constitu- 
 ency of the city of New York, whose delegation 
 >n this floor sustained the proposition at its ear- 
 iest suggestion, even in the year 1841. Acting 
 as patriotically as they had in coming to the res- 
 cue of the State in its difficulties brought about by 
 the too ardent friends of the public works the 
 conduct of the delegation on this floor, in bearing 
 unrebuked heretofore the anathemas of the gen- 
 tleman from Western localities, as to our indiffer- 
 ence upon the question of internal improvements, 
 must have struck impartial hearers as indicative 
 
924 
 
 of great forbearance on the part of the assailed. 
 
 The gentleman from Delaware, (Mr. WATER- 
 BURX) had said truly a day or two since, that af- 
 ter all the professions that are heard about honor 
 and liberality on this floor gentlemen carried 
 their honor generally but little farther than their 
 pockets sympathised with the movement. Sup- 
 pose that, influenced by a local view of the ques- 
 tion, as to which was the most economical mode of 
 reaching with boats of a large class the boundless 
 region of the west the new copper mines, if you 
 please, on the shores of Lake Superior, we 
 should prefer to meet our object by an expendi- 
 ture of three millions in continuing the enlarge- 
 ment to Syracuse, and thence to Oswego or even 
 by a less sum via Rome and the Oneida Lake to 
 Lake Ontario rather than by continuing the en- 
 largement to Buffalo, to involve the expenditure 
 of 12 millions, and not attain any greater benefit 
 to the eastern portion of the stale than either of 
 the first two propositions would secure. 
 
 Could we be well charged with a want of pro- 
 per feeling upon the subjeci, if we in view of 
 these circumstances, and the fact that the city of 
 Hew York which now has a local debt of 13 mil- 
 lions, desired to move prudently in lavoring pro- 
 positions that looked to a prolongation, and possi 
 bly an increase of the state debt, the burthens of 
 which the city at present contributed neaily one- 
 half to sustain, and in a proportion greatly beyond 
 her relative population. Willing as 1 am to con- 
 cede the vast importance of the public works to 
 the commerce of New York, I cannot forget that 
 long ere they were projected by the gigantic 
 minds of Clinton and his associates New York 
 existed as the prominent commercial city of the 
 Union and at this day much of her trade was en- 
 tirely independent of the canals. As indicative 
 of the magnitude of some branches of our trade, 
 I will mention the fact, that as counted from a 
 Light House upon Long Island Sound, the coast- 
 ing vessels to and from New York during a single 
 week, within the past three years were computed 
 at 11UO ot a capacity so great that one third of 
 their number would be more than equal to the 
 tonnage passing along one point that presented 
 the aggregate trade of the Erie and Cnamplam 
 Canals. The capacity of the Erie canal was now 
 far more extended than many were disposed to 
 admit. From personal knowledge, he knew 
 that, exclusive of lulls, a ton of merchandize 
 was now carried from Albany to Buffalo for $1, 
 and in some instances at. 623 cents, whilst a bar- 
 rel of flour can,. be brought from Oswego to the 
 Hudson for 15 cents, without tolls. Thus in the 
 upward freight exhibiting a much lower rate even 
 than the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN) had estimated in his opening remarks. 
 Goods which he had himself sold within the last 
 week, were now going from New York to Chicago 
 at a cost of but 50 cents a hundred pounds, in 
 eluding every charge, for a distance oi near 1500 
 miles of river, canal, and lake transportation. 
 Under this view he had hoped to have seen the 
 proposition made by the standing committee con- 
 firmed by the Convention. Under the provisions 
 of their first section, from the progressive increase 
 of canal revenues, the unfinished works could be 
 gradually and safely completed. Modifications in 
 the English restrictive laws, which were likely 
 
 soon to be followed by other European Govern- 
 ments, were now producing a large increase in canal 
 tolls over even the great amount oi fhe season of 
 1845. He placed the receipts the current year at 
 three millions of dollars. The new ware house 
 act, if properly understood by our Canadian neigh- 
 bors, would be found to encourage the transit of 
 their property through our canals, at least at sea- 
 sons when the navigation of the St. Lawrence be- 
 came peculiarly perilous. 
 
 Heretofore, upon such merchandize the duty 
 in cash would be required at our western custom 
 houses. Now, under the ware-house act, as pro- 
 perly interpreted by the recent circular of the 
 Secretary of the Treasury, no other charges 
 would be incurred on the produce of the Canadas 
 seeking the Atlantic through our canals, than 
 those incident to the transportation of American 
 productions intended for a foreign market. From 
 these considerations, he believed that a fund 
 would arise under the plan of the committee, 
 amply sufficient to complete the enlargement 
 within the period of eight years. Many gentle- 
 men had, however, concluded that the proposi- 
 tions with reference to the public debt and reve- 
 nues, made by the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 (Mr. LOOMIS,) as a compromise, would best meet 
 public expectation. Mr. T. trusted that this- 
 would meet with the approbation of those who 
 had invited it, and in that expectation, would 
 cheerfully sustain it by his vote. 
 
 Before he took his seat, and while he was yet 
 within the limit of time prescribed under the 
 rule for speakers, he would present a plan under 
 which localities that might be benefitted by the 
 completion of the unfinished works passing 
 through them, could secure their completion in a 
 measure independent of the means of the state at 
 large. If the friends of the Genesee Valley and 
 Black River canal were honest in their profes- 
 sions as to their belief in the capability of these 
 works when completed to pay the expenses of 
 their construction, they would cheerfully adopt 
 the principles shadowed forth in the sections he 
 would now send to the chair ; and thus avoid the 
 long delay that the completion of those works 
 from the surplus canal revenues alone would re- 
 quire : 
 
 ^ 1. The several counties through which the Genesee 
 Valley and Black River canals are projected, shall have, 
 after having obtained the assent of a majority of their elec- 
 tors, ascertained by a vote given upon a question submit' 
 ted by recommendation of three fourths of the members 
 of their several boards of supervisors, the privilege of rais- 
 ing annually a sum not exceeding per cent upon the 
 assessed value ot the real estate within the county, to 
 be appropriated exclusively towards the improvement 
 or completion of any portion of the line of either ol the 
 canals named herein. 
 
 ^2. For the reimbursement of any sums so advanced, the 
 revenues of such portions of the canals as have been placed 
 in operation by the contributions of said counties, shall be 
 lorever pledged, together with the nett revenues arising 
 upon the canals now in operation from the transit of ton- 
 nage which may have passed upon any portion of the pub- 
 lic works, pieced in operation by the foi egoing section. 
 
 3. 'I he nett revenues referred to in the preceding sec- 
 tion shall be computed by the Board of Canal Commission, 
 ers.by deducting a lair charge for constructing and operat- 
 ing any of the canals or portions oi canals now in use. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES continued the debate. 
 
 Mr. WHITE said : I desire before this question 
 is taken, and in the brief time that is allowed me 
 by the rules of the Convention, to assign the rea- 
 
925 
 
 sons which will govern my vote upon this sec- 
 tion of the report of the committee <>n finance. I 
 am (he move desirous of doing so, hi-muso 1 have 
 n to apprehend that vote will be in opposi- 
 tion to si'veral of my esteemed friends ;md col- 
 leagues with whom it is my pride and pleasure to 
 ociated upon this floor. It is well known 
 to you sir, (Gen. WARD was acting as President,) 
 that 1 was an early, zealous and decided advocate 
 of the canal policy which has immortalized the 
 name of CLINTON, and that I was a warm perso- 
 nal and political friend of that distinguished and 
 illustrious statesman, who has left the impress of 
 Ins great mind on our public works, and to whose 
 splendid genius and extraordinary sagacity these 
 public works will ever be an enduring and im- 
 perishable monument. It is due to myself to 
 state that I have always held that the true policy 
 of the people of this state was to direct their en- 
 lightened energies to the enlargement and com- 
 pletion of the Erie and Champlain canals, as 
 great state works, upon a scale commensurate 
 with our growing wants and our extended 
 commerce ; and to leave the construction of lat- 
 eral canals to local efforts and individual enter- 
 prise. All the errors that have arisen, arid the 
 financial difficulties we have encountered, as well 
 as the largest part of the debt we have contracted, 
 have, in my humble judgment, been occasioned by 
 a departure from that wise system of legislation. 
 But notwithstanding I have entertained these 
 views, which time and experience have only serv- 
 ed to confirm, yet 1 arn fiee to confers that as the 
 legislature has thought proper 'o pursue a differ- 
 ent course of policy, I do not deem this an open 
 question ; anc' rheiefore consider it to be our duty 
 to complete tr.e unfinished canals of ihe state, 
 namely, \\ a Genesee Valley and Black River ca- 
 nals, and to complete the enlargement of the Erie 
 canal, according to the plans oi the Canal Com- 
 missioners Irom tune to time, and as circum- 
 stances will permit. In that dark and gloomy era 
 of our financial history in 1S42, when the state 
 credit was impaired and the state resources ex- 
 hausted, I eniiiely concurred in the suspension cf 
 the public improvements, and I he efforts made to 
 sustain Ihe public credit, and in what has been 
 usually denominated th policy of 1842. The ob- 
 ligations then entered into, whether expressed or 
 implied, I desire to carry out according to their 
 fair import I arn willing to make ample provi- 
 sion for the discharge of the principal and inter- 
 est of the canal debt, by a sinking fund, which 
 will, besides paying the annual interest, redeem 
 the principal of that debt in twenty-two or twen- 
 ty-three years. 1 In the same spirit, I propose to 
 make an appropriation to cover the interest due 
 to the public creditors and chargeable on the ge- 
 neral fund. I regret that I have not been able to 
 give my support to the aiticie reported by my ho- 
 norable and learned friend from Heikimer (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN,) the chairman of the committee on 
 finance, because it does not, in my opinion, make 
 a sufficient provision for the prosecution of the 
 enlargement of" the Erie canal, which 1 tn-heve is 
 demanded by a due regard to the wishes of the 
 people and the prospeiiiy of the state. But I de- 
 sire to support the proposition of my distinguish- 
 ed friend from Schoharie, (Mr. BOUCK:,) if I can 
 prevail upon him, before I resume my seat, to in- 
 
 crease the annual appropriation proposed in ((his 
 arrangement from $1,225,000 to $1,300,000 in 
 order to discharge the principal and interest 
 of the canal debt proper, and with this 
 change, I have the best reason to believe 
 his proposition would be sanctioned by the 
 judgment of the Convention. I have no hesita- 
 tion in saying it will receive my feeble support. 
 The deep and abiding interest which my constit- 
 uents take in the speedy enlargement of the Erie 
 canal the vast commerce which it bears upon 
 its surface the opulence and wealth of which 
 the metropolis of the state and of the Union has 
 been the recipient leaves me no alternative but 
 to declare, that I cannot vote for any constitution- 
 al provision which does not make suitable and 
 ample appropriations for the enlargement of the 
 Erie canal and the completion of the unfinished 
 canals, with the least practicable delay consistent 
 with a sacred regard to our pecuniary obligations 
 and to our plighted faith. The income of this 
 great state work, for the past year, has been 
 nearly $2,700,000. Notwithstanding a reduction 
 by the Canal Board of more than thirteen per 
 cent, upon the tolls of the preceding year, there 
 is an income over the income of that year, of 
 more than $130,000 proving beyond all contro- 
 versy, that as you cheapen the expense, you in- 
 crease the amount of transportation, and that 
 common justice and public policy unite in urging 
 us to make every effort to enlarge the canal, and 
 reduce the tolls, and thus in a much greater 
 ratio, increase the quantity of produce and mer- 
 chandise brought to, and shipped from, the city 
 of New York to the Queen city of the west. 
 That Emporium of Lake Erie, with its navigable 
 shores of more than eight thousand miles on our 
 majestic inland seas paid into your treasury for 
 tolls, nearly $500,000 the past, year, and with a 
 continuous navigation of more than nineteen 
 hundred miles on the Father of Rivers, and its 
 tributary streams in the Great Valley of the Mis- 
 sissippi bids fair to rival on the west, that proud 
 city on the east, which I have the honor in part 
 to represent in this Convention. I have every 
 reason to believe that at this moment the com- 
 merce of our canals exceeds in value our foreign 
 imports and exports united, and that commerce 
 is advancing and extending with a rapidity that 
 has no parallel in commercial history in either 
 the eastern or western hemispheres. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said if gentlemen on this 
 floor voted according to their speeches, there 
 was no doubt but the proposition of Mr. BOUCK 
 would be adopted by a very large majority, and 
 indeed one much more favorable to the prosecu- 
 tion of the public works. Gentlemen had avow- 
 ed their action to be governed by the act of is [_>, 
 and its policy. That act required the payment 
 of the debt only within about thirty years, and 
 not a word of that act required that debt to be 
 paid in twenty-two and an half years. It provided 
 thatthe debt should be paid by a sinking fund 
 to be equal to one-third of the interest of the debt 
 remaining due at the close of every fiscal year, 
 after paying the interest, lie had produced in 
 his previous speech a mathematical calculation 
 that this would not pay the debt before 1871. 
 This could not be answered ; it was true whatev- 
 er gentlemen might assert. Assuming that the 
 
926 
 
 gentleman of Herkimer was the author of that 
 act, would a man of his well known knowledge of 
 language who had the intention of fixing a speci- 
 fic time, have used such a miserable circum- 
 locution. The exact amount of the debt was 
 just as well known then as now. Rather than 
 take such a course, the gentleman and the legis- 
 lature who passed that act, if they intended that 
 the debt should be paid in twenty-two and an 
 half years, they would have specifically set apart 
 the sum of $375,999. He insisted that the Comp- 
 troller in his report of '45, and the commissioners 
 of the canal fund, for the same year, sustained the 
 construction which he (Mr. K.) gave to this act. 
 Therefore he insisted, this proved that gentlemen 
 would vote for Mr. BOUCK'S proposition if they 
 seriously meant to adhere to their principles as 
 avowed here. He stood here as an advocate of 
 the act of 1842, and he should vote for the amend- 
 ment because ft provided for the extinguishment 
 of the debt in even a less period than did that 
 act. In reference to the debt alleged to be due 
 from the canals to the general fund, the amend- 
 ment provided for the payment of $522,000 an- 
 nually, forever. That was a trifle short of the 
 interest on the debt due as claimed by gentlemen 
 from the one fund to the other. Gentlemen had 
 expressed themselves that they would be satisfied 
 if provision was made for the interest on this debt 
 to the general fund, and he now called upon them 
 to support this amendment. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE had not intended to say a word 
 on this subject. He I'elt that it was far above his 
 powers but found himseli placed in a situation 
 where he would probably be compelled to vote 
 against the dictates ot his own judgment, and in 
 violation ot the well known and clearly express 
 ed will of his constituents j under such circum- 
 stances he ielt that it was due to himself, as well 
 as to them, and a proper respect tor their wishes, 
 that he should briefly define his own position, and 
 explain the reasons that would dictate the vote he 
 should probably give. The State debt was no 
 new subject of consideration with him. He had 
 watched i\s progress and increase Irom year to year 
 for several years, prior to 1842, with the most 
 anxious solicitude, and was gratified when its pro- 
 gress was arrested by the wise and prudent legis- 
 lation ot that year ; from that time forward he had 
 anxiously desired to see that debt paid off at the 
 earliest possible period, he therefore came here 
 prepared to vote for a constitutional enactment, 
 that alter defraying the expenses of government 
 and the necessary cost of repairs and superintend- 
 ence of the canals, the whole revenue of the state 
 snould be applied to the payment of that debt; 
 and if that was not sufficient to cancel it in 18 or 
 9.0 years, the Legislature should accomplish it in 
 that time by taxation. He was therefore gratified 
 when the financial repot t was made, but there 
 was a feature in that report that somewhat dimin- 
 ished his gratification it was that feature which 
 appropriated two and a half -millions to the Erie 
 canal enlargement (of which a word hereafter.) 
 He would first look at the position in which the 
 matter stands. Gentlemen have expended much 
 time in the investigation of the v origin, history and 
 progress of the state debt. Now, he w*s really at 
 a loss to see the relevancy of this matter to the 
 question before them, which in his judgment was 
 
 narrowed down to three simple inquiries: First, 
 what is the amount of the state debt? Second, 
 what is the resouices of the slate to pay that debt? 
 and third, how shall these resources be most pru- 
 dently and economically applied? No matter 
 when this debt was originated no matter by whom 
 it was oriignated, or tor what purpose the ques- 
 tion is how shall it be paid. The amount of the 
 state debt has been stated, and is admitted to be 
 from twenty-two to twenty-three millions ot dol- 
 lars, on which we are annually paying the round 
 sum of one and a quarter millions in the nature of 
 interest; in four years we should pay five millions 
 of interest, a sum sufficient to complete the Ge- 
 nesee Valley and Black River canals ; postpone 
 the payment twenty years, and we pay twenty- 
 five millions of interest ; a sum sufficient to com- 
 plete the Genesee Valley and Black River canals, 
 the Erie canal enlargement, and construct the 
 Erie Railroad This is no visionary dream, but a 
 stubborn reality, that figures will demonstrate be- 
 yond the power of contradiction. I*, was not ne- 
 cessary then to go into the history ot the origin 
 and progress of this debt. The simple question 
 is, how shall we pay it ? That was the object to 
 which they should direct their attention. Can 
 gentlemen sleep on such a' subject for himself, 
 he would never slumber a night over such a debt 
 if he could avoid it. He would apply the sponge 
 to the last dollar, at the earliest possible period. 
 He was aware that gentlemen who belonged to 
 certain localities, might complain that they suffer 
 in consequence of delay in the completion of their 
 improvements, but. he would ask those gentlemen 
 if there weie not other localities that had equally 
 suffered? He asked them it they could not wait 
 till this debt was cancelled, and the resources of 
 the state were at liberty to accomplish these ob- 
 jects without embarrassment. He, too, in com- 
 mon with all the friends of the Erie Railroad, 
 knew what it was to suffer under the influence of 
 hope deferred, not only till their hearts had sick- 
 ened, but till their spirits had fainted, and they 
 had abandoned their object in despair ; he had'al- 
 ways felt the force of a remark made by an old 
 farmer who once came to pay him a debt he ex- 
 pressed regret that the farmer had put himself to 
 the trouble to call purposely : his reply was, that 
 he knew no better time to pay a debt than when 
 he had the means. So in this case, we now know 
 we have the means to pay this debt, and common 
 honesty,j and prudence dictated that we should do 
 so, and after the debts were paid, the improve- 
 ments, desired could be accomplished ; besides it 
 the anticipations of gentlemen of a continued and 
 progressive increase of canal revenues were reali- 
 zed, there would after complying with the re- 
 quirements of the report, be surplus revenues suf- 
 ficient to complete these works in a reasonable 
 time ; but what a predicament would they be in ii 
 estimates gentlemen had urged upon them should 
 be found to be based on mistaken calculations? 
 If these revenues did continue to increase, so 
 much the belter for i hem if 'hey did not, or 
 should decrease, still we should be safe. If there 
 was danger it should be looked to and guarded 
 against. They must bear in mind that the Erie 
 Railroad would soon be completed, and that would 
 draw some commerce irom the canal. 
 Mr. BRAYTON thought not. 
 
927 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE. It certainly will. 
 
 Mr. BRAYTON doubled it. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE. You and I may differ on 
 this subject, but this does not prove either ot us 
 right. Then, again, our Boston friends will con- 
 struct a road to the St. Lawrence, and the ques- 
 tion was whether they would not obtain produce 
 cheaper by that medium than by the Erie canal? 
 If so, that also would draw from us some com- 
 merce, and it was not impossible thaMhe opening 
 of the ports cf England to American breadstuff's 
 may divert a portion of produce down the Si. Law- 
 rence via Quebec, and thus* more commerce may 
 be taken from us. The gentleman from Chau- 
 tauque (Mr. MARVIN) has himselt furnished a 
 strong argument in favor of the probable diminu- 
 tion of transportation through this canal. That 
 gentleman stated by way ot anecdote, as a matter 
 within his own knowledge, that he;vy articles, 
 sugar and molasses had been transported up the 
 Western rivers against the streams, with an addi- 
 tion of ninety miles land carriage, and sold lower 
 than the New York merchant could offer them at 
 the same point. If that were so, what would be 
 the result when that ninety miles of land carriage 
 was annihilated, or transit over it facilitated. But 
 sir, on this subject I will not employ the time of 
 the Convention. The gentleman from Herkimer 
 has "disposed of it so much better than I could, 
 that it would be a kind of sacrilege for me to at- 
 tempt to travel over the same ground. He could 
 readily excuse those gentlemen who urged us to 
 delay the payment of the debt on the ground of 
 local interest, connected with a desire to finish 
 the local improvements. For Pope had said self- 
 interest was man's ruling passion, and the Scotch 
 poet had said with equal truth 
 
 "If self the wavering balance shakes 
 3 Tis rarely right adjusted." 
 
 Now as he spoke from recollection, without pre- 
 paration or reflection, and had resided out of the 
 state from 1816 to '25, while the Erie canal was 
 in progress of construction, he might not be strict- 
 ly correct in the statement he was about to make, 
 but he believed he was not far astray. If he un- 
 derstood the matter right, at the time of the com- 
 mencement of the Erie canal in 1817, the State 
 was in possession of a respectable general fund, 
 the common property of all. There was also a 
 revenue from auction and salt duties, which the 
 gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN,) and 
 the gentleman from Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN,) 
 seemed to think were local taxes. He differed 
 from both those gentlemen, and was not bound to 
 follow the Admiral or the General, or any subal- 
 tern officer, when their positions were erroneous 
 ly taken. These auction duties like tariff duties, 
 fall on the consumer, and were the property ol 
 all, and could not belong to any isolated part or 
 section of the state. The salt springs and lands 
 belonged to the whole state, and the state had a 
 right to a revenue from them. All these resour- 
 ces, the property of the whole state being absorb- 
 ed in the construction of these canals, and tre- 
 bling the value of property along the line of their 
 location, while other sections were not only nol 
 benefittcd, but in some instances actually injured 
 by their inability to compete with the more favor- 
 ed, locations on the line of the canal. Does not 
 justice require that the debt incurred in construct- 
 
 ng these improvements should be cancelled from 
 their revenue, while we know it is sufficient, and 
 not subject us to the hazard of taxation in case of 
 a failure of revenue. He had the less sympathy 
 for these gentlemen on the account of local inter- 
 est, because he thought the canals, for the com- 
 pletion of which they were the advocates, were 
 unwisely undertaken, and only concurred in by 
 the friends of the Erie canal to defeat the con- 
 ruction of the Erie Railroad, from a feeling of 
 ordid and illiberal jealousy, lest that road should 
 interfere with the monopoly of transportation and 
 travel on the line of this favored locality. But a 
 " arge amount of the expense of constructing these 
 canals had been incurred, and must be irretrieva- 
 bly lost if they were not completed, and it was 
 probable that although they would never pay the 
 interest of their cost, with the expense of repair 
 and superintendence, yet they would more than 
 keep themselves in repair, and pay the interest of 
 the sum required to complete them, and there- 
 fore it was economy and good policy, and he was 
 willing to complete them as soon as the revenues 
 of the state would admit, but was not willing to 
 postpone the payment of the debt for that pur- 
 pose. He should therefore vote for the amend- 
 ment of the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. 
 LOOMIS.) [Here the Speaker's hammer announ- 
 ced the expiration of his fifteen minutes, but he 
 finished the sentence thus not in a spirit of con- 
 cession but from dire necessity.] 
 
 Mr. NICOLL, in view of the fact that all these 
 votes were to be taken before 4 o'clock, moved 
 the previous question on the proposition imme- 
 diately pending, including all amendments to 
 the first section. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM asked for the ayes and noes on 
 seconding the call for the previous question, and 
 there were ayes 58, nays 55. So the call was 
 not seconded. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said it was now 
 pretty evident the proposition of Mr. HOFFMAN 
 would not now meet the approbation of the 
 House. The question was therefore as between 
 the proposition of Mr. LOOMIS and Mr. BOUCK. 
 Mr. V S. went on to express himself in favor of 
 that of Mr. B., and as opposed to that of Mr. L. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN wished to call the at- 
 tention of the Convention to the professions of 
 gentlemen as compared with their practice. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS had hitherto listened in silence, 
 but not without deep interest, to this debate. He 
 felt now constrained to say a word before this 
 question was disposed of, although, after the con- 
 summate ability displayed in this debate, he 
 could not hope to convince a single gentleman. 
 His object was to second the patriotic appeal 
 made by Mr. BOUCK. He desired that the 
 Convention should unite, and not decide 
 this question by a mere party vote. Up- 
 on the main principles of this question all 
 agree in the payment certain of the debt from 
 the revenues of our internal works, and all profess 
 to agree that the public works should be comple- 
 ted, although the policy ot certain gentlemen 
 seemed to postpone their completion until an in- 
 definite period. He believed that a sound policy 
 would best be promoted by their speedy comple- 
 tion. The gentleman from Herkimer with his 
 mind dwelling so long upon a favorite theory, had 
 
928 
 
 taken the remarkable position that after ten years 
 the revenues were to decline. He could conceive 
 not even the remotest probability of such an event. 
 Mr. H. referred to the hitherto unprecedented 
 growth of the West as evidence of the fact that it 
 was to go on increasing and magnifying beyond 
 the conception of any man here. These people 
 must find their channel to the Atlantic and to Eu- 
 rope through this state. Hence the importance 
 of the speedy completion of these great works. 
 They would be to our state what the fabled river 
 of Pactolus whose stream turned to gold at the 
 touch of Midas, was to Crresus. Mr. H. urged 
 that there should be a compromise, which he con- 
 sidered to be offered in the amendment of Mr. 
 BOUCK. We could then present the sublime 
 spectacle of our people coming together on this 
 great and vexed question of internal improve- 
 ment. This was all that the friends of these 
 works could concede, and he urged that it affor- 
 ded a fair basis for a common meeting. 
 
 Mr LOUMIS was unwilling to sum up the ar- 
 guments adduced by the four or five last speeches, 
 but should attempt it. The gentleman from Onei- 
 da (Mr. KIRKLAND,) proposed to give a construc- 
 tion to the act of 1842, which Mr. L. denied was 
 a lair one. The debt was increased by the amount 
 due to contractors, and could not be accurately 
 ascertained ; but the act provided that when this 
 was ascertained, that then a sum equal to one 
 third of the annual interest of the debt remain- 
 ed due. This was the only fair construction that 
 could be given to the act. The construction given 
 it by the gentleman from Oneida, would never 
 pay off the debt it was an absurdity. The debt 
 could not be ascertained, and that was the reason 
 the amount was not specifically stated. As to 
 the declaration of the gentleman from Oneida, 
 therefore, that he was in favor of paying the debt, 
 under his construction of the act of '42, it fell to 
 the ground it would never pay the debt. Gentle, 
 men had called for a redemption of the pledges lo 
 complete these works. Pledges to whom ? there 
 was none about it it was a mere legislative en- 
 actment for public policy. Pledged to whom? 
 to themselves ? The only pledge made, was to 
 pay the debt ; it was idle to talk about pledges ot 
 this description. The power that enacted the law 
 could repeal it- The gentleman from Albany had 
 said that all agreed to pay the debt, and all prefer- 
 red to favor the completion oMhe public works. 
 But there were some here also, who professed to 
 prevent future taxation. There was the differ- 
 ence. The legislature, if left to appropriate this 
 money, would always be liberal towards these 
 works. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that, put any possible construc- 
 tion on the act ot 1842, it was at best, but a mort- 
 gage. If it failed to secure the entire bond, that 
 was the fault of its drawers. If this act was to be 
 incorporated into the Constitution, then he insist- 
 ed upon its construction to its very letter. He in- 
 sisted that there was an implied faith, and sub- 
 stantially a pledge given to the people on the late, 
 ral canals, that these works should be completed. 
 The legislature could change the locality of the 
 public works, and the route of the Erie canal, 
 but that no one denied would be a direct violation 
 of implied public faith. He would not leave this 
 matter to the Legislature, for then the just claims 
 
 of the canals might be defeated. This was a pro. 
 position for compromise, and if adopted, he urged, 
 would place thi? great question of our public 
 works above the mere conflicts of party. As to 
 supporting the expenses of government from 
 these canals it was not the policy of our govern- 
 ment to support itself by indirect "taxation. Such 
 a system would not secure us an economical and 
 frugal administration. He appealed to gentlemen 
 from the eastern part of the State to come forward 
 and meet the people of the west in the same spi- 
 rit of magnanimity on this subject of internal im- 
 provement that actuated them in 1817. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN replied to gentlemen on the sub- 
 ject of the construction to be given to the act of 
 1842. It was an extraordinary spectacle to find that 
 gentlemen originally opposed to that act were de- 
 termined that their construction should be adopted 
 in preference lo that given it by i!s authors and 
 supporters. He characterized the construction 
 given it by Mr. KIRKLAND as a narrow, technical 
 one. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND insisted that the commission- 
 ers of the canal fund and the comptroller, in 1845, 
 had given it the same construction. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN replied that if he conceded 
 that they did, he would not concede that to 
 be a reason why this Conrention should adopt 
 the same error. He expressed his surprise 
 that the gentleman should adopt a construction 
 purely technical, and so confessedly against 
 the contemporaneous construction given it, in or- 
 der to serve his local purposes. When this con. 
 struction was first attempted to be established, the 
 Legislature, by the explanatory act of 1844, 
 placed the true construction beyond a doubt. It 
 was reserved for those who were hostile to the 
 measure and the policy, to attempt to avail them- 
 selves of an error of mere phraseology, which 
 they alledge to have been committed, in 
 order to postpone the payment of the debt. Mr. 
 T. further replied to Mr. S., expressing his con- 
 currence in the sentiments set forth by that gen- 
 tleman on the subject of supporting government 
 wholly by indirect taxation. 
 
 Mr. STETSON asked why we should not com- 
 promise ? The country should hear and decide 
 this question. Was it the mere sum of $75,000 
 the difference between the two propositions that 
 prevented it ? No, it was this the proposition 
 of Mr. LOOMIS' was one of compromise, but in- 
 stead of meeting this, they brought in another 
 proposition, asking us to violate the plighted 
 faith of the state that the debt should be paid in 
 twenty-two and a half years. Admitting that 
 there were two pledges here, one to pay the debt, 
 and another to complete the works which should 
 be fulfilled first ? The one was the promise of 
 the man who made his note to himself that he 
 would buy himself a new carriage or build new 
 barns the other the promise to the creditor. 
 Which should be performed first ? The appeal 
 of gentlemen was to compromise the pledge to 
 the creditor he preferred to compromise the 
 pledge to ourselves, to the people of localities. 
 That was the difference involved in this matter. 
 Mr. S. repelled the construction sought to be giv- 
 en to the act of 1S42, as the argument of a law- 
 yer before a justices court, put forth here to in- 
 duce the sacrifice of a solemn pledge to the pub- 
 
929 
 
 lie creditor. He was in favor of a system to pay 
 
 up, and go on and complete these works. The 
 
 difference between him and gentlemen, was that 
 
 reversed the order and placed the item of 
 
 nditure first in order. This was the reason 
 
 why we could not compromise as asked for by the 
 
 gentleman from Schoharie. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN replied to Mr. TILDEN, denying 
 that his proposition left this matter of appropria- 
 tion entirely to the legislature. His amendment 
 of the other day, he insisted, was directly to the 
 contrary, and it would have been carried had not 
 the amendment of Mr. STOW been offered. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE thought that the gentleman from 
 Onondaga had exhibited a great deal of unneces- 
 sary warmth on being charged that he was hos- 
 tile to internal improvement. The gentleman 
 had nearly run off the track in his zeal and he 
 really thought would have exploded, but for the 
 application of the safety valve to him by the gen- 
 tleman from Chautauque, who in so doing got his 
 own eyes filled with steam. But he asked that 
 gentleman to point to the provision in the propo- 
 sition he advocated that made the slightest pro- 
 vision for the prosecution of our canal policy. 
 The proposition which the gentleman sustained 
 would effectually arrest that policy. That of 
 Mr. HOFFMAN did not propose to apply a dollar 
 to the enlargement. On the contrary, that gen- 
 tleman proposes that the canal might be improved 
 and answer all purposes until the tolls began to 
 culminate. Not only did that gentleman repudi- 
 ate the enlargement, but he denounced the pro- 
 ject of the Erie canal as incestuous. He called 
 on Mr. TAYLOR to come out and define his posi- 
 tion. If really friendly to the canal policy, le- 
 him come up to the support of Mr. BOUCK'S prot 
 position which secured something for internal 
 improvement. The gentleman from Herkimer 
 (Mr. HOFFMAN) said it was perfect nonsense to 
 talk about the faith of the state being pledged in 
 1835 to the enlargement. And yet, he contend- 
 ed, that it was pledged by the law of 1842. Mr. 
 B. would be glad to know why the faith of the 
 state was not as strongly pledged by the one act 
 as the other ! By the proposition of Mr. BOUCK 
 we could fulfil them both. This was the great 
 question, and he was rejoiced to see that the gen- 
 tleman from Clinton, who was the first man to 
 spring the party rattle here had found himself 
 in the position of the prophets of Baal when they 
 undertook to invoke their God. The gentleman 
 had invoked the spirit of party and had found the 
 party missing. Mr. B. urged that the great state 
 of New York was able to go on and complete the 
 works which she ordained in 1835 should be com- 
 pleted and that instead of paying off every dol- 
 lar of debt, before proceeding with these works, 
 would be doing injustice to ourselves, to the state, 
 and he might add to posterity for they would 
 have the benefit of this rich legacy that we should 
 leave them, and ought to pay their share of the 
 expense. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES sent up the following addition- 
 al section : 
 
 ^ . The legislature shall never sell or dispose of the 
 salt springs belonging to this state. The lands contiguous 
 thereto and which may be necessary and convenient lor 
 the use of the salt springs, may be sold by authority of 
 law and under the direction of the commissioners of the 
 land office, for the purpose of investing the moneys arising 
 
 91 
 
 therefrom in other lands alike convenient, but by such 
 sale and purchase the aggregate quantity of these lands 
 shall not be diminished. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN replied briefly to Mr. MARVIN, 
 when 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND obtained the floor, and the 
 Convention took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 About sixty members present at the opening 
 Mr. RICHMOND said that from the present 
 aspect of this financial question, he found him- 
 self compelled to choose between the proposition 
 of the gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. LOOMIS,) 
 and that of the gentleman from Schoharie, (Mr. 
 BOUCK.) He said neither of these propositions 
 were what he desired, but judging from what 
 had been said by members this morning, on all 
 sides of this house, he was satisfied that one or 
 the other of these plans was to be adopted by 
 this body such being the case, he felt bound to 
 support the proposition of the gentleman from 
 Schoharie, from the fact that it was the least ob- 
 jectionable, although it was far from being what 
 he believed was right and just in the matter. 
 That gentleman's plan provides, after appropri- 
 ating from the revenues of the canals a sufficient 
 sum to pay the interest and ultimately the prin- 
 cipal of the canal debt; and also a sum to pay 
 all the other debts of the state within a reasona- 
 ble time, including the debts of the broken down 
 railroad companies ; also lor the Clinton county- 
 prison and other matters, and then appropriates 
 two hundred thousand dollars of said canal fund 
 each year towards defraying the ordinary ex- 
 penses of the state government. Now, he be- 
 lieved the canals were under no obligation to pay 
 these railroad and other debts, but that after pro- " 
 vision had been made out of their revenues for 
 paying the debts for their construction and the 
 interest on the same, the residue should be ap- 
 plied to the completion and enlargement. But 
 it had been determined otherwise ; and he should 
 support the proposition of the gentleman from 
 Schoharie, because it provided that after pro- 
 viding for all these debts, the surplus revenues 
 shall be applied to the enlargement of the Erie 
 canal and the completion of the unfinished 
 works. He believed under this system, (al- 
 though a hard one) the enlargement would 
 ultimately be completed, as well as the other 
 unfinished works while on the other hand, the 
 proposition of the gentleman from Herkimer pro- 
 vides that after providing for all the other debts 
 of the State, as well as the canal debts, then the 
 residue to go into the State treasury, to be ap- 
 propriated in such manner and for such purposes 
 as the legislature shall by law direct. He said, 
 should this measure prevail, the enlargement , 
 would not be done in fifty years, as these sur- 
 pluses being at the control of the legislature, the \ 
 greater portion of them would be plundered out 
 by the lobbies and sharks that always hover 
 around the Capitol whenever there is plenty of 
 funds to be appropriated, as in this case ; and he 
 would hazard the opinion, judging from what 
 had been seen in former years, that for every dol- 
 lar the canals got out of the treasury, these gen- 
 try would get at least three, as they were always 
 in the habit of taking the lion's share. He urged 
 that if it was important to tie up tjje legislature 
 
930 
 
 to the payment of the debt in a given time, it was 
 equally important to provide by constitutional 
 provision that the surpluses should go to the im- 
 provement of our canals. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said as his first and only ab- 
 sence from the Convention had occurred during 
 this debate, he should not, just at the close of the 
 discussion, say more than was necessary to ex- 
 plain the considerations which would induce him 
 to vote for the amendment offered by the gentle- 
 man from Schoharie, (Mr. BOUCK.) It involves 
 two important objects, a provision for an ample 
 sinking fund from the canal revenues to pay the 
 debt of the state within a reasonable time, and in 
 a manner that will be acceptable to the holders 
 of state stocks, and satisfactory to the people. 
 We all concur in the opinion that such a provision 
 should be made secure by the Constitution. This 
 amendment also requires that the surplus canal 
 revenues, after paying into the Treasury a sum 
 that he, (Mr. N.) believes will be sufficient with 
 the salt and auction duties to defray the current 
 expenses of the government, shall be applied to 
 the completion of the unfinished public works. 
 The prevailing sentiment in this body, is that 
 these works should be finished sooner or later, 
 but there is some diversity of opinion as 
 to the expediency of thus making a specific con- 
 stitutional provision for their completion. 
 In regard to this question he Mr. N. was glad 
 that he could be influenced by no local interests; 
 he stood here as the representative of the whole 
 state, the section of country in which he lived 
 would not be much benefi tted by the enlargement 
 of the Erie canal, except as its interests are iden- 
 tified with those of the State at large. As to fa- 
 cilities for intercourse with other sections of the 
 world and the transportation of our produce to 
 market, the country in the vicinity of the Erie ca- 
 nal is now well provided for; the enlargement 
 will be of little or no service to those sections of 
 the state. In 1842, when in the Legislature, he 
 became convinced that the enlargement of the 
 canal would reduce the cost of transportation 5C 
 per cent.; and when this reduction takes place, 
 should the state need funds, the present revenue 
 may be increased $600,000 by increasing the tolls 
 25 per cent., and the cost of transportation will 
 be still 25 per cent lower than at present, anc 
 here is at once a sum more than sufficient to de- 
 fray the expenses of the government. He was 
 then, opposed to an abandonment of a work, upon 
 which we have expended nearly thirteen millions 
 of dollars, and he now wished by the Constitution 
 to require that this great work shall be resumec 
 and progressed with as fast as the surplus canal re< 
 yenue will warrant. If it was an original question 
 whether the capacity of the canal should or no 
 be thus enlarged to seven by seventy feet such a 
 work might be considered by many of doubtfu" 
 expediency; but when the work is so far advan 
 ced, after such a heavy expenditure for its con 
 struction, with a constant growth of its business 
 affording certain evidence that its enlargemen 
 will soon be indispensable, no man should hesl 
 tate a moment ; the work will be done, no human 
 power can prevent its completion. 
 
 Let the state therefore direct its energies an 
 surplus means at once to this great object, which 
 when completed will be an enduring monumen 
 
 >f its enterprise and resources. The original 
 section as reported by the committee, directs the 
 urplus revenue to be applied to the improvement 
 )f the Erie canal, and this improvement he Mr. 
 N. understands to be chiefly, as it was explained 
 by the gentleman from Herkimer,Mr. HOFFMAN, 
 he raising the banks of the old canal and length- 
 ening its locks ; the result of this kind of improve- 
 nent would be that an army of repairers must be 
 employed for several years to make temporary 
 -epairs at great cost and this unfinished work 
 ivill then be resumed and finished at an expense 
 unnecessarily great, owing to delay and conse- 
 quent dilapidation. Gentlemen were afraid we 
 should transmit a heavy debt to our successors,. 
 ;he next generation of citizens, by this provision. 
 He Mr. N. believed instead of producing, it would 
 3revent this result ; it will prevent the means of 
 the state being frittered away upon local or mi- 
 nor and unimportant objects, it will put 
 AI\ end to heavy expenditures of money lor 
 such an improvement of the canal as will only 
 answer a temporary purpose it will concentrate 
 all the energies of the state for the early, easy, 
 convenient, and thorough completion of ihe great- 
 est work in the world the best source of revenue 
 that was ever possessed by any people or nation 
 producing tolls which have steadily increased 
 since 1826, from $841,687, up to the last year, to- 
 $2,750,000 -and with the whole western world 
 tributary to it, must continue to add more and 
 more to the wealth of the state He (Mr. N.> 
 wished this great work to pass into the custody of 
 our successors in a finished, substantial state, with 
 a capacity adequate to the vast objects oi its con- 
 struction ; and he therefore earnestly hoped that 
 the surplus canal revenues might be applied by 
 this provision strictly to this purpose. In regard 
 to the Genesee Valley and Black River canals, he 
 did not concur in the opinion just now expressed 
 by the gentleman from Heikimer, (Mr. LOOMIS) 
 that the faith of the state was not pledged for their 
 completion. After the passage ot the law author- 
 izing their construction, laying the route, con- 
 structing three quarters of the work, and thereby 
 inducing emigration to its vicinity, and the pur- 
 chase and improvement of property predicated 
 upon a public work thus progressed with, who 
 can question, under such circumstances, the obli- 
 gations of the state to complete this work, how- 
 ever gradually it may be done. The Legislature 
 has the power to do almost any thing \ but there 
 is a wide difference between might and right, and 
 no government should ever attempt to encourage or 
 attenuate this distinction let it preserve its faith 
 inviolate in all other respects as well as meeting 
 promptly its pecuniary liabilities. [Here the fit- 
 teen minutes to which Mr. N. was restricted hav- 
 ing expired he resumed his seat.] 
 
 Mr. DANA said that he very much wished to 
 move an amendment to the third section. 
 
 The CHAIR Not in order now. 
 
 Mr. STOW I shall renew my amendment, sir, 
 at the proper time. 
 
 The CHAIR, (Mr. WARD) The gentleman 
 can do so. 
 
 The hour of four having arrived, 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD called for the vote on the first 
 section of Mr. HOFFMAN'S proposition, and th 
 
931 
 
 question recurred on Mr. LOOMIS' substitute, as 
 Follows* 
 
 1. After paying the expenses of collection, superinten- 
 dence and ordinary repairs, there shall be appropriated 
 ndset apart out of the revenues of the state canals, in 
 each year, commencing on the first day of June 1846, the 
 sum of one million aad three hundred thousand dollars 
 until the first day of Jane, 1855, and from that time the 
 um of one million and seven hundred thousand dollars in 
 each year, as a sinking fund to pay the interest and redeem 
 the principal of that part of the state debt called the canal 
 debt, as it existed &t the time aforesaid, and including 
 three hundred thousand dollars, then to be borrowed, until 
 the same shall be wholly paid; and the principal and in- 
 come of the said sinking fund shall be sacredly applied to 
 that purpose, 
 
 The question first recurring on Mr. BOUCK'S 
 amendment to reduce the first named sum to $1>- 
 200,000. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK said a desire had been expressed 
 by several gentlemen that h would withdraw 
 this amendment, in order to produce more har- 
 mony and conciliation on this important question. 
 He now rose to do so, and withdrew his amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD demanded the ayes and 
 noes. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS' amendment was then adopted 
 ayes 87, noes 26, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs, Allen, Angel, Baker, Bergen, Bouck, 
 Bowdish, Brayton, Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Bull, Burr, 
 Cambreleng, D.D. Campbell, R. Campbell, jr., Chatfield, 
 Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana, 
 D auto r tli, Dubois, Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Harrison, 
 Hoffman, Hotchkjss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntingtou, Hutch- 
 inson, Hyde, Kemble, Kennedy, Kernan, Kingsley, Kiik- 
 land, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, .McNitt, Maxwell, MotTiS, 
 Munro, Murphy, Nellis, Nicoli, O*Conor, Patterson, 
 Perkins, Porter, Powers, President, Rhoades, Rich- 
 mond, Riker, Buggies, Russell, St. John, Sanford, Sears, 
 Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Smith, E. Spencer, Stanton, Ste- 
 phens, Sttson, Taft, J. J.Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, 
 Townsend.Tnthili, Vacke, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Wa- 
 terbury, White, Wood, W. B. Wright. Youngs-87. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Can- 
 dee, Chamberlain, Crooker, Dodd, Dorian, Flanders, For- 
 aytit, Gardner, Hawley. Marvin, Nicholas, Parish, Penni- 
 inan, Salisbury, Shaver, W. H. Spencer, Stow, Tallmadge, 
 Warren, Worden, A. Wright 26, 
 
 The section as amended, (see above) was then 
 adopted, ayes 87, noes 28. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON suggested an amendment as 
 necessary that is to insert the word " first" be- 
 tween '* time" and ** aforesaid," which was agreed 
 to. 
 
 , So thai part of the section reads ' as it existed 
 t the lime first aforesaid." 
 
 The question then recurred on Mr. LOOMIS' 
 proposition to strike out sections two and three of 
 Mr. HOFFMAN'S article, and the first six lines of 
 Mr. H's fourth section, and insert the following as 
 second section: 
 
 ^ 2- After complying with the provisions of the first sec- 
 tion of this article, there shall be appropriated and set apart 
 out of tke surplus revenues of the state canals, in each 
 year, commencing on the first day of June, 1846, the sum 
 of three hundred and fifty thousand dollars, until the time 
 when a sufficient sum shall have been appropriated and set 
 apart, under the said first section, to pay the interest and 
 extinguish the entire principal of the canal debt ; and af- 
 ter that period, then the sum of one million and five hun- 
 dred thousand dollars in each year, as a sinking fund, to 
 pay the iaterest and redeem the principal of that part of 
 the state debt calU-d the General Fund debt including the 
 debt lor loans of the state credit to railroad companies 
 which have failed to pay the interest thereon, and also the 
 contingent debt on state stocks loaned to incorporated 
 companies which have hitherto paid the interest thereon, 
 whenever and as far as any part thereof may become a 
 charge on tke Treasury or General Fond until the flame 
 
 shall be wholly paid; and the principal and income of the 
 said last mentioned sinking fund shall be sacredly applied 
 to the purpose aforesaid; and if the payment of any part 
 of the - aid sinking fund shall at any time be deferred, by- 
 reason ot the priority recogniwd in the first section of 
 this article, the sum so deferred, with quarterly interest 
 thereon, at the then current rate, shall be paid to the last 
 mentioned sinking fund, as soon as the sum so deferred 
 shall be received into the Treasury. 
 
 The first nine lines comprise the amendment of- 
 fered by Mr LOOMIS. 
 
 The same was adopted by the following vote : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Bergen, Bouck, 
 Bowdish,Brown,Uruce, Brundage, Bull, Burr,Cambreleng 
 D. D. Campbell, R.Campbell, jr. Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, 
 Conely, Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana, Daoforth, Du- 
 bois, Gardner, Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Harris, Harri- 
 son, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntittgton, 
 Hutchinson, Hyde, Kemble, Kennedy, Kernan. Kingsley^ 
 Loomis, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Maxwell, Morris, Munro, 
 Murphy, Nellis, Nicoli, O'Conor, Patterson, Perkins, For- 
 ter, Powers, President, Rhoades, Richmond, Riker, Rug- 
 gles, Russell, St. John, Sanford, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Shepanl, Smith, E. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetsoa, 
 Swackhamer,Taft, J. J. Taylor, W.Ta}lor, Tilden.Town- 
 send, Tuthill, Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Waterbu- 
 ry, White, Wood, W. B. Wright, Youngs-89. 
 
 NAYS Mesrs F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Bascom, Bray- 
 ton, Candee, Crooker, Dodd, Flanders, Hawley, Kirk- 
 land, Marvin. Nicholas, Parish, Penniman, Salisbury, Sha 
 ver, W. H, Spencer, Stow, Strong, TaUmadge, Warren, 
 Worden-22. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to substitute for the 
 last line the following it can be done consist- 
 ently with the just rights of the creditors holding 
 the said canal debt." 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked if this could be offered 
 at this time ? 
 
 The PRESIDENT replied in the affirmative. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said it seemed to imply that we 
 had authorized something to be done that would 
 conflict with the just rights of creditors. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD thought that could not be 
 the effect. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked if the gentleman desired 
 to leave a question open here, whether this appro- 
 priation of the canal revenues was a violation of 
 the pledges under which the money was borrowed? 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD'S object was to protect these 
 pledges. 
 
 The amendment was adopted, 51 to 38. 
 
 The section as amended was then adopted, ayes 
 93, noes 27. 
 
 The next question was upon the following 3d 
 section of Mr. LOOMIS' amendment : 
 
 3. The surplus revenues of the canals, after comply, 
 ing with the provisions of the two last preceding sections 
 shall be appropriated, at the disrietion ol the legislature, to 
 defray the ordinary expenses of government, and lorother 
 purposes; but no law shall be passed appropriating or 
 pledging for the construction or improvement of any canal 
 or railroad, any part of such revenues, beyond those otthe 
 year current, at the time of passing such Jaw. 
 
 Mr. BOUCK offered the following substitute 
 for the proposition of Mr. LOOMIS : 
 
 The sum of $172 000 shall be annually applied to pay 
 any deficit which may occur in the revenue of the general 
 fund to meet the expenses of the government; the remain- 
 der ol the canal revenue shall be appropriated to the en- 
 largement of the Erie canal, and the completion of the Oe- 
 neste Valley anJ Black River canals until the same are 
 completed. After the payment of the public debt, $672,000 
 shall be annually appropriated from the canal revenues to 
 the general fund, to meet the expenses of the government. 
 
 Before taking the question on this, Mr. PAT- 
 TERSON moved to amend the section of Mr. 
 LOOMIS, by striking out all after the word " gov- 
 ernment," in thej 4th line, and insert, "and for 
 
932 
 
 the completion of the enlargement of the Erie 
 canal, and of the Genesee Valley and Black River 
 canals." 
 
 Mr. STRONG inquired if this was debatable ? 
 
 The PRESIDENT said it was not. 
 
 After some conversation on the point of order 
 Mr. S. appealed from this decision, but it was 
 sustained by the Convention. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON enquired whether his a- 
 mendment would be in order, if Mr. BOUCK'S 
 should be lost ? 
 
 The PRESIDENT replied affirmatively. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON then waived his amend- 
 ment for the present. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to amend the original 
 section by adding the following in relation to the 
 disposition of the surplus proceeds : 
 
 " At least two thirds in each fiscal year shall be appro- 
 priatedto the improvement of the Erie canal in such man. 
 ner as shall be directed by law, until such surpluses in 
 
 the aggregate shall amount to at least dollars, and 
 
 the rf-sidue of such surplus moneys shall be appiopriated 
 to defray the ordinary expenses of government and for 
 other purposes," &c. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to fill the blank with 
 $3,500,000. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD with $2,000,000. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR with $5,000,000. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL with 2,000,000. 
 
 Mr. WHITE with $6,000,000. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN with $3,000,- 
 000. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN asked if we were to have new 
 propositions sprung upon us, changing the whole 
 structure of this article, and to be compelled 
 to vote on them without even an explanation ? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS supposed the rule cut off all a- 
 mendments except those pending at the time. 
 
 The PRESIDENT replied that the resolution 
 tinder which we were acting, expressly permitted 
 uch proposition. 
 
 The question was taken respectively on the lar- 
 gest sums. 
 
 Mr. WHITE'S amendment was rejected : ayes 
 27, noes 83. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL here said he would make a slight 
 alteration changing the word "surpluses" to 
 *' appropriations." 
 
 Mr. BASCOM remarked that that was a very 
 material alteration. He now moved to fill the 
 blank with twelve millions. Lost. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN here called for the read- 
 ing of the resolution of this morning insisting 
 that these new propositions were all out of order. 
 
 The PRESIDENT (the resolution having been 
 read again) adhered to his decision. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN then had only to say 
 that he hoped the Convention would vote down 
 every amendment that had not been discussed. 
 [Loud cries of " order."} 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR'S motion to fill the blank was 
 negatived : ayes 32, noes 73, 
 
 Mr. NICOLL'S motion was negatived : ayes 32, 
 noes 73. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN withdrew his mo- 
 tion, and Mr. WAT ERBURY renewed it. The 
 same was negatived ; ayes 44, noes 70. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN moved to lay the amend- 
 ment on the table. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR insisted that this would car- 
 ry the section along with it, if not the entire ar- 
 ticle. 
 
 The PRESIDENT decided otherwise. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL'S amendment was laid on the ta- 
 ble 5 ayes 70, noes 47. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON now renewed his amend^ 
 ment. [See above.] 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD called for a divisionof the 
 question, so as to take it upon each canal sepa- 
 rately. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said it could not be divided, 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to lay the amendment 
 on the table. Lost ayes 39, noes 72. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD again moved a division of 
 the question. 
 
 The PRESIDENT again decided against Mr, 
 CHATFIELD. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said at the urgent request 
 of the gentleman from Schoharie and others, and 
 to relieve the Chair of all embarrassment, he 
 would again waive his amendment. 
 
 Mr. BROWN : I renew -it, leaving out all that 
 relates to the Black River and Genesee Valley ca- 
 nals, and leaving out the word "ordinary," before 
 " expenses." 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND hoped that would be voted 
 down. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL moved to adjourn. Lost, 
 47 to 62. 
 
 Mr. BROWN here varied his amendment so 
 that it should read as follows : 
 
 "Shall be appropriated at the discretion of the legislature 
 to defray the expenses of the government and for the im- 
 provement of the Erie canal, &c." 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN moved to adjourn. Lost 40 
 to 65. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN moved to lay the amend- 
 ment on the table. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD called for the ayes and noes, 
 and 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN withdrew his motion. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH renewed it and 
 
 The amendment of Mr. BROWN was laid on the* 
 table ayes 68 f noes 35, 
 
 Mr. BOUCK now demanded the previous ques- 
 tion on his amendment, [see above,} and there 
 was a second, &c. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD called for the reading of it- 
 saying that it seemed to contemplate the enlarge- 
 ment of the Genesee Valley and Black River ca- 
 nals. 
 
 The amendment having been read, 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL stated some objection to its 
 phraseology, and 
 
 Mr. BOUCK replied that he thought it suffi- 
 ciently explicit. 
 
 Mr.' NICOLL asked if there was any thing in it 
 in regard to pledging the revenues beyond the cur- 
 rent year ? 
 
 Mr. WORDEN replied that that was the very 
 thing that should not be in it. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. Botrci;' 
 amendment, and it was negatived ayes 54, noes 
 60, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs Angel, Archer, Ay rault, F. F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bascoin. Bouck, Biayton, Bruce, Bull, 
 D. D. Campbell, Candee, Chamberlain, Crooker, Dana, 
 Dodd Dorlon, Forsyth. Gardner, Gebiiaid, Harris, Harri- 
 son Hawley, Hotchkiss,E.Huntington, Hyde, Kirkland, 
 Mann, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Murphy, Nicholas, 
 Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Perkins, Rhoades, Richmond, 
 Salisbury, Shaver, Smith, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, 
 Stanton, Stow, Strong, Tallmadge, Van Sctvooahoven, 
 Warren, White, Wordn, A. Wright 64. 
 
933 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Bowdish, Brown, Brun- 
 dage, Burr, CambreU-ng, R. Campbell jr., Chatiield, Clark, 
 Clyde. Conely. Cook, Cornell, Cnddeback, Dantorth, Du- 
 bo'is, Flanders, Graham, <irene, Holfnvm, Hunt, Hunttr, 
 A. Huiitiauton, lliitrhinson, Ki-nm-dy, Kin^sley, Loomis, 
 il, Morris, Monro, Nellis, Nicoll, G*Conor, Porter, 
 Powers, President, Kiker. Ruggles, St. John, Sauford, 
 Hears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Stephens, Stetson, Swack- 
 hamer, Taft. J. J Taylor. VV. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, 
 Tuthill, Vache, Ward, Waterbury, Wood, W. B. Wright, 
 Youngs 60. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL when his name was called, de- 
 clined to vote, as he could not explain. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL gave notice of a motion to recon- 
 sider. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved the previous question on 
 his section. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to adjourn. Lost, 49 
 to 64. 
 
 The previous question was then seconded, and 
 the 3d section offered by Mr. LOOMIS (see above) 
 was rejected as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Bowdish, Brown, Brun- 
 dage, Cambreleng, 11. Campbell jr.. Chatfield, Clyde, Cone- 
 ly, Cuddcback, Danforth, Dubois, Flanders, Greene, Hull- 
 man, Hunt, Hunter, A. Iluutington, Hutchinson, Kemble, 
 Kennedy, Kingsley, Loomis McNeil, Munro, Murphy, 
 Nellis, Nicoll, Powers. President, Hiker, Ruggles St.John, 
 Sanford, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Stephens, Stet- 
 son, Swackhamer, Taft, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, 
 Townsend, Tuthill, Vache, Ward, Waterbury, Wood, 
 Youngs 53. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bouck, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, 
 Burr, D. D. Campbell, Candee, Chamberlain, Cook, Crook- 
 er, Dana, Dodd, Dorlon, Forsyth, Gardner. Gebhard, Gra- 
 ham, Harris, Harrison, Hawle'y, Hotchkiss.E. Huntington, 
 Hyde, Kirkland, Mann, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Morris, 
 Nicholas, O' ;onor, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Perkins, 
 Porter, Rhoades, Richmond, Russell, Salisbury, Shaver, 
 Smith, E. Spencrjr, W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Stow, Strong, 
 Tallmadge, Var 'fchoonhoven, Warren, White, Worden, 
 A. Wright, W. B. Wright 61. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved to reconsider. 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to adjourn. Carried, 
 75 to 35. 
 Adj. to 8k o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 TUESDAY, (95th day) Sept. 22. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. WIL.KINS. 
 Mr. TILDEN asked leave to have the minutes 
 Corrected so as to insert his name as voting in the 
 affirmative on the 2ti section of Mr. LOOMIS, yes>- 
 terd.iy the clerk having accidentally omitted it. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 THE LEGISLATURE. 
 
 Mr. STETSON presented the following report 
 from cornrniiree No. 2, on the present duiies ol 
 the Legislature : 
 
 ARTICLE -. 
 
 ^ 1. A majority of each house shall constitute a quorum 
 to do business, but a smaller number nny adjourn from 
 time to time, and compel the attendance of absent members 
 in such m inner and under such penalties as each house 
 may provide. 
 
 ij 2 Each house shall determine the rules of its own pro- 
 . i be tha judge ol the elections, returns and 
 qualifications ol its own members; shall choose its own oi- 
 lic !-; and the Senate shall choose a temporary president 
 when the lieutenant-governor shall not attend as piesi- 
 dent or shall act as governor. 
 
 3. Each House shall keep a journal of its own proceed- 
 ings, ana publish the same,exci-pt such parts as may ] equ.re 
 secrecy. The doors of each Ho use flhall be kept open, ex- 
 cept when the public weliare shall r quire seciecy. Neith- 
 er house fhall. without the consent ol the other, adjourn for 
 more than two days, and each house shall sit upon its own 
 adjournment. 
 
 $ 4. Each House shall retain the power to punish its 
 members tor disorderly behaviour, and with the concur- 
 
 rence of two thirds, to expel a member, but a member 
 shall not be expelled a second time for the same offence. 
 
 fj 5. For any speech or debate in either House of the le- 
 "islature, the membtrs shall not be questioned in any oth- 
 er place. 
 
 ^ 6. Any bill may originate in either House of the legis- 
 lature; and all bills passed by one house may be amended 
 by the other. 
 
 7. The enacting clause of all bill* shall be " The Peo- 
 ple of the State of New-York, represented in Senate and 
 Assembly, do enact as follows :" and no law shall be enac- 
 ted except by b;lls. 
 
 ^ 8. All bills and joint resolutions shall be read ar least 
 three times in each House, before the final passage there- 
 of; and no bill or joint resolution shall pass unless two- 
 thirds of all the members of each body be personally pres- 
 eut during the last reading and on the final passage ; and 
 the qu.-slion upon the finnl passage shall be taken immedi- 
 ately upon the last reading. The ayes and nays of the 
 members voting on such final passage shall be entered on 
 the journal. 
 
 9. No private or local bill, which may be passed by the 
 legislature, shall embrace more than one subject, and that 
 shall be expressed in the title. 
 
 ^ 10 Eveiy bill lor local or private purposes passed bythe 
 legislature after the first sixty days ol its annual session 
 shdll be void, except when the matter of the act has arisen 
 dunng the same session. 
 
 11. No bill that shall have passed onehouse shall be sent 
 for concurrence to the other on either of the three last days 
 of the session, without the assent ot two-thuds ol each 
 house, to be expressed by joint resolution upon each bill 
 separately. 
 
 . 1-2. No bill shall be presented to the Governor for his 
 signature within the last twenty -four hours of a session of 
 the legislature. 
 
 ^ 13. Provision shsll be made by law for bringing suits 
 against the State in the courts thereof, and for regulating 
 their jurisdiction and proceedings in such suits. 
 
 5; 14. No exemption from taxation shall be allowed in fa- 
 vor of any corporation or corporations ior gain or profit, 
 which is not also extended to natural persons, and all such 
 exemptions shall be according to general rule applicable 
 alike to natural persons and 10 bodies politic for fjain or 
 profit. By order ot the Committee. 
 
 LEMUEL STETSON, Chairman. 
 
 The following report from the minority of the 
 same committee was also presented by Mr. St. 
 JOHN: 
 
 () . No law shall be passed fixing the legal rate of in- 
 terest beyond the sum of six dollars lor one hundi ed dol- 
 lars, lor one j ear, or in that proportion for a longer or 
 shorter term. 
 
 They were ordered to be printed. 
 
 LIMITATION TO DEBATE. 
 
 Mr. W.TAYLOR offered the following resolu 
 tion : 
 
 " Resolved, That hereafter debates in committee of the 
 whole, and in convention, be limited to 16 minutes to each, 
 speech ." 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG: I shall vote for the re- 
 solution, sir; although I can hardly discuss the 
 great question of banking and cutrency in 15 iiii- 
 nutes. 
 
 SEVERAL, We'll allow you more time. 
 
 Mr. IN'ICOLL opposed trua resolution, <md mov- 
 ed to lay it on the table. There were too many 
 important subjects to be discussed. It was oui- 
 rageous. 
 
 Air. MURPHY also opposed it. There ^ ere 
 many important subjects that must require mure 
 than 15 minulr-s; his own repot t for instance. We 
 have allowed the greatest laiitude before, and 
 whv les'rift if now ? 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said that he was opposed to the 
 resolution, all hough the n-.ass ot the members 
 lalked infinitely more than they ought to do. And 
 the mass of them did nothing but repeat the same 
 ideas over and over again that olheis had deliver- 
 ed, and in many insiauces the very same words. 
 
934 
 
 Yet he would rather submit to these evils, than 
 submit to others which the rule would produce. 
 It was very evident that the Convention could not 
 get through with all its business; therefore what 
 it did do, it should do well. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called for the ayes and noes on 
 the motion to lay on the table He said that he 
 was determined to see what members there were 
 who really intended to do business. 
 
 They were ordered and resulted ayes 25, noes 
 77. 
 
 The previous question was then moved by Mr. 
 RUSSELL, and seconded ayes 69, noes not 
 counted. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL called for the ayes and nays on 
 the resolution itself. 
 
 They were ordered, and resultedayes 73, 
 noes 39. So it was carried. 
 
 EVENING SESSION. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL offered a resolution to devote the 
 evening sessions to the report on rights and pri- 
 vileges, and next to education and common 
 schools. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS (Mr. NICOLL withdrawing 
 for that purpose) offered a resolution to extend 
 the afternoon session to half-past seven, instead 
 of holding evening sessions. 
 
 Mr. BACKUS' resolution was adopted. 
 ELECTIVE FRANCHISE. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE called for the consideration of his 
 resolution, ordering that after the financial reports 
 should have been disposed of, that on the ELEC- 
 TIVE FRANCHISE should be next considered by 
 the convention. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND demanded the ayes and noes 
 on the question of considering the resolution. 
 
 The house refused to consider the resolution 
 ayes 47, noes 69. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN, by consent, presented a memo- 
 rial from Robert Owen, which was partly read. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said their time was too precious 
 to waste it in this way. 
 
 The SECRETARY had begun to read it; Mr. 
 OWEN stated that he had hurried across the At- 
 lantic to give his views to the convention, as he 
 took great interest in their proceedings. (Much 
 laughter.) 
 
 On motion of Mr. LOOMIS, the reading was 
 stopped, and it was laid on the table. 
 CANALS, FINANCES, &c. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL offered the following resolution 
 of instructions to the committee on Finance ; 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on finance be instructed 
 to report forth with the following as section three of the 
 1st article reported by the committee: 
 
 (j 3. After complying with the provisions of the two last 
 preceding sections, the surplus revenues of the canals, un 
 til the first day of June, Ib56, shall be appropriated as fol 
 lows: The sum of $-JOO,000 annually to defray the ordina 
 ry expenses of government, and the remainder to the im- 
 provement or completion of the canals; and alter the time 
 mentioned in this section, to such purposes as the Legis- 
 lature may direct. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved the previous question, 
 but withdrew it to allow Mr. WHITE to offer the 
 following amendment : 
 
 3. After paying the said expenses of the canals, and 
 the sums appropriated by the first and second sections ol 
 this article, there shall be paid out of the surplus revenues 
 of the canals, to the treasury of the state, on or before the 
 thirtieth day of September in each year, for the use and 
 benefit of the general fund, such sums, not exceeding $200 
 
 000, as may be required to defray the necessary expense* 
 ef the state; and the remainder of the revenues of the said 
 canals shall, in each fiscal year, be applied to the com- 
 pletion of the Erie canal enlargement, the Oenesee Valley 
 and Black River canals, until the said canals shall be com- 
 pleted. 
 
 Mr. WHITE renewed the previous question. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN protested against these new a- 
 mendments being thrust in, and then the previ- 
 ous question being forced upon them. He 
 raised a question of order. The gentleman from 
 New York (Mr. WHITE) could not move an a- 
 mendment and the previous question at the same 
 time before the question on the amendment had 
 been stated to the House. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that the gentleman 
 from Kings had withdrawn his motion to allow 
 the gentleman from New York (Mr. WHITE) to 
 make his, and therefore the motion was in order. 
 
 The previous question was seconded ayes 46, 
 noes 44. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he would now de- 
 mand the ayes and noes on the main question. 
 
 They were ordered and resulted, ayes 51, nays 
 64. So the House refused to order the main 
 question to be put. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN rose to speak but was interrupt- 
 ed many times on various points of order by 
 Messrs. MURPHY, BROWN, CHAMBERLAIN, &c., 
 but the Chair overruled them, and Mr. TILDEN 
 proceeded to oppose Mr. WHITE'S amendment. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN was not surprised at the grounds 
 of opposition assumed by the gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. TILDEN.) 
 
 He desired to call attention to one fact. In 
 1842 a tax was levied on the people of this State 
 for the canals, on the express ground that they 
 were insolvent and such tax necessary. What do 
 we see now in 1846 ? We have already adopted 
 a provision in the Constitution, levying an annual 
 tax on the canals of $350,000, to pay the debts of 
 insolvent railroads and other debts incurred for 
 the sypport of the State government. By the a- 
 mendment now offered it is proposed to charge a 
 farther tax on the canal revenues of $ 200,000 to 
 support the State government, making in all 
 $550,000, being equal to a gross charge of $11,- 
 000,000, on the canals of the State. Look at the 
 contrast. In 1842, you say the canals are insol- 
 vent and lay a tax for their support. In 1846 you 
 charge these very canals equal to the sum of 
 $11,000,000 for the support of government. Mr. 
 W. would advocate no such proposition. He had 
 agreed that the entire debt of the State should be 
 charged upon the canals. He had agreed to a pro- 
 vision which drew from the canal tolls $550,- 
 000 annually for the use of the government. 
 This was more than the amount of the direct tax 
 now levied upon the State. But beyond this he 
 would not consent to go. He could not vote 
 for any proposition that did not secure the appro- 
 priation of the entire surplus to the completion 
 of the unfinished works after supplying the sink- 
 ing funds. Having, made provision for the pay- 
 ment of the entire debt of the State out of the rev- 
 enues of the canals, and pledged these revenues 
 for that purpose, (and Mr. W. said he had uni- 
 formly advocated such a provision) he would not 
 consent that the canals should be charged further 
 for the support of the government. After paying 
 all the State debt out of the tolls of the canals, 
 
935 
 
 the best interests of the State required the appli- 
 cation of the surplus to their completion. He 
 had been willing so to arrange the sinking funds 
 as to leave sufficient surplusses to make an ap- 
 propriation for the support of the government out 
 of the tolls ; but that ground of compromise had 
 been rejected, and the whole surplus tolls if ap- 
 plied to the completion of the canals under the 
 present arrangement, would not finish them as 
 soon as the public interest demanded. He desir- 
 ed now to see the surplus revenue applied where 
 they should be, to the completion of the canals. 
 He was unwilling that these revenues should be 
 left at the disposal of the legislature to invite cor- 
 rupt legislation and to be appropriated to local, 
 
 sectional or private purposes. 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said 
 
 he did not with- 
 
 draw the motion to lay on the table with the ex- 
 pectation that the gentleman from Ontario, (WoR 
 DEN) would take advantage of the opportunity to 
 misrepresent the gentleman from New York 
 (TILDEN) whose course had been perfectly con- 
 sistent on this question : and to reiterate charges 
 against that patriotic city, as false as they were 
 unjust and ungenerous. The city of New York 
 had stood for years, the proudest monument to 
 the enterprise and progress of a free people. 
 Although the devastating element had consumec 
 millions upon millions, and unjust and unequal 
 taxation absorbed hundreds of thousands of the 
 property of our citizens, yet all this had scarcely 
 checked its growing prosperity, while it had 
 strengthened public confidence in the integrity 
 and persevering industry of her people. But 
 there were other objections to the influence ex- 
 ercised by tha<. oity, than what appeared here. 
 She was not only the centre of commerce in the 
 New world, but was also first in promulgating 
 correct and liberal principles of political econo- 
 my. From them, principles as pure as those of 
 the revolution had originated, and though oppos- 
 ed by the same class of men that resisted that 
 movement in favor of human liberty, and for 
 similar reasons, they had continued to spread un- 
 til they had become the policy of this state, and 
 country. He was proud of having been one of 
 the representatives of the commercial Emporium 
 in 1842 ; and he could now point with pleasure 
 to the agency he had in the passage of the act of 
 '42, and in redeeming the credit and sustaining 
 the honor ot the state. It was there that the di- 
 viding line was drawn between the repudiators 
 and debt payers, the honest and the dishonest. 
 It was there that the standard of state integrity 
 was hoisted by the able members of the legisla- 
 ture from Herkimer (HOFFMAN and LOOMIS,) and 
 so nobly sustained by those from New York. It 
 was there that the much abused citizens of New 
 York, and her right arm, Kings county, paic 
 without a murmur, the amount $27 1,000, annual- 
 ly, nearly half of the whole sum raised by the 
 state. It was there too while the gentleman 
 (WORDEN,) and his financial friends were trotting 
 about Wall street, begging in vain for a little cash 
 with their credit, if they had any, fifteen o 
 twenty per cent below par that the friends o 
 justice came to the rescue, and saved the stati 
 from bankruptcy. And it was but a few month 
 after this, that the stocks of the state advancet 
 
 to from 12 to 15 per cent, above par, and were 
 sought by the capitalists of every country. 
 
 The policy of '42 had been denounced in the 
 strongest terms by members of this body, yet he 
 still adhered to it, and looked upon it as one of the 
 most glorious periods in the history of this State. 
 While state after state was rushing down the 
 slough ot repudiation, and the U. S. government 
 was almost without credit, New-York emerged 
 out from the surrounding ruins and pledged her- 
 self to the world that her honor should not be 
 tarnished by the blighting influence of repudia- 
 tion. That plighted faith had been religiously 
 kept and woe to the man who this day violates 
 While his constituents had borne these bur- 
 dens willingly, it was only with the view of pre- 
 serving the honor of the State, and not for the 
 purpose of speculation and renewed extravagance. 
 They had no idea that this tax would be perpetu- 
 al, and they would sustain no proposition design- 
 ed to continue it unnecessarily. He was ready 
 to support as liberal policy towards the Erie ca- 
 nal as the state of the finances would permit, and 
 had so voted yesterday with the delegates from 
 New-York ; but where was the gentleman from 
 Ontario (Mr. WORDEN) then ? This was a great 
 State work, and if to vote against the improve- 
 ment was to favor the measure, then the gentle- 
 man might claim to be its friend. But it was 
 vident that gentlemen had other objects in view ; 
 hey wished to drag in the lateral canals, some of 
 which would not pay the interest of the cost of 
 heir construction. To this he was unqualifiedly 
 ipposed. Despots had been known to tax their 
 ubjects without their consent, but to put one 
 land of the government in the pockets of the 
 >eople to gather the tax, and with the other to 
 nflict the injury by a depreciation of their pro- 
 >erty, was a compound of despotism and gross 
 njustice. The system of constructing, so called, 
 nternal improvements, by which the price of 
 >roperty was enhanced in one locality of the 
 State while it deteriorated the value of that 
 of other sections, was oppressive enough, but 
 when you add to this direct tax on the neighbor - 
 lood injured, you sanction a principle which 
 would not only rob a man, but that would knock 
 tiim down after he was fleeced of his money, for 
 not having more to give. It was to measures of 
 this kind that he objected, and although gentle- 
 men should demand the adoption of this policy 
 one day, as a right, and ask it the next day " with 
 tears in their eyes," yet he would not consent to 
 any proposition not strictly just, whatever might 
 be the plea urged in its behalf. 
 
 Mr. \bASCUiVl called for the ayes and noes; 
 they were ordered, and resulted ayes 38, nays 72. 
 Lost. 
 
 Mr. MAN1N moved to amend the amendment of 
 Mr. WHITE, by striking out all after the word 
 " repairs" and insert : 
 
 " Of the surplus revenues of the canals, after complying 
 with the provisions ot the two last preceding sections, 
 $^00.000 shall be annually appropriated to the general lund 
 to meet the ordinary expenses of government; the remain- 
 der ol the canal revenues shall be appropiiated to the im- 
 provement and enlargement of the Erie canal, and tue 
 completion of the Gencsee Valley and Black River canals, 
 until the amount so expended shall respectively reach the 
 sum of $8,000,000 for the Erie canal, $1,200,000 for the 
 Genesee Valley canal, $500,000 for the Black River canal. 
 After the payment ol the public debt a suthcieut sum shall 
 
936 
 
 be annually appropriated from the canal revenues to pay 
 the ordinary expenses of government, not exceeding 
 $700,000." 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said he should certainly 
 oppose every attempt or proposition that perpetu- 
 ated the direct tax ; that was the great question. 
 It must be evident to every gentleman here, that 
 whatever proposition was to be adopted, should 
 be adopted with some degree of unanimity. His 
 plan was, first to provide for the ordinary expens- 
 es of government, and after that he would vote 
 to appropriate every dollar of surplus to the pay- 
 ment or extinction of this debt. 
 
 Mr. STOW inquired if the gentleman from 
 Suffolk meant to say that for a large portion of 
 the State debt, the State was no more bound to 
 pay than an individual ? 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said he only referred to 
 the General Fund debt. 
 
 Mr. STOW continued : The gentleman said 
 the State was interested in Railroads ; was the 
 Erie Canal interested in these roads, and should 
 we give up a portion of its revenues for the pur- 
 pose of carrying on these roads, which are to be- 
 come its rivals ? He admitted that it was wrong 
 to state accounts in this matter as though we 
 wer.j in a counting-house; but gentlemen on the 
 other side had commenced this practice. We 
 should regard this as a great State interest, in 
 which the every location was interested. He 
 could riot regard it as reasonable that the canals 
 should be made to pay the expenses of Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG read from the message of 
 Gov. Clinton, in which he said that the revenues 
 from the canals would one day become prolific 
 sources of revenue for the support of government. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that that was given at a period 
 when there had not been millions of worthless 
 debt heaped upon us. Gov. Clinton would not 
 use the same language at the piesent time. The 
 western part of the State, the eighth district, had 
 funded two dollars for every one which it had re- 
 ceived from the canals. He could not consent to 
 the doctrine, therefore, that the canal should be 
 made the means of taxation for the support of go- 
 vernment. The accounts had been brought in 
 here to show that this policy was not one which 
 gave an equal share of ihe burthens to all the peo- 
 ple of the S'ate. If the position was^here taken 
 that the State had no right to tax the right of 
 way, he should resist every attempt to draw from 
 the revenues of tl'.e Erie canal for the purpose of 
 defraying the expenses of the government. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that after what had taken 
 place, he could feel but very little interest 'in this 
 3d section ; and he rose now to vindicate the com- 
 mntee. Ot the promises of the acting govern- 
 ment, and the great men who participated in it in 
 the past, he took as much notice as was due to 
 them ; but us to their opinions on matters of po- 
 litical economy, they must be weighed by the 
 truth, and if in that respect they did not satisfy 
 his own uridetstandmg, he was- not able to assent 
 to them. He hdd listened with painful attention 
 to the speeches of gentlemen who had claimed 
 that, the canals, as the property of the stale, should 
 defray the entire expenses of government, because 
 hi: foresiiwthat the day and the hour would corne, 
 when the question between direct taxation and 
 
 these localities, would be the conflict,not only with 
 us, but after us. In the report of the standing 
 committee, and throughout the whole of his argu- 
 ment on that report, he had taken care to assert 
 and maintain, as his own deep conviction, that the 
 Sovereign could not, of right, except by oppres- 
 sion, undertake to make his expenses out of the 
 right of way. He asserted and vindicated that 
 principle, and he cared not for the consequences, 
 here or elsewhere now or hereafter. He denied 
 that the Sovereign could, of right, derive his reve- 
 nue from the right of way, beyond redeeming him 
 fully and fairly lor advances made. Beyond that, 
 he would be not a Sovereign, but an oppressor. 
 He would not withdraw this language, whatever 
 might happen to him, here or elsewhere. The 
 standing committee had, in their first section, 
 brought in a proposition, which, he urged, fairly 
 settled the question. He alluded to the conflict 
 of opinion which had been witnessed on the oth- 
 er propositions that had been submitted, and urged 
 that unless there was more unanimity on this sub- 
 ject, it would be rejected when sent to the people. 
 You must (said Mr. H.) send them no proposition 
 on which you are not able to 3gree. If you send 
 them a proposition growing out of your dissen- 
 tions and divisions, you invite the same state of 
 feeling among the electors. You were about in 
 this position last night. No man who looked 
 on here yesterday could doubt that you would not 
 be able to agree to any proposition that can or 
 will be submitted to. If you appropriate all the 
 revenues ot these canals, le'av ing none for the sup- 
 port of government, you will have counties again 
 and again against you. And if you do not, the 
 gentleman from Erie tells you how it will be in 
 his neighborhood. You are brought, then, to this 
 position that if you mean to get along at all, you 
 must stop where you are, if you cannot agree, 
 if we cannot do better than as is proposed in the 
 amendments already offered, let us leave the ques- 
 tion to the wisdom and the disinterested judgment 
 of the future. If he could persuade the Conven- 
 tion to adopt the proposition of the committee, 
 then the canals could say to the Sovereign, when 
 he sought to fasten on their revenues we have 
 repaid you your advances, and you have no right 
 to tax us any more. They would then be guarded 
 against any unjust exaction upon them for the 
 future. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that the county which he 
 represented had as much interest in these canals 
 as any other in the state, and had been as much 
 injured as any other by it. But he believed they 
 were ready to do justice to the canals. It was 
 not claimed that the State had advanced to them 
 more than $13,000,000, and this Mr. HOFFMAN 
 proposed in his proposition to remunerate. He 
 agreed with that gentleman as to the policy of 
 taxing the right of way, but there was another 
 consideration. The faith of the state has been 
 given to the completion of these public works. 
 On the one hand it has been claimed that they 
 could be completed from the revenues of the ca- 
 nal without a resort to taxation. This is what 
 the tax payers suppose, but they also pledged 
 themselves that after paying the debt, the canals 
 should by their revenues complete them. 
 We had gone on, and partially completed, and i 
 would be a disgrace to the state to leave them so 
 
937 
 
 if the canal revenues would afford the means. 
 He denied that the people would reject the Con- 
 stitution, if they were obliged to be taxed, provi- 
 ded provision was made ifor the payment of the 
 canal debt to the general fund. In that he inclu- 
 ded the salt tax. The products of the far west may 
 be taxed beneficially to the interests of this state 
 without doing injustice to the west, but to tax the 
 products of this state would be an act of injustice. 
 He insisted that after paying the sum ot $200,000 
 annually to the general fund, that the residue of 
 the revenues should be appropriated to internal 
 improvement. He had been among the first to 
 denounce the debtor policy he had done so in 
 every town in his county, but his constituents 
 never understood that beyond making restitution 
 for the advances from the general fund from the 
 canals they were to be charged. These were the 
 positions he was not disposed to swerve from 
 they were the same as taken in the veto of last 
 spring and he never would vote for any other 
 proposition. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN was favorably im- 
 pressed with the doctrines set forth by Mr. PER- 
 KINS, and the great difficultyi with him was to 
 perceive wherein any of those propositions re- 
 lieved the people from direct taxation. If any 
 one would offer a proposition which should pro- 
 vide for this, he would vote for it. He would go 
 for a proposition to pay the - expenses of govern- 
 ment from the revenues of the canal, before any 
 of them were 'appropriated to any other purpose, 
 if he could be shown that the tax levied by the 
 law of 1842 was to be removed. He did not agree 
 with the gentleman from Erie, (Mr. STOW) in his 
 suggestion as Jo the peculiar claims of the canals. 
 He would provide that the unfinished works 
 should be completed before any other was attempt 
 ed, and this he considered to be the effect of the 
 -proposition of the gentleman from New York. 
 He urged that the convention should harmonize 
 on that proposition. 
 
 Mr. DANA said that when the question was 
 agitated whether the report of the judiciary or 
 finance committees should take precedence, we 
 were told that the latter question was an unde- 
 bateable one. He believed tkat experience hac 
 proven the fallacy of this. He believed the 
 amendment of Mr. WHITE had been about suffi- 
 ciently discussed, and he would therefore move 
 the previous question. Mr. D. however with- 
 drew the call. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR, wished to submit to th 
 convention a proposition, if the pending one 
 should be rejected, which he hoped would mee 
 with general assent. The committee had agreec 
 upon the proposition for the extinguishment o 
 the debt with most unanticipated harmony, and 
 he hoped that the other questions should b< 
 agreed upon with at least a tolerable approxima 
 tion to the same unanimity of sentiment. Mr 
 T. read the proposition, as follows : 
 
 After complying with the provisions of the first two pre 
 ceding seciions, an equal oue-third par; of the surplus re 
 venues oi the canals shall be annually appropriated forth 
 benefit of the general fund, and the residue thereof sin h b 
 appreciated 10 the improvement and enlargement, ol ill 
 Li 10 caual, until tiie sum thus appropriated siiall amoun 
 to $2,5UO,OOu, after that, the surplus revenues ot the canal 
 shall be appropriated annually, at thediscretion otthe leg 
 islature, to defray the expenses of tne government and th 
 completion oi such public works of internal improvemen 
 
 92 
 
 s have been commenced by legislative authority, until 
 ley are completed, and when such works shall, by an 
 ct of the legislature, be declared completed, the sum of 
 >67-2,OflO, or so much thereof as shall be necessary, shall 
 e annually appropriated to defray the expenses of the 
 overnment. 
 
 Mr. WORD EN : Leave off the last clause. 
 
 Mr. TAYLOR said the gentleman from Qntario 
 ad the other day offered the same thing. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN explained that it was under dif- 
 erent circumstances. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR, after urging that this pro- 
 osition was one on which he hoped all might 
 armonize, moved the previous question. 
 
 There was a second, and the main question or- 
 dered. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. MANN, and there were ayes 14, 
 ays 97. 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR then proposed his amend- 
 ment to that of Mr. WHITE. 
 
 Mr. WARD regretted to see so much feeling on 
 ;his subject, and really wished that the matter 
 might be compromised. He saw no necessity for 
 ny amendment in this particular ; he would pre- 
 'er to see the whole matter left to the legislature. 
 We had with great unanimity provided for the 
 Dayment of the debt, and in his opinion, all that 
 ernained to be done was to restrain the legisla- 
 ture in its power to create further debts without 
 a submission to the people. These public works, 
 great and splendid as they were, were commenced 
 and completed by the legislature, and he believed 
 they could be safely trusted hereafter. The sur- 
 plus revenue this year was, deducting repairs, 
 some $2,000,000, and deducting the sums already 
 appropriated here for the payment of the debt, 
 there remained $500,000 to be disposed of. 
 Such disposal he was willing to leave to the le- 
 
 islature he had the fullest confidence in their 
 
 iscretion. But he was entirely unwilling to 
 specifically appropriate this money in the Con- 
 stitution, and to require the whole of it to go to 
 the public works, without reference to the ex- 
 penses of government. In that point of view, 
 the proposition of Mr. T., he thought, was pre 
 ferable to many others that had been proposed. 
 On the whole, his view was, that it would be 
 better to leave the whole matter to the legisla- 
 ture. He would never go for any proposition 
 which should fasten direct taxation upon the peo- 
 ple forever, unless removed by constitutional 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN agreed with the gentleman that 
 it was altogether better to let this matter rest with 
 legislatures than to do certain things, one of which 
 was to adopt Mr TAYLOR'S proposition. But he 
 did not agree that that was the only alternative. 
 He denied that this proposition was a comprom- 
 ise, and insisted that it was unjust to the canals. 
 He objected to the requirement that after the $2,- 
 500,000 should have been appropriated to the 
 Erie canal, that then the money should be appro- 
 priated in the discretion of the legislature to the 
 canals, after paying the expenses of government, 
 until they should pass an act declaring the works 
 to be completed. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR insisted that these funds 
 were not appropriated in his proposition, special- 
 ly to the expenses of government. 
 
938 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that it was left to the discre- 
 tion of the legislature. What he desired was, to 
 settle the matter here now. That was the great 
 difference. He had hoped for a compromise, 
 he confessed he now began to despair. 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that these" canals should 
 not be local works at one time, ahd state at anoth- 
 er. By the time the debts were paid off it would 
 be fifty j years from the commencement of the canal 
 policy. He agreed that the sovereign should not 
 tax the right of way, but remuneration was due 
 it for this long period of time devoted, as well as 
 the advances of money paid to the construction 
 of these works. There was therefore a broader 
 demand entitled to be made by the counties not 
 interested in these works, than for the mere re- 
 muneration of money advanced. This was the 
 only way in which this matter could be realized. 
 It was by averting from them hereafter, that eter- 
 nal scourge of nations taxation. Mr. S. further 
 urged this view of the subject. Upon the basis 
 that the Convention had proceeeded, the annuity 
 from the canals should be $322,000 forever ; that 
 would only be, even then, a remuneration for the 
 money advances made, to say nothing of the time. 
 The sum of $200,000 was insufficient for this 
 purpose, that did not leave even enough for the 
 support of government. He expressed himself 
 in favor of the suggestion of Mr. WARD, and 
 characterized this matter of attempting to secure 
 appropriations for canals, as derogatory to the 
 Convention. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that after the provision made 
 for the payment of the debt, he had no fears that 
 the Constitution would be injected by anything 
 omitted. He feared, however, it would be hazard- 
 ed by what might be inserted. We had witness- 
 ed here for the last two days, a scramble of locali- 
 ties for the revenues of thesu works, in advance 
 of future legislation Thjs betrayed a distrust of 
 the future. These canals did not belong to loca- 
 lities they were the property of the whole people, 
 and if occasion should require it, the legislature, 
 the representatives of the whole people would 
 make ample provision tor them. He had no fears 
 of the future. As to the idea that there would be 
 a scramble among the people around the Legisla- 
 ture for this money, and the necessity of guard- 
 ing against it, we should, on the same principle, 
 guard against the annual scramble for offices, 
 which took place among the people at the annual 
 election. There was nothing in the idea; he 
 thought it would be perfectly right to leave it to 
 the legislature with the restraints that it was pro- 
 posed to throw around it. All we had to do here 
 was to take care of the debt, and to leave the fu- 
 ture to take care of itself. After providing for 
 that debt, we had nothing to do with further ap- 
 propriations. iVlr. L. continued in examination of 
 several propositions, contending that the effect of 
 them would be, to fix a direct lax upon the peo. 
 pie perpetually in the Constitution. This would 
 be certain to ensure the rejection of the Constitu- 
 tion in his opinion. 
 
 Mr. STOW denied that the Convention had 
 adopted with great unanimity a provision for the 
 payment of the debt. It was well understood that 
 a provision was to be made for the appropriation 
 of the surplus revenues for the future, and if this 
 was not done, gentlemen would find no such una- 
 
 nimity on the final vote. He admitted that he en- 
 tertained a distrust for the Legislature in this 
 matter he would not turn this great fund over to- 
 the tender mercies of the Legislature. The gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer must entertain the same 
 distrust, or why should he seek to provide for the 
 payment of the debt ? why not leave it to Legis- 
 lation, to the future ? Why make a Constitution 
 at all. if it was not to guard against the future. 
 Mr. S. further urged his view of this subject, and 
 insisted that after the canal interest had yielded as 
 much as it had, that justice demanded that the 
 other interests should meet them halfway, and 
 yield this point in return. He objected to it as 
 unwise and impolitic to leave this matter to the 
 future scramble of localities, or the conflicts of 
 party. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR was not willing to believe 
 that there was a spirit of opposition here, but it 
 seemed to him that there was to any proposition 
 emanating from a certain quarter. The gentle- 
 man from Chautauque (Mr. MARVIN) and those 
 who acted with him he had understood to be in 
 favor of Mr. AYRAULT'S proposition which left 
 this matter to the legislature, and yet when he 
 (Mr. T.) introduced a proposition identical al- 
 most in language with it, they opposed to-day 
 what they so earnestly advocated yesterday. Mr. 
 T. further urged his proposition as a measure of 
 compromise, and as affording a common ground 
 on which all interests might be harmonized 
 
 Mr. MARVIN rose to correct a misapprehen- 
 sion in which the gentleman from Onondaga (Mr, 
 TAYLOR) appeared to have fallen. He was in 
 favor of closing up this matter if it could by any 
 compromise. The difference between him and 
 gentlemen was this, he wished to get all the mo- 
 ney he could for the next five years for the ca- 
 nals, and to know exactly how much money was 
 to go into the treasury. Mr. M. urged that the 
 proper course was to complete the works at the 
 earliest moment. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that a stranger who had lis- 
 tened to the discussion of to-day, would not sus- 
 pect that the proposition to leave the application 
 of the surplus revenues in the discretion of the 
 legislature, had originated with the very gentle- 
 men from whom all this opposition now came. 
 He showed that the plan of Mr. AYRAULT and 
 of Mr. BOTJCK distinctly proposed to allow the 
 surplus to be used for the current expenses of go- 
 vernment ; and he had the very best authority for 
 asserting that JVlr. STOW'S amendment contem- 
 plated leaving it at the disposal of the legislature. 
 All the different propositions which gentlemen 
 had favored, contained the feature at wh'ich they 
 are now so much alarmed and exasperated. In 
 order to reduce the amount applied to the pay- 
 ment of the debt, the inducement had been held 
 out to the members from constituencies who were 
 not interested in the expenditures for the canals, 
 that the government should be carried on without 
 taxation, and that the amount to be withheld from 
 the payment of the debt should be put into the 
 treasury. A stranger who had heard the violent 
 denunciations with which for four days the stand- 
 ing committee were visited for their proposition 
 for a final adjustment between the canals and the 
 treasury, would not suppose that they were utter- 
 ad by gentlemen who yesterday voted for the 
 
939 
 
 <lim>nt of Mr. BOUCK, containing precisely 1 
 tine tiling. The committee proposed to pay 
 an annul I v "i, from the canals to the 
 
 treasury ;"and, assailed as that provision had been, 
 the same gen.lemen not only vote for it in the 
 amendment of Mr, BOUCK but some of them sug- 
 gest a still larger amount ! 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said the point was here. The 
 gentleman from Schoharie had come upon the 
 exact ground of the committee, and yet the com- 
 mittee were opposing him. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN replied that other things were 
 mingled with the proposition for settlement which 
 were very objectionable. He continued further 
 to review the course of the discussion. He was 
 ready to return to the proposiiion of the commit- 
 tee ; but if no wise and proper prevision for the 
 public works could be made without arraying lo- 
 calitie^feainst the constitution, he would be con- 
 tent to Treavc the question to the legislature. 
 He argued that the plan of the committee to 
 make an equitable adjustment between the canals 
 and the treasury, constituting of the surplus in 
 some sort a trust fund to be administered, by 
 the legislature for the improvement of the works, 
 the reduction of tolls, and the accommodation of 
 business, was a wise and liberal policy both with 
 reference to the interests of the tax-payers and of 
 the canals ; he commented on the unforunate di- 
 rection given ; o the discussion by those who 
 claimed to be the special friends of the canals ; 
 and expressed regret that if the interests of the 
 great work which is the honor and pride of the 
 state was to be sacrificed, these gentleman should 
 officiate at the ceremonial. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved the previous question on 
 his amendment, and the pending amendment to it. 
 
 There was a second and the main question or- 
 dered. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. TAY- 
 LOR'S amendment, and there were ayes 29, nays 
 SQ, as follows: 
 
 AYES -Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Brown, Brundage, Cam. 
 breleng, Conely, Cuddeback, Dubois, Greene, A Hunting- 
 ton, Kemblcj Kennedy, Kingsley, Loomis, Munro, Mur- 
 phy, iNicoll, Hiker, Russell, Shaw, Sheldon, Stephens, 
 Taft, J. J. Ta) lor, W. Taylor, Townsend, Wood, Yawger 
 29. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bascom, BOUCK, Bray ton, Bruce, Bull, 
 Burr, D. D. Campbell, R. Campbell, Jr., Candee, Chamber- 
 lain, Clyde, Clark, Cook. Cornell, Crooker, Dana, Dan- 
 torth, Dodd, Dorlon, Flanders, Gardner, Gebhard, Graham, 
 Harris, Harrison, Hart, Hawley,Hon"man,Hotchkiss,Hunt, 
 E Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Kernan Kirkland, Mann, 
 McNeil, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Morris, Nellis, JSicho- 
 las, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Penuiman, Porter, Powers, 
 President.Rhoades.Richmond.Kuggles.St John, Salisbury, 
 Sanford, Sears, Shepard, Simmon^, Smith, E. Spencer, W. 
 H. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Taggart, Tall- 
 madge, Tilden, Tu thill, Yacht;, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, 
 Warren, Waterbury, White,Witbeck,Worden, A.Wright, 
 Youngs- 86 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. WHITE, and there were ayes 62, 
 noes 5-), as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. 
 Backus, 11. liackus, Baker, Bascom, Bouck, Brayton, 
 Bruce, Bull, D.U. Campbell, Candee, Chamber lain, Cone- 
 ly, Crooker, Dana, Dodd, Dorlon, Gardner, Gebhard, Har- 
 ris, liairison, llawley, llotchkiss, E Hnntington, Hyde, 
 Kemble, Kingsley, Kirkland, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, 
 Morris, Murphy, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, 
 enniman, Perkins, Porter, Rhoadcs, Richmond, Russell, 
 
 Salisbury, Shaw, Smith, E Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stan- 
 ton, Strong, Ta!t, Taggart, Tallmadge, Townsend, Van 
 Schoonhoven, Warren, White, A. Wright, Yawger 62. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Bergen, Brown, Brundage, Burr, Cam- 
 breleng, R. Campbell jr., Clark, Clyde, Cook, Cornell, 
 Cudileback, Danlorth, Dubois, Flanders, Graham, Greene, 
 Hart, Hoffman, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Jones, 
 Kennedy, Kernan, Loomis, Mann, NcNeil, Munro, Nellis, 
 Nicoll, Poweis, President, Riker, Ruggles, St. John, San- 
 ford, Sears, Sheldon, Shepard, 8immons,Stepbens, Stetson, 
 Stow, Swackhamer, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Tut- 
 hill, Vache, Ward, Waterbury, Witbeck, Wood, Worden, 
 Youngs 55. 
 
 So the amendment was carried. 
 The question was then taken on the section as 
 amended and it was adopted, ayes 64, nays 52. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. 
 Backus, H Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bouck, Brayton, 
 Bruce, Bull, D. D. Campbell, Candee, Chamberlain, Cone- 
 ly, Crooker, Dana, Daniorth, Dodo, Dorlon, Gardner, 
 Gebhard, Harris, Harrison, Hawley, Hotchkiss, E. Hunt- 
 ington, Hyde, Kemble, Kingsley, Kirkland, Mann, McNitt. 
 Marvin, Maxwell, Morris, Murphy, Nicholas, O'Conor, 
 Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, Rhoades, 
 Richmond, Russell, Salisbury, Shaw, Smith, *.. Spencer, 
 W. H. Spencer, Stanton, Strong, Taft.Tajjgart, Tallmadge, 
 Townsend, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, White, A. Wright, 
 Yawger 64. 
 
 NOES Messrs, Bergen, Bowdish, Brown, Brundage, 
 Burr, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr. Clark. Clyde, Cook, 
 Cornell, Cuddeback, Dubois, Flanders, Grahsm Greene, 
 Hart, Hoffman, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchin- 
 son, Jones, Kennedy, Kernan, Loomis, McNeil, Mun- 
 ro, Nellis, Nichol, Powers, President, Riker, Ruggles, 
 St. John, Sanford, Sears, Sheldon, Shepard, Simmons, Ste- 
 phens, Stetson, Swackhamwr, J. J. Taylor, W. Tcylor, 
 Tilden, Tuthill, Vache, Waterbury, Witbeck, Wood, 
 Youngs 62. 
 
 So the resolution, as amended, was adopted. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved an adjournment, but 
 withdrew it at the request of 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN who reported the section in 
 obedience to the instructions just given by the 
 Convention. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The PRESIDENT said that he was clearly 
 wrong in the decision he made yesterday, to the 
 effect that a motion to lay an amendment on the 
 table did not carry with it the original section. 
 He had since consulted parliamentary law. 
 FINANCES AND CANALS. 
 
 The third section of the financial article as re- 
 ported by Mr. HOFFMAN this morning under in- 
 structions was then taken up, as follows: 
 
 {58 After paying the saul expenses or. superintendence 
 and repairs of the canals, and the sums appropriated by the 
 first and second sections of this article, there snail be paid 
 out of the surplus revenues of the canals, to the treasury 
 of the state, on or before the thirtieth dav ot September, in 
 each year, for the use and benefit oi tne general fund, such 
 sum, not exceeding $200,000, as may be required to defray 
 the necessary expenses ot the stote; and the remainder oC 
 the revenues of the said canals shall, in each fiscal year, 
 be applied, in such manner as the legislature shall direct, 
 to the completion ot the Erin canal enlargement, and the 
 Genrsee Valley and Black River canals, until the said ca- 
 nals shall be completed. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said he reported this because 
 he had been ordered to do so, and to save him- 
 self from being treated for contempt of the house, 
 not because he assented to do it; if other mem- 
 bers of the committee choose to take a different 
 course now was their time to do so. (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to amend the section, 
 by including the Oneida river improvement, Mr. 
 T., by consent, explained that $73,000 had been 
 
940 
 
 for the improvement of the outlet of 
 the Oneida lake, and that but $69,000 had been 
 expended. It would propably require about $15,- 
 000 to complete it. Without such an amendment 
 no appropriation could be made for that improve- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY asked the gentleman from On- 
 ondaga whether, if the section was amended, as 
 proposed, he would vote for it ? 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR : Frankly, I will say, I 
 shall not. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved the previous question. 
 
 There was a second, &c. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR offered to accept Mr. LOO- 
 MIS' proposition as an addition to his own. (But 
 it was too late to amend.) 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER'S motion was lost; Mr. 
 W. TAYLOR'S also ayes 43, noes 62, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Bouck. Brown, Bruce, 
 Cambi eleng, Candee, Chamberlain, Chatfield, Clark, Cook, 
 Crocker, Cuddeback, D.ma, Danforh, Dubois, Gebhard, 
 Graham, Greene, Hart, Kingsley, Kirkland, Loomis. Mc- 
 Neil, Morris, Munro, Ne.Uis, Perkins, Rhoades, Ruggles, 
 St. John, Sears, Smith, Swackhamer, J. J. Taylor, W. 
 TayJor, Townsend, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, Witbeck, 
 A. Wright, Yawger, Youngs 43. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Back- 
 us, Baker, Bascom, Bergen, Bowdish, Brayton, Brundage, 
 Bull, Burr, D. D. Campbell, Clyde, Conely, Cornell, Dodd, 
 Dorlon, Flanders, Gardner, Harrison, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, 
 Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, Kern- 
 ble, Kernan, Mann, McNitt. Marvin, Murphy, Nicholas, 
 Nicoli, O'Cpnor, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Powers, 
 President, Richmond, Riker, Russell, Salisbury, Sanford, 
 Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Ste- 
 phens, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Taft, Taggart, Tallmadge, 
 Tuthill, Vache, Waterbury, White, Wood 62. 
 
 The section reported by Mr. HOFFMAN, un- 
 der instructions, was adopted, ayes 63, noes 50, 
 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. 
 Backus, H. Backus Baker, Bascom, Bergen, Bouck, Bray- 
 ton, Bruce, Bull, D. D. Campbell, Candee, Chamberlain, 
 Coneiy, Crooker, Dana, Dantorth, Dodd, Dorlon, Gardner, 
 Gebhard, Harris, Harrison, Hawley, Hotchkiss, E. Hun- 
 tington, Hy-ie. Kemble, Kirkland, Mann, McNitt, Marvin, 
 Maxwell, Morris Murphy, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, 
 Patterson, Pennimau, Perkins, Rhoades, Richmond, Rus- 
 sell, Salisbury, Shaw, Smith, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, 
 Strong, Taft,Taggart, Tallmadge. Townsend, Van j-choon- 
 hovn, Warren, White, Warden, A. Wright, Yawger. 63. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Bowdish, Brown, Brundage, Burr, 
 Cambreleng, Chatfiwli!, Clark, Clyde, Cornell, Cndde- 
 back, Dubois, Flanders, Graham, Gn;ene, Hart, Hofi'man, 
 Hunt, Hunter, A. Hutchinson, Jonns, Kernan, Kingsley, 
 Loomis, McNeil, Muuroe, Nellis, Nicoli, Powers, Presi. 
 dent, Riker, Ruggles, St. John, Sanlbrd, Sears, Sheldoa, 
 fchepard, Stephens, Stow, Swackhamer, J. J. Taylor. 
 "W. Tavlor, Tiiden, Tuthill, Vache, Waterbury, Witbeck, 
 Wood, Youngs 50. 
 
 The fifth section (now the fourth) of the origi- 
 nal report was then read, as follows : 
 
 ^4. The claims of the state against any incorporated 
 company to pay the interest and redeem the principal of 
 the stock of the state loaned or advanced to such company, 
 and the moneys arising from such claims, shall be set upart 
 and applied as a part of the sinking fund provided in the 
 second section of this article. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR moved to add to the sec- 
 tion, as follows : 
 
 " But tne time limited for the fulfilment of any condition 
 of any release or compromise heretofore mady or provided 
 lor, may be extended by law." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he had not the slight- 
 est objection to this ; and he would have reported 
 it, had he supposed there had been the slightest 
 necessity for it. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON remarked that the word 
 
 "defined" having been stricken out, the Legisla- 
 ture would have this power. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN thought so but the gentle- 
 man from Tioga thinks not. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR had looked into this matter 
 with some care, and he thought there was doubt 
 about it. 
 
 Mr. T.'s amendment was adopted, as was the 
 section, as amended. 
 
 The sixth (now fifth) section was then read, as 
 follows : 
 
 5. If the sinking funds, or either of them provided in 
 this article, shall prove insufficient to enable the state, on 
 the credit of such fund, to procure the means to satisfy the 
 claims oi the creditors of the state as they become payable, 
 the Legislature shall, by equitable taxes, so increase the 
 revenues of the said fund as to make them, respectively, 
 sufficient perfectly to preserve the public faith. Every 
 contribution or advance to the canals, or their debt, from 
 any source other than their direct revenues, shall, with 
 quarterly interest, at the rates then current, be repaid into 
 the treasury, for the use of the state, out ol tlMg>anal reve- 
 nues, as soon as it can be done, consistentlylWh the just 
 rights of the creditors holding the said canal debt. 
 
 The section was agreed to, without debate. 
 
 The seventh (now sixth) section was then read, 
 as follows : 
 
 (} 7. The Legislature shall not sell, lease, or otherwise 
 dispose of any of the canals of the state; but they shall re- 
 main the property of the state and under its management 
 forever. 
 
 Mr. BURR moved to amend by striking out "any 
 of the," in the second line, and inserting " Erie 
 and Champlain ;" and also to strike out "of the 
 state," after "canals." 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY demanded the ayes and 
 noes, and the amendment was negatived ayes 18, 
 noes 79 
 
 The section was then agreed to, without amend, 
 tnent 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved the additional section 
 proposed by him yesterday, in relation to the salt 
 springs. Mr. R. remarked that under the present 
 Constitution, the state was not alloAed to sell the 
 lands contiguous to the springs. There were now 
 549 acres of these lands, which might be sold for 
 $'1500 orijp200U per acre, and the object of the sec- 
 lion was to allow the state to dispose of the pre- 
 sent lands and invest the proceeds in others more 
 convenient to the state, those now held being too 
 high, the aggregate quantity not to be diminished. 
 
 The section was^agreed to. 
 
 The article having been gone through, Mr. 
 HOFFMAN moved its printing, as amended. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 STATE DEBT-SPECIFIC APPROPRIATIONS. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN now moved to take up theSd 
 article, as reported by the committee on finances. 
 
 The first section was read, as follows : 
 
 ks 1. No moneys shall ever be paid out of the treasury of 
 this State, or any of its funds, or any of the funds under its 
 management, except in pursuance of an appropriation by 
 law ; nor u.iless such payment be made within two years 
 next after the passage of such appropriation act; and every 
 such law making a new appropriation, or continuing or 
 reviving an appropriation, shall distinctly specify the sum 
 appropriated, and the object to which it is to be applied ; 
 and it shall not be sufficient for such law to refer to any 
 other law to fix such sum. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN rose and said that under other 
 circumstances perhaps he might have thought 
 that it was desirable to 'make some remarks in 
 explanation here, but after what had occurred, 
 he certainly did not feel it necessary to make anv 
 
941 
 
 extended observations in relation to this article. 
 It was now quite certain that in the future, as in 
 the past, whatever debts may hereafter exist, or 
 new OIKS be created, they will be made chargea- 
 ble ultimately upon the tolls derived from the 
 Erie canal. Every friend of cheap travel and 
 transportation must see that if we intend to guard 
 these canals from heavy tolls and taxes, that it 
 must be done by a fair and effectual restraint up- 
 on the legislature from creating or having the 
 power to create debts. This is absolutely neces- 
 sary also, in order to secure a safe, free and re- 
 sponsible government. The legislature must be 
 properly restricted in this power to create debts. 
 Every administration, federal, state and munici- 
 pal, should collect and pay as it went. If we 
 cannot enforce that wholesome, salutary and in- 
 dispensable rule, every administration would 
 leave burthens for the future, growing out of the 
 excesses of the past, and severe taxation, or what 
 is worse, repudiation, the meanest of all things 
 on God's earth, must come out of it. He desired, 
 above all things, to establish specific appropria- 
 tions. We have recommended this section 
 with a view of permanently establishing by 
 constitutional provision the doctrine of spe- 
 cific appropriation. It does oblige the le- 
 gislature to look over the condition of the State 
 Finances, the expenditures and income, at least 
 once in every two years ; and to fix upon the face 
 of the statute what money shall be paid out in 
 each year. By the present Revised Statutes, as 
 he said before, if the executive had but a corpo- 
 ral's guard to drive off the legislature, the gov- 
 ernment could go on for 50 years without it. Su 
 long as there was money in the Treasury the public 
 officers would ho paid ; the power and duty to 
 pay all demands against the treasury being vest- 
 ed in the pvblic officers; and if there was no 
 money in the treasury the comptroller would go 
 into the market and borrow it, and give the bonds 
 of the State for the payment of it ; and when they 
 become due, if there was still no money to meet 
 them in the treasury, he could again go into the 
 market, and borrow again to repay them. The 
 two years limitation was inserted to prevent this 
 state of things; and he preferred this,because under 
 the new state of things the Senate were to be a new 
 body every two years. This would compel every 
 new Legislature to see what money went for this, 
 and what for that object, and the people, by read- 
 ing the statutes, could then get some idea of how 
 the money went, where it went, and how much 
 was paid annually to carry on the government. 
 He hoped this section would meet the same unani- 
 mous assent in the committee that it had met in 
 the finance committee and unless there was some 
 opposition to it, he would say no more about it. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND asked what would be the 
 effect by this provision on a person, having a 
 claim against the state and in whose behalf an 
 act of appropriation had been passed, if he should 
 accidentally omit to apply for payment in their 
 two years : 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN replied, that if A, having a 
 claim against the state, neglected for two 
 after the money was appropriated, to come and 
 get it, then a new appropriation must be made. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he most fully concur- 
 ed in the object which he supposed that Mr. HOFF- 
 
 MAN had in view. We fastened on these canals 
 a very heavy charge ; we had entailed on them, 
 the payment of the entire debt of the state ; and 
 it was no more than just that in future these ca- 
 nals should not be encumbered by caprices or un- 
 wise legislation. In view of the burthens which 
 had been imposed upon the canals, and the ne- 
 cessity of keeping open these great avenues of 
 trade with the great west he submitted that the 
 Constitution should provide that its revenues, 
 aside from that portion appropriated to the pay{| 
 ment of the State debt, should go to no other pur- 
 pose than their improvement. He moved, there- 
 fore, to amend the section : 
 
 "Nor shall the revenues of the canals of this State, ex- 
 cent as herein provided, be appropriated or 8p;>li) to any 
 other purpose than the reparation arid improvement ot the 
 said cauals, ana such expenses and charges as are incident 
 thereto." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he thought there 
 was no necessity to embarass this article with the 
 same provisions which had been placed upon the 
 unfortunate article which had just been adopted. 
 
 Mi-. WORDEN said it was impossible to sup- 
 pose that the expense ot laud vvus not a necessary 
 cost ot the canals themselves. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS suggested difficulties that might 
 arise frotn breaking away ol the canal, &c., and 
 l)e doubted very much whether there was any- 
 thing in the language that would allow the dama. 
 ges Resulting therefrom to be defrayed from the 
 canal revenues. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said he would vary his amend, 
 ment so as to meet this objection. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that so far as related to 
 the specific appropriation and charges made in the 
 article just passed, there was no necessity of re. 
 peating them here, and the quarrels that hung 
 upon them. Such an amendment was entirely 
 unnecessary, and uncalled lor. The aiticie, as it 
 siood, would effectually protect the canal revenues 
 as appropriated in the last article. He hoped the 
 gentleman would therefore withdraw his amend- 
 ment. There was another point. It was the 
 practice of appropriate laws to say instead ot 
 specifying the fund, to re-appropriate what had 
 been done in some former law. Nu one could, 
 therefore, understand what was referred to, and 
 this was sought to be guarded against. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that his desire, in offering 
 this amendment, was to ascertain if Mr. H'<FK- 
 MAN'S construction of the article was the same as 
 his own. He had found this to be so, and he 
 would therefore withdraw his amendment lor the 
 present. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND enquired if the gentleman 
 meant that the appropi lations from the Common 
 School and Literature fund should undergo this 
 biennial review. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN desired to adopt here the same 
 couise adopted in all constitutional governments 
 but this. He desired that the people should know 
 from the statute books the exact sum of money 
 appropriated, and to whi-.t pnipose. This was the 
 course pursued by Congress, 
 
 Mr. WORDEN enquired how this would ope- 
 rate in the case of a contract which extended be- 
 yond two years 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN: Precisely as wa< done in 
 Congress. Theie was no fear of the work being 
 
942 
 
 delayed for the want of an appropriation. He 
 hoped the Convention would adopt this measure, 
 as one tending to promote economy, and to invite 
 the people to a watchful care of their expendi- 
 tures. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN agreed fully in regard to the 
 propriety of having every Legislature know dis- 
 tinctly the amount of their appropriations. He 
 believed the expenses of government had been 
 greatly swelled by a lack of this information. He 
 desired to go further, he desired to see a provision 
 requiring the Legislature, in every year, to make 
 provision for the payment, by tax or' otherwise, 
 for every dollar it appropriated. Legislatures 
 would then appropriate mon^y with much more 
 care, and it would be the saving of a large amount 
 of monev annually to the people. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that so far as related to 
 the distribution of money to academies, &c., this 
 provision would be one of great inconvenience. 
 There had for some time past been a contest go- 
 ing on between those who claimed to be friends 
 of common schools and the friends of academies, 
 in regard to appropriations made to the latter. 
 This would bring the contest up every two years, 
 and the academies would be compelled on those 
 occasions to sent agents here to guard against be- 
 ing deprived of their appropriation. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that this was to be provided 
 for in another article of the Constitution in rela- 
 tion to that particular subject. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN suggested the following amend- 
 ment as tending to obviate the difficulties suggest- 
 ed by Mr. RHOADES. Amend the fourth and fifth 
 lines so that it should read as follows : " nor un- 
 less such payment be made within two years next 
 after the same shall be payable pursuant to such 
 appropriation." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN thought this amendment 
 would in effect bring us just where we are now. 
 It would permit the legislature to make appropri- 
 tions to run four or five years, and this was what 
 he desired to guard against. He cared not what 
 act was passed or what obligation entered into, 
 all he desired was that every two years the legis- 
 lature should review these appropriations. By 
 separating the literature fund from the common 
 school fund here, these quarrels would be avoid 
 ed,arid they could only be obviated by making such 
 a constitutional provision. He was in favor 
 of that, because he regarded the academies and 
 colleges as standing in the same position to the 
 counties /and state, as did the district schools to 
 the district. His amendment would require the 
 people and the legislature to examine carefully 
 into the appropriations made to these institu 
 tions. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND desired to know what effect 
 this provision would have upon legislative appro- 
 priations to Medical colleges, and the rights o 
 parties therein. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said it would have no effec 
 on the rights of parties, but only on the action o 
 the public officers. Suppose a law was passed t< 
 give Hamilton college so much money for fivi 
 years, all the public officers would have to d< 
 would be to call upon the legislature for the ap 
 propriation. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND enquired what would be th 
 
 fleet if the Legislature should refuse to make 
 
 e appropriation. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that when the Legisla- 
 ure refused to obey law and violate faith, he did 
 otknow what could be guarded against. He did 
 ot know of an instance when congress had failed 
 o carry out the conditions of such a promise. 
 le had no fears of the action of the legislature on 
 lie subject. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND hoped this section would pass 
 ust as it was. It was in his opinion none too 
 trong or pointed. Mr. R. replied further to the 
 ueries of Mr. KIRKLAND. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said at the request of several 
 entleman he would withdraw his amendment. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said he should 
 iffer the amendment, for the purpose at least of 
 esting the question. He could, however, see no 
 .ecessity for the adoption of this provision at 
 11. The fact that it worked well at" Washington 
 ,vas not a sufficient reason why it should be adop- 
 ed here. He saw no necessity for repeating the 
 ame appropriation in law after law. As to the 
 enquiry of the gentleman from Oneida as to what 
 would be the effect of the Legislature refusing to 
 iiake the appropriation, according to the plighted 
 aith of the state, if there was a Legislature here 
 composed of such gentlemen as the gentleman 
 rom Genesee, who were bitterly opposed to all 
 appropriations to charitable or benevolent pur- 
 poses 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND : There is no truth in that 
 whatever. Not a word of it. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that was the 
 jurport of all the gentleman had said here on the 
 subject of loans to these institutions. But sup- 
 posing there should be a legislature which should 
 lo that, what guard was there against it. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN: The legislature could do 
 that now every year. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that then 
 there was the greater reason why this matter 
 should be guarded. Mr. V. S. said there was no 
 reason, he had heard urged, for this proposition, 
 except that it would afford facility to members of 
 the legislature in ascertaining what previous ap- 
 propriations were made. Gentlemen could do 
 this now by going into the library and looking at 
 the statutes. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER: In many cases then 
 you would have to go back 20 years. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN further urged 
 there was no necessity for any such provision as 
 this. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER sustained the proposit- 
 ion as being eminently wise and proper, and as 
 tending to guard the people from the absorbing of 
 their funds by monopolies these chartered in- 
 stitutions of education. It would do this by bring- 
 ing the-e questions of appropriation frequently 
 before the people. 
 
 Mr. BROWN further sustained the proposition. 
 As it was now, no gentleman could tell by look- 
 ing at the session laws what the amount of ap- 
 propriations were for any one year. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN agreed with the gentleman in 
 his purposes and would go with him. But how 
 were the payments from this sinking fund just 
 provided to be made. Was it by an act of appro- 
 priation ? 
 
943 
 
 Mr. BROWN : Certainly. This plan would not 
 affect any law appropriating money to this insti- 
 tution or that, it would simply require a biennial 
 statement of all the expenditures of the govern- 
 ment. This would be published all over the 
 State, would be read by the people, and thus act 
 as a check upon legislative profligacy. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND repelled the imputations he 
 considered to have been cast upon him by Mr. 
 VAN SCHOONHOVEN. He did not profess to be as 
 liberal with the money of the public of other 
 people as with his own. It would have been 
 much better in his opinion for the people, had 
 the gentleman and a lew others with him, been a 
 little less liberal with the public money. No 
 man as a representative of the people had a right 
 to be liberal he should only be just. 
 
 Mr. BROWN here asked for the previous ques- 
 tion. There was a second, the main question or- 
 dered. The question was then taken on the first 
 section and it was adopted without a count. 
 The second section was then read, as follows 
 ^ 2. The credit of the state shall not, in any manner, be 
 given or loaned to, or in aid of, any individual, association 
 or incorporation. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued between Messrs 
 
 VAN SCHOONHOVEN and RICHMOND, in re 
 
 lation to the matter before at issue between them 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to add after the 
 
 word " credit" the words "money or property." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN hoped this motion would not 
 be persisted in. If the slate had money lo loan 
 or property to sell, it had better be allowed to do 
 it. He was ready to guard against mischief which 
 bad become apparent, and he was satisfied that 
 the words were- broad enough. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER had no desire to persist 
 in his amendment, and would withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to add to the end of the 
 section the following: 
 
 "Nor shall any gift of public moneys or property be 
 made except as a reward for military services, or by the 
 release of escheats or forfeitures. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL thought the words of the section 
 were sufficiently guarded, and he hoped therefore 
 that this amendment would not be adopted. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR then withdrew his amendment, 
 if there wa? any objection to it. 
 
 The second section was then adopted unani- 
 mously. 
 
 The third section was then read, as follows': 
 
 5) 3. The state may, to meet casual deficits or failures in 
 revenues, or for expenses not provided lor, contract debts, 
 but such debts, direct or contingent, singly or in the ag 
 gregate, shall not, at any time, exceed one million of dol 
 fars, and the moneys arising from the loans creating such 
 debts, shall be applied to the purpose for which they were 
 obtained, or to repay tue debt so contracted, and to no other 
 purpose whatever. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN suggested a verbal amendment 
 which was assented to. 
 
 The third section was adopted also unanimously. 
 
 The fouith section wa* then read, as follows : 
 (j 4. In addition to the above limited powers to contract 
 debts, the state may contract debts to repel invasion, sup 
 press insurrection, or detend the state in war; but the mo 
 ney arising from the contracting of such debts shall be ap 
 plitd to the purpose lor which it was raised, or to repaj 
 such debtSj and to no oiher purpose whatever. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN explained that the object o 
 this section was to make this power to contrac 
 debts for this purpose, as strict as possible. Ho 
 
 thought no limitation other than the committee 
 lad proposed could be adopted. 
 
 The section was, as the others, unanimously 
 adopted, 
 
 The fifth section was then read, as follows : 
 
 5. Except the debts specified in the third and fourth 
 sections of this article, no debt or liability shall be hereaf- 
 ter contracted by or on behalf of this state, unless such 
 bt shall be authorized by a law for some single work or 
 object, to be distinctly specified theiein, and such law shall 
 impose and provide for the collection of a direct annual 
 tax, to pay, and sufficient to pav the interest on such debt 
 as it falls due, and also to pay and discharge the principal 
 of such debt within eighteen years from the time of the 
 contracting thereof. No such law shall take effect until 
 it shall, at a general election, have been submitted to the 
 people and have received a majority of all the votes cast 
 for or against it, at such election. On the final passage of 
 such bill in either house of the Legislature, the question 
 shall be taken by ayes and noes, to be duly entered on the 
 journals thereof, and shall be: t! Shall this bill pass, and 
 ought the same to receive the sanction of the people?" The 
 Legislature may at any time after the approval of such 
 law by the people, if no debt shall have been contracted or 
 liability incurred in puisuance thereof, repeal the law; and 
 may at any time by law forbid the contracting of any lur- 
 ther debt or liability under such law; bat the tax imposed 
 by such act, in proportion to the debt and liability which 
 may have been contracted in pursuance of such law shall 
 remain in force and be irrepealable, and be annually col- 
 lected until the proceeds thereof shall have made the pro- 
 vision hereirtotoie specified to pay and discharge the inter- 
 est and principal of such debt and liability. 
 
 The money arising from any loan or stock creating debt 
 or liability shall be applied to the work or obj ct specified 
 in the act authorizing such debt or liability, or for the re- 
 payment of such debt or liability, and for no other purpose 
 whatever. 
 
 No such law shall be submitted to be acted on within 
 iree months atter its passage or at any general election, 
 when any other law or any bill or any amendment of the 
 onstitution. shall be submitted to be voted for or against 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that as some gentlemen 
 eemed to suppose that the seel ion proposes to 
 make a serious change in our form of government 
 le would take a few moments to say something 
 n relation to it. If we look at home, at the 
 neighboring states, or to foreign representative 
 governments, we shall be obliged to acknowledge 
 :hat their greatest infirmity is their disposition 
 o contract debts. The freest government on the 
 other side of the water has contracted the largest 
 debt known to history, and he thought it had been 
 demonstrated by the researches of able men, that 
 it was not the Goths and Vandals who overthrew 
 the Empire of Rome, but the taxing officers, that 
 eviscerated the Empire and thus rivited the bar- 
 jarians in. For there was no resistance to them, 
 not even so much as was made on the feeble soil 
 of Great Britain, against the Dane and the Saxon. 
 If he was right in this, it behoves those who 
 were desirous of securing free and republican 
 government to find some limitation safe in prac- 
 tice to this most dangerous power. In almost 
 any case if a bad law is passed by the legislature, 
 it can be repealed the legislature have few temp- 
 tations to pass a bad one. It is not so in 
 relation to the subject of debts and compound 
 interest. It is silent, creeps along, gets into 
 the State, and when the act is once passed, the 
 debt incurred, the obligation is as strong as death 
 for its payment. That can only be wrung from 
 the industry of the people, by taxes, indirect or 
 direct. This being the case, and being so entire- 
 ly different from almost all subjects on which le- 
 gislation can act, it requires an especial remedy. 
 Such an one must be found, or he apprehended 
 
944 
 
 representative government would not be success- 
 ful. Looking into history, it would be found 
 that the worst vice of the worst government is di- 
 rect taxation, and if representative governments 
 cannot be cured of that, he feared they would not 
 long endure ; for man must have bread, clothing 
 and lodging they must have those conveniences 
 to which they are accustomed, and if we will 
 have great debts, so we must have severe taxes. 
 They who vote the debt, vote to tax, although 
 they cast the burden of the tax upon those who 
 come after them. Unless we make some provi- 
 sion of this kind, there will be large debts, and 
 these debts will fasten themselves upon the fu- 
 ture surpluses of the canals. When these debts 
 are pressing upon you, it will be impossible to 
 deal fairly with the question. The legislature 
 will in some way or other, by some contri- 
 vance, take these revenues instead of resort- 
 ing to direct taxation. And gentlemen who 
 favor a free transportation and travel will do 
 well to guard here as stringently as they can 
 against those debts which more than any thing 
 else will tend to prevent that, consummation. 
 This section contains in it a proposition to meet 
 the objections which on former occasions have 
 been urged and strongly too against it. It was 
 said that the members would vote for any law, 
 throwing it on the people to decide, and thus 
 avoiding the direct responsibility. To avoid that 
 difficulty the amendment prescribes the very 
 question to which the member must answer, and 
 he cannot answer it in any spirit of evasion. He 
 must say that he believed the law to be extremely 
 right and proper, and the people ought to sanc- 
 tion it. He therefore cannot avoid the responsi- 
 bility. There is another thing : we have got 
 along so far in our history that it is not probable 
 that "any of these large loans will be called for in 
 any case where there is reason to believe that the 
 revenues will not pay the debt. They must pro- 
 vide for the payment of the debt by direct taxa- 
 tion But if you let them off on the part of the 
 proposition, in the future like the past, it will be 
 alle-ed that the work will be abundantly produc- 
 tiveof revenue, and the legislature might be in- 
 duced to believe it, and thus incur the debt. It 
 would avoid all questions as to whether the legis- 
 lature could ever, with any decent appearance 
 even of common hypocrisy repudiate the debt. 
 The means of payment would go with the work, 
 and this he believed would give reasonable secu- 
 rity against unnecessary and improper debt. Mr. 
 H also explained the provision requiring the ap- 
 propriation bills to be submitted at a special elec- 
 iton as tending to direct the undivided attention 
 of the people to the subject. With all these 
 guards Mr. H. said a resonable protection was 
 presented for the rights of property, and the sa- 
 cred rights of labor. The power to labor is the 
 sift of heaven, and the property it produces is 
 fust as* sacred as the source from which that pow- 
 er comes. The government should never ask for 
 it unless it can show as good a title for it, as the 
 citizen has who produces it. He believed there- 
 fore that with all these provisions there would be 
 a reasonable safeguard for the rights of property 
 and of labor. 
 
 Mr SHEPARD moved to amend the section so 
 that it should provide against the possible crea- 
 
 tion of debt for the future. He believed the true 
 objects of government to be the protection of the 
 individuals that constitute it, in the enjoyment of 
 their rights. He did not think it advisable, ex- 
 cept in the cases already specified, that erovern- 
 ment should have the power to embark in the 
 construction of any long public work that would 
 run it into debt, or take upon its hands any of 
 those munificent undertakings which unfortu- 
 nately for all people, in all ages, have been con- 
 sidered the legitimate objects of human govern- 
 ment. He conceived a great principle to be in- 
 volved in this amendment, and he presented it to 
 the consideration of the Convention, without any 
 further argument, for them to determine upon it. 
 Whether the government should hereafter be con- 
 fined to the simple purposes of the administration 
 of the laws and the framing of them, or whether 
 it should be left at liberty to run wild as hereto- 
 fore in pursuit of those visionary schemes that 
 the individuals who at the time had its manage- 
 ment might deem essential to its welfare or cal- 
 culated to promote its grandeur. He hoped the 
 amendment would be considered carefully, and 
 whatever should be its fate, he should be satisfied 
 with his own course in presenting it for conside- 
 ration. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM had intended to move an amend- 
 ment authorising the legislature to create debt, 
 providing they had the moral courage to provide 
 for its payment by direct taxation. He had his 
 fears that if this section should stand as it was, 
 it might lead hereafter to the creation of another 
 large debt. He preferred to leave this matter 
 with the legislature, believing the check of di- 
 rect taxation would be sufficient to guard the in- 
 terests of the people. He thought the ameridment 
 of the gentleman from New Y.ork far preferable 
 to the original section. He believed the time had 
 gone by, when in view of the great resources and 
 wealth of this State, it would be necessary to 
 create new debts. Much less did he believe it 
 would ever be necessary to set in motion this 
 cumbrous machinery to create debt. When it 
 should become absolutely necessary to raise mon- 
 ey, let it be done by direct taxation. He did not 
 approve of this section for so far as it related to 
 this matter, it did change our representative go- 
 vernment into a democracy. 
 
 Mr LOOM1S was one of those who did not be- 
 lieve in the probability of any necessity lor the 
 creation nt a debt. Believing that, and in consis- 
 tency with the views he had heretofore advocated, 
 he desired to let the future prepare to meet the 
 question, when it should arise. He had been 
 charged, in a debate somewhat analagous to this, 
 with advocating a new and difieient doctrine from 
 what he formerly had. He did not see fit to reply 
 at the time, as he knew the occasion would arise 
 when he could vindicate himself fiom the charge. 
 He had been charged with distrust ol the Le- 
 gislature hereafter, and of manifesting it in the 
 report he had the honor to submit to the Con- 
 vention, and at another time, with having great 
 confidence in them. Now, he undertook to say 
 that his course was consistent. He had always 
 believed and maintained that the legislature and 
 the people might with perfect propriety dispose 
 of the immediate subject before them, or then- 
 own property and means in hand ; but they never 
 
945 
 
 had the right to legislate for the future, to en- 
 thrall and bind down those who came after them, 
 either by debt or any other system of legislation 
 which would prevent them from a perfect freedom 
 of action. What had been the course of the Con- 
 vention this day on the subject ? We have been 
 legislating for the future, tying down the hands of 
 the people for the next 25 years in a matter per- 
 taining to themselves and their day. It had been 
 perfectly analogous to the system of pledging the 
 faith of the state, for the prosecution of the pub- 
 lic works and drawing on the future for the pay- 
 ment. We had by our votes of to-day, imposed 
 a tax for the next twenty-five years, for the pros- 
 ecution of those works, and this too, without es- 
 timates, surveys, or any requisite knowledge. 
 It is this legislation for the future, which he had 
 heretofore deprecated, and which he now depre- 
 cated. And it was for that reason that he could 
 not consent to this amendment He knew not 
 but that in the future there might be some occa- 
 sion for creating a debt And he would be will- 
 ing that the future should impose upon themselves 
 a sufficient tax, to pay the debt within eighteen 
 years. Mr. L. doubted the power of the people 
 to restrict themselves or the future in this way. 
 If this section should be amended in this way, 
 and the legislature should submit to the people a 
 proposition to create a debt and tax themselves to 
 pay it, and if that act should be ratified with all 
 the solemnity that they would adopt this con- 
 stitution, he doubted whether any power could 
 prevent it. 
 
 Mr. E. HUNTINGTON moved to amend the 
 section by striking out all that relates to the sub- 
 mission of the law to the people. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL opposed ihb amendment. The 
 principle recognized here was in practice in all 
 our towns, and the people in their primary capaci- 
 ty, voied taxes on themselves to the amount of 
 millions, in the aggregate, every year. This pow- 
 er to tax could not be lodged in safer hands, than 
 in the hands of those who had to pay. 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that if the motion of the gen- 
 tleman from Oneida (Mr. KIRKLAND) should pie- 
 vail, then he would move to strike out part, and 
 insert a provision to the effect that no law crea- 
 ting a loan, should ta.ve effect, unless it receives 
 the assent of a majority of all the members eleci. 
 ed in two successive legislatures. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON was decidedly opposed to 
 incurring a single dollar more of debt. He felt 
 but little interest in these amendments; after we 
 had adopted a provision authorizing the .Legisla- 
 ture to create debts in case of war or invasion, 
 then he did not believe there would ever be any 
 necessity to incur any other debt to the amount of 
 a single dollar. [Cries of Good that's the true 
 doctrine."] He should, therefore, certainly vote 
 for the amendment of Mr. SHEPARD. He be- 
 lieved, also, that after the present debt was paid, 
 the canals would yield a revenue abundant for all 
 purposes. No one could visit the western States, 
 and see fheir almost boundless resource?, and still 
 doubt that the revenues of the canals would in a 
 few years amount to five or six millions of do) 
 lars. Why, only ten years ago, the little county 
 of Livingston sent to the New York market a 
 greater amount of products than all the region 
 west of Buffalo. But now, there are 20 counties 
 
 93 
 
 in Ohio alone, that each send more than that 
 county. He was quite sure that ihe tolls on our 
 canals, although they might he reduced one. half 
 (as desired by Mr, HOFFMAN), yet that they 
 would, in a few years reach the amount he had 
 named. And thus believing that they would be 
 abundantly sufficient for all the legitimate purpo- 
 ses of the State, he should vote for the amendment 
 of the gentlemen from New York, (Mr. SHEP- 
 ARD.) 
 
 Mr. KTRKLAND was opposed to the amend- 
 ment. There might be a very urgent and insur- 
 mountable necessity for a debt ; he would guard 
 by every possible means, and the strongest bar- 
 riers, the debt-creating power ; but for his own 
 part, he confessed that he could not see quite as 
 far into the future as some gentlemen (laughter) 
 seemed to do. The gentleman from Chautauque, 
 (Mr. PATTERSON,) must be gifted with a much 
 greater degree of prescience than most of the 
 other members. For his own part he (Mr. R.) 
 concurred with Mr LOOMIS, that we could not 
 foresee every thing that might happen ; and that 
 we could not do a more foolish thing, than to as- 
 sume and act on the presumption that no possible 
 state of things could exist, that would make it 
 necessary to create or contract a new debt. He 
 considered that the section as reported by the 
 Convention was abundantly guarded, even if it 
 should provide only that when a new debt 
 should be proposed, the means of payment should 
 be provided by direct taxation. But if this was 
 not deemed sufficient, the other guard in the sec- 
 tion, (to which, by the by, he had no objection,) 
 would be sufficient for all the purposes directed 
 by those most violently opposed to the creation 
 of any debt ; and would abundantly secure us 
 against an improvident debt. 
 Mr. WORDEN said that he should be exceeding- 
 ly sorry to see either by adoption or implication, a 
 section like this inserted in the Constitution of a 
 republican government If we were to adopt 
 such a section, it would only be saying to the 
 world in so many words, that republican gov. 
 ernments had proved a failure. Now, sir, I, for 
 one, am opposed to any such declaration, either 
 by implication, expression, or in any way. I am 
 a firm believer in the value, great advantages, 
 and the perpetuity of a republican government ; 
 but if this government unfortunately should fail' 
 it will be by reason of some men who bring for- 
 ward plans like these, by which they express 
 their distrust of the people. He would not ad- 
 mit in this or any way, that the experiment of a 
 republican, representative, responsible form of 
 government, after a trial of more than 70 years, 
 had proved a failure, and was not to be trusted 
 in the exercise of an essential function- 
 that the people in point of fact, were not capable 
 of judging of the action of their representatives, 
 and of correcting their errors. He regarded this 
 proposition, if carried out as calculated to lull the 
 people into a false security, where they will be- 
 lieve that all is going right, when in truth it is 
 not ; and you will disarm them of that vigilance 
 in regard to the action of their representatives, 
 that is so highly essential to the preservation of 
 public liberty. He desired to see the people al- 
 ways vigilant; and he insisted that under the sys- 
 tem which has so long been in practice in this 
 
946 
 
 state, and under the Legislature of this state 
 (which has been so much denounced) a legisla- 
 ture containing a greater number of in-telligent, 
 honest, talented men than any other one in the 
 Union this great state of New York has been 
 built up from 1,300,000 to 3,000,000 of people 
 your taxable property has been doubled it has 
 trebled your trade quadrupled your commerce 
 covered the state with colleges and schools and 
 made a progress in all the elements of wealth and 
 greatness that was unparalleled. There never 
 was a time when the people were not capable of 
 appreciating and of approving or condemning the 
 action of their representatives; and as one of that 
 people (never intending to hold another public 
 office, if he could help it,) he would never go 
 back to them, and say that they and their dele- 
 gates have acted unwisely and are not to be trus- 
 ted. He would never place such a stigma upon 
 the intelligence of the people and upon represen- 
 tative government, by voting for any such provi- 
 sion as this. The people could always be depen- 
 ded upon in any emergency. And if two cities 
 like New-York and Buffalo should combine to tax 
 the state $10,000,000 for internal improvements, 
 that tax would be paid. It was idle to advocate 
 the ground that had been taken here. The state 
 is a trustee and is liable for all the monies, &c. 
 deposited with her as a security. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said that debt always comes 
 coupled with blessings. You can't get round 
 these old debts. They always come hitched in, 
 in that way. Better go the section entire. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD would take out the words 
 " or liability." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that this section was not 
 founded on a distrust of the people. But it was 
 saying that we will not trust the legislature with 
 the power of creating indefinite mortgages on the 
 people's property. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR laid on the table a motion 
 to reconsider the 6th section of the first financial 
 report. 
 
 Mr. BROWN, a similar motion to reconsider 
 the 3d section of that report. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER laid on the table two 
 additional sections to the pending article. 
 BOARDS OF SUPERVISORS. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL, jr , from committee num- 
 ber 15, submitted the following report : 
 ARTICLE 
 
 5. t The legislature shall provide by law for the reor- 
 ganization of he boards of supervisors of the several 
 counties of the state, so as to create a more equal repre- 
 sentation m said boards, and mt.y confer upon the same 
 sach further p >wers of local legislation and administration 
 as shall from time to time be prescribed by law. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned to 8i o'clock 
 to-morrow morning. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (QQth day,) Sept. 23d. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. WILKINS. 
 
 Mr. YAWGER presented a memorial from citi- 
 zens of Cayuga county for an equal distribution 
 of the literature fund. Referred to committee of 
 the whole. 
 
 Mr. MANN called the attention of the Conven- 
 tion to the fact that the clerks of the first and 
 third chancery districts had made no returns in 
 answer to a resolution sometime since passed by 
 the Convention. They were the two most im- 
 
 portant, and the districts in which the largest a- 
 mount of funds were held. He moved that the 
 Secretary be directed to communicate with them 
 and request answers in obedience to the resolu- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART suggested that the registers 
 and assistant registers should be included in the 
 resolution. 
 
 Mr. MANN assented. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN suggested that the communi- 
 nication should be sent to the appointing power 
 the Chancellor so that if any subordinate ne- 
 glected to discharge his duty, contumacy might 
 be punished. 
 
 Mr. MANN so modified his- resolution, and as 
 amendad it was adopted. 
 RESTRICTIONS ON THE DEBT CREATING POWER. 
 
 The Conveation resumed the consideration of 
 the second report of the finance committee, on 
 the power to create state debts and liabilities and 
 in restraint thereof. 
 
 The pending amendment was thft offered last 
 night by Mr. E. HUNTINGTON, to the 5th section. 
 
 Mr. E. HUNTINGTON moved iurther to a- 
 mend by striking out the word " approval" in the 
 17th line, and insert " passage," and by striking 
 out, " by the people" from the 18th line, so that 
 the section would read " the legislature may at 
 any time after the passage of such laws,"&,c., in- 
 stead of " the legislature may at any time after 
 the approval of such law by the people" &c. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN repeated what Mr. WORDEN 
 said in relation to leaving the matter under con- 
 sideration in the hands of the legislature. He 
 (Mr. H.) had never entertained any extraordina- 
 ry confidence in the people nor in the popula- 
 tion of cities. He sought no political life, nor 
 would he shun it. But he would not be forced 
 into political life any longer than he chose tore- 
 main there. He believed cities would do as well 
 in the future as they had done in the past. Where 
 the people have given a vote for a debt directly, 
 they have honestly provided to meet it and to pay 
 it. And he wished that whenever the people 
 were to have their property mortgaged for a Slate 
 debt, that it should be done by their own voice, 
 and by their own consent. He believed that if 
 his plan carried, the legislature would have all 
 power to appoint trustees, and to take all the ne- 
 cessary security for the debt. It the plan of Mr. 
 SHEPARD prevailed, he believed that the legisla- 
 ture would in a few years get back^he debt con- 
 tracting power, in full force, without any restric- 
 tions. If gentlemen wanted to get a large debt, 
 running through a long series of years, then let 
 them vote down this proposition of his, (Mr. H's) - 
 or let them make it too lax or too strict, as was 
 proposed in the amendment of Mr. SHEPARD. 
 In 15 years, if the legislature had power to create 
 debt, we should find ourselves in the full career 
 of debt and taxation. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said that if the proposition con- 
 tained anything substantial, there would be some- 
 thing to entitle it to consideration. He would not 
 call it deceptive or demagoguish, but it was spe- 
 cious and fallacious. The gentleman (Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN) now was the recipient of the favors ot a 
 government that taxed the people of this State 
 $5,000,000 for mischievous purposes, to carry on 
 a war that would cost this state $10,000,000, and 
 
947 
 
 he (Mr. H.] made no complaint about this tax; 
 the proposition of Mr. H. would not prevent the 
 people of this State from being taxed. He seek" 
 to put no limit on the general government in it 
 power to create debt*. The people now paid $3, 
 000,000 tor local taxes ; and this proposition, tho 
 it gave the people the power to vote for a tax, ye 
 it gave the Legislature the power to veto the ac 
 at their next session the people then had. n< 
 power over this veto. This was a delusion, am 
 intended to deceive the people. Why this at 
 tempt to save the people in the penny, while 
 they were open to robbery by the pound ? It was 
 a specious pretence to deceive the people with 
 the idea that they were to be saved from debt am 
 taxation in this way. In every portion there was 
 deceit. Let gentlemen look back to the legisla 
 ture of 1836, and they will find that had it no 
 been for that legislature, which was then the trm 
 conservative branch of the government, the stati 
 might now be groaning under additional millions 
 of debt. While the members of the Legislatur 
 acted upon their individual responsibility, they 
 would be cautious in their acts ; but relieve them 
 from that responsibility by giving to the peo- 
 ple the approval of all laws to create debt 
 and this conservative feature of our representa- 
 tive government is gone, and log-rolling woulc 
 be open and bold in the halls of legislation, invitee 
 by this very provision. Upon every feature of 
 this section was written distrust of the intelli- 
 gence of the people, and it was subversive o 
 every principle of a representative government, 
 He (Mr. W.) believed that under this very propo- 
 sition, debt upon debt could and would be con- 
 tracted. He believed that the members of the 
 legislature coul i be trusted on their honors anc 
 oaths; anu that they would not now, as matters 
 stood, propose any debt, unless it is absolutely 
 necessary. But if this proposition passed, a mem- 
 ber of the legislature might ease his conscience 
 by voting for a tax law, (which he really did not 
 prove,) merely because it was to be submitted to 
 the people ; and that they would have the power 
 to do as they pleased about it 
 
 Mr HOb'FMAN denounced the remarks of Mr. 
 WORDEKT as miserable sophisms He (Mr, H.) 
 had never voted to enlarge federal power, but al- 
 ways to restrict it, whilst he had exeicised a seal 
 in Congress. The whole argument of the gentle- 
 man from Ontario was founded upon the circum- 
 siauce ot his (Mr, H.) holding an otlice under the 
 Federal government. But he alledged that his 
 acts would show him to have been at no time a 
 fcreat advocate for ihe extent of the power of that 
 gov. rnmerit. So lar from a distrust of the people, 
 his article was founded upon the belief that the 
 people knew as well as their representatives what 
 was the best for themselves. Log-rolling would 
 be prevented by the provision that but one law 
 should be submitted to the people at the same 
 time. He distinctly affirmed what the gentleman 
 denied, that the Legislature would be prevented 
 by this section fiom creating new debts. But how 
 could the Convention pass on any measure here, 
 that could restrict federal power. He did not 
 want this tax creating power left with the Legis. 
 lature; he knew what the power of corrupt lob- 
 by black-legs could do on the Legislature, but 
 these public robbers would have little effect on 
 
 the people at large. His proposition was area. 
 sonable safe-guard ; it would, if passed, protect 
 the people in all their rights and privileges from 
 the dreadful calamity of a great debt ; and ihen 
 if, after the people have passed a law to create a 
 tax, that law is found to be oppressive, then by 
 his proposition, power is given to the Legislature 
 to repeal it. He hoped it might pass; and not be 
 met with the deception and stupidity of the gen- 
 tleman from Ontario, (Mr. WORDEN.) 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped no such proposition 
 would be put into the constitution ; it was a new 
 thing, and never was done in this country; it was 
 going back to the old form of personal govern- 
 ment as practised by the Athenians and Romans. 
 Under it, if it passed it would enable the Legisla- 
 ture always to report a log-rolling plan for a tax, 
 to be " submitted to the consideration of the peo- 
 ple." He was in favor ot a good credit system ; 
 without it we never should have had the Erie ca- 
 nal. We wanted more internal improvements. 
 A recent survey had shown that 117 miles through 
 the northern part of the state of New- York was 
 capable of steamboat navigation, except about 
 eight miles; and this done, the Black River and 
 all others would be connected. As to the allu- 
 sion to cities, he would say that in the original 
 the word city, meant " state." He did not much 
 believe in cities. " God made the country, and 
 man made the town," and no mistake. A city is 
 a great political churn; the humbug is imported 
 from abroad, it is localized in the city ; the votes 
 are made ; and it is the same as if one man voted 
 sixteen times. But New- York is the Empire 
 State, and very soon it is heard of at Washing- 
 ton, and is regarded as the voice of the true 
 church. [Laughter.] He had been taxed with 
 hearing a great deal of the same arguments which 
 had been advanced here this morning at a time 
 when he had a seat in the Legislature. He was 
 opposed to the ideas advanced, which were in 
 substance that the Legislature should be made a 
 mere committee, which should report in due or- 
 der under particular directions. He compared 
 the state of New- York to a triangle, the several 
 parts of which had different interests, making up 
 a perfect whole; and all these interests should be 
 properly taken care of. The Erie canal had been 
 juilt with money borrowed in Europe, by which 
 ;he great West had been rendered prosperous. 
 HLe would do justice to that portion of the state, 
 which he knew had no jealousy of other parts of 
 ;he State, His own region was one where the 
 ron mining principle prevailed, always the last 
 :o come to perfection ; and there should be no 
 constitutional .provision which should prevent the 
 ^egislature from holding out an impartial hand in 
 aid of all interests in the different parts of the 
 State. He could not assent to carry this question 
 o the polls, by which isms would only be perpet- 
 jated by appeals to local feelings. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that no one reform had been 
 ailed for more emphatically or earnestly by the 
 jeople than that a proper restriction, in the mat- 
 er of creating debt should be imposed upon the 
 egislature. Believing that entire safety was se- 
 ured by the provisions of the section under con- 
 ideration, he should give them his support. In 
 ubmitting the creation of a debt to the people in 
 he manner provided, the danger arising from a 
 
948 
 
 combination of sectional and local interests was 
 effectually removed. Management and chicanery 
 may and too often will carry an iniquitous project 
 through the legislature, but who would not see that 
 such a thing was next to impossible with the whole 
 people when they were called to vote upon the 
 propriety of establishing a single debt for a sin- 
 gle purpose, and to provide at the same time a 
 tax for its repayment at a comparatively early 
 period. Should a proj ect under such precautions 
 receive the sanction of a majority of the whole 
 people, we should' be bound by every considera- 
 tion to regard it as calculated to promote the gen- 
 eral welfare. The experience of the past,- had 
 demonstrated that to leave to the legislature the 
 unrestricted power to pledge al their will, to any 
 extent and for any time, the property of every 
 individual in theState was productive of the gross- 
 est injustice. The gentleman from Essex (Mr. 
 SIMMONS) had said that to put a limitation upon 
 this arbitrary power, in the manner now proposed 
 was in effect to establish a new era in the history 
 of representative government. It might be so but 
 he would venture to say to his friend that the peo- 
 ple would justly regard the success of this propo- 
 sition as a sure indication of the vast progress now 
 making in the science of government. He hoped 
 that in making this Constitution, we should in- 
 deed create a new era, and that it might be a joy- 
 ful one for those who were striving to promote the 
 greatest good of the greatest number. This should 
 be the object which all the true friends of the 
 people should seek to attain, A restriction upon 
 the debt creating power would eminently favor 
 such an object, and he earnestly hoped it would 
 be made a part of the fundamental law of the 
 land. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said this was no new 
 provision in a Constitution, and he read from the 
 Constitution of New Jersey to show that it had 
 been adopted there. This provision had its ori- 
 gin in the proceedings of 1835, and in the legis- 
 lature of this State in 1842, in the passage of the 
 People's Resolutions; and grew out of the fact 
 that the States of this Union owed an aggregate 
 debt of $200,000,000, two-thirds of which was 
 repudiated. It is in the new Constitution of 
 Louisiana, where it amounts to almost a positive 
 prohibition to borrow any money. It is in the 
 Constitution of Texas, of Iowa,, of Missouri, of 
 Michigan, and in every Constitution that has 
 been adopted since the act of the legislature of 
 this State,- and was borrowed from the ideas and 
 views of the gentleman from Herkimer (Mr. 
 HOFFMAN). He was astonished at the remarks 
 of the gentleman from Essex (Mr. SIMMONS). 
 He did not expect to see any man oppose the 
 principle of this provision, however much they 
 might be opposed to the form. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said he was in favor of some 
 of the principles contained in the fifth section of 
 this report. He was willing to vote for a propo- 
 sition which would prohibit the legislature from 
 creating any debt beyond what was provided for 
 in the third and fourth sections until the law by 
 which such indebtedness should be created had 
 received the sanction of the people. He had al- 
 ways maintained that the whole canal debt which 
 the state nap? owes, had been created in accord- 
 ance with the voice ami wishes of a great majo- 
 
 rity of the people without distinction of party, 
 but we had not been in a situation to know what 
 the voice of the people was, only as it had been 
 expressed through their representatives. There- 
 has been therefore a continual contest going on 
 by the two political parties in this state, as to- 
 which was responsible for the creation of this 
 debt. He was desirous that no such contest 
 should arise in regard to future debts. Much 
 time has been heretofore consumed in the legisla- 
 ture of Ihis state in the discussion of this- subject., 
 and much money wasted in this fruitless effort, 
 to no good purpose. He was therefore in favor 
 of having the voice of the people in relation to the 
 creation of future debts, given in a manner which 
 could not be mistaken, and when that was once 
 expressed through the ballot boxes 3 -it would place 
 the subject beyond the reach of useless and un- 
 profitable controversy. 
 
 There were, however, some provisions in this> 
 section, to which he could not give his- assent. 
 There was no necessity that in every case of 
 loan a direct tax should be levied to pay 
 the interest on such loan,- and create a sinking 
 und to pay the principal in 18 years, as is here 
 provided. The time might come, when money 
 could be safelv borrowed on a pledge of the canal 
 revenues and when these revenues would furnish 
 ample means to pay the interest and extinguish 
 the debt without a resort to direct taxation. It 
 would be absurd, therefore, if money was needed 
 by the state, to look to a direct tax to pay the in- 
 terest and principal of a loan, when the state pos- 
 sessed other means ample for such purpose. ' 
 There were other provisious in the section which 
 he did not approve ; which if suffered to remain # 
 would compel him to vote against the section. 
 He belived it would be sufficient to get the sanc- 
 tion of the people to the creation of a debt, and 
 when once created, leave it to the discretion of 
 the Legislature to provide for the payment of the 
 interest and principal, according as circumstances 
 shall require. Mr. R. said he would send up a 
 section as a substitute for the fifth section, which 
 he would move when in order, and which is as- 
 follows ; 
 
 *' Ex-cept the debts specified in the third and fourth sec- 
 tions of this article, no debt shall hereatter be contracted 
 by, or in behalf ol this State, unless such debt shall be au- 
 thorised by law for some single work OP object, to be spe- 
 cified therein, and no such law shall take efl'ect until it 
 shall, at a general election, have been submitted to the 
 :, and have received a majority of all the votes cast 
 i or against it at such an election." 
 This was all that he deemed necessary in res- 
 pect to the power of the legislature /to create 
 debts. 
 
 Mr- W. TAYLOR was in favor of the proposi- 
 tion ; in tiie Legislative, he had voted for this 
 principle. The people in the several counties 
 h:id passed resolutions in favor of this. He was- 
 glad his colleague (Mr. RHOADES) partially favor- 
 ed this proposition. If we had a surplus on 
 hand, why not go on and do the work you have 
 to do, with this surplus, and not create a debt at 
 all ? Had this been done in 1838, the people ol 
 New York would have been millions ot dollars 
 better oft ; the revenues could have t>en applied 
 to the work, instead of paying the interest of a 
 debt, leaving the lary;e amount of principle unpaid. 
 This propositioD, instead of distrusting the inlelli. 
 
949 
 
 gence of the people, was in re.ility placing the 
 highest amount ol confidence in them. And, by 
 i;, there was no danger of anv system f log-roli- 
 ing, or o! the creation of an\ givut debt. Kr il 
 ihey find lhal two orthiee localities hiive combined 
 to lo-.roll ati'X bill through, the pet pie will vo e 
 against it. It provides all proper sale-guards and 
 restrictions, and ought to be sustained. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS thought that il a law was to be 
 passed to cic.t e a debt, it ought to be submitted 
 to ihe people; and wherever a work has been call 
 ed lor and sanctioned by the people it has always 
 paid i:s expenses and produced a surplus. And 
 any work of a local character made by the State 
 lias always failed. Often have schemes for local 
 improvements been scouted at when first intro- 
 duced, but by polity organization whenever the 
 voles <>t such or such a locality were wanted at 
 an election, then that law has passed. Now, tho' 
 this can be done by party leaders, it never can 
 have any effect on the people at large. He was 
 opposed to the amendment of the gentleman from 
 Oneida. On referring to the history of the state, 
 he said it was found that all works which were 
 general and had met the approval of the people, 
 were productive of good in themselves and of a 
 surplus to the treaswy of the slate. Not so in re- 
 spect to works i hat were local, and got up by po 
 litical paities and combinations. Il this section 
 was adopted, it never would stop one solitary 
 work that the interests of the state might require ; 
 notwithstanding the thousands of local acts which 
 had an effect on political leaders. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE moved the previous question, but 
 withdrew it at the icquest of Mr. RHOADKS. 
 
 Mr. RHOADKS said that his friend and col- 
 league Mr. TAYLOR, had expressed regret that he 
 (Mr. R.) could nc t go with him in the support of 
 this entire section. When in 1842 the Peo- 
 ple's Resolutions were brought forward in 
 the Assembly by the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer, (Mr. LOOMIS,) he (Mr. R.) and his col- 
 league entertained different views in regard to 
 that subject. Subsequent reflection had, howev- 
 er, caused him to change his mind in that mat- 
 ter, and he was now acting with his friend (Mr. 
 T.) as they were both pledged to their constitu- 
 ents to do, up to the spirit of those resolutions. 
 
 Mr. R. said he had now these resolutions be- 
 fore him, and if his colleague would examine his 
 substitute for the fifth section, which he had sent 
 up to the Chair, it would be seen that the substi- 
 tute embraced all that was contained in the Peo- 
 ple's Resolutions of 1S42. He repeated, there- 
 fore, that he had not " stopped short," as his col- 
 league had intimated ; nor should he fail to per- 
 form all that he had pledged himself to do. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD said, 1 desire to amend the 
 sections, so that, " except the debts specified in 
 the 3d and 4th sections, no debt shall be hereafter 
 contracted by, or on behalf of this state." In my 
 judgment these sections have amply provided for 
 these ordinary and extraordinary occasions of 
 debt that are within the proper purposes of the 
 government. In the first place, they allow debts 
 to meet casual deficits, failures in revenue and 
 expenses not provided for to the extent of 
 $1,000,000, and this is a much larger sum than 
 will be required under any imaginable circum- 
 stances, except in times of war or domestic tu- 
 
 mult. The revenues of the canals as their char- 
 ges and liabilities are paid, will be added to I he 
 available property of the state, and thus the le- 
 gislature will be able ultimately to command for a 
 peace establishment, between three and four mil- 
 lions of dollars. I see no good reason why they 
 should be allowed to transcend that limit. In 
 the second- place the power is reserved to the 
 State to contract debts to any amount to suppress 
 insurrection or for the public defence in time of 
 war. Now, I ask, for what other purposes ought 
 debts to be contracted by the public ? Since the 
 establishment of our government but one other- 
 purpose has existed for which the legislature has 
 ventured to incur debt I mean for internal im- 
 provements, and upon this subject I desire very 
 briefly to present several propositions to the con- 
 sideration of the Convention. And first, I assert, 
 that the State government ought not to embark in 
 the construction of canals or rail roads, 01 any 
 other species of internal improvement, except for 
 some object essential to, or connected with 
 its administration or defence ; as for instance, 
 the transportation of troops in time of war. 
 It is not the business of government to be- 
 come a competitor with individuals in any branch 
 of industry or of enterprise. It has other and lof- 
 tier functions to perform. It is not instituted to 
 construct mighty and magnificent works these 
 are no monuments of its beneficence and furnish 
 no index to the happiness of the people. Its sole 
 object is to afford political protection to mankind 
 in their lawful pursuits. It oversteps a safe lim- 
 it when it attempts to supply conveniences to 
 trade or wealth to individuals. I think this po- 
 sition might be amplified with great advantage 
 and enforced by a large variety of illustrations but 
 the brief time afforded me by the order of the house 
 will not permit any thing more than its statement 
 in an abstract form. But if this argument did not 
 exist there is another that appeals to us as prac- 
 tical men with irresistible force. Our experience 
 convinces us that the State ought not to con- 
 struct such works asl have mentioned. Individ- 
 uals, incited by that most general and powerful 
 of motives, the desire of gain, will judge far bet- 
 ter than your legislatures of when and where 
 these works should be constructed. They pos- 
 sess an amount of knowledge that the legislature 
 can rarely attain, as to the necessity for making 
 such works. It is inquired whether they will 
 pay a fair interest upon the investment of capi- 
 tal. If so believe me they will be made but if 
 not, then il would bean act of prodigality for the 
 State to touch them. Individuals will be made 
 cautious by their interest but legislatures have a 
 very slight interest to keep them from a career of 
 reckless extravagance. They desire to secure 
 votes by pleasing particular localities with the 
 grant of an improvement at the public expense 
 and then the members are too often willing to 
 vote an improvement in a remote neighborhood 
 agamsi their judgment and ti;eu principles, in or- 
 der to secure a lew votes for an improvement in 
 their own vicini'y. And even when they have 
 the most earnest disposition to do right, they aie 
 liable to be deceived by the representations of those 
 who fill the lobby, and are deeply interested in 
 the completion ol the project. It has been said 
 lhat private enterprise is inadequate to the largest 
 
950 
 
 woiks. Sir, 1 deny this, Those stupendous la- 
 bors that have fertilized the soil in eveiy land and 
 connected together all climes and all people, have 
 been achieved by the labor of the citizen, and not 
 of the government. Look at the rail roads m En- 
 gland and in this country look at those in your 
 own state and behold what vast channels of trade 
 have been cut out by the labor of tne citizen ; and 
 these v\orks are yet in their infancy. I know you 
 will find some that have failed the Catskill and 
 Canajoharie the Ithaca and Owego, and ihe New 
 York and Erie but those weie ruined by gratui- 
 ties from the state of more than three and a halt 
 millions of dollars, which bred corruptions utier- 
 ly fatal to legitimate enterprise. It has been your 
 misfortune to palsy whatever you touched by a 
 loan of your credit. But how many, let me ask, 
 have been the instances of a failure of private en- 
 terprise, in comparison with yuur failures in slate 
 projects? You have made eleven canals, and 
 works of that nature. Two of them the Erie 
 and Champlam are profitable. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD: They have not paid for 
 themselves. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD: That maybe; but I am will- 
 ing to concede that they will do so. But how is 
 it with the remaining nine? They cost you, from 
 the year 1826 to 1814, $12,620,035. Their defi- 
 ciencies, horn 1830 to 1844, were $3,195,767; and 
 tor 1844, alone, $461,776. I ask could private en- 
 terprise ever have committed so serious a blunder 
 as to expend twelve millions of dollars upon works 
 that cost, yeariy, half a million more than their 
 profits? Indeed, I think not. But, sir, the Erie 
 and Champlain canals may be spoken of again, in 
 this discussion. Of those works I am proud. I 
 am glad they were undertaken; but, in my judg- 
 ment, they ewe much of their success to good for- 
 tune. They pay; but, I ask, how many of the 
 public works undertaken by the other state gov- 
 ernments do the same 1 Look at Pennsylvania, at 
 Illinois, at Mississippi, at Michigan, at Arkansas, 
 at Ohio and show me the state works that pay ? 
 Two hundred millions of dollars of state debt was 
 incurred, and where are the works that pay ? Sir, 
 you can find no parallel in the history of individu- 
 al enterprise to such a series of improvident and 
 unnecessary public works. The expense of con- 
 structing, repairing, and managing works by the 
 public, is far greater than by individuals. The 
 proprietors of an individual undertaking have the 
 power to oversee it themselves ; the state, howev- 
 er, cannot do so, but must depend upon agents, 
 whose interests are to make the cost of construc- 
 tion, repairs, or management as large as possible. 
 The proprietors of an individual undertaking bar- 
 gain for labor and materials more cheaply than 
 the state, which always pays the highest prices, 
 and has its work the mosUnefficiently done. Pro- 
 prietors watch carefully the amount of money 
 drawn from their own pockets by any work; but 
 the drain goes on a long time Irom the treasury of 
 the state before it arrests public attention. Now, 
 sir, I desire to present another argument. [Here 
 the PRESIDENT'S hammer fell,] 
 
 Mr. BRUCE moved the previous question. Ayes 
 40, noes 19. No quorum. 
 
 A second count was had. Ayes 41, noes 23 64. 
 
 Mr. STETSON: No quorum ; 65 being neces- 
 sary. 
 
 The CHAIR (Mr. PATTERSON) declared it to 
 be carried. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD asked what was the main 
 question. 
 
 The pending question was on Mr. WORDEN'S 
 amendment to strike out the 10th, llth and 12th 
 lines of the 5th section; to strike out all after the 
 word " thereof" in the 15th line, and the whole 
 of the 16th line. Strike out the word " approval," 
 in the 17th line, and insert the word " passage." 
 Strike out " by the people" in the 18th line ; and 
 strike out the four last lines, being the last clause 
 of the section. 
 
 Mr. MANN called for the ayes and noes. 
 
 They were ordered 
 
 Mr. STRONG called for the reading of the sec- 
 tion as amended. 
 
 It was read. 
 
 The ayes and noes resulted thus Ayes 34 
 noes 70 : 
 
 AYES- Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H, Back, 
 us, Baker, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, Chamberlain, Crooker, 
 Dodd, Dorlon, Graham, Hawley, E. Huntington, Jordan, 
 Marvin, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, 
 Porter, Richmond, Salisbury Simmons, W. H. Spencer, 
 Stow, Strong, Taggart.Van Schoonhoven, Warren, Wor- 
 den, A. Wright 34. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Bascom, Bergen, Bowdish, 
 Brown, Brundage. Burr, Cambreleng, D. D. Campbell, R. 
 Campbell, jr. Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Cornell, Cuddeback, 
 Dana, Danforth, Dubois, Flanders, Gebhard, Greene, Har- 
 rison, Hart, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. Hunt- 
 ington, Hutchinson, Jones, Kemble, Kernan, Kingsley, 
 Kirkland, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Morris, Mun- 
 ro, Murphy, Nellis, Perkins, Powers, President, Riker, 
 Ruggles, Russell, St John, Sanford, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Shepard, {Smith, Stanton, [Stephens, Stetson, Swackha- 
 mer.Talt.J. J. Taylor, W*. Taylor, Tilden, Town*end, 
 Tuthill, Ward, Waterbury, White, Witbeck, Wood, Yaw 
 ger, Youngs 70. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN'S amendment was lost. ' 
 
 The question then recurred on the amendment 
 offered by Mr. SHEPARD. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS demanded the ayes and noes 
 on this. They were ordered, and resulted ayes 
 31, noes 73. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD'S proposition was lost. 
 
 Mr. BAKER asked if his proposition was in 
 order. 
 
 The CHAIR said it was not in order when it 
 was offered. 
 
 It was only offered conditionally, in case the 
 proposition to strike out the 10th, llth and 12th 
 lines prevailed. 
 
 The question was then taken on the passage of 
 the 5th section : 
 
 It was carried, Ayes 72, Noes 36, 108. 
 Absent 20. 
 
 The 6th section was read : 
 
 apj 6. Every law which imposes, continues, or revives a 
 tax, shall distinctly state the tax and the object to which 
 it is to be applied, and it shall not be sufficient to refer to 
 any other law to fix such tax or object. 
 
 Mr. BAKER intended to move to re-commit 
 the 5th section, with instructions to the commit- 
 tee to insert the amendments he had offered, and 
 should so move as soon as they reached the end 
 of the article. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that in order that a law 
 might show what &. tax was for, this section was 
 inserted ; that it might show on its face what it 
 was passed for, and that there should be no neces- 
 sity to go and look through two or three other 
 acts to find out the meaning of the new one. 
 
951 
 
 The section was intended to effect this and noth- 
 ing else. 
 
 The section was then passed, unanimously. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD moved the following as a 
 new section to come in after the Gth section : 
 
 ^ _. No direct tax shall be levied on the people of this 
 State so long as the revenues ol the State shall be sufficient 
 to meet the demands ot the several sinking lunds to pay 
 the debts of the State in the preceding article provided, 
 and the expenses of the State Government. 
 
 Mr. C. said it was not the policy of the State to 
 impose a direct tax on the people for the next 20 
 years, whilst the revenues of the canals produced 
 a surplus. Mr. C. then read from a table pre- 
 pared by himself, relative to the Salt tax, various 
 statistical matters in support of his position. He 
 did not believe the next ten years would be as ex- 
 pensive as the last ten years ; he did not believe 
 it would go over $600,000 annually. And then 
 you will have to raise by direct tax $250,000 or 
 $2,500,000 in ten years. Mr. C. then went into 
 the history of the Salt tax, and the revenues that 
 have been derived from them. He did not be- 
 lieve we should have over $10,000 a year from 
 the salt tax : nor more than $101,000 from the 
 Auction duties; making a total of $111,000, tho' 
 he had put it down at $150,000; add to this the 
 $200,000 secured by the vote of yesterday ; and 
 you have $350,000 leaving $250,000 to be pro- 
 vided for by direct tax. Now, he did not believe 
 that this sum should be raised out of people who 
 were not at all benefitted by the canals ; whilst 
 these canals were producing a surplus revenue. 
 And therefore he offered this section. 
 
 Mr. STOW said that it was urged here substan- 
 tially that the canals ought to sustain the govern- 
 ment because '.hey were the property of the state. 
 That was not the object he urged, nor was that 
 the policy of the government in building them. 
 This would be requiring the canal counties alone 
 to sustain the whole expense of government. He 
 insisted that we should support the government 
 by taxation, it was the prudent policy, and kept 
 the people awake to the direct action of the gov- 
 ernment. Even if it was in his power he would 
 not free the people entirely from taxation. But 
 above all he would never consent that the canal 
 counties should pay exclusively for the suste- 
 nance of government. It was as impolitic as it 
 was unjust these revenues should go where they 
 rightfully belonged and were required to the 
 public works. 'He believed that the people fully 
 understood this subject of taxation, arid were 
 desirous to be relieved entirely from it. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS was under the necessity of dif- 
 fering to a great extent from those with whom he 
 usually acted. His county had no sort of interest 
 in any further works of improvement present or 
 prospective. He was glad of this that that coun- 
 ty never would stand in need of the state bounty. 
 The whole state in 1835. pledged the resources 
 of the canals after doing justice to other interests 
 to the enlargement of the Erie canal. It was not 
 a party measure, and the county of St. Lawrence 
 was the first to protest against a departure from 
 that system. If it had been avowed in '42, that 
 these revenues were to be taken away from the 
 canals for purposes other than their improvement, 
 after paying the debt due from them to the State, 
 that law would never have been passed. Such 
 
 was not the doctrine of the veto message. He 
 did not contemplate that the Genesee Valley or 
 Black River canal would ever pay much more 
 than thru- expenses, but the question of tolls was 
 not the only one involved. The facilities they 
 would afford for business and completion would 
 reduce the price of commodities and thus repay 
 to the people what they might be obliged to pay 
 for the support of government in the way of tax- 
 es. The state had already afforded facilities of 
 that description to other counties. And even if 
 they had not paid profits they had tended to pro- 
 mote the objects to which he alluded above. As 
 the Convention had already legislated in this mat- 
 ter to a certain degree he was willing to go and 
 legislate entirely in the matter. He thought 
 abundant provision had already been made for the 
 support of this government. All the taxation 
 that would be required would be about a third of 
 a mill on the dollar and that was no burthen at 
 all on the people. 
 
 Mr. WHITE proposed the following amend- 
 ment to that of Mr. CHATFIELD : 
 
 " Provided, however, that no more than $200,000 annu- 
 ally shall bi takt n trom the the canal revenue, until the 
 Kile canal enlargement, and the Geuesee Valley and 
 Black River canals are completed." 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said that he was about to 
 submit the following amendment, which he 
 would read before the question was taken on the 
 last amendment : 
 
 9. If at any time after the period of five years from 
 the adoption ol this constitution, the revenues of the state 
 unappropriated by the last preceding article, shall not be 
 sufficient to defray the necessaiy expenses of the govern- 
 ment without continuing or laying a direct tax, ilie legis- 
 lature may at its discretion.supply ihe deficiency in whole 
 or in pirt, from the surplus revenues ofihe canals, after 
 complying with the provisions of the first two sections of 
 the last preceding article for paying the interest and ex- 
 tinguishing the principal of the canal and general lund 
 debt. 
 
 He was disposed to be liberal in this matter. 
 He would allow the tax which he considered 
 would be necessary for five years, to run for that 
 time, and then he would leave the question to the 
 discretion of the legislature. We had already 
 guaranteed the completion of the public works, 
 and he would not guarantee the continuance of a 
 tax to a period even alter that work was perform- 
 ed. Mr. T. considered that there had been a 
 great change in the course of certain politicians 
 in regard to the question of taxation since 1S42. 
 Then, those who were now so clamorous almost 
 in favor of taxation, were the most bitter denun- 
 ciators of it. He trusted that this proposition 
 would be adopted. He desired a vote upon it, so 
 that gentleman might show their hands. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD hoped that none of. these 
 amendments would prevail. He desired to pre- 
 sent to the Convention the question of direct tax- 
 ation or no taxation, and he desired that every 
 member here might record his vote on the sub- 
 ject. Gentlemen here talked as if these canals 
 were the exclusive property of the west, and as 
 if they had exclusive control over them. The 
 position was a falsehood, and unjust to the other 
 portions of the State, which had been and would 
 be, directly or indirectly liable for the construction 
 and continuance of these works. Gentlemen 
 were willing to tax the people in a thousand 
 ways, but were not willing to tax those who 
 
952 
 
 transported produce on the canals, a single cen 
 for the support of government. The great wes 
 already paid nearly half the tolls of these canals 
 and it was now proposed to give them a greatei 
 chance for competition, to the injury of produc- 
 tion in the State, by reducing the tolls. This he 
 did not consider just and fair. Mr. C. was sur- 
 prised at the votes of the gentlemen from St. 
 Lawrence to-day and yesterday, and insisted thai 
 they were directly antagonistic to the doctrine ol 
 the Veto message. He thought the Governor 
 would have ample occasion to cry out with 
 Shakspeare, " God save me from my friends." 
 Mr. C. further urged his views. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS enquired how the gentleman 
 proposed to meet the expenses of government be- 
 yond the $200,000 already appropriated for that 
 purpose. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD desired to have the vote di- 
 rectly on the question of taxation and no taxation. 
 If the proposition was adopted, then the vote of 
 yesterday could be reconsidered. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL, in reply to Mr. C., said that 
 the delegates from St. Lawrence did not consult 
 the Governor on any of these questions. But he 
 denied that the Governor or any statesman in this 
 country would deny the right of the people to tax 
 themselves. Mr. R. deprecated what he consider- 
 ed to have been the disgraceful appeals to the 
 principles of demagogueism on this question, that 
 had been made to the people by gentlemen of 
 both parties here. Mr. R. was in favor of the 
 principle of direct taxation to at least one-third 
 of the support of government. It would tend to 
 a more watchful care of the government on the 
 part of the people. Mr. R. said that he fully sus- 
 tained the proposition of Mr. TAYLOR. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS regretted to see his friend from 
 St. Lawrence so much excited on this subject. 
 Mr. L. did not believe the gentleman would at- 
 tribute such motives in his cooler moments, as he 
 had, to the action of gentlemen here. Mr. L. 
 could not fully agree with the amendment of Mr. 
 CHATFIELD. If the $350,000 appropriated to the 
 support of the government by the last article 
 should not be sufficient, then, under the gentle- 
 man's provision, there would be no authority for 
 the legislature to provide for the deficiency. He 
 could not, therefore, go for the amendment under 
 those circumstances. Mr. L. alluded further to 
 the amendment of Mr. WHITE, adopted yester- 
 day, as rendering the adoption of the amendment 
 of Mr. C., at this time, impolitic. He urged also 
 that that provision prevented the enlargement of 
 the Oswego canal, so easily to be produced, and 
 thus gave an advantage to Buffalo as against Os- 
 wego. 
 
 Mr. TALMADGE thought that the provisions 
 already made would check the expenses of the 
 legislature through improvident appropriations, 
 but if not, he would have them thrown directly 
 on the Vesponsiblity of imposing direct taxation. 
 He thought ample provision had been made for 
 an economical and prudent administration of the 
 government. 
 
 Mr. STOW in reply to Mr. LOOMIS, denied that 
 ample provision was made for the Oswego canal. 
 But at any rate, that canal was a mere shun-pike 
 to reduce the tolls on the Erie canal. Mr. S. 
 went on further to denounce the Oswego ca- 
 
 nal as aided by a foreign work, &c., &c. 
 To aid such a thing was antagonistic to the poli- 
 cy of the state. 
 
 Mr LOOMIS did favor free trade, and he de- 
 sired to see the business not confined alone to 
 pass through the city of the gentleman's resi- 
 dence, Buffalo the boasted Queen city of the 
 West. He was aware of the sensitiveness of the 
 gentleman on this subject it was evinced yes- 
 terday, when he (Mr. L.) made a motion to in- 
 clude this canal. He could well understand the 
 interest of the gentleman on this subject. He 
 Mr. L. desired to see all parts of the State equal- 
 ly favored. 
 
 Mr. STOW rose to reply, when 
 
 Mr. MURPHY raised the point of order. The 
 gentleman from Erie and Herkimer had both spo- 
 ken on this question. 
 
 The CHAIR decided the point of order to be 
 correct. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN further opposed the amendment. 
 He reviewed the previous action of the Conven- 
 tion, showing what had been proposed, and what 
 had been appropriated from the canal revenues. 
 The result was a compromise, reducing the 
 amount of the sinking fund to $1,650,000. What 
 followed ? The original report of the finance com- 
 mittee appropriated only $172,500 to the ordina- 
 ry support of government. That was every dol- 
 lar thus appropriated. We yesterday appropria- 
 ted $200,000 for the same purpose. The debt has 
 been confessedly fully provided for. When, af- 
 ter this, he saw gentlemen still claiming that 
 every dollar of the surplus should be left to be 
 frittered away by the legislature, he held up these 
 gentlemen to the country as being hostile to in- 
 ;ernal improvements, and the completion of our 
 unfinished works. They could not escape from 
 :his position. And now it was gravely proposed 
 to fix a rule in the constitution, that under no 
 circumstances should the state ever levy a tax. 
 Such a proposition was little short of treason to 
 ;he government. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that if he might be allowed 
 to classify the different interests in this house, 
 vhere there should be no interest but the interest 
 )f the whole state, arid where all are actuated by 
 he same spirit of patriotism, and to designate 
 ;hem according as they have manifested them- 
 selves here, he would say that there were at least 
 :hree such interests. One was in favor of apply- 
 ng the surplus revenues after paying the amount 
 iet apait for ttie public debt, to the completion of 
 lie canals at all hazards ; another was opposed to 
 ;he continuance of the state tax in any event; 
 and the third, at the head of which was thechair- 
 mon of the finance committee, (Mr. HOFFMAN,) 
 vas in favor of reimbursing the state for the 
 amount advanced by it, either directly or indi- 
 rectly, for the construction of the canals. For 
 limself, he professed to belong to all these inte- 
 rests ; and he thought it would appear that there 
 was really no existence of the distinctions to which 
 le alluded, among the members of the conven- 
 ion. He made these remarks in view of the pro- 
 >osition which, in the spirit of compromise, he 
 tad made the other day, as an amendment to lie 
 amendment of the gentleman from Schoharie (Mr. 
 CK,) to the substitute of the gentleman from 
 Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS,) for the article of the 
 
953 
 
 finance committee. The gentleman from Scho- 
 harie proposed to set apart S'l ,'2i )d,i M)i) annually 
 towards the payment of the in to rest, and princi- 
 pal of the canal debt, instead of #1,300,000 aspro- 
 vided in the amendment of the grntk'inan from 
 Herkimer, and after setting apart $;>(>0,00() annu- 
 ally until the canal debt shall be paid, for the in- 
 terest of the general debt, and $1,500,000 annual- 
 ly when the canal debt shall be paid for the ex- 
 tinguishment of the general fund debt, to pay 
 .'KJOofthe remaining surplus towards the 
 expense of the government of the State, and the 
 residue to complete the Erie and other canals. 
 His own amendment was to this last proposition, 
 and was to the effect that no appropriation should 
 be made for the completion of the public works 
 until the half mill tax shuld cease. He was in 
 favor of completing those works ; because it was 
 not only the interest of the county of Kings, and 
 especially of Brooklyn and Williamsburgh, but 
 because he believed it to be in consonance with 
 their wishes. Kings county had always favored 
 the construction of the canals. When New York 
 and the river counties gave almost an unanimous 
 vote against the construction of the Erie canal, 
 his own county cast her vote in its favor. Her 
 representatives have steadily adhered to the same 
 policy since. He intended by his own vote to 
 keep up that character. But his county was also 
 adverse to State taxes as at present levied. His 
 constituents did not object to a just tax for the 
 purposes of the state ; but they had been made 
 tb feel that the present tax is unequal and unjust 
 upon them. By the low valuation of property in 
 other parts of the State by the assessors, afc 
 the full valuau ms in Kings county, that county 
 is made to pay one hundred per cent, more 
 than most of the State. Relief against this 
 inequality has been asked for from the legislature 
 but in vain.. We feel, therefore, desirous to be 
 relieved from this tax, for this reason if for no 
 other. But, no community wishes to be taxed, 
 and in this feeling we participate. On the other 
 hand, it is claimed by the finance committee that 
 there is due from the canals to the general fund, 
 or, to speak more correctly, to the state, an amount 
 the annual interest of which is $672,500, and that 
 this should be reimbursed before the canals should 
 be completed. In this view he was willing to 
 coincide, and to provide for its repayment. Now, 
 his amendment was intended to meet all these 
 views ; and that consistently with the policy as 
 it is called of 1842. If he understood the gen- 
 tleman from Schoharie, the appropriation of $1,- 
 200,000 will provide a fund sufficient to discharge 
 the canal debt according to the guaranty of the 
 act of that year, within the time contemplated ; 
 that is, such a fund as will be equal to one ere 
 ated by the annual appropriation of an amount 
 equal to one- third of the interest of the canal 
 debt remaining unpaid. By transferring the $100,- 
 000 difference between the $1,200,000 and $' 
 300,000 to the general fund for the expenses of 
 the state, we would have, in addition to the $] 72,- 
 000 set apart for that purpose, $272,000, a sum 
 which, with the other revenues of the state, de- 
 riveable from the auction and salt duties, will 
 yield enough for the ordinary expenses of the 
 government. If that is so, then the effect of his 
 amendment would be to furnish a sufficient fund 
 
 94 
 
 without taxation or interference with the comple- 
 ion of the canals, which Ujp proposed by the 
 amendment of the gentleman from Schoharie ; 
 while at the same time the state would be reim- 
 bursed the annuity of $672, '>00, for the two a- 
 nounts of $350,000 set apart for the interest of 
 the general fund debt, and $272,000 would 
 amount sufficiently near that sum. The house 
 would recollect that he was prevented from 
 moving his amendment, which had merely been 
 read for information, by the call of the previous 
 question upon the*first section of the substitute 
 f the gentleman from Herkimer ; and from vot- 
 ing for the sum of $1,200,000 instead of $1,300,- 
 000 by the withdrawal of that part of his amend- 
 ment by the gentleman from Schoharie. He was 
 thus compelled to vote for the last part of that 
 amendment, although it did not altogether meet 
 his views, or else vote against any provision for 
 completing the public works, and did so vote. 
 But he rose to state now that he was prepared to 
 go back and adopt the amendment which he ori- 
 ginally proposed, but he could not vote for the 
 proposition of the gentleman from Otsego (Mr. 
 CHATFIKLD) which provided, as his amendment 
 did, that no tax should be levied for the expenses 
 of government as long as the canal revenues were 
 sufficient, but which did not reduce the amount 
 appropriated to the canal fund from $1,300,000 to 
 $1,200,000, as was necessary to leave sufficient 
 for the purpose of completing the canals. 
 
 Mr. PA i TERSON further opposed the amend- 
 ment on the ground that ample provision had al- 
 ready been made lor the expenses of government 
 in his opinion. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. RHOADES, 
 STETSON, BASCOM, WATERBURY, when 
 
 Mr. BERGEiN asked for the previous question* 
 and there was a second, and the main question or- 
 dered. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. WHITE'S 
 amendment, and there were ayes 53, nays 56, as 
 follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angel, Archer, Al fault, F.F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Baker, Kascom, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, D. D. 
 Campbell, Candee, Chamberlain, Crooker, Dana, Dodd, 
 Dorlon. Gardner, Gebhaid, Harris, Hawley, Hotchkiss, E. 
 Huntington, Hyde, Jordan. Kiikland, Maun, Marvin, Me- 
 Nitt, Morris, Murphy, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Patter- 
 son, Pennim'an, Perkins, Rhoades, Richmond, Salisbury, 
 Smith, K. Sp.-ncer, W. 11. Spencer, Stanton, Strong, Tag- 
 gart, Tallmadge, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, Whitf , Wor- 
 den. A. Wriijhi 63. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Brown, Brumlage, Burr, 
 Cambreleng, ChatlMd, Clark, Clyde, Cornell, Cuddeback, 
 Dantorth, Uubois, Flanders, Graham, Creene, Harrison, 
 Hart, Hoffman, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchinson, 
 Jones, Reman, Kingsley, Loomis, McNeil, N e ^' s i Nicoll. 
 Power*,Presiden t.lliker.Ruggles, Russell, St. John, Sanfor.1, 
 Sears, fhaw, Sheldon, Sh/.'pard, Stephens, Stetson, Swack- 
 hamer, J.J. iVylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, Tut- 
 hill, Ward, Waterbury, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, Yaw 
 ger, Youngs^uG. 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR asked lor the question on his 
 amendment. 
 
 The CHAIR decided the amendment not to be 
 pending, not being in order when offered. 
 
 Alter aonre conversation as to the point of order, 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to lay Mr. CHATFIELD'S 
 amendment on the table. 
 
 The CHAIR decided this moiion not to be in 
 order, the previous question having been ordered. 
 
954 
 
 The question was then taken on the amendment 
 ot Mr. CHATFIELD, and there were ayes 42, nays 
 72. 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved that the Convention 
 take a recess. Agreed to. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN offered the following as a new 
 section to come in after the 6th section : 
 
 K The provision contained in section three of the next 
 
 preceding article for the disposition*; the canal revenues, 
 shall continue in force until the 1st day of January, I860, 
 and after that time the whole of the 01 dinary expenses of 
 the state government, except such portions thereof as shall 
 be provided lor by other means than by a direct tax, shall 
 be paid from tlie aaid canal revenues; and no direct tax 
 shall thereafter be levied upon the people of this state to 
 pay the whole or any portion of such expense, unless there 
 shall be a deficiency in the said canal revenues to pay the 
 same after complying with the provisions of sections one 
 and two of the said article. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL offered the following as a sub- 
 stitute for the section : 
 
 i 7. If at any time after the period of eight years from 
 the adoption ot this Constitution, the revenues of ihe state 
 unappropriated by the said preceding section shall not be 
 sufficient to defray the necessary expenses of the govern- 
 ment without continuing or laying a direct tax, the Leg- 
 islature may at its discretion supply the deficiency in 
 whole or in part from the surplus revenues of the canals, 
 after complying with the provisions ol the first t\\ o sections 
 of the last precding article, for paying the interest and 
 extinguishing the principal of the canal and general fund 
 debt But the sum thus appropriated from the surplus re- 
 venues of the canals shall not exceed annually $360,< 00, 
 including <he sum ot $200,000 provided by the 3d section 
 of the last preceding article for the expenses of govern- 
 men 1 until the general fund debt shall be extinguished or 
 until the Erie canal enlargement and Genesee Valley and 
 Black Hiver canals shall be completed; and after that debt 
 shall bi> paid, or the said canals shall be completed, then 
 the sum of $67-2,500, or so much thereof as shall be neces- 
 sary, may be annually appropriated to defray the expen- 
 ses'^ the government. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to amend 
 by inserting ten years instead of five years. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said, that this was the balance of 
 the interest on the debt that the general fund 
 claimed against the canal; and that the sum was 
 lar^e enough to cover the interest for eight years. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that the third section of the 
 original report was stricken out. He wanted a 
 specific appropriation of these surplus revenues. 
 The friends of the Erie canal wished to take the 
 other two canals along with them ; and so he 
 went with them. But he thought the proposition 
 of Mr. W. TAYLOR as very similar to Mr. 
 HOFFMAN'S. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR had modified his original 
 proposition. The canals were annually indebted 
 to the General Fund $'672,600. He would' read 
 his proposition. It was read as offered above by 
 Mr. RUSSELL. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that the sum he had put 
 in $322,500 would come within the estimate 
 these canals had to pay as an annuity to compen- 
 sate the General Fund. There would be over 
 $670,000 thus appropriated to meet the Sinking 
 Fund and the State expenses. 
 
 The proposition was then read. 
 
 Mr. STETSON was opposed to this proposition, 
 there was no point in it. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN raised a point of order. You 
 cannot in the same bill bring forward a partial re 
 
 peal of a provision that has been already adopted 
 without a reconsideration of that section. 
 
 The CHAIR said the gentleman from Clinton 
 was in order. 
 
 Mr. STETSON did not like that point which 
 left it to the discretion of the legislature, to say 
 whether direct taxes should be continued or not. 
 It was not fair to those who paid the taxes. Who 
 is to determine when these canals are to be com- 
 pleted, or when this direct tax is to cease ? As 
 the provision now stands, this thing is to be 
 thrown into the elections ; and it will have the 
 effect of putting off the completion of these late- 
 ral canals for many years, and will make them as 
 expensive as possible. The two interests will be 
 eternally at war with each other. You may pre- 
 scribe the pill in any shape, but the people will 
 feel the medicine, and hold the doctor responsi- 
 ble. He represented 40,000 freemen on this floor, 
 who were to be taxed directly, and by this Con- 
 vention. He repeated the story of Dr. Johnson, 
 " Taxation, no Tyranny." He added that per- 
 haps they put the iron heel of taxation on the 
 people, lest the farmer's ox, should forget to 
 draw. This was the doctrine of some gentlemen 
 on this floor. He wished to see who here were 
 willing to go for this oppressive taxation. Let his 
 ight hand forget its cunning, and his tongue 
 cleave to the roof of his mouth, when he ceased 
 to stand up for his constituents, who were writh- 
 ing under the burthen of this grinding op- 
 pression. Let gentlemen call us demagogues if 
 they please ; let them bear the responsibility of 
 putting this tax on the people for twenty-five 
 ytars. Let their posterity see who was in favor 
 of these lateral canals : let it crawl up on the pa- 
 ges of the Constitution ; let them twine around 
 it the garland of taxation, if they choose, and as 
 the thorns of it draw the blood and sweat from 
 the brow of labor, let them receive the curses 
 they will have heaped upon them by these very 
 laborers. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that they knew veiy well 
 where the gentleman from Onond<)ga (Mr. TAY- 
 LOR) is, and how he stands. And in the 
 matter of taxation, he would hand the gentle- 
 man from Clinton (Mr. STETSON) over to his friend 
 from Herkimer, whose plan continued taxation 
 till the debt was paid. The plan ot the con.-rnit- 
 tee proposed direct taxes, lo be continued in quite 
 as bad a manner as any of the propositions that 
 had been adopted. He would not he taunted by 
 the gentleman from Clinton, or any one else, about 
 his responsibility to his constituents. He knew 
 thai respoKsibiluy, and felt it s and acted accord- 
 ingly. 
 
 Mr. STETSON disclaimed any such personal 
 reflection. The remark was I hat fhe vote carried 
 with it that responsibility that he was himself 
 free from that responsibility. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY replied that he explained fully 
 this morning his position on this question, as ex. 
 hibited by his amendment ihat he wanted these 
 canals completed, and th;it he wished to avoui tax- 
 ation, and to have a lair account taken between 
 these canals and thj state. His amendment would 
 have accomplished this. Now had he been ar- 
 raigned for inconsistency by any body else, he 
 would not perhaps have deemed it worthy of con. 
 sideration but coming from one who voted for 
 
955 
 
 the li!;n k River can il originally, and now came 
 here oppo-vd to it, he did regard it as calling for 
 some r-'inai k. 
 
 * Mr. STETSON replied, and Mr. MURPHY re- 
 joined. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY replied as to the $1,300,000 he 
 had voted for. It was because Mr. BOUCK had 
 withdrawn hi* plan I'or #1,200,000 and as there was 
 no other proposition before the house, there was 
 no other plan fur him tc vote on. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR said he had offered this pro 
 position as a compromise; he would not attempt 
 to buy votes by sacrificing a Principle. The Onei- 
 da Riv j r Impiovernent had $59,000 laid out on it, 
 and only wanted $10.000 or $15,000 to complete 
 the lock. He trusted they would act here upon 
 principle high and holy and not on log-rolling 
 arrangement^. It was unjust .to this River not to 
 tini>h it with (lie others. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY withdrew any imputation on Mr. 
 TAYLOR'S motives. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN regretted, after having settled 
 very unanimously yesterday, and on principles of 
 concession and compromise a question affecting 
 great and important interests, that it should be 
 disturbed again. He had voted finally in favor of 
 that question, but with great reluctance, and not 
 without apprehension that he had yielded more 
 than he ou^ht to have done. He was sure he had 
 gone as far as his constituents would justify, and 
 <uld go no further. Mr. W. said he would 
 not now speak of the merits of this claim against 
 the Erie canal of thirteen millions of dollars : but 
 he would advert to what had al eady been charg- 
 ed on that canal. The cost of the lateral canals 
 was until l.vj , a burthen on the general fund 
 when these ranals were authorised, the constitu- 
 tion prohib : i.ed tiie legislature from taking or ap- 
 plying the tolls or revenues of the Erie and Cham- 
 plain canals to the construction of the lateral ca- 
 nals or to any other purpose than the completion 
 of the Erie and Champlain canals and the payment 
 of the debt a.nd interest incurred in their con- 
 struction. When the Erie and Champlain canals 
 were completed, and a fund created out of the 
 tolls and revenues sufficient for the payment of 
 the debt incurred in their construction, the gen- 
 eral fund was found to be charged with the cost 
 of all the lateral canals, and the debts created or 
 authorised to be created for their construction. 
 All these liabilities for the lateral canals were 
 contracted prior to 1838, and prior to the accum- 
 ulation of a fund for the payment of the Erie and 
 Oharnplain canal debts. This liability of the gen- 
 eral fund for the cost of the lateral canals was 
 over nine millions of dollars, they having 
 cost over that amount. In 1841, provisions hav- 
 ing been made for the payment of the Erie and 
 Champlain canals debt,out of the revenues of those 
 canals, the whole subject of the claim of the gen- 
 eral i'und on those canals for the causes now sub- 
 sisted on the collateral aid from the auction and salt 
 duties and other revenues were considered a bill 
 ; hut year pas's;d,which in effect charged on the 
 Erie canal the entire debts of the lateral canals, 
 being equal to $y,OiJO,UUU. In addition to which 
 the tolls of the canals to the amount of $200,000, 
 annually appropriated to the use of the State, to 
 ^efniv its ordinary expenses. This yearly charge 
 of $200,000 being equal to a gross charge of $5,- 
 
 000,000, making over $14,000,000 charged on the 
 Krie canal in Is 11, and relieving the General 
 Fund to that amount. By the provisions you 
 have adopted, the Erie canal is to be charged 
 with the 3,000,000 loaned to the New York and 
 Erie Railroad and the other loans to defaulting 
 railroads, and the entire debt of the General 
 Fund besides, exceeding in all $5,500,000. You 
 have then, said Mr. W. charged already on the 
 tolls and revenues of the Erie canal ove> $20,- 
 000,000, and all this is on account of what has 
 been claimed to bg due by reason of the salt and 
 auction duties having been applied to the con- 
 struction of this canal. Is not this enough ? 
 Can you safely undertake to impose other and 
 additional burthens on this canal ? He made this 
 inquiry in no spirit of intimidation, but in the 
 spirit of concession and compromise. However 
 it. might be understood in the eastern part of the 
 State, the farmers of Western New York would 
 believe this to be a local, sectional tax on their 
 productions. It would fall unjustly upon the ma- 
 jority of the voters of the State. They might 
 submit to the impositions already laid upon them, 
 or which was about the same thing, on the tolls 
 of the Erie canal ; but they would not consent to 
 additional impositions. You now propose to add 
 to the burthens already imposed $150,000 a year, 
 equal to three millions of dollars, making the 
 whole charge on the Erie canal more than $23,- 
 000,000. Now, said Mr. W., I appeal to the 
 members of thi^Convention as representing 
 the entire State-^R there is not already a sum 
 cient sum charged on the Erie canal. 
 Is it wise, or politic, now to cripple 
 ;t)at. great, work in iis unfinished condition us is 
 proposed with an additional charge of $19,000,- 
 000 over that imposed on it by (he law oi 1841? 
 Mr. W. said he had heard with surprise, the asser- 
 tion here that the Erie canal had injured the tann- 
 ing interests on the North river ; thai Ihe agricul- 
 tural interests of Western N< w York were more 
 flourishing than those of the river couniie.-. The 
 fact might be so, but it was attributable toother 
 causes than the Erie canal. He could point Mis 
 friend from Delaware (Mr WATERBCJRY,) who 
 had spoke on this subject to a butler caose ^than 
 he had assigned. The tanners of Western New 
 York were the owners of a iree soil, the very ti- 
 de under which they held, prohibited the crea. 
 tion of estates partaking of all the objectionable 
 fe.ituiesof feudal teiruies, v\ hicli he believed more 
 than -any thing else, pressed down the agricullu- 
 ril interests of this section of the Slate. He had 
 desired to see the agricultural interests of Ibis 
 portion of the State relieved from these encum- 
 brances, upon some sound principle of justice and 
 of right. Such, he believed to be tho wishes of 
 the agricultural portion ot the we-urn part, of the 
 Stare. He hoped to see the fanners of the entire 
 state what those of the western portion were, the 
 free owners of the free .soil they cultivated. He 
 did not believe such a slate of things would be 
 liustened by t':is attempt to throw additional bur- 
 thens upon the we.-tr-rn portion of the State. 
 
 The gentleman from Suffolk, , (Mr. CAMBREL- 
 ENG,) had, t he other day.spoken of the enlargement 
 as prejudicial to the interests of the tanners ol Wes- 
 tern N.York, and said they must soon stop the grow- 
 ing of wheat, as had been done in the river coun- 
 
956 
 
 ties and on Long Island. That was possible, but 
 they would not stop their progress in intelligence. 
 enterprise or public virtue ; while they remained 
 the same class of men they now are, they will not 
 be arrested in prosperity : they may be obliged by 
 reason of change of circumstances to change their 
 agricultural productions, but all such changes 
 would be the result of practical wisdom and tend 
 to increase their prosperity. 
 
 We are endeavoring to settle, said Mr. W., 
 great questions of public interests, to provide for 
 the payment of our state debt, and provide for the 
 completion of the unfinished public works. He 
 had endeavored to settle these questions in the 
 spirit of conciliation and compromise, and for that 
 purpose had gone as far as he could consistently, 
 with his views of the interests of the entire state. 
 Will you have this conciliation this compro- 
 mise, or will you go on adding burthens on the 
 Erie canal, and load it down with debts and taxes 
 which belonged to the state to pay ? If these tolls 
 out. of which you now propose to pay your debts, 
 come out of the producer, or, as is contended 
 here by some out of the consumer, it equally is a 
 local tax whether they are paid by the consu- 
 mer in New- York, or the farmer who raises the 
 article, the principle of taxing these tolls to the 
 additional amount now proposed is unjust. It 
 will be satisfactory to no section ot the state. It 
 will create local jealousies and animosities, that 
 will operate prejudicially to the interests of the 
 whole state. If New-York city understands this 
 question properly, (and hew^glad to find him- 
 self acting with many of her intelligent represen- 
 tatives here) it must be opposed to this new at- 
 tempt to cripple the enlargement, and prevent 
 its speedy completion by this additional burthen. 
 He trusted the attempt would not prevail. 
 
 Mr. GRAHAM should vote for this proposition, 
 as probably the best he could get. We had been 
 told that we should not be taxed in case the arti- 
 cle was adopted as the other day. The expense 
 of the government had been $700,000, and what 
 assurance was there that it would not be as much 
 hereafter? He considered this as doing away 
 with the objectional part of the proposition adopt- 
 ed the other day. By the provisions of that pro- 
 position as adopted the other day, direct taxation 
 would be inevitable. When these works were 
 commenced, one of the members from Ulster 
 voted for the Grand Canal bill, as then called, 
 undoubtedly as he supposed, because it was right. 
 Therefore, Ulster could not be considered as hos- 
 tile to the project then. The language then used 
 was you will never be taxed it will be a source 
 of revenue it would pay all the expenses of gov- 
 ernment. It went on, there was no particular 
 opposition, and he now called upon the friends of 
 those works to carry out their promises. He was 
 not opposed to the canals. He was willing to be 
 taxed, if necessaiy, to keep the Erie canal in 
 operation. He had doubts whether the enlarge- 
 ment was necessary. He was at any rate by no 
 means willing to submit his constituents to a tax, 
 to carry on these local works, for the lateral ca- 
 nals were nothing more. They had no more 
 claim upon the bounty of the State than the Dela- 
 ware and Hudson canal. Therefore, he was not 
 willing by his vote to fix a tax on his constitu- 
 ents to carry on those works. Whenever tiie ca- 
 
 nals should by its own surplusses provide means 
 for that purpose, he had no objection to such an 
 application of them. Direct taxation fell as hea- 
 vily on those localities that were injured as uporr 
 those who were benefited by it. These local 
 works were always more or less partial in the 
 diffusion of their benefits. Gentlemen of the 
 west had changed their tone since these works 
 were commenced. It should be remembered al- 
 so that much of the tolls were not levied on the 
 productions of this State, but from the States of 
 the great west, and therefore it would not be tax- 
 ing the western portions of the State to support 
 government from that. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD in reply to Mr. WORDEN, 
 read from the official documents to show that the 
 debt due from the canals to the general fund was 
 as he had stated. All that was asked from the 
 canals was that they should pay their debts, and 
 then there would be no need of any direct taxa- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. WQRDEN insisted that the whole matter 
 was compromised in 1841. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD denied this. All that was 
 asked that there should be a fair balance struck. 
 All that they had done was to make provision for 
 a sinking fund which might pay it some time or 
 other, leaving the people to be taxed in the mean- 
 time. He might perhaps be induced to go for 
 the pending proposition. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said, that in order to make 
 up the claims against the canals, the gentleman 
 had trumped up the railroad debt. Mr. P. went 
 on further to reply to some personal allusions of 
 Mr. C. on a former occasion. He insisted that 
 ample provision had been made to pay every dol- 
 lar due from the canals to the general fund, or to 
 liquidate any other just claims upon them. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD replied to the personal al- 
 lusion of Mr. PATTERSON. 
 
 Mr. SMITH moved to amend Mr. TAYLOR'S 
 amendment by extending the time for which the 
 tax should continue from five to eight years. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON continued the personal mat- 
 ter with Mr. CHATFIELD. 
 
 The debate was further continued by Messrs, 
 CHATFIELD, PATTERSON ,SWACKHAMER, 
 when 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN asked for the previous ques- 
 tion, and there was a second, and the main ques- 
 tion ordered. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amendment 
 of Mr. SMITH, and there were ayes 61, nays 50-, 
 as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F, 
 Backvis-, H. Backus, Bascom, Bergen, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, 
 D. D. Campbell, Candee, Chamberiain, Dana, Dodd, Dorlon, 
 Gardn. r, Grbhard, Harris, Hawley, Hoffman. Hotchkiss, 
 Hunt. E. Humington, Jordan, Kenible, Kiiklaud, Maim, 
 McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Morris, Murphy, Nicholas, 
 O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Peuniman, Perkins, Porter, 
 Khoade , Richmond, Salisbury. Simmons, Smith, E. Spen- 
 cer, W. H. Spencer, Stantori, Stephens, Stow, Strong, Tag- 
 gart, Talimadge, Townsend, Van SchoonhoveB, Warren, 
 White, Worden.A. Wright, Yawger-61. 
 
 I\ UES Messrs Baker, Bowdish,Brown, Brundage, Burr, 
 Cambreleng. R. Campbell, jr., Chatfield, Clark. Clyde, 
 Cornell, Cuddeback, Danforth, Dubois, Flanders, Graham, 
 Gr< ene, Harrison, Hart, Hunter, A. Huntington, Hutchin- 
 son, Jones, Kernan, Kihgsley, Loomis, McNeil, Nellis,, 
 Nicoli, Powers, Pi esident, Hiker, Kuggles, St. John, San- 
 ord Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shep.ird, Stetson, Swackha- 
 mer, Taft, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tuthill, Vache, Ward, 
 Waterbury, Willard, Wwd, \oungs-50. 
 
957 
 
 So the amendment was adopted. 
 
 The question was then on ihe amendment of 
 Mr. TAYLOR, as amended, and there were ayes 
 76, nays 34, as follows: 
 
 A ^ ES Messrs. Allen. Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. 
 Backus, H. Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bergen, Brayton, 
 Bruce, Biundape, Bull, Burr, D.D.Campbell, Candee, 
 Chamberlain, 'Dana, Dantbrth, Dodd, Dorlon, Gard- 
 ner, Gebhard, Graham, Hairis,. Hawley, Hoffman, 
 Hotchkiss, Hunt, A. Huntington, E. Iluntington, Kemble, 
 Kernan, Kingsley, Mann, Mi-Nt-il, McNitt, Marvin, Max- 
 well, .Morris, Murphy, Nellis, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, 
 Patterson, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, Hhoades, Richmond, 
 Ruggles, Salisbury, Shaw, Sheldon, Simmons. Smith, E. 
 Spencer. W. H. Spencer, Stanton. Stephens, Stow, Strong, 
 Suackh;um-r. Taft, Taggart. Tallmadpe, W. Taylor, 
 Town-end, Van Schoonlmven, Warren, White, Witbeck, 
 Worden, A. Wright. Yawger-76. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Bowdish, Brown, Cambreleng, R. 
 Campbell, jr. Chatfield. Claik, Clyde, Cornell.Cuddeback, 
 Duliois, Flanders, Hart, Hunter, Hutchinson, Jones, Kirk- 
 land, Loomis, Nicoll, Powers, President, Hiker, St. 
 John, Sanford, Sears, Shepard, Stetson, J. J. TayJor, Tut- 
 hill, Vache, Ward, Waterbury, Willard, Wood, Youngs 
 -34. * / 
 
 The question was then on the adoption of the 
 section, and there were ayes 5S,^noes 50, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, F. F. Backus, H. Backus, 
 Bergen, Brown, Brundage. Burr, D. D Campbell, Candee, 
 Chu nberlain, Cuddeback, Dana, Danlbrth, Dodd, Dubois, 
 Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Harris, Harrison, Hoffman, 
 Hotchkiss, Hunt, A. Huntington, Kemble, Kernan, Kings- 
 ley, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Maxwell, Murphy, 
 Nellis, Patterson, Perkins, Porter, Riker, Ruggles, Rus- 
 sell, Shaw, Sheldon, Simmons, Smith, E. Spencer, Ste- 
 phens, Swackhamer, Taft, W. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, 
 Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, Wood, Yawger 53. 
 NAiS Messrs. Ayrault, Baker, Bascom, Bowdish, 
 Brayton, Bruce, Bull, Cambreleng, R. Cambpell, jr.', Chat- 
 field, Clyde, Flanders, Gardner, Hart, Hawley, Hunter, E. 
 Huntington, Hutchinson, Jones, Jordan, Kirkland, Marvin, 
 Morris, Nicholas, Nicoll,O'Conor. Parish, Penniman, Pow- 
 ers, Rhoades, I'.ichmond, St. John, Salisbury, Santord, 
 Sears, She- ard, %V. H. Spencer, Stetson, Stow, Strong, 
 Taggart, Tallmadge, Vache, Ward, Waterbury, White, 
 "Witbeck, W orden, A. Wright, Youngs 50. 
 
 The seventh section was then read as follows : 
 
 ^ 7. On the final passage, in Cither house of the Legis- 
 lature, of every act which imposes, continues or levives a 
 tax, or makes, continues, or revives any appropriation of 
 public trust or money or property 01 releases, discharges 
 or commutes any debt or demand of the state, the ques- 
 tion shall be taken by ayes and noes, which shall be duly 
 entered on the journals, and three-fifths of all the members 
 elected to either house shall, in all such cases, be necessa- 
 ry to constitute a quorum therein. 
 
 The section was adopted unanimously. 
 
 The article having been gone through with. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said, I congratulate the con- 
 vention in having after an arduous labor, concluded 
 with these reports of the finance committee. 
 Taken together, they will preserve your faith, 
 and will pay your debt. They may not be entire- 
 ly satisfactory to any one member here, but they 
 will produce the results to which I have alluded. 
 They will do more. They will set an example, 
 if this convention shall adhere to it, which vrill 
 cause every State in this Union, as soon as it shall 
 be in its power to do sp, to provide for the spung- 
 ing out ot its debt, by payment removing from 
 representative government the reproaches which 
 have been cast upon it on the other side of the 
 water. To this extent the Convention hascorne ; 
 and even if its labors should be repudiated by the 
 State, nothing can wipeout thejudgmentwhich you 
 have pronounced on this important subject. It 
 will live it will go down with time itself, until 
 that time shall mingle w'ith the murmurs of eter- 
 
 nity. I predict that the result of your labor has 
 overcome the greatest difficulty and the greatest 
 obstruction ever attempted to be cast in the way 
 of the progress of our free institutions, and if you 
 will go on and maintain the individual liability 
 of bankers, of corporators compel incorporations 
 to be by general laws, and guard the municipal 
 bodies' againslj the power tcT contract debts, you 
 will have achieved that which will bring you 
 what you have not had for a quarter of a century, 
 a legislature in these halls. I move you sir, that 
 the article be laid aside on the table and be print- 
 ed. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN. After what has fallen from 
 the gentleman from Herkimer, I feel strongly in- 
 clined to make one remark. I agree with him 
 that the labors of this Convention, in retard to 
 the disposition manifested, throughout, to pre- 
 serve inviolate the faith of the state, to pay the 
 state debt, and place the question beyond a con- 
 tingency or doubt, has resulted most auspiciously 
 for the honor of the state, and of republican in- 
 stitutions. The difference between us has not 
 been one of principle, affecting the great ques- 
 tion of the entire integrity of republican govern- 
 ment, but it has been one which had no great 
 weight attributed to it, one of time. I concur 
 with the gentleman from Herkimer as far as he 
 has gone, and I think it will be a proud monu- 
 ment to the integrity of the state, and go forth to 
 the world as evincing that we met here, and 
 kept steadily in view the great and prominent 
 object for which we were convened: to make 
 some provision for placing our credit beyond con- 
 troversy and doubt. I congratulate the people, 
 and the convention upon securing a still farther 
 object the final completion of those great works 
 of internal improvement, which more than any 
 thing else, has enabled us to assume this high at- 
 titude, and present to the world occupying the 
 high position we do now, and which more than 
 aught else, has secured to this state for all time 
 to come, the appellation of the Empire State. 
 
 Mr. BAKER desired to renew his motion to 
 recommit the report with instructions to strike 
 out that part of the fifth section which provides 
 for the submission of certain laws to the people, 
 and to insert the matter moved by him yesterday. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN insisted on his motion to lay 
 the report on the table, and it was agreed to. 
 
 The article as amended is as follows : 
 
 ARTICLE VII. 
 
 SECTION 1. After paying the expenses of collection, su- 
 perintendence and ordinary repairs, there shall be appro- 
 priated and set apart out of the icvenues of the btate 
 canals, in each year, commencing on the lirst day oi June, 
 1846, the sum ot one million and three hundred thousand 
 dollars, until the first day of June 1855; and from that time 
 the sum ol one million and seven hundred thousand dollars 
 in each fiscal year as a sinking fund to pay the interest and 
 redeem the principal of that part of the State debt called 
 the canal debt, as it existed at the time first aforesaid, and 
 including three hundred thousand dollars then to be bor- 
 rowed, until the same shall he wholly paid; and the prin- 
 cipal and income ol the said sinking lund shall be sacredly 
 applied to that purpose. 
 
 fj 2. AfttT complying with the provisions of the first 
 section of this article, there shall be appropriated and set 
 apart out of the surplus revenues of the state canals, in each 
 fiscal year, commencing on the first day ot June, 184t>, tiie 
 sum of three hundred and fifty thousand dollars, untii the 
 time when a sufficient sum shall have been appropriated 
 and set apart, under tin; said first section, to pay the interest 
 and extinguish the entire principal of the canal debt; and af- 
 ter that period, then the bum of one million and five hun- 
 
958 
 
 dred thousand dollars in each fiscal year, as a sinking fund. ' 
 to pay the interest and redeem the principal of that part of 
 the State deht called the General Fund debt including the 
 debt for loans of the Siate credit to rail road companies 
 which have failed to p-y the interest thereon, and also the 
 contingent debt on State stocks loaned to incorporated 
 companies which have hitherto paid the interest thereon, 
 whenever and as far as anypait thereof may become a 
 charge on the Treasury er General Fund, until the same 
 shall be wholly paid ; and the principal and income of the 
 said la--t mentioned sinking fund shall be sacredly applied 
 to the purpose aforesaid ; and if the payment of any part 
 of the said monies to the sinking fund shall at any time 
 be defer; ed. by reason of the priority recognized in the 
 first section of this article, ihe sum so deferred, with quar- 
 terly interest thereon, at the then current rate, shall be 
 r'd to the last mentioned sinking fund, as soon as it can 
 done consistently with the just rights of the creditors 
 holding said canal oebt 
 
 ^ 3 After paying the said expenses of superintendence 
 and repairs of the canals, and the sums appropriated by 
 the first and second sections of this Article, there shall be, 
 paid out of the surplus revenues of the canals, to the 
 Treasury of the State, on or before the thirtieth day of 
 September, in each year, for the use and benelit 01 the 
 General Fund, such sum, not exceeding $200,000, as may 
 be required to defray the necessary expenses of the State ; 
 and the remainder of the n venues of the said canals shall, 
 in each fiscal year, be applied, in such manner as the 
 Legislature shall direct, to the completion of the Erie 
 canal enlargement, and the Genesee Valley and Black 
 River canals, uu il the said canals shall be completed. 
 
 If at any time after the peiiod of eight years from the 
 adoption ol this Consutution, tne revenues of the State, un- 
 appropriated by this article, shall not be sufficient to defray 
 the necessary expenses of the government, without con- 
 tinuing or laying a direct tax, the Legislature may, at its 
 discretion, su, ply the deficiency, in whole or in part, from 
 the surplus revenues of the canals, after complying with 
 the provisions of the first two sections of this article, for 
 payi.igthe interest and extinguishing the principal of the 
 Canal and General Fund debt; but the sum thus appropri- 
 ated fn m the yur;,lus revenues of the canals shall not ex- 
 ceed annually $350,000, including the sum of $-200,000 pro- 
 vided by this section for tuo expenses of the governm -nt, 
 until the General Fund debt shall be extinguished, or until 
 the Ede canal enlarge- mem and Genesee Valley and BLick 
 River canais shall be completed; and afier that debt shall 
 be p id, or the said canals shall be completed, then the sum 
 of $672,600 or so much thereof as shall be necessary, may 
 
 unds under its management, except in pursuance of an 
 ippropriation by law; nor unless such payment be made 
 vithin two years next after the passage of such appropria- 
 tion act: and every such law making a new appropriation, 
 or continuing or reviving an a; propriat on, shall distinctly 
 specify the sum appropriated, and the object to which it is 
 to be applied; and it ihall not be sufficient for such law to 
 refer to any other law to fix such sum. 
 
 ). The credit of the State shall not, in any manner, be 
 given or loaned to, or in aid ol any individual, association 
 or corporation. 
 
 10. The State maj', to meet casual deficits or failures in 
 revenues, or for expenses not provided for, contract debts, 
 but such debts, direct ai,d comingent, singly or in the ag- 
 gregate, shall not, at any time, exceed one million of dol- 
 lars; and the moneys arising from the loans creating such 
 
 were 
 no 
 
 debts, shall be applied to the purpose for which th 
 obtained, and to repay the debt so contracted 
 
 they w< 
 , and to 
 
 be 
 government. 
 
 annually appropriated to defray the expenses of the 
 
 . The claims of the State against any incorporated 
 company to pay the interest arid redeem the principal of 
 the stock o the State loaned or advanced to such company 
 shall t>e fairly eiifoiced, and nut released or compromised; 
 arid the, moneys arising from such claims shall be set apart 
 and applied as part o! the sinking funJ provided in the se- 
 cond se.'.ti not this article. But the time limited lor the 
 fulfilment of any condition of any release or compromise 
 heretofore made or provided for, may be extended byiaw. 
 5. If the Sinking funds, or either of them provi led in 
 this article, shall prove insufficient to enable the State, on 
 the citdit of such lund, to procure the means to satisfy the 
 claims oi the creditors o. the State as they become pa> able, 
 the legisiacure shall, by equitable taxes, so inci ease the re- 
 venues ol the said funds as to make them, respective')'. 
 sufficient perfectly to preserve the public faith. Every 
 contribution o" advance to the canals or thnir debt, from 
 
 other purpose whatever. 
 
 5; 11. In addition to the above limited power to contract 
 debt, the State may contract debts to repel invasion, sup- 
 press insurrection, or defend the State in war; but the mo- 
 ney arising from the contracting of such debts shall be ap- 
 plied to the purpose for which it was raised, or to repay 
 such debts, and to no other purpose whatever. 
 
 i$ 12. Except the debts specified in the tenth and 
 eleventh sections of this article, no debt shall be hereaf- 
 ter contracted by or on behalf 01 this Stote, unless such 
 debt shall be authorized by a law for some single work or 
 object to be distinctly specified therein, and such law shall 
 impose and provide for the collection of a direct annual 
 tax.to pay, and sufficient to pay the interest on such debt 
 as it falls due, and also to pay and discharge the principal 
 of such debt within, eighteen years from the time of the 
 contracting thereof. 
 
 No such law shall take effect until it shall, at a general 
 election, have been submitted to the people, and have re- 
 ceived a majority of ail the votes cast for and against it, at 
 such election. 
 
 On the final passage ol such bill in either house ol the 
 Legislature, the question shall be taken by ayes and noes, 
 to be duly entered on the journals thereof, and shall be: 
 ''Shall this bill pass*, and ouyht the same to receive the 
 sanction of the people." 
 
 The Legislature may at any time, after the approval of 
 such law "by the people, il no debt shall nave been 
 contracted, in pursuance thereof, repeal the same ; 
 and may at any time, by law, forbid the contracting 
 of any further debt or liability under such law; but 
 the tax imposed by such act, in proportion to the debt, and 
 liability which may have been contracted in pursuance ol 
 such law, shall remain in force and be irrepealable, and be 
 annually collected, until the proceeds thereof shall have 
 made the provision herein before specified, to pay and dis- 
 charge the interest and principal of such debt and liability. 
 The money arising from anv loan or stock creating such 
 debtor liability, shall be applied to the work or object 
 specified in the act authorising the same, or for the re- 
 payment, and for no other purpose whatever. 
 
 No such law shall be submitted to be voted on, within 
 three months after its passnge, or at any general election, 
 when any other law, or any bill, or any amendment to the 
 Constitution, shall be submitted to be voted for and against. 
 13. Every law which imposes, continues, or revives a 
 tax, shali distinctly state the tax and the object to which 
 it is to be applied, and it shall not be sufficient to refer to 
 any other law to fix such tax or ot ject. 
 
 & 14. On the final passage, in either bouse of the legisla- 
 ture, of every act which imposes, con'inues, or revives a 
 
 _____ , __ . - ., 
 any source, other than theii din ct revenues, shall, with I tax, or creates a debt or chaige, or makes, continues or re- 
 
 quarterly interest, at the rates then current, be repaid into 
 tne Treasury , ;or ihe use ol the State, out of the canal re- 
 venues, as soon as it can be done consistently with the just 
 right* ol the, creditors holding the said canal debt. 
 
 ^ 6. The Legislature shall not sell, lease, or otherwise 
 dispose of any of the canals of the State; but they shall 
 remain th property of the state and under its rcanage- 
 ment, forever. 
 
 7 The Legislature shall never sell or dispose oi the 
 sail springs, belonging to this State. The lands contiguous 
 thereto and which may be, . ecessary and convenient for 
 the. use ol the salt springs, may be ld by authority of 
 law and under direction ol the commissioners of the l.md 
 office, for the t urpo.-e of investing the moneys arising 
 therefrom IB other lands alike convenient; but by such 
 eale and purchase the aggregate quantity of these lands shall 
 not be diminished. 
 
 8. No moneys shall ever be paid out of the Trea- 
 sury of this State, or any of its funds, or any of the 
 
 vivesany appropriation of public or trust money, or prop, 
 tity, or i eleases, discharges or commutes any debt or de. 
 mand of the State, the question shall be taken by ayes and 
 noes, which shall be duly entered on the journals, and 
 three fifths of all the members elected to either house, shall 
 in all such casei, be necessary to constitute a quorum 
 therein. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS -moved to go into committee of 
 the whole on the report of the committee on cor- 
 porations. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved that the Conven- 
 tion take up the unfinished business, (on the rights 
 and privileges of the citizens of the State.) 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS demanded the ayes and 
 noes on Mr. LOOMIS' motion. It was agreed to, 
 ayes 57, noes 37. 
 
959 
 
 The same taken up in Convention, and having 
 been read through. Mr. LOOMIS moved to ad- 
 jour- : to. 
 
 journed to half-past 8 o'clock to-morrow 
 morn 
 
 THURSDAY, (91th day) Sept 2-1. 
 Prayer by the Hev. Mr. WILKINS 
 The PRESIDENT presented a report from the 
 Ml' the amount of moneys in 
 th.it court. .Referred. 
 
 -irKNSATION OF LKGISLATIVE CLERKS. 
 Mr. MANN said he had a proposition to offer, 
 and hoped and trusted that the convention would 
 not object to its adoption. At the first session of 
 the legislature after the adoption of the present 
 constitution, a law was passed regulating the sala- 
 ries of the clerks, and other officers of the Senate 
 and Assembly, which may be found in chapter 
 . section 4, of the sesssion laws of 1821, viz : 
 (1 be it further enacted, that from and after 
 the first day of May next, there shall be allowed 
 to the clerk of the Senate an annual salary of one 
 thousand two hundred dollars, and to the clerk 
 of the Assembly an annual salary of one thousand 
 eight hundred dollars, in lieu of all compensation 
 and perquisites heretofore received by them res- 
 pectively and for which they shall provide their 
 own assistants and clerks, arid perform all duties 
 now required of them by law, and that it shall 
 not be necessary to copy the journals of the Sen- 
 ate and Assembly for the Governor, nor to furnish 
 the State printer, the copies of messages, bills, 
 and other communications, copies of which shall 
 be furnished in the journals. The said sums of 
 money to t.-e pa.d to the said clerks, by the trea 
 surer on the warrant of the comptroller, on the 
 first day of May in each and every year." Now 
 sir, since the passage of this act in 1821, what has 
 been the course pursued by the legislature in this 
 matter? Why sir, they have evaded or avoid- 
 ed the law of 1S21, by an indirection. Gen- 
 tlemen ot the Conveiiiion will observe that, by 
 examining the supply bills passed at eachsession 
 of the Legislature, inc. spirit of the law of 1^21, 
 has been eluded and avoided,- and that the clerks 
 have been allowed to draw their full salaries, and 
 their assistants have been paid by an indirect ap- 
 piopiiation in the supply bills. Mr. M- said he 
 would nut take up time now, i.> refer to the sup 
 ply bills from IvJl K.lSlO, but would only read a 
 short section or two from the supplv hill, passtc 
 ar the last s.ssion (IS-46,) chapter' 337, section Is! 
 "The Treasurer snail pay, on the warrant ol tht 
 Comptroller, ou: it any moneys in the treasury 
 not otherwise appropriated, the following sum* 
 of money, viz: To <-ach of the deputy clerks o 
 Assembly, not exceeding thiee in number, the 
 sum of four hundred and tifiv d -liars, in full corn 
 pen'titi'.m tot their services, und ot all charg. s lo 
 extra en^rossiug." Again, in 1844, a law wa> 
 ed, fixing tne pay of Seiue,-.nt-at-Arni- at .^i, 
 per day, dour-k ;,5d per day, ami mes 
 
 sengers at 50 c, , , which is, perhaps, toi 
 
 small a compensation* He thought n \v;,s; !>u 
 till- u by indirection 
 
 in the supply bills passed since. Again, in the 
 supply bill of 1840, a section provides k4 Then 
 shall be paid to the Rev. I. N. YVyckofl, for the 
 
 
 of the clergyman <>iii<-iaunu r as chaplains 
 o the Legislature, the sum of six dollars for each 
 lay of the present session, to be certified in the 
 aine manner. Tin: section [ propose to oiler, is 
 ;s follows: " No i>lii::.'r (ex< i-pt the Sp..-:-!ii-r of 
 he Assembly,) of either hi -.inch ol the Legisla- 
 ure, clerks, seigeanfs-at-a: ms, chaplains, (ioor- 
 ceepers, librarians, or any oih< r oilicer, now, or 
 hai may hereiliet be author;z<d by law; shall be 
 )aid or allowed directly or indirectly a greater 
 Conine;. s.ition or per diem allowance and mileage 
 iian is allowed to members of I he Le^islatur.:. 
 Such compensation shall be regulated by law, and 
 shall not be increased or diminished during their 
 erm of office." [A reference was here moved by 
 Vlr. JOTTES, to a special committee.] iVlr. M. did 
 not see the necessity (if a reference The section 
 was a very short one. and every gentleman could 
 readily comprehend every word of it, upon hear- 
 ng it read, and he prefetred a vote upon it at once, 
 rle had examined ihe su ;ply bills from year to 
 year, .since 1821, and found (he law of 1820 over- 
 ridden by these indirect supply bills, and he found 
 hem a convenient plaster, to cover up all of the 
 stealings and corruption by indirect appropriations, 
 it was a bill of iniquity and abominations, by 
 which the treasury was annually robbed of its 
 thousands, and it was lime this improvident le- 
 gislation was put an end to. The Cleik of the 
 Assembly had annually received in addition to his 
 $1800, a further sum or sums, for making the 
 idex to the laws passed at eacn session of the 
 Legislature. The Comptroller had informed him 
 that he had annually paid an ex:ra compensation 
 for this service, after the Legislature had adjourn- 
 ed, to these clerks. Tne adoption ot this section 
 would save to the treasury for the next twenty 
 years, the su-n of flSOsOOp in the office of Clerk 
 of Assembly alone. And he v\ould then be well 
 paid for his services, as much so as the members 
 of the Legislatures, and they could have no rea- 
 son to complain of this, as their labors would not 
 be any more aiduous ihan that of the im -mbers 
 He could see no reason why the clerk of the Assem- 
 bly should receive from $1800 to $2000 for his three 
 months'sei vices, while members of the Legislature 
 wciv to receive but $300; and the c)eik of the Sen- 
 ate SI 20(.i, and other oliicers of the Legislature, an 
 undue and exhorbit, nt pay for light services by in- 
 direction. He was opposed to it, and desired to 
 protect the Treasury (in this respi ct) <-gainst such 
 unwarrantable depredations. Mr.-iVl. had no ob- 
 jections to a reference to the committee on the 
 revision of the articles passed upon, tie, (Mr. 
 M ) designed to adopt this shoit section as No. 
 10 in the first ait c!e of this Constitution <; On 
 the appointment, el 'Ct on, tenure of office, and 
 compensation of the LcjrMature" or add it to 
 the 9th section. It so releind,he desiitd that 
 it should be, with instructions, to report this sec- 
 tion, or anoiher that would obviate these legisla- 
 tive abuses. And he would rn.ike that motion; en 
 tertaming these views, he hoped to see the sec- 
 tion meet with the lavor of the Convention, and 
 be adopted. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD desired to see a remedy for 
 the evils complained of, but he hoped the refer- 
 ence would be without instructions. 
 
 After a brief conversation, it was referred to 
 
960 
 
 the committee on the arrangement or the severa 
 articles of the constitution. 
 
 CHENANGO CANAL. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR moved a reconsideration 
 of the vote adopting the 7th section of Mr. HOFF 
 MAN'S first report, for the purpose of amending 
 it by adding a provision allowing the state to dis 
 pose of the Chenango canal or a part of it, or o 
 the tolls thereof, for the purpose of procuring 01 
 inducing its extension to the Pennsylvania line 
 Mr. T. remarked that when the section was un- 
 der consideration, he had moved an amendment 
 similar to the one which he now wished an op- 
 portunity to present, but that under the rule un- 
 der which the Convention were then acting, he 
 
 was deprived of an opportunity to explain the 
 amendment and give his reasons for desiring its 
 adoption. He would now briefly do so, and he 
 was sure the Convention would listen to him pa- 
 tiently, for it was the first time he had ventured 
 to occupy any of its time", while engaged upon 
 this subject of the canals and finances; having 
 contented himself throughout, with being an at- 
 tentive listener, and expressing his views only 
 by his votes. He had once or twice endeavored 
 to obtain the floor, but had not succeeded. 
 
 It was perhaps not known to every member of 
 
 the Convention, that the Pennsylvania North 
 Branch canal was completed from the main line 
 of the works of internal improvements of that 
 state up the North Branch of the Susquehannah, 
 to the mouth of the Lackawana, only ninety miles, 
 by the river, below the line of the state of New 
 York, and that upwards of two millions of dol- 
 lars had been expended in the construction of a 
 canal over that ninety miles, mostly on that part 
 nearest to New York. At the distance of about 
 ninety miles from our state line, or at about the 
 termination of the present finished Pennsylvania 
 cajial, commences one of the great anthracite re- 
 gions of that state, the richest in this article in 
 the Union, perhaps in the world. Through this 
 region, abounding also in the best of iron ore, 
 now extensively worked, the canal passes. Gen- 
 tlemen who had been there, had described in 
 glowing language, the riches and the beauties of 
 the great West. It had been his (Mr. T.'s) for- 
 tune, to visit and examine to some extent this 
 coal region of our sister state. He had neither 
 time nor language to describe it as it deserved ; 
 but he could bear witness to the propriety of 
 the expression of Proff. Silliman, made some years 
 ago, after an exploration of it, that " the sun and 
 these coal fields would burn out together ." They 
 had, too, this advantage over the coal region of 
 the upper Lackawana, from which we now de- 
 rive our principal supplies, that the mines were 
 in the hands of numerous independent owners. 
 Of course competition would bring down the price 
 of the coal. He had no doubt it could be brought 
 by the route proposed to this city, so as to com- 
 pete with that which now comes here. Of course 
 it would supply the whole interior of the state, 
 and add greatly to the tonnage on our canals. It 
 would make the Chenango canal, instead of a 
 burden upon our finances, a good investment. 
 He had almost forgotten to mention, that at a dis- 
 tance from fifteen to fifty miles from the line of 
 the two states, are also extensive fields of bitumi- 
 nous coal, in the immediate vicinity of the route 
 
 of the canal, and of the very best quality. Some 
 of it is considered nearer to this city, by the route 
 proposed, than any which is now brought here, 
 by the routes by which it comes. Could any one 
 doubt, that with this communication open an ex- 
 tensive business would be done upon our canals 
 m the interchange of the mineral productions of 
 Pennsylvania, for the salt, plaster and other com- 
 modities of our own state ? 
 
 But it might be said there was no prospect of 
 the completion of Pennsylvania's part of the work 
 On that point, he had only to remark, that up- 
 wards of two millions had been spent along the 
 line of the last ninety miles of it, and that 
 together with a portion of the finished work, had 
 been put into the hands of a company, as as in- 
 ducement to complete it. They were struggling 
 to raise the means to do so, and a serious obsta- 
 cle in their way was the want of a manifestation 
 on the part of this State of a disposition to meet 
 them. And it would be observed that he did not 
 ask to have any thing to be done or directed to be 
 done by the Constitution, but only to take this ca- 
 nal out of the operation of the 7th section, so far as 
 o leave it in the power of the legislature to do 
 omething, as circumstances and future events 
 hould point the way. He did not purpose to 
 open the much contested third section, but how- 
 yer much he was opposed to it, since the majo- 
 ity had so ordered it, he regarded that as settled. 
 3ut how were we situated ? By the third sec- 
 ion, we have appropriated every dollar of the 
 revenues of the State beyond the sinking funds, 
 and only partly enough to support the govern- 
 ment, for many years to come. By the 7th sec- 
 tion, we prevent any disposition being made of 
 the canals, finished or unfinished, and utterly 
 take away all means for constructing any work, 
 however desirable future events may make it, 
 except the favored three, provided for by the 
 third section. It certainly is not fair to ask a com- 
 pany to make a few miles of canal, with nothing 
 but the tolls upon that few miles for a remunera- 
 tion, which ^is to throw upon the State canals 
 an immense amount of tonnage. 
 
 Inasmuch, therefore, as the construction of this 
 canal might, in the course of events, become a 
 matter of much interest, not only to his constitu- 
 uents, but also to the State at large, and inasmuch 
 as it seemed to him, we had by the provisions 
 which we had adopted, put it out of the power of 
 the State to construct it, for the next twenty years 
 at least, if our work should be ratified by the peo- 
 ple, he had thought proper to ask for this slight 
 amendment, which would not interfere at all 
 with other parts of the report, so that it might be 
 left in the power of the legislature to hold out 
 some encouragement to its construction. He 
 would take this opportunity of saying that his con- 
 stituents were among those who had their full 
 share of the taxes which have gone to the con- 
 struction of the Erie and other canals. The duty 
 upon salt they had always paid to the full extent 
 of any other section, having always been consum- 
 ers of the product of our salt works, and all other 
 taxes they had paid in common with the rest of 
 the State, while the canals have been to them 
 only a.n injury. Are they now to be called upon 
 to pay the taxes which the provisions we have 
 adopted will inevitably make necessary, and at 
 
961 
 
 the same time be cut oft't'rom all hope of the con-' 
 struction of a work in which they have an interest, 
 and which may become more meritorious than 
 those for which we have so liberally provided? 
 . Mr- STRONG said that this would allow the 
 state to dispose of the entire tolls of that c.,inal to 
 complete it. If the Convention was willing to do 
 this, he had no objection. 
 
 Mi. TAYLOR replied that the tonnage which 
 would be thrown upon the other canals by this 
 means would greatly more than repay the state for 
 4he loss of these tolls. 
 
 Mr. BURR could not really see into this strong 
 desire to retain these lateral canals as the property 
 ot the state. For one, he should think it was a 
 good bargain if we could give away the Chemung 
 canal. 
 
 . Mr. BASCOM agreed with Mr. J J. TAYLOR , 
 but he did not like this attempt to i en a question 
 that last night we all considered si-ttled. He had 
 a farther objection to this amend UM# lit Thongl; 
 admitting that at some future day there was a pos 
 sibility, perhaps piobability, of the connection o 
 this canal with a Pennsylvania work, which would 
 be advantageous to the interests of the state, ye 
 there was another canaL a little farther west 
 which was also proposed thus to be connected. 
 He would not like to undertake to decide between 
 these canals. Besides, this was little else than a 
 proposal to sell out this canal. He thought we 
 had had enough ol the sale of public works in ihat 
 section ot the state. The $3,OQU,OOp lien on the 
 Eiie lail road had been given up, and the Ithaca 
 and Owego road sold for the merest (rifle. He 
 would not place even this canal in the same cate- 
 gory. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND was in favor of the motion of 
 Mr. TAYLOR. He believed the Legislature might 
 be trusted with this matter. That canal was now 
 not only unproductive, but a heavy annual expense 
 upon the state. Adopt this provision, and it un- 
 der the management of a company ih is cawal could 
 be connected with one of the Pennsylvania works, 
 the result would be of great advantage to the in- 
 terests and finances of the state. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that he must ask to be 
 excused from serving on the engrossing commit- 
 tee, on account of his health. 
 
 He was excused, and Mr. LOOMISWOS appoint- 
 ed in his stead. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said that every amendment to 
 this section (7) ought to be referred to some stand- 
 ing committee to consider upon it ; arid he would 
 make that motion, to refer it to the committee 
 No. 3 on canals and finance. 
 
 Mr. WHITE renewed the motion for the pre- 
 vious question, and enquired if the motion of the 
 gentleman from Herkimer was in order, the sub- 
 ject matter not being before the Convention un- 
 til it has agreed to the reconsideration. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL moved to lay the whole matter on 
 the table. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR demanded the ayes and 
 noes. 
 
 They were ordered. 
 
 It was laid on the table by the following vote 
 ayes 51, noes 41. 
 
 PUBLICATION OF THE ARTICLES. 
 Mr. JORDAN moved that 2,000 copies of th 
 articles already adopted be printed ; and that one 
 
 95 
 
 ;opy thereof be torwarded to each of the Editors 
 n the state. Mr. J. briefly explained the resolu- 
 ion. If was important that the people should see 
 ill the articles they had passed, as soon as possible. 
 Mr. PATTERSON objected and suggested that 
 ill these articles had been laid aside without final 
 iction. They were to be revised either by the 
 select committee or in the Convention. It might 
 necessary to make some changes, and he 
 thought we had better act finally before sending 
 them to the country. In the judiciary report 
 there was an omission in relation to the election 
 of the judges of the supreme court ; and it might 
 be found necessary to make alterations to make 
 one part harmonize with the other. Hence it 
 would not be prudent to print them at present. 
 Besides, they had already been published in the 
 newspapers of the day. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said that at this late day he was 
 satisfied that they would not attempt to make any 
 fundamental change in any of these articles. He 
 wished to put the people in possession of what 
 w T e have been about. The people wanted to see 
 as early as possible, substantially what sort of a 
 Constitution they had to pass upon. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON suggested further that the 
 ayes and noes had not been taken on any one of 
 lese articles as a whole. Some of them might 
 e voted down. He hoped not however. But 
 e wanted this question settled before they were 
 ent out to the world. 
 
 Mr. BROWN wished the articles to be perfec- 
 ed before they were sent to the people ; and if 
 ent out by the secretaries by the 6th of October, 
 hey will le regarded by the public as complete, 
 nd they will have four weeks to deliberate upon 
 hem. Many of these articles as now printed are 
 ull of errors, made by the printer. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN contended that to the people it 
 was of less consequence what the arrangement, 
 tyle, and language of these articles might be 
 ban their substance. The people should know 
 low these articles would affect their interests ; 
 ind this could be shown them by the adoption of 
 his resolution, although the phraseology of them 
 might hereafter be changed. 
 
 Mr. MANN hoped the resolution would lie on 
 he table a day or two. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN stated one advantage to be deri- 
 ved from the course proposed by reciting the fact 
 hat a gentleman to whom he some time since sent 
 icopy ot the article on the judiciary, had returned 
 :o him valuable suggestions. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD opposed the resolution. 
 The newspapers had already done all rhe work 
 that this resolution proposed to have done ; and 
 to pass it, would put the people to an unnecessa- 
 ry and additional expense. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY suggested that the editors of 
 newspapers should be paid for publishing these 
 several articles ; paid out of the treasury. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said editors had manifested a dis- 
 position to publish these articles for the informa- 
 tion of their readers, and such a provision would 
 be unnecessary. 
 
 The motion of Mr. JORDAN was carried. Ayes 
 41, Noes, 33, 74. 
 
 CORPORATIONS OTHER THAN J3ANKING AND 
 MUNICIPAL. 
 
 The Convention then took up the report of the 
 
962 
 
 committee on corporations other than municipal 
 and banking. 
 
 The 1st section was read as follows : 
 
 1. Special laws creating incorporations or associations, 
 or granting to them exclusive privileges, shall not be pass- 
 ed. But the Legislature may pass general laws by which 
 any persons may become incorporated on complying with 
 the provi-ions to be contained in such laws. And all cor- 
 porations shall by subject to all such general laws as the 
 Legislature may, from time to time enact, not inconsistent 
 with the provision of this Constitution. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS opened the discussion with some 
 historical allusions, showing the necessity of cor- 
 porations, and their existence for a long period in 
 this and other countries. The question was, if 
 they were necessary, how they should be regula- 
 ted so as to produce all necessary good and pre- 
 vent unjust inequalities? He briefly alluded to 
 the various applications made to the legislature 
 to obtain charters, and said all this might be ac- 
 complished by a general act. He ennumerated a 
 large class of companies, whose object was not to 
 produce profit to the company, and which might 
 be formed in that way. Mr. L. briefly glanced 
 over the several provisions of the article, explain- 
 ing as he went along the objects intended, and 
 the evils to be guarded against ; and urging that 
 whilst it would relieve the legislature of a great 
 deal of labor and loss of time, it would give to the 
 community all the advantages of corporations, 
 protect them against their excesses, and do away 
 with all exclusive privileges and special grants. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said the same laws would not 
 do for a village of 1,000, that would do for a vil- 
 lage of 2,000, or town of 10,000; it would not 
 do to confer the same powers on each. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that was not contemplated. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that you could not charge 
 the same amount on a plank road that you could 
 on a railroad. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY rose to meet a remark of Mr. 
 PERKINS with regard to the general laws or in- 
 corporations, as relates to towns and villages. 
 He would allow no powers to be conferred on one 
 set of men that were not conferred on another 
 set of men. 
 
 The question was upon the last section. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to amend by inserting in 
 the fourth line after the word " incorporated" the 
 following : " Or be entitled to any of the privi- 
 leges of incorporations," and in the fifth line af- 
 ter the word " corporations" the words " or asso- 
 ciations." He offered the amendment to give the 
 legislature power to pass laws for the organiza- 
 tion of societies that did not desire all the powers 
 of an incorporation, which could not be done by 
 this article as it stands. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that the sixth section amply 
 provided for all that the gentleman desired. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said the word " incorporation" 
 had a definite meaning, and he was satisfied his 
 amendment was necessary to meet the difficulty 
 and set the matter at. rest, so as to give societies 
 and associations the privileges to become quasi 
 incorporations. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS thought no difficulty would arise 
 by requiring them all to become corporations. 
 
 Mr HUNT huuccl i be gem K-ii. an (his colleague) 
 would repeat his remarks; there as so much 
 noise around him that he could not hear. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said that his amendment render- 
 
 ed the thing more definite, and he repeated the 
 above remarks. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN thought there was 
 much force in the position taken by ihe gentle- 
 
 man from New York. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND having made a few observa- 
 tions, 
 
 Mr LOOMIS withdrew his opposition to the 
 amendments. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY thought the article v*ou!d in- 
 clude municipal corporations. Was such f he in- 
 tention of the committee ? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that was not the intention r.f 
 the committee, and he therefore suggested an ad- 
 dition of the words "other than municipal corpo- 
 rations,'' if the gentleman thought proper to move 
 that amendment. 
 
 Mr MURPHY said he should not as he desired 
 to include them. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS insisted that further amend- 
 ment was necessary. The word " private" might 
 with propriety be introduced for public corpora- 
 tions of cities, villages, -&c. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD doubted the propriety of mak- 
 ing the amendment suggested by the gentleman 
 from Essex. It would deprive cities and villages 
 which were quasi corporations, of privileges 
 which were necessary and now enjoyed, and 
 would destroy remedies for injuries arising out of" 
 a disregard of their responsibilities. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS did not press his amendment 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN asked if under 
 this article the legislature could not pass a gene- 
 ral law for the construction of bridges and high- 
 ways? If so he was opposed to it, inasmuch as 
 it would give powerto obstruct rivers and streams 
 in every direction. He moved the following a- 
 mendment to obviate this objection, to come in 
 after the word " corporations" in the 5th line : 
 
 *' Except as municipal corporations and except corpora- 
 tions or a-sociations for the construction of bridges, aque- 
 ducts or viaducts over the navigable streams or public 
 highways of the state." 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND thought ample provision 
 was made for this in a subsequent section. 
 
 The debate was further continued by Messrs. 
 MARVIN, STOW, VAN SCHOONHOVEN, 
 SIMMONS, and LOOMIS. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that he hoped the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS) who was the 
 chairman of the committee which had reported 
 this section, prohibiting the passage of special 
 acts of incorporation in any case, and requiring 
 the enactment of general laws under which cor- 
 porations might be formed, would not, as he had 
 just intimated, amend it by excepting municipal 
 corporations from its operation. It was true 
 that he (Mr. M.) had reported as a minority of 
 the committee on municipal corporations a pro- 
 vision of that character in regard to them, yet, 
 as there was a possibility that the subject would 
 not again be reached, he believed it would be 
 best to meet the whole question now. In fact, 
 there was no necessity for distinct propositions 
 of the same character for different corporations. 
 If there were to be a provision on the subject at 
 all in the constitution, it should extend to all the 
 corporations to which it might be deemed advi- 
 sable to apply the principle of the section before 
 us. At all events, he wished the gentleman to 
 
963 
 
 hear before he proposed his amendment. He 
 nled this as the contest against privileges 
 conferred by law. We were now to determine 
 whether \ve would preserve that same equality 
 of rights as well between corporations them- 
 selves as between corporations and individuals 
 as is said to exist under our institutions between 
 individuals. On this point be believed the gross- 
 est violations of personal rights were to be found 
 in our municipal corporations ; and that how- 
 ever important the subject might be in reference 
 to other corporations, it was still more so in re- 
 gard to them. These innovations upon the rights 
 of individuals resulted almost altogether from 
 the form of legislation by special charters. He 
 did not charge a wanton disregard of those rights 
 upon the legislature ; but the evil resulted ne- 
 cessarily from the mode of creating those corpo- 
 rations and investing them with their power by 
 single and separate acts. He would therefore 
 endeavor to show the mischief of this practice and 
 the propriety of an uniform organization of cities, 
 and also an uniform organization for every other 
 species of municipalities. The gentleman from 
 Herkimer had given a sketch of the history of 
 corporations generally, but had not referred to 
 those of cities and towns. He (Mr. M.) would 
 refer to some points in the history of the latter 
 for the purpose of showing how the evil of which 
 he complained had grown up in this country ; 
 we had adopted the same form of legislation for 
 the government of cities as was in use in Europe, 
 without having regard to the difference between 
 the fundamental institutions of the two countries. 
 Charters of cit.ies were originally nothing but 
 grants of immunities and privileges by virtue of 
 baronial prerogative. They were intended to 
 exempt the inhabitants from personal service to 
 the lord, and were usually purchased by pay- 
 ments of money. They conferred the power of 
 local government, and the corporations thus cre- 
 ated, exercised the same absolute power within 
 the territory that the lord had done before. 
 Hence grew up in them customs against common 
 right, forbidding the practice of any trade, ex- 
 cept by certain individuals, and directly contra- 
 vening the rights of many. Thus the free cities, 
 as they were called, because the refuge of the 
 worst evils of the feudal system, which they serv- 
 ed to break up. He wished to tell his friend 
 from Albany, (Mr. HARRIS,) that these charters 
 are essentially feudal instruments. The prerog- 
 ative of granting them which was at first only ex- 
 ercised by the lords, came to be exercised by the 
 king. This was however only a change of the 
 creating power ; and there it has continued ever 
 since in Europe. These charters have always 
 since been granted by the king, or prescribed, 
 which presumes such a grant. The powers con- 
 ferred have been the same as were exercised by 
 the misnamed free cities. In the same form 
 the system was transferred to this country. 
 The charters of New-York and Albany will 
 furnish ;t Mifh'cient illusirafion of this re- 
 mark. They were granted by the Colonial Gover- 
 nor, in the name o! the King, That of New York, 
 grand"! by Montgomerie, provides that no person, 
 not beiii'4 a f i -e citizen of the city, shall at any 
 time hereafter use any trade or occupation wiihm 
 the city and its precincis, or shall sell or expose to 
 
 sale any goods or comodities by retail, in any house 
 or place, except in the times of public fairs. Ki- 
 diculous as this provision is, it may be remarked, 
 that there are those who still maintain that it is 
 not only in full force yet, but also that it is beyond 
 the control of the state. For, in a communica- 
 tion made by Ihe comptroller lo the common coun- 
 cil, in 1841, he says that the charter of New York 
 " is a constitution of a body politic, erecting the 
 city of New York inro a free city of itself. Her 
 independent sovereignty in her local matters, is 
 older than that of the state itsef. That charter 
 still stands ns much a protection to her citizens 
 from state encroachments, as it was before the re- 
 volufon, from the exactions of the British crown.'* 
 This charter was obtained like the charters of the 
 free cities of the feudal times, by the payment of 
 money one thousand pounds having been paid 
 the governor for it. Such pretensions as here set 
 up for that instrument, of course cannot he folei 
 a'ed [Ml. MORRIS said that MO such claims weie 
 advanced in this Convention.] Mr. M. proceeded. 
 He knew that; he merely alluded to Ihe New 
 York charter to show how we had borrov\ed from 
 Europe. He knew that the members of this house 
 from that city, and the great body of its enlight- 
 ened citizens, repudiated the doctrines to which 
 he alluded, and he doubted not that he would 
 have their support on this question. The form 
 of city organization thus introduced in the colo- 
 ny, had been kept up by the Legislature ; and 
 though that body hag not been guilty of granting 
 privileges so absurd as the colonial government, 
 yet it has retained the form of special legislation 
 in regard to such organization. Each city still 
 has its separate charter, and no unifottnity exists 
 in the powers conferred upon them, such as pre- 
 vails in regard to the towns and counties of the 
 state. It is to this practice of the olden time that 
 we must attribute the idea of special charters 
 which has come to oe considered so necessary for 
 cities and villages, and not to any actual necessity 
 for them. It might well be asked why a city, 
 more than a town or a county, should have a par 
 ticular organization of its own distinct from other 
 cities. The gentleman from St. Lawrence, (Mr. 
 PERKINS,) said this morning that a population of 
 10,000 individuals mi;ht need more local powers 
 than one of 1UOO. This may be true, but it is not 
 more true in regard to the ciiies than in regard to 
 towns. Towns, whatever their population may 
 be, are under the same general law. The diffi- 
 culty of the gentleman from St. Lawrence consists 
 in supposing that all the powers conferred by a 
 general law, must be exeicised, when in fact the 
 town or the city may exeicise it or not as its cir. 
 cumstances require. When not usedit isdormant. 
 Thus the right of taking wharfage, if conferred 
 jpon all the cities of the state, would be used only 
 i)y such as had a watet front. An interior city 
 would have no occasion to use it. But there 
 would be no objection to conferring that powtr 
 upon all cities generally. A general } a w rnight 
 :>rovide dillerent organizations for different 
 amounts of population, in ihe same manner as 
 he law in regard to religious incorporations 
 now i;i force, provides for the organization of 
 lifTerent religrou* denominations in different 
 ways, The great object to be obtained by a gen- 
 eral law is to secure the wisdom of the whole 
 
964 
 
 state, or at least of all the parts of the state inter- 
 ested in it, for the formation of that law ; and to 
 prevent those incongruities which special legis- 
 lation presents, and which are the causes of many 
 of the evils under which our cities are laboring 
 in regard to debt and assessments. The design 
 of state government is not only to protect from 
 powerful neighbors, but to concentrate the expe- 
 rience and wisdom of a greater number of persons 
 for the common benefit, by wise laws. Special 
 legislation defeats this design. Localities for 
 which this legislation is made, do not derive the 
 benefit of the wisdom of the whole legislative 
 body. A charter as now granted is for the most 
 part a piece of empiricism by the wiseacres of 
 the place where it is to be put in force. After 
 being prepared a! home, it is sent to the legisla- 
 ture to be passed. When it reached that body, no 
 one except the representatives from the locality 
 cares what it contains. It is thus left in charge of 
 the same interest as that which prepared it. He 
 would appeal to every member of the Convention 
 Who had been a member of the legislature, if that 
 was- not the course pursued in reference to all 
 local bills. They are passed without examina- 
 tion because they affect only a particular com- 
 munity., In this way opposite and dangerous 
 "-tute book ; and the 
 visions of any uni- 
 ted a-ction on the part of the legislature for a long 
 period are sometimes lost. It would only be ne- 
 cessary for him to show how this mode of legisla- 
 tion had operated in regard to cities to present to 
 the mind of any candid man the manifest impro- 
 priety of it. He had examined for this purpose 
 the charters of the five largest cities of the state, 
 and the powers conferred upon their corporations, 
 He would select one s-ubject that of opening 
 streets; and by a comparison of the different pro- 
 visions in those cities in regard to it, furnish an 
 illustration of the contradictions in principle 
 which existed among them contradictions so di- 
 rect that if some provisions were right, the others 
 must be wrong. 
 
 [Mr, M. was* here interrupted by the expira- 
 tion of the time allowed by the rule for having 
 the floor 
 
 principles are put into the stat 
 wholesome and beneficent pro 
 
 >or.] 
 . RI 
 
 which were granted to them. So tar as regarded 
 the liberties of the inhabitants, they were not so. 
 The corporate body exercised the same tyranny 
 over the trades and occupations and other natural 
 rights of the people as did the baron before he ex- 
 empted them from his control. He would not dis- 
 pute as to their being the cause of the civilization of 
 Europe. A high state of refinement might exist, 
 as it has often existed, arid now exists, in despot-- 
 it* governments. When he was interrupted, he 
 was proceeding to show the incongruities and in- 
 consis'encies of the charters of the cities' of New 
 York, Brooklyn, Albany, Rochester and Buffalo 
 the five laigest cities in the State. It waa to these 
 variations that he traced the cause of the evils 
 under which our cities were suffering, as would 
 appear from an examination of one single subject, 
 that of opening of streets ; for from one charter 
 we might {earn the character of all. It is welt 
 known that streets in our towns are opened upon 
 one uniform plan, that is, the same proceedings 
 are had in one town as are had for that purpose 
 in any other. All pursue the same course; and 
 an alteration of the general law affects all equally 
 alike In cities this power is now generally con- 
 tained in the acts of incorporation, though it is 
 not in the charters of the old cities, but it is con- 
 ferred upon them by subsequent legislaiion. When 
 however, he spoke of a charter of a city he meant 
 that law or body of laws which conferred uponr 
 it not only its corporate character, but also the 
 powers which it exercised for the government of 
 its inhabitants, and for their accommodation and 
 convenience. In conferring the power of open- 
 ing streets, reference must be had to the cases in 
 which the power may be exercised, to the tribu- 
 nal which is to appraise the property necessary to- 
 be taken, to the mode of assessing the means ne- 
 cessary to pay the appraisement, and to enforcing 
 the collection of the assessments, as well aa to- 
 other particulars. He spoke of these points be- 
 cause he proposed to refer to each of them in de. 
 tail in regard to each of the cities he had named, 
 in order to show the irreconcileable character of 
 many if not all of them. 
 
 As regards the cases in which streets may be 
 opened, they may, in the city of New York, be 
 made at the discretion of two-thirds of the com- 
 mon council, whenever they may deem it neces- 
 sary or convenient ; or, on petition of three- 
 fourths of the owners of the land fronting on the 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought it was time that 
 something should be done to prevent corporations 
 over-riding and running down the people. He 
 referred to a message of Governor Tompkins and 
 legislative proceedings on this subject, and said I street ; in Albany, at the discretion of two-thirds- 
 
 that half of the time of the legislature was con- 
 sumed with that class of legislation. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD opposed the amendment of Mr. 
 
 Mr. STOW briefly continued the debate in ex- 
 
 planation 
 
 was interrupted m making before. 
 
 firs-t, however, notice an observati 
 
 MURPHY continued he remarks which he 
 He would 
 >f the gen. 
 
 tlemnn from Erie (Mr. STOW), who had just taken 
 his seat. That gentleman said he would at a pro- 
 per time show that the cities created by the feu- 
 dal lords were free cities, and that they were the 
 cause of the civilization of Europe. He (Mr. M ) 
 did not intend to dispute about terms. Wnat he 
 
 had said, and would now repeat, was 
 cities were free only in the sense that 
 made independent of their lords 
 
 loose 
 
 they 
 l>v the char! era 
 
 of the common ceuncil ; in Brooklyn, only upon 
 petition, and then at the discretion of the com- 
 mon council, but not if a majority of those to be 
 assessed, remonstrate against the improvement ; 
 in Buffalo, at the discretion of the common 
 council, but in no case, where any building ex- 
 ceeding $1500 in value shall be taken unless with 
 the consent of the owner; in Rochester, in no 
 case, where the value of the building shall ex- 
 ceed $1500. Now it is very evident that these 
 plans differ in principle so radically that they 
 cannot all be right. If it be just to prevent the 
 opening of a street in Rochester without the con- 
 sent of the owner of every building exceeding 
 one thousand dollars in value, then it is unjust to 
 allow it to be done without such consent in Alba- 
 ny ; or if it be right to require the vote of two- 
 thirds of the common council of Albany to au 
 
965 
 
 thorize such an improvement, it is not riuht to 
 permit a similar improvement in Buffalo by a 
 majority vote. The propriety or improprie- 
 ty of these provisions cannot depend upon locali- 
 ties. The law is intended to meet the public 
 wants and at the same time to regard private 
 rights ; and these are the same in all communi- 
 ties. So in regard to the tribunal to which the 
 duties of appraising the damage and assessing 
 the benefit are entrusted. This is, in New York, 
 three commissioners appointed by the Supreme 
 Court: in Albany, a jury of three freeholders 
 chosen from a panel of twelve summoned by the 
 mayor ; in Buffalo, five freeholders chosen by the 
 common council ; in Brooklyn, three commission- 
 ers appointed by the first judge of the county or 
 by the county court. The diversity in principle 
 here is extreme. In some cities it is left to three 
 commissioners selected by the court in the nomi- 
 nation of the local authority, and in others to a 
 jury of three freeholders to determine the dam- 
 ages sustained. There is as much difference be- 
 tween them, as between having a suit tried be- 
 fore a jury 'or before three men selected for the 
 purpose. Thus, the whole question of trial by 
 jury in civil cases is involved. No one will deny 
 that this is a material distinction in principle. 
 He would hereafter have occasion to show that it 
 is a difference fraught with great evil ; but as he 
 was considering this question merely as one of 
 form, it was unnecessary now to do more than 
 allude to the difference of principle. 
 
 The means ot paying lor these improvements 
 are levied, in the city ot New York, by assessing 
 the lots fronting on the street, and lots lying with- 
 in halt the distance ol the next street, on each 
 side of that proposed lo be opened, and by impos- 
 ing one- third cf the value of the buildings taken, 
 as a charge upon the city treasury, at the discre- 
 tion of the commissioners. In Albany and Buffa- 
 lo, by assessments upon any property which the 
 jury may deem benefilttd. In Brooklyn, by as- 
 sessments only upon property within an assess- 
 ment district, previously determined by the com- 
 mon council. Thus, in Brooklyn the taw under- 
 takes to designate specific properly in all cases, as 
 benefited; while in New York, it declares that 
 in some cases a portion ot the expense may be put 
 upon the general treasury. In other words, local 
 assessments only are considered proper for one 
 part of the state, and assessments partly local and 
 partly general, tor another. Could anything be 
 more inconsistent ? Then, as regards local assess- 
 ments, there is still a further division. In New 
 York ihe benefit is limited to one-hall the block; 
 while in Albany the whole matter is lett to the 
 three jurymen, who may assess the whole block, 
 or a< many blocks as they may detrn proper. The 
 assessments aie entoiceci also in different ways. 
 In New Ynrk, by distress wan ant against the 
 owner or occupant, and by suit against the [tallies 
 assessed; and in default of payment to the collec- 
 tor, by sale of land, redeemable within two years. 
 In Albany, by sale of land, without any previous 
 demand. In Buffalo, the assessments are ID, <le a 
 lien upon ;he lands tin- one year oi:ly, within 
 which time they must b^ sold ; arid when sold, 
 may be redeemed the same as lands sold under exe- 
 cution. In Brooklyn, they are collected by dis- 
 tress warrant ; and in default, by sale of lands, 
 
 subject to redemption within two years. Here 
 again are contradictions. In Buffalo, assessments 
 are a lien upon the land for one year only ; in other 
 cities, the^ are a lien indefinitely. In Brooklyn, 
 lands cannot be sold until the personal property 
 of the person assessed is exhausted ; while in Al- 
 bany, they may be sold, even without a demand of 
 payment, except by advertisement. 
 
 From this brief analysis of the provisions of the 
 charters and laws relating to one single subject, 
 we find no two alike in principle. The same 
 want of uniformity may be traced throughout in 
 relation to almost every other power. Every city 
 may be said to be a law unto itself; and the sover- 
 eignity of the state, instead ol being exercised in 
 its behalf, is absolutely surrendered to it, to be 
 used at its own discretion. As I have already said, 
 the practice of the legislature has been to confer 
 upon cities just such powers as they asked for. 
 These powers affecting the locality only, the rest 
 of the state has felt indifferent to them. Thus 
 our present incongruous system has grown up, 
 the work of different hands in different parts, 
 without any attempt to produce uniformity. The 
 consequences have been great injustice oftentimes 
 to individuals, damage to the cities, and much 
 trouble to the judicial tribunals of the state, ari- 
 sing from the adoption of wrong principles from 
 the consequent mistakes of the corporate authori- 
 ties and from the necessity of giving each char- 
 ter its own judicial interpretation. The only re- 
 medy for this is an uniform or general law defin- 
 ing the powers of cities. It is objected by some 
 that the attempt to bring all the cities to the same 
 form of government would interfere with the fran- 
 chises which were granted to some of them. ~In 
 answer to this, it may be remarked that in prin- 
 ciple there should be no privileges or immuni- 
 ties exercised by one city which should not be en- 
 joyed if required by the others. But a more sat- 
 isfactory answer probably is, that so far as those 
 franchises have a permanency of profits and 
 thus partake of the character of private proper- 
 ty, this provision would not interfere with them ; 
 and so far as they may be political and therefore 
 public, and relate to the exercise of the sovereign 
 power, they are and should be revocable at plea- 
 sure. It must be the law in this country, that 
 while the rights of private property are sacred, 
 political power, on the other hand, conferred by 
 the legislature, is a public trust resumable by it 
 at pleasure. There is no novelty in this propo- 
 sition for general laws for incorporations. We 
 have such laws for the incorporation of libraries, 
 passed as long ago as 1796, and also for religious 
 societies and manufacturing companies. These 
 laws have operated well, and hundreds of compa- 
 nies organized under them are now in being. 
 The principle is not new even as regards muni- 
 cipal corporations. As has already been stated, 
 our towns all exercise their corporate powers un- 
 der one and the same law, though they are sepa- 
 rately erected by special act. But in many of the 
 new states of the Union, as in Indiana, Illinois 
 and Arkansas even the incorporation of towns 
 takes place under a general law. The simplicity 
 of this plan is most admirable ; and he would, for 
 the information of the Convention read one or 
 two of these statutes. (Mr. M. here read and 
 commented upon the general laws for creating 
 
966 
 
 municipal corporations in Arkansas and Indiana.) 
 He hoped now that no one would be startled at 
 the proposition on the ground that it was an un- 
 tried experiment ; and that the gentleman from 
 Erie would see that the different circumstances 
 of different places did not present obstacles to an 
 uniform organization. Before he concluded, he 
 wished to say that he would, at the proper time, 
 when the subject of municipal corporations should 
 be under consideration, endeavor to point out the 
 mistakes of legislation in regard to them, and the 
 abuses which they had given rise to, contenting 
 himself for the present with these observations 
 upon the immediate proposition before the Con- 
 vention, that of the mode of creating corporations. 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 Not a quorum present. 
 A motion to adjourn was lost. 
 The question was on Mr. STOW'S amendment 
 to amend the first section, confining the prohibi- 
 tory clause to the special chartering of banking 
 and manufacturing companies. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said that he was in favor of 
 generalizing the law under which corporations 
 should be formed. He was opposed, however, to 
 mingling the subject of banks with this article, as 
 that belonged especially to another committee and 
 was the subject of a special article. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that the expression 
 upon corporations was very clear, on the part of 
 the people. He hoped the whole question of 
 these corporations would be discussed at once, 
 and no special privileges granted. 
 
 Mr. K1RKLAND wanted to see all these great 
 moneyed monopolies put an end to; but there 
 would be great difficulty about this section. As 
 far as it went to destroy monopoly and exclusive 
 privilege, he was disposed to 'sustain it. That he 
 believed was a universal sentiment in this Con- 
 vention. But he could not see how the princi- 
 ple could be practically carried out in reference 
 to all corporations. Indeed he was quite confident 
 that it would lead to great difficulty, to under- 
 take to prescribe by general laws for the forma- 
 tion of all the classes of incorporations now in 
 existence to form a Procrustean bed on whict 
 they should all be stretched the legislature be^ 
 ing expressly prohibited from granting to one in 
 corporation or association privileges which ai. 
 others had not. The legislature could not devise a 
 general law, under which rail-road, turnpike 
 bridge, plank-road, charitable, religious and lite 
 rary associations might be formed certainly no 
 if all these were to be invested with the sam 
 privileges nor if the general laws were made t 
 apply only to some particular classes of corpora 
 tions. It seemed to him that the section shoul( 
 be limited to banking arid moneyed corporation 
 and to manufacturing companies. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said the principles of the sec 
 tion met his approval, and he should sustain it 
 unless com inced by discussion that he was wronf 
 he confessed he had not given the subject a 
 much attention as he perhaps should have done 
 And coming to it without any preconceived opi 
 nions or prejudices, he should be at all time 
 open to conviction. Mr. J. entered at soin 
 length into the operation of this section, as h 
 supposed it was designed to work urging tha 
 
 lere were two general classes of corporations. 
 ne upon which the sovereign, in virtue of the 
 ght of eminent domain, conferred the pf>wer of 
 iking private property for public use, on paying 
 fair equivalent ; and which thus affected indi- 
 idual rights upon which also franchises, such 
 s banking, taking toll upon public ways and the 
 ke, were conferred by the legislature. The 
 ther class was such as exercised no rights or pri- 
 ileges except over their own property ; such 
 ights and privileges as were possessed by natu- 
 al persons those who managed their own pro- 
 erty and affairs in their own way, subject to their 
 wn regulations and by laws, which they had 
 nlimited power to establish, so that they were 
 ot repugnant to the constitution and the general 
 aws of the land. Having no dominion over the 
 property of others, none of the franchises of so- 
 ereign power; being designed only for manu- 
 acturing or business purposes, or for charitable, 
 iterary and other similar objects, he thought the 
 ,ommon privilege of incorporating themselves 
 without coming to the legislature for special char- 
 ers, should be established by the fundamental 
 aw. He could see no evil in it, but much good. 
 t would save time and expense to the individual 
 applicants. It would save the time of the Legis- 
 ature, and expense to the state, and it would en- 
 able individuals, by a short, silent, economical 
 and convenient process, such as is now pursued 
 ,vith reference to manufacturing and religious 
 corporations to attain their ends. Nor could he 
 see any objection to allowing the other class, so 
 ar as the mere matter of erecting themselves in- 
 ,o acorpotative body was concerned, to do the 
 same thing. When thus incorporated, it would 
 only remain for them to come to the legislature 
 and ask for such rights and powers as were inhe- 
 rent in and could only be conferred by the peo- 
 ple ; and these might be conferred, for aught he 
 lould see, just as well and as safely on those na- 
 ied self-created corporations, as on private indi- 
 viduals or natural laws. Then our statute books 
 would not be loaded with our hundreds of special 
 acts, all repeating the same general provision for 
 erecting " a body corporate and politic," giving it 
 a power making it capable of " suing and being 
 sued," appointing directors, opening books, mak- 
 ing by-laws and the like all of which would be 
 quite unnecessary. 
 
 Mr. STOW remarked that that would be cre- 
 ating an exclusive privilege and repugnant to the 
 language of the section. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN did not so regard it, provided all 
 other like associations would be entitled to the 
 same privilege if they placed themselves on the 
 presumed ground of public necessity or accom- 
 modation. The privilege would be special, but 
 not exclusive. 
 
 Mr. STOW supposed the case of such a privi- 
 lege being granted at one session of the legisla- 
 ture, would that privilege belong to other asso- 
 ciations of the same class, without coming to the 
 legislature ? 
 
 Mr. JORDAN replied in the negative. 
 
 Mr. STOW : Then the privilege would be ex- 
 clusive for the time being. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN thought not. He supposed the 
 legislature could not be said, in any propriety of 
 language, to grant an exclusive privilege, except 
 
967 
 
 where one of tin: provisions of the grant was tlr.it 
 nn other person should hi- authorised by them to 
 :he same privilege. He drew ;i distinc- 
 tion between an exclusive right of property and 
 an exclusive privilege or franchise. A -r. tut of a 
 ri^ht of way over ;i given track would confer an 
 >.sive properly in that particular track, but 
 the privilege of constructing a way on the same 
 route and for the same pin-poses might be granted 
 to another, unless the legislature had tied them- 
 selves up by making the first grant so as to ex- 
 clude themselves from making a second. 
 
 Mr, BASCOM: Would there be anything to 
 prevent the legislature from giving the right to 
 two railroad companies, for instance, to pass over 
 the -ame track exactly. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said the question was either too 
 deep or too shallow for his comprehension. If it 
 was designed to ask whether the legislature could 
 do a thing physically impossible, as to grant one 
 company the right of making and using a way 
 over a particular track, and to another company 
 the right to make and use another way over the 
 same track at the same time, he thought it would 
 he very difficult. He believed the omnipotence 
 of the legislature would not extend far enough 
 for that. But if it was designed to ask whether 
 the legislature could grant such a privilege, with 
 the right of exercising the power of eminent do- 
 main over the land for the particular track, and 
 then to grant to another the same privilege, with 
 the power of exercising the right of eminent do- 
 main over other land for a parallel and contigu- 
 ous track on the same route, he could answer un- 
 hesitatingly, they had such right. So far as the 
 mere naked franchise of way was concerned, they 
 might grant it to several ; but so far as the right 
 of property in L he land was concerned, he thought 
 the first grantee, and occupant would have the 
 exclusive right. But this did not touch the ques- 
 tion under consideration. The question is, shall 
 the legislature grant exclusive privileges or mo- 
 nopolies ? Shall they have power of granting 
 the franchise of banking or taking toll, or the 
 like, to one, and not to another; or to grant it to 
 one in exclusion of another ? All that the sec- 
 tion contemplated was that the legislature never 
 should grunt the right of doing a particular thing, 
 (which natural persons might not do without a 
 grant from the sovereign power,) and at the same 
 time stipulate with the granter that he should be 
 entitled to that right exclusively, and that they 
 could grant it to no one else. All the legislature 
 had to do with it was to see that the right or pri- 
 vilege or franchise, so far as the sovereign pow- 
 er was concerned, was equally open and free to 
 all. That being the case, the corporation or in- 
 dividual to whom the grant was made must see 
 to it as best he might that he had the means or 
 the property requisite to enable him to avail him- 
 self of the privilege, and put himself in operation 
 under the franchise. There is a wide difference 
 between giving one the privilege of doing a thing, 
 and furnishing hirn with the means for doing it. 
 The distinction between exclusive privilege and 
 exclusive right of. property .was, in his opinion, 
 well delined. 
 
 Suppose the Constitution or the legislatuie 
 shouiii say to every citizen and corporation in 
 the s:ate, you may construct ways and lake tolls 
 
 thereon, so lar as the privilege or Manchisi? <,f ta- 
 king toil is concerned, whenever you please that 
 would be a yenerai piivilnge; . qual loall; ex- 
 clusive to none. Um t lie lands d individuals ..re 
 icquired in oider to in die ihese ways, and he who 
 could first possess himself of the mle to^uch lands 
 by purchase from the owner would acquiie an ex- 
 clusive right of property therein. So it the land 
 was tiken under a. law of the legislature in right 
 of eminent domain, on paying the value. He 
 who first made the purchase, tm it would be sub- 
 stantially a purchase) would have an exclusive 
 property in the land. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS asked whether, in case of a 
 bridge company being formed to bridge the Hud- 
 son here at Albany, and the legislature should 
 ijive the power should they not Ivive power also 
 to make the privilege worth something, by mak- 
 ing it exclusive, and to say that no ot'iier bridge 
 should be built within a certain distance of it? 
 
 Mr. JORDAN replied that that would depend 
 on circumstances. Cause might possibly arise in 
 which such a power in the legislature, and a cau- 
 tious exeiciseof it might be beneficial, though he 
 thought in our present advanced stale, lew such 
 cases, if any could arise. As a general rule mo. 
 nopolies are odious in ihis arid alf other countries. 
 It did not lolloiv that the legislature must, or 
 would, although they had the power, the inalien- 
 able Constitutional power of doing so, grant a fran- 
 chise to the destruction of the beneli;s of one pre- 
 viously granted, when under the power large in- 
 vestments, conducing to public convenience had 
 been made in good faith, and when it was fairly 
 ind honestly exercised. He thought it would be 
 quite safe to leave that to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said that he did not stand there 
 to advocate monopolies nor anything of that sort, 
 but he hoped that the Convention would proceed 
 cautiously and see whether it was best to put this 
 iron rule into the Constitution, which would pre- 
 vent religious and other societies from coming to 
 the legislature and asking for some little privi- 
 leges that were not common to all societies, and 
 yet what it might be all very right and proper to 
 give. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD said that we had general 
 laws in relation to all these companies ; and he 
 urged the passage of some such provision as this 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that he should 
 vote against the section. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question. 
 
 There was no second. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. STOW was further de- 
 bated by Messrs. SIMMONS, LOOMIS, BAS- 
 COM, RHOADES and T1LDEN, when 
 
 At the suggestion of Mr. 0'CoNOR,Mr. STOW 
 varied his amendment so as to include " trading" 
 companies. 
 
 The proposition was further debated bv Messrs 
 CAMBRELENG, BROWN, STOW, MURPHY* 
 MARVIN, RICHMOND, HARRIS, WORDEN, 
 LOOMIS and TOWNSEND, when it was reject- 
 ed, ayes 33, noes 41, as follows : 
 
 AYESMcssrs. Allen, F. K. Backus, Bascom, Bull, Can- 
 dee, Cook, Gardner,! Jraliam. llariis, Ilawlej-, K Hunting- 
 ton, Kemhie, Kirklciinl, .\larvin, Maxwell, .Miller, Nicho- 
 las, O'Uoaor, i'atteison, I'cnniman, Richmond, Shaver 
 Shaw, Simmons, Stow, Strong, Swackhamer, Ta-'art 
 Tallmadge, Townsend, White, Worden, A. Wright, Voung 
 33. 
 
968 
 
 NOES Messrs. Bergen, Bowdish.Brown, Burr.Cambre- 
 leng. Cornell, Cuddeback, Danforth, Dubois, Flanders, 
 Hunt, A. Huntingtori, Jones, Jordan, Kernan, Kingsley, 
 Loomis, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Morris, Nellis, Nicoll, 
 Powers, President, Riker, Sanford, Sheldon, Shepard, Ste- 
 phens, Stetson, Taft, W. Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, Vache, 
 Waterbury, Willard. Wood, W. B.Wright, Yawyer 41. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved a reconsideration, to lie 
 on the table. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to amend by striking out 
 the word " any" in the third line, and the first 
 syllable of the word incorporations; Also to in- 
 sert after "association," in the first line, the words 
 "other than for purposes exclusively municipal ." 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved to insert the word "nat- 
 ural" before " persons," and also, "having a gen- 
 eral capacity to contract," after "persons." Lost. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to add to 
 the section as follows: 
 
 The assent of at least two-thirds of the members elect- 
 ed to each branch of the Legislature shall be required to 
 every general law passed creating corporations or associ- 
 ations, and also to all laws authorizing them to take land 
 or to enjoy a franchise of way for their own or for public 
 
 to. 
 
 Mr. A. WRIGHT moved to adjourn. Agreed 
 Adj. to 8 1-2 o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 FRIDAY, (Q8th day,) Sept. 25. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Dr. WYCKOFF. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT had leave to record his vote in 
 the affirmative on the amendment offered by Mr. 
 STOW and voted on yesterday. 
 
 Mr. ALLEN presented the remonstrance of 
 W. C. Rhinelander and others against imposing 
 personal liabiltiy on stockholders of corporations. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD reported against the adop- 
 tion of the proposition offered yesterday by Mr. 
 MANN as a section of the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. MANN hoped the Convention would disa- 
 gree to the report of the committee. It was well 
 known to every member, that the clerks of the 
 Assembly and Senate received their full salaries, 
 and tljat assistant clerks were paid by indirect 
 appropriations in the supply bills of every year. 
 The Senate clerk's salary was not too much per- 
 haps, as he performed the duties of clerk of the 
 Court of Errors. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said he was paid extra for 
 that service in the shape of fees. 
 
 Mr. MANN said he was not aware of that. It 
 was so much the more necessary to adopt this, or 
 some similar section. There was no reason why 
 the salaries of these clerks should not be placed 
 within some reasonable limit as well as the pay 
 of members. They could not receive more than 
 $3 per day, and for a limited time. Why should 
 these clerks receive $1200 and $'1800 for the same 
 time ? As for the assistant clerks, he designed 
 that the legislature should appoint as many as 
 was necessary, and pay them reasonably for their 
 services. The clerks were here no longer than 
 the members, except to make the index to the 
 session laws, for which they were paid extra. 
 The clerk of the Senate would have no extra 
 duty to perform if this constitution was adopted ; 
 as the Court of Errors would be abolished. 
 Under the proposed section, they would be paid 
 a compensation equal to that of members of the 
 legislature. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought the committee 
 were right in reporting that that precise provision 
 should not be incorporated in the constitution. 
 It proposed that the clerk shall receive no more 
 than members of the Assembly ; but it must be 
 recollected that the clerk had Very laborious du- 
 ties to discharge, and had to employ several as- 
 sistants. 
 
 Mr. MANN reiterated that those assistant and 
 engrossing clerks were paid by the supply bill 
 as much as $450. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said some allowance might 
 have been paid to the assistants of the Assembly, 
 for the labor was greater than in the Senate. 
 The salary of the clerk of the Senate differed in 
 consequence that being $1200 while the clerk 
 of the Assembly received $1800. But it must 
 also be recollected that the clerk of the Senate 
 received fees as clerk of the Court of Errors. 
 
 Mr. MANN said these clerks were also paid 
 extra for preparing the index of the laws. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON went on to explain, saying 
 that he was willing that the salary should be 
 fixed. 
 
 Mr. MANN contended that unless some pro- 
 vision were made, the system which had been 
 pursued would be continued. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said he was not in favor of 
 the section proposed by Mr. MANN, but he would 
 have a provision declaring that the compensation 
 of the officers of the legislature should not be in- 
 creased or diminished during their term ot office. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to lay the report 
 on the table. 
 
 The vote stood 27 to 10, no quorum. 
 
 The vote was again taken, and there were 45 
 to 14, still no quorum. 
 
 Mr. BURR called for the yeas and nays and 
 there were yeas 56, nays 22. 
 
 This was carried : Ayes 56, nays 22. 
 
 THE PRINTING OF THE JOURNALS. 
 Mr. NICOLL offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That the printers to the convention be direct- 
 ed by the secretaries to lay the Journal on the table of 
 the Convention by Wednesday next j printed up to the pre- 
 sent time. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said, that the printers were now 
 a month behind with the journal ; it was very im- 
 portant that it should be all printed up and laid 
 on their table as early as possible that they might 
 examine it and correct any errors in it. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND offered the following, and it 
 was agrjeed to : 
 
 Resolved, That the unanimous consent of this Conven- 
 tion be given to WM. S. COPJELY to record his name in the 
 affirmative on every section of the second article of the 
 report of standing committee number three, on the power 
 to create future state debts and liabilities and restraint 
 thereof, on account of Mr. CONELY being unfortunately ab- , 
 sent at the time. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS offered a resolution re- 
 scinding the fifteen minutes rule. He said that 
 when the hammer went down yesterday at the 
 end of fifteen minutes, gentlemen continued, 
 when they ought to have sat down at once. It 
 was broken through four or five times. If we 
 had a resolution or rule let us adhere to it. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER thought we should ad- 
 here to rules ; but it was not the way to make 
 them observed by rescinding them a day or two 
 
969 
 
 after they were adopted. He moved to lay the 
 resolution on the table. Agreed to. 
 BOARD OF APPRAISERS. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND moved a resolution of inqui- 
 ry as to the propriety of adopting the following 
 as a section of the Constitution: 
 
 Resolved, That the committee appointed to revise the 
 articles p.issed upon by the Convention be requested to 
 consider the propriety of placing the following section in 
 the articles respecting the creation and duties of the state 
 officers: 
 
 fc . The comptroller, treasurer, surveyor and attorney 
 generals shall constitute a board to adjust the appraise- 
 ment of the assessors of the several counties, of the valua- 
 tion of the real and personal estate therein, and to provide 
 for an equitable imposition of state or national district tax- 
 ation. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE said this was a lofty prin- 
 ciple, but he hoped that the committee on enroll- 
 ment would not be allowed to put any articles 
 into the Constitution on this subject 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND stated that he had seen the 
 ineffectual attempts made by the legislature to en- 
 force by salutary laws provisions to equalize the 
 imposition of the State tax, and he now hoped we 
 should be able to establish the principle in the 
 Constitution we were making. While the facts 
 existed as exhibited in the returns before us, of 
 the inequality of the Assessor's appraisement, 
 with reference to the true value of property re- 
 turned by them,he hoped no one would oppose the 
 reference of this resoluiion. In the counties of 
 New York and Kings, the full value of the real 
 estate (though not of the personal) was returned, 
 whereas in the county of Albany but about one- 
 half of the real value of propeity was taxed, and 
 he believed ir- the county of Rensselaer even a 
 smaller proportional estimate was made. The 
 principle 01 equal taxation was a just one, and he 
 hoped that we should not be prevented from as- 
 serting it in the Constitution. He did not care 
 how the board of State Assessors or Revisers 
 should be constituted ; in this respect he would 
 yield to the best suggestions of gentlemen. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER : Does the gentleman suppose 
 that all the personal property in his own city is 
 returned ? Certainly not. Nor do I for a moment 
 suppose that the 110 millions returned as the 
 whole amount of personal property in the State 
 including the capitals of all our business incorpo- 
 rations and associations represents a one fourth 
 part of what actually exists it is to remedy this 
 difficulty that I propose some constitutional ac- 
 tion as well as the more palpable fraud of esti- 
 mating real estate, in such a manner as not to 
 bear its fair portion of taxes for other than for lo- 
 cal and county purposes. 
 
 Mr. TALL MADGE protested ag.iinst this com 
 miltee of engrossment having the power to do 
 what the resolution contemplated. It would uu. 
 settle ail they had done so well, and set every- 
 thing they had finished all afloat a^;n. 
 
 Mr, STETSON said the Legislature had the 
 power to regulate this mailer at present. He 
 hoped no new questions would be introduced at 
 this late ataa;e<'f proceedings. 
 
 Mr. C AM B HELEN G hoped no more time 
 would be lo>t on UHS. He hoped Mr. TOWNSEND 
 would withdraw it. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND: It being important, and the 
 principle a correct one, I must press it, sir. 
 
 96 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENQ moved the previous ques- 
 ion 
 
 Mr. STETSON would not give this central 
 power authority to go 250 miles or anywhere to 
 fix the value of property. 
 
 The previous question was not seconded; ayes 
 47, noes 7 54. No quorum. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND (by consent) moved to refer 
 the resolution to a select committee of five. Car- 
 ried. 
 
 The Convention then took up the unfinished 
 business, being the report on 
 
 INCORPORATIONS. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that the sec- 
 tion was incomplete without the amendment he 
 had proposal, providing lor a two-third vote 
 to pass those several corporation laws 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS would refer the gentleman to 
 the fifth section. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN: No, sir, that 
 does not do it. The legislature could grant the 
 power under a general law. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said they could not do it. 
 Mr.VAN SCHOONHOVEN said the section gave 
 full power to take land anywhere, and any body 
 of men could be incorporated for any purpose un- 
 der God's Heaven. Lands may be taken, and 
 there is nothing in the section to confine this to 
 the State at all. If these applications are to come 
 to the legislature, then there will be safety ; but 
 in- all cases a two-third vote would be required. 
 
 Mr PERKINS presumed that the general pro- 
 visions of this article met with general approba- 
 tion, but apprehension existed that it could not 
 be applied to franchises of the right of way. In 
 those apprehensions he confessed his participa- 
 tion. The Chairman, he understood, had said 
 that the legislature could provide for the regula- 
 tion of charges and freights thereon, but he (Mr. 
 P.,) after the best examination he could give it, 
 could not view it in that light. Mr. P. went on 
 critically to examine the sections to show where- 
 in these views were sustained. He (Mr. P.) did 
 not like to have these general laws to regulate 
 the franchise of way ; it could not be done or car- 
 ried into effect. He was opposed to having land 
 and estates of individuals to be taken by incorpo- 
 rations for a road or way, first to pass through 
 the government. He would move, therefore, 
 when we come to the fifth section, to strike out 
 ' franchise of way." 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said if he rightly understood the 
 provisions of this section, it was that the legisla- 
 ture should pass general laws, by which private 
 corporations should be created in the same man- 
 ner that the general banking laws of the state 
 creates banking institutions. This he regarded 
 as a mischievous provision, because it was a vio- 
 lation of individual private rights, to authorise 
 a corporation to take the property of a private 
 person. He said it was argued that the land thus 
 taken for railroads and other purposes, was pub- 
 lic property and for public use. This he denied, 
 and insisted that it was as much private property 
 (although owned by a corporation) as the proper- 
 ty of an individual. The primary object of all 
 railroad companies was to make money and bene- 
 fit themselves, and the accommodation such rail- 
 roads afforded to the public was a secondary con- 
 sideration. He would place corporations on an 
 
970 
 
 equal footing with individuals, giving to them 
 the same rights and the same privileges ; and be- 
 yond this he would not go by a constitutional pro- 
 vision so far as the taking of private property was 
 concerned. (Mr. B. further continued the de- 
 bate.) 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said this debate \vould 
 be very proper on the 5th section, but was en- 
 tirely out of order here ; it had nothing to do 
 with the question. 
 
 Mr. K1RKLAND said that he was in favor of 
 the principle of the first section of the article 
 under consideration and should be happy to see 
 some provision adopted, by means of which, that 
 principle could be safely and effectually carriec 
 out. But he was confident that in this section as 
 it stood, there were many difficulties, of which 
 the chairman of the committee, who reported it, 
 did not seem to be aware. 
 
 In the first place, Mr. K. did not believe that it 
 would be possible by general laws merely to 
 provide for all cases, where it might be perfectly 
 proper and entirely unobjectionable to grant cor- 
 porate privileges ; thus in the case of charitable 
 societies, as orphan asylums, in the case of nu- 
 merous societies, whose objects were purely be- 
 nevolent and philanthropic, it would be difficult 
 not to say impracticable, to form a general law 
 applicable to all cases : the amount of property 
 which should be held, the amount of revenue 
 proper to be allowed, the number and description 
 of officers of the society, might and doubtless 
 would greatly differ in different cases, and would 
 depend on a vast variety of contingencies and 
 circumstances, and he very much doubted wheth- 
 er any general law or laws could be so framed as to 
 admit of the creation of such associations m nu- 
 merous instances, where their establishment 
 would promote the cause of benevolence, of cha- 
 rity and philanthropy, end where no possible 
 objection could exist to them. The same diffi- 
 culties would be found in so framing a general law 
 as to admit of the creation of literary institutions 
 on one single unvarying model for the circum- 
 stances in one place or neighborhood, where such 
 a corporation might be required, might be so vari- 
 ant from those of another, as to render it impos- 
 sible to organize an institution for each locality, 
 under one and the same law. Again, there is an 
 infinite vane y of subjects and objects, in reference 
 to which such associations have been and will 
 hereafter be lequired by considerations of public 
 policy, of humanity, in tact, of the public good, 
 ind which it may well be conceived could by no 
 possibility be oiganized under * a general law." 
 These views might he further illustrated, but it 
 would not be necessary. There were oiher and 
 perhaps more serious objections to this section, 
 as it now stood. Mr. K. did not believe it possi- 
 ble to execute it in such a way as not to pioduce 
 great danger and ditlicnity. Take the cas-e of rail 
 road, turnpike, canal, or bridge companies; hov\ 
 could they be formed under a general law, unies.- 
 that laa permitted them to take lands, streams, 
 &c., belonging to individuals, ai;d how could a 
 general law be framed to give power and authority 
 like this, that could not expose the rights of the 
 citizen to be trampled on and violated? Mr K. 
 said that (as contemplated by the section, not only 
 no corporation could be crea'f.d, but no "exten- 
 
 sive privilege" could be conferred, except by 
 "genet,.! law," and consequently the rates or tori 
 it would give, must be the smie in all rail road 
 companies, in all bridge companies. &.C.; ihat is, 
 if no special act. could be passed, giving to any 
 one company a " privilege" not common to all. 
 Mr. K. could not see how the raks of compensa- 
 tion could be different in companies of the same 
 kind, and formed under !he s. rne general law, in 
 the case, loo, of these companies where rights of 
 way were one of the main things to be obtained, 
 to enable them to exercise theircorporate business, 
 it was implied in this section that thtse rights were 
 all to be obtained in one general mode; and Mr. 
 K. did not see any escape Trom one of two resuli* 
 either, that much greater power must be given 
 10 the companies than it would be safe lor the 
 citizen that they should possess, or some interme- 
 diate tribunal, as a board of couimissioneis, must 
 be instituted by the "general law," which tribunal 
 should decide what lands, streams, &.c., the com- 
 pany should lake what route of road or canal they 
 should pursue, &c., and thus this tribunal would 
 practical !y and .-ubstantiall) possess the power of 
 determining whether or not the corporation should 
 be created. Mr K. saw many other difficuliies- 
 that would flow from a provision like this, and he 
 must enter his protest against it. He was perfect- 
 ly willing, nay, desirous to prevent the future cre- 
 ation of monopolies and exclusive privileges, and 
 to tfiecttially pr>'hibit the Legislature Ircm pass- 
 ing any special laws by which they could hereaf- 
 ter come into existence. The great source of com- 
 plaint heretofore had been the " bank monopo- 
 lies," and it was a matter of his.orical fact that 
 the corrupt practices that were formerly resetted 
 j to, to procure bank charters, had mainly pro- 
 duced i he * two-thirds" clause in the existing 
 Constitution; in fact, the transactions of the Bank 
 of America in the halls of the Legislature, were 
 the immediate cause of that inhibitory provision* 
 Mr. K. was decidedly in favoi of providing, in the 
 Constitution we are about to frame, against the 
 grant of any special bank charters heiealter, and he 
 believed that a section authoiizmg the legislature to 
 pass " general laws" for incorporations lor banking, 
 manufacturing and trading purposes, and inhibit- 
 ing special charters for these objects, would at- 
 tain the desired end, would cut up, foiever, ''ex- 
 clusive privilege and monopoly," and would fully 
 satisfy the expectations and wishes of our consii- 
 tuents. All this could be safely and easily sccoin. 
 pjished. When we attempted more, Mr K., be- 
 lieved that we were attempting that which was 
 wholly useless, and which was demanded by no 
 considerations of public good or equal justice 
 and he was convinced that the section in question, 
 instead of effecting she bent fits iisauihor undoubt- 
 edly intended, would lead lo great difficul'y and 
 inconvenience, and as he apprehended, to serious 
 dantjeis and evils lo the citizens. He therefore 
 trusted it wi/uld be rejectt-d, or at any rate so mo- 
 dified as to attain the object which he, (Mr. K ,) 
 in common with the gentleman who repotted it, 
 had sincerely at heart, while at the same time, the 
 objections Mr. K had slated, and many olhers 
 which might be stated, if (he short time allowed 
 to each member in this debate permitted, would 
 be entirely obviated. 
 Mr. BASCOM said it was the duty of the gov- 
 
971 
 
 eminent to make roads and ways every where 
 through the country. But there was a vast dif- 
 ference between an incorporated company for 
 manufacturing purposes, and one for the construc- 
 tion of a road or railway, or magnetic telegraph, 
 &c. He did not want to engraft these arbitrary 
 provisions in the constitution. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL asked Mr. LOOMIS if he would 
 insert the proviso of the gentleman from St. Law- 
 rence. 
 
 The Chair said Mr. LOOMIS had sent up this 
 proviso to go in the first section after the word 
 *' privilege," except as provided in this article. 
 
 Some desultory conversation here ensued be- 
 tween Messrs. LOOMIS, VAN SCHOONHOVEN, Ni- 
 COLI, and PERKINS. 
 
 Mr. HUNT said, gentlemen seemed anxious to 
 invent something that may have the appearance 
 of a reason to justify them for voting against an 
 article depriving the legislature of the power of 
 granting monopolies and special privileges. The 
 gentleman from Erie ? yesterday, spoke of an acad- 
 emy in his neighborhood having a ferry monopo- 
 ly to sustain it, and complained that the first sec- 
 tion would prevent any such marriage of litera- 
 ture and monopoly hereafter. Might he not bet- 
 ter have worded his objection thus: " We have a 
 ferry monopoly in our neighborhood with an aca- 
 demy to cloak it ?" The gentleman from Albany 
 seemed to think that if the legislature should per- 
 mit a bridge, &c. to take toll that is, to take pay 
 for its work it would enjoy special privileges. 
 Lesser lights have put forth lesser arguments 
 still. Many seem disposed to vote against the 
 first section, because the fifth does not suit them. 
 They will gratify their spite against John Doe by 
 knocking down John Smith, who has given no 
 cause of quarrel. There is no use'in continuing 
 a debate in this way, I therefore move the pre- 
 vious question upon this 1st section. 
 
 Mr. riUN 1' VM hdrew it at ifee request of Mr. 
 
 O'CONOR. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR seat up his substitute, but it 
 was not in order. 
 
 (}1. Associations for the pecuniary gain or profit of the 
 associates, may be c eat*-d, incorporated or continued, by 
 vmue oi general laws; but not by spec.al acts All pow- 
 ers acquired under-general laws sha.l be liable to altera- 
 tion or extinguishment by law. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said he would renew the previ 
 ous question it' Mr. HUNT wished. 
 
 Mr. HUNT said no; but he asked if the amend- 
 ment ot Ins colleague would not permit a lottery, 
 grant or bank charter to associations formed under 
 literary, charitable, or patriotic pretences, and 
 thus leave an opening for the most odious monopo- 
 lies? 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said the question of in 
 dividal liability ol incorporators, and ot genera] 
 laws on the subject had been fully discussed mir- 
 ing the last few years He had seen, year afiei 
 year, this hall fill< d with lobby members, pressing 
 th^ir claims upon the Legislature, and when thev 
 were told that a general law would be passed, ob 
 viating the supposed necessity tor special acts 01 
 incorporations, they would object on the giouru 
 that such laws would not answer iheir particulai 
 purpose. The fact was, that without the exclusive 
 privilege, their charters would be entirely worth 
 less to many who procured ihem, for it was 
 
 ommon practice for those patriots to sell out their 
 ight in the artificial thing thus created, and which 
 :onsi?ted alone in the amount thereby extracted 
 rom the rnass of the people, through the most 
 ontemptible fraud. The united eftorts of these 
 nen were always brought to bear against the pas 
 age of general laws on 'his subject, and they had 
 leretofore succeeded to admiration; it therefore 
 became necessary to attend to the matter now, 
 while they were out of the way. The whole 
 unfry had been groaning under this species of 
 'egislation for nearly halt' a century. The rights of 
 he people had been sacrificed at the shrine of mo- 
 nopoly and special privileges, and their best inter- 
 ?sts disregarded at the n"d cf bankers and stock- 
 obbers. The prerogative of government which 
 ihoulj shield all from wrong, had been employed 
 n inflicting injury on the masses for the benefit 
 )f the privileged few. Without regard to the un- 
 mportant amendment directly before the Conven- 
 ion, he considered the whole question of incor- 
 lorations under discussion, and he only regretted 
 ime would not permit hirn to say what seemed to 
 >e necessary on a question so deeply affecting the 
 vhoie people not merely of this State, but ot the 
 Jnion. He thought gentlemen behind the age, 
 who objected to this prohibition to legislative 
 xiwer, in granting special privileges and exclu- 
 sive monopolies. They pointed to the prosperity 
 and glory of the country as an evidence of those in- 
 stitutions; but was it not more likely owing to the 
 fertility of our soil, the inexhaustible means of 
 wealt h, and ihe enterprise of a free people, than to 
 his kind oi Legislation. He was not opposed to any 
 egitimate means by which capital might be made 
 more productive, but he desired to keep in view 
 the productiveness of labor at the same time. Ob- 
 servation had convinced him that, more pains had 
 seen taken to increase the income of associate ca- 
 pital and of combined roguery, than for the pro- 
 ;ection of the unquestionable rights of the labor- 
 ing poor. One of the most insidious and success- 
 ful means of depriving honest industry of its just 
 reward, and of building up fortunes for the idle 
 and profligate, ever devised by human ingenuity, 
 was the system of banking adopted in this coun- 
 try and in England. A smooth piece of paper, a 
 ^retty vignette, and a couple of signatures, per- 
 haps of men who would have been more legiti- 
 mately and usefully employed in digging out iron 
 ore in the Clinton mines, have repeatedly be- 
 come the circulating medium of the country. He 
 well remembered that while in business in the 
 city of .New York, he was compelled to carry 
 these promises to pay to their makers in Wall 
 street, the best of whom would turn him ofi'to 
 the tender mercy of their agents the brokers 
 who would as a favor pay from 73 to 80 cents to 
 the dollar, in change, which was found necessa- 
 ry in conducting business. Thus these shylocks, 
 while in possession of abundant means, were buy- 
 ing up their liabilities at a discount of 25 cents 
 on the dollar, at the same time others, less re- 
 gardful of the future or better satisfied with the 
 past and present profits, refused to pay any por- 
 tion of their indebtedness. If natural persons 
 were guilty of such villany, they would receive 
 their reward in State prison, but these artificial 
 things go free. This was not all, for in the midst 
 of the general ruin and misery, they would bid 
 
972 
 
 defiance to the law and dictate the terms on 
 which they would resume payment. How often 
 had the country witnessed, during these periodi- 
 cal revulsions, brought on by the redundancy and 
 contraction of the paper circulating medium, the 
 halls of legislation besieged by these distraction- 
 ists, demanding in threatening tones, (which if 
 found Unavailing, bribery was the next resort,) 
 to be exonerated from all legal responsibility to 
 pay their debts. They had usurped the govern- 
 ment, trampled under'foot the constitution, vio- 
 lated the laws of God and dishonored man. Dur- 
 ing these revolutionary times, from fifteen to 
 twenty thousand industrious mechanics and work- 
 ing men were walking about the streets of the 
 large cities, seeking employment, and received 
 a mere pittance, scarcely sufficient to obtain the 
 necessaries of life. So it was with every other 
 honest occupation none obtained the reward to 
 which industry was entitled. How many of 
 these poor men returned home every Saturday 
 night, dejected in spirit, with their heads bowed 
 down to the ground from incessant toil and a fear- 
 ful anxiety tor the future ! Perhaps an interest- 
 ing familv are waiting to welcome with smiles 
 the industrious parent to his humble abode. 
 But how soon these smiles were turned to sor- 
 row when informed by the care-worn father that 
 he knows not where to get bread the ensuing 
 week for his little ones. How painful it was to 
 witness such scenes, especially in a country 
 abounding with plenty : that, too, while the art- 
 ful and cunning are revelling in wealth, wrung 
 from the labor of the poor. You talk of the pros- 
 perity of the country, and refer to your wealthy 
 citizens and magnificent edifices as an evidence of 
 it. He did not consider this a safe criterion by 
 which to judge. The contentment and happi- 
 ness of the masses was the only evidence of the 
 real prosperity of a country. What benefit was 
 it to the country at large, though the rich few 
 reside in palaces, while the laboring many are 
 driven into hovels? What though your bankers 
 and brokers ride in gilded carriages, while your 
 honest poor faint under the burdens of the day ! 
 What though your feudal landlords rule with a 
 rod of iron, while the tenants are bound by their 
 command ? Was there no .sympathy left in the 
 human heart, no commisseration for the oppress- 
 ed poor ? Were it possible to collect together 
 the rivers of tears shed by suffering humanity in 
 consequence of special and unequal legislation 7 
 they would not be sufficient to obliterate the in- 
 famy of unjust laws, nor wash out half the crimes 
 resulting therefrom. He was not satisfied that 
 the condition of the producing classes in this coun- 
 try was improving; he had seen nothing in them 
 to encourage the philanthropist. The best me- 
 chanics, with constant employment, could scarce- 
 ly maintain their families respectably and com- 
 fortably. The time was in this country when 
 mechanics could reserve something from their 
 weekly earnings for future events, but it was not 
 so now and why ? He believed it was because 
 we had departed from the true principles of go- 
 vernment, in creating artificial bodies and inter- 
 fering with the private business of life. We had 
 dug channels through which the wealth justly 
 belonging to and resulting from the production 
 and industry of the country, had been transferred 
 
 to the coffers of the idle and non-producing. If 
 this was not true, why was it that you see men 
 of intelligence, frugality and industry struggling 
 through the world, scarcely able to support a fa- 
 mily of the same character, while the indolent and 
 extravagant, possessing no other character than 
 that of dishonesty, are rolling in luxury and ease ? 
 perfect equality of condition was not to be ex- 
 pected, but the disparity was too great. He had 
 no doubt but that independent of the interference 
 of government, social and primary equality would 
 jxikt, misfortune excepted, in nearly the same 
 proportion as you find that of intelligence indus- 
 try and frugality. Under the present arrange- 
 ment of society there was not even an approxima- 
 ion to this rule, but on the contrary he had shown 
 that it was quite the reverse. The immense 
 wealth of a few individuals in this country must 
 lave come from somewhere. It could not have 
 sprung from nothing, f i r if you take ought from 
 ought nothing remains. And he thought it was 
 clear that the origin of wealth was found in the 
 :>rodctive labor of the country, if so, by what 
 means was it directed from its legitimate source ? 
 tie answered by partial, special and unjust laws. 
 [f by process of legislation this wealth or capital 
 should revert to those who produced it, every in- 
 habitant of the country would be comparatively 
 rich, the lazy and profligate exeepted. Fix 
 this as a starting point, and from thence conduct 
 the goverment on just principles, and it would 
 require a thousand years to effect the same ine- 
 quality that now exists, if indeed it could ever be 
 done. He would not attempt to describe the con- 
 dition of a people under this new order of things, 
 for it would be like spreading a beautiful table 
 before a starving roan, with the assurance that if 
 he eat thereof he should die. Time would not 
 warrant him in discussing this question any farth- 
 er, except to express a sincere hope that the sub- 
 stance of the report of the committee might be 
 adopted. The difficulties suggested by the gen- 
 tleman from N. Y. (Mr. O'CONOR) respecting the 
 establishment of a University or a Washington's 
 monument associations, would be easily obviated, 
 and if not, he thought there was no way in which 
 the Convention would better perpetuate the 
 memory of this great and grand man, than by en- 
 grafting on the constitution the benign principles 
 for which he and his compatriots so faithfully 
 and nobly contended. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND said he did not rise to speak 
 against all corporations. He believed corpora- 
 tions in some instances were both necesssary and 
 useful, but he did not believe it necessary or pro- 
 per to incorporate companies to do business that 
 could be carried on by individual enterprise. He 
 believed the chartering of companies to do busi- 
 ness calculated to come directly in competition 
 with individual enterprise would operate most 
 perniciously upon the best interests of the great 
 mass of the citizens of this state. These large 
 companies, b* means of the great facilities afford- 
 ed by their consolidated wealth and the special 
 privileges given them by their charters, would be 
 able to put down all individual competition, and 
 in the end there was great danger of their becom- 
 ing in reality, what they have so often been called, 
 monopolies of the most odious kind. He believ- 
 ed in the doctrines put forth by Daniel D. Tomp- 
 
973 
 
 kins while Governor of this state : that these cor- 
 porate bodies should be kept within the control 
 of the Legislature, as there was great danger of 
 their becoming formidable and oppressive, as they 
 increased in numbers and in power. There 
 seemed to be a disposition on the part of sme 
 to give increased facilities for procuring these 
 charters. He did not believe this necessary, as 
 more than half the time of the Legislature, while 
 in session, is spent in reference to these applica- 
 tions, either for new charters or for an increase 
 of the powers of old ones. The result of all this 
 is, that laws of a general nature such as are for 
 the benefit ol the whole people, are left unac ed 
 upon, as they are jumped over and overridden by 
 these combinations who always have their agents 
 in the lobby, who are pushing them forward with 
 Railroad speed. He said he believed a general 
 law under which these companies might be organ- 
 ized, would do much to divest them of their mo- 
 nopoly character, and would do much to preserve 
 the purity of Legislation. The gentleman from 
 New- York (Mr. O'Comm) has just told ua that 
 it might be thought necessary for the adv^hce- 
 tnent of common school education, to incorporate 
 a great institution to be called a university, to 
 have the particular charge and direction of schools 
 of this kind. Mr. R. said he would not so par- 
 ticularly notice this remark at this time had he 
 not noticed in various quarters out of this Con- 
 vention, a disposition on the part of some to build 
 up a great central power at the Capitol or some 
 other place, to take charge of this whole subject, 
 manage the funds and say who might and who 
 might not be a teacher in common schools. This, 
 he said would be a splendid power, and would af- 
 ford fine pickings out of the funds as well as an 
 excellent chance for doling out special privileges 
 to particular favorites. He would say that he did 
 not believe that any schemes of this kind would 
 work ; the people were awake on the subject of 
 education and they knew that they were capable 
 of managing this matter themselves, and the dif- 
 ferent towns in the state were abundantly capable 
 of electing men competent to say who was and 
 and who was not capable of teaching their schools. 
 Gentlemen must remember that the policy of the 
 day was against consolidation ; the people had 
 declared against central power and had demanded 
 a return to them of a large portion of the powers 
 heretofore exercised by the office holders congre- 
 gated about the Capitol, and this Convention, so 
 far as we have gone, have manifested their deter- 
 mination to carry out this principal in accordance 
 with their views. The cause of education was 
 one that was uppermost in the minds of the peo- 
 ple, and so long as it remained so it was safer 
 than in the hands of any aspiring office hunters, 
 whose great object is the spoils 
 
 Mr. DANA had no objection to the amendment 
 of the section as reported, But if any thing was to 
 be accomplished here, it was only by confining 
 ourselves more strictly to the question at issue. 
 He asked for the previous question on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN. 
 
 There was a second, and the main question or- 
 dered. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. V. S. was rejected. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved the amendment he had 
 indicated by adding after the word " privileges" 
 
 in the second line, the following, " except as 
 otherwise provided in this article." 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to insert the word "such" 
 after the word " all" in the fifth line, so as to 
 make future laws applicable to future corpora- 
 tions, because there were some corporations now 
 existing which were not under the control of the 
 legislature. He was willing to vote for the sec- 
 tion thus amended. 
 
 The CHAIR suggested that the amendment was 
 not now in order. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS was in the very broadest practi- 
 cal acceptation of the word anti-corporation. He 
 believed that the legislature should be restricted 
 from granting a corporation to perform any of the 
 ordinary business of life now transacted by indi- 
 viduals or voluntary associations. His honest 
 convictions were that corporations were an evil, 
 except in cases were individuals could not get 
 along. His objection to the section was, that 
 under it the legislature might pass general laws 
 authorising individuals to incorporate themselves 
 for the transaction of any business whatever. 
 
 Mr. STETSON alluded to the conflicting views 
 which existed in the Convention on this subject, 
 and feared that it would result in preventing any 
 action on the subject. He regarded the gentle- 
 man from New-York, as having taken a position 
 so entirely radical as to render the vote wholly 
 impracticable for practical purposes. There were 
 a variety of matters of business, which, from the 
 vast capital required, would be impossible to be 
 carried into operation without a corporation. 
 He would retain no power in the legislature, 
 however, to grant especial privileges. He thought 
 the section as reported by the committee, to be 
 the most wise and adequate for the purpose in- 
 tended. It would relieve the legislature from the 
 constant teazing they were obliged to undergo, 
 for these especial grants. 
 
 Mr. STEPHENS hoped that this important * 
 matter might be brought to as satisfactory a con- 
 clusion as the Finance Question. He thought no 
 reform would be attained unless the Legi^latuie 
 should be wholly deprived of the power to grant 
 corporations of this character He objected to 
 the provision in the article which made the share 
 holders individually liable for the debts of these 
 associations only for the ner cent on their interest. 
 It would go to break up all partnerships where 
 men were personally responsible to the full amount 
 of the debt. 
 
 The question was taken on the amendment of 
 Mr. LOOMIS, and it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN withdrew his amendment. 
 
 The qnes'ion was then on the amendment of 
 Mr O'CONOR. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS could not perceive that the dif- 
 ficulties suggested in relari(in to the franchise of 
 the right of way was obviated by this amendment. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that it only provided against 
 special acts. It did not prevent the granting to 
 an association the right of way or of eminent do- 
 main. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS: Under that section could the 
 Legislature regulate the rates of fare on the several 
 roads ? 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR certainly. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS was not so clear about that. 
 
974 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved to strike out the words 
 " not inconsistent with this constitution" which 
 he considered surplusage. He did not suppose 
 that the legislature could pass any act inconsistent 
 with the constitution. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL did not consider this language 
 as a surplusage. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS explained that the object was to 
 prevent the possibility of any misconstruction. 
 
 Mr. WHITE withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN proposed to add to the end of the 
 section the words " or with the provisions of any 
 charter heretofore granted." He did not wish to 
 prevent the legislature from passing laws which 
 operated on such incorporations if they did not 
 interfere with their chartered rights. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS would be gratified if he could as- 
 sent to any proposition coming from the gentleman 
 from Columbia. This section did not propose to 
 alter any charter now existing, but to make them 
 subject to all laws which should affect individu- 
 als. If those charters are existing contracts, nei- 
 ther this constitution nor laws passed under it 
 could violate those contracts. If they were not 
 contracts then they should be subject to all gene- 
 ral laws that might be passed not special laws 
 applying especially to them. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN further urged his amendment. 
 He desired to guard against any infringement of 
 what he considered to be the plighted faith of the 
 state, with reference to corporations already ex- 
 isting. 
 
 The debate was continued by Mr. TILDEN. 
 He held that the legislature could grant no cor- 
 porate power or privilege which it had not the 
 right to revoke. He admitted that the legislature 
 could not divest the corporators of the right of 
 property. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN replied, and after some further 
 conversation 
 
 Mr. JORDAN withdrew the pending amend- 
 ment, and substituted the one previously with- 
 drawn, and it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL called for the previous question, 
 and there was a second, and the main question 
 ordered. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. O'CONOR, and there were ayes 31, 
 nays 64, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ay rault, F. F. Backus. 
 Brayton, Bruce, Candee, Cook, Dodd, Gebhard, Gmham, 
 Harris, Kirkland, Marvin, Miller, Nicholas, O'Couor, 
 Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Porter, Rhoades, >haw, 
 Simmons, E. Spencer, Stow, Stiong, Taggart, V\ hite, A. 
 Wright, Young 31. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Bergen, Bowdi^h, Brundage, Bull, 
 Cambreleng, Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cornell, 
 Cryoker, Cuddeback, Dana, Dantoith, Dubois, Flanders, 
 Greene, Hart, Hawley, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Hunter, A. 
 Huritington, Hyde, Jon* s, Jordan, Reman, Kingsley, 
 Loomis, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Maxwell, Morris, Nellis, 
 Nicoii.Powers, President, Hiker, Russell,St.John,San:ord, 
 Sears, Sheldon, Suepard. smith, W. ts. ispenct:r,8tephen-, 
 Stetson, Swackhamer, Taft, W. Taylor, Tilden.Townsend, 
 Tuthill, Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Waterlmry. 
 Willard, Witbeck, Wood, W.B. Wright, Yawger, Youngs 
 
 So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS called tor a division of the ques- 
 tion, so as to lake the vote separately on the first 
 part of the section, absolutely forbidding the pas- 
 sage of special laws creating incorporations, or 
 granting to them txclusive privileges. 
 
 The CHAIR decided the motion to t e out of 
 order, the previous question having been ordered. 
 
 Alter some conveisation on the point ot order, 
 
 Mr. MORRIS withdrew his request tor a divi- 
 sion of the section. 
 
 The section was adopted ayes 65, nays 33 as 
 follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Bowdish, Brundace 
 Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr., Chatfield, Clark, Clyde, 
 Conely, Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana, Danlorth, Du- 
 bois, inlanders, Gebhard, Greene, Hotchkiss, Hunt. Hun- 
 ter, A. Huntingtpn, Hyde, Jones, Jordan, Kemble, Kernan, 
 Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, McNeil McNitt, Maxwell, Nel- 
 lis, iNicoll, Perkins, Porter, Powers, President, Riker, Rus- 
 sell, St John, Sanford, Sears, Sheldon, Shepard, Smith, 
 W. H. Spencer, Stephens, Stetson, Swackhamer, Tail, W. 
 Taylor, Tilden. Townsend, Tuthill, Vache, Ward, Water- 
 bury, White, Wood, W. B. Wright, Yawger, Youngs 65. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. A'cher, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, Bascom, 
 Brayton, Bruce, Burr, Canoee, Chamberlain, Dodd, Gra- 
 ham, Harris, Kirkland, Marvin, Miller, Nicholas, O'Con- 
 or, Parish, Patteison, Penniman.Rhoades, Richmond, Shaw, 
 Simmons, E. Spencer, Stow, Strong, Taggart, Van Schoon- 
 hoven, Willard, Witbeck,A. Wright, Young 33. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND offered the following as the 
 second Action: 
 
 fj 2. No laws shall ever be passed granting lo corpora, 
 tions or associations the right to take or use private pro- 
 perty for corporation or other purposes, without the con- 
 sent of the owner, or owners of such propeity. 
 
 The question being taken, the amendment wa9 
 rejected, ayes 9, nays 71. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES "ottered the following as the 
 second section : 
 
 2. The legislature may after the formation of any cor- 
 poration, confer by law such powers and privileges as 
 may be necessary for carrying out the object ol such cor- 
 poration, not provided for by such general law. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT moved to amend by adding 
 " other than banking, trading, or manufacturing," 
 after the word." corporation'" 
 
 Mr. RHOADES accepted the amendment. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that the object of the amend- 
 ment could be attained under the first section. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN asked (or the previous question, 
 and there was a second and the main question or- 
 dered 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. RHOADES, and it was rejected. 
 Ayes 25, nays 52. 
 
 The second section was then read, as follows ; 
 ^ 2 Every corporation for purposes of gain or benefit to 
 the corporators or share-owntrs, shall cause the names of 
 all its stockholders and officers, and the places of their re- 
 sidence, and an estimate of the value of its property, es- 
 timated and appraised as the legislature shall by law direct, 
 and the aggregate amount of all its debts and liabilities 
 absolute and contingent, to be published at stated periods 
 as often as once in each year, in a newspaper published in 
 the vicinity of its place of business. And any such corpo- 
 ration shall not become indebted to an amount greater 
 than its capital stock actually paid in, together with the 
 undivided net prolits thereon invested and employed in the 
 business of such corpoiation, or actually on hand in cash 
 or good securities for such purpose. But this shall not be 
 construed to limit the hazards of any insurance company. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS briefly ^explained the section. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG urged that this matter 
 was more strictly one of legislation, and he would 
 therefore move to strike out the section. 
 
 This was agreed to. 
 
 The third section was read as follows : 
 
 \ 3. Every corporator or share-owner in any incorpora- 
 tion for gain or benefit to the corporators or shareholders, 
 except insurance, and except for purposes specified in the 
 next section, in case such corporation shall become insol- 
 vent, shall be liable ior the unsatisfied debts and liabilities 
 
975 
 
 ot such corpoiation contracted while he was such corpo- 
 rator or sh:tre owner, 'to Hn amount to the same pro; or 
 tion to tin- whole unsati>tie<l natalities, that his siock or 
 sha e shall bear to the whole stock. But such personal li- 
 ability .shall not extend to sjny indebtedness or liability, the 
 payment 01 which shall have been deferred more than one 
 year t>y contract with the creditor, or which shull *ot 
 have been demanded by suit within one year alter it be- 
 comes duo. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to strike it out, as 
 being purely legislative. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to amend the first line 
 by inserting the words " hereafter created," after 
 the word " incorporation." Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. PERKIiNS opposed the motion urstrike out 
 the section. He considered thai, by adopting that 
 motion, the benefits derived from the section adopt- 
 ed, would be entirely neutralized. 
 
 Mr. TUTH1LL moved to strike out all between 
 the words "shareholders" in the2i1 line and" insolv- 
 ent'' in the 4;h line : also from the word " shure- 
 owner" in the 6ih line and " stock" in the bth ; 
 also the words " by suit' 5 in the last line. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 No quorum present. 
 
 The roll was called, and a little before 4. o'clock 
 65 members answered. 
 
 The question was on striking cut " insurance 
 companies" from the 3d section, on motion ol 
 Mr. TUTHILL. 
 
 Mr. MANN said that he was in favor of the 
 amendment proposed by the gentleman from 
 Orange, at all events the first division of it. The 
 bank-, as corporations, receive their incomes and 
 premiums frotu the notes they discount, or their 
 promises to pay. The rik the banks run in theii 
 transactions and discounts is that which may oc- 
 cur by taking bad paper, which may not be ulti- 
 mately paid, which n-k they are paid tor-with the 
 use of their monev. How is it with the insur- 
 ance companies? They icceive theii incomes and 
 premiums to the amount of millions, in small 
 sums, though in the aggregate to very large 
 amounts, and they receive them upon their own 
 promises to pay. You pay them a bonus, for 
 what ? lor their promises to pay your losses, ii 
 any should occur under your policy. They bind 
 the company or the stockholders to pav according 
 to contract. They are paid tor this risk, and are 
 bound to meet Ihe losses, if any occur, and should 
 be made to meet these promises to pay, it a con- 
 tingency lequires it. He was in tavor of putting 
 these incorporations upon the same tooting with 
 others under the fiist section of this article, and 
 could see no reason why they should be excluded, 
 and hoped the amendment would prevail. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND stated that the proposition 
 of.the gentleman from Orange (Mr. TUTHILL) 
 opened the whole doctrine of the liability of cor 
 porations and associations involving as it did a 
 question so much discussed everywhere but here 
 he regretted to see the indifference that the Con- 
 vention exhibited, when a proper opportunity was 
 presented for its consideration. When a few days 
 since he had the honor to present a remonstrance 
 against this principle being placed in the consti- 
 tution, from a number of the merchants of the 
 city of New York of the highest respectability 
 and of mixed political views, he took occasion 
 
 ;o state that from the reflection that he had given 
 to the subject he believed that in view of all the 
 circumstances bearing upon the case, the general 
 good would be best promoted by engrafting the 
 principle proposed into the constitution. Still he 
 was open to conviction on argument tending to 
 another conclusion and limited as our time was, 
 he hoped that a subject so important would draw 
 out at least some views from gentlemen able to 
 throw instruction and light before us. To state 
 very generally the views he held he would say 
 that the point raised in the remonstrance, he had 
 alluded to, as to the tendency of the measure pro- 
 posed to produce a classification of shareholders 
 in future associations was undoubtedly a strong 
 one. By the laws at present existing, an Astor 
 or a Whitney might associate under limited res- 
 ponsibility in business, institutions that were 
 equally open to the investments and enterprize 
 of men of small means. Under the present lia- 
 bility clause however men of heavy capitals would 
 only consent to associate with those who brought 
 a similar responsibility to themselves into 
 the association, and theVe could no doubt for 
 good or ill, that thereafter the classification 
 alluded to in the remonstrance would pre- 
 dominate among the stockholders of all new 
 associations. This was a question upon 
 which he had directed much reflection. We 
 know that in Great Britain a country peculiar- 
 ly analagous to our own in most of her institu- 
 tions affecting government and business matters 
 nearly 4000 banking-houses and their branches 
 were now operating upon full personal liabi- 
 lity. The Bank of England, that of Ireland, 
 and one or two in Scotland, were the only insti- 
 tutions of a banking nature operating under the 
 principle of limited liability and special charters. 
 If the business community of that country had, 
 after long experience, settled down upon the in- 
 dividual liability principle as the best upon which 
 to conduct her deposit, banking and exchange 
 transactions, it presented a strong argument in 
 favor of introducing the principle in our own 
 laws. The provisions as to publicity of situation 
 involving extent of liabilities, names of share- 
 holders, &c., proposed by the second section of 
 the article before us, which section has been 
 stricken out as a matter of legislative action, were 
 found in the statutes of Great Britain, and should 
 be recognized in ours, if we assimilate the for- 
 mation of our institutions of this character to 
 theirs. The principle adopted by that country 
 in 1844, r. specting paper circulating as money, 
 is in close analogy to that in force in this State 
 since the year 1840, upon the same subject. With 
 some limited exceptions as to institutions having 
 the privilege of issuing paper as money, the 
 whole paper circulation of Great Britain is now 
 based upon the securities of the government debt 
 held by the Bank of England, or upon an equal 
 deposite of bullion. Thus the power of great 
 flexibility in the currency of that country, which 
 has often, exposed her to severe financial revul- 
 sions, no longer exists. The fact ot the coin- 
 cidence in the matter of circulation with the laws 
 of our State, ma\ be explained in some degree by 
 the circumstance that the opening speech of Sir 
 Robert Peel in urging the reform, treated the 
 subject in a language and connection so analagous 
 
976 
 
 to that used in the reports of the legislature of 
 this State from the currency committee of the 
 Assembly in 1842, as to evince his familiarity 
 with, and acquiescence in, the reasoning and 
 conclusions of those reports. Having thus, 
 as i have shown, given to that great com- 
 mercial nation a hint which she has adopted, 
 with reference to the rnaiter of paper circulating 
 as money, may we not perhaps perceive in the 
 operation of her joint stock business associations, 
 principles which' we may with advantage place in 
 our own laws. That the principle of personal re- 
 sponsibility would draw with it a closer circum- 
 spection on the paitof share holders of er the ope- 
 ration and business or the institutions with which 
 they are connected, there can be no doubt. We 
 can readily imagine that where stock holders are 
 personally responsible, they wuuld often be in- 
 duced, by an additional subscription, ai a pecuni- 
 ary crisis, to save their association from insolvency 
 and thus the interest of all parties be better se- 
 cured. A strong illustration of this principle oc. 
 curred, some years since, in the case of a bank, 
 in this city, (the Commercial) where even the 
 limited responsibility which that peculiar char- 
 ter contained, urged upon the directois the 
 necessity of coining to the rescue of the in- 
 gtitution in their private resources, in a manner 
 that has secured a favor to the principle from the 
 success and public confidence that has subsequent- 
 ly attended that particular institution. Some gen- 
 tlemen have proposed to except insurance compa- 
 nies from the provisions of liability that they were 
 willing to apply to banking and othei business as- 
 sociations. Mr. T. did nof agree with them. In- 
 surance companies were foi mid generally upon 
 the same desire of gain that all other pecuniary 
 institutions were; and there was no ieason why 
 an exception should be made in their favor. For 
 several years, mny of the mutual insurance com- 
 panies of the slate have been conducted upon a 
 principle nearly allied to that of personal respon- 
 sibility ; and if he was not much mistaken, their 
 share holders are trequently called upon t coniri 
 bute their pro rata portion of losses beyond the 
 means that may be at the moment in the hands o! 
 the officers of a company. A gentleman near him 
 stated that the stockholders of theSaiatoga Mutual 
 Co. had been called upon to contribute as otten ai 
 least as at three different times. Should the mu- 
 nicipal corporations ot the state exercise the pow- 
 er that they probably possess, of considering the 
 prevention <>f fires as purely a police matter 
 then they may with propriety impose a tax to 
 return losses by tire, which ate a consequence 
 in most cases of the imperfections of their own 
 police regulations and thus render unnecessary 
 the organization of any insurance companies. 
 Insurance of any nature was .'fter all nothing but 
 a wager. The insured wagers the insurer 1 to 
 200 (or any other proportion that the peculiar 
 circumstances warrant) that his property will 
 not be destroyed by fire, the elements or ene- 
 mies At the close of the last, and for a conside- 
 rable period in the present century, all marine 
 risks in the city of New York were secured and 
 guarantied by private persons. A class of indi- 
 viduals of known pecuniary responsibility, were 
 alwavs ready to take the hazard of a marine loss ; 
 and no difficulty was then experienced in having 
 
 the most valuable India cargo insured by the pri- 
 vate underraters, each taking a risk presumed 
 equal to his own ability to discharge the obliga- 
 tions he undertook. Most of the marine insu- 
 rance of the commercial metropolis of the world 
 is now conducted upon the plan of individual re- 
 sponsibility ; and the fame of " Loyd's Lists," 
 (connected with this peculiar mode of insurance) 
 is as wide spread as the range of the commerce 
 which it registered. From considerations, aris- 
 ing in these facts, Mr. T. was not disposed to 
 look with the alarm upon the proposition of at- 
 taching the personal responsibility clause to our 
 business associations, that many appeared to feel. 
 He was persuaded, that the proposition had many 
 characteristics to commend it ; yet he was free to 
 admit, as he had before stated, that it was a grave 
 question, and one upon which he was yet open to 
 the effects of a full discussion of the principles 
 that it involved. The limited or special part- 
 nership act, which had existed for fifteen years 
 in this State, presented a means through which 
 men of enterprise and business experience could 
 draw around them the capital of others, without 
 involving the full responsibility of a partnership, 
 and undoubtedly the adoption of the amendment 
 proposed, would repudiate in a considerable ex- 
 tent, what had been open to the public under 
 that law. He had risen without premeditation 
 or preparation, rather than a question of this im- 
 portance, and one upon which so much had been 
 said among the press and people, should be pass- 
 ed upon here in silence, and he hoped that the 
 discussion would be fully entered upon. 
 
 Mr MARVIN supposed that the gentleman 
 (Mr. TOWNSEND) was opposed to the proposition. 
 Mr. TOWN SEND : No, sir, I am in favor of 
 it. [Much laughter.] 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that the whole drift of the 
 gentleman's argument was in opposition to it. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND : When the ayes and noes 
 are called, I am perfectly ready to define my po- 
 siti^n without walking out like some gentlemen. 
 Mr. MARVIN said he was in favor of striking 
 out, but was opposed to the whole section. He 
 was in favor of these stockholders being render- 
 ed personally liable ; for they put their money 
 into these companies for the sake of the gain. 
 He related an anecdote about a poor blacksmith 
 who made a valuable invention ; but who had no 
 money to put into extensive operations. Some 
 large capitalists on being made acquainted with 
 the invention, were willing to risk a certain 
 amount of capital in a fair experiment of manu- 
 facturing the article, but these same capitalists 
 were unwilling to become partners and to become 
 personally liable beyond the amount they should 
 advance. An application was made by the smith 
 for a charter, and the doctrine of personal liabil- 
 ity was insisted upon, which he knew would be 
 death to the application, and would in fact pre- 
 vent an advance of capital from the surest of his 
 friends. The eftect would have been that this 
 poor blacksmith would have been placed entire- 
 ly in the power of the wealthy capitalists and 
 they could have controlled his labor and would 
 probably have availed themselves of his invention 
 and skill, and thus the poor man would have been 
 a hewer of wood and a drawer of water to the 
 rich. If you continued this system of individual 
 
977 
 
 liability you would drive small capitalists away 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that it would throw these 
 
 from these investments, and none but your John 
 
 nrporations into two classes exclusively, the ex- 
 
 J. Astors would have any control of this matter. 
 
 clusively rich and the exclusively poor. He knew 
 
 If that was democracy, to enrich the rich against 
 
 a company that once nearly failed", and would have 
 
 the poor, then he wished to have nothing. to do 
 
 failed but for the individual liability clause, which 
 
 with it. 
 
 made all the stockholders liable; and they went 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS would explain. He would ex- 
 
 to work, contributed each something to help the 
 
 cept insurance companies, because their losses 
 
 concern, and it is now a flourishing and valuable 
 
 were the result of accident or misfortune, and not 
 
 company. If it had not been for this clause they 
 
 of design or of speculation j and it would be very 
 
 would have sold out their stock to the first beggai 
 
 unjust to do this; no stockholder could He down 
 
 they met in the street. These were the reasons 
 
 at night, certain he would not wake up a beggar 
 
 that actuated the committee in reporting this 
 
 in the morning. And at this rale insurance stock 
 
 section. 
 
 would be poison ; no one would touch it. If cor- 
 
 Mr. MARVIN replied that if the Convention 
 
 porations ought not to exist, and if the design 
 
 had listened to the gentleman's argument, thej 
 
 was to prevent them from being formed, there 
 
 must be satisfied that if it was impolitic to make 
 
 could be ne more effectual mode of doing it lhan 
 
 shareholders responsible to the fullest extent, i 
 
 by making every stockholder uersonally responsi- 
 
 was equally impolitic to make them liable to < 
 
 ble to the fullest extent. But if, as he believed, 
 
 partial extent but that if to a partial or to the 
 
 these corporations were salutary in their opera- 
 
 full extent, it was entirely a matter of legislative 
 
 tions, within certain limits, and if we designed 
 
 detail and discretion which did not belong to i 
 
 that they should continue to exist, we should be 
 
 constitution. In some cases this personal liability 
 
 cautious that we did not by an indirect blow, an- 
 
 to a limited extent, might work well and soim 
 
 nihilate them. VVe should take care also to dis- 
 
 corporations might be willing to submit to it 
 
 criminate between the classes of corporations in 
 
 but in other cases it might operate badly. 'H 
 
 the application of this principle. Insurance com- 
 
 could not foresee the operation of it in all cases 
 
 panies, the committee 'thought, were nroper sub- 
 
 and nothing could be more unwise than to bine 
 
 jects of an entire exemption, and for the reason 
 
 down the legislature by a rule, which it might b 
 
 that their losses were the result of accident or ca- 
 
 impracticable to carry out. But be this as i 
 
 lamity which no human foresight could anticipate 
 
 might, the effect of such a principle would b 
 
 or guard against, but which often annihilated im- 
 
 obviously to throw all these corporations eithe 
 
 mense amounts of property. The losses of other 
 
 into the hands of large capitalists or into th 
 
 companies resulted rather from mismanagement, 
 
 hands of men of straw ; and either result must b 
 
 or from a desire for excessive gain, from large and 
 
 mischievous. It was true that these corporation 
 
 ill-judged adventures, when the company willing. 
 ly incurred the hazard, for the sake of the gain, 
 
 sometimes failed perhaps often but were the 
 the only things that failed ? Did not the mer 
 
 and ought to abide the losses. But if the stock- 
 
 chant sometimes fail and involve his creditors ii 
 
 holders in insurance companies were to be made 
 
 heavy losses ? And were these natural person 
 
 individually liable, no man would hold stock in 
 
 liable to this extent beyond their property, or t 
 
 them one moment. No stockholder could lay his 
 head on his pillow without apprehension that he 
 might wake up in the morning beggared by one 
 of those devastating calamities that sometimes 
 lay waste your cities and large villages. There 
 was also reason for exempting railroads and other 
 companies having the right of way. Their capi- 
 tal was generally large, and held in large amounts 
 by individuals, and to make them individually li- 
 able, even to the extent of their stock, might over- 
 whelm them in ruin. Again, when borrowers, 
 these companies loaned large sums from capital- 
 ists who alwa\s could and would see to their own 
 security, either in the proper management of the 
 company's concerns, or in the intrinsic value of 
 the improvement, 01 by the liens on the materials 
 or fixtures. Their capital was, in fact nearly all 
 laid out in fixtures, and these large capitalists who 
 loaned them money would always take care of 
 themselves. But the small class of creditors, 
 those who labored on the road, and who were em- 
 ployed by them in various capacities, these this 
 article proposed to secure by the personal liability 
 of the stockholders. 
 
 Mr. WHITE asked Mr. LOOMIS whether the 
 provision exempting insurance companies from 
 tlu-. operation of the general law providing for the 
 liability of all corporations was not in direct con- 
 flict with the first section of this article, which 
 declared that there should be no exclusive privi- 
 Jeges. 
 
 97 
 
 any extent ? Why should an artificial person be 
 iable to any greater extent than its capital? Why 
 should not the public be left to deal with them 
 on the credit of their capital, and on the integrity 
 of those who managed it ? 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said that expost facto laws 
 were actually dishonest ; and if you did not hold 
 aws to an honest liability you would injure 
 community instead of bettering it. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that Mr. 
 LOOMIS had got all his ideas on this subject from 
 Kent and others on Incorporations ; but he had 
 not studied Kent far enough or else not under- 
 stood him. One of the objects for incorporating 
 associations was to bring private capital into uses 
 for the public benefit ; this would be accomplish- 
 ed only to any considerable extent, by authorizing 
 citizens of moderate means to contribute to a lim- 
 ited extent, and increase responsibility which 
 might be previously defined. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said, that had the Convention ta- 
 ken the time spent upon the consideration of this 
 subject to perfect a provision securing to the cre- 
 ditor a fair and equal distribution of the estates 
 of individual insolvents, he believed their labors 
 would have been of some service to the commu- 
 nity. The earnest desire manifested to protect 
 the creditors of corporations induced him to hope 
 that something would yet be done for creditors 
 generally. Their situation, although they ,had 
 the benefit of the unlimited responsibility of ftie 
 
978 
 
 debtor, was a hard one. In the large majority of 
 cases of individual insolvency the interest of the 
 great body of creditors were sacrificed to protect 
 a few whose liabilities consisted' in lending their 
 money or their name, and thereby giving a ficti- 
 tious credit to the debtor. This was a real and 
 oppressive evil, the effects of which were daily 
 felt by all our trading communities. As the tide 
 whicirhad been so long running in favor of the 
 debtor interest seemed to be turning, he hoped 
 the Convention would not confine their attention 
 to a single class, but would provide for all credi- 
 tors whether of corporations or individuals. Mr. 
 N. asked the pardon of the house for not having 
 spoken more directly to the subject under consid- 
 eration. It was one, however, to which he had 
 given some little reflection, and upon which he 
 would say a few words. The advocates of the 
 unlimited liability of corporators seemed to for- 
 got that there had existed in this state for more 
 than fifteen years, a system of limited individual 
 responsibility, under which, in our commercial 
 cities at least, if not elsewhere, a vast amount of 
 business was constantly transacted. He alluded 
 to the system of special partnerships first enacted 
 in the Revised Statutes, which had been found 
 highly beneficial, and had undoubtedly attrac- 
 ted to mercantile operations a large amount of 
 capital which would otherwise have been 
 applied to different purposes. It was true 
 there was a marked difference between spe- 
 cial partnerships and corporations, as had been 
 correctly stated by the chairman of the commit- 
 tee (Mr. LOOMIS). Still, however, with one or 
 two additions to its powers, a special copartner- 
 ship might be made almost, if not quite, as effi- 
 cient and useful as a corporation. All that he 
 intended to advert to was that the doctrine of in- 
 dividual responsibility had been long recognized 
 and acted upon in this state. If it was proper to 
 be applied in one class of cases, it might be in 
 another, providing no principle was violated, 
 particularly if in doing so it was apparent a great 
 benefit could be attained. That benefit was plain. 
 The advantages to accrue from a system of corpo- 
 rations, under which every person might be as- 
 sociated for any purpose, and with a liability of a 
 limited character had been stated by the chairman 
 of the committee with his usual force and clearness. 
 In all that had been said by that gentleman, Mr. 
 NICOLL fully concurred. He would venture to 
 say, that in his opinion the monopoly and power 
 of wealth could only be successfully combatted 
 by the equalizing principle of association. De- 
 ter men from so uniting, throw in their way 
 unnecessary and unjust embarrassments, expose 
 them to the hazard of utter ruin, and you perpet- 
 uate the thraldom of the money power and give 
 to wealth an over shadowing influence. He 
 thought the committee had gone the proper length 
 in this matter ; while they rejected the idea ol 
 unlimited responsibility as unsound and as calcu- 
 lated to prevent association and to drive capita] 
 away from the State, they had still provided foi 
 the corporators liability to a certain extent. In 
 his opinion they had properly proportioned thai 
 liability with the extent of the interest 
 enjoyed. This was a safe and just rule 
 and should secure in all share-holders a pro- 
 per vigilance and attention to the affairs of theii 
 
 corporations. Mr. N. said a great triumph had 
 )een gained in annihilating special privileges. 
 Henceforth corporations were no longer fran- 
 chises, but simply instruments for the benefit of 
 society, incapable of being restricted to a few. 
 [n destroying this great monopoly, the conven- 
 tion had done infinite good they had taken a 
 great step towards the purification of the legisla- 
 "rire, and they had equally provided for the se- 
 curity of society. Give all persons the power of 
 'ncorporating themselves, and you at once put an 
 end to that fictitious credit now extended to cor- 
 porations, because they have come to us with the 
 :egislative stamp of merit. He thought in estab- 
 ishing this principle, the "great points had been 
 cained. The other provisions of the article were 
 ndeed salutary, but they were of secondary im- 
 portance compared with the overthrow of a mo- 
 nopoly, under which so much abuse had taken 
 olace and so much suffering been endured. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved the previous 
 question. It was seconded. 
 
 The ayes and noes were ordered and resulted, 
 ayes 44, noes 45. 
 
 AYES Messrs Allen, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 Bascom, Brayton, Bruce, Burr, Cambreleng. Cardee, 
 Chamberlain, Cook, Dpdd, Lmbois, Flanders, Gebhard, 
 Graham, Harris, Hotchkiss, Mann, Marvin, Miller, Morris, 
 Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Kicbrnond, Faker, 
 St. John, Shaw, W. H. Spencer, Strong, Swackhamer, 
 Townsend, Tuthill, VanSchoonhoven, Ward, Waterbury r 
 White, Willard, Witbeck, W. B. Wright, Yawger-44. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Bergen, Bowdish, R. Campbell, jr., 
 Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cornell, Dana^Danforth, Gardiner, 
 Greene, Hart, Hunt, Hunter, A. Huntingdon, Hyde, Jor- 
 dan, Kdmble, Kernan, Kingsley., Kirkland, Loomis, Me 
 Neil, McNitt, Maxwell, Murphy, Nellis, NicolJ, O'Conor, 
 Perkins, Porter, Powers, Russell, Sanlord, Sears, Sheldon, 
 Shepard, Stephens, Stetson, Talt, Tallmadge, Tilden, 
 Wood, Young, Youngs 45. 
 
 This vote was on striking out " except insur- 
 ance and except for purposes specified in the 
 next section in case such corporation shall be- 
 come insolvent." 
 
 The question was then taken on the remainder 
 of Mr. TUTHILL'S amendment on striking out " to 
 an amount in the same proportion to the whole 
 unsatisfied liabilities, that his stock or share shall 
 bear to the whole stock." 
 
 The ayes and noes were then ordered and re- 
 sulted, ayes, Messrs. BOWDISH, FLANDERS, 
 MANN, SHAW, TOWNSEND, TUTHILL 6 ; noes 
 81. So the motion was lost. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved to strike out the whole 
 section, and on that he asked the previous ques- 
 tion, but withdrew it to allow Mr. TILDEN to of- 
 fer this : After the word " shareholder" in the 
 6th line to insert " at least." 
 
 This was almost unanimously voted down. 
 
 The ayes and noes were then ordered on the 
 adoption of the 3d section, and resulted, ayes 49, 
 noes 45. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bergen, Bowdish, Biundage, D. D. 
 Campbell, R. Campbell, jr. Cl.irk, Clyde, Conely, Cornell, 
 Cuddeback, Dana, Danlbrth, Greene, Hart, Hotchkiss, 
 Hunter, A. Huntington, Hyde, Jones, Jordan, Kernan, 
 Kingslfy, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, Mc.vitt, Maxwell, Mor- 
 ris, Nellis, Nicoll, O'Co >or, Perkins, Powers, President, 
 Russsll, St. John, Salisbury, San ord, Sears, Shaw, Shel- 
 don. Shep:ird. Stephens, Stetson, Swackhamer, '1 ait, Til- 
 den, Yawger, Youngs. 49 
 
 NOES -Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 Bascom, Brayton, Bruce. Bull, Burr, Candee, Chamber- 
 lain, Cook, Dodd, Dubois, Flanders, Gardner, Gebhard, 
 Graham, Harris, Kirklaud, Marvin, Miller, Nicholas, Pa- 
 
979 
 
 rish, Patterson, Penniman, Porter, Khoades, Richmond, 
 
 , W. H. Spencer, Strong, Taggart, Tallmadge, Town. 
 
 Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Waterbuiy, 
 
 "White, Wjllard, Witbeck, Wood, W. JJ. Wright, Young 
 
 45. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT moved a reconsideration of 
 the last vote. Laid on the table. 
 
 The fourth section was then read : 
 <j4. Every corporator and share-owner in any corpora 
 tiou herealier created for a public railway, canal, turn- 
 pike, bridge, pluiik-\vay, or other franchise of public way, 
 or for any telegraphic or other means of communicating 
 intelligence for public use shall be liable for the debts and 
 liabilities of such corporation to the extent provided in 
 the last preceding section, [except as to debts for money 
 borrowed, for land purchased or taken by authority of 
 law, or for iron on rail roads.] 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said this was intended to except 
 some things not txcepted by the last section ; the 
 reasons for which he had already assigned. Mo- 
 ney borrowed is generally lent to rail roads in such 
 large sums that the lender does it with his eyes 
 open, and knows if it is good stock or not; so of 
 land bought; the sellers are all on the spot, make 
 their own terms, and generally get paid before 
 hand ; 50 of rail road iron; the makers of it deal 
 to so treat an extent that^ they generally secure 
 themselvesithoroughly. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND wanted to know why this 
 class of corporators should be excluded more than 
 manufacturing companies ? 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL defended the section. In rail- 
 roads the whole of the capital is expended in real 
 estate and fixtures ; and if it is not well managed 
 the whole world knows it. He thought that the 
 queries of the gentleman from Genesee might be 
 answered to his entire satisfaction, if that gentle- 
 man really desired information to enable him to 
 sustain tho article under consideration. He asks 
 why make distinctions between the individual 
 shareholders in railroad and canal corporations, 
 and those in banking and other business corpora- 
 tions ? Mr. R. could well see that the chairman 
 of the committee was right in confining the secu- 
 rity of creditors, loaning large sums of money, 
 selling lands and iron rails, to these corporations, 
 to the corporate property of the company, whilst 
 the shareholders might be liable personally, for 
 other debts for labor and ordinary credits. 
 
 Our state will not very soon undertake to con- 
 struct new canals, railroads, plank roads, or Mc- 
 Adain roads. Yet many sections of the state may 
 require some of these improvements, for which 
 companies have not yet been formed. Sound pub- 
 lic policy requires that, citizens should be allow- 
 ed to construct such works with their own means 
 aided by the capital of individuals not locallv in 
 terested in these projects. It would be unjustly 
 onerous upon persons engaging in such compa- 
 nies, to impose unnecessary liabilities and restric- 
 tions upon them. They effect a public benefit, 
 often at pecuniary hazard, which the state is un- 
 able, or unwilling to perform, but is willing to 
 entrust to their charge. By the provisions of the 
 section, debts of these companies for money bor- 
 rowed, for lands, or for iron rails, shall be char- 
 geable upon the corporate property only, except 
 by express agreement. In truth, if persons choose 
 to lend their money to such companies, they must 
 look to their own security. If they sell land or 
 iron, they may retain their lien upon the land or 
 the iron, till the purchase money be paid, or 
 stand as general creditors upon corporate assets. 
 
 Nearly the entire capital of these companies is 
 invested in real estate and permanent fixtures. 
 Bad officers and agents cannot squander or run 
 away with the money thus invested. The capital 
 remains secure for public use, if not for individu. 
 al profit to stockholders. But unfaithful, or in- 
 competent agenls may borrow money or contract 
 other debts against the company. Is it desirable 
 to give them the power to contract such debts 
 upon the personal liability of the shareholders, 
 many of whom have risked their share of the capi- 
 tal invested, merely to aid a public work with 
 little hope of profitable returns? Mr. R. believ- 
 ed it would be bad policy to induce large credits 
 to such corporations, by holding out the property 
 of all the stockholders as the security. If the 
 work should be improvident, or certain to end in 
 ruin, no such credits should be given to it if a 
 well advised and beneficial project, for which capi- 
 talists were willing- to lend their money, let them 
 ascertain that fact and look to their own security, 
 as they doubtless would do. Persons selling lands, 
 or rails, could rescue liens for the purchase money 
 in the sale. Lands taken by authority of law 
 must be paid for before used, unless the owner 
 chooses voluntarily to waive that right. Mr. R. 
 hoped the section would pass as reported. 
 
 Mr. DANA said that the n: embers of the com- 
 mittee, who reported this article, reserved to them- 
 selves, respectively, the right to vote, when the 
 subject should corne before the Convention, for or 
 against any of its provisions or sections. As a 
 member of that committee, it appeared necessary 
 that he should say this much, that hig vote on the 
 proposed amendment might not ceem to involve 
 him in an inconsistency- He was opposed to ex- 
 cepting from the personal liability, debts lor bor- 
 rowed money, or for lands, or fur iron. It was 
 argued by some gentlemen that such debts might 
 be secured by liens on the rond ; and, therefore, 
 there was no need, of the exceptions, as to such 
 debts. Mr. D. considered this argument against 
 the amendment, as conclusive in its favor. If,as hud 
 been asserted, such debts may be secured by liens 
 on the property of the corporators, .surely the 
 adoption of the amendment can work no haim to 
 them. He was in fiivor of ihe proposed .unend- 
 ment, because it sirikes out an odious distinction 
 in security for debts. No such distinctions should 
 be made; and least of all should any constitution- 
 al provision be made, recognizing and adopting a 
 principle, so flagrantly at war with all just views 
 of equal rights. H* H/SO proposed to strike out 
 the words "telegraphic or other," in the third 
 line of the section, as useless <uid unnecessary. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON asked, would not a manu- 
 facturing company also expend all their capital in 
 their buildings and real estate, &c., and can they 
 not give the same security that a rail road compa- 
 ny can ? Why make this distinction between 
 these two classes of creditors ? He could see no 
 propriety in striking out those words. As he had 
 voted against the preceding section, he could not 
 consistently vote to strike out these words. But 
 he must confess lie could not understand the dis- 
 tinction drawn by the gentleman from St. Law- 
 rence. He says a railroad company will invest 
 large amounts of money in the building of their 
 road, and this will be abundant security. Will 
 not the same argument apply to a manufacturing 
 
980 
 
 corporation? Do they not invest laige sums in 
 the erection of a building and machinery? 
 Where then the difference? Mr. P. held that the 
 same doctrine should apply to all. If a capitalist 
 choosss to loan money to a manufacturing or rail- 
 road corporation, why should we step in as a Con- 
 vention and say what his security shall be? Let 
 him look after his own interests. He was oppos- 
 ed to any constitutional action on this subject. 
 Were he a member of a Legislature, he would 
 vote to secure the bill holder of bank bills against 
 los. But he would let depositors look after their 
 own money. And he would do the same with 
 capitalists who loan money to corporations. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER .was in favor of the 
 amendment. He could see no reason for making 
 a distinction in the collection of debts. The dis- 
 tinction heretofore made in favor of the landlord 
 over other creditors was one of the most odious 
 statutes known to the people of this state. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to amend by inserting 
 all incqrporations hereafter created. He thought 
 this necessary. This was always the argument 
 against reform. " You must n't do it here," was 
 always the cry. The gentleman just up was ne- 
 ver known to vote tor any reform that had for its 
 object to protect the people. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON: If the gentleman says 
 that, he has never read the General Banking law, 
 where I moved to require for every bill issued 
 the security of United States stocks or of this 
 State. The gentleman had not waked up then. 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER: That was one good 
 move. It is said that the Dutch cannot see after 
 4 o'clock, and that is probably the reason that I 
 did not see what the gentleman alludes to. Mr. 
 - S. said he should vote to strike out these words, 
 for he was opposed to making any distinction be- 
 tween creditors. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL: If these words are stricken 
 out, the preceding section will not read right. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER : I know that, and I 
 mean to strike all out as perfect nonsense. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN hoped the exclu- 
 sive friends of personal liability would vote this 
 amendment. He referred to, the argument of his 
 Iriend from St. Lawrence, who had ably argued 
 that rail road iron should be exempted. He (Mr. 
 R.) was not at all interested in railroad iron ! Not 
 at all ! They have nothing to do with rail-roads 
 in St. Lawrence ! Mr. V. S. proceeded to argue 
 against the injustice of making distinctions be- 
 tween the cre'ditors of these corporations. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG meant to apply to bank- 
 ing companies the provision of the law regarding 
 manufacturing companies. He reminded the Con- 
 vention that ever since 1811, we had had the per- 
 sonal liability principle to a limited extent ap- 
 plied to corporations. And he regretted that the 
 gentleman from Herkimer had not introduced a 
 simple provision, of rive lines, based on the ex- 
 isting law. That would meet the object of this 
 whole article ; and he now gave notice, that 
 when the article in relation to banks should com< 
 up, he should move a general clause, making al 
 corporations liable personally to the amount o 
 the shares held by them. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT enquired if the gentleman in 
 tended to apply this to the circulation of banks o 
 to all the liabilities ? 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG replied that he intended 
 o cover all their liabilities. 
 
 Mr. SANFORD called for the previous ques- 
 ion. It was seconded, ayes 51, noes not counted. 
 
 The main question was ordered. 
 
 The question was on Mr. RICHMOND'S 
 
 motion to strike out the words, "except as 
 
 o debts for money borrowed, for land purchased 
 
 ir taken by authority of law or for iron for rail 
 
 oads," in the 6th, 7th and 8th lines. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND demanded the ayes and noes. 
 ?hey were ordered and resulted, ayes 52, noes 31. 
 
 The motion was carried. 
 
 Mr. DANA offered an amendment to strike out 
 hat part of the section relating to magnetic tele- 
 graphs. 
 
 This was not in order, as not pending when the 
 revious question was seconded. 
 
 The question was then taken by ayes and noes 
 >n the section and resulted ayes 44, noes 42^ as 
 ollows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Bergen, Bowdish, Brundage, Burr, Cam- 
 )releng, II. Campbell, jr., CLirk, Clyde, Cuddeback, Dan- 
 orth, Flanders, Greene, Hart, Hotchkiss, Hunter, A. Hun- 
 ington, Hyde, Kemble, Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, 
 McNitt, Morris, Nellis, Perkins, Powers, President, Rich- 
 mond, Russell, St. John, Sanford, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 Shepard, Stephens, Taft, Tilden, Tutbill, Waterbury, 
 fawger, Youngs 44. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 Jascom, Brayton, Bruce, Candee, Conely, Cook, Cornell, 
 Dana, Dodd, Dubois, Gratiam, Harris, Hunt, Jordan, Mar- 
 vin, Maxwell,Miller,Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Rhoades, 
 iiker, Salisbury, W. H. Spencer, Strong, Swackhamer,. 
 Taggart, Tallmadge, Townsend, Van Schoonhoven.Ward, 
 White, Willard, Witbeck. Wood, W. B. Wright, Young 
 42. 
 
 The section was carried. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to reconsider the vote on 
 he 4th section, because with the last part of it 
 stricken out, it was useless ; the 3d section provid- 
 ed for every thing. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that both the 3d and 
 ith sections ought both to be stricken out, and a 
 single section of five lines inserted, stating that 
 every stockholder in every corporation should be 
 ndividually liable to the amount of his or her 
 share and no more. He would draw a section in 
 ;he words of the present act in existence since 
 1811. They read thus : 
 
 (^ 3. Every corporator or share owner in any incorpora ' 
 ion for gain or benefit to the corporators or share holders, 
 shall be individually liable to the extent ot the share or 
 shares he may hold in such corporation or association for 
 ts debts or liabilities. 
 
 It was desirable that whatever they passed 
 upon should be done with great unanimity. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN suggested that it should be made 
 applicable to future corporations. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG replied that that would 
 make an inequality which would be unjust. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS wished such a si-mple, sound and 
 sensible proposition might prevail, and be incor- 
 porated in the Constitution. They could all 
 agree with great unanimity on this provision. 
 
 The 5th section was read : 
 
 5j 5. Lands may be taken lor public way for the purpose 
 ot "ranting or demising to any corporation the franchise 
 ot way over the same lor public use, and for all necessary- 
 appendages to such rig. A of way. Such grants and demi- 
 ses shall be made in such cases and on such terms and con- 
 ditions as the legislature may deem for public good. But 
 no such grant or demise shall extend beyond filty years in 
 duration. 
 
981 
 
 Mr. LOOiVlIS had several amendments to ofle 
 to this section, so as to read thus: 
 
 5. Lands and streams may be taken lor public way o 
 public use, or lor thr purpose ot granting or demiting to ain 
 corporation a franchise in or over the same, 1'or public use 
 and lor all necessary appemlngcs to such pulilic usr. Surl 
 grants ami demises, and other grants and demises oi lYau 
 chisein oroverpublic lanQdfl.hJgnn ays and streams.shall b 
 made in each such <.,..', on MU-II terms and conditions, as 
 the legislature may deem lor public good ; such terms am 
 conditions may in each case be altered or modified from 
 time to time by special laws; but no such grant or demise 
 shall extend beyond fifty years in duration. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN would offer this as a substitute: 
 ' The Legislature shall have power to authorize 
 the taking of private property tor public use on 
 paying a just compensation, and to grant, such 
 franchises as the public good may require." 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS objected that this would inter 
 fere with the first section. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN desired to give the legislature 
 all the power they now had in special cases. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS thought that the amendment of 
 Mr. LOOMIS did not meet the end he appeared to 
 have in view. The sovereign could not confer 
 on another the right to take property; but he 
 must take it first, and then give it to the third 
 party. This would be the effect of the section ; 
 and it would be attended with great difficulty, 
 expense and trouble. 
 
 Mr. STRONG rose to protest against all this 
 legislation in the Constitution. He saw the 
 chairman of the committee on previous questions 
 (Mr. BERGEJV) in his place, and so he would say 
 all he had to say now. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said they had better sleep on it, 
 and moved to tidjourn. He withdrew it to al- 
 low 
 
 Mr. MARVIN to offer this : 
 
 <5 1. The Legislature may pass general laws authorizing 
 persons to be erected into a body corporate for banking, 
 manufacturing, religious and other purposes as the Legis- 
 lature may deem safe and practicable, and under such re- 
 strictions and conditions, and with such powers and .limi- 
 tations as shall be provided in such laws; butno law shall 
 embrace more than one species or class of corporations. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM sent up the following proposi- 
 tion : 
 
 3. Every corporator or share owner, in any corpora- 
 tion for gain or benefit that shall continue in operation al- 
 ter this Constitution goes into effect, and in every suoh 
 corporation to be hereafter created, shall be individually 
 liable to the extent of the nominal amount oi the share or 
 shares he may hold in said corporation, for any debt or 
 debts to be created by said corporation after this Constitu 
 tiun goes into effect. 
 
 And then the Convention adjourned. 
 
 SATURDAY. (99th day) Sept. 26. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Dr. WYCKOFF. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG moved that the commit- 
 tee of the whole be discharged Irorn the further 
 consideration of the report of committee No. 10 
 relative to currency and Banking. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to rescind the resolution 
 excluding Saturday from the provisions for after- 
 noon sessions. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to lay the 
 resolution on the table. 
 
 Mr. JONES called for the ayes an* noes on that 
 motion. It was rejected, ayes 19, nays 57. 
 
 The resolution was adopted. 
 
 DISTRIBUTION OF LAND. 
 
 Mr. HUNT presented a petition from the Na- 
 
 tional Reform Association of the city of New- 
 York, for a more general distribntion'of landed 
 property, and for the perpetuation of a landed 
 democracy. Referred to committee No. is. 
 INCORPORATIONS OTHE^ TH \N BANKING AND 
 MUNICIPAL. 
 
 The Convention resumed the consideration of 
 the article in relation to corporations, other than 
 municipal, &c. 
 
 . The fifth section being under consideration, 
 
 The question was taken on the amendment of 
 Mr. LOOMIS, offered last night, and it was adopted. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND thought this section did not 
 sufficiently provide for the rights of the owners of 
 the lands to be taken for these purposes. To ob- 
 viate this objection, he proposed the following 
 amendment : " To insert at the end of the 7th 
 line the words " in all cases of the taking of lands 
 or streams, as in this section mentioned, due com- 
 pensation shall be made to the owner or owners 
 thereof." 
 
 This was adopted. 
 
 Mr/ RICHMOND moved to amend by striking 
 put the word " corporation" in the 7th line, and 
 inserting " individuals." 
 
 After some conversation, Mr. R. modified his 
 amendment, so that it should read " corporations 
 or persons." It was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN desired to offer a substitute for 
 the entire section, but not being prepared with it, 
 moved that the section be passed over for the 
 present. Agreed to. 
 
 The sixth section was read as follows : 
 
 6. All corporations and associations to be created or 
 brmed after the adoption of this Constitution, shall be sub- 
 ect to the provisions herein respecting corporations. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said it was perfectly super- 
 fluous. Corporations hereafter to be created 
 must necessarily be subject to the fundamental 
 Laws of the land. He therefore moved to strike 
 it out. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said it was necessary that the 
 section should remain as it was. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE moved to add at the end of 
 ;he section, (and this took precedence of a mo- 
 tion to strike out) " and shall sue and be sued in 
 the same manner as private citizens." 
 Mr. SIMMONS opposed it. 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought it necessary to bring 
 companies and individuals on the same level, in 
 espect of rights and principles. Corporations 
 should be sued in justices' courts as well as indi- 
 viduals'. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE was very glad the gentleman from 
 Steubeh had offered this proposition, and he hoped 
 t would prevail. He thought we had already 
 idopied provisions which were in violation of all 
 irivate right. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND called for the ayes and nays, 
 and there were a\es 74, nays 7, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Ayrault, Bascom, Bergen, 
 Jowdish, Brayton, Bruce, Brundage, Bull, Burr, Cambre- 
 eng, Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cook, Cornell, Crooker, Cud- 
 leback, Dana, i)ul:oN, Kl,ni<k>rs, (k-bliard, Greene, Haw- 
 ey, Hoffman, Hotchki>s, Hunt, Hunter, A. Hunting-oil, 
 lyde, Jones, Kcmble, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirkland, Loo- 
 nis, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Morris, Nicholas, O'Conor, 
 'arish, Penniman, Powers, Rhoades, Richmond, St. John, 
 Sanford, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, E. Spencer, W. 11. spen- 
 cer, Stephens, Strong, Swackhamer, Tall, Taggart, Tall- 
 madge. J. J. Taylor, Townsend, Tuthill, Van Schoonho- 
 ven, Waterbury, AVhite, Wiliard, Wood, A. Wright, Yaw- 
 ger, Young, Youngs 74. 
 
982 
 
 NOES Messrs. F. F. Backus, Dana, Miller, Patterson, 
 Shepard, Simmons, Smith 7. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to strike out the words 
 " herein respecting corporation?," in the third 
 line, and insert " of this article " Carried. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to strike out section 
 six, and insert the following, which he said met 
 the approbation of the chairn.an of the committee: 
 ^ 6. The term corporations as used in this article shall 
 be construed to include all associations and joint stock 
 companies hereafter formed having any of the powers or 
 privileges of corporations not possessed by individuals or 
 partnerships. And all corporations shall have the right to 
 sue, and shall be subject to be sued in all courts in like ca- 
 ses as natural persons. 
 
 Mr, RUSSELL desired to insert the words 
 " hereafter created," so as not to extend the pro- 
 vision to existing charters. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG opposed the motion. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL protested against ihis as an act 
 of grossly bad faitn. There were now invested 
 in corporaiions in this s;ate, other than banking, 
 more than thirty millions of capital, which would 
 be driven from this state by such legislation as 
 this. Who would build your Erie, your Hudson 
 River, and your northern rail roads, if \ou made 
 this sweeping alteraiion in their charters ? No 
 one. The capitalists who had subscribed and paid 
 their first instalments, would not give another dol- 
 lar. He earnestly protested against such retro- 
 active legislation. If the gentleman wanted to 
 reach the Manhattan Bank, let him attack it 
 singly, and not strike at every charter in one fell 
 swoop. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS enquired whether it was pro- 
 posed to attach these liabilities to pre-existing 
 corporations ? 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL understood Mr. CAMBRELENG 
 to make such a proposition. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS enquired whether the gentle- 
 man thought it was proposed to attach the indi- 
 vidual liability to debis previously existing? 
 
 Mr RUSSELL supposed that the effect would 
 be the same. Mr. R. was understood to oppose 
 attaching the principle to any corporation no\\ 
 existing. Most of them fell in within a few yeirs 
 and when they were renewed, then these provi- 
 sions could be adopted. Mr. R. considered the 
 adoption of the contrary principle in relation to 
 them, would shake the faith of capitalists in oth 
 er Slates, in the chai ters of this State, to the great 
 injury ol the people and of works of internal im- 
 provement. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG, acknowledging himself 
 to be one of those reformers who had no respect 
 whatever, as a matter of principle for those rights 
 and privileges whose origin lies in the ashes of 
 the po.st he had no reverence tor royal grants or 
 privileges he would appease the new-born zeal 
 ot the gentleman from St. Lawrence, by with- 
 drawing his pioposition to revoke the charters of 
 the Manhattan Company and the Dry Dock Bank. 
 The charter for one of them was a dead letter al- 
 ready the purposes for which it was created had 
 ceased. The gentleman's democracy and princi- 
 ples of reform were in effect that he would ex- 
 tend what he considered to be, these ruinous prin- 
 ciples to all corporations hereafter to be created, 
 but would not to the Northern railroad. He 
 would leave to the gentleman to settle the ques- 
 tion with his own morality and sense of right. 
 
 The principle had already existed in spirit lor 
 hirty years, and there was at least a thousand cor- 
 porations existing under it. He would, therefore, 
 propose a modification of his amendment, so as 
 o apply only to future incorporations. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS expressed his concurrence in the 
 riews of Mr. CAMBRELENG. To tie up all the 
 corporations hereafter to be created, and to allow 
 hose already existing to go free, would be to in- 
 crease the exclusive privileges of those last. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS enquired what provision would 
 >e made for cases wherein a company might not 
 accept the new one proposed to be imposed upon 
 them ? 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS admitted that this was a great 
 question of principle to be settled here. He was 
 one of those who believed that we had a right to 
 mpose these restrictions. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that in the case of the 
 Manhattan Bank and other corporations vested 
 with a franchise to issue money, &c., he had no 
 doubt of the power to revoke these charters. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was happy to have the opinion 
 of so high a legal authority on the subject. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that was the opinion 
 of Chancellor Kent in the case of the Manhattan 
 Bank. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was aware of this. What he de- 
 sired to do here was to assert the principle that 
 the legislature could not part with any power 
 which it possessed. And that whatever it might 
 do, it might also undo. In case the public good 
 required the repeal by the Legislature of any law 
 under which rights had been acquired, or pro- 
 perty invested, it was also the duty of the Go- 
 vernment to make compensation to the owner so 
 as to do no injustice. And in the case of a law 
 authorizing the borrowing of money or creation 
 of State debt, such law could not be repealed 
 
 without payment of the debt. 
 
 Mr. COOK asked the gentleman from Herki- 
 mer (Mr. LOOMIS,) if the public faith was not as 
 much broken by a total change of the nature of 
 the contract, although a Charter, when the stock- 
 holders of any company had expended their capi- 
 tal in good faith, as when money was borrowed 
 according to law, and the nature and provisions 
 of the law were changed by the succeeding leg- 
 islature ? The passage of this amendment was 
 wholesale repudiation of the worst kind. Mil- 
 lions of dollars had been expended in good faith 
 in this state, and it was an utter breach of public 
 faith to change the nature of the contracts by a 
 general and sweeping provision. Mr. C. admit- 
 ted the right of the legislature to repeal any char- 
 ter, they providing for the damage caused by such 
 repeal . 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND was willing to accede to the 
 amendment of Mr. RUSSELL altho' he thought 
 
 there was no necessity for it. 
 that the debate which had 
 
 He thought also 
 occurred between 
 
 Messrs. RUSSELL and CAMBRELENG was very 
 inopportune at this time, the question not being 
 under consideration. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND expressed his opposition to 
 any thing that would extend to these corpora- 
 tions greater privileges or rights than were pos- 
 sessed by individuals. The contrary doctrine 
 might be held for a few years, but the time was 
 near when it would utterly be subverted. 
 
983 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said a distinction was made 
 between the rights of corporations ;ind 
 individuals which did not exist in fact. The 
 right i' eminent domain, which gave to the gov- 
 ernment the power to appropriate private pro- 
 to public purposes, the owner being fully 
 ner.ited then-tor, was a peculiar, but an in- 
 I inwer granted by every ci- 
 vilized people to its government for the common 
 benefit of the whole community. Now, this 
 ; was just as applicable to the property of 
 corporate companies as that of individuals. If 
 the right of way over lands belonging to an in- 
 corporated company was required for the use of 
 the public, it might be thus appropriated as rea- 
 dily as if owned by individuals. On the other 
 hand, all corporations had the same right to le- 
 gal protection as individuals. A chartered com- 
 pany could not be vested with rights one year, 
 and the next year stripped of those rights by the 
 legislature. He was surprised to hear the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer express the opinion that 
 the acts of the legislature were not binding upon 
 subsequent legislatures. Such a doctrine would 
 be subversive of our government, which was a 
 government of laws for, if adopted, it must de- 
 stroy the stability of and respect for the laws. 
 He had earnestly hoped, until we took up this 
 report, that the Convention would, to the close 
 of its labors, steer clear of all extravagancies, and 
 he would still entertain the hope that vested 
 rights would be duly respected ; but if the resull 
 were otherwise, if the legislature were authorizec 
 to tamper with such rights, any such interfer- 
 ence would prove a nullity, as our Constitution 
 would be at oirce in conflict with the Constitu^ 
 tion of the United States, which protects all vest 
 ed rights by forbidding retrospective legislation 
 Mr. KIRKLAND accepted the amendment o 
 Mr. RUSSELL. 
 
 Mr. STETSON continued the debate, when, 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG, in order to place thi 
 question distinctly before the Convention, and t< 
 see whether it desired to make any distinction 
 between those corporations, moved to strike ou 
 the words " hereafter found" in the substitut 
 of Mr. KIRKLAND. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN opposed the a 
 mendni' nt. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG replied. 
 Mr. STETSON went on to assert that wher 
 a charter had been granted, no matter whethe 
 the clause to repeal or modify it was containe 
 or not, it was impossible to impose the individu 
 al liberty clause upon them. It would be an ex 
 post facto law. Such a provision as this woul 
 so be declared by the supreme court of the U. S 
 He was in favor of individual liability, but desir 
 edto have it pro rata. He was not one of thos 
 theoretical reformers who could perceive no dif 
 ference in the cases where the application of th 
 principle was to be made. Mr S. adverted i 
 conclusion to the disastrous elfect which the ap 
 plication of this, principle might have on th 
 Northern rail r 
 
 Mr. L'JOMIS did not believe these word 
 whether inserted or not, would make .n:y uiuteria 
 difference. He concurred in the views ot M 
 CAMBRELENG, but he believed from the \ariet 
 of views here, that it would be impossible to pro 
 
 all extend beyond 50 years in 
 
 ure their adoption; and he would therefore make 
 o exertion to secure it. Mr. L. urged that the 
 uestion should now be taken. 
 Mr. JORDAN opposed the motion of Mr. CAM- 
 
 RELENG. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. SUMMONS 
 nd STETSON, when 
 
 Mr. WHITE asked for the previous question. 
 
 There was a second, and the main question or- 
 ered, 
 
 The question was then taken on the amendment 
 f Mr. CAMBRELENG, and there were ayes 39, 
 ays 53. So the amendment was rejected. 
 
 The question was then taken on the substitute 
 f Mr. KIRKLAND, and it was adopted, ayes 60, 
 ays 15. 
 
 The section was then adopted, ayes 68, nays 21. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN then proposed the following sub- 
 titute for the fith section : 
 
 5. Special laws may be passed authorising the taking 
 f private property for public use on just compensation 
 .rst being made therefor; and for transferring public* 
 ands, ways or streams, or a right to the use thereof, to in- 
 ividuals or corporations for public purposes, and for 
 ;ranting such tranchises as are not by this constitution 
 uthorized to be conferred by general laws. But all such. 
 pecial laws shall be subject to be altered, modified or re- 
 ealed. 
 
 This was discussed by Mr. RICHMOND, when 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend by pro- 
 r iding that the value of the property taken should 
 >e assessed by a jury. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY moved to amend the original 
 section by striking out the words " but no such 
 grant or demise sh 
 duration." 
 
 The former propositions were further debated 
 by Messrs. TOWNSEND and TALLMADGE. 
 
 Mr. TODD moved the previous question. No 
 second. 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved to amend the amendment 
 of Mr. HAWLEY, by providing that the terms and 
 conditions of grants for devises should be fixed by 
 law for a longer period than fifty years. Lost. 
 
 Messrs. MORRIS and BASCOM continued the 
 debate, and the amendment of Mr. HAWLEY was 
 agreed to. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN'S substitute next came up. Mr. 
 J. thought it was not necessary to settle in the 
 constitution the manner of ascertaining the da- 
 mages in cases where property was taken. There 
 was a provision that the property should not be 
 taken without compensation, and that was as far 
 as he should go. There were many questions of 
 detail, such as what kind of a jury should be se- 
 lected, their number, &c., which were proper 
 matters of legislation. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER wished to make .this 
 uniform with the great principle upon which all 
 such questions were settled in this country. He 
 thought its adoption would make the provision 
 more acceptable to the people. 
 
 After some further debate 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to amend the substitute, 
 so that it should read as follows : 
 
 " Special laws may be passed, granting or demising for 
 public use to any person or corporation, any property so 
 Uken, or any franchise therein or in respect to public 
 lands, ways or streams, on such terms and conditions as 
 may be provided by law, subject to alteration and modifi- 
 cation from time to time by law." 
 
984 
 
 After some further debate, between Messrs. 
 JORDAN and STETSON, the Convention took a 
 recess until 3 o'clock, P. M. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The question being upon the proposition of Mr. 
 JORDAN as a substitute for the 5th section of 
 Mr. LOOMIS' report, and the amendment of Mr. 
 L. thereto, 
 
 After some debate by Messrs. STETSON, 
 MURPHY, KIRKLAND, and VAN SCHOON- 
 HOVEN, as to the effect of their provisions, in 
 permitting the Legislature to grant exclusive pri- 
 vileges to corporations, 
 
 M'r. BERGEN moved the previous question, 
 fearing that the fog in which gentlemen seemed 
 involved would only become greater by more dis- 
 cussion. 
 
 There :vas a second, &c. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. LOOMIS was negativ- 
 edayes 36, noes 51. 
 
 The substitute proposed by Mr. JORDAN was 
 rejected ayes 33, noes 54. 
 
 The original section was also lost, as follows : 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Brundage, R. Campbelljr. 
 C/onely, Dana, Danforth, Greene, Hart, Hotchkiss, Hunter, 
 A.Huutington, Hyde, Jones, Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, 
 McNitt, Maxwell, Morris, Nellis, President, Russell, San- 
 ford, Sears, Sheldon, Shepard, Stephens, Taft, Townsend, 
 Tuthill, Ward, Wood, Yawger, Youngs 35. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Angel, Archer, Ay rault, F. F. Backus, 
 Bascom, Brayton, Burr, Cambrtleng, Candee. Chamber- 
 lain, Glark, Cook, Cornell, Crooker, Dodd, Dubois, Flan- 
 ders, Gebhard Graham, Hawley, Jordan, Kifkland, Mann, 
 McNeil, Marvin, Miller, Murphy, Nicholas, O'Conor, Pa- 
 rish, Patterson, Penniman, Perkins, Rhoades, Richmond, 
 Biker, St. John, Shaw, W. H. Spencer, Stetson, Stow, 
 Strong, Swackhamer, Taggart, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, 
 Vache, Van Schoonhoven, Waterbury, White, A.Wright, 
 W. B. Wright, Young 63. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote adopting the 1st section, with a view of mov- 
 ing a substitute therefor, which should more 
 plainly indicate the powers proposed to be confer- 
 red upon the Legislature in giving special char- 
 rers. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS presumed that divine wisdom 
 itself could not form a code of laws upon general 
 rules alone which could be distinctly understood 
 in their application to all classes of cases. 
 
 Messrs. MURPHY and NICHOLAS continued 
 the debate. 
 
 The motion to reconsider prevailed. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to strike out the words, 
 " or granting to them exclusive privileges," in 
 the second line, and also " except as provided in 
 this article" in the last line. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN preferred that his proposition 
 should be substituted for the entire section, 
 which would cover the whole ground, and dis- 
 solve the difficulties which seemed to beset the 
 subject. His substitute was as follows : 
 
 (5 1- The Legislature shall pass general laws authorizing 
 persons to be erected into a body corporate for banking, 
 manufacturing, religious and such other purposes as the 
 Legislature may deem safe and practicable, and under such 
 restrictions and conditions. and with such powers and limi- 
 tations as shall be provided in such laws; but no law shall 
 embrace more than one species or class of corporations. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY preferred his own proposition. 
 There could be no panacea for all the difficulties 
 which arose upon the question of corporation. 
 The legislature, by passing a general law appli- 
 cable to a majority of cases, would be relieved 
 
 from the numerous applications which were ev- 
 ery year thrown upon them. In cases which 
 were peculiar, they might take them into con- 
 sideration, or amend the general law by incorpo- 
 rating into it the provisions asked for in these 
 special cases. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG thought that simplicity 
 and directness should be the leading features in 
 forming a Constitution ; and in order to effect 
 this desideratum, in regard to the question now 
 up, he had drawn the following section to apply 
 to it. Four or five lines would effect all the pur- 
 poses of this provision. He would read it: 
 
 ^ 1. The Legislature shall have no power to pass any law 
 granting special charters to any corporation or joint stock 
 association, except corporations exclusively municipal; 
 but such corporations or associations may te formed under 
 general laws. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that it would be exceedingly 
 unwise, indiscreet, and improper for the Conven- 
 tion to go back and undo what they had done with 
 so much labor, (laughter) when there was .barely 
 a quorum in the house, (great noise and ^confu- 
 sion) and when many of those who had aided in 
 adopting the article, so far as it had passed, were 
 absent ; they ought not now to tear to pieces 
 what they made when the house was full. It 
 was not that we had commenced wrong ; (laugh- 
 ter and noise,} that this reversal of a previous 
 strong affirmative decision was asked ; but, be- 
 cause we had been unable to agree upon the de- 
 tails. This, he (Mr. L.) did not think was the 
 proper way for us to proceed, who were here to 
 make the fundamental laws of the land. For the 
 purpose therefore, of raising this question, until 
 there should be a full house, he moved to lay the 
 article upon the table. Agreed to, 49 to 34. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG moved to take up the re- 
 port of committee No. 16 on Currency and Banks. 
 
 Mr. STRONG : I move we adjourn. 
 
 The motion was carried by one. Ayes 43, 
 noes 42. 
 
 So the House adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, (lOQth day.) Sept. 28th. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BENEDICT. 
 A communication was received from the Chan- 
 cellor relative to the difficulty experienced in 
 getting returns from the Clerks and Registers as 
 to the monies now in their hands. 
 
 It was ordered to be printed and laid on the 
 table. 
 
 FORMATION OF NEW COUNTIES. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE moved that the committee 
 appointed to revise and arrange the new Constitu- 
 tion be instructed to insert the following provision : 
 
 11 In case of the formation of a new county, from difler- 
 ent Senate districts, the Legislature may at any time reor- 
 ganize the judicial, Senatorial or Assembly districts, which 
 may be aflected by the formation of such county." 
 
 It was laid on the table, ayes 47. noes 23. 
 Mr. WRIGHT moved to discharge the commit- 
 tee of the whole from the consideration of the 
 reports of committees No. 7 and No. 4, on local 
 officer, and on the elective franchise, and that 
 they be taken up next in order, thus : 
 
 The appointment or election oi all officers whose func. 
 tions are local, and their tenure of office, powers, duties 
 and compensation. 
 
 The elective franchise, and the qualification to vote and 
 to hold office. 
 
985 
 
 In relation to municipal corporations, their powers o 
 taxation, &c. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG hoped that the report or 
 banking would be taken up next. It ought to fol 
 low the kindred subject of corporations, and wai 
 first in order. 
 
 Mr. WRIGHT said this report on the electiv* 
 franchise was the inost important we had to con 
 aider. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG asked him to modify his 
 resolution so as to take up these two next afte 
 the reports on corporations and on banking. 
 
 Mr. WRIGHT accepted this. 
 
 Mr. ALLEN said that he wanted the report on 
 municipal corporations taken up next. It was 
 lLore important than the one on banking 
 
 Mr. JORDAN moved to add after No. 4, the re- 
 port of committee No. 14 on cities and Villages 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought that the one on 
 rights and privileges ought to be considered next. 
 They ought not to do so much legislating. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN'S amendment was carried and 
 so was Mr. WRIGHT'S resolution as amended. 
 So that the order of business stands thus : 
 
 1. Incorporations. 2. Banking. 3. Local of- 
 ficers. 4. Elective Franchise. 5. Cities and In- 
 corporated Villages. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE asked that committee num- 
 ber eleven be discharged from the further con- 
 sideration of a petition on the rights of the clergy, 
 &c., and that it be referred to the committee ol 
 the whole having in charge the report on rights 
 and privileges. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offerred the following: 
 
 Resolved, Tha'. the report of standing committee No 12, 
 with amendments made thereto by the convention, be ta 
 ken from the table and referred to a special committee ol 
 7; also, of committees No. 16, (66 and 6?) and of No. 16 (33 
 and 56), be referred to the same select committee, with in- 
 structions to report over comprehensive and concise arti- 
 cles on the subject ol incorporations. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that he had drawn 
 his report carefully, and had since revised it, and 
 was ready to act on it at once, and it could begot 
 through with by two o'clock to-day. No select 
 committee could improve it. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said he had offered his 
 resolution from a mere sense of duty. Unless the 
 resolution should prevail, he believed there 
 would be nothing else done during the session. 
 It was impossible for the convention to go thro' 
 these reports section by section, and the plan he 
 had suggested would be the only way of dispos- 
 ing of these matters during the present session. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG moved to lay the resolu- 
 tion on the table. 
 
 Mr. S's. motion was laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. WHITE by consent, presented a petition 
 of Mr. JAMES on assessments. It was referred. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY gave notice of a motion to re- 
 consider the recent vote on the 'order of business. 
 
 On motion ot Mr. SHEPARD, Mr. CHAT- 
 FIELD was excused from serving on the commit- 
 tee of Revision, on account ol sickness. Messrs. 
 POWERS and RUSSELL were appointed to fill va- 
 cancies. 
 
 Mr. STOW offered the following additional sec- 
 tion to the report of committee No. 4: 
 
 An elector owning a freehold, or having an uneroired 
 term of not less than twenty-one years, m a leasenolct 
 (now existing) may by an instrument executed by him, 
 
 98 
 
 declare that he intends to exempt from incumbrances for 
 debt, the property described in such instrument ; the value 
 of such property should not be less than one thousand dol- 
 lars. 
 
 <) . The value of the property mentioned in the last 
 section shall be ascertained by the assessors of the town or 
 wardia which it shall be situated, who shall make a certi- 
 ficate of their appraisal. Such instrument and such certi- 
 ficate shall be acknowledged in the manner entitling a 
 deed to be recorded, and shall be iccoided in the clerk's 
 office of the county in which the property is situated; and 
 notice of such record shall be published in such manner 
 and for such time as shall be prescribed by law. After 
 such record, and notice thereof shall have been duly puo- 
 lished, such property shall not be incumbered by or lor 
 any debt created or contracted by such elector. 1 his 
 privilege shall not enable an elector to Isold more than one 
 piece of property thus exempt at the same time; and such 
 exemption shall cease whenever he shall cease to be a re. 
 sident ot this state. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was also excused from serving on 
 the same committee of Revision, on account of 
 sickness. ' 
 
 The chair was authorised to fill the vacancies 
 of Mr. CHATFIELD, and Mr. LOOMIS. 
 CURRENCY AND BANKING 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG moved that the report of 
 committee No 16 be taken up. Agreed to. 
 
 The same was then taken up, wher* Mr. CAM- 
 BRELENG offered the following substitute for 
 the whole report: 
 
 . The Legislature shall have no power to pass any 
 act granting special charters for banking purposes; but as- 
 sociations may be formed for such purposes under gen- 
 eral law. 
 
 . The Legislature shall have no power to authorize, 
 nor to pass any law sanctioning in any manner, the sus- 
 pension of specie payments, by any person, association or 
 "ncorporation issuing bank notes ol' any description 
 
 . The Legislature shall provide by law lor the regis 
 try of all bills or notes, issued or put" in circulation as 
 money, and shall require ample security for the redemp- 
 tion of the same in specie. The stockholders in every cor- 
 poration and joint stock association lor banking purposes, 
 issuing bank notes or any kind of paper credits to circu- 
 late as money, after the first day of January, 1850, shall be 
 "ndividually responsible to the amount of their respective 
 share or shares of stock in any such corporation or associ- 
 ation for all its debts and liabilities of every kind contract- 
 ed after the said 1st day of January, 1850. 
 
 $ . The Legislature shall limit the aggregate amount 
 ol bank notes to be issued by all the banks and joint stock 
 associations in this State, now existing or which may be 
 hereafter established. 
 
 ^ . All incorporated companies and associations, exer- 
 ising banking powers, shall be subject to visitation and 
 xamination at the instance of their shareholders, or of 
 heir creditors, under regulations to be established by the 
 ^egislature; and in case of the lailure of any such corpora- 
 ion or association,to discharge its debts or liabilities, or of 
 ny of its members to discharge the debts lor which they 
 may be personally liable as members of such corporation 
 >! association provision shall be made for the speedy and 
 quitable settlement of the affairs of such corporation or 
 ssociation and for dissolving the same. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG moved that the first sec- 
 ion be now taken up. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT said that these were new pro- 
 >ositions ; entirely new matter ; he hoped they 
 vould not be pressed at this time. They ought 
 o consider about them carefully, as the changes 
 vere very important. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that if the gentleman 
 vould allow him he could explain the provisions 
 o the satisfaction of all present. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT had no objections, although 
 e should like to have the documents printed 
 first. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that he must ask the 
 ndulgence of the committee to allow him to go 
 
986 
 
 beyond the fifteen minutes rule, in explanation of 
 his views on banking. 
 
 General cries of " leave leave" " take half 
 an hour" " an hour" " an hour and a half" 
 * : take any time." 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said, before proceeding to 
 the consideration of the amendments proposed, it 
 is perhaps proper, that I should ask the indul- 
 gence of the Convention to submit some general 
 remarks on the subject of banking, and especial- 
 ly that branch of it relating to currency. The 
 question of currency the question by what 
 standard the contracts, property and labor of a 
 tate shall be measured is one of the most 
 important that can be presented to the attention 
 of this Convention involving, as it does, the in- 
 terests and welfare of every class of the commu- 
 nity. Past legislation has rendered it an embar- 
 rassing question. We have, through the agency 
 of monied corporations, attempted for more than 
 half a century, to substitute our own measure of 
 y.xlue for one recognized in all civilized countries 
 and in every age of the world, as a universal 
 standard. The experiment is not new. Govern- 
 ments, ancient as well as modern, have, through 
 state necessity, or the profligacy of monarchs, 
 waged frequent wars against the currency estab- 
 lished by the common consent of nations ; but 
 wherever they have occurred they have uniform- 
 ly produced bankruptcy, poverty and crime. 
 Whatever form these wars have assumed, wheth- 
 er by debasing the coin, issuing government bills 
 of credit, 01 bank bills of credit, under govern- 
 ment authority, the effect has ever been to excite 
 alarm, paralyze industry and suspend the employ- 
 ments of labor. Whether the depreciation is in 
 either form the effect on the community is essen- 
 tially the same, varying only according to the 
 extent of the abuse. The tyrants of antiquity 
 began this war upon the currency by debasing 
 the coin the monarchs of China and Persia re- 
 newed it in the 13th century, in the form of bills 
 of credit, and in both forms most European na- 
 tions, from time to time continued it. But Eng- 
 land, of all countries, has suffered most from an 
 abuse of currency, in various forms. For two 
 centuries her Edwards and Henrys debased the 
 coin ; and for generations these acts of tyranny 
 were followed, to use the language of the histo- 
 rian, "by galling oppression, sanguinary execu- 
 tions and right sore famine." 
 
 It was reserved, however, for our more en- 
 IMitened age to discover a new mode of warfare 
 against the currency of the world, by bank bills 
 of credit, circulating as money under the authori- 
 ty of government. England is entitled to the 
 credit of this discovery. It sprang out of state 
 necessity, in 1694, when the Bank of England 
 was founded on a government loan. Originally 
 its notes were of large denomination and not de- 
 signed to circulate as coin ; but even then, it 
 suspended specie payments in two years in 
 1745, it was driven to the necessity of paying in 
 six-pences and in 17SU it was near suspending 
 a-ain. The crisis, however, of this new system 
 o paper money occurred in 1797, when, although 
 the baiik issued no note, under live pounds ster- 
 ling, it suspended specie payments and continued 
 to do so for more than a generation.- From that 
 moment confidence was destroyed and the spell 
 
 broken. The bank finally resumed in 1821 
 but in four years-*-during the panic of 1825-6, it 
 applied to ministers for an order to suspend, 
 which was refused. In 1839 came the last trial 
 of this currency, when the Bank of England was 
 saved from suspension by the Bank of France, 
 through whose agency, a loan of two millions 
 and a half sterling, was negotiated. 
 
 Satisfied by an experiment of just a century 
 and a half, from 1694 to 1844, that the more a 
 paper currency was enlarged the weaker and 
 more dangerous it became, and that England with 
 her immense capital and resources, must in every 
 revulsion rely on France and her immutable cur- 
 rency ministers in the latter year surrendered 
 the question, and commenced a retrograde move- 
 ment. By the acts of 1844, the currency and 
 business departments of the Bank of England 
 were separated : its issues limited to the amount 
 of its government securities, coin and bullion ; 
 and the banks of England and Wales prohibited 
 from issuing notes beyond the average amount in 
 circulation within a given time being two mill- 
 ions three hundred thousand pounds less than 
 their circulation in 1838. No new bank of issue 
 is to be authorized, and banks ceasing to issue 
 notes, are prohibited from doing so again. The 
 Bank of England may compound with banks of 
 issue to withdraw their circulation, and may is- 
 sue their own notes for two thirds the amount so- 
 withdrawn, paying the government the net profit 
 on all issues on securities beyond fourteen mill- 
 ions deducting the amount paid to bankers for 
 withdrawing their issues. In 1845, the circula- 
 tion of Scotland and Ireland was in like manner 
 limited. The design of ministers appears to 
 be to concentrate in the Bank of England, the 
 whole authority to issue notes in England and 
 Wales, and still further to reduce the aggregate 
 circulation. Such is the result of this protract- 
 ed and severe contest in England, between paper 
 and coin. After a struggle lor a century and a 
 half after enacting statutes relating to the Bank 
 of England, the mere titles of which fill more 
 than two hundred pages of the index to the stat- 
 utes at large after commencing with a debt of 
 little more than a million and ending with one 
 hopefully irredeemable after a succession of 
 revulsions and panics from generation to genera- 
 tion, filling a country, overflowing with wealth, 
 with bankruptcy, poverty and crime, and reduc- 
 ing the peasantry to a condition more wretched 
 than exists in any other civilized land after all 
 these appalling results, ministers at last discov- 
 ered, that an unrestricted issue of paper money 
 is wholly impracticable, and that commercial 
 credit, though sustained by government, can 
 never permanently contend with the universal 
 coin of the world. 
 
 What is the history of our experiment to sub- 
 stitute paper for coin ? We had much reason to 
 be cautious in the outset. No people had suffer- 
 ed more than ours during the revolution, from an 
 issue of three hundred millions of bills of credit; 
 and every precaution was taken in 17b7, by the 
 strongest constitutional guards, to protect this 
 country from the ruinous etiects of a paper cur- 
 rency in any form. In the strong language of 
 Oliver Ellsworth, it was " a favorable moment to 
 shut and bar the door against paper money." 
 
987 
 
 The states were prohibited from " coining money, 
 omitting bills of credit, or making anything but 
 old or silver a lawful tender in payment of 
 ," and the federal government was refused 
 the power to emit bills of credit, or to grant char- 
 ters of incorporation. And that these hard-mo- 
 ney men might not be misunderstood, the first 
 revenue act of 1789, expressly required "that 
 the duties and fees collected by virtue of this act, 
 shall be received in gold or silver coin only," 
 thus, as it was supposed, " shutting and barring 
 the door against paper money." The discovery 
 was, however, soon made, that it was lawful to 
 do by our authorized agent, what we could not 
 constitutionally do ourselves, and all our govern- 
 ments, state and federal, established their incor- 
 porated agents throughout the union to emit bank 
 bills of credit without limitation, and to expand 
 and contract the currency at their pleasure. The 
 consequence has been a succession of revulsions 
 and panics, producing bankruptcies and crimes. 
 The mischiefs of this paper system were notper- 
 ceptable at first, the amount issued being incon- 
 siderable, and our country being protected by 
 European wars and the suspension by the Bank 
 of England in 1797. But even as early as 1808-9, 
 and long before the bank resumed specie pay- 
 ments, this paper currency exploded in New 
 England, with disastrous consequences. During 
 the war, all the banks, out of New England, sus- 
 pended in 1818 there were partial suspensions 
 in 1819 and 1825, general panics in 1837, 
 every bank in the union stopped payment, and in 
 1839, they suspended south and west of New 
 York. 
 
 In twon'y-two years, from 1817 to 1839, we 
 have had no less than eight revulsions or periods 
 of partial or total stagnation of trade and suspen- 
 sion of labor. The apprehension of war for two 
 yeaVs past, has suppressed the spirit of specula- 
 tion, or we should now be in the midst of anoth- 
 er revulsion ; and the moment peace is restored 
 with Mexico, we may anticipate a sudden expan- 
 sion of credit, soon to be followed by another ex- 
 plosion of our paper system. Such must forever 
 be the calamitous history of trade, so long as our 
 currency expands and contracts, with the fluctu- 
 ations of commercial credit and government rev- 
 enue ; and so long as its convertibility depends 
 on the absurd fiction, thaj one dollar in specie 
 can redeem five or six dollars in notes and de- 
 posits. 
 
 The suspension in 1837, was the most memo- 
 rable and disastrous event, which has occurred 
 during this war of ours upon the currency of na- 
 tions, and forcibly illustrates the danger and, in- 
 deed, impracticability of a system which connects 
 commercial credit and public revenue with bank 
 notes circulating as money. Between 1834 and 
 1837, our banking capital had increased ninety- 
 one millions, the deposits near fifty-two millions, 
 of which about forty millions were government 
 revenue, and the banks had increased their issues 
 more than fifty-four millions, making an aggre- 
 gate of one hundred and ninety-seven millions. 
 The consequence was a sudden increase of their 
 loans from three hundred and twenty-four mill- 
 ions in 1834, to five hundred and twenty-live 
 millions in 1837, making an expansion of credit 
 of two hundred and one millions. The imme- 
 
 diate effect of this increase was a simultaneous 
 and speculative movement throughout the union, 
 and an excess of over-trading unparalleled in 
 modern times. If we measure the contracts of 
 the nation by this enormous increase of bank 
 loans, we may form some idea of the countless 
 millions of credits exchanged in 1835 and '36, 
 founded upon valuations wholly imaginary, and 
 ending in the common bankruptcy of individuals, 
 banks and states. Indeed there has been nothing 
 like it since the South Sea and Mississippi 
 schemes of England and France in the last cen- 
 tury. In the latter, we are told that the man 
 who was one day a millionaire, could not the day 
 after, buy a breakfast, with a hundred millions of 
 paper in his pocket ; and our great capitalist of 
 1836 would have starved in 1837, had he depend- 
 ed on his contracts for a hundred lythographic 
 cities. It is not the speculator, however, who 
 suffers most from these periods of commercial 
 delirium. It is of little consequence to those who 
 are perpetually revolving with the wheel of for 
 tune. Still less to the wealthy capitalist 
 to him, on the contrary, revulsions are profitable. 
 It is the capitalist alone who revels in an explo- 
 sion of credit. While the wrecks of bankruptcy 
 are scattered around, he and he alone, has money 
 and credit enough to reap the periodical harvest 
 of the paper system. Far otherwise is it with the 
 laboring classes. Speculation and revulsion are 
 destructive to labor. They raise prices without 
 increasing quantities, or the wages of labor. 
 While they give no additional employment, they 
 increase the expense of living the succeeding 
 panic brings all industry to a stand, and leaves 
 the artizan, mechanic and laborer, without em- 
 ployment and their families without bread, suffer- 
 ing all the pangs of famine, in a land overflowing 
 with every blessing, which can contribute to the 
 comfort and happiness of man ! Such is the 
 harvest, labor every where reaps from the paper 
 system. Well may we exclaim, in the language 
 of one of our most distinguished men : 
 
 " Of all the contrivances for cheating the la- 
 boring classes of mankind, none has been more 
 effectual than that which deludes them with pa- 
 per money. This is the most effectual of inven- 
 tions to fertilize the rich man's field by the sweat 
 of the poor man's brow. Ordinary tyranny, op- 
 pression, excessive taxation, these bear lightly 
 on the happiness of the community compared 
 with fraudulent currencies and the robberies 
 committed by depreciated paper. Our own his- 
 tory has recorded for our instruction, enough and 
 more than enough, of the demoralizing tendency, 
 the injustice and the intolerable oppression on 
 the virtuous and well disposed, ot a degraded 
 paper currency, authorized by law or any way 
 countenanced by government." 
 
 If our state governments do not adopt prompt 
 measures to arrest the further increase of our pa- 
 per currency, the scenes of 1S35--6 and 7, will 
 soon be enacted over again. Its fluctuations in a 
 generation past, indicate another crisis. After 
 the expansion and speculations following the war 
 and the revulsion of 1819, the amount of bank 
 notes issued, was reduced in 18:21, to about forty 
 millions it rose in 1837 to more than a hundred 
 and forty-nine millions being an increase, of 
 more than a hundred millions. From thisexces- 
 
988 
 
 sive expansion it was reduced in six years, in 
 1843, to fifty-eight millions and a half a sudden 
 reduction of more than ninety millions of dollars, 
 and in the last three years, it has risen again to 
 more than a hundred and five millions, at the 
 A rate of a hundred millions in six years. I appeal, 
 I earnestly appeal, to the wisdom and patriotism of 
 \ this Convention I entreat gentlemen to reflect 
 \ upon these excessive and violent expansions and 
 . contractions of our currency this rising of a 
 \. hundred millions, and falling of ninety millions 
 r this sudden increase again at the rate of a hun- 
 dred millions in six years. What stability can 
 there be in the value of property or contracts 
 what steady employment can labor expect when 
 the artificial standard by which property, con- 
 tracts and labor are measured, is thus constantly 
 and violently fluctuating,in other words when your 
 currency is periodically depreciated by an over-is- 
 sue of paper ? What would be thought of a govern- 
 ment which should attempt to meet its extrava- 
 gant expenditures by debasing its coin, or depre- 
 ciating its measure of value, ten per cent, every 
 ten years ? Both bring industr> to a stand, and 
 rob labor of its employment. The power to do 
 either is fatal to the welfare of the community. 
 And yet this monstrous power to violate all con- 
 tracts and prostrate labor, which, wherever exer- 
 cised by tyrants, brought upon them the just exe- 
 crations of mankind, has been bestowed by the le- 
 gislatures oi republican governments on monied 
 corporations I Government dare not debase its 
 coin ; but banks are invested .with the sovereign 
 privilege to depreciate the currency at their dis- 
 cretion ; and as an encouragement to perpetuate 
 the abuse, they are authorised to levy an annual 
 tax upon the country, nearly equivalent to the 
 interest on two hundred millions of circulation 
 and deposits. While this privilege is enjoyed 
 while our bankers have the power to create mo- 
 ney without limitation requiring security for the 
 circulation to protect the bill-holder, is a mere 
 mockery; for we may anticipate a succession of 
 expansions, and contractions of the currency at 
 the rate of a hundred millions and upVards every 
 six years, overthrowing all credit and prostrating 
 every branch ot industry. 
 
 Such a system of banking and currency was ne- 
 ver contemplated by the bankers and legislators of 
 this State at the outset of our government they 
 had then nothing to do with each other, and for- 
 tunate indeed would it have been for both, and 
 still more for the community, had the separation 
 continued until this day. The first bank in this 
 State, the old Bank of New York, was a voluntary 
 association formed in 1784 it remained such, un. 
 aided and unrestricted by government for seven 
 years, until 1791 ; when thesame hand which drew 
 the charter of our first national bank, framed the 
 act to incorporate the Bank of New York. The 
 framer seemed to be awate that bills payable to 
 bearer and circulating as money, were bills of 
 credit, and they were therefore made "assignable 
 bv endorsemen!," and not redeemable in state bills 
 of credit. The State became a shareholder This 
 was the first and most unfortunate connection of 
 our government with the trade of banking. In 
 1804 the war commenced between free-banking 
 and privileged corporations. Prior to that, the 
 Manhattan company, though chartered lor another 
 
 purpose, had assumed banking powers. An asso- 
 ciation had been foimed in New York, called the 
 Merchant's Bank, and had been some time in ope- 
 ration, and another in Albany the Mercaniile 
 company. The influential stockholders in the 
 Manhattan company petitioned the Legislature not 
 to grant charters to these companies : but to pro- 
 hibit all voluntary associations from engaging in 
 the business of banking. -The Legislature accord- 
 ingly in 1804 parsed that celebrated and extraor- 
 dinary law, called the restraining act, prohibiting 
 under severe penalties, all associations or individ- 
 uals, not only from issuing notes, but from "re- 
 ceiving deposits, making discounts or transacting 
 any other business which incorporated banks may 
 or do transact." No person was permitted to sub* 
 scribe to any such association. While this despo- 
 tic measure was under consideration in the senate, 
 a proviso was added that it should not affect the 
 Merchant's Bank, upon condition that the stock- 
 holders should be '^personally liable as in the case 
 of ordinary partnerships;" but even this was af- 
 terwards lost. Another restraining act still strong- 
 er was passed in 1818. These abominable re- 
 straints on banking continued for thirty-three 
 years, and were not repealed until 1837. Such 
 was the origin of our banking system the miser- 
 able abortion of legislative despotism and privi- 
 leged monopoly. Had government never meddled 
 with the quesjion had banking bee left as free 
 here as it has been in Scotland for more than a 
 hundred years, it would have grown up under vo- 
 luntary associations more profitable to them, and 
 infinitely more useful to the community. Com- 
 petition would have compelled them to allow in- 
 terest on deposits, uniting as the Scotch banks do, 
 the business of trust companies for eapitalists 
 savings banks for the poorer and laboring classes, 
 and banks ot discount for the merchant, trader and 
 manufacturer. Ours might have had in time, as 
 theirs have, thirty millions sterling in deposits, 
 more than half of which is in sums of ten to two 
 hundred pounds the savings of the poorer and 
 laboring classes. Such is the admirable result of 
 banking when free from every legislative contri- 
 vance, and wholly independent of all government 
 control. When this aseful branch ot trade acts 
 as the voluntary agent of the community, it culti- 
 vates frugality, makes the savings increase the 
 employment of labor, d/aws together the earnings 
 and dormant capitals of every class, distributes 
 them to every branch of industry, and gives acce- 
 lerated velocity to the anuual accumulations of 
 national wealth. 
 
 Free banking is one thing free-trade in the 
 'manufacture of paper money, is a very different 
 affair. I have always been, and trust I shall con- 
 tinue to be, the advocate ot iree-trade and the na- 
 tural rights of man ; but I have never advocated 
 ithe natural right of monied corporations or of 
 bankers to circulate their own credit as a substitute 
 for coin, in violation of the federal constitution 
 and of the law of the world. Free trade in the 
 issue of paper money has never succeeded any- 
 vshere, and will inevitably fail here, notwithstand- 
 ing the opinion of some intelligent n.en, that 
 competition would coi reel any evils resulting from 
 such issues. The moie free the manufacture of 
 paper, the more it is enlarged, and as the amount 
 increases, revulsions become more frequent and 
 
989 
 
 violent. The only effect ot competition is to en- 
 courage over-issues and to wind up this excess of 
 credit by the periodical sacrifice of trade and la- 
 bor. Neither banks nor bankers can anywhere 
 be trusted with the power lo create money with- 
 out abusing it, and indicting serious injury on the 
 community. The example of Scotland can not 
 be relied upon. There is no resemblance between 
 that currency and ours. Their circulation never 
 passes beyond the Tweed they have no note un- 
 der a pound sterling their issues are in a con- 
 stant and quick process of redemption less liable 
 to excess, and act more as a medium of transfer, 
 than as a loan of credit. But the currency ol 
 Scotland, like that of England, depends on gov- 
 ernment securities, and is liable to the same sus- 
 pension of specie payments. It is sustained by 
 exchequer bills and drafts on London, while the 
 coin of the continent sustains that of England, and 
 the whole paper fabric of Great Britain. Had the 
 banks of Scotland been transferred to the borders 
 of the British Channel they would have been 
 among the first to suspend ; for this currency can 
 no where stand in conflict with coin, amidst all 
 the fluctuations of the foreign trade. After a long 
 trial, the experiment has failed in Great Britain 
 and Ireland, and ours has had no better success 
 for we have had repeated suspensions in one gene- 
 ration. We may go on with ours we may pros- 
 trate trade and labor every ten years by an exces- 
 sive issue of paper money ; but after a series of re- 
 vulsions and panics, and a vast increase of pau- 
 perism, we shall be compelled, eventually, to 
 abandon our war against the currency of the world 
 and limit the issues of our paper money, as they 
 have done in England, Wales, Scotland and Ire- 
 land. This auxiliary medium of circulation can 
 be perpetuated in no country without limitation, 
 the only measure which can effectually prevent 
 over-issues, and moderate the evils of periodical 
 over-trading. 
 
 The first amendment proposed is to substitute 
 I general for special laws, leaving bankers at liberty 
 /to form associations without applying to the Leg- 
 ^slature. When these general laws are applied to 
 thher branches of trade, the power should be ex- 
 ercised with great caution ; for if there is no limi. 
 lation, all ordinary partnerships may come in un- 
 der general laws, trade would soon become a lot- 
 tery, and under a limited responsibility, the bank- 
 rupt partners might be richer than their creditors. 
 General laws should be limited to such purposes 
 only, as cannot well be accomplished without an 
 association of capital, and such as special charters 
 would have been granted to effect. Further, the 
 Legislature should never interfere with trade 
 Indeed, but for our unwise legislation, which has 
 cultivated the growth of government corporations 
 there would be no necessity for such laws, special 
 or general, in relation to banking or any other 
 branch of trade; and the interference ot govern- 
 ment never would have been required, unless the 
 sovereign authority was necessary to effect the ob- 
 ject of the corporation. Trade, if left to it>elf, 
 would have found its own expedients to accom- 
 plish every other purpose, whether through the 
 agency of individual or associated capital, and to 
 any amount, wholly independent of legislation. 
 The progress of reform may eventually leave trade 
 without any such laws, special or general, and en- 
 
 tirely free and uncontrolled by government regula- 
 tion. 
 
 The second proposition is to prohibit the Legis-( 
 latute from passing any act sanctioning the sus- 
 pension ot specie payments. It is true, that in 
 1837, the Legislature did not directly authorise the 
 suspension; but the measure adopted indirectly 
 sanctioned it, and had the same practical effect, 
 not only as it regarded contracts between banks 
 and individual?, but between the banks and the 
 State. At the time of their suspension they held 
 more than five millions and a half of public mo- 
 ney. When called upon to pay only about a mil- 
 lion of that in specie, or the premium upon it, 
 they refused, and the loss fell upon the canal fund; 
 and that too after the State had expended $275,- 
 000 for premiums on the debt, paid in anticipation 
 to divide the payments for the accommodation of 
 the banks. That act not only indirectly sanction- 
 ed the suspension of specie payments, but violated 
 the constitution of the United States. The federal 
 constitution prohibits the states from making any- 
 thing but gold or silver a lawful lender the sus- 
 pension act made it a condition that the banks 
 should receive the notes of each other in payment 
 ot debts, and thus gave currency to irredeemable 
 paper, instead of compelling them only to recieve 
 and redeem their own notes. In every suspension 
 of specie payments our laws bhould remain un- 
 changed. Our monied corporations may trample 
 upon them, as they have done repeatedly; but the 
 Legislature should have no power, directly or in- 
 directly, to sanction the suspension, or to partici- 
 pate in any manner in violating the contracts of 
 the community. 
 
 Personal liability is not new even in this coun. 
 try. Our first bank was a voluntary association. 
 The principle has been introduced into some of 
 our modern acts, and more than twenty of our in- 
 dividual bankers are personally liable without li- 
 mitation. There are three degrees of liability 
 first for the notes issued second for an amount 
 equal to the stock of each shareholder, as in the 
 Ct mmercial Bank of this city and third, unlimi- 
 ted liability, as it has existed for more than a hun- 
 dred years, in England and Scotland. Responsi- 
 bility for the circulation only, would be of very 
 little importance, while security is held for the 
 amount of notes issued if not unlimited, it should 
 certainly extend to an amount equal to the shares 
 of each stockholder. This is indispensable under 
 our present system, which without additional re- 
 sponsibility, will prove a failure. As it now 
 stands we offer a bounty on the manufacture of 
 paper money, while we take from the parties the 
 means> to redeem it. We encourage the deposit 
 of securities drawing interest, in exchange for 
 bank notes to be loaned thus producing nearly 
 double interest on the same capital while the 
 most available means of the banker are locked up 
 here beyond his reach, rendering his suspension 
 more certain at every commercial crisis. It would 
 be exceedingly unwise to perpetuate, by a consti. 
 tutional provision, a system which thus encoura. 
 ges the increase of paper money, and weakens the 
 banks at home, where alone the pressure will be 
 felt. Unlimited personal liability, relinquishing 
 these securities, would be infinitely preferable to 
 the present system ; for the credit of the banks 
 would then rest on a broad and firm basis ; and in 
 
990 
 
 possession of all their available means, they would 
 be better prepared to meet any demand which 
 might be made upon them. If we mean to keepi 
 the securities for the circulation, we must extend 
 the personal liability to strengthen the banks 
 wherever they are lo'cated. The private resources 
 of the partners must be brought in to sustain the 
 bank, or it must inevitably stop payment. At 
 present the lar*e bill-holder who can send his 
 bills to Albany, may be protected; but it affords 
 little protection to the small bill-holder, who can- 
 not do so extend the liability and you protect 
 both, by sustaining ihe bank. We are bound by 
 other considerations to strengthen the security ol 
 the banks. We have made them the authorized 
 agents of the State we hold then plates and their 
 funds the notes are countersigned at, and issued 
 from the Comptroller's office they go forth with 
 cut endorsement, and we thus give these banks a 
 fictitious nay, a State credit,, which secures the 
 confidence of the community, and they become the 
 trust. holders of the money of all classes whose in- 
 terests we are bound to protect from the insolven- 
 cy of our agents. Unlimited responsibility is the 
 best substitute tor our present system. Voluntary 
 associations on that principle, began in Scotland 
 more than a century ago. They would have ex- 
 tended to England but for the act of 1708 which 
 limited the number of partners to six, to protect 
 the monopoly of the Bank of England. When 
 that restriction was removed in 1826, such asso- 
 ciations were immediately formed, and the latest 
 publication I have seen, gives a list of one hun- 
 dred and ten joint stock associations, and 506 
 branches in England and Wales, with from eleven 
 to one thousand partners. Banking in Great Bri 
 tain rests on a broad security, is conducted with 
 greater skill and economy, and yields larger divi- 
 dends to the stockholders, notwithstanding their 
 low rate of interest, than in the United States. 
 
 But as we have, in this state, security for the 
 issues whether we continue the present plan ot 
 actual deposits or restore the safety fund system, 
 which experience, I think, will prove to be the 
 better for the banks and the community a limi- 
 ted personal responsibility to the amount of the 
 shares ot each stockholder, will place the credit 
 of our banks on a more solid foundation. Thai 
 provision is in the charter of the Commercial 
 Bank of this city, and the same principle was em- 
 bodied in the act of the 22d of March, 1811, and 
 applied to certain trading companies. It is some 
 what extraordinary that it never should have been 
 applied, until recently and in one instance, to the 
 trade of banking, in which the whole commu:iity 
 have so deep an interest. That liability has saved 
 the Commercial Bank and many of our trading 
 companies from bankruptcy, and had it been ap- 
 plied to all our banks, tor the last thirty-five years 
 it would have saved many that have become bank- 
 lupt. As i-l is desirable to place all banks on the 
 same footing, it is proposed that the liability 
 should commence on, and apply to all debts con 
 trac'ed after, the 1st of January, 1850. 
 i Were this an original question, I should prefer 
 \ dissolving ail connection between our governmen 
 \ and the banks, and recommend the provision adop- 
 ted last year by the convention of Louisiana. The 
 severe losses of that state where a debt has beer 
 incurred of near twenty millions by bankinghas 
 
 ntroduced the most salutary reform they deny 
 heir legislature the power to create or renew any 
 bank charter. Other states have since adopted a 
 similar provision. Fortunate would it be for us. 
 were we in a condition to adopt the same wise po- 
 licy but this paper currency is so interwoven 
 with our commercial system, we are driven to the 
 necessity of providing the best remedies we can. 
 Besides those referred to, other measures are ne* 
 cessary. All notes which are substitutes for our 
 gold and silver coin, should be excluded from cir- 
 culation. It is of little importance to the people 
 of the United States, to have expended millions on 
 our mint establishments to secure for their use an 
 enlarged and sound metallic currency, if our coins 
 are to be driven from circulation by the end it of 
 bankers circulated as money. In no other coun- 
 try but ours, are all coins except the fractions of a 
 dollar, banished from circulation. If our curren- 
 cy is to be wholly and permanently regulated by 
 our bankers, we had belter abolish our mints and 
 save this annual tax upon the people for the ex- 
 clusive bertefit of our moneyed corporations. The 
 circulation of the notes of banks of other states 
 should also be prohibited, and all the states should 
 adopt the same policy. Without this mutual re. 
 striction, there can be no limitation of currency, 
 and no security against over-issues. Notes circu- 
 lating at a distance are seldom if ever redeemed, 
 and form the worst part of our currency, which 
 they increas-e and depreciate in defiance of any 
 limitation or regulation of our own. It is in vain 
 to attempt to restrict over issues, while the notes 
 of other states circulate with ours. We prohibit 
 our banks from receiving them, but that only en- 
 larges their circulation among traders. We thus 
 give currency to the notes of some ol ihe weakest 
 banks in neighboring stales, for which we have no 
 security, and discourage the circulation of our own 
 notes, though secured by stocks and bonds to prc- 
 tect bill-holders! If we must have a paper cur- 
 rency, it is certainly proper to have that only 
 which we can preserve sound; and one which we 
 can regulate, control and limit. Whenever the 
 other states shall judiciously limit the amount of 
 their issues and require security for their redemp- 
 tion, such prohibition will be unnecessary. To 
 limit the amount of notes issued, is the most im- 
 portant provision that can be adopted. This is 
 the only effectual safeguard to protect the commu- 
 nity from constant and excessive fluctuations aad 
 to prevent a progressive augmentation of paper 
 money. During the last twelve years these fluc- 
 tuations in our currency have been detrimental to 
 every interest. In 1834 the issues of the banks of 
 this state exceeded fifteen millions in three years 
 they increased to more than twenty-lour millions, 
 in 1837, when the banks suspended specie pay- 
 ments the next year, 1838, they fell to a little 
 over twelve millions the year alter rose again to 
 more than nineteen millions in 1839, and in 1840 
 fell again to about eleven millions. Since then 
 (his currency has been steadily increasing, and in 
 May last had reached near twenty-one millions. 
 The war with Mexico has for the moment checked 
 its increase, but the whole amount created from 
 time to time by the incorporated banks and issued 
 by the Comptroller, is more than twenty-eight 
 millions and a half, including the small portion 
 which may have been lost or destroyed. Between 
 
991 
 
 Dine and ten millions of these notes are in the pos- 
 Segsion of the banks, and as soon as peace with, 
 Mexico is restored and speculation begins, thev 
 will he. issued loan excess beyond thai existing in 
 . producing, a^ it did then, an explosion of 
 the <MMTency. Had t; - been limited by 
 
 our laws, such extraordinary expansions and con- 
 tractions of this artificial measure of value, could 
 not have occurred. Issued, as they now are, by 
 the Comptroller, the amount could never have 
 risen so high nor fallen so low; the course of trade 
 would have been more uniform, and commeraial 
 credit and bank credit would not have been mutu- 
 ally stimulated by speculation to expand and de- 
 stroy each other. Without some limitation not 
 exceeding twenty millions this modern auxiliary 
 medium of circulation cannot be sustained sus- 
 pension must ever follow over-issue, and the a- 
 inounf will be progressively augmented increas- 
 ing the embarrassments of trade and the violent 
 effect of revulsions on every class ot the com- 
 munity. 
 
 The currency of this State is important, not 
 only to ourselves, but to the whole Union, owing 
 to our position and our commercial relations, for- 
 eign and domestic. Our commercial capital is 
 the centre of exchanges, internal and external, 
 and must necessarily, at every crisis, bear the 
 whole pressure of commercial credit. When our 
 bank issues are too much expanded and over trad- 
 ing brings exchanges against us, specie will flow 
 out from New York there the alarm will begin 
 and there will be the first suspension of specie 
 payments. If we go on without any limitation 
 on the amount of this currency, such an event, 
 and at no distant day, is unavoidable. I trust we 
 shall adopt efficient measures to avert such a ca- 
 lamity, not only to protect our commercial inter- 
 ests from such vicissitudes, but our laboring class- 
 es from the excesses of our paper system. It 
 cannot be denied, that in our legislation in this 
 country, we have adopted the maxirn of monar- 
 chy, that property is the primary nay the sole 
 object of government. We have not only clothed 
 it with extraordinary privileges ; but armed it 
 with the federal power to regulate the currency, 
 and with a power to be found in none of our con- 
 stitutions the formidable power to create money. 
 Labor, on the contrary, the origin of all wealth, 
 has not only been wholly disregarded, but tram- 
 pled upon. It solicits no privileges it asks only 
 for a sound currency to secure to trade steady 
 profits and for itself steady employment. It has 
 a right to expect, that the moriied 'interest, pow- 
 erful as it is, will not be armed with the authori- 
 ty to suspend all labor every ten years by depre- 
 ciating the currency, and suddenly arresting eve- 
 ry branch of industry. It has a just right to anti- 
 cipate that this convention will interpose the so 
 vereign power of the state, as a shield to protect 
 the laboring classes from the abuses resulting from 
 the substitution of the credit of bankers for the 
 current coin of the world. But whatever may be 
 our measures, I hope we shall all unite in an 
 earnest and patriotic desire to provide the strong- 
 est constitutional guards against future explosions 
 of our currency and to place the welfare, for- 
 tunes and labor of all classes, on some foundation 
 more solid and secure than a fluctuating, progres- 
 sive and unlimited issue of paper money. 
 
 l\lr. AYRAULT said that he felt bound to re. 
 new his motion to lay the report upon the table, 
 and that it be printed. If any argument was 
 needed in defence of this motion, the Convention 
 had been favored with it in the veiy able speech 
 just delivered by the gentleman Horn Sufiulk 
 (Mr. CAMBRELENG) and he trusted that that 
 gentleman would again consent to Hie short delay 
 i hat was desired. That gentleman (Mr. CAM- 
 BRELENG) had to-day demonstrated the vast im- 
 portance of this subject, and that it was one wor- 
 thy of the greatest deliberation. Now, upon one 
 great principle contended for by Mr. CAMBREL- 
 ENU, he (Mr. AYRAULT) would go to the fullest 
 extent with the honorable member trom Suffolk ; 
 that was, to provide the amplest security to the 
 community. 
 
 If the Convention would consent to the adoption 
 of only the first section, as at present presented 
 by the honorable gentleman, (Mr. CAMBRELENG) 
 and leave the rest to the Legislature as aJl that 
 followed (the subsequent suctions) being strictly 
 matters ot legislation he (Mr. AYRAUJLT) would 
 be satisfied. But, he said, that if we go on and 
 adopt other sections, it appeared th^y differed 
 much in the details The gentleman from Suffolk 
 (Mr. CAMBRELENG) says that he would redeem 
 all notes in specie; and in his argument he tells 
 us how he would secure this : that is, in the way 
 ot pledging securities as a portion of our bank- 
 ing is riow conducted. He (Mr. AYRAULT) dif- 
 lered with that gentleman (Mr. CAMBRELENG) as 
 to that mode being the most secure to the com- 
 munity. And he (Mr. A.) was very sure that all 
 past experience had shown that he was right - 
 The deposit of securities with the Comptroller 
 had certainly not proved judicious in practice. 
 The capital should always he within control of 
 those who issue the circulation of thestate. Then 
 firmness and stability would be given to the com- 
 mercial community, as they would bave something 
 substantial to fall back upon in the way of capital, 
 instead ot testing on the credit of circulation only. 
 
 At present, the banking system under the ge- 
 neral banking law was based wholly upon credit. 
 It does not require the employment of capital to 
 the amount of a dollar in the transaction of busi- 
 ness. There is no capital in the business of the 
 banker for those banks to rest upon. W T hatever 
 the capital may be, it should at all times be im- 
 mediately available to the bank. Our own state 
 stocks, which so many favor as the basis of bank- 
 ing, will soon be out of the market, as we have 
 by this very constitution provided for the p;iv- 
 ment of our entire debt. As it has been, our own 
 stocks have been forced to a sale to redeem notes 
 of broken banks at a depreciation of eleven and 
 a half per cent. That is an average of the ag- 
 gregate depreciation. Besides this, bonds and 
 mortgages, perfectly good, have been in like man- 
 ner, forced t^a sale at an aggregate depreciation 
 of over 80 oWK per cent. All this has resulted 
 in a serious loss to the bill holders in the com- 
 munity. The direct losses to the community 
 from these sources alone, have amounted to about 
 sl."),ouu a year, besides the loss u> individuals, in 
 sale of notes, and to the stock holders. The most 
 safe system in his (Mr. AYRAULT'S) judgment, 
 was one that employed capital, like our " safety 
 fund system." Prohibit special charters, but 
 
992 
 
 pass a general law which he (Mr. A.) was in fa 
 vor of, and that was all that was required. Th< 
 community, as such, had not been subjected t< 
 the loss of a single dollar from the safety func 
 system, except individuals may have sold in timi 
 of panic and alarm notes at a discount. But, i 
 the securities now deposited with the Comptrol 
 ler should be forced to a sale, (a thing I do no 
 expect) at the rate they were heretofore sold, ii 
 could not be done with less than a direct loss of 
 about a million of dollars to the community in 
 the redemption of notes issued. He (Mr. A/ 
 desired to see some amendments to this report 
 and for this purpose he asked delay. He there- 
 fore renewed the motion to lay on the table anc 
 to print. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG assented that the con- 
 sideration of his report should be postponed unti] 
 to-mbrro w at 10 o'clock, and desired that it should 
 be printed. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT moved to amend by postpon- 
 ing until half-past 3 o'clock to-morrow ; believ- 
 ing that such postponement would furnish but 
 quite as short a time as was absolutely necessary 
 for its examination. 
 
 Mr. JONES was opposed to any postponement 
 whatever. There was but a single proposition 
 in the new report that was not contained in the 
 original printed document. He therefore could 
 see no propriety either in delaying or in printing. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT agreed to move to postpone 
 the consideration of this subject until half-past 3 
 o'clock to-morrow, provided it was printed to- 
 day 
 
 Mr. STETSON said that if this was to be put 
 off till to-morrow, then Mr. AYRAULT might 
 bring in an amendment, and then somebody else 
 might ask to delay the consideration of his 
 amendment till they had time to consider it; and 
 so they might go on and postpone the matter in- 
 definitely. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD followed, and strongly pro- 
 tested against delay. It was too important a sub- 
 ject to be put off. 
 
 Mr. TOW'NSEND said he could not agree to 
 any postponement of this question, and he differ- 
 ed with his honorable colleague otthe committee, 
 (Mr. CAMBRELENG,) in the propriety of assent- 
 ing to the proposition of delay made by the gen- 
 tleman from Livingston (Mr. AYRAULT.) It had 
 been well stated that, if there was any weight in 
 the objection that the sections were not all print- 
 ed in the precise form that the chairman of the 
 committee now presented them, it would apply 
 with equal force to the consideration of every pro- 
 position that might be made to amend the report 
 when in Convention. The gentleman from Liv- 
 ingston (Mr. AYRAULT) has gone somewhat out 
 of his way to condemn the Free Banking Law, 
 and instituted some unfavorable comparisons be- 
 tween the old privileged system jJiat of char- 
 ters and institutions operating undw the law of 
 '38, and the actsiri its modification. The gentle- 
 man had stated that these latter institutions could 
 be formed without the presence of real capital; he 
 had certainly gone very wide of the mark in this 
 assertion. It had been Mr. T.'s good or ill fortune 
 to be an actor in the Legislative scenes of 1842, 
 when the stock of our State reached its lowest 
 point ; that of 22 per cent below par, for a 5 per 
 
 cent stock. At this dark period of the State cre- 
 dit, he never knew of any opportunity of obtain- 
 ing the bonds of the State upon credit, or for else 
 than cash or its equivalent. Now, as no institu- 
 tion under the act, could be organized since the 
 act of May, 1840, without having in possession, at 
 least $50,000 ot the stock of our State, it was al- 
 tered to say that the act did not require the pre 
 sence of bona fide capital at the formation of * in- 
 stitutions, under its provisions. This was throw- 
 ing out, now, t he requirement as to bond and mort- 
 gages, under the strict provisions of which, if the 
 State officers do their duty, such as are pledged 
 for circulation, would command nearly their par 
 value in cash at a forced sale. The gentleman 
 had stated that the community never lost a dollar 
 by the Safety Fund System ; Mr. T. was compelled 
 to make a direct issue with him as to this state- 
 ment. He remembered distinctly, that when in '42 
 he had the honor of bringing the plan of registering 
 of the safety fund notes before the legislature in 
 view of the great frauds in the circulation of the 
 Buffalo Banks the notes of some of the broken 
 banks of that system were then selling at the Ex- 
 change in New York at auction at but 60c on the 
 dollar. When the gentleman from Ontario (Mr. 
 WORDEN) a few evenings since a gentleman 
 whose ideas of finance and banking were in close 
 union with the gentleman from Livingston, had 
 uttered, with no particular reference to the ques- 
 tion before the Convention, similar views, he 
 had promptly called attention to the fact that by 
 a report from the Comptroller, long upon our ta- 
 ile, (Convention doc. 34,) the direct losses in- 
 flicted upon the community, including stock hold- 
 ers, since the year 1840 by the safety fund system 
 had approximated to seven millions of dollars. 
 The security of that system at the present time, 
 so much lauded by the gentleman from Living- 
 ston, would be best appreciated by the annexed 
 extract, from page 3 of the document in question : 
 ' The future contributions to the Safety Fund, 
 which were not commuted for under the act 
 chapter 24) of the laws of 1842, have been an- 
 icipated by the issue of stock for the payment of 
 ;he debts of the nine banks which failed prior to 
 1843, as provided for by the act, chap. 114 of the 
 aws of 1845. The safety fund therefore is used 
 up and mortgaged for liabilities already incurred, 
 .nd there is no provision which can be made 
 vailable for the redemption of the notes of the 
 safety fund banks, which may become insolvent 
 lereafter." With these facts in a reliable form 
 efore.us, he could not excuse the gentleman for 
 assailing the institutions operating under the free 
 system, as not affording equal security with those 
 under special charters. Under the admonitions 
 hat he had quoted from a public officer, who had 
 ften, in Mr. T.'s opinion, given the safety fund 
 tanks evidence that he was not their enemy, he 
 bought the public would soon understand which 
 >f the two systems afforded them the best secu- 
 ity. He spoke of the matter as between two sys- 
 ems, not with reference to particular institutions. 
 r rom his own knowledge he believed that a very 
 arge portion of the safety fund banks were and 
 vould remain, particularly if the article of the 
 gentleman from Suffolk is adopted, perfectly sol- 
 vent but if his opinion were invoked as to the 
 >est of the two modes he would give his most un- 
 
993 
 
 qualified preference for the free banks as aftbrd- 
 ino; the best security for the public, particularly 
 in the matter of circulation. He would not de- 
 tain the Convention longer, for he had risen only 
 to set the gentleman from Livingston right, and 
 to urge the chairman of his committee (Mr. CAM- 
 BRELENG) not to consent to allow any farther de- 
 lay in postponing the consideration of the report 
 of the currency committee. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT desired to say no more upon 
 the subject of a short postponment and he re- 
 gretted to feel it necessary to say a word in reply 
 to the gentleman from New York, Mr. T., and 
 sir I deny to having gone out of my way to con- 
 demn free banking but on the contrary I have 
 declared myself here and elsewhere in favor of 
 free banking and opposed to special charters I 
 also deny assailing the institutions in operation 
 under the free system, and I further deny that the 
 gentleman has correctly quoted from the docu- 
 ment to which he alludes and when I have sta- 
 ted the facts, I will have the gentleman to settle 
 with himself, for I shall make no issue with him, 
 neither am I indebted to him for setting me right 
 upon any subject. The gentleman in quoting 
 from the document uses these words : The di- 
 rect loss, inflicted upon the community, inclu- 
 ding stockholders approximates, to $7,000,000 
 here again I deny any such language or tacts are 
 to be found in the document but the nearest to 
 it is as follows : 
 
 The capital of the eleven Safety Fund Banks which 
 hare failed amounts to a total of $3, 1 50,000. These banks 
 iiave paid into the Safety Fund $86,-279 42; and there has 
 been paid from the Safety Fund on account of nine of them 
 thesumef $2,447,997 41. 
 
 The Safety Fund, therefore, is used up and mortgaged 
 for liabilities already incurred, and theie is no provision 
 which can be made available for the redemption of the 
 cotes of Safety Fund banks which may become insolvent 
 hereafter. 
 
 Thus, it is shown that the total loss is about 
 $5,600,000, and that every dollar has been sus- 
 tained by the banks. I cannot find the word 
 " community" contained in the report, much less 
 as connected with these losses. Mr. A. reitera- 
 ted his former statement, that it was true the 
 community, as such, had never lost by the circu- 
 lation under the safety fund system ; individuals 
 may have sold their notes at a discount, but it 
 was unnecessary, as every dollar had been re- 
 deemed at par. And if no more failures, the con- 
 tributions yet to be made would leave on the final 
 settlement at the expiration of the charters, a ba- 
 lance of about $250,000, to be divided among the 
 banks contributing. Now, sir, what do we find 
 in the same document, in relation to the good 
 banks which the gentleman from New York, in 
 his sense of propriety, has omitted it is as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 At the time of failure these twenty-nine banks had in 
 circulation notes to the amount of $1,233,374. 
 
 On these notes the payments were equal to an average 
 Of 76 per cent; the total loss to bill holders being $292, 
 344 36, a* shown in the last column of Table D. It i 
 thus shown that while the banks have lost $601,966 25, 
 on that portion of their securities deposited with the Comp. 
 trailer, the holders of th*>ir notes have lost $-29-2,344 36, or 
 a fraction less than 24 per cent on the amount in circula 
 tion at the time ol the failure f the banks respectively. 
 
 Now, sir, does this say the community or bill- 
 holder have never lost a dollar ? No, sir ; but it 
 says the [bill-holders have lost $292,344. The 
 
 99 
 
 gentleman from New- York, (Mr. T.,) it appears, 
 is for making a Constitution that protects the 
 aanks and bankers, instead of protecting the com- 
 munity, the poor bill-holder. In my judgment, 
 it is quite enough to protect the community, and 
 let the stockholders take care of themselves. It 
 is a new principle that we are to protect bankers 
 at the expense of the community. The gentle- 
 man would also have us understand he is in fa- 
 vor of a specie currency, while in fact he is in 
 favor* of banking on credit that is, paper circu- 
 lation only while I am in favor of employing 
 capital, paid in specie or its equivalent, as a ba- 
 sis of banking. The gentleman (Mr. T.) figuring 
 at Albany in the dark period of the State credit, 
 and in aid of its restoration, and in forming bank- 
 ing laws, I leave to his own imagination. The 
 public appreciate his valuable services. 
 
 Mr. MANN said he was opposed to any post- 
 ponement of this subject. The whole report ex- 
 cept one short section was already printed and 
 before us, in report No. 38 and 56. And there 
 was no occasion to defer this important matter for 
 the purpose of printing. If gentlemen would do 
 as he (Mr. M.) had done, take report No. 38 and- 
 56, write one short sentence to come in between* 
 the two reports, which could be done by every 
 member in five minutes, he would have an exact 
 copy before him. Therefore there could be no 
 necessity to reprint ; he hoped gentlemen would 
 take this course and go on with the report with- 
 out further delay. He, Mr. M. would oppose any 
 such delay, and. hoped the motion to postpone and 
 print would not prevail. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that there was no 
 new section in this report as now presented; and 
 he was surprised that gentlemen should express 
 themselves unprepared to consider it now. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER had always believed that 
 the duties of government were plain and Tree 
 When it had protected the citizen in the legitimate 
 pursuits of business and of happiness, from the 
 interference oJ evil disposed persons, its first and 
 greatest lunction was discharged. The U. S. Go- 
 vernment had provided a constitutional standard 
 of weights and measures and of value; and the 
 attempt on the part ot the states to supplant the 
 one, was, in his opinion, as much a violation of 
 that instrument, as it would be to interfere with 
 that of ihe other. He would not now, however, 
 enter into a discussion of the constitutionality of 
 this question ; but he would say that he considered 
 the whole attempt to substitute paper rags for a 
 metalic currency or standard of value the stand- 
 ard value of the civilized world mere quackery; 
 but as it had been commenced, he hoped to see at 
 least some limitation to a business, the results of 
 which had proven most disastrous to the interests 
 of every country where it had been introduced. 
 The argument of the trentleman trom New York, 
 (Mr. TILDEN) and of other gentlemen, seemed to 
 be based on a very singular view of moral right. 
 They appeared to argue that because other states 
 done wrong, therefore this should ; for all admit 
 that the enormous expansion of hank issues, un- 
 der the present system, was ruinous; yet they tell 
 us that if it was not done by this stafe, it would 
 be by others; and that the banks of other states 
 would be enriching their stockholders by a redun } 
 dant currency, while owe was restricted from the 
 
994 
 
 rarne privilege, by law. He had heard ot men 
 reasoning in 'the following manner: "If I don't 
 give him liquor, he will get it somewhere else 
 if I don't make him drunk, others will he would 
 Jose his property, any how; and if I don't get it, 
 others will." Why not carry out the analogy by 
 saying: Ii' we don't wrong the people bylaws, 
 other states will if we don't rob them, others 
 will ? He did not pretend in say that this was the 
 intention of gentlemen, but he submitted wheth- 
 er this was not the result to which their chain of 
 reasoning would inevitably lead them. But it 
 seemed that no limitation was to be put to bank 
 issues. Up, up, up, was the order of the day until 
 the paper bubble grew so large that it would ex- 
 plode of its own accord, then follows universal 
 ruin. Who would deny but that if the proposed 
 restriction had been in operation in 1837, the 
 banks of this State would have been in a safer 
 condition than they were and that the resump- 
 tion of specie payment would have taken place 
 much earlier than it did, if suspension had hap- 
 pened at all ? 
 
 Mr. TAFT moved the previous question, on 
 Mr. AYRAULT'S motion. Ayes 48, noes 13. 
 No quorum. 
 
 A second Ayes 56, noes not counted. 
 The main question was then ordered to be put. 
 Mr. AYRAULT was willing, at the request of 
 several members, to withdraw that part of his 
 motion which fixed the time when the report 
 should be taken up ; but there were objections, 
 and it required unanimous consent. He then 
 withdrew his entire motion, and moved that the 
 report lie upon the table and be printed. 
 
 Mr. MANN moved the previous question on 
 this motion. Seconded. 
 
 The ayes and noes were ordered, and the mo- 
 tion of Mr. AYRAULT was negatived ayes 37, 
 noes 52. 
 
 The report was then taken up by sections, and 
 the first sec ion having been read, 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to add " or corpora- 
 tions" after the word " associations." 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said he had objected to 
 the insertion of this word in committee, because 
 he desired to get rid of that term as applied to 
 everything but municipal establishments. He 
 believed the word associations was sufficiently 
 descriptive of the character of all other business. 
 The amendment was negatived. 
 Mr. FLANDERS moved the following as a 
 ubstitute : 
 
 The power of issuing paper money shall not be grant 
 ed by this State 
 
 Mr. F. asked for the ayes and nays on his mo 
 lion, and they were ordered. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was in favor of that proposi- 
 tion if it was desirable. It was already in the U 
 S. Constitution, no State had ;he right to issue 
 paper or to grant the tight to do it. Bank bills 
 were mere promissory notes. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to add after the words 
 " paper money," or " bills oi credit.' / 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS accepted the amendment. 
 Mr. WHITE moved toadd alter the words " pa 
 per money" ** of a less denomination than fivedol 
 Fars." 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD saw no necessity for the amend 
 ment of Mr. MURPHY, that was provided for in 
 
 the Constitution oi the U. S. It had been decid- 
 ed, however, that bank notes were not bills of 
 credit. All the writers on cuFrency had used the 
 term " paper money," in the sense used by the 
 gentleman from Franklin. He hoped the amend- 
 ment would prevail. It had been adopted in se- 
 veral Slates, and he thought it to be a sound sys- 
 tem. In this view, he opposed Mr. WHITE'* 
 amendment as not going far enough. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM thought this would open the door 
 a little too wide lor the circulation o( U. S. Trea- 
 sury notes, and thus bring us too much within 
 the influence of I he general government. He was 
 therefore a little afraid of this amendment, 
 
 Mr BOWD1SH moved the previous question, 
 and there was a second, and the main question or- 
 iered. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. WHITE'S 
 amendment, and it was rejected, ayes 9, nays 97. 
 
 YEAS. Messrs. Cambreleng, R Campbell, jr. Conely, 
 Hart, Murphy, Kiker, Townseud, Vache and White 9. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. FLANDERS, and it was rejected, 
 
 ayes 11, nays 78, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Cambreleng, Conely, Flanders, Hunt, 
 Mann, McNeil, Morris, Sbepard, Swackhamer, Towusend, 
 Vache II. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. 
 Jackus, Baker, Bascom, Bowdish, Bray ton, Bull, Burr, 
 [>. D. Campbell, R. Campbell, jr Cande, Clark, Cook, 
 Jrooker, i-uddeback, Dana, Danlorth, Dodd, DorJon, Du- 
 jois, Gebhard, Graham, Harris, Harrison, Ha-t, Hawley, 
 iiofl'man, A. Huntington, Hyde, Jordan, Kernan, Kirk- 
 land, McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Munro, Murphy, 
 Mellis, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson. President, 
 Rhoades. Richmond, Riker, Russell, St. .John, Santo rd. 
 Sears, Shaw, Sheldpn, Simmons, Smith, E. Spencer, W. 
 H. Spencer, Stanton, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Talt, J. J. 
 Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, Van Schoonhoven, 
 Ward, White, Witbeck, Wood, A. Wrigtit, W. B. Wright, 
 Yawger, Young, Youngs 79. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS proposed the following as a sub- 
 stitute for the first section : 
 
 1. Laws creating corporations shall not bo passed, ex- 
 cept for municipal purposes, and lor the construction of 
 such works, and for the performance of such business as 
 necessarily require sovereign prerogative powers, rights 
 and privileges. The legislature may pass general laws 
 under which associations may be formed for business, re- 
 ligious and charitable purposes. 
 
 Mr. M. thought this would embrace the whole 
 subject of corporations, and thus prevent the ne. 
 cessity of any action on the report of Mr. LOOMIS. 
 He thought a corporation should only be created 
 where it was necessary to confer upon an associ- 
 ation some of the attributes of sovereignty, which 
 it prefers to have exercised in that manner. For 
 instance, the government had the full power to 
 construct railroads and canals the right of way 
 was an attribute of government but he would 
 authorise thegovernment to devolve those powers 
 on a corporation if it was desired. This was the 
 effect of his amendment. He would -not allow 
 the government to vest in a corporation any pow- 
 er which it would not desire, or had no power to 
 exercise He would not have the ordinary busi- 
 ness of life to be transacted by corporations, 
 whose operation was eternal, who died not when 
 men did. It would utterly destroy individual 
 competition. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES thought that by this amend- 
 ment there could be no corporation, unless the 
 sovereign power had first been tried, to see if it 
 would operate. For instance in the establish- 
 
995 
 
 
 ment of a railroad route, land could not be ob- 
 tained, unless it was first ascertained whether it 
 could be purchased. As to the prohibition of 
 corporations generally, there were many counties 
 in the state where individual capital could not op- 
 iateand also-, where a wealthy capitalist could 
 control the entire market. Associations of men 
 of small means would obviate all this. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM considered this the most correct 
 proposition yet offered, and if any restrictions 
 were to be incorporated in the Constitution this 
 \vas the most sensible and proper one. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY accepted to the exceptions of the 
 amendment. The great evils in municipalities 
 arose from an abuse of the sovereign powers like 
 that of the right of eminent domain which were 
 conferred upon them, and in whose favor the ex- 
 ception was made. 
 
 Mr, RUSSELL urged that the proposition was 
 ample for all practical purposes. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS briefly continued the debate. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said his object was to prevent the 
 establishment of the same kind of society here 
 which had -been described as existing in other 
 countries. He did not wish to see women and 
 children carrying baskets for the emolument of 
 those who did not labor, or children from an early 
 age trudging off to factories to toil from early day 
 to night-fall for the good of others. This in Great 
 Britain did exist ; and the system might in some 
 measure be traced to the law of primogeniture. 
 He proceeded to shew that what primogeniture 
 did on the other side of the Atlantic, corporations 
 would do here. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said in his neighborhood, the 
 corporations did not make so much profit as indi- 
 viduals in iheir employment 
 
 Mr. MORRIS then proceeded and concluded in 
 reply. 
 
 Mr. STOW denied the position of Mr. M., that 
 corporations were detrimental to equality or tend- 
 ed to a favored class. In his opinion, they tend- 
 ed to produce directly the reverse results, and 
 tended to elevate and not to depress the masses. 
 They enable men of small means and moderate 
 capital to compete with men of enormous wealth, 
 and it was the only way they could do it. Mr. 
 S. said that one-half of the stock in the immense 
 manufactories of Cincinnati were owned by the 
 operatives, and that over a million of dollars in 
 Massachusetts were invested from the Savings' 
 Bank. This was evidence that these were not 
 aristocratic institutions. The institution of cor- 
 porations would give to men of enormous capital 
 at monopoly. He considered there was no analo- 
 gy between these corporations and the laws of 
 primogeniture. The great difficulty in them was 
 til at they have been too exclusive, they have been 
 made monopolies, when they should have been 
 distributed equally among the people. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG desired to vindicate the 
 system of voluntary banking. Banking, as con- 
 ducted in Scotland, was one of the most useful 
 systems in the world. There, where the popu- 
 lation did not exceed that of our own state, they 
 have 30,000,000 on deposite ; for these they al- 
 lowed interest on deposits. In that county, com- 
 paratively of no sort of importance with our own, 
 where we have more wealth and enterprise 
 where our laborers get better pay of this large 
 
 amount of money, more than 75,000,000 belong 
 to the poorer or laboring classes. ' Thesfc institu- 
 tions, with three exceptions, are all voluntary as- 
 sociations, and the law and government had no- 
 thing to do with them, except to provide that 
 they may sue and be sued. If we had done the 
 same thing in the origin of our government, we 
 should now have had a Savings' Bank of that des- 
 cription in every town in the State. He trusted 
 that the time would come when something like a 
 system which had produced results so admirable 
 might be adopted here. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN went into some criticisms on 
 the language of the amendment, to show that it 
 would produce an effect directly contrary to what 
 he conceived to be the intention of the mover. 
 He considered that it would compel a return to 
 the old system of granting the franchise of bank- 
 ing, which was a sovereign form and prerogative. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL asked for the previous ques- 
 tion, and there was a second, and the main ques- 
 tion ordered. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. MORRIS' 
 amendment, -and it was rejected ayes 9, nays 78. 
 
 The question was then taken on the first sec- 
 tion, and it was adopted, ayes 84, nays 1 (Mr. 
 BURR). 
 
 The second section was then read, as follows : 
 
 ^ 2. The legislatuie shall have no power to pass any 
 law sanctioning in any manner, direct or indirect, the sus- 
 pension of specie payments, by any person, association or 
 incorporation issuing bank notes of any description. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said this was already the law, 
 and there was no necessity for its passage. The 
 legislature never had authorized the suspension 
 of specie payment, and it never had and never 
 could do so. When the banks suspended pay- 
 ment, the legislature, in favor of the bill-holder, 
 prohibited costs if persons should sue. This he 
 considered to be very desirable legislation. He 
 saw no possible use for this section. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that when he arose 
 before, he had admitted that the suspension act 
 of the legislature was not a direct authority to 
 the banks to do this, but to all interests, and pro- 
 posed precisely the same thing, because it re- 
 quired the banks to receive the irredeemable pa- 
 per of the others in payment of debts. He de- 
 sired to prevent the legislature from doing again 
 what they did then. A more useless act never 
 was passed, nor would it ever have been but for 
 the effect of a panic. The legislature had the 
 disgrace of participating in a violation of the con- 
 tracts of the bank to the community. That act 
 had been condemned by every banker with whom 
 he had conversed, as most useless, and a most 
 unwise example to other States. He desired to 
 prevent a recurrence of these things in future. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS asked it ihe gentleman suppos- 
 ed that this section deprived the legislature of Ihe 
 power of divesting the plaintiff ol costs in cer- 
 tain case* ? 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG'S desire was not to allow 
 the Legislature to reach one ol Ihtrse contracts, 
 in any form. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD insisted that the effect of the 
 act ot 1837 wa- totalize the suspension of spe- 
 cie payments, and winch would have been uncon. 
 stuutional, had the pending proposition then been 
 in the Constitution. Mr. S. referred to the act to 
 show that although it did not in terms perhaps 
 
996 
 
 violate th,e contrast between the banks and the 
 community, yet that, it did in effect, by divesting 
 the community of their remedies to secure the 
 fulfilment of those contracts, 
 
 Mr. STETSON took the same view of the sub- 
 ject as suggested by Mr. SHEPAHD, and urged the 
 adoption of the section aa tending to prevent a re- 
 currence of that evil. 
 
 Mr. STOW objected to the section as being su- 
 perfluous the United States Constitution guaran- 
 teed the rights of the bill holders. He objected 
 to it also on the ground, that if any thing was put 
 in the Constitution on the subject it should be co- 
 extensive with the Constitution of the U.S. By 
 saying as the section did that the legislature 
 should not authorize the suspension of specie 
 payments by a certain class, it was by the strong- 
 est implication to be inferred that it might au- 
 thorize somebody else to do so. The effect of the 
 bill of 1837 was only to prevent a perfection of 
 these charters of the banks for every man had 
 the right under the U. S. Constitution to enforce 
 specie payments and he would not, prevent the 
 legislature from doing so again. This form might 
 be required to be exercised during war. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that there was no 
 more necessity for a suspension of specie payments 
 during war than in peace. It was only where 
 the banks entered into a fraudulent partnership 
 with the government, that they were even oblig- 
 ed to suspend specie payment. The banks ac- 
 ting as the agents of the government might bor- 
 row millions, but when they loan what they have 
 not, they substitute credit for money. This pro- 
 duced the suspension during the last war. If con- 
 gress had borrowed money during the last war, 
 and levied taxes to pay it y instead of entering in- 
 to a partnership with the banks there would 
 have been no necessity for the suspension. The 
 banks of New England who had nothing to do 
 with the government loan were sound enough. 
 Mr.R. CAMPBELL jr. moved the previous ques- 
 tion, and it was seconded. 
 
 Mr. ALLEN, by consent, explained his vote. 
 He intended to vote against this section. He re- 
 membered well th history of the war of 1812, and 
 here undertook to say that that war could not 
 have been carried on unless it had been for the 
 banks. To do this they were compelled to sus- 
 pend specie payments, and then every dollar they 
 could get, they loaned to the government. He 
 spoke of the Eastern banks and of this state. For 
 in the Eastern states there was opposition to the 
 war, and there no money could be borrowed and 
 hence there was no necessity for suspension. As 
 to the second suspension in 1837, he undertook to 
 say, that had it not been for that suspension every 
 merchant in New Y'ork would have broken down. 
 If the banks had been compelled to pay specie, 
 they would have required the merchants to have 
 paid them in specie. Thi* none of them could 
 have done. He cited this to show that there 
 were times when the suspension of specie pay- 
 ments was absolutely necessary. 
 
 The section was adopted 56 to 37. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The third section being under consideration, as 
 follows : 
 
 3. The legislature shall provide by law fortheregis^ 
 try of all bills or notes issued or put in circulation as mo- 
 ney, and shall require ample security, by pledges ol prop- 
 erty, lor the redemption of the same in specie. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said he would not tie up 
 the hands of the legislature in regard to the kind 
 of security that should be given for the redemp- 
 tion ot bills. For himself, he believed the saiety 
 fund system provided the best and mos<t ample se^ 
 curity ever devised; and that but for the frauds of 
 the banks of Buffalo, arid the misconstruction put 
 upon the safety fund act, by which the debts, ra- 
 ther than the notes of the banks, were paid, it 
 would have provided ample security. He would 
 therefore leave the legislature to provide such se* 
 curity as they might deern expedient; and he 
 moved to strike out the words, "by pledges of 
 property. " 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT concurred with the gentleman 
 as lo the security of that mode ol banking. But 
 he had no regrets that this .ystem had given place 
 to the free bank system, which he believed had 
 been found to work equally well. He could have 
 wished that the gentleman, preferring, as he did, 
 the saiety fund system, had made provision for 
 commencing anew under that system immediate- 
 ly The sooner we got into it, the better. We 
 had had the safety fund system lor about sixteen 
 years. Something like one hundred banks had 
 been organized under it, and there had been but 
 eleven failures. We had had the free bank system 
 in operation about seven years. Something like 
 one hundred banks had been organized under that 
 system, and there had been twenty-nine failures- 
 As he intended this morning, he now oflered an 
 amendment, to strike out all after the word " mo- 
 ney," in the second line, and insert 
 
 " But the amount of bills or notes to be issued by any 
 bank, shall be in proportion to the actual capital of said 
 bank, paid in specie, or its equivalent, which capital shall 
 in no one case be less than $100,000) and the same amount 
 of capital shall be employed in the business of the bank 
 during its continuance; but the foregoing provision shall 
 not be construed to prevent the legislature from imposing 
 other restrictions, limitations and provisions, in the crea' 
 tion of banking corporations or associations. 7 ' 
 
 Mr. A. said, if he could have his way, these re- 
 strictions would be sufficiently numerous and as- 
 tringent to secure the most perfect safety. One 
 of them would be, to prohibit stockholders or offi- 
 cers from using the money of a bank. From this 
 circumstance, and the want of a registry of notes, 
 had resulted all the disasters that had happened. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG concurred entirely in the 
 views ot the gentleman from Livingston, but it 
 was his object to avoid details of a legislative cha- 
 racter. Were he in the legislature, he should 
 vote for the proposition. 
 
 Mr. COOK thought this was precisely the sta- 
 tute as itsiood on the subject. Mr. C. went on 
 to advocate the present free banking system as far 
 preferable to the saiety fund system. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL expressed his concurrence in 
 the views expressed by Mr. COOK. There was- 
 no security in banking unless the securities were 
 placed beyond the reach of the banker. 
 
 Mr PATTERSON could see no necessity either 
 for the section or the amendment. It was all mat- 
 ter for legislation. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG was unwilling to put any 
 thing in the Constitution that was matter for legis. 
 lation ; but if there was any thing that should be 
 
997 
 
 put in the Constitution, it was a provision on this 
 subject. Any thing in regard to the currency 
 should be as unchangeable as the Constitution 
 itself. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT further explained his amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN inquired whether the gentleman 
 from Suffolk intended to embrace bonds and mort. 
 gages in these securities ? 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said he would not, if it 
 were left to him ; but he referred that to the le- 
 gislature. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN should be glad if the gentlemen 
 would exclude bonds and mortgages on agricultur- 
 al lands. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG would readily go for that 
 as a legislator; but did not like to have it in the 
 Constitution. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN thought it unsafe to the agricul- 
 tural interest, to leave it open to the legislature 
 to make landed property the basis of commercial 
 credit, thereby subjecting it to all the fluctuations 
 incident to commerce and trade. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG concurred entirely with 
 the gentleman. The only difference between 
 them was that he did not think it a proper pro- 
 vision for a constitution. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN went on to say that great mis- 
 chiefs had resulted from the exercise of this pow- 
 er by the legislature. These bonds and mort- 
 gages, thrown into market upon the failure of a 
 bank, depreciated the general value of real estate 
 in the county where the bank was, more than the 
 whole amount ol the security. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT'S amendment was here rejec- 
 ted, ayes G, noes 73. 
 
 Mr.'TiLDEN moved to strike out the words 
 " as money," and insert " as cunency." 
 
 Mr. HUNT had an amendment drawn, intend- 
 ed to effect the same object. Mr. H. sent up the 
 following: 
 
 "Strike out in the second line 'or put in,' and insert 
 ' by any bank or banks, or lor general,' and also to strike 
 out' as money.' " 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said in his section of the 
 state, people sgmetimes gave notes, that were 
 transferred from hand to hand. Would the gen- 
 tleman have all these sent down here to be regis- 
 tered ? 
 
 Mr. TILDEN withdrew his amendmet to ena- 
 ble Mr. HUNT to offer his. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said he would move'to strike 
 out this section, but the sense of the Convention 
 could be tested in less time by a direct vote upon 
 it, and he hoped it might be rejected, for it seem- 
 ed to him tftet we were constantly encroaching 
 on the province of the legislature. The first pro- 
 position in this section requiring a registry of all 
 bank notes, had been acted upon by the legisla- 
 ture for several years. The second, compelling 
 banks to give ample security for their indebted- 
 ness, was a power which had always belonged 
 to the legislature; and this constitutional re- 
 quirement would effect nothing, for the nature 
 and the extent of the security not being specified, 
 the term ample would receive various construc- 
 tions, and the whole matter would at last be at 
 the disposal of the legislature. He would rely 
 upon public sentiment to direct legislative action 
 on all such questions ; and as he was not prepared 
 
 to believe that the representatives of the people 
 were destitute of integrity and common sense, he 
 was still disposed to repose confidence in them, 
 and not unnecessarily to interfere with their or- 
 dinary duties. 
 
 Mr. HUNT'S amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to strike out "as 
 money." Lost. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN now renewed his amendment. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN enquired of Mr. CAMBRELENG 
 whether a note put in circulation was not money ? 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG: According -to the con- 
 struction of trade, which he was more familiar 
 with than Blackstone, he should say a promissory 
 note did not mean money. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN : The law, for some 300 years, 
 has been that it was. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG : Then adopt Mr. TIL- 
 DEN'S amendment. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said currency was the precise 
 technical term suited to the case. As the section 
 stood, it was inaccurate in point of language re- 
 cognizing that as money which in contemplation 
 of the Constitution and laws was not money. 
 
 Mr. T.'s amendment was lost 34 to 35. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved to vary the language of the 
 section but 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG stated that it was now in 
 the precise words of the Revised Statutes. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN replied, that you could not use 
 language more vague. It had never been settled 
 what the phrase " circulating as money" meant. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL urged that language in a con- 
 stitution should be used in the ordinary accepta- 
 tion, and not in a technical or legal sense. These 
 words " issued as money," were well understood, 
 and no legislature could hesitate about it. 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR read from the Statutes to 
 show that it was the precise language that had 
 long been used in the law against unauthorized 
 banking. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN was aware of that, but the con- 
 struction of that language had never been settled 
 by the courts. 
 
 The question was then taken on the section, 
 and it was adopted, ayes 70, noes 20. 
 
 The fourth section was then read, as follows: 
 
 ^4. The stockholders in every corporation and joint 
 stock asseciation lor banking purposes, issuing bank notes 
 or any kind of paper ere lits to circulate as money after 
 the first day of January, 1850, shall be individually respon- 
 sible te the amount of their respective share or shares ot 
 stock in any such corporation or association, for all its 
 debts and liabilities of every kind, contracted alter the said 
 first day of January, 1850. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND proposed to amend so as to 
 limit the individual liability clause to associations 
 to be hereafter formed. Even if adopted he did 
 not consider that the provision would apply to 
 existing institutions. Mr. R. also opposed the 
 policy of extending the liability beyond the claim 
 of the bill holder. Mr. R. proposed the follow- 
 ing amendment. 
 
 After the word " purposes" add " hereafter authorized 
 or formed." Strike out after '' it,'' to the end of the sec- 
 tion, and insert, " notes or bills issued for circulation as 
 money, whenever payment thereof shall, alter due de- 
 mand, be refused by such corporation or association." 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER did not conceive that 
 these corporations were so entirely beyond the 
 reach of the people as gentlemen supposed. He 
 would propose the following amendment : 
 
998 
 
 "All bank charters shall expire in the year 1850, after 
 which they may re-commence business after the manner 
 provided by this Constitution." 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG took issue with the gen- 
 tleman from Oneida, as to the right to include 
 existing corporations saying that no charter had 
 been passed since 1822 that did not contain a pro- 
 vision that the legislature might repeal or modify 
 ' it and the general banking law was certainly 
 open to amendment at any time. He said he of- 
 fered this section as a compromise. He should 
 have preferred unlimited responsibility himself. 
 Without some responsibility in addition to what 
 we now had, we should have an unsafe system of 
 banking. He alluded to the case of the Commer- 
 cial Bank of this city, to show the salutary ope- 
 ration of the limited liability, and said if it had 
 been applied twenty-five years ago, it would have 
 saved many from bankruptcy. 
 
 Mr. COOK read from the Charter of the Com- 
 mercial Bank to show that the liability was pre- 
 cisely that proposed by Mr. KIRKLAND. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG referred to the amended 
 charter. His object was to place the banks on a 
 perfectly sound footing ; and every sound banker 
 should wish to see it so. It was important that 
 the weaker banks should be made strong by a 
 more extended liability. 
 
 Mr. COOK argued that the section rendered 
 the bill-holder less secure than now. He stated 
 the case of the failure of a bank with a capital of 
 $200,000, a circulation of that amount, and a de- 
 posite of $100,000. If the failure was a bad one 
 and the creditors were driven to the liability pro 
 videdin this section, the effect was to take from 
 the bill-holder one-third of his security, and give 
 it to the depositors. The bill-holder, he insist- 
 ed, should be first paid leaving the residue of 
 the assets to go pro rata among the depositors and 
 other creditors. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG urged that there should 
 be no discrimination between bill-holders and de- 
 positors that the deposites in a bank were a 
 trust fund as sacred as any other obligation and 
 that were it otherwise, the provision extending 
 this liability of the banker to all debts, was a su- 
 peradded security to the small bill-holder, who 
 might, but for this, be thrown into the hands ot 
 the broker. Indeed, he regarded money deposit- 
 ed without interest as creating a more sacred ob- 
 ligation than any that a bank could come under. 
 Those banks, too, were to all intents and pur- 
 poses government banks, and we were bound to 
 protect the community against their insolvency 
 whether depositors or bill-holders. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND would secure the depositors 
 but not by a provision that would be partial anc 
 nugatory. He farther urged that the legislatur 
 could not, by an alteration of the general banking 
 law, impose personal responsibility on the indi 
 vidual associates. And so of charters the legis 
 lature might alter the terms of them, but couk 
 not impose new obligations on the stockholders 
 Mr. STETSON contended, in reply to Mr 
 KIRKLAND, that the section did not contemplat< 
 any ex-post facto operation. On the contrary, i 
 contemplated only that, after 1850, there shoulc 
 be no banking establishment without the indi 
 vidual liability to this extent thus giving tht 
 legislature ample time to bring them all in on 
 
 he same stable footing. He concurred also with 
 VIr. CAMDRELENG, that there should be no dis- 
 inction between depositors and bill-holders. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE moved the previous question. 
 
 It was seconded. 
 
 The 1st amendment of Mr. KIRKLAND was in 
 rder. It was to add the words " hereafter au- 
 horised or formed." This was negatived Ayes 
 32, noes 4779. 
 
 The other amendment of Mr. KIRKLAND (as 
 given above) was then put and lost : Ayes 42, 
 oes 48. 
 
 AYES- Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 taker, Bascom.Brayton, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Candee, Cook, 
 Cornell, Danforth, Dodd, Dubois, Gebhard, Greene, Har- 
 ris, Harrison, Hawley, Jordan, Kirkland, Loomis, Marvin, 
 Maxwell, Munro. Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, 
 liker, Simmons, W. H. Spencer, Stow, Strong, Van Schoon- 
 hoven Warren, Worden, A.Wright, W. B.Wright, Young 
 42. ' 
 
 NOES Messrs. Bowdish, Cambreleng, R. Campbell jr., 
 ^lark, Clyde, Conely.Cuddeback, Dana, Dorlon, Flanders, 
 iunt, A Huntington. Hyde, Jones, Kernan, Kingsley, 
 
 ann, McNeil, McNitt, Murphy, Nellis, O'Conor, Presi- 
 dent, Rhoades, Richmond.Russell.St.John, Saniord, Sears, 
 Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, Smith, Stanton, Stetson, Swack- 
 hamer, Tail, Taggart, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, 
 Townsend, Tuthill, White, Witbeck, Wood, Yawger, 
 Youngs 48. 
 
 The 4th section was adopted as follows : 
 AYES Messrs. Bascom, Bowdish, Burr, Cambreleng, 
 R. Campbell, jr., Clark, Clyde, Coiiely, Cuddeback, Dana, 
 Danforth, Dorlon, Harrison, Hunt, A. Huntington, Hyde, 
 Jones, Kernan, Kingsley, Mann, McNeil, McNitt, Max- 
 well, Munro, Nellis, President, Rhoades, Richmond, Riker, 
 Elussell, St. John, Sanford, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, Shepard, 
 Stanton, Stetson, Swackhamer, Taft, Taggart, J. J.Tay- 
 or, W. Taylor, Townsend, Tuthill, Ward, Witbeck.Yaw- 
 ger, Youngs 49. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, Baker, 
 Brayton, Bruce. Bull, Candee, Cook, Dodd, Dubois, Geb- 
 hard, Graham, Greene, Hawley , Jordan, Kirkland, Marvin, 
 Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish. Patterson, Penniman, W. H. 
 Spencer, Strong, Tilden, Van Schoonhoven.Warren, White, 
 Wood, Worden, A. Wright, W. B. Wright, Young 35. 
 
 Mr, BAKER moved a reconsideration. 
 
 The 5th section was read as follows: 
 
 5. The legislature shall limit the aggregate amount of 
 bank notes to be issued by all the banks and joint stock 
 associations in this state, now existing or which may here- 
 after be established. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved to insert the words, " and 
 the denomination" after " amount" in the first 
 line. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND said that he feared that we 
 were crowding the Constitution with details. At 
 the early part of the session he had stated that he 
 was willing to join gentlemen in an effort to 
 place so many of our organic laws within the 
 Constitution, as to render much of the legislation 
 heretofore exercised unnecessary but this sen- 
 timent was rebutted on the grounds, that a large 
 discretion must necessarily be left to the legisla- 
 ture $ and that the principle of saying what they 
 shall not do, in contrast with that of defining 
 what they shall do, appeared to be the sentiments 
 of the majority of the Convention and he had sub- 
 mitted to their decision. The task enjoined up- 
 on the legislature by this section had been often 
 undertaken by them. In the year 1837, (one so 
 eventful in the history of our banks) the legisla- 
 ture limited the circulation of the existing laws 
 in proportion to their capitals. If his memory 
 was correct the circulation under that limitation 
 of all the banks might have been carried up to 
 between 34 and 35 millions of dollar*, an amount 
 
999 
 
 nearly double of what (he Banks could ever suc- 
 ceed in keeping in the hands of the public. He 
 had given his cheerfnl support to the four first 
 sections of this report, and he had believed that 
 in doing so he had gone as far in the matter of 
 regulation as is prudent. 
 
 The two remaining sections had not the full 
 sanction of the committee, and he was disposed 
 to leave the matter they contained to the discre- 
 tion of the legislature. In effect we had already 
 constitutionalized a limitation of circulation. 
 Public opinion had decided so unequivocally in 
 favor of a secured circulation, that it was fair to 
 infer that bank paper not thus authorised would 
 decrease in amount from year to year as the spe- 
 cial charters expire. The amount of our own 
 State stock now held in this country is probably 
 not over twelve millions, nor would there be at 
 any period during the existence of our debt, pro- 
 bably over that amount on this side of the At- 
 lantic. Consequently with the existing popular 
 provision as to that stock forming the basis to the 
 extent of at least one half in the security, we had 
 by effectually providing against an increase of 
 state debt, indirectly but not the less effectually 
 limited the amount of bank paper circula- 
 ting as money. When by the payment of our 
 debt, this convenient security was withdrawn, (a 
 period of some twenty years must first elapse, 
 however,) legislative ingenuity could provide by 
 the substitution of government stocks, or other 
 securities and pledges, for the prompt redemp- 
 tion of such paper money as the modifications of 
 trade and the advance of intelligence might pos- 
 sibly then require. Were he to be called upon 
 as a member of a purely legislative body to at- 
 tempt to prescribe what extent of paper money 
 was required at a given period, he should consi- 
 der it a most difficult matter to adjust in consi- 
 deration of the magnitude and abstrusity of the 
 subject. Look at our recent census returns and 
 observe the fluctuations from period to period in 
 the amount of productions of every kind that en- 
 ter into the great aggregation of trade, and the 
 fact becomes apparent that an attempt to set 
 bounds to the volume of currency would be found 
 entirely futile, under the free compel ition in 
 the issue of circulating notes that we had secur- 
 ed under the previous sections of this article. 
 If paper money was wanted it would be regula- 
 ted by the #reat laws of demand and supply, and 
 which were obeyed, carried out and felt lar be- 
 yond the injunctions and provisions of any statute 
 that we could frame. Gold and silver being jn 
 his estimation the proper currency of the country; 
 when we had obtained either that, or one of pa- 
 per, so issued and secured as to possess a value 
 closely approximating to coin, we might rest with 
 an indifference as to the extent to which it might 
 be put forth, for what we should feel of the ex- 
 tent of the currency was dependent only upon the 
 caprice or cupidity of irresponsible bank mana- 
 gers. He thought the section wholly unnecessa- 
 ry, and one that conveyed no power that the leg- 
 islature had not before exercised, and which when 
 claimed and acted upon could do no possible good^ 
 he should like to see it rejected. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN had an amendment to offer. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD sustained it at some length. 
 
 The section was then adopted ayes 50, noes 
 
 Mr. JORDAN offered the following additional 
 section : 
 
 In case of the insolvency of any bank or banking asso- 
 ciation, the bill-holders thereof shall be entitled to prefer, 
 ence in payment over all other creditors of such banks. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL hoped this section would be 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON hoped so too, and was glad 
 that his friend from Suffolk was at last disposed 
 to secure the bill holders. He deemed this the 
 wisest provision yet offered in connection with 
 this report. He only desired to say in relation to 
 the section last adopted, that when the legisla- 
 ture should limit our circulation to ten millions, 
 Massachusetts and other states could step in and 
 supply the deficiency. 
 
 The section was then adopted ayes 85, noes 0. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS moved a reconsideration of 
 the vote on the section in regard to limiting the 
 aggregate amount of circulation. 
 
 The sixth section was then read, as follows : 
 
 (5 6. All incorporated companies and associations, exer. 
 cismg banking powers, shall be subject to visitation and 
 examination at the instance of their shareholders, or of 
 their creditors, under regulations to be established by the 
 legislature; and in case ot the failure of any such corpora- 
 tion or association to discharge its debts or liabilities, or 
 of any of its members to discharge the debts for which 
 they may be personally liable as members of such corpo- 
 ration or association, provision shall be made for the spee- 
 dy and equitable settlement of the aflairs of such corpora* 
 tion or association and for dissolving the same. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND asked for the ayes and noes, 
 but they were not ordered. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN enquired if under this section 
 the legislature would have the power to relieve 
 a bank from the penalties imposed if it should 
 only suspend specie payments for 48 hours ? 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that this section was 
 not his own ; but he had introduced it at the re- 
 quest of the gentlemen from Dutchess and Sara- 
 toga (Messrs. RUGGLES and COOK.) His own 
 opinion was that the subject was purely legisla- 
 tive. 
 
 Mr. COOK said that this was not the section 
 he had desired. He only wished to get a quick 
 remedy as between different stockholders. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND agreed with Mr. CAMBRE- 
 LENG, that this was purely legislative matter, 
 and he therefore moved to strike out the section. 
 
 The debate was briefly continued bv Messrs' 
 MARVIN, CAMBRELENG and RUSSELL 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved the previous 
 question. It was seconded. 
 
 The motion to strike out the section prevailed 
 ayes 44, noes 35. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved to recommit the article 
 with instructions to strike out of the 4th section 
 the words " to the amount of their respective 
 shares," &c. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG : That, sir, is only rais- 
 ing the old question of unlimited against restrict- 
 ed liability. I hope it will be voted down at 
 once. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON called for a division of the 
 question, so that it should be first taken on the 
 motion to recommit. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG : I move, then, sir, to 
 lay the whole question on the table. 
 
 This was carried ayes 48, noes 19. 
 
1000 
 
 The whole article was then laid aside and or 
 dered to be printed. 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, (101st day f ) Sept. 29th. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. BATES. 
 
 Mr. TOVVNSEND presented a memorial from 
 the city of New York tor the organization oJ 
 state board of assessors. Referred to the select 
 committee heretofore appointed on this subjf ct. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE presented a petition of Peter Groat 
 and others lor the merging of the Literature in 
 the Common School Fund, instead of its appro 
 priation to the support of the Normal School. 
 Referred to standing committee No. 12. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN presented a petition of Seth P. 
 Staples and others for the abolition of the superi- 
 or court at New York, and that an addition be 
 
 made to the supreme court of that city, 
 to the committee of the whole. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE called for the consideration of 
 the resolution relative to the format run of new 
 counties, which he offered yesterday; and he moved 
 to refer it to a select committee. 
 
 Mr. W- TAYLOR hoped the motion would no 
 prevail. The law now prevented the breaking u 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG hoped gentlemen would 
 be very careful how they changed their votes 
 to-day from the vote of yesterday On this sec- 
 tion depended the whole principle whether there 
 was to be wild speculation in banking, or whether 
 the issues were to be limited; whether there was 
 to be an unlimited issue of paper money or not. _ 
 The only safeguard of the system in this State, 
 and in the United States, he considered to be this 
 very section. If those who were in favor of the 
 circulation of paper money, would provide against 
 its failure, and the suspension of specie payments, 
 they ought to refuse to reconsider this question. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said he yesterday gave notice 
 of his intention to move a re-consideration of this 
 section, which compels the legislature to limit 
 the aggregate amount of bank notes to be issued 
 
 by ali the banks in the state - He was 
 
 the 
 
 anticipation of a new 
 unwise to disturb th 
 
 of county lines except in 
 census, arid he thought it 
 present order. 
 
 Mr. RUSSEL hoped this squabbling about new 
 counties would not be gone into. He moved t 
 lay it on the table. 
 
 Mr W. TAYLOR opposed the consideration 
 The law now prevented the breaking up ot county 
 lines, except in anticipation of a new census, anc 
 he thought it unwise to disturb the present order 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE also hoped the question o 
 consideration would not be carried 
 
 The motion to consider was laid on the table. 
 
 UNFINISHED BUSINESS. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved the reconsideration of the 
 3d section of the report adopted yesterday. He 
 said that in the haste and confusion, in which, a 
 a late hour the night previous this subject hac 
 been acted on, he voted for this section under 
 some misapprehension of its nature. He wishec 
 for leave to correct his vote or he should be com- 
 pelled to move a reconsideration. He feared the 
 consequences of adopting this section, which he 
 proceeded to discuss. In compliance with this, 
 with the desires of gentlemen around him, he 
 finally made that motion. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that the section pro. 
 posed to be reconsidered, was one of the most im- 
 portant that they had passed. It was the greatest 
 safeguard ot the whole system of paper circula- 
 tion. It was worth all the rest. It was the only- 
 section that could pievent over issues, prevent a 
 suspension of specie payments, arid was the only 
 safeguard we had against corruptions in the bank 
 ing system. As to the dangers apprehended by 
 Mr. TILDEN, they were all visionary, and as to 
 drawing a distinction between the currency of 
 one country arid that of another, it was visionary 
 
 also. He moved to lay the motion of Mr. 
 on the table. 
 
 The ayes and noes were ordered and resulted, 
 ayes 41, noes 45. 
 
 So the motion to lay on the table was lost. 
 
 u . twu ^ 
 
 Referred <l uestlon was now ca Ued for by a gentleman who 
 voted for the section, and is now convinced upon 
 further reflection that it should not have been 
 adopted. The general banking law which the 
 Constitution will require to be kept in force, au- 
 thorises associations for banking purposes where- 
 ever citizens have the funds to spare, and the 
 country requires more banking capital. The ob- 
 jects of this law must be defeated by the opera- 
 tions of the provision of this section. An associ- 
 ation may be formed in the county in which he 
 (Mr. N.) resides, whose issues will be only suffi- 
 cient for the business wants of the community. 
 A populous city, say Buffalo, with growing com- 
 mercial interests, will be frequently requiring 
 additions to its banking capital, and whenever a 
 new bank is started you swell the aggregate issue 
 in the state, and in order to keep it within the 
 proposed limit you must reduce the circulation of 
 other banks, which have only circulated paper to 
 an amount authorised by the general law, and 
 which the business interests of the vicinity have 
 required. Hence the commercial and banking 
 interest of the State ^would be kept in a constant 
 state of agitation and uncertainty, and all the an- 
 ticipated benefits of the general banking law frus- 
 trated. He (Mr. N.) should deem it unwise un- 
 der any circumstances, to compel the legislature 
 to make such an experiment, to embark upon an 
 untried system which may involve such impor- 
 tant consequences to the country, especially as it 
 is a question which has not been thoroughly exa- 
 mined either here or in the community, and 
 which we have not time to examine. The legis- 
 .ature has the power and will have the wisdom to 
 dispose of the whole question in a manner best 
 adapted to the wants of the people, and it should 
 )e left at their disposal. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN was opposed to the section, and 
 should vote to reconsider, and then should vote to 
 reject it. He thought it unwise to tie the people 
 of New York down by such a constitutional pro- 
 vision, when all the other state banks of the union 
 were unlimited in their issues. He desired a 
 arge infusion of specie into our circulation, but 
 low could it be accomplished so long as other 
 tates were placed under no such restrictions ? 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said the argument of the 
 gentleman from New-York (Mr. TILDEN) and 
 ther members who concurred with him, seemed 
 o be based on a very strange principle of morals. 
 All conceded that the unlimited power of the 
 
1001 
 
 banks to issue bills tor circulation was a great 
 evil, but at the same time they contended -,i- iin<r 
 roposition I.- restrict them, on the grounds 
 that if we did not, other states would ; or in oth- 
 er words, if tliis state was not accessory to de- 
 frauding the people, other states would be. It 
 was feared that, during the times of suspension 
 and a redundant currency, the banks of other 
 States would have an advantage over those of this 
 State in swindling the people, and in accumu- 
 lating wealth from the hard-earned substance of 
 the laboring people. He believed the right of 
 creating a standard of weights and measures, and 
 of rule was an exclusive prerogative of the federaf 
 government, with which the States had nothing 
 to do ; but as they had commenced " tinkering" 
 with the currency, he hoped some safeguards 
 would be thrown round the people, and that their 
 interests would be protected, as far as practica- 
 ble, from future depredation and. wrong. 
 
 JVIr. TOWNSEND wished to enquire of the 
 gentleman (Mr. TILDEN) what vote he wished to 
 reconsider if lie desired to call up again the vote 
 upon the limited personal responsibility for which 
 he last evening gave notice of reconsideration, 
 he hoped the Convention would not consent ; but 
 if the gentleman wished to reconsider the vote 
 upon the section relating to the limitation upon 
 the aggregate circulation, (which section the gen- 
 tleman himself had voted for) he would cheerful- 
 ly join them in an 'effort to reconsider and ex- 
 punge the section from the article which 
 we had last night adopted. Mr. T. said in ad- 
 dition to his observations of last evening against 
 the section, he would state further that any at- 
 tempt to circumscribe the extent of the paper cir- 
 culation, would meet with practical difficulties at 
 every step. Suppose that 20 millions should be 
 deemed by our legislature as a proper quantity of 
 paper money to represent the demands of busi- 
 ness in this State, when in practice it was found 
 to be far short of the necessary sum. Would we 
 not have the vacancies soon supplied by bank 
 notes from other States, and thus the whole ob- 
 ject of the provision defeated. While we were 
 contented to legalize paper money, he was in fa- 
 vour of retaining the profits that it afforded 
 among the people of our own State. In Massa- 
 chusetts, and other New England States, the poli- 
 cy of encouraging their own bank paper was so 
 well understood that even the paper of the New 
 York banks, secured by the public stock of this 
 State was looked at askance, as not presenting 
 equal value with their own circulation. 
 
 At present certified checks and bank drafts an- 
 swered in a great degree all I lie purposes ot com- 
 merce in our Stale, else how would it be possible 
 that with our present extended trade, we could 
 get along with a paper circulation ot only about 
 one half the volume of what had been required at 
 a period when the business operations of this 
 State were of not one-fourth the extent which 
 they had nov* attained. Under restrictions of the 
 nature contained in the section under considera- 
 tion, the only effect would be to add to the amount 
 of individual and hank checks and diaf'ts now so 
 extensively used. As to any tears of an expan- 
 sion, ot circulation, while we took care that any 
 paper issued as money should be reckoned in com, 
 no apprehension need be felt, but the matter 
 
 100 
 
 would thereafter regulate itself. An imprudent 
 BS of pappr would r:nrv up the prices ot our 
 produce to .such \.< e^use tin- espoir,-,. 
 
 tion of coin in preference as the che ; 
 modify. This would immediately cause a con- 
 traction of the paper currency and bank facilities 
 which would restore prices again to their proper 
 specie standard, their exportation would a&nin be 
 resumed, and quiet be soon again attained. This 
 state of t bines had been introduced by the free- 
 dom of bankiri now existing in this controlling 
 commercial State. Had it existed in 1837 and 
 f 3Q, the evils of an expansion would have been 
 felt vind removed long before they attained a mag- 
 nitude 'hat overwhelmed, in its correction, the 
 whole financial system of the Union. 
 
 My colleague, (Mr. SHEPARD), last evening 
 alluded to the foreign exchanges, as connected 
 with this subject, and yet sustained the proposi- 
 tion. It was true that the state of those exchan- 
 ges could alone regulate this matter. By an 
 erroneous system of computation, that of deeming 
 the pound sterling as worth but $4 44 cents, in- 
 stead of its true value, as declared by the laws of 
 the United States, '$4 84-100, exchanges were 
 actually at par with Great. Britain when the quo 
 tation in New-York was at 8k per cent premium 1 
 consequently when it exceeded 9 per cent, sil- 
 ver could go abroad in small quantities, while at 
 10 per cent, gold would move, and soon thereaf- 
 ter the contraction of credits and necessary fall of 
 prices present merchandize again, as the more 
 profitable medium of extinguishing the foreign 
 balance. Mr. T. hoped the proposition would be 
 reconsidered and the section expunged from the 
 article. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG said that this section pro- 
 posed no monopoly ; it was perfectly fair for all 
 the banks, the old and the new; leaving the le- 
 gislature to pass such laws as would render all 
 the banks infinitely more secure than they were. 
 In those States where they have prohibited the 
 issue of notes under $5, you see' no notes of other 
 States there under $5. He should like to know 
 when and where paper was at a premium. He 
 was for free trade in banking, but not for free 
 trade in the manufacture of paper money. No 
 country on earth could have more specie than we 
 could if we adopted a wise policy. There were 
 $4,000,000,000 in the world. He was opposed to 
 this terrible augmentation of paper money ; and 
 it' gentlemen realized their dreams, and got $40,- 
 000,000 of paper money, you will double the 
 price of every thing you consume in a few years, 
 by the depreciation of your currency. A metal- 
 lic currency is the sheet anchor of trade, of mo- 
 rals, and of prosperity. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN asked how they could get out 
 of the difficulty he had before alluded to? 
 
 Mr- CAMBRELENG said it was impossible for 
 us at present to control the currency of other 
 States; but make our currency as sound as you 
 can, for on the currency of this State depends the 
 currency of the whole Union. He wanted some- 
 thing in the Constitution fixed and permanent, 
 so as to prevent this erroneously progressive aug- 
 mentation of paper money. Now it amounts to 
 $100,000,000, and unless some restraints are 
 made, it will soon amount to $200,000,000. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN very much regretted to differ 
 
1002 
 
 even on an unimportant question from his friend 
 from Suffolk. In the great contests of 1834 and 
 1837 in regard to the currency, he had if he 
 might use an expression which implied so much 
 of equality between so humble an individual as 
 himself and his distinguished friend stood shoul- 
 der to shoulder with that gentleman. He had at 
 a period even earlier, and on mature reflection, 
 adopted the great principle of FREE TRADE as 
 applied to the business of banking, which was so 
 ably and successfully vindicated by LEGGETT in 
 the memorable controversies that followed its first 
 practical assertion by a small number of persons 
 in the city of New- York, at that time derided as 
 visionaries and disorganizes. He had maintain- 
 ed the doctrine during those contests in resolu- 
 tions and other forms adopted and approved by 
 the democracy of that city ; he stood by it now ; 
 he had always supposed that it was held by his 
 friend from Suffolk, and was surprised to learn 
 since he came here that the fact was in some re- 
 spects different. 
 
 Mr. President When will men learn to trust 
 more to the laws of trade and less to the artificial 
 ' regulations" of government ? more to the wise 
 arrangements of Providence, and less to their own 
 cunning devices ? If the government had con- 
 fined itself to its appropriate duty of furnishing a 
 standard of value, recognising nothing as mo- 
 ney but the constitutional currency of gold and 
 silver, if it had abstained from interfering with 
 the circulating credits which exist only by the 
 voluntary consent of individuals, and from giving 
 them its sanction under the pretence of regula- 
 tion, and thus creating an unnatural confidence in 
 them, we should have had the best currency which 
 any nation has enjoyed. The smaller channels 
 of circulation would have been, to a much great- 
 er degree, filled with coin, and the paper which 
 existed, deriving no credit from the government 
 sanction, and furnished under an active competi- 
 tion as to its quality and the guaranties for its re- 
 demption, would have been of the soundest cha- 
 racter. But unfortunately, our government has 
 claimed as a prerogative of sovereignty, not mere- 
 ly to fix the standard of value, not merely to sup- 
 ply the legal currency, but to furnish the com- 
 mon form of circulating credit, which is sustain- 
 ed by the voluntary consent of individuals. It 
 has then farmed out this prerogative of sovereign- 
 ty to trading corporations, organised for the pri- 
 vate gain of stockholders ; and made what it 
 claimed a right to interfere with only as a proper 
 function of government, a mere incident of trade. 
 It has then prescribed certain general regulations 
 which it has assumed to be the great secret ol 
 safe and successful banking, but which have not 
 the slightest tendency lo previ nt the worst evils, 
 really experienced ; and has exempted a sjsten 
 thus subjected to all the dangerous impulses ol 
 private business from the laws ot trade, by which 
 alone those impulses couid be restrained. Ii 
 would not he difficult to show that nearly all the 
 mischiefs of hanking proceed from such unwise 
 legislation It the occasion allowed, I should 
 hope to exhibit and prove by admitted f.cis, the 
 modes in which legislation suspends or obstruct 
 the natural laws, which would regulate banking; 
 that its artificial restrictions have been wholly in 
 operative as to the most essential points ; and that 
 
 all the practical regulations which the business 
 has had, is from the laws of tiade thus suspended 
 >r obstructed. But, limited to so brief a period 
 or discussion, I can but ulance at a lew of the 
 most obvious views of the subject. The first 
 great error to which 1 shall allude, is in with- 
 drawing, to a veiy large extent, from banking, the 
 influence of a principle which alone does or can 
 restrain tne excesses of any business 1 mean the 
 responsibility for its hazards of those who are to 
 receive its profits. We not only gave to the bank- 
 ing corporations for a lons< time an entire monopo- 
 ly, but we even now continue to them an exemp- 
 tion from as high a degree of liability as applies 
 to mos; trading corporations, and from the full de- 
 gree of liability which applies to individuals 
 engaged in business. The consequences of this 
 privilege, this immunity ove'r the great mass of 
 other business, have been to invite an inordinate 
 proportion of capital into banking, and to cause a 
 most false and dangerous system to be organized. 
 The money of widows, children, retired persons, 
 and all those who are incompetent to engage in ac- 
 tive business; who have not th3 personal knowl- 
 edge,or are incapableof the personal supervision, or 
 are unwilling to incur the risks which belong to ac- 
 tive business have been collected together, gene- 
 rally in small sums, the incomes fiorri which would 
 not recompense much personal attention or effort j 
 and entrusted to the management of persons who 
 have no considerable interest in the institutions 
 which they control ; to directors who are frequent- 
 ly boi rowers, rather than lenders, and to salaried 
 officers ; in a word, to persons on whom those mo- 
 rives to vigilant care and assiduous effort which 
 are the springs of success in all business can ope- 
 rate if at all, but very slightly. Would any sane 
 man venture such an experiment in any other bu- 
 siness? Would it be expected to succeed in any 
 branch of commerce or any mechanical trade or- 
 dinarily conducted by individuals ? And yet we 
 have applied this false and mischievous system to 
 the most delicate and perilous of all kinds of bu- 
 siness, an irregularity which disturbs every de- 
 partment of human industry. I had hoped that 
 the Convention would correct this great error, and 
 would enforce that full personal responsibility of 
 the stockholder in banking corporations to which 
 I have long looked as a principal means of reno- 
 vating our present vicious ssslem. I regret that 
 the honorable chairman felt compelled to abandon, 
 without taking the sense of the convention upon 
 the question, so important and valuable a reform. 
 In another respect our legislation has been no 
 less unfortunate. It has suspended the law of 
 trade by which alone fluctuations in the amount 
 of the currency are restrained. I do not mean to 
 discuss the general question, as to the policy of 
 the laws fixing the rate of interest. I wish, 
 merely, to advert to the effect on the currency, of 
 the establishment by law of a uniform and inflex- 
 ible rule of discounts tor commercial paper. 
 The rise in the price of a commodity, resulting 
 from a supply less than the demand, is a benifi- 
 cent arrangement of Providence, by which every 
 person is warned of the scarcity consumption 
 is checked and the supply eaked out to the de- 
 mand. If, for instance, the price of flour were 
 inflexibly fixed at five dollars a barrel, when 
 there was a deficiency, instead of its use being 
 
1003 
 
 economized by the substitution of other articles 
 and by every ingenious expedient, we should all 
 Consume, with the prodigality of abundance, un- 
 til thf whole supply was exhausted and absolute 
 scarcity produced. This principle is just as true 
 of the supply of loanable capital as of anything 
 else. Its operation has been repeatedly shown by 
 experience. Early in 1836, (I speak from recol- 
 lection and can not state the exact period,) some 
 twelve months at least before the suspension of 
 specie payments in May, 1837, money was worth 
 in Wall street, from, one to two percent a month. 
 If the rate of discount at the banks had been al- 
 lowed to rise with the market, the price would 
 have been somewhat less than it was in the street 
 but much more than the legal rate. Individuals 
 would not have based their calculations and formed 
 their contracts on the expectation of obtaining 
 discounts to meet them at the legal rate, risking 
 only, what men are not disposed to fear, the 
 chance of not being able to get a sufficient quan- 
 tity. They would not have procured means on 
 \vhich to do business at an interest larger than 
 the usual rate of commercial profit ; they could 
 not have competed for loans with the speculators 
 \vho were anticipating enormous gains; and must 
 have reduced their business to their own capital. 
 If at that early period more than the length of 
 an ordinary commercial engagement before the 
 catastrophe a reduction had been commen- 
 ced, the shock would have passed the men 
 engaged in regular business and fallen only on the 
 wildest adventurers. It is not too much to say 
 that except for the legally established rate of dis- 
 counts, the worst calamities of the commercial 
 revulsion o f 183" could not have occurred. Noth- 
 ing can be more obvious than that the induce- 
 ment to obtain discounts is the difference between 
 the rate of profit at which money can be employed 
 and the rate of interest at which it can be borrow- 
 ed; that in times of commercial excitement when 
 the rate of profit rises, if the rate of interest is 
 artificially kept down, the demand for discounts 
 must be greatly increased ; and that the natural 
 and effectual check on that demand is for the rate 
 of interest to rise with the rate of profit. The 
 Bank of England has for the last ten years regu- 
 lated the amount of her discounts not as our 
 banks do by arbitrary selections between the notes 
 offered for discount, but by raising the rate of in- 
 terest; and the experiment has proved entirely 
 successful. I do not suppose it would be safe to 
 remove the restraint on the rate of discount 
 charged by the banks unless the greatest free- 
 dom of competition was allowed to individuals 
 and associations; but if such freedom were 
 allowed, I do not doubt that the general rate 
 would be as low as now, while its fluctuations 
 would be constantly operating to preserve the 
 equality between the supply and demand. 
 Other errors in our legislation, scarcely less mis- 
 chievous, there have been, but I cannot now dis- 
 cuss them. So far as their effect has been to 
 build up an elaborately artificial system, and to 
 give to its issues a false credit, the evil 4ias be- 
 come so interwoven with existing institutions, 
 and modes of business, and with prevalent habits 
 of thinking and acting, that it can be but gradual 
 ly removed. But the two great errors to which 
 have before adverted, are within the power of 
 
 his Convention or of the legislature; they could be 
 remedied by a single act, and I doubt not that so be- 
 neficent a reform will be ultimately accomplished. 
 That measure would afford a most efficient re- 
 medy if not the only one applicable to our con- 
 dition for those fluctuations in the aggregate a- 
 mount of our currency, which are its greatest 
 evil. There cannot be, I know, an indefinite ex- 
 aansion of a currency convertible into coin. 
 The liability to the demand for instant redemp- 
 :ion in specie of the paper issued, operates effec- 
 :ually to subject a convertible currency to the same 
 law which governs the aggregate amo'.mt of a spe- 
 cie currency, and to keep it at the same average* 
 [f the currency of this country becomes excessive 
 as compared with that of other countries prices 
 rise, relatively to those abroad importations are 
 encouraged and exportations discouraged, until 
 an adverse balance of trade is produced foreign 
 exchange rises, and when it passes the point at 
 which specie can be profitably shipped, a demand 
 for it compels the banks to contract their issues, 
 and the currency is restored to an equilibrium. 
 Nevertheless, the vibrations of an elastic curren- 
 cy are sometimes considerable before the check 
 of the exchanges operates, and in two remarkable 
 instances in our history in 1818 and in 1837 
 the regulating action of the exchanges was sus- 
 pended, by causes to which I cannot now allude, 
 for a period; and the exp .nsions reached nearly 
 fifty per cent on the whole amount of the curren- 
 cy, and was followed by reductions to about the 
 original quantity, which produced wide spread 
 distress and ruin. The attention of legislators 
 and of the public does not seem to have been 
 much drawn to this subject. While we have 
 made careful provision lest a man should lose a one 
 dollar note, we have made none against a fluctua- 
 tion which should change the value of his pro- 
 perty one-half reduce a claim he may have to 
 receive on^ half or double a debt he may have 
 to pay. My reflections were long since address- 
 ed to this evil and its remedy. From a rar t'ul 
 examination of all our legislation, I am satisfied 
 th t it contains not one provision calculated to 
 prevent this mischief, but that its whole tenden- 
 cy has been greatly to increase it by suspending 
 or obstructing the laws of trade, which alone 
 could restrain these various fluctuations. The 
 object cannot be obtained by artificial means, ex- 
 cept by a suppression oi our whole bank note cir- 
 culation a separation of the issue of currency 
 from the business of banking and a supply by 
 the government of the necessary circulating me- 
 dium, and even that would not be effectual, so 
 long as we permit other forms of circulating 
 credits. If insuperable obstacles exist to such a 
 measure, the only alternative presented, is to re- 
 store the natural action of those checks which 
 exist in the very nature of business, and in in- 
 terfering with which we have incurred, as far as 
 fluctuations in the currency are concerned, all 
 the mischiefs of absolute freedom, without its 
 compensating advantages. It is utterly idle, and 
 worse, to expect a remedy from any legislative 
 measures such as is proposed. 
 
 This section imposes upon the legislature the 
 duty of fixing the aggregate circulation of all the 
 banks in the state at a specified amount. How is 
 such a provision to be executed ? Assume the 
 
1004 
 
 aggregate amount, and how is it to be distributed 
 among the numerous banks ? Not in the ratio of 
 capital ; for in the city banks the circulation is 
 mainly in the form of deposits, while in the coun- 
 try it is almost wholly in the form of bills ; and 
 such a rule would be most unequal and mischiev- 
 ous. Not certainly according to the present cir- 
 culation of the banks ; for that would be to per- 
 petuate by law an accident, without reference to 
 inevitable changes in the future. Either rule 
 would destroy all exercise of judgment in those 
 who receive the bills, and by confining the circu- 
 lation of banks with good credit, enforce the cir- 
 culation of banks with bad credit. But there is a 
 still greater difficulty. Under our general laws, 
 a few individuals may establish at any time a 
 bank. What is to be done in such a case ? If 
 the circulation is to be confined to the banks now 
 existing, that would be to restore the old system 
 of monopoly; if a change is to be made in the 
 amount allotted to each" every time a new bank 
 may happen to be set up, the interference of go- 
 vernment and the disturbances of business would 
 be incessant and intolerable. Can it be doubted 
 that under such a system, struggles between the 
 different banks would arise at every session of the 
 legislature, and endless conflicts of "local interests? 
 
 Nor is the proper amount of the aggregate cir- 
 culation so easily to be fixed. Who can say at 
 any moment what it ought to be ? If fixed too 
 high, it would be merely a delusion and a snare. 
 If loo low, it would cause the influx of the paper 
 of other States which is less safe than our own 
 for even if Jit be practicable to prevent such an 
 influx, no provision for that purpose is proposed. 
 The attempt to fix the amount from time to time, 
 would generate incessant controversies utterly 
 destructive of the stability of business. Who does 
 not know that whenever a pressure in the money 
 market should occur there would be a clamor for 
 relief by enlarging the issues ? And this, even if 
 they were already too large and were not restrain- 
 ed in practice by the limitation, from the mere 
 fact that government professed to regulate the 
 matter? Men would be taught to look, not at 
 themselves but to the government for remedy ; 
 endless controversies would arise ; and perhaps 
 even parties be arrayed on such questions. All 
 the interests of business would be drawn into the 
 vortex of politics, and a state of wretched insecu- 
 rity and instability produced. What regulations 
 can be established by general and permanent law 
 government might make, wisely or unwisely ; 
 but if the legislature be converted into an admin- 
 istrative board, to manage in detail the currency 
 of the state, fixing from time to time its aggregate 
 amount and alloting that amount among some hun- 
 dreds of different banks according to its varying 
 discretion, I hazard nothing in saying it would do 
 intolerable mischief as well as violate all sound 
 principles. 
 
 ThtT ide d of this provision is adopted, I suppose, 
 troin the discus-ions on the currency which have 
 taken place in England. It had its origin \vith 
 Mr. Kicajdo, v\ ho devised a plan lor uniting in a 
 currency (lie uniformity and stability of specie 
 with I he convenience and economy of p;ipcr and 
 soint' of the promini'iit parts of whose plan have 
 been rccentlv attempted to he put in practice. 
 The Bank of England has a monopoly of the cir- 
 
 culation lor sixly-five miles around London ; its 
 nolea are made legal tender except <iy itself, and 
 are the medium in which the country banks re- 
 deem their bills; and the issue of notes is separa* 
 ted from the business of making discounts and 
 put in charge of a distinct board of administra- 
 tion, who attempt to regulate the amount of the 
 circulation not according to the demand for dis- 
 counts, but according to the principles which 
 govern the fluctuations of a specie currency. This 
 system is obviously inapplicable to our condition. 
 Instead of having one central ^institution, which 
 issues most of the currency, a'nd practically go- 
 verns the whole, we have hundreds ot indepen- 
 dent establishments scattered over the whole 
 state. We have no power to make the notes of 
 any a legal lender which is an indispensable part 
 of the scheme. And instead of a board of com- 
 petent officers; to administer the circulation of a 
 single institution, the proposition is that we leave 
 the legislature to administer, without anv rules 
 prescribed to them or mode established, the cir- 
 culation of several hundreds of independent in- 
 stitution*. 
 
 I have long been of opinion that government 
 should either separate the function of issuing cur- 
 rency from the other business of banking, and as- 
 sume to itself that office, or should allow it to be 
 a mere incident ol trade, to be governed by the 
 laws of trade. If the present proposition were 
 that the government should do the former if it 
 were a complete and effectual plan if indeed it 
 would accomplish anything ot value towards the 
 object, it would be worthy of great consideration. 
 But I see in it no approximation to such a result, 
 or any beneficial result, but merely an officious in- 
 termedling of government" with what it after all 
 leaves to the practical regulation of trade-an inter- 
 medling which is wrong, because it concede* 
 the principle that the office which it assumes, is a 
 mere matter of business an intermedling which 
 does not go far enough to attain any possible good, 
 and is sure to produce great mischief. ' The ques- 
 tion whether the government should assume the 
 function of issuing circulating credits, or should 
 leave it to be an incident ot trade, I will not now 
 discuss, but I will remark that it seems to be im- 
 piarticable fo adopt in this country a system so 
 artificial as that of England. The distribution of 
 powers between the National and State Govern- 
 ments, would prevent either from doing what 
 would be indispensable to the execution of such 
 a scheme, and in oiher respects the system is not 
 adapted fo our institutions or condition. 
 
 Mr. MANN demanded the previous question. 
 It was seconded. 
 
 The main question was ordered ; so were the 
 ayes and noes, and resulted : ayes 58', noes 42. 
 
 So the section was reconsidered. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved the previous question on 
 the adoption of the section. 
 
 It was seconded. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG deemed this the most im- 
 portant section that could be passed upon by the 
 convention and therefore he demanded the ayes 
 and noes on the adoption of the section : and they 
 resulted Ayes 44 noes 58. So the section was 
 rejected. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Angfl, Bascom, Bowdish, Brnndage, 
 Cambreleng, R.Campbell, jr. Clark, Clyde, Cuddeback 
 Dana, Dorlon, Flanders, Harrison, Hart, Hoffman, Hotel* 
 
1005 
 
 
 Witbeck, Wood, Yawger, Youngs 44 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ayratilt, F. F. Backus, 
 Baker Bergen, Bruce, Bull, Burr, Candee, Chamberlain, 
 Conely, Cook, Crooker. Danforth, Dodd, Dubofc, Forsyth, 
 Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Harris, Hawley, Kemble, Ken- 
 nedy, Kirkland. Looinis. McNeil, Marvin, Maxwell, Mil- 
 ler, Munro, Murphy, Nicholas, O'Conor, Parish, Patter- 
 son, Penninian. Khoades, Richmond, Shaver, Shaw. Sim- 
 mons, Smith, E. Spencer, W. H. Spencer, Stow, Strong, 
 Tallmadse W.Taylor, Tilden, Townsenrt, Van Schoon- 
 hove Wa'rd, Warren,' A. Wright, W.B. Wright, Young 
 68. 
 
 The Convention took up the unfinished busi- 
 ness, being the report on 
 
 INCORPORATIONS, OTHER THAN BANKING AND 
 
 MUNICIPAL. 
 
 Mr. LOO MIS after alluding to the previous ac- 
 tion of the Convention on this article, and the 
 difference of opinion entertained by himself and 
 Mr. JORDAN, as to the proper construction given 
 to the language of the section under consideration, 
 expressed nis willingness that his own amend- 
 ment, and that of Mr. JORDAN should becombin 
 ed in one proposition. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN expressed his concurrence in the 
 views expressed by Mr. LOOMIS. 
 
 The question being on the amendment pro- 
 posed the other day by Mr. MURPHY, 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that the first part of the 
 section proposed not to allow the legislature to 
 grant exclusive privileges while the amendmen A 
 of Mr. JORDAN proposed to allow them to do it 
 He could net conceive the propriety of adopting 
 such a section as that. He was in favor of gene- 
 ral laws for corporations, but he confessed thai 
 from the arguments here and his own delibera^ 
 tions he was satisfied that general laws would no 
 be practical for all purposes. All he desired to 
 accomplish was that the legislature should be en 
 joined to pass general laws in all cases where 
 they would be practical. In some cases citiei 
 should have exclusive privileges, and the exclu 
 sive privilege of taking toll should be granted in 
 the cases of railroads, &c. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said all that difficulty arose from 
 defining exclusive privileges and special privi 
 leges to mean the same thing. Exclusive privi 
 leges he held to be what was granted to one an< 
 not to another. The granting of a certain rout 
 to a company and prohibiting the construction c 
 any other way within a certain distance would b 
 an'exclusive privilege. To grant this right o 
 way without this prohibition, would be merely 
 special privilege. In the one case it would be 
 monopoly, and in the other it would be throwin 
 open the matter to free competition. Those wh 
 were in favor of exclusive privileges under thi 
 construction would vote for the amendment o 
 Mr. MURPHY. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS urged that no proposition < 
 this kind, upon which there could be so muc 
 hair-splitting, should be adopted in the Const 
 tution. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY'S intentions were the same a 
 those of the gentleman from Columbia, and bein 
 opposed to exclusive privileges, and believin 
 that the distinction which had been alluded 
 by that gentleman might be drawn, he vvou] 
 withdraw his amendment. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend by ad- 
 ing the word " first," after the word " compen- 
 ation." 
 
 Mr. PERKINS suggested a difficulty, that if 
 le section, as now amended, was adopted, that 
 le legislature could not allow, for instance, great - 
 r tolls for passing over a road in one section cf 
 ie country than in another. In other words, he 
 eared it would not allow the legislature to adopt 
 ie privileges of corporations to the circum- 
 tances under which they were adopted. Such, 
 ie feared, would be the effect if the legislature 
 jvere required to pass only general laws on this 
 ubject. They could not reduce the tolls on one 
 oad without reducing them on all. He feared, 
 t any rate, that the section would give rise to 
 nuch litigation and confusion of construction. 
 f the Convention agreed with him, therefore, 
 hey never could pass the section at least in its 
 resent language. 
 
 Mr- SWAtKHAMER moved the previous ques- 
 ionon theseciion and amendment but withdrew 
 t at the request of 
 
 Mr. STETSON, who opposed the amendment, 
 jointing oui the difficulties that would arise there- 
 rom. He renewed the call tor the previous ques- 
 ion. 
 
 There was no second, 
 
 Mr. BASCUM then moved the previous ques- 
 ion on the amendment ot Mr. SWACKHAMER. 
 
 There was a second, and the main question 
 ordered. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER'S amendment was rejected. 
 Mr. RICHiViOIND briefly opposed the amend- 
 ment of Mr. LOOMIS, as being complex and diffi- 
 cult of being undei stood. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN replied, insisting that the section 
 was noi of that character. Mr. J also further ex- 
 plained what he considered to be the distinction 
 Between "exclusive" and "especial" privilege. 
 The objections urged by Mr. PARKINS he denied 
 would apply to this section. It would only apply 
 where two railroads were exactly alike, kniilt on 
 the same route, and similar in every respect. It 
 appeared to him that the opposition to this section 
 was much of it for the mere sake of opposition. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN liked the principle 
 of the proposition very well, and would vole for 
 it it it should be so amended as to require a two- 
 third vote on the part cf the legislature to grant 
 these privileges. Mr. V. S. proposed an amend- 
 ment, to come in alter the end to effect thai object. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS urged that expeiience had shown 
 that this two- thirds provision had been more ef- 
 fectual to prevent the correction of abuses than 
 to operate beneficially the other way. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEIS only desired that 
 this vote should be required when the right of 
 eminent domain was to be granted. He was wil- 
 ling that their charters should be modified by a 
 majority vote. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS: How would you reduce tolls. 
 
 Mr." VAN SCHOONHOVEN said there neve 
 was any difficulty in getting a two-third vote for 
 such a purpose. 
 
 Mr. LOOMJS said there had been a great diffi- 
 culty found on that BCi 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN asked for the ayes 
 and nays on his amendment, arid they were or- 
 dered. 
 
1006 
 
 Mr. WORDEN could not concur in the propri- 
 ety of incorporating mere abstractions in the con- 
 stitution, which would only lead to confusion. 
 He was convinced that it would be totally inap- 
 plicable and inadequate to the wants of the com- 
 munity. He did not believe there was an intelli- 
 gent man on the floor who could tell what this 
 section meant. He deprecated the adoption of 
 any such provision in the constitution. The arti- 
 cle should either be recommitted or else the pro- 
 positions should be printed. He could not vote 
 upon it understandingly now. He moved that the 
 section be recommitted with instructions to re- 
 port complete to-morrow morning. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN continued the debate, when 
 
 Mr. WORDEN expressed his concurrence in 
 what he conceived to be the object of this section 
 that is to require general laws for the forma- 
 tion of corporations, but allowing the legislature 
 to grant to any of those corporations the favored 
 special privileges that might be required in lo- 
 calities, &c. What he desired was to get the sec- 
 tion into such language as would attain that ob- 
 ject, and hence his motion to recommit. 
 
 After some further conversation, Mr. WOR- 
 DEN withdrew his motion. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN modified his a- 
 mendment so as to apply the two third clause 
 to special laws conferring grants, &c., and called 
 for the yeas and nays thereon, and there were 
 yeas 52, nays 44. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN called for the previous question, 
 and there was a second and the main question 
 ordered. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. LOOMIS as amended. It was adop- 
 ted, ayes 58, nays 37. 
 
 The question was then on the proposition of 
 Mr. MARVIN to substitute the following for the 
 section : 
 
 1. The legislature may pass general laws authorizing 
 persons to be erected into a body corporate for banking, 
 manufacturing, religious and such other purposes as the 
 legislature may deem sate and practicable, and under such 
 restrictions arid conditions, and with such powers and lim- 
 itations as shall be provided in such laws; but no law shall 
 embrace more than one species or class of corporations, 
 nor shall the legislature grant any special act of incorpo- 
 ration in any case provided for in such general laws. 
 
 It was adopted, ayes 53, noes 50. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS laid on the table a motion for a 
 reconsideration of this vote. 
 
 Mr MURPHY moved to amend by substituting 
 the word " shall" for " may", so as to make it 
 mandatory on the legislature to pass general laws. 
 
 The CHAIR (Mr. PATTERSON) decided that the 
 motion would not be now in order. 
 
 Mr. A. WRIGHT/asked unanimous consent that 
 the amendment might be adopted. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM objected. 
 
 The question was then taken on 'he section as 
 amended, and there were ayes 53, nays 51. 
 
 So the section was adopted. 
 
 Mr. T1LDEN moved to refer the section to a 
 select committee to report complete to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN contended thai such a motion 
 was not now in order. The action just had was 
 final. 
 
 The CHAIR decided the motion to be in order. 
 
 Mr CAMBRELENG suggested that the whole 
 article should be recommitted. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to amend by instructing 
 
 trie committee to report the following two sec- 
 tions : 
 
 I. Provision shall be made by law, as far as practica- 
 ble, enabling persons to become incorporated for manufac- 
 turing, religious, charitable, and for other purposes. 
 
 2. Dues from corporations shall be secured by such in- 
 dividual liability of the corporators, and other means, as 
 may be prescribed by law. 
 
 Messrs. LOOMIS, MARVIN and RUSSELL 
 continued the debate on the motion, when 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend by strik. 
 ng out the instruction ol Mr. O'CONOR 
 
 Mr. PERKINS also sustained this motion. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN hoped the subject 
 would not be sent back at all, but if it was, that 
 there should be no instructions attached to it. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN asked for the previous question, 
 but withdrew it at the request of 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR, who further explained his 
 amendment. On concluding, he renewed the mo- 
 tion for the previous question, and it was second- 
 ed, &c. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR'S motion was negatived, 35 to 49. 
 
 The question recurred on Mr. TILDEN'S motion 
 to refer the whole article with instructions to re- 
 port complete to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON called for a division. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN consented to withdraw the in- 
 structions, and the number of the committee was 
 fixed at five. 
 
 The yeas and nays were then taken on Mr. TIL- 
 DEN'S motion, and were yeas 53, nays 44. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The Convention, pursuant to previous order, 
 took up the report of committee No. 7, on the 
 election of LOCAL OFFICERS. 
 
 $ 1. Sheriffs, clerks of counties, including the register 
 and clerk of the city and county ol New-York, coroners, 
 not exceeding four in each county, and district attorneys, 
 shall be chosen by the electors of the respective counties, 
 once in every two years, and as often as -vacancies shall 
 happen. Sheriff's shall hold no other office, and be ineligi- 
 ble for the next two years after the termination of their 
 offices. They may be required, by law, to renew their 
 security, from time to time ; and in default of giving such 
 new security, their offices shall be deemed vacant. But 
 the county shall never be made responsible for the acts of 
 the sheriff; and the governor may remove any such offi- 
 cer, except district attorney, within th term for which he 
 shall have been elected ; giving to such officer a copy of 
 the charges against him, and an opportunity of being heard 
 in his defence. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said there were a number of local 
 officers who were not specifically provided for in 
 their report, from the difficulty or changing the 
 mode of appointment \ it had been left to the le- 
 gislature to decide as to their tenure of office and 
 mode of appointment. The committee had en- 
 deavored, however as far as possible, to strip the 
 Executive of patronage, believing that it was de- 
 sirable that this central patronage and influence 
 should be diminished, if not entirely obliterated. 
 This had been a source of great complaint, and 
 there seemed to be a general disposition to cut 
 this thing all loose from the capitol here, and 
 throw these officers into the hands of the people, 
 who were no doubt the best depositories of it. 
 Mr. A. enumerated the different classes of officers 
 now appointed by the Governor and Senate, show, 
 ing which of them had been done away with by 
 the present Constitution, and how far the article 
 
1007 
 
 proposed to go in respect to others. But the ar- 
 ticle spoke for itself, and he should be happy to 
 ijear any suggestions f hat would improve it. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to amend by striking out 
 the words " district attorney." He preferred that 
 they should be appointed by the supervisors. Let 
 the district attorney discharge his duty ever so 
 well, he could not, if elected, escape the imputa- 
 tion that he had m view his re-election. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said he believed it to be the pub- 
 lic wish to have this officer in their own hands ; 
 and hence he consented to this provision. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER hoped it would not be 
 stricken out. He was the people's officer, and 
 there was much propriety in their electing him. 
 Mr. BASCOM'S motion was lost. 
 Mr. FORSYTH moved to strike out "two 
 years" in the fourth line, and insert " three years." 
 * Mr. SIMMONS and Mr. PATTERSON advoca- 
 ted I lie "three years'* term. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said he was in favor of the three 
 yeais' term: but was over-ruled in committee. 
 
 Mr. ARCHER wanted power to return frequent 
 ly to the people. He said there was a difference 
 of opinion in the committee on this point. He 
 was himself for a two years' term. The spirit ot 
 the age favored the return of power frequently to 
 its source. And why should a sheriff hold longer 
 than your governor, senators, &c., longer indeed 
 than any officer, except your judges? 
 
 Mr. SWACKH4MER Why then make him 
 ineligible, and an exception in that respect from 
 all the rest? 
 
 Mr. ARCHER had no objection to striking that 
 out. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH insisted that we should not g< 
 off upon a mere abstraction, as to the frequent re 
 turn of powtr to the people. The practical effeci 
 of this restriction should be the controlling con- 
 sideration And he could not see the analogy be 
 tween the duties of this officer and those of gov 
 ernor and senator. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought that the sheriff hek 
 in his hands, through the patronage of his office 
 and the character of his official duties, an influ 
 ence which would secure his re-election in des 
 pite of all kinds of opposition, even though 
 there should be a strong desire among the citizen 
 to give the office to some other individual. Hi 
 deputies located in different parts of the county 
 would bring an influence to bear in the matte 
 that would tell most effectively. He was in fa 
 vor of having him ineligible for the next term, 
 in the present Constitution. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND advocated the striking ou 
 of the clause which rendered these officers ineli 
 gible. 
 
 Mr. STRONG opposed it, from similar reason 
 to those urged by Mr. RICHMOND. In Monro 
 county it had been found difficult to break up th 
 rule that the sheriff should be selected from a 
 mong the deputies, thus securing the appoint 
 ment from the same class for years in succession 
 He was in favor of retaining the term of tw 
 years, as in the report. This was long enough 
 and sheriffs would get rich enough in thai time. 
 Mr. FORSYTH demanded the ayes and noe 
 on his motion, and it was agreed to, ayes 46, noe 
 42. 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVENsaid he wished t 
 
 mend the first section, by adding the words "by 
 nd with the consent of the board of supervi- 
 ors." He thought the authority to remove local 
 fficers of the class mentioned, was too great a 
 ower to be given to the Governor. He might 
 verthrow the decision of a county from partizan 
 motives. He moved to amend by striking out 
 be words "except district attorneys," and to pro- 
 ide that the removal should be made by request 
 f the board of supervisors, or by their consent, 
 "his would give the officers against whom charges 
 ow preferred an opportunity to be tried by their 
 jeers. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said the Governor had already 
 he power to remove sheriffs, &c., and he had 
 lot heard that there was any complaint against 
 hat power, which had not been very frequently 
 ixercised. 
 
 Mr. STOW hoped if the amendment prevailed 
 t would not be imposed upon the Governor to 
 iee that the laws were faithfully executed/ His 
 jowers had already been so restricted that he 
 :ould not do much more than look on and wish 
 hat the government might do well. He could 
 ee no good reason for a change of the present 
 Constitution in this respect 
 
 Mr. RHOADES thought we might "leave well 
 enough alone." 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN advocated his 
 amendment. His objection was to giving any one 
 fficer the power to remove another without just 
 reason. He knew of an instance when an officer 
 was threatened with removal, and it was supposed 
 tie would have been. But he had been since fleet- 
 ed to one of the highest offices in the county, 
 which he could not have reached had theGovein- 
 or interposed, and thus created an impression that 
 he had committed some high-handed offence. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON had never fcll any danger 
 from this provision, and he did riot believe any 
 
 ivsrnor of this State would descend to the exer- 
 cise of this power from mere partisan motives. 
 He Knew that in one instance it had been exercis- 
 ed with great propriety. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM suggested that the power of re- 
 moval might be properly transferred to the Su- 
 preme Court. These officers might then be tried 
 by a tribunal very capable of deciding whether 
 they had committed any thing worthy ot removal. 
 He would be tried at home, too ; while U' the Go- 
 vernor was to decide there must be the expense of 
 a journey to the capital 
 
 Mr. MARVIN move to amend by striking out 
 the words "except district attorneys," and also the 
 word "such" before "officer," and insert "in this 
 section mentioned." Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND suggested alterations in the 
 wording of the section, and il was amended, by 
 striking out the "exception of district attorneys," 
 and inserting a clause giving the Governor power 
 to remove all the officers mentioned in the sec- 
 tion Agreed to. 
 
 Mr NICHOLAS moved to transpose the words 
 "and district attorneys" to the second line, before 
 "coroners," to avoid the inference that there 
 might be four of each of the several officers men- 
 tioned in each county. 
 
 SEVERAL GENTLEMEN thought this would not 
 remedy the matter ! 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to strike out "four in each 
 
1008 
 
 comity," and leave that to the Legislature. The 
 motion prcv.iiipii 15 to 31. 
 
 Mr, STOVV nan! he .supposed the objecl !I;M] 
 been in the first instance, to have the sheriff's 
 elected at the same time throughout the State, but 
 by the decision of the courts, when a sheriff was 
 elected to supply a vacancy, he served for the full 
 term of three years, thus breaking up the unifor- 
 mity. He proposed an amendment, providing that 
 that when elected to fill a vacancy, the sheriff 
 should serve only for the unexpired term. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY asked what the effect would 
 be of this amendment. 
 
 Mr. STOW thought there should be a time fixed 
 when'the office of a sheriff should expire, when 
 elected to fall a vacancy. Otherwise the object of 
 electing for three years might be defeated, so far 
 as the intention was to have these elections come 
 round at a general election By the decision of 
 the courts, when a sheriff was elected to supply a 
 vacancy, he served for the full term of three years 
 Now when he is elected to fill a vacancy, it shall 
 be understood to mean only for the unexpired 
 term of the officer whose place he has been elect- 
 ed to fill. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said that no evil had arisen 
 from the law as it now stands. It might, be well 
 to avoid the additional excitement which the elec- 
 tion of these local officers at the same time would 
 be likely to produce. 
 
 Mr. STOW said all these offices ought to expire 
 at the same time; so as to have symmetry and uni- 
 formity in the elections. 
 
 Mr. fORSYTH said that the language in the 
 Constitution as proposed, would cause too many 
 special elections. He would like to secure the 
 object of the gentleman from Erie, if it would not 
 cost too much ; but he thought the counties would 
 thus be too ofien put to the expense of special 
 elections. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that if a vacancy occurs 
 bt a tew months before the expiralion of the 
 sheriff's terra, the deputy sheriff' discharges the 
 duties 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH said that the language was that 
 an election shall be held to choose officers as often 
 as the vacancies -hall happen. Mr. BASCOM 
 thought the board of supervisors ought to appoint, 
 these officers whenever vacancies shall happen. 
 
 Mr. STOWS amendment was negatived ayes 
 30, noes 39. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to insert, after the word 
 "offices," in the seventh line, as follows : 
 
 "No person shall be eligible to the office of sheriff Who 
 shall have been a deputy sheriff, or under sheriff, within 
 one year next preceding the election at which the sheriff 
 is to be chosen." 
 
 Mr. S. referred to the evils which had resulted 
 from the election of deputies to the office of 
 sheriff they procuring their nomination through 
 the influence of the retiring officer, who is again 
 appointed under sheriff. It also degraded the 
 character of the officer, and tended to reduce the 
 responsibilities of the station. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER considered this a pro- 
 position to narrow down the material from 
 which the people were to select their officers. 
 He would rather strike out the clause prohibit- 
 ing the eligibility of sheriff. 
 
 Mr. STOW said this was not a question of prin- 
 
 | ciple, but one of enlightened public policy. 
 
 i Great evils had resulted from having a succession 
 
 of officers, as from sheriff down to deputy sheriff. 
 
 Jt \\ as our right and duty, to protect the public in 
 
 this matter. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that if the principle was 
 right to exclude the sheriff from election, it was 
 right also to apply the same principle to the 
 deputy sheriffs. If it was to be retained, and he 
 was aware of no public opinion which demanded 
 it to be stricken out, he would at least go as far 
 as the gentleman from Erie. 
 
 Mr.VAN SCHOONHOVEN urged that the adop- 
 tion of this* amendment would take away one of 
 the strongest inducements for the deputy sheriff 
 to make himself a good officer. But there was 
 no need of throwing these restrictions at all upon 
 the people, in the choice of their officers, and he 
 hoped it would be voted down. 
 
 Mr. MANN opposed the amendment. It 
 would prevent the people from the opportunity 
 of selecting an experienced and capable officer. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND also opposed the amendment. 
 It was carrying this principle quite too far. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG took the same view of the 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. STOW had no doubt that this proposition 
 was wise and expedient, but he saw that the opin- 
 ion of the Convention was the other way, and he 
 should withdraw it. 
 
 SEVERAL : Oh, no, let's have a vote upon it. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped it would be withdrawn. 
 
 Mr. STOW withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to strike out the 
 restriction as to re-eligibility on the part of the 
 sheriff. 
 
 Mr. DANA opposed the amendment. It was 
 but safe and wise that the sheriff should be oblig- 
 ed to wind up his affairs once in three years. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND asked for the ayes and nays, 
 but they were not ordered. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS: Vote it down. The amend- 
 ment was voted down by acclamation. 
 
 Mr. DANA had consent to record his vote in 
 the affirmative on the question as to fixing the 
 term of office of sheriff' for three years. 
 
 Mr. STETSON had consent to record his vote 
 in the negative on the same question. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER gave notice of a motion to re- 
 consider the vote alluded to. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON moved an addition to the sec- 
 tion providing that in all cases of vacancy by re- 
 moval or death, the board of supervisors shall 
 fill the same for the unexpired term. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN suggested that the amendment 
 should lay on the table for the present, as it 
 would come in better at the end of the session. He 
 had drawn a section which would cover the 
 whole ground, and which he should offer at the 
 end of the article. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON acceded to the suggestion of 
 Mr. WORDEJV. 
 
 The first section was then adopted nem con. 
 
 The second section was then read : 
 ^ 2. District attorney s may be removed from office, at any 
 time within the term for which they shall have been elect- 
 ed, by the county courts of the respective counties of this 
 state giving to such district attorney a copy of the charges 
 against him, and an opportunity of being heard in his de- 
 fence. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that the section had become 
 
1009 
 
 unnecessary by the amendment just made to the 
 first section, and moved to strike it out. This 
 
 The amendment was voted to lay on the table. 
 The 3d section was ih'Mi read as follows: 
 
 , , t l to \ 3 - T UB board of supervisors shall fix the number of sti 
 
 Mr SWACKHAMER offered a section that perintendents of the poor, who shall be chosen by the 
 
 /Mil rl KO electors, not exceeding three in each county; and where 
 clerks or district attorneys should re- more th ' anono shall g e chosen in any cou ' t ' y> they shall 
 
 ceive any fees of office, but that both should re- divide them into classes, so that one shall be chosen each 
 ceive a salary to be fixed by the board of super- year, alter the first election 
 
 visors, the same to be neither increased nor di- jyi r> ANGEL moved to strke out "each" in the 
 minished during their continuance in office. tne third line, and insert "any." Adopted. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER thought a due regard to M r. STETSON inquired if the gentleman was 
 consistency would justify him in believing that so certain as to the necessity of the continuance 
 the section he had offered would pass. They had ot tne o jfi ce O f superintendents of the poor, as to 
 already very properly abolished all fees for judi- p rov jde tor its constitutional guarantee, 
 cial officers except justices of the peace he re- ]y| r ANGEL was willing to have it amended so 
 gretted that they were not included also and he aa , rneer , n j s difficulty. 
 
 could see no reason why the reform should not be M r STETSON suggested it would be better to 
 extended to the class of officers named in the pro- j eaye j t to t [ le legislature. 
 
 posed section. Many of these officers were an- jy ir ANGEL would submit to the will of the 
 nually receiving lees amounting to from five to Convention. There had been great complaint on 
 six thousand dollars for nominal services, while tnis su bject in his county. 
 
 the most able judges got only about half that sum. Mr. SIMMONS urited that the amendment 
 These heavy taxes or charges had become one- shou j j [, e stricken out. He preferred to leave the 
 rous to the people. Besides it was holding out a Inatt er lo the legislature, to be changed as cii- 
 bonus for political corruption. It was about pia- cum stanres might require. 
 
 ces of this kind that so much bitter feeling was | jyj r BERGEN advocated the striking out of the 
 excited. Reduce the pay of public officers to a 
 reasonable and fair compensation, and one of the 
 strongest inducements to political intrigue and 
 dishonesty was removed. He could see no diffi- 
 culty in the way of this reform. The fees should 
 go in the county treasury, and the regulation re- 
 specting the pay of the officers would be perfect- 
 ly safe with the board of supervisors. He agreed 
 
 section. Expense in his own county (Kings) had 
 demonstrated that it would be lar better that it 
 should be left to the legislature, to be subject to 
 such alterations as circumstances might dictate. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL way willing that the section should 
 stricken out. 
 
 It was stricken out nem con. 
 
 The fourth section was then read : 
 
 with gentlemen that the fees ought to be reduced A coucty treasurer shall be annua n y chosen by the 
 
 where they wore too high, but could this be ex- e i ec t or s of each county. He shall hold his office for one 
 pected under th^ present system ? He had sel- year, unless sooner removed. He may be required by the 
 dom known the legislature to act favorably on board of supervisors to give such security as they shall 
 
 v, cii J fl^o approve, and to renew the same from time to time; and 
 matters of this kind. Gentlemen who filled these I ... 
 
 maers o is . default in giving> or renewing such secur jt y , 
 
 offices always found personal and political iriends wnen required, his orlice shall be deemed vacant. The 
 
 there and it was difficult to resist the strong ap- boaid of supervisors of each county shall have power to 
 
 o w.th whom members ' 
 
 Seals made by local officers with whom members 
 id not like lo interfere. He knew that any at- . gjving such treasurer a copy of the charges against him, 
 tempt to reach abuses of this kind was unprofita- an d an opportunity of being heard in his defence; andshall 
 ble business for public men, yet he meant to do have power to fill all vacancies in the office of county 
 his duty regardless of consequences. He hoped treasurer, by appointment, until the next annual election, 
 some limit would be fixed to the amount of mo- jyj r> ANGEL said there had been many com- 
 ney to be drawn from the people for public ser- plaints against the board of supervisors for log 
 vices. rolling in relation to tnis office. The committee 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said there was a section authori- had thought it better therefore to give the election 
 zing the supervisors to fix the salaries of the U the people, 
 district attorney. Mr. KENNEDY asked that the city of New- 
 
 Mr. STRONG sustained the amendment. It York should be excepted. 
 
 was right in principle, and one that the people jyir. ANGEL said there had been so much said 
 would sanction, and he thought this or a similar \ , relation to excepting New York, that we should 
 proposition should be adopted. make aliens of its citizens by and by. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said this subject was provid- Mr HAWLEY after a few remarks proposed a 
 
 ed for in another section. He moved to lay the subs'.itute providing for the election of commis- 
 
 proposition on the table. sioners for loaning money, whether of this State 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER. Oh, no! Meet the or 'of the United States, as well of county trea- 
 
 question fairly let us have no whipping the sur er. 
 
 devil around the stump in this way. I don't like M r . BERGEN hoped that the Convention would 
 it. not endertake to make the office of commissioners 
 
 Mr. ANGEL thought the amendment of the ,,f loans elective. In his county the office went 
 gentleman, would not cover the whole ground. a begging. 
 He thought it would be well for the gentleman ;\lrT S 1'ETSON : Is not the office a State one ? 
 to waive his amendment until the appropriate Mr. BERGKN: Yes. He hoped it would not 
 section was reached. be adopted. 
 
 Mr. STOW appealed to the gentleman to with- y^r. WORDEN s^id the money lobe loaned was 
 draw his proposition until it became more in s tate property, anil he would not take from the 
 order. 1 state the control of these commissioners. He 
 
 101 
 
1010 
 
 thought the whole matter had better be left where 
 it was, to the law and the legislature. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON could see no objection toth 
 election of tht-se officers. In Kings these officers 
 might go a begging, but it did not in other coun- 
 ties. It was one better paid than any oiher office 
 in proportion to the service rendered in many 
 counties. He did not know that, it was necessary 
 to provide fur the election of these officers; but 
 he would prefer to have them appointed by some 
 other power i han the Executive and the Senate. 
 
 Mr WORDEN: Would ir not be an induce 
 ment for the applicant (o go around the county 
 promising loans to every one if elected 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON: He would have but very 
 little to loan. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN' : A very considerable amount. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said that at any rate he 
 would prefer some other mode of appointment 
 than the Governor and senate. 
 
 Mr, RUS>ELL also opposed the amendment. 
 He concurred in the views of Mr. WORDEN. He 
 would be willing as a member of the Legislature 
 to vote for a law authorising the board of supervi- 
 sors to appoint these officers. He thought it alia 
 a matter of legislation. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY explained that his sole object 
 was to reduce the executive patronage. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said that the present Constitu- 
 tion said nothing about this office. It was a mere 
 matter of legislation. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY further urged his amendment. 
 He was willing to modify his amendment so as to 
 provide that the board of supervisors should ap- 
 point this officer. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL insisted that no necessity ex- 
 isted for making this a constitutional provision. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that these officers were 
 obliged to give bonds and the persons elected 
 might not be able to give them. He objected to 
 the proposition. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN further urged his objections to 
 the proposition. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH thought the appointment of 
 these officers should be given directly to the peo- 
 ple. He preferred it to nesting the power either 
 in the supervisors, or in the Governor and Sen- 
 ate. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS hoped the whole section would 
 be stricken out. All he desired, was, that in re- 
 lation to these county officers, the sixth section 
 should be adopted. That provided that all coun- 
 ty officers, and others not provided for in this 
 Constitution, should be elected or appointed as 
 the legislature might direct. This would cover 
 the whole ground. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY said this was not a county offi- 
 cer. Mr. H. further urged his amendment. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN moved the previous question, 
 on the amendment. It was seconded, and the 
 main question ordered. 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY asked for the ayes and nays, 
 on his amendment, and they were ordered. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. Ayes, 13, 
 nays, 48. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN hoped the section would be 
 stricken out as a matter appertaining solely to 
 legislation. In many counties a capable treasu- 
 rer was retained in office for years, under all 
 
 parties. This would require an election every 
 year. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought it desirable to consti- 
 tute a town treasurer in each town, around which 
 strong safe guards sjiould be thrown. He wanted 
 a little of the sub-treasury here. He would cer- 
 tainly not establish any thing in the Constitution 
 which would preclude the establishment of such 
 a system. He might perhaps offer here an amend- 
 ment to carry out his views. 
 
 Mr. ALLEN moved to except the county of 
 New York from the requisition of the fourth 
 section, as to the election of Treasurer. 
 
 Mr ANGEL moved that the Convention ad- 
 journ. Agreed to. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (W2nd day,) Sept, 30. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev Mr BENSON. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND presented a memorial from 
 Brown, Brothers &, Co., of New York, lor an 
 equalization of taxes, and a state board ot asses- 
 sors Referred 
 
 Mr. BRAYTON, by instruction of the commit- 
 tee on revision, &c. moved that that commit- 
 ee be excused from attending the sittings of the 
 Convention. Agreed lo. 
 
 Mr. BAKER called for the question upon the 
 reconsideration of the vote upon the 4th section 
 >f Mr. CAMBRELENG'S report. (The individual 
 iability clause.) He withdrew his motion tem- 
 porarily. 
 
 CLOSING BUSINESS OF THE CONVENTION. 
 
 Mr. JONES said that as they would have to ad 
 journ next Tuesday, t.e would lav the following 
 un the table till half oast 3 P M.," tins dny : 
 
 Resolved, That after Saturday next the Convention will 
 not take up and consider any of the reports ol tiie standing 
 committees ot this body then unacted" on, but will on the 
 ensuing Monday proceed to consider the report of the se- 
 lect committee appointed to revise the several amendments 
 adopted by the Convention. 
 
 CURRENCY AND BANKING. 
 Mr. BAKER moved to take up the motion to re- 
 consider vaiious sections ot the article on curren- 
 cy and banking. The first question was on the 
 adoption of the 4th section. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND'S amendment to the section 
 was then read. (I' has been already given.) 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND hoped the report would not 
 >e disturbed. He called (or the yeas and navs 
 hereon, and 'hey were ordered. 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that perhaps the report ot the 
 l>ecial committee would have an effect to accom- 
 plish the settlement of the questions involved in 
 hese matters, and he therefore withdrew his 
 notion 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELING had hoped that this ques- 
 ion was settled He wished to make the whole 
 tanking system of this state stronger than it is.in 
 any other state, as it ought to be. It wa* lor tiie 
 good of the strong batiks that there should be this 
 bility clause; so as to strengthen the weak 
 >anks. The strong banks did riot care a feather 
 bout this iability. He (Mr. C.) had surrender- 
 ed his own, views of more stringent liability, to 
 ircom nodate the gentleman from Columbia (Mr. 
 (ORDAN) ,<nd otheis in the Convention, to ensure 
 ouciliation, and the passageotthe liability clause 
 n as strong a shape as he could get it. He (rust- 
 ed the good sense of the Convention would pre. 
 
1011 
 
 Tent ttit j in trom re-considei ing this section. He 
 was called awav from the city lor a few days, and 
 should leave this evening, and he desired a dispo 
 sifion nf this matter now as he was anxious to he 
 present when it wns acted upon. His desire was 
 to strengthen (he banks, and that was the interest 
 of the twenty or thirt> gentlemen on thisfloorwho 
 were either banker* or holders of stocks in banks; 
 and the section would not accomplish that pur 
 pose. But he was opposed to a reconsideration, 
 for the question had been decided satisfactorily by 
 the compromise on the amendment of Mr. JOR- 
 DAN. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND followed briefly. 
 
 Mr RUSSELL said that it was best that the 
 subject should be postponed until Monday at 10 
 o'clock, A. M., at which time the gentleman from 
 Suffolk would be present ; and at that lime gentle- 
 men might subnvt the amendment they desired to 
 ee adopted. On that day a full attendance might 
 be expected, and then the final vote would be 
 more sat.stnotory. 
 
 Mr. BAKER consented to postpone the consid. 
 eration of thi* matter till Monday next, at lu 
 o'clock. 
 
 RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved fo discharge the 
 committee of the whole from the consideration ol 
 report No. II, on rights arid privileges, and that ii 
 be taken up next after that on the elective Iran- 
 chise. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said that in a very short time we 
 should h ve M take up the report or. the commit- 
 tee on the revis. -in of the Constitution. We could 
 better spen-1 two or three days in considering the 
 whole body of the Constitution, than separate ar- 
 ticles. He had supposed that this report would 
 be placed in the report of th" revising committee, 
 and when the Conversion came to the considera- 
 tion of that report, this would necessarily have t< 
 be decided upon and amended. He thought it 
 would be well to make no more special orders 
 but spend a few days in discussing the general 
 report. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT moved to lay the resolution on 
 the table. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved to lay all the other orders 
 of business on the table, and that the unfini>hcv 
 business be taken up. Agreed to. 
 
 UNFINISHED BUSINESS. LOCAL OFFICES. 
 
 The question was on the 4th section of the re 
 port of standing committee No. 7. 
 
 Mr. ALLtN withdrew his amendment to the 
 section 
 
 Mr. BASCOM and Mr. MARVIN moved to 
 strike out the section. 
 
 The previous question was called by Mr. Rus- 
 SELL, seconded, ihe main question ordered, arid tin 
 section as stricken out. 
 
 The 5th section was read : 
 
 (j 5. Mayors of cities in the several cities in this state, 
 shall be onosen annually, by the electors entitled to vote 
 for membei s of the Common councils of such cities, re- 
 spectively. 
 
 Mr. CORNKL T . moved to strike out the won* 
 ''annually." I e wished Nev York to elect its 
 mayor biennially. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS wanted the section stricken out. 
 
 All he wanted was to be found in the next sec- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr MORRIS explained. 
 
 The amendment was withdrawn. 
 
 The 5th section was then stricken out. 
 
 The 6th section was then read : 
 
 6. All officers now elective by the people shall con 
 tinueto be elected All county officers whos" election ot 
 appointment is not provided lor by this constitution, shall 
 be elected by the electors of the i^esjiective ounties, or 
 appointed by the boards of supervisors, as the legislature 
 shall direct. All city, town andvillige officers, whose 
 election or appointment is not provided for by this consti 
 tution shall he elected by the electors of suc.hcities, towns 
 and villages, or appointed by such authorities thereof, as 
 the legislature shall designate lor that purpose. All other 
 offic rs, whose election or appointment is i ot provided lor 
 in this constitution, and all officers wnoFe offices may 
 hereafter be created by law. shall be elected by thepeople> 
 or appointed, as the legislature may by law direct. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to amend, by striking 
 out the second sentence from " elected" to and 
 including " direct." This was for the purpose of 
 obviating all question as to who were or were not 
 county officers ; the office of loan commissioner 
 and canal commissioner having been brought in 
 question heretofore. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said this would derange the whole 
 design of the section. Some question had arisen 
 whether loan commissioners were county officers. 
 To obviate all difficulty, he moved to strike out 
 the second sentence as follows : 
 
 " All county officers whose election or appointment is 
 not provided for by this constitution, shall be ehctidby 
 the rl c'ors of the respective counties, or appointed by the 
 boards of supervisors, as the legislature shall direct." 
 
 Mr. ANGEL thought this would produce a de- 
 rangement of the design of the section, 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND explained. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said it would leave a fragment 
 of central appointing power, by striking out the 
 sentence; and he was in favor of retaining it. 
 
 Mr. JONES said if the amendment prevailed, 
 the power might be given by the legislature to 
 the central appointing power the Governor 
 which it was the desire of the committee to a- 
 void. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said it would not do to take 
 out this provision, for it was the best in the sec- 
 tion. St- ike it out, and the Governor might be 
 given power to appoint county treasurers. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to strike out all after the 
 word " elected," in the second line, and down to 
 and including the word " purpose" in the ninth 
 line. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER : That is more objectionable 
 than the other. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS opposed the amendment of Mr, 
 DANA. The section was most admirably drawn ; 
 fhe best drawn in the whole constitution. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said the amendment pro- 
 posed was most ridiculous; if carried, it would 
 give the legislature the power to allow the Gov- 
 ernor to appoint all these local officers. 
 
 Mr. DANA explained. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND said if gentlemen were will- 
 ing to run the risk of the construction of the lan- 
 guage of the section, he would withdraw his a 
 mendment. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to amend by striking out 
 
1012 
 
 the second and third clauses, and inserting the 
 word " and," before " all," in the ninth line. 
 
 Messrs. HARRIS, PATTERSON and DANA, 
 debated this amendment. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved to amend the matter pro- 
 posed to be stricken out, by inserting after the 
 word "constitution," in the third line, the words 
 " including commissioners of loans, and the com- 
 missioners for loaning certain moneys of the U. 
 States, deposited with the state of New-York for 
 safe keeping." 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said the loan commissioners of 
 the various counties were really county officers. 
 This was a very important reformation. Il eleva- 
 ted the board of supervisors, and the article is 
 right as it stands. 
 
 The commissioners for loaning the U. S. depo- 
 site fund are the trustees of the state, the state 
 being responsible to the U. S. for the reimburse- 
 ment of this fund, ought to have the control of it, 
 and should not be tied up by the constitution. 
 The appointment of the commissioners ought to 
 be subject to the direction of the legislature. If 
 the legislature should see fit, they might give the 
 election of the commissioners to the counties. 
 The counties are the borrowers and the state is 
 the lender. If the constitution should put it out 
 of the power of the legislature to designate and 
 appoint its trustees to manage the fund, and give 
 their election to the counties, it would be virtu- 
 ally giving the exclusive control of the fund to 
 the borrowers, a principle that no reasonable man 
 would cherish or encourage. He could well fore- 
 see a state of things that might arise which would 
 jeopardize the fund in given counties, if the legis- 
 lature should be deprived of the control of it; foi 
 these reasons he considered it highly improper to 
 adopt the proposed amendment. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said that these loan commission- 
 ers 'were trustees of the state. He would regre 
 to see the amendment adopted. The section was 
 left in such a shape, that the legislature migh/ 
 direct the election or appointment of the loan 
 commissioners as they might see fit, and this was 
 obviously proper. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question 
 and there was a second, &c. 
 
 Mr. BAKER'S amendment was negatived 
 ayes 29, noes 63. 
 
 Mr. DANA'S motion to strike out the seconc 
 and third sections was negatived ayes 6, noes 85 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to insert after " villages 1 
 the words " or subdivisions thereof." In the cit 
 of New -York it was necessary to elect officers in 
 large districts, which were not wards. Agreed to 
 The section was then agreed to. 
 Mr. LOOMIS gave notice of a motion to re 
 consider this last vote. 
 The 7th section was read : 
 
 {j7. The several officers in this article alluded to, sha! 
 possess the Bowers and perform the duties now provide 
 by law, and such as the legislature shall, hereafter, Iron 
 time to time, fey law, direct. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said there was no necessity to 
 the section. 
 
 Mr. ARCHER rose to obviate the same objec 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN was of the same opinion. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said he had no objection to hav 
 ing the section stricken out. It was stricken ou 
 
 The 8th section was then read : 
 
 ^8. The legislature shall regulate by law, the fees or 
 ompensation of all county, town or other officers, for 
 ariose compensation no other provision is made in this 
 onstitution. 
 
 Mr. S WACKHAMER moved the following as 
 substitute : 
 
 $ 8. The legislature shall establish by law the fees to 
 e paid to and received by the county clerks and district 
 ttorneys ol the several counties of this statefj and such 
 lerks and district attorneys shall account for all fees re- 
 eived by them, to the treasurers of their respectize coun- 
 es. And the county clerk, district attorney and county 
 reasurer in the several counties, shall be compensated 
 or their official services by annual salaries to be fixed by 
 le boards of supervisors of such counties, and paid out of 
 he treasury thereof, which shall not be increased or di- 
 linished during the official term of such county clerk^ 
 istrict attorney or treasurer. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS had prepared a somewhat simi- 
 ar section as a substitute. The mind of the gen- 
 leman from Kings had been running in a direc- 
 ion with his own. He had prepared a section 
 vhich he should have offered if the gentleman 
 rom Kings had not made this motion. 
 Mr. ST . JOHN moved to amend the substitute 
 y striking out all after the words " thereof," and 
 nsertirig " which shall not exceed the amount of 
 ees paid into the treasury by such officers respec- 
 ively." 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND thought that some alteration 
 ,vas required here. 
 
 Mr SIMMONS said that a great principle was 
 nvolved r here, which had been fully discussed for 
 ieveral days on the judiciary question. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said that the clerk ought to be 
 aaid according to the number of folios he record- 
 ed annually. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said it was a very un- 
 pleasant thing to have to differ with those whose 
 judgment he respected; but his proposition in- 
 volved many important matters. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES was in favor of reducing the 
 fees. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND asked a question that was 
 inaudible. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND hoped some principle anal- 
 agous to that of Mr. SWACKHAMER'S, would be 
 adopted here. 
 
 Messrs. RUSSELL, SWACKHAMER, PAT- 
 TERSON, LOOMIS, TOWNSEND, STOW, 
 SIMMONS, RUGGLES, PERKINS, and others 
 explained and debated this proposition. 
 
 The debate was terminated by the previous 
 question. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN'S amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER'S section was also^nega- 
 tived. 
 
 The question being taken on the amendment of 
 Mr. ST. JOHN to the amendment of Mr. SWACK- 
 HAMER, it was rejected. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. S. and it was rejected. 
 
 The eighth section was then read as follows : 
 
 & 8. The legislature shall regulate by Taw, the fees or 
 compensation of all county, toun or other officers, for 
 whose compensation ao other provision is made in this 
 constitution. 
 
 It was rejected. 
 
 The ninth section was then read, as follows : 
 
 &9 The board of supei visors, in each county, shall fix 
 the annual compensation of the district attorney, which 
 shall not be changed, after his election, during the term for 
 which he shall have been chosen. 
 
1013 
 
 Mr. SHAVER moved to amend by striking -out 
 all after the word " attorney," in the second line 
 of the section. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN thought the section had better 
 be stricken out. He thought no such rule should 
 be put in the constitution; it was better that the 
 matter should be left to legislation. 
 
 Mr. SHAVER withdrew his amendment. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND urged that the section should 
 be striken out. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER sustained the motion to strike 
 out as did Mr. SIMMONS and Mr. HARRIS. 
 
 Mr. BOWDISH asked for the previous question, 
 and there was a second, and the main question 
 ordered. 
 
 The ninth section was striken out, ayes 53, 
 nays 3^. 
 
 The tenth section was then read, as follows : 
 
 10. When the duration of any office, is not provided 
 by this constitution, it may be declared by law, and if net 
 BO declared, such office shall be Ivid, during the pleasure 
 of the authority making the appointment. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to strike out all after the 
 words " by law." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought it would be better to 
 leave the section as it stood. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said that in case the people 
 should elect one of these officers his term would 
 be for life under this section. 
 
 The amendment was rejected ayes 33, nays 39. 
 
 The section was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER proposed the following 
 additional section : 
 
 The legislature shall not fix the fees or compensa- 
 tion of attorney d or counsellors at law, and the fees and 
 compenat.on now established are abolished; but provi- 
 sion may be made by law for allowing to the prevailing 
 sarty in any suit as a part of the recovery, an equitable 
 pompensationfor the expenses of prosecuting or defending 
 cuch suit or proceeding. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said there was no constitution- 
 al provision required on this subject and if there 
 was, this amendment belonged to the article on 
 the judiciary. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM sustained the proposition. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said the last clause allow- 
 ed the legislature to fix an equitable compensa- 
 tion, and that was but a regulation of the fees. 
 This would be doing for the lawyers what they 
 would not dare do for themselves. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS also urged that this would be 
 solely for the benefit of the legal profession. 
 
 After some further conversation. 
 
 Me. SWACKHAMER advocated his amend- 
 ment as tending to break down what he now con- 
 sidered to be a monopoly in the legal profession. 
 It was very easy for gent^men to sneer down a 
 provision which was to efte^c their pecuniary in- 
 terests. But he was not to be driven from his 
 position, in opposition to legal monopoly, by any 
 such attempts. He did not wish to make war 
 upon the legal profession his proposition ^did 
 not effect their character and dignity ; but in all 
 his actions here he endeavored to follow the wish- 
 es of the people. 
 
 tor, FORSYTH asked for the previous ques- 
 tion, and there was a second and the main ques- 
 tion ordered. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amend- 
 ment of Mr. SWACKHAMER and there were ayes 
 29 nays 50. 
 
 Mr. LOO. MIS moved to amend the sixth sect- 
 tion by inserting the words " or other county au- 
 thorities," after the word "supervisors," in the 
 fifth line. He explained that, as the section 
 stood, it prevented the sheriff appointing his own 
 deputies. 
 
 Messrs. LOOMIS, RICHMOND, SIMMONS 
 and RUSSELL made brief explanations, and the 
 motion was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said some provision should be 
 made, or the sheriffs to be elected under the pre- 
 sent constitution, but who would not come into 
 office before the first of January, would be ousted 
 by the operation of the new constitution. He 
 moved the reference of a section to the standing 
 committee, from which the article was reported, 
 as follows, with instructions, &c. : 
 
 . All officers mentioned in this article eUcted by the 
 people of the several counties and hi office on the 1st day 
 of January ,1847, shall hold their respective oilices until 
 the 1st day of January, 1850, and the terms of ail officers 
 mentioned in this article, and not elected by the people, 
 in office when this constitution takes effect, or appointed 
 to fill any vacancy in such office, shall expire on the 1st of 
 January, 1848, and the legislature shall provide by law for 
 supplying any vacancies occurring in any office created 
 in this article until they shall be supplied by election or 
 otherwise, and all elections to fill vacancies shall be for 
 the residue of the current term. 
 
 Mr. DODD moved that the article be laid aside 
 and printed. Carried. 
 
 CORPORATIONS. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN from the select committee to 
 whom was referred the report on the subject of 
 corporations made the following report: 
 
 1. Corporations may be formed under general laws; but 
 shall not be created by special act, except for municipal 
 purposes, and in cases where, in the judgment of the le- 
 gislature, the objects of the corporation cannot be attained 
 under general laws. All general laws and special acts 
 passed pursuant to this section, may be altered from time 
 to time or repealed. 
 
 2. Dues from corporations shall be secured by such 
 individual liability of the corporators and other means as 
 may be prescribed by law. 
 
 '3. The term corporations as used in this article shall 
 be construed to include all associations and joint stock 
 companies having any of the powers of corporations not 
 possessed by individuals or partnerships. And all corpo- 
 rations shall have the right 10 sue and shall be subject to 
 be sued in all the courts in like causes as natural persons. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that the following v^as a sub- 
 stitute for the second section proposed by the mi- 
 nority of the committee: 
 
 2. Afier the 1st of January, 1860, every stockholder in 
 any corporation for pecuniary gain or benefit to the stock- 
 holders, except in insurance companies, shall in case such 
 corporation become insolvent, be liable for the unsatisfied 
 liabilities of such corporation, contracted whilst he was a 
 stockholder, to an amount in addition to his stock equal to 
 the nominal amount of such stock. But such liability shall 
 continue as to persons who shall cease to be stockholders 
 for such time and under such restrictions as shall be es- 
 tablished by law. 
 
 Mr. T. moved that the report be printed and 
 inaue a special order for 3 o'clock, P. M. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said that there 
 was already a special order for that hour. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN moved to amend by taking it up 
 after that special order. 
 
 This was agreed to. 
 
 THE ELECTIVE FRANCHISE, &c. 
 
 The Convention then took up the icport on the 
 elective franchise, 
 
 The article having been read through, 
 
1014 
 
 Trie first section was then read for amendment, 
 as follows : 
 
 1. Every white male citizen of the age of twenty-one 
 years, who shall have been a citizen for sixty days, and 
 an inhabitant of this sta;e one y ar next preceding any 
 election. and lor the last six months a residt nt of the oun- 
 ty where he may otter his vae, shall be entitle i to vote at 
 such election, in the election district of which he shall 
 hive been an actual resident during the last preceding 
 sixty ciays, and not elsewhere, for all officers that now are, 
 or hereafter rnay be, elective by the people. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE moved to strike out the word 
 white." 
 
 Mr. BURR said he rose to make a little speech 
 which wa n it intended altogether for Buncombe, 
 for he knew it would be unpopular with his con- 
 stituents. The amendment proposed by the gen- 
 tleman from Madisoi appealed Ifke one of small 
 amount ; but it v\as in fact of vast magnitude 
 The standing coinmili.ee, whose report we had un- 
 der consideration, intended, it seems, that theco 
 lor of a man's skin should be i he lesi of his fit 
 nes to approach tile btlio -box. He dissented 
 from this altogether. Ttie canymg out of this 
 principle was i>eset wi>h difficulties. He did not 
 see how a board of inspectors could, in all cases, 
 determine who -\ere"wti!le male cifzens." It 
 Was true, thai if an An^lo Saxon, especially one 
 who did not labor in I tie sun, should offer his vote, 
 he would at once be recognized as a white man. 
 and if he had the other necessary qualifications. 
 his vote would at once t>e received If the fnll- 
 blooded Amcan'shoiud approach the poll what 
 ever his other qualifications were he would rea- 
 dily be known as a man of color, and his Vote 
 would be promptly rejected But suppose the 
 next man A- ho off',.- red tns vote should be a free 
 native bom cit;z j n, whose father was a white 
 man and his mother a black uoman, and possess 
 ing all other qualifications of a voter; was not he 
 entitled to voie? He should probably be answer 
 ed that" he was not a while man, his * ote must b 
 rt-j-eted ; and*uch he supposed would be the case, 
 judging troin the practice under our ptesent con 
 siiiution, with a man who had but one-sixteenth 
 Ot African Mood, and such there \\vie among us, 
 some of whom had skins as fair as many who bad no 
 t i nt of the African. iSuppose one ot these pei sons 
 should ofter hi.-: vote < ornmon fame said he as 
 tainted with African blood he denied it: ho^ 
 stiould the inspectors determine the question ? were 
 they tod-oa.4 wasdoue in Missouri a lew years since, 
 in the case of a young man who was arrested for the 
 crime of having African blood in his veins, and 
 dragged before a legal tribunal, and who plead not 
 guilty; when in the absence of witnessts the 
 court ordered that several skilful physicians 
 should be summoned to examine the accused, 
 and to determine by their knowledge of physiol- 
 ogy* whether he had African blood in his veins, 
 or not? They pronounced him a white man. 
 He consequently escaped being sold as a slave 
 to pay the expense of the prosecution. Or 
 should the inspectors themselves be permitted 
 to determine the question on the spot? If so, 
 he feared that sometimes the color of a man's 
 political coat might be taken into consideratior 
 as well as the color of his skin. But, it was 
 proposed not only to continue to withhold the 
 right of suffrage from a large class oi native 
 born citizens, who did not now enjoy it, but to 
 
 disfranchise a numerous class who did and for 
 no other crime than that of being " guilty of a 
 skin not colored like our own." The constitu- 
 ion of 1777, made no distinction in the qualifi- 
 cation of voters, founded upon color. It wag 
 eft to the distinguished gentlemen who framed 
 he constitution of 1821, to introduce this objec- 
 ionable feature into our organic law. And with 
 due deference to those gentlemen, he must say 
 that he then believed, and still believed, that 
 hey made a retrograde movement that they 
 ook a step toward the dark ages. And should 
 his Convention in 1846, take still another step 
 n that direction by continuing this odious pro- 
 'ision, and by disfranchising another portion of 
 )ur tax-paying native born citizens ? He trust- 
 ed that a majority of this honorable body were 
 not prepared to perpetrate such an act of injus- 
 ice ; and that no such anti-republican pro- 
 vision as this would appear as a blot upon 
 the fair face of the constitution. But we were 
 old of an inferior race, dwelling in our midst. 
 We talked about " people ot color." What did 
 we mean by that ? Those whose ancestors were 
 Africans, ? He could not concede that su h a 
 distinct race existed among us. There were in 
 dividuals of pure African bloodj but their num- 
 ber was constantly diminishing, and the process 
 of amalgamation which was going on, in a few 
 generations more would whiten them out of ex- 
 istence. It was his opinion that a majority of 
 ;hose who had African blood in their veins, could 
 Doast that they had also a portion of European 
 blood. And of what parentage were these per- 
 sons ? Not more than one of a thousand was the 
 child of a white woman. They were the chil- 
 dren of our " free white male citizens ;" and by 
 our laws the child followed the condition of the 
 father ; and bore his name, regardless of the con- 
 dition or color of the mother. And should we 
 undertake to deny the right of suffrage to the sons 
 of our qualified electors? Mr. B. was acquaint- 
 ed with an individual of the class we proposed 
 to disfranchise. He was years a neighbor. Mr. 
 B. knew him to be a man of intelligence, re- 
 spectability and moral worth. He owned a good 
 farm, and few men managed farming better than 
 he. He paid taxes promptly, and performed all 
 the duties of a good citizen ; but the fact was (and 
 the man was too honest to attempt to conceal it) 
 that one sixteenth, or may be one-eighth, of the 
 blood that coursed his veins was of the prescrib- 
 ed kind. This fact might not be established by 
 his color, his skin to be sure was not white^-nor 
 darker than that of many a sun-burt farmer, who 
 claimed to be Anglo-Saxon; but his hair had 
 something of the African curl. This man had 
 always enjoyed the right of suffrage, and had ex- 
 ercised it much more discreetly than many of his 
 neighbors ; but he had exercised it under that 
 ari-tocratic feature in our constitution a proper- 
 ty qualification. Now, if we incorporated this 
 section into our constitution, unamended we 
 disfranchised this worthy man, and for no other 
 reason than that his hair was a little curly ; and 
 Mr. B. was almost tempted to say not more so 
 than the hair of some of us here. It would be 
 no more unjust no more an act of tyranny to dis- 
 franchise a port. on of us who occupied seats on 
 this floor, because our heads were silvered with 
 
1015 
 
 
 age. Against such monstrous injustice he enter- 
 ed his protest and recorded his name. 
 
 Mi. bllUCti said: In using 10 address (he Con- 
 vention in support of the in >tion I M.iVt' h<<d the 
 honor to submit, I ti .ii myself noi a In I It- embar 
 : fiom I lit' f.K't ihai 1 am smiounded by gen- 
 tlemen of acknowledged talent and ability, who, 
 I h.tve reason to believe, will oppose tbe prim i 
 pies I bave risen t<> advocate. Jiut, convinced, -a* 
 I am, ot ihe truih and justice of the proposition, 
 I am constraint d to offer a nw rerriai Us on this 
 q'ie>tior., which I consider one ol themos-t impoi- 
 tant ihat has been under consideration during the 
 protracted session of ihis Convention. Sir, the 
 natural and -acquired right ol man has long since 
 been theoretically settled in this government, but 
 practically, a well settled and established theory 
 lias been to so great an extent repudiated, that a' 
 this period in our history, there are not a lew 
 among us that seem disposed to contest the theo 
 ry that was established by our fathers at the very 
 commencement ot our National existence. Now. 
 sir, let us no back in the history ot t-he world to 
 the eventful period when " ihe morning star* 
 sans together," and whenDeiry,by His Almighty 
 power said " let there be light." At this time, 
 we are informed "God created man in His own 
 image, and bieathed into his nostrils the breath ol 
 lile," and then it >> as. that man's rights and privi- 
 leges were clearly d. fined, arid from that time t<- 
 the present, they have remained unchanged, an') 
 man entitled to ihe lull possession ot them 
 all, except what he forfeited to his creator 
 by disobedience of divine commands. 
 
 And, sir, in the plan of redemption, Infinite 
 wisiiuin ha-, ma Je no distinction, but on the con 
 trary has -aid " whoever will, let him come and 
 take of the waters ot life freely." That " of one 
 blood all the nations of the Eanh" aie treated, is 
 the declaration of holy writ, and the Declaialion 
 of our Nation's Independence boldly and unequivo- 
 cally pioclauns the same sentiment, (haf- *' ail men 
 are created equal, and endowed by their Creatoi 
 with certain inalienable right-;, among which is 
 life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness/' Sir, 
 theie is no distinction: and whether a man be 
 born in the cold and banen regions of theNmth 
 or the warm and fruitful fields of the South, he is 
 entitled to the same protection, and should t>e en- 
 dowed with the s.nne rights, and have secured t 
 him the same privilege as any other ciiizen ir 
 this land ot " equal rights and equal privileges. 
 Sn, distinction in the exercise ot the elective 
 franchise, on account of color or complexion, is 
 invidious and a;iii-iepublican But such a dis- 
 tinction has existed in this state since 1820, in t 
 great degree, and if the report <>' 'he honoiabh 
 gentleman from Schor arie (Mr. BOUCK) is adopt, 
 ed, will exist in a still greater decree irian ha: 
 ever before been known. And in this conviction 
 sir, I propose toi-x.iunne this report j for wha'evei 
 O'her gt-ntlemen may think of its ineiits, 1 confess 
 there is at least one strange aiid unheard of posi 
 tion, and whether it is by design or accident, 
 can. lot sty. It is sutiicieii! lor the argument tha 
 tin provsion is there. The fiisi s-ction provide 
 that ,ili white male citizens who have attained '!< 
 age ot 2\ years and been one yeat a resident ot thi 
 state, &,c , shall have the right ol the elective 
 franchise. In the last section, he ostensibly pro 
 
 oses to give the same light to persons of color; 
 >ui mark the language, which 1 wi 1 ! read "per- 
 dns of color, possessing the qualifications nam- 
 d in the first section f 'his article," shall have, 
 &.C. Now ,sir, what are the qualifications to which 
 i-tion of his report reters? Why. the first 
 ne is to be a white male citizen. So the persons 
 f color must become, by Some singular transforina- 
 ion, (I will not pretend to say what) white persons 
 f color, to entitle them to the rights ot'cmzens 
 if we give a "strict construction" to this article, 
 and especially if every man is permitted to "con- 
 strue the Constitution as he understands it" and 
 or which he most certainly has high authority.) 
 3ut I am not disposed to cavil on this point, and 
 will allow the speech and not compel the letter 
 o be the experiment of the honorable chairman's 
 ntention. To return then to the principles of 
 the Declaration of Independence, that "all men 
 are created equal." Sir, what is the plain import 
 >f this language ? Does it mean anything? or is 
 t thrown in merely for form, or ornament? Sir, 
 [ believe that the men who " pledged their 
 fortunes and their sacred honors" in support of the 
 principles they promulgated in that instrument 
 meant what they said. We, sir, their descend- 
 ants, profess to adhere to the principles they 
 adopted. But I ask, if this great principle is not 
 most shamefully violated in reference to the col- 
 ored men in this state? How can he be said to 
 be equal, and at the same time deprived of the 
 first right that a freeman possesses? If he was 
 created equal" then I maintain that no circum- 
 stances whatever has destroyed, or in the least im- 
 paired that equality, and if equal in his creation, 
 equal by birth, equal in his attachment to the go- 
 vernment under which he lives, equal in his rea- 
 diness to defend that government, equal in his ob- 
 ligation to yield .obedience to our laws, and above 
 all equal as a moral agent to his Creator, then 
 I ask, in the name of common sense, common 
 honor, and common justice, if he should not be 
 equal in the exercise of the elective franchise ? 
 By depriving him of his right you not only tram- 
 ple in the dust your boasted motto of " equal 
 rights and equal privileges," but you adopt the 
 very principle about which our fathers complain- 
 ed, and which was one of the chief and promi- 
 nent causes of the American revolution: "taxation 
 without representation." Yes, sir, at this period in 
 history, it is proposed to exclude from the ballot 
 box several thousand men, freemen, of like pas- 
 sions with ourselves, who were born on our soil, 
 have grown with the growth and strengthened 
 with the strength of this prosperous republic. 
 Men who fought for the liberties that we now en- 
 joy, and volunteered in the defence of our com- 
 mon country. Yes, sir, in the times that " tried 
 men's souls," these very people who are to be 
 disfranchised, volunteered, and you need but re- 
 fer to the history of the last war'to find that they 
 acted a conspicuous part in that contest. Sir, 
 the lakes of Erie and Champlain were crimsoned 
 with thfir blood and they manned the engines of 
 dentil in common with the white man and essen- 
 tially aided to secure \oiir ulorious victories. But, 
 sir, this is not all. In the very /uca/ity where 
 the demon of slavery has a dwelling, we lind this 
 class of American citizens repelling an invading 
 foe. In this connection, sir, I will read an au- 
 
1016 
 
 thority on this point (which I have no doubt 
 gentlemen on the other side of this question 
 will consider orthodox) which will abundant- 
 ly sustain the assertion I have made. I hold 
 in my hand Niles' Weekly Register, volume 7, 
 and read from page 205. " Proclamation to the 
 free colored inhabitants of Louisiana : Head 
 Quarters, Mobile, Sept. 21, 1814. Through a 
 mistaken policy you have heretofore been de- 
 prived of a participation in the glorious strug- 
 gle for natural rights in which our country 
 is engaged. This no longer shall exist. As 
 sons of Freedom you are now called upon to de- 
 fend our most inestimable blessing. As Ame- 
 rica, your country, looks with confidence to her 
 adopted children for a valorous support. As 
 Fathers, Husbands and Brothers you are sum- 
 moned to rally round the standard of the Ame- 
 rican Eagle, to defend all which is dear in ex- 
 
 istence." This, sir, is an extract from the Pro- 
 clamation of General Andrew Jackson, and if I 
 had time I would read more but I must pass on. 
 To this call these people responded and I will 
 now read another extract from a Proclamation by 
 theGeneral made in December following, in which 
 he informs us that his expectations in reference 
 to them were " more than realized." On page 
 356 of the same book I find in his address to the 
 soldiery this recognition of theiV efficiency and 
 patriotism : " Soldiers ! When on the banks of 
 
 the Mobile I called on you to take up arms in- 
 viting you to partake of the perils and glory of 
 your white fellow citizens, I expected much of 
 vou, for I was not ignorant that you possessed 
 qualities most formidable to an invading enemy. 
 I knew with what fortitude you could endure 
 hunger and thirst and the fatigues of a cam- 
 paign. 1 know well how you loved your na- 
 tive country and that you had as well as our- 
 elves to defend what man holds most dear, his 
 parents, relations, wife, children and property. 
 You have done more than I expected. In ad- 
 dition to the previous qualties I before knew 
 you to possess,! found moreover a noble enthu- 
 siasm which leads to the performance of noble 
 
 deeds." Such, sir, is the language of General 
 Jackson and such is his certificate of the patriot- 
 ism and willingness and ability of these " sons of 
 freedom" to defend the dearest rights of our com- 
 mon country. And, sir, shall it be said that our 
 own native born American citizens, who fought 
 and bled for" their country's freedom shall be de- 
 nied the common rights of freemen ? Tell it not 
 from this hall, publish it not in the streets of our 
 cities lest the daughters of tyranny rejoice and 
 the enemies of republicanism triumph. Sir, 
 there is another consideration to which I desire 
 to call the attention of this Convention. While 
 governments continue to " derive their just pow- 
 ers from the consent of the governed," it becomes 
 the duty and the policy of the government to enact 
 such laws as will not only promote the prosperity 
 and happiness of its subjects but to adopt such prin- 
 ciples as shall induce all who live under its influ- 
 ence to become so identified with it that they 
 shall not and cannot be induced to forsake it and 
 attach themselves to a different one from disaffec- 
 tion and hostility. We should, if we would en- 
 sure the perpetuity of our institutions, strive to 
 attach' rather than alienate our people from the 
 
 government under which they live. But, sir, 
 has this been the course of policy of this govern- 
 ment towards our colored population ? Does our 
 government as a whole grant to this people any 
 inducements whatever to risk their property ? 
 Do we offer any incentives to them again to " pe- 
 ril their lives in defence of our country" if neces- 
 sity should exist ? No, sir, not one. On the 
 contrary in a majority of the states in this Union, 
 in this land of so-called " civil and religious lib- 
 erty," they are not only deprived of the privilege 
 of participating in the choice of their officers, but 
 more than two and a-half millions of these 
 " sons of freedom" (as Gen. Jackson denominated 
 them) are robbed of every right, both of citizens 
 and freemen, ground down by the " iron heel" of 
 oppression and bought and sold " like cattle in 
 the shambles." Well, indeed, did Thomas Jef- 
 ferson exclaim "I tremble for my country when I 
 remember that God is just." I would pursue this 
 part of the subject further if time permitted, but 
 must pass on ; and with one remark in reference 
 to '* the expediency" of this proposition I will re- 
 turn from this digression. It is said that it is 
 " not expedient" to give the " people of color" 
 the right of suffrage because they are not all ca- 
 pable of exercising it. Sir, my only wonder is 
 that they are what they are and I ask the op- 
 posers of the proposition under consideration 
 whether all who now enjoy the elective franchise 
 are capable at all times and do under all cir- 
 cumstances exercise that right as freemen should 
 do? 
 
 England has repudiated and wiped out the in- 
 stitution of slavery. We retain it in its most 
 odious forms. ' In the event of a war between the 
 two most powerful nations of the civilised world, 
 I ask if it would be unreasonable to expect that 
 this class of our citizens might be induced (from 
 motives of self-defence, which is the first law of 
 our nature) to yield to the temptation of the em- 
 isaries of a foreign power as they hold out to 
 them the palm of emancipation ? Sir, that " gov- 
 ernment derives their just power from the consent 
 of the governed" is the plain, simple but positive 
 language of our Declaration of Independence. But 
 I ask where and how did these people give their 
 " consent"? Sir it is all a mockery for you to boast 
 of" equal rights and equal privileges" and deny 
 the exercise of elective franchise to them, while 
 you extend it to those who come to this from a 
 foreign country, after a nominal or real residence 
 of a single year, and in many cases a less period. 
 I am one of those sir, who hold the truth to be 
 self evident that " all men are created equal" and 
 would reduce to practice what we all hold most 
 tenaciously in theory. Now if" colored persons" 
 are men then give them the rights and privileges of 
 men, if they are not men, then make them slaves, 
 chatties and things, and let us have no more of 
 this " opposition to slavery'^ and desire " to be- 
 nefit the colored man" that is so much talked in 
 favor of and voted against. 
 
 I venture the assertion, there is not a delegate 
 on this floor, and scarcely a man in the state, who 
 will not be very ready to say, " I am as much op- 
 posed to slavery in all its forms as any body, and 
 wish it. was not in existence," and yet when a 
 proposition of this kind is placed before them, 
 when we can give the southern states a practical 
 
1017 
 
 and occular demonstration of our opposition to 
 that" peculiar institution," instead of acting anc 
 deciding like men, we are ready to yield our opi- 
 nions to southern dictation, and be as submissive 
 as the devotees of eastern superstition, who bow 
 their heads to the ponderous wheels of Jugger- 
 naut's car, and while it is crushing them to death 
 sing hallelujahs to the god of their idolatry. 
 It is sometimes urged as an argument against this 
 proposition, that if the right of suffrage is extend- 
 ed, all the black population will flock to this 
 state, and the government be in danger. But, sir 
 a moment's observation will teach us that the sup- 
 position is founded in error. In several, of the 
 states, this right has been enj oyed by colored peo- 
 
 fle to the same extent as by white citizens, anc 
 need only refer to the " Old Bay State" as an 
 example of the workings of this principle, a state 
 whose laws are as good, whose government as 
 perfect, and whose people as pure, patriotic and 
 public spirited, as thit of any state in this Union, 
 I apprehend no danger in allowing all to vote. 
 No, sir ; there is not a case that can be instanced 
 in the history of any republic, where the poor ol 
 that government endangered its prosperity. It is 
 the rich and affluent that sow the seeds of mis- 
 chief and most endanger the country, as they be 
 come corrupt and exercise the power that money 
 too often commands. 
 
 I have, Mr. President, given some of the rea- 
 sons that will govern my vote on this question. 
 Entertained honestly, they may be erroneously, 
 I know they are, and I hope and trust that gen- 
 tlemen who differ with me will assign some good 
 and different reason for entertaining an opposite 
 opinion. Our votes are soon to be put on record, 
 and will stand as monuments of our decision on 
 this important question when we shall have been 
 forgotten. Yes, sir, we shall soon be on an 
 equality, when no distinction on account of color 
 can exist, but when the rich and the poor, the 
 bound and the free, shall appear at the same tri- 
 bunal, be judged by the same righteous laws, 
 saved by the same great sacrifice, and partici- 
 pate in the same heavenly inheritance. One 
 word, sir, and I have done. It is said this is an 
 " unpopular side of the question." Well, be it 
 so. For myself, I envy not the man who will 
 oppose it from such a motive. In advocating this 
 
 E reposition, I am governed by what I conceive to 
 e the truth ; and I stand upon the firm founda- 
 tion of justice, and if I fail from that position, I 
 will be buried in the broad folds of the banner of 
 freedom and " equal rights." Yet, sir, I have a 
 proud consciousness that I have discharged my 
 duty, and have contended for the cause of truth, 
 and content myself that although it may be un- 
 successful for a time, yet I know that 
 
 " Truth crushed to the earth will rise again 
 
 The eternal years ol God arehei'sj 
 But error, wounded, writhes in pain, 
 
 And dies amid her worshippers." 
 
 Messrs. BASCOM, WATER BURY and PEN- 
 NIMAN addressed the Convention in favor of hu- 
 man rights and in opposition to distinctions based 
 on shades of complexion. 
 
 Mr. W TAYLOR understood the gentleman 
 from Seneca (Mr. BASCOM) to say that tie was in 
 favor of submitting to the people, as a separate 
 proposition, the question of extending the elective 
 
 102 
 
 franchise to the colored man, and that he would 
 not give any vote which should go to deprive 
 those of the right to vote who, by the provisions 
 of the present constitution, are entitled to that 
 privilege. In these respects he fully agreed with 
 that genileman, and at the proper time, he should 
 propose to amend the section, by adding the pro- 
 vision' of the present constitution, which admitted 
 colored men to vote on a property qualification. 
 In doing this he wished it to be distinctly under- 
 stood, that he repudiated the doctrine that pro- 
 perty constituted, in any sense, a just criterion of 
 qualification for the exercise of the elective fran- 
 chise; but he was unwilling to leave the section, 
 as reported by the committee, without this provi- 
 sion, for the reason, that if the ninth section should 
 be submitted to the people as a separate proposi- 
 tion and should by them be rejected, then all the 
 colored population now entitled to vote would be 
 disfranchised, a result he did not wish to see. 
 As to the property qualification of the present 
 constitution, he would say, that he presumed the 
 tramers of the Constitution did not regard it as 
 constituting a just criterion of qualification, for 
 the doctrine was at that time repudiated as to all 
 others He therefore presumed that it was re- 
 tained as to the colored man for the reason, that 
 color constituted a physical characteristic which 
 distinguished a class of persons who for many rea- 
 sons were not supposed to be well qualified for the 
 exercise 6f this right, and that the Acquisition of 
 property would be regarded as exhibiting that de- 
 gree of improvement, and those habits of indus- 
 try, prudence, and good morals that indicate a bet. 
 ter state of qualification, and that the provision 
 would offer an inducement to them to adopt those 
 habits by which they might acquire the requisite 
 qualification. It was fair to presume that some 
 such reasons influenced the convention in making 
 the distiction which was adopted ; but whether 
 the reasons, whatever they may have been, were 
 well founded or not, or if well founded at the 
 time, whether the period had not arrived for the 
 removal of the distinction, were v quesf ions upon 
 which the public mind was divided; and he was 
 in favor of submitting the question to the people, 
 that they might have an opportunity of deciding 
 it themselves. If the people adopted i', all would 
 acquiesce; if they rejected it, then the question 
 would be settled for a long tiir.e to come, and agi- 
 ation upon the subject would cease. He thought 
 t would be best for all concerned, that the ques- 
 ion should be settled in the manner proposed. 
 Eie could not, however, vote to strike out the word 
 'white" in this section, for if that motion should 
 revail, then we incorporate in the constitution to 
 je submitted to the people, a proposition which 
 would jeopard the whole instrument, or if sub- 
 mitted in a separate article, it must be in connec- 
 ion with other important amendments, all which 
 vould be in danger of rejection by being thus com- 
 >ined. He would add that the committee to which 
 lad been submitted the subject of revising the 
 onstitution and proposing the manner of submis- 
 ion, had bestowed some consideration upon this 
 question, and although they desired, if practicable, 
 o submit the constitution, or the amendments 
 idopted, in separate articles, yet it was apprehen- 
 .eu mat tins would be attended with difficulty, 
 rom the reason, that the rejection of any one ar- 
 
1018 
 
 ticle might disjoint and derange the whole ; still 
 as no action had yet been had upon it, it might be 
 found practicable thus to submit it. It the propo- 
 sition relative to the extension of the elective 
 franchise to the colored population, be submitted 
 as a separate proposition, it would stand upon its 
 own merits in the estimation of the people, and its 
 fate would not involve any other proposition. He 
 hoped, therefore, the convention would adopt the 
 9th section as reported by the committee, and the 
 amendment he had su^tje^ed. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL said the Convention had listened 
 to much declamation, about natural rights of 
 man. "All men are by nature equal, endowed 
 with certain inalienable rights, among which are 
 life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," has 
 been the text of all the preachers to the Conven- 
 tion, and they have all urged the very erroneous 
 conclusion, that this Convention, in determining 
 who should compose the electoral body the 
 only sovereign power and real governors of the 
 state are bound to admit negroes and Indians to 
 an equal participation in this sovereign power 
 and privilege. 
 
 Mr. R. denied that any such conclusion could 
 wisely be drawn from the text. Gentlemen have 
 not correctly stated the question, which the elec- 
 tors, our constituents, have sent us here to deter- 
 mine. The present electors demand of their 
 servants on this floor, that the members of the 
 governing body shall be safely and wisely defined 
 not according to visionary philosophical theo- 
 ries concerning the best natural state of society, 
 but according to the judgment and will of that 
 governing body, whose exponents we are, or 
 ought to be. 
 
 The true question is this. What class of our 
 entire population shall exercise the actual politi- 
 cal power for the whole ? By whose "votes" 
 shall government be conducted, modified, or 
 abolished ? 
 
 This is a a;veat political question, and, upon a 
 wise practicable solution, depends in a high de- 
 gree, the permanency of republican government. 
 There is no one question, upon which represen- 
 tatives should be more strictly bound by the 
 judgment of our present electoral body, regard- 
 less of all theories, which individuals may deem 
 possibly practicable. For one, Mr. R. should be 
 governed by this strict representative responsi- 
 bility, and he was happy that his individual 
 judgment coincided fully with the opinions of his 
 own immediate constituents. 
 
 Gentlemen much mistake their premises, when 
 they contend that "life, liberty, right of proper- 
 ty, and free pursuit of happiness," are political 
 privilege*. These are mere natural social rights, 
 for the protection of which, political government 
 is instituted. What the form of that political 
 government should be, has been the mooted 
 point for ages. By nature, all have the same 
 equal social rights, and for the common protec- 
 tion of these natural rights, all must yield to 
 some subjection to some restrictions for the 
 necessary maintenance of civil government. 
 All must yield something, but the sacrifice should 
 be equitably apportioned upon all. 
 
 In this country the republican form of govern 
 ment is wisely adopted, as the best for any people 
 who have the capabilities necessary to maintain it. 
 
 That form of governing, requires that the sover- 
 ign power should be lodged in a portion not, 
 the whole number of individuals, whose social 
 rights are protected by it. All must be subjects, 
 but a part only can be governing rulers. The 
 governing class act, through their representatives, 
 in all the administration of civil power. The 
 remainder are as truly subjects, as in any other 
 form of government. The votes of the govern- 
 ing class rule all, and no one contends that all 
 should vote. Females, the entire half of society 
 paying a large portion of the taxation to support 
 society, cannot have any voice nor can male 
 persons under 21 years, although they arc called 
 upon to risk life and liberty for common defence 
 f all. There are also classes, besides negroes, 
 lo whom equal political privileges are necessari- 
 ly denied. 
 
 The white foreigner, of our own race and kin- 
 dred, who comes among us with his property, to 
 live and die in our land pays taxes for common 
 protection ; and risks all upon the stability of our 
 institutions, cannot vote until after five years 
 residence, and not then, unless he will take an 
 oath to support our form of government, and to 
 objure all allegiance to every other. What natu- 
 ral justice is there, in compelling any man to 
 swear to support any particular form of govern- 
 ment, before he can ballftie a member of the elec- 
 toral body, when that body has full power to 
 change that government ? Simply, because the 
 white race, who have here subdued nature's sav- 
 age wilderness to the use of civilized man, and to 
 his civil power, have for self preservation, the 
 right to declare and fix the governing body, and 
 to admit new members of it, on such conditions 
 only, as they may deem safe and wise, for the 
 good of all. For this governing body, they have 
 ordained as governors, a certain class, which ex- 
 cludes at least four-fifths of all individuals gov- 
 erned by it. The persons actually voting, at any 
 election in this state, have never exceeded 
 one sixth of the entire population. 
 
 With this governing class, as a close corpora- 
 tion, is deposited the sole pow. r of extending, or 
 limiting its numbers. No one on this floor pro- 
 poses to extend its numbers, except in a single 
 direction and that, in favor of a class, who, for 
 401)0 years have never yet been found capable of 
 sustaining our political institutions, under any 
 circumstances, or in any country. The gentle- 
 man fr<>m Madison tells us, and probably truly, 
 that in the progress of slave emancipation, we 
 shall soon have large annual accessions of this 
 class of people, to the population of our state, 
 and contends that we should yield them equal 
 political privileges, as well as social rights, with 
 the one-fifth of our population now governing 
 us all. 
 
 New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, the only 
 states between us and the slave population of the 
 South, will not yield these privileges, because it 
 would invite among them a dangerous proportion 
 of another race of men. But we are told, that 
 New York should extend such invitation, by an 
 offer of equal participation in the government of 
 five-sixths of our own citizens, who cannot ex- 
 ercise the same privilege, and some gentlemen 
 are pleased to take into their own hands, the 
 thunderbolts of Almighty Power, and to wield its 
 
1019 
 
 <-ance upon all who doubt the justice, or pro- 
 priety, i't' extending the numbers of the electo- 
 ral body, by an i illusion of this new class with 
 it. Mr. II." doubted, whether gentlemen had been 
 legitimately ordained as ministers of Divine ret- 
 ribution. Many suspected that their motives, as 
 well as their mission in this cause, were of the 
 earth, earthly and not of any Divine source, 
 express or implied. 
 
 If we invite ail the blacks, who are to come 
 from the south, by giving them this political pow- 
 er, which they cannot have till they reach this 
 state, the next ten years will bring thousands of 
 them among us, if they have in fact the ambition 
 of ruling with our race, which has been ascribed 
 to them by their special friends on this floor. 
 
 Is such an accession to our population desi- 
 rable ? In the name of the people of St. Law- 
 rence county, I answer, no ! " Our own free 
 race" have there cleared the face of. mother earth 
 of its primeval forests, and have rendered it hab- 
 itable for civilized man. They have there found- 
 ed social institutions adapted to their wants, and 
 have contributed their part in giving wise direc- 
 tion to civil government. They want no co-part- 
 ners to share with their electors, the civil power 
 of governing, who come fresh from an inferior 
 race of men, for ages debased \>y the chains of 
 servitude. St. Lawrence county has no blacks, 
 and never had a slave. Her citizens abhor slave- 
 ry, and are in no wise responsible for its existence 
 elsewhere. But they consider it a mock philan- 
 thropy, which requires them to share their 
 own dear-bought political privileges with any 
 class of intju, who are not intellectually andmor- 
 rally competent to appreciate our intitutions, and 
 faithfully sustain them. They believe the ne- 
 gro race are not so competent that centuries 
 must elapse before that race of men can success- 
 fully maintain free institutions. Gentlemen may 
 denounce such opinions, as prejudice as resist- 
 ance to the moral law of the Almighty, but they 
 do not reflect that the same Creator of both races 
 has himself ordained the mental and moral dif- 
 ferences which characterize b >th. 
 
 The proposition, that the intellectual power of 
 the white race is vastly superior to that of the 
 Mack, is a "fixed fact" not the mere conclusion 
 of piejudice. 
 
 There is now no existing constitutional law, 
 which deprives the negro of any social right, 
 more than the alien foreigner residing with us. 
 If the negro does not stand as high in relations 
 of social intercourse, it is not the fault of our 
 constitution or laws, but the result of free action, 
 of all the members of society, unrestrainred by 
 any written law. Some of the whites do practi- 
 cally carry out equality, by mixing with the 
 blacks in all the reiuti ns of life, marriage not 
 excepted. Yet such is not the taste of a vast ma- 
 jority, and probab y never will be. 
 
 Suppose the thousands of emancipated blacks 
 of the south, are, by an offer of all the privilege* 
 of citizenship, invited to settle in this state, 
 must they not labor for their support ? Will not 
 their labor be brought in direct competition with 
 that of our white laboring classes ? It must of 
 necessity, and one of two things must result. 
 Either, this competition must reduce the price of 
 abor, or our white laborers must make room for 
 
 our new black citizens, by emigrating to other 
 states. In either view, this would be a political 
 evil, and would work great injustice to the white 
 laboring class at least to nine-tenths of all our 
 present voters. The few who live upon the pro- 
 fits of their capital, might not be seriously affect- 
 ed, except by the gradual degeneracy of the elec- 
 toral body, and consequent insecurity of pro- 
 perty. 
 
 Mr. R. hoped, there was no class of men, in 
 this body, or in the state, who advocated negro 
 suffrage, for the intended object of degrading our 
 white laboring classes to the same servile condi- 
 tion of that class in other countries. 
 
 Past experience shows that mixed races, where 
 black and white commingle without prejudice,in- 
 variably deteriorate. Who believes that the 
 bronze mixture, now existing in the Mexican 
 and South American republics, is in any way 
 competent to sustain pure republican govern- 
 ment ? Whilst the intellect, and determined en- 
 ergy of the old Castillian race, is theie lost or 
 but weakly developed, by its mixture with the 
 blacks, the savage himself has also l>st his own 
 native excellence in the union. If Providence 
 had intended such unions for good, the results 
 now exhibited would have been far different. 
 
 The present voting electors of tins si alt-, in Mr. 
 R.'s opinion, were opposed to admitting (he black 
 race to an equality of political privileges. If all 
 blacks, who come among us, be permitted fo vote, 
 the right of eligibility to office could not be denied 
 to them. They must freely compete for labor 
 with all white citizens, who support their (ami- 
 lies by the work of their own hands. They must 
 have the right to sii in our jury boxes, and in our 
 courts as judges. The great body of our white 
 voters feel that self-preservation itself, forbids 
 such an extension of the governing power of 
 this state. And call it what you please, they are 
 righi, 
 
 There are men, of soundest injellect, who have, 
 even now, strong doubts, whether our own wbite 
 race will be able to hand down to remote posteri- 
 ty, the blessings of republican government, un- 
 contaminated by the growing corruptions ever at- 
 tending grea- national wealth, and high civiliza- 
 tjon. It certainly would be dangerous to deterior- 
 ate our own race, in view of these elements of 
 decay. 
 
 Mr. R. fell that the members of this Convention 
 should, upon this question, .simply reflect the po. 
 pular will. All are sent to thi-s floor by the exist- 
 ing body of voters. The composition of that body 
 should not be changed without its own lu<l assent. 
 
 It the majoritv of the Convention doubted 
 whether the present electors ot the" state desired 
 to extend their franchise to the negro race, with- 
 oufjestrictiori, Mr R. would not object to have 
 that question tested by a distinct, separate sub- 
 mission of the proposition ; but he could go no 
 further, to carry out the theories of any man, how- 
 ever philanthropic he may be. 
 
 Mr. STRONU continued the debate in favor of 
 the motion to amend. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND offered a proposition which he 
 believed would enable the Convention to decide 
 upron this question with a great deal of unanimity. 
 There were few gentlemen, he believed, who de- 
 sired to deprive the colored population of their 
 
1020 
 
 natural rights, while there were many who doubt- 
 ed the propriety of ar once admitting them to 
 share with white citizens the benefits or the elec- 
 tive franchise. His proposition was to save to 
 the colored people the same privileges which they 
 now possess, and also to submit to the people the 
 question of allowing them to enjoy the elective 
 franchise. He said he would present them in 
 form in due season. 
 
 The Convention here took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. JONES' resolution was taken up, providing 
 that after Saturday next, the Convention will not 
 take up or consider any article not then acted up- 
 on, &c. (af above). 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS proposed to strike out Sat- 
 urday, and insert Friday. 
 
 Mr. JONES, though in favor of commencing 
 the work of revision at the earliest day, preferred 
 to leave the question on the amendment to the 
 decision of the question. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM thought we had better not tie 
 ourselves up to this as delegates might leave for 
 home on Saturday, in the expectation that noth- 
 ing new was coming up; and yet something might 
 occur making that necessary. 
 
 Mr. LOOiMIS moved a substitute, as follows: 
 
 Resolved, That this Convention will, on Friday morn- 
 ing next, at nin^ o'clock, proceed to the consideration and 
 revision of the articles ot the < onstitution which have 
 been acted upon, and also so much of the existing consti- 
 tution as shall not have been considered beiore then. 
 
 Mr TALLMADGE opposed the resolution 
 saying that whenever the committee on the en- 
 grossment of the articles should make their re- 
 port, we could then take up the articles for revi- 
 sion, and keep the matter within our control. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said we should not have to wait 
 for that committee to report. They would be 
 ready as soon as we should. Again, if we were 
 to prolong the session a month, we should be just 
 where we were now, with articles before us that 
 we could not act upon, except in a hurry, and we 
 had better not touch them unless we could have 
 time for it. We could not pass on all these re- 
 ports, and do our work well ; and hence we had 
 better leave the old constitution to stand in such 
 cases, than to kick over what we had done well, 
 by something badly done. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG was opposed to any reso- 
 lution which would preclude taking up any of 
 these reports that were behind saying that it 
 might compel us to adjourn, leaving our work 
 half done. 
 
 Mr. JONES said his object was to secure time 
 enough for a revision of what had been done, that 
 it might be well done. He did not believe we 
 should sit beyond Tuesday ; and that would leave 
 the people little time enough to consider the ar- 
 ticles we should submit. The Convention of 
 1821 gave the people some seventy days to over- 
 look their work. We should give them but 
 twenty-seven, if we adjourned on Tuesday. He 
 had thought that we might revise our work on 
 Monday and Tuesday ; but the gentleman from 
 Herkimer thought otherwise. He was inclined 
 to think we Bright want more time, and perhaps 
 it would be well tu begin the work on Saturtiay. 
 But he disliked so much of that gentleman's pro- 
 
 position as contemplated taking up other and new 
 articles, after we had gone on with the revision. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN opposed the reso- 
 lution, and ran over several articles which were 
 yet behind, and which it was all important to act 
 upon among them the article concerning estates 
 in land. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL had no doubt a resolution would 
 pass unanimously to instruct the engrossing com- 
 mittee to bring in that article precisely as it stood. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said he had no 
 assurance of that. He went on to urge that if we 
 proceeded to dispose of these articles as they 
 came up, we could dispose of them by Tuesday, 
 and if the session was extended until Wednesday 
 evening, that would be better than to break off 
 abruptly, and leave these important subjects un- 
 touched. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN remarked that as we had so 
 little time, we had better do something. He sug- 
 gested Saturday as the day when we should pro- 
 ceed to the revision. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to lay the whole 
 subject on the table which was done. 
 
 CORPORATIONS. 
 
 The Convention took up the report of Mr. 
 TILDEN, in relation to corporations, other than 
 municipal, &c. 
 
 The first section wag then read (Given above.) 
 
 Mr. TILDEN briefly explained the section and 
 urged its adoption as a compromise, although it 
 did not entirely meet his views. 
 
 The- section was adopted nem. con. 
 
 The second section was then read. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that on this section,* the 
 committee did not agree. The minority (himself 
 and Mr. LOOMIS) had proposed a substitute 
 (given above) for it. Mr. T. explained that this 
 was in effect the same proposition, adopted in the 
 banking report, on this subject. 
 
 Mr. O'COISOR replied in opposition to the mo- 
 tion of Mr. TILDEN. Mr. O'C. referred to the 
 intense difficulties which attended an attempt to 
 lay down a fixed rule on this subject from rhe va- 
 riety of subjects involved, and the diversity of the 
 character ot the corporations. He thought the 
 section brought forward by the committee recom- 
 mended the latter course to be pursued. There 
 were corporations for instance, which required un- 
 limited liability, while there would be others to 
 whom it would be unjust if attached to them. 
 He would allow, therefore, the legislature to look 
 at the various classes of corporations in imposing 
 this liability. 
 
 Mr. SIJVliVlONS enquired if the gentleman sup- 
 posed this liability could attach to the corporations 
 already existing; 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that it would operate on 
 no corporation heretofore or hereafter created. 
 It applied only to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS referred to the section of Mr. 
 TIL.DEN. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR had nothing to do with that 
 Mr. O'C. further explained his section. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. MORRIS, 
 LOOM1S, SIMMONS, AYRAULT, MARVIN 
 and TOWNSEND.. when 
 
 Mr. MANN moved the previous question, and 
 there was a second. 
 
1021 
 
 The amendment of Mr. AYRAULT was agreed 
 to ayes 58, noes 27. 
 
 The substitute for the second section was re- 
 jected, as follows : 
 
 AYKS Messrs. Bowdish, Brundage, Burr, R.. Campbell, 
 jr., Chamberlain, Clyde, Coftely, Cornell, Cuddeback, Da- 
 na, Danl'orth, Greene, Hart, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, Hunt, A. 
 Huntington, Jones, Kornun, Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, Me 
 Neil, McNiU, Miixwell, Morris, Nellis, Powers, President, 
 St. John. Sanford, Sheldon, Stephens, Swackhamer, Tai't, 
 W. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, Tuthill, Waterbury, Yaw- 
 ger. Youngs 4-2 
 
 NAYS Messrs Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bergen Bray ton, Bruce, Bull, 
 Candee. Cook, Dodd, Dorlon, Dubois.Graham. Harris, Har- 
 rison, Hawley, Jordan, Kcnible, Kirkland, Marvin, Miller, 
 Nicholas, Ni'coll, (('Conor, Parish, Patterson, Penniman, 
 Perkins, Rhoades, Shaver, Simmons E. Spencer, W H. 
 Spencer. Stanton, Stow, Strong, Tallmadge, J.J.Taylor, 
 Van Schoonhoven, Ward, Warren, Willard, Wood, Wor- 
 den, A. Wright, W. B. Wright, Young 51. 
 
 The section as reported was then adopted, ayes 
 70, noes 25. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved the follow- 
 ing as the third section : 
 
 (j 3. All special laws passed by virtue of the provisions 
 of the first section of this article, and granting a power to 
 take private property lor public use, without the consent 
 of the owner thereof, or gra; ting a franchise or right ot 
 way over the public highways or public streams of this 
 state, shall be passed by a vote of at least two-thirds of the 
 members elected to each branch of the legislature. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said that it would never do to 
 pass this in that way. There might be other rea- 
 sons that would arise to render it necessary to 
 take property, besides taking it for a ditch or a 
 railroad. In time of war, for instance, and in 
 other cases. There had never been so restrictive 
 a provision as this in the constitution, and he 
 trusted that it wo.'.ld not be adopted now. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved an amendment but 
 finally withdrew it. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN thought there 
 would be no difficulty in getting a two-third vote 
 in cases where there was an evident public neces- 
 sity for any measure 
 
 Cries of "question question." 
 
 Mr PATTERSON rose to speak, but said there 
 was so much confusion in the House that it was 
 best to take the vote on Mr. S.'s section. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved to amend by inserting, "a 
 majority of all elected instead of two-thirds." He 
 was convinced that the two-third vote enabled 
 crafty men to force through more improper laws 
 than any other system. 
 
 Mr. DANA could not see how 86 men could be 
 more easily corrupted than 65. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said, very easily. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE moved the previous question. It 
 was seconded. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS'S amendment was agreed to: 
 Ayes 54, noes 27, 81. 
 
 The section as amended was then passed. Ayes 
 49, no. 
 
 The 3d (now the 4th) section was then read. 
 
 ^3 The term corporations as used in this article shall 
 be construed to include all associations and joint-stock 
 compHnies hereafter formed having any of the powers or 
 privileges : of corporations not possesse I by individuals or 
 partnecfchipt. And all corporations shall have the right 
 to ue and shfill be subject to be sued in all courts in like 
 cases as natural persons 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to amend by insert- 
 ing in the 5th line, after the word *' corporations" 
 the words " now existing or hereafter to be crea- 
 
 ted." He did this at the request of several gen- 
 tlemen who had doubts as to the effect of the pre- 
 sent language of the section. 
 
 This was objected to as unnecessary The term 
 " all corporations" covered the whole ground. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS hoped it would not pass ; the 
 section now says that it includes all corporations, 
 and it's no use to encumber it with unnecessary 
 verbiage. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said there was a misprint in the 
 section. The word " hereafter " ought not to be 
 inserted. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON objected to this section, be- 
 cause it took away the right heretofore enjoyed 
 of sueing a corporation or bank in any part of the 
 state. As for instance, if the Chautauque co. 
 Bank failed to provide for the redemption of their 
 notes in this, the company might be sued in the 
 couniy court here. 
 
 With this opinion, there was some question 
 raised, upon the legal point, by several gentle- 
 men. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. KIRKLAND was nega- 
 tived 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON objected to the latter clause, 
 saying that if gentlemen supposed it placed indi- 
 viduals and corporations on the same footing, 
 they were mistaken. It, in fact, took away the 
 right heretofore enjoyed of sueing a corporation 
 or bank in any part of the state. 
 
 This position was questioned by Mr. KIRK- 
 LAND and others. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. KIRKLAND was nega- 
 tived. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN opposed the adoption of the 
 section as unnecessary. It amounted to this, that 
 a corporation was a corporation. He moved to 
 strike out the section. 
 
 Mr. STRONG said if they could make the wa- 
 ter of Patroon's creek run up hill to Rochester, 
 he would move to give corporations extraordina- 
 ry powers. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND'S amendment was lost. Ayes 
 20, noes not counted. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN: There could not be a corpora- 
 tion enjoying powers tha f could not be enjoyed by 
 individuals. He opposed the adoption ot the sec- 
 tion as unnecessary in the constitution. Never, 
 before the arguing ot the General Banking Law 
 question, was there an idea entertained that a cor- 
 poration could be created with powers which 
 could riot be enjoyed by individuals. He moved 
 to strike out the section. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND: On the abuses of these com 
 panies barfiig fences. He hoped the motion 
 would not prevail. He knew of many instances 
 in which the agents of railroad companies had 
 set fire to fences and woodlands by their careless, 
 ness, and the owners of the property failed of ob- 
 taining redress. There should be a provision by 
 which these corporations might be sued lor dama- 
 ges. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said he had known instances in 
 which some miserable fellow had a just claim 
 against a. corporation for sixpence, who extolled 
 filly dollars, upon tin- threat of suing in a Court 
 of Recotd, and then throwing lhat or a giealer 
 amount of costs upon them. He was not opposed 
 to a provision in a law by which these corpora- 
 tions should be made sueable in all cases like in- 
 
1022 
 
 dividuals, but he did not regard it as necessary to 
 the conshtu'ion. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said there was a difficulty about 
 this section. 
 
 Messrs. TILDEN, O'CONOR, STOW and 
 WATERBTJRY continued the desultory conver- 
 sation. 
 
 Mr. \SWACKHAMER moved the previous 
 question. 
 
 It was seconded. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN withdrew his motion to strike 
 out. 
 
 The ayes nays were ordered on the first part 
 of the 4th section down to "partnerships," and 
 resulted, ayes 56, noes 10. 
 
 The question was now taken on the. last para- 
 graph, and it was carried. Ayes 57, noes 9. 
 
 The entire section was then agreed to, in form. 
 
 Mr. JONES *hen gave notice of a motion to re- 
 consider the 2d section. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMERgave notice to reconsider 
 the vote, with the section he offered this morn- 
 ing relative to attorney's fees, and it was ordered 
 to be printed. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH offered the following as an ad- 
 ditional section : 
 
 The legislature may grant to corporations the right to 
 take private property for purposes beneficial to the pub- 
 lic, upon making just compensation therefor. But such 
 compensation shall not be reduced by any allowance for 
 prospective benefits. 
 
 Lost, without a division. 
 
 Mr. WARD moved that the report be laid aside 
 and printed. Agreed to. 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, (103d day,) Oct. 1. 
 
 No clergyman present. 
 
 EQUALIZATION OF TAXATION. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND from the select committee 
 on the subject of the equalization of state taxa- 
 tion, reported the following section : 
 
 ^ 1. The legislature shall at its next session after the 
 adoption of tins constitution, provide by law lor t>quali- 
 zing the valua'iun of property for the purpose of taxation 
 as made by the assessors and supervisors in the respective 
 counties of ihis state: so that each county shall con- 
 triuute its proportionate share to the support of govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Laid on the table, and ordered to be printed. 
 VACANCIES IN OFFICE. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL from the 7th standing committee, 
 to whom was referred the section yesterday offer- 
 ed by Mr. WORDEN, reported the following : 
 
 . The legislature shall provide by law for filling va- 
 cancies in office, and in case of elective officers, no per- 
 sons appointed to fill a vacancy shall hold his office by 
 vinue of such appoimment longer than until the com- 
 mencement ot the political year next succeeding the first 
 annual election after th^ happening of the vacancy. 
 
 Referred to the committee of revision. 
 
 EDUCATION AND COMMON SCHOOLS. 
 Mr. BOWDISH offered the following : 
 Resolved, That the Convention will proceed to the con- 
 
 sideiation of the icport of committee No. 12, on education, 
 
 to-moriow morning at ten o'clock. 
 
 Mr. BOWDISH said he was well aware of the 
 impatience of the Convention but as he had not. 
 before trespassed upon their time, he had a claim 
 to their indulgence while he offered some of the 
 reasons that had influenced him in presenting 
 
 this resolution. He however, deemed it due to 
 himself to say that he was unaccustomed to pub- 
 lic speaking. For the first time in his life he 
 now attempted to address a public body nor 
 when he came here, did he intend to take any 
 part in the debates but had determined rather, 
 to profit by the wisdom of others, than to under- 
 take to enlighten them with any views of his 
 own. He should not now depart from that de- 
 termination, but from the conviction that he 
 owed a duty to mankind, to posterity and his 
 country. He availed himself therefore, of this 
 opportunity to urge the establishment, by consti- 
 tutional provision, of some principle which 
 should be the basis of a system of free schools, 
 similar to that proposed by the committee on ed- 
 ucation, which he proposed to make a special 
 order. He trusted he need not impress upon the 
 Convention the importance of the subject mat- 
 ter of his resolution relating as it did, to the 
 fundamental principle upon which yested our 
 only hope for the perpetuity of free irtlfttutions 
 to our system of popular education the sys- 
 tem which was to mould our laws through the 
 influence it would exert upon the morals, habits 
 and intelligence of the masses. 
 
 The formation of those opinions which create 
 our laws, is dependent on a judicious education ; 
 and as those laws form the morals and habits of 
 the people, is it not proper that all questions 
 touching so important a matter should be pub- 
 licly discussed, maturely deliberated on, and 
 only settled when the public mind has fully sat- 
 isfied itself of the intrinsic merits of the system 
 that may be proposed ? I utterly repudiate, as 
 unworthy of an American freeman, the idea that 
 we should not open wide the field for the encour- 
 agement of science and literature, by establish- 
 ing such a system of schools as will afford an op- 
 portunity for all classes to become educated, em- 
 bracing the high and low, the rich and poor. It 
 is true sir, our present system has done much 
 towards the consummation of this noble object, 
 yet the system is very imperfect, and in my judg- 
 ment, will never be complete until this most de- 
 sirable end is attained. I hold that the welfare 
 of a free government depends upon the virtue 
 and intelligence of its subjects, the character 
 and habits of its members. If this be true, we 
 should make no distinctions, but the banner of 
 education should be proudly unfurled, 
 
 ' Like the wild winds free," 
 
 allowing all alike to enjoy its advantages. The 
 child of the woodland cottage, and that of the 
 princely mansion, should, if possible, be educat- 
 ed together, that all might have an equal oppor- 
 tunity of rising to eminence and fame. It is a 
 cardinal principle of republicanism that there is 
 no royal road to distinction : it is held to be ac- 
 cessible to all. None are born to command or to 
 obey. In the order of nature, God has made no 
 distinctions, he has not provided for the poor a 
 coarser earth, a thinner air, or a paler sky. The 
 same glorious sun pours down its golden flood as 
 cheerily upon the poor man's home as upon the 
 rich man's palace. The cottager's children have 
 as keen a sense of all the freshness, verdure, fra- 
 grance, melody and beauty of luxuriant nature, 
 as the pale sons of the wealthy. Neither has he 
 
1023 
 
 stamped the imprint of a baser birth upon the 
 man's child, than that of the rich, by which 
 it knows with a certainty that its lot is to crawl, 
 not climb. Mind is immortal. It is imperial. 
 It bears no mark of high or low, of rich or poor; 
 it heeds no bounds of time or place, of rank or 
 circumstances. It requires but light. It only 
 needs that liberty to glide along in its undisturb- 
 ed course, that the rill does to now into the rivu- 
 let, and the rivulet into the sea. Should every 
 little streamlet tarry at its fountain head, where 
 would be the river and the ocean which is now 
 bearing commerce and wealth upon its never 
 ending tide ? So will it be with the human mind, 
 If properly cultivated, it will march on undis. 
 turbed until it reaches the summit of intellectu- 
 al glory. But how many a youth of the finest in- 
 tellect, has lived and died useless and unnknow- 
 merely because scanty poverty invaded the 
 threshhold of early life, preventing the "bud" 
 from bursting into an open flower. Poverty ob- 
 scured it from public gaze, and the youth when 
 thus abandoned becomes a victim to a licentious 
 world, left to live and die unknown, unhonored, 
 and unsung, as though man were decreed by the 
 fiat of nature and her God, to be a slave to igno- 
 rance from his cradle to his tomb. 
 
 Once establish the free school system, and 
 knowledge, which may well be termed the "in- 
 clined plane" of power, and "lever of liberty/' 
 will no longer be monopolized by the wealthy 
 and favored few. Those who have heretofore 
 been unable to struggle along, can then enter the 
 arena of learning, bold aspirants to reach the 
 temple of Pytho, and finally arrive at the goal of 
 intellectual glory, acquiring an education that 
 will add other nobler and more essential elements 
 to the happiness, prosperity and welfare of our 
 common country, than the renown consequent on 
 military.achievments and territorial acquisition, 
 though it is true that such renown may add new 
 splendor to the name of the republic if justly 
 and equitably won. But intelligence, which is 
 the consequent result of a good education, is that 
 which alone will be found to be the true constit- 
 uent of that auspicious power that will preserve 
 and perpetuate the liberties which were solemnly 
 declared to be ours by the declaration of freedom, 
 to which is appended the names of the immortal 
 Jufterson, Franklin, Hancock, and others, who 
 formed a bright constellation of true hearted 
 Americans, of a character almost beyond human 
 perfection. Like these men, let us likewise 
 make our vows at freedom's altar, and weigh well 
 our relative duties to the millions of freemen 
 who are to follow us. For one moment let us 
 visit the sage of Monticello, the immortal author 
 of that sacred instrument, the philosopher Ben- 
 jamin Franklin, and John Hancock, whose bold 
 signature, as yonder exhibited, [pointing to the 
 painting of the signers of the .Declaration of In- 
 dependence,] was characteristic of his gigantic 
 and dauntless mind. Although these worthies 
 have gone to their tombs, let us not ask the ques- 
 tion 
 
 " Has earth no more such seed within her breast," 
 
 but be it ours to cultivate it to the same ripe 
 maturity, in fancy let us visit those honored 
 graves whose flowery turf is still humid with a 
 
 nation's tears, and there behold the stupenduous 
 purchase-price of liberty, then turning our 
 gaze upon our country's triumphant banner, 
 swear, 
 
 " With her to live, lor her to die," 
 loudly protesting against ignorance in every form, 
 s it is the parent of anaichy, contusion and un- 
 justifiable revolutions. Literature, apparently, is 
 yet in the bud, as many of the piesent generation 
 scarcely urideistand the alphabet, by which lo 
 give an expression to tfce thoughts of their differ- 
 ent order ->t genius. Their best conceptions are 
 lost in the obscurities of their native rubbish. To 
 remedy as far as possible this startling evil, let us 
 establish free schools, making them liberal tem- 
 ples of learning crucibles, in which the edifices 
 of the mind may be formed. As the sculptor 
 forms the marble, giving it form and beauty, so 
 may the intellect, be burnished and brought forth 
 to astonish, to d zzle, and to improve. 
 
 I hold, sir, that I he diffusion of intelligence and 
 the principles of liberty, should be co.extensive, 
 as one will be very likely to perish without the 
 other. They are twin stars in a firmament of 
 their own, and in case either should be extinguish- 
 ed, or partially eclipsed, that firmament would 
 exhibit but a dim and sickly light. Then should 
 we not provide ample means for ihe education of 
 all our children ? If we should not, might we not 
 as well trust the lamb to the safe-keeping of the 
 wolf, or powder to the devouring flames, or the 
 salvation of the human soul to the Sun of the Mor- 
 ning? If we desire to perpetuate our freedom that 
 it may not be buried amid the'ruins of its own in- 
 stitutions, let us guard our liberties by establish- 
 ing a s>stem of schools, whose altar fires can ne- 
 ver be extinguished, thereby preventing the mid- 
 night darkness of ignorance from spreading over 
 "the land of the brave and the home of the free," 
 whose only abode is beneath the concave ot Co- 
 lumbia's heaven. 
 
 Like religion, free schools will send forth their 
 apostles, who will render your constitution and 
 your country a greater service than all the more 
 splendid deeds of man could confer. You will 
 give her I he living elements of durable and future 
 glory, a wall of pure hearts around her, the Imht 
 of great souls to direct her at freedom's alt,.r, 
 where all will be able to judge correctly of their 
 relative duties to the constitution and their coun- 
 try. 
 
 It has been well said, sir, by an eminent indi- 
 vidual, that education and intelligence are the 
 surest guarantees for the prosperity of nations as 
 well as individuals. It this be true, sir, then let 
 me ask every memoer of this Convention to make 
 the inquiry of himself whether we should not, at 
 ihis advanced period of time, establish such a sys- 
 tem of schools as shall afford such advantages to 
 the poor man's children, as shall elevate them to 
 the same common level with those of ihe rich, so 
 far as education, adapted to the wants of a tree 
 people shall tend to make them so, that our pos- 
 terity may not have it lo say that the brilliant sun 
 of the 19th century has dawned upon the world 
 in vain, and that at this era every individual ap- 
 peared to have lived for himself, regardless of the 
 mental or moral improvement of his fellow men ? 
 
 Here I cannot help hut dweil upon the enor- 
 mous evils of ignorance the deep reproach with 
 
1024 
 
 which it covers us the dangers that it threatens, 
 and the burdens thnt it entails. It is not neces- 
 sary to speak of the appalling amount or pauper- 
 ism and crime that it has caused, of prisons peo- 
 pled, and lands impoverished. I pause not, sir, 
 to describe the numberless evils and nameless 
 sufferings it has produced, I would only say that 
 it has been estimated that there are over 2,000,000 
 of free white chilnren in the United States who 
 are growing up apparently perfectly ignorant of 
 all that ennobles, refines, arid exalts the human 
 mind; and it is a lamentable fact, that there are 
 over half a million of free white citizens in the 
 United States, above the age of twenty years, who 
 can neither read nor write. With a knowledge 
 of these facts before me, for one, I cannot but re. 
 gard our school system as being very defective 
 and imperfect, unuited to the age, very far be- 
 hind the spirit of the times, and in a great mea- 
 sure opposed to the genius of our republican in- 
 stitutions. Then shall we waste our time in fra- 
 ming apologies for our ignorance, instead of adop 
 ting means to remove the evil at once and for- 
 ever? 
 
 It is said, sir, that JEolus locked up the winds 
 in the mountain caverns, and that the sun stood 
 sull at the bidding of Joshua. But I cannot be- 
 lieve that we have any of their legal representa- 
 tives in this Convention, as I believe that a large 
 majority of the members of this body are in favor 
 of this very important measure of reform, which if 
 adopted by us and submitted to the people for 
 their approval and ratification, will I apprehend, 
 meet with feeble opposition, and indeed all at- 
 tempts to obstruct it, will only be like an attempt 
 to chain the lion to his lair by throwing cobwebs 
 about his mane. For one I desire to see the means 
 of acquiring an education made free to all as the 
 air that surrounds us and of which we breathe 
 so extended and expanded as to afford an opportu- 
 nity tor the poor man's child, without restriction, 
 to inhale its purifying and salutary influence. 
 
 In a republican form of government like ours, 
 I doubt not that all are in lavor of extending ihe 
 blessings of education without limit, from the 
 pines of our northern highlands to the palm trees 
 of our southern frontier, believing as I do, that 
 the true glory of a nation does not consist in the 
 extent of iis territory, but in the majesty of its in- 
 tellect, not in the sound of populous cities spring- 
 lug up in the wilderness, but in the virtue and in 
 teiligenceof tbe people, which are the surest 
 gnaranty of their purity and good morals. 
 
 I am well aware, sir, it may be urged by many 
 that the legislature have full power to pass laws 
 that would carry out all that ha* been proposed by 
 the committee. ThisViay all be very true. But 
 from the experience of past legislation, it is quite 
 evident that the fluctuating and vascillatmg no- 
 tions of men are such, that those who fill our leg- 
 islative halls are continually repealing, modifying 
 and altering all our laws. Scarcely a legislature 
 convenes but what our school law undergoes some 
 sort of modification or revision ; it has no kind ol 
 permanence or stability, consequently it will be 
 continually liable to change. We may have free 
 schools to-day, but to-morrow's sun may usher in 
 some new s\stem, or new theory. These contin- 
 ual changes are nearly as hostile to the spiiit 
 enius and management of our school institutions, 
 
 as the deadly simoons that sweep over the desert 
 sands of Arabi.i are to those who traverse the re- 
 gions of that country. 
 
 Again, under the present system, the law has 
 become so voluminous and so complex that it is 
 a source of trouble and confusion, frequently end- 
 ing in serious litigation and expense. It is instru- 
 mental of much mischief in almost every district 
 in the state, growing out of the fact that the strict 
 letter of the law has not been clearly understood 
 or closely obeyed, from a want of knowledge or a 
 clear understanding of its effects and operation by 
 those who are called upon to execute or adminis- 
 ter it. Sir, since my recollection, the school law, 
 and the rules for its regulation, have swelled up 
 from a small pamphlet to a large volume, and 
 have now become so voluminous and so complex 
 that it requires a good lawyer to understand them, 
 and about as much reading as is necessary to ad- 
 mit an individual to practice at the bar in the 
 higher courts. But if you would establish a well 
 digested system of free schools upon some firm 
 and inflexible basis, under suitable legislative reg- 
 ulation, stripped of many of the forms and much 
 of the required paraphernalia that is necessary in 
 carrying out our present system, much of which, 
 in my judgment, is entirely superfluous, and in- 
 stead thereof, establish a permanent system, so 
 organized and so arranged, that its existence may 
 not be as liable to change as the winds of heaven 
 or the notions of men, you would obviate and re- 
 move many of the difficulties that now seem to 
 exist, and the great object of education would not 
 be so much misunderstood or be so grossly neg- 
 lected. The great fundamental principles of 
 American liberty, of equal laws and equal rights, 
 should be discussed and taught every child in our 
 land. The first great principles imbibed by the 
 youth of our country should be those of liberty 
 and equality. All our literature should partake 
 of a republican tone, instead of that of the ene- 
 mies of freedom. Here might I not say that Eng- 
 land performs the mighty labor, to a very great 
 extent, of thinking and writing for this vast na- 
 tion of freemen. To remedy, as far as possible, this 
 startling defect, I deem it of vital importance to 
 the rising generation that we establish a system 
 of schools upon some firm, fixed and irrevocable 
 basis, to be so regulated in their organization by 
 legislative enactment as to make them good 
 schools, because it is in these, our primary schools, 
 that the child obtains first impressions, there lay- 
 ing the foundation for its future usefulness. In 
 all good works the beginning is one half; then 
 should riot the fountain at which the mind first 
 drinks and becomes refreshed and strengthened 
 for its onward career of usefulness and glory, be 
 pure and abundant ? Knowledge should be im- 
 parted to every child; we should spread wide the 
 ample field to those young buds of being in whom 
 our country's hope soon must rest. It must be 
 conceded by all that the blessings of education, 
 the equality of companionship and benevolence 
 extended towards the youth of our country, will 
 infuse the principles of permanence into our na- 
 tional existence. 
 
 With us, in part, the responsibility rests. Shall 
 we neglect to mature a plan to be submitted to the 
 people for the/r approval that is to determine in 
 a great measure, whether virtue and intelligence 
 
/025 
 
 shall illume every dwelling, or whether the clouds 
 mrance shall enshroud the glory of our land, 
 scattering from its wings destruction and desola- 
 tion. The issue seems fail ly made up. It is wheth- 
 er we are willing that ignorance should fill our 
 dwellings with violence and crime, or patriotism 
 and peace shall become the stability of our times, 
 and continue through all after generations. Let 
 us not be blinded by our love of dollars and cents 
 so far as to neglect the young and rising genera- 
 tion ; leaving the bright intellect of many of those 
 who are to come after us, and who must necessa- 
 rily rise up and fill our places, to grope their way 
 in darkness, without the means of education being 
 afforded them. 
 
 Man is born to die, and so are nations ; and do 
 we expect to escape its universal doom in a world 
 strewed with the mouldering wreck of empires ? 
 If we do, sir, we must enlighten and elevate man, 
 which can only be done by well -educating the 
 youth of our country, thereby enabling them to 
 soar above the obsolete forms, hoary prejudices, 
 political abominations, and national absurdities 
 derived from past ages. Sir, it is ignorance, the 
 lack of education, that seems to bind man's freest 
 thoughts and palsy his boldest exertions. It is ig- 
 norance that forms the fatal virus, that rules man 
 as it were with a rod of iron. It is ignorance that 
 forms the most stupendous obstacles in the way 
 of our national progress. It is ignorance upon 
 which is based our blind veneration for ancient 
 usages and long established customs. Man wor- 
 ships at this pernicious shrine, paying homage 
 and adoration to all those antiquated notions that 
 have been handed down from one generation to 
 another, rushing rapidly onward, pursuing the 
 phantoms of the past, because they are crimsoned 
 o'er with the hoar of ages, thereby sealing the lips 
 of millions, and consigning the laboi ing classes 
 to inferiority, and defying the mediations of rea- 
 son and common sense ; and which will continue 
 in a great measure to be so through countless 
 ages, unless the people spurn these ignoble fet- 
 ters, and rise up in the majesty of their omnipo- 
 tence and lay the foundation or crowning stone of 
 glory and joy. 
 
 If we should withhold the means of education 
 from our children, what stability could we hope 
 for in our present form of government? Our 
 legislature might revise, enlarge and amend our 
 penal code, but would it not be cruel mockery 
 for us to place these statutes beyond the reach of 
 our childien, that they inigtu nui be able lo read 
 them, by withholding a knowledge of the charac- 
 ters which compose them? It' so, then let us af- 
 lord every child the means of acquiring a good 
 common education , which alone will prevent inure 
 crime than the election of a fallows as high as 
 Human's. For one, sir, I hope that the resolution 
 may be adopted with a view ol considering the re- 
 port, that we may propose some system to be sub- 
 mitted to the people lor their approval the final 
 adoption of which will be the carrying out of one 
 of the great fundamental principles lor which our 
 patriotic tat hers so strongly contended, viz : "Me 
 pursuit of Happines and Virtue" They by 
 their unwearied exertions laid the foundations 
 broad and deep. With Herculean vi^ot they rais- 
 ed those ponderous columns of Freedom, that 
 seem to tower so sublimely in their unparalleled 
 
 103 
 
 grandeur. They completed enough to demonstrate 
 the possibility of the task, and ensure the perfec- 
 tion of the design, when death overtook them, 
 leaving it for us, or some more patriotic genera- 
 tion to finish. Then shall we neglect this golden 
 opportunity of establishing upon some firm, fixed 
 and irrevocable basis, such a system of schools as 
 shall afford an opportunity for every child to be- 
 come educated, or shall we continue our reverence 
 for all those old systems under which man has li- 
 ved for ages, and which are nearly ready to tum- 
 ble to pieces from the weight of their own rotten- 
 ness, many of which deserve long since to have 
 been consigned to merited oblivion ? Or shall we 
 enlist all our energies to perfect the glorious woik 
 our fathers began, thereby rendering out emanci- 
 pation perfect and complete? 
 
 When that happy day shall come, who will not 
 be proud to exclaim in the fullness of his soul, 
 "I too am a citizen ot the Empire State! the land 
 of Intelligence, of Virtue, of Freedom, and good 
 morals." Sir, should we propose to submit the 
 Free School question to the people, and should 
 they adopt it, I would ask what member of this 
 Convention would not be proud that he had aided 
 in perfecting this glorious design? When popu- 
 lar sentiment shall have climbed the dizzy heights, 
 making melody in the mountain air, and proudly 
 reverberating throughout the rich and fertile val- 
 lies, the towns and cities of this great and flourish- 
 ing state, and when all the other bright constel- 
 lations in this proud confederacy shall have caught 
 the glad tidings, borne upon every breeze, freight- 
 ed with rich lessons emanating from this glorious 
 system, thereby influencing them to strive to emu. 
 late our glorious example. Will not the free 
 school system then hare become like some 
 mighty cataract. Nay, sir, will it not be the "po- 
 pular Niagara of America," and like that noble 
 work of Nature and of Nature's God stand 
 through all after time, a proud and enduring 
 monument of the wisdom end liberality of the age 
 in which it had its origin ? 
 
 The free school system once established through- 
 out the new world, the story of its virtuous lame 
 will be written in the highest vault of popular ex- 
 pression, its eulogy will be heard in the deep 
 tned voice of posterity, whose loud accents of 
 app r oval will go rolling along the shores of time, 
 until it is engulphed in the mighty vortex of 
 eternity. 
 
 Mr. BAKER stated that he was as anxious as 
 any man to consider deliberately all the matters 
 that had been brought before the Convention ; but 
 believing that we could much better consider by 
 continuing at work, he moved to lay the resolu- 
 tion on the table. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY. I would suggest that the 
 article on education should be placed after the 
 report of committee No. 14. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL hoped Mr. BOWDISH'S motion 
 would pass. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN. Then we shall 
 never reach it. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY. Then place it after the re- 
 port of committee No. 4. 
 
 Mr. BOWDISH. I am willing to assent to 
 that. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL. Mr. President, I call for the 
 ayes and noes on laying this motion on the table. 
 
1026 
 
 The ayes and noes were ordered, and resulted, 
 Ayes 34. Noes 60. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said if this subject were taken 
 up there would not be time to dispose of it. 
 Upon the first great principle that every child in 
 this state should receive an education in our com- 
 mon schools, all were agreed. It was necessa- 
 ry, however at this point that we should leave 
 the details unsettled. For the purpose of dispo- 
 sing of this section, he moved to amend by strik- 
 ing out the resolution and inserting as follows : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on revision be instructed 
 to incorporate the following section in the Constitution, 
 in such form that it may be submitted separately to the 
 
 bt). vine legislature shall, at its first session, after the 
 adoption of this Constitution, and from time to time there- 
 after, as shall be necessary, provide by law for the free 
 education and instruction of every child between the ages 
 ot faur and sixteen years, whose parents, guardians or 
 employers shall be residents of the state, in the common 
 schools, now established, or which shall hereafter be es- 
 tablished therein -, the expense ol such education and in- 
 struction, after applying the public funds as provided by 
 law shall be defrayed by taxation, at the same time, and 
 in the same manner, as may be provided by law for the 
 liquidation of tow n and county charges. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said if this was to be a res- 
 olution of instruction it required some amend- 
 ment. He saw no reason to educate children 
 from the ages of four to sixteen free, and to limit 
 it to that age. He thought the period should be 
 extended so that all who had not had the oppor- 
 tunity to obtain an education early in life, might 
 be able to obtain it. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY objected that the provision of 
 Mr. WORDEN was not a proper amendment to the 
 resolution of Mr. BOWDISH. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL did not want to see one section 
 adopted without the others being considered. 
 He did not wish the U. S." Deposite Fund to be 
 left for legislative scrambling. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS thought the means of bearing 
 the expense of the education ot these children, 
 should be left to the legislature. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said there was no 
 subject before the Convention of equal importance 
 with this. If it were to be taken up, he hoped it 
 would be in the regular form, as the report of a 
 committee, and discussed in its order. We could 
 take it up to-morrow, and dispose of it, and he 
 hoped that course would be pursued. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to amend the proposition 
 of Mr. WORDEN by striking out all after the word 
 " therein." 
 
 Mr. WORDEN assented. 
 
 Mr RUSSELL said that children were as nu. 
 merous in log houses as they were in marble pa- 
 laces. He prererredia'general state tax to defray 
 the expenses of education. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN would not have offered the sec. 
 tion if he had thought there was a disposition se- 
 riously to consider this report in Convention. 
 
 Mr- RUSSELL contended that the poor should 
 be educated, not at the expense of their localities, 
 but of the entire state, every part of which was 
 interested in their culture. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE moved the previous question, but 
 he was induced to withdraw it, that 
 
 Mr WORDEN might make some explanations. 
 On concluding he renewed the motion for the 
 previous question, and there was a second, &c. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR remarked that it was desirable 
 
 to strike out the limitation to those children 
 '* whose parents, guardians, or employer shall be 
 residents of the state." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS asked if any provision was made 
 for children who had no parents or guardian ? 
 
 Wr. WORDEN' s amendment was rejected 39 
 to 46 and the resolution of Mr. BOWDISH agreed 
 to, 64 to 29. 
 
 FEUDAL TENURES. &C. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE offered the following, to lay on 
 the table until to-morrow : 
 
 Resolved, That the select committee to whom is refer- 
 red the revision of the several articles adopted by the Con- 
 vention, be instructed to report the following as an addi- 
 tional article :/ 
 
 ^ 1. All feudal tenures of every description, with all their 
 ncidents, are abolished. 
 
 ^ 2. No lease or grant of agricultural land for a longer 
 period than ten years, hereafter made, in which shall be 
 reserved any rent or service of any kind, shall be valid. 
 
 3. All covenants or conditions in any grant of land 
 whereby the right of the grantee to alien is in any manner 
 restrained, and all lines, quarter sales and other charges 
 upon alienation reserved, in every grant of land hereafter 
 to be made, shall be void. 
 
 LEGISLATIVE SALARIES. 
 
 Mr. MANN ottered a resolution ot instruction 
 to the committee ot revision, to report an arti- 
 cle requiring the legislature to fix by law, the per 
 diem allowance or compensation of all cificers of 
 the legislature. He wished to prevent the dis- 
 graceful provisions which the supply bills had for 
 some years exhibited. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN regarded this as small business, 
 and not at all belonging to the Convention. He 
 also defended the legislature and its finance com- 
 mittees, against the imputations of the gentleman 
 from New York. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE wished to express his dis- 
 sent to all these motions, to refer articles and sec- 
 tions to the engrossing committee. He moved to 
 lay the resolution on the table. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN threw back any imputations 
 that might have been thrown upon the Legisla- 
 ture in relation to these supply bills. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE wished to enter his protest 
 against the principle of allowing this engrossing 
 committee to be instructed to repoit any aitieles 
 that have not been discussed in the Convention. 
 Gentlemen under the previous question were con- 
 stantly in a lalse position, and voting against their 
 own wishes. 
 
 EXPIRATION OF OFFICE. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved that the committee of 
 revision be instructed to insert some provision in 
 the new constitution by which the expiration of 
 the term of those offices which are by it abolish- 
 ed, should be designated. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to amend so as to direct 
 the committee to report a suitable provision on 
 Monday morning at 9 o'clock. [Oh no, say Sat- 
 urday.] He would yield to the wishes of those 
 around him and say Saturday morning at 9 o'clock. 
 
 The amendment was agreed to, and the resolu- 
 tion as amended, adapted. 
 
 ELECTIVE FRANCHISE. 
 
 On motion of Mr. KENNEDY, the Convention 
 resumed the report of the committee on the elec- 
 tive franchise the pending amendment being to 
 strike out in the first section, the word "white." 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY said, the absence of the chair- 
 man of committee No. 4, (Mr. BOUCK,) and two 
 
1027 
 
 others of its most intelligent members, had de- 
 volved on him, in part, the duty of explaining the 
 views which influenced them in presenting the 
 portion of the section under debate. This ques- 
 tion had been very fully examined by the commit- 
 tee. Opportunity had been afforded to those who 
 felt an interest in the subject,to lay their views and 
 wishes before it. Among others a delegation from 
 the colored population had appeared, and the same 
 privilege was extended to them. After many 
 meetings, and laborious application, the opinion 
 prevailed in the committee, nearly unanimously, 
 adverse to property qualification for an elector, in 
 any case. The mere possession of property was 
 deemed to be no test of political merit ; that the 
 colored man, whether possessed of property or 
 not of a certain kind, and to a certain extent, was 
 entitled to natural rights ; and that if political 
 privileges were extended to his race, they should 
 not depend on his possessions, but on his man- 
 hood. The possession of property by the white 
 man was no infallible evidence of either intelli- 
 gence or patriotism. One dependent for 1 his daily 
 bread on his daily toil, might surpass him in both. 
 And there was no good reason for believing that 
 color would make an essential difference in these 
 particulars. This article, therefore, was design- 
 edly put in the form in which it was, for the pur- 
 pose of excluding from our fundamental compact, 
 the last vestige of an odious, cruel and unjust con 
 dition for holding office, and exercising suffrage. 
 If the colored man was worthy of being admitted 
 to these privileges, it should be on a principle of 
 perfect equality. He should be either excluded 
 altogether from a participation in government, on 
 account of his race ; or admitted into full connex- 
 ion for th- sake of his humanity. The honorable 
 and learned gentleman who occupied the floor 
 yesterday, seemed determined to confound rights 
 with privileges, in discussing this question ; and 
 boldly claimed the elective franchise as a right. 
 In these views he couid not concur. Rights were 
 emanations from nature ; born with him to whom 
 they belonged, and alienable only for offences a- 
 gainst society and this under all forms of govern- 
 ment. But on the contrary, privileges were ac- 
 quired, conventionally, or by grant of the gov- 
 erning power. When long possessed, they were 
 sometimes denominated civil rights, but they ne- 
 ver became naturalized. In considering a ques- 
 tion of this kind, full of abstractions, it was, to 
 say the least, disingenuous to endeavor to confound 
 natural rights with civil franchises. It would not 
 be disputed that civil rights or privileges were 
 the constant subject of mutation, while natural, 
 rights were inalienable. Should it be conceded 
 that the elective suffrage is not a franchise, but a 
 natural right, to whom would it belong? and who 
 would be entitled to its exercise ? Not male citi- 
 zens of natural age and diverse colors only. No, 
 sir ; natural rights recognized no more distinctions 
 in age. or sex, than in color or condition. Nor did 
 they stop with our women and children : but fairly 
 and honestly carried out, would extend the exer- 
 cise to every human being who might happen to 
 be on our soil on an election day, in the same 
 manner in which they would be entitled to their 
 personal liberty or the enjoyment of life. Gen- 
 tlemen had made themselves merry in ridiculing 
 the result to which their own arguments natu- 
 
 rally conducted them ; but declaim as they might 
 against the results of their own reasoning, and 
 ridicule as they must the extreme to which they 
 were led by such perversion, if suffrage was a na- 
 tural right, women and children were among your 
 electors. But let gentlemen speculate as they 
 might on false premises, their ingenuous fallacies 
 were transparent even to themselves. The elec- 
 tive suffrage was a privilege, a franchise, a civil 
 right, and not a natural right ; and the governing 
 power might limit, restrict or extend the exer- 
 ise of it in such manner as to it might seem wise 
 and proper ; and was in duty bound to confer it 
 only on such as could in the exercise of it, best 
 subserve the objects of good government. Those 
 persons having the control and responsibilities of 
 government resting upon them, had the sole right 
 to determine, in their discretion, who should par- 
 ticipate with them in its exercise. Any deviation 
 from this rule was revolutionary. Civilized soci- 
 ety throughout the world had, with a few excep- 
 ted cases, connected with the right of descent, 
 limited political privilege, to mature age and the 
 male sex. By this restriction, the governing 
 power in this state was in the possession of about 
 one-fifth of the population. If this sovereignty 
 was too much concentrated for the general wel- 
 fare if a necessity had arisen for its enlargement, 
 let it not be by amalgamating with us a people 
 who were foreigners in our midst. The females 
 of mature age, of our own race, were entitled to 
 a preference, when we were prepared to make 
 such an extension. The gentleman from Orleans, 
 (Mr. PENNIMAN,) in derogation of his own argu- 
 ment in favor of the natural right of suffrage, re- 
 marked that delicacy should prevent females from 
 uniting in the exercise cf political power. But 
 what sort of delicacy was that which, refusing 
 political privilege to- the mothers of our being, 
 the wives of our bosoms, the children of our love, 
 and the sisters of our blood, would squander it 
 upon those whom nature had marked as a distinct 
 race ; and who were merely an excrescence upon 
 our society ! In supporting this preference he 
 did not design to be understood as advocating any 
 farther extension of the elective franchise; but, 
 in case an extension were made, he would con- 
 sider it matter for gratulation, should it still re- 
 main in the possession of our own flesh and blood. 
 But what was the gross proposal submitted by the 
 gentleman from Madison (Mr. BRUCE)ror our con- 
 sideration ? Nothing less than to permit all who 
 bore the name and likeness of man to participate 
 in our inestimable privileges ! To permit the 
 Ethiopian race to become an important portion of 
 the governing power of the state ! To allow that 
 race, the farthest removed from us in sympathy 
 and relationship of all into which the human fam- 
 ily was divided, to become a participant in gov- 
 erning, not themselves, but us ! Nature revolted 
 at the proposal. 
 
 We v\ere informed by physiologists, that the hu- 
 man family was divided inlo five races, all of 
 which had distinctive characteristics. Those two 
 which had the fewes: points of resemblance were 
 the Caucasian and Ethiopian. Indeed in their pu- 
 rirv, they were almost antipodes to each other, as 
 we'll in habits and manners, as in complexion and 
 physical organization. These rariations were not 
 made by man, nor by human government. It was 
 
1028 
 
 the work of nature, and was not without its ob- 
 ject. Let not government dare to counteract and 
 overthrow the distinctions and divisions that na 
 ture designed should exist ; as was evident from 
 the strong manner in which they had been mark- 
 ed. In supporting these views (said Mr. K.) I 
 disclaim all hostility of feeling towards the Afri- 
 can race. My earliest sympathies were awakened 
 in their behalf, and my young blood prompted me 
 to indiscretion for their sake. True, they had 
 evidently been much improved in transportation 
 from the'ir native wilds, where they were but lit- 
 tle superior to the mimic man, their co-inhabi- 
 tant. But, sir, they surrounded me in bondage, 
 and slavery seemed to me as too severe a penalty 
 for ignorance and degradation. At a period when 
 the real friends of these unfortunate people could 
 fearlessly and effectively act in their behalf, al- 
 though yet young, I was industriously employed 
 in promoting, by my i'eeble efforts, their success. 
 In a slave state," with slave owners, and slave dri- 
 Ters, and slaves surrounding us, year alter >ear, 
 we brought forward our candidate for the legis- 
 lature on the hustings and in the maiket place. 
 There was no concealment in our movements no 
 underground railroad operation but openly and 
 frankly avowed our purpose to be, ihat no more 
 slaves should be born in the slate. Sir, we went 
 on prosperously; all classes listened to us atten- 
 tively; and our vote annually increased but sir, 
 at the very moment when the hearts of the slave, 
 holders were melting down in feelings of good will 
 to the cause, and they were counselling one with 
 another on the best means ol ridding therrseives 
 ot that which they were convinced was a blight 
 to their landa pitiless ruffian torced his way into 
 our midst, ur^ed on by fanaticism that was blind 
 to all the means by which alone he could obtain 
 success; and ruthlessly endeavored to compel the 
 slaveholder to do that which he was about to do 
 of his own fiee will. The menacing attitude, and 
 boisterous tongue of this intruder into a domestic 
 circle, had its usual effect. The slaveholder pla- 
 ced himself in a position for defence. Sir, the se- 
 quel is soon told on that day anti-slavery was left 
 dead upon the field; and the loosened fetters ot 
 the slave were replaced with double rivets. The 
 scenes which soon after occurred at Southampton, 
 tell the rest. Allow me now to add, that the de- 
 struction of the active efforts of anti slavery in the 
 south, is the only victory I have ever known abo 
 litionism to gain. But, the spirit of anti-slavery 
 is immortal, and awaits only the prostration of its 
 adversary to arise in majesty and power. Anti- 
 slavery efforts, by a gradual process, will yet suc- 
 ceed ; while abolitionism can only incite the own- 
 er to increased vigilance, and compel a more vig- 
 orous discipline over the slave. To say that I am 
 free from prejudice, would be to conceal my feel- 
 ings. 1 confess myself under its operation ; pos- 
 sibly equally as much as gentlemen appear to be 
 under the domination of a fanaticism that would 
 reverse the order of natural sympathies; 
 that would take to their bed and board, the 
 extreme link of humanity, simply because it is 
 the extreme link of humanity. He would also 
 confess that his feelings prompted him, when ma- 
 king concession of privilege, to begin by confer- 
 ring it on those of his own race who had been ex- 
 empt ; and then to the next akin. On that princi- 
 
 ple the Ethiopian is the one which would receive 
 his favor last, while providing for the mixture of 
 races. The circumstance of thet-e people having 
 been born on our land, did not give them claims of 
 country. They were brought here under compul- 
 sion ; and remained from ar necessity that is al- 
 most paramount ; uncontrolled either by them- 
 selves or others. But he did not feel inclined to 
 oin with those who took special pride in under- 
 rating their mental capacity. Observation had 
 convinced him, as it convinced Mr. Jefferson 
 that they were capable of being improved, 
 ar above their ordinary standard. He could in- 
 stance cases of great industry and close applica- 
 tion, on the part of pure specimens of the race, in 
 obtaining such literary improvement as accidental- 
 ly catne within their reach, and which would have 
 been creditable to men of any color. Their ag- 
 gregate moral character was a more ftt subject for 
 the painful consideration of the philanthropist. 
 He said it grieved him, when on coming to reside 
 at the north, he found how much deeper in degra- 
 da'ion the free colored man of New York stood, 
 than the same class did any where in the south ; 
 that they had higher aspirations than their breth- 
 ren in the south, with less merit to sustain them. 
 He would not now allude to this point had not 
 the colored delegation, in their ignorance of sta- 
 tistics, invited investigation and comparison. 
 
 It had been an ordinary observation that there 
 was more vice among colored people than whites, 
 in proportion to the population ot each respective- 
 ly. And this was disputed by the delegation; ad- 
 mitting at the same time, that convictions for mi- 
 nor offences might be proportionably greater than 
 with the whites. Which was accounted for thus: 
 "When a colored man commits an offence, there 
 are a thousand chances to one he is taken up, be. 
 cause he has not the opportunity of exercising po- 
 litical retaliation." He would lay before the Con- 
 vention, statements obtained entirely from sources 
 that might be deemed official, and on which reli. 
 ance might be placed. First of Blackwell's Is- 
 land, where minor offences only are punished, but 
 are of two classes. By the report of the prison 
 association of May, 1846. p. 86, it would be seen 
 that the visifing committee on Nov. 8th, 1845, 
 found the following inmates: 
 Court Convicts, whites 348 
 
 colored 96 
 
 Police convicts, whites 838 
 
 colored &8 
 
 1186 154 
 
 No persons were imprisoned at this penitentiary 
 except for offences committed in the city of New 
 York. The population of which, by the census 
 taken the preceding August, was as follows: 
 
 Whites, 358,310 
 
 Colored, 12,913 
 
 Or one person colored to twenty-seven and three- 
 quarters white, [1 to 27,755.] From which the 
 following deductions resulted: White peniten- 
 tiary convicts were about as one to three hundred 
 and two of the white population, [1 to 302,112.] 
 Colored penitentiary convicts were about one to 
 eighty-three and three quarters of the colored po- 
 pulation, [1 to 83,827.] Or, the relative piopor- 
 tion of penitentiary convictions, was more than 
 three and a half times greater in the colored than 
 
1029 
 
 the white population of the county of New York 
 [3,603 to I.] So that even in the class of minor 
 offences, the summary convictions of the colored 
 people were much less in por portion) than those 
 by a court and jury, which were for offences of a 
 higher degree. But the returns he had obtained 
 from the several state pi isotis would show that 
 these people had attained a greater eminence ir 
 the higher crimes, for which alone they were 
 punishable in these institutions. He directed his 
 enquiries to the condition of each prison, at the 
 nearest possible period to the 1st August 1845, the 
 date ot the last census: 
 SIHG-SING PRISON : 
 
 White. Colored. Indian 
 
 Sept. 30th, 1845 Convicts, 630 228 
 
 AUBURN PRISON : 
 
 Jan. 1st, 1S46 Convicts, 603 80 
 
 CLINTON PRISON : 
 
 Aug. 1st, 1S46 Convicts, 175 21 2 
 
 1408 329 2 
 
 The census of 1845 gave the following popula- 
 tion of each race in the state: 
 
 Total white persons, 2,660,149 
 
 Do. colored persons, 44,446 
 
 Do. Indian (including Schoolcrafts 
 
 enumeration,) 6,179 
 
 These results, when retiuced to an unit, produce 
 the following pVoportions: 
 
 There is one white state prison convict to about 
 one thousand eight hundred and eighteen ot the 
 white population [1 to 1,818,287 ] 
 
 There is one colored slate prison convict to 
 about one hundred and thirty-four and three-quar- 
 ters of the colored population, [1 to 134,759 ] 
 
 Or, the relative proportion ot infamous crime is 
 nearlv thirteen and a half times as great in the co- 
 lored population as in the white, [13,489 to 1 ] 
 
 This result far exceeded any thing he had anti- 
 cipated when he entered on the ex minafion of it; 
 and contained evidence of a criminal disposition 
 in the race that he had never before rightly ap. 
 preciated. And there was nothing to sustain the 
 slightest suspicion that injustice had been done to 
 any one of those incarcerated, notwithstanding the 
 bold insinuation contained in the high reaching 
 .aspirations of one of the colored delegates before 
 the committee, when'he asked whether any co- 
 lored man had ever been tried in this country by 
 a colored jury ? And answered, "No! they are 
 tried by white jurors, and sentenced by white 
 judges.'* He would say but a word or two more 
 relative to those whom he desired to treat with 
 all kindness. It had been denied on the part of 
 those who were the special advocates for extend, 
 ing to them our political privileges, that it was 
 not intended to take them into social union. 
 The delegates who appeared before the committee, 
 did not so understand the matter. They freely 
 discussed the means whereby existing prejudices 
 could be overcome; and avowed that, should you 
 "enfranchise the man of color, you will have no 
 more prejudices against him ;" and in the strongest 
 terms denounced their "exclusion from proper 
 places in churches, in colleges," &c. And not to 
 be misunderstood on this point, one of them, a 
 pure specimen of the race, asserted in the most 
 emphatic manner, that" God'* design is to anni- 
 hilate the distinctions of caste, by bringing them 
 together in this country." Their views oil this 
 subject could not be mistaken. 
 
 He would return to the motion under conside- 
 ration, to strike out the word " white" in the first 
 line, and protest against its adoption. The form 
 in which the committee propose to submit the 
 question to the people is plain and simple : one 
 section providing for the continuance of the fran- 
 chise to the " white male citizen," &c. and a sep- 
 arate one, to be voted on separately, for extend- 
 ing to " colored male citizens" the same privile- 
 ges on the same conditions, and with the same 
 advantage of eligibility for office, with the white 
 citizen. If the judgment of the people of New 
 York on this momentous subject, was in reality 
 desired, why such objection from gentlemen to 
 this plain manner of putting the question ? Did 
 they fear that the people were not yet prepared 
 for their visionary schemes I or, after all their 
 professions ot love for the people of confidence 
 in the dear people which we had heard so much 
 of within the last four months ; were they not to 
 be trusted with the decision of this question? 
 
 Mr. DANA replied to Mr. KENNEDY. In re- 
 lation to the convictions for crime, he said it was 
 not surprising that they were so numerous. The 
 wonder was that all the colored people were not 
 degraded so low by the treatment they met with, 
 as to make the number of criminals greater. He 
 contended that his colored brother was entitled to 
 be placed on an elevation which would give him 
 the privileges of citizenship. 
 
 Mr BRUCE explained, and replied to Mr. 
 RUSSELL, and made an impassioned appeal in be- 
 half of equal rights. He called upon the Conven- 
 tion to decide whether the colored people were 
 men or not. If they were men, he claimed for 
 them the enjoyment of the common rights of men ; 
 otherwise make them slaves to yourselves and 
 your children and trample them in the dust for- 
 ever. 
 
 Mr. DANA said he was glad to hear, that his 
 colored brother ever had a friend at the South. 
 He was glad to learn that the sympathies of the 
 honorable gentleman from New York, who had 
 just taken his seat, had once, though long ago, 
 been awakened in behalf of this injured people. 
 He too, has once been industriously employed, in 
 procuring their success. He has been an anti- 
 slavery man. Although in a slave state, sur- 
 rounded with slaves and their owners and drivers, 
 he belonged to an anti- slavery party. And with its 
 candidates for office, his party publicly avowed 
 in the hustings of the market place, that their 
 purpose was the overthrow of this Heaven ac- 
 cursed system. In the midst of their prosperity, 
 when all things went on swimmingly ; when all 
 classes listened attentively to their appeals in be- 
 half of his dear colored brother; when their 
 inti-slavery vote was rapidly increasing ; when 
 the hard hearts of even the wicked slave holders 
 were melting down with godly sorrow for their 
 past transgressions, and with feelings of good 
 will for the cause of emancipation ; when all 
 hearts were full of hope that the day of their de- 
 iverance from the blighting curse of this Heaven- 
 daring and soul-crushing system ; just then, the 
 gentleman informs us, a blind, pitiless, menacing, 
 anatical ruffian forced his way into their midst, 
 and boisterously demanded, that they should do 
 .vhat ? Why, just what they were then about to 
 do of their, own free will. And the sequel, says 
 
1030 
 
 my honorable friend, is soon told. On that day, 
 anti-slavery was left dead upon the field 5 and the 
 loosened fetters of the slave were hastily replac- 
 ed and doubly riveted. But it is cheering to 
 hear from the honorable gentleman, that notwith- 
 standing this universal abandonment of our poor 
 colored brother, he remained his unwavering 
 friend. He has told us of his grief, at their de- 
 graded condition here at the north. The out-go- 
 ings of his philanthropic soul are still toward 
 them ; and with painful anxiety, he desires their 
 elevation. And what great measures for the re- 
 lief and elevation of the colored native citizens 
 of this state does the honorable gentleman pro- 
 pose ? Having farther examined the subject, he 
 has ascertained, that the Caucassian and Ethio- 
 pian races are, in their physical organization, an- 
 tipodes to each other ; and that it would be ex- 
 tremely dangerous for government to venture on 
 the attempt to allow our colored people the rights 
 of men. He has likewise ascertained, in the 
 progress. of his labors in their behalf, and re- 
 searches for their benefit, that they are naturally 
 vicious : and that a criminal disposition in their 
 nature clearly distinguishes them from the whites, 
 and he seems to have been frightened out of his 
 propriety, because a colored gentleman asserted 
 in his presence, " that it is God's design to anni- 
 hilate the distinctions of caste in this country." 
 From such f-iends, well may my colored brother 
 exclaim, said Mr. D. "Good Lord deliver us." 
 
 In regard to the statistics, which the honorable 
 gentleman has produced, to show that a larger 
 proportion of our colored people are imprisoned 
 for crime, Mr. D. had a word to say. In the first 
 place, it is hardly possible, that persons in their 
 condition should have an impartial trial. Hated, 
 trodden down, and despised, they had not the 
 means to procure counsel to defend themselves 
 against false and malicious charges, and false 
 witnesses ; and too often, an accusation against 
 them was equivalent to conviction. But on the 
 other hand, said Mr. D. the wonder should not 
 be, that a larger proportion of them than of the 
 whites, compared with their relative numbers, 
 should be guilty of offences against the laws of 
 the white man, in the enactment of which, they 
 have had no agency, either directly or indirectly, 
 and the duty of obedience to which has been in- 
 culcated on them by brute force only ; but the 
 wonder should be that any of them have escaped. 
 The wonder is not that one in eighty-four of them 
 are convicted of offences against the laws, but 
 that one in a hundred should not, under the cir- 
 cumstances of the case, be guilty of the most of 
 crimes. He asked for his oppressed colored bro- 
 ther the restoration to him of his equal political 
 rights, so long and so wickedly denied him. 
 Whatever else we may afford to do, we cannot 
 afford to violate the principles of eternal recti- 
 tude. We cannot afford to do wrong. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question. 
 
 There was considerable excitement and much 
 confusion, during which it was impossible to hear 
 distinctly what transpired. 
 
 The motion for the previous question was vo- 
 ted down. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND I renew it. 
 
 Mr. BAKER. On that I call the ayes and noes. 
 There was not a second, ayes 31, noes 2. 
 
 Mr. HUNT went into the subject of negro suf- 
 frage at some length. His doctrine, and that of 
 bis constituents, in relation to the right of suf- 
 'rage, was briefly this. We (said he) want no 
 masters, and least of all no negro masters, to reign 
 over us . We contend for self-government. We 
 hold that no man who is not a partizan of the re- 
 public's self who is not a bona fide citizen, shall 
 have any voice in the state. We also concede to 
 all other persons, and all other nations, in their 
 respective spheres, the same rights we claim for 
 ourselves. The fact that all men had a right to 
 form themselves, or rather are formed by the op- 
 eration of circumstances and the law of necessity, 
 into distinct nations or states that every nation 
 had the right of self-government without the in- 
 terference of aliens or of other states, so long as it 
 will take the trouble to exercise that right with 
 any tolerable degree of wisdom and justice: we 
 are entirely left out of sight by the advocates of 
 negro suffrage. They forget that negroes were 
 aliens aliens, not by mere accident of foreign 
 birth not because they spoke a different lan- 
 guage not from any petty distinction that a few 
 years association might obliterate, but by the 
 broad distinction of race a distinction f hat neith- 
 er education, nor intercourse, nor time could re- 
 move a distinction that must separate our chil- 
 dren from their children for ever. He regretted, 
 as much as any one, that this class of irreclaima- 
 ble aliens was fastened upon us. If any good 
 could come of wishing, he could wish as heartily 
 as any one, that the Ethiopian might change his 
 skin, and become a part of our body politic. But 
 all such wishes and all efforts to realize them, 
 were idle. They might indicate a very good dis- 
 position, but they did not indicate a very good 
 head. We might close our eyes in a fit ot amiable 
 enthusiasm, and try to dream their wool out of 
 curl ; but our dream did them no good. They 
 knew and felt all the while, (that is, all sane ne- 
 groes,) that they were negroes and aliens by the 
 act of God, and there was no remedy. The great- 
 est injury that any man could inflict upon his 
 fellow, was to place him in a false and un- 
 natural position lo tempt him into a path which 
 he could not travel, a sphere not his own ; to se- 
 duce him into a war against his inevitable desti- 
 ny, and thus destroy his powers of usefulness and 
 his chances of happiness 'together. In his judg- 
 ment, our negroes had thus been injured by their 
 mends. They had been deluded with unreal 
 hopes, and blinded to their true destiny, as he 
 read it, far ignoble. For as they progressed m 
 knowledge, their piide would incite them to re- 
 turn to the home of their race, where they could 
 hold the position of superiors and teachers. They 
 had gained much by their intercourse with civil- 
 ized men. They were no longer idolaters no 
 longer naked savages. They had made much pro- 
 gress in the arts and the learning of a superior 
 race. They yet n.ight he believed they yet 
 would convey these arts and this lean. ing lo 
 their uncivilized brethren. Such was the path 
 he would point out to them the destiny he would 
 aid them to accomplish. As lo the practical ef- 
 fect of negro suffrage in New Yoik city, he pre- 
 dicted that it would be the exclusion ( f the race 
 from Manhattan Island. Another consideration : 
 The Jews were forbidden to yoke animals of dii- 
 
1031 
 
 ferent kinds together; and if it were wrong to 
 unite the cow and the ass in the same yoke, would 
 it be right to unite the Caucasian and" the negro 
 race in the same government? To conclude: 
 The reason why his constituents refused to enter 
 partnership with negroes in the business of go- 
 vernment were, that they could perform all then 
 political duties better without their help than 
 with it. They did not wish to debase themselves 
 by any hypocritic.il professions of fellowship. 
 They could not acknowledge as co-citizens a class 
 of men more widely separated from them than 
 any other race upon the globe, and who cannot be 
 naturalized bj any fiat of law or lapse of time. 
 We know (said he) that we put ourselves upon a 
 par with negroes whenever we put negroes upon 
 a par with us. We cannot enter into any politi. 
 cal amalgamation with blacks. We will not med- 
 dle with their government in St. Domingo nor in 
 Africa, and, if we can prevent it, they shall not 
 meddle with ours. 
 
 Mr. A. W- YOUNG in reply to Mr. HUNT, 
 quoted from the Declaration of Independence, in 
 which the word color does not occur. A docu. 
 ment which was written by a man whose follow- 
 ers many here profess to be but he was satisfied 
 that if Thomas Jetferson could only witness their 
 conduct and hear their language, he would dis- 
 own all such democrats. He proceeded to con- 
 tend that colored people were as intelligent as 
 etnmigrants from foreign countries, and was as 
 much entitled to the elective franchise. He al- 
 luded to the statistics) furnished by Mr. KENNEDY, 
 and regretted that the statistics of the good por- 
 tion of that race had not been furnished also. 
 He denied that the bad were more criminal than 
 other races in like condition. He also denied that 
 the slave owners were ever about to do what abo- 
 litionists required them to do- All they ever 
 contemplated was expatriation. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL : I think, Mr. President, this sub- 
 ject has been sufficiently discussed, [cries of oh, 
 no, no !] I move the previous question, for I'm 
 satisfied the debate will not change a single vote. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS (vehemently.) Then vote the 
 previous question down. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE: I call for the ayes and nays on se- 
 conding the call for the previons question. Or- 
 dered, and they resulted, ayes 41 nays 49, no se- 
 cond. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES said that he could but regret 
 that a delegate from the great city of New York 
 the commercial emporium of this country a 
 city which professed to have a purer democracy 
 than that in any other part of the world should 
 advocate the deprivation of rights, simply on the 
 ground of a difference in the complexion of the 
 skin, or the curl of the hair. He also felt great- 
 ly disappointed when he heard the argument of 
 the representative and mouth-piece of the com- 
 mittee (Mr. KENNEDY). Why, sir, so great is 
 the democracy of the New-York progressives, 
 that a negro is not permitted even to drive a cart 
 there. They are degraded to the lowest point ol 
 moral and social position there^ as well as polit- 
 ical. And yet one of the representatives of thai 
 city has based his argument on the statistics oj 
 crime committed by a class of men whom the 
 democrats of that city have degraded so low. 
 
 Mr. MANN : That is not so. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY said the Convention was 
 about to vote upon a proposition which, if adop- 
 '.i:d, would place us upon the same looting as Ver- 
 mont, Massachusetts and Rhode Island. He 
 thought we might with safely assume the position 
 which, they occupy. The gentleman from New 
 York (Mr. KENNEDY) had brought in the women 
 and children to sustain his argument. But the 
 wives and children of all white citizens were 
 protected in their rights and privileges by hus- 
 bands and brothers. Where do you find any one 
 to stand up for the colored man ? Not one. The 
 argument that because a race of men are marked 
 by a peculiarity of color and crooked hair, they 
 were not endowed with a mind equal to another 
 class who had other peculiarities, was unworthy 
 of men of sense. The negro race must always 
 make a part of our population. Colonization 
 would never transfer them all to their original 
 country. As well might we attempt to drain out 
 all the'water of the ocean with a dipper. What 
 position they would occupy, he was not prepared 
 to say; but he would remind gentlemen that those 
 who were once slaves in Rome became freemen. 
 The argument of the gentleman from St. Lawrence 
 (Mr. RUSSELL,,) reminded him of the Pharisee 
 who went into the temple to pray, and forgetting 
 his errand, went on to brag how much better he 
 was than other people. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. STOW said in one single lespect, he was 
 entitled on this occasion to be heard over some 
 other gentlemen who had addressed the Conven. 
 lion he might say over almost all tor almost all 
 who had spoken had said that they came here un- 
 der pledges, and that they were bound to vote in 
 a particular manner, and that in fact they had no 
 sort of right to listen to any argument on the sub- 
 ject. Now in all these respects he stood impar- 
 tial. He was asked to express his convictions 
 when he became a candidate for this Convention, 
 but his answer was, that on no subject would he 
 go pledged. His mind should be left open to the 
 convictions of reason and good counsel, and on no 
 other terms would he consent to stand on this 
 floor. He claimed to be a free man, free to do 
 what his undeistanding and his conscience dic- 
 tated to be right. On this subject now before the 
 Convention, he should perhapsdiffei from some of 
 his political tnends. It was one on which there 
 was a diversity of opinion ; indeed with him, the 
 first enquiry was now, to settle this question, 
 whether this was a question of absolute, abstract 
 moral right ? If it were true that there was no 
 discretion that they we^ bound by the rule of 
 moral duly and religious obugation to pursue a par- 
 ticular course, there was an end of the argument 
 not only with respect to the amendment, but to 
 the entire section and article. Because, if they 
 were really to adjudge what was a question of ab- 
 stract right, and not to settle political relations 
 and the true policy of the people of this state, it 
 was their business to strike out the entire section. 
 I! that were true, why have any qualifications? 
 Wherefore the qualification of 21 years of age? 
 Wherefore the qualification of male citizenship? 
 Wherefore a residence of one year? Why not al. 
 low it to all of both s> xes, and all conditions and 
 ages, whether alien or citizen, if it was a matter of 
 absolute right? The great, fundamental error was 
 that it was not a rightit was a franchise. And 
 
1032 
 
 what did franchise mean? A privilege, as the 
 had heard argued, to be conceded by all th 
 citizens of a country to those who will exercise i 
 best, for the common interest of all. It wa 
 therefore a matter of policy and expediency an< 
 not of abstract right, by any- manner of means 
 But some gentlemen had said in answer to sucl 
 positions, m the language of the Declaration o 
 Independence, " that all men are created equal 
 that they are endowed by their Creator with cer 
 tain inalienable rights, that among these are life 
 liberty, arid the pursuit of happiness" and who 
 was going to deny such an obvious proposition 
 Not he. But that did not help us. The ques 
 tion was how are these great right! life, liber- 
 ty and the pursuit of happiness to be best pro- 
 tected ? Not whether the rights now claimed 
 are abstract rights, but whether we shall better 
 protect our rights, by limiting the franchise to a 
 peculiar class of persons. If it should be shown 
 that a portion would exercise the elective fran- 
 chise best, and best secure life, liberty, and the 
 pursuit of happiness, then he submitted that it 
 was their solemn duty to make restrictions. The 
 question was one of policy. Ought we then un- 
 der the circumstances in which we are placed, 
 to make this restriction ? He was of opinion 
 that some restriction should be made ; but he 
 would here remark, that sound policy, prudence, 
 and a species of justice, too, required that they 
 should restore the old clause of the constitution 
 and allow colored persons to vote who had here- 
 tofore had that privilege ; and hereafter he 
 should submit an amendment to effect that ob- 
 ject but they ought not to go further. And 
 why not ? Because we had prejudices, as the 
 gentleman from Onondaga had said ; and if pre- 
 judices led to evil results, they must take some 
 notice of them in this country. It was difficult 
 to say how far this prejudice arose from our nat- 
 ural constitution ; but arise as it might, we had 
 got to take notice of prejudices, so far as they 
 would influence the true organization of society. 
 And here was a conclusive objection against this 
 extension of the elective franchise. Why ? Be- 
 cause when the franchise was given to all white 
 citizens, they gave it to a class of men who were 
 reached by the same common sympathies, who 
 felt the same general influences, who participa- 
 ted in the same private, public and political rela- 
 tions, and who had all the same general object. 
 Policy then must govern. For that reason they 
 could permit aliens to become naturalized and 
 electors. Why? Befause when they become 
 citizens their interests were the same in all the 
 relations of life. The great error to the prevent- 
 ing foreigners to become voters was that it pre- 
 served amongst them a distinctive character, and 
 so long as that was the case they stood towards 
 us in a false relation; it therefore, became, our 
 duty to break down the barrier and remove all 
 prejudices that would serve to perpetuate clans. 
 He was, therefore, in favor of giving the utmost 
 liberty to foreigners, that we might act with com- 
 mon sympathies, for a common end and object. 
 But was this so with regard to the colored man ? 
 Unfortunately it was not. He must always be 
 governed by his social and not his political con- 
 dition. When a measure of this character was 
 proposed, we must ask ourselves whether it would 
 
 tend to elevate him from his degraded condition. 
 Great difficulties surround this question. 
 
 Mr. S. here made a statement of a case which 
 occurred in the city from which he came, to show 
 the influence of this question on the public mind. 
 A question arose whether colored children were 
 entitled to be received into the public schools on 
 an equality with the whites, a question on which 
 he should now say nothing. Afterwards the elec- 
 tion of a Mayor occurred, and that question af- 
 fected that election ; for there were those who 
 would give the right to the colored children, in 
 opposition to those who would not; and he asked if 
 it was not evident that the vote of the colored man 
 would be influenced by his social condition, and 
 given to that man who was in favor of their social 
 equality? By giving way, on this subject, to those 
 who desired to extend the franchise to the blacks, 
 we should raise a large number of electors amongst 
 us who were not governed by the same common 
 influences that govern others, and who would 
 hold the balance of power between the parties 
 in the State. That was one great, and to his 
 mind, conclusive argument on this subject. But 
 ;here were other reasons which must govern us. 
 We must take notice both of our political and 
 geographical relations. Slavery prevailed in 
 this Union. We could not overlook that fact if 
 we would. However desirous we might be to 
 relieve ourselves of that curse and awful scourge 
 of man and no man would be more willing to 
 render his aid to overthrow it, than himself 
 we must acknowledge that it existed we could 
 not avoid noticing it. Yet suppose Kentucky 
 should abolish slavery, and should pass the same 
 stringent law as had been passed in Ohio, forbid- 
 ding a residence within the limits of that state to 
 he tree colored man, what would be the conse- 
 quence to this state, particularly to that part from 
 .vhich he came ? They would have an avalanche 
 jf men educated in slavery corning here to tell 
 as how to govern. And would it be wise to in- 
 cite the accession of such a population altogeth- 
 er the worst that could come amongst us? It 
 /vould be dangerous to the best interests of the 
 people to do so. In his neighborhood, they had 
 n impressive example of the danger of such a 
 ourse. The British government had invited the 
 ccession of such a population to its colony, and 
 t had thus brought into Canada a worthless pop- 
 htion a degraded class of men; and the inba- 
 i rants of that country suffered morally and so- 
 ially from that circumstance. Would it then be 
 rudent to adopt that system amongst ourselves, 
 f which our neighbors under another govern- 
 nent, so much complained ? New England had 
 eeri referred to as an example of the absence of 
 anger in such circumstances; but to this he 
 eplied that there was a difference in geo- 
 raphical position. Extend this right, and we 
 ecome the reservoir for this population of 
 outhern states to be poured into. They would 
 ass over us from the south and the west. We 
 must be the recipients of men raised in bondage, 
 who would become our Governors in freedom. 
 'o this we should carefully look, before we 
 hanu'ed the existing relations between us. As 
 o the right or wrong of this matter, he was not 
 rguing ; but feeling, as our people do, that the 
 African was a degraded race, they would not con- 
 
1033 
 
 sent to social equality, and it would be dangerous 
 to our institutions to create political .'<|u;lity 
 where no social equality existed. If we would 
 not give them social relations, it was dangerous 
 to give them political, and thereby put them in 
 our jury boxes and our public offices. But it was 
 said that this would tend to eleva'e the cha- 
 racter of the colored population. He hoped it 
 would ; but yet he was satified it must be by slow 
 degrees. If the feeling entertained against the 
 colored people was mere prejudice, it was the 
 growth of centuries, and it had become deeply 
 fixed in our habits and constitutions ; and we could 
 only eradicate it by degrees. We must go step 
 by step, it' we would elevate this down-trodden 
 people, and not by<shocking even the prejudices 
 of our own people. And again, who was to be 
 affected by this ? Men of high condition ? The 
 men of wealth, who were removed far from ordi- 
 nary connection with labor, would feel it very 
 little. It would extend mainly to those who la- 
 bor day by day ; it would reach that class of citi- 
 zens and draw them down to give a doubtful 
 elevation to another class. On this subject he 
 should not be accused of d.emagogueism for 
 he had too frequently shown his independence ; 
 he therefore with propriety could appeal to this 
 Convention and ask them if they would pull down 
 the working class of men by bringing them in 
 contact with a degraded race ? They might in 
 their attempt to raise up mortals, draw down an- 
 gels. He begged the Convention to remember 
 existing social relations, the proximity oi other 
 states, the condition of slavery there and the 
 long established habits of our people, before they 
 attempted to make this sudden change. For 
 These reasons, succinctly given, and not at length, 
 as he could wish to give them, he should vote 
 against striking out. He should however vote to 
 
 Eut them on the footing on which they had been 
 eretofore, which experience had shown to be 
 beneficial. It connected them with the soil, and 
 this tended to the elevation of their condition. 
 No danger had or was likely to ensue, for their 
 number was at best but small, and would not 
 therefore be felt injuriously to affect society. He 
 thought we ought not to take from these men the 
 privileges we had heretofore given them, unless 
 some public policy imperiously demanded it 
 and public policy must govern in this case. He 
 should also vote in the end to allow the people to 
 determine this matter for themselves, and if they 
 were satisfied that this relation shall exist between 
 them and the colored population, they had an un- 
 doubted right to decide, and he should acquiesce 
 in the settled sentiment of society but it must 
 be remembered that social and political equality 
 could not long be kept distinct. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR stated that he had been en- 
 tirely misunderstood by his colleague (Mr. 
 RHOADES) in regard to the inferences deduced 
 from his remarks of yesterday. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL jr. moved the previous 
 question on the amendment, and there was a se- 
 cond 45 to 33. 
 
 On the amendment of the gentleman from Ma- 
 dison (Mr. BRUCE), to strike out the word 
 "white," the result was, ayes 37, noes 63 : 
 
 AYES-Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. 
 Backus, Baker, Bascom, Bruce, Burr, Candee, (Jiooker, 
 
 104 
 
 Dana,Dodd,Dorlon, Hawley, Hotchkiss, Kirkland, McNeil, 
 Marvin; Miller. I'arish, Patterson, Penniman, Rhoades, 
 Richmond, Shaver, Simmons. E Spencer, W. 11. Spencer, 
 Stanton, Strong, Taggart, Tallmadge, Van Schoouhoven, 
 Warren, Waterbury. Worden, Young 37. 
 
 NOfcLS -Messrs Allen, Angel, Bergen. Bowdish, Brown, 
 Brundage, Bull.D D. Compbeil, R. Cwnanbell, jr., Clark. 
 Clyde, (Joneiy, Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback, Danlorlh, Du/ 
 liojs Graham, Greene, Harrison, Hoffman, Hunt, A. Hunt- 
 ington, Hutchinsori, Jones, Kemblo, Kennedy, Kernan, 
 Kmgsley, Loomis, Mann, McNitt. Maxwell, Morns, Muii- 
 ro, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll. O'Conor, Perkins, Porter, 
 Powers, President, Riker, Russell, St. John, Sanford 
 Shaw, Sheldon, Stephens, Stow, Swackhamer, Taft, J. J. 
 Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, Tuthill, Willard, 
 Wood, A. Wright, Yawger, Youngs 63. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN then moved to 
 amend, so as to secure to the colored citizen who 
 now has the right to vote, the same right as that 
 appeared to be the settled sentiment of the Con- 
 vention by inserting after the word ** vote" in 
 the fifth line, the following : 
 
 1 ' And every colored male citi/en so qualified, who, un- 
 der the provisions of the existing Constitution of this state, 
 would be, entitled to vote for ail officers heretolo re elec- 
 tive by the people thereof." 
 
 Mr. BRUCE said the amendment would not an- 
 swer the purpose of the gentleman, for every per- 
 son " so qualified," would have reference to the 
 word "white," and a negro could not be a "white 
 colored citizen." 
 
 Mr. DODD contended that the word white was 
 descriptive of the person only; and formed no 
 part of the qualification. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND, for the purpose of obviating 
 all question as to the intention of the article, mo 
 ved to amend the section as follows : 
 
 " But no man of color, unless he shall have been for 
 three years a citizen of this state, and tor one year next 
 preceding any election shall be seized and possessed of a 
 freehold estate ol the value of two hundred and fity dol- 
 lars over and above all debts and incumbrances charged 
 thereon, and shall have been actually rated and paid a tax 
 thereon, shall be entitled to a vote at any such election 
 and no person of color shall be subject to direct taxa- 
 tion \mlessheshallbeseizedand possessed of such real 
 estate as aforesaid." 
 
 This was an exact transcript of the provision 
 in the present constitution. He proposed also 
 the following, as the last section, in lieu of that 
 reported from the committee,} to |be submitted 
 separately : 
 
 *} . After the year 1S43, no property qualification shall 
 be require 1 to entitle any citizen of this slate to the exer 
 cise of the right ofsuflrage. 
 
 Mr. W. H. SPBNCBR moved to reduce the 
 qualification of colored freeholders ttotn $350 to 
 $100. 
 
 On this amendment a brief discussion was con- 
 tinued by Messrs. KENNEDY, W. H, SPENCER, 
 E. SPENCER, A. VV. YOUNG, STOW, and 
 KIRKLAND, until 2 o'clock, when the Conven- 
 tion took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS, after some remarks in opposi- 
 tion to the property qualification, as a test of ca- 
 pacity to vote, went on to say that this amend- 
 ment provided in effect, that these persons should 
 not be only entitled to vote, but should also be 
 entitled to sit on juries, on the bench, in the As- 
 sembly, to do militia duty, &c. &c. Were the 
 people of the state in favor of such a thing as 
 that? Was there anything in the Christian reli- 
 gion, or in humanity, that required it? As to 
 
1034 
 
 the argument that had been adduced here, that 
 we were all of one flesh and blood, Mr. P. said 
 he would not enter into that controversy further 
 than to say, that if there was any veracity in scrip- 
 ture, mankind were at Babel divided into separate 
 classes that it was the fiat of the Almighty that 
 they should remain separate nations that he put 
 his mark on these creatures, that it might be 
 known that it was a violation of the law of God 
 to commingle our blood with them in marriage. 
 That, he undertook to say 
 
 Mr. DANA Does the gentleman find that in 
 the Bible ? 
 
 Mr. PERKINS Yes, not in those words, how- 
 ever. He did separate them, for purposes of his 
 own, into distinct nations. These colored per- 
 sons existed as early as we had any history of 
 mankind, as a distinct and separate people, with 
 every distinctive mark exhibited by the African 
 to this day. Within a century of the confusion 
 at Babel, history proved the direct fact that they 
 existed separately, with all the physical marks 
 that we saw about them now. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY If they were thus sepa- 
 rated at Babel, how came they to go through the 
 Ark with the rest ? [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said the gentleman was about 
 as correct in his chronology as in some other 
 things. The building of Babel was three or four 
 centuries after the flood. His query was of a 
 piece, in point of accuracy, with all that had been 
 said in favor of negro suffrage. History showed 
 that every attempt to amalgamate these races, 
 had been attended with the curse of God. He 
 denied the position of the gentleman from Essex, 
 that the commingling of blood and breeds, impro- 
 ved a race, as it did cattle. He would not say 
 that it was not better for a man to improve his 
 breed by commingling his blood with theirs, than 
 not to improve his breed at all. The gentleman 
 had better try it, legitimately or illegitimately. 
 [Laughter.] Better try the experiment on that 
 race, than not at all. [Renewed laughter.] 
 There was no such thing as their mingling with 
 us on terms of equality, unless their blood was 
 mingled with ours in marriage and if there was 
 any obstacle to that, in the prejudices, (if they 
 were such,) of society, that would be a fatal ob- 
 stacle to any peace. We should have nothing 
 but the perpetual turmoil which always existed 
 when there were two races in the same country, 
 antagonist to each other. One or the other must 
 govern, and the struggle for superiority had kept 
 all countries, vrhere two such races existed, in 
 constant turmoil and revolution. Mr. P. was 
 going on to allude to the history of the Jewish 
 nation when his time expired. [Cries of "goon."] 
 
 The PRESIDENT asked if there were any ob- 
 jections to the gentleman's proceeding ? 
 
 Mr. BRUCE objected. 
 
 Mr. DANA, in allusion to the bible argument 
 of the gentleman from St. Lawrence, said he was 
 not aware that any thing was to be found in the 
 account of the building of Babel against the right 
 of the colored man to vote. And before he could 
 be convinced of that, he must have chapter and 
 verse. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON said he could refer the gen- 
 tleman to a passage which had a strong bearing 
 on this subject. He referred him and the gentle- 
 
 man from Delaware particularly, to Noah and his 
 aon Ham, and his grandson Canaan, and asked to 
 whom, if not t^ that race, did the denunciation 
 so emphatically made, apply, " cursed be Ca- 
 nsan ; a servant of servants shall he be to his 
 brethren." Had there ever been any revocation of 
 that sentence ? 
 
 Mr. DANA said it was true, that after Noah 
 came out of the Ark,he planted a vineyard anc got 
 drunk and cursed Canaan. But he found nothing 
 about voting there nothing that should prevent 
 our colored brethren, born and brought up among 
 us, from voting. Well might the colored man 
 say, in this day of boasted reform, that all change 
 was not reform. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS asked how often those who were 
 advocating this measure were entitled to speak, 
 and others denied the privilege of speaking at all? 
 
 Mr. DANA had not spoken on this amendment, 
 nor should he trouble the committee much lon- 
 ger. [Cries of " go ahead," " go on."] Mr. D. 
 went on to say that in '77, during the revolution- 
 ary struggle, the constitution made no distinction 
 between the colored and the white man in regard 
 to the right of suffrage ; but in '21, a three years' 
 residence and the possession of a freehold to the 
 value of $250 was required of the colored man, 
 by which almost the entire population were de- 
 prived of that precious right. Only 1000 of them 
 voted in 1845, when some 3000 of them were tax- 
 ed. But now the proposition was to exclude them 
 altogether. This was reforming backwards into 
 the dark ages. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER hoped we should have 
 no more long speeches, but come directly to a vote. 
 He would have the section stand as we had adopt-* 
 ed it thus far, and that we should retain the pro- 
 visions of the old constitution, striking out the 
 sixty days' citizenship, and leaving out the pro- 
 perty qualification ; for he trusted the day had 
 gone by when property was to be made a test of 
 qualification. The colored race were either en- 
 titled to vote on the same terms with the whites, 
 ur not at all. His constituents were of opinion 
 that the colored man was not capable, and should 
 not have the right to vote ; and howeter strong 
 his sympathies might be for the African race, he 
 did not hesitate to express that opinion. He 
 should, at the proper lime, move to strike out the 
 sixty days' citizenship, and otherwise to amend so 
 as to restore the old constitution. 
 
 Mr. STRONG remarked that those who came 
 here highly charged with abolition speeches, had 
 had an opportunity to express their views, and 
 the gentlemen from St. Lawrence, charged with 
 anti-abolition speeches, had had a chance to ex- 
 press themselves. He hoped the good sense of 
 the Convention would now induce them to take a 
 vote at once. 
 
 Mr. BURR hoped, in the position in which 
 matters stood, that the question would be submit- 
 ted nakedly to the people, whether colored men 
 should have the right of suffrage on the same 
 terms as white persons. He was opposed to all 
 property qualification whatever, as anti-republi- 
 can and preposterous. He should therefore vote 
 against it, in the hope that the distinct question 
 whether the colored man should vote on the same 
 ertms with others, would be submitted to the 
 people. 
 
1035 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved the previous question, 
 on the section, hut there was no second. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved the previous question 
 on Mr. SPENCER'S motion to insert $100, instead 
 of $r250, and there \vas a second, &c. 
 
 The amendment was negatived, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. 
 Backus, Baker, Bruce, Bull, Candee, Crooker, Dana, Dan- 
 forth, D odd, Greene, Hsrt, Hawley, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, 
 Hutchinson, Kirkland, L,oomis, McNeil, Marvin, Maxwell, 
 Nicholas, Parish, Patterson. Penniman Khoades, Rich- 
 mond, Shaver, Simmons, W. H Spencer, Stow, Strong, 
 Taggart, Tallmadge, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, Water- 
 bury, Willard, Worden, W. B. Wright 4-2. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Bowdish, Brown, Brun- 
 dage, Burr, D. D. Campbell, Clark, Coiiely, Cook, Cornell, 
 Cuddeback, Dorlon, Dubois, Harrison, Hunt, A. Hunting- 
 ton, Jones, Kembie, Kennedy, Kernan, Kingsley, Mann, 
 Morris, Munro, Nellis, Nicoll, O'Conor, Perkins, Porter, 
 President, Riker, Ruggles. St. John, Santbrd, Shaw, Shel- 
 don, E. Sprncer, Stancon, Stephens, Swackhamer, Taft, J. 
 J.Taylor, Tilden, Townsend, Tuthill, Wood, A. Wright, 
 Yawger, Youngs 50. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved to amend the amend- 
 ment of Mr. KIRKLA.ND by striking out the words 
 *' of color, '' where it last occurs, and insert " not 
 entitled to the elective franchise ;" and to strike 
 out all after "taxation." 
 
 Mr KIRKLAND remarked that this, in effect, 
 would exempt from taxation all not entitled to 
 vote including all females, aliens, &c., no mat- 
 ter how much property they might have. His 
 own amendment was an exact transcript of the 
 existing constitution. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY wished to show the injustice 
 of giving special privileges to one class which 
 were not enjoyed by another. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said there were certain cor. 
 porations \vh<ch were called "persons," that would 
 be exen.pted from taxation by this amendment 
 as would also the property of deceased persons, 
 whose heirs were minors. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY modified his motion, by insert- 
 ing the word " natural" before " persons " 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS spoke of the proposition of Mr. 
 KIRKLAND as a test of the question whether we 
 would politically enslave a portion of our citi. 
 zens, by depriving them of the little shadow of 
 political power they now had, or leave them with 
 that small voice in the government. Political sla- 
 very was but one remove from civil slavery. He 
 should regard all those who voted to deprive the 
 colored man of the political rights he now had, as 
 a friend of slavery; and if gentlemen were dis- 
 posed to go that length, and this course should ul- 
 timately result in insunection, he hoped they 
 would not call on him or his county for aid for 
 they might find us (said he) on the wrong side of 
 the question. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said this great work of revis 
 ion had been, in his opinion, in the main, well 
 done, and he was desirous to bring it to a close 
 under such circumstances as would not jeopardize 
 its adoption by the people. It was well known 
 fhat there existed much diversity of opinion and 
 great sensitiveness on the question of general suf- 
 trage as applied to the colored people. Knowing 
 this to be the case in his section of the state, he 
 deemed it his duty, whatever might be his indi- 
 vidual views, to make a spcial submission of this 
 question to the people, and at the same time he 
 would reserve for this unfortunate class of people, 
 who were certainly entitled to our commisseration, 
 
 the qualified right of suffrage which they now pos- 
 sessed. It had been said here that the colored peo- 
 ple themselves did not desire a continuance of this 
 freehold qualification. He had reason to believe 
 that those of them who enjoyed the right, fully 
 appreciated its value, and although they wished 
 it to be extended to their brethren, they would 
 abhor the idea of their own disfranchisement. 
 The aversion to extending this right of suffrage, 
 arose from a common, and, as he believed, an er- 
 roneous impression, that these depressed people 
 were not generally competent to become intelli- 
 gent voters. He supposed this must have been 
 a prevailing opinion in the Convention of 1821, 
 and that the freehold qualification was adopted, 
 so that the colored man who by his industry, fru- 
 gality and good conduct became the owner of a 
 comfortable tenement, might give evidence of his 
 ability to become an intelligent judge of the wants 
 of the country and of the qualifications of candi- 
 dates for his suffrages. He trusted the Conven- 
 tion would continue this small privilege to these 
 unfortunate fellow creatures. It was true it had 
 been enjoyed by a very small proportion of the 
 aggregate number of colored people in the state, 
 but it might hereafter, should the people decide 
 against a general suffrage, be an incentive to 
 their young men, by their good conduct and in- 
 dustrious habits, to emerge from their present ab- 
 ject condition, and become proprietors and voters, 
 and their example might influence others to 
 struggle with adversity and acquire all the rights 
 of citizens. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY thought the views of the 
 colored people were misunderstood as it seemed 
 to be supposed that they desired to have the right 
 of voting on the same footing as others, or not at 
 all. Such was not the case, as he was advised ; 
 they preferred to vote under the property qualifi- 
 cation rather than not at all; and hence, though op- 
 posed to this property qualification, altogether, he 
 should vote to retain it, believing it to be the wish 
 of the colored people. 
 
 Mr. E. SPENCER said he had misunderstood 
 the agents of the colored people who appeared 
 before the standing committee, if it was their 
 wish that the property qualification should be re- 
 tained ; and from information he had obtained 
 since, he was inclined to think he had misunder- 
 stood them. On further reflection, therefore, he 
 felt disposed to vote for the amendment. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN hoped the latter part of^ the 
 proposition proposed to be amended by Mi*. KEN- 
 NEDY, would be withdrawn, as it recognized a 
 wrong principle ; and it was a poor salve for the 
 wrong you did to this race, to exempt a portion 
 of them from taxation who were not, benefited by 
 the very limited franchise you accorded to an- 
 other portion. The withdrawal would obviate 
 the lately discovered objections to the clause on 
 the ground of principle, and we should then see 
 who was for extending the area of freedom." 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND had rather the gentleman 
 would move to strike out. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN could not do it, as there were 
 two amendments pending. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER: Stop talking, vote down the 
 amendment of Mr. KENNEDY, and then you can 
 move it. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY'S amendment was negatived,* 
 
1036 
 
 ayes 2, noes 85. (Ayes, Messrs. HUNT and KEN- 
 NEDY.) 
 
 The question recurring on Mr. KIRKLAND'S 
 amendment 
 
 Mr. BURR said he had made up his mind to 
 vote against this ; but learning that the colored 
 people would regard even this as a boon, he 
 sh6uld vote for it. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON sustained it at some length. 
 He urged that the exemptions we allowed to the 
 blacks were a full equivalent for the deprivation 
 of the free right of suffrage that all attempts by 
 legislation to raise them to a social equality 
 with us, would be utterly nugatory that they 
 were an inferior race to the whites, and would 
 always remain so that the experiment in St. 
 Domingo had proved this beyond cavil that the 
 African in his original home had never improved, 
 that they were under the curse to which he had 
 referred before : and would never recover from 
 it. He believed that if we retained the present 
 provisions of the constitution, we should do all 
 that justice or policy required of us towards the 
 black race. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved the previous question, and 
 there was a second. 
 
 The amendment was agreed to, as follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bascoin, Bergen, Bowdish, Bruce, Bull, 
 Burr, R. Campbell jr ., Candee, Cook, (looker, Dana,Dodd, 
 Graham, Greene, Harrison. Hart, HawJey, Hcflman.Hotch- 
 kiss, E. Huiumgton, Hutchinson, Kembie, Reman, Kings 
 ley, Kirkland, Marvin. Maxweil, Miller, Munro, Nellis, 
 Nicholas, Parish, Parterson, Penniman, Porter, Hhoades, 
 Kichmond, Ruggles, St. John, Shaver, Simmons, E. Spen- 
 cer, W- H. Spencer, Stanton, Stow. Strong, Taggart, Tall- 
 madge, Tuthill, Ward, Warren, Waterbury, \Vorden, A. 
 Wright, W. B. Wright, Young 63. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Brown, Brundage, Clark, Conely, Cor- 
 nell, Cuddeback, Danforth, Dor'on, Dubois, Hunt, A. 
 Huntington, Jones, Kennedy, Mann, McNiel, Morris, Ni- 
 coll, O'Conor, Perkins, President, Hiker, Russell, Sanford, 
 Sheldon, Stephens, SwackliQmer, J. J. Tajlor, Tilden, 
 Townsend, Wood, Yawger, Youngs 32. 
 
 Mr. CLARK moved to amend the section by 
 striking out the requirement for a six months re- 
 sidence in the county, and limiting the sixty days 
 residence in the district, to thirty days. 
 
 Both these amendments were separately nega- 
 tived. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out " six 
 months" and insert " two months" residence in 
 the county. He illustrated the harsh operation 
 of this requisition by the case of his own county, 
 where the county line run through a village, and 
 where a removal from one side of a street to the 
 other would disqualify a voter. 
 
 The amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend by stri- 
 king out the sixty days citizenship, and altering 
 the phraseology of the section as follows : 
 
 " Shall be entitled to vote at such election in the elec- 
 tion district in which he shall actually reside.and not else- 
 where," &c. 
 
 Mr. JONES said this would make the section 
 read exactly like the present constitution, and he 
 hoped the amendment would prevail. He could 
 see no reason why a person who had become a 
 citizen, after five years' probation, should be 
 compelled to wait 60 days longer before he could 
 vote. The clause was aimed at naturalized citi- 
 zens, and them only, and he confessed to his 
 surprise to see it there. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS also opposed the 60 days' re- 
 sidence in the district saying that it would op- 
 erate to disfranchise thousands of laboring men, 
 who were compelled often tp change their resi- 
 dence. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY explained that he opposed 
 this 60 day's citizenship in committee, as aimed 
 at recently made citizens and he hoped it would 
 be struck out. 
 
 Mr. STRONG thought that this clause, one of 
 the most wholesome provisions in the whole sec- 
 lion, and he dwelt at some length on the struggle 
 by both parties to get foreigners naturalized on 
 the eve of an election, and on the bad effect which 
 this struggle had upon the foreigner himself, in 
 improperly influencing his first vote. 
 
 Mr. SHAVER said the attention of the com- 
 mittee on the Elective Franchise had been brought 
 to this subject by a resolution which he had him- 
 self offered at an early stage of the session. And 
 gentlemen were right when they supposed it was 
 aimed against foreigners, and for the purpose of 
 preventing such scenes as were witnessed just be- 
 fore every exciting election. Men who were poor, 
 were taken by partizans on the day before the 
 election, or even the same day, up to" the courts, 
 where their papers were made out free of ex- 
 pense, and they hurried to the polls to deposite 
 their votes. He had no objection that these per- 
 sons should become citizens and should enjoy the 
 right to vote ; but there was abundant opportuni- 
 ty for them to become naturalized at other times 
 than just at the eve of an election. It gave rise 
 now to the charge which we hear so often itera- 
 ted and reiterated, of corruption and bargaining. 
 These charges were by no means flattering to the 
 foreigner himself, and he wished to relieve them 
 from it. They should not desire to become citi- 
 zens merely for the purpose of voting, and that as 
 a reward to those who from partizan motives, ob- 
 tained their papers for them and then led them 
 to the polls. He hoped the section would be al- 
 lowed to remain. 
 
 Mr. STRONG followed in opposition to so much 
 of the amendmen t as dispensed with the sixty 
 days' residence in the district urging that that 
 was the only effectual mode of breaking up colo- 
 nization. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN supported the a- 
 mendment. He did not see why the legislature 
 could not protect the ballot-boxes from the colo- 
 nization frauds which were so loudly complained 
 of. He believed they could do so ; and with the 
 co-operation of the guardians of the franchise, 
 could do so effectually. 
 
 Mr. BROWN opposed the sixty days' citizen- 
 ship, or one moment longer citizenship than the 
 law of Congress required for naturalization. It 
 was in restraint of the exercise of the franchise, 
 and as such he protested against it. He opposed 
 also the sixty days' residence in the district, as a 
 provision which must result in disfranchising 
 thousands of laboring men, who were obliged to 
 change their residence often, to obtain employ- 
 ment. He trusted the provision of the old con- 
 stitution in regard to residence in the county, and 
 actual residence in the district, at the time of the 
 election, would remain as it was. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS opposed the sixty days' resi- 
 dence in the district, on the grounds taken by 
 
1037 
 
 Mr. BROWN, that it would deprive a large class 
 of voters, laboring men, of their right to vote. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said there were at least 15,000 
 removals in the city of. New- York, in a single 
 year, exclusive of those whose names were not in 
 the directory and a large portion of the laboring 
 masses must necessarily lose their votes under 
 this sixty day rule of residence. He hoped the 
 proposition of Mr. SWACKHAMER would be a- 
 dopted. 
 
 Mr. STOW took the ground that we could not, 
 in framing a constitution, regard isolated cases of 
 hardship. All we could do was to lay down such 
 general rules as public policy and general good 
 sense seemed to require. General rules must be 
 adopted, however stringently they might ope- 
 rate in individual cases that might be imagined. 
 Even the rule requiring a voter to be 21, some- 
 times operates to exclude a man from the polls 
 for nearly the whole year after he attains his ma- 
 jority. And yet, all acquiesced in the rule. So 
 with the requisition of sixty days citizenship. 
 If it was believed to be necessary to secure the 
 purity of the franchise, and to protect the for- 
 eigner himself from the undue influences which 
 otherwise would be brought to bear upon him, in 
 giving his first vote, we ought not to hesitate in 
 fixing the rule, though it might exclude a few 
 persons from the immediate exercise of the right 
 of voting. He also urged the other provision of 
 a sixty or thirty days' residence in the district, as 
 absolutely necessary to the protection of resident 
 voters from being overborne by importations from 
 abroad, and thus making the purity of our elec- 
 tions a by-word and reproach. Better deprive 
 one legal wer i.-f his right, than have twenty or 
 thirty others deprived of theirs by imported 
 votes. 
 
 Mr. BROWN urged in reply that it would be 
 unjust to visit upon a voter, whose necessities, 
 not his wishes, compelled him to change his resi- 
 dence, the penalty which we sought to impose 
 on those who practiced frauds. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL remarked that the greater num- 
 ber of removals in New York took place in May. 
 In June following, there was a school election, 
 at which, under this provision, thousands might 
 be disfranchised. 
 
 Mr. STOW said it would be an easy matter 
 to obviate that by changing the time of the elec- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL rejoined that it was as easy a 
 matter to change the general election from No- 
 vember to June. 
 
 Mr. BAKER followed in support of the sixty 
 days citizenship and residence. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS remarked that the wards in New 
 York were divided into rive or six election dis- 
 tricts, in each of which, in the same ward, the 
 electors voted for precisely the same persons, ex- 
 cept inspectors ; now und'er this sixty day lule, 
 a man who moved from one district to another in 
 the same ward, within these sixty days of an 
 election would be disfranchised ! Was that in- 
 tended ? Could there be any fraudulent design 
 reached by >uch a prohibition, where the voter, 
 after removal, actually voted for the same persons 
 that he would have voted for, had he remained 
 where he was before ? 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES moved to amend the latter 
 
 clause of the original section so that it would 
 read thus : 
 
 11 Shall be entitled to vote at such election in tho town 
 or ward in which lie shall have been a resident during the 
 last sixty days, and in the election tistnct where IK- shall 
 reside at the time of the election, and not eisewhere." &c. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said this was an improvement on 
 the section, as it required the sixty days residence 
 to be in the town or ward, instead of the district. 
 Still he preferred the old rule, one year in the 
 state, six months in the county, and actual resi- 
 dence in the district at the time of the election 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER urged his amendment, 
 and an adherence to the provisions of the present 
 constitution in regard to suffrage insisting that 
 the public would frown down any attempt to re- 
 strict or hamper the exercise of that sacred right. 
 He repelled also the idea that these restrictions 
 were necessary in regard to naturalization, for he 
 had no faith in the allegations, so frequently 
 made, of fraud in the granting of naturalization 
 papers. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND had as much faith as the gen- 
 tleman from Kings had in the honesty of these 
 naturalized foreigners. But he regarded this 
 sixty day's citizenship as aimed not at them, but 
 at the political rogues and rascals that deceived 
 them, and often got them into difficulty. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said his impressions were in 
 favor of retaining this sixty days' citizenship. 
 He supposed it would exclude very few natural- 
 ized persons ; and it would put an end to the 
 frauds, if any, of which we always heard so much 
 after a contested election, in the presses of 
 both parties in the city of New- York and else- 
 where. But he was not so tenacious of that 
 provision as of the sixty days' residence in the 
 town or ward. If the half that was charged on 
 one side, and not denied on the other, in regard 
 to colonization frauds in the great cities, was 
 true, some such provision as this was absolutely 
 necessary to secure the purity of our elections. 
 And if its eflect would be to exclude one legal 
 vote, it would for every such vote, exclude per- 
 haps ten illegal votes. Still, if gentlemen from 
 the cities would say that there was no foundation 
 for these charges of colonization and fraud, so of- 
 ten reiterated after an election, then certainly we 
 ought to hesitate before we adopt it. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN followed in support of the sixty 
 days' citizenship, at some length. 
 
 Mr. T1LDEN then obtained the floor, but gave 
 way for a motion to adjourn. 
 
 Adjourned to half-past eight to-morrow morn- 
 ing. 
 
 FRIDAY, (104th day,) Oct. 2. 
 
 Prayer by Rev. Dr. CAMPBKLL. 
 
 The PRESIDENT presented the remonstrance 
 of the Canajoharie Academy against the proposed 
 diversion of (he literature fund. ReU-rred. 
 
 Also, of the Kingston Academy. Referred. 
 THE LATERAL CANALS. 
 
 Mr. MAXWELL ottered the following section, 
 and moved its reference to the committee on revi- 
 sion, with instructions to incorporate it in the ar- 
 ticle on the debts of the State : 
 
 4. Whenever the North Branch Canal of the State of 
 Pennsylvania shall be completed to the N. Y State line, 
 then a portion of the said remainder of the revenues of the 
 
1038 
 
 said canals may, in each fiscal year, be applied in such 
 manner as the Legislature shall direct, to the extension 
 of the Chemung canals to the Pennsylvania State line, at 
 the termination of said North Branch Canal. 
 
 Messrs. J. J. TAYLOR and MARVIN advoca- 
 ted the motion. 
 
 Messrs. MORRIS, RICHMOND and BURR op- 
 posed it. 
 
 Mr. COOK moved to amend by including the 
 Sacandaga canal and the Slack Water navigation 
 connected therewith. If there was to be a^ene- 
 ral scramble, he did not know why Saratoga coun- 
 ty should noi come in for a share. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question, and 
 there was a second. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. COOK was lost. 
 
 The original motion was also negatived ayes, 
 23, noes 66. 
 FUTURE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved that the committee on re- 
 vision be instructed to incorporate in the Consti- 
 tution his article upon future amendments and re- 
 visions of the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to amend by striking out 
 "two-thirds," and inserting "a majority," so that 
 when an amendment received the assent of a ma- 
 jority of the second Legislature acting upon it, it 
 should be adopted. If the two-third principle was 
 preserved in this relation, it should be in the Le- 
 gislature which originated the amendment. In 
 the second case, the members came especially in- 
 structed from the people. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM hoped we should adopt the 
 amendment, and thus avoid placing ourselves 
 again in the power of a factious and interested 
 minority. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to strike out the pro- 
 vision which made it necessary that the question 
 of ' Convention, or No Convention," should be 
 submitted to the people once in every 20 years. 
 He thought the Legislature should have discre- 
 tion in this respect. He would he soriy to see 
 this question agitated every 20 years. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN opposed both the proposed 
 amendments. The second proposition in the ar- 
 ticle was intended to give the people an opportu- 
 nity to endorse their Constitution once in every 
 20 years, if they were satisfied with it; and if 
 they were not, they might have it revised and 
 amended, by calling a Convention. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN opposed the amendment of 
 Mr. O'CONOR, which, he said, would only make 
 it more easy for the legislature to increase its own 
 powers. He approved the second clause ot the 
 article. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS sustained the amendment of Mr. 
 
 O'CONOR. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND supported the view taken by 
 Mr. HOFFMAN. The great evil in our govern- 
 ment was excessive legislation and excessive con- 
 stitution making. He had confidence in the le- 
 gislature, and believed that two-thirds would 
 obey the wishes of the people. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS advocated, both of the amend- 
 ments proposed. 
 
 Messrs. LOOMIS, SIMMONS and MARVIN 
 continued the debate. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to lay the whole question 
 on the table. He desired to amend so as to pro- 
 vide against having an amendment go through 
 by chance one year and by rule the next. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN moved the previous question, 
 and it was seconded. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. O'CONOR prevailed 
 ayes 50, noes 43. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved tq amend so that the 
 amendment passed by one legislature should be 
 submitted to that chosen at the next general elec- 
 tion for Senators. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS supported his motion, and Mr. 
 WORDEN opposed it. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS was so sick of fifteen minute 
 discussions, and the screws of the previous ques- 
 tion, that he was quite in favor of the proposition 
 to have amendments considered two years. 
 There should be some mode of giving vent to the 
 prevailing mania for Constitution making. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. LOOMIS was agreed to, 
 75 to 25. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN was permitted to amend the 2d 
 section verbally. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER moved to strike out the whole 
 of the 2d section, providing for calling future 
 Conventions. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON'S amendment was first in or- 
 der, and upon taking the question, it was nega- 
 tived, without a division. 
 
 Mr. CROCKER advocated his motion to strike 
 out the whole. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN opposed it. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to amend by striking out 
 the permission to the legislature to call a Conven- 
 tion within the 20 years, if they deemed it prop- 
 er. Lost, 22 to 68. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the P.Q. upon Mr.CRooit- 
 ER'S section and it was seconded. 
 
 The Convention refused to strike out, 5 to 89. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES proposed an additional section 
 providing that the next Convention should be 
 composed of two distinct and separate bodies of 
 men, sitting in different chambers, without whose 
 concurrent assent no amendment should be valid. 
 Their organization to be provided for by law. 
 Negatived 29 to 65. 
 
 Mr. J. YOUNGS moved the previous question 
 on the original resolution, and it was agreed to 
 without a division. 
 
 RIGHTS OF MARRIED WOMEN. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved instructions to the com- 
 mittee No. 7 to report the following section of 
 Mr. TALLMADGE'S report : 
 
 14. All property of the wife, owned by her at the time 
 
 her marriage, and that acquired by her afterwards, by 
 ft, devise or descent, or otherwise than from her hus- 
 
 of her marriage, and that acquired by her afterwards, by 
 gift, devise or descent, or otherwise than from her hus- 
 band, shall be her separate property. Laws shall be pass- 
 
 ed providing for the registry of the wife's separate proper- 
 ty, and more clearly denning the rights of the wife thereto; 
 as well as to property held by her with her husband. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR hoped, little time as they had 
 left that the Convention would not adjourn 
 without acting on the very important report of 
 Mr. TALLMADGE, relative to the rights of man. 
 The section now proposed by the gentleman from 
 Albany was contained in that report, and could 
 be more fully discussed when the whole report 
 was under consideration than at present. His 
 opinions on this subject was widely different from 
 that expressed by the gentleman from Albany. 
 He believed such a law as that proposed would 
 tend greatly to impair domestic harmony. He 
 moved to lay the resolution upon the table. 
 
 Mr. HUTCHINSON moved the previous ques- 
 
1039 
 
 tion on the resolution, but the Convention refused 
 to second : ayes 21, noes 59. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to substitute the follow- 
 ing section for that proposed by Mr. HARRIS : 
 
 ^ 4. The contract of marriage shall not be held to vest in 
 cither of the contracting parties the property of the other, 
 or to create a liability upon either to discharge the debts 
 or obligations ol the other. 
 
 Mr BASCOM said that the wrongs which the 
 proposition of the gentleman from Albany sought 
 to cure, arose from a violent construction that the 
 law put upon the marriage contract, making it en- 
 tirely different and more comprehensive than the 
 contract itself. The laws, not the marriage con- 
 tract, vested the property of the wife in the hus- 
 band, and all that was required was that the mar- 
 riage contract should be what the parties agree 
 that it should be. If a man now wants a wife, he 
 has to bargain for her; adopt this amend.nent, and 
 if he wants her property, he will have to bargain 
 for that too. The reason for the violent construc- 
 tion that the law puts upon the marriage contract, 
 by which the property of the wife is vested in the 
 husband, is founded upon the liability of the hus- 
 band to pay her debts contracted before marriage, 
 because in one case in a thousand a man incurs 
 liability to pay debts of his wife. Nine hundred 
 and ninety-nine men, more fortunate in their mar- 
 riage, shall have the whole property of their 
 wives. The amendment aims to secure the rights 
 of men, too, by relieving them from this con- 
 structive liability. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that a sense of duty 
 had induced him to bring to the notice of the 
 Convention, the important question under discus- 
 sion, atanearb stage of their deliberation. That 
 the proposition vvould be resisted, was anticipat- 
 ed by him It had always been the case from the 
 earliest ages to the present day, and unless the 
 nature of man should be changed, it would con- 
 tinue so until the end of time. In every period 
 of the world in which the light of science had 
 appeared, it was resisted because it came in con- 
 tact with the selfishnes and established habits of 
 man. Truth is immutable as the laws of Heav- 
 en, and clothed with the robe of Divine law, had 
 found a most formidable enemy in ignorance, su- 
 perstition and selfishness. When the star of 
 hope appeared in the east, and "peace and good 
 will" was proclaimed to man, it was rejected by a 
 foolish 'King and his selfish counsellors, who ig- 
 norantly supposed that they could extinguish 
 light and retard the progress of truth, by causing 
 the mothers of Judea to rnourn over the loss of 
 their infant children. If the sordid disposition 
 of man had impelled him to resist a cause, upon 
 the success of which depended the destiny of the 
 human race, how much more reason was there 
 to expect that he would reject reforms like that 
 before the Convention. He knew the objections 
 urged against the protection of the rights and 
 property of married women, and he thought it 
 would be as well to meet them then and there, 
 for fear another opportunity might not occur du- 
 ring the session. He felt confident that a glance 
 at the history of man, would satisfy every gentle- 
 man, that the neglect and oppression of females 
 was a sure evidence of an absence of civilization 
 and Christianity. Thus it was, that amongst sav- 
 ages, women were treated as mere animals with- 
 
 out souls, created only to be used and abused by 
 man, and when his foul spirit left the body,her's 
 was buried alive with his. But perhaps this cus- 
 tom would find an apology in the same reasons 
 used to justify the generous practice of depriving 
 the wife of her property and other rights, which 
 was that the "two were one." Polygamy, and 
 the desertion of the wife at the option of the 
 master, were but one state further from the low- 
 est state of barbarity. Corporeal punishment of 
 the wife evinced a very low state of society also, 
 and he apprehended that the ladies would be sur- 
 prised to learn that their "lords" still possessed 
 the right, under the "common law," to chastise 
 them occasionally, if they did not behave pretty 
 well, and obey with becoming servility. True 
 the courts "no longer recognized this power and' 
 ancient privilege of whipping," but they did not 
 deny its existence. The fact was, we were just 
 emerging from a system of feudalism, oppressive 
 to woman and degrading to man. It could not 
 be denied, however sad the commentary on the 
 character of man, that he had yielded more readi- 
 ly to the blandishments and vices of the mistress, 
 
 than to the purity and tenderness of the wife. 
 
 The matrons of Rome, although honored for 
 their virtues and patriotism, possessed but little 
 in the republic, until the introduction of voluptu- 
 ousness and corruption at the termination of the 
 punic wars. It was then that the women of Rome 
 took a position in society before unknown to 
 their sex. It was during this period that their 
 oppressors seemed to have discovered that they 
 had souls, and that they possessed intelligence 
 and power ; for then they began to consult them 
 respecting, matters of state, and admit them to 
 the councils of the nation. It was during the 
 polite but licentious reign of Charles the Second 
 too, that a relaxation of severity to women was 
 effected. Christianity had struggled for ages, 
 and philanthropy plead almost in vain for the 
 melioration of the condition of females ; and his 
 face burned with shame for his sex at the thought 
 that so little had been accomplished, and that from 
 other motives and considerations than a sense of 
 moral justice or a desire to do right. 
 
 But he would be told that the question was not 
 what had been the past condition of woman, but 
 what was their present situation. To this he 
 wouid reply, that it was unfortunate and cruel. 
 It was true that women were not buried alive in 
 this free country, yet when they entered into 
 what is usually called the holy bonds of matrimo- 
 ny, they become dead to every thing but the hus- 
 band, as he would presently show. The church 
 too, (or some branch of it,) had so far departed 
 from its divine prerogative of justice and mercy 
 as to become accessary to a mercenary and un- 
 christian practice. He did not remember the 
 ceremony of his own wedding, except that each 
 promised to be true, faithful and kind to the oth- 
 er ; but he knew that the conditions were recip- 
 rocal, for nothing degrading or unjust towards 
 one party, would have met the approval of the 
 other. He had, however, witnessed the adminis- 
 tration of that solemn ordinance, where the bride 
 was required to say, " I promise to love, cherish 
 and obey thee." And again, "with this ring I 
 thee wed, and with all my worldly goods I thee 
 endow." Love and benevolence were character- 
 
1040 
 
 istic of woman, and breathed the lofty, gentle and 
 confiding spirit of her sex. But to make servili- 
 ty and a sacrifice of property, a condition of vir- 
 tuous attachment and affectionate regard, was in 
 keeping with the character of those who required 
 it. But what part did the bridegroom take in the 
 performance ? Was it that of the magnanimous 
 and brave ? Or of the knavish fortune hunter ? 
 c I take thee to be my wedded wife, to have and 
 to hold from this day forward " was the modest 
 promise, and generous consideration for the name, 
 the property and the obedience of a priceless 
 bride. It was not necessary to say who wrote 
 this ceremony, nor on what authority it was bas- 
 ed, for its authorship was indicated by the condi- 
 tions imposed on one of the parties interested 
 therein. 
 
 It was not customary at the present day to buy 
 and sell wives (on this side of the water at least) 
 in the public markets, with halters round their 
 necks, but they were sometimes placed in a situ- 
 ation almost as unfortunate by what was termed 
 the " marriage contract," but which should be 
 called woman's transfer of property and sacrifice 
 of liberty or woman's loss and man's gain. The 
 moment the nuptials are tied, her bondage was as 
 complete as that of the southern slave. By the 
 marriage the man became entitled to the rents, in- 
 come and profits of his wife's land ; and if he sur- 
 vive her, paving had issue, he has a freehold es- 
 tate in the whole during life. These interests 
 could be taken for his debts, or disposed of in any 
 way he chose. Her household estate arid personal 
 property became absolutely his, and her chases in 
 action he acquired a right to assign or collect, and 
 if recovered during marriage the avails were his. 
 All property accruing to her during marriage be- 
 came his also, and she had no voice in adminis- 
 tering it. And what did she receive in return for 
 this great sacrifice ? If she happened to get a 
 good husband, she might secure a degree ef com- 
 fort and domestic' happiness to be found only in 
 that condition of life so peculiarly favored by di- 
 vine providence if not, she was undone forever ; 
 there was no retracing her steps ; the fiat had 
 gone forth " What God hath joined together let 
 not man put asunder." She and her's was hence- 
 forth the property of the husband; and if by his 
 harsh and unkind treatment she should be driven 
 from a home provided by her own money there 
 was no resting place on earth for her, like the 
 dove which went from the window of the ark, her 
 only defence was in the air. When and wherev- 
 er found, she was the prisoner of her master, and 
 bound to obey his command. It would be said 
 that the law protected the wife from the inhuman 
 treatment of the husband. So did it also protect 
 animals, in the same manner and to about the 
 same extent. The idea that the wife would ob- 
 tain a divorce, was a very silly one in connection 
 with the fact that she was deprived of every dol- 
 lar's worth of property, and perhaps the public 
 cautioned not to trust her by an advertisement in 
 some public newspaper. Without money, justice 
 was not easily obtained, and law suits were scarce. 
 The wife could not be a witness against her hus- 
 band, and if he wished to exercise his authority as 
 the " head of the family," all he had to do was to 
 use the " rod of correction" in some secluded 
 place, and he was safe from any interference of 
 
 the law, even though the " whip was larger than 
 the judge's finger." The laws of marriage were 
 not only unjust, but public sentiment was equally 
 so towards females. If from inhuman treatment 
 and the faithlessness of her husband, the wife was 
 driven from home, she and her children were en- 
 titled to " food and clothing," if any one would 
 trust them and take chance for pay. But if in her 
 extreme destitution, with her tender offspring 
 suffering from penury and disease, she should in 
 a single instance violate principles of morality, 
 constantly disregarded by the husband, she was 
 no more the wife, but the outcast and condemned 
 her claim to protection was forever forfeited 
 and her restoration to society denied. Not so with 
 the husband ; he could spend his days and nights 
 at the pot-house, or gambling table he could re- 
 vel in debauchery and infamy perhaps his iusst 
 were fed and his passions gratified by the poorly 
 rewarded toil of a heart-broken wife and despond- 
 ing mother ; yet he had th right to command 
 and it was her part to obey his right to her was 
 not alienated, nor his authority denied. How re- 
 peatedly did it occur that during this desertion of 
 the husband, the mother would by prudence, 
 industry and constant labor, earn and collect to- 
 gether a little property for the comfort of her and 
 his children, which on his return would be squan- 
 dered by him, and the mother and children again 
 turned out doors to search shelter when it was 
 not to be found ? Nor could the children nor their 
 earnings be claimed by the mother. The infant 
 could be torn from her bosom by the authority of 
 the husband. How cruel and unfeeling was man ! 
 It was not enough thai this portion of the commu- 
 nity should be excluded from the halls of legisla- 
 tion, taxed without representation despoiled 
 of iheir property deprived of an equal share of 
 education, and confined to the menial drudgery of 
 the domestic but ties stronger than life must be 
 broken, the child must be forced from its mother's 
 arms. She who had spent the flower of her life 
 in watching over and protecting the children of 
 her love who by the bedside had lonely guarded 
 the innocent babe while its tender life seemed to 
 ae flickering away from disease who knelt at the 
 family altar, with her little ones by her side, and 
 then first taught them to lisp th.3 name and im- 
 plore the blessings of a just and holy Father 
 must be deprived of all control of those who so 
 much need the maternal tenderness and care, to 
 be found only in the heavenly purity and never- 
 dying love of a virtuous wife and an affectionate 
 mother. 
 
 What he had said was not fiction, it was truth 
 and reality tor the wife there was no law but 
 that of injustice. When abused or ill treated, her 
 only defence was her imploring look, her flowing 
 tears, and her penetrating sigh. These would be 
 sufficient to protect her against wrong from a luan 
 who possessed a heart to feel; but from the lor- 
 tune-huntmg villain, who married the money and 
 not the woman, and who estimated domestic hap- 
 piness and female virtue by the amount of proper- 
 ty secured through the business transaction, there 
 was no shield, it was to guard against cases of 
 ihat kind, that tho proposition before the Conven- 
 tion had been submitted, and not to build up se- 
 parate interests between n?an and wile, as was 
 falsely charged. The man who would not show 
 
1041 
 
 the same respect and affection for his wife with- 
 out property, as he would with, was unworthy the 
 name of husband, and should have continued in 
 the condition of life occupied by some members 
 of that body, who were so strongly opposed to the 
 reform sought to be effected by constitutional pro- 
 vision. 
 
 The matrimonial condition in this country was 
 more elevated, refined and happy than that of any 
 other country; but this was owing to the hallowed 
 influence of religion, morality and intelligence, 
 and was attained in despite of a false and barbar- 
 ous system transported from other countries. He 
 wished to know how the protection of the wife and 
 mother, to the property justly hers, and required 
 to sustain herself and children, could operate to 
 the injury of the family ? If the husband was what 
 he should be, no difficulty could occur; but if not, 
 much evil would be prevented. The husband 
 that would spend his wife's money and then abuse 
 her because she refused to give him more, was but 
 a brute in man's guise, and would, it he had the 
 power, deprive her ol the last farthing, and then 
 cast her off for not finding him more. 
 
 He thought that the argument that the protec- 
 tion of the wife's property, would stimulate the 
 husband constantly to quarrel with her in order to 
 get possession of it, was very unfavorable to his 
 sex. Why was it that the wife never quarrelled 
 lor the property of her husband, or rather to re- 
 cover that of which he had robbed her ? There 
 seemed to be no rear of this no interference with 
 the solemn rights of marriage then. No disturb- 
 ing domestic happiness no wrangling no mis- 
 chief flowing from such a state of things. It ap- 
 peared to him. that every step taken in opposition 
 to the proposed reform involved additional absur- 
 dity, and detracted from the character of the male 
 sex, while it demonstrated the disinterested kind- 
 ness, and inherent tenderness of the female char- 
 acter. In regard to the safety of the property and 
 its judicious dispensation, it was as secure in the 
 hands of the wife, as it was in the husband's. 
 She was not exposed [o the same temptations was 
 not as ambitious of worldly distinction, and would 
 not be likely to hazard her property to as great 
 an extent as he would. Her affection (or her off- 
 spring was more ardent, and her attachment to, 
 and inducements for remaining at home, much 
 stronger than his. Indeed, the wile, the mother, 
 was a safe depository for the comforts, the educa- 
 tion and the happiness ot those with whose destiny 
 hers was so interwoven that nothing but death 
 could separate it. 
 
 Nineteen cases out of every twenty, when want 
 has- found its way in families, especially those who 
 commenced with property, it was through the mis- 
 fortune or the bad character of the husband ; anc 
 it would seem but just that, in either event 
 protection should be afforded to the defenceless 
 mother and children. The subterfuge resorted to 
 by the enemies of this measure, reminded him o 
 what was said of the spirit of darkness, who when 
 unsuccessful in seducing the good from the path 
 . of duty, would assume the garb of light, and 
 by concealment effect through deceit what he 
 has failed to do under his recognized character 
 It was the same in regard to the attempt to excite 
 prejudice againet this proposition, under the pre 
 tence that it would interfere with the institution 
 
 105 
 
 )f marriage. This ordinance originated in Divine 
 aw, and was as far above human laws as heaven 
 ,vas above the earth. When the Creator pronoun- 
 ced the "twain one flesh," he established a prin. 
 ciple of equality and justice, found alone in the 
 3urity of His own character. There were no hu- 
 miliating conditions no oppression no injustice 
 no selfishness no inequality there. But man, 
 or sordid and mercenary motives, had supplanted 
 he ordinance of God by substituting conditions sa 
 derogatory lo the character of woman, as it was 
 degrading to his own. 
 
 The remarks he had submitted were not alone 
 applicable to married women much that lie had 
 said would equally apply to the unmarried. It 
 was not his intention to allude to the civil rights 
 or condition of single females. That they were 
 taxed without representation, all knew. That the 
 reward for their labor was much below what was 
 received by males, none would deny. That they 
 were spurned from society, if entangled in but one 
 of the thousand snares which were thiown in their 
 rugged and unprotected path of life, was too pain, 
 fully true. It was a cruel state of society which 
 looked with complacency on the immorality of 
 males permitting them to associate in families 
 that were called the first class when it would 
 consign to endless infamy the other sex for the 
 first violation of that standard of moral rectitude 
 which should govern all. The education and re- 
 finement of females had been neglected by those 
 having control of government, who appeared to 
 have acted under the belief that to spell, read and 
 write, was the height of female ambition in litera- 
 ture. While vast sums of money had been appro- 
 priated for the higher institutions of learning, for 
 the education and refinement of young men, com- 
 paratively nothing had been done for the instruc- 
 tion and embellishment of the female mind. The 
 whole system of laws relating to females, so com- 
 pletely developed the selfishness of man, that it 
 occasioned unpleasant emotions when reflecting 
 upon the subject. 
 
 That females were mentally and morally equal 
 to males, he hoped would not be denied by any 
 one. The high intellectual attainments and bril- 
 liant acquirements offernale authors, were kfiown 
 to all. That they were deprived of rights and pri- 
 vileges to which they were justly entitled, he had 
 humbly endeavored to show. That they were re- 
 fused these from mercenary considerations, must 
 be manifest to every mind. But he sincerely hoped 
 that those who resisted the salutary reform con- 
 templated, would soon yield to the light of truth, 
 and a sense of justice. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE moved to substitute the fol- 
 lowing in place of Mr. BASCOM'S : 
 
 " The property of married women, real or personal, 
 which bel onged to her before marriage, or acquired after- 
 wards by gift or devise other than from her husband, and 
 the avails thereof, shall not be liable in any wise lor the 
 debts of the husband." 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND wished to amend by striking 
 out the last clause of Mr. HARRIS' section and 
 inserting the following : 
 
 $ . No ex post facto laws, either civil or criminal, shall 
 be passed; nor any law impairing the obligation of con- 
 tract, or the statutory remedy existing at the time such con- 
 tract shall be made. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS read the following substitute 
 for the information of the House : 
 
1042 
 
 " The legislature shall provide by law for a competent 
 livelihood to be secured to married women and to her in- 
 fant children out of the property owned by her, and out of 
 the use of one-third other husband's real property, owned 
 during coverture." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said this subject had been 
 before the Legislature for many years, and if there 
 was any desire among the people for such a pro- 
 vision, they should have known it. He also con- 
 tended that this separation of interest and division 
 of propeity between man and wife, would produce 
 domeslic trouble. They should jointly own all, 
 instead of having separate possessions; but if a 
 young woman, when about to be married, was ap- 
 prehensive that her property would not be safe in 
 the keeping of her hu.sband, she might vest, it in 
 trustees for her own use. This however should 
 be left to the le^islalure. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS desired to have some provision 
 which should secure the interesis of the wife 
 where the husband wss civilly dead, as well as in 
 case of his physical death. It was however better 
 tole?ve it to the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND was in favor of Mr, HARRIS' 
 proposition. He enumerated many enormities 
 which had been inflicted on females by worthless 
 husbands, and appealed to the Convention to se- 
 cure their safety. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS said this was a subject of too much 
 difficulty and delicacy to be put in so permanent a 
 form as a constitutional provision. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON appealed to the good sense 
 and intelligence of the Convention whether at 
 this late hour, they could dispose of this subject 
 properly. He moved to postpone it to the 1st of 
 December next. 
 
 Mr. STOW begged of gentlemen not to dispose 
 of this important queston with so much haste, 
 especially not to make it a constitutional provi- 
 sion, with less consideration than a village corpo- 
 ration would give to a by-law. He moved to lay 
 the whole subject on the table. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS called for the yeas and nays, and 
 there were ayes 44, noes 48. 
 
 Mr. DODD moved the previous question, and 
 there was a second. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN called for the yeas 
 and noes on the question, "shall the main ques- 
 tion be now put?" and there were ayes 51, noes 
 40. 
 
 The question recurred on the amendment of 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE, which was agreed to, ayes 50, 
 woes 48. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM gave notice of a motion to re- 
 consider. 
 
 The question then recurred on striking out 
 and inserting the amendment of Mr. BASCOM, as 
 amended, which was negatived, ayes 37, noes 59. 
 
 The question was then taken on the original 
 provision, which was carried, ayes 58, noes 44, 
 as follows : - 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Archer, F. F. Backus, H.Backus, 
 Baker, Bascom, Bowdish, Burr, R. Campbell, jr , Candee, 
 Chamberlain, Clark, Clyde, Conely,Cook, Crooker, Dana, 
 Dodd, Dubois. Greene, Han is, Hart, llotchkiss, Hutchin- 
 son Kernan, Kirklaud, Mann, McNitt, Maxwell, Miller, 
 Morris, Nellis, Nicoll, Parish, Perkins, Porte.r, President, 
 Hiker, St. John, Salisbury, Sranton, Stephens, Swackha- 
 mer Talimadge, Tilden, Townsend, Van Schoonhoven, 
 Ward Warren, Waterbury, White, Willard, Wood, Wor- 
 den, A.Wright, W. B. Wright, Yawger, Young 68. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Angel, Ayrault.Bergen, Brown.Bruce, 
 Brtmdage, Bull, Cornell, Cuddeback, Danforth, Dorlon, 
 
 Graham, Harrison, Hawley, Hunt, A. Huntington, E. 
 Huntington, Jones, Kemble, Kennedy, Kingsley, Loomis, 
 McNeil, Marvin, Munro, Nicholas, O'Conor, Patterson, 
 Penniman, Rhoades, Richmond, Russell, Shaver, Shaw, 
 Simmons, E. Spencer. Stow, Strong, Tait Taeeart, J J. 
 Taylor, Tuthill, Witbeck, Youngs 44. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote of yesterday on the amendment of the first 
 section of the report of the 4th standing commit- 
 tee, which lies over. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved the reference of the ar- 
 ticle on oaths and affirmations to the committee 
 on revision, to be incorporated in the constitution. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN made a like motion on a section 
 providing against payments to public officers for 
 services not rendered, constructive travelling, 
 and payments for two offices held at the same 
 time. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND called for the ayes and nays. 
 
 Mr. HUNT moved to strike out the word "con- 
 structive." 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said if the people thought pro- 
 per to make a constable a deputy sheriff, they 
 would not be at liberty to do so under this 
 provision. He moved to lay this order of busi- 
 ness on the table. Carried. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL gave notice of a motion to recon- 
 sider the last vote taken by yeas and nays, [on 
 Mr. HARRIS' proposition.] Table. 
 
 FLECT1VE FRANCHISE. 
 
 The Convention proceeded to the consideration 
 of the report of committee number four. 
 
 The pending amendment was on Mr. SWACK- 
 HAMER'S motion to strike out "a citizen for six- 
 ty days and" being the clause in the 18th sec- 
 tion requiring sixty days' citizenship, as one of 
 the qualifications of the naturalized elector. 
 
 Messrs. O'CONOR, TILDEN, RHOADES, 
 HARRIS, WATERBURY, and JONES, discuss- 
 ed the amendment. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question, 
 and it was seconded. 
 
 The motion to strike out the words " a citizen 
 for sixty days and," was lost* ayes 48 noes 48, as 
 follows : 
 
 AYES- Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Bowdish, Brown, R. 
 Campbell, jr., Clark, Clyde, Conely, Cornell, Cuddebf ck, 
 Danforth, Hart, Hotchkiss, Hunt, A. Hurrtington, Hwtch- 
 inson, Jones, Kennedy, .Kingsley, Mann, McNeil, Max- 
 well, Morris, Munro, Nellis, Nicoll, O'Conor, Perkins, 
 President, Riker, Russell, St. John, Sanford, Shaw, Ste- 
 phens, Swackhamer, Taft, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Til- 
 den, Townsend, Tmhill.Van Schoonhoven, Ward, White, 
 Willard, Wood, Youngs 48. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus,H.Back- 
 us, Baker, Bascom, Bull, Burr, Candee, Coek, Crooker, 
 Dana, Dodd, Dorlon, Dubois, Forsyth,- Graham, Greene, 
 Harris, Harrison, Hawley, E. Huntington, Kirkland, Mc- 
 Nitt, Marvin, Miller, Nicholas, Parish, Patterson, Penni- 
 man, Rhoades, Richmond. Salisbury, Shaver, Simmons, 
 E. Spencer, Stanton, Stow, Strong, Taggart, Talimadge, 
 Warren, Waterbury, Worden, A. Wright, W. B. Wright, 
 Yawger, Young 48. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS resumed his speech of yester- 
 day on the extension of the right of suffrage to 
 blacks. He ridiculed what he called the extreme 
 apprehension in certain quarters lest a class of 
 white voters, who were obliged often to change 
 their residence* should commit fraud* upon the 
 
1043 
 
 ballot boxes, and might be bought and sold and 
 the great anxiety in the same quarter to let in a 
 class of colored persons whose degradation and 
 vices decreased their numbers annually, notwith- 
 standing the large accession from other states. 
 It was the destiny of the black race ever to occu- 
 py an inferior social position to the white. It 
 was the latent decree of the Almighty, and noth- 
 ing could change it. Mr. P. laid it down as the 
 economy of Providence that there should be sep- 
 arate races and grades of beings on the earth. 
 He asserted that the great offence which brought 
 the flood on the earth was the intercourse be- 
 tween the sons of God and the daughters of men, 
 the intercourse of one race with another that 
 God had separated. When they commmingled, 
 he separated them again. A century after the 
 dispersion at Babel profane history showed that 
 this black race existed, with all the characteris- 
 tics that now marked them. That climate should 
 have done this was impossible. This mark 
 was on them as a warning that other nations 
 should not commingle with them. Subsequent- 
 ly, when the Jews intermingled with other nations 
 it was called whoredom, and was denounced by 
 God. You could not admit the blacks to a parti- 
 cipation in the government of the country, unless 
 you put them on terms .of social equality with us 
 and that could only be done, by degrading our 
 own race to a level with them. He adverted to 
 Asia Minor, the garden of the world, and the 
 three nations that were attempting to live there 
 the Jew, the Mahomedan and the Christian to 
 the constant warfare going on between these na- 
 tions, to the decrease in population which was 
 the consequence. He adverted also to Mexico, 
 where there were three races ; with something 
 like an ec aality of right, and yet nothing but a 
 standing army could govern them. So in Eng- 
 land, where there were distinct races, nothing 
 but the bayonet kept the peace. He predicted 
 that in the city ot New York, negroes would ne- 
 ver be permitted to come up to the ballot boxes, 
 or if they did come, it would be only to be bought 
 and sold like cattle in the market. Riots and 
 violence would be the order of the day. Mr. P. 
 closed by warning the Convention against adopt- 
 ing a provision which must disfranchise a large 
 class of white voters saying that they would 
 hear from it at the polls of the election, as well 
 as from the proposition to bring in the whole ne- 
 gro race at the polls. 
 
 Mr. DANA replied, remarking that he should 
 hardly expect to successfully oppose the learned 
 and Biblical orator who had preceded him. He 
 could not however, see the bearing of the gentle- 
 man's arguments on the question, as to the right 
 of the colored man to vote. The question was 
 raised during his speech, whether the mark 
 placed upon Cain was the same now found upon 
 the African race. And whether that mark was 
 intended for protection or destruction. Also 
 whether the flood was not brought upon the earth 
 by reason of the violence of men of one man 
 upon his fellow. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS understood Madison was a Bi- 
 ble county. If the black skins came from the 
 mark on Cain, he asked the gentleman whether 
 it was put on for their protection or to make 
 slaves of them. 
 
 Mr. DANA said God put a mark on him, lest 
 any man finding him* should do him any injury. 
 3ut it seemed now, the same mark on a man ten- 
 ded to his destruction. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER: How does the gentleman 
 enow it is the same mark ? 
 
 Mr. DANA replied that he said it was a mark, 
 tie was following the position of the gentleman 
 "rom St. Lawrence who called it the mark. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said his remark was this, that 
 when God separated Cain from the rest, and 
 drove him out, it became offensive in his sight 
 that the other children of Adam should intermar- 
 ry with the descendants of Cain. He supposed 
 the female descendants of Cain were the "daugh- 
 ters of men," spoken of in the chapter preced- 
 ing the account of the flood which was brought 
 on the earth because the sons of God inteunar- 
 ried with them. 
 
 Mr. DANA said we had no account of Cain's 
 descendants marrying the sons of God. There 
 was no account of any other son or daughter of 
 Adam, at the time when Cain received the mark. 
 [A voice "You're wrong there."] Mr. D. said 
 he was not wrong. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS : What was the cause of the 
 flood ? Was it not slavery ? 
 
 Mr. DANA : The wickedness of man. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS: The violence of man. 
 [Laughter.] My bible says so. 
 
 Mr. DANA said the subject was not pursued in 
 a manner that was profitable, and he would de- 
 sist from any further remarks now. 
 
 Mr. SHAVER understood the gentleman from 
 Dutchess was willing to modify his amendment 
 so as to change the 60 to 30 days. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES was willing to put it at that. 
 
 Mr. SHAVER said it was understood that the 
 formation of this Constitution was to be the re- 
 sult of compromise individual, personal and 
 party preferences were to be given up. Upoa 
 this principle the friends of the provision in the 
 section were willing to accede some portion of 
 their first position . 
 
 Mr. TILDEN said that those who opposed the 
 first proposition would be quite as unwilling to 
 vote for a thirty days' residence. 
 
 Mr. SHAVER proceeded to describe the opera- 
 tion of the provision. Gentlemen object to this 
 term of residence in a town or ward, while they 
 forget that a much larger term is required in the 
 county, the lines of which are much longer. He 
 could not believe that removals from one ward to 
 another in the city would be likely to deprive 
 many citizens of their votes. The usual time of 
 removals aid not occur within sixty days of any 
 election. His only desire was to prevent the 
 great amount of colonizing, which was known 
 to be carried on at every election, and the bribery 
 and corruption which was practised openly to a 
 great extent. It was a principle which the safe- 
 ty of the several counties call for, and he hoped 
 it would be adopted. 
 
 Mr. 11LDEN insisted that the remedy was 
 much more than co-extensive with the evil in- 
 tended to be reached that colonization could not 
 be the object of a removal In.rn one dij-trict to an- 
 other where the same class of officers were to be 
 voted for and that in the cases where coloniza- 
 tion might be the object ol a removal, the remedy 
 
1044 
 
 went to the length of disfranchisement for local 
 or state officers. 
 
 Mr. BROWN replied that the six months' resi. 
 dencein the county had been heretofore required, 
 because counties were the smallest subdivisions 
 within which the important class of officers were 
 elected such as sheriffs, clerks, &c. By the same 
 rule now, residence in the assembly district should 
 be required rather than in the towns or wards, 
 and then the elector should not be disfranchised 
 from voting for county, or district, or state officers. 
 And after all, what object was to be gained by 
 tiiis that might not be attained by legislation ? 
 Why make an inflexible rule here which might be 
 found to work harshly ? He trusted the friends of 
 an unrestricted suffrage, as it was now enjoyed, 
 woyld not yield an inch of the present constitution; 
 but stand by it firmly. If there were evils to be 
 remedied in the large cities, he begged gentlemen 
 not to adopt a rule which would afiect injuriously 
 the rights of the country. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND remarked that formerly when 
 town meetings were held on different days, colo- 
 nization was as rife in the country as it was said 
 to be in the city. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN replied that it was no reason be- 
 cause a bad man moved from town to town t& help 
 carry it, that one honest man moving from town 
 to town from necessity, should be deprived of the 
 right of voting for governor. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND, continued, saying that colo- 
 nization had by no means ceased in the country 
 since town meetings were held on the same day. 
 And if it was necessary to have a six months' re- 
 sidence for a county, thirty days' residence in a 
 town ought also to be required. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend Mr. RtrGGLEs' a- 
 mendment by inserting " in the Assembly dis- 
 tricts." It had been provided that in the city of 
 New York wards might be divided in the forma- 
 tion of Assembly districts, and this would meet, 
 that case. He earnestly beseeched gentlemen to 
 forget partizan considerations in deciding upon 
 this matter. All had a deep and holy interest in 
 the preservation of the purity of elections. Peo- 
 ple of all parties in the city from which he came, 
 and,. he believed, in all parts of the State, were 
 convinced of the necessity for some remedy for 
 the evils which all knew to exist, and which 
 made our elections almost mockeries. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS was in favor of the section as it 
 was reported, with the exception of the provision 
 which would be likely to deprive of a vote those 
 who should by necessity remove before the elec- 
 tion. He would provide against this by amend- 
 ing the section so that all who had resided in the 
 locality for which the officer is to be elected, for 
 sixty days previous to the election, should be en- 
 titled to vote for such officers. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said it was his honest convic- 
 tion that the provision desired to be retained here 
 would disfranchise many thousand upright, hon- 
 est citizens, every fall, in the city of New- York. 
 For the purpose of preventing frauds, he would 
 have a provision which would disfranchise every 
 person who should be convicted of either com- 
 mitting or procuring them. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES could see no good reasons for 
 the objection made to the amendment of the sec- 
 tion, which many gentlemen admitted was an im- 
 
 provement upon the original section. Unless gen- 
 tlemen desired to have the section remain as bad 
 as possible, in order to vote against it, they would 
 allow it to be improved. He desired, as the gen- 
 tleman from New- York also professed to wish, to 
 provide some means by which the frauds of colo- 
 nization and double voting might be prevented. 
 If it could be done, without producing the con- 
 tingent evils which the members of the N. York 
 delegation seemed to fear, but which he believed 
 were imaginary, he certainly believed it ought to 
 be acquiesced in by all. He proposed to modify 
 his previous amendment, so that it would read : 
 
 " Shall be entitled to vote at such election in the town or 
 ward, or in the Assembly district in which he shall have 
 been an actual resident daring the last preceding THIRTT 
 days, and not elsewhere," &c. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS urged a shorter period of resi- 
 dence also say ten or twenty days. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN read an amendment which he 
 should like to offer, requiring a six months' resi- 
 dence in the ** official" district for which the offi- 
 cer was to be chosen. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS offered the following as a substi- 
 tute for Mr. RUGGLES'. 
 
 " Shall be entitled to vote at such election in the election 
 district where he shall reside at the time of the election, 
 providing he shall for the last preceding thirty days have 
 been an actual resident of the town or ward or Assembly 
 district, in which he offers his vote, for all officers which 
 now are or hereafter may be elective by the people." 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES accepted this substitute, upon 
 the condition that he should be allowed to add to 
 it as follows : 
 
 " An elector who by reason of the removal of his resi- 
 dence from one town, ward or Assembly district to anoth- 
 er, in the same county, is not entitled to vote in the town 
 or ward in which he shall reside at the time of the elec- 
 tion, may vote in the town or ward from which he shall 
 have last removed, provided such elector shall have been 
 a duly qualified voter in the place from which he shall have 
 removed, at the time of his removal." 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS called for a division of the ques- 
 tion, so that it should be first taken upon the 
 clause first offered. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said an inspector must 
 be a judge forty years to understand the section. 
 Not a man here, he ventured to say, understood 
 these amendments fully. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR hoped all friends of the exten- 
 sion of the elective franchise would vote against 
 every motion which amended the section as it 
 stood in i he original constitution. This was an 
 attempt to complicate the matter and make it a 
 more intricate question than 128 of the wisest 
 men in the state would be able to unravel in the 
 time which was left for the sitting of this Con- 
 vention. 
 
 The CHAIR (Mr. PATTERSON) now decided the 
 amendment originally proposed by Mr. SWACK- 
 HAMER to be first in order. 
 
 After some conversation between Messrs, 
 BROWN and HARRIS, as to the effect of the 
 proposition of the latter, 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved the previous question, 
 and it was seconded. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. SWACKHAMER, which 
 restored the section to the form of the old consti- 
 tution, was negatived, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Bergen, Bowdish, Brown, Brun- 
 dage, R, Campbell, jr., Clark, Clyde, Cornell, Hart, Hunt, 
 A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Jones, Kernan, Kingsley, 
 Mann, Maxwell, Morris, Muuro, Nicoll, 'Conor, Perkins 
 
1045 
 
 Powers, Hiker, Russell, St. John, Sanfonl, Shaw, Stephens, 
 Taft, W.Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, Vache, Ward, White, 
 Willard, Wood, Yawger, Youngs 42. 
 
 i-ssrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Back- 
 us, Baker, Bascom. Brayton, Bruce, Bull, Burr, D. D 
 Campbell, Candee, Conely, Cook, Dana, Danforth, Dodd, 
 Dorlon, Dubois, Forsyth, Gebhard, Graham. Greene, Har- 
 ris, Harrison, Hawley.Hotchkiss, Jordan, Kemlile, Kirk- 
 land, Loomis, McNeil, Marvin, Ifliller, Ncllis, Nicholas, 
 Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Porter, fRhoades, Richmond, 
 Ruggles, Salisbury, Shaver, Simmons, E. Spencer, Stan- 
 ton, Stow, Strong, Taggart, Tallmadge, J. J. Taylor, 
 Townsend, Van Schoonhoven, Wan en, Waterbury, Wit- 
 beck, Worden, A. Wright, "W. li. Wright, Young 2. 
 
 Mr, TILDEN here raised the point that the 
 amendment of Mr. RUGGLES was not now in or- 
 d er it not being in order at the time when the 
 previous question was moved and appealed from 
 the decision of the CHAIR to the contrary ; but 
 subsequently withdrew it. 
 
 The first part ot Mr. RUGGLES' amendment, 
 (that proposed by Mr. HARRIS) was agreed to as 
 follows: 
 
 AYES Messrs. AUkn, Angel, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. 
 Backus, H. Backus, Baker, Bascom, Brayton, Bruce, Bull, 
 Burr, D. D. Campbell, Caudee, Conely, Cook, Dana, Dodd, 
 Doiion, Dubois, Forsyth, Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Har. 
 ris, Harrison, Hawley, Jordan, Kemble, Kirkland, Loomis, 
 McNitt, Marvin, Maxwell, Miller, Nellis, Nicholas, Par. 
 ish, Patterson, Penniman, Porter, Powers, President, 
 Rhoades, Richmond, Ruggles, St. John, Salisbury, Shaver, 
 Simmons, E. Spencer, Stow, -Strong, Taggart, Tallmadge, 
 Townsend, Van Schoonhoven, Warren, Waterbury, Wit- 
 beck, Worden, A. Wright, W. B. Wright, Young 64. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Bergen, Brown, Brundage, R.Campbell, 
 jr., Clyde, Cornell, Cuddeback, Danlorth.Hart, Hotchkiss, 
 A. Huntington, Hutchinson, Jones, Kennedy, Kernan, 
 Kingsley, Mann, McNeil, Morris, Munro, Murphy, Nicoll, 
 O'Conor, Perkins, Riker, Russell, Sandford, fehaw, Ste 
 phens, Swackhamer, Taft, W. Taylor, Tilden, Tuthill, 
 Vache, Ward, White, Willard, Wood 39. 
 
 The latter clause was adopted 58 to 43. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote upon the first clause. He did not think that 
 a thirty days residence would effect the object de- 
 flired. 
 
 Mr. STOW made the same motion with regard 
 to the last vote. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved the section of the old consti- 
 tution as a substitute for the amended section of 
 the report, omitting the clause in regard to per- 
 sons of color. 
 
 Propositions to amend the matter proposed to be 
 struck out being first in order 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to amend so as to lequire 
 six months residence in the judicial district, in- 
 stead of the county but withdrew it under a call 
 for the previous question. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to amend so as to require 
 ten instead ot sixty days' citizenship, and three in- 
 stead ot six weeks' residence in the county. 
 
 Both these propositions were adopted 49 to 45, 
 and 65 to 35. 
 
 Mr. J ONES' substitute was next in order. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to amend the substitute, 
 so that it would read as follows : 
 
 ' Every male citizen of the age of 21 years, who shall 
 have been an inhabitant ol this state one year next pre- 
 ceding any election, and for the last three months a resi- 
 dent of the county where he m;iy offer his vote, and shall 
 have been a citizen lor 20 days, shall be entitled to vote in 
 the election district in which he shall actually reside, for 
 all officers that now are, or hereafter may be elected by the 
 people, provided he shall loi 30 days next preceding, have 
 ])! an actual resident of the town or ward and assembly 
 district in which he offers to vote." 
 
 Mr. JONES withdrew his proposed substitute. 
 
 Mr. CORNELL moved to amend by adding at 
 the end of the section : 
 
 "But the privilege of the elective franchise herein con- 
 ferred, shall not be construed to apply to any person of co- 
 lor except such as shall be siezed and possessed of a free- 
 hold estate as required in this section, on the day when 
 this Constitution shall go into effect. And no person of 
 color shall be subject to direct taxation unless he shall 
 possess the privilege of the elective franchise." 
 
 At an earlier period of the session Mr\ C. had 
 intended to have examined some of the proposi- 
 tions reported to the Convention by committee 
 number four, especially those which related to 
 negro suffrage, somewhat at length. But the 
 subject not having been reached until after the 
 Convention, from the press of business upon its 
 hands, had found it necessary to adopt a fifteen 
 minute rule, under the operation of which it 
 was of course impossible to examine a question 
 of this nature; indeed there could be no greater 
 folly than to suppose that any thing at all 
 worthy the. name of a discussion of the merits of 
 a question, so grave and intricate as this, could 
 be had under it. He should therefore merely al- 
 lude to some of the principal points of argument, 
 and to some of the facts and circumstances upon 
 which the question must turn and be decided 
 
 He differed with the gentleman from Erie (Mr. 
 STOW) who if he understood him, held it to be 
 purely a question of expediency and public policy 
 who we would entrust with the possession and 
 exercise of the power of voting in the state, while 
 he agreed with the gentleman from Seneca (Mr. 
 BASCOM, and the gentleman from Wyoming (Mr. 
 YOTJNG) that it was one of natural and inalienable 
 right. How then, it might be asked, could we 
 exclude the negroes, or as gentlemen call them, 
 our colored fellow citizens, without a gross vio- 
 lation of right and justice, by which we should 
 forfeit all just claim to democracy or republican- 
 ism, and give to the negroes just cause and right 
 revolution ? If time permitted him to give this 
 subject the examination which it merited, he 
 should think it proper to go into a critical analy- 
 sis of the supposed difficulties which beset the 
 practical operation of this natural and inaliena- 
 ble right of all men to political equality, not 
 doubting that they would be found to have no 
 real existence. 
 
 The doctrine promulgated in the Declaration of 
 Independence, *' that all men are created equal 
 that they are endowed by their Creator with cer- 
 tain unalienable rights that among these are 
 life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness: That 
 to secure" (the practical enjoyment of) " these 
 rights," that " governments are instituted among 
 men, deriving their just powers from the consent 
 of the governed ;" or, in other words, " That any 
 and every government instituted or existing, de- 
 rives all its just powers of judgment and action, in 
 which it has its entire entity, as a'n organised in- 
 stitution or being in the state, from the consent 
 of the people, governed by means of its operation, 
 as their agency for that purpose." This was to 
 him no mere idle abstraction, destitute of practi- 
 cability ; but on the contrary, he held it to be a 
 part of the fundamental basis of the true science 
 of government, and civil society, and of Ameri- 
 can constitutional law. 
 
 In perusing the pages of history, he found that 
 the capacity and necessities of mankind had rear- 
 
1046 
 
 ed the civil state in several different forms, 
 with many differences of detail but upon a close 
 examination, it would be found that there was but 
 one power in operation, and that there were but 
 two principles upon which it did or could ope- 
 rate. The attributes of God were proportionate 
 one to another. Man was created in his image, 
 with the privilege toward God, but toward his 
 fellow, the rights of life, liberty, and the pur- 
 suit of happiness, to be held by the race in 
 perpetuity, necessarily bringing with them 
 the power of providing for their security and as 
 no power was adequate to that end, but that 
 which was supreme, absolute, sovereign, it fol- 
 lowed of necessity that sovereignty, except as to- 
 ward God, existed in man, coextensive with 
 his rights and as sovereignty was in its nature a 
 unit, indivisible, it coul'd be vested in and opera- 
 ted by man, but upon two distinct principles 
 first, upon the American principle of the sove- 
 reignty of the people, or all men, upon which 
 the individuals, as held by Justice 'WILSON, and 
 other eminent writers upon government and con- 
 stitutional law, were joint tenents in the sove- 
 reignty of the state, and of right co-participants 
 in its exercise. 
 
 This was the elementary principle the funda- 
 mental basis of democracy. 
 
 The second and only other principle upon 
 which it could exist and operate, was that com- 
 monly known as the divine right of kings, or ab- 
 soluteism, which differed from the first, only in 
 that it assumed a divinely conferred sovereign- 
 ty, exclusively in one person, or in a number of 
 persons, in perpetuity. Although this doctrine 
 had been exploded, principally because it involv- 
 ed the necessity of man's existing without rights 
 or of his rightful existence without a rightful or 
 legitimate title to the power of existence in per- 
 petuity, which was the same thing ; yet he was 
 aware that it was still held to be true, and practi- 
 ced upon in many nations. He believed that all 
 the various forms of government would, upon 
 careful examination resolve themselves into one 
 or the other of these two principles, and that the 
 estates, technically so called, which enter form- 
 ally into the composition of what is called mixed 
 government, would be found to be held of grace 
 irom the sovereign, he permitting their existence 
 and exercise or not, at pleasure. The estates, or 
 orders in the English nation were so permitted to 
 exist; the functions of sovereignty which thev 
 exercised were not original in them, but the ex- 
 ercise of those functions was merely vested in 
 them by the sovereign. 
 
 It was not necessary to his present purpose to 
 allude to the various conditions incident to special 
 absoluteism, such as abdication, regency, &c.; 
 sufficient was it to say, that it differed essentially 
 from the true theory, only in that it necessarily 
 held all human rights and power to be alienable. 
 
 If the people were sovereign, if all the persons 
 composing the people were joint tenants in the 
 sovereignty, wherefore, it was asked, do we ex- 
 clude females and children of a certain age, &c., 
 from voting ? or from participating in the action 
 by which the sovereign speaks ? 
 
 Time would not permit him to reply to this 
 objection at length, to examine in detail the ele- 
 mental condition, or if he might be permitted 
 
 the expression, the physiology of the State, or 
 what constitutes its perfection or imperfection, 
 in what condition it is complete or incomplete, 
 its positive or male side, its passive or female 
 side, their embrionic condition, &c. He would 
 merely remark, that the conditions and limita- 
 tions to the practice of conventional rights and 
 powers, must be conventional. To the practice of 
 those rights and powers which were natural, the 
 conditions and limitations must be natural. The 
 peculiar mode of exercise of the sovereign power 
 to which the several natural elements of the 
 State were entitled or confined, the positive and 
 direct, or the passive and indirect, were indi- 
 cated and determined with great precision and 
 certainty, by their capacity to its full and con- 
 tinuous exercise ; but of this there was no time 
 to speak, or of those conditional and subsidiary 
 elements, which were necessitated to non user, 
 the limitations of which' were found by the natu- 
 ral rule of general average. 
 
 He believed that the great points of this doc- 
 trine should be declared in the Constitution. At 
 an early period of the session a resolution had, 
 upon his motion, been adopted asking committee 
 number eleven " to enquire into the expediency 
 of embodying in the Constitution a clear and suc- 
 cinct statement or declaration of principles, as to 
 the origin and ground of government in this 
 State." But the famous debate upon the qualifi- 
 cations of the Governor had cured him of all ex- 
 pectations which he might have entertained that 
 it would be practicable for this Convention te do 
 so. But this was not the only great truth con- 
 tained in the Declaration of Independence. To- 
 ward the end of that immortal document we read 
 the further declaration " that these colonies are, 
 and of right ought to be " not only separate, but 
 " free and independent states," &c. Now what 
 was the condition of a free, sovereign and inde- 
 pendent state a separate, distinct and indepen- 
 dent nationality ? It was a condition of complete 
 and unlimited power, to admit individuals, of the 
 people of other nations, to enter and sojourn with- 
 in its territory as aliens, and to privilege them as 
 it chose, so far and so long as it thought proper, 
 or not at all ; and also to naturalize or consolidate 
 into itself all such alien sojourners as may con- 
 sent thereto ; or such races and national descrip- 
 tions of them, and such only, as it chose, or none 
 at all. 
 
 The right of nations to do that, and the entire 
 destitution of right in other nations or the indi- 
 viduals thereof to do any thing inconsistent there- 
 with, cannot be denied without opposing the 
 clearest conclusions of reason and common sense, 
 and the best authorities upon natural and inter- 
 national law. That being the case how were we 
 to understand the democratic principle of the po- 
 litical equality of mankind, in connection with 
 nationality, and in that connection alone. All men 
 who are of the people of New York, were of right 
 equal one to another, all men who were of the 
 people of Spain were of right equal one to ano- 
 ther, as to their nationality. There was no other 
 political equality. 
 
 Who were the people of a state ? Who were 
 the people of New York ? The true answer to 
 this question is given by the publacist, " since 
 every state is constituted by men's submitting 
 
1047 
 
 their wills to a single person or to an assembly, 
 they principally have a title to the name of mem- 
 bers, by whose covenants the society were first 
 incorporated, and they who regularly succeed in 
 to the place of those primitive founders," and 
 such others as they admit to consolidation witn 
 themselves. Now who were the founders of this 
 state ; who were " the good people of this colony" 
 by whose authority it was founded ? They were 
 a portion of the British people ; they were British 
 subjects up to the day of its foundation ; not quasi 
 subjects merely, subject to obey the laws by rea- 
 son of their inhabitancy by permission within the 
 territorial jurisdiction of the crown, but full and 
 free subjects, in the so to speak, technically na- 
 tional or political sense of the term. 
 
 To this condition, the negroes, whether of trans 
 or cis-atlantic birth, were never admitted by the 
 British nation prior to the revolution they were 
 an alien people' on the day New York assumed 
 existence as a sovereign state, and he denied that 
 it could be shown that the state of New York had 
 ever naturalized or consolidated into itself a sin- 
 gle negro, while the power to naturalize was con- 
 tinued to be exercised by separate state action, 
 nor had it been done by any other state. 
 
 It was well known that Congress, in accord 
 ance with the spirit of the federal constitution 
 and the universal understanding and well known 
 intention of the people of the States, at the time 
 of its adoption, had expressly provided against 
 their naturalization. Nothing could be claimed 
 on account of their having been soldiers in our 
 revolutionary and other wars, beyond what migh 
 be done for any other aliens, if so much seeing 
 they were in modt cases governed by their mas- 
 ters, whether for oo against us, and could not have 
 been deemed capable of treason in any event. 
 
 No one pretended that an alien of exlra-territo- 
 rial birth could be naturalized without some ex- 
 press act in his favor, declaring or recognizing 
 some rule as to its effect upon his descendants o 
 heritable blood ; yet it seemed lobe supposed tha 
 the son of an alien, even though he might be ex 
 trageneous, would be a citizen, it born within ou 
 territory, in the absence of any express provision or 
 our part in relation to the case, even in the lac< 
 of an express exclusion of the father. But thi 
 he apprehended was not the rule. 
 
 He was willing to admit that the negro, like 
 any other alien, might be privileged beyond true 
 alien ritthts ; and that such privileges might be 
 identical in form with the rights of the citizen 
 but these privileges were subject to revocation 
 Massachusetts had prnileged the negroes in ilia 
 form ; and some supposed she had naturalizec 
 them into herself, and constituted them citizen 
 of the United States, in the proper technical sens 
 of that term. Nothing was larthertrom the tiuth 
 Those privileges did not reach beyond the bound 
 of that state. 
 
 The subject of the political grade of the fre 
 negro population of the United States, had bee 
 supposed to be full of difficulties. For himseli 
 he could see none of an insurmountable charac 
 ter. He could indeed see many anomalies in ou 
 legislation upon the subject ; but he believed tha 
 upon a careful examination ot the matter, the 
 would prove to have arisen more from a misur 
 derstanding of the elementary principles of ou 
 
 olitical institutions, and from a strange disposi* 
 on to overlook the existence of the conditions of 
 xtrageneous alienage and the various stages of 
 uasi citizenship intermediate between the con- 
 ition of chattel slavery, and that of complete 
 
 chnical citizenship, than from the intrinsic na- 
 ure of the case itself. 
 
 He regarded the privilege of voting granted to 
 ic negroes in this State, by the constitution of 
 wenty-one on condition of their owning a free- 
 old estate, to be of that special character, sub- 
 ;ct to revocation. It was conferred upon them as 
 n experiment for their improvement ; but it had 
 ailed to produce any other effect than to mislead 
 Republic mind as to their citizenship, and create 
 n odious and aristocratic distinction among them- 
 elves, at war with the theory of our institutions, 
 nd of evil example and tendency. For these, 
 mong other reasons, he had voted for its entire 
 bolition. But the Convention by a strong vote 
 lad decided to retain it, not, as he understood, 
 hat it was right and proper in itself, but express- 
 y upon the ground that these negroes who had 
 ecome voters under the encouragement held out 
 o them by the provisions of the old constitution, 
 lad an equitable claim upon us to continue the 
 peration of these provisions in their favor. He 
 ould not concur in that opinion, but he had been 
 iverruled upon that point. 
 
 It had also been decided, that no attempt should 
 >e made to naturalize them, or to privilege them 
 A'ith what, to them, would be really and truly the 
 mvilege of the elective franchise, or suffrage, 
 ipon the condition of their humanity alone, or 
 upon any other terms or conditions than the pos- 
 session of a freehold estate. The Convention 
 had also seemed to consider that direct taxation 
 without representation, should not apply even to 
 the individual resident though an alien. In ac- 
 cordance with these decisions of the Convention 
 lis amendment had been drawn. If adopted, it 
 would work the gradual abolition of the require- 
 ment of property as a qualification for voting, to 
 which principle we all professed to be opposed, 
 saving at the same time the privileges of the pre- 
 sent negro voters, and leaving all other negroes, 
 who could not hereafter acquire that privilege, 
 from direct taxation even though they should ac- 
 quire property far beyond the value of two 
 hundred and fifty dollars, on the same principle 
 which the old constitution applied to those who 
 acquire an amount of property less than two hun- 
 dred and fifty dollars. This provision, based as 
 it was upon the decisions already made by the 
 Convention, was, it appeared to him, eminently 
 wise and beneficent, and could not fail to meet 
 the hearty approval of the people of this state. 
 To the decision of the Convention, that it would 
 make no attempt to consolidate the negro into 
 the people of this state, he heartily agreed, be- 
 lieving that the people of this state had no right 
 to attempt it under the Federal Constitution, if 
 indeed it were possible to do so successfully un- 
 der any circumstances. He believed it would be 
 impossible by reason of the antipathy which na- 
 ture had interposed between the races, as an 
 impassable barrier to social amalgamation into 
 consanguinity ; he believed that it would be 
 against the manifest spirit of the Federal Con- 
 stitution, to privilege the negro with any direct 
 
1048 
 
 voice in our political affairs, and that it would be 
 dangerous to our welfare, and to the union of the 
 States. 
 
 If the principles involved in the case were such 
 as he had indicated, it would be seen at once, 
 that there was no question of democracy and 
 equal rights, or of aristocracy, embraced in its 
 consideration or connected with it, any more than 
 there was in the question of consolidating the abo- 
 riginees of our country with ourselves, or of the 
 naturalization of Europeans, otherwise than that 
 an attempt to consolidate the negro with our own 
 race, must, so far as it was successful, operate to 
 deteriorate, corrupt and wither our democratic in- 
 stitutions, while on the other hand, as from the na- 
 ture of the case might have been expected, the ad- 
 mission of Europeans had operated to sustain and 
 strengthen them. But if the negroes were to be 
 admitted, or the principle contended for by the 
 gentleman from Madison (Mr. BRUCE) and oth- 
 ers upon this floor, upon their humanity alone, 
 irrespective of nationality and race, operating 
 throughout the world of mankind at large, estab- 
 lishing one great cosmos, it would in the present 
 condition of the world, instead of carrying out 
 and establishing the principle of democracy, 
 work its entire and complete overthrow, and of 
 nationality along with it. 
 
 But the Convention he was sure would not 
 sanction a principle like that, were we, in antici- 
 pation of the long looked for millenium, about to 
 proclaim ourselves citizens of the world, cos- 
 mopolites, destitute of patriotism, and all the 
 world and his wife promiscuously citizens of our 
 own state, he trusted not, he trusted the decision 
 of the convention in that respect would be adher- 
 ed to. 
 
 If the state retained the power to natu- 
 ralize them, or even the clear right to privilege 
 them as proposed, it would, he could not doubt, 
 be highly inexpedient to do so, but he should not 
 discuss that branch of the subject, not doubting 
 that chattel slavery was destined to cease, leaving 
 some three millions of those people to be dispos- 
 ed of in some way ; he could not deem it wise to 
 tie them to us in any manner whatever. 
 
 He believed that slavery had been permited in 
 the providence of God, as a means of preparing 
 a portion of the Ethiopian race for the great mis- 
 sion of civilizing the tribes of Africa,a work which 
 had failed in the hands of every other race ; he 
 would do every thing to prepare them for that 
 great work but nothing to retard their entrance 
 upon it at the earliest possible day. 
 
 Mr. A.W. YOUNG opposed the amendment, and 
 was lost ayes 15, noes 74, 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved to substitute the section 
 proposed by Mr. JONES as modified by Mr. HAR- 
 RIS, with the exception that he changed the 30 
 days in the last place mentioned to 20 dajs. 
 
 Explanations passed between Messrs. RUG- 
 GLES, STOW, WORDEN and TILDEN, who 
 moved to amend the amendment of Mr. WORDEN, 
 by adding as follows : 
 
 "But the removal of any citizen from one election dis- 
 trict to another within twenty days next preceding an elec- 
 tion, shall not prevent such citizen from voting in the dis- 
 trict from which he removed, if he had been a resident 
 thereof ior twenty days next preceding his removal." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR was allowed to read a resolution 
 
 referring the first section to a select committee, 
 with instructions to report it in a certain form; 
 but the previous question was insisted upon. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved to adjourn. 
 
 He gave way to allow Mr. BAKER to give no- 
 tice of a motion to reconsider the resolution fixing 
 the day of final adjournment. 
 
 The motion to adjourn was negatived. 
 
 The previous question was then seconded. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. TILDEN was lost 46 
 to 46. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. WORDEN was negati- 
 ved ayes 43, nays 50- 
 
 Mr. MARVIN gave notice of a motion to recon- 
 sider this vote. 
 
 Mr. BRAYTON had leave to record his vote in 
 the affirmative on the question of striking out the 
 word white in the 1st section. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned to 8 1.2 o'clock 
 to-morrow morning. 
 
 SATURDAY, (105th day,) Oct. 3. 
 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. A. CAMPBELL. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND presented a petition from Al- 
 van Stewart and others of Oneida, for an exten- 
 sion of the elective franchise. Laid on the table. 
 
 Messrs. JORDAN and W. C. WRIGHT sever- 
 ally presented petitions Irotn the city of New 
 York, for the abolition of the superior court of 
 that city, and an increase of the number of su- 
 preme court judges. Referred to the committee 
 of revision, &c, 
 
 THE NEW CONSTITUTION. 
 Mr. JORDAN, from the select committee on 
 the revision of the Constitution, submitted a re- 
 port. The articles, as far as acted upon, the com- 
 mittee had arranged; some of the phraseology 
 they had changed, and subjects not touched by the 
 Convention they had provided for by adopting the 
 provisions of the present constitution. The order 
 in which the committee had placed the articles 
 was as follows : 
 
 1. The Bill of Rights. 
 
 2. The Elective Franchise. 
 
 3. The Powers and Duties of the Legislature. 
 
 4. The Executive Department. 
 
 5. The Administrative Department. 
 
 6. The Judiciary. 
 
 7. Finances both articles. 
 
 8. Corporations Messrs. LOOMH and CAMBRELENQ'S 
 
 report. 
 
 9. Education. 
 
 10. Local Officers. 
 
 11. The Militia (old constitution.) 
 12 Oaths and Affirmations. 
 
 13. Future Amendments. 
 
 14. A Schedule which provides the time when the 
 
 term of offices abolished shall expire, and the 
 new Government go into full effect. 
 
 To these the committee had prefixed the fol- 
 lowing preamble : 
 
 We, the People of the State of New York, grateful to 
 Almighty God for our freedom : in order to secure its 
 blessings, do establish this Constitution." 
 
 There were various provisions which the com- 
 mittee had introduced, under instruction of the 
 Convention. Mr. J. went into a minute explana- 
 tion of the efiect of the changes and modifications 
 made by the committee, and concluded by moving 
 that the report be laid on the table and printed. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to amend so as to have 
 the printing done under the supervision of the 
 
1049 
 
 gentleman who had made Ihe report, who had 
 given his best attention to the subject day and 
 night for some time. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND offered a substitute providing 
 that the leport be laid on the table and printed by 
 84 o'clock on Monday morning, and made the spe- 
 cial order for that day. Agreed to. 
 THE MILITIA. 
 
 Mr. WARD moved that the report of committee 
 No. 8 on the militia, be referred to the committee 
 on revision, with instructions to incorporate it in 
 the constitution. The only difference he said in 
 the article as reported by the select committee, 
 and that of the standing committee, was in rela- 
 tion to the appointment ot the Commissary Gener- 
 al, and the provision changing the mode of ap- 
 pointment of the Brigade Inspectors. 
 
 Mr. JONES thought this to be but matter for 
 legislation, and as there was no time, in his opin- 
 ion, to consider the subject, he moved it to be laid 
 on the table. Mr. J. subsequently withdrew his 
 motion. 
 
 Mr. WARD replied, urged the importance of 
 action on this report. No provision had yet ben 
 made for the appointment of the Commissary Ge- 
 neral. 
 
 The first section was then read and agreed to. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM urged that there was not time to 
 go through with this article, and suggested that 
 the chairman of the committee draft an article 
 vesting the whole arrangement of the matter in 
 the legislature. 
 
 Mr. WARD said the whole article had been re- 
 ported on this matter by the committee on revi- 
 sion, except that in relation to Brigade Inspectors 
 
 The question being taken, the first section was 
 adopted. 
 
 The second section was then read. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved to amend by striking out all 
 that related to the Commissary General, and on 
 that question asked for the ayes -and nays. 
 
 Mr WARD said this section was adopted on 
 the recommendation of the committee on elections. 
 For himself he could see no reason why the Com- 
 missary General should be elected. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS moved to add to the end of the 
 second section the words "He (the Commissary 
 General) shall give security for the faithful execu- 
 tion of the doty of his office, in such manner and 
 amount as shall be prescribed by law." 
 
 Mr. WARD thought it unnecessary to make 
 such a provision here. It was matter of legisla- 
 tion. 
 
 The amendment was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. JONES then modified his motion so as to 
 provide for the election of this office by the peo- 
 ple. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES said this was a military officer, 
 especially, and in time of war, there should be an 
 entire confidence between this officer and the 
 C >mmander-in-Chief. If as in the last war, there 
 should be high party conflicts, and they should 
 participate in those feelings, it might lead to great 
 evils. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE was opposed to the inser 
 tion of the proposition in the constitution at all 
 it was a matter of legislation, and should be left 
 there. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS concurred in the vievvsexptess- 
 ed by Mr. RUGGLES. 
 
 106 
 
 Mr. BRUCE followed on the same side. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS replied to Mr. TALLMADGE. 
 
 The debate was then continued by Messrs. 
 PERKINS and JONES, when Mr. ST. JOHN ask. 
 ed for the previous question. 
 
 There was a second and main question or- 
 dered. 
 
 Mr. JONES' amendment was rejected ayes 23, 
 nays 73. 
 
 The question was then taken on the section, and 
 there were ayes 12, nays 89 C 
 
 The third, fourth arid fifth sections were then 
 agreed to, and the resolution referring the article, 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN desired to send to the printer, 
 with the other articles of the constitution, a cor- 
 rect copy of his article on future amendments of 
 the constitution, into which, by some means the 
 error had occurred. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved to lay this order of 
 business on the table. This motion was negati- 
 ved. 
 
 THE OSWEGO CANAL. 
 
 Mr, HART offered the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the committee on the revision of the 
 
 articles of the constitution be instructed to amend article 
 
 5, section 3, by inserting after the words " Black River 
 
 canal," the words "and the improvement of the other state 
 
 canals." 
 
 Mr. HART said : I have prepared this amend- 
 ment in the full conviction that it ought not to 
 meet with opposition from any quarter. This 
 Convention have already made ample provision 
 for the completion of the Erie canal enlarge- 
 ment and for finishing the Black river and Gene- 
 see Valley canals ; but it must necessarily re- 
 quire for the completion of these works a period 
 of perhaps twelve or fifteen years, more or less ; 
 and it appears to me unwise to place in this con- 
 stitution a provision which seems little less than 
 an absolute veto upon air improvements upon the 
 other canals of the state during that period, how- 
 ever important or necessary for the interests of 
 the state such improvements may be, and which 
 improvements may require no very large sums of 
 money for their accomplishment ; and it will be 
 contended that in such cases no power should re- 
 side in the legislature, to direct such improve- 
 ments, without resorting to extraordinary means 
 to procure the necessary funds I confess my- 
 self unable to see either the justice or good poli- 
 cy of such a course. While we provide with a 
 liberal hand for part of the public works, we 
 will not allow the merest pittance for others. 
 Such action as this does not commend itself to 
 my judgment as in any sense that even-handed 
 justice should be dispensed to all. I have no ex- 
 pectation that by the adoption of this amend- 
 ment any essential interference with the progress 
 or completion of the works already authorized by 
 this Convention \\ould result; and such interfer- 
 ence is no part of my design ; but I deem it wise 
 and proper that some discretion should be left to 
 the legislature that will permit them to provide 
 for cases which may and must arise in the lapse of 
 ten or fifteen years, which no human wisdom can 
 now foresee ; and also to provide for cases which it 
 is easy to foresee must and will arise. These ca- 
 ses I desire to place it in the power of the legisla- 
 ture to provide for, without compelling them to 
 
1050 
 
 resort to extraordinary means to secure the re- 
 quisite funds, tor instance, (lor 1 wish to state my 
 objec's frankly,) whenever it may be necessary to 
 rebuild lock/, aqueducts, or other structures on 
 the canals, during the progress of the woiks for 
 which appropriations have been made, I wish to 
 put it in the power of the k-gislatuie, if in their 
 judgment the interests of the state and the neces- 
 sities ot 'commerce require if, to order such works 
 to be enlarged Such a course would be mani- 
 festly required by true ec nomy, if I am right in 
 the belief that several of the canals not named in 
 this Article, will eventually be enlarged. I men- 
 tion the Oswego canal, the Cayuga and Seneca, 
 and perhaps others. I have not the remotest idea 
 that these canals will remain tor any considerable 
 time after the enlargemeut ot the Erie canal of 
 their present' capacity only, this would involve 
 the necessity ot a' trans-shipment of all property 
 on arriving at or leaving the Erie canal, or what 
 would proirably be still worse, that canal must be 
 navigated by a class of boats having only one-ihird 
 or one-half the tonnage which that canal would 
 permit. It is well known that the Oswego canal 
 is one of the greatest channels of western com- 
 merce, and that its existence creates an active 
 competition highly beneficial to commerce, in foi- 
 wardi>'g property to and from New York to the 
 great West. It enjoys also a large trade with Ca- 
 nada West. About twenty-five millions of lum- 
 ber has this season already arrived at Oswego ; a 
 large proportion coming Irom Canada, the tolls at 
 the Oswego office amounting annually to about one 
 hundred and seventy thousand dollars. But per- 
 haps it may not l>e exactly in order on this amend- 
 ment to discuss the question of enlargement of 
 that work, or die extent to which it should be 
 cairied ; permit me, however, to say that 1 have 
 no shadow ot doubt, that its enlargement is a mere 
 question of tune, and although that time may be 
 somewhat dela\ed by unjust and partial legislation, 
 the event is crrtain. All I expect or ask to ac- 
 complish 'by this amendment, is to leave the dis- 
 cretion of which I have spoken in tne hands ul 
 the legislature, where, in my judgment, it most 
 properly belongs, to make such improvements on 
 any of me state canals, as in their wisdom may be 
 deemed advisable. Under this amendment, pro- 
 vision might a. so be made for completing the un- 
 finished improvement on the Oneidd River, and 1 
 apptal to the inends of the cabals, who have so 
 strongly and so successively claimed the plighted 
 laith of the state, to complete their lavorite works; 
 and who refused to do justice to this work on the 
 Oneida River, to tell me whether it the laith ot 
 the state was solemnly pledged to (hem, it was 
 less so in regard to this mile work. 1 have only 
 to add that in my judgment a fair and consistent 
 course on the part oi me Convention, requires the 
 adoption of this amendment ; by doing which, we 
 would at least recognize the principle that it is 
 not hereafter to be held unconstitutional to make 
 necessary improvements upon :he canals, not pio- 
 vided for in this constitution. 
 
 Mi. WHITE thought ample provision had al- 
 ready been made tor the canals, and moved to lay 
 the resolution on the table. 
 
 This was rejected *yes 45, nays 48. 
 
 Mr. SMITH, moved U> amend by adding the 
 words "and extension" after "improvement," 
 
 as to provide for the extension of the Chenango 
 nd Chemnrig canals to the state line. 
 
 Mr PATTERSON urged that the article al- 
 ready adopted made ample provision for all the 
 canals 
 
 M*. LOOMIS thought this an eminently just 
 and wise proposition. He would not tie down the 
 surplus revenues specially to the three canals 
 mentioned in the anicle, inasmuch as the Oswego 
 canal might in a few years become an important 
 channel ot communication with the Western states. 
 Certainly he did not desire to see the legislature 
 prohibited from it as its increase of business might 
 require. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN expressed his surprise 
 o see such a sudden turn on the part of gentle- 
 men on thi floor. Such he regarded to be the 
 course of Mr. L. Mr. C. urged that nothingshould 
 
 adopted to disturb the arrangement which had 
 :>een entered into in regard to these canals. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL regretted to see the motion made. 
 This question had heretofore undergone a long 
 discussion, and as he hoped had been satisfactoral- 
 ly settled. 
 
 Mr. COOK moved to add to the amendment of 
 Mr. SMITH, "and for the construction of such ca- 
 nals whose routes have been absolutely surveyed 
 t)y the authority and at the expense of the state." 
 
 Mr. MARVIN expressed his hope that this 
 question would not be re-opened. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES moved to substitute for Mr. 
 HART'S amendment as follows which Mr. HAKT 
 accepted add after the word " completed," " or 
 may in the discretion of the legislature, be applied 
 to the improvement or enlargement of the other 
 state canals;" 
 
 Mr. HART accepted the substitute. 
 
 Mr. CONELY moved to add as follows to Mr. 
 RUGGLES' amendment : 
 
 Provided such enlargement and improvement of any 
 public work shall be in proportion to the amount of its 
 nett income." 
 
 -Mr. JONES moved the previous question. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to lay .the whole subject 
 on the table. 
 
 Mr. SMITH called for the yeas and nays, and 
 there were yeas 69, nays 26. 
 
 BILL OF RIGHTS. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT moved instructions to the com- 
 mittee on revision to incorporate the 9th, llth, 
 12th, 15th and 16th sections in the bill of rights, 
 as reported by Mr. TALLMADGE, which provides, 
 1st, that a presentment by the grand jury shall be 
 necessary to place a criminal upon trial. No per- 
 son shall be subjected to a penalty or loss of life 
 without trial, nor twice put in jeopardy. 2d. Pri- 
 vate property shall not be taken for public use 
 without compensation. 3d. Witnesses shall not 
 be imprisoned for want of bail. 4th. No divorce 
 shall be granted by the legislature. 5th. No lot- 
 teries shall be authorized in this-state. 
 
 Messrs. TALLMADGE PERKINS, BROWN 
 and O'CONOR debated this proposition. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to amend the motion of 
 Mr. AYRATTLT, by inserting in one of the sections 
 a provision by which persons might be put upon 
 trial for petit larceny without the intervention of 
 the grand jury. 
 
 i\jr. O'CONOR presented a set of sections, a- 
 mended in several respects from those first pro- 
 
 
1051 
 
 posed, and providing that the party accusec 
 crime should have the right of last appeal to 
 
 accused of 
 the 
 
 jury, in reply to the counsellor prosecution. He 
 moved a reference to a select committee with in- 
 structions to insert, by way of amending the reso- 
 lution of Mr. AYRAUL.T. 
 
 Mr. KINGSLEY moved to amend Mr. AY- 
 RAULT'S motion by adding a section providing 
 that no person should be hindered from pursuing 
 any lawful business. 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT appealed to gentlemen who 
 had proposed amendments to allow the simple 
 prepositions which were contained in the sections 
 which he had offered to be referred and disposed 
 of, without embarrassment. We had not time to 
 discuss the matters embraced in the abstract pro- 
 positions which were presented in the motions to 
 amend. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend the ninth section 
 so as to provide that no person shall be tried with- 
 out benefit of counsel. In military trials espe- 
 cially should the accused have the benefit of coun- 
 sel, and in such cases he never had it. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to refer the original 
 proposition and the amendments to a select com- 
 mittee, to report complete on Monday morning 
 next. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE called up his resolution offered 
 yesterday, referring the report of the committee 
 on the division of estates in land to the select 
 committee with instructions. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL demanded the ayes and noes, and 
 the Convention agreed to consider, ayes 66, 
 noes 15. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE took the floor, but gave wav to 
 
 Mr JORL \N, who reported from the select 
 committee resolutions declaring that in the opin- 
 ion of the Convention, the amendments of the 
 Constitution could not be prepared so as to be 
 submitted separately. Also prescribing the form 
 of the ballots to be "No," and " Yes." Providing 
 for the distribution of 20,000 copies of the amend- 
 ments by the county clerks ; and also for their 
 publication weekly in the State paper until the 
 day of election. 
 
 Laid on the table and ordered printed. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL offered a resolution for the bind- 
 ing and distribution of the journals. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. CHATFIELD had leave of absence for the 
 remainder of the session. 
 
 The Convention then took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE addressed the Convention at 
 length in favor of his motion to refer the follow- 
 ing article, reported by the committee on the 
 " creation and division of estates :" 
 
 I. All feudal tenures of every description, with all 
 their incidents are a'*>lisbed. 
 
 ^ -2. No lease or grant oi agricultural land for a longer 
 period tban tenyears, hereafter made, in which shall be 
 reserved any rect or service of any kind, shall be valid. 
 
 ^ 3. All covenants or conditions in any grant of land 
 whereby the right ot the grantee to alien is in any 
 manner restrained, and alt rims quarter sales, and othj r 
 charges upon alienation r. serve 1, in every grant of land 
 hereafter to be made, shall be void. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved to add to the first sec- 
 tion as follows, taken from the Revised Statutes : 
 
 " Saving, however, all rents and services certain which 
 at any time heretofore have been lawfully created or re- 
 8 erveil." 
 
 For the 2d section, he proposed the following: 
 
 ' All lands witiiin this State are declared to be allodial, 
 
 so that, subject only to the liability to escheat, theentiie 
 
 and absolute property is vested in the owners according 
 
 to the nature of their respective estates " 
 
 Mr. S. proceeded to give his views upon the 
 subject. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS had no objection to the amend- 
 ments proposed by Mr. S. 
 
 The first amendment was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES wished to hear from some gen- 
 tleman, what possible benefit the provisions of 
 this section could be to the persons who dem^n- 
 ded relief. He believed the legislature had I ull 
 power in the case, and there was no desire on t he 
 part of any one to extend the privileges of land- 
 lords. He did not see that this section had any 
 effect upon the question which it was supposed 
 to influence ; and if it did change the relations of 
 landlords and tenant, it was important that we 
 should know what that change was, which we 
 had not time to examine into at this period of the 
 session. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS desired to take away the stig- 
 ma of the name " feudal." We had high poei ic 
 authority that there was nothing in a name ; but 
 he thought there was a propriety in declaring th at 
 " feudal tenures are abolished." It would give 
 a different character to the terms upon which te- 
 nants occupied their farms upon the large manors. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN thought there was a manifest 
 propriety in the declaration that " all feudal te- 
 nures are abolished" in this state. It was true 
 that this was now the provision of the statute, but 
 a repeal of the statute would establish them again. 
 Put it in the constitution, and it would be unal- 
 terable. This was all that need be said on the 
 first section ; when the others came up, the fri nds 
 of the measure would be ready to defend them. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES objected only because the legis- 
 lature had full power to regulate the matter, and 
 it was emphatically their duty to attend to it. 
 There was no danger that any body of m^n as- 
 sembled as a legislature, would assume to take 
 the retrograde step of again establishing feudal 
 tenures. If this provision could operate in any 
 respect, to reconcile the tenantry, to the existing 
 sta.e f things, he would vote for it with plea- 
 suie But unless they were led into some delu- 
 sion as to the real effect of this, it would not have 
 su h an influence. And for the reason that it 
 \\ ; s absolutely and entirely useless, he should 
 v< te against it. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN wished to have 
 tl is question fixed beyond the power of the legis- 
 lature to alter it. It was a principle which should 
 I >e as distinctly asserted in our fundamental law 
 .is any other which had been placed there. It 
 was one which had caused great difficulties in 
 this section of the state, and he was desirous that 
 this: convention, to which the people interested 
 looked for some relief in regard to the unjust te- 
 nures which existed, would give a hearty if not a 
 unanimous vote in favor of this measure. 
 
 Mr. NK'OLL thought it would be more seem- 
 ly that this proposition should be in a negative 
 form. To say that " all feudal tenures are abo- 
 lished," when it was known that they had been 
 abolished for fifteen years, appeared to him but 
 
1052 
 
 a little short of stultification. Better say " no 
 feudal tenures shall hereafter be established." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS replied to Mr. RUGGLES, saying 
 that this provision would not deprive any man of 
 his rights, but it would declare our absolute de- 
 termination to uproot all vestiges of the unright- 
 eous tenures which have existed in this part of 
 the state. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved to insert " hereby de- 
 clared to be" before " abolished." Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. JORDAN said there was a just feeling 
 against the occupancy of farms belonging to a 
 lord who exercises the same rights over his te- 
 nants as a lord in England, and holds on to his 
 lands merely from the pride of being the lord 
 over the manor. These were rights reserved to 
 the owners after the revolution because it was 
 private property. But they were inconsistent 
 with the spirit of our republican institutions, and 
 should be abolished. It was not proper to give 
 the cold shoulder to these tenants and tell them 
 to go about their business, because their requests 
 were mere folly ; they had these feudal tenures 
 already abolished, and we had no fear that the 
 legislature would ever revive them. ' He wished 
 it to be placed in the constitution beyond the 
 power of the legislature to touch it. It would 
 nave some effect to allay that natural spirit of op- 
 pugnation to the idea of living upon a farm held 
 under these tenures, whose owner has a right to 
 say " you owe me a day's riding, and you must 
 pay it," not because he has any need of the ser- 
 vice, but because he has some pride in displaying 
 his authority, and some pride in having it to say 
 " I am the lord of this broad domain !" We wish 
 to have these tenures and their incidents abolish- 
 ed, and constitutionally abolished. He would 
 not have a man released from paying his rent 
 when he legally owed it, unless he could get re- 
 leased from it in a lawful way. The payment of 
 rent was not what was complained of. He gave 
 some instances of the terms of leases in which 
 the tenant was obliged to get permission in writ- 
 ing if he entertained a stranger in his house for 
 twenty-four hours ; that he should trade in no- 
 thing else than the produce of the manor ; that he 
 should trade at the store and grind his flour at 
 the mill of the proprietor, &c., &c. It was from 
 such things that relief was asked; which, al- 
 though the moral sense of the community will 
 not admit to be enforced, are still actually in ex- 
 istence. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question, 
 and there was a second. 
 
 The first section as amended was agreed to, as 
 follows : ayes 83, nays 12. 
 
 The proposition of Mr. SIMMONS for the 2d 
 section was agreed to, without a division, after 
 debate by Messrs. SIMMONS and RUGGLES. 
 
 The 3d section was read, and Mr. WHITE mov- 
 ed to strike out "for a longer period than ten 
 years." Lost. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS moved to strike out the sec- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend it by striking out 
 "ten" and insetting "twenty-one," so that infants' 
 estates may be leased during their entire minority. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved a recon- 
 sideration. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said he should feel obliged to vote 
 against the section, because of the amendment 
 adopted with so much haste upon the motion of 
 the gentleman from Erie. If the proprietors of 
 the lands, whose leases are about falling in, should 
 be allowed to release for the term of twenty-one 
 years, it would answer their purpose about as 
 well as the present system. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL voted against the amendment, 
 but he should vote for the section, hoping, upon 
 a reconsideration on Monday, to restore it to its 
 original form. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS thought the argument from the 
 gentleman from Erie should have no influence 
 upon this question, which affected the interests 
 of thousands of the people in this vicinity, while 
 there would be few instances where infants would 
 be injured by the provision. 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE moved to insert after "years" 
 the words "or natural life of the grantee." There 
 might be many instances in which indigent per- 
 sons migh obtain a comfortable home for the term 
 of his natural life through the benevolence of 
 some friend. He should not be deprived of such 
 a benefit. 
 
 Mr. BROWN had voted against the first section 
 not because he was unfriendly to the. principle, 
 but because he regarded it as a humbug to incor- 
 porate in the constitution a provision for which 
 there was not the least necessity. But we were 
 now called upon to abridge an important right, to 
 deprive him (Mr. B.) from leasing his property 
 for 21 years, if he had an opportunity. It was in 
 direct opposition to the great principle which 
 had animated all the people of this country, that 
 of the free right of alienation' of property. It was 
 a wild project which no man in his senses out of 
 an Anti-rent district, would for a moment think 
 of. It could do no benefit to any person, and 
 might work the greatest injury to every part of 
 the state. No such provision could get his vote. 
 
 Mr. CLYDE thought the term " humbug," 
 which the gentleman applied to the proposition 
 which had been adopted, would belong to him- 
 self when he asserted, after his remarks upon this 
 proposition, that he was in favor of granting any 
 kind of relief to the tenants on these manors, and 
 that he was strongly enlisted in their favor. He 
 went on to show that these 21 year leases were 
 much worse than leases for life ; for after the te- 
 nant had spent years in its improvement, he would 
 be subject to an ejectment. 
 
 Mr. WATERBURY continued the debate, in 
 opposition to any law which recognised two clas- 
 ses in society. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said there were lands in the vi- 
 cinity of New York and other large cities which 
 were rented for agricultural purposes, for a long 
 term ; and if the terms of the lease were short- 
 ened they would be used for building lots, thus 
 throwing out of any occupation those who tilled 
 them. He would amend the section as it stood, 
 by limiting its provisions to a certain quantity, 
 say 25 acres, to meet these particular cases. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN followed, saying that it had al- 
 most become a recognised principle in Western 
 New York that agricultural lands should not be 
 leased for a longer term than 5 years. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS continued the debate, stating his 
 purpose to move to strike out the word " agricul- 
 
1053 
 
 tural." He knew no reason why this provision 
 should applv to the country more than to cities 
 Mr. HARRIS replied to Mr. BROWN and Mr, 
 LOOMIS. He contended that it was a principle 
 of political economy that there should be no more 
 restrictions placed upon the alienation of real es- 
 tate than upon personal estate. Property was im- 
 proved by passing from hand to hand. When a 
 man owned the land he cultivated he would fine 
 it to his interest to add to its wealth. This 
 inducement was not found where these long leas- 
 es existed, and the lands were consequently in- 
 differently improved. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND followed on the same side of 
 the question. He believed that these tenures 
 were disastrous to agriculture and .the best inte- 
 rests of the state. They also tended to degrade 
 the character of the tenants. This was an opinion 
 which he had formed long before anti-rentism 
 was thought of. He would not for any human 
 inducement violate the right of a single individu- 
 al ; but he believed that the interests of the state 
 would be advanced, and the character of humani- 
 ty elevated in the instance of hundreds, without 
 the slightest injury to any one, by the adoption 
 of some principle whicxh should induce the land- 
 lords to part with their lands to those who occu- 
 pied and tilled them. He proposed to amend by 
 inserting " ten" in place of " twenty-one," and 
 inserting a clause providing for the" case of in- 
 fants' estates. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN submitted that nothing could 
 be a more flagrant violation of sound policy than 
 to adopt the principle as its friends desired to 
 have it put*. The limitation would not affect 
 the few who owned the land, so much as it would 
 the millions who are yet to be born, and born 
 poor as they must be. They must either remain 
 day laborers from the cradle to the grave, or be- 
 come the miserable tenants of land for seven or 
 ten years when property becomes as dear in all 
 parts of the state as it is now in some. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said there was no people in any 
 portion of the state who felt more acutely the 
 hardships of these tenants upon the manors than 
 his constituents; and if there was any mode, 
 short of the abrogation of the great principles up- 
 on which the government was founded, by which 
 they might be relieved, they would be ready to 
 be adopted. But in his opinion, there was no 
 such mode. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to adjourn. Lost, 28 to 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved the previous 
 question, and there was a second. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. BRUJVDAGE was nega- 
 tived. 
 
 AYES Messrs. Brundage, Hoflman, W. H. Spencer 
 Taggart NOES-76. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to strike out " twenty- 
 one" and insert " twelve." Agreed to ayes 46, 
 nays 35. 
 
 The section, as amended, was agreed to, as fol- 
 lows : Ayes 46, nays 33. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to adjourn. 
 Agreed to, 41 to 30. 
 
 MONDAY, (IQQth day,) Oct. 5. 
 Prayer by the Rev. Mr. CLAPP. 
 Mr. PERKINS moved that the special order of 
 
 the day be laid on the table until half past nine. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. ARAULT, from the select committee ap- 
 pointed on Saturday, reported the following sec- 
 tions and moved their reference to the committee 
 on revision, with instructions : 
 
 1. No member of this state, shaiJ be disfranchised, or 
 deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any 
 citizen thereof, unless by the law of the land. 
 
 2. The trial by jury, in all cases in which it has been 
 heretofore used, shall remain inviolate forever, and shall 
 be secured in like cases arising, in any new court or pro 
 ceeding hereafter instituted or authorized. Eut a jury 
 may be waived by the parties in all civil cases, in the man. 
 nef to be prescribed by law. 
 
 $) 3. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, shall 
 not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion, or 
 invasion, th public safety may require its suspension. 
 
 4. No person shall be held to answer for a capital or 
 otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or in- 
 dictment of a grand jury, except in cases of impeachment, 
 and in cases arising in the militia when in actual service, 
 and in the land and naval forces, in time of war, or which 
 this state may keep, with the consent of Congress, in time 
 of peace; and in cases of petit larceny under the direction 
 of the legislature. 
 
 5. No person shall be subject, to be twice put in jeo- 
 pardy for the same offence; nor shall any person be com- 
 pelled to be a witness against himself, in any case, to sub- 
 ject himself to any criminal punishment, or to any penalty 
 or forfeiture, or any loss or deprivation, in the nature of a 
 penalty or forfeiture, or be deprived of life, liberty, or pro- 
 perty without process of law. 
 
 Jo. In any trial in any court whatever, the party accu- 
 shall be allowed to appear and defend in person, and 
 with counsel. 
 
 7. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive 
 fines imposed, nor shall cruel and unusual punishments be 
 inflicted. 
 
 8. No law shall be passed abridging the right of the 
 people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the govern- 
 ment, or any part thereof; nor shall any divorce be grant- 
 ed, otherwise than by due judicial proceedings; nor shall 
 any lottery hereafter be authorised, or any sale of lottery 
 tickets allowed, within this state. 
 
 ^ 9. No law shall be passed requiring the inspection, 
 measuring, guaging, weighing or culling, of any commo- 
 dity as a condition of individual dealing therein; nor shall 
 any office be created or continued tor that purpose. 
 
 10. No private property shall be taken lor public use 
 without just compensation; when private property shall 
 t>e taken for public use, other than that of the whole state, 
 :he compensation to be made therefore shall be determined 
 by a jury, or by not less than three commissionersj ap- 
 pointed by a court of record, as shall be prescribed by 
 law. Private roads may be opened in a manner to be pre- 
 scribed by law; but in every case the necessity of the road 
 and the amount of all damage to be sustained by the open- 
 ing thereof, shall be first determined by a jury of free-hold- 
 ers, and such amount, together with the expenses of the 
 iroceedings, paid by the person to be benefited. 
 
 11. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious pro- 
 "esdon and worship, without discrimination or preference, 
 shall forever be allowed in this state, to all mankind; and 
 no man shall be deprived of any right, or rendered incom- 
 >etent to be a witness on account of his opinions on mat- 
 ers of religious belief. But the liberty of conscience 
 icreby secured, shall not be so construed as to excuse 
 acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent 
 with the peace or safety of this state. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to postpone the conside- 
 ration of this report until that of the committee 
 on revision was taken up. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved that the committee on 
 evision be instructed to incorporate in the consti- 
 tution the report of the majority on municipal 
 corporations 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to lay the resolution on the 
 table, and that the Convention proceed lo take up 
 the report on the Elective Franchise, 
 
 On this motion Mr. MURPHY demanded the 
 ayes and noes, and it was negatived, 42 to 54. 
 
1054 
 
 The report on MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS 
 was then taken up. 
 The first section was read, as follows: 
 
 1. Private property shall not be taken for improvements 
 in cities and villages, unless the compensation therefor 
 shallt e first determined before a judicial tribunal by a jury 
 of twelve freeholders of the city or village where the 
 same shall be situated, who shall be chosen and qualified 
 as jurors in civil cases. 
 
 Messrs. STOW, MURPHY, KIRKLAND, SIM- 
 MONS and VAN SCHOONHOVEN debated the 
 proposition. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to strike 
 out "cities and villages," so as to make the pro- 
 vision general. Agreed to. 
 
 And the section as amended was adopted. 
 
 The hour of half past nine was here announced 
 by the PRESIDENT. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved that the amended Consti- 
 tution be engrossed upon parchment, for the sig- 
 nal ires of members, under the direction of a se- 
 lect committee of two. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. S WACKHAMER moved that the commit- 
 tee of revision be instructed to engrafr a provision 
 against the disinterment of the dead. Objected to. 
 
 Several members were allowed to record their 
 votes upon the question last taken on Saturday 
 evening. 
 
 REVISED CONSTITUTION. 
 
 The report of the committee on revision was 
 taken up, pursuant to order. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved that the report of Mr. 
 AYRATJLT made this morning, be first considered. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON objected. The latter re- 
 port had been thrown upon us this morning, and 
 we had no opportunity to examine it. The re- 
 port of the committee on revision had been before 
 us for several days. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN agreed with Mr. P. The on- 
 ly safety was in adhering to what had been done, 
 and not attempt to substitute galvanized matter 
 at the close of the session. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said the report of the select 
 committee embraced in it several propositions 
 which had been passed upon by the deliberate 
 action of the Convention. As regarded some 
 new matters which it contained, he probably 
 should agree with the gentleman from Herkimer 
 in striking it out. The article brought in by the 
 committee on revision contained only the provi- 
 sions of the old Constitution, together with the 
 married women matter, in regard to which they 
 were instructed. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN thought it unwise now to cut 
 loose from the settled order of the day. We 
 should be at sea again, under such a course, and 
 no one could tell where we would land. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS concurred in this opinion. 
 
 The PRESIDENT decided that the subjects 
 upon which the Convention had heretofore finally 
 acted upon, were not now open to amendment, 
 in considering the report of the committee of re- 
 vision, without a reconsideration of the several 
 votes. The amendments proposed by the select 
 committee on rights and privileges were in order, 
 but none other. 
 
 After some discussion upon this point, the re- 
 vised Constitution was taken up, and the PRE- 
 AMBLE thereto was read as follows : 
 
 " WE THE PEOPLE of the State of New- York, grateful to 
 
 Almighty GOD for our Freedom, in order to secure its bles- 
 sings, Do ESTABLISH this Constitution." 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought it too narrow. We 
 established the Constitution for something besides 
 FREEDOM. If that term was to be enlarged to 
 mean all other rights which fell within the pro- 
 tection of government, it was all right ; but that 
 was something new. 
 
 Mr TALLMADGE moved to strike put this 
 preamble, and insert that of the old Constitution, 
 as follows : 
 
 " We. the People of the Stateof New York, acknowledge 
 with gratitude the grace and beneficence of (JOD, in per- 
 mitting us to make choice oi our form of government, do 
 establish this Constitution." 
 
 Messrs. SWACKHAMER, HOFFMAN, DA- 
 NA and CROOKER discussed this proposition. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved the previous question ; 
 we had no time to waste upon this unimportant 
 matter. There was a second. 
 
 The amendment was negatived. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY demanded the ayes and noes 
 upon agreeing to the preamble as reported, and 
 it was adopted unanimously ayes 111. 
 
 The first section was read as follows : 
 
 5j 1 No member of this State shall be disfranchised, or 
 deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any 
 citizen thereof, unless by the law of the land, or the judg- 
 ment of his peers. 
 
 The section was agreed to nearly unanimously. 
 
 The second section of the report was read, as 
 follows : 
 
 2. The right of trial bv jury in all cases in which it has 
 been heretofore used, shall remain inviolate forever. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to strike it out and in- 
 sert the second section of the select committee. 
 [Report of Mr. AYRAULT.] 
 
 This was debated by Messrs. O'CONOR, MUR- 
 PHY, HOFFMAN, RUSSELL, SIMMONS, 
 STOW and PATTERSON. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to amend by striking 
 out the section and inserting as follows : 
 
 ' The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate." 
 
 Mr. HAWLEY moved the previous question. 
 Seconded. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY called for a division of the ques- 
 tion, and the words following are rejected : "And 
 shall be recovered in like cases in any new court 
 or proceeding hereafter instituted or auth.or.ized." 
 
 The following words were agreed to : " But a 
 jury trial may be waived by the parties in all civil 
 cases in the manner to be prescribed by la\\." 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR asked unanimous consent to 
 strike out "in which it has been heretofore used." 
 Oojecled to. 
 
 The ayes and noes were called upon agreeing to 
 the sec' ion as amended, and it was agreed to, 107 
 to 2 Messrs CORNELL ai d FORSYTH. 
 
 The third section was read, as ioilows : 
 
 3. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profes- 
 sion and worship, without discrimination or preference, 
 shall forever be allowed in this state to all mankind; but 
 thr- liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so 
 construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or ju-tify 
 practices inconsistent with the peace or salety of this state. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to amend by inserting alter 
 " mankind," as follows: 
 
 "And the Legislature shall provide by law for the effec- 
 tual protection ot the rights of conscience, so that in the 
 exercise thereof, no person shall sailer in person or estate." 
 
 Mr. STOW thought it unsafe to attempt to reach 
 
1055 
 
 in the Constitution such isolated and particular 
 cases. By this provision, seels might he given 
 the same right* which are here sought to be ex- 
 tended to seventh Day Bdptiets, so that the gov. 
 ernnient might be prevented from being carried 
 forvuird. Every day of the week might be made 
 sacred by the tenets of different creeds. 
 
 Messrs. SIMMONS and PERKINS continued 
 the debate. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS paid that there was rnt much use 
 in declaring in the constitution that the liberty 
 of conscience should be secured, unless it was 
 provided that the laws should not affect the rights 
 of conscience to persons like the Seventh Day 
 Baptists, who are persecuted by those who are 
 opposed to their belief, by making their process of 
 law returnable on the day which they consider 
 sacred. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL thought they could not do any- 
 thing more mischievous than to give power to the 
 legislature to legislate on the subject of religion. 
 All should be protected and contribute alike, and 
 he thought the article as it stood would answer 
 every purpose. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN thought there 
 was no danger to be apprehended if they should 
 pass this amendment. The conscience of all 
 should be protected alike. He alluded to the 
 sacrifices which quakers make, suffering their 
 property to be taken to preserve their conscien- 
 ces, and this afforded evidence of their sincerity, 
 and entitled them to consideration. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved the previous question, 
 and there was a second, &c., and the amendment 
 of Mr. HARRIS was negatived ayes 32, noes 68. 
 Mr. T.-vGG.-.RT proposed to add the following 
 Words ''and no pt-rsou shall he rendered incoii 
 petent to be a witness on account of his opinions 
 in matters of religious belief." Mr. T. buefly 
 sustained his amendment. 
 
 Mr SIMMONS considered this to be a most dan- 
 gerous proposition. The only individuals now ex- 
 cluded from giving testimony, were those who de- 
 nied ihe existence ot a supreme being, and the 
 moral power of the government to punish false 
 swearing. 
 
 Mr. LOOM IS regarded the usages of the courts 
 in excluding witnesses for ifligious opinions as 
 entirely contrary to the freeoom oi con>cience 
 He considered it also as doing injustice to the 
 ritiht- of parlies in suits. He considered it an;ila. 
 g us to the principle of excluding slaves i'iorn tes- 
 t Iving, no matter whether the crime woscommil- 
 t-d HI his presence. He desired to see man only 
 accountable to G id for his religious opinions. 
 Mr. SIMMONS: Why no abolish official <vUhs 
 Mr. LOOMIS : I would do it. He did not ap- 
 prehend that this Convention would do it howev- 
 er they perhaps had not given sufficient atten- 
 tion to it. They were doing it in England. 
 
 Mr. STOW did not acknowledge the capacity 
 of any earthly tribunal to determine the question 
 as to what constituted a man's accountability to 
 this duty. It was not left for human beings to de- 
 cide. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS : Has any ereat danger result- 
 ed from it heretofore. 
 
 Mr. STOW had seen great conflicts in the courts 
 on the subject. This he desired to avoid hereaf- 
 ter. The general moral deportment of the man 
 
 might be a better evidence of his belief in the 
 existence of the Deity, than in the mere expres- 
 sion of his religious expeiience, These qualifi- 
 cations were not required in the case of a man 
 assuming an official station. Again he did not 
 vish to let the laws recognize that there might 
 )e even a doubt as to the existence of a Deity. 
 The asking of such a question implied such a 
 doubt. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART further sustained this amend- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to add at the end of the 
 ection " but evidence may be given as to the be- 
 ief and disbelief of a witness in the obligations of 
 an oath, and the grounds for such belief and dis- 
 Delief in order to enable the jury to judge of his 
 credulity." 
 
 Mr. JONES asked for the previous question. 
 There was a second and the previous question or- 
 dered. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY'S amendment was rejected. 
 Ayes 12, nays 92. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART'S amendment was adopted. 
 Ayes 53, nays 46. 
 
 The section as amended was then adopted : 
 
 The fourth .section was then read as follows : 
 
 ) 4. And whereas, the ministers of the Gospel are by 
 their profession, dedicated to th service ol" God, and the 
 care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great 
 duties of their functions; therefore, no minister of the 
 Gospel, or priest of any denomination whatsoever, shall 
 at any time hereafter, under any pretence or description 
 whatever, be eligible to, or capable of, holdiiig any civil 
 or military office or place within this State. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to strike out the section. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL asked for ihe previous question. 
 There was a second and the main question ordered. 
 
 The section was stricken out ayes 77, nays 
 33 as follows : 
 
 AYES- Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, F. F. Backus, H. Back- 
 us, Baker, Bascom, Bergen, Bowdish, Bray ton, Brown, 
 Bruce, Bull, Burr, Cambieleng, Candee, Clark, Conely, 
 Cook. Dana, Flanders, Forsyth, Greene, Harris, Hart, 
 Hoft'man , Hotchkiss, Hunt, A Huntington, E. Huntington, 
 Hyde, Jones, Kernan, Kingsley, Loomis, Mann, McNitt, 
 M'arvin, Maxwell, Mum o, Murphy, Nellis, Nicholas, Ni- 
 coll, O'Conor, Parish, Patterson, Perkins, Rhoades, Rich- 
 mond, Ruggles, Russell, Salisbury, SaiJord, Seats, Shaver, 
 Simmons, Smiih, E. Spencer, Stephens, Stetson, Swack- 
 hamer, Talt, Taggart, J. J Tayl >T, Townsend, Tuthill, 
 Van Schoonhoven. Waterbury, White, \\ illard. \Vorden, 
 A. Wright, W. B.Wright, Yawger, Young, Youngs 77. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Brundage, Clyde, Cornell, 
 Crooker, Cuddeback. Danfortb, Dorlon, Dubois, Giaham, 
 Harrison, Hutchmson, Kenible, Kennedy. Kirkland, Mc- 
 Niel, Miller, Morris, Penniman, Powers, President, Riker, 
 St John, Shaw, W. H Spencer, Stanton, Stow, Tallmadge, 
 W*rd, Warren, Wood, Chamberlain-33. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved a reconsideration, and de- 
 sired to have it taken up now. He wished to say 
 that he would give this privilege to the clergy if 
 they desired it, but in his neighborhood they did 
 not. 
 
 After a brief conversation, he withdrew the 
 motion. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND offered the following as an 
 additional section. He wished to put all citizens 
 on the same footing : 
 
 " No laws shall ever be passed exempting ministers of 
 the gospel from taxation." 
 
 After a conversation, and the previous ques- 
 tion had been moved, 
 Mr. RICHMOND withdrew his motion. 
 
1056 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered the following! opened, the public shall' have the right of wav " 
 as a separate section : Lost. 
 
 Every qualified elector, not excluded by virtue of hold- Mr. JONES moved the previous Question 
 ing any other office, shall be eligible to any elective office There was a second and the main question or- 
 dered 
 
 JJr. BAKER moved the previous question. Mr . COOK'S amendment was rejected. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY insisted that the motion to lay Mr. FORSYTH moved to add as follows- 
 on the table was not m order, the previous ques- But such compensation shall in no case be re- 
 
 t10 ha S 1 * n i-Sn en a ? KA ^ 11 f ^ duced b >' an ^ all wance or prospective benefits." 
 
 Mr. BAKER; I withdraw the call for the pre- Mr. MURPHY sustained the amendment 
 
 V1 S SSSSSfcrrtr / i* INT Mr> RH ADES opposed the amendment. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY (simultaneously :) I move to Mr. NICHOLAS called for the previous ques- 
 
 la y ? n ^^fewun * tion " There was a second and the main question 
 
 The PRESIDENT put the question on the mo- ordered, and the amendment was negatived- 
 
 tion of Mr. KENNEDY, and it was carried. ayes 37, noes 82. 
 
 The 5th (now 4th) section was then read, as Mr. LOOMIs' moved to insert after the words 
 
 follows : private roads" the following" with right of 
 - The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall way to the public over the same" and also to 
 
 to be benefited" and insert 
 It was adopted nem. con. e( j bv j aw 
 
 The 6th section was then read as follows : T he first amendment was rejected-ayes 16, 
 
 ^6. No person shall be held to answer for a capital or noes 84. 
 
 otherwise infamous crime, (except in cases of impeach- Mr. LOOMIS withdrew the remaining amend- 
 ment, and in cases arising m the militia when in actual ser- men t 
 vice, and in the Innd and naval forces, in time of war, or , , ' i\,rr-DT>Tc< 
 
 which this state may keep, with the consent of Congress in Mr. MUKKlb moved to strike out the words 
 time of peace; and in cases of petit larceny under the dis- " other than that of the whole state." 
 cretion of the legislnture;) unless on presentment or in- Mr. CHAMBERLAIN moved 
 
 dictmentofagiand jury, and in every trial on impeach- A0-rPPrl tn 
 ment or indictment, the party accused shall be allowed to ^6 iet 
 appear and defend in person, and with counsel. No per- 
 son shall be subject to be twice put in jeopardy for the AFTERNOON SESSION, 
 same offence; nor shall he be compelled in a criminal case -php arnpnrlmpni- r>f Mr 
 to be a witness against himself, in any case, nor be de- L , L * M , r ' , 
 pnved of life, liberty or property, without due process of tne words other than thlt of the state," after 
 law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, some conversation, was lost, 
 without just compensation. Mr. STOW proposed to amend so that the se- 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND proposed the following sub- cond clause would read " when private property 
 stitute : shall be taken for any public use, the compensa- 
 
 When private property shall be taken for any public tio n therefor, if not to be made by the state, shall 
 use, other than that ol the state, the compensation to be be ascertained by a jury," &c. Agreed to. 
 made therefore, shall be ascertained by a jury, or by not ]yj r> BERGEN movect to amend by striking out 
 cord, as^ha^l beprescribed by tew Private roads may " bv a court of record," so that the appointment 
 be opened in the manner to be prescribed by law; but in of the three commisioners would be left to the 
 every case the necessity of the road, and the amount of all legislature. Lost. 
 
 damage to be sustained by the opening thereof, shall be \*r T4.GGART moved tn strikp mit "nffrPP 
 first determined by a jury of free-holders, and such amount , TV ' ,, ? 
 
 together with the expenses of the proceeding, shall be holders, alter jurors. He Wished no quallfica- 
 paid by the person to be benefited. tions of jurors in the constitution. 
 
 Mr*. MURPHY moved to amend the amend- Mr. JONES moved the previous question on the 
 
 ment bv striking out all after the words " by a section and the amendment, and it was seconded. 
 
 jury," and adding instead By unanimous consent, Mr. STOW offered an 
 
 of 'twelve freeholders where the same shall be situated, amendment striking out the words "unless on pre- 
 
 who shall be chosen and qualified as jurors in civil cases, sentinent ol the grand jury," and altering the 
 
 This was discussed by Messrs. HOFFMAN, P hra seology so that it would read: "In any trial, 
 STETSON, BROWN, SIMMONS, KIRKLAND, m a , n / court whatsoever, the party accused shall 
 COOK, RUSSELL, MURPHY and LOOMIS, be . allowed to appear and defend in person and 
 
 a recess. 
 
 fr, 
 to 
 
 when 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH moved the previous question on 
 the amendments. There was a second, and the 
 main question ordered. 
 
 The question was then taken on the amendment 
 of Mr. MURPHY, and it was rejected ayes 20, 
 
 with counsel as in civil actions." Agreed to. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. TAGGART was lost. 
 
 The 6th section, as amended, was agreed to, 86 
 to 20. 
 
 RIGHTS OF MARRIED WOMEN. 
 
 The 7th section was read as follows : 
 7. All property of the wife, owned by her at the time 
 was then taken on the amendment 
 of Mr. KIRKLAND. A division being ordered it I stailTe^er seiTaVate^^ 
 
 was first taken on the first clause of ihe amend- viding for the registry of the wife's separate property, and 
 ment, and it was adopted. The second clause was I mo * e ^F 1 / defining her rights thereto, as well as to pro- 
 also adopted ayes 89, nays 21. The amendment 
 was therefore adopted. Mr. O r CONOR called up the question on re- 
 
 Mr. COOK moved to insert after the word considering this section. He remarked that the 
 " law" the following" but iu such roads, when sudden manner m which it had been first brought 
 
 up had prevented full discussion, had allowed no 
 
1057 
 
 time for deliberate reflection, and led the Con- 
 vention to form a hasty judgment. He had not 
 d the point then, "but rather than permit so 
 important a resolution to be brought sub silentio, 
 he would endeavor to compress within the, allot- 
 ted fifteen minutes argument, enough to induce 
 reflection. And he was sure that due reflection 
 would induce a majority to reverse the former 
 vote. He regarded this section as more important 
 than any which had been adopted perhaps than 
 all the rest of the constitution. If there was any 
 thing in our institutions that ought not to be 
 touched by the stern hand of the reformer, it was 
 the sacred ordinance of marriage and the relations 
 arising out of it. The difference, he said, between 
 the law of England and that of most other nations, 
 was that it established" the most entire and abso- 
 lute union and identity of interests and of persons 
 in the matrimonial state ; it recognized the hus- 
 band as the head of the household, merged in him 
 the legal being of the wife so thoroughly, that in 
 contemplation of law she could scarcely be said 
 to exist. The common law of England was the 
 law of this country, and both were based upon the 
 gospel precept, " they twain shall be one flesh." 
 Pure as its origin the fountain of holy writ this 
 common law rule upon this subject had endured 
 for centuries ; it had parsed the ocean with our 
 ancestors, and cheered their first rude cabins in 
 the wilderness ; it still continued in all its origi- 
 nal vigor and purity, and with all its originally be- 
 nign tendency and influences; unimpaired by 
 time, undimiiiished in its capacity to bless by any 
 change of climate or external circumstances. 
 Revolution after revolution had swept over the 
 home of married love here and in the mother 
 country ; forms of government had changed with 
 Proteus-like versatility ; but the domestic fire- 
 side had remained untouched. Woman, as wife, 
 eras mother, had known no change of the law 
 which fixed her domestic character, and guided 
 her devoted love. She had as yet known no de- 
 basing pecuniary interest apart from the prospe- 
 rity of her husband. His wealth had been her 
 wealth ; his prosperity her pride, her only source 
 of power or distinction. Thus had society exist- 
 ed hitherto did it need a change ? Must the 
 busy and impatient besom of reform obtrude, with- 
 out invitation, its unwelcome officiousness within 
 the charmed and charming circle of domestic life, 
 and there too change the laws and habits of our 
 people ? He trusted not. He called upon not 
 only husbands, but brothers, sons all who held 
 the married state in respect, to pause and delibe- 
 rate before they fixed permanently in the funda- 
 mental law, this new and dangerous principle. No 
 change should be made in the rules affecting the 
 relation of husband and wife. The habits and 
 manners built upon those rules and arising out of 
 them could not be improved and ought to be per- 
 petuated. The firm union of interests in married 
 life, as established by the common law, occa- 
 sionally, in special cases, produced * deplorable 
 evils, but its general influence upon the manners 
 of society was most benign. This was exhibited 
 in the past history of England and our own coun- 
 try ; it was visible in the existing condition of our 
 people. Why change the law, and by a rash ex- 
 periment, put at risk the choicest blessings we 
 enjoy? 
 
 107 
 
 Husbands in America, are generally faithful, 
 and true protector-* of their vaves ; wives in 
 America, are generally Tcui/O.els for imitation. 
 The least reflection must convince, that this state 
 of manners amongst us, results from the purity 
 of our laws for domestic government. These 
 laws ought not then to be changed, lest manners 
 should change with them. The proposition came 
 in an insidious and deceitful form ; it came with 
 professions of regard for woman, and thus won 
 a ready access to the favor of all good men ; but 
 like the serpent's tale to the first woman, it tended 
 if it did not seek to degrade her. He thought 
 the law which united in one common bond, the 
 pecuniary interests of husband and wife, should 
 remain. He was no true American who desired 
 to see it changed. If it were changed and man, 
 and wife converted as it were into mere partners, 
 he believed, a most essential injury would result 
 to the endearing relations of married life. A 
 wife with a separate estate secured to her inde- 
 pendent disposal and management, might be a 
 sole trader ; she might rival her husband in trade 
 or become the partner of his rival. Diverse and 
 opposing interests would be likely to grow out of 
 such relations ; controversies would arise, hus- 
 band and wife would become armed against each 
 other to the utter destruction of the sentiments 
 which they should entertain towards each other, 
 and to the utter subversion of true felicity in 
 married life. Did time allow, he might illustrate 
 by exhibiting the thousand shapes and forms in 
 which those conflicting interests would operate 
 mischievously. And though each might seem 
 trifling in itself in the aggregate they would 
 form a mighty force in their oft recurring pre- 
 sentment, they would form a fatal means of irri- 
 tation and dissention. It might be said that the 
 utterance of this thought was an unmerited re- 
 proach upon American wives and husbands. 
 Nothing was further from his purpose ; it was 
 the perfection and purity of their relations, as 
 now actually existing, that commanded his admi- 
 ration. His object was to defend those relations 
 against the imputation that they would be im- 
 proved or reformed. Married life, as it WAS, he 
 wished to protect. It was governed by laws of 
 divine origin ; it was, in this country, as perfect, 
 as human institutions, or human nature could 
 be made ; and he wished it to be left untouched, 
 in all its sacredness and simplicity. The state of 
 society in this respect, under the existing law wa? 
 no proof that it would continue the same under a 
 law precisely the reverse. On the contrary it wa? 
 evidence in favor of the existing law. None could 
 deny that the great fundamental laws of a communi- 
 ty in respect to property, have an esential influence 
 even upon the workings of human affection, with- 
 in the domestic circle. In England the unnatu- 
 ral law of primogeniture prevailed ; but there, 
 as with us, the parent having property, might 
 dispose of it as he pleased ; yet an English father 
 though loving his children with a equal affection, 
 almost invariably gave the bulk of his estate to 
 the eldest son. In conformity with the law, ac- 
 customed and approved, he confers wealth upon 
 one child, and in violation of the dictates of nat- 
 ural affection, puts, off his younger sons with 
 places rn the army or the navy his daughters 
 with a sorry pittance. 
 
1058 
 
 In this country, the opposite law produced ex- 
 actly the opposite result. A father here would 
 consider himself violating a moral duty if he 
 made any discriminations or preference in the di- 
 vision of his property, unless indeed, some spe- 
 cial cause should give one an equitable claim to 
 a better provision than the others. 
 
 [Here the hammer fell, but by unanimous con- 
 sent Mr. O'C. had leave to proceed.] 
 
 Mr. O'C. said that he would not unduly tres 
 pass upon this indulgence. A law like that pro- 
 posed was unnecessary. Whenever the particu- 
 lar circumstances of the family rendered it pro- 
 per, special settlements could now be made to 
 secure the separate estates of married women, 
 and that was sufficient for every useful purpose. 
 Indeed, the utility of that power was very doubt- 
 ful, for although it secured married women from 
 being dependant upon the affection of their hus- 
 bands, it was to be feared that it too frequently 
 secured them from the enjoyment of any such 
 sentiment. It grew up in the hot-bed of wealth 
 and luxury ; and it had never emigrated ; it 
 flourished there only. It affected not the humble 
 cottage, nor any great portion of society. Many 
 doubted the wisdom of allowing separate settle- 
 ments in any case ; but he would not enter into 
 that question. The theatre of their action was 
 limited and lay among those who had many 
 sources of enjoyment ; and he would not. change 
 the rule on that subject. He would leave sepa- 
 rate settlements to take effect only by the special 
 act of the party. Then they would have no 
 effect upon society at large. It was the general 
 law of the state the laws operating alike upon 
 all classes and that law only which worked its 
 way into the very frame of society, became a 
 part of the mental constitution of the people, 
 and permanently influenced for good or for evil, 
 the habits, manners, and morals of a country. 
 The occasional acts of individuals have no gen- 
 eral influence, but the general law of society if it 
 was not the offspring, would always become the 
 parent of a general morality conforming to it. 
 He asked the convention to look, at the state of 
 society in the nations of continental Europe, gov- 
 erned by the civil law, where the estate of the 
 wife was kept separate, and to compare it with 
 the beautiful and divine simplicity of the mar- 
 riage relation in England and this state to con- 
 template high life, with its separate settlements 
 for the wife, its thousand luxuries and few real 
 joys, and to compare it with the domestic rela- 
 tions as they existed in the ordinary walks of life, 
 where this device of man's enemy was unknown. 
 After such a comparison would any man say, that 
 a change from these to those was desirable ? 
 
 In reference to the system of marriage settle- 
 ments by which in special cases, that relation is 
 established between man and wife which this sec- 
 tion seeks to make universal. Mr. Justice PLATT 
 says: "It tends to sever, in some degree, the 
 marriage union; because it not only renders the 
 wife independent of her husband, as to her for- 
 tune, but bars him of a participation in it, by new 
 and increased impediments, ;>-i if he were pre- 
 sumed to be her worst enemy." If matrimony is 
 not desirable without these trammels, and fences, 
 and reservations, I say marry not at all I The an. 
 cient rule of the English common law* was adapt- 
 
 ed to the state of English manners in early times,, 
 and accords best with the general simplicity of 
 society among us at this day. I know that parti- 
 cular cases often occur when such restraints would 
 be salutary, but as a general rule their operation 
 would be unfavorable to connubial happiness. A 
 benign 'policy would not admit a rule which im- 
 pairs the union, and lessens the attributes of holy 
 matrimony. It is better that confidence between 
 husband and wife should sometimes be abused, 
 than that it should not exist in that relation. We 
 often see acts of tyranny and cruelty exercised by 
 the husband toward the wife, of which the law 
 takes no cognizance; and yet no man of wisdom or 
 reflection can doubt the propriety of the rule 
 which gives the husband the contro'l and custody 
 of the wife. It is the price which female wants 
 and weakness must pay for their protection. 
 That a woman should contemplate feer intended 
 husband, as likely to become her enemy and de- 
 spoiler, and should guard herself against him as a 
 swindler and a robber, and then admit him to her 
 embraces, presents a sombre and disgusting pic- 
 ture of matrimony. Marriage justly implies a re- 
 union of hearts and interests; and the modifica- 
 tions of that relation which excessive refinement 
 have introduced form an excrescence which should 
 be extirpated." 
 
 Mr. O'C. continued : the same ideas in still 
 stronger terms, are enforced in the same case by 
 Mr. Chief Justice SPENCER. This was the opin- 
 ion of the pure-minded JONAS PL.ATT ot the ve- 
 nerable, wise, and profoundly learned AMBROSE 
 SPENCER. If this Convention should change the 
 laws invade the sanctuary of domestic love, and 
 entrench within it the fiend pecuniary self-inter- 
 est, he believed it would ultimately change the 
 whole character of the married relation in our 
 country. He spoke for posterity, not tor the pre- 
 sent geneiation. If the members of this Conven- 
 tion and the people acted unwisely in this matter 
 they would go down to the grave unpunished; for 
 the evil would not come in their day. Laws might 
 be changed in an instant, but manners could nei- 
 ther be formed nor subverted suddenly. The pre- 
 sent tone of society in this respect was too well 
 fixed to be soon changed. It was the result of 
 centuries, of human existence, under a wise law. 
 The wives and husbands ot" the present day would 
 retftin the manners that law had created long after 
 the law itself was abolished. But if this new rule 
 should be adopted, the student of history in after 
 times would condemn the act. From amid the 
 less pure and incorrupt habits and manners of do. 
 mesticlifeas then existing around him, he would 
 look back to the present day with emotions akin 
 to those which affect our minds when contempla- 
 ting the first family, in happy Eden, before the 
 empter came. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said he was not surprised that 
 this doctrine of the identity of man and wife to be 
 sustained only by the laws of England laws un- 
 der which men once sold their wives under 
 which a husband could flog his wife with a stick 
 as large as the judge's thumb a law which was 
 well said to unite men and women for better or 
 for worse which literally construed, gave the 
 men all the benefit and the women all the evil 
 or rather which proceeded on the assumption that 
 the harmony of a family consisted in the man's 
 
1059 
 
 pocketing all the cash. Mr. M. adverted to the 
 fact that by our law, property could be settled on 
 the wife and her children beyond the reach of the 
 husband and his creditors and that this precau- 
 tion against the profligacy of the husband had not 
 only been acquiesced in by the public, but that 
 it had been found to be a most wise provision. 
 Thousands and thousands of cases probably exist- 
 ed now, where it had been the means of keeping 
 a family together in comfort, the wife enabled to 
 live as she was reared, and the children properly 
 educated, and where, but for such a eprovision, 
 she and they would have been neglected. Why 
 could not this provision which every prudent 
 man made for his children, be made general so 
 that the children of the ignorant or the careless 
 may have the benefit of it? Mr. M. related some 
 cases that had come to his knowledge officially 
 and otherwise during his service as mayor and re- 
 corder of New- York where females who had 
 brought property to their husbands, had been 
 made beggars by the profligacy of the men whose 
 duty it was to have sustained and comforted 
 them of wives who had worked night and day 
 with the needle, and had not only supported hus- 
 band and family, but had laid up something 
 against a wet day but whose earnings had been 
 seized and squandered by a dissolute husband 
 where friends and relatives, under his promi- 
 ses of reformation had come forward and fur- 
 nished a house for the family ; but when 
 promises were broken, and the house stripped 
 of every thing by the creditors of the debau- 
 chee of a husband, and his family, turned 
 inio the street. This was the sort of domestic 
 harmony that resulted from this delectable rule of 
 the unity of husband and wife in matters of pro- 
 perly. He alluded also to facts that. were known 
 to many connected with the police of the city, 
 that pmved the existence of an organized system 
 of fortune hunting in Europe, under which heir- 
 esses here were made the victims of a partition 
 among " nice young men" having in view solely 
 the property to be acquired by marriage under our 
 law and he related a case, as a sample of this 
 kind of matrimonial speculation, which was car- 
 ried on under the sanction ot our laws, and which 
 he vouched for as fact, and not fancy. There 
 were cases no doubt within the knowledge of every 
 man who heard him cases which we did not love 
 1o talk of, and the knowledge of which, therefore, 
 had not become general, which, he ventured to 
 say had determined every one of us that had pro. 
 perry to leave to female children, to see to it, that 
 by will, it should be secured beyond contingency, 
 from the grasp of a dissolute husband. This was 
 a precaution which as none of us would omit, he 
 urged we should not hi silate to take for the benefit 
 of the thousands, for whom no such special pro- 
 vision had been made, either because there was 
 not property enough to make this machinery o! 
 trusts advisable, or because the parent had been 
 struck down suddenly by death, and without the 
 opportunity to make a will. He insisted that such 
 a provision as this engrafted in our constitution, 
 instead of disturbing the married relations, or in- 
 troducing dissatisfaction and heart-burning in fa- 
 milies, would do more to alleviate human suffer- 
 ing, and bind families together in the bond of' 
 peace, than any provision it was in our power to 
 
 adopt. He urged that the proud vote by which it 
 had been adopted, would not be reversed. 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL jr. moved (he previous ques- 
 tion, but there was no second. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY hoped that after having been so 
 long in the clouds, we should now view this sub- 
 ject in a common sense light. So far as the real 
 estate of the wife was concerned, this proposition 
 would make no essential change in the law as it 
 stood. It would only affect the personal property, 
 and that if the wife had confidence in her hus- 
 band, would be just as much within the reach of 
 the husband, under this provision, as now. But 
 his main objection to it was that we should be 
 under the curse of the married relation as it ex- 
 isted under the civil law. He should therefore 
 vote to reconsider, and reject the section. 
 
 Mr. BROWN trusted there would be no hasty 
 action on a question which involved such vital 
 consequences as the one under consideration. 
 When it was adopted, it could have had no such 
 examination as was due to it. It was the most 
 radical and important principle that had been in- 
 troduced during the entire session, and although 
 he had been an early reformer, he had no hesita- 
 tion in saying that if this proposition in the Ian. 
 guage in which it now stands, was inserted in the 
 constitution, it would and ought to be rejected. 
 Mr. B. went on to argue that it was not to be to- 
 lerated that the social relations of the whole peo- 
 ple should be changed, and for the worse tb*t 
 the married state should be disturbed as it existed 
 under the benign principles of the common law 
 in order to reach the individual cases that have 
 been mentioned such as those foreign fortune 
 hunters, or any of those isolated cases. It was 
 impolitic, he urged, thus to tie up, not merely the 
 real, but the personal property of the wife, with 
 all its accumulations during coverture. It might 
 well perhaps be an experiment for the legisla- 
 ture to adopt, but he would ever object to its be- 
 ing made the inflexible constitutional law of the 
 land. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS said that he made no pretensions 
 to any great share of chivalry, nor did he propose 
 to stand there as the champion of the gentler sex, 
 he intended to speak with becoming gravity, and 
 with a deep impression of the importance of the 
 subject. The condition of the female sex was one 
 which might well command the consideration of 
 every statesman, patriot and philanthropist. In 
 savage life, the woman is but a menial slave in 
 half civilized life, she is but a voluptuous toy ; 
 and it is only where Christianity exerts its holy in- 
 fluence, that she becomes the companion and as- 
 sociate of man, and assumes her proper rank, and 
 is permitted to win her way to that equality in 
 intellectual rank and social condition, which her 
 God designed she should occupy. And it was 
 because for 6000 years she has been deprived of 
 that equality, that the world had made such slow 
 progress in elevation, improvement, refinement, 
 and every thing that blesses mankind. Much 
 had been said by way of comparison between the 
 civil and common law, with reference to this 
 question, and gentlemen had alluded to the con- 
 dition of the married state in the counties where 
 the civil law is in operation, and where the com- 
 mon law prevailed. But gentleman should. re- 
 fer to a greater principle, and seek there the dif- 
 
1060 
 
 ference. It was because that in England and the 
 United States Christianity prevailed, that the fe- 
 male condition was elevated, and not because the 
 common law was preferable to the civil. It was 
 under the benign and holy influence of Chris- 
 tianity, that women in these two countries had 
 attained her proper rank in the social scale, in 
 despite of the principles of the common law, 
 which originated in a dark and barbarous age. 
 The proposition pending, he urged, contemplated 
 only doing that directly which by our laws could 
 now be done indirectly, and which was always 
 done when there was any considerable amount of 
 property belonging to the woman before marriage. 
 The proposition made that a general rule, and 
 gave to the poor also, where the greatest amount 
 of suffering was under the present state of things, 
 the benefit of the same provision. He urged it, 
 al&o, as a father, anxious to secure to his own the 
 benefit of the little that he might have then. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN had voted originally against 
 this section, and was not sure that it did not go 
 too far, and that a middle course between the ex- 
 tremes of opinions here might be most safe and 
 advisable. He read the following substitute, 
 which he.should propose for the section, if it 
 were reconsidered : 
 
 " Every married woman shall be entitled to an equita- 
 ble support out of the property, real or personal, owned 
 by her at her marriage or acquired by her at any time af- 
 terwards. Such property shall be held in her owii name, 
 and provisions shall be made by law for carrying this sec- 
 tion into efiect." 
 
 Mr. STETSON denounced the section as a 
 phantasy and as the offspring of delusion saying 
 that it was urged and was calculated only to reach 
 foreign adventurers and fortune hunters, and to 
 protect the daughters of the millionaires rather 
 than those of the million. Its effect, he urged, 
 would be pernicious in the extreme on the social 
 condition of the state, being at war with the very 
 essence of the marriage relation as it existed in 
 this country. He concurred with the view taken 
 by Mr. O'CoNOR of this question and in the 
 course of his remarks read from the constitution 
 of Texas to show its origin, and the sinister con- 
 nection in which it stood in that constitution. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS said the section would not 
 bear a breath of discussion and after a remark 
 on the propensity of gentlemen to make them- 
 elves merry over his " solitary and alone" con- 
 dition, whenever he undertook to talk about the 
 domestic relations went on to quote from vari- 
 ous authors in commendation of the institution 
 of marriage, as it existed under the common law ; 
 and to say that to distrust the relations as pro- 
 posed by this strumpet provision would justly 
 alarm the country. He quoted Mr. Jefferson also 
 in opposition to the principle of the section, and 
 dwelt upon that great man's declaration, that il 
 was owing to the separate interest of wife and 
 husband in France that about half the annual in- 
 crease of the population of Paris was illegitimate. 
 He trusted, if we did any thing, we should go no 
 further than adopt Mr. WORDEN'S proposition 
 
 Mr MARVIN moved the previous question 
 and the motion to reconsider prevailed ayes 59 
 noes 43. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to amend by striking out 
 all after the word " husband," in the third line 
 and inserting : 
 
 Shall not be liable for the debts of the husband, and the 
 legislature shall provide by law for more effectually se- 
 curing to married women the benefit of such property. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved the previous question on 
 the amendment, and it was seconded. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. HARRIS was negatived, 
 ayes 48, noes 61. - 
 
 The whole section was then rejected, ayes 50, 
 noes 59, as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen. F. F. Backus, H. Backus, Bascom 
 Bowdish, Burr. Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr , Candee, 
 Conely, Cook, Dasa, Dodd. Flanders, Forsyth, Gebhard, 
 :jlyde,Harris, Hotchkiss, Hutcliinson,Hyde,Kernan,iV]ann, 
 McNitt, Maxwell, Morris, Nellis, Parish, Perkins Hiker, 
 StJohn, Salisbury, Smith, Stanton.Stephens.Swackhamer, 
 Tallmadge, Tilden, Townsend, Van Scboonhoven, Ward, 
 Warren, Waterbury, White, Willard, Wood, A. Wright, 
 W. B. Wright, Yawger, Young 50. 
 
 NOES Messrs.Angel.Ayrault, Bergen.Brayton.Brown, 
 Bruce. Brundage, Bull, D. D. Campbell, Cornell, Cudde- 
 back, Danforth, Dorlon. Dubois, Graham, Harrison, Hart, 
 Hoffman, Hunt, A. Huntington, E. Huntington, Jones, 
 Kemble, Kennedy, Kingsley, Loomis, McNeil, Marvin, 
 Miller, Munro, Murphy, Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor. Pat- 
 terson. Penniman, Powers, Rhoades. Richmond, Ruggies, 
 Russell, Sanford, Shaver, Shaw, Simmons, E. Spencer, 
 W. H Spencer, Stetson, Stow, Strong, Taft, Taggart J. J. 
 Taylor, Tuthill, Vache, Witbeck, Worden, Youngs. 59. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM offered the following as a new 
 section : 
 
 . The contract of marriage shall not be held to vest 
 in either of the contracting parties the property of the oth- 
 er, or to create a liability upon either to discharge the 
 debts or the obligations of the other, unless by virtue of 
 special legal enactment. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM urged that the country was full 
 of wrongs growing out of the constructions put 
 upon the marriage contract by the English courts. 
 He desired, if the husband was to have the sole 
 control of his wife's property, if he was to be mas- 
 ter and she the slave, that the legislature should 
 be obliged to frame the law accordingly, and let 
 the people look at it and pronounce their judg- 
 ment on it.' 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved the previous question, 
 and the section was rejected, ayes 5, noes 88. 
 
 Mr. NELLIS offered the, following section: 
 
 ^ . All property, real and personal, owned by a female 
 at the time of her marriage or acquired by her afterwards, 
 by gift from any person or persons other than her husband, 
 or by devise, bequest or descent, shall be her separate 
 property and under her control, subject however, to such 
 restrictions, limitations and regulations as may from time 
 to time be prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS offered the following substitute 
 for this section : 
 
 " Provision shall be made by law for securing to every 
 married woman an equitable support out of the real or per- 
 sonal property owned by her at her marriage, or acquired 
 by her at any time afterwards, but the power ot alienation, 
 by consent of the wife, shall not be destroyed by any such 
 laws ' 
 
 Mr. BRUNDAGE opposed the original section, 
 as one that would produce incalculable mischief, 
 in its disturbing effects upon the domestic circle 
 at the same time avowing himself in favor of 
 exempting the property of the wife 'from liabi- 
 lity for the debts of the husband. He concurred 
 with Mr. BROWN, that if this section was incor- 
 porated into the constitution, the whole thing 
 ought to be rejected. 
 
 iVir. LOOMIS urged that this was a subject 
 that should be approached with great caution, 
 and went on to say that some of the propositions 
 offered here would change the whole face of so- 
 ciety, independent of their moral effect directly 
 
1061 
 
 on the parties for it would result in all real 
 property descending in the female line, and being 
 tied up in families, secure from the reach of cre- 
 ditors, and from alienation. 
 
 After some further debate, in which Messrs. 
 SW AC KRAMER and HARRIS took part, 
 
 Mr. SANFORD moved to lay the section and 
 amendment on the table: Carried, 52 to 49. 
 
 The 8th section was read, as follows : 
 & 8. Every citi/en may freely speak, write and publish 
 his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible lor the 
 abuse of that right ; and no law shall be passed to restrain 
 or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all 
 criminal prosecutions or indictments, and in civil actions 
 for libels, the truth may be given in evidence to the jury ; 
 and if it shall appear to the jury that the matter charged 
 as libellous is true, and was published with good motives 
 and for justifiable ends, the party shall be acquitted, and 
 the jury shall have the right to determine the law und the 
 fact. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to strike out the words 
 " and in civil actions." He would leave the con- 
 stitution as it always had stood. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN hoped the motion would pre- 
 vail. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS thought there would be no ob- 
 jection to this. The words had evidently got in 
 by mistake. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE explained that this was 
 one of the sections reported by the committee on 
 rights and privileges whose report had been 
 most unceremoniously taken out of their hands 
 and turned over to another committee, who had 
 reported it precisely in its original shape. He 
 had objected strenuously to the insertion of these 
 words in committee, but was over-ruled by a 
 majority of the committee. The words should 
 be struck out for they were clearly out of place 
 there and would be found to be most mischie- 
 vous in tendency. He explain^ d their effect at 
 some length, and commented with much severity 
 upon the course which had been taken with the 
 article reported by the committee of which he 
 was chairman particularly upon its postpone- 
 ment to this late day of the session, and until 
 matters of comparatively trivial importance had 
 been discussed for weeks together. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said if these words should be 
 retained, it would make the law of libel still more 
 stringent than it was at present. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question, 
 and it was seconded. 
 
 The words were stricken out and the section 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN, after a few explanatory re- 
 marks, offered the following additional section : 
 
 . No person shall be prejudiced in any civil or cri- 
 minal prosecutiou lor libel, by reason of any false plead, 
 ing. 
 
 Laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved to adjourn: Lost. 
 
 The 9th section was then read as follows : 
 
 ^ 9. The assent of two-thirds of the members elected-.to 
 
 each branch of the legislature, shall be requisite to evwy 
 
 bill appropriating the public moneys or property for local 
 
 or private purposes. 
 
 Mr. CORNELL moved to add * or creating, 
 renewing, altering or Continuing any municipal 
 corporation or body politic." 
 
 This was debated by Messrs. PATTERSON, 
 CORNELL, SWACKHAMER, TALLMADGE, 
 HOFFMAN and SIMMONS, and rejected. 
 
 The section was adopted. 
 The 10th section was then read : 
 10. No lottery shall hereafter be authorized in this 
 
 state, and the legislature shall pass laws to prevent the 
 
 sale of all lottery tickets within this state. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to substitute for this the fol- 
 lowing: 
 
 ^ 10. No law shall be passed abridging the right of the 
 people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the govern- 
 ment, or any department thereof; nor shall arfy divorce 
 be granted, otherwise than by due judicial proceedings j 
 nor shall any lottery hereafter be authorized, or any sale 
 of lottery tickets allowed, within this state. 
 
 The motion was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. BROWN moved also to add the 9th sec- 
 tion of the report of the select committee, in re- 
 lation to the inspectors, &c. as follows : 
 
 10. No law shall be passed requiring the inspection, 
 measuring, guaging, weighing or culling of any commo- 
 dity as a condition of individual dealings therein ; nor 
 shall any office be created or continued for any such pur- 
 pose. 
 
 Several gentlemen suggested that section 8, of 
 article 5, provided for all this. 
 
 Mr. BROWN thought not, and insisted upon 
 his motion. 
 
 Mr. STOW explained the section. 
 
 Mr. F. F. BACKUS moved to lay the section 
 on the table. This was not the proper place to 
 offer it. 
 
 The motion was lost. 
 
 The section was debated by Mr. MORRIS. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to strike out the word 
 " requiring" and insert " for." 
 
 Mr. BROWN accepted the amendment. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. TOWN- 
 SEND and RUSSELL. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved to adjourn. Agreed to. 
 
 Adj. to 8i o'clock to-morrow morning. 
 
 TUESDAY, (101th day.) October 6. 
 
 No Clergyman present 
 
 Mr. TUTH1LL proposed a resolution instruct- 
 ing the select committee on revision to incorpo- 
 rate in the Constitution the article reported by the 
 committee on education 
 
 Mr. BRUCE moved to lay the resolution on the 
 table. This vas agieed to. 
 
 Mr. HARRISON ottered a resolution instructing 
 the select committee on revision to unite Rich- 
 mond with Rockland in the apportionment arti- 
 cle. 
 
 After some conversation Mr H. assented to the 
 resolution being laid on the table. 
 
 THE ADJOURNMENT. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved that the resolution fixing 
 the final adjournment at 12 o'clock to-day be re- 
 considered. This was agreed to and the resolu- 
 tion laid on the table. 
 
 THE REVISED CONSTITUTION. 
 
 The Convention then resumed the report of the 
 committee on revision. 
 
 The (lending question was on the section offered 
 last evening by Mr. BROWN in relation to the in- 
 spection of merchandize. 
 
 Mr. GREENE moved to strike out the words, 
 " as a condition ot individuals dealing therein." 
 
 After some debate in which Messrs. O'CONOR 
 and TOWNSEND participated, Mr. GREENE 
 withdrew his mocion. 
 
1062 
 
 Mr. J. J. TAYLOR moved to insert the words, 
 * and ail existing laws for such purposes are abol- 
 ished." 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved to lay the section on the 
 table. Atrreed to. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered the following as 
 an additional section : 
 
 <5 1-2. Witnesses in criminal cases shall not be imprison- 
 ed for the want of bail to secure their attendance at the 
 trial of the cause; but laws shall be passed to secure, if ne- 
 cessary, the temporary detention of witnesses in criminal 
 cases; and for their prompt examination de bene esse; 
 which examination shall be evidence in all subsequent 
 proceedings upon the subject matters; and shall have the 
 same efl'ect as the oral testimony of the witness would 
 have, were he pivsent, and examined in person. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND objected to the section on the 
 ground that this was purely a legislative matter, 
 and that its adoption might lead to. very serious 
 inconveniences. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND enquired what the gentleman 
 from Kings meant by de bene esse. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER explained that he trans- 
 lated it to be " conditionally." 
 
 Mr. TILDEN opposed the amendment, and 
 Mr. MORRIS supported it, when 
 
 Mr. N1COLL moved to lay this matter on the 
 table. 
 
 Mr. JONES called for the ayes and noes on 
 this motion, and it was carried, ayes 59, noes 43, 
 as follows : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, Archer, Bascom, Bergen, 
 Brayton, Brown, Bruce, Brundage, Cambreleng, D. D. 
 Campbell, R. Campbell, jr., Cook, Crooker, Cuddeback, 
 Danforth, Dodd, Dorlon, Dubois, Gebhard, Graham, 
 Greene, Hawley, Hofl'man, A, Huntington, Hutchinson, 
 Hyde, Kemble, Kingsley, Kirkland, Loomis, McNitt, Max- 
 well, Miller, Munro, Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, O'Conor, 
 Patterson, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, President, Rhoades, 
 Riker, Russell, St. John, Sanford, Sears, Shaw, Sheldon, 
 W. H. Spencer, Stow, J J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Tilden, 
 Tuthill, VV. B. Wright -59. 
 
 NOKS Messrs. Ayrault, F. F. Backus, Baker, Bowdish, 
 Bull, Burr, Candee, Chamberlain, Clark, Conely, Dana, 
 Harrison, Hotchkiss, Hunt, Jones, Kennedy, Kernan, Mann, 
 McNeil, Morris, Murphy, Parish, Richmond, Salisbury, 
 Shaver, Shepard, Smith, E. Spencer, Stephens, bwack- 
 hamer, Taft, Tallmadge, Townsend, Vache, Van Schoon- 
 hoven, Warren, White, Willard, Witbeck, Wood, Yaw- 
 ger, Young, Youngs 43. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to insert as a separate 
 section the seventh section of the report of the 
 select committee made yesterday by Mr. AY- 
 
 fj Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive 
 fines imposed, nor shall cruel and unusual punishments 
 be inflicted. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to add " nor shall wit- 
 nesses be unreasonably detained." 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON asked how long unreasona- 
 bly was? 
 
 Mr. MURPHY inquired in reply how much 
 excessive was ? What he desired was to as- 
 sert a liberal principle in regard to the imprison- 
 ment of witnesses, similar to that in regard to 
 bail. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE adverted to the evil prac- 
 tices that arose from this system of imprisoning 
 witnesses and urged the necessity of providing 
 a remedy. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved the previous question on 
 the section and the amendments. There was a 
 second and the main question ordered. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY'S amendment was then adopted, 
 Ayes 103. 
 
 The section as amended was then adopted. 
 
 The section on motion of Mr. HOFFMAN was 
 then divided so as to form two sections. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS then moved to insert the four 
 sections in relation to the feudal tenures in this ar- 
 ticle as follows : 
 
 1. All feudal tenures, of every description, with all 
 their incidents, are declared to be abolished; saving, how- 
 ever, all rents and services certain which at any time 
 heretofore have been lawfully created or reserved. 
 
 (j2. All lands within this state are declared to be allodial, 
 so that, subject only to the liability to escheat, the entire 
 and absolute property is vested in the owners according to 
 the nature of their respective estates. 
 
 3. No lease or grant of agricultural land for a longer 
 peiiod than seven years, hereafter made, in which shall 
 be reserved any rent or service of any kind, shall be valid* 
 
 (5 4. All fines, quarter sales, or other charges upon alien- 
 ation reserved, in any grant of land hereafter to be made, 
 shall be void- 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said that if these sections ap- 
 plied also to city property, we should see a great 
 war against it here. He objected to making these 
 restrictions solely for country property. He con- 
 sidered it unjust. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES asked if it was not better to 
 adopt the provisions of the revised statutes on the 
 subject entire. The sections adopted the other 
 day declares that feudal tenures were abolished, 
 and that all lands are allodial, subject only to 
 escheat, but they do not declare the grounds on 
 which that liability shall exist. Mr. R. read the 
 provisions of the revised statutes alluded to, as 
 showing the grounds on which an escheat should 
 be enforced. He urged that it was equally im- 
 portant that these provisions should be inserted 
 in the Constitution, in order that the rights of the 
 state should be declared at the same time as were 
 those of individuals. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS remarked that the adoption of 
 the course suggested by Mr. R., would remove 
 his objections to the subject. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON briefly sustained the propo- 
 sition as introduced by Mr. HARRIS. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS concurred in the views sugges- 
 ted by Mr. RUGGLES. Mr S. objected to the 
 proposition for shortening the term of leases as in- 
 terfering with the rights of the citizen. He 
 would not go for any such pretence as this, of a 
 general law, which in reality was intended only 
 as a stab at the patroon. He desired to get rid of 
 these evils as much as any man, and would go for 
 a proposition to authorise the legislature to as- 
 sume the exercise of eminent domain, and take 
 possession of these estates for the protection of 
 the public peace, suitably indemnifying the own- 
 er therefore. The only object he could see in 
 this proposition was to influence votes for Gover- 
 nor, and he was not willing to lend himself to 
 any such object. 
 
 Mr. BROWN asked the gentleman from Alba- 
 ny what was to be the effect of the proposition 
 1$ the case where a tract of land was to be leased 
 for agricultural and manufacturing purposes ? 
 
 The CHAIR said the section in relation to 
 leases was not under consideration. 
 
 Mr. BROWN said the gentleman could answer 
 him when the question was under consideration. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN asked for the previous question, 
 and there was a second, and the main question 
 ordered. 
 
 The second section was adopted. 
 
1063 
 
 The third section was then read. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS urged that the adoption of a 
 provision of this kind in the Constitution would 
 be dangerous, although it might be very well as 
 a mere matter of legislation. He desired to see 
 manorial estates brought to a close, and broken 
 up, and was willing to aid in any effort to attain 
 that end which did not interfere with the rights 
 of the owner. He thought this could be attained 
 best by some provision in relation to bequests of 
 these lands. 
 
 Mr. N1COLL moved to amend by inserting 
 *' twelve" instead of " seven," as the term of the 
 lease. He asked for the previous question. 
 
 There was a second, and the main question or- 
 dered. The amendment of Mr. NICOLL was 
 adopted ayes 71, nays 31. 
 
 The section was then adopted. Ayes 58, nays 49. 
 
 The fourth section was then read. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to strike out the words 
 * other charges," as tending to impede the aliena- 
 tion of property. The word charge" was very 
 vague and indefinite, and indeed might conflict 
 with the provisions of the preceding sections. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS did not think the section liable 
 to the criticism of Mr. N. It had been the poli- 
 cy in reference to these large estates to prevent 
 alienation. This section was intended to destroy 
 this policy. Mr, H. further explained and advo. 
 cated his proposition. There was no earthly rea- 
 son why land shouW not be as freely transl'ened 
 as personal property. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS and WATERBURY continued 
 the debate. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES had long been if the opinion 
 that these quarter sales and other restraints upon 
 alienation, in these long leases, were not only un- 
 favoiable to the interest of the tenant but also ol 
 the landlord. Whether that was so or not, he 
 was ot the opinion that they should be abolished> 
 and he had been surprised that some law had not 
 long since been parsed doing them away. But he 
 objected to this section as extending too far and 
 reaching conditions in short leases, for village lots 
 &c., necessary for the protection of the owner of 
 the land. He should offer for the section the fol- 
 lowing substitute : 
 
 " All fines, quarter sales, or other like restraints upon 
 alienation reserved in any lease of agricultural lands for 
 lile or for a longer term than five years hereafter ta be 
 made shall be void. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS thought this section would 
 operate unfavorably upon the owners of small 
 farms throughout the state, and he referred to the 
 case of a lease of lands by a widow for the bene- 
 fit of her infant children. It was all wrong in 
 principle. 
 
 Mr. MANN wanted the word " agricultural" 
 added before '* land," if the section was to be 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS hoped this section would not be 
 adopted. We had gone as far as we should when 
 we had limited these leases, whether in city or 
 country, to 12 years. 
 
 The debate was farther continued, by Messrs. 
 WORDEN and HARRIS. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question 
 and it was seconded. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. NICOLL was agreed 
 to, ayes 49, noes 48. 
 
 The question then came up on the substitute of 
 Mr. RUGGLES. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to add the words " or 
 grant" after " lease." Ruled out of order, the 
 previous question having been ordered. 
 
 The substitute was rejected, ayes 34, noes 61. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS asked unanimous consent to in- 
 sert in the original section the words " or 1: ke 
 restraints" in lieu of those stricken out. 
 
 Objection was made. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS. Then I must vote gainst the 
 section. It is perfectly useless as it stands. 
 
 The section was rejected, ayes 37, noes 66. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES now offered the following, 
 which is the first section of the Revised Statutes : 
 
 \ . The people of this state, in their right of sovereign- 
 ty, are deemed to possess the original and ultimate pro- 
 perty in and to all lands within the jurisdiction of the state; 
 and all lands, the title to which shall fail, from a delect of 
 heirs, shall revert or escheat to the people. 
 
 Mr. R. said if this should prevail, he should 
 move a reconsideration of the first two sections 
 just adopted. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS could see no objection to the 
 adoption of this section. It should precede those 
 already adopted. But he was entirely opposed 
 to the reconsideration of what had been adopted. 
 
 The section was adopted nem con. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES laid on the table a notice to 
 reconsider the first two just adopted. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS offered the following section : 
 
 . All lines, quarter sales, or other like restraints up- 
 on alienation reserved in any grant of land, hereafter to be 
 made, shall be void. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL raised the question of order that 
 this being in effect what had j ust been voted down, 
 could not be received. 
 
 The CHAIR could not thus rule it out. 
 
 Mr.VAN SCHOONHOVEN supported the sec- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. BAKER moved the previous question, and 
 it was seconded. 
 
 The section was adopted, ayes 62, nays 39. 
 RIGHTS. PRIVILEGES, &c. 
 
 The llth section was then read, as follows, and 
 adopted : 
 
 11, No purchase or contract for the sale of lands in 
 this state, made since the fourteenth day of October, one 
 thousand seven hundred and seventy-five; or which may 
 hereatter be m&de, ol, or with the Indians, shall be valid, 
 unless made under the authority, and with the consent of 
 the Legislature. 
 
 Tht? 12th section was then read : 
 
 12. Such parts of the common law, and of the acts of 
 the Legislature of the Colony ot New York, as together 
 did form th law of the said colony, on the nineteenth day 
 of April, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five 
 and the resolutions of the Congress ol the said Colony, and 
 of the Convention of the State of New Yoik, in force on 
 the twentieth day of April, one thousand seven hundred 
 and sev euty-seven, which have not since expired, or been 
 repealed or altered; and su^-h acts ot the Legislature of 
 this State as are now in force, shall be and continue the 
 law of this State, subject to such alterations as the Legis- 
 lature shall make concerning the same. But all such 
 parts ol tlie common Jaw, and such of the said acts, or 
 parts thereof, as are repugnant to this Constitution, are 
 hereby abrogated. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to amend by adding as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 And the Legislature, at its first, session after the adoption 
 of this Constitution, sliail appoint five cormni>&ioners, 
 whose duty it shall he to reduce into a written and system- 
 atic code the whole body of the law of this State, or so 
 much aid such parts thereof ts to the said commissioners 
 
1064 
 
 shall seem practicable and expedient. And the said com- 
 missioners shall specify such alterations and amendments 
 therein as they shall deem proper, and they shall at all 
 times mak reports of their proceedings to the Legislature, 
 when called upon to do so; and 
 
 I, The Legislature shall pass laws regulating the tenure of 
 office, the filling of vacancies therein, and the compensa- 
 tion of the said commissioners; and shall also provide for 
 the publication of the said code', prier to its being present- 
 ed to the Legislature for adoption. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved to strike out five," 
 and to insert " three," as the number of the com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. JONES asked for the previous question, 
 and there was a second, and the main question 
 ordered. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND'S amendment was adopted 
 51 to 42. 
 
 The proposition of Mr. NICOLL, as amended, 
 was then adopted ayes 65, nays 37. 
 
 The question was then taken on the section as 
 amended, and it was adopted* ayes 60, noes 45. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN laid on the table 
 a motion to reconsider the vote just taken. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND offered a substitute for the 
 seventh section. 
 
 The Chair said the motion was not now in or- 
 der. 
 
 The seventh section was then, read : 
 
 ^13' All grants of land within this State, made by the 
 King of Great Britain, or persons acting under his au- 
 thority, alter the fourteenth day of October, one thousand 
 seven hundred and seventy-five, . shall be null and void; 
 but nothing contained in this Constitution shall effect any 
 grants of lind within this State, made by the authority of 
 the said king or his predecessors, or shall annul any char- 
 ters to bodies politic and corporate, by him or them made, 
 before that day; or shall afl'ect any such grants or char- 
 ters since made by this State, or by persons acting vinder 
 its authority or shall impair the obligation of any debts 
 contracted by the State, or individuals, or bodies coipo- 
 rate, or any other right of property, or any suits, action, 
 or oiher proceedings in courts of justice. 
 
 Mr. DODD asked for the previous question, 
 but it was not seconded. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY proposed the following amend- 
 ment : 
 
 " But such charters to bodies politic or corporate, made 
 by the King of England, shall have no other or greater 
 eft'ect by virtue of this section, than similar charters gran- 
 ted by law in this State." 
 
 Mr. ALLEN opposed the amendment. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to strike out the last two 
 lines of the section as being entirely unnecessary. 
 Lost. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. SIMMONS, 
 O'CoNOR, STETSON, WORDEN and RUSSELL. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved the previous question 
 and it was seconded, 49. to 40. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. MURPHY was nega 
 tived, 68 to 30. 
 
 The section was agreed to, 69 to 23. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN ottered the following additional 
 section to the first article: 
 
 ^ . The rents and profits of all real estate owned by 
 
 the wife at the time of her marriage, and the rents and pro- 
 fits of all real estate acquired by her afterwards, by gift 
 devise descent or otherwise, than from her husband, shall 
 be her separate property, and such property shall in no 
 case be taken, without the consent of the wife, to pay the 
 debts of the hu<band. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS moved to lay it on the table. 
 Agreed to, 53 to 39. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND offejed the following sec- 
 tion : 
 
 ^ . The home of every family shall be held sacred 
 rom civil process taan amount not exceeding $600 for 
 debts created after tire adoption of this constitution ; and 
 f he legislature shall provide for an appraisement by a jury 
 if the value ol any real or personal estate-so held. 
 
 Mr. T. said that as every proposition tending to 
 favor the principle of allowing the property of 
 women to rest undisturbed by the pecuniary mis- 
 fortunes of their husbands, had been eventually 
 annulled by the Convention, he hoped the prin- 
 ciple shadowed forth in the section now present- 
 ed would at least meet with favor. 
 
 If he understood the views of the large busi- 
 ness and creditor interest of the state on this ques- 
 tion, it was not as to the amount of exemption 
 that might be recognized, but that the sum should 
 
 fixed permanently, and not held subject to the 
 caprice of legislators, from year to year, as they 
 might be influenced by the clamor of local and 
 temporary excitements. On these grounds he 
 had deemed some provision of this nature of high 
 importance in the Constitution, if the principle 
 of allowing any property to be held privileged 
 from the operation of our collection laws, was 
 deemed advisable. To show that there was no 
 startling novelty in this, he would but for a mo- 
 ment glance at what had been the action of the 
 Legislature from time to time in the matter. In 
 the "supply bill," laws of 181$ page 193, twenty 
 sheep, one cow, two swine, and all necessary 
 wearing apparel, of a house holder, were made 
 exempt for five years. Chapter 227, of laws of 
 1815, reduced the number of sheep, but extended 
 the principle to a greater number of articles. 
 By a law of 1824, chap. 238, the principle was 
 made permanent, and again extended, and includ- 
 ed pews, prayer-books, &c., &c. The Revised 
 Statutes adopted the idea, to the full extent of 
 existing laws, including library, family pictures, 
 &c. Thus the question stood, until the year 
 1842, when the privilege was further extended, 
 in the sum of $150, leaving the matter in such a 
 position that a debtor with but a moderate elasti- 
 city of conscience, can find legal justification for 
 holding certainly over a thousand dollars in value 
 of property, exempt from his debts particularly 
 if he happens to worship in one of the fashiona- 
 ble and splendid structures that now adorn many 
 of our cities. 
 
 How much preferable would it appear, to name 
 some specific sum, beyond which the privilege 
 could not apply, and require the legislature by 
 appropriate laws, to provide an appraisement by 
 an inquest of the debtor's own neighbors, of the 
 value of the property, real and personal, sought 
 to be made sacred, and the propriety of their res- 
 ervation in view of the number, locality, and cir- 
 cumstances of the family. It would be conceded 
 he thought, by many legal gentlemen, in his 
 hearing, that some provision of this nature would 
 work great good, in allaying many of the painful 
 vicissitudes that the circle of the domestic fire- 
 side now endures, from results over which, in 
 many cases, they have not but remote, if any 
 control. 
 
 His personal views upon this subject, would 
 probably at the present era, meet with but few 
 supporters in a body peculiarly constituted, as 
 this was. They extended to the degree of leav- 
 
1065 
 
 ing all debts, where no fraud had existed in their 
 inception, a matter of HONOR. The doctrine, he 
 would remark, so startling here, was extensively 
 held by many of the most responsible men of the 
 community. A few lines from a recent editorial 
 in the first commercial paper iff the Union, (the 
 Journal of Commerce,) would not be inappro- 
 priate here, and he would ask the attention of 
 gentlemen to them : 
 
 " These reforms, for which we should think public sen- 
 timent might be speedily prepared, would strike oli half 
 the labor of the legislature, and half the patronage, at a 
 stroke. It would be a most glorious restoration to the 
 people ot their unalienable rights. 
 
 " The public have determined that they will not com- 
 mit cititens to jail for debt, nor tor militia fines, in time of 
 peace. It must come up for grave consideiation at no dis- 
 tant day, whether the state is responsible for the collection 
 of debts at all. Whether if a citizen parts with bis prop- 
 erty without an equivalent, that is, delivering it on credit, 
 he shall have a right to call on government to reinstate 
 him in the possession. There are a multitude of details 
 connected with this thought, which it is not necessary 
 now to pursue. The questions of government superin- 
 tendence of education and of alms, are great questions, 
 and will ere long come up for discussion. There are many 
 men already, who think that education would be as much 
 benefited as religion has been by the withdrawal of gov- 
 ernment interference." 
 
 We need not fear but that the commercial 
 classes, who under our collection and banking 
 laws of the past half century, have in the pro- 
 portion of 95 out of every 100, at least in our cit- 
 ies, sunk under insolvency, are fully prepared 
 from sad experience for this change, from a sys- 
 tem that has worked for them so much of evil 
 and sorrow. It was proper here to say, that of 
 our course where pledges of property existed, 
 and no credit was given, every proper remedy 
 should maintain the lien thus created. And in 
 cases of fraudulent representation as an induce- 
 ment for credit, effectual and summary justice 
 should follow the delinquent. He had originally 
 in the resolution, named $1000 ; he would at the 
 request of some gentlemen name $600 instead 
 and in addition at their request that a direct vote 
 (however small,) might be obtained, move the 
 previous question. 
 There was a second. 
 The proposition was negaiived, 11 to 76. 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote taken yesterday upon the amendment of Mr 
 TAGGART, relating to the qualification of witnes 
 ses. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE advocated a reconsideration. 
 Mr. WORDEN moved the previous question 
 and there was a second. 
 
 The motion to reconsider was lost. Ayes 4S 
 nays 64. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN moved that the 1st article b< 
 adopted and ordered to be engrossed. Agreed to 
 68 to 38. 
 
 ARTICLE II-ELECTIVE FRANCHISE. 
 Mr. O'CONOR proposed the following as the Is 
 section of the 2d article: 
 
 ^ 1. Every male citizen of the age of 21 years, who shall 
 have been an inhabitant ot this State for one year nextpre 
 ceding any election, and for the last three months a re si 
 dent of the county where he may offer his vote, shall b 
 entitled to vote in the town or ward where he actually re 
 sides, and not elsewhere, for all officers that now are 01 
 hereafter may be elective by the people. But no man o 
 color, unless he shall have been for three years a residen 
 f this State, and for ne year next preceding any elec 
 tion shall be seized and possessed of a freehold estate of thi 
 value of two hundred and fifty dollars, over and above al 
 
 108 
 
 lebts and ineumbrances charged thereon, and shall have 
 t>en actually rated and paid a tax thereon, shall be enti- 
 led to vote at such election. And no person of color shall 
 >e subject to direct taxation, unless he shall be seized and 
 >ossesied of such real estate as" aforesaid. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved the following as a substitute : 
 
 } 1. Every male citizen of the age of 21 years, who shall 
 
 lave bOfto a citizen for ten days, and an inhabitant ot this 
 
 itate one year next preceding any election, and for the last 
 oui months a resident of the county where he may offer 
 
 is vote, shall be entitled to vote at such election in the 
 election district of which he shall at the time be a resident, 
 and not elsewhere, for all officers that now are or hereafter 
 may be elective by the people; but such citizen shall have 
 been for thirty days next preceding the election, a resident 
 of the district from which the officer is to be chosen for 
 whom he offers his vote. But no man of color, &c., (as 
 above.) 
 
 Mr. STOW and Mr. KIRKLAND debated the 
 amendment. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved to strike out " a citizen for 
 10 days," and Mr. STOW moved the previous 
 question, and it was seconded. The amendment 
 of Mr. JONES was lost, 51 to 59. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved to strike out 30 days and 
 insert 10. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN opposed the amendment 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR supported it, and Mr. HUNT 
 and Mr. MURPHY followed on the other side, 
 when the amendment was negatived, ayes 27, 
 noes 80. 
 
 Mr. DANA moved to strike out "four months" 
 and insert " three months." Lost. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. STOW was agreed to, 
 ayes 79, noes 29. 
 
 Mr. FLANDERS moved to strike out all that 
 relates to qualifications of colored persons. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE advocated this motion with great 
 earnestness. 
 
 The previous question was moved and second- 
 ed, and the motion of Mr. F. was negatived, ayes 
 28, noes 75. 
 
 The section as amended on motion of Mr. STOW, 
 was agreed to ayes 72, noes 30. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS moved the following tariff law 
 to promote education, as section two of this arti- 
 cle : 
 
 ^ -2. No person born after the adoption of this Constitu- 
 tion, shall be entitled to vote unless he shall be able, at 
 the time he oft'ers his vote, to read and write the English 
 language. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to add the word " well." 
 (Laughter.) 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved to insert " and Dutch," 
 after " English." He said there were a great 
 many Dutch families still in this country, who 
 ought not to be deprived of the right to vote. 
 [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. N1COLL did not lik fc> see this matter, 
 which was exceedingly well meant, and if It 
 were practicable would be very desirable, treat- 
 ed with levity, and he hoped the gentleman from 
 Essex would withdraw his proposition. 
 
 Mr. SIMMONS advocated his motion. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY was one of those who believed 
 " a little learning to be a dangerous thing." 
 
 Mr. JONES moved to lay the section on the ta- 
 ble. Agreed to. 
 
 The section of Mr. BOUCK'S report was then 
 read, as follows : 
 
 -2. Laws may be passed excluding from the right of 
 suit'rage all persons who have been, or may be convicted 
 of bribery, of larceny, or of any infamous crime: and lor 
 depriving every person who shall have a bt or wager de 
 
1066 
 
 pending upon the direct or indirect result of any election, 
 from the right to vote at such election. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved to amend by substitu- 
 ting tor the last clause as follows : 
 
 '< And for depriving every person who shall make, or be- 
 come directly or indirectly interested in, any bet or wager 
 depending upon the result of any election from the right 
 to vote at such election." 
 
 Messrs. RHOADES, NICOLL, BASCOM, 
 RICHMOND and E. HUNT1NGTON debated 
 this proposition. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER offered the following amend- 
 ment to the amendment : 
 
 Add " Laws shall be passed to define the meaning of 
 the term ' man of color,' as used in the preceding section, 
 und rules snail be established for determining questions re- 
 lating thereto, that may arise under it. But no person shall 
 be considered a man of color in whom the white blood pre- 
 dominates." 
 
 Mr. ANGEL moved the previous question,and 
 it was seconded. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER'S amendment was lost. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. RHOADES was agreed 
 to. 
 
 The section was adopted. 
 
 The 3d section was read as follows : 
 
 3. Laws may be passed providing that alter the year 
 one thousand eight hundred and titty five, no person shall 
 have the right of suffrage under this Constitution unless 
 he can read the English language. 
 
 Mr. DORLON advocated the section. 
 
 Mr. RUUGLES thought this mutter ought to be 
 treated seriously, and he proposed to amend so 
 that it should not affect those who are now elec- 
 tors , by inserting after ''person" ihe words "not 
 now an elector," and striking out 55 and inserting 
 60. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR thought we should place no 
 sucii restriction in the constitution. All that 
 could be done for the instruction of the people, 
 should be done; but the unfortunate should not 
 be excluded by a provision like this. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON concurred with Mr. T. A 
 person might become blind, and would thus be 
 incapacitated and excluded from the franchise. 
 
 Air. BERGEN moved to add the words "and 
 Dutch" (as before.) 
 
 Mr GREENE moved to strike out and insert, so 
 that the section would read as follows : 
 
 "After the year 1S55, r.o person shall acquire the right 
 to Vi-te under this constitution, unless he can read and 
 write, except in cases of physical inability." 
 
 Mr. MORRIS opposed all provisions of the kind. 
 Give the ignorant a right to vote, and fheri the 
 wealthy, who would be effected by those votes, 
 would iind it to their interest to extend the bene- 
 fits of education. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved the previous question on 
 the amendment of Mr, RUGGLES, and there was 
 a second, when the amendment was lost. 
 
 Mr. GREENE advocated his amendment. 
 
 Mr. HUlCHlNSON moved the previous ques- 
 tion on the whole maMet, and it was seconded. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. GREENE was lost. 
 
 The section was also negatived a\es G, nays 
 
 75. 
 
 i'he 4th section was read as follows, and agreed 
 
 to: 
 
 4. For the purpose of voting, no person shall be deemed 
 to have gained or lose a residence, by reason of his pres- 
 . nee or absence, while employed in the service of the Uni- 
 Jed States; nor while engaged in the navigation of the wa- 
 
 ters of this State, or of the United States, or of the high 
 seas; nor while a student of any seminary of learning; nor 
 while kept at any elms house, or other asylum, at public 
 expense; nor while confined in any public prison. 
 
 Mr, MORRIS njpved the following additional 
 section to lie on Tne table : 
 
 . Laws shall be passed compelling parents and guar- 
 dians to afford their children an opportunity to acquire a 
 good English education. 
 
 The fifth section was read as follows, and agreed 
 to: 
 
 5. Laws shall be made for ascertaining by proper 
 proofs the citizens who shall be entitled to the right of 
 suffrage hereby established. 
 
 The sixth section was then read, as follows: 
 6. All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot, ex- 
 
 cept for such town officers as may by law be directed to be 
 
 otherwise chosen. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to insert "and village," 
 after "town." Lost. 
 
 The section was agreed to. 
 
 The seventh section was read, as follows : 
 
 7. Every elector of this State shall be eligible to any 
 orhce under this Constitution, except as herein otuerwUe 
 provided. But no person shall be elected or appointed to 
 local office, who is not an elector in the district, county, 
 city, town or ward, for which he may be elected or ap- 
 pointed. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to strike it out. Agreed 
 to. 
 
 The eighth section was read, as follows: 
 5} 8. No person holding an office or place of public trust, 
 in or under the government of the United S'ates, shall be 
 eligible to, or hold any office or place of public trust, un- 
 der the constitution or laws of this State. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said that in every town there 
 was a postmaster; and there were also many little 
 offices which were a burden upon the citizens, 
 such as school inspector, &c., which the post- 
 master should be allowed to help bear. The pro- 
 vision here - was sufficiently made in another ar- 
 ticle. He moved to strike out the section. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 The 9th section was read as follows : 
 9. Colored male citizens possessing the qualifications 
 required by the first section of this article, shall also have 
 the right to vote for all officers that now are, or hereafter 
 may be, elective by the people. 
 
 This was recommended to be submitted sepa- 
 rately. 
 
 Mr. RHOADES moved the following as a sub- 
 stitute : 
 
 " After the year 1848, no property qualification shall be 
 required to entitle any citizen of this state to the exercise 
 of the right of suffrage." ^ 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to add " except as in 
 this article provided." Lost. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG thought we had made but 
 little progress within the last few days. This sub- 
 ject had been fully discussed, and if he could un- 
 derstand the sense of the House, it was willing to 
 allow the Constitution to stand as it was. He 
 moved the previous question. 
 
 The substitute proposed by Mr. RHOADES 
 was rejected, ayes 30, noes 53. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to amend the 9th 
 section by adding after " article" the words " oth- 
 er than the property qualification," and to add to 
 the section " after the first day of Jan., 1S47." 
 
 Mr. T. moved as a preamble to this section, 
 that it be referred to the select committee, with 
 instructions to report the manner of, and the form 
 
1067 
 
 of the ballot for, its separate submission to the 
 people. 
 
 Mr. WARD and Mr. WORDEN supported the 
 motion of Mr. T. and it was agreed to ayes 73, 
 noes 26. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved a reconsideration. 
 Laid on the table. 
 
 Mr. STOW offered the following additional 
 sections, and proceeded to advocate their adop- 
 tion : 
 
 ^ . An elector owning a freehold, or having an unexpired 
 term of not l>ss than twenty-one years in a leasehold, (now 
 existing,) may by an instrument executed by him declare 
 thai he intends to exempt from incumbrances for debt the 
 propeity described in such instrument j the value of such 
 property shall not be l-ss than one hundred, nor more 
 than one thousand dollars. 
 
 . The value of the property mentioned in the last 
 section, shall be ascertained by the assessors of the town 
 or ward in which it shall be situated, who shall make a 
 certificate of their appraisal. Such instrument, and such 
 certificate shall be acknowledged, or proved in the manner 
 entitling a deed to be recorded, and shall be recorded in 
 the clerk's office of the county in which the property is 
 situated, and notice of such record shall be published in 
 such manner, and for such time as shall be prescribed by 
 law. 
 
 After such record and notice thereof shall have been du- 
 ly published, such property shall not be incumbered by 
 or for any debt created or contracted by such elector. 
 This privilege shall not enable an elector to hold more 
 than one piece of property thus exempt at the same time ; 
 and such exemption shall cease whenever he shall cease 
 to be a resident of this state. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to lay the proposition 
 on the table. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM demanded the ayes and noes, 
 and the motion was agreed to, ayes 47, noes 41. 
 
 Mr. WARD now moved that the article be a- 
 greed to and ordered engrossed. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON called for the ayes and noes 
 on this motion, and it was agreed to, ayes 74 
 noes Messrs. Bergen, Cornell, Flanders, Jones, 
 .Mann, Murphy, Nicoli, Shepard, Stephens 
 Swackhamer, White, Youngs 13. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to adjourn. 
 
 Mr. JONES called for the ayes and noes. The 
 motion was agreed to, 52 to 31. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, (108th day,) Oct. 7. 
 
 No Clergyman present. 
 
 After the reading of the Journal, Mr. MORRIS 
 moved to lay all intervening orders on the table, 
 and tnat the Convention proceed to the unfinish- 
 ed business. Agreed to. 
 
 ARTICLL III THE LEGISLATURE. 
 The first and second sections of the report of 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR, as amended, was read and pass- 
 ed without objection. 
 
 The third section was read, (the apportion- 
 ment of Senate districts,) and Mr. HARRISON 
 moved a reconsideration of the vote which an- 
 nexed Richmond county to the first district, with 
 Suffolk and Queens. 
 
 The ayes and noes were ordered, and there 
 were Ayes 44, Noes 53. 
 
 Mr. SMITH made the like motion upon the 
 vote changing the position of Delaware and Otse- 
 go counties in the 17th and 18th districts. 
 
 Mr. BURR and Mr. DANA opposed the motion 
 to reconsider. 
 
 The ayes and noes were demanded, and the 
 Convention agreed to reconsider. Ayes 52, noes 
 39. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to amend by including 
 Schenectady in the 17th district. Ruled out of 
 order. 
 
 Mr. SMITH moved to transpose Otsego to the 
 18th, and Delaware to the 17th district. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON should vote against the mo- 
 tion because it would make the inequality in the 
 two districts more than 20,000 greater than at 
 present. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved the previous qnestion, and 
 Mr. HARRIS demanded the ayes and noes on se- 
 conding that motion. 
 
 The House ordered the main question to be put. 
 
 The motion of Mr. SMITH was agreed to, Ayes 
 49, Noes 48. 
 
 So Schoharie and Delaware are to constitute 
 the 37th district, and Otsego and Chenango the 
 18th. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to reconsider the section 
 for the purpose of changing the words "contigu- 
 ous territory and of compact form," in the para- 
 graph relating to the districts in the city of New 
 York, to the following : "convenient and con- 
 tiguous territory." This is the language used in 
 the section relative to the formation of Assembly 
 districts. 
 
 This motion was debated by Messrs. O'CONOR, 
 PATTERSON and MORRIS. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved the previous question 
 and there was a second. 
 
 The motion to reconsider was agreed to, 70 to 
 31. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR then moved his amendment, 
 (see above) and also adding the words "excluding 
 aliens and persons of color not taxed ; " also, 
 that no Assembly district (in that city) should be 
 divided in the formation of a Senate district. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 The whole section was then agreed to. 
 
 The 5th section relating to the formation of 
 Assembly districts, having been read, 
 
 Mr. PERKINS moved to reconsider the same, 
 for the purpose of striking out all that provides 
 for single districts, except in the city of New 
 York, which he proposed to divide into four dis- 
 tricts. 
 
 It being found by reference to the Journal that 
 no motion to reconsider this section had been 
 heretofore made, the motion of Mr. P. was ruled 
 out of order. 
 
 The 6th section, relates to the pay of members 
 of Assembly. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to reconsider for the pur- 
 pose of striking out all that limits the aggregate 
 pay for a session to $300. 
 
 No record of this motion being found, it was 
 ruled out of order. 
 
 The Secretary continued to read the sections, 
 which were adopted up to the IGth, which is as 
 follows : 
 
 16. No bill shall be passed unless by the assent o! 
 majoritj of all the members elected to each bianch ol the 
 legislature, and the question on the h'nai passage sh.U be 
 taken immediately ui>on us last reading, and the yeas and 
 nty-g entered on the journal. 
 
 Mr. STETSON opposed this as going much too 
 far. 
 
 Mr. S. concluded by moving to strike out all 
 after the word "passed," in the first line, and in- 
 sert "unless two-thirds of all the members elect- 
 
1068 
 
 ed to each house be present during the last read- 
 ing, and the question upon the final passage shall 
 be taken immediately upon its last reading, and 
 the yeas and nays entered on the journal." 
 
 Mr. MARVIN opposed the section as being en- 
 tirely unnecessary, unsafe and unwise. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND sustained the original section 
 as did Mr. RUSSELL. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY further opposed it. 
 
 Messrs. HARRIS and MORRIS further support- 
 ed it. 
 
 The debate was continued by Messrs. JONES in 
 opposition, and Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN in fa- 
 vor of the section, when, 
 
 Mr. STRONG moved the previous question. 
 
 There was a second, and the main question 01- 
 dered. 
 
 The question was then taken on the proposi- 
 tion of Mr. STETSON, and it was rejected. Ayes 
 35, Noes 62. 
 
 The question was then taken on the section 
 and it was adopted. Ayes 78, Nays 30. 
 
 The question then recurred on tne 15th section 
 as follows : 
 
 "The enacting claase of all bills shall be, The People 
 of the state ot New York represented in Senate and As- 
 sembly, do enact aa follows : and no law shall be enacted 
 but by bill." 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out " repre- 
 sented in Senate and Assembly." 
 
 This was rejected. 
 
 The l"7th section was then read, as follows- : 
 "No private or local bill, which may be passed by the 
 legislature, shall embrace more them one smbjeet. and that 
 shall be expressed in the title." 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to strike out the words 
 "private or local." Lost. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to strike out the words 
 "by the legislature," as unnecessary. Lost. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE moved to insert after the 
 word "bill," the words " and no act." Lost. 
 
 The section was then adopted. 
 
 The 18th section was then read as follows : 
 
 " Provision shall be made by law for bringing suits a- 
 gainst the state, in the courts thereof, and for regulating 
 their jurisdiction and proceedings in such suits " 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN hoped the section would be 
 stricken out. It might be sale to allow the State 
 to be sued on written contracts, but as this sec- 
 tion stood, it would open the door to innumera- 
 ble suits against the State upon every variety and 
 description of claims. (Instead of one Attorney 
 General it would require twenty.) He moved to 
 strike it out. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN fully concurred in the views 
 expressed by the gentleman from Herkimer. 
 
 iVJr. STETSON thought this would be a safe- 
 guard against the loose legislation which hereto-^ 
 fore characterized the action on claims. Howev- 
 er, there was no objection on his part to its being 
 stricken out, it being one of much doubt. 
 
 The previous question was then asked. There 
 was a second and the main question ordered. 
 
 The section was rejected. 
 
 IV) r. TOWNSEND moved the following as an 
 additional section, being the unanimous report of 
 the committee of five on the subject: 
 
 } . The Legislature shall, at its next session after the 
 adoption of this Constitution, provide by law for equaliz- 
 ing the valuation ol property lor the purpose of taxation, 
 as made by the assessors and supervisors in the respective 
 
 counties of this State, so that each county shall contribute 
 its proportionate share to the support of government. 
 
 Mr, T. in view of the fact that this measure had 
 received the unanimous approval of a committee 
 selected from every section of the State, would 
 not occupy but a brief period in his remarks up- 
 on the subject. From the investigations that he 
 had made into the nature of the returns to the 
 State, exhibiting the amount of the State tax in 
 the various counties, he felt authorized to assert., 
 that whilst in most of the western counties real 
 estate was computed nearly at its cash valuation, 
 and the counties of Kings and New- York often a- 
 bove its cash value by the assessors, intermediate 
 counties, and others in the northern and southern 
 sections of our State, escaped with the payment 
 of sums less than one quarter of what should be 
 their proportionate contribution to the State tax. 
 This was effected by an open and understood 
 fraud (he would almost say) in the valuation of 
 both real and personal property 
 
 (Mr. GRAHAM here made some observation 
 not understood.) 
 
 Mr. T. continued and said the restlessness of 
 the gentleman might be explained from the fact 
 that his county (Ulster) happened to be one which 
 on the face of the returns, appeared as obnoxious 
 to the censure that he had just uttered. He did 
 not know but if the system of assessing personal 
 property was continued, that in the salutary ope- 
 ration of some provision of the character now 
 moved, a large amount of personal property might 
 find its way to the tax books in his own city. He 
 cared not how this might be so long as a fair and 
 equitable estimate was secured throughout the 
 State. As at present computed we had about one 
 hundred and fifteen millions of personal property 
 reported in the whole State, including all our in- 
 corporated and public associated capital which 
 two items alone should nearly cover that sum. 
 At an early period of the session he had noticed 
 this evasion of personal and unfair valuation of 
 real property., and had then stated his concurrence 
 in the views of a distinguished gentleman, (S. B. 
 RUGGL.ES,) who, in an official report, had several 
 years recommended real estate alone as the best 
 basis for equal and effectual taxation. Those who 
 would answer that thus personal property would 
 entirely escape, forget that personal property is 
 represented by articles either living or inanimate, 
 and as all such must rest or abide in some locali- 
 ty of land, by storage, rents, &c., they would be 
 called upon to bear their share of the burthen at 
 first for convenience enforced upon fast property. 
 We have provided for a term of years a continu- 
 ance of a small State tax. Under the heavy ex- 
 penditures of the general government, the reve- 
 nues from customs, even with duties upon the 
 present free articles, will render a large national 
 debt or direct taxation for the national exchequer 
 unavoidable. Preferring that the government 
 should pay as they go, and believing that the peo- 
 ple would require this mode of proceeding, he 
 had felt it peculiarly the duty of this Convention 
 seeing that legislative, efforts to effect this ob- 
 ject h?.ve heretofore been defeated by the repre- 
 sentatives of delinquent localities, to provide 
 means for an equitable imposition of the national 
 tax, which will soon by its large addition to our 
 present half mill State tux, make the present un- 
 
1069 
 
 equal mode of valuation a still greater enormil 
 upon his own county, (New-York,) which ft 
 some years had borne nearly two-thirds of th 
 State tax. Mr. T. would leave to other gentle 
 men, whose counties suffered as his own, the far 
 ther advocacy of the measure, and hoped that un 
 der the favor with which the Convention appa 
 rently received the suggestion, it would be speed 
 ily adopted. He would only state in additio 
 that numerous memorials had been presented t 
 us on the subject from some of the most intell" 
 gent and respectable citizens of the State. 
 
 Mr. GRAHAM considered this to be mere mat 
 ter of legislation and therefore moved to lay th 
 proposition on the table. 
 
 The motion was rejected, ayes 37, nays 55. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL, jr., hoped the sectio 
 would be adopted, or some other, by which th 
 Legislature should be directed to revise our ta: 
 laws. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to strike out " at its nex 
 session after the adoption of this Constitution, 
 and to strike out "proportionate" and inser 
 " equitable." 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND assented. 
 
 Mr. LOOM1S moved to add as follows: 
 44 And also to sure the equalization of taxation accord 
 ing to propei ty, without regard to the distinction betweei 
 real and personal estate." 
 
 Mr. PERKINS said the effect would be to com 
 pel the assessment of personal property withou 
 regard to its indebtedness. He was not prepared 
 to assent to 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to add " and such prop- 
 erty shall le taxed at the place of domicil of the 
 owner." 
 
 Mr. T9WNSEND suggested to Mr. L. that h 
 should withdraw his amendment, and offer it as a 
 distinct section. 
 
 Mr. LOO MIS assented and withdrew his a- 
 mendment, (carrying with it Mr. Mr. MURPHY'S.) 
 
 Mr. PERKINS opposed the proposition as 
 vague and indefinite. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS urged the importance of equali 
 zing taxation, so that all should be burdened a- 
 like. This all conceded did not exist now. He 
 therefore proposed the following substitute for the 
 proposition : 
 
 ^ . All property subject to taxation shall be taxed ac 
 cording to its actual value, to be ascertained in such man- 
 ner as the Legislature shall direct, making the same equal 
 and uniform throughout the State. No one species of pro- 
 perty from which a tax may be collected, shall be taxed 
 higher than another specie * of property of equal value. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved to lay the whole subject 
 on the table. * 
 
 Carried, ayes 62, nays 44. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL, Jr. offered the following 
 as an additional section : 
 
 . The Legislature shall provide bylaw for there- 
 organization of the boards of supervisors of the several 
 counties of the State, so as to create a more equal repre- 
 sentation in said boards, and may confer upon the same 
 uch further powers of local legislation and administra- 
 tion, as shall from time to time, be prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. R. CAMPBELL, Jr. said he wouldaskthe 
 attention of the Convention for a few moments, 
 (a request he had seldom made during the sitting 
 of the Convention,) while he briefly stated some 
 of the reasons that induced him to offer the sec- 1 
 tion under consideration. He said that such sec- , 
 
 tion was the unanimous report of standing com- 
 mittee No. 15, of which he was a member, and 
 that it was to be found in document No. 12 of the 
 reports, &c. of this Convention. Sir, the labors 
 of this Convention, from its commencement, have 
 have been to perfect a Constitution for regulating 
 the powers and duties of the agents of the State 
 government, and I propose now to invite the mem- 
 bers of this Convention to approach a little nearer 
 to the great principle of all republican govern- 
 ments, viz., that of self-government and to pro- 
 vide for the organization of a republican govern- 
 ment in each county, founded upon a principle of 
 equal representation. Sir, I am one of those who 
 believe that the true moral influence of our gov- 
 ernment can only be preserved by a proper divi- 
 sion of the subjects of legislation and administra- 
 tion between the State and the local authorities 
 by conferring upon the State Legislature and 
 the State authorities, those subjects of legislation 
 and administration which are strictly theirs up- 
 on counties those matters of legislation and ad- 
 ministration which are theirs upon towns theirs 
 and by securing to individuals the right to at- 
 tend to their business without restrictions orlimi- 
 :ations. 
 
 Sir, I am willing to admit that our town and 
 county governments have done more to protect 
 he citizens of ihis state to preserve their rights, 
 and promote their happiness, than any other of 
 ;he aids which the state have brought to its re- 
 ief but I hold that our county governments are 
 established upon a system utterly at variance with 
 he representative principle of republican govern- 
 ments ; and subversive of the rights and best in- 
 'erests of the people. Sir, almost every county in 
 he state is governed by a minority of its popula- 
 ion in all matters which affect local legislation 
 and taxation ; in regard to nineteen-twentieths of 
 all the taxes imposed upon the citizens of (his 
 tate. Yes, sir, nearly one-third of the entire po- 
 lulation of this state, are entirely unrepresented 
 n all matters committed to the board of supervi- 
 ors of the several counties of the state. A town 
 hat has 10,000 inhabitants, and its citizens mil. 
 ions of property, has no greater representation in 
 hese local legislatures than a town of 200 inhabi- 
 ants, with a few thousand dollars of taxable pro- 
 erty. I regard this inequality in representation 
 s grossly wrong and unjust, and as an evil that 
 ught to be at once corrected. But, sir, it maybe 
 aid that our supervisors now represent a territory 
 r property interest, and not the inhabitants of 
 le towns and that the effect ot a re-organization 
 f the different boards of supervisors upon the re- 
 resentative principle, would give the towns ha- 
 ing a large population an undue representation in 
 hose boards. I answer, that the principle of re- 
 resenting towns or corporations, instead of the 
 opulation in them, is a part of the old rotten bo- 
 -ugh system of England aristocratic in all its 
 atures and tendencies at war with governmental 
 nicy of a republican government and that nei- 
 ier the agricultural or any other interest can be 
 ijured by a just representative government 
 ' by equal laws and equal rights. That no hon- 
 t man who properly respects the rights of others, 
 ibuld be disposed to withhold from any citizen 
 s due and equal representation in the boards 
 here laws are to be made and taxes imposed. 
 
1070 
 
 Sir, the people of this state may consent to the 
 acts of the boards of supervisors so long as those 
 acts are only administrative; but if powers of le- 
 gislation are conferred up.on those boards, the ne- 
 cessity of their re-organization upon a principle 
 of more equal representation is absolute. Without 
 such a re-organization, the people will never obey 
 the laws enacted in siid boards. 
 
 Mr. President, this town or borough system of 
 representation in these boards, by which one-third 
 of the people of this state are disfranchised as to 
 their just influence in assessing the burthens of 
 government, cannot, and will not long be endured. 
 This imposing of taxes without the consent of the 
 governed, is a teature of governmental policy that 
 was resisted by our forefathers, and should be re- 
 pudiated by all men who know their rights. 
 
 Sir, the section under consideration proposes 
 that the state legislature may re-organize the 
 b >ards of supervisors in the several counlies of the 
 state, upon a principle of more equal representa- 
 tion that clause is not mandatory and can be 
 complied with either by decreasing the number 
 of supervisors in each county, so that each super- 
 visor or member of the local legislature shall re- 
 present several towns, and be elected as members 
 of assembly, are to be elected under the constitu- 
 tion we are about to submit to the people of this 
 stale for their approval or rejection; or by increas- 
 ing the representation of the towns having a large 
 population by uniting some of the assessors of 
 such towns with their supervisors as representa- 
 tives in the local legislature providing if deemed 
 necessary, that no town shall have over three re- 
 presentatives or votes in said boards indeed any 
 provision tor a more equal representation will 
 be in compliance with the terms of this section. 
 
 Sir, the section also proposes that the legisla- 
 ture may confer upon such boards of supervisors, 
 such further powers of local legislation and ad- 
 ministration as shall from time to time be prescrib- 
 ed by law. Surely there is nothing wrong in this 
 portion ot the section. At all events, nothing 
 more than a compliance with the instructions gi- 
 ven the members of this Convention in the resolu- 
 tions of the different county conventions, at which 
 they were severally nominated. 
 
 Mr. President, I believe that the people of this 
 state have demanded at our hands the refonn in- 
 dicated by the section under consideration that 
 they will not longer submit to the wrong and op- 
 pression of the rotten borough system of repre- 
 sentation a system that ought to be discarded by 
 every true democrat, "who asks for nothing hut 
 what is right, and intends to submit to nothing 
 that is wrong." 
 
 Sir, the first section of the article to which this 
 is offered as an amendment, provides that the en- 
 tire legislative power ot the state shall be vested 
 in the~Senate and Assembly. It is therefore my 
 opinion that powers of local legislation cannot be 
 conferred upon the several boards of supervisors, 
 without a constitutional section permitting the 
 state legislature to delegate such power. 
 
 Mr. President, the people of this state have call- 
 ed for a division of the legislative and administra- 
 tive duties of government between the state and 
 local authorities. And the question now to be 
 determined, is whether the people shall have a 
 local government founded upon a principle of re 
 
 presentation according to population or a local 
 government formed upon the rotten borough sys- 
 tem, ot representing by towns or corporations. 
 Sir, the people are renresented in these halls, 
 where millions of taxes, direct and indirect are 
 imposed upon the true democratic system of re- 
 presentation. No other representation would be 
 tolerated for a moment by the people. Shall we 
 then form our local governments by recognizing 
 the federal doctrine of property representation, or 
 shall we adopt the true democratic principle, 
 that of representation according to population ? 
 Let the members answer this question by their 
 votes. Having been instructed by the committee 
 that reported this section, to offer it for the con- 
 sideration of the Convention, I avail myself of this, 
 the first opportunity I have had for that purpose, 
 since the section was reported. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to strike out "shall," 
 and insert "may."' Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved to lay the subject on 
 the table. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH asked for the previous question. 
 There was a second arid main question ordered. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH then withdrew his amendment. 
 
 The question was then taken on Mr. CAMP- 
 BELL'S proposition, and it was adopted ayes 67, 
 noes 37. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN moved that the whole of arti- 
 cle three now be adopted and be ordered engross- 
 ed. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL moved the previous question, and 
 it was seconded. 
 
 The article was adopted ayes 68, noes 31. 
 
 Several motions were laid on the table to re- 
 consider. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 The Convention took up, on motion of Mr. 
 HOFFMAN, 
 
 ARTICLE IV. ON THE EXECUTIVE. 
 Passed through the same without amendment, 
 and it was adopted by a unanimous vote, (with 
 the exception of Mr. TAGGART, who voted in the 
 negative,) and ordered to be engrossed. 
 
 ARTICLE V ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS. 
 
 The fifth article, on the election and appoint- 
 ment of state officers, was next taken up, read 
 through to the last section, (that relating to the 
 abolition of inspection laws,) when 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved a reconsideration for 
 the purpose of offering the following substitute : 
 
 S. No law shall be passed compelling the inspection, 
 weighing or measuring of any article of merchandise, pro- 
 duce or manufacture, (except salt manufactured withiu 
 this state,) or prohibiting any person from acting as in. 
 spector or measurer of any such article. 
 
 There appearing no motion for a reconsidera- 
 tion upon the journals, at the time of the a- 
 doption of the section, the motion was ruled out 
 of order. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS asked unanimous consent to a- 
 mend by adding "the public health or" after 
 "protecting." 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD objected. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS moved to recommit the section 
 with instructions to report it amended as he had 
 indicated. 
 
1071 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to amend the instruc- 
 tions by directing the substitution of a section 
 heretofore proposed by him. Lost. 
 
 Mr. SHEPARD moved to substitute his section 
 in the instructions. Lost. Mr. S. then with- 
 drew his objections, his purpose having been 
 gained by the last vote. Other objections being 
 made, 
 
 Mr. MORRIS' motion was put and carried, and 
 Mr. M. being appointed the committee, reported 
 as instructed. His report was agreed to, and the 
 section adopted as amended. 
 
 The entire article was then adopted and order- 
 ed to be engrossed 
 
 AVKS 89. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Cornell, Hoffman, Hunt, Jones, Kenne- 
 dy, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, Murphy, O'Conor, Shepard, 
 Stetson, Stow, Tallmadge, Waterbury 15. 
 
 ARTICLE VI. ON THE JUDICIARY. 
 
 This article was read through to the 8th sec- 
 tion, when 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to recommit with in- 
 structions to strike out the clause relating tb the 
 qualifications for admission as attorneys. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER moved to amend by in- 
 structing the committee to insert the following in 
 place of the present clause : 
 
 " Every citizen of the state, of good moral character, 
 (except judicial officer., excluded by this Constitution) 
 shall be admitted to practice as counsellor, solicitor or at. 
 torney in any court of law in this state." 
 
 Mr BASCOM thoughtthat by striking out "and 
 who possesses the requisite qualificationsoflearn- 
 ing and abiliiy," and the words "to admission," 
 all objections against this article would be obvia- 
 ted. He -vouki vote for such a motion if made- 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY moved to lay on the table the 
 motion to recommit. Agieed to, 56 to 48. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES asked unanimous consent to 
 amend the llth section by excepting from re- 
 moval by the Legislature, together with justices 
 of rhe peace, justices of inferior courts not of re- 
 cord. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. SANFORD moved to recommit the 14th 
 section with instructions to amend the section so 
 that the third sentence of the first clause should 
 read as follows: 
 
 " The county court shall have such jurisdiction in cases 
 ari=ing in justices courts, and in such special cases as the 
 Legislature may prescribe, and shall have such original 
 civil jurisdiction as may be prescribed by law." 
 
 Mr. S advocated his motion. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to lay the motion on 
 the table. This question had been fully discuss- 
 ed and decided by several strong votes. Agreed 
 to 60 to 42. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved to recommit the same 
 section, with instructions to amend the third 
 clause, so that it would read: "The justices to 
 sit in courts of session shall be selected by the 
 Board of Supervisors." Lost. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN asked consent to amend so 
 that the two justices to sit with the county judge 
 should be designated by law. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to amend by inserting "on 
 questions of law," after " appeals." Objected to. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to recommit, with in- 
 structions tostike out of the 5th clause the follow- 
 ing words : " Appeals shall lie from the county 
 court and court of sessions to the supreme court," 
 (the same sentence alluded to above.) Carried 
 
 under the previous question, and the amendment 
 was made in pursuance of instructions. 
 
 Mr. STOW moved to amend so that Buffalo 
 should be excepted from the provision of the last 
 clause, prescribing an uniform organization for 
 inferior local courts. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to restore the 15th sec- 
 tion to its original form, by striking out the alter- 
 ations made by the committee of revision. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL explained the object of the re- 
 vising committee in making the alterations. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES asked consent to add to the 
 17th section the following: 
 
 "Justices of the peace and judges or justices of inferior 
 courts, not of record, and their clerto, may be removed, 
 (after due notice ana an opportunity of being heard in their 
 defence.) by such county, city or State courts as may be 
 prescribed by law,ior causes to be assigned in the order of 
 removal." 
 
 No objection being made, this amendment wag 
 agreed to. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS offered the following farther a- 
 mendment, which was adopted : 
 
 " In case of an election to fill a vacancy occurrin? before 
 the expiration of a full term, they shall hold for the residue 
 of the unexpired term." 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved to add the word "coun- 
 ties" in the 18th section, as to the election of lo- 
 cal judicial officers. Objected to. 
 
 The 22d section provides for the speedy publi- 
 cation of statute laws and judicial decisions, and 
 declares that such publication shall be free to any 
 person. 
 
 This was debated by Messrs. LOOMIS, NICOLL, 
 RUSSELL and STOW, and adopted. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER asked consent to offer 
 his section, abolishing the fees of attorneys and 
 counsellors. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL objected. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to recommit, with instruc- 
 tions to add the following section : 
 
 . In civil actions for libel or slander the defendant 
 shall be allowed to give in evidence, upon reasonable no- 
 tice, any facts tending to show that the alleged slander or 
 libel is true, or that he uttered or published the &ame be- 
 lieving it to be true ; %nd the jury shall have the right of 
 deciding upon the effect to be given to such evidence, ei- 
 ther in justification or in mitigation of damages. 
 
 The CHAIR ruled this out of order. 
 
 Mr. LOO.VJIS moved to reconsider the 18th sec. 
 tion, with instructions to strike out the words 
 "and villages." Out of order. 
 
 The whole article was then adopted by the fol- 
 lowing vote- 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angel, V. F. Backus, Baker 
 Bascom, Bruce, Brundage, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr.' 
 Clyde, Conely.Cook, Dani, Danforth, Dodd, Dorlon Du-' 
 bois, Flanders, Graham, Harris, Harrison, Hart Hoffman 
 Hotchkiss. A. Huritington, Hyde, Kernan, Kingsley' 
 Loomis, Morris, Iviunio, Nellis, Paterson, Powers, Presi- 
 dent, Rhoades, Ruggles, Russell, Shaw, Swack'hamer 
 Taft, J. J. Taylor, W. Taylor, Townscnd, Tuthill Ward' 
 Warren. Witbeck, Wood, A. Wright, TV. B. Wrieht Yaw-' 
 ger, Young 58. 
 
 NOES Messrs. Archer, Ayrault, H. Backus, Bergen 
 Bow.lish, Brayton, Bull, Candee, Chamberla n, Cornell 
 < Uddeback, Forsyth. Greene, Hunt, E. Hun-in^ton' 
 Hutchmson, Jones. Kennedy, Kirklaiul, .Mann, McNeil! 
 \1aivin, Murphy, Nicholas, NkoJl, O'Conor, PaiMi, Pen- 
 niman, Perkins, Richmond, Riker, St. John, Salis'uuy 
 Shaver, Shenard, Smith, V7. H. Spencer, Stetson Stow' 
 Taggart, Tallmadge, lilden, Waterbury, White, Willard 
 Worden-46. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH moved to adjourn. 
 Lost-, 40 to 49. 
 
1072 
 
 ON THE FINANCES. 
 
 One or two verbal amendments were made t 
 the first two sections, on motion of Mr. HOFF 
 MAN. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR moved to amend the third 
 section, by adding after words ''Black River ca 
 nals,'" the following;, "and for the Oneida River 
 improvement." 
 
 This was rejected after a short debate. 
 
 Mr. STOW inquired of Mr. HOFFMAN, if he so 
 construed this section as that any surplus in the 
 treasury on the 1st of October, 1846, would be 
 available for the use of the canals? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN had not a doubt of this. The 
 
 legislature would have the entire control of any 
 surpluss there might be on that day. 
 
 The third section was then adopted. 
 
 Mr. HOTCHKISS moved to adjourn. Lost. 
 
 The article was then gone through with, with 
 only some slight verbal amendments. 
 
 Some conversation took place between Messrs. 
 WORDEN, HOFFMAN and MARVIN upon the 
 last section, which requires a quorum of three-fiflhs 
 to be present on the passage of any bill appropria- 
 ting public money, &c. No motion was made to 
 amend. 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved that the article be agreed 
 to, and ordered to be engrossed. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN. This article had originally con- 
 sisted or two parts. He would have been glad to 
 have voted for the first part, which secured the 
 payment of the State debt, and the completion of 
 the unfinished works, but the second contained 
 principles which he could not sanction, He gave 
 this as his reason for voting in the negative. 
 
 The article was adopted by the following vote 
 AYES Messrs. Allen. Angel, Ayrault, F. F. Backus 
 H. Backus, Baker, Bergen, Bruce, Bascom, Bowdish 
 Brayton, Bull, Cambreleng, R. Campbell, jr., Candee 
 Chamberlain, Conely, Cook, Cornell, Cuddeback, Dana 
 Danforth, Dodd, Dubois, Forsyth, Graham, Harrison, Hott 
 man, Hotchkiss, Hunt, A. Huntington, Hyde, Kemble 
 Kennedy, Kernan, Kingsley, Kirkland, Loomis, Mann 
 McNeil," Max well, Munrp, Morris, Nellis.Nicoll, O'Conor 
 Parish, Patterson, Perkins, President, Richmond, Riker 
 Ruggles, Russell. Salisbury, Santord, Shaver, Smith, W 
 H. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Strong, Swack 
 hamer, Taft, Taggart, W. Taylor^ Tilden, Townsend 
 Tuthill, Warren, White, Willard, Witbeck, Worden, A 
 Wright, W. B. Wright, 77. 
 
 NAYS Messrs. Flanders, E. Huntington, Hutchinson 
 Marvin, St. John, Shepard, Stow Young, Youngs 9. 
 
 The Convention then adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, (WQth day,) Oct. 8. 
 
 No Clergyman present. 
 
 Messrs. BRUNDAGE, CLYDE, GREENE, GEB- 
 HARD, and YAWGER were permitted by unani- 
 mous consent to record their votes in the affirma- 
 tive on the Financial article. 
 
 Messrs. CROOKER and E. SPENCER made a like 
 request, and Mr. SHEPARD objected. 
 
 Mr. MANN, from the committee to whom was 
 referred the several returns from the court of 
 Chancery in relation to the funds in its charge, 
 reported the following resolutions : 
 
 Resolved, That this Convention recommend to the next 
 Legislature to provide by law for transferring, securing 
 and depositing all funds and securities, now held, or which 
 may hereafter be held, or under the control of the court 
 of chancery, register, assistant register and clerk thereof, 
 in the state or county treasuries, or make such other pro- 
 visions as shall be deemed expedient to effect the invest- 
 ment, safety and security of said funds and property, and 
 the convenience of the persons interested therein. 
 Resolved, That the several returns and statements now 
 
 in the possession of the Convention, made in pursuance 
 of a resolution passed Aug. 13th, and directed to the chan- 
 cellor, with the return and statements yet to be received 
 from the first district, (New-York) in compliance with said 
 resolution, be transmitted to the Legislature, with a re- 
 quest to that body to have them printed complete, and one 
 or more copies thereof lorwarded to each of the county 
 clerks in this State for public use and inspection: That the 
 Secretary ol this Convention transmit a copy of these re- 
 solutions, with the documents and statements relating 
 thereto, to, the next Legislature. 
 
 Laid on the table and ordered printed. 
 Mr. STRONG moved that the engrossing com- 
 mittee be instructed to engross the section rela- 
 ting to the equalization of the Boards of Supervi- 
 sors, adopted yesterday, in the following words : 
 . The Legislature may provide by law for conferring 
 upon the several boards of Supervisors in this State such 
 powers of local legislation and administration as shall from 
 time to time be prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. STOW said as a representative of a city, 
 tie regarded it as highly injudicious that the re- 
 aresentation of the country towns should be taken 
 irom them. 
 
 Mr. STRONG proceeded to say that this would 
 )e found to be the general feeling against thi 
 section. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN withdrew his objection, but 
 Mr. TOWNSEND renewed it. 
 
 Mr. STRONG then moved to lay the pending 
 order of business on the table. Carried. 
 
 Mr. S. then moved to lay all other orders of 
 msiness, prior to resolutions, on the table. Car- 
 ied. 
 
 Mr. S. then offered his resolution (see above) 
 and moved the previous question. 
 
 There was a secund, and the resolution of Mr. 
 STRONG was adopted, ayes 80, noes 24. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved instructions to the com- 
 mittee on revision to report the following sec- 
 tion : 
 
 . It shall be the duty of the Legislature to provide 
 for the organization of cities and incorporated villages, 
 and especially to restrict their power of taxation, assess- 
 ment, borrowing^ money, contracting debts, and loaning 
 their credit, so as to prevent abuses in assessments, and 
 in contracting debts by such municipal corporations. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to add at 
 the end of the section the following : 
 
 " But shall not affect any existing legislative provisions 
 respecting liabilities heretofore incurred by any city or 
 village corporation." 
 
 Mr. V. S. advocated his amendment. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS moved the previous question 
 on the amendment, and it was rejected, 37 to 39. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS was in favor of the principle of 
 the section, but thought it would be improved 
 by striking out the last three lines, and he moved 
 accordingly. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY opposed the amendment. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved the previous question on 
 ;he whole section. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. HARRIS was rejected, 
 and the section offered by Mr. MURPHY adopted, 
 ayes 94, noes Messrs. DODD and TOWNSEND 2. 
 
 Mr. DANFORTH moved the members be al- 
 owed to change their votes upon the 3d article, 
 ;he character of that article having been essen- 
 tially changed by the adoption of the resolution 
 offered this morning by Mr. STRONG. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to lay the pending 
 order of business on the table, and proceed with 
 ;he unfinished business. Agreed to. 
 Mr. HARRIS, from the coixynittee en revisions 
 
1073 
 
 reported back the section presented by Mr. MUR- 
 PHY, and it was agreed to. 
 
 ARTICLE VIII-ON CORPORATIONS. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved a reconsideration of 
 the 2d section, which requires a majority vote to 
 pass general corporation laws, &c. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON and Mr. RUSSELL remark- 
 ed that this section was now unnecessary, as by a 
 previous section, a majority vote had been re- 
 quired for all laws. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN wanted the recon- 
 sideration, that the vote on laws of this kind 
 might be increased to two-thirds. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN moved the previous question, 
 and the motion to reconsider was lost 43 to 54. 
 
 The section was rejected ayes 17, noes 79. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to amend the 5th sec- 
 tion, by inserting the words " corporations or," 
 before " associations," so that it would read 
 " but corporations or associations may be formed 
 for such purposes under general laws," Agreed 
 to. 
 
 The 7th section is as follows : 
 
 ^7. The legislature shall provide by law for the regis- 
 tering of all bills or notes, issued or put in circulation as 
 money, and shall require ample security for the redemp- 
 tion of the same in specie. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG moved to add at the end 
 of the section as follows : 
 
 " But no deposit of securities shall be required from 
 banks now existing and incorporated by special acts." 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN had no doubt this was now 
 the construction of this section, and he objected 
 to the amendment. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG appealed to him to with- 
 draw the objection, but Mr. H. refused. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS hoped the amendment would 
 be passed, as it would satisfy all parties, and al- 
 lay the feeling which now prevailed among those 
 interested in Safety Fund Banks. He moved to 
 recommit, with instructions to add the amend- 
 ment moved by Mr. CAMBREL-ENS. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND remarked, that before the 
 convention voted affirmatively upon this proposi- 
 tion, he felt it to be again his duty to call their 
 attention to the fact, that in reality there was no 
 security to the public now in the so called Safety 
 Fund system ; from the fact that its ability to 
 meet losses that might henceforward occur, was 
 annihilated by the pledges that the bank failures 
 for the last six years had entailed upon the fund. 
 It was idle for gentlemen to rise here and talk of 
 th present security of the system, when in doc- 
 uments, from the most responsible sources, we 
 had been told that all such reliance was utterly 
 baseless. Mr. T. here read from Convention 
 Doc. 34, page 3, to show that all the circulations 
 for the remainder of the period of the charters of 
 these banks, were effectually " used up." To 
 prove this, the bills of an institution that had 
 suspended payment the past summer, had until 
 very recently been floating in Wall street at 20 to 
 30 per cent under par and they had only just 
 been taken up by a new subscription from the 
 stockholders, under the operation of which the 
 bank (the Lewis Co.) had been again put on its 
 feet. A constitutional provision, authorising the 
 legislature to call for other securities than is now 
 required from such banks, was proper if we 
 meant to say to the people that the state would 
 
 109 
 
 look closely to the security of the paper money of 
 which they sanctioned the issue. He had dis- 
 charged his duty when he had stated these sim- 
 ple facts: and gentleman would not now vote for 
 the motion of the gentleman from Albany unad- 
 visedly. He had in substance given this admoni- 
 tion when the question was up a week ago. It 
 was proper to say before he took his seat, thaj 
 he believed that under the beneficial operation of 
 the provisions we had secured by the article on 
 Banking, the great majority of the chartered 
 banks would always meet their engagements 
 punctually ; for these provisions would tend to 
 insure a continuance of their present solvent con- 
 dition ; and one in which they contrasted most 
 favorably with similar institutions in many 
 other states ; a soundness, however, dependent 
 upon their own particular resources, and wholly 
 disconnected with the " Safety Fund System," 
 under which name they were known, and by 
 which the honest and well conducted banks had 
 been great losers themselves. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said this was an attempt to 
 disturb the compromise which had been agreed 
 upon. As this matter now stood, the Legislature 
 would or would not require additional security 
 from the Safety Fund Banks. But adopt this 
 amendment and you make these banks constitu- 
 tional libertines, free to act as they pleased, with 
 no power of control by the legislature. 
 
 Mr. STOW concurred with Mr. HOFFMAN, that 
 this would be a dangerous provision. The sec- 
 tion was abundantly guarded as it stood, but if 
 this clause should be inserted, it might give a 
 very unsafe construction to the remainder of the 
 section. 
 
 SfcThe motion of Mr. HARRIS was negatived, 
 ayes 22, noes 71. 
 
 Mr. MUNRO moved to strike out the word 
 " shall" where it occurs the second time and in- 
 sert ** may." 
 
 Mr HOFFMAN objected. 
 
 The Sth section is as follows : 
 
 ^8 The stockholders in every corporation and joint 
 stock association for banking purposes, isfiuingbank note* 
 or any kind of paper credits to circulate as money, after 
 the first day of January, 1850, shall be individually respon- 
 sible to the amount of their respective share or shares of 
 stock in any such corporation or association, for all its 
 debts and liabilities of every kind, contracted after the 
 said first day of January, 1850. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND for the purpose of inserting 
 the words " hereafter formed" after the words 
 " banking purposes," moved a reconsideration of 
 the section. 
 
 Mr. BAKER hoped the reconsideration would 
 prevail for another reason. There had been a 
 motion made to amend the last line, by striking 
 out the words *' debts and liabilities of every kind 
 contracted" and insert " notes or bills issued for 
 circulation." Mr. B. showed the necessity for 
 this restriction. 
 
 Mi. CAMBKELENG contended that all these 
 apprehensions were ill founded, and hoped this 
 section would not be disturbed. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY should vote for the section, al- 
 though he proiesied against the inconsistencies of 
 this article. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved the previous question, and 
 the motion to reconsider was negatived ; ayes 39, 
 noes 56. 
 
1074 
 
 The last section was then read. 
 
 On the question of agreeing to the article and 
 ordering it engrossed, 
 
 Mr. MARVIN railed for a division, so that the 
 question should first be taken upon that part of it 
 which consisted of the report on corporations 
 other than banking. That portion he was in favor 
 of; hut the remainder he was opposed to. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG did nor know why there 
 should be a distinction made between different 
 kinds of corporations. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN again opposed the adoption of the 
 latter part of the article, relating to banking cor- 
 porations. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE asked consent to offer the following 
 additional section, but it was objected to: 
 
 All special laws granting the power to take private pro- 
 perty lor public use by any corporation or association 
 (without the assent of the owners thereof) or granting a 
 franchise or right of way on the public highways or 
 streams oi this state, shall be passed by the votes of two- 
 thirds of all the members elected to each branch of the 
 Legislature. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG moved the previous ques. 
 lion on the whole article, and it was seconded. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN called for a division, but it was 
 ruled out of order. 
 
 Mr. M. then asked unanimous consent for such 
 a division, 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG objected. 
 
 Some conversation here ensued as to whether 
 Mr. BRUCE'S section was in order. 
 
 The CHAIR finally put the question to the Con. 
 vention, whether it should be considered, and the 
 House refused, ayes 43, noes 51. 
 
 The whole ariicle was then adopted, ayes 65, 
 noes 33. 
 
 ARTICLE IX. ON EDUCATION. 
 
 The only section reported on this subject by 
 the committee on revision, is as follows: 
 
 1. The proceeds of all lands belonging to this State.ex- 
 cept such parts thereof as maybe reserved or appropria- 
 ted to public use, or ceded to the United States, and such 
 as are contiguous to the salt springs, which shall hereaf- 
 ter be sold or disposed of, together with the fund denom- 
 inated the Common School Fund, shall be and remain a 
 perpetual fund; the interest of which shall be inviolably 
 appropriated and applied to the support of common schools 
 throughout this State. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved to recommit with instruc- 
 tions to substitute tor this, the report of commit- 
 tee No. 12. Mr. N. explained and advocated these 
 sections. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE agreed heartily with his 
 friend in one-halt ot his speech, and differed in 
 tr>to with the rest. In all that he said about ed- 
 ucation, he fully concurred, but in thfse two-pen- 
 ny provisions about the Appropriations of these 
 funds, he hoped we should have nothing to do 
 with therm He would leave the Legislature free 
 to act on the subject of schools, and there was no 
 necessity for a single additional provision in this 
 constitution 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON said if the Convention went 
 beyond the provisions ot the section reported by 
 the committee ot tevision, and made provision for 
 the permanent application of I he U. S. Deposite 
 Fund which he was glad to see the gentleman 
 from New York (Mr. NICOLL) recognize as the 
 property of the State he (Mr. P.) thought some 
 provision should be made for it in the Constitution. 
 While he could agree to make all necessary pro- 
 
 vision for our present good system of .common 
 schools, he should be opposed to so doing at the 
 expense of the academies. 
 
 Mr. TUTHILL moved to substitute for the en- 
 tire report his minority article on the same sub- 
 ject. 
 
 Mr. WILLARD moved to amend this substi- 
 tute by striking out and inserting the first section 
 of his own report : 
 
 ^ 1. The proceeds of all lands belonging to this State ex- 
 cept such parts thereof as may be reserved or appropria- 
 ted to public use or ceded to the United States, which 
 shall hereafter be sold or disposed of, together with the 
 fund denominated the Common School Fund, and all mo- 
 neys heretofore appropriated by law to the use of said 
 fund, and which may be added thereto, shall be and re- 
 main a perpetual fund, the interest of which shall be invi- 
 olably appropriated and applied to the support of common 
 schools throughout this State. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS opposed any action that would 
 injure or break down academies. He believed 
 the present appropriation from the State Treasu- 
 ry was abundant to secure the education of every 
 child in the state. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND desired to call especial at- 
 tention to the last clause of the article, which pro- 
 vided that the amount ofexpen.se remaining af- 
 ter the application of the public fund, shall be 
 defrayed by taxation upon the town. He believ- 
 ed that under such a provision, the expenses 
 would be greatly enhanced. Competition be- 
 tween different districts to obtain the best teach- 
 ers would lead to the payment of large salaries, 
 and while one district would pay but $20 per 
 month, another would give $60. The people 
 would never agree to such an inequality, and the 
 whole system would fail under it. Make the dis- 
 tricts themselves responsible for the expense, 
 and then the people would be likely to have some 
 interest in the condition of their school, which 
 was the life and support of them in all cases. 
 
 In many instances, he believed that the teach- 
 ers in the common schools, and the best teachers 
 too, carne from the district schools themselves ; 
 but he would not raise the question between a- 
 cademies and common schools. He was willing 
 to adopt any measure which was not really wrong 
 to give a common school education to every child 
 in the state. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said he proposed to strike out 
 the first clause of the 6th section, and leave to 
 the legislature to determine in which way the ex- 
 penses of free education should be defrayed. 
 He wished merely to obtain an expression by the 
 Convention upon this great subject. 
 
 Mr. A. W. YOUNG followed in general re- 
 marks upon the whole subject. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN did not rise to say any thing 
 upen the subject of education, or the best system 
 of education. Any attempt to discuss that sub- 
 ject he aprehended would bring the Convention 
 to its certain death ; for although the Convention 
 might not adjourn, the members would. All 
 that we could hope to do, might be done in a 
 short section, securing the principal of the school 
 fund, the literature fund, and the U. S. deposite 
 fund, and render them inviolate. He hoped leave 
 might be granted him to offer an amendment, 
 which would cover all the Convention could hope 
 to do upon this matter. His proposition was as 
 follows : 
 
1075 
 
 1. The capital of the common school fund, the capital 
 of the literature fund, and the capital of the U. S. deposits 
 ftfnd, shall be -respectively preserved inviolate. The rev- 
 enue of the said common school fund shall be applied to 
 the support of commun schools; the revenues of the saic 
 literature fund shall be applied to the support of academies 
 and the sum of $25,000 of the revenues of the U. S. depos 
 ite fund shall each year be appropriated to and made a pan 
 of the capital of the said common school fund. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON thought this the best pro- 
 position which had been offered on the subject. 
 He commented upon its various provisions and 
 though the only question in it which should claim 
 the attention of the Convention was, whether the 
 sum named by him ($25,000) was too large or too 
 small. Was it not a little too large to preserve 
 inviolate the present appropriations ? That was 
 the only question. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN (his motion being objected to) 
 moved to lay the motion to recommit on the table. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY inquired if this motion to lay 
 on the table would carry the section in relation 
 to free schools? 
 
 The CHAIR replied in the affirmative. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND inquired if Mr. HOFFMAN'S 
 secti on would then be susceptible of amendment? 
 
 The CHAIR replied in the affirmative. 
 
 The motion to lay on the table prevailed, ayes 
 78, noes 22. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN then offered his substitute. 
 (See above.) 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to amend by striking out 
 ' $25,000" and insert "$20,000." 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND hoped this would be acceded 
 to, as this YUM just about the amount of surplus of 
 that fund. With that modification, he hoped the 
 section offered by Mr. HOFFMAN would be adop- 
 ted. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved the previous question, 
 and it was seconded. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. O'CONOR was negativ- 
 ed, ayes 35, noes 66. 
 
 The section itself was then adopted, ayes 104, 
 noes 3. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL offered as an additional section the 
 proposition to submit to the people separately 
 rhe proposition to establish Free Schools, which 
 is as follows : 
 
 ^ 6. The Legislature shall provide for the free education 
 and instruction of every child of the State, in the common 
 schools now established, or which shall hereafter be es- 
 tablished therein. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved the previous question, and 
 it was seconded. 
 
 The section was adopted by the following vote: 
 ayes 57, nays 53. 
 
 Mr DANFORTH laid on the table a motion to 
 reconsider. 
 
 The section was then referred to the committee 
 for the purpose of preparing the form of the bal- 
 lot. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES moved the following additional 
 section: 
 
 . The Legislature shall at the same time provide for 
 raising the necessary taxes to carry into effect the provi- 
 sions contained in the preceding section. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved 1o amend by inserting 
 " in each school district," after the word taxes." 
 
 Mr WARD advocated the amendment of Mr. 
 RUGGLES, and was followed on the same side by, 
 Air. RUSSELL. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved the previous question and it 
 was seconded. 
 The amendment of Mr. RICHMOND was agreed 
 
 to. 
 
 The section was also adopted, ayes 82, noes 26. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES moved that this be submitted 
 separately in connection with the preceding. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to adjourn. Lost. 
 
 Mr NICHOLAS moved that the 9th article be 
 agreed to and ordered engrossed. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to lay that question on 
 the table until to-morrow morning. Lost. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to adjourn. Agreed to. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to recommit the 9th article 
 (on education) with instructions to strike out the 
 two last sections, which were ordered to be sub- 
 mitted separately. 
 
 Mr. TOWNSEND regretted that his friend from 
 Herkimer (Mr. LOOMIS) should feel called upon 
 to change the position in which the Convention 
 had this morning left the subject- He regretted 
 it the more, as he did not see at the moment any 
 of the committee charged with the subject of edu- 
 cation, in their seats This principle of entire 
 freedom from charge for the instruction of the 
 children who attend the public schools, was not 
 by any means a new idea in his own part of the 
 state, and it had been found to work with eminent 
 success. When, in 1841, important modifications 
 were made in the general school law of the state, 
 it was conceded by most of the gentlemen from 
 the country, that with respect to t he entire equality 
 with which the children availed themselves of 
 public education, in the city ot New York met 
 upon the benches of their schools the system of 
 the city was far preferable to the mode of' rating, 
 (as it was called) pursued in the interior of the 
 state; thus discriminating between the parents of 
 scholars, in the matter of contribution, in place 
 of sustaining the school by a general tax upon the 
 property of the district. It was urged with force 
 then that the children were unavoidably made 
 sensible of the fact that there was an inequality 
 in their position, and that this feeling was detri- 
 mental to that buoyancy and happiness in their 
 associations with their schoolmates, so essential 
 to their progress in the acquisition of useful in- 
 struction. Every incentive should exist to make 
 he school attractive to the scholar, and nothing 
 n the system should compel them, to feel that 
 others were there by any better right than them- 
 selves 
 
 There was no time then to show, what was per- 
 "ectly apparent to all but the contracted and pre- 
 udiced, that, the benefits of a well educated com- 
 munity reacted directly upon the property of the 
 neighborhood, by rendeiing that more secure from 
 depredations, and more desirable from the better 
 society and morality that followed as the attend- 
 nts upon knowledge. The far-seeing man of 
 wealth paid no taxes more cheerfully than such 
 as went to promote knowledge in his neighbor- 
 hood, and with it a capacity for self-support and 
 good government. 
 
 The city of New Yoik now paid near a halt a 
 million of dollars, annually, for the free instruc- 
 ion of all children between live arid sixteen years 
 
1076 
 
 of age, that presented themselves to the city 
 schools. This included all books, stationery, &c ; 
 so that the whole expense of education was borne 
 by the city treasury. Notwithstanding this heavy 
 charge upon property, it was met with more 
 cheerfulness than almost any other, as its living 
 benefits were constantly before us. There were 
 many who deemed the matter of instruction not a 
 government concern saying that when you have 
 once commenced, you might, upon the same prin- 
 ciple, give every child a trade or profession, as a 
 matter of public care. However well sustained 
 these views may be, upon full investigation and 
 there was undoubtedly great difficulty in refuting 
 them when government undertakes to effect an 
 object, it should be thoroughly and completely 
 done. For years, the question of public instruc- 
 tion has occupied the solicitude of the leading 
 statesmen of this state, and it has been deemed 
 proper to vest large funds permanently for the 
 benefit of education. We had this day constitu 
 tionalized a progressive increase to our already 
 large fund for that purpose, and we ought to feel 
 disposed to give the system the greatest efficiency, 
 even in the most sequestered and remote regions 
 of our state. From the habit of thus viewing and 
 reflecting upon the subject, he had seen with sur- 
 prise the opposition exhibited this morning to the 
 section establishing, after a popular vote, the prin- 
 ciple of universal and gratuitous instruction ; and 
 he earnestly hoped that the Convention were not 
 about to imitate their conduct on the question ot 
 the "rights of women," by a sudden change of 
 opinion from a previously, and, in his belief, a 
 properly formed one. He now observed the mem- 
 bers of the committee charged v\ith this matter, 
 in their places, and he would leave in their hands 
 any further opposition to the motion now pending 
 of reconsideration upon which, however, he 
 asked the ayes and nays. 
 
 Mr. WHITE demanded the previous question. 
 There was a second, and the main question ordered. 
 
 The question was then taken on the motion of 
 Mr. LOOMIS, and it was carried, ayes 61, nays 27. 
 
 The committee reported back the article thus 
 amended, and the report was agreed to. 
 
 The ninth article was then agreed to, and or- 
 dered to be engrossed without a division. 
 ON LOCAL OFFICERS. 
 
 The tenth article was then taken up. 
 
 The first section was then read 
 
 Mr. COOKER moved a reconsideration of the 
 vote adopting this section, in order to strike out 
 *' three" years as the term of office of the Sheriff, 
 and insert " two." 
 
 The motion was negatived. Ayes 17, nays 81. 
 
 The 2d section was then read. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL said it had been suggested to him 
 that the first line of the 2d section might tend to 
 make all officers which were now elective, per- 
 manent, preventing the legislature from abolish- 
 ing them. It was " All officers now elective by 
 the people, shall continue to be elected." He 
 saw no necessity for it, and moved to strike it out. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. ANGEL moved an additional section as 
 follows : 
 
 The political year and legislative term shall begin on 
 the first of January, and the legislature shall assemble on 
 the first Tuesday ol January, unless a different day may 
 be provided by law. 
 
 Some verbal amendments were permitted, and 
 the article was adopted and ordered to be engross- 
 ed, ayes 101, noes 1, Mr. E. HUNTINGTON. 
 THE MILITIA. 
 
 The eleventh article was then considered. 
 
 The first section was read, as follows : 
 
 1. The militia of this State shall at all times hereafter 
 be armed and disciplined and in readiness for service; but 
 all such inhabitants of this State of any religious denomi- 
 nation whatever, as from scruples of conscience may be 
 averse to bearing arms, shall be excused therefrom by pay- 
 ing to the State an equivalent in money, and the Legisla- 
 ture shall provide by law for the collection of such equiv- 
 alent to be estimated according to the expense in time and 
 money of an ordinary and able bodied militia man. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM moved to strike out all of the 
 section after the word " therefrom" and insert in 
 lieu the words " upon such conditions as shall 
 be prescribed by law." Mr. B. said as the section 
 now stood it would require those who were averse 
 to performing military duty from conscientious 
 scruples to pay the old commutation instead of 
 the new as established last winter. 
 
 The amendment was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND moved to strike out the 
 words " and disciplined." 
 
 This was rejected. 
 
 The section was then read and adopted. 
 
 The third section was then read. 
 
 Mr. FORSYTH moved to refer the article to a 
 committee of one with instructions to amend by 
 striking out the words '* The governor shall no- 
 minate, and with the consent of the senate, ap- 
 point all major generals, and the commissary 
 Eneral," and to insert " all major generals shall 
 chosen by the generals and field officers of 
 eir respective brigades." 
 
 Mr. WARD opposed the motion, and Mr. FOR- 
 SYTH sustained it, when 
 
 Mr. BERGEN asked for the previous question, 
 and there was a second, and the main question 
 ordered. 
 
 The amendment was rejected. 
 
 The fourth, fifth and sixth sections were then 
 read and agreed to. 
 
 The article was then adopted and ordered to 
 be engrossed, ayes 95, nays 3. 
 
 Mr. PERKINS suggested that there were seve- 
 ral officers to be elected by the people, as to 
 whom no provision for their removal was to be 
 made. To obviate this difficulty, he*would pro- 
 pose the following : 
 
 1. The Governor, Lieutenant-Governor and Chief Jus- 
 tice of the Court of Appeals, shall constitute a commission 
 for hearing and investigating all suspicious and charges of 
 embezzlement, fraud, oppression, gross neglect, or other 
 malversation in office, of the officers, (except judicial) 
 whose powers and duties are not local, and who shall be 
 elected at general elections. They shall have power, at 
 all times, to compel the attendance of witnesses and th 
 production ot papers. They may, under such regulations 
 as shall be prescribed by law, remove such officers, and 
 appoint others in their place, but before any such officers 
 shall be removed, he shall be furnished with a copy of the 
 charges made against him, and be heard, in his defence. 
 Upon the removal of any such officer, a copy of the char- 
 ges and the evidence taken in support of the same, shall 
 be filed in the office of the Secretary of State. Officers ap- 
 pointed by any body, or board of public officers, may ex- 
 cept as otherwise provided in this Constitution be remov- 
 ed under such regulations as may be prescribed by law. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN moved to strike out the words 
 
 " suspicions and," in the third line. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN moved to insert 
 
1077 
 
 " official" before "books," in the 8th line. 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. PORTER moved to insert " legislative 
 and" before "judicial," in the parenthesis. He 
 feared giving this inquisitorial power to the court 
 here provided for removal of officers, which in 
 high partizan times might be used to remove of- 
 ficers merely for the purpose of substituting 
 agents of the appointing or removing power. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND moved the following substi- 
 tute for the section : 
 
 1. Provision shall be made by law for the removal for 
 Misconduct or malversation in office of all officers (except 
 judicial) whose powers and duties are not local and legis- 
 lative, and who shall be elected at general elections, and 
 also for suj plying vacancies created by such removals 
 
 Mr. PORTER advocated his motion to amend, 
 and insisted upon a vote being taken. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved the previous question upon 
 all the questions before the House, and there was 
 a second. 
 
 Mr. PORTER'S amendment was agreed to. 
 
 The substitute of Mr. KIRKLAND was adopted. 
 
 Mr. STOW offered the following additional 
 section : 
 
 J 2. The legislature may declare the cases in which any 
 office shall be deemed vacant, where no provision is made 
 lor that purpose in this constitution, 
 
 This was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved that these two sections be 
 adopted and ordered engrossed as a part of arti- 
 cle X. Agreed to. 
 
 OFFICIAL OATHS. 
 
 The Twelfth Article was then read as follows: 
 1. Members of the legislature and all officers, execu- 
 tive and jud-cial, except such inferior officers as may be 
 by law exempted, shall, before they enter on the duties of 
 their respective offices, take and subscribe the following 
 oath or affirmation: 
 
 " I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) 
 that I will support the Constitution of the United States, 
 and the Constitution of the State of New-York; and that I 
 will faithfully discharge the duties of 
 according to the best of my ability." 
 
 And no other oath, declaration or test shall be required 
 as a qualification for any office or public trust. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to add after the words 
 " duties of," the words the office of." 
 
 This was adopted. 
 
 The Article was then adopted and ordered to 
 be engrossed. 
 
 FUTURE AMENDMENTS, 
 
 The Thirteenth Article was then considered. 
 
 The first section was then read and adopted. 
 
 The second section was then read. 
 
 Mr. CROOKER moved to refer the Article to 
 a committee of one, with instructions to strike out 
 the second section (providing lor future Conven- 
 tions.) Lost. 
 
 The Article was then adopted and ordered to 
 be engrossed. 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS. 
 
 This Article provides for the expiration of the 
 terms of offices abolished, and the commencement 
 of the rerun of all oihers, and the organization of 
 the new Government in general. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES moved the following addition to 
 the fifth section : 
 
 " The courts of oyer and terminer hereby established 
 shall, in their respective counties, have jurisdiction, on 
 and after the day las. mentioned, of all indictments and 
 proceedings then pending in the present courts of oyer 
 and terminer; and also of all indictments and proceedings 
 
 then pending in the present courts of general sessions of 
 the peace, except in the city of New-York, and in cases of 
 which the courts ol sessions hereby established may law- 
 fully take cognizance; and of such judgments and proceed, 
 ings the courts of session hereby established shall have 
 jurisdiction on and after the day mentioned." 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to add between the priat 
 ed section and the amendment of Mr. RUGGLES, 
 the following : 
 
 " Proceedings pending in courts of common pleas in 
 writs originally commenced in justices' courts shall be 
 transferred to the county courts provided for in this Con- 
 stitution, in such manner and form, and under such regula- 
 tions as shall be provided by law." 
 
 Both amendments were agreed to, and the sec- 
 tion adopted. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER enquired by what au- 
 thority the select committee had left out the sec- 
 tion abolishing the offices of masters and exami- 
 ners in chancery ? 
 
 Mr. BAKER said that was provided for in the 
 8th section. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER said that it was not the 
 same. He moved to recommit the 6th section 
 with instructions to add to it, the following : 
 
 The offices of master and examiner in chancery are 
 abolished. 
 
 After some conversation the previous question 
 being demanded and seconded, the motion of Mr. 
 S. was negatived and the section agreed to. 
 
 The 8th section was then read as follows : 
 
 8. The officers of Chancellor, justices of the Supreme 
 Court, master in Chancery (except as herein otherwise 
 provided) , circuit and county judges, vice-chancellors, as- 
 sistant vice chancellor, supreme court commissioners, ex- 
 aminers in chancery, and surrogates, as now existing, shaJJ 
 expire on the first Monday of July, 1847. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM offered the following substitute : 
 8. The offices of chancellor, justice of the existing su- 
 preme court, circuit judge, vice chancellor, assistant vice 
 chancellor, judges of the existing county courts of each 
 county, supreme court commissioner, master in chancery^ 
 examiner in chancery, and surrogate, (except as herein 
 otherwise provided) are abolished from and after the first 
 day of July, 1847. 
 
 After some debate, Mr. LOOMIS moved to 
 amend the original section, by making the last 
 clause read as follows : " as they now exist are 
 abolished and shall expire on the first Monday of 
 July, 1847." 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to strike out the words 
 " as they now exist." Agreed to. 
 
 The amendment of Mr. LOOMIS was also agreed 
 to. 
 
 The substitute of Mr. BASCOM was further de- 
 bated, when 
 
 Mr. NICOLL called for the previous question, 
 and it was seconded, and the substitute of Mr. 
 B. agreed to. 
 
 Mr. BAKER asked unanimous consent to add 
 after the words " supreme court commissioner," 
 " commissioners to take affidavits to be read in 
 the supreme court." Objected to. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS moved to insert "justices of the 
 peace" after " New York," in the 10th section. 
 This was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR then offered the following as 
 an additional section : 
 
 11. The 9th section of the 5th article so far as it relates 
 to the officers thereby abolished, shall take effect on the 
 first day of July, next after the adoption of this Constitu- 
 tion." 
 
 After some conversation, Mr. T. added the 
 
1078 
 
 words " except in cases where the offices shall 
 sooner expire," when the previous question be- 
 ing moved and seconded, the section was reject- 
 ed, ayes 18, nays 76. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS offered the following additional 
 section : 
 
 ^ 12. All courts established in any county or city, and all 
 judicial officers of such courts in office on "the first day of 
 January, 1847, shall continue, with all their respective 
 powers, and compensation until the first Monday of July, 
 1847, (unless sooner discontinued by the Legislature,) on 
 which day the terra of office of all such judicial officers 
 shall expire. And the courts in cities shall remain with 
 their present powers and jurisdiction until otherwise di- 
 rected by law." 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved to strike out the words 
 " on which day the term of all such judicial offi- 
 cers shall expire." 
 
 Mr. MURPHY moved to add at the end of the 
 section as follows : 
 
 " And the judicial officers of such courts shall continue 
 in office until the expiration of their respective terms as 
 now established, unless such courts be discontinued by the 
 legislature." 
 
 Mr. WHITE moved the previous question on 
 Mr. TAGGART'S amendment, and it was sustain- 
 ed, and the amendment adopted. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved the previous question on 
 Mr. MURPHY'S amendment and the section. It 
 was sustained, the amendment rejected, and the 
 section adopted. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES laid on the table a motion to 
 reconsider this vote. 
 
 Mr. ST. JOHN offered an additional section, as 
 follows : 
 
 ^ . No public officer shall receive pay from the public 
 treasury for services rendered in two capacities during the 
 same period of time; nor shall any such officers receive 
 pay for constructive services or lor services which have 
 not actually been performed. 
 
 Laid on the table ayes 52, noes 35 : on the 
 motion of Mr. NICOLL. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY offered an additional section, as 
 follows : 
 
 . All appointments by any legislative body, or offi- 
 cial board, on whom appointments to office may devolve, 
 shall be made viva voce; and a record of the vote of each 
 member shall be entered on their respective journals. 
 
 Laid on the table for the present, at the sug- 
 gestion of Mr. TALLMADGE. 
 
 Mr. TALLMADGE offered a resolution in- 
 structing the committee on revision to inquire 
 into the expediency of providing for a separate 
 submission of the articles as far as practicable. 
 
 Mr RUGGLES moved to amend so as to in- 
 struct the committee to report the judiciary arti- 
 cle for separate submission. 
 
 Pending a debate which arose on these propo- 
 sitions, the Convention, on motion of Mr. NICH- 
 OLAS, adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, (HOthday,) October 9. 
 
 No Clergyman present. 
 
 FUNDS IN CHANCERY. 
 
 Mr. MANN called for his resolutions reported 
 yesterday from the select committee on the funds 
 in Chancery. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS opposed the resolutions. These 
 matters might well be left to the legislature, 
 which must make some provision for the disposi- 
 tion of these funds, the Court of Chancery being 
 abolished. 
 
 Mr. MANN spoke in defence of his resolu- 
 tions, the passage of which he thought neces- 
 sary 
 
 Mr. TAGGART trusted that the Convention, 
 after imposing upon the officers in Chancery such 
 onerous duties as they had been required to per- 
 form, would make some use of the information 
 furnished. 
 
 Mr. MILLER moved to lay the first resolu- 
 tion on the table. Carried i2 to 32. 
 
 The second resolution was adopted. 
 CITY COURTS. 
 
 Mr. RUGGLES moved to reconsider the sec- 
 tion adopted last night, on the, motion of Mr. 
 MORRIS, relating to courts in cities, for the pur- 
 pose of adopting the following in its place : 
 
 . All local courts, established in any city or vil- 
 lage, including the superior court, Common Pleas and 
 Surrogates courts of the city and county of New York, 
 shall remain with their present powers and jurisdiction 
 until otherwise directed by the legislature; and the 
 judges ot such courts and any clerks thereof in office on 
 the first day of January, 1849, shall continue in office 
 until the expiration of their terms of office or until the 
 legislature shall otherwise direct. 
 
 The motion to reconsider was agreed to, after a 
 brief explanation by Mr. O'CoNOR. 
 
 The substitute of Mr. RUGGLES being before 
 the Convention, 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON moved to amend by striking 
 out " and any clerks thereof," and also all after 
 " office," near the end ot the section, and insert- 
 ing " until the first Monday of July, 1847, and no 
 longer." 
 
 Messrs O'CONOR, PATTERSON, LOOMIS, 
 and WORDEN discussed this proposition. 
 
 Mr. BERGEN moved the previous question, 
 which was seconded. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON'S amendment was lost, ayes 
 35, noes 61, and 
 
 The substitute of Mr. RUGGLES was adopted. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS asked unanimous consent to trans- 
 fer the words " until otherwise directed by the Le- 
 gislature." 
 
 The section as amended was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY called for the" consideration of 
 the section offered by him yesterday, declaring that 
 the votes for all appointments to office by any 
 board upon whom it should be devolved to make 
 them should be given viva voce, and entered on 
 the journals of such bodies. 
 
 The Convention refused !o consider, 34to43. 
 THE REVISED CONSTITUTION. 
 
 On motion of Mr. WARD, the Conrention pro- 
 ceeded to the unfinished business. 
 
 The question was on the 14th article. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved the previous question, 
 and the article was agreed to, and ordered to be 
 engrossed. 
 
 COLORED SUFFRAGE. 
 
 The Convention next proceeded to the consid- 
 eration of the report of the committee on revision 
 submitting separately the proposition to extend 
 the right of suffrage to colored citizens.' 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS moved to recommit with instruc- 
 tions to strike out all to the fourth paragraph and 
 insert a provision that the last clau.se of the first 
 section of the article on suffrage shall be submit- 
 ted to the people for their approval or rejection ; 
 and to amend the remainder of the report in ac- 
 cordance. He desired to avoid the absurdity of 
 
1079 
 
 having two parts of the same article in direct con- 
 tradiction with each other. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said this would unsettle the 
 freehold suffrage of the colored people. The 
 "ntion had decided, by a strong vote, not to 
 deprive them of this right, and that it should not 
 be involved by this special submission of the ques- 
 tion of equal suffrage. If the people decided in 
 favor of equal suffrage, the present right would of 
 course become a nullity, but should the special 
 submission fail, he wished, and he believed the 
 Convention intended, that the present freehold 
 suffrage should be continued in full force. 
 
 Mr. JONES moved to lay the motion to recom- 
 mit on the table. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. RUSSELL moved the previous question 
 on the first resolution, and there was a second, 
 and it was adopted ayes 84, noes 25 : 
 
 NOES Messrs. Allen, Cambreleng, Conely, Cornell, 
 Cuddeback, Brundage, Harrison, Hunt, A. Huntingdon, 
 Jones, Kennedy, Mann, Morris, O'Conor, Perkins, Riker, 
 Santbrd, Shepard, Stephens, Tilden, Vaclie, Ward, White, 
 Wood, Yawger 25. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR moved to lay the second motion 
 on the table until the supplemental report was 
 taken up. Lost ayes 20, noes 84. 
 
 The resolution was agreed to and both ordered 
 to be engrossed. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR offered the following, and it 
 was agreed to : , 
 
 Resolved, That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of 
 State, to cause the Constitution, as proposed to be amend- 
 ed, together with the forms of the ballots, to be published 
 at least twice prior to the election in each of the public 
 newspapers published in this state, Provided, the same 
 shall be published for such reasonable compensation as 
 shall be fixeu by the Secretary of State and Comptroller: 
 but m-> neglect to publish ttie same in any of the papers of 
 this state shall impair the validity of the notice 
 
 The Convention then took up the supplemental 
 report of the committee on revision, the first re- 
 solution, as follows, being under consideration : 
 
 Resolved, That in the judgment of this Convention the 
 several amendments lo this Constitution, agreed to by 
 this Convention, cannot be prepared so as to be voted up- 
 on separately. 
 
 Mr. KIRKLAND rose to protest against this 
 resolution. The act under which this Conven- 
 tion had acted, required them to submit to the 
 people each article separately, if in the judgment 
 of the Convention it should be practicable. 
 Deeming it practicable, he could not vote for the 
 resolution. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said the act required another 
 thing. It required them to submit the amended 
 Constitution to the people at the coining election, 
 which they should not do, if they spent a week 
 or two in arranging it. He moved the previous 
 question, and 
 
 The first resolution was adopted, ayes 70, noes 
 40. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR offered the following : 
 
 Resolved, That it be referred to a select committee of 
 three to arrange the amendments to the Constitution 
 agreed to by thi- Convention in such manner that the 
 aiuendmen's relating to the judiciary , and also the amend- 
 ment rela-m^ to future amendments, may be separately 
 submitted; and that the said committee report the manner 
 of bo sui.mittuig all said amendments, together with the 
 iorm of the ballot, within two hours. 
 
 Mr. COOK enquired if it was in order. 
 
 The PRESIDENT (Mr. WARD pro. tern.) de- 
 
 cided that it was not, without a reconsideration 
 of the vote just taken. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR appealed, and proceeded to ex- 
 plain. He said the Convention had decided the 
 several amendments could not all be voted upon 
 separately; but it did not follow that some partic- 
 ular articles might not be separately submitted. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER contended that the de- 
 cision of the chair was right. 
 
 Mr. HARRIS sustained the chair, and looked 
 upon the appeal as the last struggle against a con- 
 stitution which was the best that ever was framed. 
 He had never moved the previous question, but 
 he thought this was the proper place to begin. 
 He moved the previous question. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR called for the yeas and nays on 
 seconding, and there were yeas 70, nays 26. 
 
 The decision of the CHAIR was affirmed, ayes 
 70, noes 17. 
 
 The 2d, 3d and 4th resolutions were adopted. 
 Mr. HOFFMAN here rose and said" I sup- 
 pose, Mr. President, that we have now got nearly 
 through with our labors. We have made a Con- 
 stitution which I admit contains some palpable 
 defects and errors ; but I affirm that it contains 
 more excellent matter, got together by this Con- 
 vention, than any constitution in the whole earth. 
 [ suppose that the resolutions just adopted, to- 
 gether with that adopted on the motion of the 
 gentleman from Onondaga, (Mr. W. TAYLOR,) 
 should be ordered to be engrossed with the Con- 
 stitution as one of the Convention's public acts. 
 [ therefore make you that motion." 
 
 Mr. NICOLL said this would be done the res- 
 olutions being engrossed on a separate piece ot 
 parchment. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN varied his motion accordingly, 
 and it was agreed to nem con. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN then suggested that some 
 member who could write he could not, and, 
 therefore, he hoped he should not be on the com- 
 mittee should move the appointment of a com- 
 mittee to prepare a short address to the people 
 to accompany the Constitution. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN hoped the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer would make the motion, and 
 he be appointed on the committee ; and if writ- 
 ing was inconvenient to him, he could obtain an 
 amanuensis. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL moved that a committee of three 
 be appointed, of which Mr. HOFFMAN should be 
 the Chairman, to prepare the address suggested. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN suggested that the 
 number of the committee be five. 
 Mr. NICOLL assented. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN moved to strike out his own 
 name. 
 
 Mr. BASCOM said, we have excused the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer a number of times, but I 
 cannot vote to excuse him now. 
 
 The motion to excuse Mr. HOFFMAN was 
 negatived. The resolution was then adopted. 
 
 The CHAIR designated Mr. HOFFMAN, POR- 
 TER, STOW and , as said committee. 
 
 Messrs. SMITH and WHITE both called for 
 the consideration of a resolution some time since 
 offered Ijy Mr. CHATFIELD, to designate the Sec- 
 retaries and Door-keepers, in order to secure 
 them the compensation formerly paid to such of- 
 ficers iri the Legislature. 
 
1080 
 
 The resolution was discussed by various gen 
 tlemen. 
 
 Mr. NICHOLAS said that ours was a govern 
 ment of laws, and the very being of that govern- 
 ment depended upon the supremacy of the laws. 
 As constitution-makers, we should not practice 
 or countenance such an evasion of the law as 
 was now proposed. He would be liberal in the 
 allowance to the attendants on the Convention so 
 far as the law would permit, and if the law was 
 defective and would not remunerate them for their 
 services, he would unite with other gentlemen in 
 a representation to that effect to the Legislature, 
 and he had no doubt ample justice would be done 
 them ; but he would not evade the existing law. 
 He would not attempt to do by indirect means 
 what could not be done under a fair construction 
 of the existing law. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS offered a substitute to the effect 
 that each member of this Convention would con- 
 tribute his equal quota from his private means, to 
 make up the pay of these officers to $3 per day. 
 
 Mr. JONES offered a substitute requesting the 
 next Legislature to make up the pay of these of- 
 ficers to $3 per day. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS withdrew his amendment, and 
 that of Mr. JONES was adopted. 
 
 Mr. CAMBRELENG remarked that there was 
 a class of hard working gentlemen, who had 
 served us faithfully, and who were entitled to our 
 thanks, which were all that we had the power to 
 give them. He offered the following resolution, 
 which was unanimously adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the six gentlemen connected with the 
 Albany Argus, Albany Atlas and Albany Evening Journal, 
 as Reporters, viz : Sherman Croswell, Richard Sutton, 
 Wm. G. Bishop, Won. H. Attree. Wm. H. Hill and Francis 
 S. Rew, be entitled to the thanks of this Convention for 
 the industry and ability with which they have discharged 
 their duty as Reporters for the papers to which they have 
 been respectively attached. 
 
 Mr. STOW being compelled to leave the city 
 to-day, asked to be excused from serving on the 
 committee to prepare an address. Agreed to. 
 
 Mr. MILLER offered a resolution recommend- 
 ing the next legislature to provide for the pay- 
 ment of the clergymen officiating at this Conven- 
 tion. Adopted. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN offered a resolution returning 
 the thanks of this Convention to the clergy. 
 Adopted. 
 
 Mr. NICOLL (for himself and Mr. BAKER) 
 the engrossing committee, reported the Constitu- 
 tion as correctly engrossed upon parchment, which 
 the Secretaries proceeded to read. 
 
 At two o'clock, six articles having been read, 
 the reading was suspended, and the Convention 
 took a recess. 
 
 AFTERNOON SESSION. 
 
 Mr. W. TAYLOR offered a resolution directing 
 the Secretary of State to compare the printed co- 
 pies of the constitution with the engrossed copy 
 to be deposited in his office, &c., &c., which was 
 agreed to. 
 
 The reading of the engrossed constitution was 
 then concluded. 
 
 Mr. TAGGART moved that the constitution, 
 as read, be adopted and signed; adding that 
 though there were many things in it that he dis- 
 approved, as a whole it was a better constitution 
 
 than we had ever had, and he was disposed to 
 take it as it was. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON seconded the motion, and 
 hoped it would receive a unanimous aye. That 
 the instrument had defects could not be denied ; 
 but on the whole there was so much more in it 
 that he approved, than that he did not approve, 
 that he should give it his hearty approval. He 
 adverted to some of its leading features which 
 gave it a great superiority over the old constitu- 
 tion glancing at the provisions in regard to the 
 legislative, the judicial, executive and adminis- 
 trative departments the abolition of hundreds 
 of useless offices the election of the necessary 
 officers by the people directly the ample provi- 
 sion made for the payment of the state debt and 
 the completion of the unfinished works saying 
 that as a whole no State in the Union could boast 
 of a better constitution. In the judiciary de- 
 partment particularly, the improvement upon the 
 present system was, in his judgment, greater than 
 in any other department. He had no doubt the 
 instrument would be adopted by the people by a 
 large majority, and it deserved to be. 
 
 Mr. MURPHY said that he felt bound, in con- 
 sequence of the remarks of the gentleman from 
 Chautauque, who had just taken his seat, to trou- 
 ble the Convention with one word. With that 
 gentleman he should vote for the Constitution, be- 
 cause he believed that the good exceeds the evil 
 which it contains; but that gentleman had point- 
 ed out what he considered to be its merits, and 
 compelled him to speak of one of ils most unfor- 
 tunate features and now solemnly to protest 
 against it and that is, the provision which au- 
 thorizes private property to be laken for certain 
 private purposes a stretch of power, in his opin- 
 ion, beyond any exercised by any other country 
 where the fruits of a man's labor are respected. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND also protested against that 
 part of it. 
 
 Mr. -JONES sent up the following resolution, 
 which was adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the engrossed Constitution be now signed 
 by the members of the Convention, as an attestation there- 
 of ; and that those members not now in attendance be at 
 liberty to sign at any time previous to the 3d day of No- 
 vember next, in tne office of Secretary of State. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR gave briefly the reasons why he 
 could not record a vote in favor of this constitu- 
 tion premising that he should not have done so, 
 had not the gentleman fron Chauiauque given at 
 large the reasons why he should vote tor it. He 
 went on to say in regard to the single part of it to 
 which he had given most attention, and which 
 had received from the gentleman the highest com- 
 mendation he meant the judicial department 
 that he thought the Convention had altogether fail- 
 ed to present to the people a constitution which 
 would meet the exigencies ot the times, or in 
 any degree remedy the difficulties in this respect, 
 which led to the calling of this Convention that 
 it did not in any moderate degree meet his approv- 
 al and was a most signal failure. It would there- 
 fore be his duty to vole against the constitution, 
 and to induce his fellow citizens to take the same 
 course when they came to vote upon it. 
 
 Mr. VAN SCHOONHOVEN said, though a 
 vote for this constitution did not imply an ap- 
 proval of every item of it, yet he was prepared to 
 
1081 
 
 vote for every article in it as a whole not how- 
 ever without protesting against the principle al- 
 luded to by Mr. MURPHY, and qualifiedly against 
 the judiciary article. As a whole, however, he 
 approved of it, and should vote for it, and do what 
 he could to sustain it at the polls, believing it to 
 be a great improvement on the present constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN did not believe that this con- 
 stitution was to be adopted on any such narrow 
 ground as that, by the enlightened constituency 
 represented here", but because it commended it- 
 self to their judgment. He regarded this consti- 
 tution, as a whole, as an improvement on the sci- 
 ence of government throwing, as it did, upon 
 the people the responsible duty of keeping their 
 o\vn government under their own control, and of 
 preserving and perpetuating their own rights and 
 liberties. " There were provisions in it that he 
 should* have preferred to have had changed ; but 
 in the fundamental principle to which he had al- 
 luded, it was \vhat he desired to see it. He was 
 willing to leave this great experiment of republi- 
 can government in the hands of the people, with 
 the least possible trammels upon their free ac- 
 tion. And this the instrument intended to do 
 and having framed it, after much labor, and in a 
 spirit of compromise and concession, he hoped we 
 should submit it to the people without attempting 
 to influence their action for or against it, by 
 pointing to this or that provision as objectionable 
 but that the whole instrument would be left to 
 their calm and deliberate judgment. 
 
 Mr. CAMJi IELENG had hoped the vote on 
 this Constitution would have been unanimous, at 
 least for submission. He held up for the imita- 
 tion of those who based their objection to the in- 
 strument upon a single article the example of 
 one of the most distinguished statesmen of the 
 Convention of '21 from Oneida, who separated 
 from the few friends with whom he had acted 
 against the details of the constitution, when the 
 question came up on voting for it, and its submis- 
 sionand this, on the ground that it contained 
 in itself a provision for its own amendment. Mr. 
 C. went on to say that this was the the first con- 
 stitution ever formed that rested, not nominally, 
 but in fact, on a popular foundation which made 
 your legislative, judicial and executive depart- 
 ments, distinct in reality as well as in name, and 
 all of them springing directly from the people. 
 He went heartily for every article in this consti- 
 tution. With all its defects, it was sound in prin- 
 ciple, from beginning to end. Its defects con- 
 sisted in its extent, and in some respects in its 
 language; but in principle it was sound from the 
 first syllable to the lust. He should give it his 
 hearty approbation, and he had hoped every mem- 
 ber would. 
 
 Mi. Sl'OVV felt embarrassed under the form of 
 proceeding ordered by the Convention. An at- 
 testation might be regarded as a solemn sanction 
 nf the instrument l>y every member signing it in 
 that lorrn. For one, he would not give his un- 
 qualified assent to the instrument. It might for 
 the people would have very little time to examine 
 and discuss it. It adopted, he trusted it might 
 prove to be tor the best interests of our common 
 country, and he should then give it his sincere 
 support, and endeavor to carry it out. But now, 
 
 110 
 
 he was called upon to decide tor himself and his 
 oninion was that this constitution would not meet 
 ihe first expeciations of the state orlhe couniry. 
 Il was not such a constitution as he approved ; and 
 lest his silence might be regarded as a tacit ap. 
 prov al of it, be felt called upon to express this 
 hi< dissent. 
 
 Mr. MORRIS said he should not have said a 
 \vord but for the remarks of his friend, (Mr. 0'- 
 CoifOK.) and his not less esteemed friend from 
 Erie, (Mr. STOAV) which would go forth among 
 thousands who had not perhaps time to consider 
 this instrument fully, and who might thus imbibe 
 a prejudice against it. There were many things 
 in it that he and others voted against, not because 
 it was not an improvement upon the present con- 
 stitution, but because he desired to set some'hing 
 better for there was not a provision in this in- 
 strument that he did not regard as an improve- 
 ment upon the old constitution. Every part and 
 parcel of it was founded on the principle on which 
 our government was based the intelligence and 
 capacity of the people for self-government he 
 could with pleasure vote for each and every part 
 of it believing that it was designed and calcula- 
 ted to promote the best interests of the people of 
 the state, individually and collectively. 
 
 Mi. DANA concurred with Mr. MORRIS, pro- 
 testing, however, against the principle of making 
 constitutional distinctions between citizens on ac- 
 count of color. 
 
 Mr. MARVIN said he would vote for the con- 
 stitution here, int ndmg, however, by that, to sub- 
 mit it. to the people, for their deliberate conside- 
 ration. It contained provisions which he had 
 combatfed from the beginning to the end provi- 
 sions which he believed would be changed in a 
 tew years, and through the power of amendment 
 which was contained in it. He would not advert 
 to the particular provisions to which he had oiten 
 expressed his objections, and which were not, in 
 his judgment, such as the people had a right to 
 expect from ns. But there was running through 
 it a popular principle of which he approved most 
 heartily ; and in giving his vote for it, he intend, 
 ed to approve of its general tenor, and not to 
 sanction the particular articles in regard to which 
 his opinions were well known particularly that 
 feature of it which placed trammels on the action 
 ot the people through the legislature. These and 
 ! (fther defects, he h;id no doubt would be changed 
 ' under the power to amend. 
 
 Mr. RICHMOND expressed his approval of the 
 popular principle which ran through the whole 
 instrument, and particularly of the provision ob- 
 jected to by Mr. MARVIN, which he thought one 
 of the best provisions in it. 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN said he was one of those 
 who in one branch of the legislature voted against 
 the bill calling this Convention together. He 
 voted against it at the polls, and did everything 
 he could fairly and honorably to defeat it. Not 
 because he did not think some amendments to 
 the constitution necessary and proper ; but be- 
 cause he believed the instrument itself pointed 
 out a way in which it could be amended in such 
 manner^as the people might desire. But the peo- 
 ple thought otherwise. This Convention was 
 authorised by the people, and they had sent 
 their representatives here to revise the constitu- 
 
1082 
 
 tion. He was sent here, not expecting however 
 to do much towards perfecting a constitution; 
 but intending rather to guard the interests of his 
 constituents, so far as he could do so fairly and 
 honorably. In that respect he was fully satisfied. 
 He had voted against several articles of the Con- 
 stitution when presented separately. He prefer, 
 red that the people should have the same oppor- 
 tunity to express their judgment upon each arti- 
 cle. But the Convention had willed otherwise, 
 and he submitted to their decision. He dissented 
 from a portion of the instrument; but there were 
 many bright spots about it; and he should sus- 
 tain it as a whole with great pleasure. 
 
 Mr. BRUCE regarded the instrument as far 
 better than the present Constitution ; and though 
 opposed to some things in it, he should sustain it 
 as a whole, here and elsewhere. 
 
 The Convention then proceeded to vote, and 
 the Amended Constitution was AGREED to by 
 the following vote : 
 
 AYES Messrs. Allen, Angei, Archer, Ayrault, F. F. 
 Backus, H. Backus, Baker, Bascom, BowdisU, lirayton, 
 Bruce, Brundage, Bull, Burr. Cambreleng, =K. Campbell, 
 jr. Candee, Chamberlain, Clyde, Conely, Cook, Cornell, 
 Crocker, Cuddeback, Dana, Danfoith, Dodd, Dubois, 
 Flanders, Forsyth, Gebhard, Graham, Greene, Harris, 
 Harrison, Hawley, Hoffman, Hotchkiss, A. Huntington, 
 Hutchinson, Hyde, Jones, Kemble, Kernan, Kingsley, 
 Kirkland, Loomis, Mann, McNeil, Marvin, Maxwell, Mil- 
 ler, Morns, Munro, Murphy Nellis, Nicholas, Nicoll, 
 Parish, Patterson, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, Powers, Pre- 
 sident. Rhoades, Richmond, Riker, Ruggles, Rus>ell, St. 
 John, Salisbury, Sanford, Sears, Shaver, Hhaw, Sheldon. 
 E. Spencer, Stanton, Stephens, Stetson, Strong, Swack- 
 hamer, Taft, Taggart, J. J. Tayloi, W. Taylor, Tilden, 
 Townsend Tufhill, Van Schoorihover, Ward, Warren, 
 Waterbury, Willard Witb*ck. Worden, A. Wright, W. 
 B. Wright, Yawger, Young, Younjs 104. 
 
 NOES Messrs. K. Huntington.O'Conor, W. H. Spencer, 
 Stow, Tallmaoge, White 6. 
 
 The remaining 18 members, were absent. 
 
 [Gov. BOUCK, Mr. BROWN, Mr. D. D. CAMP- 
 BELL, Mr. CHATFIELD, Mr. CLARK, Mr. GARD- 
 NER, Mr. HUNTER, Mr JORDAN, Mr. McNrrr, 
 Mr. NELSON, Mr. SIMMONS, and Mr. SMITH 
 were absent from the city when the vote was ta- 
 ken.] 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN from the committee appoint- 
 ed for that purpose submitted an Address to the 
 People. 
 
 Mr. KENNEDY here said that he should be 
 o-lad to vote for the constitution if allowed to 
 have recorded on the journal a brief explanation, 
 which he sent up. 
 
 Objections being made, it could not be ve- 
 
 ' Mr. WORDEN moved that the address be 
 signed by the President and Secretaries, and be 
 printed with the official copies of the constitu- 
 tion ordered to be printed for distribution. He 
 took the occasion to say that the address was in 
 the cold, rigid, truthful language of the gentle- 
 man from Herkimer, and the gentleman would 
 pardon him for saying, it was in the eloquent and 
 forcible manner which that gentleman at alt times 
 could command. It presented the naked facts- 
 leaving the people, without any attempt to in- 
 fluence their decisions, to form their own conclu- 
 sions. 
 
 The motion was agreed to. 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS offered the following resolution, 
 which was agreed to : 
 
 Resolved, That the President do, in Convention, deliver 
 to the Secretary of State the engrossed amended Constitu- 
 toin, to be deposited on record in his office. 
 
 Mr. SWACKHAMER offered the following re- 
 solution, which was unanimously adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That JAMES E.STARBUCK, FRANCIS SEGER and 
 HENRY W. STRONG, are entitled to the thanks of this Con- 
 vention for the faithful and efficient manner in which they 
 have discharged their duties as Secretaries. 
 
 Mr. PATTERSON [Mr. CAMBRELENcin the 
 chair pro tern,] said he had a resolution to offer, 
 which he trusted would receive the unanimous 
 vote of the Convention. It was a resolution of 
 thanks to our presiding officer, and which he took 
 great pleasure in offering. He knew full well the 
 arduous and delicate duties of the chair, and he 
 could appreciate the courteous and impartial man- 
 ner in which they had been discharged. He trust- 
 ed the Convention would adopt the resolution 
 with a hearty and unanimous aye : 
 
 Resolved, That the thanks of this Convention be pre- 
 sented to the Hon JOHN TRACY, for the able, dignified 
 and impartial manner in which he has discharged the ar- 
 duous and responsible duties of the Chair ; and that in re- 
 tiring therefrom he carries with him the best wishes of 
 every member of this Convention. 
 
 The resolution was unanimously adopted. 
 
 Mr. E. HUNTINGTON said he gave a very re- 
 luctant vote against the Constitution. There were 
 many things in it to which he could give his un- 
 qualified approval. Indeed, with the exception 
 of the article on the judiciary anil that, on corpora- 
 tions, he liked the constitution very well. But 
 his objections to these articles prevented his giv- 
 ing a vote for it. 
 
 I\3r. BAKER, from the engrossing committee, 
 presented the resolutions of submission, &c., and 
 thev were adopted. 
 
 The SECRETARY of STATE being present, 
 and the engrossed Constitution having been signed 
 by the members present, 
 
 The PRESIDENT delivered it into the hands 
 of the Secretary of State, to be deposited in his 
 office of record. 
 
 The PRESIDENT then addressed the Conven- 
 tion, as follows: 
 
 Gentlemen : It is highly gratifying to me, to 
 receive at the close of our labors, the approbation 
 contained in the resolution you have adopted 
 unanimously. With a grateful heart, I return you 
 my sincere thanks. 
 
 "To form a constitution of civil government, 
 which will best secure the political rights [and 
 permanent welfare of a free people, is a work of 
 great magnitude and importance. You have de- 
 voted yourselves to this momentous work, and 
 have discharged the high trust committed to you, 
 with great zeal and fidelity. I confidently hope, 
 that the constitution now "to be submitted to our 
 constituents, will be ratified by them, and that 
 ,the people of this State will realize from it the 
 most auspicious results. 
 
 It gives me great pleasure, gentlemen, to ac- 
 knowledge rny obligations to you for the courtesv 
 and kindness you have at all times extended to 
 me, and to assure you of my best wishes for your 
 prosperity and happiness. 
 
 On motion of Mr. WARD, the Convention then 
 
 Adjourned sine die. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 REMARKS of Mr. HOFFMAN, on the Finan- 
 ces, in Convention, Friday Sept* 11, 1846. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN said, commanded by the order 
 of the Convention to make a parol report without 
 writing, upon complicated finances, I am obliged 
 to solicit the indulgent attention of the com- 
 mittee. After so long a stiuggle tor public debt 
 and with finances carried for long years through 
 that struggle, to write such a report would be 
 sufficiently laborious and difficult but to speak 
 it, seems to be a duty never before imposed on any 
 one. I do not advert to these circumstances to 
 complain, bu'_ to show some ground lor an indul- 
 gent hearing, while I endeavor to treat, not the first 
 section only, but the whole subject of our debts 
 and the means of their extinction. 
 
 In the Legislature, and again in this Conven- 
 tion, complaint has been repeatedly made that the 
 public accounts are complicated and obscure. The 
 real complaint should be that our debts and deal- 
 ings are great and multifarious. The public ac- 
 counts of these are kept with the greatest simpli- 
 city that can possibly state them with fairness. No 
 merchant, mechanic, or farmer, can keep his own 
 with more simplicity. To make them useful, he 
 must make them show his income and expenses 
 with each of his adventures, jobs, fields and crops, 
 and the united results of all his operations. So 
 the State must keep an account of its revenue 
 and expenses in each department of the public 
 service, and with each of its canals and show the 
 yearly result of all its operations, including its 
 large and multifarious debt, absolute and contin- 
 gent. In the introduction of the Finance Report 
 of 1842, is a brief and explicit explanation of the 
 manner in which the public accounts are kepi, 
 yearly closed, and reported which it will be 
 found difficult to misunderstand. In truth, the pub- 
 lic accounts are admirably kept to answer the de. 
 signaled specific purposes of the government. If 
 a call be made for information pjj principles con- 
 formable to the arrangement of the accounts in the 
 public offices, the answer can be made speedily, 
 arid in the most satisfactory manner. But when 
 the call of either house or of the Convention re- 
 quires a new account to be made and stated, the 
 accounts and vouchers must be reviewed perhaps 
 for a long series of years the labor must be great, 
 there is danger of error, and delay is inevitable. 
 
 The committee, therefore, endeavored to shape 
 the call ordered by the Convention, so as to make 
 the answer easy and correct, and to afford the Con- 
 vention the largest practicable results of past ex- 
 perience in the branches of the public service to 
 be considered, and as free as possible from all 
 mere estimates and opinions. They desired to give 
 the practical facts of the past as the best means to 
 judge of the future. These are fully, correctly 
 and clearly stated in Convention document No. 
 47 and its tables. Painful as it may be to attend 
 to these dry, cold details, I must ask it while I at- 
 tempt what no one was ever before required to 
 do to make a parol report, without writing, on a 
 vast debt,accurnulated in'long years, under systems 
 of complicated and varied finance. By following 
 me through the tables and reports, members will 
 find it possible to understand me correctly. With- 
 out that labor on their part, I must despair of ma- 
 king myself intelligible to them. 
 
 Before we proceed to consider what our present 
 
 debt is, it may be well to ascertain what it was in 
 
 April, 1842, that we may see how much it has 
 
 been reduced by the system of payment adopted 
 
 in that year. A full explanation on this part of 
 
 our inquiry will be found in Convention doc. No. 
 
 47, p. 4 and 5 a part of which I will read p. 5. 
 
 Below is shown in the first column the several 
 
 items of debt as given on the 7th of Feb., 1842, 
 
 in table F and in the second column as it has 
 
 since been ascertained to have existed at that 
 
 period, say on the 1st of April, 1842, viz: 
 
 As shown in Ascertained 
 
 table F. Feb. debt as ot April 
 
 7, 1342. 1, 1842. 
 
 "Canal debt, $18,65601172 $21,179,01981 
 
 " Contingent debt, 5,235,70000 1,720,00000 
 
 "Treasury debt, 1,872,87892 6,383,57892 
 
 $25,764,590 64 $23,287,598 73'' 
 The causes of these changes is in part explained 
 on pages 3 and 4 and c mpletely in the paragraph 
 which follows the one 1 have just read. The Re- 
 port then proceeds, p. 5: "The whole debt at 
 the time the suspension law passed, instead ofbe- 
 ;t ing $25,764,590 64, as was then supposed, actu- 
 ally amounted at that time, as since ascertained, 
 <: to $28, 237,598 73 without including the sum 
 " which has since been paid to canal contractor*, 
 "growing out of the suspension law." These un- 
 earned profits paid to contractors amount to $409,. 
 
1084 
 
 641 95 including large sums allowed to contrac- 
 t >r.s under the act of 1839, lor changing some struc- 
 tures on the Genesee valley can^l, a$ appears from 
 the Com.Uroller's report, Assembly doc. Is46 
 N> 25, p. 17. 
 
 What was our present debt on the first day oi 
 
 June, 18-ld, when the Convention 
 
 Beyond 
 
 our passive debt the answer to this inquiry will be 
 round in the Convention doc. No. 47. The pas- 
 sive debt consists of the U. S. deposite fund' oi $4,- 
 014,520 71. In the act of congress which author- 
 ized the deposite, the Sfate was required to pledge 
 its faith lor its return. In the act of the legisla- 
 ture which accepted the deposile, thid pledge was 
 made in the most explicit manner, and your pub- 
 lic officer, in the receipt he gave for the money in 
 pursuance of law, in express terms pledged the 
 public faith of the Slate lor its safe keeping and 
 return. It is therefore a most sacred debt, made 
 doubly sacred because our pledge is to the govern, 
 ment of o a own choice. The net revenue fiom 
 this money is by law devoted to the purposes ol 
 education that most absolute necessary of life 
 and the money has been loaned on bond and mort- 
 gage, according to a law that requires all losses of 
 the fund to be immediately supplied out of the re- 
 venue. So far this act has been carefully observed 
 and the fund kept good, and I suppose it always 
 will be, so long as men have any regard to honor, 
 honesty or good faith. The securities being thus 
 made perfectly good, the bonds and mortgages may 
 be justly deemed sufficient to satisfy any possible 
 claim the federal government can make for these 
 moneys; and I shall therefore take no further no- 
 tice of this passive debt. 
 
 The active debt of the State, direct and contin- 
 gent, on the 1st of June, 1S46, will be found at. p. 
 8 of the doc. No. 47. The interest computed is 
 according to the rates fixed on the stocks and 
 brought down to the time the stocks are respec. 
 lively payable; and on that small part of the gen- 
 eral tund debt for which there are no stocks the 
 interest is calculated at the rates usual for these 
 moneys and down to the period indicated in the 
 report. The report and the tables ail s'ate the 
 debt as it stood on the first day of June. For this 
 there are several conclusive reasons. The Ccn- 
 vention met on that day the call for the report 
 was made in June, and though the first of June is 
 not as good a season to ascertain the money on 
 hand as a quarter day or the close of the fiscal 
 year, yet the day had gone by and an examination 
 of the books would show with reasonable certainly 
 what these funds were, and their worth. The com- 
 missioners of the canal fund have a heavy debt to 
 manage with large sums to be paid for principal 
 and interest; as well as the duty of preserving the 
 public works in the most, useful condition, the 
 yearly expenditure on which is some $ GOO 000, 
 and where from accidents or disasters, large 
 expenditures may suddenly become ine/ilable. 
 It was seen that the funds on hand on the first 
 of June would leave in their hands the means 
 necessary to make these operations safe say some 
 quarter of a million. A portion of the canal debt 
 became payable on the first of July, amounting in 
 interest and principal to some $800,000. To call 
 for the account at that time was not only to ask it 
 before it could be in fact taken but to ask it for a 
 time when nothing available would be left in the 
 
 hands of the commissioneis for either the safe ma- 
 nagement of the canal debt or the secure operation 
 and maintenance of the canals. The first of June 
 WM therefore the only safe or proper time to fix on 
 for the ascertainment of the State debt or the funds 
 on hand. No greater available funds were then on 
 hand than the interest of the canals and the secu- 
 rity of the State credit required. All the estimates- 
 of interest have been made, therefore, with a refe- 
 rence to that date and the debt ascertained as at 
 that time. In all the tables the debt is supposed 
 to be paid as soon as it becomes payable without 
 any extension beyond that period. If in the actual 
 progress of the debt it should become necessary to 
 extend the period for the payment of any pait of 
 it, new interest, which I will call extra interest on 
 such extension, must be calculated. Almost any 
 yearly sum that our revenues will permit us to de- 
 vote to the payment of this debt, will leave some 
 portions of it to be extended and delayed with 
 consequent additional or extra interest for the 
 extension. 
 
 On these principles the State debt on the first of 
 June, 184b', should be thus stated: 
 
 Canal debt, tableB 2. 
 Insolvent Rail Roads, table C. 1, 
 Solvent. Bail Roads, table C. 2. 
 General Fund debt, table D. 
 
 Principal. 
 $17516,119 57 
 3.515,70' 00 
 1,713 000 00 
 2,369,849 24 
 
 $25,114,668 81 
 Contract Interest. 
 
 Canal debt, table B. 2. $8 379 838 33 
 
 Insolvent Rail Roads, table C. 1. 2,933, 165 37 
 Solvent Bail Reads, table C 2. 1,001707 50 
 
 General Fund debt, table D. b70,292 87 
 
 $13,185,004 07 
 Will re quirt for prompt 
 
 payment. 
 
 Canal debt, table B 2, $25,895 957 90 
 
 Insolvent Rail Kosds, table C. 1. 6.448,865 37 
 Solvent Rail Roads, table C. 2. 2,714 707 50 
 
 General Fund debt, table I). i 3 240,142 11 
 
 Total, principal and interest $38,299672 88 
 
 From this statement, it is seen that the princi- 
 pal of this active debt, which in April, 1842, was 
 in fact, as since ascertained, $25,287,598 73; has 
 by payment been reduced to $'25,1 14,668. 81, show- 
 ing payments for principal, exclusive ot interest, 
 of $3,173,929.92. Although this reduction has 
 been made, yet it appears that the contract inter- 
 st up to the time the money becomes payable, 
 v\\\ be '13, 185,004,07, and that th\s reduced dfbt 
 cannot be paid short of $ 33,299,672.88. It to this 
 we add interest for extensions almost inevitable, 
 we may deem ourselves fortunate if this debt shall 
 be eventually paid, principal and interest, for for- 
 ty millions of dollars, to which it was at one time 
 supposed the principal of our debt miyht safely 
 be extended, and its payment secured without di. 
 rect taxes, in ]863. 
 
 Whether we regard thi* debt as it should have 
 been stated in 1842, at $28,287,598.73, or as we 
 find it on the first of June last at #25, 114,661.81, 
 requiring in addition to that principal the pay- 
 ment of $13,185,004,07 of interest before the debt 
 can be extinguished, and some addition for inter- 
 est on inevitable extensions it must be regarded 
 as a British debt, to be paid by British taxation, 
 direct or indirect, with the misery inseparable 
 from that taxation. It is a solid, broad founda- 
 
1085 
 
 lion on which to build perpetual, endless debt and 
 taxation to wither, blight and blast every branch 
 of human industry. I do not make these remarks 
 to censure those who contracted the debt. They 
 may have been mistaken. We have, if we will 
 apply them, the means of payment, and if we will 
 not apply them, because we desire rather to spend 
 the money and employ these means for our own 
 wants, ours will not be an error, but a deliberate 
 crime, committed against faith and obvious duty. 
 In ]S41, when I came by the sheerest accident 
 into the legislature, it was strongly denied that 
 any part of the Railroad debt ever could become a 
 charge upon the treasury. Charging these slocks 
 to the State as part of her debt, was denounced as 
 panic making and treasonable. While the con- 
 test on this point was waging, these debts amount- 
 ing to $3,515,700 became a charge on the treasu- 
 ry, and settled the contest, that to that amount at 
 least they were to be paid by the State. There was 
 still left $1,720,000 of this debt hanging as a con- 
 tingent debt on the State, which by a payment of 
 $7,000 made by the Delaware and Hudson canal 
 company, has been reduced to $1,713,000, as now 
 stated by the Comptroller. In truth the liability 
 of the State for these stocks, in aid of incorporated 
 companies, was always absolute. The only thing 
 contingent about these stocks was whether the 
 companies to which the credit of the State was 
 loaned, would redeem them, and thus save the 
 treasury from the payment of them. Of the com- 
 panies which have as yet paid interest, two have 
 applied and obtained, one by joint resolution, and 
 the other by law, some exemption from paying 
 in the two per cent sinking fund required to be 
 paid for the eventual redemption of the debt. 
 Others may need the like or greater relief; and as 
 such relief has been given to some, and the hea- 
 viest of these companies have become bankrupt, 
 and left the treasury to pay these debts, it seems 
 reasonable to suppose that more of this debt will 
 eventually fall upon the treasury. Without de- 
 scending to invidious particulars, I think it prob- 
 able that the Slate will be obliged to pay some 
 $420,000 of the principal of this contingent debt, 
 with interest for a greater or less number of years. 
 Ifthe State shall escape from this contingent debt, 
 by the payment of one million of dollars for prin- 
 cipal and interest on this part of the deb', I shall 
 regard it as fortunate. We may do better we 
 may do worse. Still as the public officers do not 
 desire to encourage these incorporated companies 
 to becorre defaulters, they treat the debt as con- 
 tingent, and therefore usually omit this portion of 
 the State debt ; but in making a final provision for 
 the State debt, it cannot be safely disregarded. 
 The provision to extinguish the general fund and 
 insolvent railroad debt, should be such as will also 
 extinguish any portion of the contingent debt that 
 will probably become a charge on the treasury, 
 though we cannot now fix with certainty the 
 amount. If this contingent debt to $874,433 for 
 principal and interest shall become a charge on 
 
 the treasury, as I think it will, it will cost you 
 about $45,000 for each of the ensuing 19 years. 
 
 Omitting then this contingent debt, the abso- 
 lute debt of the State will be found in the Con- 
 vention document No. 47. The Canal debt is 
 stated at page 36, in the table marked (B2), which 
 I will read: 
 
 (B2) 
 
 CANAL DEBT. 
 
 Statement showing the amount of principal and 
 interest actually payable in each year, as it be- 
 comes due, on the State stock issued for the se- 
 veral canals. 
 
 OOGDODODalcCCOCC I 
 
 .*? 
 
 gg 
 
 >fe* r O 
 
 S 
 
 o. Principal 
 _ I actually 
 ~g | payable. 
 
 1 
 
 1 8 S! 5 
 
 ' SpSSS 2 83gjS Interest 
 ~- Seals o I actually 
 *o(a< i I payable. 
 
 i M ^- en H- 
 
 -(.-*;, 
 'XCCOJr 
 
 Total Prin- 
 cipal and 
 Interest. 
 
 The General Fund and Insolvent Railroad debt 
 united, is stated at page 42, in table E, which I 
 beg leave to read: 
 
 GENERAL FUND AND RAILROAD DEBT. 
 Statement showing the amount of principal and in- 
 terest payable in each year on the General Fund 
 State debt, as it becomes due, assuming that the 
 Astor Stock, ($561,500,) and the Comptroller's 
 bonds for loans from the School Fund and the 
 Railroad Sinking Funds ($36,395.59,) will be 
 paid in ten ye^rs; and the principal of Indian 
 Annuities, ($122,694.87.) and the balance due 
 the Specific Funds, ($740,151.78,) will be paid 
 in five years. 
 
1086 
 
 YEAR. 
 
 Principal ac- 
 tually payable 
 in each year. 
 
 Interest actu- 
 ally payable 
 in each year. 
 
 TOTAL. 
 
 1846, 1st June to 
 Sept. 30th, 
 1847, Sept. 30. 
 1848, 
 1849 < 
 
 $11,000 00 
 13,000 00 
 368,107 00 
 
 $131,159 02 
 324,479 24 
 314,919 06 
 
 $142,159 02 
 337,479 24 
 633,026 06 
 
 1850 ' 
 
 
 
 304 816 39 
 
 1851, ' 
 1852, 
 1853, ' 
 
 862,846 65 
 467,000 05 
 
 304 816 39 
 253,045 60 
 225 025 60 
 
 1,167,663 04 
 720,045 60 
 225 025 60 
 
 1854 ' 
 
 
 225 025 60 
 
 
 1855 
 
 
 
 
 1856, 
 
 647,895 59 
 
 225,025 60 
 
 872,921 19 
 
 1858, " 
 1859, 
 1860, < 
 1861, ' 
 1862, 
 1863 '< 
 
 100,000 00 
 250,000 00 
 350 000 00 
 1,500,000 00 
 1,000,000 00 
 
 191,936 50 
 184,736 50 
 172,111 50 
 133,476 50 
 66,986 50 
 14' 486 50 
 
 291,986 50 
 434,736 50 
 522,111 50 
 1,633,476 50 
 1,066,986 50 
 14 486 60 
 
 1864, 
 1865, 
 
 287,700 00 
 28,000 00 
 
 $5,885,549 24 
 
 7,993 25 
 1,540 00 
 
 $3,803^458 24 
 
 295,693 25 
 29,540 00 
 
 $9,689,007 43 
 
 These two debts united are stated at page 43, in 
 table F, which I feel it my duty to read to the 
 Committee: 
 
 (F. ) 
 
 The following statement embraces the debts of all 
 the canals, the debts of the railroads which have 
 failed to pay interest, and the debt of the Gene- 
 ral Fund, being the aggregate of the direct debt 
 on which the State is now paying interest. The 
 first column shows the amount of principal pay- 
 able in each year ; second, the interest payable 
 in each year on the whole debt; third, the a- 
 mount of principal and interest payable in each 
 year, from 1st June, 1846, to the maturity of the 
 stock or debt. This table is a consolidation of 
 tables B. 2, C. 1, and D. 
 
 W " 
 
 2*00 
 
 
 
 ; 
 
 > So 
 
 
 : 
 
 J"" 1 .^ .J"* -^ 
 
 8 - 8 3 3 25 S S 8 3 
 
 |OO>3 
 
 to w 
 " 
 
 O~*OO* 
 
 o SB 5 
 
 ~ 
 
 
 III 
 
 Us 
 
 From the table B 2, it is seen that ihe Canal 
 debt of $17,516,119,57 will cost you in interest 
 before it can be paid, $8,379,838.33, making a 
 charge on your revenues of $25,895,957,90. The 
 table E shows you that your general fund debt is 
 
 $5,885,549,24, and that the interest on it will in 
 the period fixed for it redemption, cost you $3,- 
 803,458,24, creating a charge on your reve- 
 nues ot $9,689,007,48. The burthens of this di- 
 rect absolute debt united, are stated in the table F, 
 principal $23,401,668,81 contract interest $12,- 
 183,296,57, making a total of $35,584,965,38, 
 which must be paid to extinguish the debt. This 
 calculation does not include any portion of the 
 contingent debt, stated in table C ,1 C, 2; nor 
 any thing for interest that must be paid for anyex- 
 tension of time for paying the absolute debt. 
 
 In fixing a contribution to your sinking fund, if 
 you fix it too small, and pay loo slow, you may 
 disgrace your sinking fund and the Stale. The 
 disgrace will be ours, but the injury will fall 
 mostly on our creditors. They expect not only 
 payment, but that your credit in their hands will 
 be maintained. Their necessities frequently oblige 
 them to sell, and every reduction in the price 
 from proper and adequate means to sustain your 
 credit, is a robbery on them. 
 
 It may be said that there were funds on hand on 
 the first day of June, (hat might be applied towards 
 the reduction of this debt. A statement of these 
 and their character, will be found in the Conven- 
 tion document No. 47 : p. 6. 
 
 'Available deposites in banks, $392,854,46 "- 
 These funds are good, and to a small extent ex- 
 ceed what is necessary to be kept on hand at all 
 times for the proper care of the public debts and 
 public works. The payments in July consumed 
 them entirely. The remainder of the funds on 
 hand promise but little 
 
 Unavailable deposites in banks, viz: 
 
 Bank of Brockport, $3,715 50 
 
 Bank of Lyons, 19.11386 
 
 Clinton County Bank, 86,200 00 
 
 Lockport Bank, 29,700 00 
 
 Lockport Bank & Trust conjp'y. 32,072 31 
 
 Lewis County Bank, 20,000 00 
 
 Watervliet Bank, 42,430 00 
 
 Wayne County Bank, 20,912 02 
 
 254,211 69 
 
 The Canal Fund has also in 
 stocks issued for the payment 
 of balances due on account of 
 Canal fund, money s deposited in 
 the Bank of Buffalo, Commer- 
 cial Bank of Buffalo, and Com- 
 mercial Bank ot Oswego, $314,448 0-2 
 
 Total unavailable loans to 
 
 Banks, $563,659 71 
 
 Loan to the city of Albany, 30,000 00 
 
 To be raised under chap. 326 of 
 
 the laws of 1346, 300,000 00 
 
 $1,291,514 17 
 
 Now looking at the character of these funds, 
 they appear to me to be really "unavailable." It 
 cannot be expected that the enumerated bank- 
 rupt banks will soon, if ever, pay the deposites en- 
 trusted ro them. Nor do I regard as available Ihe 
 stocks of the Bank safety fund, though that fund 
 may redeem them at some indefinite but remote 
 period. The claim against the city of Albany is 
 under protest, though the^city must ultimately pay 
 it. The $300,000 about to be borrowed is destin- 
 ed to pay arrearages to contractors and for land 
 damages, and can be regarded as available for no 
 other purpose. These remarks dispose of all these 
 funds, and show that the available portion of them 
 are fairly needed as funds on hand. If other por- 
 tions shall prove available, then, and not before, 
 
1087 
 
 they may be employed to improve the canals. 
 When available, the legisfature may appropriate 
 them to any canal purpose. They are certainly 
 noi now applicable to the payment of the debt, 
 nor should dependence be placed upon them for 
 that purpose. 
 
 Having thus briefly stated our debt, I will now 
 call the attention of the committee to the charges 
 against the State. The first in order is the Canal 
 current expenses. These are large and will in- 
 crease with the increase of business on the canals. 
 We shall hereafter have occasion to consider what 
 they probably will be for a short series of years. 
 The charge next in order is for the payment of 
 the interest and principal of the Canal debt- We 
 must also prepare to meet the interest and redeem 
 the principal ot the General lund, and Insolvent 
 Railroad debt, with such portion of the contingent 
 debt as may tall on the treasury. In addition to 
 these three charges, we must meet the State cur- 
 rent expenses, which have increased rapidly for 
 many years, arid which it will be difficult essen- 
 tially to reduce. 
 
 Then what are our ways and means our re- 
 venues to meet these charges ? 
 
 Some effort has been made to tax the railroads 
 on their transpoitation, as if the company paid 
 this class of taxes, and not the persons who con- 
 sume the articles transported. The legislature 
 have made some progress in this Spanish Bourbon 
 legislation of pensioning the government on trade 
 and travel. We would make internal improve- 
 ments to cheapen transportation, and tax the trans- 
 portation to make it dear. Supporting a govern 
 ment by tax or, trade and travel appears to me 
 worse than the old repudiated practice of asking 
 a bonus fof a bank charter. If we attempt to ex- 
 tend and fix this system of taxes on transportation 
 if we pursue the course of taxing transuortation 
 on roads not made at the expense of the State, we 
 shall make the government a real highwayman 
 odious, and an oppressor. Such acourse may, like 
 any other abuse, answer for a time but it must 
 soon fail from surrounding circumstances. Trade, 
 travel and transportation will be driven from us, 
 and our industry must; languish for want of the re~ 
 wards which untaxed transportation and trade can 
 alone secure to labor. We can do ouiselves an in- 
 jury by this sort of taxation ; but there are so many 
 rival routes, and there soon will be so many more 
 which will not be taxed, that to secure trade and 
 travel we shall be obliged to act in this whole 
 matter with liberality and justice. 
 
 I might, dismiss this branch of the subject, but 
 I never can consent that the current expenses of 
 the Strite, and all its great expenditures, should be 
 charged on the right of way, which the sovereign 
 should hold, not as property for revenue, but in 
 trust tor the million to promote travel, transpor- 
 tation ancl commerce. To thn extent that the Slate 
 makes advances and incurs a reasonable risk in 
 nuking a road or canal, the State from the tolls 
 shouldjully indemnify iisi.-lf for those expenses 
 and that risk. But when the cifizen, at his own 
 expense, makes the road or canal, I can think of 
 no worse or more oppressive course than the 
 Bourbon one, which we have commenced, of tax- 
 ing the transportation on it for the benefit of the 
 State. The revenues will be collected in small 
 sums from every body in every quarter, and no 
 
 one can afford to resist or make effectual com- 
 plaint. But the monies when they go out of the 
 treasury, will go in large sums for families, inter- 
 ests or localities to reward followers, and pur- 
 chase supporters. Such a course must engender 
 the worst oppression and the worst corruptions, 
 and soon realize the worst vices of the worst go- 
 vernmentsTaxation on all we consume whit h 
 will allow nothing to move to or from the market 
 without tribute to the State. 
 
 The salt and auction taxes resemble in charac- 
 ter and impolicy the tax on transportation; and I 
 think you will not long be able to maintain either. 
 Of the two last, I have given my views somewhat 
 at large on former occasions. They are both 
 strictly local taxes, and it is as unjust to defray a 
 general expense by such a local tax, as it is impo- 
 litic and dangerous to make expenditures for local 
 improvements out of a general revenue. To he 
 safe, local expenditures must be met by locil 
 taxes. To be just, general expenses should be 
 paid from general revenues. If a peculiar tax CED 
 be collected in a locality, the peculiar circum- 
 stances which enable it to be raised will expose 
 that locality to peculiar charges, which render 
 such a tax necessary to be expended where it is 
 collected. This is certainly true of the auction 
 tax. 
 
 The salt tax has already been reduced to one 
 cent a bushel. If then 4,000,000 of bushels shall 
 be manufactured yearly, the gross revenue will be 
 $40,000; and the yearly expense has been about 
 $130,000 leaving a nett revenue of only about 
 $10,000. These expenses may perhaps be some- 
 what reduced, but there is quite as much danger 
 of their increase as hope of their reduction ; and I 
 can scarcely expect to see them brought below 
 $26,000. For the great State of New York to 
 cling to such a tax, looks as if it were driven to 
 the last extremity ; and were acting like a broken 
 down merchant, endeavoring to live out of his old 
 book accounts trumped up against.old customers, 
 with whom he had long before fully settled. But 
 sir, if we will cling to this tax, we cannot in. 
 crease it, and it will soon escape our grasp. By 
 the St. Lawrence, salt has reached Lake Cham- 
 plain, and the federal tax on it once reduced, it 
 will come freely, to supply not only that lake, but 
 the countries bordering on the whole extent of 
 the great lakes ; and by the Hudson, will reach 
 Troy, and the interior connected with the Lakes, 
 and the Hudson. Our salt tax therefore is sub- 
 stantially gone forever. 
 
 Then comes the auction tax almost exclusively 
 collected in the city of New York. It is equally 
 unjust and unwise. It comes in direct opposition 
 to trade. It is a tax against trade. It declares 
 that you must not sell in the manner in which 
 trade finds it best to make its sales. Hitherto 
 about $32,000 of this tax has gone for the support 
 of some charities located in that city. At the 
 last session this tax was reduced ; and you cannot 
 long continue it. If other rival cities have no 
 such tax, it can and will be evaded. In truth 
 your tax is a bounty to invite evasion. If the tax 
 presses on the business, instead of carrying his 
 whole stock to the auction, the seller may send 
 there fair samples of the whole a fifth or a tenth 
 and sell them ; thus fix the price, and then say 
 to buyers, you can take Btocks from my store at 
 
1088 
 
 auction price, less the tax. It your tax is oppies 
 give, auctions may be opened in other states where 
 your tax cannot reach the goods. You may em 
 barrass or drive off trade by this tax, but circum 
 stances will not long permit you to sustain it as 
 available revenue. I do not regret that you wil 
 soon be obliged to abandon these two impolitic 
 taxes ; and to my mind, I must confess that the 
 salt and auction taxes look somewhat disreputa- 
 ble. Reduced as they are, we cannot safely esti- 
 mate their proceeds at more than some $100,000 
 a year ; and disgraceful as they are, they mus 
 soon go down to the tomb and shrivel into no. 
 thing. 
 
 Here then our state ways and means are reduc 
 ed to canal tolls on the one hand, and direct tax- 
 es on the other. What we do not take from ca- 
 nal tolls, we must obtain by direct taxes. Our si- 
 lence as to direct taxes is of no avail. We can- 
 not always continue to borrow and not pay ; we 
 cannot adopt the infamous course of repudiation 
 by neglecting to pay. We must meet our state 
 expenses and debts, by canal tolls or direct taxes, 
 or both ; and what we do not realize from tolls, 
 must, whether we say it or not, be wrung from 
 our people by direct taxes. We cannot deny, we 
 ought not to conceal the fact. 
 
 These charges divide themselves into four kinds. 
 First our canal expenses, already very large, and 
 to increase with time and the increase of business 
 on the canals. Second, our large canal debt to 
 which I shall have further occasion to call the 
 attention of the committe, and on which every 
 delay of payment must occasion additional inter- 
 est. Third, our general fund debts, including that 
 for aid given to companies already insolvent as 
 well as any part of the contingent debt before 
 spoken of. which may fall upon the treasury. 
 On these perhaps I have said enough to show 
 their character and probable amount ; but I must 
 add that every delay to meet them early, must 
 add proportionably for extra interest. Fourth, 
 the state current expenses, already large and to in- 
 crease with our population. To these I shall have 
 occasion hereafter to call special attention. 
 
 To pay your debts and to meet your canal and 
 state current expenses will require about $3,200,- 
 000 a year, nor can you in my opinion reduce 
 these charges as low as three millions a year. 
 Whatever you do not take from canal tolls to 
 meet these charges, you must take from direct 
 taxes. You may to some extent delay the pay- 
 ment of your debt by a guilty breach of the 
 public faith or by the British system of funding 
 the debt, paying interest and maidngthe debt and 
 drain for interest, perpetual a system, if less base 
 yet more cruel than repudiation. Repudiation 
 would be a bold stand in infamy, but this funding 
 system would fasten on the limbs of your children 
 the withering, blasting effects of British eternal 
 debt and taxation. Payment, prompt payment 
 payment with the least interest is your only course, 
 and what we do not pay with canal tolls we must 
 pay by direct taxes. You cannot well live on the 
 luture as the past has foraged on you. 
 
 It therefore, becomes proper for us to consider 
 briefly, the general circumstances applicable to 
 our future canal revenues. If some of these look 
 to a probable large increase, others may incline us 
 
 to believe that sooner <*r later we must adopt con- 
 siderable reductions on the rates of toll. 
 
 Our canals have been in operation since the 
 spring of 1826, and the competition of carrier 
 against carrier, shows what competition can do. 
 Without going into detail, it seems to me right to 
 say that taking the up and down freights together, 
 competition has reduced the share which the car- 
 rier retains for himself, from what was two dol- 
 lars, to one, or less than one. What was $3, for 
 him, is certainly now less than $2, and I believe 
 it does not exceed $1,50; and yet the full force 
 of competition has not probably been felt. For- 
 merly the up freights made a fair yield to ths 
 carrier ; now they are much reduced, and yield 
 him little over tolls. Will not competition on 
 all other routes have a like effect in reducing 
 freights ? On the rivers of the south west, on 
 their main streams, the competition has been re- 
 spectable, but by no means equal to the competi- 
 tion on our canals and the Hudson ; while on all 
 the upper portions of those rivers, the competi- 
 tion has been new. imperfect and feeble, and will 
 long and rapidiy increase. In 5, 10, or ISyeaas the 
 increase of competition in that quarter will proba- 
 bly do as much to reduce freights there, as it has 
 done here, in the like past period of years. The 
 same thing is true with regard to the Pennsylva- 
 nia route. The competition has been feeble 
 time will make it active, strong and vigorous, and 
 it will force down the freights there, as it has 
 done with us. Competition, hitherto feeble on the 
 Ohio routes, will in due time become active and 
 efficient ; and it will play for us, or against us, 
 accerding as the season and our rates of toll shall 
 affect the choice of the merchants between our 
 route and the great south western rivers,where we 
 must expect large reductions in charges. The 
 new works at the west, too, will come in to play 
 a part in thi& competition and reduce prices still 
 "urther. 
 
 I must not in this enumeration omit the great 
 works from the tide waters of the St. Lawrene 
 o the extreme west of the great lakes, some 1300 
 miles of ship navigation. Of the full size of the 
 vessels that can pass this inland navigation, I can 
 not speak with certainty, but I find in the report 
 of the officer in charge of these public works that 
 here were three propellers on lake Erie, the ag- 
 gregate tonnage oi which is 1900, which would 
 be able to reach the tide, on completing certain 
 of the new locks on the Welland Canal. The 
 works are now, I believe, completed, or soon will 
 
 ; and it appears from this fact, that vessels of 
 600 tons can pass from Mon'treal to Chicago. 
 This route is so entirely new, that competition 
 las there yet to do its whole work in reducing 
 freights. When, or how far it will reduce them, 
 cannot now well be foreseen ; but that it will do 
 so largely, can scarcely be doubted. Indeed this 
 route appears to have drawn an unusual quantity 
 of produce this season to Montreal and Quebec, 
 ^or, without any unusual deficiency in the ship- 
 ing at these ports, the price of freights has risen 
 o much as to be the subject of complaint. From 
 his, I infer that the Canada route has not been 
 die. Another year may send more shipping to 
 hese ports, and thus reduce their charges. Be- 
 ides the reductions which a growing competition 
 an effect on that route, it is evident, that the 
 
1089 
 
 rates ot toll there, are such as will well bear large 
 redactions. 
 
 It .-eern-i to me, therefore, entirely probable, 
 thar a great reduction will sooner 01 later be ef 
 lect< station on all these rival routes, 
 
 not only by the competition between carrier and 
 carrier on the same route, but also by the reduc- 
 tion of tolls on these several routes." We have 
 several times set the example^f reducing tolls 
 and it will be earnestly followed by all our com- 
 petitors for the trade to and from the great west. 
 The prize is great and the struggle will be earnest 
 as well on the part of the routes reducing tolls as 
 on the part of the carriers leducing their charges; 
 and in these reductions, the newest and least im- 
 proved routes on which the least reductions have 
 as yet been made, can go farthest. This com- 
 petitio'n of rival routes and of the carriers on 
 them, will yet effect enormous reductions in the 
 cost of transpoitation. 
 
 The great west will enrich us it is true, ir we 
 do not forbi'i it by our rates of toll. From the 
 vast extent of tha? new country, fioin the fertility 
 of its unexhausted soil, and the rapid increase ot 
 its population, well may we jusily expect a great 
 increase in the products to be brought and the 
 pav to be returned; but it vse keep up our high 
 rates of toll, or inctease our debt and makethere- 
 duction ot our rates of toll impracticable, we 
 shall drive those products to other less taxed 
 routes, more eflvctually than by any other means 
 in our power. The high rates of toll is our great- 
 est enemy in this competition for revenues and 
 transportation. The debt which forces us to im- 
 pose tnese rates rf toll is our greatest misfortune 
 worse than if the waters of our canals were 
 solidified info rock because then less than this 
 canal debt ot #17,000,000, to say nothing of our 
 other debts and expenses, would remove the rock 
 and clear the passage. 
 
 But, sir, this competition does not end with 
 rival canals. Hitherto railroads have been con- 
 structed almost exclusively for the accommodation 
 of travel upon the principle of flying and we 
 c.-tnnot sately determine how tar they can be made 
 useful insuuments for the transportation of pro- 
 perty. By a proper location and use, they mav, 
 and doubtless will be largely improved for this 
 purpose, and existing circumstances show us, 
 that they vv II be constructed and fully tiied. 
 
 Finished gouds for the spring consumption, 
 reach the great Atlantic cities, in Januaty, Febru- 
 ary and March, fiom abroad the return pay for 
 our exports. Our own manufacturers must bring 
 i his into the market at the same time, or wait for 
 / a purchaser for consumption until the fall sales, 
 i M line to Carolina, a country, made some 
 100 or 150 miles wide by short railroads to the 
 water, can reach the great cities every week of 
 the winter, to purchase and sell ; that district in- 
 cludes the great cities, a vast popul Uiori.and a laage 
 part of our manufactuiers These therefore have 
 a free and full use of the markets in winter, to 
 buy what they need, and sell what they make. But 
 in our vast interior, whatever other advantages 
 may be enjoyed, the manufacturer must purchase 
 in autumn risk the changes of the market during 
 that long period, and it dependant on a canal, 
 frozen up five months in the winter, he cannot get 
 his goods into the market, until after the traders 
 
 111 
 
 have made their purchases for thespnng business. 
 He must in effect, buy in autumn, and sell for the 
 next autumn business, or all his VA heels, spindles, 
 and machirmy nns' ies! from October uutii May. 
 This is a great, and he regards it as ao iasuppc rtu- 
 ble misfortune, and will theretore, join with all 
 others who desire a railroad to open (he way iu 
 winter, 10 and from the markets. As some of the 
 cities have railroads, which open far into the 
 country, and enable their merchants in winter, to 
 supply their country customers, other cities must 
 secure the like communications with the country, 
 or their merchants will feel, and fiud that trade 
 leaves them, and goes to those favored with rail 
 roads operating through the winter. The mer- 
 chant will therefore be obliged to join in the ef- 
 fort to multiply and extend the transpoitation by 
 railroads. Since large agricultuial districts ac- 
 c immodated by these roads, made and making, 
 will possess a monopoly of the market in winter ; 
 all other agricultural districts must seek the like 
 facilities to reach that market. At the southwest 
 the great rivers are open in the winter, to a certain 
 point. At that point, a railroad may be used ia 
 winter, extending into the country, and thus in 
 effect extending the unfrozen rivers in winter, 
 when it is safe to transport bread stuffs and butch- 
 ers meat, through the Mississippi and the Guiph, 
 to the Atlantic cities, the West indies, Brazil or 
 Europe. 
 
 From all these causes, I infer, that it is quite 
 certain that railroads will be stretched from tiie 
 Atlantic to the Lakes, as well for the transporta- 
 tion of freight, as of passengers. The change has 
 in part taken place, and soon these works will be 
 constructed, and their power of competition will 
 be tried. 
 
 One further view of the subject. Suppose all 
 these desires do make these railroads, can they 
 compete with the canals, for transportation ? I 
 have stated belore, that since they have all been 
 made heretofore for FLYING, i' is very uncertain 
 how useful tney may be made for the transporta- 
 tion of property. But there are some examples 
 which may serve to show us what they can do, 
 and I may add, what they must do, if they once 
 get made. The railroad from hereto Boston, over 
 as ungainly a route as could well be selected, 
 either for its grade or its operation, and wnich has 
 fo war against the open Hudson, and against the 
 open coast what does it do ? It is made, and like 
 all things which have a being, it must stru^yie 
 for existence. On that hilly route of 200 miles, 
 it picks up its barrel of flour at the dock here across 
 the river, and drags it over the mountains at,d 
 through the country, and delivers it at the mer- 
 chants store in B'>s'on lor 25 cents. The Hudson 
 than which a better canal does not exist on the 
 whole earth if put under such tolls as are put 
 on the Erie canal, could not carry is cheap tor 
 130 miles, as can the Boston rail road for 2lO 
 miles- I mention this to show you what is meai t 
 by tolls. Applying to the Hudson such a rate tf 
 toll as you must necessarily apply to the Erie ca- 
 nal, you would drive traffic and trade to Boston. 
 In less than twenty years, the same question may 
 arise in respect to the Erie eanal ; for it cannot te 
 denied that owing to the smallness of the grades 
 of the railroads Irom Buffalo to this city, if the 
 road were' as good as the one from here to Boston 
 
1090 
 
 they could transport flour cheaper tor 360 miles 
 than it can be done for the 200 miles from here to 
 Boston. It would be one almost continuous level 
 grade, with scarcely even a sharp curve. The 
 rail road from Ogderisburgh to Lake Champlain, 
 occupies at leasi as favorable a position as the 
 road from here to Boston. I say then, that from 
 the examples of the Boston road, these roads, if 
 they existed, could strongly compete with the 
 Erie canal, loaded and burdened as it is, with its 
 debts and tolls. We may through the power of 
 legislation, maintain our monopoly, may prevent 
 the Ojfdensburgh rail road, and the Erie rail road 
 from carrying freight. Legislation may block up 
 the passage from here to Butialo it has the power 
 to do so. But that power is the immoral power 
 of self-destruction a horrible, impossible power. 
 You could only turn the trade by all the varied 
 channels to winch I have alluded, to the south- 
 west in winter, and to the north and south in 
 summer. That is all you could do. You can 
 destroy commerce, and with that, destroy the re 
 wards of industry, but you cannot by that destruc- 
 tion secure your revenues. You must be just and 
 wise you must deal with your neighbors as you 
 desire to be dealt with you must afford for them 
 a better and cheaper way, and must act towards 
 them in kindness and conciliation. 
 
 Viewing this matter altogether, how does it 
 ' stand in the range of probabilities ? Why fairly 
 and rightfully thus : That for some period 
 to [come, say every eight or ten years, your 
 tolls on the canals, in.iy be sustained at about 
 their present rales, and your revenues in- 
 creased as they have been, and that in ten or fif- 
 teen years, you will find them beginning to cul- 
 minate, unless you reduce your rates of toll. In 
 ten or fifteen years, with the competition and the 
 reduction of tolls on other routes the introduc- 
 tion of new rail roads, with the present, compet- 
 ing for bread, and each well knowing that five 
 per cent, is better than four, that four is belter 
 than three,three better than two.and two a hundred 
 per cent, better than one; knowing this, and look- 
 ing back and seeing how much ten years experi- 
 ence have aided to improve rail roads, who can 
 doubt that the competition will be severely ielt- 
 These roads when they once exist, must like all 
 other things, struggle to obtain a living ; for these 
 roads have living representatives, men wanting 
 bread, clothing and lodging ; and they will com- 
 pete with industry, economy and iron perseve- 
 rance for the means of existence. I may be mis- 
 taken in i he period when the competition will be 
 felt, but I cannot disguise the conviction of my 
 own mind, that it certainly will be fell in twenty 
 years, I believe it will strongly in filteen, and that 
 we shall not be without some experience of it in 
 ten years. And 1 wish to say, that in my own 
 mind, whatever it may be in others, this view of 
 the subject is not entirely new. The past has not 
 pushed on in this competition, as last as it would 
 if it had not been for the wretched public bank- 
 ruptcy, and social insolvency of the West, and if 
 the evils of bad financiering in the Southwest, and 
 from civil dissensions in the Canadas. From 
 these cai^es you feel no injury from competition 
 now. They may be unwise, again, they may 
 not, and 1 think they will not but if they are, 
 you may be saved again. But is it wise thus to 
 
 calculate on the folly of your neighbors ? Per- 
 haps the burnt child will dread the fire too much 
 to repeat his tolly. 
 
 During the present year too, the road to the 
 Southwest by the Gulph < i Mexico, has bee.i to 
 some extent, avoided, because of apprehended- 
 danger of war with Great Britiau ; for I do riot 
 believe any thing was apprehended from misera- 
 ble Mexico, and tha road through the Canadas- 
 was probably, to some extent avoided lor the same 
 reason. I believe that all these things had some 
 small effect upon the progress of the last year. 
 
 These remarks enable me to say that I do not 
 believe that this Convention here, is in a situation 
 10 fix rules against the reduction of canal tolls. 
 All such attempts are, in my opinion, gone past 
 their time. You cannot do it with salety, you 
 must leave the question open. You must take 
 he consequences of this discretionary power for 
 good or evil. If yon can make the revenues large 
 either by high or low tolls, and thus get rid of 
 he debr, you will be fortunate, if you cannot do 
 t, the debt must be met by direct taxes. It can- 
 not hang around the energies of the people of the 
 state, it will not. You have not even a corpoaal's 
 guard to enforce your laws, and if we who have 
 contracted the debt, who have looked somewhat 
 to its reduction have not the moral courage and 
 foresight to end it by payment, and instead of pay- 
 ing, will take the money to spend, who believes 
 that the conduct of our successors, when the 
 debt comes to them with the weight of years, will 
 be in anywise moie reputable or honest ? The 
 result will be non-payment and repudiatio. If 
 we who have been active in getting up debts, are 
 not prepared for payment, but will use the means 
 of payment for our own expenses, believe you, 
 that those who come after us will pay them ? You 
 may believe it if you can, but it will not be true. 
 You must take these tolls when you can get them, 
 and you must pay with them as well as you can. 
 When they will not answer, you must meet the 
 deficit by taxes, direct or indirect, and expunge 
 the debt. I wish to know whether any other 
 course is open to a free people ? What is the 
 worst vice of the worst government ? It is the 
 fact, that it dof-s not pay will not pay its 
 current debts. This vice generally goes on and 
 ends as it would here in cruel and oppressive 
 taxation for a period the wronging of the credi- 
 tor, and despoiling of the citizen. Such is the 
 way in which debt works in every country. I 
 wish to know whether these representative gov- 
 ernments are to be marked by this woist of vices, 
 or whether they will as becomes a free and res- 
 ponsible people, by canal tolls, and if these are 
 insufficient, by taxation, meet this debt. For one, 
 I answer, that it must be paid speedily, and with 
 interest, by canal means, if it can ; but be paid by 
 taxes if necessary. And in saying this, I believe 
 I express nothing but the opinion of every mem- 
 ber of thestanding committee. While I say this 
 for the committee, I will conclude this pan of the 
 subject by expressing as my own opinion the con- 
 viction, that in all probability our revenues for 
 some S or 10 years to come, will increase, as has 
 been usual, and we shall be able to maintain most- 
 ly our tolls at present rates. After 8 or 10 years, 
 competition will be sensibly felt, and compel us 
 to reduce our rates of toll to secure transpoitation 
 
1091 
 
 and sustain our aggregate levenue. In 15 or 20 
 years that competition will become so strong as 
 to force down these rates of toll so strongly and 
 rapidly as to reduce that aggregate of revenue. 
 While yet we .can, we should pay our debts, and 
 prepare for this great and distinctly foreseen com- 
 petition. 
 
 Wi v h these general observations, applicable to 
 the whole subject, I now proceed to examine the 
 projet intioduced by the committee, for the dis- 
 position of this debt. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN then read the following: 
 SKC. 1. Alter paying the expenses of collection, super- 
 intendence and ordinary repairs, [$1,500,000] one million 
 and fire hundred thousand dollars ot the revenues of the 
 State canals shall, in each fiscal year, and at that rate lor 
 a shorter period, commencing on the first day of June, 
 one thousand eight hundred and forty-six, be set apart 
 as a sinking fund, to pay the interest and redeem the prin- 
 cipal of that part of tne S'.ate debt called the canal debt, 
 as it existed at the time aforesaid, and including three 
 hundred thousand dollars then to be borrowed, until the 
 same shall be wholly paid; and the principal and income 
 of the said sinking fund shall be sacredly applied to that 
 purpose. 
 
 The first matter provided for in the section, is 
 the ordinary expenses of the canals. 
 
 The committee thought themselves bound to 
 apply for these repairs of the canal the funds, so 
 far as they are necessary for that purpose. Good 
 faith to the creditors require il good faith to the 
 State, and sound policy in every respect. Then 
 what will be the ordinary repairs of the canal? 
 On this subject there is undoubtedly room for some 
 degree of speculation. But I believe from the ta- 
 bles presented, it will not be very difficult for the 
 Convention to come to a safe conclusion. Table 
 9, page 48 of the Convention Document No. 47, 
 shows the charges for repairs upon all the canals 
 as a system and the aggregate amount of expendi- 
 ture upon them Looking at page 49 and taking 
 their whole course, gentlemen will find that the 
 whole payment upon all the canals, for all sorts 
 of expenses paid upon them, has been over $10, 
 098,370, and the difference between their income 
 and payment is $18,603,155. A general inference 
 from this comparison tolerably safe, would be thai 
 the ordinary expenses upon a system of canals of 
 the kind, would about equal one-third of their en- 
 tire revenues. In the case alluded to, ot all the 
 canals as a system, the rate would be a little high- 
 er. Taking the Erie and Charnplain canals from 
 1826, when they were first brought into operation 
 down to the end of 1845, as it appears by table H 
 p. 47 of the same document, the total paymen 
 for expenses were $8,630,921 and revenues over 
 these payments were $18,964,796 the expenses 
 being between a third and a fourth of the whol 
 income from these canals. In the table, som 
 extraordinary expenses are included, but even af- 
 ter all past improvements, such must be expectec 
 hereafter. In these tables the Convention hav< 
 our large practical results. Taking the expense 
 ot these canals as a system for the last ten years 
 and I find that they have paid in all $5,841,609 
 and that their annual cost might be put at $584, 
 160. I refer the Convention to these tables, as ai 
 fording the best information in our power to ob 
 tain on the subject of these expenses. They spea! 
 truly as to ihe past, and furnish the best ground 
 for judging of the future. [Note A., foot of nex 
 column.] 
 
 I do not like to hazard a calculation on a matter 
 f this sort, at best a mere matter of conjecture. 
 When the canal commissioners who managed the 
 anals in 1825-'26 estimated the expense ot the 
 anals for a series of years to come, they supposed 
 hat about $100,000 per annum would be ample for 
 ine years then to came, but when it came to be 
 ried, it was found that the expenses in some nine 
 ears came to $3 ,000,000. I prefer, uncertain as es- 
 inaates must be, to be guided in this matter, some- 
 vhat by certain results. The repairs last year werea 
 
 ttle larger in amount than usual. In future years 
 re may not be so unlortunate, and we may be 
 more so. And when we come to examine the 
 uestiori as to the capacity of the canals, I believe 
 t will be found that not too much has been set 
 part for these ordinary repairs. Under these 
 ircumstances, allowing for every thing, consider- 
 ng all things that have passed in relation to it, 
 ^collecting that some items which ought to have 
 .een put in here as repairs, have actually got into 
 he funded debt, the committee were not able to;say, 
 hat probably the ordinary expenses of the canal 
 is a svstem, can be less than $600,000 lor each of 
 he ten ensuing years. In some years it would be 
 more, in some less; but tor the general average 
 his is as small a sum as we ought to estimate. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN: I wish to ask the gentleman 
 f that includes all the expenses on the canals? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN: No sir. The heading of 
 he table shows that it includes only what you 
 uust pay to keep the canals in operation, and in- 
 cludes nothing for debt, or interest on stocks. 
 The necessary amount for expenses might be put 
 perhaps at $584,000, if we continue to do for the 
 iext ten years as we have for the past. But $600,- 
 JOO yearly is more probable. The average of 
 $600,000 to which I allude then, is by the plan of 
 inance of the committee entitled to priority over 
 others, and I believe that it is rightfully. We 
 supposed that sum to be about sufficient to cover 
 ordinary expenses. This is not the tune or place 
 :o discuss the question, whether the canals, in 
 their present condition, can perform their duty to 
 ;he public.. I will only say here that before 1 set 
 down, I hope to be able to satisfy every member 
 who will attend to the question, that they are 
 abundantly able to do all the business, and better 
 than they did in LS34-'35, in the condition in 
 which they then were; and that by a proper ex- 
 penditure upon thAn, they may be made equal to 
 any duty which can in all human probability over - 
 take them in the next ten or twenty years. 
 
 I now proceed to consider whether the $1,500,000 
 of tolis proposed to be taken to pay the canal debt, 
 
 [A-] 
 
 Erie and Charnplain Canals table H: pages 46-47. 
 
 $27,695,71825 
 8,630,921 72 
 
 From 1826to 1846 total Revenue, 
 < total Expenses, 
 
 Difference in 20 years, 
 All the Canals as a system table 1 
 Total Revenues, 
 Total Expenses, 
 
 Difference, 
 All the Canals as a system for the 
 
 Total Expenses for 10 year?, 
 Or average of 
 Vide Con. Doc. No. 47. 
 
 $18,964,796 53 
 
 : pages 48 9. 
 $28,701 ,627 64 
 10,098,370 34| 
 
 $18,603,155 69 
 last 10 years, 
 
 $5,841,609 88 
 634,160 98 
 
1092 
 
 is a fit and proper sum. The debt, as I showed 
 the Convention from ihe table B 2, Con. Doc. 
 No. 47 : p. 36, on the first day of June 1846, was 
 $17,516,119,57, the interest up to the lime of pay- 
 ment is $8,379,833, making in the aggregate to 
 the day ot" payment without any extension, $25,. 
 895,957,90, or in round numbers, $26,000,000. 
 
 Tiiis annual sum of a million and a half propo- 
 sed to be set off' as a sinking fund, will pay the 
 debt at about 1864; but it will add to the debt 
 about a million and a half, from its necessary ex- 
 tension beyond the time when it falls due. In no 
 scheme of paying this debt yet brought forward do 
 we get tid of the necessity lor this extra interest. 
 The scheme adopted by the committee comes near- 
 est to doing this so near, that although it can- 
 not at all times pay the debt as portions of it tall 
 due, it does pay the whole within the time at 
 which the lategr portion of it does actually fall 
 due. It becomes then a question for consideration 
 if the debt must be deferred, how long it can safe- 
 ly be deferred, and what will probably be the ex- 
 pense of deferring it, and the interest upon it- On 
 the long loans of the State, when its credit was 
 best, money could be obtained at 5 1-2 per cent. 
 quarterly, and 1 urge attention to this distinction. 
 The Stale has no yearly loan, and you cannot tell 
 precisely what tin: yecirly rales ot interest are, 
 the rates are quarterly, except in the single in- 
 stance of temporary loans tor the general fund, 
 which have been six percent half yearly. Look- 
 ing at the table in general use among the dealers 
 in stocks, 1 find that 5 1 2 percent quarterly, comes 
 witMn ine very smallest possible traction of being 
 .six percent per annum, taking the short time ot 
 'one year, and cannot differ a "very litile from it, 
 taking another year or two. The ternpoiary loans 
 have generally been six percent half yearly, that 
 is something over six per cent yearly. Five and 
 a half per cent quarterly, lias been about your 
 lowest rate, and that is about six per cent per an- 
 num. Endeavoring to come at some rate which 
 might be practical in its operation, I have sup- 
 posed six per cent yearly to be about that rate. 
 Oiher estimates are here, as I presume Irom the 
 printed papers before us, calculating interest al 
 lower rates. 1 believe such a mode to be enurel} 
 deceptive, and that six per cent yearly will be the 
 lowest rate at which the matter can be managed. 
 In paying lai ge sums you must have a sum on hand 
 accumulating to meet the payment while ihe in. 
 teresr is running, both on the payment to be made t 
 and the money you have porvided to make the pay- 
 rneut. If you are obliged to extend the old debt 
 and your sums are large as they are here, you will 
 be obliged to obtain money somewhat before- 
 hand to pay the interest or principal, and if in thu- 
 movement of this matter, your fiscal officers shall 
 be able to keep within Ihe limit of six per cent per 
 annum, they will do well. They will try to obviate 
 the difficulty by purchasing stock at a pietnium. 
 Your creditor has aright to hold till the last hour. 
 For he is dealing with these stocks as a trade, and 
 rightfully. We blame him sometimes tor this, as 
 it the money-lender had not the same right to pur- 
 sue his trade as others have. You are bound to 
 meet him at the time and pluce appointed, and to 
 do so you may have to lose inteiest on your mo- 
 ney he will not on his. I object to the low rates 
 at which the estimates alluded to are computed, 
 
 
 oecause they make no provision tor this loss in the 
 movement, and the quarterly rates. They are made 
 in direct disregaid of what has taken place since 
 we have been here. You have advertised for $300,- 
 000, and looking at the table here, it may be sup- 
 posed that you get it at five per "cent. Not one 
 offer was made at that rate, and the State in 1846, 
 cannot get $300,000 at five per cent, quarterly. 
 You offered six, and it was taken af a small pre- 
 mium of five or six per cent, on eighteen years. 
 In a long period ot eighteen or twenty years, which 
 this debt has to run, the rate of interest may be 
 reduced so it may be increased. Suppose you 
 had to attempt loans now, in the face ot those 
 sought by the Federal government. In some of 
 the plans submitted here, it is proposed to get 
 $12,000,000 or $16,000,000, but suppose you had 
 to get half of that sum in the face ot the Federal 
 government in the market, believe you that you 
 would get it at 5 1-2 per cent, quarterly ? No sir I 
 You may not always be at peace. You may be 
 compelled to make these pa\ merits. Not when 
 struggling with weak, insignificant Mexico. No 
 sir; but when in conflict with France or with 
 Great Britain, it is not safe to suppose that be- 
 cause you choose to run in debt, that the world 
 therefore will choose to be at peace with you. 
 True, you may be at peace if you will yield in ev- 
 ery controversy, but it may not be honoiable, pro- 
 fitable, or in your temper to yield. But gentlemen 
 seem to suppose, out of doors, that it would ba 
 John Bull that would hold our stocks, and that if 
 he goes to war, you would be under no obligation 
 to pay them. Such vile logic, such villanous im- 
 morality, does not exist in fact. If John Bull did 
 hold your stocks, he is not compelled to do it. He 
 c,<n put them in the hand of a neutral, your triend, 
 perhaps the very country where you go to borrow 
 the sinews of war, and who will say to you, pay 
 us this money. The demand would not come Irom 
 the public enemy, but from your friend, a neutral, 
 and he the very one from whom you desire to bor- 
 row to arrn and defend your country. It is not 
 very agreeable to have such a debt; it is rather 
 unpleasant. But we must try some mode of pay- 
 ing this debt, besides repudiation. Now, I have 
 staled the reasons why the committee have adopt- 
 ed no other mode of calculation than six per cent., 
 and I now wish to state the result of that calcula- 
 tion. 1 want to show its mevement and how the 
 thing will practically work at the end of each 
 year -beginning with June, 1846. I have in my 
 hand tables to show the opeiations of all or most 
 of the various sinking funds proposed, calculated 
 in the same manner, as well for the canal debt, as 
 for the general fund debt, (always including the 
 insolvent rail-road debt as now fixed on the 1-reas- 
 ury,) and of the canal and such general fund d< bt 
 united. The sum due as ascertained Irom the ta- 
 bles estimated by the comptroller, as I have read 
 them, for interest and principal due at the end of 
 each fiscal year, is taken as the debt due that year 
 and from it is deducted the sinking fund of that 
 year, showing, as an actual settlement would do, 
 the deficiency of the fund, or its surplus, for that 
 year. If there be a deficiency, interest on it at six 
 per cent, for the coming year is charged and added 
 lo what falls due for pi incipal and interest that 
 vear, as slated in the table; and then the sinking 
 fund for that year is applied in payment arid the 
 
1093 
 
 new balance is struck. But if the sinking lurid 
 over pays the demands of the year, then interesi 
 a 1 six per cent, is calculated on thaf surplus and 
 added to the income of the sinking fund lor the 
 next year. In this manner the process is contin- 
 ued each year until the sum set apart as a sinking 
 fun' I fully pays the whole debt, principal and in- 
 terest in the table, and any balance of extra inter- 
 est which may be caused by the extension of pay- 
 ment. The estimate makes in fact a statement of 
 the balance at the end of each year, showing at 
 once the principal and contract interest united, 
 and the extra interest received or paid each year, 
 until the debt is wholly extinguished by the fund 
 the sum over due or in arrear, the surplus on 
 hand, and the extra interest each year. Here they 
 are, sir, and any gentleman can examine them. 
 Since the committee made some of these state- 
 ments, they have been recalculated by able, faith- 
 ful clerks in the public offices, and are undoubted- 
 ly correct. They show the practical working of 
 the several propositions, and as I may not be able 
 to print them at full length, I must state to you 
 some of the results. 
 
 Take the canal debt if we pay at the rate of 
 $1,500,000 a year, as proposed by the committee, 
 then for the years 1847 and 1855 there will be a 
 surplus in the fund and interest in its favor. For 
 every other year there will be a deficiency in the 
 fund, and of course extra interest againt it. These 
 deficiencies in the fund will in general not be lartje 
 but will in 1856 be $2,249.396 in 1S58, $3,. 
 238,229, and in 1862, $2,444,486 the balance of 
 interest on the^e deficiencies over the interests on 
 the two snrplu.-es will be $1.587,817 49 and the 
 debt will be paid in 18 1-3 years, in 1864. In this 
 mode of paying the canal debt, it will cost (ta- 
 ble B. 2) 
 
 For principal, 
 
 For interest per contract, 
 
 ! or extra interest for extension, 
 
 $17 516,119 57 
 8,379 838 33 
 1,587,817 49 
 
 $27,483,776 89 
 
 Total for canal debt, 
 
 I must here anticipate and state the results of pay- 
 in? $500,000 a year towards the General fund debt, 
 as proposed by the committee.* The fund would 
 in general be able to meet that debt, interest and 
 
 * NOTE- The part of the report of the standing commit- 
 tee which contains the provisions for the General Fund 
 - debt is as follows : 
 
 (j 4. Ot the sum of six hundred and seventy-two thou- 
 sand and five hundred dollars, required by ti e second 
 section ol this article to be paid into the Treasury, [$600,- 
 000] five hundred thousand dollars shall, in each fiscal 
 ye.ir, and at that rate for a shorter period, commencing on 
 the first day of June, one thousand eight hundred and 
 forty-six, be set apart as a sinking fund to pay the inteerst 
 and redeem th<- principal of that pait of the S at^ debt, 
 called the General Fund debt including the. debt foi 
 loans of ;ho State credit to rail road companies which 
 have (iiiled to p.iy the interest thereon, and . Iso the con- 
 tingent .debt on State s'oek 1 - loaned to incorporated com- 
 panies which have hitherto p;id the interest thereon when- 
 evi'i-, and as far as any part thereof may become a charge 
 on the Treasury o 1 General Fund, until the same shall 
 be ^holly paid ; and the principal and income ot th said 
 last mentioned sinking fund shall be sacredly appJi--d to 
 the purpose aforesaid ; and if the payment of ;.ny art of 
 the said fivr huudred thousand doll: rs shall at any time 
 be deferred, by r*anm of the priority recognized in the 
 second section ot this article, the sum so deierr.d, with 
 
 gumt'Tly inteiest thereon, at the then current rate, shall 
 e paid to the last mentioned sinking fund, as soon as the 
 sum so deferred shall be received into the Treasury. 
 
 principal, as it is proposed to be paid in the Comp- 
 troller's fable E. befoie m;de 
 
 The interest on deficiencies of the fund would 
 
 be $214,2-14 23 
 
 And in favor of the fund on its surplus, 197,167 89 
 
 Leaving a balance of interest on deficiencies, 
 of only $ 17,036 34 
 
 showing that there would be some balaces in favor 
 of this fund in the hands of Ihe public officers, 
 with which they could aid the canal sinking tund 
 and the general fund debt would be paid in 
 19 1-3 years, at the cost of 
 
 For principal $5,885,549 24 
 
 For interest as per table 3,803,458 24 
 
 Foi balance of extra interest, ... 17,086 34 
 
 Makingtogether, 
 
 ),7<J6,093 82 
 
 But this supposes that no part of the contin- 
 gent debt will tall on the Treasury. If the sum 
 which I have before stated, as iht? probable one, 
 shall become a charge on the Treasury, then this 
 sum of $'500,000 a year would pay the debt about 
 as soon without that charge as it would be paid, 
 by applying $450,000 a year towards the debt. 
 The latter sum without any increase of the debt, 
 would subject the fund to pay : 
 
 Interest on deficiencies, .. < $1,118,577 84 
 
 And receive interest on surplus,. 20,626 76 
 
 Making a balance of extra inter- 
 est ot, $1,097,951 08 
 
 Add interest and principal as in 
 table E,., 9,689,00748 
 
 Requiring to pay the debt in about 
 
 24 years, or by May, 1870, $10,786,958 56 
 
 If the sinking fund for this debt be reduced to 
 $400,000 a year, it would without any increase 
 from the contingent debt extinguish it in 1878, at 
 a cost for the balance of extra interest of $3,191,- 
 442 83 requiring $12.880,450 31 to extinguish 
 the debt, the principal ot which is now only $5,- 
 835,549 24, and which if promptly paid, will 
 cost onh 9,689,007 48 to pay it. 
 
 Your committee could tut, therefore, recom- 
 mend these slow, expensive modes of paying this 
 part of the public debt I musi, therefore, call 
 attention to the slower and si ill more expensive 
 projects to pay these debts, or rather of non-pay- 
 ment. 
 
 The gentleman from Schoharie, proposes to pay 
 the canal debi by a sinking fund ot $1,275,000 a 
 year. To make his sinking fund, he appears to 
 have taken the one third of the interest when the 
 debt was largest, and to have added it to the in- 
 terest when the debt was least, and reduced by 
 'he 1 te July payments, instead of doing as the 
 acts of 1842 and 1S44 reqmie, that is, adding that 
 third ot the interest of the debt when it was 
 largest, and applying the aggregate in a constant 
 sum every year. Oa his plan of paying the canal 
 debt, there would be no surplus or interest in fa- 
 vor of the fund. There would be a deficiency in 
 each year, and extra interest on it. These defi- 
 ciencies would be large; (or example in the year 
 1849, $3,116.089 j iri'1851, $3,540,321 ; in 1858, 
 87.184.8Sl ; in 1861, $3,246.539, and in 1862 
 $8,411,832. And the aggregate of interest on 
 
1094 
 
 these deficiencies, from January, 1846 to 1872, 
 to which the debt would extend, 
 
 Would he, $6,455,295 37 
 
 Principal of debt, $17,516,119 57 
 Interest from the 
 
 table, 8,379,838 33 
 
 25,895,295 37 
 
 Making the debt cost tor its ul- 
 
 timate payment $32,351,253 27 
 
 He proposes to pay the General Fund and Insol- 
 vent Rail Road debt, fable F., by a sinking fund of 
 $420,000 a year. On this plan the deficiencies of 
 the fund would be almost constant, and in some 
 years quite large, as for example, in 1852, $1,050,- 
 
 The aggregate interest on these deficien- 
 cies would be $ 2,154,166 58 
 And the interest on surplusses, only 7,051, 39 
 
 Causing extra interest to $ 2,147,114 65 
 
 If we add the principal of 
 
 this debt, table E., $5,885,549 24 
 
 Interest by the table, 3,803,458 24 
 
 9,689,007 48 
 
 Requiring to pay this debt in 1874. $11,836,1:22 13 
 
 All the other schemes of payment are, I believe 
 slower, more expensive, and are subject to the ob- 
 jection that they wholly disregard the prior equi- 
 ties of the canal creditors over all others and over 
 the State. These canal creditors have special 
 pledges that can not be violated without great in. 
 justice to them and severe reproach to those who 
 may violate them. As fiscal means to pay the whole 
 canal and general fund debt united, as calculated 
 in the table F., which I have read they may be 
 considered and compared with the plan of the com- 
 mittee.. 
 
 The plan of the committee, if united, would es- 
 tablish a sinking fund of $2,000,000 a year for the 
 whole absolute debt which, according to table F., 
 would be, 
 
 For principal, $23,401,668 81 
 
 Interest as computed in the ta- 
 ble according to contract, $12,183,296 57 
 
 Will be together, $35,584,965 38 
 
 which, for brevity, I will now call the whole debt. 
 On this plan the largest deficiency would be felt 
 in 1S61, of $3,302,335 18, and in 1862, of $3,512,- 
 461 80. It would pay the debt in Dec., 1864, with 
 an addition for interest on defici- 
 encies, of $ 1,583,014 32 
 
 Whole debt, as above, , 35,584,965 38 
 
 Interest on deficiencies, 1,583,014 32 
 
 Necessary to pay the debt on the 
 committee's plan, $37,167,979 70 
 
 Mr. Bouck's plan united proposes to pay the 
 
 whole debt as above, $35,584,965 38 
 
 by a sinking fund of $1,695,000 a 
 year, will leave very large defi- 
 ciencies for many years, and in 
 1862 of $11.600 851 91 redeem 
 the debt in July, 1872, and the ag- 
 gregate of interest for deficiencies 
 will be 8,528,708 47 
 
 Requiring lo pay the debt,..,. $44,113,673 85 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT, of Livingston, proposes to pay 
 the debt of, '$35,584,965' 38 
 
 By a sinking fund of $1 ; 500,UOO, 
 for ten aed a half years, and after 
 that of $2,000,000 which will 
 leave still larger deficiencies and 
 in 1862, amounts to $13,200,953.- 
 85, will extend the debt down to 
 January, 1872, at an aggregate for 
 extra interest of 10,366,479 01 
 
 Requiring to extinguish this debt, $45,951,444 39 
 
 And extending the debt down to January, 
 1872. 
 
 Among the other schemes for not paying this 
 lebt, is one which proposes a sinking fund of 
 $1,500,000, very little exceeding the interest. 
 The deficiencies on this plan will fur three years 
 exceed $15,000,000, and in 1862 will amount to 
 $16,772,117 73. The debt will extend to May, 
 1883, and the aggregate of interest will be, 
 
 $19,441,113 87 
 Adding the debt, 35,584,965 38 
 
 And it will require, $55.026,078 87 
 
 To extinguish it one hundred years after the treaty 
 of peace with Great Britian, at the close ot the 
 Revolution. 
 
 My friend from Allegany, Mr. ANGEL, has pro- 
 posed a sinking fund, I believe, of $1,600,000 a 
 year. This is worse than that of Mr. BOUCK, 
 and only some better than the last, and^could 
 scarcely fail to require the payment of ten mill- 
 ions or more to the debt for extra interest. 
 
 Such, sir, are the comparative results of the 
 several sinking funds proposed for payment, when 
 calculated by the same rule and rate of interest 
 which I believe to be the true one, and most con- 
 formable to what will be found correct in practice. 
 Although our means are great, yf t the payment of 
 our debt will be most expensive. 
 
 You will scarcely get rid of it short of $40,000, - 
 000. I have the detailed results of the plans of 
 others, to show this committee how much worse 
 can be done, than by the prompt payment recom- 
 mended by the standing committee. It is seen 
 that even paying one and a half millions a year 
 towards the canal debt, there will continue to be 
 deficits, in some instances, of two and a quarter 
 millions, and in one instance of more than three 
 millions. How are your public officers to meet 
 these temporary deficits at the end of the year ? 
 So long as they can secure the creditor by tempo- 
 rary advances from the School Fund, the Litera- 
 ture Fund, or any other, with the tolls of the next 
 month, or of the next quarter, so long as the bor- 
 rowing power of the State is maintained, so long 
 will your financial officer be able to get along. 
 But whenever these deficits are larger, you must 
 not only pay the large interests, but you will have 
 to commence a British funding system. If I had 
 time, and temper, and the committee had time to 
 bear'with me, I could show what a curiosity the 
 action of your financial officer would be in the 
 nursing of this debt through eight or ten years of 
 suspension. But I wish to show how much worse 
 this thing can be done. As these deficits are ar- 
 ranged in the plan of the committee, and compa- 
 ratively email as they will be, they will be con- 
 
1095 
 
 trolable by the public officers, and the management 
 of them will be perfectly easy anil safe. But when 
 they come up to four or five, or six, eight, twelve 
 or sixteen millions, it appears to me that it will 
 not be entirely safe. By looking at the dates, the 
 committee will see, that bringing these entirely 
 within the limit of the time for the payment of the 
 debt, the last sum becomes due in 1864. I believe 
 that the plan of the committee will comprise the 
 whole ground by that time and be entirely satis- 
 factory. But if it will not do so, there is yet ano- 
 ther part of the report which defends the faith of 
 the State against the reproach of repudiation. 
 The sixth section provides that if the sinking fund 
 will not respectively preserve the credit of the 
 State, the Legislature shall make them sufficient 
 to do so perfectly by taxes not to be direct, be- 
 cause that might not be just but by any other 
 mode which necessity may make just and proper. 
 There is another part of the subject to which I 
 wish to call attention. The plan of the committee 
 proposes to pay this debt within the time the law 
 of 1842 promises to pay it. The act of 1842, it 
 seems to me. never could be misunderstood. In 
 drawing that act if I had had a doubt, it would 
 have been removed'by clauses however tautologi- 
 cal. All the acts prior to that time, fixed a day 
 when Ihis money is to be paid. I do not ask the 
 rigid exaction of the time, or ask the payment as 
 early as some of the acts required. They pledged 
 your faith, you must keep it inviolate. It became 
 endangered, and your credit sunk in 1842, and you 
 called again upon those who loaned you before to 
 aid you in your difficulty. That act was under- 
 stood here, by the people of this state, by the 
 creditor, that you would pay them in twenty-two 
 and a half years. Nn one doubted it, and it was 
 in the faith of that promise that you obtained ored 
 it for four < *r five millions of dollars, and were 
 secured from a social bankruptcy, and your cred 
 it was restored. And if you do not pay when you 
 promised, your course is as unjustifiable, as if you 
 obtained money by false pretences. Again, if tha 
 act was in itself in any degree doubtful, it was no 
 long left so. The finance act of 1844, approve 
 by the then Governor, and passed by the two 
 branches of the Legislature, receiving a decidei 
 majority, gave a construction to the act of 1842 
 and expresses in strong, plain terms, that the ac 
 of 1842 engages to pay in twenty-two and a hal 
 years. On that act you obtained $900,000 it wa 
 renewing your engagements to your creditors. 
 You said to them, the former act intends that thos 
 who loaned us money should be paid in twenty 
 two and a half years from the passage of the act o 
 1842 and we will pay you the amount borrowe 
 under this act in eighteen years. This was th 
 act of 1844, approved by the then administration 
 and by the country. In the report of the Commis 
 sionersof the canal fund for 1846, will be found 
 computation upon the sinking fund on the act o 
 1842. It supposes the funded sum every year t 
 be made equal to the production of six per ceni 
 It carries out the scheme of a sinking fund, an 
 pays the debt in twenty-two and a half years, an 
 is made out precisely in accordance with the act 
 of '42 and -'44. In the same report, page 9, is 
 sinking fund constructed under she act of '44, fo 
 
 the payment of tl.e $900,000 in eighteen years 
 
 The same period for payment is taken by the stand 
 ing committee, and these two funds are supplie 
 as nearly as can be. It pays the debt with the leas 
 possible extra interest, and therefore makes th 
 least burthen upon the finances of the State, 
 does another thing; the act of '44 imposes a tax 
 one-tenth of a mill or $56,000 a year, and pledge 
 so far the payment of the interest on the $900,00 
 
 >an, and declares that it shall continue to operate 
 i favor of that class of creditors, until the surplus 
 f the tolls shall make the requisite sinking fund 
 >r its discharge in the 18 years specified in the 
 ct. If we take the sinking fund as proposed by 
 le standing committee, in connexion with the 
 :h section, it will liberate in effect the $56,000 of 
 irect taxes that are now paid towards the canals, 
 ut if you make the sum less, you must either vi- 
 late this sacred, direct and specific pledge, or else 
 ou must leave this tax to operate in favor of the 
 anal debt. You will not say, we approve of the 
 romises, we have got the money, and we turn 
 ou over such security as we think right. The 
 reditor must have what you agreed to give him 
 e must have the canal tolls, or direct taxes to the 
 mount agreed on, and these tolls when they come 
 
 'Mr. ANGEL ; What was this $900,000 for ? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN ; To pay arrearages and un- 
 arned profits to canal contractors, and land dama- 
 es. Instead of being $900,000 I believe it should 
 lave been more, $1,200,000, because during the 
 ast session, the legislature authorized a new loan 
 f $300,000, paying 6 per cent, interest for it, and 
 ot 5 as is supposed in the table. Now I appeal to 
 gentlemen here when they recollect the condition 
 )f the State credit in 1842, and the relief obtained 
 nder the act of that year, the sense in which it 
 was known to be received and understood here by 
 he creditor and all who supported and opposed it. 
 The construction given to it by the act of '44, the 
 cans obtained under that act, the direct tax under 
 t, operating now in favor of the canal debt, and the 
 pecific loans for the canals, with the approbation 
 )f the then government and those who represent- 
 ed the State sovereignty, whether the standing 
 committee could with any propriety have recom- 
 mended a less sum to be applied to the payment of 
 he canal debt. 
 
 I have no desire to make a stalking horse of the 
 public faith, but I wish to bring before the com- 
 nittee, what is meant by a breach of public faith. 
 In a moral point of view, and in its numerous con- 
 sequences, it is in relation to the sovereign body 
 precisely what wilful and corrupt perjury is to the 
 ndividual man. It is the maximum of human guilt. 
 [t may be committed by contracting debt, for 
 which the sovereign makes no adequate provis- 
 ion. In other states, it has been so committed, and 
 perhaps we came too near it to leave us any great 
 cause lor exultation in this State. But it may be 
 committed in a worse, and if possible in a more 
 lisreputable and guilty manner. When the sov- 
 ereign has contracted a debt, wise or foolish, if \ve 
 have the means to pay it, if instead of paying it, 
 we will take those means for our own convenience 
 or in any other way, it is the worst and most cor- 
 rupt manner of producing a breach of the public 
 faith. I believe this has been the usual mode 
 among sovereigns, personal or social, because I 
 apprehend that not a single one of the embarrass- 
 ed states of the Union could have reached their 
 situation of debt and difficulty, without foreseeing 
 their danger, being warned of it, and that the day 
 must come when the debt would exist, and there 
 would be no means for its payment: Nor one 
 which by an application of the means in its pow- 
 er, might not have wholly provided for its debt. 
 We were on the very verge of this condition. If 
 you will take your revenues and apply them in 
 payment, make it as rapidly as you engaged to do, 
 and keep your promises fully, you will do some- 
 thing to redeem representative government from 
 the reproach of repudiation. But if you will lag 
 behind, if to pension this locality or that, to re- 
 ward followers, or to get a numerical majority 
 
1096 
 
 here or there you will apply these revenues to 
 new or old works, you will designedly destroy, by 
 disregarding the rights of your creditors. Their 
 just claims must first be provided for. If under any 
 pretences for better or for worse, you will take 
 these revenues to answer any of your own purpo- 
 ses, instead of giving them to the creditor, then I 
 submit that in the eye of heaven, and in the judg- 
 ment of the whole earth, you have repudiated anil 
 incurred a breach of faith in the most deliberate, 
 most corrupt, and in the worst manner. The stand- 
 ing committee have asked you only to pay accord- 
 ing to the lightest rule of your own engagement. 
 Not only did the government in ? 42 and '44 make 
 these promises, but I submit that the government 
 in '38 did the same. It was then supposed that 
 these debts would reach the large sum of $40,000,- 
 000 they did reach $28/>00,OOU. The revenues 
 have been as great as they were then calculated or 
 expected. You have no apology for non payment 
 on that score, and you have put forth to the whole 
 country, to the creditors, to the people of the State 
 and to the world, that these revenues would pay 
 the debt, in the very period, in which the stand- 
 ing committee have required it to be done. Here 
 is the sinking fund table as found in the Assembly 
 document No. 242. of 1838. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN exhibited and read from that 
 table, calculated by Mr. Ruggles for the purpose 
 of showing the progress of the sinking fund form- 
 ed from the surplus revenues of the canals, com- 
 mencing in 1838, and amounting in 1865 to more 
 than $40,000,000 ; and extinguishing the debt of 
 that amount which he alledged might be safely 
 created for internal improvements, on the assu- 
 rance of its being paid in that manner. 
 
 It was then said that these revenues would pay 
 the debt without a resort to taxation. The debt 
 has not been so large as was expected, by many 
 millions, and yet they have not done it. It may 
 be said that the gentlemen who then administered 
 the government here were not cur political friends, 
 that we were not bound by those engagements, 
 and I am afraid that even political friends have re- 
 pudiated the engagements of their predecessors in 
 office. Whoever occupies these places as the rep- 
 resentatives of the government of the State, speaks 
 for the people as the sovereignty of the State. If 
 they hold out promises of this kind, they are the 
 promises of the sovereignty, and it is in vain to 
 say that they are political friends or opponents 
 If they act within their constitutional limits, 
 they are the sacred inviolable word of the sover- 
 eign ; and accursed be that person, who finding 
 himself under an obligation of this kind, should 
 renounce it, or hesitate to the extent of the means 
 in his power, to meet the sacred engagements of 
 the sovereign body. They did make these prom- 
 ises in 1838, to redeem the dent in the time, and al- 
 most the total of our debt was contracted on the 
 faith of those promises the revenues have been 
 as ample as was expected the debt upon us is 
 some 17^ millions of dollars, and the standing com- 
 mittee ask yo to pay it within the time you pledg- 
 ed and engaged yourselves it should be paid. Will 
 you hesitate, will you doubt ? You said in 1842, 
 you would pay it you said it, because whoever 
 
 stood here then spoke for you, you said it again 
 in '44 you had said it in '38, and you said it with 
 more distinctness and emphasis, in the progress of 
 this debt each time you borrowed. Do I say too 
 much then, when I say, that not to secure these 
 funds, and pay as far as you are able, is to commit 
 a wilful and deliberate breach of trust ? I will say 
 that if this convention should do it, I may be obli- 
 ged to keep silent while I remain here, but not 
 even this convention or any other on earth with- 
 out these walls shall hinder me from expressing 
 my utter detestation of such a course. I will hold 
 it to be a breach of public faith, to be the perjury 
 of the State, and I will apply it to the conscience 
 of every individual man. I will not be deterred 
 from doing it, for I know what has been the con- 
 sequence of speaking and acting lightly in matters 
 of this kind. It has brought social bankruptcy on 
 other States. 
 
 While in this convention, I will submit to its ac- 
 tion, but I will hold to my right as a citizen of the 
 State, to express freely my convictions upon this or any 
 other subject, in or out of this body. I can look 
 around here on some gentlemen who I supposed 
 would, under any circumstances, have stood by me, 
 and perhaps they will stand by me yet. I was about 
 to address an argument tq them on the subject, but I 
 will wait until the issue is made. 
 
 The committee have proposed that you keep your 
 faith that you be not guilty of a breach of public 
 trust that you do not engage in a course which shall 
 protract ihis debt, endanger Us eventual payment, and 
 encumber the people with interest and taxes. Do we 
 desire in order to pay this sum to take the most expen- 
 sive scheme ? Are we so greedy to get a dollar to spend 
 to-morrow is it so necessary to pension dependents, 
 reward followers, and purchase numerical major- 
 ities, that we will allow this extra interest of ten mill- 
 io >s to become a burthen upon I e public works? I 
 believe there are some other schemes one to pay this 
 debt by applying to the joint debt $1,500,000 per an- 
 num. This is a joint stock concern, and its deficits 
 are abundantly large. I shall content myself with 
 saying, that they setup to 15, 16, 13 and 12 millions. 
 These are the deficits to be from time to time provi- 
 ded, and the extra interest on them amounts to $19,- 
 451,113,49. This enormous s-um is to be paid to get 
 money to spend, because in all these calculations the 
 same debt is eventually to be paid, and the revenue 
 for the same time would be the same. By paying 
 these large deficits you get a few six-pencesto spend, 
 instead of getting the debt out of the way and having 
 large dollars to spend. That is the effect of it. I 
 have compared some of these schemes with one 
 another, and intended, although I am not very able 
 to do it, to read them now, and to bring them in con- 
 trast more fully than I have done. Gentlemen at their 
 leisure can compare for themse ves. They will pur- 
 chase a delay by these several propositions; and if 
 they think the people of the State ought to make such 
 a purchase let them say so. I believe they ought not 
 and that we ought to resist any attempt at such a pur- 
 chase. 
 
 Painful as it must be, I must read you an abstract 
 of the statements showing the practical workings of 
 these various schemes of payment : 
 
1097 
 
 In each year. 
 
 Sinking Fund. 
 $1.500,000 
 36years and 9 months 
 
 Sinking Fund. 
 10 1-12 yrs 1.500, 01 K) 
 15.12,000,000 
 
 Sinking Fund. 
 $1, 695, 000 
 
 Sinking Fund. 
 $2,000,000 
 
 
 36 years 9 months. 
 
 Ayrault. 
 25 years & 7 months. 
 
 Bouck united. 
 26 years & 1 month. 
 
 Committee united. 
 18 years & 7 months. 
 
 1846 
 
 Deficiencies 
 526,260 56 
 
 Deficiencies 
 
 526,260 56 
 
 Deficiencies 
 461,260 50 
 
 Deficiencies 
 359,593,90 
 
 1847 .... 
 
 330,316 75 
 
 330,316 75 
 
 66,416 75 
 
 *346,349,90 
 
 1848 
 
 ]:-!'. 
 
 2,025,166 25 
 3,887,782 92 
 
 2,025,166 25 
 3,887,7H2 92 
 
 1, 550, 432 26 
 3,189,564 89 
 
 807,899,61 
 2,097,480 28 
 
 ISf.O 
 
 1851 
 
 4,033,584 75 
 5,434,064 68 
 
 4,033,584 75 
 5,434,661 G8 
 
 3,098,473 64 
 4,248,446 90 
 
 1,635,863 95 
 2,393,080 63 
 
 1852 
 
 5,590,641 96 
 
 5,590,641 96 
 
 4,138,251 11 
 
 1,866,562 87 
 
 
 1854 .... 
 
 5,260,957 88 
 5,423,242 75 
 
 5,260,957 88 
 5,423,242 ~5 
 
 3,526,423 58 
 3,389,636 40 
 
 813,434 04 
 208,867 47 
 
 1855 
 
 5,052,514 72 
 
 5,052,514 72 
 
 2,701,891 98 
 
 *974,723 08 
 
 185(3 
 
 9, 157,438 59 
 
 9,098,500 63 
 
 6,470,778 49 
 
 2,268,566 53 
 
 1857 
 
 8,777,723 21 
 
 8,215,248 97 
 
 5,734,863 50 
 
 975,518 82 
 
 1858 
 
 11,495,597 67 
 
 10,399,374 98 
 
 8,075,166 38 
 
 2,725,261 02 
 
 1859 ...... 
 
 11,345,991 56 
 
 9,683,995 51 
 
 7,525,334 39 
 
 1,549,434 71 
 
 I860 
 
 12,203,737 58 
 
 9,942,021 77 
 
 7,958,840 98 
 
 1,319,387 33 
 
 1861 
 
 15,339,746 44 
 
 12,442,327 69 
 
 10,645,156 05 
 
 3,302,335 18 
 
 1862 
 1863 .... 
 
 16,772,117 73 
 16 307,931 29 
 
 13,200,953 85 
 12,022, -197 58 
 
 11,600,851 91 
 10,631,389 52 
 
 3,512,461 80 
 1,752,696 01 
 
 1864 
 
 16,393,350 42 
 
 11,350,790 08 
 
 10,181,216 14 
 
 464,801 02) 
 
 1865 
 
 15,906,491 45 
 
 10,061,378 J2 
 
 9,126,629 11 
 
 1,313 01 -f 
 
 1866 
 1867 
 1868 
 
 15,360,880 94 
 14,782,533 80 
 14,169,485 83 
 
 8,665,060 81 
 7, 184,964 46 
 5,616,062 33 
 
 7,979,226 85 
 6,762,980 40 
 5,473,759 28 
 
 on 31 Dec. 1864 ) 
 
 1869 .... 
 
 13,519,654 98 
 
 3,953,026 07 
 
 4,107,184 84 
 
 
 
 1870 
 
 12,830,834 28 
 
 2,190,207 63 
 
 2,658,615 92 
 
 
 1871 .. 
 
 12,100,681 34 
 
 321,620 0!) 
 
 1,123,132 88 
 
 
 1872 
 
 11,326,725 40 
 
 on 1 Jan. 1872 > 
 
 Surp. 97, 576 15 ? 
 
 
 1873 
 
 10,506,328 92 
 
 Surp. 173,555 61 $ 
 
 on 1 July 1872 \ 
 
 
 1874 
 
 9,636,708 66 
 
 
 
 
 1875 
 
 8 714 911 18 
 
 
 
 
 1876 
 
 7,737,805 85 
 
 
 
 
 1877 
 
 6 702 074 20 
 
 
 
 
 1878 
 
 5,604, 198 65 
 
 
 
 "Surplus. 
 
 1879 
 
 4,440,450 57 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 206 877 60 
 
 
 
 
 1881 ... 
 
 1 899 290 26 
 
 
 
 
 1882 
 1 Mar. 1883 
 
 513,247 68 
 Surp. 98,921 13 
 
 
 
 
 
 35, 584 965 3t 
 
 4 35, 584, 965 36 
 
 35, 584, 965 38 
 
 35 5y4 965 38 
 
 Int. on deiicicnc 
 
 19,441,113 4J 
 
 > 10,366,479 01 
 
 8,528,708 47 
 
 1,583,014 32 
 
 
 $55,026,078 8 r 
 
 = 
 
 ' $15,951,444 39 
 
 $44,113,673 85 
 
 $37,167,979 70 
 
 Worse than the plan of the committee to the amount of 
 I $17,858,099 17 | $8,783,464 69 
 
 $6,945,694 15 
 
 NOTE. $1,400,000 and 400,000 is worse thau the committee by $4,876,687.99. 
 Vide B2, Con. Doc. No. 471,400,000 for time and particulars. 
 
 [The amount of debt to be paid is $35,584,965.38. The 1st column in the preceding tahle shows the de- 
 ficiencies there would be in each year, in paying the debt as it. falls due, if a sinking fund of only $1,500,000 
 was annually set apart for the payment of principal and intcrtst. The 2d column shows the deficiencies on a 
 sinking fund of a million and a half for ten years, and two millions thereafter, as proposed by Mr. Ayrault. 
 The 3d column shows the annual deficiencies on a sinking fund of $1,695,000, as proposed by Gov. Bouck. 
 The 4th column shows the operation of the plan of the committee. In paying the debt whh a sinking fund of 
 $1,500,000, the interest on the deficiencies would be, as shown at the foot of the h'rst column, $19,441,113 49 
 Interest on deficiencies in Mr. Ayrault's plan, 10,366,479 01 
 
 Gov. Eouck'splan, 8,528', 708 47 
 
 plan of committee 1,583.014 32] 
 
 \\ill the Convention, could they ask this stand- 
 ing committee with any regard to the duty of the 
 State, to adopt any less sum than the one they 
 have recommended'? It pays the debt within the 
 period for which its faith was pledged, and reduces 
 the delicits to a sum so small, that they can be 
 managed with safety.. It observes good faith to the 
 creditor and saves the citizens from the expenses 
 
 112 
 
 01 millions. And if the standing committee could 
 not in the sight of man bo justified in recommend- 
 ing a less sum, how will you, who are here as a 
 committee of the Convention, desire to make your- 
 selves equal to what the standing committee were 
 morally forbidden to do. I hope 1 have sufficiently 
 vindicated the position of the committee in saying 
 that $1,500,000 of the canal fund revenues should 
 
1098 
 
 be taken in each year to pay the debt until it is 
 paid. I do not pretend that the argument on the 
 subject is finished. It is not difficult to turn to 
 other passages in history that would come as the 
 scourge of Nemesis to the hands of any one who 
 wished to inflict it. Perhaps in the progres of the 
 debate this matter may be more distinctly brought 
 to the view of the Convention and the country. I 
 believe I have explained the only clause in the sec- 
 tion that could need it. 
 
 The next question in order, is what is justly and 
 fairly due from the canals as a system, to the State'? 
 For in my opinion the State has a right to a return 
 of what advances it has made, with the fair and 
 usual mercantile profit upon them for the risk fairly 
 estimated for engaging in the work. Beyond that 
 it has no right, in my judgment, and if it had, it has 
 lost it by the unhappy manner in which the account 
 for the advances of the State to these canals has 
 been kept. To that extent I go ; and I leave it to 
 gentlemen when they come to view the subject, to 
 say whether they can with propriety resist the 
 claims of the State against the canals to that extent. 
 It will be seen that the standing committee do not 
 intend that the canals must pay the rail-road 
 debt, the general fund debt, or any thing of the 
 kind. They put the question distinctly to the 
 Convention, what is the fair sum which is due 
 to the State for advances to the canals as a sys- 
 tem, and for the risk of the State for engag- 
 ing in their construction. How shall that account 
 be taken, and when ascertained 1 What annuity 
 shall the canals settle upon the State in liquidation 
 of those claims'? Neither in form or!in substance do 
 I accede to the doctrine that the canal tolls shall be 
 taken for general purposes. I deny it. The right 
 of way, I insist, is the right of the million; the sove- 
 reign holds it in trust, and can exercise it only for 
 their benefit, and has no right to make a revenue 
 out of it. This is my opinion. What are the fair 
 actual advances made by the State 1 Now I say that 
 any sum of money which has gone into the Canal 
 fund, and which does not proceed directly from the 
 canal revenues, tolls or water rents, is an advance 
 by the trustee having them in charge, and should 
 justly be repaid, and with the proper interest. This 
 is the position I assume, and 1 beg leave to call the 
 attention of the Convention to the sum, and to ex- 
 plain the manner in which the result is obtained. 
 The first item of these advances, as stated in table 
 C, page 44, Con. Doc. No. 47, is the Salt duty. 
 The Salt Springs were the property of the State, 
 and the duties from salt were devoted to the Canal 
 System in 1817; and before their restoration to the 
 Treasury, amounted to $2,055,458.08. A question 
 has arisen whether this is a fair charge, and I admit 
 that sophistry has exercised its ingenuity to show 
 that it is not. It is said that the canals have largely 
 increased the salt tax. Be that so. The salt 
 transportation has largely increased the canal tolls ; 
 but because it has, is that any reason why the salt 
 boiler should claim that part of the canal tolls'? No 
 sir. And on the other hand, because the canals 
 may have increased the salt tax, by extending the 
 trade, that is no reason why the salt tax should 
 belong to the canals. I submit that this infinit- 
 esimal mode of financiering, by which these two re- 
 rsouces assert claims on each other, which are ca- 
 epabl neither of computation xor of collection, is 
 absurd, and practically impossible. The State was 
 
 entitled to the salt tax, for it was the tax of the 
 State. The canals may have increased it, so the 
 salt manufacturer may have increased the canal 
 tolls, but neither has a just claim against the other. 
 However much the transportation of salt has in- 
 creased the tolls, those belong to the canals. And 
 however much the sale of salt has been extended by 
 the canals, the salt tax belongs to the State. Sir, 
 good faith is a jewel, and I advise the canals not to 
 act like a fraudulent bankrupt and repudiate the 
 debt. Good faith is a jewel, at any rate bad faith 
 is vile any where. In 1817, when about to enter 
 upon the construction of the canals, the committee 
 of ways and means of the Assembly addressed them- 
 selves directly to Mr. Clinton, then chairman or 
 president of the Board of Internal Improvements or 
 Navigation, on the subject of a finance system for 
 the canals. That gentleman gave them advice on 
 this subject, that this salt tax, this auction tax and 
 the like, should be taken from the State, and given 
 to the Canal fund, and that advice was adopted. He 
 promised that in due season, and in a short period, 
 the salt and auction tax should be restored to the 
 State by the canal tolls. Sir, that great man is no 
 more among us, but did he believe, when he made 
 this engagement, that after all he predicted has ta- 
 ken place, there would be a human being on earth 
 who would come forward and say that what he pro- 
 mised, should not be performed'? No sir. Let no such 
 thing be believed. You did promise to the people 
 who assented to that law, the restitution of those 
 funds, and this was distinctly one of the reasons 
 why they went for that bill. Good faith is a jewel, 
 let us abide by our word : We said that these taxes 
 should be restored let it be done. In 1S25, when 
 the canals were completed, the gentleman from 
 Dutchess (Mr. TALLMADGE) was one of the Fund 
 Commissioners, as Lieut. Governor of the State' 
 and so was the present Secretary of War. These 
 commissioners took up this very subject, discussed 
 it, and then renewed in the strongest and most di- 
 rect terms, the engagements of 1817. They pro- 
 mised the restoration of these taxes. In 1830, this 
 subject came before the Canal Board, a computa- 
 tion was then made of these arrearages, the claim 
 of the State was distinctly asserted and maintained, 
 that in fairness and fact the salt tax should he re- 
 stored and that the interest on it be compounded. 
 They estimated the very items down to that time 
 and compounded the interest on them at the rates 
 now charged. In 1838, the ground was maintained 
 in full force, and it was asserted that the) general 
 fund existed in the canal revenues, it was the doc- 
 trine upon which the then administration continued 
 to act. I wish then to know whether, while the 
 people look to this as a source of income to free them 
 from direct taxes, it is honorable or honest to con- 
 tend that the salt tax or the auction tax ought not 
 to be restored 1 I deny the moral right of this Con- 
 vention to repudiate these promises upon which all 
 men have relied. In my judgment, therefore, the 
 Salt tax and the Auction tax, with the interest on 
 them fairly compounded, is a just charge against 
 the Canal. So with the land sales. I know that 
 some of these lands were given by private donation 
 to the canals, and to the amount of $32,240, they 
 ought to have been allowed in this account. But 
 even this had been more than made up to the ca- 
 nals. The preliminary surveys of them were paid 
 by the State to the amount 'of $42,957, that is 
 
1099 
 
 10,717 more than the donations to the Canal fund 
 Lands have also been given by the State from tin 
 general fund to the Oswcgo canal, the sales o 
 which brought $2 1*1,087. So that the land sales art 
 in fact charged at $223.804 less than they ought tc 
 have been. As to the other items in this account 
 no honest man who is willing to pay for money bor 
 rowed in an emergency can hesitate about them 
 Credit for all the canals has paid has been given 
 The items charged will be found in Con. Doc. No 
 17. p. 44, tablcG . 
 
 For the salt tax $2,055,458 06 
 
 the auction tax 3,592,039 05 
 
 the land sales 103,755 18 
 
 the steam-boat tax 73,509 99 
 
 money paid for lateral canals 1,386,498 88 
 mill tax 280,563 58 
 
 $7,491,824 7 
 
 If simple interest at 5 per cent be 
 calculated, deducting from time to 
 time the sums refunded by the ca- 
 nals, there will be added for interest 3,796,973 9, 
 
 Making due the Stale $11, 278,798 7^ 
 
 But if the same deductions be made 
 and the interest be compounded at 5 
 cent yearly there will be due to the 
 
 State $13,451,167 7 
 
 as the proper basis of the State annuity and at 5 
 per cent on this sum the annuity would be $672, 
 558 38 or in round numbers $672,500. 
 The argument used by the Canal board in 1830, in 
 favor of the items and the mode of computing inte 
 rest, appears to uie conclusive. If these taxes had not 
 gone to the Canal fund, money must have been bor 
 rowed instead of them, and the rates of interest 
 would have been calculated at 5 or 6 percent quar- 
 terly, and that compounded quarterly in effect, and 
 not as has been done here, compounded yearly at 
 5 per cent only. As the State paid quarterly inte- 
 rest to supply the deficit caused by the diversion of 
 those revenues, it is right to compute the interest 
 compounded yearly. It could not force a settlement; 
 it could only compound interest for delay. I insist 
 that the account made out is fair and ought to be 
 allowed. The same principle has been recognized 
 in this matter from the beginningin 1817, in 1SLT), 
 in 1830, in 1835, and in 183H." Therefore in cal- 
 culating the annuity due to the General Fund, the 
 committee have concluded that in round numbers 
 $672,500, is about the just annuity against the ca- 
 nals.* Not that the canals should pay the State 
 debt or the rail-road debt, but that they should pay 
 
 * The section of the report of the standing commit- 
 tee which proposed this settlement is as follows: 
 
 2. In liquidation of the State claims for advances 
 to, and payments for, the canals, [$673,5tiQJ. six hun- 
 dred and seventy two thousand and live huinirer] 
 dollars of the revenues of the said canal- 
 forever, in each fiscal year, and at that rate for a 
 shorter period, commencing on the fim day of June, 
 one thousand eight hundred and forty-six, be paid in- 
 to the Treasury for the use of the State ; and if the 
 payment of that sum, or any pan thereof, shall be de- 
 layed by reason of the priority established in the pre- 
 ceding section, the amount so delayed, with quarterly 
 interest thereon, at the then current rate, shall he 
 so paid out of the said revenues as soon as can be 
 done consistently with such priority. 
 
 their legitimate debt to the State. Pay that, and so 
 far as the committee is concerned, all that is asked 
 is done. 
 
 There is no reason why the claim should be re- 
 duced, but several why it might very justly be in- 
 creased, both as to the items and the rate ofinterest 
 on them. On long loans the State usually paid 5 
 per cent quarterly, which is nearly equal to 6 per 
 cent yearly and on short loans it usually paid 6 
 per cont half yearly. The diversion of these reve- 
 nues to the canals, obliged the State to borrow equi- 
 valent sums at 6 per cent half yearly and in no 
 way could these monies have been borrowed for the 
 canals at less than 5| per cent quarterly in effect 
 by new loans compounding the interest. These 
 revenues too gave its best credit to the canal fund 
 and enabled it to obtain credit on the most favora- 
 ble terms. In many cases too, items fairly charge- 
 able to the canals have been omitted. And I de- 
 sire to call the attention of the committee to the fact 
 that in the legislative efforts to increase the canal 
 revenues by bounty, the General fund has been de- 
 prived, up to the 30th of September last, of $377,- 
 180, collected for that fund by direct taxation ; and 
 that from time to time special appropriations for ca- 
 nal purposes, in the whole amounting to about 
 $130,281, have been paid by the General fund for 
 the canals which have never been charged against 
 them. 
 
 A few days since the gentleman from Ontario, (Mr. 
 Worden,) supposed that the Legislature had always 
 acted ve y properly, and I ask him whether, in the par- 
 ticular instance to which I am about to allude, there 
 was any propriety in their conduct. Direct taxes 
 were provided by act of 1812, for the General Fund, 
 and the. Legislature in 1843 found it more convenient 
 to fornjre on the act of 18-12, and eet $300,000 to pay 
 canal eonirictors, lhan to levy it in any other way. 
 While the General Fund was increasing, although it 
 had direct taxes: to aid it, the Legislature passed an 
 act with one of those exquisiiely moral titles, which so 
 clearly express the intention of the act. It was de- 
 scribed as ;t proposition ''for improving the revenues 
 of the Srai.e." Now as to the manner of improvement. 
 While the General Fund debt was aecumulating,while 
 the treasury was being replenished by direct taxes, the 
 Legislature directed n bounty to be paid on salt, coal, 
 gypsum, and I believe empty barrels transported on the 
 ;aiial, nut of the Gene. ml Fund, Ho contribute to which 
 he people, were every day paying direct t^xes, and un- 
 I'T that law the ,377,281 which the people had paid 
 nto the treasury by direct taxes, ha gone as a bounty 
 <> ihe general transportation on the canal. If this did 
 mprove 'ho revenues of the fjtnte, then 1 submit that 
 Jus money ought to be charged to the canals, asaidgiv- 
 MI by direct taxation to them. The purport of the act 
 was to ta.ko it out of tlio salt, tax, but in effect, in sub- 
 ;i:uiff, it. was taken out of direct taxes. If all that 
 VHS fair arid honest, { say nothing against it except that 
 t is fair to charge it ntrainst. the Canal Fund, and just 
 is fair as any of the other canal charges, for it did in- 
 iras.- the canal revenues. The State lost nothing if 
 t troes to pay thedebl, perhaps it makes now part of the 
 upposed .surplus, hut J have not been able, with the 
 riost iiheral views, to believe such a course to be coti- 
 istent with good morals, either public or private. 
 
 Mr. Worden When was that law passed? 
 
 Mr. Hoffmsui In 1843. I believe the gentleman hrul 
 10 part in that law. 1 do not know that he ever voted 
 ;>r any act " to improve the revenues of the State." I 
 elieve he has for several to increase the debt. But [ 
 ave, on this occasion, hoped that he would vote with 
 ie to try and get the debt paid. 
 
 f have no doubt that certainly half a million and more 
 light be justly charged, If these items were taken 
 
1100 
 
 into the account, and the same rate of interest which 
 the State has paid, and the canals must have paid, if 
 the money had been borrowed directly from them were 
 calculated, the basis of the annuity would have been 
 enlarged a million or more. I do not desire to increase 
 the amount ; but there are strong reasons why it should 
 not be diminished. 
 
 1 do not stop to inquire whether the canals can pay 
 these sums or not ; they are just debts, and should be 
 paid if possible. If they are deferred, then, it is pro- 
 vided in the second section that the canals shall pay 
 quarterly interests at the then current rates. I sup- 
 pose that it will be said that the canals will not be able 
 to pay these sums of money. Does any gentleman 
 suppose that any larger expenditure upon them will 
 be required than what the committee have authorized 
 if they cannot pay ? If they will not pay what is al- 
 ready chargeable upon them, then I apprehend no fur- 
 ther expenditure will be made upon them than is ne- 
 cessary to keep them in a useful condition. But if 
 they can pay, I wish to know whether you will leave 
 them not to pay the State, and say to the Legislature, 
 you shall tax the constituent body to pay the debt and 
 State expenses, because we will not take from the ca- 
 nals what is due from them to the State? For in one 
 way or the other the State debts and the State current 
 t xpenses must be met. If the canals should unfortu- 
 nately prove insufficient to meet these charges, they 
 will be deferred, and when the tolls are sufficient to 
 pay them they will be paid to the State. That is the 
 provision of the second section, and if either of those 
 sinking funds prove insufficient, then the taxing power 
 of the State is to be brought into requisition to make 
 them sufficient, and any such sum so advanced is to be 
 reimbursed out of the canal tolls, if ever these are ade- 
 quate. 
 
 It will be seen that so far I have not argued the ques- 
 tion upon the ground that the canals can do this, but 
 solely on the ground that it is their duty to pay. This 
 enables me to close all the observations I have felt it 
 my duty to make on this part of the subject. 
 
 I now come to the consideration of the 3d section of 
 this plan, and it involves very serious questions, and 
 on which perhaps I shall be obliged to occupy conside- 
 rable time. 
 
 Mr. Hoffman here read the following : 
 
 SEC. 3. The surplus of the revenues of the canals, 
 after paying the said expenses of the canals and the 
 sums appropriated by the two preceding sections, shall 
 in each fiscal year be applied to the improvement of the 
 Erie canal, in such uianner as may be directed by law, 
 until such surplus shall amount in the aggregate to the 
 sum of [$2,500,000] two millions and five hundred 
 thousanddollars. 
 
 The charges now proposed to be fixed on the canal 
 revenues, say, 
 
 For ordinary expenses, $600,000 
 
 For the canal debt, 1,500,000 
 
 For the State annuity in liquidation of past 
 
 advances, G72,500 
 
 Making together a yearly charge of $2.772.500 
 
 Will there be any surplus of canal revenues ''. This 
 raises the question as to what are and what have been 
 the canal revenues, and what will they probably be for 
 a course of years to come what capacity has the ca- 
 nals, and how far this sum of $2,500,000 may be ren- 
 dered necessary to add to the capacity of the canals. I 
 could write a book upon such a subject, and find a dif- 
 ficulty to compress my remarks upon it. I ought, be- 
 
 fore I proceed, to call attention to the difficulty which 
 lies in the matter, and which to some seems not to 
 have occurred with reference to the several laws autho- 
 rizing the State debt. I find that in general the canal 
 creditors have had both general and specific liens upon 
 the canal fund. All of them, so far as 1 can recollect, 
 and I believe every one of them, unless it may be for 
 the last $300,000 debt, are entitled to a priority in this 
 fund over the State or any other creditor. This is a 
 reason why none of these joint stock projects for pay- 
 ing off this debt can be carried into effect. You must 
 cteate two sinking funds, and give the canal debt pri- 
 ority, and take the residue to pay the State the claim 
 of which must be regarded as subordinate. In draw- 
 ing up estimates of the joint operation of any one of 
 these propositions, the committee did not mean to have 
 it supposed that any such proposition could be adopted, 
 and when I come to that part of the report relating to 
 the State General Fund debt, I shall have something 
 more to say in relation to the several and joint opera- 
 tion of the different sums proposed as a means of pay- 
 ment. This question as to the future revenues of the 
 canals, like all others that lay in conjer-ture, must be 
 determined upon principles of rational probability. 
 Different minds will come to different results in rela- 
 tion to it. I have said in view of all surrounding cir- 
 cumstances, that 1 believe that the canal tolls will con- 
 tinue their usual increase for the next eight or ten 
 years, and that in that period they will probably begin 
 to culminate, and require reduction in the rates to 
 compete for business, and the largest aggregate reve- 
 nue. The question then arises, will there be any sur- 
 plus ? The revenue of 1846, ascertained to the 22d of 
 July, is $ 2,550,000 and a fraction, and estimating the 
 remainder of the year according to what was received 
 in 1845, the accruingjrevenues should be $2,757,178.08. 
 According to the scheme of the committee, there will 
 be wanted for expenses on the canals, $600,000 ; for 
 the canal debt, $1,500,000, and for the State annuity, 
 $672,500. This will make an aggregate of $2,772,500, 
 and it would be $14,000 more than the income for the 
 present year by estimate. But it is now ascertained 
 that these revenues for this fiscal year will exceed $2,- 
 775,000. They will exceed the proposed charges on 
 the canals by some 2,000 dollars. I shall therefore 
 view them as coming to one and the same result. The 
 wants as proposed by the committee, and the actual re- 
 venue would be about the same, or at any rate would 
 not differ to an amount worth naming, the tolls, per- 
 haps, being a li tie in excess. I have tables of the past 
 increase of the canal revenues. The actual tolls in 
 each year are given in Con. Doc. No. 47, p. '48, table I. 
 down to 1845. The tolls in 1836 were unusually high, 
 insomuch that they fell off considerably in succeeding 
 years, yet comparing a series of ten years with the year 
 1S36, and taking the actual tolls as they came in, to 
 1845 inclusive, and averaging them so as to suppose 
 an equal sum of increase for each year over that of 
 1836, and the common difference in an arithmetical 
 series, would be $48,274 81-100 over the tolls of 1836. 
 It is a very low.and the lowest mode of estimating these 
 future sin plusses. There is another mode of estimating 
 them, and that is as the tolls have for the last ten years 
 Increased 3.02-100ths per cent on those of 1836 ; to as- 
 sume that they will in the ten years to come, increase 
 nt the same rate on those of 1846. The basis of these 
 modes is exhibited in the table of the actual canal re- 
 venues from 1836 to 1845, both inclusive, which I now 
 read : 
 
1101 
 
 ACTUAL CANAL REVENUES. 
 
 
 1836 
 
 1H37 
 
 1840 
 1S11 
 1H4-J 
 1843 
 l44 
 1845 
 
 Tolls, &c. 
 
 ,598, 
 ,325, 
 ,465, 
 ,655, 
 ,606, 
 ,989, 
 ,797, 
 ,953, 
 
 2,375, 
 
 455 48 
 609 77 
 27$ Hi 
 783 56 
 827 28 
 (Mi 71 
 163 80 
 829 08 
 457 34 
 533 43 
 
 18,156,921 61 
 
 Actual differences. 
 
 Increase. 
 
 139,665 39 
 190,508 40 
 
 382,859 43 
 
 156,365 28 
 434,628 26 
 
 1,304,026 76 
 
 Decrease. 
 
 272,845 71 
 
 48,956 28 
 1 9^2:22 *9i 
 
 12,923 91 
 
 520,948 81 
 
 CONTINUATION OF TABLE. 
 
 Year. 
 
 1836 
 
 ] 837 
 1838 
 
 1840 
 1841 
 1842 
 
 1813 
 1JM4 
 
 Common Piff. 
 
 48,274,818 
 
 Arithmetical se- 
 ries of tolls. 
 
 1,598,455, 
 
 1,04(5,730, 
 
 ,695,005, 
 
 ,743,279, 
 
 ,791,554 
 , 839, 829 
 ,888,104 
 ,936,379 
 i 084,654 
 ,032,928 
 
 48-0 
 
 29-y 
 
 11-6 
 93-4 
 75-2 
 57-0 
 
 38-8 
 20-6 
 02-4 
 
 84-2 
 
 18,156,9:21.01-0 
 
 In the series &f fen years the increase is equal to 
 3 02-lOOths per cent lor each year on the tolls of Ifc30, 
 the lir.st year of the series. 
 
 Un tolls of 1836 to 1845, 10 years, common differ- 
 ence $48,274,81 8. Rate per cent 3 02-iO()ths. 
 
 I give you now the result of these two modes of 
 computation, and of another beginning with the 
 lowest. Commencing a series of ten years imme- 
 diately after the present fiscal year, and the com- 
 mon difference would be $48,271 81 cents at that 
 rate. Coniinuing it for five years, the total reve- 
 nue from 1847 to 1851 inclusive, would be $14,510,- 
 012.67. Deduct from this the amounts the commit- 
 tee have stated as the charges on the canals, that is 
 five times $2,772,500, equal to $13.862,500, and it 
 would leave for these five years the small surplus of 
 $647,512.67. If the same mode of computation be 
 continued until 1856, that is, for ten years, the sur- 
 plus would amount in these ten years to $2,501,895 
 and 76 cents. Or more accurately, taking (he canal 
 revenues of 1846 as equal to the charges on them, 
 and they will to some small amount exceed the 
 charges, and converting the common difference, 
 ,sK 271.81, into a series in arithmetical progres- 
 sion for ten terms or years, the first term would be 
 
 $48,271 81 
 The last in 10th term, ten times that sum, 482,718 10 
 
 The sum of the two extremes $530,989 91 
 
 Multiplied by half the number of terms,. . 5 
 
 Surplus in ten years, $2,654,949 55 
 
 Mr. Worden Are these results the same as given 
 by the Comptroller ? 
 
 Mr. HolTman I believe not. The call on the 
 Comptroller prescribed the rule by which he should 
 estimate. He computes by the same common dif- 
 ference, but he was directed to commence with and 
 
 include 1846, which I exclude. In the two 
 first results I have given, I estimate on the reve- 
 nues of 1846, as ascertained in part by estimate, 
 making them only $2,757,178.08, when in fact they 
 will amount to $2,775,000; and instead of falling 
 short, will a little exceed the proposed charges on 
 them. In the. mode I last gave, estimating merely 
 by the common difference, I avoid this error, be- 
 cause this mode assumes that the tolls of 1846 were 
 equal to the proposed charges. 
 
 If we assume the second mode of estimating these 
 surpluses, that is, that the Revenues will for a series of 
 10 years, commencing with those of 1846 increase 
 3 02-100 per cent then the common difference taking 
 the tolls of 184G as above stated, in part from esti- 
 mate $2,757,178.08, would be $83,266.78 but on the 
 actual tolls as now ascertained, it would be somewhat 
 higher. Disregarding this error as immaterial, and 
 the surpluses would lie 
 
 For 5 years from 1847 to 1851, $1,248,401 
 
 For 10 years from 1847 to 1856, 5,579,672 
 
 This mode of estimating the future surpluses ap- 
 pears to me the most probable, and produces rssults 
 most in accordance with past experience-^ It suppo- 
 ses the revenues of 1846 equal to the proposed charges 
 on the canals, when in fact they exceed these char- 
 ges, and takes a common difference from the tolls of 
 1846, ascertained to June and estimated from that 
 time, which it is now ascertained, gives less than they 
 actually are as above staled. But this mode of esti- 
 mate supposes that we can for ten years keep up our 
 present rates of toll, and yet secure our usual increase 
 of business. In the estimate of the committee of Ways 
 and Means in the Assembly of 1838, of which Mr. 
 RUGGLES was chairman. Assembly Doc. No. 242 it 
 is -assumed that these revenues would become station- 
 ary, and not increase after 1849, when they would 
 reach $3,000,000 after deducting expenses. The 
 bankruptcy at the south-west, the civil dissetitions in 
 the Canadas to which I have alluded, the general 
 embarrassment which lias injuriously affected the con- 
 struction of Railroads, have delayed to a considerable 
 extent the then expected competition with our canals, 
 and I incline to the opinion, that we shall not reach 
 this culminating point in some 8 or 10 years, though I 
 think the rate of'increase was taken onsomewhat too 
 high an expenditure. If we take from the commit- 
 tees proposed charges on the canals the $000,000 
 for ordinary repairs, we may adopt as a third mode 
 of estimating our probable surpluses, the nett reve^i- 
 ues siated by the committee of 1838, and they would 
 give 
 
 For 5 years from 1847 to 1851, $3,237,500 
 
 And tor 10 years from 1847 to 1856, .... 7,375,000 
 
 By a rough general average of these various modes 
 of estimate, it. seerns entirely probable that these sur- 
 pluses in G or 7 years will exceed the $2.500,000 pro- 
 posed in the 3d section to be exclusively appropriated 
 to the improvement of the Erie Canal,' and that it is 
 reasonable to suppose that they will exceed five mill- 
 ions in the next ten years. Beyond that period, 1 am 
 not disposed to indulge in the luxury of estimating 
 surpluses. 
 
 In any event it see ins right to say that there will be 
 cancl surpluses in 5,6 or 7 years, equal to the $2,500,- 
 000, contained in the 3rd section. From past experi- 
 ence and under existing and probable circumstances 
 if can scarcely be doubted and cannot be disputed. 
 Well suppose there is not, then there can be no in- 
 crease of canal business, because the present revenue 
 runs a little beyond the wants of the canals as the 
 committee have fixed them, in the sums for ordinary 
 repairs, and to pay the canal debt, and the annuity to 
 the State. They have fixed the sum a little below the 
 canal revenues, and if there is any increase in the 
 canal transportation or business, it must bring with it 
 a surplus of tolls. Either there will be no increase of 
 
1102 
 
 business and no occasion for canal improvements, or 
 the increase of canal transportation must bring these 
 surpluses as fast and as early as they can possibly be 
 needed. It is not possible to escape from this conclu- 
 sion. The canals now perform their whole duty and 
 carry all that is presented, and could well transport 
 much more. If there be no increase in business all 
 will be done in the best manner, and if the transpor- 
 tation shall increase as I believe it will for some years 
 to come that increase must bring with it all the sur- 
 pluses that can be required. 
 
 Here Mr. HOFFMAN gave way to a motion to rise and 
 report progress 
 
 Afternoon Session Mr. HOFFMAN resumed 
 The question to which I will now call the attention 
 of the committee is, has the canal in its present con- 
 dition capacity to perform its duties well in carrying 
 on the navigation ? If the surplus, 1 mentioned this 
 morning of $2,500,000 shall accrue from the business 
 of the canals, will it so improve the canals that they 
 may perform their whole duties to the public? I will 
 endeavor to answer these questions, for 1 have state- 
 ments here which I cannot very well read, yet I shall 
 be obliged,to ask the attention of the committee \vhile 
 I attempt in some way or other to read or explain them. 
 In 1834 and 1835, there was a very large crowd on the 
 canal, the lockages rose to a considerable number, 
 and the navigators were forced to increase the ton- 
 nage of the boats, then small, and averaging some 35 
 or 36 tons. Perhaps now and then there was a boat 
 carrying 40 tons. The appearances then were that 
 there was to be a very large and rapid increase of 
 this trade. I am not certain what the depth of wa- 
 ter in the canal at that time was, but from circum- 
 stances which then came to my knowledge, and from 
 facts since ascertained and attested upon oath, I have 
 been inclined to believe that perhaps at that time the 
 water in the canal was scarcely over three feet, it 
 may have been more, but I am rather inclined to the 
 opinion that it was a very little over that. I do not 
 know that 1 can state with perfect precision what 
 was the swiftest lockage performed, but from recol- 
 lection, I can state that 7, 8 and 10 minutes, prior to 
 the spring of 1835, was the ordinary working time of 
 the locks. I believe there were some locks that could 
 not operate with the same facility, and the commia 
 sioners appear to have been of the same opinion, and 
 in the spring of 1835, ordered new paddle twites to 
 the locks where the crowd was the greatest, in or- 
 der to increase the facility of discharging and receiv- 
 ing. How that worked I am not able to say, but I 
 believe it increased most materially the capacity of the 
 canal ; and if the commissioners in 1834, and 1835, 
 had known the shallow state of the water, they would 
 hardly have come to the conclusion which they did 
 that double locks were indispensable. 
 
 But they did come to the conclusion, and in 
 their report recommend as the probable extent oi 
 the enlargement, 5 feet by 50 and 6 feet by 60 
 The enlargement of 7 feet by 70 was then a 
 thing unheard of. It owed its birth to a conven 
 tion at Rochester, got up I believe the succeeding 
 year, and where we have lately had a conventioi 
 on enlarging and improving navigation. In al" 
 this matter there was a vast deal of theory am 
 something of fact, and I have done the utmost in 
 my power, since I have been here, and before, U 
 try and get for this convention the facts so tha 
 gentlemen might judge in some degree for them 
 selves. I have a table here of the boats whict 
 navigate the canals, and I find that a well buil 
 boat carrying 80 tons or more, in point of fac 
 draws but 3 feet 4 inches of water. An ill form 
 ed boat of the same burden draws a little more 
 and the heaviest of all these boats I find is on 
 
 o which has been given the name of " Bull- 
 ead." This comes up to 3 feet 8 or 9 inches, 
 "hese boats make their trips with such cargoes, 
 liey come to the weigh-locks. they are weighed 
 here, and therefore the fact that they carry such 
 argoes is unquestionable. It may be said that 
 hese boats are ill-formed, and I do not know but 
 hey are. The doctrine of easiest traction in na- 
 igation has been in practice disregarded ; and I 
 ieiieve I may say that the boatmen and the car- 
 ier hold it in sovereign contempt. I am not sure 
 iut they are right, because in any effort to get at 
 t, the boat will be so far from the towing path 
 s to render the traction indirect and inconveni- 
 nt. At any rate, they hold in sovereign contempt 
 11 these theories, and continue to make their 80 
 on boats and carry their 8u ton cargoes. I must 
 efer to one of these tables, bringing; into discus- 
 ion at this point what ought to have been thrown 
 n somewhere else, that is the moderate increase 
 >f the lockages, the increase in the tonnage of the 
 )oats, and the vast increase of the tonnage trans- 
 orted. 
 
 Mr. Hoffman here referred to and commented 
 upon the following table. 
 
 Navigation year or season on the Erie Canal. 
 
 
 Total of 
 
 Lockages 
 
 Tonnage 
 
 Average 
 
 
 lockages 
 
 at Alexan 
 
 arriving at 
 
 down 
 
 
 at Alex- 
 
 cler's leek 
 
 ide water 
 
 cargoes 
 
 Year. 
 
 ander's 
 
 being as- 
 
 from the 
 
 of the 
 
 
 lock. 
 
 sumed as 
 
 Erie ca- 
 
 boats. 
 
 
 
 one half 
 
 nal. 
 
 
 
 (the Whole. 
 
 
 
 1835 
 
 25,798 
 
 J2,899 
 
 497,839 
 
 38.6 
 
 1836 
 
 25,516 
 
 12,758 
 
 419,125 
 
 32.8 
 
 1837 
 
 21,055 
 
 10,527 
 
 387,506 
 
 36,8 
 
 1838 
 18:J9 
 
 25, 962 
 21,234 
 
 12,981 
 12,117 
 
 419,249 
 386,267 
 
 32.3 
 31.8 
 
 1840 
 
 26, 987 
 
 13,493 
 
 467,315 
 
 34.6 
 
 J841 
 
 30,320 
 
 15, 160 
 
 532,520 
 
 35 
 
 1842 
 
 22,869 
 
 11,434 
 
 480, 149 
 
 42 
 
 1843 
 
 23, 184 
 
 11,592 
 
 635,345 
 
 54.8 
 
 1844 
 
 28,219 
 
 14,109 
 
 799,816 
 
 56.6 
 
 1845 
 
 30,452 
 
 15,226 
 
 959,590 
 
 63 
 
 From this table it is seen that while the lock- 
 ages have increased from 26,798 in 1835, to 30,- 
 452 in 1845, the tonnage arriving at tidewater has 
 increased from 497,839 tons, in 1835 to 959,590 
 tons in 1845- It is also seen that the average 
 cargoes of the boats in 1835 was 38 6-10 tons in 
 1839 that average was reduced to 31 8-10 tons, 
 and had risen in 1843 to 63 tons, or more than 
 doubled. The average cargoes of the boats for 
 1846 will probably be ftill greater, as almost all 
 the new boats exceed ihe highest average stated 
 in this table. 
 
 The canal commissioners in 1841. and again in 
 1842, stated as a matter of demonstration, that if 
 225,000 tons should be added to the down ton- 
 nage of 1840 which was 467.315 tons, the Erie 
 canal would then have reached its maximum ca- 
 pacitythey were confident that its greatest ca- 
 pacity would not eiceed 692,315 tons. 
 
 They supposed and said that when the canals were 
 doino- this amount of transportation, thev would have 
 reached their maximum. They were fated to expe- 
 rience the same overthrow in this matter of conject- 
 ure which their predecessors, of whom I was one, 
 had experienced on the subject. In 1845 the. tonage 
 wus 959,590. It had passed the maximum winch the 
 
1103 
 
 canal commissioners had fixed, not once, but more 
 than twice. This is the way in which the canal per- 
 formed in point of fact. It seems to have had a sort 
 of flexibility to overthrow calculations. It realizes its 
 own results and brings out, as time always does, 
 truths on which it is safest to rely. The boatman, 
 acting in defiance of the rule of easiest traction, con- 
 trived greatly to increase his cargo, as appears by the 
 return from the Weigh locks. 
 
 The table which I hold in my hand, shows the num- 
 ber of cargoes, exceeding 70 tons, weighed at Roch- 
 ester and Syracuse, and exceeding 65 tons weighed 
 at Utica, in several months of the present year. It 
 may be assumed that these are down cargoes, for 
 nearly all the cargoes weighed at these locks are such. 
 
 Cargoes weighed in 1846, at the several Weigh 
 Locks : 
 
 Over 70 tons. Over 70 tons. Over 60 tons. 
 
 ROCHESTER 
 Weigh-lock. 
 April, (2 weeks) 28 
 May, " 97 
 
 June, " 169 
 July, " 136 
 August, " .129 
 
 SYRACUSE 
 
 Weigh-lock. 
 
 59 
 
 138 
 
 147 
 
 135 
 
 122 
 
 UTICA 
 
 Weigh-lock , 
 40 
 120 
 91 
 66 
 93 
 
 559 601 410 
 
 I now beg leave fo call the attention of the 
 Convention to another statement illustrating the 
 increase of these cargoes, by showing the contin 
 ued increase ot the tonnage of the boats. For- 
 merly, all boats were entered in the register, but 
 what hecame of them afterwards was never known. 
 In 1844, an order was made to have the officers 
 go along the line of the canal, and take down the 
 name of the boats, and of the tonnage of each 
 and transmit them to the office here. As all the 
 boats were then lied up by the winter, the truth 
 as to the number of boats and their tonnage was 
 obtained. The number of boats according to that 
 account, in 1843, was 2126, and their tonnage and 
 the tonnage ot the boats built in each year since 
 is given in the table which I will now read. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN here read and commented on the 
 following table : 
 
 TONNAGE OF NEW BOATS, F. 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 -S3 
 
 S.S 
 
 ii 
 
 sir 
 
 o 
 
 1* 
 
 ^ CO 
 
 111 
 
 t3r3 - 
 
 a '- 
 
 ri t- "^ 
 
 |S 
 
 H 
 
 *n 
 
 II 
 
 1" 
 
 l'^ 3 
 
 180 
 
 
 
 
 1* 
 
 100 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 90 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 86 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 80 
 
 3 
 
 9 
 
 13 
 
 33 
 
 75 
 
 13 
 
 33 
 
 60 
 
 118 
 
 70 
 
 162 
 
 124 
 
 107 
 
 97 
 
 IS 
 
 264 
 
 94 
 
 64 
 
 20 
 
 60 
 
 444 
 
 71 
 
 33 
 
 7 
 
 60 
 
 325 
 
 15 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 50 
 
 464 
 
 14 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 45 
 
 166 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 40 
 
 158 
 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 53 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 30 
 
 40 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 16 
 
 3 
 
 
 2 
 
 20 
 
 8 
 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 15 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 4 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 Av.Tonnag 
 
 2,126 
 
 378 
 
 297 
 
 288 
 
 3 50 
 
 64 
 
 67 
 
 72 
 
 With this increase in the tonnage and cargoes 
 t the boats, has come a corresponding reduction 
 i the prices of freights exclusive of tolls. The 
 p freights in 1830, '31 and '32, gave to the car- 
 ier after he had paid the tolls, some 45 cents on 
 he hundred weight ; and in 1845 and '46 only 9 
 ents. I do not know it that result is possible, 
 ut it is actual it cannot be helped, for the thing 
 a done. The down freight is nuw so heavy and 
 i bulky, and the up freight so light, being scarce- 
 y sufficient for useful ballast, and most easy navi- 
 ;ation of the boat, that the carrier gets very little 
 icyond the tolls, for the up freight. In 1830, '31 
 nd '32, the carrier after paying the rolls on a bai- 
 el of flour, reserved to himself, 37 cents ; in 
 846, but 22 cents. So that while this controversy 
 .bout reducing the cost of transportation by the 
 mlargement of the canal has been going on, a re- 
 hictiun of much more than fifty pet cent, on the 
 carrier's share of the charge for transportation has, 
 aking the up and down business together, been 
 ;i general, actually effected. The cafrier has, 
 with such a canal as you have given him, reduced 
 lis compensation more than one half. 
 
 The facts now brought to the a tention of the 
 committee, prove strongly, that in the increase in 
 he tonnage of the boat and the reduction in the 
 rcight. which the carrier after paying tolls, can 
 etam for his use, we have without the enlarge- 
 ment, realized about all the benefits promised by 
 that enlargement. It may be supposed that the 
 ;anal has been deepened or enlaiged by repairs, 
 jut there is no foundation for this supposition. 
 Since the Convention has been in session, by or- 
 der of the Canal Board, the water in the canal on 
 the upper and lower mitre-sill of every lock, and 
 at about every four rods of the space intermediate 
 he locks, and on both sides ot the boat, has been 
 measured the measurement sworn to, and return- 
 ed to the Canal Department, with the ascertained 
 ime to fill and discharge the lock and pass the 
 boat, where any gentleman may examine them. 
 From these returns, it appears that at points ot con- 
 siderable extent, there is not full four feet of water 
 either from Albany to Utica, or from Syracuse to 
 Buffalo. Some of the boats, however, draw 3 ft. 
 8 inches, and one 3 feet 9 inches and I infer from 
 this, that the canal when very full of water, af- 
 fords this draft at all points but the admeasure- 
 ment of the water shows that it does not afford 
 the full four feet promised in the construction 
 On the mitre sills there is usually an exces sof 
 five or seven inches over the four feet, and I sup. 
 pose these mitre sills, especially at the heads of 
 the locks, indicate more truly than any thing else, 
 the true original bottom watei line of the canal. 
 The admeasurements, however, show that in the 
 distance between locks, the bottom of the canal 
 is frequently, and for long spaces, some inches 
 above the mitre sills'. 
 
 [Here Mr. 1JOUCK interrupted Mr. HOFFMAN- 
 by saying, that these sills were usually depressed 
 some six or eight inches below the bottom water 
 line of the canal.] 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN proceeded. I have often 
 
 * NOTE The boat pf 180 tons, built in 1846, is 95 feet 
 long, 16 fe*t "2 inches in width, draws 3V loot water when 
 freighted with 1'20 tons, but would require 4| feet to carry 
 180 tons runs from liultaio to Rochester, aud moves Irom 
 2^ to three miles an hour. 
 
1104 
 
 doubted whether, although the state paid for a 
 four foot canal the contractors ever excavated i 
 to that depth. The returns to which I have al- 
 luded, create doubts on the. point and if these 
 sills were depressed five or seven inches, I shoulc 
 conclude that the canal was not originally exca- 
 vated to much more than three feet. Aside iron 
 this question, however, these returns prove that 
 the water for navigation does not exceed, if it 
 equals, lour feet in depth. 1'he increase of the 
 tonnage of the boat, and the carrier's reduction of 
 his share ot the freight, has been effected with a 
 canal of not exceeding four feet ; at points, it is less 
 
 These returns also show that with the best pad- 
 dle gates and apparatus, a lock may be filled in 
 40 seconds, and discharged in the like short time. 
 With such a lock, a boat may pass in ihree min 
 utes with practical ease. Yet some of the locks 
 operate much slower. In truth, if at the most 
 crowded points on the canal, (tor which as is seen 
 by the lockages, there is and can be no difficulty,) 
 there should be given to every lock the same pow- 
 er and facility now possessed by some, the capa- 
 city of the canal would be largely increased, say 
 one-third, to pass boats, to say nothing of the 
 great increase of its capacity that must result from 
 fairly cleaning it out, and affording 4 ft. 5 inches 
 of water through the whole distance, being less 
 than the average on the mitre sills. These two 
 changes alone, which can cost almost nothing, 
 would increase the capacity of the canal with 
 only its old locks one-half, and make it answer 
 all our purposes until surpluses can be earned, 
 as I have endeavored to show they will be, to 
 improve it. 
 
 What then can these surpluses do when obtain- 
 ed to improve the Erie canal? They will be suf- 
 ficient to secure double locks, and one of them, a 
 line of enlarged locks to Syracuse. From Syra- 
 cuse to Lockport, they will either extend the old 
 locks, to make them 100 feet in the chamber, or 
 erect enlarged locks. They will complete the double 
 enlarged locks at Lockport, and extend them to 
 Buffalo. In addition to all this, they will raise 
 and strengthen the banks ironi Albany to Buffalo, 
 so as to secure by reasonable cleaning, full five 
 feet of water and thus with the improved facility 
 of the locks, enlarge the boats to 120 tons, and 
 triple the capacity of the Erie canal. The ex. 
 pense of this work to Syracuse, has been closely 
 estimated. For the residue ot the distance expe- 
 rience furnishes a safe guide. To obtain five feet 
 of water and locks of 100 feet in the chamber, the 
 engineer's estimate would reach about $1,600,000, 
 my own about $1,900,000, and certain it is that 
 the $2,500,000 proposed would complete it in the 
 best manner. The $300,000 to reach Syracuse 
 will soon be realized. To my mind, it is entirely 
 certain, that we can, in this manner, svithout de- 
 ferring the payment ot our debt in due season, and 
 before it can be needed give the Erie canal ca- 
 pacity at once, to reduce its tolls if need shall be, 
 and yet earn the surpluses to complete its con- 
 struction, and that of any work the State may de- 
 sire. 
 
 Sir, pain obliges me to desire to bring these re- 
 marks to a close. But in the schemes proposed 
 for the arrangement of our debts, I cannot fail to 
 perceive a strong wish to preserve the old debt- 
 or system, under the new and milder pretence of 
 
 delaying payment, in otdur to get money to spend. 
 I must therefore call attention to the great injuries 
 we have sustained from this debtor system. We 
 cannot now very well estimate the cost of comple- 
 ting the works begun. Judging from the estimates 
 and the reports of those who had them in charge 
 in 1842, the cost would equal $15,000,000. That 
 was the sum asked by the commissioners of the 
 canal fund, and canal commissioners, and recom- 
 mended by the Governor. The estimate then for 
 the Black River called for some $800,000, which 
 with land damages, extras and contingences, 
 would probably swell to one million. About $1,- 
 800,000 appeared then to be required for the Ge- 
 nesee Valley, which with the usual additions, 
 would probably reach $2,000,000, unless the worfc 
 should be executed bad enough, as on theChe- 
 mung, to reduce the cost ; and yet these canals 
 would not probably pay their own expenses in 
 many years. The Erie enlargement seemed then 
 to require some $12,000,000 to complete it, al- 
 though at some expensive points, the plan to be 
 pursued was not settled might be changed, and 
 made more expensive. Lower estimates may have 
 since been made, to get them again under way, 
 but I rely more on the estimates of those who 
 supposed they might be required to complete them, 
 than on those who seek their resumption. When 
 we engaged in these works we had only a small 
 debt;, some four or four and a half millions beyond 
 funds on hand; yet in five years, from 1838 to 
 1842, we exhausted and depressed our credit, 
 brought on numerous and extensive bank failures, 
 and rolled up a debt of more than $28,000,000, and 
 sunk ourselves exhausted, and suspended these 
 works. We have by four years' effort, somewhat 
 reduced our debt but that debt is still some $24,- 
 000,000, quarterly demanding the payment of in- 
 terest, and rapidly becoming due in its millions of 
 principal. Under the most favorable circumstan- 
 ces the debtor system was fully tried and failed 
 us. The failure drove from power its most ar- 
 dent friends and I ask does any Whig desire to 
 repeat it? does any Democrat concerned in the 
 effort to pay it, desire to repeat it ? does any of 
 the new parties, Natives or Abolitionists, desire to 
 repeat a system so destructive to its friends and 
 the country ? Is there no other road to defeat, 
 ruin and political disgrace ? 
 
 We have had very bitter experience of the evils 
 of this poor, impoverishing debtor system. Let 
 us see the great advantages we might have secured 
 by a cash system. The Erie and Champlain canals 
 cost us. including the care of them, to completion 
 $8,401 : 394,12, and were eight years in construc- 
 lon, from 1817 to 1825. When we began them 
 we had a general fund, which is now entirely ex- 
 sended, and while they were in construction, the 
 3alt tax, the auction tax, the land sales, and some 
 canal tolls were poured into the canal fund now so 
 deeply indebted. During those eight yearg the 
 canal fund received : 
 
 From the salt tax, $557,409 09 
 
 Auction tax, 1,351,349 57 
 
 " Steamboat tax, 73,409 99 
 
 Canal tolls, 977,339 32 
 
 Land sales, 2,371 30 
 
 Add the general fund now gone, 2,740,001 51 
 
 Making together, 
 
 $5,601,880 78 
 
1105 
 
 which it' deducted IVotn the cost of the canals, as 
 stated before, would leave to be supplied by taxes 
 $2,799,513.34. So that aduect tax of about $350, 
 UOO lor each of the eight years, these canals were 
 in construction, would have enabled the State, to 
 construct them without one dollar of debt. Since 
 these two canals were completed, Jailer paying 
 their own expenses, their nett revenues, as is seen 
 by Convention document No. 47 H, has been 
 down to 15-15, $18,964,790 53 
 
 The whole cost ol constructing 
 
 all the finished lateral canals, 
 
 was only 3,496,839 66 
 
 Leaving without interest 
 
 $15,567,850 87 
 
 is their least cost. The gieat expense is lo inain- 
 ain them and this class, called extraordinary ex- 
 ,.<-nses, will increase with our population. Under 
 all ciicumstances, it is not probable that our State 
 current expenses, for each of the ten years to 
 come, will be less than $603,000 and after that 
 period it is probable they will largely exceed that 
 
 The State expenses then will be 
 
 To meet them we have residue 
 
 of State annuity as before, $172,500 
 
 Auction and salt tax, say 100,000 
 
 $600,000 
 
 272.500 
 
 for the construction of the Black River canal, the 
 Genesee Valley, and the Erie enlargement without 
 a canal debt; and yet in the receipt ot our full and 
 growing canal revenues To this we should add 
 3,749, 954'.42 cents for the salt and auction tax, 
 and land salex. that have been sunk in the canal 
 fund since 1525. With the experience of all we 
 have suffered from, and the great advantages we 
 have lost, will we still, if not in an open, yet dis- 
 guised form, cling to this fatal debtor system ? 
 Will we permit our debts to hang about us in- 
 crease by accident, and by interest, and make our 
 debt, and the taxes, direct or indirect, to meet it, 
 eternal? The action, not the words of this Conven- 
 tion, sh.>ll answer. Be that what it may, your peo- 
 ple will answer no ! Eternal debt and taxes are 
 nor ours and cannot be fastened on us. The go. 
 vernment have not the power to doit. 
 
 The annui'y in liquidation of the State claim 
 foi advances to the canals, is fixed by the commit- 
 tee at $67-; ,500. Of this sum $500,000 a year is 
 proposed to be taken as a sinking fund to pay the 
 General fund and insolvent Rail-road debt, and 
 such part of the contingent debt as may fall on the 
 treasury. It will do it in some nineteen or twenty 
 years, as 1 have before showed. I had designed to 
 say something more of the origin ot this debt, and 
 the character of the legislation that caused it, but 
 I must forbear. It we deduct this last sinking fund 
 from the State annuitv, we shall have remaining 
 $172,500 a year to apply to State current expenses. 
 All beyond this small income for some twenty- 
 years, must be supplied by taxes, direct or indi- 
 rect. 
 
 What then will these current State expenses be, 
 and what taxation will be necessary? As to the 
 first, the past is our safest guide. These expenses, 
 exclusive of interest on the General fund debt, will 
 be found in Convention doc. No. 47, p. 18, in each 
 year from 1817 to 1845 Looking at the table, it 
 will be seen that they have maintained a steady 
 increase and most rapidly for the lust ten years. 
 From 1830 to 1845 they amount to more than $7,- 
 000,000 in the aggregate, making an average ot 
 more than $700,000 a \ear. A part of these ex- 
 penses are lor matters which bring into the treas- 
 ury or as it is called the General fund, as much as 
 they take out such as advances for non resident 
 taxes replaced ro the treasury by tax sales. Items 
 of this ki'td may reduce these expenses some $50,- 
 000 or $100,000 a year. Beyond this I see no rta- 
 son to look for reduction in our State expenses. 
 We will have geological surveys or something 
 quite as expensive. We have asylums and state 
 Their construction 
 
 113 
 
 Unprovided for, $327.600 
 
 To meet these expenses unprovided for, we must 
 retain in force 
 
 The half-mill direct tax $280,000 
 
 The one-tenth mill direct tax 56,000. 
 
 prisons, and must build more. 
 
 $336,000 
 
 and any increase of our current expenses will im- 
 pose new taxes until 1865, when the extinguish- 
 ment ot the General fund debt willleave the whole 
 annuity to the State, $672.500, for current expen- 
 ses. But in that long period it is leasonable to 
 suppose that these expenses will pass some $300,- 
 000 or $400,000 beyond that annuity, and make 
 direct taxes to that amount necessaiy. Such, sir, 
 it is probable, will be the result of our debtor svs- 
 tetn for internal improvements. It promised ex- 
 emption from taxes and with it the endowment of 
 schools and charities. It has already made us feel 
 these taxes, and will leave us long to their mercy. 
 In this view of the subject, it is scarcely necessary 
 for me here to repeat that what we do not take 
 from the canal revenues to pay these, must be sup- 
 plied by taxes. Although this is no reason for en- 
 larging the State claims for advances for the canals 
 be\ond their just amount, and a fair rate and mode 
 of estimating the interest it is a strong ground for 
 asserting and maintaining this claim to its full and 
 fair extent. 
 
 Sir, other matters in the report of the commit- 
 tee deserve some explanation, and I had designed 
 now to make them, but I arn not able. I will en- 
 deavor, however, to do so when the several sec- 
 tions shall be considered. In the main, however, 
 they will sufficiently explain themselves. 
 
 REMARKS of Mr. WORDEN, on 
 
 CES, Wednesday y Sept. 16th, 1846. 
 
 The first section of Mr. HOFFMAN'S leport, ap- 
 propriate! one million five hundred thousand dol- 
 lars of the nett revenues of the Canals as a sink- 
 ing fund, to pay the interest and the principal of 
 the canal debts of the slate. 
 
 The second section provides, that ''in liquida- 
 tion of I he state claims for advances to, and pay- 
 ments for the canals, $672,500 of the nett canal 
 revenues forever, in each y* ar, shall be paid out 
 of the Treasury tor the use ot the btate," being th 
 same as an annual tax on the canals to that 
 amount. 
 
 The third section provides, that after paying the 
 sums appropriated by the two preceding sections, 
 the surplus nett. revenues of the canals "shall in 
 each year be applied to the improvement of the 
 Krie canal, in such manner as may be directed by 
 law, uiuil such surplus shall amount in the ag- 
 giegate to two million five hundred thousand dol- 
 lars." 
 
1106 
 
 Tne other sections of the report contains pro- 
 visions for a sinking fund to be created out of the 
 $672,500 to be paid under the second section into 
 the state treasury, and for making good by taxa- 
 tion, any deficiencies to supply the sinking funds. 
 
 The last section of the report, provides that the 
 legislature shall not sell, lease or otherwise dis- 
 pose of any of the canals of the state, now finished 
 and navigable, leaving the legislature at liberty to 
 sell the unfinished portion of the Genesee Valley 
 and the Black River canals. 
 
 iVIr. WORDEN said the question for the Con- 
 tion to meet and decide was, whether, by the 
 adoption of the provisions reported by the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer(Mr. HOFFMAN,) the prose- 
 cution of the public works as now ;-uihorized, 
 should be abandoned; such would be the inevita- 
 ble result should these provisions become incor- 
 porated info the constitution. Before a question 
 of this magnitude was decided, it would be wise 
 to ascertain what we were to abandon. 
 
 First, the gentleman (Mr. HOFFMAN) proposes 
 to abandon entirely, as a state work, the Black 
 River and the Genesee Valley canals. It appears 
 from tho report of the canal commissioners to the 
 last legislature, that prior to the 1st of April, 1842, 
 the amount of work done on c-.ntracls, and not 
 brought into use on the Black River canal, amount, 
 ed to $1,676^111.31, and that, the sum necessary to 
 finish ihese works, under the contracts when they 
 were put an end to by the state, was $80,447.46. 
 The total cost of all the work done on that canal, 
 as appeared by the same report, was $1,750', 593. 77. 
 We are not now to determine upon the correct- 
 ness or propriety of the act authorizing the con- 
 struction of this work ; but in what way we can 
 best secure the benefit of the money already ex- 
 pended. A little over $80.000 would have com- 
 pleted all the work under contract on the Black 
 River canal, when the suspension act of Ib42 took 
 effect, and about $400,000 would have completed 
 the entire canal. The question then was, whether 
 we should go on and make this expenditure and 
 thereby secure to the state the benefits ut the 
 $1,750,000 already expended ? 
 
 It appeared from the same report ol the Canal 
 Commissioners, that the completed portion of the 
 Genesee Valley canal, in use, co*t $1,400,365 25, 
 and that the cost of ihe work done on the aban- 
 doned contracts previous to the 1st of April, 1842, 
 and not in use was $1,807,525 29, and that an ex- 
 oenditure of $922,392.82 would have completed 
 the contracts. About $1,500,000 is now required 
 to finish this canal. Will you throw away ,ul this 
 money expended on the unfinished portion of >hese 
 canals, or go on in a reasonable manner and cum- 
 plete them, and thereby secure the advantage of 
 all you expended ? 
 
 By the same report of the commissioners, it ap- 
 pears that when the contracts for the enlargement 
 of the Erie canal were suspended by the act of 
 1842, the work done under those contracts, but 
 not completed, amounted to $1,245,035 46, and 
 that. $1,533,31820 was all thai was required to 
 complete the work under the abandoned conn-nets. 
 The same report also shows that the work done on 
 the Oneida River Improvement, on the abandoned 
 contracts, amounted to $14,574.91, and that the 
 sum to be expended to complete the contracts was 
 $13,038.50. 
 
 The following table brings into one view the op- 
 eration of the suspension act ot 1842 upon the then 
 existing contracts: 
 
 Amount of work Amount to be paid 
 done on contracts to complete the 
 which were aban- abandoned con- 
 doned liy the poll- tracts, 
 cy of 1842. 
 
 Genesee Valley canal, $1,807,525 29 $922,392 82 
 
 Black River canal, 1,652,039 95 80,48746 
 
 Erie canal, 1,245,03546 1,533,31835 
 
 Oneida River Improvement, 14,57491 13,08850 
 
 $4,719,17571 $2,549,28703 
 
 It appears, then, (said Mr. W.) that $2,549,- 
 287.03 would have completed the entire contracts. 
 And tendered available to the state an actual ex- 
 penditure of $4,719,175.61 on the suspended or 
 unfinished works. 
 
 It was not his purpose, said (Mr. W.) to contro- 
 vert at this time the policy of 1842, or to quarrel 
 with that policy. There was little more in it 
 that wiis substantial than he labored to secure, 
 with the gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. HOFF- 
 MAN) in the legislature of 1841. 'At that time 
 stocks had been issued by many of the stales of 
 the Union to a large amount, and thrown upon the 
 money markets of this country and of Europe. 
 This large issue of these stocks depressed the va- 
 lue of all American securities and brought discredit 
 upon the solvent as well as the insolvent Slates. 
 A large debt also existed against the United 
 States; Congress authorized a loan to pay oif this 
 debt, but the Secretary of the Treasury during a 
 portion ot the years 1841 and 1842, was unable to 
 obtain such a loan on the stocks of the United 
 States at the rale of six per cent per annum. The 
 legislature in 1841, found the whole country em- 
 barrassed in its financial affairs, and as the law 
 then stood the State officers were authorized to 
 make contracts for the completion ot the Eiie ca- 
 nal enlargement and the Genesee and Black River 
 canals. A large proportion of work was then un- 
 der contract. These contracts had been made by 
 the political friends of the gentleman from Herki. 
 mer, (Mr. H.) It was then the policy of that 
 gentleman to break these contracts and pay to the 
 contractors the damages therefor; had that policy 
 prevailed in 1841 it would now be impossible to 
 estimate the amount of those damages. Another 
 course ardently insisted on by some gentlemen, 
 was to proceed with the public vsorks at all haz- 
 ards, and loan money at any rate of interest at 
 which it could be obiained toccmplete the canals. 
 Any amount of money could then have been ob- 
 tained on a seven per cent stock. The mercantile 
 interests of the State represented to the legisla- 
 ture I hat it would be most destructive to the pub- 
 lic interests, if the State should come into the 
 money market as a borrower at seven per cent. 
 Under all these circumstances the legislature of 
 1841 was called upon to act. The idea that the 
 State should repudiate its own contracts, was then 
 entertained by lew. If the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer \vas then willing to go that length, he stood 
 alone or nearly so. Mr. W. said he was among 
 those who deemed it wise to prevent the making 
 of new contracis, and to limit the loans to pay for 
 v\orkdone, and to be done under existing contracts 
 to the smallest possible amount, and that such 
 leans should not be made as permanent stockloaris. 
 i at a rate of interest above six per cent., giving, 
 
1107 
 
 however, to the commissioners of the canal fund, 
 power to make temporary loans at rates of interest 
 not exceeding seven per cent., should they be un- 
 able to procure money on stocks at six per cent. 
 A vast majority of the Assembly so thought, and 
 a bill with such provisions passed both bodies, and 
 the Assembly by a very great majority. No po- 
 litical considerations then influenced" the action of 
 the legislature. The bill, said Mr. W., to provide 
 funds for carrying on the public work*, originated in 
 the Senate, and appropriated $4,000,000. if he re- 
 membered rightly, to that purpose. The Assem- 
 bly reduced the amount more than a million ol 
 dollars, but the Senate refused to concur with the 
 amendments of the Assembly. The bill came 
 back to that body, and a gentleman then belong- 
 i ig to the same political party as the gentleman 
 fiom Herkimer (Mr. HOFFMAN) moved (and Mr. 
 W. said he believed in good faith,) that the house 
 recede from its amendment. That motion, Mr. 
 W. said, he moved to amend, by inserting the word 
 "not" before the word "recede," and his motion 
 prevailed. The amendments of the Assembly 
 were finally concurred in. The commissioners ol 
 the canal fund under the law were enabled to pro- 
 vide the means to pay the contractors on the pub- 
 lic works ; true, they were enabled to obtain such 
 means on a six per cent stock, and were obliged 
 to resort to the provision authorizing temporary 
 loans at 7 per cent.; but there was not a moment 
 from the termination of the session o( the legisla. 
 ture in 1841 to the commencement of the session 
 in 1842, when such loans could not have been ob- 
 tained on a 7 per cent siock, or on as good terms 
 as were ob^.ineo! under the law of 1842. .Now, 
 said Mr. W., we are in a position to examine a 
 little more critically the policy of 1842. Means 
 were then to be provided to pay these temporary 
 loans, and to pay the contractors. It was antici- 
 pated in 1841, that it would be so, but it was 
 thought unwise to rush into market as a borrower 
 on State stocks at 7 per cent for lonn periods, un- 
 til it should be found necessary. To avoid this, 
 these temporary loans were authorized and made. 
 They might have been without difficulty contin- 
 ued for one year by the legislature of 1842 at the 
 same rate ; but it was decided otherwise. The 
 law of 1842 authorized loans to be made on stocks 
 at 7 per cent, and they were made at tha r rate, 
 hastily, ill-advisedly, and at great cost to the State. 
 A year or a little more afterwards, the same loans 
 could have been made at six per cent. The loans 
 of 1842 were made at the high rate of 7 per cent., 
 and if at any time they could not be made at less 
 rates, it was owing to the most pertinacious efforts 
 in certain quarters, to depreciate the value of our 
 public securities, and to represent the canals as 
 having impoverished the State. Instead of carry- 
 ing out the contracts of the Stale, they weie bro. 
 ken by the law of 1842, the public engagements 
 were violated, and the contractors with their bro- 
 ken contracts turned over to the canal board for 
 the adjustment and payment of their damages. 
 The sum of two million five hundred and forty- 
 nine thousand dollars would have completed all 
 these contracts ; but the policy of those in power, 
 chose to violate them. Now let us see, (said Mr. 
 "W.) at what cost. By the Comptroller's report 
 to the last legislature, page 17, Mr. W. said, he 
 found the following statements. 
 
 " The sums actually awarded and paid for breach. 
 
 es of contracts growing out ot the suspension, are 
 
 as ft'llows, viz : 
 
 On the Erie canal enlargement, $248,290 83 
 
 Black River, 2,671 22 
 
 Genesee Valley, 167,543 19 
 
 Oneida River improvement, 3,944 66 
 
 $422,449 90 
 
 Of this amount, however, there was paid on ac- 
 count of the Genesee Valley canal, $55,000 under 
 the law of 1839, leaving the amount paid under 
 I he act of 1842, $367,449 90, (same report, )smce 
 which time, as appeals from a memorandum made 
 by the Comptroller himself, $28,000 have been 
 paid, making the total paid under the law of 1842, 
 $395,449 90. While from Convention Doc. No. 
 59, il appears the claims allowed, amount to 
 $425,434 19. In addition, it appears from the 
 canal commissioners report, before ciied, that the 
 cost of the work done since April 1, 1842, on the 
 enlargement to bring the work into use, amounts 
 to $296,459 8G. This latter sum does not include 
 work done, bv contractors since the suspension, 
 and paid for by the .state. The precise amount 
 thus paid, Mr. W. said he could not find from 
 public documents. Laws have been passed, au- 
 thorizing payment for this work, and the amount 
 will not probably be less than $50,000. The 
 amount of damages paid for breaches of contracts 
 and the amount since expended on these contracts 
 has not been less than from $700,000 to $800,000. 
 Besides, these contractors have claims which they 
 insist or have insisted on for breaches of these 
 contracts to about $700,000 more. Would it not 
 then, (said Mr. W.) have been wiser and more for 
 the dignity and honor of our state in 1841 to have 
 kept faith with these contractors and observed 
 your own engagements', when doing so would have 
 coat only $1,700,000 more than you have already 
 paid, and .secured to you the benefit of the com- 
 pleted contracts, and especially when it is certain 
 that these very works you have abandoned must 
 and will be shortly resumed. 
 
 Mr. TILDEN wanted to know if the State had 
 not made more money in breaking contracts than 
 if it had allowed them to be completed : 
 
 Mr. VVORDEN 8md that was a mere specula- 
 tive question, which no one could answer. He 
 only knew that these contracts had been made by 
 the state, arid the faith ot the state was pledged 
 for their fulfilment. The gentleman from New 
 York, (Mr. TILDEN,) may have calculated with 
 accuracy how much money the slate has made "in 
 breaking contracts," it. was not an investigation 
 he (Mr. W.) had gone into. So much for the 
 policy of 1842. 
 
 The idea ot abandoning the public works at 
 this time, had the sathe origin as the law of 1842. 
 The gentleman from Herkimer, had endeavored 
 to sustain his proposition on several grounds. 
 One was the overshadowing amount of the state 
 debt, positive and contiegent, as the gentleman 
 termed them. Another the impolicy of com- 
 mencing the works in progress ; another, that no 
 necessity existed for the enlargement, and that 
 all that was required was the improvement of the 
 present canal, as he now proposes ; and another, 
 the deferred claims of the General Fund on the 
 canals. Mr. W. said he proposed examining these 
 
1108 
 
 several positions in Connection wuh the tacts pro- 
 perly connected with them. 
 
 In the outset, Mr. W. said he admitted the state 
 owed a large debt. This debt has not been faiily 
 or truly stated on this floor, and it is very difficult 
 to ascertain Us (rue amount from documenls fur- 
 nished to this Convention. Mr. W. said he hlam 
 ed no one tor this, nor should he have adverted to 
 this contusion in stating the debts in the public 
 documents had not the gentleman from Herkirner 
 (Mr. H.) done so by way of explanation. He 
 might again refer to this subject. 
 
 The debts due by the state, said Mr. W. are 
 called the canal debt, and the General Fund debt. 
 The first consists of debts contracted foi the con- 
 struction of the canals. The latter includes all 
 other debts of the state. Mr. W. said he had en- 
 deavored to arrange these debts, and to state them 
 truly ; he believed he had been able to do so from 
 the public documents. 
 
 The canal debt said Mr. W. grows out of our 
 canal system. He had prepared a table showing 
 the cost of all the canals of the state. The amount 
 paid and the amount of outstanding stocks for the 
 construction of each canal, and the rates ot inter- 
 ests on I he stocks constituting the canal debt, 
 which he read, as follows : 
 
 Name of canals. Cost. Am't paid. Am't due on 
 
 outst'd'g stocks. 
 
 Erie and Cham., $8,401394 12 $8,059.919 60 $341,474 52 
 Erie Enlargem't 12,800,851 76 2,867,851 76 9,933,000 00 
 Oswego. 665,439 35 
 
 Cayusja & Sen'a 237,000 00 
 Crooked Lake, 156,776 00 
 Chemung, 684,603 58 
 
 Chenango, 2,4*0,000 00 
 
 Black River, 1,544,000 00 
 Genesee Valley, 3,794,000 00 
 Oneida Lake, 50,000 00 
 
 Oneidalmp't, 69,276 13 
 
 665,487 35 
 
 150,000 00 
 
 36,776 00 
 
 36,000 00 
 
 2,362,535 66 
 
 87,000 00 
 
 120,000 00 
 
 648,600 58 
 
 67,464 34 
 
 1,544,100 00 
 
 3,794,000 00 
 
 50,000 00 
 
 69,276 13 
 
 (R pott of Commissioners of Canal Fund, 1846, 
 p. 17) 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said although the aggregate a- 
 mount of I he general fund debt or all Other debts 
 ot the stale was $5,762,854 37, yet it miaht be 
 satisfactory lo the committee to slate the items of 
 that debt which were taken from the Comptrol- 
 ler's report to' the last legislature j see pages 7 
 and 12 of that report. They were as follows, ex- 
 cluding the principal of the Indian Annuities : 
 Stock issued to John Jacob Astor, $561,500 00 
 Stock issued for loans from the bank 
 
 Fund, 348,107 00 
 
 Slock issued to the Ithaca and Os- 
 wego R. R. Co , 315,700 00 
 Stock issued to the Canajoharie and 
 
 Catskill R. R Co, 200,00000 
 
 Stock issued to the N. Y. and Erie 
 
 R. R. Co., 3,000,000 00 
 
 Temporary loans to the Treasury, 597,395 59 
 Balance due specific funds, 740,151 78 
 
 The latter item consists of moneys 
 used by the state belonging to the 
 following specific funds : $407,- 
 183 07, due to the school fund ; 
 $20,232 58, due to the Literature 
 Fund ; $371.899 73, due to the 
 United States Deposite Fund, for 
 capital of that fund ; $38,853 05, 
 due to the Bank Fund ; $57,517- 
 47, due to the Mariners' Fund ; 
 $181 25, due to the Long Island 
 Railroad Co.'s Sinking Fund ; 
 making the above am't of $740,- 
 151 78, after deducting $158,844- 
 61, in the Treasury, total General 
 
 $30,723,335 94 $14,078,520 37 $16,647,815 57 
 Stocks have been 
 issued under the 
 law of 1846 to 
 pay land dama- 
 ges, &c., which 
 are not yet ap- 
 portioned among 
 the several canals, 
 amount, 300,000 00 300,000 00 
 
 $31,023 335 94 $14,078,520 37 $16 947,815 57 
 
 See Comptroller's report to the legislature ot 
 1846, page 6. Also report of the Commissioners 
 of the Canal Fund to the same legislature, page 
 17. Also Comptroller's report to the Convention. 
 (Statement B, 1, continued.) 
 
 The slocks outstanding and unpaid after the 1st 
 July, 1846, and which constitute the entire 
 outstanding canal debt, bear interest, as follows, 
 Tiz : 
 
 Principal. Interest. 
 
 Stocks at 7 per cent. $3,647,136 00 $255,299 52 
 6 " 1,481,782 00 S8.906 92 
 
 ft 11515,89757 575,79488 
 
 $16,644,815 57 $920,001 32 
 Add the stock issued 
 under the law of 
 1846, at 6 per cent, 
 interest, 300,000 00 18,000 00 
 
 $16,944,815 57 $938,001 32 
 
 Fund Debt, 
 
 $5,762,854 34 
 
 This statement of the amount of canal debt, 
 said Mr. W. shows it as it existed on the 1st July, 
 1846, and agrees with the Comptroller's report to 
 the Convention. Doc. 47, p. 35. By the same 
 document, it appears that the funds in the hands 
 of the Commissioners of the Canal Fund, on the 
 Isi of July last, were as follows : 
 Debls due from broken banks and 
 
 secured by the Safety Fund, $568,659 71 
 
 Amount of canal funds loaned to the 
 
 city of Albany, 30,000 00 
 
 One-half of the canal tolls for June, 
 
 iay , 175,000 00 
 
 Making in all, 
 
 $773,659 71 
 
 In addition to this, the law of 1846, appropria- 
 ted the tolls collected on railroads as a sinking 
 fund to pay the interest and principal of the 
 stocks issued under the law of the same session, 
 and which are included in the above statement of 
 canal debts. These tolls, as appears, said Mr. W. 
 from a note he held in his hand from the chief 
 clerk in the Canal Department, were about $32,- 
 000 and he also understood that the stocks sold 
 under the la'v of 1846, had produced a premium 
 of about $10,000, all of which funds, as they were 
 applicable to the payment of the canal debt, 
 should, in ascertaining the amount of that debt, be 
 taken into the account and deducted from the out- 
 
1109 
 
 standing stocks, which would leave that debt, to 
 be provided lor, about. $16,150,000 00 
 
 The other debts, being the General 
 Fund Debt, as staled by the Comp- 
 troller to the last legislature and 
 the Convention, excluding the 
 principal of Indian Annuities, as 
 stated before, amounted to, 5,762,854 00 
 
 Total debts of the state, 
 
 $21,912,654 00 
 
 The annual interest on this debt to be provided 
 for is as follows : 
 Total interest on canal debt, $938,001 32 
 
 Deduct interest from funds on hand 
 
 say, 25,001 32 
 
 Annual interest to be provided for, 
 
 on canal debt, $913,000 00 
 
 Total interest on General Fund 
 
 Debt, 317,936 63 
 
 Total annual interest on State Debt $1,236,936 63 
 
 This amount of debt, Mr. W. .said was great in- 
 deed, and when presented alone, and by those 
 seeking to mislead the public judgment, it might 
 appear alarming, but this debt had not been con- 
 tracted in th prosecution of wars, of conquest or 
 ambition. It had not been created to pension pub. 
 lie officers, or reward political profligates. It had 
 no f . arisen like those British debts, to which the 
 gentleman from Herkimer had so oftenalluded, to 
 subsidise foreign princes, and enable the British 
 crown to encircle the earth with its power. Every 
 dollar of this canal debt had been paid to labor, to 
 our own citizens ; it had made happy and content- 
 ed the hearts and homes of thousands who had toil- 
 ed in the construction ol these canals. The debt 
 was the means by which the state was ever the 
 owner of canals worth more than forly million of 
 dollars, charged with only about sixteen millions 
 for the cost of consi ruction. The net revenues of 
 these canals, over the cost of superintendence 
 and repairs, for the current year, were now ascer- 
 tained, and amounted, as the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer stated the other day, to over $2,100,000, be- 
 ing nearly a million of dollars more than the in- 
 terest on the entire debt ot the State, and afford- 
 ing you from your canals alone a net revenue of 
 over $L,200,00(J. Was there any thing alarming 
 in such a state of things? Yoq have expended on 
 your unfinished canals more than your entiie ca- 
 nal debt. On the Erie enlargement alone you have 
 paid over $12,000,000, and yet you have received 
 liltle advantage from this enlargement, and can 
 not until you complete it or expend much more. 
 From your finished works your revenues exceed 
 as before stated, $1,200,000 over the canal debt of 
 the State. And every dollar of debt you have in- 
 curred or are now under for the construction of 
 your canals, has resulted in the creation of a State 
 property double in value to the debt. Some other 
 reason, then, should be assigned for the abandon- 
 ment of the public woiks besides the existence of 
 such debt. 
 
 The gentleman from Heikimer has insisted up- 
 on another debt as existing against the canals, 
 which he now claims should be paid off' before any 
 further amount of tolls or revenues from them are 
 
 applied to their completion. This is the amount 
 claimed to be due to the general fund from the ca- 
 nals. And one of the provisions in the article un- 
 der consideration, reported by the gentleman from 
 Herkimer, requires "$672,500 of the revenues of 
 the canals to be annually, on each fiscal year, paid 
 into the treasury "in liquidation of the State 
 claims for advances to, and payments for, the ca- 
 nals." This provision on its face assumes that the 
 canals are indebted to the State for a principal 
 sum of money, the interest of which, at some given 
 rate, will be equal to the proposed yearly payment. 
 The nature of this claim and the items compo- 
 sing it will be found in schedule G annexed to 
 the report of the Comptroller. Convention Doc. 
 No. 47. It. consists of moneys specially appropri- 
 ated to the construction of the Erie and Cham- 
 plain canals, and derived from the following sour- 
 ces, viz : 
 
 Salt duty from 1817 to 1836, $1,055,458 06 
 
 Vendue'duty, 3,592,039 05 
 
 Steamboat lax, 73,509 99 
 
 Paid by the general fund for defi- 
 ciencies of the revenues of the 
 lateral canals to pay these ex- 
 penses, and the interest on the 
 moneys borrowed for their con- 
 struction, 1,386,498 
 Proceeds of the sales of land, 103,754 
 Direct tax, 
 
 $7,491,824 74 
 
 In the above table the Cumptrol. 
 ler allows a credit to the canals 
 for moneys drawn (rom the tolls 
 received upon them and paid in- 
 to the State Treasury for the 
 uses of the general fund of 2,137,602 73 
 
 Total amount received as collate- 
 ral aid in the construction of the 
 canals, $6,354,222 01 
 
 The Comptroller, by compounding the interest 
 on the several sums as they were annually receiv- 
 ed and applied to the consiruction of the canals, 
 at the rale of 5 per cent , makes the amount due 
 to the general fund from the canals on the 30th of 
 Sept., 1844, $13,451,167 74; and on the pretence 
 that this amount is an actual debt or claim in fa- 
 vor of the State againsl the canals, the chairman 
 of the committee, on the statement of the Comp- 
 troller, proposes to make the constitutional provi- 
 sion reported by him, in order that such claim may 
 be liquidated and paid. 
 A preliminary inquiry, said Mr. W. , arises as to 
 
 he rmht or authority of any member*of this Con- 
 vention or of the Convention itself, to set up any 
 such claim, or to insist on any provision for its 
 
 iquirlation. The State undertookjhe construction 
 of the Erie and Champlain canalsupon considera- 
 
 ions ot public policy in reference to the interests 
 of the whole State. The canals as they now exist 
 are the property of the State, whatever their value 
 may be. The means appropriated by law for their 
 construction were also the property of the State, 
 and were so appropriated, not as loans to the ca- 
 nals, but as permanent applications in the way, 
 which in its judgment was best calculated to ad- 
 
 ance its own interests. It would be about as sen- 
 sible for an individual who has built a house or 
 
1110 
 
 bought a farm to say his house or farm is indebted ' 
 to him for the amount paid for such house or farm, 
 as it would be to say the State of New- York owes 
 itself so much money as it can be shown its canals 
 have cost. 
 
 This assumption that the State has a claim on 
 the canals is without warrant in the laws of the 
 State, and only serves to confuse and mystify the 
 condition of our State finances. The act of 1817 
 specifically appropriated the auction and salt du- 
 ties and the steamboat tax and other revenues, to 
 the payment ot the debt and the interest thereon, 
 to be incurred in the construction of the Erie and 
 Champlain canals, and by this act the duties ou 
 salt were raised from three cents to a shilling on 
 the bushel. By the Constitution of 1821, these 
 duties and revenues were appropriated and pledged 
 to the payment of the Erie and Champlain canal 
 debt. They were set apart by law and Constiiu. 
 tion to the aid of these public works, and no where 
 in the statutes of the Slate is there any provision 
 authorizing any State officer or any body else to 
 consider or to pretend that by such appropriation 
 any claim whatever is created against the canals 
 to be repaid. They have gone towards the con- 
 struction of these canals which are the property 
 of the State, to be dealt with as any other State 
 property, and the assumption contained in the 
 proposition of the chairman of this committee No 
 3, is without any warrant whatever. No such 
 thing in la v, or in the fair construction of the laws 
 of the State, as a claim by the State on the pro- 
 perty of the State, exists. The idea is an absurd- 
 ity. It is impossible. 
 
 It is true, said Mr. W., as stated by the Comn- 
 troller, that the auction and salt duties from 1817 
 to 1837, and other incidental revenues, have been 
 appropriated to the construction of the Erie and 
 Champlain canals, and that these appropriations 
 over and above the amount taken from the canal 
 revenues and applied to the use of the State gov- 
 ernment is, as contained in the Comptroller's ta- 
 ble, $5,354,222 01. Mr. W. said he wished it un- 
 derstood that this amount included all that had 
 ever been raised under the tax law of 1842, and 
 from every other source, except from the tolls and 
 revenues of the canals, for their construction and 
 the payment of principal and interesi borrowed 
 for their construction. This whole claim against 
 the canals, therefore, arises from the items before 
 stated. 
 
 Mr. W. said he also desired it to be remembered 
 that when the canals weie commenced in 1S17, the 
 duties on salt manufactured in the western di- 
 trict, were increased from three to twelve and a 
 half cents per bushel. That this was done for the 
 express and avowed purpose of imposing a local 
 tax upon the people of the western -part of the 
 State using the aajt, and who were supposed to be 
 benefited by the construction of the canal. It is 
 admitted in one of the reports read by the gentle 
 man from Herkimer, in support of his claims a 
 gainst the canals, that the salt and auction duties 
 have been greatly increased, above what they oth- 
 erwise would have been, by the construction of 
 the canal. This pretence of claim against theca 
 nals has ever been urged by the enemies of the 
 system of internal improvement, for the purpose 
 of awakening local and sectional prejudices, on the 
 pretence that the canals have swallowed up the 
 
 general fund of the State. It has never, however, 
 Deen carried as far as is now insisted on. What- 
 ever of right or justice there may have been in this 
 claim, said Mr. W , it is special and direct against 
 :he Erie and Champlain canals, and has already 
 seen arranged on most just and equitable terms to. 
 wards the whole State. 
 
 By the Constitution of 1821, the tolls of the Erie 
 and Champlain canals were pledged and appropri- 
 ated to their completion, and to the payment of the 
 interest and the redemption of the debt contract- 
 ed in their construction, and it was declared that 
 the tolls should not be diverted or reduced, until 
 he payment of such principal and interest. They 
 could not, therefore, be pledged or appropriated, 
 hile the Erie and Champlain canal debt remain- 
 ed unprovided for, to any other purpose. They 
 had, however, accumulated in 1837 to a sum suffi- 
 cient to pay off the Erie and Champlain canal 
 debt, after which period the salt and auction du- 
 ties were restored to the general fund, and a yearly 
 appropriation made out of the canal toils to the 
 support of the State government. Prior to the pe- 
 riod when these tolls had accumulated sufficiency 
 to pay the Erie and Champlain canal debt, the 
 State had authorised the construction of all the la- 
 teral canals. The money borrowed for their con- 
 struction, and the interest thereon, was a charge 
 on the general lund, and the interest paid out of 
 such fund the Constitution prohibiting any ap- 
 plication of the canal lolls for that purpose. All 
 these lateral canals were authorized by acts passed 
 in 1836, and prior thereto. In 1836 acts tvere 
 passed for the construction of the Genesee Valley 
 and Black River canals, and a loan or $2,000,000 
 authorized for the first, and $800,000 for the latter. 
 In 1841 your treasury, or general fund, stood 
 charged with debts and liabilities, contracted for 
 the following canals, viz. : 
 
 Oswego canal, $565.43735 
 
 Cayuga and Seneca canal 237,000 00 
 
 Crooked Lake canal, 156,776 00 
 
 Chemung canal, 684.600 00 
 
 ehenangb canal, 2,420 000 00 
 
 Black River canal, (whole cost,) 1,544000 00 
 Genesee Valley canal, 3,794,000 00 
 
 $9,401,813 35 
 
 You had no means in the treasury to pay this 
 debt, or the interest, and it became necessary to 
 provide means for paying such interest. Upon the 
 principle the gentleman from Heikimer now goes, 
 and to that extent, Mr W. said he went with him. 
 Not hin could be more unjust than to tax the pro- 
 perty coming from western New- York, to pay the 
 debt cieatod for the construction of the Chenango 
 canal, or any of the lateral canals; but it was then 
 consideied that the Erie canal had received aid 
 from the general fut.d, as before slated, that the 
 tolls on that canal were rapidly increasing, and 
 probably would be sufficient to pay the debt and 
 interest on the cost of the lateral canals. A law 
 was therefore passed reducing ail the canals into 
 one system, and providing for the entire payment 
 of principal and interest on the debts contracted 
 for the construction of the lateral canals, out of the 
 tolls of the Erie canal, (such is the effect of that 
 law, as the lateral canals do not pay the interest 
 on their cost and repairs.) Thus, in 1841, the 
 Erie canal became, in effect, charged with the 
 
1111 
 
 debis of the lateral canals, and ihe general fund 
 was relieved to that amount, in addition to which 
 it was provided lhat $200,000 annually, should be 
 paid nut of the canal lolls into the treasury lor the 
 support of the State government. This was sup- 
 posed to be a lair and just arrangement ot the 
 claims set up against the canals in favor of the gen- 
 eral fund. It was recognized in the act of 1842, 
 and in the act of 1844 explanatory of that act. 
 
 Prior to 1841 there had been paid from the ca- 
 nal tolls into ihe treasury for State expenditure, 
 
 $1,137,602 
 Principal of the annuity of $200,000, 
 
 charged on the canals, under the 
 
 act oi 1841, at 5 per cent, equal to 4,000,000 
 Debts ol the Literal canals, charged 
 
 to the Erie canal, under the act of 
 
 1841, 9,401,813 
 
 Total am't. in 1841 and prior thereto, $14,539,415 
 cnaiged on the Erie and Champlam canals 
 
 In addition to the amount noA actually charged 
 on the tolls of the Erie canal, the gentleman from 
 Heikimer proposes to fasten an additional charge 
 on that canal of a yearly annuity or lax ol $67 
 500, equ^l to a gross charge, at five per ceiil, ol 
 $13,450,000, which he assumes to be "in liquida 
 tion ol ihe Slate claims lor advances to and pay- 
 ments for the canals." Making in all that the 
 Erie canal is to pay, under the law of 1841, and 
 under the proposition now insisted on, to ihe gen 
 eral fund, &c., in relief of the debts of the general 
 fund, the sum of $27,989,415. And we are told 
 that this is jus', that good faith to all parts of the 
 State require the canals now to be charged with 
 this additioj.al debt- Mr. W. said he could not re- 
 gard it in any such lignt, but in an entirely differ- 
 ent one. It was an attempt to tax the west with 
 the payment of the State debt, incurred for IO.IMS 
 to the New- York and Erie rail-road, and other in 
 solvent rail roads, to about three millions and a hal 
 of dollars, and all the other debts of the Stale in 
 curred for the support of the government, and then 
 to throw the whole expenses of the State on the 
 Erie canal, to be paid by the west. The gentle 
 man from Chautauque (Mr. PATTERSON) the othei 
 day asked the gentleman from Herkimer what par 
 of those tolls would be collected between the Hud 
 son river and Utica ? The enquiry was pertinent 
 but the gentleman could not or would not answer 
 There was no difficulty in giving the answer, am 
 the fact enquired about is material, to show on 
 what part of the State these burthens will fall. 
 The whole amount of tolls collected in 1845 on 
 the Erie canal between the Hudson river and Uti 
 f ca, was $30,586 less than half of the amount col 
 lected in the county of Wayne alone. L-irge a 
 mounts of tolls are collected at Albany and West 
 Troy, on ascending freight ; but a very inconside 
 rable portion of this amount is on property stop 
 ping east of Utica. The whole amount of toll 
 paid on the Erie canal for ascending and descend 
 in? freight, east of Syracuse, is probably less tha 
 $200,000 per annum, and probably not more tha 
 enough to pay the expenses of the canals, east c 
 that place; the residue is on property coming from 
 and goins to and west of Syracuse. That proper 
 ty it is now proposed to tax, (with the taxes an 
 burthens already imposed and for other purpose 
 than to pay lor the construction of the Erie canal, 
 
 127,000,000. The injustice of doing so is appa- 
 ent. No claim tor auction or salt duties, 'that 
 ave gone into the construction of the Erie and 
 /hamplain canals, can justify the measure. 
 It has been claimed that the canals have bene- 
 ited western New-York, to the prejudice of the 
 iver counties, and therefore western New-York 
 hould submit to the imposition of these burthens. 
 Vlr. W. said this was mere assumption; since the 
 ommencement of the Ene canal, the taxable real 
 nd personal property of the State had about dou- 
 led. It now exceeded six hundred millions of 
 lollars; of the three hundred millions increase, 
 bout one hundred and ninety-seven millions was 
 he increase of fifteen counties, including Rich- 
 uond and Long Island, Albany a;id Rensseiaer.and 
 he counties below, on each side of the North river. 
 The city of New- York had increased since the 
 rnmencement of the Erie canal, from about 87,- 
 )00 inhabuants to 300,000- The city of Brooklyn 
 vas a new city, the creation of the canal. Other 
 cities had vastly increased on the North river in 
 copulation. The pietence that the Erie canal had 
 njured the eastern part ol the State was an a-sump- 
 ion. It was useless to throw arguments away on 
 :hose who made it. 
 
 One word more, said Mr. W., on this claim on 
 he canals by reason of salt and auction dunes, to 
 ihow its injustice. 
 
 The salt and auction duties received into the 
 :reasury since 1817 may more properly be consid- 
 ered to aiise from the construction ot the canals. 
 We are in one sense indebted to the canals for the 
 auction and salt duties, and not to the auction and 
 salt duties for the canals. 
 
 No salt duties were received by the State prior 
 to 1803. The amount received from 1803 to 1817, 
 a period of 14 years, was $45 082 52. For the 
 same number of years, from 1818 to 1831, inclu- 
 sive, a like period of 14 years, the salt duties a- 
 rnounted to $1,301,663 91, being an excess over 
 the 14 preceding years of $1,256~581 39. 
 The nett proceeds of auction du- 
 ties received into the treasury 
 from 1784 to 1816, being a peri- 
 od oi 32 years, is $971,461 14 
 The whole amount of auction du- 
 ties received into the treasury 
 from 1817 to 1836, inclusive, be- 
 ing the period they were appro- 
 pi lated to the canals, in 'the 
 whole 20 years, are 3,592,039 05 
 
 Excess of auction duties for 20 yrs. 
 after the commencement of the 
 construction of the canals, over 
 32 years before such commence- 
 ment, ' $2,620,577 91 
 
 Since 1836 the auction and salt du- 
 ties have been restored to the 
 general fund and applied to the 
 ordinary expenditures of the 
 State. The amount of salt du- 
 ties received into the State trea- 
 sury since 1836, and thus ap- 
 plied, amounts to $1,081,674 81 
 
 The amount of auction duties re- 
 ceived since 1836, is 1,725,476 43 
 
1112 
 
 Total auction and salt duties re- 
 ceived since 1836, being 10 yrs. $2,807,151 
 
 Total salt duties re- 
 ceived before the 
 commencement of 
 the canals, during 
 14 years, $45,082 52 
 
 Total of nett auction 
 duties from 1784 to 
 1816, being 3b' yrs. 
 prior lo commence- 
 ment of the canals, 971,46114 1,016,5436 
 
 Excess of auction and salt duties 
 lor 10 years, since 1836, applied 
 to the ordinary expenses of the 
 government, over the total a- 
 mount received prior to the 
 commencement of the canals in 
 1817, 
 
 $1,780,607 5 
 
 In addition to the total amount of 
 auction and salt duties received 
 into the State freasuiy since 
 
 1836, and applied to the ordina- 
 ry expenditures of the State go- 
 vernment, being in all $2,807,151 2 
 
 The State has also taken from 
 the canal tolb and applied since 
 
 1837, to the ordinary expendi- 
 tures of the State government, 
 and paying deficiencies on the 
 lateral canals, as stated in the 
 comptroller's report before re- 
 ferred to, 2,137,602 73 
 
 Making in all $4,944,753 97 
 
 That the account may be fairly 
 
 stated with all the canals, on 
 
 the above view ot the case, the 
 
 amount paid out of the general 
 g" fund tor the deficiencies of lal'ral 
 
 canals, as before stated, should 
 
 be deducted, being 1,386,498 8b 
 
 Balance received into the general 
 
 fund since 1836 for the support 
 
 of the government from canals 
 
 and auction and salt duties, $3,558,255 09 
 
 Those who claim that on principles of equity 
 and fairness, the State, as against the canals, has a 
 right to abstract over $600,000 annually from the 
 canal revenues, must prove from the data here giv- 
 en, that the auction and salt duties, which prior to 
 1817, amounted to only $1,016,543 6G, would with- 
 out the aid of the canals since their commence- 
 ment in 1817, have amounted to the sum, derived 
 from the auction and salt duties and canal tolls, of 
 $3,558,255 09. Indeed there is about as much 
 justice in a claim against the State at large, for 
 this increase of revenue for the support of the go- 
 vernment, as there is in that now and heretofore 
 set up against the canals on account of the auction 
 and salt duties. 
 
 Mr. VV. said he would next proceed to consider 
 what had been called the contingent Railroad debt. 
 The State has issued and loaned its stock to cer- 
 tain corporations for which it is contingently lia- 
 ble, and for which our stocks are now outstanding. 
 These loans are as follows, viz : 
 
 To the Delaware and Hudson Ca- 
 nal company, 
 
 " Auburn and Syracuse Rail, 
 road company, 
 
 " Auburn and Roch. Rail- 
 road company, 
 
 " Hudson and Berk. Rail- 
 road company, 
 
 " Tonawanda Railroad com- 
 pany, 
 
 Long Island Railroad com- 
 pany, 
 
 '* . Schenectady and Troy 
 Railroad company, 
 
 * Tioga Coal and Iron Man- 
 ufacturing company, 
 
 There has been paid into the 
 reasury for the final extinction of 
 hese contingent debts, as follows, 
 viz.: 
 
 3y the Auburn and Ro- 
 chester Railroad co. $23,157 31 
 Jy the Tonawanda R. 
 
 road company, 7,733 59 
 
 By the Hud. and Berk. 
 
 Railroad company, 17.359 20 
 By the Tioga Coal and 
 
 Iron Manufac co., 944 74 
 By the Long Island R. 
 road company, 3,181 25 
 
 $793,000 00 
 
 200,000 00 
 
 200,000 00 
 
 150,000 00 
 
 100,000 00 
 
 100,000 00 
 
 100,000 00 
 
 70,000 00 
 
 $1,713,000 00 
 
 52,376 09 
 
 'otal contingent debt over funds 
 in the treasury, see Comptrol- 
 ler's report to last sess. p. 34, 35, $1,660,623 91 
 These companies regularly pay the interest on 
 le stocks loaned to them, and there is no reason- 
 ble apprehension that they will fail to pay the 
 )rincipal. These loans are secured by liens prior 
 o all others upon the property of the respective 
 orporations, which in point of value isabundanty 
 ufilcient to pay the debt tor which they are liable, 
 has been said by the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 iat it is very certain that a portion of these loans 
 ill fall upon the State to pay, and he was under- 
 ood to say the amount thus to be paid will ex- 
 eed $400,000. He did not designate which ot 
 iese corporations will prove bankrupt. Leaving 
 e subject as he did, throws discredit upon them 
 1, whether justly or unjustly, 'those interested in 
 ern will be able to appreciate. 
 The remaining alleged debt, viz: the United 
 ates deposit fund, Mr. W. said he would now ex- 
 mine. It must, said he, be manifest to every gen- 
 eman that will examine this subject, that this 
 eposite can never be classed among the debts of 
 le state. It is a portion ot the surplus revenues 
 the federal government, which by a law of Con. 
 ess was deposited with the several states of the 
 Jnion: no one ever supposed ii would be recalled, 
 d no administration, under any conceivable cir- 
 rnstances, will ever attempt to do so. The se- 
 rai states will never consent to its repayment, 
 lould the demand however be made, this state 
 las every dollar so safely invested as to be able to 
 ake repayment without taxation or increase of 
 3t. It was therefore with surprise that lie had 
 leard the gentleman from lierkimer advert to this 
 posite fund as "constituting a debt the most sa- 
 
1113 
 
 cred that can be imposed uu a goveinment to pay." 
 And Ihen proceed to class it among the debts of 
 the state to be provided for. Although the depo- 
 sile fund has never been considered a debt, on the 
 other hand it has never been regarded as proper 
 to use it in any way so as to extinguish or impair 
 the principal. It has therefore been kept invio- 
 late and separate from all other funds of tht 
 eminent, and the greater portion of it is loaned 
 out on bond and mortgage, and the residue in the 
 
 :iv;fj'iry is only regarded as a debt, and is 
 classed am.uvj; the debts of the general fund, in 
 .nt of the debts of the s'.tte, as he, Mr. 
 W., hail stated them. Heretofore those disposed 
 to swell the stale debt in the public estimation, 
 have been able to do so by keeping out of view 
 large sums in the hands of the commissioners of 
 
 tiral tund applicable to the payment of the 
 canal debt. These sums from 1841 to 1845 have 
 r, m^.'d horn two to three millions of dollars. Be- 
 tween tin: close of the fiscal year 1844, and this 
 nt-riod, si,Uti9,U90.0l of canal stocks have been 
 paid and cancelled, and now the actual debt can 
 only be given, it therefore seems convenient, in 
 order to keep up the idea of a vast outstanding 
 debt, th.it the United States deposite fund should 
 be clashed among the debts of the state, which is 
 f >r the first time done by the Comptroller in Con- 
 vention document No. 72, page 18, where he says 
 that this deposite fund is more properly classed 
 among the debts of the state, and he then re- 
 marks: 
 
 ''They" meaning the canals* "may be regarded 
 as mortgaged ior the following sums : 
 
 Principal o:' canal debt, $16,944,815 57 
 
 Insolvent railroad debts, 3,515,700 00 
 
 Contingent 
 
 do. 
 
 1,713,000 00 
 
 General fund debt,. . 2,369,849 24 
 
 Due. United Stales tor moneys de- 
 posited for safe keeping, 4,014,520 71 
 
 Total 
 
 $28,557,885 52 
 
 The gentleman from Herkimer, (said Mr. W.) 
 has also spoken of the em ire debts of the State as 
 amounting to the above sum, and neither he nor 
 the Comptroller, on the assumption that this is 
 tne amount o! debt, states what is most material 
 to be known in connection, viz: that the entire 
 canal df-:bt is stated without reference to funds on 
 ,lhat the entire amount loaned to paying 
 railroads, without deducting the sums they have 
 paid into the treasury as a sinking fund, is also 
 s'ated. The amount of the United States' deposite 
 fund is nl<o stated ut its lull amount, although 
 ; 1,020.9s 1 of that fund is loaned on bond and 
 mortgage. Eleven bundled dollars is invested 
 in our State stocks, and $37 1, 809.73 is in the trea- 
 sury of the State, and is included in the general 
 fund debt, as would IK? se;en by referring to the 
 items of that debt, as he (Mr. W ) had stated 
 rhein. The Co.ipt roller has therefore included 
 the la'tpr named sum-* twice in the estimate of his 
 debt. First a> a debt to the United States ; second 
 as a debt due by the general fund to the United 
 
 oi the -'.:,in.il fund, the same 
 amount being included in the U . 
 depo^iU' . luml debt, $372,999 73 
 
 Omission to creditor reter tosini<ing 
 
 fund of paying railroads, 52,570 09 
 
 Omission to state the amount of ca- 
 nal funds, 773,059 71 
 
 States deposite fund. 1'hus, even on the ground 
 
 assumed, the debt is exaggerated in the following 
 amounts 
 
 rs in the foregoing statement of 
 debt by the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer and the Comptroller,. ... $1,199,035 53 
 
 But really, after all the parade that has been 
 made by the gentleman from lieikimer about the 
 U. S. deposite fund, and the contingent railroad 
 debts, he tacitly admitted , and Mr. VY. said he be. 
 lieved, in direct terms that there was no reasona- 
 ble apprehension that the securities in which the 
 United States deposite fund is invested are insuffi- 
 cient, and that at the most the contingent debt of 
 the railroads, the State would be obliged to pay, 
 would not exceed some $400,01)0. What object 
 has there been then in parading these debts in the 
 reports to this body, and in the gentleman's speech 
 as has been done? Is it to influence the Conven. 
 tion or the public, or to raise a fictitious or imagin- 
 ary state of things in regard to our State debts, m 
 order to prevent the public from taking a cairn 
 and considerate view of the actual condition of the 
 State finances ? and to secure the adoption of pro- 
 visions in the constitution that will arrest the pro- 
 secution of the unfinished canals r Mr. W. said 
 he had no design to be understood as conveying 
 the idea that the Comptroller or the other State 
 officers intentionally mis-stated the debt of the 
 State. He did not think so. It was not for any 
 such reason that the difficulty so frequently ex- 
 pressed in understanding the reports arose. All 
 the facts stated, so far as he had been able to dis- 
 cover, were substantially true, but there were fre- 
 quently manj facts connected with those staled, 
 materially qualify ing or altering their effect, which 
 were withheld. Thus Jhe Comptroller in his re- 
 port to the Convention, Doc. Wo. 47, p. 5, ^i.it.'s 
 that the ascertained canal debt on the 1st April, 
 1842, was $21,179,019^1. The gentleman from 
 Herkimer has reierred to this statement as con- 
 taining the truth. It he intended to use this truth 
 for any fair ground of argument, he should also 
 have stated, what he and the Comptroller entirely 
 omitted to do, viz: that although the ascertained 
 canal debt on the 1st April, 1842, was as stated, 
 yet that there was a large fund tnen in the hands 
 of the commissioners of the canal fund to pay this 
 canal d>jbt. The precise amount of this fund on 
 the 1st April, 1842, Mr. W. said, he could not 
 without reference to the documents, state. At 
 the close of the fiscal year 1841, the funds in the 
 hands of the commissioners of the canal fund, were 
 1,037.25, and at the close of the fiscal year 
 Ib42, they amounted to ^2,1 7'J,5G9.3i. These 
 facts, for the purpose of fairly and accurately un- 
 derstanding tiie amount of the canal debt, should 
 be known and stated, as they reduced by that 
 amount for all practical or financial purposes the 
 debt of 1842, as staled by the Comptroller and the 
 iioni Ili-ikimer. From 1842 to the 
 
 presi. nt, especially in the Comptroller's reports, 
 these funds applicable to the payment of the 
 canal debt, have either been kept out of view, 
 
 114 
 
1114 
 
 or not prominently stated, and it is only by refer 
 ring to the report of the commissioners of the ca 
 nal fund, that the amount of funds in their hand: 
 applicable to the payment of the canal debt is as 
 certained. The Comptroller in his annual repor 
 of 1846, pages 7 and 9, accurately states th< 
 amount of the canal debt at $19,690",020.77, and 
 the debt of the general fund (improperly including 
 the principal of Indian annuities) at $5,885,549.24 
 making in all $25,576,670.01 ; yet there was in 
 the hands of the commissioners of the canal fund 
 as appears by their report, page 1, $2,712,730 06 
 applicable to the payment of the canal debt. Hac 
 this latter tact been stated by the Comptroller, al 
 who read his report would have at once perceivec 
 the real debt unprovided for, was but $22,862,- 
 839-95. The actual canal debt, as reported by the 
 Comptroller, has since been reduced by the pay- 
 ment of $2,362 ; 535 60 of Chenango stocks falling 
 due the 1st January, 1846, and $571,304 of Oswe. 
 go and Cayuga and Seneca stocks falling due Is 
 July last, and increased $300,000 by the issue of 
 stocks under the law of last winter, making the 
 actual canal debt on the 1st July, 1846, $16,944,- 
 815.57, as accuiately stated in the Comptroller's 
 rep. Con, Doc. No. 47, p. 35, statement B,and re- 
 port of the commissioners of the canal fund, 1846, 
 pages 16 and 17. Although the canal debt was on 
 the 1st July, 1846, as stated, yet the funds on that 
 day in the hands of the commissioners of the ca- 
 nal fund had also been kept out of view, which re- 
 duced the actual debts of the State as before stated, 
 to $21,912,854, embracing canal debts and all 
 other debts of the State to be paid or provided 
 for. 
 
 Mr. W. said he would next proceed to consider 
 the other ground of argument of the gentleman 
 from Herkimer (Mr. H.) viz: the impolicy of 
 commencing the present unfinished works. If 
 there was any such impolicy, Mr. W. said, he de 
 sired those chargeable with it, should alone be 
 censurable; and he would now undertake to show 
 that the gentleman from Herkimer had as much to 
 do with the origin of that measure as anyone else. 
 That he, not only as to yie necessity and policy of 
 commencing and prosecuting the enlargement, had 
 at one time occupied an entirely different ground 
 from that assumed by him at this time; but that 
 in his own reports while canal commissioner,"lhe 
 very plan he now advocates for "the improvement" 
 of the Erie canal was unequivocally condemned 
 under his own signature. 
 
 In 1834, an act was passed to improve the ca- 
 nals of this State, which authorized the canal 
 commissioners to construct double locks of such 
 dimensions as they should deem proper from Al- 
 bany to Syracuse, and make all proper works to 
 adapt the canal to the use of the double locks. 
 The Canal Commissioners, of whom the honorable 
 gentleman from Herkimer, Mr. HOFFMAN, was 
 one, after the passage of this act, directed the en- 
 gineers of the State to make the necessary surveys 
 and estimates for complying with its piovisions. 
 No work, however, was done under it. At the 
 session of the legislature of 1835, the Canal Com- 
 missioners, thea being Messrs. S. VANRENSSE- 
 LAER, MICHAEL HOFFMAN, SAMUEL YOUNG, 
 WM. C. BOUCK and JONAS EARLE, JR., made a 
 special report, relative to the improvement of the 
 Erie canal," (see Assembly Doc. of 1835, No. 143,) 
 
 in which they gave a detailed account of what had 
 been done under the act, and in which the assign- 
 ed reasons why some other mode of improving the 
 canal should be adopted. Throughout the whole 
 report the gentleman from Herkimer and his col- 
 leagues assumed that doubling the locks without 
 widening and deepening the canal would not give 
 to it adequate capacity to accommodate the in- 
 creased trade upon it. That for this puipose and 
 to secure such trade, the future improvements of 
 the canal "must be designed to make the tianspor- 
 tat ion as cheap and secuie as possible;" "but if to 
 secure these reduced expenditures and tolls, im- 
 provements and enlargement of the capacity of the 
 canal be neglected or long delayed, the business 
 of the oountiy so enlarged and rapidly increasing? 
 would exceed the capacity of the canal, and, seek- 
 ing new and rival channels, would with the lolls* 
 thereon, be lost to this State." The report then 
 goes on to speak of the increased business on the 
 canal, and states it to have been about 12 per cer>t 
 in each year since 1826, and of a much higher rate- 
 on the business of 1831 and 1832. 
 
 During the same session of the legislature, the 
 proceedings of a public meeting, held in Utica, to 
 take measures to affect the construction ot a ship 
 canal between Lake Ontario and the Hudson river, 
 and also a resolution of the Common Council of 
 the city ot New York, in favor of tht construction 
 of said canal, were referred to the Canal Board, 
 which Board on the 30th March, 1835, made a re- 
 port thereon to the legislature, '(Assembly Docu- 
 ments, 1S35, No. 334.) This report is signed by 
 Wm. C. Bouok, S. Van Rensselaer, A. C. Flagg, 
 John A.Dix, Greene C. Bronson, William Camp- 
 bell and Michael Hoffman, and it concurs in the 
 opinion expressed in the proceedings referred to, 
 that the facilities for transportation through the 
 state should be commensurate with the wants of 
 the fertile regions of Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Mis- 
 souri and the territories north and west of these 
 states, but the board did not deem the proposed 
 ship canal the best channel for affording such fa- 
 cilities. They arrived at and expressed afar safer 
 and wiser conclusion, viz : to use their own lan- 
 guage, "That an enlargement of the Erie eanal 
 would be in all respects the best plan to accom- 
 modate the transportation between the Hudson 
 river and the western lakes." 
 
 The Canal Board also advert to the act of 1834, 
 authorizing the doubling of the locks, which they 
 admit will increase the capacity of the canal for 
 a short period, without essentially lessening the 
 expense of transportation. They then say, "It is 
 lowever, quite certain that the time is not very 
 listanl when additional facilities will be necessa- 
 y, and the Canal Board take this occasion to ex- 
 press the opinion that the enlargement of the 
 2rie canal should be directed at the present ses- 
 uon of the legislature." Speaking of the mode of 
 >rosecuting this enlargement, the Canal Board 
 ilso say, "As the work must be eifected without 
 nterruption to the navigation, its progress must 
 )e necessarily slow and cannot reach Lake Erie 
 )o soon to accommodate the western trade which 
 will naturally seek this channel." 
 
 Such were the clear and emphatic opinions ex- 
 ressed by the gentleman from Herkimer in 1835, 
 n favor of the immediate enlargement of the Erie 
 ^anal. That gentleman's opinions as expressed 
 
 
1115 
 
 at this time on this floor, are of a very differen 
 character. He now seeks to discredit the under 
 taking by charging its origin upon a Rocheste 
 meeting. Whether the huelligent citizens of tha 
 place are entitled to the honor, Mr. W. said hi 
 had no other evideace than the gentleman's dec- 
 larations. Whatever might have been the early 
 action of the citizens of Rochester, the gentleman 
 from Herkimer was among the first public officers 
 of the state, and Mr. W. said, he believed the firs 
 public officer that, in direct and explicit terms 
 advised the legislature to authorize the enlarge- 
 ment of the Erie canal. Mr. W. said the gen 
 lleman perhaps might reconcile his opinions 
 on this subject in 1S35, with those he now ex- 
 pressed. 
 
 The gentleman from Herkimer, the other day 
 bitterly complained of the gentleman from Wayne 
 (Mr. ARCHER,) that he had not done him (Mr H.) 
 justice by neglecting to read that portion of the 
 report of the canal board in 1835, which suggest- 
 ed the manner of obtaining means to prosecute 
 the enlargement. Mr. W. said he intended to do 
 the gentleman from Herkimer no such injustice 
 Among the objects the gentleman now seeks to 
 secure by a constitutional provision, is the repay- 
 ment by the canals to the general fund of what he 
 claims the canals owe to that fund ; and he insists 
 ihat no considerations connected with the enlarge- 
 ment of the Erie canal should prevent for any 
 time such repayment. It is now a question or' 
 strict obligation to make this repayment, involving 
 *uch high moral and political considerations, that 
 he has framed and reported a provision to be in- 
 corporated in the instrument we are about passing 
 so that this duty shall not be dependent upon any 
 legislative sense ol morality. The salt arid auc- 
 tion duties constituting this now pretended debt 
 against the canals were mainly appropriated prior 
 to 1835, when the report last mentioned was writ- 
 ten. Such application ceased after 1836. The 
 whole ground of claim on account of these auc- 
 tion and salt duties existed against the canals in 
 1835, with the same lorce and on the same prin- 
 ciple of justice as at this time, and it' it would tit- 
 unjust now to appropriate the entire revenues of 
 the Erie canal to its enlargement it was equally 
 unjust to do so in 1835. At that time I he gentle- 
 man from Herkimer was silent upon this claim of 
 the general fund. No mention whatever was then 
 made by him of this debt owing by the state to The 
 state, or about th plundering of the genual fund 
 by the canals. If the position now assumed by 
 him was sound, there was then a debt due to the 
 general tund from the 'canals of about $'9,000,000, 
 which the canal tolls should have been appropriat- 
 ed to pay. If this debt u owing now, ii was then 
 due. Where then was the zeal of the gentleman 
 
 when in 1835, he 
 to which he (Mr. 
 
 penned the recommendation 
 W.) alluded ? Why was he 
 
 then silent on a subject on which he is now so 
 zealous ? 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN. I was then a Canal Commis- 
 sioner, and had nothing to do with that question. 
 Had I been a member of the legislature, I should 
 probably done as I now propose. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN. Probably you would, but being 
 Canal Commissioner, you did entirely different. 
 Mr. W. said he conceded the gentleman did not 
 thea recommend that the enlargement should be 
 
 prosecuted by moneys raised on loans ; but that 
 there could be no mistake as to what he did re- 
 commend, he would read the language of the gen- 
 tleman from his own report. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN then read from the report of the 
 Canal Board in 1835, as follows : 
 
 " In urging upon the consideration of the legis- 
 lature the importance of authoiizing, at the pres- 
 ent session such an enlargement of the Erie canal 
 as is conceived to be necessary to adapt it to the 
 increasing trade ot the country, the Canal Board 
 desire to have it distinctly understood that they 
 do not recommend such an expenditure of money 
 upon this work as will interfere with the arrange- 
 ments now in progress for accumulating a sum 
 sufficient to pay the Erie and Champlain canal 
 debt, and for restoring the auction and salt duties 
 to the general fund. The nett proceeds of the 
 canal fund for 1835, '36 and '37, will probably be 
 sufficient to pay the balance of the canal debt, 
 and meet the disbursements on the contracts for 
 doubling the locks. At ihe close of 1837, the 
 auction and salt duties will be restored to the gen- 
 eral fund if the proposed amendment to the Con- 
 stitution should meet the sanction of the people. 
 After the period alluded to, the nett proceeds of 
 the canal tolls will be sufficient to meet the dis- 
 bursements necessaiy for improving aad enlarging 
 the canal without having recourse to new loans 
 for that purpose." 
 
 If, said Mr. W. there is any force in language, 
 the above extract conveys a clear, unequivocal re- 
 commendation to apply the nett proceeds of the 
 canal tolls, after providing for the payment of the 
 old Erie arid Champlain canal debt, to the en- 
 argement of the Erie canal ; and no one enter- 
 aining the opinion now expressed by the gentle- 
 nan from Herkimer, that these canal tolls should 
 >e applied to the payment of a just debt to the 
 tate treasury in preference to the enlargement, 
 could consistently have used the language tu 
 ?vhich the gentleman from Herkimer appended 
 signature in 1835. Not a word was then said 
 tbout arrearages to the general fund or in support 
 'f the claim now brought forward. Mr. W. could 
 nly account for this on the ground that no such 
 laim was then considered as founded in justice 
 and equity. 
 
 The gentleman from Herkimer (said Mr." W.) 
 now takes credit to himself because he was in 
 Ib35, opposed to prosecuting tho enlargement by 
 means of loans. His language as just stated ex- 
 presses no such opposition. He merely said that 
 the appropriation of the entire nett revenues of 
 the canals would be sufficient to prosecute the 
 enlargement without recourse to loans, but the 
 gentleman wa for prosecuting the enlargement 
 at all events ; and if the tolls were diverted to 
 any other purpose, or if at that time, as a mem- 
 ber of the legislature lie would have done as he 
 now proposes : divert over $500,000 of the toils 
 of the canals to support the government, where 
 would the gentleman have obtained the means to 
 carry on the enlargements ? But Mr. W. said he 
 never believed the idea was seriously entertained 
 in any quarter, that the enlargement could be 
 prosecuted with the surplus tolls alone. The act 
 uf 1835, authorizing the enlargement, directed 
 generally that the cost should be paid "out of any 
 moneys which may be on hand belonging to the 
 
1116 
 
 Erie and Champlain canal fund." And that after 
 1837, the expenditures should be so limited as to 
 leave from the canal revenues without reference 
 to auction and salt duties, an annual income to the 
 state of $300,001). Gov. Marcy in his message to 
 the legislature of 183t>, said in reference to the 
 prosecution of the works then authorized, "No 
 new work can be executed without using the 
 public credit." In 1837 the Senate addressed a 
 series of enquiries to the canal board, to ascertain 
 whether in their opinion, it was for the interests 
 of the state to proceed more rapidly with the en- 
 largement of the Erie canal, than was contem- 
 plated by the act of 1835 ; and whether the cost 
 of the work would exceed their former estimate, 
 (that being about twelve and a half -millions of 
 dollars.) JVfr. W. read the answer to this enquiry 
 which was signed by the present Comptroller, 
 Jonas Earl, jr., John A. Dix, and Samuel Beards- 
 ley. The answer was distinct and decisive, that 
 it was expedient to proceed faster with the en- 
 largement than had been provided for in 1835. 
 How otherwise proceed faster, said Mr. W., than 
 by loans ? The whole point of the enquiry was 
 to ascertain whether it was proper and necessary 
 to complete the enlargement by loans, and the 
 answer was most emphatic in its meaning that it 
 was. 
 
 Nothing further was done on the subject of the 
 enlargement until 1838. At the opening of the 
 session of the legislature in that year, Gov. Mar- 
 cy brought to its attention the importance of pro- 
 gressing more speedily in the enlargement of the 
 canal. He said, "The best interests of the state 
 appeal to you with great earnestness to provide 
 for the early completion of this important im- 
 provement. I am persuaded that a larger sum 
 jhan the present appropriation (the surplus .tolls) 
 might be advantageously expended without caus- 
 ing interruption and delays to the transportation 
 on the canals." Again he says, in the same mes- 
 sage, "both duty and interest indicate not only 
 the propriety of making it (the enlarged canal) 
 adequate to the public wants, but of making it so 
 at the earliest practicable period." 
 
 Mr. W. said this was the language of a wi.sc 
 statesman, whose recommendations had always 
 been received with favor by the people of this state. 
 He then referred to Gov. Marcy's special message 
 in that year when the finances were deranged. 
 He then recommended the issue of $7,500, 
 state stocks to be loaned to the banks, the proceeds 
 to be used in the prosecution of the public works, 
 as fast as could wisely be done. Mr. W. com- 
 mented upon this recommendation, referring to 
 what he doubted not would be the verdict of pos- 
 terity upon its patriotism. Pursuant to the re- 
 commendations of Gov. Marcy an act was passed 
 in 1838, authorizing the first loan for the enlarge- 
 ment of the Erie canal. 
 
 Mr. VV. said the gentleman from Herkimer had 
 Undertaken to prove that the Erie canal did run 
 need to be enlarged, at all events, nut to the ex- 
 tent it had been declared necessary by tbe canal 
 board, under the law of 1S35. On the 3d July, 
 1835, the canal board decided that the public in- 
 terests required the enlargement, and persuant. to 
 the law tiipy fixed the dimensions of the enlarged 
 canal at 70 feet by 7. The gentleman from Her- 
 kimer condemns this decision as unwise and un- 
 
 called tor. Indeed every recommendation ot the 
 Executive of the Slate of all its officers charged 
 wittr the duty of looking after the canal inteit s's 
 of the State 'he acts of the legislature on that 
 subject from 1835 to 1S3S, now fall under the de- 
 nu'K'i'itioo, and condemnation of that gentleman. 
 Mr. W. said he had purposely come down to no 
 Liter period in the history of the Erie canal en- 
 la gement than 1838. He had referred to the ar- 
 guments and opinions of distinguished men during 
 the period Iroin 1835 to 1838, and had used their 
 names as connected vviih these arguments and 
 opiiiions;|h.e hoped he should not be understood as 
 having dune so for any improper purpose. The 
 names and opinions of those gentlemen were iden- 
 tified vviih the history of the State, and he had ie- 
 ferred to no act or opinion which he condemned, 
 or fel- disposed to condemn ; on the contrary, the 
 views they so often expressed in favor ot the pro- 
 secution and early completion of that great work, 
 the enlargement of the canal, were those of wi^e 
 arid enlightened statesmanship, and would render 
 their namesconspicuousin the history of the State. 
 Mr. VV. said he had also used the name, and ad- 
 verted to the opinions of a distinguished individual, 
 a member of this Convention, the gentleman from 
 Schoharie, (Gov. BOUCK.) Although it had been 
 his fortune to differ with that gentleman political- 
 ly, vet he felt it his duty to say, in reference to 
 this great question of internal improvement that 
 he had always considered that gentleman as a firm 
 supporter of that policy. He trusted he should 
 rind him so throughout this Convention. High as 
 that gentleman had been elevated in office, and 
 sure as he was to fill a conspicuous place in the 
 history of the State, his devotion to the cause of 
 internal improvement, would add lustre to his re- 
 putation, and cause his memory to be regarded 
 with veneration by posterity. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN said he had, he believed, very 
 fully stated all the arguments from 1835 to 183S, 
 in favor of the enlargement of the Erie canal; and 
 he was glad to know that some of the most power- 
 ful and conclusive ones in favor of the measure 
 wore advanced by the gentleman from Heikimer. 
 
 The argument in favor of the enlargement, from 
 1838, was based upon conjecture as to 
 the amount and increase of the western trade. 
 Every anticipation at that time entertained has 
 been more than realised. Every argument which 
 could justify the canal board in 1835, in advising 
 the legislature to commence the enlargement, has 
 increased force in favor of the measure at this mo- 
 ment. The arguments of 1835 werebase.l on the 
 anticipated increase of trade ; at present they rest 
 upon the actual increase since that period, and 
 the probable future increase. 
 
 The following facts, taken from tables of the 
 trade and tonnage of the canals, as reported to the 
 legislature at its last session, are of the utmost 
 importance to exhibit the past and probable fu- 
 ture trade of the canals. 
 
 In 1834, the property of all descriptions coming 
 on the canals to tide-waters was 553,596 tons. 
 Value $13,405,022. In 1845 the tons of property 
 arriving at tide-waters on the canals, were 1,204,- 
 ) L'J. Value $45,452.321, being an increase of 
 tonnage of over two hundred per cent., and in 
 value over three hundred per cent. 
 
 In 1834 the whole quantity of wheat and flour 
 
1117 
 
 arriving at the Hudson river from the canals, was 
 130,452 tons, value $5,719,795. In 1845 the 
 quantity of wheat and flour arriving at the Hud- 
 son was :!-j(>, 103 tons, value $15,962,950, 
 
 In 135 the wheat and flour from other States, 
 shipped at Buffalo, Black- Rock and Oswego. was 
 ;iu,^>23 tons. In 1S45 it was J>o,;2lO tons, being 
 an increase of about six hundred per cent, in ten 
 years. 
 
 In 1830 the tons of property from the Western 
 States arriving at tide-waters, by way of the Erie 
 canal, were 54,219 tons. 
 
 In 1845 the tons of property from the Western 
 States arriving at tide-waters by the way of the 
 Erie canal, were 304,551 tons, being an increase 
 of about six hundred per cent, in the Western 
 trade in the preceding ten years, while the amount 
 of tonnage from our own State arriving at tide- 
 waters, has only about doubled in the same pe- 
 riod, and that going from tide waters within the 
 same period, has increased about fifty per cent. 
 Should the trade on the Erie canal increase for 
 the next ten years in the same ratio as during the 
 past ten years, it would exceed that of the year 
 1845, three hundred per cent. The gentleman 
 from Herkimer only anticipates that his present 
 plan of "improvement" of the Erie canal will 
 treble its capacity. 
 
 A few other facts Mr. WORDEN said he desir- 
 ed to state. They addressed themselves to the 
 representatives from the city of New York, and 
 he trusted they would have their proper influence. 
 That city enjoyed a large proportion of the for- 
 eign export and trade of the United States. Mr. 
 W. said the value of property in 1845 arriving at 
 tide- water from the canals, was #45,452,321, 
 about equal to one-half, of the value of the entire 
 exports of the whole of the United States-. Du- 
 ring the year 1845 the value of all the property 
 ascending and descending on the canals, was 
 $1110,953,245, exceeding the value of all exports 
 from the United States for the same year. 
 
 Is this immense trade to increase ? (asked Mr. 
 W.) He believed it would, experience justified 
 that belief, to think otherwise, would be to dis- 
 trust the munificence of Providence. Mr. W. 
 said he regretted to be obliged to resort to statis- 
 tics to sustain and illustrate his position, but they 
 often contained in themselves potent and convin- 
 cing arguments. If any gentleman would take 
 the trouble to look over the map of the Western 
 States, and ascertain the character of their popu- 
 lation, their climate, soil and productions, or ob- 
 tain even a tolerable knowledge on those subjects 
 / and then would say he doubted the future increase 
 of the trade and business of the Western States, 
 he should consider that man as one deprived oJ 
 ordinary intelligence and reason. And yet gen- 
 tlemen possessed of these high qualities, in an 
 eminent degree, from inattention to facts easily 
 ascertained, are continually expressing doubts as 
 to the progress and advance of the Western trade 
 arid the business of the canals. Mr. W. said he 
 could in tracing through the public documents of 
 this State, find estimates ol the probable increase 
 ot tolls and trade, made by very respectable anc 
 intelligent gentlemen, that their authors would 
 now blush to look upon, they fell so far short of 
 actual results. They appear to be the production 
 of men of the past age, and of by-gone times, be- 
 
 'ore education elevated, and enterprise stimulated 
 :o exertions, the free and imtrameled intellects 
 of the noble race of men that now people the 
 ri-cat West. But said Mr. W., I will return to 
 ny statistics. 
 
 In 1800, the territory now com prising the States 
 
 of Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and the ter- 
 
 itory of Wisconsin, contained a population of 
 
 about 50,000. In 1840 the population of the same 
 
 territory was as follows : 
 
 Ohio, 1,519,408 
 
 Indiana, 6S5,sf,; 
 
 Illinois, 407,183 
 
 Michigan, 212,207 
 
 Wisconsin Territory, 30,945 
 
 The population of these States and Territory, 
 ;annot at this time be less than three million and 
 a half of people, and the country bordering on the 
 great Western Lakes is capable of sustaining a 
 vast increase of population, which in no very re- 
 mote period will amount to ten millions. They 
 are rapidly increasing in wealth and production, 
 and their trade will increase in a ratio beyond 
 that of the population. They are also construct- 
 ing extensive works of internal improvement, 
 having reference to an outlet to tide waters 
 through our canals. 
 
 The extent of the Wes'ern trade, said Mr. W., 
 may be more accurately estimated by the im- 
 mense extent of inland communication, natural 
 arid artificial, connected with and leading through 
 the Erie canal from the city of New York. 
 
 The city of Chicago is distant from 
 New York, 1,478 miles. 
 
 The following canals leading into 
 Lake Erie are completed: 
 The Erie extension from Beaver to 
 
 Erie, 136 " 
 
 Cross Cut Canal from Beaver to 
 
 Cleaveland Canal, 143 " 
 
 Ohio Canal from Portsmouth to 
 
 Cleaveland, 309 " 
 
 Miami Extension from Cincinnati to 
 
 Toledo, 247 
 
 Total, 2,313 " 
 
 The W abash and Erie canal is now in the pro- 
 gress of completion, and is designed to connect 
 the waters of the Ohio by way of Maumee Bay 
 with Laka Erie. Its entire length is about 450 
 miles, traversing the richest agricultural portion 
 of the globe. Four millions of dollars are already 
 expended on this canal, and about one million 
 and a quarter ol dollars is required to complete 
 the entire work, for which Congress has appro- 
 priated 800,000 acres of public lands. 
 
 The Illinois canal when completed, will open 
 a channel of communication between Lake Michi- 
 gan and the Mississippi, through the Illinois ri- 
 ver, of more than 300 miles in extent. The final 
 construction of this work within no remote pe- 
 riod, may be regarded as certain. The rich min- 
 eral district bordering on ' Lake Superior, must 
 furnish an immense tonnage to our canals, and en- 
 sure the construction of a Ship canal around the 
 rapids, in the strait separating it from Lake Hu- 
 ron. 
 
 Will the world believe it possible, said Mr. W 
 that the State of New York can be so lost to her 
 interests, as to incorporate into her Cons. itui ion 
 
1118 
 
 provisions that shall prevent her legislature from 
 employing the abundant resources at her com- 
 mand, in the way best calculated to secure this 
 immense trade ? Wars have been prosecuted fo 
 commercial objects of far less importance. Th< 
 whole foreign trade of the city of New York, is 
 almost insignificant when compared with the mag- 
 nitude of the trade of the Western States, being 
 an interior coast trade of more than 3000 miles al 
 ready, and rapidly extending the trade also o 
 three millions and a half of people, that must soon 
 increase to ten millions. Great Britain under- 
 took an expensive war to extend her trade with 
 China. She expended more in that war than the 
 entire cost of enlarging the Erie canal, and yet, 
 said Mr. W., it may be doubted whether the trade 
 of China is worth to the British Empire what the 
 trade of the Western States is to the State of New 
 York or even the city of New York, and yet no 
 representative of that city has as yet on this floor, 
 done aught to secure that trade, or to advocate the 
 policy of doing so. Mr. W. said he saw among 
 that representation, gentlemen of high character 
 and intelligence, and sincerely trusted they would 
 aid with all the force of their exertions, to secure 
 to the city they represent, by suitable provisions 
 in the Constitution, the completion of the en- 
 largement of the Erie canal, and thereby secure 
 those great commercial advantages, of which, 
 without such aid, she might be entirely deprived. 
 ' 8PMr. W. said he had said all that he intended in 
 vindication of the policy of enlarging the Erie ca- 
 nal, and of the necessity for such enlargement. 
 He now proposed to examine the policy of the 
 proposed improvement of the canal as stated and 
 advocated by the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 (Mr. H.) Mr. W. said he understood that gentle- 
 man to say he was in favor of completing the enlar- 
 ged locks from Albany to Syracuse. In that Mr. W. 
 said he concurred. He believed most of these locks 
 were under contract when the work was arrested 
 in 1842 . The cost of completing them as estima- 
 ted by the Canal Commissioners was $395,000, 
 and under any circumstances their completion 
 was necessary. The gentleman from Herkimer 
 had stated very distinctly, that from Syracuse to 
 Buffalo he would not construct new locks on the 
 plan of the enlargement, but merely lengthen the 
 chamber of the old locks, so that a longer boat 
 could pass through them. The gentleman propo- 
 ses to deepen the bed of the canal and raise the 
 banks so as to give a depth of five feet water in 
 the channel, without increasing the width of the 
 water or widening the water way of the canal for 
 the passage of boats. This is the extent of the 
 improvement of the Erie canal as now proposed 
 by the gentleman from Herkimer. 
 
 Mr. W. said he was obliged again to avail him- 
 self of the arguments of the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer in 1835, in condemnation of his present 
 plan of improvement of the Erie canal, as he had 
 done before in support of the policy of enlarging 
 the canals. The gentleman from Herkimer now 
 says all that is required is to add one foot to the 
 depth of water in the canal and lengthen the 
 locks. How is he to add this one foot ? Is it by 
 excavating the bed of the canal ? If so, then said 
 Mr. W. I refer to his argument in 1835, signed, 
 if not written by him. (See Assembly Doc. 1S35, 
 
 No. 148.) The gentleman there says, "Depress- 
 ing the bottom line of the canal will in general be 
 expensive. It will displace any lining which may 
 have been placed in it. It will by the slopes of 
 the banks contract the width of the canal and 
 make large excavations necessary to afford the re- 
 quisite width, and especially at the foot of high 
 banks and hills used to slide. It will make ex- 
 pensive excavations necessary in the beds of 
 streams through which the canal passes, or over 
 which it is crossed, in many cases on aqueducts 
 and culverts. It will require that these be rebuilt 
 at the depressed levels, and the heads and foun- 
 dations of the locks must be accommodated to the 
 new bottom line, which will require that the 
 guard locks on the line and the locks which lift 
 from it be rebuilt." Nothing more need be said 
 against the present proposition to deepen the bed 
 of the old canal with the present locks remaining 
 as they are. Any one at all acquainted with me- 
 chanical structures, knows the thing to be of no 
 practical utility. 
 
 If the depth of water in the old canal is to be 
 increased to the depth of five feet without widen- 
 ing the canal, then again the gentleman from Her- 
 kimer in 1835, shows in the report last referred 
 to, that it is impolitic, if not impracticable, to do 
 so without widening the canal. On this point, 
 Mr. W. said he would again quote from the re- 
 port of the gentleman in 1835, page 14, where he 
 says, " In order to procure the materials necessa- 
 ry to raise and strengthen the banks of the canals, 
 so as to render them sufficient to sustain six or 
 even five feet of water, it will in the earth exca- 
 vations be necessary to excavate the canal in gen- 
 eral 20, and in some parts 30 feet wider than it 
 now is, which will afford a water line of 60 to 70 
 feet." The gentleman frem Herkimer has advert- 
 ed to the yearly expenditures on the canals for 
 repairs and their increase, and says they must con- 
 tinue to increase. The cost of repairs done for 
 ihe last year on the Erie and Champlain canals, 
 is said to be over $500,000. This great expendi- 
 ;ure arises from the fact that the water in the ca- 
 nal is now greater than the capacity of the banks 
 to sustain. They were made for a four feet canal, 
 and are not too strong to sustain that depth of wa- 
 er. If the water is raised in the present banks 
 .o five feet, you will have continued breaches, 
 and your expenses will be enormous. The very 
 fact that your expenses for repairs run up to 
 $500,000 a year, shows that you overtax the ca- 
 nal. You pay in repairs the interest on $10,000,- 
 000, which, if applied to the enlargement and ma- 
 king the canal as it ought to be, would avoid these 
 arge expenditures. Your present insufficient ca- 
 nal requires a yearly expenditure to keep it in 
 repair nearly sufficient to pay the interest on the 
 mtire cost of the enlargement. The best con- 
 itructed canals of the present day require very 
 ittle expenditures for repairs, and if the canal is 
 properly enlarged and the structures as they 
 should be, the entire expense of repairs from Al- 
 bany to Buffalo would be less than one-fourth of 
 he present amount. A saving to this amount 
 vould be equal to the gross sum of $8,000,000. 
 The gentleman from Herkimer forgets all these 
 considerations, and fails to consider that by rais- 
 ng the volume of water in the present canal, the 
 banks must be greatly strengthened, and the requi- 
 
1119 
 
 site strength cannot be given them, probably, with- 
 out an additional quantity of earth, equal, as the 
 gentleman supposed in 1835, to an excavation of 
 the canal 20 to 30 feet wider than it now is. 
 
 In 1835, the gentleman from Herkimer, in the 
 report before alluded to, asked " What capacity 
 shall be given to the canal and locks east of Syra- 
 cuse, and in what manner shall the desired capa- 
 city be afforded ?" Several modes (he says) are 
 suggested. These he immediately considered : 
 the first was almost precisely the one now sug- 
 gested by him in regard to the present width of 
 the canal, aided by " raising and strengthening 
 the banks," so that the depth of the water in the 
 canal and the tonnage of boats should be increased . 
 This plan left the canal at its present width, but 
 deepened the water. What did he say to this pro- 
 ject then? It was in these emphatic words, 
 But this course is subject to great and insupera- 
 ble objections." Are they less so now than in 
 1835 ? In 1835, the gentleman in the report al- 
 luded to used this language, after considering the 
 plans, substantially the same as he now proposes, 
 and after giving reasons conclusive against them, 
 he said, It therefore appears indispensable that 
 the water of the canal should be deepened and 
 widened." See same rep. p. 11. 
 
 The gentleman from Herkimer now says by 
 doubling the'locks and deepening tbe water to five 
 feet, without widening the canal, it would treble 
 its present capacity. He estimates that the boats 
 would on such a canal carry .50 per cent more ton- 
 nage than at present. Give the boats then 50 per 
 cent more thtin the present capacity, and you dou- 
 ble the number navigating the canal whenever the 
 business on it is trebled. Mr. W. said he had en- 
 deavored to show that the business on the canal 
 would treble in ten years, should it increase in 
 the same ratio as during the past ten years. To 
 accommodate this increase, with boats carrying 
 50 per cent more than the present boats, would 
 require double the number ; the Erie canal cannot 
 accommodate twice the present number of boats 
 now navigating it. It has not the necessary width 
 to do so, and the difficulty is the same with the 
 depth of water increased without increasing its 
 width; the press of boats would be so great as to 
 interrupt and hinder each other and retard the 
 business on the canal. 
 
 The gentleman from Herkimer probably in jus- 
 tification of his present policy as distinguished 
 from that of 1S35, has indulged in various con- 
 jectures as to the future extent of this western 
 trade through the canals. He had supposed the 
 northern railroad from the bt. Lawrence to Lake 
 Champlain, would be continued to Boston, and 
 considerable trade diverted that way. That much 
 of it would find its way down the St. Laurence 
 and the Mississippi, by means of new and impro- 
 ved routes across the country from Lake Erie to 
 Philadelphia and Baltimore, and that eventually 
 some great improvement might take place in rail- 
 roads, which would take oil' the trade almost en- 
 tirely from the canals. Js this so ? What say the 
 delegates from New- York to this ? Is there to be 
 a northern railroad to take the trade to Boston ? 
 Shall the southern road take it to Pennsylvania? 
 Shall Mr. Calhoun's western canal divert it to N. 
 Orleans ? And shall this State slumber on its re- 
 sources, when by the completion of the Erie en- 
 
 largement, the world may be defied to compete 
 with us ? Complete this enlarged canal and you 
 will never hear of these rival routes again. As to 
 the competition of railroads, Mr. W. said, he was 
 astonished that any gentleman at this day would 
 indulge in the conjecture that a railroad could 
 compete in the business of transportation with a 
 canal of the capacity of the enlarged Erie canal. 
 Railroads as against canals would always carry 
 some freight. Light and valuable articles would 
 be carried on railroads, but for the great business 
 of a country, it was preposterous to suppose rail- 
 roads were to supercede canals. Mr. W. said he 
 regretted the gentleman from Herkimer had 
 brought forward no theory now that he had not at 
 a prior time controverted and denied. In Assem- 
 bly documents for 1835, No. 296, there will be 
 found a report bearing the signature of the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer, with valuable statistical 
 documents as well as the opinion of scientific en- 
 gineers attached, on the average cost of transpor- 
 tation on railroads and canals. The whole sub- 
 ject is fully and critically examined by the engi- 
 neers, Messrs. Jervis, Hutchinson andMilis, who 
 state that from all the facts they have obtained, 
 the relative cost of conveyance is (as 4,375 to 1) 
 " a little over four and one-third to one in favor 
 of the canals." The gentleman from Herkimer, 
 in the document referred to, says, " The commis- 
 sioners have examined this report and believe the 
 general results to be correctly stated." 
 
 The gentleman has stated on this floor to sus- 
 tain his position, that the cost of transporting 
 flour from Albany to Boston on the railroad was 
 21 cents per barrel. Has the gentleman ascer- 
 tained whether this was less than the expense of 
 the motive power less than the actual cost. Mr. 
 W. said, he had understood that the railroad from 
 here to Boston carried the article of flour at a loss. 
 
 Mr. W. said, he had before him a statement of 
 the comparative cost of transportation on every 
 railroad and canal in Scotland and England, show- 
 ing conclusively that in the transportation of 
 freight, railroads c could not compete with canals. 
 As the result of the comparison between railroads 
 and canals in the business of carrying freight, the 
 statement last alluded to, assumed two cents per 
 ton per mile as the minimum expense of trans- 
 portation on a railroad, and half a cent per ton per 
 mile as the cost of transporting on a canal with 
 horse power : at these rates the expense of trans- 
 porting a ton of flour on a railroad from Buffalo to 
 Albany would be $7 24, and by canal .<?! 81. Un- 
 der such circumstances the heavy freight of the 
 country would never leave the canals and seek 
 transportation upon the railroads. 
 
 Mr. W. then adverted to .the immense trade of 
 the west, which was seeking yes, asking an ave- 
 nue through our canals. He showed that the ca- 
 nal as proposed to be improved by the gentleman 
 from Herkimer, could never accommodate this 
 vastly increased trade of the west. That gentle- 
 man said that boats now navigated the canal of 
 double the tonnage of those in 1S3G. This was 
 so owing to the improvements and enlargement 
 of the canal since 1835, and the tonnage on the 
 canals was also double in amount. The tonnage 
 then had only increased in the same ratio as the 
 trade. Where then was the proposition to accom- 
 modate .the future increase ? The trade of the last 
 
1120 
 
 twenty years had increased more than 000 pe 
 cent, and he had shown that there would be a 
 least that increase for the next twenty years. Th 
 canal proposed by the gentleman from Herkime 
 would not accommodate that trade. To show tha 
 the tonnage has increased as stated, Mr. W. ad 
 verted to the tolls in 1820, and in 1S4G. In th 
 former year he said they were $'087,986, in th 
 latter about $2,800,000, notwithstanding betweei 
 the two periods the tolls had been reduced nearly 
 50 per cent. If then the amount named by th< 
 gentleman ($2,500,000) should, as he alleged, tri 
 pie the capacity of the canal, he (Mr. W.) hac 
 proved that on that basis the capacity of the cana 
 would only be sufficient for the next ten years 
 That section of the report was intended to prohi 
 bit the expenditure of any further sum upon the 
 enlargement. 
 
 Mr. HOFFMAN hereupon rose, and deniec 
 that any such thing was intended. This pro- 
 vision was affirmative that the legislature should 
 spend $2,500,000.. Beyond that, the legislature 
 might do what it pleased with the surpluses. 
 
 Mr. WORDEN used the word intended in its 
 good sense. He referred not to the quo ammo* 01 
 the gentleman, but to the effect of the proposi- 
 tion. It might not be the intention of the gentle- 
 man himself to prohibit the legislature from ex- 
 pending any further sum than $2,500,000 on the 
 enlargement; but he had used language, the in- 
 tent of which limited the expenditures for impro- 
 ving the Erie canal to $2,500,000. Mr. W. read 
 the 3d section of the report of Mr. HOFFMAN, re- 
 lative to the expenditures on the Erie canal. It 
 is as follows : " The surplus revenues of the ca- 
 ' rials , ; fter paying the said expenses of the ca- 
 ' nals, and the sums appropriated by the two pre- 
 ' ceding sections, shall in each fiscal year be ap- 
 ' plied to the improvement of the Erie canal, in 
 ' such manner as may be directed by law, until 
 ' such surplus shall amount in the aggregate 
 1 to the sum of ($2,500,000,) two million five 
 ' hundred thousand dollars." It would not be 
 a forced construction of the article, arid Mr. W. 
 said he doubted if it was not the true construc- 
 tion, to consider it as prohibiting the legislature 
 from appropriating over the two and a half mill- 
 ions of dollars. It professed to confer an authority 
 or perhaps more properly speaking, it limited the 
 exercise of an admitted authority, to an appropri- 
 ation of a certain amount to a specific purpose 
 which always implied an inhibition against appro- 
 priating any greater amount. But, said Mr. W. 
 the gentleman has repeatedly assured us that this 
 expenditure of two and a half million of dollars 
 will make the canal all that is requisite for the 
 trade upon it, he has given us details and statis- 
 tics and prophecy to show that is so, and he is 
 now indignant at the suggestion, that he intends 
 to prohibit any further expenditure upon the en- 
 largement. He has assured us repeatedly, that 
 this expenditure of $2,500,000, was to lengthen 
 the locks west of Utica, complete the enlarged 
 locks to Syracuse, and deepen the water five i'eet 
 in the canal ; but now he seems unwilling to give 
 up the enlargement. If the gentleman really con- 
 templates the completion of the enlargement, he 
 has been peculiarly fortunate in concealing any 
 such design. Why has he been attempting to 
 show us that the trade would be diverted, be 
 
 drawn off by railroads and other routes, that there 
 was a period not far advanced, when, to use his 
 own expression, " it would culminate ?" Whv 
 does he propose to go on for ten years tinkering 
 up the canal at a cost of $2,500,000, if after that 
 period you are to undo all you have done and go 
 to work upon the enlargement. He will double 
 the locks one set being on the enlarged plan and 
 the other on the present size, merely lengthening 
 the chamber. That was his great panacea. Now 
 if he will go to the most scientific engineers of 
 the country, they will tell him that to double the 
 locks on the present size of the canal, would onlv 
 double the mischief. Attempt to feed a double 
 set of locks from a canal of the dimensions he 
 proposes, and let there be a crowd of boats above 
 a lock, and before you can pass them, you draw 
 off' the water on the lock above, and the canal is 
 powerless. Such would be the practical opera- 
 tion of the gentleman's plan such the way in 
 which he proposes to triple the capacity of the 
 canal. But, Mr. W. said, he was not mistaken in 
 supposing that the gentleman proposed the aban- 
 donment of the Black River and Genesee Valley 
 canals, for he said yesterday he was willing to sell 
 them out. Would this be keeping the State faith 
 with the inhabitants of those regions interested 
 n the construction of those canals ? Would it be 
 compatible with the honor and dignity of the 
 State, now to abandon these works ? To do so, 
 said Mr. W., would be repudiation of the most 
 shameless and treacherous character. The gen- 
 leman from Herkimer has spoken of repudiation 
 njust terms of reproach: but said Mr. W., there 
 ire other modes of repudiation than the refusal to 
 pay State debts. This State is solemnly pledged 
 o complete the enlargement of the Erie canal. 
 Vtr. W. said he recollected among the reasons as- 
 igned by the public officers from 1835 to 1838 for 
 mdertaking the enlargement, was the importance 
 >f giving assurance to the people of the western 
 states, that we would construct and maintain a 
 ;hannel of transportation from Lake Erie to the 
 ludson that would accommodate their trade, so 
 hat they might construct their own works of in- 
 ernal improvement, in reference to our enlarged 
 anals. They have done so, and on such assuran- 
 es have constructed railroads and canals with 
 pecial reference to trade and travel through our 
 state, and to trade not on the present canals, nor 
 n one of the dimensions now proposed by the 
 entleman from Herkimer, but on a canal having 
 he capacity, and which will afford the cheapness 
 f transportation of the enlarged canal. Are we 
 eady to repudiate these pledges and assurances, 
 r to acknowledge ourselves incapable of redeem - 
 ig them ? To do either, would bring dishonor 
 n the State. Not unly did we pledge our faith 
 o the citizens of our own State and of the west- 
 rn States, that we would complete these canals, 
 ut we sent our circulars abroad in Europe, invi- 
 ^rig thousands of the oppressed citizens of that 
 ountry to come here, promising them employ- 
 lent. In proof of this, Mr W. would read one 
 f these circulars, which received the endorse- 
 ent of the Hon. gentleman from Schoharie (Mr. 
 OUCK.) 
 AiiOllKRS WANTED IN THE STATE OF N. YORK. 
 
 We, the undersigned, together with others, are 
 ontractors on the enlargement of the Erie canal 
 
J121 
 
 between the cities of Albany and Utica. Our work 
 consists of jobs of excavations, construction of 
 locks, aqueducts, culverts, bridges, &c. in which 
 we expect to be engaged until the spring of 1842. 
 A large number of common laborers and me- 
 chanics, in addition to those which now appear 
 to be in the country, will find ready employment, 
 in summer and winter, at liberal wages. The 
 work is constructed by the authority of the State 
 of New-York, whose funds are ample, and en- 
 sures prompt payment ; and is located in a very 
 healthy country. 
 
 John Stewart & Co. Jas. Hutchins, Best & Co. 
 
 Sage, Gustier & Co. Yates & Vandebogert. 
 
 Beach. Chapman & M'Omber. George Strover. 
 Timothy N. Ferrell & Co 
 Yates, Badgely &, Co. 
 John Ellis. 
 H. & S. i'armelee. 
 Hai^ht, Blood & Cady. 
 Andw. Jos. Yates. 
 Yate.> & Burnham. 
 
 Biven & Veeder. 
 
 Bigham 8t Stewart. 
 
 James Stewart. 
 
 Wilson Van Vrankenfc Co. 
 
 Davis & Curtiss. 
 
 John Sandford. 
 
 Hart & Candee. 
 
 Learned, Goodull &Hubbard. John N. Vrooman. 
 F. Hitching & to. John M. Ferrell. 
 
 Barney Becker 
 
 I certify, that I am personally acquainted with 
 the contractors who have signed the above notice; 
 that I consider them honorable and responsible 
 
 men ; and that the facts stated are correct. 
 I take this occasion to state farther, that 
 
 the 
 
 State of New- York is now engaged in enlarging 
 the Erie canal, 363 miles in length : in construct- 
 ing the Genesee Valley canal, 97 miles in length ; 
 and the Black River canal, 80 miles in length ; 
 involving an expenditure of about $20,000,000, 
 and live or six years in execution. Dec. 4, 1838. 
 
 WM C. BOUCK, Canal Commissioner. 
 Such were the promises such the pledges 
 which you made not only to the people of your 
 own State, but which you sent abroad and pub- 
 lished in Europe. How have you enabled these 
 contractors, or the honorable gentleman from 
 Schoharie, to redeem their pledges to the thou- 
 sands who came here for employment on their as- 
 surances ? You violated the contracts and laws 
 of the State on which these assurances were in 
 good faith made, you dealt in bad faith with your 
 own State engagements and the consequence 
 was that many a poor man was sent adrift in a 
 strange land to seek labor and employment as he 
 best could rind it, after he had come here upon 
 your assurance of " ready employment and liberal 
 wages." The injustice to the laborers on the ca- 
 nals is not among the least disgraceful features of 
 that policy which arrested the prosecution of the 
 public works. 
 
 We have, said Mr. W., one plain and practical 
 question before us, shall we go on with the public 
 works, or acknowledge ourselves unwilling or in- 
 capable to do so? Notwithstanding all that has been 
 said in respect to our finances, there is no dilliculty 
 in that quarter. Your entire State debt to be pro- 
 vided for is less than $22,<)00,0(.)(J. Your annual 
 interest on that debt is $1,230,936. Your canals 
 an; intrinsically worth inure than double your 
 debt, and now yield a nett revenue of $2,200,- 
 These tolls are annually increasing. The 
 Comptroller, in Doc. No. 73, p. 14, has given a ta- 
 ble of the nett amount of tolls that will be received 
 at au annual increase of 3 02- 100 per ct. from 184G 
 to 1^.35 inclusive, showing the amount to be $2"),- 
 318,785 HO, In this estimate the nett tolls in no 
 
 115 
 
 /ear amount to three million pf dollars. The pro- 
 )osition of the gentleman from Herkimer takes 
 "or the next ten years to supply the sinking fund, 
 nd the payments to the treasury, $2,172,700 an- 
 lually, being in the ten years $21,725,000, leav- 
 about three millions and a half undisposed of. 
 it will be seen in a moment, that under this ar- 
 rangement all idea of prosecuting the enlarge- 
 ment, to the dimensions now directed and estab- 
 lished by law, must be given up. It has been 
 proposed by some to allow the debt to remain as 
 it is for ten years, and merely to pay the interest 
 and supply the annuity of $200,000 to the general 
 fund. This would relieve the general fund from 
 the payment of the interest on its debt, which is 
 $317,000, and be more than the amount of the 
 State tax, and leave eleven millions to be expen- 
 ded on the canals in the next ten years. This 
 sum thus expended, would probably be the best 
 appropriation of the revenues for the public in- 
 terests. It would very nearly complete the ca- 
 nals, and after that period leave the revenues to 
 the payment of the debt, so that a million of dol- 
 lars, after paying the interest, could be yearly ap- 
 plied to the extinction of the principal of the 
 debt, which would accomplish that object in 
 about twenty-five years from this time through a 
 properly arranged sinking fund. Another pro- 
 position brought forward by the gentleman from 
 Livingston (Mr. AYRATJLT) authorizes the legis- 
 lature^ increase the debt to $25,000,000 to com- 
 plete the unfinished works, and apply the sums 
 
 borrowed to that purpose, and creates a sinking 
 fund for 10 years of $1,500,000, and after that 
 period $2,000,000, annually out of the canal 
 tolls, to pay the principal and interest of the 
 State debt, leaving the surplus tolls togeth- 
 er with the auction and fsalt duties, and all other 
 receipts into the treasury, to be applied by the 
 Legislature to defray the expenses of the govern- 
 ment, the completion of the unfinished works, 
 and the payment of the State debt. This propo- 
 sition would enable the' legislature to expend in 
 the next ten years some twelve millions of dol- 
 lars on the public works, and after paying the in- 
 terest on the entire debt, appropriate annually 
 $200,000 to the support of the State government. 
 It provides for the payment of the entire debt'in 
 about 28 years. Other propositions have also 
 been submitted, having in view the payment 
 of the public debt and the completion of the un- 
 finished works. They also come from gentlemen 
 whose opinions were entitled to great considera- 
 tion. The gentlemen from Allegany (Messrs. 
 ANGEL, and CHAMBERLAIN,) and from Schoha- 
 rie (Gov. BOUCK,) have submitted others. The 
 prominent features and general objects of all these 
 several plans were similar, viz : to provide for 
 and secure the payment of the public debt, and 
 the completion of the unfinished works. It was 
 a matter of regret that the only one brought for- 
 ward which did not secure the completion of the 
 unfinished works, was by the standing commit- 
 tee. That seemed to discriminate between the 
 two great leading measures that were so intimate- 
 ly connected with, and dependent on each other, 
 and while it made ample provisions for the paj- 
 ment of the debts, it puts, to say the least of it, 
 the prosecution of the public works in jeopardy! 
 Whatever might be the intention of the authors 
 
1122 
 
 of it, if adopted, Mr , W. said, he believed it would 
 have the effect to arrest those works. He desir- 
 ed to see the debt paid, and that ample provisions 
 for its payment should be made ; about this there 
 was but one objection. There never had been 
 but one, and if the whole subject should remain 
 as it was, open to the action of the legislature, no 
 one had the right to doubt, but the most ample 
 provision for the payment of the debt would be 
 made. Any doubt or suspicion to the contrary, 
 would imply a distrust of the integrity of the 
 people. Should the people of this State ever be- 
 come so lost to a just sense of all moral obliga- 
 tion as to be indifferent to the payment of the 
 public debt, or to sanction any evasion or repudia- 
 tion of the obligations of the State, it would be in 
 vain to hope they would be restrained by any con- 
 stitutional provisions. He was not in favor of a 
 constitutional provision for the payment of a debt 
 out of any distrust of the people or their represen- 
 tatives hereafter. He was in favor of it as a great 
 measure of State policy, and under the circum- 
 stances, deemed it wise that we should arrange a 
 system of finance embracing the payment of the 
 debt, so that the State might act hereafter on the 
 ground that the debt was provided for. The 
 people, he believed, desired that this arrange- 
 ment, should be made permanently and efficient- 
 ly. They have not settled down upon a day or 
 hour when this 'debt shall be paid. They know 
 full well, notwithstanding all that has been said 
 to the contrary, that the State possesses ample 
 means to pay the debt, and proceed with the pro- 
 secution of the unfinished works. They desire 
 also that both these objects should be accom- 
 plished and you will fail to satisfy them if you 
 neglect to do so. You cannot expect the public 
 will believe the State unable to prosecute the un- 
 finished works, and any measure that tends to 
 that result, cannot be made acceptable by any in- 
 temperate zeal for the payment of the debt. Nor 
 can the interests of the State be evaded by an ex- 
 travagant exhibition of such zeal. The people 
 at large are as anxious to pay this debt as any one 
 here is to secure its payment. They will discri- 
 minate between a plain straight forward provis- 
 ion to pay the debt consistent with a reasonable 
 purpose to complete the unfinished canals and an 
 over zealous, clamorous tirade against the State 
 debt, cloaking a hostility to the whole system of 
 internal improvement. Mr.W. asked what course 
 patriotism and an enlightened policy dictated > 
 The answer was plain secure both these great 
 objects pay your debts and finish your canals 
 you have the means of doing both. Gentlemen 
 had spoken of a fixed period of paying the exist- 
 ing debt of some pledge to that effect in the law 
 of 1842 so far as there was any thing in the po- 
 licy of that law for pajing the debts of the State, 
 he would not wage war upon it. Whatever there 
 was in it hostile to the system of internal im- 
 provement, would be by him disregarded and 
 condemned; we were not acting under the law of 
 1842, nor are we to frame our constitution upon 
 it, in respect to our finances or otherwise. He 
 was as anxious to pay the debt as the most strenu- 
 ous supporter of that law, which added not one 
 substantial pledge or guarantee not embraced in 
 other and prior Jaws to the security of the public 
 creditor. The day would probably never come 
 
 when all should be agreed on the construction of 
 that law. It is admitted on this floor, that in '44 
 a new law was passed to explain it. He threw it 
 out of view in seeking to frame constitutional 
 pledges for the payment of our debt. He believ- 
 ed it to be more important to do so in reference 
 to our own legislation hereafter, than any consid- 
 erations connected with the public creditors; they 
 were protected by the laws and faith of the State", 
 and he would never admit that either would be 
 violated, or that constitutional provisions preserve 
 the laws of the State, or its faith were necessary; 
 but the other considerations he had stated, influ- 
 enced him in favor of some provisions in respect 
 to the debt. He desired not to leave the halls of this 
 capitol until with the gentleman from Herkimer, 
 he could say to the people, a rule had been fixed 
 in the constitution which would certainly pay the 
 debt beyond contingency. But while doing this, 
 he did not want to lay an axe at the root of our 
 prosperity. He would not say to the people in 
 the Genesee Valley and Black River countries, 
 that their canals were not to be completed, nor 
 would he say to the city of New York, that a limit 
 had been placed on the capacity of that great 
 avenue which was pouring untold millions of 
 trade into that commercial metropolis ; and there- 
 fore while securing beyond contingency the pay- 
 ment of every dollar of the State debt, he would 
 also in a reasonable and safe way secure the com- 
 pletion of the unfinished canals. This done, and 
 we shall have satisfied the people. We shall have 
 done what we were sent here to do secure the 
 payment of the State debt, and yet at the same 
 time fulfil the equally pledged faith of the State 
 to complete its unfinished works. The ingenuity 
 of man could not devise a plan that would pay the 
 debt more surely than the annual appropriation 
 of $1,500,000 for ten years, and $2,000,000 there- 
 after. If you had the whole amount of your State 
 debt now in the Treasury, you could not consider 
 its final payment as certain as it will be under 
 the operation of a sinking fund with these yearly 
 appropriations. No one believed, or for a mo- 
 ment had doubted but that after the expiration of 
 ten years the nett revenues of the canals would 
 be at least f 2,000,000. Every calculation of the 
 probable increase of these revenues, had fallen 
 far short of the actual results. Even the far 
 grasping mind of Mr. RUGGLES had failed to an- 
 ticipate the actual revenues of the canals. 
 
 Mr. W. said he had spoken on this qnestion 
 without any political feelings or influence, he had 
 purposely avoided any allusion to the acts or 
 opinions of his political friends or associates. 
 He found enough in the views and opinions of 
 those he differed with in politics, to sustain him 
 in the grounds he took on these great questions. 
 He hoped party considerations would not be 
 brought in to influence our action. He came 
 here not to carry out his own views or the views 
 of any party ; but to compromise and arrange all 
 these great questions satisfactorily if possible to 
 the whole State, and beneficially to the interests 
 of all her citizens. He hoped to be able to com- 
 promise this great question even with the gen- 
 tleman from Herkimer. He was not strenuous 
 as to the precise sum that should be set apart as a 
 sinking fund. He had named $1,500,000 for ten 
 years, and $2,000,000 thereafter, because he be- 
 
1123 
 
 lieved these sums would not leave too much o- 
 the revenues for the completion of the canals, anc 
 in naming them he had also reference to a further 
 provision, equal to the appropriation of the law 
 of 1841, ($200'000,) for the support of the State 
 government out of the tolls ; the residue of the 
 tolls he desired to see secured to the construction 
 of the canals. This plan would pay your entire 
 debt in 1869, more certainly than if this Con- 
 vention had the power to place the whole amoun 
 of it in the hands of the Comptroller, who, he 
 (Mr. W.) would implicitly trust to keep the 
 money, whatever he might be disposed to do in 
 regard to the best interests of the State in other 
 respects. Mr. W. appealed to gentlemen to go 
 for this, or some similar policy, as wise, liberal 
 and j ust. He would remind them that in forming 
 constitutions, we should proceed on principles oJ 
 compromise and conciliation. You mi^ht force 
 a measure of government on the people by the 
 force of party power, but you could not by any 
 such appliances force them to submit to unjust 
 constitutional provisions. It was the great con 
 servative feature of compromise and conciliation 
 exemplified in our history that more than any 
 thing else gave assurance of the permanency ol 
 our republican institutions. All our constitutions 
 had been formed on principles of concession and 
 compromise. He pointed gentlemen to that body 
 of patriots who framed the instrument which 
 bind these States together. The very strength 
 and power of that instrument rests in the fact that 
 it was framed through concession and compro- 
 mise ; and shall we not profit by that illustrious 
 example ? The constitution we are framing af- 
 fects the interests and destinies of more people 
 than was then embraced in the Union. If in this 
 spirit we frarpe this instrument, generations yet 
 to come will live prosperously, happy and con- 
 tented, under its safeguards and protection, and 
 we may have the consolation of knowing in after 
 years, when the excitements and bitterness of 
 party strife is lost in the feebleness of age, that 
 we have done something to secure to the people 
 of this State, with the blessings of God, advanta- 
 ges no finite mind can estimate. 
 
 REMARKS of Mr. 0'CONOR,onMe Judiciary, 
 Thursday, Sept. 3, 1846. 
 
 The question being on the amendment of Mr. 
 MORRIS, proposed yesterday, providing for addi- 
 tional associate judges of the Supreme Court in 
 the city of New York. 
 
 Mr. O'CONOR said that simple justice to the 
 city of New York, required the adoption of this 
 amendment. There was a great excess of litiga- 
 tion in New York, beyond the ratio of her popu- 
 lation, and to allow her state judges only in pro- 
 portion to population, was unequal and unfair. 
 It had been shown, that that city contributed in 
 taxes, to the support of the government in a pro- 
 portion fully equal to the cost of the required 
 excess of judicial force. And even if this were 
 not so, the city would still be entitled to this ad- 
 ditional force. It was not the perverseness of her 
 
 agents for the people of the interior they were 
 obliged, as defendants or otherwise to sustain the 
 burthen of other men's controversies. The ju- 
 dicial system before the Convention, contemplat- 
 ed that all the judicial business of the state was 
 to be performed by judges of equal grade. For 
 this purpose, our whole judiciary had been re- 
 modeled, the court of chancery and county courts 
 were to be abolished all rivals were to be swept 
 away, and a monopoly secured to the new, so 
 called Supreme Court. Was not the city of New 
 York to be admitted to a participation in these 
 alledged advantages of this new system ? Was a 
 mere local judge, of low grade, to try the causes 
 of the citizens of New York, whilst in all other 
 parts of the state, every man's suit from $100, 
 upwards, was to be tried by a state judge of the 
 first grade, paid from the public treasury, and 
 dignified by the high sounding title of "Justice of 
 the Supreme court." Surely this would, not be 
 dealing with the city on principles of even hand- 
 ed justice. Gentlemen have said they would 
 make no distinctions between the city and the 
 country. This was all New York asked. No 
 distinctions had been made heretofore, and if the 
 amendment should not be adopted, a distinction 
 will now be made for the first time. Heretofore 
 New York had occupied the time of the high 
 judicial officers of the state in the precise ratio of 
 her business It was estimated, that business 
 coming from that cjty, had usually occupied about 
 one half of the Chancellor's time, one quarter of 
 the time of the Court of Errors, and a very large 
 proportion of the time of the Supreme Court. 
 But the new scheme of three judges in eight dis- 
 tricts, limited New York to the one-eighth part 
 of the judicial force of the state. This clearly, 
 will be insufficient. Then why not allow to the 
 city district a larger number ? It had been said 
 that this would give the city a larger representa- 
 tion in the Supreme Court, than her population 
 entitled her to claim. This objection is founded 
 in many falacies. In the first place, what have 
 the judges to do with representing the people ? 
 ^L judge represents the majesty of justice 
 he speaks the voice of the la.v he is not 
 the exponent or executioner of the popular 
 will. In the next place, the supreme court of 
 thirty-two judges was an ideal fiction. The su- 
 preme court exists only in name, it is a mere ab- 
 straction. It is "invisible and intangible, and 
 exists only in contemplation of law." One of the 
 supporters of this plan one of the committee, 
 had compared it to the trinity. That gentleman 
 "nsisted that we ought to see it with the eye of 
 aith, and believe in its existence, although we 
 could not perceive it with our physical senses. 
 lie (Mr. O'C.) would not step aside from his ar- 
 ument to observe upon this comparison. He 
 would merely remark that its eye conceded the 
 supreme court of the new judicial plan to be un- 
 iiscoverable to mortal ken a matter of faith. 
 And this was clearly so. Certainly these 32 
 udges were never to meet and hear, or decide a 
 He admitted that there was nothing in the 
 
 citizens, or their tendency to disputation, that I plan which in terms forbid their so meeting; but 
 created the necessity for the addition, as had j the whole scope the whole design of that plan 
 
 been illiberally and unfairly insinuated. The 
 commerce of the whole state was concentrated in 
 that city. Her merchants, were the trustees and 
 
 was against such an idea. They were to hold 
 their law terms in districts, three judges were to 
 be sufficient to hold such term, and from every 
 
1124 
 
 judgment rendered, an appeal lay to the eight 
 judges of the court of appeals. 'Of these eight 
 judges, five would form a quorum, and three could 
 decide. Four judges of the supreme court were 
 to sit in the court of appeals, and they alone were 
 sufficient to prevent the reversal of any judgment. 
 They could produce a tie, and an affirmance. 
 Will any friend of this scheme arguing with per- 
 verse ingenuity against light and against reason, 
 to sustain it right or wrong assert that the 32 
 judges may rightfully sit together and decide a 
 supreme court case? If so, what was the proprie- 
 ty of allowing an appeal from their decision to the 
 court of appeals? Was the judgment perhaps 
 unanimous it 32 judges to be gravely received 
 into the court of appeals there solemnly heard 
 before four of the same judges and four others, 
 the farce ending with an affirmance by the votes 
 of the first four ? To make this incongruity more 
 apparent, it had been said by prominent members 
 of the judiciary committee that the eight members 
 will not generally attend the court of appeals 
 that the quorum of five will be the common num- 
 ber in attendance. This shows it to be plainly 
 inconsistent with the plan that any considerable 
 number of the 32 judges should ever decide a case 
 in the supreme court. An appeal from three 
 judges to five judges, all of equal grade, was suffi- 
 ciently frivolous, without descending to the folly 
 of allowing an appeal from a greater number to a 
 less. It was clear that the plan contemplated no 
 supreme court. It contemplated a local district 
 court of 4 judges, with an. appeal to a central 
 State court of eight judges. If the supreme court 
 of 32 judges was a reality, the court of appeals 
 would be an absurdity. But however contradic- 
 tory the arguments in support of the plan may be, 
 there is no contradiction in the plan itself. It is 
 a distinct system, and allows an appeal from 
 three or four judges, to five or eight, as the 
 case may be. 
 
 From this view of the matter it would be seen 
 that the notion of the city obtaining an undue re- 
 presentation in the supreme court, was a fallacy. 
 The judges of that court are never to meet in joint 
 session, and consequently an increase of judges in 
 the district court of the district of New- York, 
 could not countervail the due influence of other 
 districts in the ideal tribunal called the supreme 
 court. We had been told that judges will be sent 
 from other districts to supply the deficiency in 
 New- York. To this he objected most solemnly. 
 It was one of the faults of the bad system offered 
 to the Convention, that an equal number of judg- 
 es were assigned to each district. This rigid rule 
 presented one of the phases of the radical error 
 pervading the whole report. In the second judi- 
 cial circuit, which would form a district, one 
 judge has for many years done all the circuit busi- 
 ness. Little business had been done in its county 
 courts, and few cases had gone up for review. In 
 this district, then, two judges would afford a su- 
 perabundance of judicial force. The same was 
 no doubt true of other districts. But in the first 
 district, formed of the city of New- York, nine or 
 ten juderes would be required. This deficiency, 
 it was said, migftt be supplied from the judges 
 elected in the second and other districts. Again 
 
 he protested against this. He had been charged 
 with entertaining a great repugnance to permit- 
 ting country judges to sit in New-York, and terms 
 of disrespect for the country judiciary had been 
 imputed to him which he never used. One phrase 
 imputed by the gentleman from Herkimer, (Mr. 
 LOOMIS,) he had never even heard in his life be- 
 fore, and he knew not what it meant. It was no ' 
 sentiment of disrespect for country judges, that 
 induced him to object it was a reverence for de- 
 mocratic principles. He had been taught to be- 
 Lieve that no man had a right to exercise power 
 over the citizen unless, directly or indirectly, that 
 citizen had a voice in his appointment. He had 
 supposed this rule applied equally to the judicial 
 as to the executive and legislative departments, 
 [n practice that rule had not yet been departed 
 from. Though a circuit judge might be transfer- 
 red from one circuit to another, he was the ap- 
 pointee of the governor and senators, who repre- 
 sented the whole people in making the appoint- 
 ment. Though the senators elected in distinct 
 districts voted in the court of errors, yet the judg- 
 ment pronounced was the result of an union of 
 voices from every district of the State. But when 
 we come to the holding of a district court in the 
 county of Erie, by judges elected in the district 
 of New-York, and vice versa, all principle is lost 
 sight of. 
 
 The electors of a district do not represent the 
 electors of any other district ; they hold no fidu- 
 ciary trust from, and do not act for, their fellow 
 citizens in other districts. They act in their own 
 ight, according to their own taste or fancy, and 
 without responsibility. If the people of New- 
 ark must take their judges from the electors of 
 Erie, they will be reduced to the same condition 
 in which the people of these colonies were when 
 judges were sent from Britain to rule over them. 
 They will be governed by those in whose appoint- 
 ment they have no voice, directly or indirectly. 
 One gentleman had said that if bad judges were 
 sent to them, they might retort the evil. This 
 was not said in soberness, but he would give it a 
 sober answer retort is no remedy for evils suf- 
 fered. It was true that the electors of Erie were 
 their fellow citizens, and it may be supposed 
 would act from a sense of justice and select for 
 them good judges. No doubt they would act with 
 good intentions. But this was no answer to the 
 objection. The same might be said in support of 
 a proposition to constitute the electors of Dutchess 
 or Clinton the electoral body for the whole State. 
 It was quite probable that our officers would be as 
 well selected ; but ought the rest of the State to 
 submit to such a deviation from principle ? Per- 
 haps if it were enacted that Massachusetts should 
 send us all our judges, we would fare better than 
 under any arrangement likely to be made. But 
 no man here would propose that mode of appoint- 
 ment. He deemed it indispensable to the main- 
 tenance of sound principles, that these elective 
 judges should be confined to the districts in which 
 they were elected, and consequently hoped that 
 the Convention would allow the district of New- 
 York to elect within its own borders so many as 
 were required to transact its judicial business. 
 
INDEX 
 
 ALLEN, Mr. a delegate from New York. 
 Remarks on the Judiciary, 818, 827 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 878 
 
 on Bank ing and Currency, 996 
 
 on Local Officers, 1010, 1011, 1012 
 
 ANGEL, Mr. a delegate from Allegany. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Business, 47, 48 
 on the Executive Department, 190. 339, 340 
 and presentation of his report relative 
 
 to Local Officers, 310 
 
 on the discussion of the Report, 
 
 100G, 1007, 1009, 1011 
 on the apportionment, election and te- 
 nure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 427, 434, 438 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 581, 818, 827 
 on the Canals and Finances, 843, 857, 
 
 879, 911, 913, 933, 954 
 on the proposition of Mr. J. J. TAY- 
 LOR, relative to the Chenango Ca- 
 nal, 961 
 on the .Rights of Married Women, 1042 
 on the resolution of Mr. HART on the 
 
 Avego Canal, 1050 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 1053 
 
 ARCHER, Mr. a delegate from Wayne. 
 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 47, 48 
 on the Canals and Finances, 843 
 
 on Local Officers, 1012 
 
 AYRAULT, Mr. a delegate from Livingston. 
 Remarks on the Rights and Privileges of 
 
 the Citizen, 548,1050,1051, 1053 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 917 
 
 on Corporations, other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 9.74, 970 980 
 
 on Currency and Banking, 985, 991, 
 
 992, 993, 994, 996, 997 
 ARRANGMENT OF BUSINESS. - 
 
 Discussion thereon, 37 
 
 ASSESSMENTS OF PERSONAL PRO- 
 PERTY. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RUGGLES, 95 
 
 ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISH- 
 MENT. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CONELEY, 105 
 
 ARREST OF NEGRO RUNAWAYS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RHOADES, 109 
 
 APPRAISAL OF PRIVATE PROPERTY 
 TAKEN FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES. 
 Resolution of Mr. STOW, 118 
 
 ARRANGEMENT OF THE NEW CON- 
 STITUTION. 
 Resolution of Mr. BRAYTON, 118, 842 
 
 ASSESSMENTS AND TAXES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. HARRIS, 140 
 
 ABOLITION OF BOARDS SUPERVISORS, 208 
 
 APPROPRIATIONS FOR LITERARY 
 PURPOSES. 
 Resolution of Mr. LOOMIS, 268 
 
 ACCOUNTANT GENERAL. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. WORDEN, 634 
 
 ADJOURNMENT FINAL. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. STEPHENS, 776 
 
 Reconsidered, 1061 
 
 Discussion thereon, 781 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CHATFIELD, 395 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE, 1082 
 
 BACKUS, F. F. Mr. a delegate from Monroe. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 307, 308 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 519 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 847, 856, 868 
 BAKER, Mr. a delegate from Washington. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and order of Business, , 79, 530 
 on the Executive Department, 308 
 
 on the apportionment, election and 
 tenure of Office, of the Legislature, 
 
 389, 395, 396, 401 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 510, 520 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 539 
 
 on the Judiciary Department, 682, 
 
 769, 771, 777, 801, 803, 808, 835, 836, 838 
 on Canals and Finances,945, 950, 957, 
 
 1011, 1012 
 
 on Currency and Banking, 998 
 
 on Mr. BOWDISH'S resolution relative . 
 
 to Education, 1025 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1037 
 
 BANKING SYSTEM. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. POWERS, 107 
 
 BANKS AND BANKING. 
 
 Report of the Standing Committee there- 
 on through Mr. CAMBRELENG, 371 
 discussion thereon, 985, 1000, 1010 
 BANKS CAPITAL STOCK PAID IN, &c. 
 
 Res lution of Enquiry of Mr MURPHY, 289 
 Exhibit of AfFairs-^-Resolution of Mr. 
 
 RUGGLES, 117 
 
 BASCOM, Mr. a delegate from Seneca. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the order of Business, 42, 57, 78 
 on the resolution for Door-keeper to 
 the Ladies' Gallery, 67 
 
1126 
 
 manner of Committees reporting, 143 
 on the Executive Department, 175, 
 
 186, 220, 287, 290, 297, 317, 342, 360 
 on the apportionment, election and te- 
 nure of Office, of the Legislature, 
 375, 391, 406, 426, 427, 435, 458, 
 
 467, 468, 469, 477 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 453, 537, 538, 541, 542, 545 
 on the presentation of his Minority 
 
 Report on the Judiciary, 489 
 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 500, 501, 516, 519, 534, 535 
 on the correction of a Reporter's Er- 
 ror, 535 
 on the Salt Duties, . 535 
 on the Judiciary Article, 556, 558, 
 582, 589, 654, 657, 658, 684, 724, 
 754, 755, 761, 764, 765,- 766, 770, 
 772, 776, 778, 783, 784, 785, 788, 
 794, 797, 798, 799, 801, 804, 805, 
 
 806, 1071 
 on the Canals and Finances, 868, 877, 
 
 906, 932, 944 
 
 on the proposition of Mr. J. J. TAY- 
 LOR relative to the Chenango Ca- 
 nal, 961 
 on Incorporations other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 967, 970, 981 
 on Banking and Currency, 994, 995 
 on Local Officers, 1007, 1008, 1011, 1013 
 on future Amendments, 1038 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 
 
 1039, 1060 
 
 on the Militia, 1049, 1076 
 
 on the Equalization of Taxation, 1069 
 on Separate Submission, 1079 
 
 BERGEN, Mr. a delegate from Kings. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the order of Business, 70 
 on the apportionment, election and 
 tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, 383, 388, 421, 425, 427, 447, 
 
 450, 467, 797 
 
 on Local Officers, 1009, 1010 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 1056 
 
 BETTING ON ELECTIONS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. ANGEL, 97 
 
 BIENNIAL SESSIONS OF THE LEGIS- 
 LATURE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CORNELL, . 104 
 
 BOUCK, Mr. a delegate from Schoharie. 
 Remarks on the apportionment, election 
 and tenure of Office, of the Legisla- 
 ture, 466 
 on the Canals and Finances, 848,849, 
 
 909, 912, 917, 920, 931, 932 
 BOARDS OF SUPERVISORS. POWERS 
 
 THEREOF. 
 
 Resolutions of Mr. WHITE, 150 
 
 " of Mr. FORSYTH, 116 
 
 Report thereon by Mr. R. CAMPBELL, 946 
 
 Discussion thereof, 1069, 1072 
 
 BOARDS OF APPRAISERS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. TOWNSEND, 969 
 
 BOWDISH, Mr. a delegate from Montgomery. 
 
 Remarks on his resolution relative to 
 
 Education, 1022 
 
 BROWN, Mr. a delegate from Orange. 
 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the order of Business, 24, 
 
 25, 40, 43, 53, 56, 530 
 on the resolution of Mr. CROOKER for 
 
 the appointment of Stenographers, 61 
 on the manner of Committees Report- 
 ing, 98, 131, 133 
 on the Arrangement of the Amend- 
 ments, 128 
 on the Executive Department, 168, 
 191, 229, 253, 292, 296, 297, 304, " 
 
 308, 311, 329, 339, 349 
 on the apportionment, election and te- 
 nure of Office, of the Legislature, 
 
 415, 469, 470, 472, 478 
 on the presentation of his Report on 
 
 the Judiciary, 493 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 544, 547, 530 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 554, 559, 
 589, 615, 641, 642, 714, 734, 759, 
 761, 762, 763, 768, 769, 771, 772, 
 773, 776. 778, 779, 780, 781, 782. 
 785, 786, 787, 789, 794, 798, 801, 
 
 804, 805, 807, 808 
 
 on the Canals and finances, 932, 943 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1036, 1037, 
 
 1044, 1045 
 on the resolution relative to the Os- 
 
 wego Canal, 1050 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1052, 1053 
 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1059 
 on the Law of Libel, 1061 
 
 BRUCE, Mr. a delegate from Madison. 
 Remarks on the resolution for the appoint- 
 ment of a Door-keeper in the La- 
 dies' Gallery, 67 
 on the manner of Reports from Com- 
 mittees, 135 
 on the Executive Department, 177, 
 
 264, 287, 288, 339, 345 
 on the apportionment, election and 
 tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 406, 446, 458, 468, 469, 471 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers. 509 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 540, 543 
 
 on the Judiciary, 771, 784, 706, 797, 
 
 798, 799, 804 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 851, 915, 929 
 on Incorporations other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 969, 981 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1014, 1029, 1033 
 on the final vote on the Constitution, 1082 
 BRUNDAGE, Mr. a delegate from Steuben. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 
 242, 345, 346 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 550 
 
 on the Judiciary, 740, 808 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 926 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1052 
 
 on Incorporations other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 981 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 
 
 1041, 1060 
 
 BURR, Mr. a delegate from Delaware. 
 Remarks on the manner of Committees 
 
 Reporting, 142 
 
1127 
 
 on his resolution to restrict State In- 
 debtedness, 347 
 on the apportionment, election and 
 tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 374, 466 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 507 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 539, 552, 714, 759 
 
 on the Judiciary, 833, 834 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 896, 940 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1014, 1034, 1036 
 
 BUSINESS OF THE COURTS. 
 
 Resolution of Inquiry of Mr. NICOLL, 51 
 
 of the Convention report on'the or- 
 der thereof by Mr. LOOMIS, 523 
 Resolution in relation thereto, by Mr. A. 
 
 B. WRIGHT, 985 
 
 CANALS AND DEBT. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. TILDEN, 
 CANALS. 
 Resolution of Mr. AYRAULT, 
 
 of Mr. HART, relative to Osweeo Ca- 
 nal, 1049 
 of Mr. CHAMBERLAIN, 94 
 of Mr. F. F BACKUS, 159 
 CANALS AND FINANCES. 
 .Report of Mr. HOFFMAN, 461 
 Plan of Mr. ANGEL, 
 
 Mr. AYRAULT'S Proposition, 776 
 
 Mr. BOTJCK'S Minority Report, 66( 
 
 Mr. LOOMIS' Substitute, 895 
 
 Mr. CHAMBERLAIN'S Proposition, 802 
 
 Mr. MAXWELL'S Proposition, 103 
 
 Discussion thereon, 843, 867, 878, 880, 
 894, 896, 909, 913, 934, 939, 940, 
 
 946, 958, 107 
 CAMPBELL, R. Mr. a delegate from Steu- 
 
 ben. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 
 344, 359 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, 380, 382, 405, 419, 420, 422, 451 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 537 
 
 Officers, 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 543 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 921 
 
 on the Powers of Boards of Supervi- 
 sors, 1069 
 CAMBRELENG, Mr. a delegate from Suf- 
 folk. 
 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the Order of Business, 32, 
 
 52, 528 
 
 on the manner of Committees' Re- 
 porting, 130 
 on the presentation of his Report on 
 
 Banks and Banking, 184, 372 
 
 on the Personal Liability Question, 226 
 on the Executive Department, 303, 
 
 306, 308, 363 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 401, 402, 407, 420, 449, 458. 469 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 Officers, 516 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 792, 795, 
 
 810, 819, 833 
 on the Canals and Finances, 910, 912, 
 
 936, 948 
 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 969, 974, 980, 
 
 982, 983, 984 
 
 on Banking, &c., 985, 986, 992, 993, 
 994, 995, 996, 997, 998, 999, 1000, 
 
 1001,1004, 1006, 1010, 1073 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitu- 
 tion, 1081 
 CHATFIELD, Mr. a delegate from Otsego. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the order of Business, 33, 
 
 34, 39, 43, 47, 71, 78, 79, 530, 532 
 on Mr. CROCKER'S Resolution for the 
 
 appointment of Stenographers, 61 
 
 on the locality of Taxation, 122 
 
 on the manner of Committees' Re- 
 porting, 132, 147 
 on the Presentation of his Report in 
 
 relation to the State Officers, &c. 150 
 on Mr. PERKINS' Resolution, relative 
 to the Salaries of Civil Officers, 151, 
 
 158, 159 
 
 on the Executive Department, 273, 
 277, 339, 343, 344, 345, 350, 351, 
 
 352, 354, 356, 358, 360, 370 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, 374, 382, 383, 385, 388, 394, 
 396, 400, 402, 419, 422, 423, 424, 
 425,429, 430, 431,436, 446, 450, 
 452, 453, 455, 456, 466, 469, 477, 480 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 Officers, 498, 499, 500, 503, 504, 
 506, 507, 509, 512, 520, 523, 534, 
 
 535, 536 
 
 on the Rights of the Citizen, 539,542, 543 
 on the Judiciary, 560, 655, 656, 657, 
 659, 683, 684, 715, 725, 729, 732, 
 751, 756, 758, 759, 760, 762, 763, 
 764, 769, 813, 816, 821, 826, 827, 
 
 831, 832, 833, 834, 835, 837 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 967 
 
 CHAMBERLAIN, Mr. a delegate from Al- 
 
 legany. 
 
 Remarks on the Apportionment, Election 
 and Tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, 448, 458 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, &c., 522 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 848, 849, 
 
 857, 902, 927, 932 
 
 on the Oswego Canal, 1050 
 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitu- 
 tion, 1082 
 CHANCERY INFANT SALES THEREIN. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. TAGGART, 114 
 
 Discussion thereon, 125 
 
 FUNDS OF SAID COURT. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RHOADES, 126,166 
 
 Mr. MANN'S Resolution, 443,496,615 
 
 Report of Mr. RUGGLES, 565 
 
 Report of Mr. MANN, 669 
 
 2 " " * 1072 
 
 Minority Report of Mr. TAYLOR, 682 
 
 CHENANGO CANAL. 
 
1128 
 
 Resolution of Mr. J J. TAYLOR, 960 
 
 CLASS LEGISLATION. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. WHITE, 81 
 
 CLERGYMEN. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BOWDISH, 95 
 
 CLARK, Mr. a delegate from Oswego. 
 
 Remarks on the Elective Franchise, 1036 
 
 CLYDE, Mr. a delegate from Columbia. 
 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 353 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 419 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 1051 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 793 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1026, 1052 
 
 CODIFICATION OF THE LAWS. 
 Resolutions of Mr. WHITE, 109 
 
 Discussion thereon, 117, 838 
 
 Report of Mr. WHITE thereon, 588 
 
 COLLECTION AND DISBURSMENT OF 
 
 THE PUBLIC REVENUES. 
 Resolution of Mr. SHEPARD, 86 
 
 COMMON SCHOOL FUND. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. NICOLL, 113 
 
 COMMON SCHOOLS. 
 
 Report of Mr. TUTHILL, 709 
 
 Minority Report of Mr. WILLARD, 709 
 
 Letter from Common"School Convention, 112 
 Resolution of Mr. PENNIMAN, 99 
 
 COMPENSATION OF LEGISLATIVE 
 
 CLERKS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MANN, 959 
 
 Report of Mr. CHATFIELD on the same, 968 
 COMPENSATION OF CIVIL OFFICERS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. PERKINS, 150 
 
 COMMITTEES. 
 
 Manner of Reporting, 129 
 
 Duties of, Resolution of Mr. BAKER, 97 
 On Rules, 18 
 
 Appointment of Standing, 91 
 
 on County Court Expenses, 24 
 
 on Judiciary Returns, 106 
 
 on the Funds in Chancery, 337 
 
 of 17, on the Order of Business, 41 
 
 to Arrange Business, 310 
 
 on the Resolution of Mr. MANN, 128 
 on the Resolution of Mr. SHAW, 104 
 on the Revision of the Constitution, 985 
 COMMISSARY GENERAL. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BRUCE, 503 
 
 CONELEY, Mr. a delegate from New York. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 330 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 419,426,477 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, .- 544, 548 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 556, 760,j768, 794 
 on the Oswego Canal, 1050 
 
 CONTRACTS WITH THE STATE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CHATFIELD, 97 
 
 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BROWN, 349 
 
 CONTRACTS LAWS IN RELATION 
 
 THERETO. 
 
 Report of Mr. TALLMADGE, 833 
 
 COURTS OF APPEAL FROM JUSTICES' 
 COURTS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. WATERBURY, 150 
 OF EQUITY. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BASCOM, 764 
 
 FOR THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS, 
 AND OF CHANCERY. 
 Resolution of Mr. SWACKHAMER, 86 
 CITY. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RUGGLES, 1078 
 COUNTY, MAYORS AND RECORDERS'. 
 
 Resolutions of Mr. KIRKLAND, 35 
 OF ARBITRATION. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. STEPHENS, 128 
 OF CONCILIATION. 
 
 Plan of Mr. KIRKLAND, 588 
 
 COUNTY. 
 
 Plan of Messrs. J. J. TAYLOR 
 
 and BRUCE, 803 
 
 Plan of Mr. CROOKER, 698 
 
 FUNDS OF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. WHITE, 443 
 
 EXPENSES OF. 115 
 
 JUSTICES', &c. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RICHMOND, 99 
 COUNTY OFFICERS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. GARDINER, 100 
 
 COOK, Mr. a delegate from Saratoga. 
 Remarks and Resolution on the Personal 
 
 Liability Question, 226 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 422, 424, 428, 469 
 on the Judiciary Article, 778, 779, 
 
 794, 798, 820 
 
 Correcting an Error of a Reporter, 825 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1056 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 982 
 on Banking, &c., 996, 998, 999 
 on Mr. MAXWELL'S Proposition rela- 
 tive to the Lateral Canals, 1038 
 on the Proposition relative to the Os- 
 wego Canal, 1050 
 CORNELL, Mr. a delegate from New York. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department,' 174 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 550 
 
 on Local Officers, 1011 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1045 
 
 CROOKER, a delegate from Cattaraugus. 
 Remarks on the Appointment of Steno- 
 graphers. 60, 62, 63, 65 
 on the Appointment of a Door-keeper 
 
 to the Ladies' Gallery, 66 
 
 on the Duties of Committees, 99 
 
 on the Executive Department, 187, 
 296, 297, 320, 322, 323, 327, 337, 
 
 339, 343,, 350, 354 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 . 401, 410, 417, 423, 425, 428, 429, 
 430, 435, 436, 446, 447, 448, 452, ft 
 468, 469, 476, 478, 1068 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 539, 540, 542, 551, 721 
 
 on the Judiciary Department, 698, 
 765, 769, 776, 779, 780, 785, 786, 
 
 797, 798, 799, 821, 828, 836, 838, 839 
 on the Canals and Finances, 933 
 
 Correcting a Reporter's Error, 843 
 
 on Local Officers, 1008, 1010, 1013 
 
 -on the Elective Franchise, 1036, 1066 
 
1129 
 
 on Future Amendments to the Con- 
 stitution, 
 
 D 
 
 1038 
 
 DANA, Mr. a delegate from Madison. 
 Remarks on the manner of Committees i. 
 
 Reporting, 133 
 
 on the Executive Department, 166, 
 167, 16S, 170, 284, 303, 307, 320, 
 
 340, 343, 353 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 381, 467 
 
 on the Article relative to State Offi- 
 cers, 501 
 on the Judiciary System, '555, 767, 804, 837 
 on the Canals and Finances, 937 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 973, 979, 980 
 on Local Officers, 1008, 1011 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 1021 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1029, 
 
 1034, 1043, 1045, 1065 
 on Future Amendments to .the Con- 
 stitution, 1038 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitution, 10S1 
 DANFORTH, Mr. a delegate from Jefferson. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the Order of Business, 37 
 on the Executive Department, 288, 320 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 435, 436, 473 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 503, 520 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 551, 552 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 848 
 
 on Local Officers, 1010 
 
 DODD, Mr. a delegate from Washington. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 
 171, 476 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1033 
 
 DORLON, Mr. a delegate from Greene. 
 Presents a Substitute for the first Section 
 of Mr. BOUCK'S Report on the Elec- 
 tive Franchise, 309 
 DOCUMENTS FOR THE NEW YORK 
 
 CITY CONVENTION. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. SHEPARD, 289 
 
 DEBT CREATING POWER OF THE LE- 
 GISLATURE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. WATERBURY, 128 
 
 DISTRICT ATTORNIES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. HAWLEY, 100 
 
 THEIR FEES. 
 
 Resolution or Mr. BRUCE, 86 
 
 E 
 EDUCATION. 
 
 Report thereon by Mr. NICOLL, 388 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BOWDISH, 1022. 1074 
 
 EDUCATIONAL FUNDS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. R. CAMPBELL, 104 
 
 ELECTIVE FRANCHISE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. STOW, 95 
 
 Report of Mr. BOUCK, 901 
 
 Report of Mr. DORLON, 309 
 
 Discussion thereon, 1013, 1026, 1042, 1065 
 Resolution.of Mr. BRUCE, 934 
 
 116 
 
 ELECTION DISTRICTS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BAKER, 97 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MORRIS, si 
 
 ELECTION OF JUDGES BY THE PEO- 
 PLE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. W. TAYLOR, 125 
 COUNTY OFFICERS BY THE PEOPLE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CLYDE, 163 
 
 OF U. S. SENATORS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RUGGLES, 267 
 
 EMISSION OF BILLS OF CREDIT. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. KENNEDY, 109 
 
 ERECTION AND DIVISION OF COUN- 
 TIES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. STOW, 117 
 
 ESPECIAL PRIVILEGES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. ST. JOHN, 117 
 
 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. 
 
 Report thereon, 1Q7 
 
 Discussion thereon, 152, 163, 
 167, 177, 186, 197, 209, 227, 
 248, 268, 284, 290, 298, 310, 
 
 323, 338, 349, 354, 372, 1073 
 ARTICLE. 
 
 As first adopted, 371 
 
 PATRONAGE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. KIRKLAND, 51, 52 
 EXEMPTION OF PROPERTY FROM 
 DEBT. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. STOW, 935 
 
 EXECUTION. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. TOWNSEND, 128 
 OF NON- VOTERS FROM MILITIA 
 DUTY. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. DANFORTH, 107 
 EXPENSES OF GOVERNMENT. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. STOW, 735 
 
 EXPIRATION OF OFFICE. 
 Resolution of Mr. RUSSELL, 1Q26 
 
 F 
 
 FEUDAL TENURES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CLYDE, 1026 
 
 Discussion of Question, 1Q51 1Q62 
 
 FLANDERS, Mr. a delegate from Franklin. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 
 290, 349 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 449 
 on the Judiciary Article, 557, 630, 785 
 on Banking, &c., 994 
 
 on Elective Franchise, 10Q& 
 
 FORSYTH, Mr. a delegate from Ulster. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 
 290, 349 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 449 
 on the Judiciary Article, 557, 630, 785 
 on Banking, &c., 994 
 
 on Local Officers, 1007, 1008 
 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 1022 
 on the Militia, 
 FOREIGN WITNESSES RIGHTS OF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. KENNEDY, gi 
 
 FREE SCHOOLS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MURPHY, 40 
 
 FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CORNELL, 104 
 
 FUTURE AMENDMENTS TO THE 
 CONSTITUTION. 
 
1130 
 
 115 
 "772 
 
 103S, 1077 
 833 
 
 056 
 16GO 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MANN, 
 
 Report of Mr. MARVIN, 
 
 Discussion thereof, 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CHATTIER, 
 
 G 
 GRAHAM, Mr. a delegate from Ulster. 
 
 Remarks on the Canals and Finances, 
 GREENE. Mr. a delegate from Jefferson 
 
 Remarks on the Elective Franchise, 
 
 H 
 HARRIS, Mr. a delegate from Albany. 
 
 Remarks on the Executive 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 377 392, 422, 427, 428, 434, 435, 
 444 446, 451, 453, 455, 466, 475,476 
 
 on the Article relative to State Offi- 
 cers, ' ^ 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 Citizen, 542, 543, 550, 1054, 1055 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 639, 643, 
 752,758,757,760, 761, 767, 768, 
 780, 783, 784, 785, 796, 797, 802, 
 805,806,813, 814, 815, 817, 828 
 
 834, 84C 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 927, 952 
 
 on Incorporations other than Banking ^ 
 and Municipal, 
 
 on Local Officers, 10 
 
 on Mv. BOWDHH'S Resolution rela- 
 
 tive to Education, 
 the Right, of Warned 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1044, 1045 
 2 Feudal Tenures, 1051, 1052, 1053, 
 
 1062, 
 
 on the Equalization of Taxation , 1069 
 HARRISON, Mr. adelegatefrom Richmond. 
 Remarks on his Resolution relative to the 
 
 Naturalization Laws, 
 on the Executive Department, 177, 
 
 296, 305,339,340,342,346 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 415, 421, 422, 443,449,450,458, 
 
 467, 1067 
 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 Officers, 
 
 the Rights and Privileges oi the 
 T itLn* ^42, 547, 548, 549 
 
 on 
 
 Citizen, 
 on the Judiciary Article, 759, 752, 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 
 
 on Local Officers, 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 
 
 769, 1071 
 879 
 1008 
 
 1034, 103( 
 
 , Mr. a delegate from Oswego. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, ;> 4b > 7o 
 
 on his proposition relative to the Os- 
 
 \vego Canal, 
 
 H AWLEY Mr. a delegate from Cattaraugus. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 
 on the Executive Department, 
 
 35; 
 
 49! 
 
 104 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 . 408,458- 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 533 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 764, 767, 
 
 7 1 ,>V>, SOO, 822, 825, 826, 836 
 on the Canals and Finances, 848, 854, 
 
 874, 918 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 957 
 
 on Local Officers, 1009, 1010 
 
 HOFFMAN, Mr. a delegate from Herkimer. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of L ommit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 32, 
 
 33, 41, 45, 46, 53, 54, 57, 68, 74 r 532 
 on the Executive Department, 313, 
 318, 324, 325, 350, 351, 353, 354, 
 
 365, 370 
 on the presentation of his Report on 
 
 the Canals and Finances, 461 
 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 497, 499, 500, 505, 527 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 529 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 556, 557, 
 670, 755, 759, 763, 777, 778, 780, 
 ,794, 803, 807, 809, 817, 825, 828, 
 
 831, 1071 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 843, 849, 
 850, 851, 854, 857, 867, 873, 874, 
 876, 877, 878, 880, 893,909,911, 
 912, 936, 939, 940, 941, 942, 943, 
 
 946, 947, 950, 957, 1083 
 on Future Amendments to the Con- 
 stitution, 1038 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1053 
 on the Election, Apportionment, &c. 
 
 of the Legislature, 106S 
 
 on Education, 1074 
 
 on Ordering Constitution to be En- 
 grossed, 1079 
 HUNT, Mr. a delegate from New- York. 
 Remarks on Mr. HARRISON'S Resolution 
 
 on the Naturalization Laws, 81 
 
 Resolution and Remarks on a Jury System, 111 
 on the Executive Department, 169, 
 
 170, 186, 227, 300, 339 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 419, 443, 445, 455, 468 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 541 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 559, 751, 
 
 762, 773, 779, 794, 796, 804, 813, 814 
 on the Canals and Finances, 920 
 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 971, 983 
 
 on Banks and Banking, 
 on the Elective Franchise, 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1042 
 HUNTINGTON, E. Mr. a delegate from 
 
 Oneida. 
 Remarks on the Article in relation to the 
 
 State Officers, 507, 524 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 945, 946 
 on Final Vote on Constitution, 1082 
 
 HUNTINGTON, A. Mr. a delegate from 
 
 Suffolk. . 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 328 
 
1131 
 
 HUTCHINSON, Mr. a delegate from Fulton 
 
 and Hamilton. 
 
 Remarks on the Apportionment Election 
 and Tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, 428 
 
 INCORPORATIONS MUNICIPAL. 
 
 He-solution of Mr. MURPHY, 41 
 
 Discussion of Question, 1054, 1072 
 Minority Report of Mr. ALLEN, 734 
 OTHER THAN BANKING AND MU- 
 NICIPAL. 
 
 Report of Mr. LQOMIS, 221 
 
 Discussion thereon, 061, 981, 
 
 960, 1005, 1013 
 RAILWAY. 
 
 Plan presented by Mr. LOOMIS, 104 
 Mr. MURPHY'S Resolution, 735 
 
 INVITATION. 
 
 For Celebration of Fourth of July, 151, 106, 221 
 INDIAN SUFFRAGE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RICHMOND, 94 
 
 INSPECTION LAWS. 
 
 Discussion thereon, 1061 
 
 JONES, Mr. a delegate from New- York, 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 27, 
 
 28,40 
 
 and Report from the Committee of 17 
 on the Order of Business, 42, 53, 
 
 69, 71, 78, 79 
 on the Executive Department, 305, 
 
 324, 343 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenuro of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 401, 413, 426, 429, 441, 478 
 on the Article relative to State Offi- 
 cers, 516 
 on the Militia, 1049 
 on Banking, &c., 992 
 on Local Officers, 1011 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 1022 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1036, 1045, 
 
 1065 
 
 on Final Vote on Constitution, 1080 
 
 JORDAN, Mr. a delegate from Columbia. 
 
 Remarks on Codifying the Laws, 110 
 
 on Royal Grants, &c., 118 
 
 on the Manner of Committees Report- 
 ing, 135 
 on the Executive Department, 177, 
 . 301, 300, 307, 312, 314, 315, 
 
 317, 343, 345, 354, 358 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 3M, 391, 393, 419, 428, 430, 431 
 on the Article Relative to State Offi- 
 cers, 504, 510, 521 
 on the Order of Business, 527, 531 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 543, 547, 54<J, 550, 1051, 1052 
 on the Judiciary Article, 557, .V>^, 
 fxio, :>;u, 5VJ, 619, 641, 652, 655, 
 684, |-,>>5, 703, 734, 752, 764, 765, 
 766, 767, 768, 772, 820, 821, 824, 
 825, 827, 828, 830, 832, 834, 835, 
 
 836, 837, 838, 839, 840 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 851, 865, 874 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 and Municipal, 966, 967, 974, 980, 
 
 981, 983, 1005 
 
 on Banking, &c., 995, 999 
 
 JUDICIARY. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BASCOM, 114 
 
 EXPENSES THEREOF. 
 
 Report of Mr. RHOADES. 106 
 
 Resolution of Mr. PERKINS, 776 
 
 PLAN or A SYSTEM 
 
 Presented by Mr. TALLMADGE 102 
 
 SHEPARD, 106 
 
 HARRISON, 117 
 
 SHAW, 139 
 
 WITBECK, 139 
 
 O' CONOR, 100 
 
 TAGGART, 150, 569 
 
 BOUCK, 309 
 
 WORDEN, 529 
 
 MARVIN, 590 
 
 ST. JOHN, 614 
 
 Report thereon by Mr. RUGGLES, 481 
 
 O'CONOR, 485 
 
 KlRKLAND, 487 
 
 BASCOM, 489 
 
 Discussion of Reports, 534, 567, 582, 615, 
 <.>:}">, 646, 660, 670, 682, 686, 709, 
 729, 735, 749, 759, 763, 766, 772, 
 
 782, 834, 840, 1071 
 JUDICIAL DISTRICTS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. GARDINER, 100 
 
 of Mr. TALLMADGE, 103 
 
 JUDICIAL OFFICERS-- 
 AppoiNTMENT AND FEES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. KIRKLAND, 85 
 JUDGMENTS AND APPEALS. 
 
 Proposition of Mr. KEMBLE, 749 
 
 JUDGES APPOINTMENT THEREOF* 
 
 Resolution of Mr. STOW, 140 
 
 JURORS DUTIES OF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BERGEN, 85 
 
 PETIT. 
 Resolution of Mr. HART, 85 
 
 KEMBLE, Mr. a delegate from Putnam, 
 Remarks on the Apportionment, Election 
 and Tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, 424 
 on the Article relative to State Of- 
 ficers, 525, 526 
 on the Judiciary Article, 801, 820 
 KENNEDY, Mr. a delegate from N. York. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 408, 412, 415, 434, 445, 447, 449, 
 
 459, 464, 465, 467, 468, 480 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 453 
 
 Correction of an Error of Reporter, 453 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 509 
 
 on Local Officers, 1009 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1026, 1035, 
 
 1036, 1045 
 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1042 
 on Viva Voce Voting, 1078 
 
 KINGSLEY, Mr. a delegate from Onondaga. 
 Remarks on the Article relative to the 
 
 State Officers, 3 
 
1132 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 793 
 
 KIRKLAND, Mr. a delegate from Oneida. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 70, 
 
 348, 528 
 
 on Mr. HARRISON'S Resolution rela- 
 tive to the Naturalization Laws, 82 
 on the Arrangement of the Amend- 
 ments, 126, 127 
 on the Executive Department, 153, 
 
 155, 163, 235, 321. 351, 358 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 
 Tenure ot Office of the Legislature, 
 
 388, 397, 411, 424,425,428,429, 
 
 430, 465, 444, 446, 454, 461, 463, 
 
 466, 472 
 on the presentation of his Minority 
 
 Report on the Judiciary, 487 
 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 518, 526, 527, 536, 537 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 542, 547, 550, 1051, 1056 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 557, 558, 
 
 575, 588, 619, 642, 683, 740, 759, 
 
 762, 765, 770, 771, 772, 773, 777, 
 
 779, 780, 782, 788, 789, 790, 799, 
 
 800, 826, 827, 835 
 on the Canals and Finances, 872, 876, 
 
 881, 925, 928, 932, 941, 942, 945 
 on the. Proposition of Mr. J. J. TAY- 
 LOR relative to the Chenango Canal, 961 
 on Incorporations other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 966, 970, 981, 
 
 983, 1021 
 
 on Banking, &c., 997, 998, 999 
 
 on Local Officers, 1007,1008,101] 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1019, 1033, 
 
 1035 
 
 on Future Amendments to the Con- 
 stitution, 1038 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1042 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1053 
 on the Removal of Officials, 1077 
 on the Question of Separate Submis- 
 sion, - 1079 
 
 LAND TENURES. 
 
 Report of Committee by Mr. HARRIS, 879 
 LAW OF LIBEL. 
 
 Resolution oi Mr. O'CoNOR, 94 
 
 Discussion of Question, 1061 
 
 LEGISLATURE-APPORTIONMENT, ELEC- 
 TION AND TENURE OF OFFICE. 
 Report thereon through Mr. W. 
 
 W. TAYLOR, 265 
 
 Discussion on the Report, 373, 
 388, 395, 401, 4:24, 4:2!.), 443, 
 
 463, 470, 479, 1067 
 ORGANIZATION THEREOF. 
 
 Report of Mr. STETSON, 935 
 
 PASSAGE OF BILLS THEREIN. 
 Resolution of Mr. W. TAYLOR, 
 
 267, 283 
 
 PAY OF THE MEMBERS THEREOF. 
 Resolution of Mr. WHITE, 232 
 
 Resolution of Mr. TOWNSEND, lOu 
 PAY OF THE OFFICERS THEREOF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MARVIN, 1026 
 DURATION OF THE SESSION. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. J. J. TAYLOR, 100 
 of Mr. WHITE, 227 
 
 of Mr. CANDEE, ng 
 
 LEGISLATION MAJORITY. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MANN, 372 
 
 LEGISLATION RETROSPECTIVE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RHOADES, 100 
 
 LITERATURE FUND. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. NICOLL, 267 
 
 LIMITATIONOF THE POWERS OF JUDGES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MURPHY, 107 
 OF LANDED PROPERTY. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. WILLARD, 185 
 LOANS OF THE CREDIT OF THE STATE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RICHMOND, 54 
 To COLLEGES, &c. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. SWACKHAMER. 372 
 LOCAL OFFICERS. 
 
 Report, thereon by Mr. ANGEL, 310 
 
 Discussion thereon, 1006, 1010, 1020, 1076 
 Resolution of Mr. ANGEL, 95 
 
 LOOMIS, Mr. a delegate from Herkimer. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 24, 
 27, 28, 29, 38, 39,43, 73, 74, 75, 76, 
 
 79, 531 
 
 on the Resolution for the Appoint- 
 ment of Stenographers, 64 
 on the Locality of Taxation, 120 
 on Chancery Sales, 125 
 on the Manner of Committees' Report- 
 ing, 130, 147 
 on the Executive Department, 167, 
 
 284, 293, 327, 329, 344, 345 
 on the Presentation of his Report on 
 Incorporations other than Banking 
 and Municipal, 221 
 
 on Presenting his Report on the Or- 
 der of Business, 323, 347 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 386, 401, 402, 420, 429, 433, 444, 
 
 465, 473 
 on the Presentation of the Judiciary 
 
 Reports, 491 
 
 on the Report relative to the State 
 Officers, 507, 508, 517, 523, 525, 
 
 535, 537 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 539, 541, 542, 548, 1055, 1056 
 on the Judiciary Article, 557, 559, 
 590, 637, 639, 654, 684, 710, 734, 
 752, 761, 767, 768, 770, 773, 782, 
 783, 785, 786, 794, 796, 798, 801, 
 808,811,812, 813, 819, 820, 821, 
 822, 823, 824, 825, fe2r,, 829, 830, 
 
 '831, S34, 835, 836, 1071 
 on the Canals and Finances, 649, 895, 
 
 909, 910, 928, 933, 944, 952 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 and Municipal, 962, 90S, 969, 973, 
 974, 977, 979, 981, 982, 983, 984, 
 
 1005, 1006, 1012, 1013 
 on Future Amendments to the Con- 
 stitution, 1038 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 
 
 1042, 1060 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1044 
 
 on the Equalization of Taxation, 1069 
 on Feudal Tenures. 1052 
 
1133 
 
 on Mr. HART'S Resolution relative to 
 Oswego Canal, 1050 
 
 M 
 
 MANN, Mr. a delegate from New- York. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 37, 
 
 528, 530 
 on the Executive Department, 265, 
 
 :{i is, 317, 3-2-2, 336, 342, 360, 371 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, 425, 430 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 51 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 541 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 619, 738, 
 752, 762, 763, 766, 772, 773, 781, 
 784, 792, 793, 794, 797, 799, 800, 
 
 820, 826, 834 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 935 
 
 on the Compensation of Legislative 
 
 Clerks, 959 
 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 975 
 
 on Banking, &c. 993 
 
 on Local Officers, 1008 
 
 MARVIN, Mr. a delegate from Chautauque. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 51, 
 
 72,73 
 
 on the Manner of Committees Re- 
 porting, 136 
 on the Executive Department, 168, 203 
 on the Taxation of Mortgages, 176 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 391, 297, 427, 432, 437, 457, 458, 
 
 461, 463, 464, 474, 1067 
 on th > Article in Relation to the State 
 Officers, 497, 508, 509, 517, 518, 
 
 519, 534, 536 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 548 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 590, 619, ' 
 639, 682, 683, 703, 725, 734, 759, 
 766, 770, 783, 786, 797, 798, 837, 
 
 867, 868, 1071 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 878, 909, 
 910, 911, 929, 937, 938, 939, 942, 
 
 952, 1072 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 976, 977, 981, 982, 1006 
 on Banking, &c. 999, iQOO 
 
 on Local Officers, 1007, 1008, 1013 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1037, 1066 
 on Mr MAXWELL'S Proposition rela- 
 tive to the lateral Canals, 1038 
 on Future Amendments to the Con- 
 stitution, 1038 
 on the Rights of Married Women,* 1042 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitution, 1081 
 MAXWELL, Mr. a delegate from Chemung. 
 Remarks on the Apportionment, Election 
 and Tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, 4Gi 
 on his Proposition relative to the lat- 
 eral Canals, 1037 
 MAYOR OF NEW- YORK TERM OF OF- 
 FICE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CORNELL, 109 
 
 MILLER, Mr. a delegate from Cortland. 
 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 343 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 425, 469 
 
 on Tribunals of Conciliation, 833, 836 
 MISCELLANEOUS ARTICLE, 1077, 1078 
 MILITIA. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BASCOM, 114 
 
 Report thereon by Mr. WARD, 443 
 
 Discussion thereof, 1049 
 
 MORRIS, Mr. a delegate from New- York. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 50, 
 
 73, 78, 533 
 on his Resolution as to the Locality 
 
 of Taxation, 119, 122 
 
 on his Resolution as to the Arrange- 
 ment of the Amendments, 126 
 on the Executive Department, 152, 
 169, 171, 181, 271, 284, 286, 288, 
 290, 295, 298, 300, 308, 311, 320, 
 321, 322, 323, 325, 337, 350, 352, 356 
 on Royal Grants, &c., 163 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 389, 411, 413, 461, 476 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 499, 535 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 646, 756, 
 760, 783, 786, 787, 796, 817, 818, 
 
 819, 828, 949 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 973, 974, 1021 
 
 on Banking, 974, 995 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1037, 1044, 
 
 1066 
 
 f on Mr. MAXWELL'S Resolution rela- 
 tive to the lateral Canals, 1038 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1058 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1063 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitution, 1061 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS. 
 
 Reports in relation thereto by Mr. MUR- 
 PHY, 463 
 MURPHY, Mr. a delegate from Kings. 
 Remarks on Municipal Corporations, 41, 
 
 463, 467, 469, 473, 961, 1072 
 on the Arrangement of Committees 
 
 and the Order of Business, 71 
 
 on Mr. HARRISON'S Resolution in re- 
 
 tion to the Naturalization Laws, 83, 84 
 on his own Resolution in relation to 
 
 Royal Grants, &c., 117, 139, 160, 161 
 on the Locality of Taxation, 119, 123 
 
 on the Executive Department, 172, 
 
 209, 291, 318, 326, 340, 358 
 on his Resolution relative to Bank 
 
 Stocks, 289 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 386, 401, 417, 419, 4J6, 449, 450, 458 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 509,' 510, 511, 514, 515, 614 
 on the Judiciary Article, 77.'J, 77i>, 
 777, 780, 784, 785, 7U2, T'.Ki, 7<J-'>, 
 
 801, 806, 819, 820, 822, 823, 828 
 on the Canals and Finances, 913, 952, 
 
 953, 954, 955 
 
1134 
 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 984, 1005, 1006 
 
 on Banking, &c., 994, 995 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 1054, 1055, 1056, 1052, 1064 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1059 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1053 
 
 on the Equalization of Taxation, 1069 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitution, 1080 
 
 N 
 
 NATURALIZATION LAWS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. HARRISON, 81 
 
 of Mr. WORDEN, 105 
 
 NELLIS, Mr. a delegate from Montgomery. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 311 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1060 
 NEW COUNTIES FORMATION THEREOF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. BRUNDAGE, 984, 1000 
 
 NEGRO SUFFRAGE. 
 
 Resolution oi Mr. YOUNG, 96 
 
 NICHOLAS, Mr. a delegate from Ontario. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 60, 70 
 on the Manner of Committees Report- 
 ing, 137 
 on the Executive Department, 179, 
 186, 263, 294, 295, 306, 308, 317, 
 
 319, 322, 355, 360, 368 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 382, 391, 401, 404, 422, 429, 436, 
 
 457, 473 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 497, 505, 506, 507, 509, 526 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 542 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 536, 684, 
 
 734, 755, 758, 763, 799, 800, 823 
 on the Canals and Finances, 930 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1052, 1060 
 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 983 
 
 on the Militia, 1049 
 
 on Banking, &c., 997, 999, 100( 
 
 on Local Officers, 1007, 1009 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1035 
 
 NICOLL, Mr. a delegate from New- York. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 73,78 
 on Codifying the Laws, 109, 11 
 
 on the Titles of Acts, 177 
 
 on the Executive Department, 199, 
 
 324, 325, 327, 353, 36( 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature. 
 377, 407, 415, 428, 431, 443, 466, 
 
 474, 48( 
 on the Presentation of his Report on 
 
 Education, 38 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 453, 1051, 106 
 
 on the Article relative to the State Of- 
 ficers, 51 
 on the Judiciary Article, 600, 656, 
 752, 760, 761", 762, 768, 770, 775, 
 779, 7bJ, 7VJ, 7M, 793, 794, 795, 
 
 798,799,800,838,83 
 on the Canals and Finances, 932, 942, 94 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 962, 979 
 
 on Mr, BOWDISH'S Resolution rela- 
 tive to Education, 1026 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1039 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1051, 1052, 1063 
 on Education, 1074, 1075 
 ON IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. 
 Resolution of Mr. MORRIS, 96 
 of Mr. TALLMADGE,. 102 
 S T ON RESIDENT LANDS. 
 Resolution of Mr. HYDE, 109 
 
 O 
 
 )ATHS AND AFFIRMATIONS. 
 Report of the Committee thereon. 894, 1077 
 'CONOR, Mr. a delegate from New York. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the Order of Business, 31, 
 
 56, 57, 60, 74 
 
 on Mr. HARRISON'S Resolution, rela- 
 tive to the Naturalization Laws, 81 
 on the Ex?cutive Department, 200, 
 
 268, 297, 300, 337, 340, 350, 358, 359 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 384, 441, 455, 458, 461, 466, 467, 477 
 on the Presentation of the Minority 
 
 Report on the Judiciary, 485 
 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 314,515 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 Citizen, 540, 542, 543, 545, 546, 
 
 548, 550, 1050, 1054 
 on the Judiciary Article, 555, 556, 
 557, 558, 560, 642, 652, 682, 684, 
 692, 753, 762, 763, 765, 779, 782, 
 783, 784, 785, 804, 805, 813, 814, 
 818, 825, 828, 831, 832, 834, 835, 
 
 836,837,839,840 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 932, 943 
 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 
 and Municipal, 971, 973, 1006, 1020 
 on Local Officers, 1012 
 
 on Mr. BOWDISH'S Resolution rela- 
 tive to Education, 1026 
 on Future Amendments to the Con- 
 stitution, 1038 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 
 
 1038, 1056 
 
 on Education, 1075 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1044, 
 
 1048, 1065, 1067 
 
 on Separate Submission, 1074 
 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitu- 
 tion, 1080 
 ORIGIN OF GOVERNMENT. 
 Resolution of Mr. CORNELL, 111 
 Resolution of Mr. JONES, 24 
 ORDER OF BUSINESS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. LOOMIS, 347 
 
 Report of Mr. LOOMIS, 
 
 Which Report first to be considered, 527, 530 
 Resolution of Mr. JONES, 1010, 1040 
 
 ORGANIZATION OF THE CONVEN- 
 TION, &c., 17, 18 
 OFFICERS THEREOF APPOINTED, 18 
 
 PARDONING POWER. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. SHEPARD, 
 Resolution of Mr. CONELY, 
 
 118 
 105 
 
1135 
 
 PATTERSON, Mr. a delegate from Chau- 
 
 tauque. 
 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the Order of Business, It',, 
 
 49, 53, 72 
 on the Appointment of a Door-keeper, 
 
 for the Ladies' Gallery, 65, GO 
 
 on Mr. HARRISON'S Resolution on 
 
 Naturalization haws, 82, 85 
 
 on the Separation of Banks and State, 125 
 on the Election of Judges, 141 
 
 on the Executive Department, 172, 
 175, 213, 260, 286, 296, 297, 318, 
 
 324, 325, 336, 349, 353, 358, 364 
 on the Presentation of the Report re- 
 lative to Banks and Banking, 185 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 401, 409, 430, 466, 468, 469 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 Officers, 49S, 500, 504, 508, 511, 
 
 514, 515, 534, 535, 537 
 on"' the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 551, 1054 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 558, 642, 
 652, 82, 8fii5, r>s<i, 75s, 770, 771, 
 779, 7.sO, 7s4, 7.s5, 786, 787, 794, 
 800, 801,803, 810, 813,817, 820, 
 
 ,V21, 826, 828, 833, 839 
 on the Canals and Finances, 866, 875. 
 
 . ^77, |78, 911, 931, 940, 945, 946 
 on. Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 974, 979, 980, 1021 
 on Banks and Banking, 996, 997, 99 
 
 on Local Officers, 1007, 1008, 1010, 
 
 1011, 1011 
 on Mr. BOWDISH'S Resolution relative 
 
 to Education, 102i 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 103 
 
 'on Future Amendments to the Con- 
 
 stJ f .utio i, 103* 
 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 104 
 on the Resolution relative to the Os- 
 
 wego Canal. 105( 
 
 on Education, 107 
 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitution, 108 
 
 Complimentary of the President, 10S 
 
 PARISH, Mr. a delegate from Lewis. 
 
 Remarks on the Canals and Finances, 86 
 PENNLMAX, Mr. a delegate from Orleans. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 
 179,240,273, 303, 33 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 375, 419, 74 
 PEOPLE'S RESOLUTION. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. SHAW, 14 
 
 PERSONAL LIABILITY. 
 Resolution of Mr. SHELDON, 
 Resolution of Mr. COOK, 22 
 
 PERKINS, Mr. a delegate from St. Law- 
 rence. 
 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the Order of Business, 43, 44, 8 
 on the Duties of Committees, 
 on the Locality of Taxation, 12 
 
 requesting to be Excused from a 
 
 Committee, 13 
 
 on his Resolution in relation to the 
 Salaries of Civil Officers, 15 
 
 on his Resolution on the Removal of 
 
 Officials, 150 
 
 on the Executive Department, 173, 239 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 375, 392, .'JIM, 40D, 40->, 405, 420, 
 
 123, 424, 428, 469; 476, 1067 
 on his Minority Report on the Elec- 
 tion of State Officers, 480 
 on the Article relative to the Elec- 
 tion of State Officers, 497, 199, 
 501,502,500, 508, 509, 510, 511-, 
 
 517, 522, 5.11, 536, 537 
 on the Judiciary Article, 556, 635, 
 652, 759, 794, 795, 801, 802, 809, 
 
 839, 840 
 on the Canals and Finances, 851, 936, 
 
 941, 951 
 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 962, 969, 973, 
 
 975, 981, 984, 1005 
 
 on Local Officers, - 1012 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1033, 1036 
 on Future Amendments to the Con- 
 stitution, 1038, 1042 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, ioe>2 
 
 on the Feudal Tenures, 1003 
 
 on Education, 1074 
 
 on the Militia, 1075 
 
 PETITIONS of the Society of Friends, 112 
 of the Trustees of Yates Academy, 842 
 for Free Schools, 526, 802 
 
 of the Tuscarora Indians, 128 
 
 in relation to Judicial Practice, 166 
 
 of Wm. H. Remsen, 175 
 
 relative to Negro Suffrage, 220, 424 
 
 relative to the Canal Policy of the 
 
 State, 248 
 
 relative to State Indebtedness, 309 
 
 for the Extension of the Elective 
 
 Franchise to Women, 2S4, 646 
 
 of the National Reform Association, 
 
 265, 981 
 
 of Burtis Skidmore, 265 
 
 for the Abolition of Capital Punish- 
 ment, 284 
 for the Enlargement of the Erie Canal, 359 
 relative to the Rendition Clause in 
 
 Constitution, 37} 
 
 relative to the Unfinished Canals, 387 
 relative to Right of Railroad Corpora- 
 tions to take Private Property, 400 
 relative to the Elective Franchise, 515 
 for a State Board of Assessors, 1000 
 relative to the Canals, " 4913 
 relative to the Common Pleas of 
 
 Cayuga, 443 
 
 for the Completion of the Canals, 685 
 relative to the Literature Fund, 660 
 
 of the Seneca Indians, 454 
 
 relative to the Canals, 553 
 
 relative to the Literature Fund, 521, 
 
 553, 750 
 of Union Academy, (Queen's co.) 946, 
 
 1000, 588 
 against the Election of Judges by the 
 
 People, 565,766 
 
 of Clinton Grammar School, 734 
 
 for County Courts, 734 
 
1136 
 
 of Cayuga Academy, 7 
 
 for Elective Judiciary, 7 
 
 relative to Sabbath, 7 
 
 of George Lawson, 89- 
 
 of Teachers of the Moravian' Institute, 77 
 of the Genesee Wesleyan Seminary, 77 
 Against Personal Liability, 968, 776. 91 
 of Teachers' Association of Utica, 76 
 relative to Woman's Rights, 76 
 
 Against Free Schools, 76 
 
 ' to allow Clergymen to Hold Office, 91 
 relative to Assessments, 98 
 
 for the Abolition of the New York- 
 Superior Court, 100 
 for a State Board of Assessors, 101 
 relative to the Elective Franchise, 104 
 for the Abolition of the New York 
 
 Superior Court, 104 
 
 PORTER, Mr. a delegate from Saratoga. 
 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 24 
 PRACTICE OF LAW. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. STRONG, 
 OF COURTS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. STOW, 10 
 
 PRIVATE ROADS AND BRIDGES. 
 
 Resolution, 10 
 
 PRIVATE PROPERTY THE TAKING 
 
 THEREOF FOR PUBLIC USE. 
 Resolution of Mr. JONES, 12 
 
 PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS. 
 
 New Rule proposed by Mr. MARVIN, 86 
 
 PRESIDENT Mr. JOHN TRACY, a dele- 
 gate from Chenango. 
 
 Remarks on taking the Chair. 17 
 
 on the Adjournment of the Conven- 
 tion, 1082 
 PRINTING for the Convention, 18 
 PRIVATE PROPERTY SECURITY THERE- 
 OF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RICHMOND, 118 
 
 PURSUITS OF BUSINESS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. SWACKHAMER, 913 
 
 PUBLICATION OF THE ARTICLES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. JORDAN, 913 
 
 QUALIFICATION FOR VOTERS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. GREENE, 9] 
 
 Resolution of Mr. SHAVER, 125 
 
 FOR HOLDING OFFICE. 
 Resolution of Mr. STOW, 167 
 
 R 
 
 RATE OF INTEREST. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. DANA, 96 
 
 RETURN OF VOTES CAST IN N. YORK, 112 
 RE.V1EDIES ON CONTRACTS. 
 
 Resolution, 830 
 
 RECESS. 
 
 Discussion thereon, 225 
 
 REMOVA.L OF OFFICIALS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. PERKINS, 156 
 
 Discussion of Question, 1077 
 
 REPORTS FORM OF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RHOADES, 156 
 
 REGISTRATION EXPENSE OF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. KENNEDY, 97 
 
 RENT CHARGES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. JORDAN, 100 
 
 REPORT OF THE COMPTROLLER IN 
 
 RELATION TO THE BANKS, 137 
 
 to the Compensation of Judges, 781 
 
 to the Value of the Canals, 495 
 to the Laws, paid to the Commissary 
 
 General, 553 
 tp the amount paid for Canal Damages, 248 
 
 to the Expenses of the Legislature, 284 
 
 to the Debts and Revenues of the State, 226 
 
 to the School Fund, 153 
 
 to the Salt Duties, 533 
 
 to the amount of State Stocks, 838 
 REPORT from the Clerk of the 1st Circuit, 
 
 2d 128, 226 
 
 3d 128 
 
 4th 175 
 
 5th 182 
 
 6ih 175 
 
 7th 763 
 
 8th 221 
 
 the Chancellor, as to the 
 Funds in his Court, 337, 
 
 633, 984 
 
 the Register in Chancery, 118, 196 
 the Assistant Register in 
 
 Chancery, 155 
 
 the Clerk in Chancery, 843 
 
 from County Clerks, 102 
 
 on the Returns from the Law 
 Courts, by Mr. J. J. TAY- 
 LOR, 224, 795 
 the Secretary of State, 166 
 on Local Officers, 163 
 the Regents of the University, 372 
 of Jas. Conner, New York 
 
 County Clerk, 226 
 
 from the Executive on Par- 
 dons, 224 
 
 " to the dura- 
 tion of the Legislative Ses- 
 sions, 248 
 from Surrogates, County 
 
 Clerks, &c., 469 
 
 of the Judiciary Committee 
 
 on the Funds in Chancery, 553 
 of Committee No. 17 on the 
 Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, 43 
 on the Printing of the Consti- 
 tutions of the other States, 
 by Mr. RUSSELL, 50 
 Address to the People, 1082 
 of Committee < f Revision, 1054 
 ESOLUTION of Mr. RHOADES, on the 
 
 Preservation of Documents, 52 
 
 of Mr. CHATFIELD, on the hour of 
 
 Meeting, 52 
 
 of Mr. RUSSELL, for a Door-keeper in 
 
 Ladies' Gallery, 65 
 
 of Mr. HAWLEY, on the Arrangement 
 
 of the Journal, 103 
 
 of Mr. A. B. WRIGHT, A on the Print- 
 ing of Documents, 105 
 of Mr. STRONG, on a Recess, 123 
 of Mr. CHATFIELD, to provide the 
 
 Officers with Newspapers, 123 
 
 of Mr. RHOADES, on the Form of 
 
 Reports, 156 
 
 of Mr. RUSSELL, relative to a Recess, 177 
 of Mr. TALLMADGE, on the Attend- 
 ance of Members, 185 
 of Mr. STRONG, relative to a Recess, 185 
 
1137 
 
 of Mr. ANGEL, Change of Hour of 
 Meeting, 196 
 
 of Mr. BAKER, relative to the Hour 
 of Meeting, 197 
 
 of Mr. CHATFIELD, relative to After- 
 noon Sessions, 267 
 
 of Mr. CHATFIELD, relative to Hour 
 of Meeting, 288 
 
 of Mr. SWACKHAMER, on the Limi- 
 tation of Debate, 275,284 
 
 of Mr. BURR, on the Restriction of 
 Debate, 347 
 
 of Mr. MANN, on the same, 338 
 
 of Mr. BROWN, on Afternoon Ses- 
 sions, 323 
 
 of Mr. HAWLEY, on the Arrangement 
 of the Amendments, 372 
 
 of Mr. MURPHY on the Order of 
 Speaking, 395 
 
 of the N. Y. City Convention, 454 
 
 of Mr. NICOLL, on Evening Sessions, 934 
 
 of Mr. ST. JOHN, on the Restriction 
 of Debate, 527 
 
 of Mr. BROWN, on the Hour of Meet- 
 ing, 734 
 
 of Mr. PATTERSON, on Evening Ses- 
 sions, 728 
 
 of Mr. WHITE, on the Order of Busi- 
 ness, 782 
 
 of Mr. STETSON, to terminate De- 
 bate on the Canals and Finances, 908 
 
 of Mr. W. TAYLOR, to Limit Debate, 933 
 
 of Mr. BAKER, on Evening Sessions, 908 
 
 of Mr. BRUCE, relative to Discussion 
 on Rights and Privileges of the 
 Citizen, 895 
 
 of iVlr. BRUCE, on the termination of 
 Deba'e on the Canals and Finances, 913 
 
 of Mr. BAKER, to terminate Debate 
 on the Judiciary, 715 
 
 of Mr. BASCOM, relative to Pay of 
 Messengers, 842 
 
 of Mr. A. W. YOUNG, to terminate 
 Debate on the Article in relation to 
 the State Officers, 503 
 
 of Mr. SWACKHAMER, relative to the 
 Report on the Rights and Privi- 
 leges of the Citizen, 1011 
 
 of Mr. KIRKLAND, on the Fees, &c., 
 of Officers of County Courts, 20 
 
 of Mr. RHOADES, relative to Officers 
 holding from the Governor and Ca- 
 nal Board, 20 
 
 Complimentary to Reporters, 1080 
 
 relative to Signing the Constitution, 1080 
 
 relative to Disposition of Constitu- 
 tion, 1082 
 
 Complimentary to President, 1082 
 
 Relative to Clergymen, 1080 
 
 Complimentary to Secretaries, 1082 
 
 REVISION OF THE ARTICLES Report 
 
 of the Committee thereon, 1048 
 
 RICHMOND, Mr. a delegate from Genesee. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the Order of Business, 54, 
 
 56, 57, 59, 68, 69, 528 
 
 on the Locality of Taxation, 119 
 
 on the manner of Committees Re- 
 
 130 
 177 
 
 . porting, 
 
 on the Title of Acts, 
 
 117 
 
 on the Executive Department, 259, 
 - 294, 297, 309, 311, 313, 318, 319, 
 
 358, 359 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 374, 378, 3bl, 400, 408, 414, 420, 
 
 425, 435, 444, 467, 476, 480 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 502, 505, 508, 518, 526 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 542, 544, 550, 1055, 1064 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 560, 652, 
 653, 685, 758, 766, 768, 769, 770, 
 778, 782, 789, 794, 797, 799, 801, 
 802, 803, 815, 816, 821, 827, 831, 
 
 835, 1071 
 on the Canals and Finances, 850, 851, 
 
 867, 879, 910, 929, 932, 942 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 964, 972, 975, 
 
 979, 981, 982, 1005, 1073 
 on Local Officers, 1007, 1012, 1013, 1021 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1037, 1044 
 on Education, 1074 
 
 on the Militia, 1076 
 
 RIKER, Mr. a delegate from Queens. 
 
 Remarks on the Executive Department. 
 RHOADES, Mr. a delegate from Onondaga. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the Order of Business, 47, 
 
 60, 528 
 on the Appointment of a Door-keeper 
 
 for the Ladies' Gallery, 56, 67, 75 
 
 on the Locality of Taxation, 122, 123 
 on the manner of Committees Re- 
 porting, 144 
 on the Executive Department, 167, 
 285, 293, 294, 298, 309, 319, 327, 
 
 343, 353, 354 
 on the Personal Liability Question, 
 
 227, 25S 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 378, 389, 391, 416, 426, 445, 446, 
 
 447, 448, 449, 455, 461 
 on t) >e Article relative to the State 
 Officers, 505, 507, 508, 509, 511, ' 
 
 513, 514, 516, 520, 526 
 on the Judiciary Article, 653, 654, 
 659, 711, 787, 815, 816, 817, 819, 
 
 820, 834, 840 
 on the Canals and Finances, 929, 940, 
 
 942, 948 
 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 974 
 on Banking, &c., 994 
 on Local Officers, 1010 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1031, 1066 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1042 
 RIGHTS OF MARRIED WOMEN. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. WARD, 155 
 
 of Mr. NELLIS, 80 
 
 Discussion of question, 1038, 1056, 1064 
 
 RIGHTS OF WIDOWS AND ORPHANS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. WATERBURY, 96 
 
 RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF THE 
 
 CITIZEN. 
 
 Report thereon by Mr. TALLMADGE, 19G 
 
 Discussion thereon, 453, 959, 1050 
 
 RIGHTS OF EQUITY, &c. 
 
138 
 
 Resolution of Mr. O'CONOR, 94 
 
 ROYAL CHARTERS AND FRANCHI- 
 SES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MURPHY, 117 
 
 Discussion thereon, 139 
 
 RULES. 
 Report of Committee thereon and adoption 
 
 thereof, 20, 21, 23 
 
 Relative to Previous Question, by Mr. 
 
 WARD, 429 
 
 Amendment thereto of Mr. CHATFIELD, 208 
 of Mr. TAGGART, 278 
 Enquiry relative thereto of Mr. STRONG, 51 
 RUGGLES, Mr. a delegate from Dutchess. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of- Business, 49, 527 
 on the Codification of the Laws, 1 10 
 
 on the Executive Department, 215, . 
 
 293, 306, 315,316,319 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 402, 418, 420, 428, 429, 432, 437, 
 
 438, 440, 443, 444, 449, 450, 451, 
 
 452, 453, 454 
 on the Presentation of his Report on 
 
 the Judiciary, 481 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges- of the 
 
 Citizen, 547, 550 
 
 on hi& Report relative to the Funds in 
 
 Chancery, 553 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 555, 556, 
 557, 558, 560, 587, 619, 760, 762, 
 
 763, 771, 772, 777, 836, 1071 
 on Local Officers, 1012 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1037, 1043, 
 
 1044, 1066 
 on Future Amendments to the Co-n- 
 
 stitution, 1038 
 
 on the Resolution relative to the Os- 
 
 wego Canal, 1050 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1049, 1051, 1062, 1063 
 on Education, 1075 
 
 on City Courts, 1078 
 
 KUSSELL, Mr. a delegate from St. Law- 
 rence- 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 57, 79, 80 
 on Resolution for Appointment of 
 Doorkeeper to Ladies' Gallery , 65, 
 
 66,67 
 
 on the Manner of Committees report- 
 ing, 129, 144 
 on the Executive Department, 175, 
 177, 185>, 247, 290, 302, 303, 304, 
 
 339, 343, 356, 357 
 
 on the Presentation of the Report re- 
 lative to Banks and Banking, 183 
 on the Personal Liability Question, 226 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, ' 
 
 374, 377, 391, 392, 400, 414, 424 
 on the Judiciary Article, 804, 806, 
 
 807, 812, 813, 815, 825, 837 
 en the Canals and Finances, 871, 920, 
 
 932, 933, 934, 943, 945, 954 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 974 y 975, 979, 980, 982 
 on Banking, &c., 994, 995, 996, 997, 
 
 999, 1010, 1012, 1013 
 on Local Officers, 1010 
 
 on Future Amendments to the Consti- 
 tution, 1038 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1018, 1065 
 
 on Mr. BOWDISH'S Resolution relative 
 to Education, 1026 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1052 
 
 S 
 
 SALT SPRINGS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr RHOADES, 95 
 
 DUTY Resolution of Mr. TAYIX>R, 96 
 Mr ST. JOHN, 97 
 SALARIES OF STATE OFFICERS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. SALISBURY, 140 
 
 SALISBURY, Mr. a delegate from Erie. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 
 285, 287, 288- 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election, and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 414, 473 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 501, 507, 508 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 551 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 760, 779, 
 
 806, 825, S26 
 
 SAFE KEEPING OF THE PUBLIC MO- 
 NIES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. FLANDERS, 116 
 
 SCHOOL MONIES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. A. HUNTINGTOW, 128 
 
 SECRETARIESAPPOINTMENT OF, 18 
 
 ASSJS-TANT Discussion of Appoint- 
 ment, 87,91,208,454,634 
 SECURITY FOR COSTS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. NELMS, 118- 
 
 Separate submission of Amendments, 
 
 1078, 1079- 
 
 SEPARATION OF BANKS AND STATE. 
 Resolution of Mr. Conely, 123 
 
 SINGLE SENATE DISTRICTS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. Chatfield, 95- 
 
 SANFORD, Mr, a Del. from St. Lawrence. 
 
 Remarks on the Judiciary, 1071 
 
 SHEPARD, Mr. a delegate from New-York. 
 Remarks on the Appointment of a Door- 
 keeper for the Ladjes' Gallery, 67, 77 
 on the Resolution of Mr. HARRISON, 
 
 relative to the Naturalization Laws, 8t 
 on the Locality of Taxation, 121 
 
 on Royal Grants, &c. 140, 161, 162: 
 
 on the Executive Department, 169, 
 
 )75, 192, 297, 298, 340, 344, 350, 356- 
 oa the Apportionment, Election arid 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 390, 409, 422, 436, 444, 449, 450, 
 
 452, 454, 459, 460, 468, 478 
 en the Inspection Laws, 1070 
 
 correction ot a Reporter, 555- 
 
 on the article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 509, 513, 514, 515, 516, 568- 
 on the Judiciary Article, 620, 752, 
 762, 767., 768, 794, 817, 818, 85>7, 
 
 914, 94 &, 949* 
 on Incorporations other th&n Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 962. 968 
 
 on Backing, &c. 992, 994, 995 
 
 SHAFER, Mr. a delegate from Albany, 
 Remarks o the Executive Department, 178- 
 
1139 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 42( 
 on local officers, 101C 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1036, 1043 
 
 SIMMONS, Mr. a delegate from Essex. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 55, 68 
 on the Resolution for Appointing Ste- 
 nographers, 63 
 on Mr. HARRISON'S Resolution rela- 
 tive to the Naturalization Laws, 82 
 on the manner of Committees Keport- 
 
 ing, 131, 148 
 
 on the Removal of Officials, 159 
 
 on the Executive Department, 169, 
 171, 178, 215, 230, 288, 293, 204 
 305, 30(5, 311, 314, 316, 319, 322, 
 344, 340, 349, 352, 353, 355, 358, 
 
 360, 363 
 
 on the Personal LiabilityjQuestion, 226, 277 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 393, 416, 419, 432, 433,435,436, 
 
 443, 456, 477, 480 
 on the Presentation of the Reports on 
 
 the Judiciary, 490 
 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 478, 501, 502 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 643, 661, 
 681, 725, 763, 764, 765, 768, 772, 
 777, 778, 812, 813, 821, 822, 824, 
 825, 826, 823, 829,830, 831, 832, 
 
 836, 837, 838, 947 
 on Incorporations, other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 962, 967, 974, 981, 982 
 on Banking, &c. 994, 995, 1005, 1020, 1021 
 on Local Officers, 100S, 1009, 1010, 
 
 1012, 1013 
 
 on thp Elective Franchise, 1035, 1065 
 
 OB Future Amendments to the Con- 
 stitution, 1038 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 
 
 1041, 1042, 1060 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1051, 1052, 1062 
 
 on the Preamble to Constitution, 1054 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 1055 
 
 on the Law of Libel, 1061 
 
 SIMPLIFICATION OF PLEADINGS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. SHEPARD, 735 
 
 J. J. TAYLOR, 735 
 
 W. W, TAYLOR, 735 
 
 SMITH, Mr. a delegate from Chenango. 
 Remarks on the Apportionment, Election 
 and Tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, 414, 466, 1067 
 on the Canals and Finances, 956 
 on the Resofuiion relative to the Os- 
 
 wego canal, 1050 
 
 SPENCER, Wm. 11. Mr. a delegate from Li- 
 vingston. 
 
 Remarks on the Apportionment, Election 
 and tenure of Office ot the Legisla- 
 ture, 444, 449, 778, 779 
 on the Judiciary Article, 794, 837 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1033 
 SPENCER, E. B. Mr. a delegate from ^ates. 
 
 Remarks on the Elective Franchise, 1035 
 
 STATE OFFICERS MODE or ELECTION, 
 &c. 
 
 Report of the Standing Committee thereon, 1^9 
 Minority Report thereon, by Mr. PERKINS, 480 
 Discussion thereon, 480, 495, 504, 515, 
 
 527, 533, 1070 
 STATE PRISON COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RHOADES, 150 
 
 STATE STOCKS OUTSTANDING. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. CHAMBERLAIN, 763 
 
 STATE LOANS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. HAWLET, 323 
 
 STATE BOARD OF ASSESSORS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. TOWNSEND, 298 
 
 STATE LIBRARIES. 
 Resolution in relation to the opening there- 
 of, 142 
 STENOGRAPHERS Mr. CROOKER'S Re- 
 solution for the appointment thereof, 51 
 STEPHENS, Mr. a delegate horn N. York. 
 
 Remarks on codifying the laws, 110 
 
 on the manner of committees report- 
 ing, 135 
 on the Executive Department, 290, 
 
 294, 295, 353, 359, 457 
 on the Order of Business, &c. 528, 532 
 on the Judiciary Article, 556, 659, 734, 
 
 750, 799, 821, 836 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank. 
 
 ing and Municipal, 973 
 
 STETSON, Mr, a delegate from Clinton. 
 Remarks on the arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the order of business, 48, 58, 528 
 on the Locality of Taxation, 120 
 
 on the Separation of Bank and State, 124 
 on the manner ot" Committees Report- 
 ing, 133 
 on the Executive Department, 153, 
 286, 288, 293, 301, 303, 306, 307, 
 316,322, 327, 333, 339,343,344, 
 
 346, 350, 351, 352, 355, 359 
 
 on ihe Apportionment, Election and 
 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 378,398, 414, 415, 417,427,428, 
 
 433, 445, 447, 449, 453, 464, 465, 
 
 46,9, 477, 478, 1067 
 on the Canals and Finances, 864, 866, 
 
 874, 911,912, 928, 938, 952, 955 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 973, 983 
 
 on Banking, &c., 992, 996, 998 
 
 on Local Officers, 1008, 1009 
 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1060 
 Sr JOHN, Mr. a delegate from Otsego. 
 Remarks on the Apportionment, Election 
 and Tenure of Office of the Legis- 
 lature, 428, 458 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 509 
 
 on the Judiciary, 614, 761, 836 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 954 
 
 on Local Officers, 1012 
 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 
 
 1042, 1064 
 
 on the pay of Officials, 1078 
 
 STOW, Mr. a delegate from Erie. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, Order of Business, &c. 75 
 on Codifying the Laws, 110 
 on his Resolution in relation to the ta- 
 king of Private Property for Public 
 Purposes, 118 
 
1140 
 
 on the Request of Mr. PERKINS to be 
 excused from serving on a Com'tee, 138 
 
 on his Resolution relative to the Ap- 
 pointment of Judges, 141 
 
 on the Executive Department, 170, 
 171, 197, 290, 292, 294, 295, 296, 
 304, 306, 307, 336, 343, 346, 353, 
 
 357, 358, 360, 371 
 
 on the Titles of Acts, 177 
 
 ^on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 387, 408, 410, 414, 419, 438, 444, 
 
 445, 461 
 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 Officers, 514 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 Citizen, 546, 1054, 1055, 1056, 1061 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 725, 759, 
 760, 769, 780, 783, 786, 787, 792, 
 795, 801, 804, 806, 812, 814, 817, 
 
 819, 820, 1071 
 
 on the Canal& and Finances, 879, 892, 
 
 895, 928, 938, 951, 952 
 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 and Municipal, 966, 967 
 
 on Banking, &c., 992, 996, 998 
 
 on Local Officers, 1007, 1008, 1009 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1031, 1037, 
 
 1044, 1045, 1065, 1066 
 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1042 
 
 on the Resolution relative to the Os- 
 wego Canal, 1050 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1052 
 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitution, 1081 
 STRONG, Mr. a delegate from Monroe. 
 Remarks on Arrangement of Committees 
 
 and the Order of Business, 40 
 
 on the Appointment of a Doorkeeper 
 for the Ladies' Gallery, 67 
 
 on the Resolution relative to the Tax- 
 ation of Mortgages, 128,175,176 
 
 on the Reque-t of Mr. PERKINS to be 
 excused from serving on a Commit- 
 tee, 138 
 
 on the Manner of Committees report- 
 ing, 143 
 
 on the Removal of Officials, 157 
 
 on the Executive Department, 164, 
 
 232, 262 
 
 on his Resolution for the taking of a 
 Recess, 185 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office, 376, 405, 423, 
 
 434, 456, 463, 466 
 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 Officers, 497, 508, 509, 516, 523, 525 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 Citizen, 541 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 603, 735, 
 759, 768, 779, 780, 787, 789, 794, 
 
 795, 796, 814, 816, 817, 830, 838 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 896 
 
 on the Equalization of Boards of Su- 
 pervisors, 1072 
 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitu- 
 tion, 1081 
 
 on the Proposition relative to the 
 Chenango Canal, 961 
 
 on Incorporations other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 967, 968, 981, 1021 
 
 on Local Officers, 1009 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1034, 1036 
 SUITS AGAINST THE STATE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. SWACKHAMKR, 166 
 
 SUBDIVISION OF TOWNS INTO TITH- 
 
 INGS, &c. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. HUNT, 111 
 
 SURROGATES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. J. J. TAYLOR, 95 
 
 of Mr. CLYDE, 37 
 
 SUPREME COURT JUDGES. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. WATERBURY, 735 
 
 SUFFRAGE COLORED, 1078 
 
 SWACKHAMER, Mr. a delegate from Kings. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 31, 
 
 37, 45, 54, 75 
 on the Appointment of a Doorkeeper 
 
 for the Ladies' Gallery, 66 
 
 on the Executive Department, 167, 
 
 182, 286, 312, 316 r 317, 318, 357, 359 
 on his Resolution respecting. Loans to 
 
 Colleges, 372 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 393, 422, 423, 428, 429, 432. 448, 
 
 455, 472, 474, 477 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 544, 549, 550, 1056, 1062 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 558, 590, 
 607, 654, 656, 683, 684, 762, 766, 
 787, 790, 797, 799, 802, 806,. 812, 
 
 813, 814, 818, 1071 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 934, 942, 945 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 and Municipal, 966, 971, 980, 983, 
 
 1005, 1006 
 
 on Banking, &c., 993, 997, 1000 
 
 on Local Officers, 1007, 1008, 1009, 
 
 1012, 1013 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1034, 1036, 
 
 1037, 1044 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1039 
 
 T 
 
 TAGGART, Mr. a delegate from Genesee, 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 
 
 284, 286, 299, 302, 304, 308, 351, 353 
 on the apportionment, election and te- 
 nure of Office of the Legislature, 
 374, 396, 414, 419, 420, 423, 428, 
 
 429, 448, 458, 1068 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 502, 504, 509, 518,- 534 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 551, 1055, 1056 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 556, 559, 
 567, 751, 761, 7S2, 70S, SCO, 801, 
 
 814, 822, 836, 837, 1071 
 on Banking, &c , 994, 1073 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1066 
 
 TALLMADGE, Mr. a delegate from 
 
 Dutchess. 
 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the order of Business, 41, 
 
 47, 348 
 
 on Mr. HARRISON'S Resolution, rela- 
 tive to the Naturalization Laws, 82, 84 
 on the Duties of Committees, 97 
 
 on the Locality of Taxation, 121 
 
1141 
 
 on the Resolution relative to the At- 
 tendance of Members, 186 
 on the Executive Department, 193, 
 219, 286, 290, 294, 295, 296, 300, 
 
 301, 3U4> yi>, 3-21, 324, 326, 327, 337 
 on presenting the Report on the 
 Rights and Privileges of the Citi- 
 zen, 196, 345, 346, 353, 357 
 on the apportionment, election and 
 tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 374, 382, 397, 401, 402, 407, 414, 
 
 415, 427, 435, 444, 445, 458, 464 
 on the Article in relation to State 
 
 Officers, 504, 514, 515, 516, 533 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 537, 542> 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 710, 751, 
 755, 769, 779, 780, 781, 786, 791, 
 797, 803, 810, 822, 829, 833, 835, 
 
 836, 909, 952 
 
 on the Militia, 1049 
 
 on the Preamble to the Constitution, 1054 
 on the Law of Libel, 1061 
 
 on Education, 1074 
 
 on Separate Submission, , 1078 
 
 TAYLOR, J. J. Mr. a delegate -from Tioga. 
 Remarks on the Apportionment, Election 
 and Tenure of Office of the Legisla- 
 ture, '419,443 
 on the Judiciary Article, 626, 732, 
 776, 777, 800, 802, 806, 813, 824, 
 
 &S25, 826, 940, 946 
 on his Proposition relative to the 
 
 Chenango Canal, 960, 961 
 
 on Banking, &c., 997 
 
 on Mr, MAXWELL'S Proposition rela- 
 tive to the Lateral Canals, 1038 
 TAYLOR, W. Mr. a delegate from Onondaga. 
 Remark? on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and the Order of Business, 31, 
 
 44, 51, 74 
 
 on the manner of Committees Re- 
 porting, 134 
 on the Executive Department, 189, 
 208, 247, 295, 305, 306, 308, 311, 
 
 313, 315, 325, 328, 345, 357, 359, 363 
 on Presenting his Report relative to 
 the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 266 
 on the Discussion thereof, 373, 376, 
 381, 383, 385, 391, 398, 433, 436, 
 443, 444, 454, 456, 461, 464, 466, 
 
 468, 473 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 453 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 652, 655, 
 656, 735, 758, 759, 763, 769, 781, 
 
 797, 807, 808, 813, 818, 827, 912, 922 
 on the Canals and Finances, 937, 938, 
 
 939, 944, 948, 949, 951 , 953, 1072 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1017, 1038, 1066 
 TAXATION EQUALIZATION THEREOF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. LOOMIS, 86 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MORRIS, 118 
 
 Report of MI-.TOWNSEND, 1022, 1068 
 OF FOREIGNERS. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MORRIS, 96 
 
 LOCALITY OF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MORRIS, 118 
 OF MORTGAGES. 
 
 Mr. STRONG'S Resolution, 128,175 
 UNIFORM. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. RTJGGLES, 289 
 Resolution of Mr.R. CAMPBELL, 104 
 TILDEN, Mr. a delegate from New York. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees, and order of Business, 29, 34, 
 40, 47, 58, 68, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 78, 
 
 80, 531, 533 
 
 on the Executive Department, 167, 
 284, 286, 302, 303, 309, 326, 346, 
 
 350, 351 
 
 on the apportionment, election and 
 tenure of Office, of the Legislature, 
 
 376, 392, 407, 413, 454, 455 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 514, 524, 526 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 685, 751, 
 
 763, 766, 767, 768, 773, 785 
 on the Canals and Finances, 877, 894, 
 
 912, 928, 933, 934, 938, 939 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 
 and Municipal, 974, 1006, 1013, 1020 
 on Banking, 997, 999, 1000, 1001 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1043, 1044, 
 
 1045, 1048 
 
 TOWNSEND, Mr. a delegate from New York. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 40, 
 
 75,77, 79 
 
 on Royal Grants, &c., 140 
 
 on the Taxation of Mortgages, 176 
 
 on the Executive Department, 303, 306 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 389, 414, 429, 432, 458 
 on the Article relative to the State 
 
 Officers, 514 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 818, 823, 
 
 828, 836, 837 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 857, 923 
 
 en Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 962, 966, 975, 1073 
 on Banking, &c., 992, 998, 1Q01, 1010 
 on Local Officers, 1012 
 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1041 
 on the Exemption of the Homestead 
 
 from Execution, 1064 
 
 on the Equalization of Taxation, 1068 
 on Education, 1075 
 
 TITLE OF ACTS. 
 
 Resolution ot Mr. TAGGART, 176 
 
 TREASON DEFINITION THEREOF. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. HARRISON, 310 
 
 TRIAL BY JURY. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. MILLER, 163 
 
 TUTHILL, Mr. a delegate from Orange. 
 Remarks on Incorporations, other than 
 
 Banking and Municipal, 975 
 
 on Education, 1074 
 
 TWO-THIRD CLAUSE. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. ALLEN, 95 
 
 u 
 
 UNFINISHED BQSI NESS, OFTHE COURTS. 812 
 USURY LAWS Resolution ut Mr. CONELY, 97 
 
 VACHE, Mr. a delegate from New-York. 
 Remarks on ihe Executive Department, 
 
 254 
 
1142 
 
 VAN SCHOONHOVEN, Mr. a delegate 
 
 from Rensselaer. 
 
 Remarks on the locality of taxation, 120 
 
 on the manner of Committees report- 
 ing, 136,243 
 on the Executive Department, 301, 
 
 308, 350, 351, 353, 357 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 392, 443, 446, 458, 467 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 500, 519, 520, 537, 548 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 753, 764, 
 763, 78% 785, 805, 806, 807, 817, 
 
 818, 819, 820, 823, 826, 828 
 on the Canals and Finances, 849, 853 
 
 908, 909, 927, 937, 942, 954 
 on Incorporations, other than Bank- 
 ing and Municipal, 962, 967, 968, 
 
 969, 977, 980 
 
 VACANCIES IN OFFICE How FILLED. 
 Report of Mr. ANGEL, 1005, 1006, 1021 1022 
 on Local Officers, 1007, 1008 
 
 on Mr. BOWDISH'S resolution relative 
 
 to Education, 1026 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1033, 1036 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, > 1051 
 
 on Municipal Incorporations. 1054, 1072 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 1055 
 
 on the final vote on the Constitution, 1080 
 VIVA VOCE VOTING. 
 
 Resolution of Mr. KENNEDY, 243, 1078 
 
 W 
 
 WARD, Mr. a delegate from Westchester. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 26, 
 
 37, 43, 46 
 
 on his Report on the same, 61, 71, 80 
 ofl the resolution for the Appointment 
 
 of Stenographers, ,62 
 
 on Mr. HARRISON'S Resolution rela- 
 tive to the Naturalization Laws, 81 
 on Mr. KIRKLAND'S Resolution rela- 
 tive to the Court of Errors, 106 
 on the Arrangement of the Amend- 
 ments, 127 
 on the manner of Committees Report- 
 ing, 146 
 on the Executive Department, 154, 
 
 199,287, 292, 314, 320, 349 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 392,430, 433,448, 452, 460 
 on the presentation of his Report on 
 
 the Militia, 443 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 746 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 898, 937 
 
 on the Militia, 1049 
 
 WATERBURY, Mr. a delegate from Dela- 
 ware. 
 
 Remarks on the Locality of Taxation, 123 
 
 on the Manner of Committees Report- 
 
 ing, 
 
 137 
 
 on the Executive Department, 154, 
 
 292, 294, 297, 317, 322 
 on the Article relative to the State Of- 
 ficers, 507, 508, 728, 755, 759 
 on the Judiciary Article, 780, 795, 
 
 799, 801, 807, 812, 813, 826, 828, 840 
 
 on the CJanals and Finances, 946 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1052 
 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 977 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1031, 1035 
 WHITE, Mr. a delegate from New-York. 
 Remarks on the arrangement of Commit- 
 
 tees and the Order of Business, 29 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 401 , 408, 409, 440, 461, 465, 477 
 on the Judiciary Article, 495, 753, 
 
 756, 779 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 507, 513 
 
 on the Canals and Finances, 924, 932, 
 
 934, 951 
 
 on Feudal Tenures, 1052 
 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 974, 977, 978 
 
 on Banking, &c., 994, 998 
 
 on the Resolution relative to the Os- 
 
 wego Canal, 1050 
 
 WILLARD, Mr. a delegate from Albany. 
 Remar-ks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 29 
 on the Judiciary Article, 806 
 on Education, 1074 
 WORDEN, Mr. a delegate from Ontario. 
 Remarks on the Arrangement of Commit- 
 tees and the Order of Business, 77, 
 
 78, 80, 533 
 
 on the Duties of Committees, 98 
 
 on the Naturalization of Citizens, 105 
 on the Funds iu Chancery, ' 126 
 
 on the Executive Department, 178, 
 200, 205, 260, 296, 298, 301, 305, 
 306, 307, 308, 322, 343, 344, 357, 
 
 358, 368 
 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 382, 385, 399, 402, 435, 439, 456, 
 
 475, 476, 477, 478 
 
 on presenting a Plan for a Judiciary, 528 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 509, 514, 536 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 540, 541, 542, 544, 548 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 556, 557, 
 563, 589, 641, 642, 657, 771, 777, 
 794, 795,796, 816, 831, 832, 849, 
 850, 878, 895, 909, 912, 931, 932, 
 934, 941, 942, 945, 946, 955, 957, 
 
 1105 
 
 on Banking, &c., 997 
 
 on Incorporations other than Banking 
 
 and Municipal, 1006, 1021, 1022 
 
 on Local Officers, 1008, 1009, 1010, 1013 
 on Mr. BOWDISH'S Resolution relative 
 
 to Education, 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1035, 1048 
 on Feudal Tenures, 
 
 on the Rights of Married Women, 1060 
 on the Law of Libel, 1061 
 
 on the Final Vote on the Constitution, 1081 
 WRIGHT, W. B. Mr. a delegate from Scho- 
 
 harie. 
 
 Remarks on the Executive Department, 531 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 379 
 
1143 
 
 on the Judiciary, 648 
 
 WRIGHT, A. B. Mr. a delegate from Erie. 
 Remarks on the Judiciary Article, 794 
 
 Y 
 
 YOUNG, Mr. a delegate from Wyoming. 
 Remarks on the Executive Department 
 
 198, 210, 338, 354, 358, 359 
 on the Apportionment, Election and 
 Tenure of Office of the Legislature, 
 
 374, 379, 401, 417, 419, 423, 429, 
 
 432,447,418, 441), 408,473 
 on the Article in relation to the State 
 
 Officers, 498 
 
 on the Rights and Privileges of the 
 
 Citizen, 552 
 
 on the Judiciary Article, 780 
 
 on Local Officers, JQ08 
 
 on the Elective Franchise, 1031, 1048 
 
ERRATA. 
 
 On page 187 1st column, lines 8 and 9 from the bottom, for "to confine themselves 
 to the amending of," read "to destroy the whole for 
 one, he was disposed to confine himself to amending." 
 2d column, line 35 from bottom, strike out "But even." 
 
 " line 10, strike out "that." 
 
 page 188 1st column, line 5 from top, for "devise," read "revise." 
 line 39, for "un," read "on " 
 line 42, strike out "one." 
 line 43, for "several," read "seven." 
 line 44, for "all," read "had. :> 
 
 2d c umn, line 5 from the top, for "under," read "upon." 
 line 8, for "in the union," read "to the contract." 
 line 31, strike out "Because." 
 line 36, for "prevented for," read "effected." 
 line 44, for "that," read "the." 
 line 54, strike out "not." 
 line 56, for "so," read "otherwise." 
 last line, for "committee," read "constitution." 
 
 page 189 1st column, line 6 from bottom, for "or any," read "or in any." 
 page 635 1st column, lines 33d and 34th from top of page, Mr. RICHMOND is attri- 
 buted as saying "three dollars a day for one small pray- 
 er?" which should be credited to some other person, who 
 spoke in his vicinity. 
 
 page 876 2d column, line 31 from the top, instead of "costs," read "interest." 
 
 " line 38 from top, instead of "part of the canal fund," read 
 "part of the general fund." 
 
d / ^ 
 
36116 
 
 f